COMMENTARIA IN LIBRUM PRIMUM SENTENTIARUM
by St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, O. F. M.
DOCTOR SERAPHICUS
WITH TEXT OF THE BOOK OF SENTENCES BY PETER LOMBARD
ENGLISH TRANSLATION by The Franciscan Archive
© 2006-7 English Translations, emendations
and digitization of texts, unless otherwise specified.
As Part of the Commentary Project
Accompanied by the Latin Text of the Quaracchi Edition, in Parallel
With the footnotes and Scholia of the Quaracchi Editors
Nota Bene: If you are a Professor of Theology or Philosophy or of Medieval Studies and have found this English Translation useful to yourself or students, and would like to publicly commend it, to further its diffusion and utility, please contact the Project at the URL Above.
Public Commendations of This Work:
"This is a very impressive achievement and a great service to the scholarly community,” says Dr Benjamin Myers
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Centre for the History of European Discourses (CHED), The University of Queensland, Australia
January 31, 2007Also: Comments, criticism and suggestions in regard to any aspect of this translation or project are cordially invited from the Academic Community, and most gratefully accepted, as the purpose here is to propagate the authentic thought of the respective Authors.
This "Summa" of Theology stands shoulder-to-shoulder with that of St. Thomas Aquinas, but which differs from it by retaining the outlook of the Greek and Latin Fathers, while reconciling Aristotle with St. Augustine.
AN INTRODUCTION TO THIS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
N.B.: This Translation is not yet available in Print. However, this Volume is scheduled to be published in the Summer of 2014. Until then, it is no longer available on the web.
INTRODUCTORY DOCUMENTS
TAKEN FROM THE PREFACES OF VOLUMES I & III OF THE OPERA OMNIA S. BONAVENTURAE
Biographical Excerpts about St. Bonaventure from the General Preface of the Quarrachi Edition of the Commentary: in English, with footnotes.
The Bulls of Popes Sixtus IV and Sixtus V on St. Bonaventure's Canonization and elevation to the status of Doctor of the Church: in Latin & English.
Superna Caelestis: April 14, 1482 A.D.
The Bull of Pope Sixtus IV, canonizing St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio.
Triumphantis Hierusalem: May 14, 1588 A.D.
The Bull of Pope Sixtus V, inscribing St. Bonaventure among the primary Doctors of the Church.
The Letter of Pope Leo XIII to the Minister General of the Order of Minors : December 13, 1885 A.D.
on the occasion of the publication of the second volume of the Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae. Taken from the preface to Vol. III of the said work.
BOOK I
DE DEI UNITATE ET TRINITATEFOREWORD (Proœmium) by St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio
Question I : What is the matter or subject of this Book or of theology?
Question 2 : What is the formal cause or manner of proceeding in this Book or of theology?
Question 3 : Whether this book or theology is for the sake of contemplation, or that we become good, or whether it is a speculative or practical science?
Question 4 : What is the efficient cause or author of this book?The Prologue to the Book of Sentences
by Master Peter LombardCommentary on the Prologue of Master Peter: Division of the Text and Doubts, by St. Bonaventure
DISTINCTION I
Chapter 1: Every doctrine concerns things and/or signs.
Chapter 2: On the things which one is to enjoy and/or to use, and on those who use and enjoy
Chapter 3: What is it to use and to enjoy?DISTINCTION I: The Division of the Book of Sentences and the Disputation on ‘to enjoy’ and ‘to use’, by St. Bonaventure
ARTICLE I: What is it ‘to use’, and on the usable
Question 1: Whether ‘to use’ is an act of the will, or of the reason, and/or of every power?
Question 2: Whether one is to use every creature?
Question 3: Whether one is to use only the created good?ARTICLE II: What is it ‘to enjoy’?
Question 1: Whether ‘to enjoy’ is an act of the will, or of the other powers?
ARTICLE III: On the enjoyable.
Question 1: Whether one is to enjoy God?
Question 1: Whether one is to enjoy God alone or the uncreated good?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's First Distinction
DISTINCTION II
Chapter 1: On the Trinity and Unity.
Chapter 2: What was the intention of those writing of the Trinity?
Chapter 3: What order is to be observed, when dealing with the Trinity?
Chapter 4: On the testimonies of the Old Testament, by which the Mystery of the Trinity is declared.
Chapter 5: On the testimonies of the New Testament, pertaining to the same.DISTINCTION II: On the Unity and Trinity according to what is believed, by St. Bonaventure
ARTICLE I: On the Unity of the Divine Essence and the plurality of the Persons
Question 1: Whether there is only one God?
Question 2: Whether in God there is to be posited a plurality of persons?
Question 3: Whether the number of divine Persons is infinite?
Question 4: Whether there are only three divine Persons?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's Second Distinction
DISTINCTION III
PART I, Chapter 1: On the cognition of God through the creatures, in which the vestige of the Trinity appears.
PART II, Chapter 2: On the image and similitude of the Trinity in the human soul.
Chapter 3: On the similitude of the creating and created trinity.
Chapter 4: On the unity of the Trinity.DISTINCTION III : Part I: On the Cognition of God through distant similitudes, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the Cognizability of God
Question 1: Whether God is cognizable by a creature?
Question 2: Whether God is cognizable through creatures?
Question 3: Whether man in every state cognizes God through creatures?
Question 4: Whether a trinity of persons with a unity of essence can be naturally cognized through creatures?
DOUBTS on the First Part of the text of Master Peter's Third Distinction
DISTINCTION III : Part II: On the Cognition of God through near similitudes or through the image, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the first impression of the image
Question 1: Whether the reckoning of the image is attained in the memory, intelligence and will?
Question 2: Whether the imagine is attained in these powers through their comparison to God?
Question 3: Whether memory, intelligence and will are the same in essence with the soul?Article II: On the second impression of the image
Question 1: Whether the image is attained in mind, knowledge and love as in the powers, or at in the habits, or in both simultaneously, or according to substance and habit?
Question 2: Whether mind, knowledge and love have order, equality and consubstantiality?
Question 3: Whether the trinity of image, which consists in mind, knowledge and love, necessarily leads unto cognition of the Three Divine Persons?
DOUBTS on the Second Part of the text of Master Peter's Third Distinction
DISTINCTION IV
Chapter 1: Whether God the Father begot Himself God?
Chapter 2: Whether the Trinity may be predicated of the one God, as the one God of the Three Persons?DISTINCTION IV: Questions from the comparison of generation to the essential, concrete term, such as the name “God”,
by St. BonaventureArticle I: On the comparison of the name "God" to generation and of its consignification and supposition
Question 1: Whether this saying: "God begot God", must be conceded?
Question 2: Whether this saying can be admitted: "God generates another God"?
Question 3: Whether congruously in accord with the rules of grammar it can be said: "there are more gods"?
Question 4: Whether this name "God" substitutes for a person, and/or for a nature?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's Fourth Distinction
DISTINCTION V
Chapter 1: Whether the Divine Essence begot the Son, and/or is begotten by the Father,
and/or whether the Son is born from It, and/or the Holy Spirit proceeds from It?
Chapter 2: That the Son is not from nothing, but some someone or thing,
non however from matter, just as also is the Holy Spirit.
Chapter 3: Why the Word of the Father is called the Son of His Nature.DISTINCTION V: On the Comparison of Generation to its essential concrete term, “essence”, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the comparison of generation to the substance or essence in the reckoning of a principle
Question 1: Whether the Substance or Essence generates?
Question 2: Whether there is to be conceded the saying, that the Son is generated from the substance of the Father?Article II: On the comparison of generation to essence in the reckoning of a term
Question 1: Whether the Substance or Essence is generated?
Question 2: Whether the Substance or Divine Essence is communicated through generation?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's Fifth Distinction
DISTINCTION VI
Chapter Sole: Whether the Father begot the Son by will, or by necessity; and whether God is willing and/or unwilling.DISTINCTION VI: On the Comparison of the act of generation to the power, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the generation of the Son according to its conditions
Question 1: Whether the generation of the Son is according to a reckoning of necessity?
Question 2: Whether the generation of the Son is according to a reckoning of will?
Question 3: Whether the generation of the Son is according to a reckoning of exemplarity?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's Sixth Distinction
DISTINCTION VII
Chapter 1: Whether the Father could and/or willed to beget the Son.
Chapter 2: Or whether there is some power in the Father that can beget the Son, which is not in the Son.DISTINCTION VII: On the Comparison of the power of generating to the Person, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: (Untitled)
Question 1: Whether the power of generating means something absolute, and/or relative?
Question 2: Whether the power of generating is in the Son?
Question 3: Whether the power of generating and the power of creating are a unique power?
Question 4: Whether “to be able to be generated” and “to be able to be created” are a univocal “to be able”?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's Seventh Distinction
DISTINCTION VIII
PART I, Chapter 1: On the truth and property of the Divine Essence.
Chapter 2: On the incommutability of the same.
PART II, Chapter 3: On the simplicity of the same.
Chapter 4: On the corporal and spiritual creature, in what manner it be multiple, and not simple.
Chapter 5: That God, though He be simple, is nevertheless spoken of in a multiple manner.
Chapter 6: That the simplicity of God is subject to none of the predicaments.
Chapter 7: That God is abusively said to be a substance.
Chapter 8: That there is not in God anything that is not God.DISTINCTION VIII : Part I: On the Essential Properties and Conditions of the Trinity and Unity, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the truth of God.
Question 1: Whether truth is a property of the Divine "to be"?
Question 2: Whether the Divine "to be" is true to such an extent, that it cannot be though not to be?Article II: On the immutability of God.
Question 1: Whether God is immutable?
Question 2: Whether God alone is immutable?
DOUBTS on Part I of the text of Master Peter's Eighth Distinction
DISTINCTION VIII: Part II: On the Simplicity of God, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: (untitled)
Question 1: Whether God is most highly simple?
Question 2: Whether a most high simplicity befits God alone?
Question 3: Whether the rational soul is whole in the whole body, and whole in any part of it?
Question 4: Whether God is in any determinate genus or predicament?
DOUBTS on Part II of the text of Master Peter's Eighth Distinction
DISTINCTION IX
Chapter 1: On the distinction of the Three Persons.
Chapter 2: On the coeternity of the Father and of the Son.
Chapter 3: On the ineffable and intelligible manner of the generation.
Chapter 4: Whether there ought to be said: God always is begotten, and/or always has been begotten.
Chapter 5: On the objections of the heretics striving to prove, that the Son is not coeternal to the Father.DISTINCTION IX: On the properties, which respect the Persons, and indeed on the emanation of generation, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On generation among the divine
Question 1: Whether generation is to be posited among the divine?
Question 2: Whether among the divine generation distinguishes between the One begetting and the One begotten?
Question 3: Whether among the divine generation is eternal?
Question 4: Whether the generation of the Son has been terminated?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's Ninth Distinction
DISTINCTION X
Chapter 1: On the Holy Spirit, that He is properly said to be the Love of the Father and of the Son, etc..
Chapter 2: That the same names are properly and universally accepted.
Chapter 3: That the Holy Spirit, just as He is common to the Father and to the Son, so He has commonly a proper name.DISTINCTION X: On the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, inasmuch as regards the Person who proceeds, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the manner of the proceeding of the Holy Spirit
Question 1: Whether among the divine there is to be posited a Person proceeding through a manner of liberality?
Question 2: Whether among the divine there is to be posited a Person proceeding through a manner of love or charity?
Question 3: Whether among the divine there is to be posited a third Person proceeding through a manner of mutual charity?Article II: On the property of the Holy Spirit
Question 1: Whether love or charity is proper to the Holy Spirit?
Question 2: Whether the Holy Spirit is the nexus or unity of the Father and the Son?
Question 3: Whether the Holy Spirit is properly a spirit?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter's Tenth Distinction
DISTINCTION XI
Chapter 1: That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, whom, however, the Greeks disavow to proceed from the Son.
Chapter 2: On the Agreement of the Latins and the Greeks in sense, and their difference in words.DISTINCTION XI: On the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, inasmuch as regards the principle, from which He proceeds,
by St. Bonaventure.
Article Sole: On the principle of the procession of the Holy Spirit
Question 1: Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son?
Question 2: Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, as from one principle?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter’s Eleventh Distinction
Chapter 1: Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds before and/or more fully from the Father than from the Son.Chapter 2: That the Holy Spirit principally and properly is said to proceed from the Father.
DISTINCTION XII: On the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, how He proceeds from the Father and the Son, by St. Bonaventure.
Article Sole: On the procession of the Holy Spirit in comparison to the Father and the Son.
Question 1: Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father before He does from the Son?
Question 2: Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds more fully and more principally from the Father than from the Son?
Question 3: Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father by means of the Son?
Question 4: Whether the generation of the Son is prior to the spiration of the Holy Spirit, according to the reckoning of understanding?
DOUBTS on the text of Master Peter’s Twelfth Distinction
Chapter I: Why is the Holy Spirit, since he is from the Substance of the Father, not said to be begotten, but only proceeding?
Chapter II: Why is the Son said to proceed, when the Holy Spirit is not said to be begotten?
Chapter III: That a mortal cannot distinguish between the generation of the Son and the procession of the Holy Sprit.
Chapter IV: Whether the Holy Spirit ought to be said to be unbegotten, since He is not begotten.
DISTINCTION XIII: On the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, to the extent that it is distinguished from generation,
by St. Bonaventure.
Article Sole: On the procession of the Holy Spirit and on the difference of procession from generation.
Question 1: Whether among the divine there is to be posited a procession?
Question 2: Whether the procession of the Holy Spirit is a generation?
Question 3: Whether the procession of the Holy Spirit differs from the generation of the Son really, and/or only according to the reckoning of understanding?
Question 4: Whether the Holy Spirit is unbegotten?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirteenth Distinction
Chapter I: On the twin procession of the Holy Spirit, the temporal and eternal.Chapter II: That not only the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but also the Holy Spirit Himself is given and sent to men.
Chapter III: Whether or not holy men could give the Holy Spirit.
DISTINCTION XIV: On the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit as much as regards the principle from which, by St. Bonaventure.
Article I: On the temporal procession of the Holy Sprit.
Question 1: Whether a temporal procession of the Holy Spirit is to be posited?
Question 2: Whether the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit and the temporal are to be numbered as two processions?
Article II: On the giving of the Holy Spirit.
Question 1: Whether the Holy Spirit is given in His own Person, or whether only in effect?
Question 2: Whether the Holy Spirit is given by any holy man?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Fourteenth Distinction
PART I, Chapter I: That the Holy Spirit is given by Himself, and the Son is sent by Himself
Chapter II: In what manner is the mission of Each to be understood.
Chapter III: That the Son has also been sent by the Holy Spirit.
Chapter IV: That the Son has also been given by Himself.
Chapter V: In what manner this must be understood: I have not come on My own.
PART II, Chapter VI: Whether the Son has been sent only once, or often.
Chapter VII: On the two manners of the Son’s mission.
Chapter VIII: That according to one manner He has been sent once, according to the other often;
and according to one manner He is said to have been sent into the world,
according to the other He is not.Chapter IX: For what reason is the Father not said to be sent.
Chapter X: That the Son and the Holy Spirit are not as ones lesser than the Father, because They have been sent.
DISTINCTION XV: PART I: On mission or temporal procession as much as regards its principle, by St. Bonaventure.
Article Sole: On mission among the divine.
Question 1: Whether there is mission among the divine?
Question 2: Whether mission among the divine is only on account of time, or also from eternity?
Question 3: Whether mission, passively accepted, belongs to the whole Trinity, in view of the Father?
Question 4: Whether mission, actively accepted, belongs to the whole Trinity?
DOUBTS on the Text of Part I of Master Peter’s Fifteenth Distinction
DISTINCTION XV: PART II : On the mission of the Son and of the Holy Spirit as much as regards its manner, which is twofold, namely, the visible and invisible, by St. Bonaventure.
Article Sole: On the invisible mission both of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Question 1: Whether the invisible mission is according to gifts of the grace, freely given, and/or of the grace which makes one pleasing?
Question 2: Whether the Son and the Holy Spirit are said to be sent according to the same gifts of grace?
Question 3 : Whether the Son and the Holy Spirit are sent, when gifts of grace are augmented?
DOUBTS on the Text of Part II of Master Peter’s Fifteenth Distinction
Chapter I: On the Mission of the Holy Spirit, which comes to be in two manners, visibly and invisibly.
Chapter II: That the Son, according to which He is man, is not merely less than the Father, but also less than the Holy Spirit.
DISTINCTION XVI: On the mission of the Holy Spirit in particular, and indeed concerning the visible mission, by St. Bonaventure.
Article Sole: On the visible mission of the Holy Spirit.
Question 1: What is a visible mission?
Question 2: For what is the visible mission of the Holy Spirit useful?
Question 3: In which manners does the visible mission come to be?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Sixteenth Distinction
PART I, Chapter I: That the Holy Spirit is the charity, by which we love God and neighbor.
Chapter II: That fraternal love is God, and not the Father and/or the Son, but only the Holy Spirit.
Chapter III: That this verse: ‘God is charity’, has not been said in the manner of a cause, as this verse:
Thou art my patience and my hope.
Chapter IV: In what manner the Holy Spirit is sent and/or given to us.
PART II, Chapter V: Whether the Holy Spirit is increased in a man, and/or is less and more had and/or given,
and whether He is given to one having and to one not having.
Chapter VI: That some say, that the charity of God and neighbor is not the Holy Spirit.
DISTINCTION XVII: On the invisible mission of the Holy Spirit, by St. Bonaventure
PART I: The invisible mission of the Holy Spirit is determined.
Article Sole: On the created habit of charity, whether it exists, and in what manner it can be loved and cognized.
Question 1: Whether besides uncreated Charity there ought to be posited a created habit of charity?
Question 2: Whether charity is to be loved out of charity?
Question 3: Whether anyone can know with certitude, that he is in charity?
Question 4: Whether charity is cognizable in the universal, even by one not having it?
DOUBTS on the Text of Part I of Master Peter’s Seventeenth Distinction
DISTINCTION XVII: PART II: Master Peter puts forth the defense of his own opinion.
Article Sole: On the augment of charity.
Question 1: Whether charity can be increased according to its substance?
Question 2: In what manner charity is increased?
Question 3: Whether charity can be diminished?
Question 4: Whether charity has a terminus in its augment?
DOUBTS on the Text of Part II of Master Peter’s Seventeenth Distinction
Chapter I: Whether it must be conceded, that gifts are given through a gift.
Chapter II: Whether the Holy Spirit is said to be ‘a gift’ for the same reason, that He is said to be given or granted.
Chapter III: That just as the Son by being born accepted not only, ‘to be the Son’, but also ‘to be the Essence’,
so the Holy Spirit by proceeding accepted not only, ‘to be a gift’, but ‘to be the Essence’.
Chapter IV: That the Holy Spirit is said to be a ‘gift’ and a ‘granted’ according to the two aforesaid manners of procession, who, according to which He is a gift, is referred to the Father and the Son, according to which a given, to Him who gives and to those to whom He is given.
Chapter V: Whether the Son, since He has been given to us, can be said to be ‘ours’, as the Holy Spirit is.
Chapter VI: Whether the Holy Spirit is referred to Himself.
DISTINCTION XVIII: On the property of the Holy Spirit, according to which it befits Him to proceed temporally, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the property of the Holy Spirit, whereby His is a gift.
Question 1: Whether the Holy Spirit is the Gift, in which all other gifts are granted?
Question 2: Whether the Holy Spirit is the a gift from eternity, or in time?
Question 3: Whether there is more fittingly said of the Holy Spirit “gift” than “given”?
Question 4: Whether “gift” is an essential name, or a personal and proper one of the Holy Spirit?
Question 5: Whether “gift” or “grantability” is a distinctive property of the Holy Spirit?
Question 6: Whether the Holy Spirit by reason of His grantability can be said to be “our Spirit”?
DOUBTS on the Text of Mater Peter’s Eighteenth Distinction.
PART I, Chapter I: On the equality of the Three Persons.
Chapter II: That eternity and magnitude and power in God is one, even if they seem to be diverse.
Chapter III: That none of the Persons exceeds the Other in magnitude, because one Person is not greater than the Other,
nor are Two something more than One, nor Three than Two and/or One.
Chapter IV: In what manner is the Father said to be in the Son an the Son in the Father and the Holy Spirit in Each.
PART II, Chapter V: That None of the Persons is a part in the Trinity.
Chapter VI: For what reason are the Three Persons said to be most highly one.
Chapter VII: When we say, that the Three Persons are the one Essence,
neither do we predicate It as a genus of species nor as a species of individuals,
because it is not that the Essence is a genus and a Person a species,
and/or the Essence a species and the Persons individuals.
Chapter VIII: That neither according to a material cause are the Three Persons said to be the one Essence.
Chapter IX: Nor are the Three Persons thus said to be the one Essence, as three men are one in nature and/or of one nature.
Chapter X: Whether the Three Persons differ in number, who have been distinguished by properties.
Chapter XI: For what reason are the Three Persons together not something greater than One (Person).
Chapter XII: That God is not to be said to be “threefold”, but “triune”.DISTINCTION XIX: On the equality of the Three Persons in God, in particular, in regard to Their magnitude, by St. Bonaventure.
PART I: On the equality proven through the unity of the Essence.
Article Sole: On the equality of the Divine Persons and its properties.
Question 1: Whether equality is to be posited among the divine?
Question 2: Whether among the divine there is a most high equality?
Question 3: Whether the equality of the Divine Persons is reciprocal?
Question 4: Whether among the divine there is equality with circumincession?DOUBTS on Part I of the text of Master Peter’s Nineteenth Distinction
DISTINCTION XIX: PART II: On the equality proved through the exclusion of inequality.
Article Sole: That from God ought to be excluded all reckonings of inequality.
Question 1: Whether among the divine there is to be posited an integral whole?
Question 2: Whether among the divine there can be posited a universal whole?
Question 3: Whether among the Divine Persons there can be posited a material principle?
Question 4: Whether among the divine there can be posited a difference according to number?
DOUBTS on Part II of the text of Master Peter’s Nineteenth Distinction
Chapter I: That None of the Persons exceeds Another in power.
Chapter II: That the Son is no less able than the Father.
Chapter III: On the objections of heretics against this, and the response of Catholics.DISTINCTION XX: On the equality of the Three Persons as much as regards power and virtue, by St. Bonaventure.
Article I: On the adequation of power among the divine.
Question 1: Whether among the Divine Persons there is equal power as much as regards (its) extension to possibles?
Question 2: Whether among the Divine Persons there is equality as much as regards the intensity of power?
Article II: On order among the divine.
Question 1: Whether among the divine there is a reckoning of order?
Question 2: Whether among the divine there is an order of nature?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twentieth Distinction
Chapter I: In what manner can there be said: ‘the Father alone’, and/or ‘the Son alone’ and/or ‘the Holy Spirit alone’, since They are inseparable.
Chapter II: Whether there ought to be said: ‘the Father alone is God’, and/or ‘the Son alone is God’, and/or ‘the Holy Spirit alone is God’; or whether, ‘the Father is the only God’, ‘the Son is the only God’, ‘the Holy Spirit is the only God’.
Chapter III: In what manner is the Trinity said (to be) God alone, since He is with the spirits and the souls.DISTINCTION XXI: In what way exclusive sayings are accepted among the divine, by St. Bonaventure.
Article I: On exclusive sayings added to a substantial term.
Question 1: Whether there is said in a true manner: “God alone is the Father”?
Question 2: Whether an exclusive saying can be truly added to a substantial term on the part of the predicate?
Article II: On exclusive sayings added to a relative term.
Question 1: Whether the exclusive saying “solus” is truly added to a personal term in respect to a proper predicate?
Question 2: Whether the exclusive saying “solus” is truly added to a personal term in respect to a common predicate?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-First Distinction
Chapter I: On the difference of the names, which we use speaking of God.
Chapter II: On those which convene with God temporally and are said relatively.
Chapter III: On this name which is “Trinity”.
Chapter IV: On those which properly pertain to the each Person, and on those which signify the Unity of the Essence.DISTINCTION XXII: On Faith in the Trinity, to the extent that having been believed and understood It is expressed through the discourse of Catholics, and indeed on the Divine Names in general, by St. Bonaventure.
Article Sole: On the Divine Names.
Question 1: Whether God is nameable?
Question 2: Whether God has only, one Name, or more?
Question 3: Whether all Divine Names are said in a transferred manner?Question 4: Whether all names said of God are said according to substance?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Second Distinction — with “The Five Rules on the Names of God”
Chapter I: On this name which is “Person”, since it is said according to substance, it is accepted not singularly, but plurally in the Most High.
Chapter II: By what necessity has there been said by the Latins “Three Persons”, and by the Greeks “Three Hypostases and/or Substances”.
Chapter III: For what reason do we not say that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are “Three Gods”,
since we do say that they are “Three Persons”.
Chapter IV: Why do we not say “Three Essences”, since we do say “Three Persons”.
Chapter V: That in the Trinity there is not a diversity and/or singularity and/or solitude, but a Unity and a Trinity and distinction and identity.
Chapter VI: That God ought not be said to be “manifold”.DISTINCTION XXIII: On substantial Divine Names in particular, by St. Bonaventure.
Article I: On the transferal of the names “person”, “substance” and “essence” to the divine.
Question 1: Whether the name for ‘person’ has been fittingly transferred to the divine?
Question 2: Whether among the divine the name for ‘substance’ and ‘subsistence’ is fittingly to be used?
Question 3: Whether the name for ‘ essence’ is fittingly employed among the divine; moreover, there is asked
concerning the difference of the names “essence”, “subsistence”, “substance” and “person”?
Article II: On the numbering of the four Names.
Question 1: Whether among the divine there can be said to be many “substances”?
Question 2: Whether among the divine there can be numbered many “essences”?
Question 3: Whether in a Catholic manner we can say that there are “many Gods”?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Third Distinction — with a Note to the Readers from the Quaracchi Editors
Chapter Sole: What is signified by these names: “one”, “two”, “three”, “triune” and/or “trinity”, “many” and/or “plurality”,
“distinction” and/or “distinct”, when we use them, speaking of God.DISTINCTION XXIV: What does a numeral term signify among the divine, by St. Bonaventure.
Article I: On the numeral and partitive term “one”.
Question 1: Whether this name “one” is said positively, and/or privatively, among the divine?
Question 2: Whether “one” among the divine is said according to substance, or whether according to relation?
Article II: On purely numeral names.
Question 1: Whether purely numeral names among the divine are said positively, or privatively?
Question 2: Whether numeral names among the divine are said according to substance, or according to relation?
Article III: On the name “triune” and “trinity”.
Question 1: Whether names, which signify at the same time ‘one’ and ‘number’, convey a unity?
Question 2: Whether the unity, which the names “Trinity” and “Triune” convey, is a unity of essence, or of
supposit?NOTES on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Fourth Distinction
Chapter I: What is signified by this name “Person” in the plural number, that is, when there is said “Persons”.
Chapter II: On the threefold acceptance of this name “Person” in the Trinity.
Chapter III: Out of which sense is there said: One, the Person of the Father, Another, the Person of the Son, Another, that of the Holy Spirit; or the Father is one in person, the Son another, the Holy Spirit another.DISTINCTION XXV: What does the name “person” signify?, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the quiddity of the name “person”.
Question 1: Whether the name “person” among the divine is said according to substance,
or whether it is said according to relation?
Question 2: Whether “person” has been rightly defined by Boethius, as that which is an individual substance
of a rational nature, and whether this reckoning befits the Divine Persons?
Article II: On the commonality of the name “person”.
Question 1: Whether the name “person” is common to the uncreated Persons?
Question 2: Whether the name for ‘person’, said of created and uncreated persons, is a common univocal term?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Fifth Distinction
Chapter I: On this name “hypostasis”.
Chapter II: On the properties of the Persons and on the names relative to these.
Chapter III: That not all names are said of God according to substance; for certain ones are said according to relation, however nothing is said according to accident.
Chapter IV: For what reason is it said that it is proper to the Only-Begotten, to be the Son of God, since even men are the sons God.
Chapter V: That a man is said to be a “son” of the Trinity, and the Trinity, the “father” of men.
Chapter VI: That the Holy Spirit is said to be “the Gift” by the same property, by which He is said to be “the Holy Spirit”, and in each manner relatively to the Father and the Son.
Chapter VII: Whether the Father and/or the Son and/or the Trinity Itself can be said to be a “holy spirit”.
Chapter VIII: That not all the names, which are said relatively, respond, according to their terms, to one another in reverse.DISTINCTION XXVI: On the properties of a Person, according to which they are assigned in the Persons Themselves,
by St. BonaventureArticle Sole: On the properties in general.
Question 1: Whether among the divine there are to be posited properties for the Persons?
Question 2: What are properties of the Persons among the divine?
Question 3: Whether the act of the personal properties is to distinguish the Hypostases,
or to show that They are distinct?
Question 4: How many personal properties are there among the divine?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Sixth Distinction
PART I, Chapter I: What are those properties, by which the Persons are distinguished.
Chapter II: That it is not entirely the same to say, that He is the Father and that He has begotten and/or has a Son.
Chapter III: That the properties determine the Hypostases, not the Substance, that is, the Nature.
PART II: That there are other names for the Persons, which also signify Their personal properties.
Chapter IV: On the general rule for those which regard themselves, and for those which are said relatively.
Chapter V: Or whether according to substance there is said “God from God”, and sayings of this kind.DISTINCTION XXVII: PART I: On the properties of a Person, to the extent that they are expressed through more usual words, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the property of the paternity, on the abstraction of the properties, and on the certitude of this doctrine.
Question 1: Whether ‘to be the Father’ and ‘to generate’ is one and the same notion?
Question 2: Whether the generation is the reason for the paternity, or the other way around?
Question 3: Whether the properties can be abstracted from the Divine Persons?
Question 4: Whether it is licit to opine in a contrary manner concerning the notions or properties?DOUBTS on the First Part of the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Seventh Distinction
DISTINCTION XVII: PART II: On the Properties of the Persons, to the extent that they are expressed through less usual words, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the name for a word.
Question 1: Whether “word” is said essentially, or notionally among the divine?
Question 2: Whether the eternal Word connotes anything on the part of a creature?
Question 3: What is the comparison of the Word to wisdom or knowledge?
Question 4: Whether the name for a word has been rightly transferred to the divine?DOUBTS on the Second Part of the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Seventh Distinction
Chapter I: That there are not only three properties of the Persons.
Chapter II: Whether the Father alone ought to be said to be “not-begotten” and/or “not-a-son”, just as He is said to be “unbegotten”.
Chapter III: On the property, which “unbegotten” notes.
Chapter IV: The response of St. Ambrose against the Arians concerning the Unbegotten.
Chapter V: Whether ‘to be a father’ and ‘to be a son’ is diverse.
Chapter VI: Whether wisdom is said to be begotten according to relation, and/or according to substance.
Chapter VII: On “image”.DISTINCTION XXVIII: On the non-personal property, which is the innascibility, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the innascibility and improcessibility.
Question 1: Whether the name “unbegotten” or “innascibility” is said according to substance, and/or relation?
Question 2: Whether the innascibility and the paternity convey the same relation?
Question 3: Whether the innascibility, or the paternity is the personal property of the Father?
Question 4: Whether improcessibility just as innascibility also means a notion in the Father?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Eighth Distinction
Chapter I: On principium.
Chapter II: That from eternity the Father is a principle and the Son, but not the Holy Spirit.
Chapter III: In what manner the Father is the principle of the Son, and He with the Son the principle of the Holy Spirit.
Chapter IV: Whether the Father and the Son are the principle of the Holy Spirit according to the same notion.DISTINCTION XXIX: On the non-personal property, which is the common spiration, signified through this name principium,
by St. BonaventureArticle I: On principium as much as regards the multiplicity of its meaning.
Question 1: Whether the name principium among the divine can be accepted personally or notionally?
Question 2: Whether this name principium, if taken essentially and notionally, is said univocally, or equivocally?
Article II: On principium as much as regards the unity of its meaning.
Question 1: Whether the Father and the Son can be said to be “the one principle” of the Holy Spirit?
Question 2: Whether the Father and the Son can be said to be “the one spirator”, and or even
“the same principle” of the Holy Spirit?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Twenty-Ninth Distinction
Chapter I: On those names, which are said of God temporally and relatively according to an accident, which accedes not to God, but to creatures.
Chapter II: Whether the Holy Spirit is said to have been given and/or granted relatively to Himself, since He is given by Himself.DISTINCTION XXX: On the relative names, which are said of God temporally and commonly, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On those names which are said of God on account of time.
Question 1: Whether anything is said of God on account of time?
Question 2: Whether the names, which are said of God on account of time, are said per se, and/or per accidens?
Question 3: Whether the names, which are said of God on account of time, convey a real relation in God?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirtieth Distinction
PART I: Chapter I: Whether the Son is said to be “equal” and/or “similar” to the Father according to substance.
PARTII: Chapter II: On the sentence of Saint Hilary, by which he shows the names proper to the Persons in the Trinity.
Chapter III: For what reason is “unity” attributed to the Father.
Chapter IV: For what reason are the Father and the Son said to be unum and/or unus Deus, but not unus.
Chapter V: Why there is said to be an equality in the Son.
Chapter VI: Why in the Holy Spirit there is said to be virtue, concord and/or a connection.DISTINCTION XXXI: On the relative names, which are said of God commonly and eternally, by St. Bonaventure
PART I: On the signification of these names.Article Sole: On the names “similar” and “equal”.
Question 1: Whether equality and similitude are said of God positively and/or privatively?
Question 2: Whether “equality” and “similitude” among the divine are said according to substance,
or according to relation?
Question 3: Whether “equal” and “similar” are said among the divine according to a mutual relation?DOUBTS on the First Part of the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-First Distinction
DISTINCTION XXXI: PART II: On the appropriation of relative names, which are said commonly and eternally.
Article I: On St. Hilary’ s appropriation.
Question 1: Whether there is said to be an image among the divine according to substance,
or according to relation?
Question 2: Whether “image” among the divine is properly said of the Son?
Question 3: For what reason is “eternity” appropriated to the Father, “sightliness” to the Image,
and “use” to the Gift?
Article II: On St. Augustine’ s appropriation.
Question 1: Whether God can be said to be “one” with a creature?
Question 2: Whether one creature with another can be said (to be) “one” simply?
Question 3: By what reckoning is “unity” appropriated to the Father, “equality” to the Son,
“concord” to the Holy Spirit?DOUBTS on the Second Part of the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-First Distinction
Chapter I: Whether the Father and/or the Son love by that love, which proceeds from Each, that is, by the Holy Spirit.
Chapter II: Whether the Father is wise by the Wisdom, which He begot.
Chapter III: Whether the Son is wise by Himself and/or through Himself.
Chapter IV: Whether there is only one Wisdom of the Father.
Chapter V: Just as in the Trinity there is the Love, which is the Trinity, and yet the Holy Spirit is the Love,
which is not the Trinity, nor for that reason are there two Loves; so also concerning Wisdom.
Chapter VI: For what reason is the Father not said (to be) wise by the Begotten Wisdom,
just as He is said (to be) loving by the Love, which proceeds from Him.DISTINCTION XXXII: The doubts about two expressions pertaining to appropriation are solved, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the expression: “the Father and the Son love Themselves by the Holy Spirit.”
Question 1: Whether the Father and the Son love Themselves by the Holy Spirit?
Question 2: In what habitude is that ablative construed, if there be said: “the Father and the Son
love Themselves by the Holy Spirit”?
Article II: On the expression: “the Father is wise by begotten Wisdom”, on the other: “the Father is powerful by the Virtue, which He begot”.
Question 1: Whether there can be rightly said: “the Father is wise by begotten Wisdom”?
Question 2: Whether there can be rightly said: “the Father is powerful by the Power or Virtue, which He begot”?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Second Distinction
Chapter I: Whether the properties of the Persons are the Persons Themselves, and/or the Divine Ousia.
Chapter II: In what manner can the properties be in the Nature of God, and not determine It.DISTINCTION XXXIII: On the properties in comparison to the Essence and to the Persons, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the diverse comparisons of a property
Question 1: Whether a property is a Person?
Question 2: Whether a property is the Essence?
Question 3: Whether a notion is predicated of a notion?
Question 4: Whether the same property can be denominatively predicated of itself?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Third Distinction
Chapter I: On the words of St. Hilary, by which he seems, according to the intelligence of the depraved,
to say, that the Divine Nature and the Thing of the Nature is not the Same, and that God and what God is, is not the Same.
Chapter II: Whether there can be said, “one God of three Persons”, as there is said, “one essence of three Persons”,
and whether there can be said “three Persons of one God”, as there is said “three Persons of one essence”.
Chapter III: That power, wisdom, and goodness are sometimes referred in Scripture to the Persons distinctly.
Chapter IV: For what reason is power attributed to the Father, wisdom to the Son, goodness to the Holy Spirit,
since there is one Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of the Three.
Chapter V: On this name homoousion, where is it received in authority, and what does it signify.DISTINCTION XXXIV: On the comparison of the Persons to the Nature, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the comparison of a Person to the Nature and on appropriation and transferal.
Question 1: Whether among the divine a Thing of the Nature adds upon the Nature?
Question 2: Whether among the divine a Person is predicated of the Nature, and the Nature of a Person?
Question 3: Whether among the divine there is a positing of appropriated names?
Question 4: Whether among the divine a transferal of names is to be posited?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Fourth Distinction
Chapter I: On God’s knowledge, foreknowledge, providence, disposition and predestination.
Chapter II: What does His foreknowledge and/or foresight concern?
Chapter III: What does His disposition concern?
Chapter IV: What does His predestination concern?
Chapter V: What does His providence concern?
Chapter VI: What does His wisdom and/or knowledge concern?
Chapter VII: Whether foreknowledge and/or disposition could belong to God, if there were no future things?
Chapter VIII: That God’s knowledge concerns things temporal and eternal.
Chapter IX: In what manner are all said to be “in God” and to be “life in Him”?DISTINCTION XXXV: On God’s knowledge in general, according to itself, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On ideas.
Question 1: Whether ideas are to be posited in God?
Question 2: Whether among ideas there is a plurality according to thing?
Question 3: Whether among ideas there is a plurality according to a reckoning?
Question 4: Whether ideas are plurified through a comparison to the ideated, to the extent that these are diverse in species, and/or in the individual?
Question 5: Whether ideas in God are finite in number, or infinite?
Question 6: Whether ideas have an order?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Fifth Distinction
Chapter I: Whether all ought to be said to be in the God’s Essence,
as they are said to be in God’s Cognition and/or foreknowledge?
Chapter II: By what reckoning are good things said to be in God, and not evil ones?
Chapter III: Whether it is the same that all are “from God” and “through Him” and “in Him”?
Chapter IV: That all are in Any of the Three both through Him and in Him.
Chapter V: That not all which are ex Deo, are also de ipso.DISTINCTION XXXVI: In what manner are things in God?, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the existence of things in God.
Question 1: Whether things were in God from eternity?
Question 2: Whether things are in God according to a reckoning of essence, and/or of person?
Article II: On the manner, in which things exist in God.
Question 1: Whether all are life in God?
Question 2: Whether things have “being” more truly in God than in their own genus?
Article III: On the number or generality of the existence, which things have in God.
Question 1: Whether evil things are in God?
Question 2: Whether imperfect things are in God?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Sixth Distinction
PART I, Chapter I: In what manners God is said to be in things.
Chapter II: That God does not dwell, wheresoever He is, but the other way around.
Chapter III: Where God was, before there was a creature.
Chapter IV: That God, though He is in all things essentially, yet is not completely befouled with sordid things.
PART II, Chapter V: Since God is everywhere and always, yet does not belong to a place,
He is moved neither according to place nor according to time.
Chapter VI: In what manners is something said to belong to a place, and/or be circumscribable?
Chapter VII: What is it to be changed according to time?
Chapter VIII: Whether created spirits belong to a place and are circumscribable?
Chapter IX: That God is everywhere without local movement.DISTINCTION XXXVII: PART I: In what manner is God in things and in corporal places, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: Wherefore does it befit God to be everywhere?
Question 1: Whether God is in all things?
Question 2: Whether God is in all places?
Article II: It is proper to God to be everywhere.
Question 1: Whether ‘to be everywhere’ befits God alone?
Question 2: Whether ‘to be everywhere’ befits God from eternity?
Article III: In what kind of manner is God in things?
Question 1: Whether God is equally in all things?
Question 2: In what manners is God said to be in things?DOUBTS on the First Part of the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Seventh Distinction
DISTINCTION XXXVII: PART II: On the Immutability of God as much as regards place, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the incircumscriptibility of God.
Question 1: Whether God belongs to a place?
Question 2: Whether God is able to change according to place?
Question 3: Whether God is separable from every place and/or is outside of every place?
Article II: On the mutability of the Angels through place.
Question 1: Whether an Angel can move locally without a body?
Question 2: Whether an Angel moves through a medium?
Question 3: Whether an Angel passes through a medium by a sudden movement, and/or by a successive one?DOUBTS on the Second Part of the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Seventh Distinction
Chapter I: Whether the Knowledge and/or Foreknowledge of God is the cause of things, and/or the other way around?
Chapter II: Whether God’s Foreknowledge can fail?DISTINCTION XXXVIII: On the causality, infallibility and necessity of the Divine Foreknowledge, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the causality of the Divine Foreknowledge.
Question 1: Whether the Divine Foreknowledge is the cause of things?
Question 2: Whether the Divine Foreknowledge is caused by things?
Article II: On the Divine Foreknowledge as much as regards the reckoning of Its necessity.
Question 1: Whether God’s Foreknowledge imposes a necessity upon the things foreknown?
Question 2: Whether God necessarily foreknows those which He foreknows?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Eighth Distinction
Chapter I: Whether God’s Knowledge can be increased and/or lessened and/or in any manner be changed?
Chapter II: Whether God can newly either know in time and/or foreknow something?
Chapter III: Whether God can know more, than He knows?
Chapter IV: That God, both always and together, knows all.DISTINCTION XXXIX: On the perfection of the Divine Knowledge, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the perfection of the Divine Knowledge as much as regards the number of cognizables.
Question 1: Whether God cognizes those other than Himself?
Question 2: Whether God cognizes all others than Himself?
Question 3: Whether God can know more, than He knows?
Article II: On the manner of the Divine Cognition.
Question 1: Whether God cognizes Himself and those other than Himself in the same manner?
Question 2: Whether God cognizes mutables immutably?
Question 3: Whether God cognizes each and every thing presently?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Thirty-Ninth Distinction
Chapter I: Whether anyone predestined can be damned, and/or anyone reprobate be saved?
Chapter II: What is God’s reprobation, and in whom is it considered, and what is the effect of predestination?DISTINCTION XL: On predestination and reprobation as much as regards (their) active cause, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On predestination as much as regards its entity.
Question 1: Whether predestination is something eternal, or temporal?
Question 2: Whether predestination is God’s Knowledge, or Will?
Article II: On predestination as much as regards its necessity.
Question 1: Whether predestination infers the necessity of salvation?
Question 2: Whether predestination posits a certitude in the outcome?
Article III: On the Divine election.
Question 1: Whether election is in God from eternity, or on account of time?
Question 2: Whether election is the same as predestination?
Article IV: On reprobation and in particular on obduration.
Question 1: Whether obduration is a punishment, or a fault?
Question 2: Whether obduration is from God?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Fortieth Distinction
Chapter I: Whether there is anything meriting obduration and/or mercy?
Chapter II: On the various opinions of carnal men on this.
Chapter III: Whether those which God once knows and/or foreknows, He always knows and foreknows,
and always had known and had foreknown?DISTINCTION XLI: On the passive causality or meritorious cause of predestination and reprobation, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the cause of Divine predestination.
Question 1: Whether predestination and/or reprobation have in us a meritorious cause?
Question 2: Whether predestination and reprobation have in God a motive reason?
Article II: On the sempiternity of Divine Cognition.
Question 1: Whether God cognizes things through the manner of complexion?
Question 2: Whether the enunciables, which God cognizes once, He always cognizes?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-First DistinctionChapter I: On the Omnipotence of God, for what reason is He said to be “omnipotent”,
since we can do many things, which He Himself cannot do?
Chapter II: In what manner is God said to be able to do all things?
Chapter III: That the Omnipotence of God is considered according to two acts.DISTINCTION XLII: On the Power of God in comparison to the possibles, which He can do, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the Divine Power in comparison to the possibles, which It can do.
Question 1: Whether God can work anything other than Himself?
Question 2: Whether God can do everything which a created agent can do?
Question 3: Whether God can do all those whatsoever, which are impossible for a created agent?
Question 4: Whether the “simply possible” is said according to superior causes, or inferior ones?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-Second Distinction
Chapter I: An invective against those who say, that God can do nothing, but what He wills and does.
DISTINCTION XLIII: On the Divine Power in regard to Its immensity, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the infinity of the Divine Power.
Question 1: Whether God’s Power, according to which It is of this kind, is infinite?
Question 2: Whether the Divine Essence is infinite?
Question 3: Whether the Divine Power is able unto an effect infinite in act?
Question 4: Whether the reason for the Divine Power extends itself to things infinite?DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-Third Distinction
Chapter I: Whether God can make something better, than He has made it, and/or in another and/or better manner, than He has?
Chapter II: Whether God can always do everything which He could do?DISTINCTION XLIV: On God’s Power in comparison to the manner or quality of things, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the possibility of a better world.
Question 1: Whether God could make a better world in regard to the substance of its integrating parts?
Question 2: Whether the world could be made better as much as regards the properties of its integrating parts?
Question 3: Whether God could make the world better as much as regards the order of its parts?
Question 4: Whether God could make the world more ancient?
Article II: On the immutability of the Divine Power.
Question Sole: Whether what God can do once, He can do always?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-Fourth DistinctionChapter I: On God’s Will, which is God’s Essence, and on Its signs.
Chapter II: That though for God it is the same to will as to be, yet God cannot be said to be all which He wills.
Chapter III: On the understanding of these expressions: “God knows, and/or God Wills”, “God knows all and/or wills something”.
Chapter IV: That God’s most highly Good Will is the Cause of all which naturally are,
the cause of Which is not to be sought, because It is the First and Most High Cause of all.
Chapter V: In what manners is God’s “will” accepted?
Chapter VI: That God’s preception, prohibition, permission, counsel, and operation are sometimes understood by the name of “will”.
Chapter VII: That God wills that by all there be done those things which He precepts, and/or not be done those which He prohibits.DISTINCTION XLV: On God’s Will, according to Its quiddity, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the Divine Will, as much as regards Its quiddity.
Question 1: Whether in God there is a positing of a will?
Question 2: Whether God is said to be “omnivolent”, just as He is said to be “omniscient” and “omnipotent” ?
Article II: On God’s Will, as much as regards Its causality.
Question 1: Whether God’s Will is the Cause of things in general?
Question 2: Whether God’s Will is the First and Immediate Cause?
Article III: On the Divine Will, as much as regards Its reckoning of being signified.
Question 1: Whether the Divine Will is fittingly divided into the will of a sign and the Will of good pleasure?
Question 2: On the number and sufficiency of the signs of the Divine Will.
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-Fifth DistinctionChapter I: That the Will of God, which He Himself is, can be cancelled in nothing.
Chapter II: In what manner is this to be understood: “I willed to gather thy children together,
and thou wouldst not”, and this: “He who wills all men to come to be saved”?
Chapter III: Whether evils come to be with God being willing and/or unwilling?
Chapter IV: In what manner is this saying of St. Augustine to be understood: “It is good that evils come to be”.
Chapter V: On the multiple acceptation of the “good”?
Chapter VI: That evils have value for the university of things.
Chapter VII: That the cause, that man is worse, is not in God.DISTINCTION XLVI: On the fulfilling of the Divine Will, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the Will of God in respect of the salvation of all, and in respect of evil.
Question 1: Whether God wills that all men come to be saved by the Will of His Good Pleasure?
Question 2: Whether God wills evils to come to be?
Question 3: Whether it is good that evils come to be?
Question 4: Whether it is true that evils come to be?
Question 5: Whether evil is ordainable by the Will of God?
Question 6: Whether evil concerns the complement of the universe?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-Sixth DistinctionChapter I: That the Will of God concerning a man is fulfilled, whithersoever he turns himself.
Chapter II: In what sense certain things are said to be done “against” the Will of God?
Chapter III: For what reason did God precept to all to do good and avoid evil, but does not will that this be fulfilled by all?DISTINCTION XLVII: On the Divine Will in regard to Its efficacy, by St. Bonaventure
Article Sole: On the efficacy of the Divine Will.
Question 1: Whether the Will of God’s Good Pleasure can be impeded?
Question 2: Whether anyone can work against the will of a sign?
Question 3: Whether God ought to permit evils?
Question 4: Whether God can precept evils?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-Seventh DistinctionChapter I: That man sometimes with good will wills something other than God wills,
and with bad will sometimes wills the same which God wills.
Chapter II: That God’s Will is fulfilled through the evil wills of men.
Chapter III: Whether it pleased holy men, that Christ would suffer and die?
Chapter IV: Whether we ought to will the sufferings of the Saints?DISTINCTION XLVIII: On the conformity of our will to the Divine Will, by St. Bonaventure
Article I: On the conformity of our will in regard to its quiddity.
Question 1: Whether it is possible, that our will be conformed to the Divine Will?
Question 2: Whether the conformity of our will to the Divine Will makes it just?
Article II: On the conformity of our will as much as regards obligation.
Question 1: Whether we are bound to conform our will to the Divine Will in the reason for willing?
Question 2: Whether we are bound to conform our will to the Divine Will in the (thing) willed?
DOUBTS on the Text of Master Peter’s Forty-Eighth Distinction
HERE ENDS THE SERAPHIC DOCTOR’S COMMENTARIES
ON THE FIRST BOOK OF MASTER PETER LOMBARD
This page is part of
The Franciscan Archive
A WWW Resource on St. Francis and Franciscanism