Dist. 32, 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/32/q/bon-sent-I-d32-divisio
----------------------------------------
## Commentary on Distinction XXXII.

#### *Doubts are resolved concerning two locutions pertaining to appropriation.*

> *"Here arises a question deduced from what has been said before."*

### Division of the text.

Above the Master set forth the appropriations, in the explanation of which he said that the Holy Spirit is *concord*, because the Father and the Son love themselves by the Holy Spirit; therefore here he raises a question about that locution. And this he does in this distinction. Now this distinction has three parts.

In the first the Master raises the principal question previously posed, namely whether the Father and the Son love themselves by the Holy Spirit. In the second, however, he raises another question similar to this one, which serves for its explanation, and he does this there: *"Furthermore, it must be diligently investigated"*, and that is the question: whether the Father is wise by a begotten wisdom. In the third he returns to the principal question to be determined, and this he does there: *"Furthermore, it must be diligently noted."*

The first part has two divisions. In the first the Master raises the question and objects. In the second, however, he answers the question, but does not answer the objection, there: *"To this question, since the depth..."*.

*"Furthermore, it must be diligently investigated."* This is the second little section, in which the Master determines the annexed question, namely whether the Father is wise by a begotten wisdom. And because for the determination

of this question three other doubts concur, therefore this part has four divisions according to the four doubts which he raises and determines. And first he determines this question: whether the Father is wise by a begotten wisdom, which he determines in the negative. Second, however, he determines another question: whether the Son is wise by an unbegotten wisdom, which he determines in the affirmative, there: *"After these things it is wont to be asked"* etc. Third, he raises this question: whether the Son is wise through himself or by himself, which he determines by means of a distinction, namely that *by himself* can be taken originatively or formally, and this there: *"It is wont to be asked, however, whether the Son"* etc. Fourth, he raises this question: whether the Father has a twofold wisdom, which he determines in the negative, showing that this question and its reasoning are not worthy of a response, and this he does there: *"After these things it is wont to be asked by some, whether there is only one wisdom"*.

*"Furthermore, it must be diligently noted."* This is the third little section, in which the Master returns to the question first posed, and this part has two divisions. In the first he raises an objection, taking his reason from the determination of the other question. In the second, however, in place of a solution he shows his own insufficiency and leaves this question to be determined by the reader, and this there: *"I confess that this question is most difficult for me"*.

### Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of the present distinction two things are principally asked according to the two questions which the Master determines.

First it is asked concerning this locution: *"The Father and the Son love themselves by the Holy Spirit."*

Second it is asked concerning this other one: *"The Father is wise by a begotten wisdom."*

As regards the first, two things are asked.

First it is asked whether that locution is to be admitted.

Second it is asked, in what construction that ablative is to be construed.

---