Dist. 17, Part 2, 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/17/q/bon-sent-I-d17-p2-divisio
----------------------------------------
### COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION XVII.

### Part II.

#### *The Master sets out the defense of his opinion.*

> *It is asked here, whether charity is the Holy Spirit, since it itself is augmented.*

> FOR THE TEXT OF THIS PART, SEE ABOVE P. 289.

### DIVISION OF THE TEXT.

Above the Master treated of the invisible mission of the Holy Spirit according to his own opinion. Here, secondly, he sets out the defense of his opinion, and this he does by responding to the objections which could disprove his opinion. And since his position can be disproved by reason and by authority and by both modes together, therefore this part has three parts.

In the first part he attacks and disproves what he had said, namely that the Holy Spirit is the charity by which we love God and neighbor.

Secondly, however, [he attacks his position] by authority, at: *It has been said above, that the Holy Spirit.*

Thirdly, by authorities and reasons, at: *They also adduce other things* etc. — The first reason against the Master is taken from this, that charity is augmented; the second reason against him is taken from this, that charity is from the Holy Spirit, as Augustine says; the third reason is taken from this, that charity is an affection of the soul, and this indeed is consonant both with reason and with authority. In each of these parts, however, the Master first raises the objection and then determines; and the parts are manifest.

### TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.

For the understanding of this part there is here a question concerning the augmentation of charity, and concerning this four things are asked.

First it is asked whether charity can be augmented according to substance.

Secondly it is asked concerning the mode of the augmentation of charity itself.

Thirdly it is asked concerning the opposite of its augmentation, namely concerning diminution, whether charity can be diminished.

Fourthly, concerning the augmentation of charity with respect to its term or state.

---