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

SECUNDI LIBRI

BOOK TWO

COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM IV.

COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION IV

ARTICULUS III.

 

Quaestio II.

ARTICLE III

 

Question 2

 

Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae,
Ad Claras Aquas, 1885, Vol. 2, pag. 141-142.
Cum Notitiis Originalibus

 

 

Latin text taken from Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae,
Ad Claras Aquas, 1885, Vol. 2, pp. 141-142
Notes by the Quaracchi Editors.

 

QUAESTIO II.

 

Utrum Angeli modo habeant cognitionem vespertinam.

QUESTION 2

 

Whether the Angels now have an evening cognition?

SECUNDO QUAERITUR circa hoc, utrum in Angelis sit cognitio vespertina post glorificationem.  Et quod sic, videtur.

SECOND THERE IS ASKED about this, whether in the (good) Angels there is an evening cognition after (their) glorification.  And it seems, that (it is) so.

1. Augustinus quarto super Genesim ad litteram,1 loquens de superna Ierusalem:  « Ibi semper est dies in contemplationi incommutabilis veritatis, semper vespere in cognitione creaturae in se ipsa; semper mane ex hac cognitione in laude Creatoris ».

1. (St.) Augustine in the fourth (book) On a Literal Exposition of Genesis, speaking of the supernal Jerusalem, (says): « There, there is always a day in the contemplation of incommutable Truth, always an evening in the cognition of a creature in itself; always a morning from this cognition in the praise of the Creator ».

2. Item, ratione.  Eadem lux est, quae faciebat vespere et mane:  si ergo lux, quae facit mane, est illuminatio gloriae, ergo in hac illuminatione est vespere:  ergo in statu gloriae est cognitio vespertina.

2. Likewise, by reason.  The same is the light, which made evening and morning:  if, therefore, the light, which makes morning, is the illumination of glory, therefore in this illumination there is an evening:  therefore in the state of glory there is an evening cognition.

3. Item, cognitio vespertina est cognito rerum in proprio genere; sed Angelus gloriosus in proprio genere cognoscit res:  ergo habet cognitionem vespertinam.

3. Likewise, an evening cognition is the cognition of things in their own genus; but a glorified [gloriosus] Angel cognizes things in their own genus:  therefore he has an evening cognition.

4. Item, Angelus gloriosus amplius laudat Deum quam homo viator; sed homo viator non solum laudat Deum in sua maiestate, sed in operum suorum multiformitate:  ergo et Angelus beatus.  Sed haec laus praesupponit cognitionem:  ergo etc.

4. Likewise, a glorified Angel praises God more fully than a wayfaring [viator] man; but a wayfaring man does not only praise God in His Majesty, but in the multiformity of His works:  therefore a beatified [beatus] Angel (does this) too.  But this praise presupposes a cognition:  ergo etc..

CONTRA:  1. Primae ad Corinthios decimo tertio:2  Cum venerit quod perfectum est, evacuabitur quod ex parte est; sed cognitio vespertina ideo dicitur vespertina, quia tenebrae est admixta; Angeli autem vident in luce plena:  ergo etc.

ON THE CONTRARY:  1. In the thirteenth (chapter) of (St. Paul’s) First (Letter) to the Corinthians:2  When what is perfect has come, what is in part shall be emptied out; but an evening cognition is called “evening” for this reason, because it has been mixed up with shadow; but the Angels see in full light:  ergo etc..

2. Item, cognitio fidei, quae est per speculum, evacuatur, adveniente cognitione gloriae, quae consistit in videndo Verbum aeternum.3  Si ergo cognitio vespertina ideo vespertina est, quia in umbra creaturae, ergo non stat cum cognitione gloriae.

2. Likewise, the cognition of faith, which is through a mirror, is emptied out, with the approaching [adveniente] cognition of glory, which consists in seeing the Eternal Word.3  If, therefore, an evening cognition is “of the evening” for this reason, because (it is) in the shade of a creature, therefore it does not stand with the cognition of glory.

3. Item, mane adveniens expellit vesperam, et similiter vespera expellit mane; sed in Angelis continue est cognitio matutina, qua vident in ipso Verbo sine interpolatione:  ergo non habet locum in eis vespertina cognitio.

3. Likewise, the approaching [adveniens] morning expels the evening, and similarly the evening expels the morning; but in the Angels there is continually a morning cognition, by which they see in the Word Himself without an interpolation:  therefore an evening cognition has no place in them.

4. Item, vespera est per declinationem solis ad occasum; sed in Angelis beatis nunquam est approximatio ad occasum, sed continuus fulgor et calor lucis aeternae:4  ergo nunquam est in eis cognitio vespertina.

4. Likewise, the evening is (caused) through the declination of the Sun toward (its) setting; but in the blessed Angels there is never an approach [approximationem] toward a setting, but the continual lightning-brightness [fulgor] and heat of the Eternal Light:4  therefore there never is in them an evening cognition.

Et propter hoc est quaestio — cum tam mane quam vespere utrumque importet approximationem ad noctem et ad tenebras; et Angeli distent distantia omnimoda tam a frigore peccati quam ab ignorantia veri:  videtur, quod nec matutina nec vespertina cognito sit ponenda, sed potius meridiana — quaeritur igitur, pro quanto dicatur cognitio matutina et pro quanto vespertina; et quare non ponatur differentia tertia, scilicet cognitio meridiana.  —  Et iuxta hoc quaeritur, ad quos pertineant istae cognitiones, et de ipsarum ordine et praerogativa, ut sic elucescat harum cognitionum quidditas et natura.

And on this account there is the question — since both the morning and the evening each convey an approach to the night and to shadows; and the Angels are distant by an omnimodal distance both from the cold of sin and from the ignorance of truth:  it seems, that neither a morning nor an evening cognition is to be posited, but rather a noonday (cognition) [meridiana] — therefore, there is asked, “In virtue of how much is (their) cognition said (to be) a “morning” one and in virtue of how much (is it said to be) an “evening” one; and for what reason is there not posited a third difference, namely, a noonday cognition?”  —  And in accord with this there is a question, “To whom do those cognitions of theirs pertain?”, and (a question) concerning the order and sure sign [praerogativa] of these (cognitions), so that in this manner the quiddity and nature of these cognitions may shine forth.

CONCLUSIO.

 

Angeli beati simul cum cognitione matutina habent etiam vespertinam.

CONCLUSION

 

Together with (their) morning cognition the blessed Angels have an evening cognition.

RESPONDEO:  Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod, sicut vult Augustinus,5 « omnis creatura, quantum est de se, tenebra est »; Deus autem lux est, et tenebrae in eo non sunt ullae, sicut dicitur in prima canonica Ioannis.6  Dies dicit illustrationem a luce procedentem super haec tenebrosa; mane autem et vespera dicunt media inter diem et noctem secundum accessum et regressum.

I RESPOND:  For the understanding of the aforesaid it must be noted, that, just as (St.) Augustine wants,5 « every creature, as much as it is of itself, is a shadow »; but God is Light, and there are no shadows in Him, just as is said in the first canonical (Letter of St.) John.6  “Day” means the illustration proceeding from light upon those shadowy (things); but “morning” and “evening” mean the media between day and night according to an approach [accessum] and  an a withdraw [regressus].

Intelligendum igitur, quod divina lux, illuminans Angelum illuminatione perfecta ad cognitionem sui, facit Angelum lucem; et cognitio ipsius Dei in se dies dicitur, quia pure est lux et cognitio et ratio cognoscendi. Lux ista angelica, sic illuminata, habet cognoscere creaturam; et sic, quia cognoscit id quod est tenebra, est eius cognitio mane vel vespera appellata; sed vespera, prout cognoscit creaturam in se ipsa, mane, prout ex illa cognitione consurgit ad laudandum7 et refert ad cognitionem ipsius, quam habet in Verbo.  Unde Augustinus de Civitate undecimo, septimo capitulo:  « Scientia creaturae in comparatione scientiae Creatoris quodam modo advesperascit, itemque lucescit et mane fit, cum ipsa refertur in laudem dilectionemque Creatoris; nec in noctem vertitur,8 ubi non Creator amore creaturae relinquitur ».

Therefore one must understand, that the Divine Light [divina lux], illuminating the Angel by a perfect illumination regarding Its own cognition, makes the Angel light [lucem]; and the cognition of God Himself in him is said (to be) a “day”, because (that cognition) is purely light and a cognition and a reason for cognizing.  That angelic light, thus illuminated, has the cognizing of a creature; and thus, because he cognizes that which is a shadow, his cognition is called a “morning” and/or an “evening”; but an “evening”, insofar as he cognizes a creature in himself, a “morning”, insofar as out of that cognition he rises up to praise7 (God) and refers (it) to that cognition, which he has in the Word.  Wherefore (St.) Augustine in the eleventh (book) On the City (of God), in the seventh chapter (says):  « The knowledge of a creature in comparison to the knowledge of the Creator in a certain manner grows toward the evening [advesperacit], and likewise grows light and becomes morning, when it is referred unto the praise and dilection of the Creator; and it is not turned8 into night, where the Creator is not relinquished for the love of a creature ».

1  Cap. 30. n. 47.

2  Vers. 10.

3  Respicitur I. Cor. 13, 12: Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmata, tunc autem facie ad faciem.

4  Cod. cc et ed. 1 candor lucis aeternae, quod respicit ad Sap. 7, 26:  Candor est enim lucis aeternae.  Infra d. 5. a. 3. q. 1. fundam. 2. legitur:  Fulgor cognitionis et calor affectionis.

5  Cfr. XIII. Confess. c. 2. n. 3. c. 8. n. 9; I. de Gen. ad lit. c. 4. n. 9. seqq. et IV. c. 22. n. 39. et c. 26. n. 43, ubi hoc supponitur pro declaranda cognitione vespertina; Serm. 67. de Verbis Evang. Matth. c. 5. n. 8. seq.

6  Cap. 1, 5.  —  Vat. hic addit ubi Glossa.

7  Vat. consurgit ad laudem Dei sive ad laudandum Deum.

8  Vat. cum textu originali vergitur.

1  Chapter 30, n. 47.

2  Verse 10.

3  A reference to 1 Cor. 13:12:  We see now through a mirror in an enigma, but then (we shall see) face to face [Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmata, tunc autem facie ad faciem].

4  Codex cc and edition 1 have the shining whiteness [candor] for heat [calor], in reference to Wisdom 7:26:  For shining whiteness belongs to the Eternal Light [Candor est enim lucis aeternae].  Below in d. 5, a. 3, q. 1, 2nd argument of the fundament there is read:  The lightning-whiteness of the cognition and the heat of the affection [Fulgor cognitionis et calor affectionis].

5  Cf. Confessions, Bk. XIII, ch. 2, n. 3; ch. 8, n. 9; On a Literal Exposition of Genesis, Bk. I, ch. 4, n. 9 ff, and Bk. IV, ch. 22, n. 39, and ch. 26, n. 43, where this is supposed for the declaration of an evening cognition; Sermon 67,  “On the Words of the Gospel of Matthew,” ch. 5, n. 8 f.

6  1 Jn. 1:5.  —  The Vatican edition here adds where the Gloss (has): [ubi Glossa].

7  The Vatican edition has he rises up for the praise of God or to praise God [consurgit ad laudem Dei sive ad laudandum Deum].

8  The Vatican edition, together with the original text, has bent [vergitur] for turned [vertitur].

p. 142

Unde nota, quod etisi ad similitudinem huius lucis visibilis dicatur ibi mane et vespere, sicut dictum est, tamen duplex est differentia:  una, quia ibi vespera non vertitur in noctem, sicut in luce materiali; altera vero, quia mane non succedit meridies, nec diei vespere, sed totum est simul.  Unde Augustinus super Genesim quarto:1  « Simul, inquit, habent diem et vesperam et mane ».

Wherefore note, that even if “morning” and “evening” be said there according to the similitude of this visible light, just as has been said, yet there is a twofold difference:  one, because there evening is not turned into night, just as in material light; but the other, because noon does not succeed morning, nor vespers day, but the whole is at once.  Wherefore (St.) Augustine in the fourth (book) On Genesis1 says:  « They have at once day and evening and morning ».

Et sic patet, quod in Angelis beatis est nunc cognitio vespertina cum matutina, nec habent successionem vel ordinem temporis, habent tamen ordinem dignitatis, quia dicit Augustinus de Civitate undecimo:2  « Cognitio creaturae in se ipsa decoloratior est, quam cum in Dei sapientia cognoscitur ».

And in this manner it is clear, that in the blessed Angels there is now an evening cognition with a morning one, nor do (these cognitions) have a succession and/or order of time, yet they do have an order of dignity, because (St.) Augustine says in the eleventh (chapter) On the City (of God):2  « The cognition of a creature in itself is more discolored [decoloratior], than when it is cognized in God’s Wisdom ».

1. 2. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod est ex parte; dicendum, quod falsum est, immo bene potest esse perfecta in proprio genere; et si dicatur aliquo modo minus perfecta, hoc est respectu cognitionis in Verbo.  Verumtamen non habent oppositionem, quia haec imperfectio non venit ex parte cognoscentis, sed ex parte cognoscibilis vel ipsius medii.  —  Et per hoc patet sequens de fide, quia ibi est imperfectio ex parte cognoscentis, non cogniti.

1. 2. To that, therefore, which is objected, that (an evening cognition) is in part; it must be said, that it is false, nay it can well be perfect in its own genus; and if it be in any manner said (to be) less perfect, this is in respect of the cognition in the Word.  But yet (these two cognitions) do not have an opposition, because the former imperfection does not come on the part of the one cognizing, but on the part of the cognizable and/or its medium.  —  And through this the following (objection) concerning faith is clear, because in that there is an imperfection on the part of the one cognizing, not (on the part of) the one cognized.

3. 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod vespera declinat ad occasum et non compatitur mane; dicendum, quod verum est in his, ubi est vespera et mane propter lucis variationem; non ibi, ubi simul convertit se Angelus ad creaturam et Deum.  Nec est ista3 diversitas nisi solum ratione diversi modi cognoscendi, qui quamvis sint diversi, non sunt tamen oppositi, sed unus famulatur alteri, et unus perficit alterum, non excludit.

3. 4. To that which is objected, that evening falls at the setting and is not compatible with the morning; it must be said, that (this) is true among those, where there is evening and morning on account of a variation of light; not there, where an Angel turns himself at once toward a creature and (toward) God.  Nor is that a diversity (of cognitions)3 except only by reason of a diverse manner of cognizing, which (manners), though they be diverse, yet are not opposed, but one serves familiarly the one, and one perfects the other; it does not exclude (it).

Ex his etiam patere possunt aliae quaestiones, scilicet, in quibus sunt istae cognitiones; quia proprie in beatis Angelis, nisi nomina extendantur.  —  Patet etiam, quare non dicitur cognitio creaturae dies sive meridies, sed cognitio Dei;4 quia omnis creatura tenebra.  —  Patet enim, quod cognitio matutina praecellit propter pleniorem lucem, ob quam clarior est et certior et altior; et sic patet totum.5

From these (considerations) other questions can also be clear, namely, in whom these cognitions are; because (they are) properly in the blessed Angels, unless (their) names be extended.  —  It is also clear, for what reason the cognition of a creature is not called “day” or “noonday”, but the cognition of God (is);4 because every creature (is) a shadow.  —  For it is clear, that the morning cognition takes precedence [praecellit] on account of (its) fuller light, on account of which it is clearer and more certain and higher; and in this manner the whole is clear.5

1  Cap. 29. n. 46.

2  Cap. 7.

3  Cod. T ibi.  Finis solutionis in cod. F sic sonat:  et unus alterum non excludit pro non excludit.

4  Plurimi codd. cum edd. 2, 3 dici; perperam.  Dein post creatura cod. aa interserit est.

5  Vide Schol. praecedentis quaest.

1  Chapter 29, n. 46.

2  Chapter 7.

3  Codex T has there a diversity (of cognitions) there [ibi] for that a diversity (of cognitions) [ista].  The end of the solution in codex F sounds thus:  and one does not exclude the other [et unus alterum non excludit] for it does not exclude (it) [non excludit] .

4  Very many codices, together with editions 2 and 3, have faultily is called a “cognition” [cognitio dici] for the cognition of God (is) [cognitio Dei].  Then after creature [creatura] codex aa inserts is [est].

5  See the Scholium of the preceding Question.

This English Translation and the digitization of the Latin and English texts, the HTML markup,  all emendations and corrections of the Latin text, and all notes by the Translator, are © 2007, 2008 by Br. Alexis Bugnolo.  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.