Dist. 43, 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/2/d/43/q/bon-sent-II-d43-a3-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article III. *On the species and differences of this sin.*

Next there is an inquiry into the genus of this sin with respect to its species and differences. And concerning this, two questions are asked.

First, there is an inquiry into the species of this sin with respect to their number and sufficiency.

Second, there is an inquiry into them with respect to the proper account of each.

### Question I. *On the number and sufficiency of the species of this sin.*

Concerning the first one proceeds thus, and there is an inquiry into the number and sufficiency of the species of this sin. And commonly six species of this sin have been wont to be assigned, namely despair, presumption, obstinacy, envy of a brother's grace, impugning of acknowledged truth, and final impenitence. But that there ought to be far more, it seems:

1. For, since there are three theological virtues, namely faith, hope, and charity, each of which is as necessary for salvation as the other, it seems that, just as there is one sin against the Holy Spirit which is against hope, namely despair, so likewise there ought to be one against faith, and another against charity.

2. Likewise, there are many cardinal virtues besides penance which are necessary for salvation: therefore, just as a species of the sin against the Holy Spirit is taken by opposition to penance, so it ought to be taken by opposition to the other cardinal virtues.

3. Likewise, in God there are considered not only these conditions, namely mercy and justice, but also several others, such as goodness and majesty: therefore, just as there are two species of this sin, of which one is against justice, like presumption, the other against mercy, like despair, so it seems that two other species ought to be against the other conditions.

4. Likewise, there are seven capital sins, among which some are as great as envy is: therefore, just as envy of a brother's grace is set down as one species of this sin, so pride and anger ought also to be set down.

5. Likewise, it is just as great a sin to impugn goodness as to impugn truth: therefore, just as there is one species of this sin in respect of the impugning of acknowledged truth, so there ought to be another species in respect of the impugning of goodness.

6. Likewise, *the spirit of blasphemy* is a sin against the Holy Spirit, according to what is said in the Gloss and in the text of Matthew, chapter twelve; nor is it any of the aforesaid: therefore it seems that there are more species of the sin against the Holy Spirit than the aforesaid.

7. Likewise, I ask whence this distinction of the species is taken.

For either it is taken on the part of *that to which* this sin is opposed, or on the part of *the underlying acts*, or on the part of *the motives*. If on the part of *that to which it is opposed*; since that is penitential grace, and penitential grace is one, it seems that there ought to be one sole species of this sin. If on the part of *the underlying acts*; either those acts are *principal* acts of the interior powers, or *not principal*. If *principal*; then there ought to be only three according to the number of the powers. If in respect of the *non-principal* acts; then there ought to be far more than six. If on the part of *the motives*; the same objection is made, for, since there are more motives than six, there will be more species of this sin.

Alongside this it is asked, since the Master in the text treats only of four species of the sin against the Holy Spirit, while others posit five species, others six, whence this diversity comes. Therefore it is asked in respect of what these species are distinguished, and what is their number and sufficiency.

### Conclusio

> Six species of the sin against the Holy Spirit are more fittingly assigned than four or five.

**Respondeo:** It must be said that the sin against the Holy Spirit is directly against the effect of the Holy Spirit, which indeed is called penitential grace. Now this penitential grace, as it is considered in the Sacrament, regards three things, namely the physician, the sick man, and the minister. — On the part of the physician these two concur: *mercy* and *justice* — mercy, by which he remits the offense, and justice, by which he exacts amendment. Against mercy is *despair*; against justice is *presumption*. — Likewise on the part of the sick man two things concur, namely *detestation* of past sin and the *purpose* of not sinning; for unless he have these two in himself, he is not fit for the grace of the Holy Spirit to have efficacy in him. Against the detestation of sin is *obstinacy*; against the purpose of not sinning is *final impenitence*. — Likewise on the part of the minister two things concur, namely *the truth of doctrine*, by which he instructs the sinner, and *the holiness of grace*, by which he aids and lifts him up. Against the truth of doctrine is *the impugning of acknowledged truth*; against the holiness of grace is *envy of a brother's grace*. — And thus the number and sufficiency are clear, why namely there are so many species of the sin, neither more nor fewer.

In another way the sufficiency of the said species can be taken; for, since that sin is against *penitential grace*, inasmuch as through it the remission of sins comes about *in the unity of the Church*, that sin is either against *penance* or against *ecclesiastical unity*. — Against penance it can be in two ways: either by *withdrawal from the good*, and thus it is despair; or by *obstinacy in evil*, and thus it is obstinacy. — If against ecclesiastical unity, then it is either by reason of *truth* or by reason of *goodness*. If by reason of truth, then it is the impugning of acknowledged truth; if by reason of goodness, then it is envy of a brother's grace. And in this way four species are taken.

Nor does this manner of assigning conflict with the one already stated, for under *obstinacy*, which is obstinacy in evil, are included presumption and final impenitence. For by the very fact that someone is obstinate in evil, he neither fears punishment nor purposes to lay aside his fault.

In yet another way the number of these species is taken; for, since the sin against the Holy Spirit is against *penitential grace*, it is either against it by reason of *itself*, or by reason of *what precedes*, or by reason of *what follows*. — If by reason of itself, then it is obstinacy. If by reason of what precedes; since *fear* and *hope* precede penance like two millstones, against fear is presumption, against hope is despair. If by reason of what follows; since amendment follows upon penance, which consists in two things, namely in *true confession* and *good satisfaction*; thus two species are taken, of which one is *the impugning of the true*, the other *the detestation of the good*; and according to this assignment obstinacy comprehends obstinacy properly so called and final impenitence.

And thus the number and sufficiency of the species are clear, and by what reasoning some assign four, some

five, some six. But that manner by which six species are assigned is more fitting and is more commonly held, for the reason that what the others say implicitly, this one says explicitly. — According to this manner it must be granted that the species of the sin against the Holy Spirit are six in number, and not more.

**To the arguments:**

1. To that, then, which is objected, that there ought to be a sin against the Holy Spirit against faith and against charity; it must be said that that reasoning does not compel, because despair is not called a sin against the Holy Spirit because it is against *hope*, but because it directly repugns the disposition of *penitential grace*. For he who despairs of pardon never prepares himself for grace, like Judas, who « more easily, despairing, ran to the noose, as Augustine says, than to seek the benefit of mercy ».

2. To that which is objected, that there are other cardinal virtues besides penance; it must be said that, although there be other virtues, yet penance is properly the virtue by which man rises again in grace, and by which fault is remitted; and therefore the sin which is most of all an impugning of grace has more directly to be opposed to penance than to another cardinal virtue. Moreover, penance is not only a virtue but also a Sacrament, and in both ways the sin against the Holy Spirit is opposed to it.

3. To that which is objected, that there are conditions of God other than mercy and justice; it must be said that, although there be others, these nevertheless are the chief ones, which are considered in the work of justification, and which sinners must attend to that they may be able to return to grace; and therefore the species of the sin against the Holy Spirit are assigned rather against these than against the other conditions.

4. To that which is objected, that there are seven capital sins as great as envy; it must be said that envy of a brother's grace is set down as a sin against the Holy Spirit not by reason of that whereby it is a capital sin, but by reason of that whereby it is an impugning of the good, which has direct opposition to the good of penance.

5. To that which is objected, that one may impugn goodness as well as truth and majesty; it must be said that in the impugning of acknowledged truth there is included the impugning of majesty and also of goodness; since truth not only proclaims itself, but also proclaims and manifests the goodness and also the majesty of God; and when someone knowingly speaks against the truth, in which the majesty and goodness of God are proclaimed, he consequently impugns the majesty and goodness.

6. To that which is objected concerning the spirit of blasphemy, it must be said that it is comprehended under the impugning of acknowledged truth. For he who by false words resists the truth of God is said both to blaspheme and to impugn acknowledged truth.

7. To that which is asked, in respect of what the number and sufficiency of the species of this sin are taken; it must be said that it is taken on the part of the opposite. Now this genus of sin is opposed to penance not only by reason of the habit of penance, but also by reason of those things which concur unto the effect of penance. And since these are six, as has been shown — two on the part of the physician, and two on the part of the sick man, and two on the part of the minister — for this reason there are six species of this sin.

And to that which was last asked, the response is now clear from what has been said.