Dist. 43, Art. 2, Q. 2
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-a2-q2
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *On the same sin as to its proper conditions.*
### Question II. *Whether the sin against the Holy Spirit is unforgivable.*

Secondly, inquiry is made concerning the unforgivableness of this sin. And that this sin is unforgivable is shown.

1. Matthew, chapter twelve: *The blasphemy of the spirit shall not be forgiven*; and afterward: *Whoever shall speak a word against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven, neither in this world nor in the world to come*; but Christ can in no way lie: therefore that sin can in no way be forgiven.

2. Likewise, the Gloss on the said passage: *Blasphemy shall be forgiven; but the blasphemy of the spirit shall not be forgiven, neither in this world nor in the world to come.*

3. Likewise, Jeremiah, chapter eighteen: *We have despaired, after our own thoughts we will go*; and afterward it is added: *But do not pray for this people, for I will not hear you*: if, therefore, the Lord wills to be entreated for a forgivable sin, and was unwilling to be entreated on account of the sin of despair; therefore it seems that the sin of despair is unforgivable. By parity of reasoning the same is concluded concerning every species of this sin.

4. Likewise, no sin can be forgiven except one for which a person can undergo penance and ask for pardon; but the sin against the Holy Spirit is not of this kind: therefore etc. The major is manifest; the minor is proved by that saying of Augustine, who says in the book *On the Lord's Sermon on the Mount*: « So great is the stain of this sin that it cannot submit to the humility of imploring ».

5. Likewise, impenitence is a species of this sin and is annexed to its other species; if, therefore, impenitence is directly opposed to pardon and penance itself, therefore it seems that it simply deprives one of pardon and remission: therefore it seems that this sin is unforgivable.

**On the contrary:** 1. Upon that text of the Psalm: *They were turned into the depth of the sea*; the Gloss: « That is, those who were most desperate »: therefore if this is the sin which most removes one from pardon, and even that is altogether forgiven; it seems that all the others are too.

2. Likewise, Augustine *On the Words of the Lord*: « This impenitence, or impenitent heart, so long as one lives in this flesh, cannot be judged; for one must despair of no one, so long as the patience of God leads him to penance ». But concerning him who sins by an unforgivable sin, one must despair: therefore it seems that he who sins by the sin against the Holy Spirit does not sin unforgivably.

3. Likewise, the sin against the Holy Spirit does not take from a man the state of wayfarer; but so long as a man is in the state of wayfarer, he has the changeableness of free choice; and so long as he has this, he can be reconciled to God and freed from sin: therefore it seems that the sin against the Holy Spirit can possibly be forgiven.

4. Likewise, grace and virtue are more powerful toward the good than sin is toward evil; but no virtue renders a man by his own act incapable of sinning, neither penance nor any other: therefore it seems that no fault renders a man incapable of rising again. But a man does not rise again from sin unless the sin be forgiven: therefore not only that kind of sin, but also any other, is forgivable.

5. Likewise, if the sin against the Holy Spirit is called unforgivable, either this is by privation of the *act of remission*, or by privation of *disposition*, or by privation of *possibility*. If by privation of the *act*: then any sin that is not forgiven ought to be called unforgivable: therefore any kind of sin would be called unforgivable in this manner. If by privation of *disposition*: then since every mortal sin renders a man unfit for remission on account of the offense and contempt of God, it seems therefore that every sin ought to be called unforgivable. If by privation of *possibility*; on the contrary: either this is because *God* cannot infuse grace; or this is because *that man* cannot receive grace. But the first is plainly false, and likewise the second, since that man has freedom of choice: it does not therefore seem that in any way that sin ought to be called unforgivable.

> There is, therefore, a question: if it is called unforgivable, in what way and how it is so called.

### Conclusion
> The sin against the Holy Spirit, taken in a general sense, is called unforgivable because it not only resists grace, but also resists the disposition for receiving grace and pardon, yet without depriving one of the power of saving oneself, as does final impenitence.

**I respond:** It must be said that, as the Master suggests in the text, it was the opinion of some that the sin against the Holy Spirit was called unforgivable « because it is forgiven scarcely and rarely and with difficulty ». But others said that that sin is called unforgivable « because it can in no way be forgiven, in that he who sins by such a sin cannot worthily repent ». — Now each of these ways of speaking is fitting and true, nor does the one conflict with the other, if they are rightly understood.

For just as the forgivable is spoken of in two ways — in one way the forgivable means *aptitude*, in another way the forgivable means *custom* — so too the unforgivable can be spoken of in two ways: in one way, so that it is called unforgivable, that is, *unfit* or impossible to be forgiven; in another way, so that it is called unforgivable, which is *unaccustomed* to be forgiven.

In both of these ways the sin against the Holy Spirit can be called unforgivable; for every sin against the Holy Spirit either *is impenitence*, or *has impenitence annexed*. Now impenitence is spoken of in two ways, just as is *perseverance*: in one way perseverance is called the *purpose of persevering*; in another way perseverance is called *continued remaining* in the good unto the end. And in the *first* way perseverance is in any virtue; in the *second* way perseverance includes final grace. So too *impenitence* is spoken of in two ways: in one way impenitence is called the *purpose* of not repenting; in another way impenitence is called *continued remaining* in evil up to and including the last day. — And according to this latter way *the sin against the Holy Spirit*, which encloses impenitence within itself, can be spoken of in two ways: in one way, inasmuch as it encloses within itself the impenitence which is the *final persistence* in evil; and thus it is called unforgivable, because it cannot be forgiven, just as final grace cannot be lost. But to sin by sin against the Holy Spirit in this manner is to be attributed to no one until that instant in which it can be said of him that he is finally impenitent. And according to this manner runs one of the aforesaid opinions, and thus it takes the sin against the Holy Spirit very strictly. — In another way the sin against the Holy Spirit is spoken of, inasmuch as it encloses within itself impenitence, that is, the *purpose* of not repenting; in this manner it is called unforgivable, that is, unaccustomed to be forgiven. For although it is not impossible to be forgiven, since such a purpose can be changed; nevertheless it is rarely and scarcely forgiven, because such a purpose closes the way to grace and impedes the entrance of the Holy Spirit. For that which introduces grace and which disposes toward grace congruously is the will to withdraw from sin; and therefore, when the will has hardened its face toward the opposite, unless the gift and help of a special calling be given to it, the benefit of remission is not attained. Since, therefore, the other kinds of sins, even if they deprive one of good will and justice, nevertheless do not render the will rebellious and resistant against the divine calling; hence it is that if they are never forgiven, on account of the negligence of the sinner, or on account of the forestalling of death, they are not called unforgivable.

It is clear, therefore, why that sin is called unforgivable more than the other kinds of sins, namely because it not only resists grace, but also the disposition for receiving pardon and grace. It is also clear in what way it is called unforgivable; because, generally speaking, it does not deprive one of the power, but of the disposition; but strictly speaking, it deprives one of the power; but in this manner one is not said to sin against the Holy Spirit, so long as he lives in this life.

**To the arguments:** And by this is clear the response to the reasonings which are brought forward on both sides; chiefly to those which are brought forward for the second side, which show, namely, that that sin is not called unforgivable on the ground that it renders a man incapable of pardon while he is in this life; and because they conclude truly, they are therefore to be granted.

Nevertheless the last reasoning seems to show that it ought in no way to be called unforgivable; but this is already manifest from the things that have been said, because in other mortal sins there is not such a privation of remission as there is in this sin. For although other sins take away *justice*, nevertheless they do not take away the *purpose of returning to justice*. For nearly all who sin propose to amend. But this kind of sin, inasmuch as it is *sin*, takes away justice; inasmuch as it is *such a sin*, which has impenitence annexed, it takes from a man the purpose of returning to grace; and therefore it is called unforgivable, because it deprives one of the disposition toward the good.

*To 1, 2.* As to that which is first objected to the contrary from the authority of the Lord in Matthew, and also from the Gloss; it must be said that both the text and the Gloss are to be understood as referring to the privation of remission according to *custom*, not according to *possibility* and *aptitude*; hence, that the Lord threatens that that sin shall not be forgiven, this is to be understood, not because it cannot be forgiven, but because God is accustomed to forgive it for few. — Or it must be said, as Augustine says, that it is understood of the sin against the Holy Spirit insofar as it includes final impenitence, that is, that in which one perseveres unto death.

*To 3.* As to that which is thirdly objected concerning the word of Jeremiah, that God was unwilling to be prayed to for the desperate; it must be said that this was not because they could in no way be converted or return to the good; for this they could have done, if God had willed to visit them specially; but because they themselves did not merit it, and God by his hidden judgment was unwilling to extend to them the hand of his mercy. Hence it is that, foreseeing both his own judgment and their impenitence, he was foretelling this to the Prophet; and so from this it is not had that that sin could not be forgiven, but that God was unwilling to forgive it to them, and that they were finally going to remain in impenitence, although they could have departed from it.

*To 4.* As to that which is objected, that so great is the stain of this sin that one cannot repent; it must be said that Augustine retracts and explains that word, that this was not said by the privation of every kind of possibility, since God converts the most desperate, but by the privation of *facility*; hence not only is something accustomed to be called impossible which can in no way come to be, but also that which comes to be with difficulty.

*To 5.* As to that which is objected, that impenitence is a species of this sin; the response is already clear, because impenitence is spoken of in two ways, as has been said; and inasmuch as impenitence is called the *purpose of not repenting*, it does not render a man incapable of pardon, since he can desist from that purpose; and when that purpose is abandoned, another purpose can succeed it for him, and through it he can attain to pardon.

---