Dist. 45, 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/45/q/bon-sent-I-d45-divisio
----------------------------------------
## Commentary on Distinction XLV.

#### *On the will [of God] according to its quiddity.*

> *"Now concerning the will of God [let us say] something, according to the feebleness of our understanding,"* etc.

### Division of the text.

Above the Master treated of knowledge and power; here now, in the third place, he treats of [the divine] will. And this part has three parts. In the *first* he treats of the will according to its quiddity. In the *second* [he treats of it] according to its fulfillment with respect to its work — namely, how it is fulfilled — below in the forty-sixth distinction: *"Here a question arises: for it has been said,"* etc. In the *third* he determines how our will is conformed to the divine [will], and this in the forty-eighth distinction: *"It must also be known that sometimes the will is evil."*

The *first* part has three [parts]. In the *first* he shows that God's will is the divine essence itself; in the *second*, that it is the cause of all things, there: *"This will therefore of the highest good is the cause"*; in the *third* he shows that God's will itself is said in many ways, there: *"Here it must not be passed over by us,"* etc.

The *first* part has two [parts]. In the *first* he shows that *to will* in God is *to be*, and the will is the essence. In the *second* he resolves a doubt, there: *"And although for God it is the same to will as to be."*

The *second* part likewise has two [parts]. In the *first* he shows that the divine will is the first cause. In the *second* he shows that it is the most general cause, there: *"The will therefore of God, as Augustine says."*

*"Here it must not be passed over,"* etc. — this is the *third* part, in which he treats of the multiplicity of this name; and although it is not a multiplicity of equivocation but of analogy, there are in this part three particles. In the *first* he sets forth the principal mode of taking this name which is *will*, namely insofar as they take it for the will of [God's] good pleasure. In the *second* he sets forth the non-principal modes — namely, the tropological [modes] — according as it is taken for a sign of will; and this he does there: *"But hypponoia, according to a certain figure of speaking,"* etc. In the *third* he briefly epilogizes what has been predetermined, there: *"The five things therefore set forth above, which are called,"* etc.

### Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of the present distinction, three [questions] are principally asked.

*First*, it is asked concerning the divine will as to its quiddity.

*Second*, as to its causality.

*Third*, as to its mode of signifying.

As to the first, two [questions] are asked.

*First*, it is asked whether the will is to be posited in God.

*Second*, whether it [is right] to call him "all-willing" [*omnivolens*], just as he is called "all-powerful" [*omnipotens*].

---