Reportatio IV-A by Oleg Bychkov

Author:Oleg Bychkov [Bychkov, Oleg]
Language: eng
Format: azw3
Publisher: Franciscan Institute Publications
Published: 2016-05-31T16:00:00+00:00

______________________________

1 The sense of the last sentence is unclear as it appears in this paragraph in the Latin; it has been restored following the sense of n. 21 below.

2 Otherwise than for the purpose of this satisfaction; one cannot make satisfaction using something that is already owed the same party for another debt.

3 Scotus makes up two words in this sentence to contrast the active nature of a voluntary act with the passivity of being forced.

4 In this case, God.

5 Because he had none.

6 Instead of the conjectured “satisfaction,” all MSS have “incarnation.”

7 Christ’s incarnation and passion.

8 Presumably based on their own nature.

9 Instead of “is inflicted,” L has “afflicts one.”

10 The reading “a punishment, allows one to give back … to a greater degree” follows L.

11 The reading “but one or many” follows L.

12 The last phrase can be translated also as “and his efforts can be classified as fasting.”

13 Correctly, dist. 15.

14 The MSS actually have “that one cannot” which is contrary to the sense of the pro arguments.

15 I.e., second.

16 In Latin, the noun lex (‘law’) is a cognate of ligare (‘to bind’).

17 Swear an oath.

18 This type of transfer was behind the Franciscan concept of usus pauper debated at the time.

19 The Latin word for ‘contract’ (contractus) is a cognate of contrahere (‘draw together’).

20 The second part of this paragraph lacks content and is repetitious in the original Latin.

21 It is not clear to whom Scotus refers as the author of the “economic” transaction. In Politics I, c. 9, Aristotle refers to “household management” (οἰκονομική), and in Politics I, c. 8, 1256b 38 specifically to the “manager of household” (οἰκόνομος). Perhaps, Scotus refers to “household managers” as authors of “economic” (=household-managerial) transactions.

22 Possibly chalcopyrite, a mineral that looks like gold.

23 At this point BL add: “This consideration can excuse usury: because if someone has money or some other property, which he direly needs to use for commerce, and whose lack would be extremely damaging to him for it would impede just profit, and if someone else who needs this money even more asks the first person to loan it to her, the first person, using the concept of fair value, can indemnify himself and receive in return more [than the original value of this money]. Similarly, a creditor who makes a temporary loan of something, for example of fish or meat, to someone else and does not receive back anything immediately for the things that he sold, and of which nevertheless he would have great need in order to conduct and continue his commerce, and their lack would be very damaging [to him], can legitimately sell this property to the other person for more money and thus indemnify himself.”

24 I.e., the profit and efforts of the buyer.

25 Instead of “consumed,” RV have “given up.”

26 Money as coins, or as physical objects with certain characteristics.

27 As coins.

28 Scotus’s pun based on a false etymology (mutuum, a cognate of mutuatio [‘lending’], supposedly derived from meum tuum) cannot be adequately translated into English.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.