Gabriel Biel (c. 1425–1495) was a German Catholic theologian and one of the last major representatives of late scholasticism, often called "the last of the scholastics." Born in Speyer, he studied at Heidelberg, Erfurt, and Cologne before becoming a cathedral preacher in Mainz and later joining the Brethren of the Common Life. In 1484 he was appointed to the newly founded University of Tübingen, where he taught theology until shortly before his death. His principal work, the Collectorium circa quattuor libros Sententiarum, is a vast synthesis of nominalist theology drawing especially on William of Ockham, and exercised a profound influence on Martin Luther and other reformers.
Commentary on the Fourth Book of the Sentences of Peter Lombard
Collectori Quarti Sententiarum Egregii Viri Magistri Gabrielis Biel
Distinction 13, Question 2: On the Matter of the Sacrament of Penance
Distinctio XIII, Questio II: De Materia Sacramenti Poenitentiae
Gabriel Biel's discussion of the matter of the sacrament of penance, engaging the view attributed to Jean Gerson in his Flores morales that the penitent recipient is himself the matter of the sacrament. Against this, Biel presents the standard tripartite scheme: the remote matter is sins committed, the proximate matter is confession, and the form is sacramental absolution. He works through the question of whether the sacrament requires any act on the part of the recipient, compares the structure of penance to that of baptism and the Eucharist, and examines the conditions under which the sacrament produces grace—concluding that the sacrament confers grace on one who receives it without the obstacle of mortal sin, whether actual in deed or persistent in the will.
Distinction 15, Question 3: On Various Kinds of Restitution
Distinctio XV, Questio III: De Variis Speciebus Restitutionum
Gabriel Biel's extended treatment of the various kinds of theft and the obligations of restitution, introduced as the third question of Distinction XV. The question proceeds through three articles: (1) whether all thieves and robbers are required to restore specifically to each defrauded owner; (2) noting special classes of theft—peculatus (embezzlement of public property), abigeatus (theft of dispersed livestock), plagiatus (sale of a free person), and rapina (violent seizure)—and defining their conditions; and (3) resolving a series of seven dubia concerning cases where restitution obligations may be mitigated or excused, including extreme necessity, the rule that found property whose owner is unknown may go to the poor, the status of goods seized in shipwreck, and the excommunication decreed at the Fourth Lateran Council against those who plunder Christian castaways.
Distinction 16, Question 4: On Almsgiving as Satisfaction
Distinctio XVI, Questio IIII: De Eleemosyna ut Satisfactione
Gabriel Biel's fourth question under Distinction XVI, treating almsgiving as a form of penance-satisfaction. Invoking James 5 and the principle that the whole Church is one commonwealth—so that whoever spends on those in need receives in turn what is necessary for Christian life—Biel argues by reason, example, and authority that almsgiving is obligatory on those with surplus, citing the mendicant exemplars of Alexius, Benedict, Dominic, and Francis. Five dubia follow: whether healthy beggars are obligated to work; whether almsgiving (as satisfaction) is superior to fasting and prayer; whether spiritual alms outrank bodily alms; whether venial sin can be remitted while mortal sin persists; and whether venial sin can become mortal. The question's explicit closing—"Et tantum de illa questione ac tota distinctione"—ends Distinction XVI.
Distinction 5, Question 1: On Intention in Baptism
Distinctio V, Questio Vnica: De Intentione in Baptismo
Gabriel Biel's treatment of the intention required for valid baptism, presenting the latter conclusions of the sole question under Distinction V. Drawing on Alexander of Hales, Thomas Aquinas, Richard of Middleton, and Scotus, Biel argues (Conclusio III) that the minister's intention must extend not only to the baptismal act as such but to its effect and terminus; (Conclusio IV) that specific actual intention is not required—it suffices to intend what the Church intends in general, so that infidels and heretics may validly baptize provided they intend to do what Christians do; (Conclusio V) that virtual intention (neither merely habitual nor fully actual) is what is strictly required; and (Conclusio VI) that when multiple ministers jointly baptize a single person, each must complete the entire form—including ablution and words with intention—for the sacrament to be valid, as illustrated by the hypothetical of a mute and a one-handed man.