Dist. 43, 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/2/d/43/q/bon-sent-II-d43-a1-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article I. *On the sin against the Holy Spirit compared to the other kinds of sins.*
### Question I. *Whether the sin against the Holy Spirit names a kind of sin distinct from the other kinds of sins.*

Concerning the first point one proceeds thus, and it is asked whether the sin against the Holy Spirit names a kind of sin distinct from the other kinds of sins. And that it does, it seems:

1. *First*, by the word of the Master in the text: « There is a certain kind of sin graver and more abominable than the rest, which is called the sin against the Holy Spirit ».

2. *Likewise*, this seems so by reason. For the mortal and the venial make different kinds of sins, therefore much more strongly the remissible and the irremissible; but the sin against the Holy Spirit is an irremissible sin: therefore it seems that the sin against the Holy Spirit is a kind other than the other kinds of sins.

3. *Likewise*, the sin against the Holy Spirit is a sin proceeding from settled malice: if therefore the sin from settled malice is divided over against the sin from ignorance and from weakness, therefore it seems that the sin against the Holy Spirit is a distinct kind of sin.

4. *Likewise*, that which has its own species, distinct from the species of the other sins, is a kind of sin distinct from the other kinds of sins; but the sin against the Holy Spirit is of this sort, since its species are despair and obstinacy and the impugning of acknowledged truth, which are the proper species of this sin, and not of the others: therefore, etc.

**On the contrary:**
1. « The sin against the Holy Spirit, as the Master says in the text, is a sin unto death »; but every mortal sin is a sin unto death: therefore, since the sin unto death is general to all the differences of sins, then so too is the sin against the Holy Spirit.

2. *Likewise*, the sin against the Holy Spirit is so named either because it is against the person of the Holy Spirit, or because it is against that which is appropriated to the Holy Spirit. If because it is against the person of the Holy Spirit; but the majesty of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one: therefore every sin that is against the Holy Spirit is against the Father, and everything that is against the Father is against the Holy Spirit: therefore in this way it would be general to every sin. But if because it is against the effect appropriated to the Holy Spirit, namely against goodness and grace; but every sin is against the goodness and against the grace of the Holy Spirit: therefore every sin is a sin against the Holy Spirit.

3. *Likewise*, sin is divided into sin from weakness and from ignorance and from malice, such that sin from malice is said to be the sin against the Holy Spirit; but sin from ignorance and sin from weakness do not name a special kind of sin — for every kind of sin can be from ignorance and from weakness — therefore it does not seem in like manner that sin from malice names a determinate kind of sin.

4. *Likewise*, everything that anyone does from ignorance, he can do from settled knowledge or from deliberate purpose: therefore if every kind of sin can be done from settled purpose, it seems that the sin against the Holy Spirit would range over all the kinds of sins: therefore it does not seem to be a kind of sin distinct from the other kinds of sins.

### Conclusion

> The sin against the Holy Spirit, by reason of its principle, of its opposite, and of its underlying act, is a determinate kind of sin.

**I respond:** It must be said that the sin against the Holy Spirit names a kind of sin distinct from the other kinds of sins by a threefold reason, namely by reason of its principle, by reason of its opposite, and by reason of its underlying act.

By reason of its principle, because the sin against the Holy Spirit is said to be that which is from settled malice or deliberate purpose, from which not every sin proceeds, but only that which a person does knowingly. — By reason of its opposite it is likewise distinguished, because, since grace is threefold, namely of innocence, baptismal, and penitential, the sin against the Holy Spirit properly is opposed to penitential grace, and impugns it both as to its beginning and as to its term, just as through original sin the grace of innocence is lost, and through the other actual sins baptismal grace is impugned. — And by reason of its underlying act it is likewise distinguished, because, since that sin is impugnative of grace, and the malice is in the spirit itself according to itself, the sin against the Holy Spirit consists about the act of the spirit itself, as is evident in despair and obstinacy; whence fornication and adultery cannot in any way be called a sin against the Holy Spirit.

Therefore by reason of its principle and of its opposite and of its underlying act, the sin against the Holy Spirit is a determinate kind of sin. And by reason of these three it is so named, that it be called the sin against the Holy Spirit, namely by reason of the malice from which it proceeds, which is directly opposed to the goodness appropriated to the Holy Spirit; by reason of the penitential or final grace which it deprives, which is the effect appropriated to the Holy Spirit; and also by reason of the spiritual act about which it consists; whence it is directly called a sin against the Holy Spirit, which is in the spirit and about the act of the malignant spirit. — And thus it is evident that the sin against the Holy Spirit is a kind of sin distinct from the other kinds of sins. And the arguments that show this are to be conceded.

**To the solution of the opposed arguments:**
*To 1.* To that which is objected, that it is a sin unto death: it must be said that a sin is called "unto death" according to a likeness to bodily death. Now in bodily death three things concur, of which the first is the loss of life, the second is the corruption of the disposition on the part of the body for the reception of the soul, the third is the impossibility of repair according to the course of nature. As to the first condition, every sin in which there is an aversion from God is said to be a mortal sin or unto death. As to the second, the sin against the Holy Spirit is called a sin unto death, because it takes away the disposition for the reception of life, which indeed consists in the reception of penance. But as to the third condition, that sin is called "unto death" in which one dies corporeally. When therefore it is said that every mortal sin is unto death, and that the sin against the Holy Spirit is a sin unto death, "sin unto death" is taken in a different way.

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that the sin against the Holy Spirit is so called either because it is against the person etc.; it must be said that it is called a sin against the Holy Spirit not because it is against the *person*, but because it is against the appropriated effect; nor because it is against every appropriated effect, but because it is against the chief effect among the things appropriated to the Holy Spirit. And this is the gift of final grace, that is, of penitential grace, and such properly as to the state of final grace, in which all efficacy of grace consists; and in this way not every sin is against that effect; and through this it does not follow that every sin is against the Holy Spirit.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that every sin can be a sin from ignorance and weakness; it must be said that the case is not alike, since ignorance does not determine for itself any act, nor does weakness either; and therefore it does not name a determinate kind of sin, but ranges over all the kinds of sins. The like is to be said of the sin which is from *weakness*; but it is not so of the sin insofar as it is from *malice*. For in order that it be a sin against the Holy Spirit, it does not suffice that it be from settled *knowledge* and purpose, but there is required a *determination of kind* with respect to the underlying act.

*To 4.* To that which is objected, that every sin can be done from malice; it must be said that although malice can concur in every sin, nevertheless it does not always make a sin against the Holy Spirit. Whence if some old man, who does not have an appetite for fornicating, were to arouse his flesh that he might fornicate, he would not be said in that fornication to sin with a sin against the Holy Spirit, although he committed that sin from purpose and a certain malice. When therefore it is said that the sin from malice is a sin against the Holy Spirit, this is understood only of *those kinds* of sins which properly take their origin from malice, such as envy of a brother's grace and the impugning of acknowledged truth.