Epistola I ad Timotheum

Translated 2026-08-19, one translator, 3 chunks (3,393 Latin words), on Opus. verify-english.mjs clean: columns, notes and sections aligned, no duplicate paragraphs.

Apparatus: 17 [var:] · 2 [sic:] · 0 [cj:] · 0 [d:] · 0 [ed:] · 0 [nt:] · 12 [n:] (exact parity with the Latin twins). Structure: ARGUMENTUM, CAPUT PRIMUM–VI. Zero guillemets in either language. Italic spans 44 / 56 / 51, 1:1 with the Latin (143 lemmata + 8 usque ad formulae). Three Greek words in chunk 2, carried verbatim.

Conventions applied without re-opening them: VERS. n.-- verbatim; the lemma Englished; a fragmentary lemma rendered as the phrase it stands for; sigla ride as [n:] with Latin abbreviations unanglicized; usque ad → as far as (8978 §205); heads matched to Ruth's and 8987's shipped English (ARGUMENTUM. → THE ARGUMENT., CAPUT PRIMUM. → CHAPTER ONE., CAPUT II. → CHAPTER II., and so on).

§0 · PLATE STATUS — NOT READ. This is an unchecked zero, not a checked one.

No plate read was performed for this work and there is no data/plate-notes/8983.tsv; coverage.json has no entry for 8983. The Latin twins carry zero [cn:] markers, which in this case means only that Migne's foot-of-page apparatus has never been recovered for these ten columns — not that he printed none. Two cruces below (§5.1, §5.9) would be settled or narrowed by a plate read of PL 114 cols 623–632, and one spelling (§5.12) is a positive candidate for a digitization alteration. Recorded so a later reader can tell this from Ruth, where the zero was checked.

§1 · THE LEMMA COLLATION — ALL 143 LEMMA SPANS CHECKED AGAINST THE CLEMENTINE

Collated against sources/vulgate/clementine-flat.txt (grep) with the faithful clementine/<Book>.lat consulted where a call turned on a word. The full list is here, agreements included, because a list of findings alone cannot be told apart from a list by someone who did not look.

1a. The marking bar I applied, stated so it can be checked

[var: …] on every lemma where Migne's printed words differ from the Clementine by a word — a lexical substitution, an addition, an omission, or a different inflected form — whether or not English shows the difference. No marker for (i) pure orthography, (ii) pure word order, (iii) lemma truncation of the ordinary "head words + etc." kind. Every member of classes (i)–(iii) is nevertheless listed below. Precedent for the generous bar: 8987 @0621A already ships [var: Vulg. in revelatione, ablative] on a bare case-form difference, so a form-level divergence is a markable one in this block.

1b. THE DIVERGENCES — 17 marked

1c. DIVERGENCES FOUND AND DELIBERATELY NOT MARKED, each with its reason

• 0626A Quia Christus Jesus. — the same quia-for-quod as the full quotation eight lines above, which already carries the marker. Marked once, cross-referenced here; a second marker on the fragment would say nothing new.
• 0627C Unus, inquit, Deus, unus et mediator, — the italic words themselves agree with 1 Tim 2:5 exactly, so both spans are counted as agreements below; what is missing is the Clementine's Unus enim Deus, and Migne has not changed the text but replaced the connective with his own inquit, printed outside the italics. That is Pattern 5's construction, not a variant reading.
• 0628A per generationem filiorum, — Vulg 2:15 per filiorum generationem. Word order only; identical in English.
• 0629B Si non venissem, et locutus eis fuissem, — Jo 15:22 locutus fuissem eis. Word order only.
• 0631C Quicunque. — Vulg 6:1 Quicumque. Orthography (n/m) only, and Corpus Corporum's normalization is not distinguishable from Migne's here.
• 0626C Deum nemo vidit unquam. — Jo 1:18 umquam. Orthography only.
• 0626A Ut non dicam divinus, — introduced by Migne's own Alia littera. He has flagged it as a variant himself; stacking our marker on his would tell the reader twice and blur whose observation it is (the same principle as the standing rule on his ( sic )).

1d. CHECKED AND FOUND TO AGREE WITH THE CLEMENTINE EXACTLY — 118 spans, named

Chunk 0 (1 Tim 1 unless noted). Misericordia · Pax · Gratia · Sicut rogavi. · Rogavi. · rogavi, · Fabulis et genealogiis. · Genealogiis. · Finis autem. · Praecepti. · praecepti, · Conscientia bona. · Et fide non ficta. · A quibus. · Non intelligentes, · Scimus autem. · Scimus autem, · Legitime utatur. · Gratias ago ei qui, · Sed misericordiam Dei. · Misericordiam consecutus sum, · Superabundavit. · Omni acceptione, · Primus. · In me. · Invisibili. · soli invisibili, · Soli Deo. · Hoc praeceptum. · Conscientiam. · Quos tradidi. · Tradidi.

Chunk 1 (1 Tim 2–4). Obsecro. · Obsecrationes. · Orationes. · Postulationes. · Gratiarum actiones. · Pro omnibus. · Ut quietam · Hoc enim. · Hoc enim bonum est. · Unus, · Deus, unus et mediator, · Mediator Dei, · Et veritate · Volo ergo viros, · Ira, · disceptatione, · Non in tortis, · Mulier in silentio. · Docere, · Adam non est. · Salvabitur. · Si permanserit in fide et dilectione et sanctificatione, · Cum sobrietate. · Bonum opus desiderat. · Irreprehensibilem. · sine crimine. (Tit 1:6–7, checked there and agreeing) · Unius uxoris virum, · Sobrium, · Non cupidum. · Ne in superbiam. · Oportet autem, · Nullum, · Ecclesia. · Apparuit angelis. · In mundo. · Spiritus autem manifeste dicit. · Spiritus manifeste dicit. · Cauteriatam. · Sanctificatur. · Nam corporalis. · Pietas, · Praecipe haec. · Prophetiam. · Quae data est tibi per prophetiam: · presbyterorum,

Chunk 2 (1 Tim 5–6). Seniorem ne increpaveris. · Ut sorores. · In omni castitate. · Viduas honora quae vere viduae sunt. · Parentibus. · Desolata, speret. · Quae in deliciis. · Curam non habet. · Pedes. · Sanctorum. · Devita. · Habentes. · Irritam fecerunt. · Conversae sunt retro Satanam. · Qui bene. · Adversus presbyterum accusationem noli recipere, · Coram omnibus, · Testor coram Deo. · Noli adhuc aquam, · Quorumdam hominum peccata, · Subsequuntur. · Superbus. · Languens. · Quaestiones. · Nam qui volunt. · Cupiditas. · Haec fuge. · Pietatem. · Fidem. · Praecipio tibi. · Et Christo Jesu. · Beatus et solus, · Qui solus habet immortalitatem · ⭐ Accedite ad eum, et illuminamini (Psal. XXXIII = Ps 33:6) — word for word, including the connective; the one full-verse citation in the work that agrees exactly · Divitibus hujus saeculi. · Non sublime. · Ad fruendum. · Thesaurizare. · O Timothee. · Profanas. · Promittentes, circa fidem exciderunt,

Not scripture, so not collated (checked as such): sine peccato: (the gloss's own phrase, not a citation) · hypostasis, (the word under discussion) · the eight usque ad formulae.

§2 · THE TWO [sic: …] — and neither swallows its word

Both are word-division defects (Pattern 10), so the whole run is carried, and in both the English says in plain words what the run carries (7a⁗, and the brief's test 1).

2a. 0625A · serupulus for scrupulus

cui malae conscientiae serupulus inest.

Metathesis of c and r. Corpus control: src/latin/ holds one serupul- (this one) against 35 scrupul- forms. Not a word; carried. English: "in whom the scruple [sic: serupulus] of an evil conscience is present." Strip the marker and the clause still reads: subject, verb, and the noun the clause is about are all outside the quarantine.

2b. 0630C · nesolius for ne solius — the fused direction, and it carries a negative

ipse potius ministra, nesolius impendii, verum obsequii praemium percipias

Corpus control: one nesolius in all of src/latin/, and no ne solius anywhere, so no control from usage; the reading is from the sentence. ⚠ This is the dangerous shape: the run contains both the purpose particle ne and the quantifier solius, and quarantining it silently would take the negation out of the English.

Host of the negative: solius, not percipias. The proof is structural, not a matter of what reads well — solius impendii is answered by verum obsequii, a correlative pair, and reading the ne onto the verb would make Augustine tell the bishop not to receive his reward, which the imperative ipse potius ministra immediately before it contradicts.

English: "that thou mayest receive the reward not [sic: nesolius] of the outlay alone, but of the service." Stripped: "that thou mayest receive the reward not of the outlay alone, but of the service." Reads aloud, keeps the negative, keeps the correlative.

§3 · EVERY SUPPLIED SUBJECT AND REFERENT, NAMED — with the evidence

Latin leaves the subject unexpressed where English cannot. Each one below names who it is and what fixes it. The two genuinely open ones are marked ⚠ and are the places a blind reader should go first.

• 0623D "He instructs Timothy" — the Apostle. Migne prints no subject at all in the ARGUMENTUM; the referent is fixed by the work (a gloss on a Pauline epistle) and by the sibling argumenta in this block, which name Apostolus.
• 0624C–D "here he begins", 0624D "He says I besought", 0625B "he adds… he subjoins", 0625D "here he shows", 0626B "he judges", 0626C "he says not, to the Father alone", 0626D "After he has recounted… he shows", 0628A "he not only taught… denied… commanded", 0629D "He admonishes him", 0632A "He does not say… he knew", 0632C "Above he treated… here he treats… he determines" — all the Apostle, in every case the speaker of the lemma standing immediately above.
• 0626A "because he not only forgave sins, but gave faith and love" — the Lord, from the verse the lemma opens: 1 Tim 1:14 Superabundavit autem gratia Domini nostri. Not from the sentence, which would allow "the Apostle".
• 0626C "he is seen when he wills and as he wills" — God, named two clauses earlier (Invisibilis est ergo ab hominibus Deus in natura).
• 0626B "but it is not God to us" — the soul. ea is feminine, agreeing with anima in the same sentence, and omnes vires ejus is the soul's powers.
• 0628B "the Apostle calls him a transgressor" — Adam, from the lemma above (Adam non est [seductus]) and from the Augustine excerpt's own subject.
• 0628C "let one be chosen" — the bishop, from the lemma Irreprehensibilem (1 Tim 3:2 Oportet ergo episcopum irreprehensibilem esse).
• 0628C "if even before he had a wife", 0629A "that he be blameless" — the same candidate for the episcopate.
• 0629B "he therefore who was before seen lowly… appeared in majesty" — Christ, the subject of 1 Tim 3:16 through the lemma Apparuit angelis.
• 0630B "she is with her whole mind devoted to God" — the widow (Desolata, 1 Tim 5:5, feminine throughout); 0630B "since she professes religion" — the widow in delights (1 Tim 5:6).
• 0630A "lest he be more exasperated" — the senior of the lemma.
• 0631C "reason does not lead him… he bursts forth" — the proud man (Superbus, 1 Tim 6:4); 0631D "whether he should be a servant" — the Christian slave of 1 Tim 6:1–2.
• 0632A "he fears this concerning that man" — Timothy; de isto points at the addressee of the lemma Tu autem, homo.
• 0632B "He has it by nature" — God, from the lemma Qui solus habet immortalitatem.
• 0632B "Because none comes to it of himself" — the light; ad eam is feminine and its antecedent is lucem at 1 Tim 6:16, which Migne's spliced lemma (Inaccessibilem quem nullus hominum) has cut away. This is why the [var:] at that lemma quotes the whole Clementine clause: without it the English pronoun has no visible antecedent at all.
• 0631A "which he [Timothy] himself had entered upon" — supplied in brackets on purpose. Migne's ipse marks a change of subject (the Apostle forbids; Timothy had taken up the abstinence, per 1 Tim 5:23, which is addressed to Timothy). Left bare, the English "he himself" reads back onto the Apostle — the reference-misbinding class, and it would have been invisible to every count-based check.

The two open ones

• ⚠ 0627A · Sed volens facit cum illa quod bonum est. Rendered "But willing, he does with it that which is good", taking the subject to be God. Evidence: the paragraph's whole argument is that no creature escapes divine providence, the very next sentence is impersonal (fit quod justum est) with the same agent, and the paragraph closes naming him (Deus negavit… sibi retinuit). The rival reading, and why it lost: volens is nominative and could agree with an implied creatura, giving "But the willing creature does with it what is good" — grammatically clean, but it makes the creature the agent in a sentence-pair whose second member has no creature-subject available, and it leaves cum illa pointing at the creature twice over. Taken, not declined; the rival is recorded so a reader can weigh it.
• ⚠ 0629B · non tacet dicens futuros pestiferae doctrinae viros. Rendered "he keeps not silence, saying…". The subject may be the Apostle (who has just been told Quae sibi… Spiritus sanctus revelaverit, and who is the one writing) or the Holy Spirit (the lemma is Spiritus autem manifeste dicit, and non tacet dicens echoes manifeste dicit exactly). English "he" preserves the ambiguity the Latin has, so nothing was decided in the text — deliberately, and this line is the notice.

§4 · CRUCES PROPER — Migne's own roughness, rendered literally

Nothing below was smoothed, and no word was translated as anything but what it means.

1. 0624C–D · Post salutationem prius de pseudo repellendis: incipit hic legem adhuc tenendam docentibus. Two ellipses in one sentence. de pseudo is Migne's clipped form for the false apostles — the corpus is its own control here: three columns later at 0627B he writes de pseudo-apostolis of the same men, so the English reads "the false [apostles]" with the supply bracketed. incipit … docentibus has a dative with no verb of speaking to govern it; rendered "here he begins with those teaching…", which supplies nothing. A plate read would say whether the abridgment or the compositor made the gap.
2. 0625D · Bona vero ea; dimissa, quod fidelis est, et positus in ministerio, unde et fortis: The semicolon and the hanging dimissa are Migne's; both are carried. dimissa is neuter plural with no expressed noun, and mala in the sentence before is its only available agreement, so the English reads "[the evils] forgiven" with the supply bracketed. The punctuation is exactly as printed — semicolon, then comma, then colon.
3. 0626A · Super majora bona quam olim mala. ⚠ The roughest sentence in the work and the one to look at hardest. Super governs nothing: the abridged gloss has no verb, and the phrase is left as a bare comparison. Rendered "Over greater goods than formerly evils", which is as close as the printed words allow. No conjecture is offered and none is smuggled in; the sense the passage plainly wants (grace superabounded in goods greater than the former evils) is stated here and not in the text.
4. 0627C · ut omnes homines salvari nunquam fiat nisi per mediatorem… salvari as subject of fiat is not construable Latin. Rendered "that all men be saved may never come to pass save through the mediator", carrying both nunquam and nisi.
5. 0627D · Quaeris, mercedem? The comma between verb and object is Migne's, and it is kept: "Dost thou ask, the reward?" The mark is his; Pattern 8 forbids deleting it and forbids tidying the comma away.
6. 0627D · Veritas, quae credidisti videre. No verb. Rendered "Truth, to see what thou hast believed", supplying nothing and keeping the comma.
7. 0628A · sint promittentes et indicantes extra pietatem animi. extra read as the adverb ("outwardly"), which is an attested sense and yields "showing outwardly the piety of the mind" — outward works declaring inward piety, which is what 1 Tim 2:10 is about. The preposition reading ("outside the piety of the mind") was rejected: it inverts the verse. Declared, because the adverb reading is the less common one.
8. 0628C · sed eligatur, cujus comparatio caeteri grex dicantur. Two faults in five words: comparatio is nominative with nothing to govern it, and plural caeteri takes singular grex. Rendered "but let one be chosen, by whose comparison the rest may be called a flock" — the nominative has no English exponent (Pattern 9), and the number disagreement likewise vanishes in English "the rest… a flock". No [sic:]: both are real words in real slots, and Pattern 12's own boundary keeps the marker off them.
9. 0629C · Cauterium est ferrum a cavendo dictum. ⚠ An etymology that English cannot carry. Migne derives cauterium from cavere, "to beware". Rendered "A cautery is an iron so called from taking heed" — the pun is simply lost, and no second italic span was invented to preserve it, because italic parity with the Latin twin is 1:1 and an added cavendo would break it. The reader has the Latin opposite; this line is the explanation.
10. 0629D · ut actus ejus excusarent - et non quasi juvenis… The spaced hyphen is in the source and is reproduced as printed. excusarent has no object; rendered "that his acts might excuse [him]" with the supply bracketed.
11. 0631C · Superbia quippe, non eum ratio ducit… An anacoluthon: Superbia is a bare nominative that never becomes the subject of anything. Rendered "Pride assuredly, reason does not lead him, since…", keeping the comma and the dangling nominative.
12. 0623D · Tychichum — ⚠ raised as a possible digitization alteration, per the brief's fourth test. src/latin/ holds Tichicum ×2 and Tychicum ×1 against this single Tychichum. It is legible and renders in place ("Tychicus"), so it takes no marker under Pattern 9 — proper-name spellings vary freely in this period. But the corpus-frequency shape is exactly the one that surfaced 8970's Nephtlali, and a plate read of col. 623 would settle it in one glance. Recorded as a candidate, not a finding.
13. 0632A · Doloribus multis against the Clementine's doloribus malis. ⚠ The on-disk Clementine is the 2005 "Quasimodo" release with its later correction diffs not applied (sources/vulgate/README.md), and this call rests on one word of it. It is a word and not a letter, so it is inside the precision that copy is warranted to; but a reader who needs 1 Tim 6:10 decided to the letter should check a second witness rather than this file. The marker states both readings and nothing about why they differ.
14. 0625A · in qua non quisque sibi quodlibet fingit, sed catholica duntaxat. The negative sits before the quantifier quisque, so the 2a trigger fires. Host: the verb fingit, with quisque as its subject — "in which no one feigns for himself whatever he pleases". Proof from structure: the sed … duntaxat correlative opposes the kind of faith (catholic, not private), not one person against another, so a "not everyone" reading has nothing to answer it. Recorded because the rejected reading is grammatical.
15. 0626C · quod de ipsa Trinitate intelligitur, non de solo Patre. Same trigger. Host: the whole phrase de solo Patre, not solo — Migne's own next clause proves it (quia non ait, soli Patri, sed soli Deo): the phrase "to the Father alone" is rejected outright, not merely narrowed. English "not of the Father alone" is therefore right, and "not only of the Father" would have been the inversion.
16. Our double quotation marks at 0625A (for "of the commandments,"). Pattern 6's " " is ours by convention and is the only supplied punctuation anywhere in these three chunks; it distinguishes the mentioned word from the glossing prose where Migne's unitalicized pro praeceptorum would otherwise run into the sentence. Declared because a band-by-band punctuation check will find it.

Lemma completions made under convention 3 (fragment → the phrase it stands for)

Each supplies from the verse the fragment opens, and each is listed because the supply is ours and invisible on the page: 0627D Non in tortis, → "Not in plaited hair," (1 Tim 2:9 tortis crinibus) · 0628A Adam non est. → "Adam was not seduced." (2:14 seductus) · 0629A Nullum, → "No crime," (3:10 nullum crimen habentes) · 0631A Noli adhuc aquam, → "Do not still drink water," (5:23 bibere). Held back deliberately at 0632B Inaccessibilem quem nullus hominum — the completion there would have had to import lucem and vidit across a splice, and the [var:] does that work instead, in our own voice.

§5 · THE FOUR TESTS, RUN ON THESE FILES

1. A [sic:] must not swallow its word. Both markers stripped and the residue read aloud: §2a and §2b. Both clauses keep verb, object, negation and conjunction outside the quarantine. Mechanically re-run over the whole work: no stranded article or preposition on punctuation, no doubled mark, in any of the three chunks.
2. Negation attachment, host by host. Every printed negative was named to its Latin host and the host found in the English. Twenty-two sites fired the 2a trigger (a negative with solus / solum / tantum / omnis / penitus / adeo / simpliciter, or a non … sed or sicut … ita pivot nearby) and each was proved from the correlative rather than from what read well: 0625A, 0625B, 0626A ×2, 0626B, 0626C, 0628A, 0628C, 0628D, 0629A ×2, 0629C, 0630C ×2, 0631C, 0631D, 0632A ×2, 0632B, 0632C ×3. ⭐ This test caught the one real defect in the drafts: at 0625B vel de quibus had been rendered "nor of what things", importing a negative Migne does not print there (and the Clementine's neque … neque at 1 Tim 1:7 is exactly what makes that slip easy). Repaired to "or of what things".
3. Punctuation, band by band, never by total. The column anchors partition both twins identically (13 / 11 / 12, verified in order and against the word each stands beside). ? ! : ; « » ( ) compared band by band: zero mismatched bands in all three chunks, with the single declared exception of the two quotation marks at 0625A (§4.16). Question marks: 1 / 2 / 1, matching, all of them direct questions — Pattern 8b never fired, and no ? was supplied or deleted. Four semicolons supplied in the first draft of chunk 0 and one in chunk 2 were found by this test and removed; Migne's own semicolons (1 / 5 / 1) all stand in their own bands. ⚑ Anchor position, not merely presence (2b): every anchor was placed beside the word it stands beside in the Latin, splitting a construction where Migne splits it — e.g. legem adhuc tenendam [0624D] docentibus → "with those [0624D] teaching that the law is still to be kept", and Justus tamen, et si ea non eget, [0625C] utitur → "even if he needs it not, [0625C] uses it".
4. The fourth test — does the English assert what he asserts. Each paragraph read back against the Latin with the counts already clean. The passages where smooth English is most likely to be hiding a mis-parse are §4.2, §4.3, §4.4 and §4.8, and each is disclosed rather than resolved. The usque ad tails (eight of them) were parsed as strict prose, not excused as abridgment noise; all eight resume grammatically.

§6 · READ CLEAN — named, so a later reader can tell checked ground from unexamined

• Chunk 1, CAPUT II 0627B (the ordo missae paragraph) — seven lemmata in ten lines, every one collated, no divergence, no supplied subject, no negation at risk.
• Chunk 2, CAPUT V 0630A–0630B (VERS. 1–8) — eight lemmata, all agreeing with the Clementine word for word; the only thing to notice is that two paragraphs end with no terminal stop (auxilium vitae et salutis, cum profiteatur religionem) and the English ends without one too, under Pattern 8. A third does the same at 0632D (aliae non sunt vitandae), as does Qui solus habet immortalitatem at 0632B, which Migne closes with no point before the gloss begins. None of these is a defect of ours and none should be reported as one.
• Chunk 2, CAPUT VI 0632C (the paragraph on riches) — the densest negation cluster in the work (seven negatives in eleven lines, three of them 2a-shaped) and it came back clean on both the count and the attachment pass.
• All 12 [n:] notes are citations, not prose — sigla and locators only, the longest being (AUG., lib. II contra adversarios legis et Proph., c. 1.). Pattern 15 never fired; there is no [nt:] in this work and that is a checked zero.
• One siglum is NOT an [n:] and was left as printed: at 0628A the attribution (AUG., lib. II de Gen. [0628B] ad litteram, c. ult.) stands inside the italic lemma as ordinary parenthetical text, with a column anchor inside it. It is reproduced verbatim, unanglicized, exactly as the [n:] sigla are, and the anchor keeps its place inside the parenthesis. Treating it differently from its twelve marked siblings would have been an invention.
• Three Greek words (0632A φιλαργυρία, 0632D Τίμιος, Θεὸς) carried verbatim with their Latin glosses Englished beside them, following 11064's practice. No transliteration was added, because Migne supplies the Latin equivalent himself.

§7 · WHAT A BLIND READER SHOULD LOOK AT HARDEST

In order: 0626A Super majora bona (§4.3, an unconstruable sentence rendered as closely as the words allow) · 0627A the subject of Sed volens facit (§3, taken not declined) · 0629B the subject of non tacet (§3, deliberately left ambiguous) · 0630C the nesolius attachment (§2b) · 0628A extra read adverbially (§4.7) · 0623D Tychichum (§4.12, wants a plate).

§Adjudication — blind polarity read (2026-08-19)

Blind reader, fenced from this file: 5 sites, all OURS-SIDE, no Migne-side polarity defect. Every printed negative was present and correctly hosted, including the two double negatives (Nulla enim creatura … non serviat; Non est genus mali quod non ex cupiditate … proveniat). All five accepted and repaired.

1. 0626A–B · quo prior non erat / nemo prior inter peccatores — "earlier" → "greater" (twice). The gloss exists to say Paul's primus is rank, not chronology, and says so in its own last clause (non ordine temporis, sed magnitudine iniquitatis). Rendering prior temporally made the premises deny the conclusion inside one sentence. The inference from acrior inter persecutores only licenses the comparative of rank.
2. 0626C · quomodo populum imbuat disciplina ecclesiastica ostendit — imbuere takes accusative of person + ablative of thing, so disciplina is not the subject: "he shows how he is to imbue the people with ecclesiastical discipline." Making discipline the agent turned a directive to Timothy into a general observation. The Argumentum at 0623D frames the epistle the same way (Timotheum instruit et docet de … omnis ecclesiasticae disciplinae).
3. 0626D · excludatur a Satana regnum Satanae — "from Satan" → "by Satan". a + ablative of a person with a passive verb is agent, and the whole remaining gloss is built on Satan as the unwilling instrument (procuratores … divinae providentiae). "Satan's kingdom shut out from Satan" is close to incoherent.
4. 0629A–B · genu illi flectentes quasi Deo gratias agant — quasi Deo picks up the dative illi: "bending the knee to him as to God, might give thanks." The prior rendering attached quasi to the verb as a hedge ("might as it were give thanks to God"), which loses the christological identification the sentence is making. ⚑ Rival recorded: Deo can be read as the dative of gratias agant (gratias agere Deo is idiomatic). It lost because a quasi hedging the angels' thanksgiving asserts nothing, while quasi Deo answering illi is the point of the passage.
5. 0631C · Superbia quippe, non eum ratio ducit — now "Pride assuredly, not reason, leads him." ⚑⚑ This overturns a deliberate, argued call by the translator (§11 above read it as an anacoluthon and kept the dangling nominative). Recorded as a disagreement, not an oversight: the sense is identical under both readings, and the ellipsis of ducit is the ordinary discourse shape after quippe explaining the lemma Superbus, so the reading that ASSERTS something wins over the one that leaves Superbia predicated of nothing in English.

⚑ The pattern across 1–5: not one is a missing word. Every defect was a question about what the English SAYS — a comparative read in the wrong dimension, an ablative read as a nominative, an agent read as separation, a dative reattached, an ellipsis left dangling. Counts, parity and band checks cannot see any of them, and the blind reader found all five while reporting no polarity defect at all. That is the fourth test earning its place for the second batch running.

⬜ Unchanged and still owed: the plate read of col. 0623 that would settle Tychichum (§12), and the unchecked plate status of §0 — no [cn:] recovery for cols 0623–0632.