Dist. 13, Divisio Textus
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/1/d/13/q/bon-sent-I-d13-divisio
----------------------------------------
# Commentary on Distinction XIII.

*On the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, insofar as it is distinguished from generation.*

*"After these things, it must be considered..."* etc.

### Division of the text.

Above, the Master treated of the procession by comparing it to him from whom and to whom it is. Here, in the third place, he treats of it according to its comparison with generation, from which it differs. And this part has two parts. In the first, the Master inquires and determines whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called *begotten*; in the second, whether he ought to be called *unbegotten*, at the words: *Now it must be considered, since the Holy Spirit is not begotten.*

Likewise, the first part has four divisions. In the first, he shows that the Holy Spirit ought not to be called *born*. In the second, he shows that although "to proceed" is said of the Holy Spirit, it is nonetheless said also of the Son, at the words: *But although the Holy Spirit is not called begotten*; and the reason is that the Son is said to proceed in a manner different from the Holy Spirit. In the third, he attempts to assign the difference between generation and procession, at the words: *But between the generation of the Son and the procession,* etc. In the fourth and last, he shows the insufficiency of human reason to investigate that difference, at the words: *But what lies between being born and proceeding.*

*Now it must be considered, since the Holy Spirit.* This is the second part, in which the Master inquires and determines whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called *unbegotten*; and this part has four divisions. In the first, the Master shows and proves on the authority of Augustine that the Holy Spirit ought not to be called *unbegotten*. In the second, he shows the contrary on the authority of Jerome — that he ought to be called *unbegotten* — set down at the words: *Yet Jerome in the Rules of Distinctions,* etc. In the third, he resolves the aforesaid controversy by means of a distinction, at the words: *But that we may put aside this seeming contradiction.* In the fourth, he confirms his solution by the authority of Jerome, at the words: *That Jerome did so understand,* etc.

### Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of what is said in the letter, four questions are asked.

First, whether procession is to be posited in divine things.

Second, whether the procession of the Holy Spirit is generation.

Third, whether the procession of the Holy Spirit really differs from generation.

Fourth, whether the Holy Spirit ought to be called *unbegotten* or not.

---