552. Subtle Ockam Quodl. 3. q. 15. disputing Utrum rectitudo & deformitas actus differant à substantia actus? denieth it; and after a Confutation of the common saying, that Deformitas est carentia rectitudinis debitae, & distinguitur ab actu, quod in peccato Actus est materiale, & carentia justitiae debitae inesse est formale, concludeth, [Quod deformitas non est carentia justitiae vel rectitudinis debitae inesse actui, sed est carentia rectitudinis debitae inesse voluntati: Quod non est aliud dicere, nisi quod voluntas obligatur aliquem actum elicere secundum praeceptum Divinum quem non elicit; & ideo rectitudo actus non est aliud quam qui debuit elici secundum rectam rationem.] But I conceive, 1. That the rectitude of the Will can be nothing else but the rectitude of its acts, suspensions and dispositions; 2. That Ockam here describeth only sins of omissions, whereas the Rectitude of the Will is often also materially in not doing or willing what is forbidden. And with these two animadversions I am reconciled to Ockam: who addeth, [Ad aliud dico, Quod illud dictum de Materiali & Formali est falsum; Quia aut est peccatum commissionis aut omissionis: si primo modo, est Materiale sine formali: quia ibi non est carentia rectitudinis, debitae inesse actui: si secundo modo, tunc est ibi carentia quae est formale sine materially.] Resp. 1. To the first I add, that It had been true, if it had been the Act as an act that had been forbidden, or else the species of the act as quid naturale; But it being the Act not as an act in genere, but as this act thus modified or specified by an undue object, that Act with its Relation as quid physicum are presupposed as the relatum to the moral relation of Pravity or Disconformity. And to the second I say, that it's true that Omission is not Materia Physica; but it is an inadequate first conception of sin, and so is materia moraliter dicta vel loco materiae. And the Omission being considerable, 1. Quatenus Non-agere, 2. Qua privatio naturalis, 3. Qua & Privatio & disconformitas moralis, these three inadequate conceptions take up the whole nature of the sins of omission.
552. Subtile Ockam Quodl. 3. q. 15. disputing Utrum rectitudo & deformitas actus differant à substantia actus? denyeth it; and after a Confutation of the common saying, that Deformitas est carentia rectitudinis debitae, & distinguitur ab actu, quod in peccato Actus est materiale, & carentia justitiae debitae inesse est formale, concludeth, [Quod deformitas non est carentia justitiae vel rectitudinis debitae inesse actui, sed est carentia rectitudinis debitae inesse voluntati: Quod non est aliud dicere, nisi quod voluntas obligatur aliquem actum elicere secundum praeceptum Divinum quem non elicit; & ideo rectitudo actus non est aliud quam qui debuit elici secundum rectam rationem.] But I conceive, 1. That the rectitude of the Will can be nothing else but the rectitude of its acts, suspensions and dispositions; 2. That Ockam here describeth only sins of omissions, whereas the Rectitude of the Will is ofren also materially in not doing or willing what is forbidden. And with these two animadversions I am reconciled to Ockam: who addeth, [Ad aliud dico, Quod illud dictum de Materiali & Formali est falsum; Quia aut est peccatum commissionis aut omissionis: si primo modo, est Materiale sine formali: quia ibi non est carentia rectitudinis, debitae inesse actui: si secundo modo, tunc est ibi carentia quae est formale sine materiali.] Resp. 1. To the first I add, that It had been true, if it had been the Act as an act that had been forbidden, or else the species of the act as quid naturale; But it being the Act not as an act in genere, but as this act thus modified or specified by an undue object, that Act with its Relation as quid physicum are presupposed as the relatum to the moral relation of Pravity or Disconformity. And to the second I say, that it's true that Omission is not Materia Physica; but it is an inadequate first conception of sin, and so is materia moraliter dicta vel loco materiae. And the Omission being considerable, 1. Quatenus Non-agere, 2. Qua privatio naturalis, 3. Qua & Privatio & disconformitas moralis, these three inadequate conceptions take up the whole nature of the sins of omission.
