De causa Dei: Book III, Chapter 46
Thomas Bradwardine, De causa Dei contra Pelagium (1344). English translation: Wroot Press, CC BY-NC 4.0; machine-learning use permitted with attribution (https://bradwardine.wrootpress.com/rights/).
Source: Henry Savile's edition, London 1618, 793C–794C; Latin from EEBO-TCP A16626 (public domain).
Canonical: https://bradwardine.wrootpress.com/3/46/
Status: draft translation, not yet reviewed.

[793C–793D]
CHAPTER 46.

Against the same opinion and hypothesis, by way of revelation in its own kind [n1] concerning pure creatures, namely, Angels.

[793D–793E]
With Christ as our guide, then, these objections have been set against the principal hypothesis along the first path of this two-way revelation in its own kind, the path concerning the Lord Jesus Christ. It seems to follow that we may proceed against that hypothesis also by the other method of the revelation, the one concerning pure creatures, namely Angels and men, his servants. Suppose, then, that a revelation is made in its own kind to Michael about his good future merits and about the salvation of Paul, who is still a pilgrim in this world.[n2] Notwithstanding this revelation, Paul can neither merit nor be saved. Hence Michael too can be deceived, and could previously have been deceived.[n3] For this reason he is not blessed even then, nor was he blessed before, as the things set out in the thirty-fourth of this book teach.[n4] Again, since, as the Philosopher says, "One absurdity granted, others follow,"[n5] it further follows evidently from this that Michael is not now certain of his future beatitude. Indeed, what seems more absurd, he is not certain of it as past or as present either,[n6]

[794A–794C]
for this depends on one uncertain thing, since it is a future contingent. Hence he neither is blessed now nor ever was, as is clear from what was shown earlier in the thirty-fourth of this book. It also follows from the same premise that it lies in the power of Paul, a wretched pilgrim on earth, to drag Michael, a most happy citizen in heaven, down from his highest beatitude to the lowest misery, because by conjuring tricks he can shamefully deceive him all day long. Indeed, what is graver and worse, it follows that it is now possible, and depends on Paul's will, that Michael now sins and has sinned before. For suppose, according to the authorities on prayer and the manner of praying set out beforehand in the twenty-third and twenty-fifth of the first [book], that Michael has received a command in its own kind that he should wish to be saved everyone, and only the one, who is shown to him and seen as one to be saved, in its own kind and in the Word, and that he should assist with services and benefits only such a one. Suppose that Paul, still a pilgrim, is shown to him in its own kind and in the Word as one to be saved, and that Michael, by an act of willing in its own kind, wills him to be saved, and also renders him services and benefits. When all this has been done, it is still possible that Paul is not saved. Hence it is possible that Michael has sinned by willing him to be saved and by rendering him benefits against the divine command. For it is possible that he did not see Paul as one to be saved in its own kind and in the Word. Indeed, it is possible that he saw the opposite of this in the Word, and that he did not see this in its own kind, since what is false is in no way seen, just as it is not known. Suppose further, following on this, that Michael appears to Paul to comfort him and says, "May joy be with you always, for you are of the number of those to be saved." Yet it is still possible that Paul is, for the present, not to be saved but damned, and that Michael now sees this in the Word. It would then be possible that he asserts this against his mind and lies, that he is an Angel of Satan, an apostate from the truth, and that he has been so in the past. Moreover, it follows that Michael can believe two plainly contradictory things at once, against what was shown beforehand in the forty-second of this. For he now believes in its own kind that Paul is to be saved, and he must believe so for the present. Yet it is possible that he now sees the opposite of this in the Word, because it is possible that the opposite is now true and has been shown to him in the Word. Further, if it is possible that Paul is not saved, it is possible that Michael did not know with certainty in its own kind that Paul was to be saved. Hence it is possible that he did not will in its own kind that Paul be saved, and did not render him benefits, since this certain vision was the cause why he willed these things and did them, as has been argued more fully concerning vision in the Word in the thirty-third of this book and the chapters that follow. [n7] Likewise, according to this, any wretch can very easily inflict harm and punishment on the most holy and blessed Angels all day long without any preceding fault of theirs. This seems to rebound to their misery and to God's injury, as was shown more fully in the thirty-third of this book.

NOTES

1. In proprio genere is rendered "in its own kind" throughout. It is Bradwardine's term for knowledge of a thing in its own proper manner, as distinct from knowledge "in the Word" (in verbo), that is, in God, the vision the blessed have. The two are contrasted throughout this chapter. The "two-way" (biuialis) revelation is revelation in its own kind, which can be approached by the path of Christ (ch. 45) or by that of pure creatures (this chapter). Savile's variant "primo" for "proprio" is not adopted, since the main reading construes.
2. "Paul" and "Michael" are schematic names for a wayfarer (viator) and a blessed Angel. Paul is not here identified as the Apostle. He is simply a man still "in the world" (in saeculo peregrini), whose final salvation is a future contingent.
3. The infinitives decipi … fuisse deceptus and, below, esse … fuisse depend on an elided verb. Since Paul "can" fail to be saved, the sense is carried by the possibility: Michael can be deceived and could have been deceived before. That possibility is enough for Bradwardine's inference that Michael is not blessed. I supply "can" and "could" accordingly.
4. Chapter numbers in cross-references are ordinal ablatives with capitulo understood (tricesimo quarto huius, vicesimo tertio … primi). Following the conventions, they are left as Bradwardine wrote them. Here "of this" means "of this book" (the third), and "of the first" means "of the first book."
5. A scholastic commonplace attributed to "the Philosopher" (Vno inconuenienti dato alia contingunt). Savile gives no marginal citation, and I have not identified a precise passage in Aristotle.
6. The Latin is nec praeterita, nec praesenti, with "beatitude" understood from the preceding clause. The sense is that Michael is certain of his beatitude neither as past nor as present. The following Haec … dependet then takes his past and present beatitude as its subject.
7. Savile's marginal variant "ostensum" for "argutum" ("shown" for "argued") would give the sense "as has been shown more fully." The main reading construes and is kept.