Dist. 14, Dubia
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/14/q/bon-sent-I-d14-dubia
----------------------------------------
### Doubts concerning the Letter of the Master.

#### Doubt I.

In this part there are doubts concerning the letter, and first concerning the *placement* of this part: for it does not seem that here he ought to treat of temporal procession, since in this part he is treating of those things which belong to God eternally. Furthermore, since the eternal generation of the Son and the temporal generation are determined in different books — for the eternal in the first, but the temporal in the third — why does he not do likewise concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit?

**I respond:** It must be said that, because the temporal and eternal procession are from the same principle, as the Master says, and again because there is in some manner a conformable mode of proceeding there, therefore the one serves to clarify the other: and therefore a treatise on temporal procession is incidentally placed here for the manifestation of the eternal procession. But it is not so concerning the temporal generation of the Son, because it is not from the same principle — rather from the Mother only — and regards two natures, namely the divine and the human. Therefore the determination concerning it had to be made after the divine, of which one treats in the first [book], and after [the treatment of] human nature, of which in the second.

#### Doubt II.

Likewise, it is asked concerning the *account* of temporal procession, of which the Master says that *the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son when He proceeds for the sanctifying of a creature*. For he seems to say something false, since temporal procession is His mission: but the Holy Spirit was sent in the dove and in tongues of fire, which He did not sanctify. If you say that He was not sent *to* the tongues, but sent *in* tongues to the Apostles, whom He sanctified; **on the contrary:** He was sent in the dove over Christ, and He sanctified neither the dove nor Christ.

**I respond:** To this it can be said that the Master is not here defining temporal procession generally, but specially, insofar as it is the same as invisible mission, in which the Holy Spirit is given and a creature is sanctified. Or it can be said that he takes *sanctification* generally. For sanctification is taken in three ways: in one way, as it is to make holy out of what is not holy; in the second way, to confirm in holiness what is already holy; in the third way, to manifest what is already holy and confirmed. And according to some one of these three modes a sanctification is found in every mission of the Holy Spirit by reason of the term *to which*; and so the Master takes it.

#### Doubt III.

Likewise, it is asked concerning what the Master says of the Holy Spirit: *And He is the power that went out from Him*. For he seems to speak ill, since *power* is taken either properly or by appropriation. In the first way it is not so, as is plain; in the second way it is not so either, it seems, since in the first letter to the Corinthians, chapter one, we say *Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God* etc.

**To this** it can be said that *power simpliciter* is not appropriated to the Holy Spirit, but *healing power*; and this because the *grace of healings* is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and His grace is the medicine of the soul itself; but to the Son is appropriated the *power of operating*, since *all things were made through Him*.

Otherwise it can be said that power has a relation to that for which it is, and so it holds the account of *principle*; or to that whose it is, and so it holds the account of *complement*; or to both, and so it holds the account of *middle*. Therefore just as *from Him* is appropriated to the Father, *through Him* to the Son, *in Him* to the Holy Spirit: so power, insofar as it holds the account of principle, is appropriated to the Father; insofar as [it holds] the account of middle, to the Son; insofar as the account of completion, to the Holy Spirit; because completion is in the goodness and delight of the Holy Spirit. But this will be better said below.

#### Doubt IV.

Likewise, it is asked concerning what he says, that after the resurrection the Lord Jesus gave the Holy Spirit *twice*. For it seems He gave Him *thrice*: since He first gave Him to them before the Passion, when He gave them the power of casting out demons and healing infirmities, in Matthew chapter ten. Likewise after the resurrection, in John chapter twenty: *Receive the Holy Spirit*. Likewise after the ascension, in Acts chapter two. Therefore Augustine enumerates insufficiently.

**I respond:** For the present it must be said that the givings of the Holy Spirit can be numbered as to *act and effect*; and so Rabanus enumerates, and they were three, since He gave thrice and since He gave for three things: first for the working of miracles; second for the absolution of sins; third for the conversion of unbelievers. They can also be numbered in another mode, as to *place and signified meaning*; and so He gave twice, namely on earth and in heaven; likewise on earth for the commending of the precept of love toward the neighbor, in heaven for the commending of the affection of love toward God; and so the controversy is plain.

#### Doubt V.

Likewise, it is asked concerning that word of the Apostle: *We have drunk one Spirit*; by what trope is this said? And it seems that it would rather befit the Son, since in Ecclesiasticus chapter fifteen it is said: *Water of saving wisdom*, and in Proverbs chapter nine: *Come, drink the wine*; and this Wisdom Herself says, namely the Son of God: therefore etc.

**I respond:** It must be said that the Holy Spirit is called *drink*, insofar as He restrains the heat of worldly thirst. But this is appropriated to the Holy Spirit because, as Gregory says, «when the Spirit has been tasted, all flesh becomes insipid». But insofar as through drink there is the dispatching of nourishment to the individual members, so it is appropriated to the Son, to whom prudence and wisdom are appropriated, which in some manner have a power of governing and ordering nourishment for all the powers of the soul.

#### Doubt VI.

Likewise, it is asked concerning another word: *The charity of God has been diffused in our hearts*. For it seems improperly said, since what is diffused is dispersed, and a power dispersed is lessened: if therefore charity is mighty, it ought not therefore to be called diffused.

**I respond:** It must be said that *to be infused* and *to be diffused* are properly said of a liquid. But charity itself is compared to a liquid, because just as a tree has its sap and life and greenness from a liquid, so the whole spiritual fabric [has these] from love. But this love is *infused* insofar as it is received within; and it is *diffused* insofar as, proceeding from the inmost parts, it dilates the affection to the love of many and moves all the powers of the soul to good operations. «For it works great things if it is; but if it refuses to work, it is not love», as Gregory says. And therefore the Lord says in John chapter seven: *Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water*. — As to what is said, that it is lessened; it must be said that this is true of those things which have their origin from a deficient source, as is the case in wells, in which water does not live. But charity has an unfailing origin, like a river.

---