Dist. 40, Art. 3, 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/40/q/bon-sent-I-d40-a3-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article III.
#### *On divine election.*

Consequently, as regards the second article, inquiry is made concerning divine election. And on this two questions are asked.

First, it is asked whether election is in God eternally, or from time.

Second, it is asked what election is according to the thing.

### Question I.
#### *Whether election is in God from eternity, or from time.*

That election is in God eternally is shown:

1. *First, by authority*, [from] the Apostle to the Ephesians 1: "*He chose us before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and unspotted in his sight.*"

2. Likewise, John 13: "*I know whom I have chosen*"; but he had chosen all temporally who were his disciples: therefore there is in God another election than the temporal.

3. Likewise, that election is in God is shown by *reason*, since every agent [acting] discretely and orderedly is an agent through election: but God is of this kind: therefore in God election is to be posited.

4. Likewise, that [election is] from eternity is shown thus, since every love that is specifically of certain ones is not only love but also election; but the predestination of God is not of all men, but only of those to be saved, and predestination is not without love, therefore neither without election; but that [predestination] is from eternity: therefore so is this [election].

**On the contrary:**

1. Damascene: "*Election does not fall in God, since the divine nature is not possible-of-ignorance.*"

2. Likewise, to elect is to prefer one to another; but God wills all men to be saved: therefore it seems that election is not in God.

3. Likewise, it seems that [election] is in God only temporally — for there would be no election if man had not fallen, therefore it seems that the fall of man contributes to election — but the temporal does not contribute to the being of the eternal: therefore election is not eternal but temporal.

4. Likewise, election is *of dissimilar beings*; but all things in God eternally are one and alike: therefore election is of things existing in their proper genus. But in their proper genus they are not except from time: therefore neither is election.

5. Likewise, election is preferential-choosing; but God prefers nothing to another by way of intensity of affection: therefore [he prefers] only by way of excellence of effect. But effect is not to be posited except from time: therefore etc.

6. Likewise, calling is wider than election. For *many are called, but few are chosen*, Matthew 22; but calling is temporal: therefore it seems likewise that [so is] election.

It is asked therefore, since calling is temporal, but predestination eternal, whence is it that election is both temporal and eternal.

### Conclusion.

> *Election — but not deliberative — is in God from eternity, of which [election] the manifestation is temporal election.*

**I respond:** It must be said that *election* is said in two ways: in one way, insofar as it expresses love with discretion alone; in another way, insofar as it expresses love with preceding discretion and deliberation and inquiry. And in the first way it is in God; in the second way in the creature, in whom ignorance can occur; and in this second way Damascene speaks.

**To the arguments:**

*Ad 2.* To that which is objected, that the will of God and [his] love is without discretion; it must be said that there is an antecedent will and a consequent: the antecedent, by which he wills [salvation] insofar as it is in itself; the consequent, by which he wills with foreknowledge of our salvation; and the first indeed [regards] all, but the second not. According to this mode, love is twofold: one which regards the antecedent will, and by this he loves all; there is also another, which regards the consequent, and by this he loves all those to be saved, and this is election.

*Ad 3.* To that which is objected, that there would be no election if man had not sinned; it must be said that there is an election by which the good is chosen and separated from the bad, and there is an election by which the better is separated from the less good. This second [election] would have been even if man had not sinned; the first however would not have been if man had not sinned — not because the fall does anything to the *ratio* of choosing, but the foresight of the fall [does]; and although the fall of man was temporal, the foresight of it was nevertheless eternal.

*Ad 4.* To that which is objected, that election is *of dissimilar beings*; it must be said that just as love is twofold — one which arises from consideration of the divine goodness, and one which is the principle of goodness — so *election* is twofold: one which is caused by the diversity and pre-eminence of the things to be chosen, and this follows the things to be chosen, as human election; another which is the *ratio* of diversity in choosing, as the divine [election], and this is of dissimilar things — not of those which are, but of those which will be. And such [election] precedes and is eternal; for unless there were divine election, all of us would be reprobate and evil. And so that [argument] is plain.

*Ad 5.* To that which is objected, that election is preferential-choosing; it must be said that preferential-choosing, by reason of the greater [efficacy of its] effect, can be of two kinds: either by way of approbation, or by way of disposition and pre-ordination. By way of approbation it places the effect in act; by way of pre-ordination and disposition it places [it] in potency only; and just as disposition is eternal, so also is preferential-choosing.

*Ad 6.* To that which is objected concerning calling, that it is only temporal; it must be said that calling expresses the act *as exterior*, election expresses the act *as interior*, predestination expresses the act *as prior*. Since therefore the act *as exterior* connotes the effect *as exterior*, hence calling is only temporal. Again, since the act *as prior* does not have the *ratio* of initiating, hence predestination is solely eternal. But since the interior act through manifestation becomes exterior, hence it is that election and love are both eternal and temporal.

As to what is therefore objected concerning calling, that it is wider, therefore prior; it must be said that it is prior according to the *ratio* of understanding, as more common, but not as regards the order of duration; for it is not an essential superior, but a consequent effect. And so all [the arguments] are plain.