Dist. 11, 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/3/d/11/q/bon-sent-III-d11-a1-q1
----------------------------------------
### ARTICLE I. *On the predestination of Christ.*
### QUESTION I. *Whether Christ's predestination is conformable to our predestination.*

Concerning the first matter one proceeds thus, and it is asked whether Christ's predestination is conformable to our predestination, such that our predestination and his are said according to a univocal account. And that it is so, seems [to be the case]:

1. *First*, by the definition of predestination: "Predestination is the preparation of grace and glory"; but this belongs to Christ and to us: therefore etc.

2. *Likewise*, what belongs to Christ according to his human nature belongs uniformly to us, since he is of the same nature and species as we are; but predestination belongs to Christ according to his human nature: therefore it pertains to us and to him according to a univocal account.

3. *Likewise*, we are conformed to Christ in merit; and if we are conformed in merit, it is necessary to be conformed in reward: therefore by parity of reasoning also in the divine purpose. But this is predestination: therefore etc.

4. *Likewise*, Augustine, *On the Calling of the Saints*: "Whatever man is made a Christian by grace, just as that man was from the beginning made Christ": therefore if God made other men Christians in the same way by which he also made that man Christ, and altogether predestined in the same way in which he made [them]; therefore he predestined us and Christ by the same mode.

**On the contrary:**
1. Augustine, *On the Predestination of the Saints*: "Predestination is the purpose of having mercy"; but with respect to him in whom it is possible to find no sin there is no purpose of having mercy: if, then, such is Christ, it seems that predestination is not said of us and of Christ according to the same account.

2. *Likewise*, predestination is commonly described thus: "Predestination is the preparation of grace in the present and of glory in the future"; but in Christ grace and glory existed at the same time: therefore predestination does not belong to us and to Christ according to one account.

3. *Likewise*, predestination is in us not only by reason of nature, but also by reason of person; but in Christ predestination is by reason of the assumed nature, not by reason of person, since that [person] is eternal: therefore etc.

4. *Likewise*, that man Christ was predestined to be God, or the Son of God, according to what is said in Romans, chapter one: *Who was predestined the Son* *of God in power* etc. — whence also *the Spirit was given to him not by measure* — but we are predestined to created and finite grace: therefore if the created and finite is not univocated in anything with the uncreated and infinite, it necessarily follows that predestination is said of us and of Christ according to one account and another.

### CONCLUSION.

> Christ's predestination is in a certain way conformable to our predestination, in a certain way unconformable, and it is not said univocally with the latter except insofar as it is conformable to it.

**I respond:** It must be said that Christ's predestination in a certain way has *conformity* to our predestination, in a certain way *unconformity*; which is evident if one attends to the things that belong to predestination. For predestination is considered in comparison to the *one predestining*, and to the *one predestined*, and to the *term*, and to the *initial state*. If, then, predestination be considered according to the comparison to the *one predestining*, Christ's predestination is of one account and of a conformable mode with our predestination; for in the same way in which God predestined Christ, he also predestined us. — If we speak in comparison to the *state from which*, there is simply a difference. For he snatched us by the grace of predestination from the state of sin and from the mass of perdition, as the Gloss says on that text of Romans, chapter eight: *Whom he predestined, these also he called,* and the text itself indicates [it]; but this state is not to be found in Christ in any way. And thus, as regards the first, there is simply agreement; as regards the last, namely as regards the state, difference.

But as regards the two intermediate [points] there is partly agreement, partly difference. For in us predestination is with respect to nature, and also with respect to person, and more properly with respect to person than to nature. But in Christ predestination is by reason of the assumed nature, which follows the divine disposition, not by reason of person; and thus there is in a certain way agreement, and in a certain way difference, with respect to the one predestined. — With respect also to the term it is likewise so. For we are predestined to grace and glory, and likewise also Christ; but we are predestined to partake of grace and glory successively, whereas Christ [partakes] at the same time. Likewise, we are predestined to the grace of a singular person, but Christ to the grace of the union and of the singular person; and thus he has as much as we and abounds beyond us; and through this he in a certain way agrees, in a certain way exceeds. It is true, therefore, that Christ's predestination is in a certain way *conformable* and in a certain way *unconformable*; and if it be described according to that in which it is conformable, there is univocation; but according to that in which it disagrees, there is not.

**To the arguments:** And through this the arguments for both sides are clear. For the first ones, which show that it is conformable to our predestination, proceed from the side of the *one predestining*, or of the *one predestined* as regards *nature*, or from the side of the *term* as regards *grace and glory*; and thus they conclude truly. But the arguments to the opposite proceed concerning predestination itself from the side of the *initial state*, or from the side of the *one predestined* by reason of *person*, or from the side of the *term* by reason of the *divine union*; and each is to be conceded along its own paths.