Peter Auriol

English

The first [proposition] indeed is that every form must be intensified through the acquisition of something real which shares the specific character of that form. That something real must come to it was made plain above, in the first place, by arguing to the opposite. And it can be demonstrated more evidently, since it is impossible that contradictories about a real predicate should be verified of a subject at different times without a change having been made in something real in the subject at those times.

Draft English (Claude), awaiting Wilson · cc-by · published at bonaventure.wrootpress.com. This page quotes it; that is its home.

Latin

Petrus Aureoli, Scriptum in primum librum Sententiarum, d.17 q.2 (Quaestio XXXV), Articulus secundus, prima propositio; Electronic Scriptum ed. Friedman, Nielsen and Schabel · auriol-electronic-scriptum

Notes

The first witness on the dissenting bench in this edition, and a Franciscan — which is the reason the benches are schools and not orders. Auriol answers the increase question by a general thesis about forms as such: intensification is always the arrival of something real sharing the form's own specific character. Where Thomas asks what kind of quantity charity has, Auriol asks what happens to any form whatever when it becomes more intense, and lets charity follow. ⛔ Licence: the Electronic Scriptum is copyright, not public domain, so this excerpt is quoted at apparatus length under licence key auriol-electronic-scriptum. RULED 2026-09-06 (Wilson): approved as fair use; do not extend beyond apparatus length. His first question on this distinction, which is crux 1's question, is edited but unpublished on the Electronic Scriptum.

Threads

• → contests · Thomas Aquinas
  Both affirm that charity really increases and divide over what increase is. Thomas denies that a greater charity destroys the lesser and explains increase as alteration in a quantity of power, with no addition of parts. Auriol makes the arrival of something real the general condition of any intensification whatever: omnem formam intendi necesse est per acquisitionem alicuius realis participantis formae illius specificam rationem. Auriol names Thomas in his own first article, under the heading Opinio Thomae secunda secundae quaestione XXIIII articulo quinto.
• ← parallel · Adam Wodeham
  Two dissenting arguments fifteen years apart with no citation between them, arriving at the same place from opposite ends. Auriol argues positively that intensification is always the acquisition of something real: omnem formam intendi necesse est per acquisitionem alicuius realis. Wodeham argues negatively that a remitted degree is of just the same nature as an intense one, so no degree of a form tolerates its contrary. Neither will let increase be a matter of degree alone, and neither is arguing about charity when he says so.
• → parallel · Albert the Great
  Seventy years apart, no citation, and the same instinct: increase is not a matter of degree alone but of something real arriving. Albert: augetur charitas per additionem essentiae ad essentiam. Auriol: omnem formam intendi necesse est per acquisitionem alicuius realis participantis formae illius specificam rationem. ⚠ What separates them is the scope of the claim, not its content — Albert is answering about charity and says the question is the same for the augmentation of all the virtues; Auriol is answering about form as such and lets charity follow.