Dist. 10, 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/3/d/10/q/bon-sent-III-d10-a2-q2
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *On the sonship of adoption.*
### Question II. *Whether the sonship of adoption belongs to us through Christ.*

Secondly it is asked whether the sonship of adoption belongs to us through Christ. And that it does seems to be the case.

1. John, chapter one: *He gave them power to become the sons of God, to those who believe in his name*; it is established that the Evangelist speaks of the incarnate Word: therefore it seems that through him we are sons of God; but no other sons than adoptive ones: therefore, and so on. (*Foundations.*)

2. Likewise, Galatians, chapter four: *God sent his Son, made of a woman, that we might receive the adoption of sons*: therefore if the Son was sent into flesh for this purpose, it seems that through Christ we are adoptive sons.

3. Likewise, «everything that is per accidens is reduced to the per se»; but sons by adoption are sons per accidens with respect to the natural son, who per se and properly is the son: therefore if Christ alone is the natural son, it seems that no one is adopted into a son except through him.

4. Likewise, we are made sons of God through him through whom we are reconciled to God; but we are reconciled to God through Christ, as is said in Second Corinthians, chapter five: *God reconciled us to himself through Christ*: therefore it seems that we have been adopted through him.

**On the contrary:** (*To the opposite.*)
1. Romans, chapter eight: *You have not received the spirit of servitude again in fear, but the spirit of the adoption of sons*: therefore it seems that the adoption of our sonship should properly be attributed to the Holy Spirit, not to Christ.

2. Likewise, John, chapter three: *Unless one is reborn of water and the Holy Spirit* etc.; and again: *So is everyone who is born of the Spirit*; but to whatever the birth is attributed, to the same the sonship must be attributed: if therefore we are reborn spiritually through the Holy Spirit, it seems that through him properly, not through Christ, we are adopted into sons. But if you should say that this belongs to both; it is argued at least that by appropriation it does not belong to Christ, but to the Holy Spirit; and the aforesaid reasons seemed to show the opposite.

3. Likewise, before the incarnation of Christ God had men as sons, as he himself says of Solomon: *I will be to him a father*; but it is established that the Son of God had not yet come into flesh: therefore if Christ names the incarnate Son of God, it seems that we are not sons of God through Christ.

4. Likewise, however much the Son be incarnate, no one is nonetheless an adoptive son of God except him who receives the gift of sanctifying grace, which once received, he is a son even before the incarnation: therefore whether the incarnation of the Son of God be posited or removed, the account of adoption remains intact: it seems therefore that the sonship of our adoption was not brought about through Christ.

Alongside this it is asked, by which gift of grace we are made adoptive sons; for it seems that it is through *charity*, as Augustine says: «Charity alone is what discerns between the sons of the kingdom and of perdition». — It seems too that it is through *faith*, as is said in John, chapter one: *He gave them power to become the sons of God, to those who believe in his name.* — It seems nonetheless that it is through *fear*; upon that passage in Romans, chapter eight: *You have not received again the spirit of servitude* etc.: the Gloss: «Chaste fear, which is good and perfecting, begets us as sons». — It seems too that it is through *baptismal grace*, by the authority of the Lord, in John, chapter three: *Unless one is reborn of water and the Holy Spirit*; but this is through baptism. — It is asked therefore: to which of these graces or gifts is the sonship of adoption *properly* attributed? And if to all in some manner, it is asked, to which more properly? (*An incidental question.*)

### Conclusion

> It is true in every mode that we are adoptive sons through Christ.

**I respond:** It must be said that when it is asked whether we are sons of adoption through Christ, this can be understood in two ways: for that preposition *through* can import an *effective* cause, or a *meritorious* or *dispositive* one. (*A twofold sense.*) And if it imports a *meritorious* or *dispositive* cause, it is without doubt true that we are sons of adoption through Christ. (*Conclusion 1.*) For he himself merited grace for us, by which we are adoptive sons, insofar as he is the head of the Church. And this regards not only the divine nature, but also the assumed nature. — But if it imports an *effective* cause, then it is still true; (*Conclusion 2.*) for the Father adopted us through the Son and the Holy Spirit. And if we speak by appropriation, through the Son he adopted as to the inception, (*Conclusion 3.*) through the Holy Spirit as to the consummation. For two things concur toward our adoption, namely *redemption*, which was brought about through the Son's mission, and *sanctification*, which was brought about through the mission of the Holy Spirit. And this is what is said in the book *On the Soul and the Spirit*, chapter six: «From the Father through the Son and the Holy Spirit divine things descend to us. The Father indeed handed over the Son, that he might redeem us; he sent the Holy Spirit, who might adopt servants into sons; he gave the Son as the price of redemption, the Holy Spirit as the privilege of adoption».

And thus it is clear that in every mode — whether *through* expresses a *dispositive* account, or an *effective* one, and this, whether by *propriety* or by *appropriation* — it is true that we are adoptive sons through Christ. (*General conclusion.*) — And the reasons that show this are to be conceded.

**To the arguments on the opposite side:** (*Resolution of the opposing arguments.*)
*To 1, 2.* To that which is first objected to the contrary concerning the Holy Spirit, it must be said that the sonship of adoption belongs to the Holy Spirit and can be appropriated by reason of *sanctification*; but by this it is not excluded that it belongs to the Son. For if we speak by *propriety*, «the works of the Trinity are undivided»; but if by *appropriation*, nothing prevents that one thing, for diverse causes, can be appropriated to several persons. And by this the following objection is clear.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that there were adoptive sons before the coming of Christ; it must be said that although there were [such] before the coming of Christ according to the thing, nonetheless they were not adoptive sons before faith in the one to come, because, as Augustine says, «no one could be saved without faith in the Mediator». (*Note.*) Moreover, before the coming of Christ there was not the full account of sonship, because no one could attain the inheritance, however just he might be. And if you should object concerning the angels, that they are sons; it must be said that although they are not sons by the mediating merits of Christ as man, they are nonetheless sons of God through the effect and conformity. «For it is necessary, as

Augustine says, that we be adopted into sons through him who is Son by nature».

*To 4.* To that which is objected, that when the incarnation is posited, sonship is not posited, nor when it is removed is it removed; it must be said that this does not prove that Christ is not the cause of our adoption; but it shows that the incarnation is not the *whole* cause, because the sonship is completed in the mission of the Holy Spirit.

But to that which is asked last, by which gift of grace we may become adoptive sons; it must be said that we are sons of God insofar as we are conformed to the image of the natural Son, according to that passage in Romans, chapter eight: *Whom he predestined, [these] to be made conformed to the image of his Son.* And this is in two ways: either through *removal from evil*, and this is through baptismal grace, which insofar as it is sacramental is a remedy against evil; or through *ordering to the good*, and this can be in two ways: either on the part of the *intellect*, and so *faith*; or on the part of the *affection*, and so *charity*. But if it be said that *fear* or *humility* makes sons, this is dispositively. (*To the incidental question. Note.*)