Project NOTA Database
Project NOTA Database
Browse
Manuscripts
Persons
Visualize
Networks
Maps
Timelines
Texts
About
<De> matrimonio et virginitate: An virginitati matrimonium licite prefertur.
Edition
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE TEI PUBLIC "-//TEI P5//DTD Main Document Type//EN" "tei_all.dtd"> <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"> <teiHeader> <fileDesc> <titleStmt> <title>&lt;De&gt; matrimonio et virginitate: An virginitati matrimonium licite prefertur.</title> <author>Stephanus Galdeti</author> </titleStmt> <editionStmt> <edition>work in progress</edition> <respStmt> <resp>Edited by</resp> <name>Alexander Baumgarten</name> </respStmt> </editionStmt> <publicationStmt> <distributor>Project NOTA-ERC</distributor> <date when="2025-03-05"/> </publicationStmt> <seriesStmt> <title/> </seriesStmt> <sourceDesc> <listWit> <witness xml:id="P1">Paris, BnF lat. 16408</witness> </listWit> <listObject> <object corresp="#P1"> <objectIdentifier> <objectName>Paris, BnF lat. 16408</objectName> </objectIdentifier> <ab type="meta" subtype="label">BnF. Département des Manuscrits. Latin 16408</ab> <ab type="meta" subtype="attribution">Bibliothèque nationale de France</ab> <ab type="meta" subtype="license">https://gallica.bnf.fr/html/und/conditions-dutilisation-des-contenus-de-gallica</ab> <ab type="meta" subtype="logo">https://gallica.bnf.fr/mbImage/logos/logo-bnf.png</ab> <ab type="meta" subtype="related">https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b52514617v</ab> <ab type="meta" subtype="description">Questions de théologie et notes diverses dans lesquelles figurent Amand de Valenciennes et beaucoup de professeurs de Paris.</ab> </object> </listObject> </sourceDesc> </fileDesc> <encodingDesc> <variantEncoding method="parallel-segmentation" location="internal"/> </encodingDesc> </teiHeader> <text xml:lang="la"> <body> <div> <head><cb ed="#P1" n="130v" facs="https://gallica.bnf.fr/iiif/ark:/12148/btv1b52514617v/f281/full/full/0/native.jpg"/> <De> matrimonio et virginitate: An virginitati matrimonium licite prefertur.</head> </div> <div> <p>Ponuntur tres conclusiones.</p> <p>Matrimonium est licitum et honestum sine eligere matrimonium. </p> <p>Secunda, quod eligere virginitatem <app><lem>est</lem><witDetail type="p. c." wit="#P1"/></app> melius et perfectius. Iste due patent 1 Ad Cor., 7.</p> <p>Tertia, quod virginitati matrimonium licite prefertur, quia eligere matrimonium est licitum, preeligere est eligere, et eligere et preeligere saltem implicite convertuntur in proposito, cum nullus possit unum eligere nisi alterum deferendo, igitur etc.</p> <p>Ex <app><lem>ista</lem><witDetail type="coni." wit="#P1">isto</witDetail></app> ultima conclusione inferunt tria corrolaria. Primum, quod preferens non preferendum recte prefert, quia matrimonium non est preferendum nec e converso virginitas, quia tunc non preferens faceret contra rectam rationem non solum preter. Hec ‘ad recte preferendum’ quadrupliciter potest capi vel exponi, id est futurum prefferi, debitum prefferi, licitum prefferi, melius prefferi. Et istud videtur satis contineri sub secundo, quia maius est debitum non sub pena, sed sub pena amissionis illius excessus bonitatis in secundo sensu verum est corrolarium iuxta sententiam Magistri primo libro distinctione 44 vel 3.</p> <p>Secundum corrolarium est quod preferens vel preeligens contradictorium eius quodquod consonat rationi recte eligit quia eligens non continere recte eligit etc. Ex quo ultima patet quod utrumque contradictorum consonat rationi, et si obiciatur dissonant inter se, igitur nulli dissonant, verum est eodem genere consonantie vel <app><lem>dissonantie</lem><witDetail type="coni." wit="#P1">dissonantia</witDetail></app>, sed bene alio genere bene duo dissimilia possunt esse equalia.</p> <p>Tertio similiter potest dici quod virtus dicitur illa esse rectis rationibus et rectis iudiciis, sed contra, quia alterum erit falsum. Non oportet, quia illa iudicia non sunt contradictoria sed de contradictoriis extremis, verbi gratia ‘eligendum est non continere, eligendum est continere’ vel e converso ‘continere’. Et apparet magis si <app><lem>exponantur</lem><witDetail type="coni." wit="#P1"/></app> illa iudicia ‘eligendum est, id est licitum eligi’ modo quod utrumque sit licitum quid dubitat. Si autem unum illorum diceret ‘eligendum est continere non est eligendum continere’, tunc concluderet ratio. Tertium corrolarium, quod faciens contradictorium vel contrarium eius quod consonat sapientis concilio vel divino concilio recte agit, licet non faciens contra in alia forma posuerat, scilicet faciens aliter quam dicit divinum concilium. Sed ista esset falsa, quia divinum concilium confunderetur ibi ita quod sequeretur quod ille nulli divino concilio se conformaret virtute vel aliter. De ista materia tractat <name>Ybernicus</name> in questione de peccato originali in solutione cuiusdam argumenti an Adam potuit peccare venialiter.</p> </div> </body> </text> </TEI>
<De> matrimonio et virginitate: An virginitati matrimonium licite prefertur.
...