S. Bonaventurae Bagnoregis
S. R. E. Episc. Card. Albae
atque Doctor Ecclesiae Universalis

St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio
Cardinal Bishop of Alba
& Doctor of the Church

Commentaria in Quatuor Libros Sententiarum

Commentaries on the Four Books of Sentences

Magistri Petri Lombardi, Episc. Parisiensis

of Master Peter Lombard, Archbishop of Paris

PRIMI LIBRI

BOOK ONE

COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM V.

COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION V

 

ARTICULUS II.

 

Quaestio II.

 

ARTICLE II

 

Question 2

 

Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae,
Ad Claras Aquas, 1882, Vol 1, pp. 118-119.
Cum Notitiis Originalibus

 

Latin text taken from Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae,
Ad Claras Aquas, 1882, Vol. 1, pp. 118-119.
Notes by the Quaracchi Editors.

 

QUAESTIO II.

 

Utrum substantia sive essentia divina per generationem communicetur.

QUESTION II

 

Whether the Substance or Divine Essence is communicated through generation.

ULTIMO QUAERITUR, utrum substantia per generationem communicetur; et quod sic, ostenditur1 hoc modo.

LASTLY IT IS ASKED, whether the Substance is communicated through generation; and that (this is) so, is shown1 in this manner.

1. Per illud res communicatur, per quod fit, ut sit in pluribus; sed substantia est in pluribus personis et non est nisi per generationem et per processionem:  ergo per generationem communicatur.

1. A thing is communicated through that, through which it comes to be [fit], so that it may be among more [in pluribus]; but the Substance is in more Persons and is not (there) but through generation and through procession:  therefore through generation It is communicated.

2. Item, causa est, qua posita ponitur res et qua remota removetur;2 sed posita emanatione in divinis, ponitur communitas et distinctio; remota generatione vel emanatione, essentia est in uno solo, sicut hypostasis:  ergo generatio est ratio communicandi essentiam.

2. Likewise, a cause is (that), which when posited a thing is posited and which when removed (a thing) is removed;2 but with emanation posited among the divine, there is posited a community and a distinction; with generation and/or emanation removed, the Essence is in One alone, just as a Hypostasis (is):  therefore generation is a reason for communicating the Essence.

3. Item, quod datur alicui et non desinit haberi a dante, per illud3 per quod datur, per illud communicatur; sed substantia a Patre datur Filio per generationem et non desinit haberi a Patre, dum datur Filio:  ergo per generationem communicatur.

3. Likewise, what is given to someone and does not cease to be had by the one giving, through that3 through which it is given, through that it is communicated; but the Substance is given by the Father to the Son through generation and does not cease to be had by the Father, while It is given to the Son:  therefore through generation It is communicated.

4. Item, generatio in his inferioribus est ratio communicandi substantiam sive naturam; sed in divinis natura est illis multo communicabilior,4 quia simplicior:  ergo in divinis per generationem substantia vel essentia communicatur.

4. Likewise, generation among these lesser (things) is the reason for communicating a substance or nature; but among the divine the Nature is much more communicable than these (are),4 because (It is) simpler:  therefore among the divine the Substance and/or Essence is communicated through generation.

CONTRA:  1. Generatio est principium distinguendi;5 sed non est idem principium distinguendi et communicandi:  ergo per generationem non est ratio communicandi in divinis:  ergo per generationem nihil communicatur.

ON THE CONTRARY:  1. Generation is a principle of distinguishing;5 but the principle of distinguishing and of communicating is not the same:  therefore through generation there is not a reason for communicating among the divine:  therefore through generation nothing is communicated.

2. Item, quod facit aliquid esse in hoc, non est ratio communicandi, sed appropriandi et individuandi; sed generatio facit esse substantiam in tali persona, utpote in persona Filii:  ergo non est ratio communicandi, sed appropriandi.

2. Likewise, what makes something to be in this one, is not a reason for communicating, but for appropriating and individuating; but generation makes the Substance to be in such a Person, as [utpote] in the Person of the Son:  therefore it is not a reason for communicating, but for appropriating.

3. Item, omne illud quod per generationem communicatur, per generationem est commune.6 Si ergo substantia per generationem communicatur, generatione circumscripta, non erit communis:  ergo propria; sed proprium per generationem non potest communicari:  ergo nec substantia.

3. Likewise, every ‘that’ which is communicated through generation, is common through generation.6  If, therefore, the Substance is communicated through generation, with generation excluded [circumscripta], It will not be common:  therefore (It will be) proper; but the proper cannot be communicated through generation:  therefore neither (can) the Substance.

4. Item, quod per generationem communicatur, per generationem datur et recipitur, et omne tale, si non est generationi accidentale, generatur; sed substantia non accidit generationi:  ergo etc.

 

4. Likewise, what is communicated through generation, through generation is given and received, and everything such, if it is not accidental to generation, is generated; but the Substance is not an accident [accidit] to generation:  therefore etc..

CONCLUSIO.

 

Essentia divina per generationem communicatur, quia per generationem fit, ut sit in pluribus una.

CONCLUSION

 

The Divine Essence is communicated through generation, because through generation it comes to be, so as to be the One among More.

RESPONDEO:  Ad hoc intelligendum notandum est, quod commune, quantum est de se, indifferenter se habet ad actum et potentiam. Commune enim potest dici illud quod est communicabile, quamvis non sit in pluribus; sicut patet in multis universalibus, ut in sole et luna et huiusmodi. Commune etiam dicitur communicatum, quod est actu in pluribus.

I RESPOND:  For this to be understood it must be noted, that “the common”, as much as it is from itself, holds itself indifferently toward act and potency. For “the common” can be said (to be) that which is “the communicable”, even though [quamvis] it be not in the more; just as is clear in many universals, as in the Sun and the Moon and (things) of this kind. “The common” is also said (to be) “the communicated”, because it is by an act in the more.

Dico ergo, quod quemadmodum forma universalis, quantum est de se, est communicabilis; sed tamen actu communicatur per propagationem7 plu- / -rium, . . .

Therefore I say, that to the extent that [quemadmodum] a form (is) a universal, as much as it is from itself, it is communicable; but, nevertheless [tamen], it is communicated by an act through the propagation7 of the / more,

1  Vat., obnitentibus mss. et ed. 1 videtur.
2  Aristot., II. Phys. text. 37 (c. 3.):  Operantes quidem (causae) et singulares simul sunt et non sunt cum iis, quorum sunt causae. Cfr. S. Thom., Comment. in hunc locum.
3  Substituimus ex plurimis mss. et ed. 1 illud pro idem.
4  Sensus est:  natura est multo communicabilior quam in illis inferioribus.   —   Forte melius cum cod. T omiteretur illis.
5  Cfr. supra d. 4. q. 2. obiect. 4.   —   Mox post primum ergo Vat. planius quidem generatio loco per generationem, sed contra mss. et ed. 1.
6  Vat. absque auctoritate mss. et ed. 1:  Item per generationem communicatur omne illud quod per generationem est commune, et paulo infra post communicatur addit:  per generationem est communis. Si ergo substantia per generationem communicatur, qua transpositione et edditione vis argumenti debilitatur.
7  Ita antiquiores codd. cum ed. 1, dum Vat. et cod. cc actu non communicatur nisi per propagationem.  Vat. deinde contra mss. et ed. 1 addit vel aggregatoinem; sed aperte falsum.  Paulo infra plerique codd. ut A F G K T etc. cum ed. 1 communicatur pro communicetur.

1  The Vatican edition, disagreeing with the manuscripts and edition 1, has it seems [videtur].
2  Aristotle, Physics, Bk. II, text 37 (ch. 3):  Indeed working and singular (causes) simultaneously are and are not with those, of which they are the causes. Cf. St. Thomas, Commentary on this passage.
3  We have substituted from many of the manuscripts and edition 1 that [illud] in place of the same [idem].
4  The sense is:  nature is much more simpler than (it is) in those inferior (beings).   —   Perhaps it would be better to omit with codex T than they (are) [illis].
5  Cf. above d. 4, q. 2, objection 1.   —   Then after the first therefore [ergo] the Vatican edition indeed more plainly has generation [generatio] in place of through generation there [per generationem], but contrary to the manuscripts and edition 1.
6  The Vatican edition without the authority of the manuscripts and edition 1:  Likewise through generation there is communicated every “that” which is common through generation [Item per generationem communicatur omne illud quod per generationem est commune], and a little below this after is communicated through generation [communicatur] it adds:  through generation It is common.  If, therefore, the Substance is communicated through generation [per generationem est communis. Si ergo substantia per generationem communicatur], by which transposition and addition the force of the argument is weakened.
7  Thus the more ancient codices together with edition 1, while the Vatican edition and codex cc has it is not communicated by an act except through propagation [actu non communicator nisi per propagationem].  Then the Vatican edition, contrary to the manuscripts and edition 1 adds and/or aggregation [vel aggregationem]; but this is clearly false.  A little below this very many codices, such as A F G K T etc., together with edition 1 have the indicative rather than the subjunctive for is communicated [communicetur].

p. 119

plu- / -rium, sic natura divina vel essentia de se quidem communicabilis est, sed quod actu communicetur, non est nisi per illud quod multiplicat vel plurificat ei supposita; haec autem est generatio.1

of the / more, so the Divine Nature and/or Essence is from itself indeed communicable, but because It is communicated by an act, It is not except through that which multiplies and/or plurifies Its supposits; but this is generation.1

Quoniam igitur per generationem personae plurificantur, et substantia in illis non numeratur, hinc est, quod verissime substantia vel essentia per generationem communicatur, quia per generationem fit, ut sit una in pluribus.

Therefore since through generation the Persons are plurified, and the Substance is not numbered among Them, hence it is, that most truly is the Substance and/or Essence communicated through generation, because through generation it comes, to be the One in the More.

1. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod generatio est principium distinguendi; dicendum, quod generatio per se est principium distinguendi suppositum a supposito, quia ad illud terminatur per se; etiam est principium communicandi naturam2 communem, quia similem ex simili.  Sed quoniam natura in inferioribus numeratur in suppositis, ideo est principium distinguendi etiam commune, sed per accidens; in Deo autem nec est per se nec per accidens.

1. To that which is objected, that generation is a principle of distinguishing; it must be said, that generation per se is a principle for distinguishing a supposit from a supposit, because per se (generation) is terminated at that; it is also a principle for communicating a common nature2, because (it makes) a similar from a similar.  But since nature in inferiors is numbered in supposits, for that reason it is a principle for distinguishing even (what is) common, but per accidens; but in God (generation) is neither per se nor per accidens.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod facere commune esse in hoc est ratio appropriandi; dicendum, quod illud habet veritatem, quando commune est appropriabile vel appropriatum per esse in hoc.  Divina autem essentia non est sic appropriabilis, vel appropriata per esse in hoc, quia non est appropriabilis quoad significatum nec quoad suppositum, quia idem significat et supponit, sicut supra ostensum est;3 significatum autem eius nulla additione distinguitur.  Haec enim est vera:  essentia Patris et essentia, quae est in Patre, est Filius.

2. To that which is objected, that ‘to make the common to be in this’ is a reason for appropriating; it must be said, that that has (its) truth, when the common is appropriable and/or appropriated through the ‘to be in this’.  But the Divine Essence is not thus appropriable, and/or appropriated through the ‘to be in this’, because it is not appropriable in regard to the signified nor in regard to the Supposit, because it signifies and supposes the Same, just as has been shown above;3 but its signified is distinguished by no addition.  For this is true:  “the Essence of the Father and the Essence, which is in the Father, is the Son”.

Vel aliter potest dici, quod facere esse in hoc est dupliciter:  aut absolute; et sic est ratio appropriandi; aut in comparatione, ut illud quod erat prius in uno, fiat postea in alio; et sic est ratio communicandi naturam. Sed quaedam natura est, quae distinguitur4 in suppositis, ut puta illa cui fit additio, quaedam non, ut divina; et in prima est ratio communicandi et distinguendi, in divina solum communicandi.

And/or it can otherwise be said, that ‘to cause (something) to be in this’ is in a twofold manner:  either absolutely; and thus it is a reason for appropriating; or in comparison, as that which was first in one, afterwards comes to be [fit] in another; and thus it is a reason for communicating a nature.  But there is a certain nature, which is distinguished4 in supposits, as for example [ut puta] that (nature) to which an addition is made, (and there is) a certain one (that is) not, as in the Divine (Nature); and in the first there is a reason for communicating and of distinguishing, in the Divine solely (a reason) for communicating.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod si per generationem communicatur, generatio substantiam facit communem;5 dicendum, quod verum est, secundum quod commune dicitur secundum actum, quia in pluribus, sed non secundum potentiam. Unde circumscripta generatione, substantia est communis, quia communicabilis; sed non est communis, quia communicata.

3. To that which is objected, that if it is communicated through generation, generation makes the Substance to be common;5 it must be said, that it is true, according to which “the common” is said (to be) according to an act, because (it is) in the more, but not according to potency. Whence with generation excluded, the Substance is common, because (it is) communicable; but It is not common, because (it is) communicated.

4. Ad ilud quod obiicitur, quod illud quod per generationem datur, generatur; dicendum, quod falsum est:  quia generari dicit productionem et distinctionem, sed datio6 dicit auctoritatem et communicationem; et quoniam per generationem substantia non distinguitur, quamvis communicetur:  ergo etc.

 

4. To that which is objected, that that which is given through generation, is generated; it must be said, that it is false:  because ‘to be generated’ means (that there is) a production and a distinction, but a ‘being given’ [datio] means (that there is) an authorship and communication; and since through generation the Substance is not distinguished, though It is communicated:  ergo etc..

SCHOLION.

SCHOLIUM

I. Scot. (hic. q. 2.) observat, quod aliud est aliquid per generationem communicare, aliud per eandem aliquid producere:  productio enim infert realem distinctionem inter producentem et productum, non vero communicatio.  Essentia igitur divina nec generatur nec producitur nec multiplicatur, tamen secundum omnes theologos communicatur.  Terminus totalis generationis in Deo est Filius, et relatio inter generantem et generatum est realis cum reali distinctione.  Sed inter communicantem et communicatum, quod est essentia divina, non est realis relatio, nec alia distinctio nisi secundum rationem.  Cfr. infra d. 19. p. II. q. 2. in corp. et ad 2; et d. 34. q. 2. ad 7, et ibid. q. 1.

I. (Bl. John Duns) Scotus (here in q. 2) observes, that it is one thing ‘to communicate something through generation’, another ‘to produce something’ through the same:  for production introduces [infert] a real distinction between the one producing and the product, however communication (does) not.  Therefore the Divine Essence is neither generated nor produced nor multiplied, however according to all theologians it is communicated.  The terminus of the whole generation in God is the Son, and the relation between the One generating and the One generated is real with a real distinction.  But between the One communicating and the One communicated, because (each) is the Divine Essence, there is not a real relation, nor any distinction except according to reckoning.  Cf. below d. 19, p. II, q. 2, in body, and at n. 2; and d. 34, q. 2, at n. 7, and ibid., q. 1.

II. Inter antiquos Scholasticos non invenimus, qui explicite hanc quaestionem tractent, praeter B. Albert., hic a. 1.  —  Henr. Gand., S. a. 60. q. 1. n. 57 et seqq.  —  Petr. Aureolum, hic q. 5.  —  Eam tangit Scot., hic q. 2.

II. Among the ancient Scholastics we have not found any who explicitly treat of this question, except Bl. (now St.) Albertus (Magnus), here in a. 1.  —  Henry of Ghent, Summa., a. 60, q. 1, n. 57 ff..  —  Peter Aureolus, here in q. 5.  —  (Bl. John Duns) Scotus touches upon it, here in q. 2.

1  Cod. O addit et processio.
2  Ex antiquioribus mss. adiecimus etiam, sicut et paulo infra fide mss. et ed. 1 similem substituimus loco consimilem.
3  Hic a. 1. q. 1. ad 2.
4  Vat. dividitur, sed absque auctoritate mss. et ed. 1. Paulo post cod. I quaedam quae non distinguitur loco quaedam non, et mox cod. W post solum repetit ratio.
5  Ita multi codd. ut C L O S V W X Y etc. cum ed. 1; alii vero ut A F G H I T Z etc. quod si generatio communicat substantiam, facit communem. Vat. communicatur substantia, fit per generationem communis substantia.
6  Mendum Vat. ratio pro datio ex mss. correximus et paulo infra fide codd. B D F H I P Q T Y loco quia substituimus et quoniam, licet alii antiqui codd. ut A E G K S W X Z ee ff cum ed. 1 colum habeant quoniam, sed minus bene.

1  Codex O adds and procession [et processio].
2  From the more ancient manuscripts we have inserted also [etiam], just as also a little below this, trusting in the manuscripts and edition 1, we have substituted similar [similem] in place of an exactly-similar [consimilem].
3  Here in a. 1, q. 1, at n. 2.
4  The Vatican edition has is divided [dividitur], but without the authority of any manuscript or edition 1. A little after this codex I has a certain one which is not distinguished [quaedam quae non distinguitur] in place of a certain one (that does) not [quaedam non], and then codex W after solely [solum] repeats a reason [ratio].
5  Thus many codices, such as C L O S V W X Y etc., together with edition 1; but others, such as A F G H I T Z etc., read that if generation communicates a substance, it makes (it) common [quod si generation communicat substantiam, facit communem]. The Vatican edition has is communicated as a substance, there comes to be through generation a common substance [communicator substantia, fit per generationem communis substantia].
6  The faulty reading of the Vatican edition, reason [ratio] for a being given [datio], we have corrected from the manuscripts and a little below this, trusting in codices B D F H I P Q T and Y, we have substituted and since [et quoniam] in place of because [quia], though other ancient codices, such as A E G K S W X Z ee and ff, together with edition 1 have solely since [quoniam], but less well.

The English translation here has been released to the public domain by its author. The / symbol is used to indicate that the text which follows appears on the subsequent page of the Quaracchi Edition. The translation of the notes in English corresponds to the context of the English text, not that of the Latin text; likewise they are a freer translation than that which is necessitated by the body of the text. Items in square [ ] brackets contain Latin terms corresponding to the previous English word(s), or notes added by the English translator. Items in round ( ) brackets are terms implicit in the Latin syntax or which are required for clarity in English.