Dist. 11, Divisio Textus
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-divisio
----------------------------------------
## COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION XI.
### *On the communication of idioms which state some defectibility.*

*Next, if it be asked whether predestination* *etc.*

### DIVISION OF THE TEXT.

Above the Master showed how those idioms belong to Christ which seem to ring of completeness and dignity. But in this part he inquires concerning those which state some defectibility; and such are those which mark an inception and signify having being after non-being. And such are of a threefold difference: for some import inchoation in *being* implicitly and by reason of what is *connoted*, as the word "to-predestine"; some *implicitly*, but by reason of the *principal thing signified*, as the word "to-create"; some *explicitly* and by reason of their *primary signification*, as the word "to-begin." Therefore this part has three parts. In the first of these he inquires whether predestination is said in Christ of the nature or of the person. In the second he inquires whether Christ is a creature, at the beginning of the eleventh distinction: *It is also wont to be asked whether it ought to be said simply,* etc. In the third he asks whether that man at some time began, or always existed, there: *After the foregoing it is asked,* etc.

But the first and last parts remaining undi-vided, the middle part is divided into three. In the first of these he proposes the question and determines it. In the second he confirms it by the authorities of the Saints, there: *He who [shows that] Christ, or the Son of God, is not made,* etc. In the third he resolves the sophistical argumentation, which indeed seems to be contrary to the truth, and this there: *Although, therefore, Christ is said to be a creature according to the man,* etc.

### TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.

For the understanding of this part there falls here a question concerning two matters. First, as regards Christ's predestination. Second, it is asked concerning those things which seem to posit an inception in Christ.

Concerning the first, three things are asked by comparison to our predestination.

The first is, whether Christ's predestination is conformable to our predestination.

The second is, whether it is the exemplary form of our predestination.

The third is, whether, with respect to our predestination, there is in it an account of causality.

---