Dist. 16, Art. 1, Q. 3
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/16/q/bon-sent-I-d16-a1-q3
----------------------------------------
### Question III. *By what modes the visible mission was made.*

In the third place it is asked, by what modes the visible mission is made. And diverse modes are taken from the Scriptures. For the Son appeared visibly in a rational creature, namely in a man; but the Holy Spirit in an irrational [creature], namely in a dove, fire, and breath. It is asked therefore concerning the diversity of these modes of appearing; and it appears that the modes were not fitting, in this way.

1. The Holy Spirit is a person equally noble as the Son: therefore he ought to be manifested in an equally noble creature, as the Son [was].

2. Likewise, if the Son on account of the assumption of humanity, or [on account of] the apparition in the form of a servant, is less than the Father, indeed *made less than the Angels*: therefore much more strongly the Holy Spirit, from the apparition in fire, [would be] less not only than God but also than man; but this in no way fits: therefore it does not fit the Holy Spirit to appear in an irrational creature. — If you say, that the Son appeared in a man assumed and united, but the Holy Spirit was not united to the dove or to the fire; on the contrary: union takes nothing away from divinity: therefore on account of union [the Son] ought not to be called less. If therefore he is called less, this is on account of the apparition: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, it appears that the Holy Spirit was united, because the Holy Spirit was appearing in that dove, and not in another; and again he himself was appearing there, not another person: therefore he was in that [dove] in another mode than the Father and the Son, and otherwise in that [dove] than in another; but he could not be otherwise in that [dove] than another person as to substance nor as to operation, since substance and operation are the same in the Trinity, therefore as to union: therefore etc. — If you say, that he appeared as in a sign, then I ask: was that sign by nature, or by institution? If by nature, then by parity of reason every other dove also; if by institution, it is asked: who instituted?

4. Likewise, the Son appeared visibly in only one mode and in only one creature; it is asked, why not similarly the Holy Spirit? And it appears that it ought to be so, because just as in the Son no variety falls, but rather every kind of uniformity, so also in the Holy Spirit: therefore he ought to have appeared only in one species, as the Son [did].

5. Likewise, the Son appeared visibly only once, because he was only once incarnated, no more. It is asked therefore, whence is it, that the Holy Spirit appeared more often, namely not only once in fire, but also as long as the Holy Spirit was being given? — If you say, that those [creatures] in which the Holy Spirit appeared, immediately ceased to exist after the apparition, and therefore it was necessary that other [creatures] be made again; then it appears that neither was that dove true, nor the fire, since both the dove and the fire have the power of remaining; and if this was not [the case] in that apparition, then they were not true, but false, and were not apparitions, but tricks and illusions, as are the phantasms of demons and other magicians.

6. Lastly it is asked, why the Holy Spirit appeared in so many modes, and why in another species in the head than in the members, namely in Christ and the Apostles?

### Conclusion.

> *The apparition of the Son was fittingly made once in one and rational substance united; but the Holy Spirit fittingly appeared more often in many and irrational creatures as signs.*

**I respond:** It must be said, that *the end imposes necessity on those things which are unto the end*; therefore the mode of appearing is to be taken according to the end of the apparition. Now the Son appeared in flesh, that he might be the *mediator*; but the Holy Spirit, [appeared] as *teacher*, [as in] John 16: *When he comes, he will teach you all truth.* For mediation there is necessary the concourse of separated extremes and union into one, as is clear; and therefore the Son appeared in a creature as *united*. But for the instruction of the ignorant a sign intervenes; therefore the Holy Spirit appeared in a creature as *the signified in a sign*.

Since therefore nothing is perfectly unitable to God except what is capable of beatitude, and this alone is rational substance; therefore the Son appeared in rational substance alone.

But because for the use of pure signification an irrational creature is more fitting than a rational one, lest perhaps it be believed united, not only signifying;

therefore the Holy Spirit appeared in an irrational creature, which would have in some way an account of signifying and expressing, as breath signifies spiration, but fire love.

Again, since for perfect mediation it is required that the mediator be one and that the union be inseparable; therefore the Son's apparition was singular and indivisible. But on the contrary, since the Holy Spirit cannot be perfectly signified in one sign, therefore it was necessary to be signified through several: and therefore the Son appeared in one mode, but the Holy Spirit in several. These things seen, it is easy to respond to the objections.

**To the arguments on the contrary:**

*To 1.* For as to what is objected first, that the Holy Spirit is an equally noble person; it must be said, that the nobility of the one appearing makes nothing there, but the end of the apparition; because the one [appears] as mediator, the other as instructor or teacher, therefore the Son [appeared] as in a man assumed, the Holy Spirit as in a creature and sign.

*To 2.* As to what is objected, that the Holy Spirit ought to be called less, just as also the Son; it must be said, that that lessness is not said of the Son by reason of divinity, but by reason of union and communication of idioms; because the Son was made a passible man, but the Holy Spirit was not made a dove.

*To 3.* As to what is objected, that he is united to the dove; it must be said, that there is union *according to truth*, and there is union *according to intention*. In the first mode are united those things which are united in nature or person; in the second mode the signified and the sign are united; and in this mode the person of the Holy Spirit was united to those forms in which he appeared.

If however it is asked, whence such union came; it must be said, that *dispositively* [it came] from the properties of the creature, in which it was apt to declare the person of the Holy Spirit, as breath [declares] spirit, fire [declares] love, the dove [declares] gift on account of fecundity. But *completively* this came from the divine ordination, which ordained the creatures unto this, not by instituting, but simultaneously by forming and instituting, since for this alone it was forming; and therefore both the dove and the fire began and ceased simultaneously with the apparition.

*[To 4.]*

*To 5.* From this it is clear, why the Holy Spirit not only once appeared, but more often, but the Son did not, because the dove and the fire ceased to exist immediately after the apparition, but not [so] the man. — From this it is also clear, that even if that dove and that fire were a true body, nevertheless neither was the dove a true dove, because it ceased immediately, but a likeness of a dove; similarly neither was the fire a true fire, because it was not burning. Yet there was no illusion there, because there was no falsity in signifying. For it was offered to sense to signify what truly was there; and because the account of signifying was attended to more than [the account] of existing, therefore it lasted as long as it could signify, or [as long as] it fulfilled the office of a sign. And since the dove was formed, moved, and conserved by the same power, immediately when that power ceased to move, the dove and the fire ceased to be.

*To 6.* As to what is asked last, why the Holy Spirit appeared in so many modes; it must be said, that the apparition of the Holy Spirit was for manifesting the *fullness of redundance*, as was had before; and since the redundance can be in three ways, therefore he appeared in three modes. For this fullness can be *through redemption*; and so it was in Christ, and this is perfect grace in every mode. Therefore in Christ he appeared in the dove, because [the dove] was the price of redemption of the firstborn and was an integral and perfect animal. It can also be *through the influence of life* as to sense and motion, and this through the mediation of the Sacraments; and this fullness is in priests, and therefore the Holy Spirit was given to them in the form of breath, [as in] John 20: *He breathed on them, saying: Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall remit* etc. It can also in a third mode be *through the administration of cognition* or doctrine; and this fullness is in the Apostles and Doctors, and therefore the Holy Spirit appeared to them in fiery tongues. From these the response is clear, and the sufficiency of the modes of appearing and of the objects.