Dist. 18, Art. 1, Q. 1
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/18/q/bon-sent-I-d18-a1-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article Unique. *On the property of the Holy Spirit by which He is Gift.*
### Question I. *Whether the Holy Spirit is the Gift in which all other gifts are given.*

As to the first [question], that the Holy Spirit is the Gift by which all other gifts are given is shown by authority and by reason.

1. By authority thus: the Apostle, in 1 Corinthians 12: *There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit, who divides to each one as He wills*: and he speaks of gifts not only of the grace which makes pleasing [*gratum faciens*], but also of those which are given gratuitously [*gratis datae*]: therefore if both are given through the Holy Spirit, since there is no other distinction of gifts, He Himself is the Gift in which all other gifts are given.

2. Likewise, Augustine, *On the Trinity* XV: «Through the Gift, which is the Holy Spirit, common to all the members of Christ, [their] proper gifts are distributed to each».

3. Likewise, by reason it is shown thus: the Holy Spirit is the first Gift; but everything posterior is reduced to the prior: therefore every gift is reduced to the Gift, which is the Holy Spirit: therefore in all gifts the account of the giving is through the Holy Spirit: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, every gift, insofar as it is a gift, is given out of love, otherwise it does not have the account of a gift; but «the Holy Spirit is the love of the Father and of the Son», as Augustine says, and as has been held above: therefore etc.

**On the contrary:** 1. Isidore: «To many unworthy of the Holy Spirit are given the gifts of the Holy Spirit»: therefore it happens that other gifts are given without this [one]: therefore He is not the Gift in which all other gifts are given.

2. Likewise, there are certain gifts which are appropriated to the Son — such as those which are given for the illumination of the intellect: therefore if we speak by appropriation, such gifts are given in the Son or through the Son, not by the Gift which is the Holy Spirit.

3. Likewise, the Son was given to us, in Isaiah 9: *A Child is born to us, a Son is given to us*: therefore if He is given through the Holy Spirit, it seems that the Holy Spirit has some authority or influence over the Son; but this is false: therefore not all other gifts are given through the Holy Spirit.

4. Likewise, this very thing is shown by impossibility [*per impossibile*]: granted that one suppose by impossibility that the Holy Spirit is not, still the Father and the Son are understood as liberal — otherwise liberality is in them from the Holy Spirit, which is false: therefore if they are understood as liberal, then also as donators.

5. Likewise, if the Holy Spirit is the Gift in which other gifts are given, therefore the Gift is the Gift of the Gift and the giving of the giving: and if so, motion is the motion and the relation of relation, and the Philosopher holds this for incongruous. For since the dependent cannot terminate another, there will be a process to infinity.

> **Conclusion.** This locution — if the ablative *in which* is taken in the sense of concomitance — is true only of gratuitous gifts; but if [it is taken] in the sense of causality, and indeed of exemplar causality, it is true of all gifts.

**I respond:** It must be said that when it is said that the Holy Spirit is the Gift in which all other gifts are given, this ablative can be taken in two ways: either thus, that it expresses concomitance, or thus, that it expresses causality. If it expresses concomitance, then so understanding it universally, it is false; because the sense is that He is given with all gifts. For there are certain gifts which are always with the Holy Spirit, as charity and wisdom; certain ones which are never with the Holy Spirit, as servile fear; certain ones

which are sometimes with the Holy Spirit, sometimes without — as faith, prophecy, and the like.

If, however, it be understood particularly of the gifts of the grace which makes pleasing [*gratiae gratum facientis*], so it is true and admits no instance.

Again, this ablative can import causality, and this in three ways: either thus, that it expresses causality simply, and in this it is not distinguished either from the Father or from the Son, since all gifts are from the Father and from the Son, as from the Holy Spirit; or thus, that it expresses causality and sub-authority, and in this it is distinguished from the Father, but not from the Son, since the Father gives both through the Son and through the Holy Spirit; or thus, that it expresses causality and sub-authority and exemplarity, and so it properly belongs to the Holy Spirit. For He proceeds by way of the first Gift, in such wise that every right and gratuitous donation is after that one and from that one receives the account of donation. It is to be conceded therefore that the Holy Spirit is the Gift by which all gifts — namely, gratuitous ones — are given by concomitance, and by which all the gifts of God are given through the cause of exemplarity.

1. To that therefore which is objected first concerning Isidore, the response is now plain: that he is speaking of gifts of grace gratuitously given [*gratis datae*], not of [grace] making pleasing.

2. To that which is objected secondly, that certain gifts are appropriated to the Son; it must be said that one can speak of gifts in two ways: either by reason of that which underlies, or under the account of donation. By reason of that which underlies, certain gifts are appropriated to the Son, as wisdom and understanding, and others to the Holy Spirit, as charity. But by reason of the donation, all are appropriated to the Holy Spirit by the reason already stated, because through Him as through the first Gift the others are given.

3. To that which is objected, that the Son was given, and not by the Holy Spirit; it can be answered that the Son was given according to His human nature, and this was through love, in John 3: *So God loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son*.

4. To that which is objected, that, with the Holy Spirit set aside, the account of gift still remains; it must be said that, with the Holy Spirit set aside, one can understand in God the causality and sub-authority of gifts, but not the exemplarity of donation under the account of donation, since the procession of love is not understood; and in this last mode it is said properly to belong to the Holy Spirit.

5. To that which is objected, that then there would be a Gift of a Gift; it must be said that motion is not motion as a term, and likewise neither is there a relation of relation; nevertheless as a principle and motion there is motion, since motion is the principle of motion, and the relation of relation; and so it is called the Gift of a gift. And since in causing one stops at the first, since He is the first Gift, there is no going on to infinity. Furthermore, *Gift* in divine things expresses a true hypostasis.