Albertus Magnus

The Opera Omnia of the Universal Doctor, rendered into English

Works › The Mariale: Questions on “Missus est”

Volume 37 · pp. 289–290

Question 200. When it is said here: Fear not, why is fear of this sort removed here?

A marker with ≈ is an approximate page boundary, placed by measure of the text; the page photographs remain the authority. In the paired views, clicking a page marker brings that page into view.

Latin (Borgnet)English
p. 289

QUAESTIO CC. Cum hic dicitur: Ne timeas, cur hujusmodi timor hic removeatur?

Deinde sequitur: Ne timeas 1. Et quaeritur, Cur hujusmodi timor hic removeatur?

Et videtur, quod nullus hic vere possit removeri: quia

1. Ut Damascenus dicit 2, timor dividitur in sex, in cunctationem, verecundiam, erubescentiam, in stuporem, terrorem et agoniam. Cunctatio est timor futurae operationis. Ille non fuit hic: quia ei nihil nuntiatur operandum. Verecundia est timor ex exspectatione convicii. Et ille quoque non est hic. Erubescentia est timor ex re turpi perpetrata. Et de hoc nihil hic. Stupor est timor ex magna imaginatione. Contra illam non est necessaria consolatio, ut dictum est. Terror est timor ex imaginatione inconsueti mali. Hic autem nihil de imaginationibus agebatur. Agonia autem est timor casus et infortunii: timentes enim in operatione infortunari, agonizamur. Hic quoque de infortunio vel casu nihil. Ergo non fuit agonia: et sic nullus timor: et sic frustra removetur timor, ubi nullus est timor.

QUESTION 200. When it is said here: Fear not, why is fear of this sort removed here?

Then there follows: Fear not 1. And it is asked why fear of this sort is removed here.

And it seems that none here could truly be removed, because:

1. As Damascene says 2, fear is divided into six: into hesitation, shamefastness, blushing, into stupor, terror, and agony. Hesitation is fear of a future operation. That was not here, because nothing to be done is announced to her. Shamefastness is fear from expectation of reproach. And that also is not here. Blushing is fear from a shameful thing perpetrated. And there is nothing of this here. Stupor is fear from a great imagining. Against that consolation is not necessary, as has been said. Terror is fear from imagining an unaccustomed evil. But here nothing was being dealt with concerning imaginings. Agony, however, is fear of mischance and misfortune; for, fearing to be unfortunate in an operation, we agonize. Here too there is nothing concerning misfortune or mischance. Therefore there was not agony; and thus no fear; and thus fear is removed in vain where there is no fear.

Printed page
0289
≈ p. 290

2. Item, Si stuporis timor, ille non prohibetur.

3. Item, Non est timor nisi contra malum: quia nihil timetur timore removibili nisi culpa vel poena.

4. Item, Perfectis nulla timenda est poena: ergo frustra: unde, Act. V, 41: Ibant Apostoli gaudentes, etc.

5. Item, Laus plus excitat ad amorem quam ad timorem: ergo cum nihil praecessit nisi quod fuit de laude, nullus debuit timor ei removeri.

Sed contra. Glossa: "Ex verecundia pavet." Item, alia Glossa: "Trepidare virginum est, et ad omnes viri ingressus pavere, omnes viri affectus vereri: ergo videtur, quod ex verecundia timuit 3."

2. Likewise, if it is the fear of stupor, that is not forbidden.

3. Likewise, there is no fear except against evil, because nothing is feared with removable fear except fault or punishment.

4. Likewise, for the perfect no punishment is to be feared; therefore in vain. Whence Acts 5:41: The Apostles went rejoicing, etc.

5. Likewise, praise rouses more to love than to fear; therefore, since nothing preceded except what was of praise, no fear ought to have been removed from her.

But to the contrary. The Gloss says: "She is afraid from shamefastness." Likewise, another Gloss says: "It belongs to virgins to tremble, and to fear all entrances of a man, to fear all affections of a man; therefore it seems that she feared from shamefastness 3."

Printed page
0290

Notes

  1. Luke 1:30. (Luc. I, 30.) ↩
  2. St. John Damascene, Book 2 On the Orthodox Faith, chapter 15. (S. J. Damascenus, Lib. II de Fide orthodoxa, cap. 15.) ↩
  3. St. Ambrose, Book 2 on Luke, chapter 2. For the solution of the objections of this question, see below after Question 204. (S. Ambrosius, Lib. II super Lucam, cap. 2. Pro solutione objectionum hujus quaestionis, vide infra post Quaest. CCIV.) ↩