Dist. 9, Dubia
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/9/q/bon-sent-III-d9-dubia
----------------------------------------
## DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.

### Doubt I.

In this part there are questions concerning the text, and first it is asked about this which he says, that the worship of the divinity consists *in love and in the offering of sacrifice and in reverence.* It is asked how these three are distinguished. And it seems that he speaks insufficiently, because it seems rather to consist *in adoration.* For Rabanus says thus: «The flesh of Christ is to be adored with latria, as the Word is, yet not with every species of latria; since we do not adore it prostrate on the ground in such a way that we believe that it created us from nothing»: therefore it seems that prostration on the ground pertains to the worship of God rather than the aforesaid things. — Likewise, it seems a *diminution,* because God is worshiped not only by love, but also by faith.

*(Question.)* It is asked, then, how these three aforesaid things are distinguished?

**I respond:** It must be said that, as was treated above, God is worshiped with an *interior* and an *exterior* worship; but that the Master might express both kinds of worship, he says that it consists *in love,* namely as regards the interior worship, in such a way that under love we understand the three theological virtues, namely charity and the other two that are preliminary to it. *Therefore* as regards the exterior worship he says that he is worshiped *by sacrifice,* so that under sacrifice he may comprehend all the reverence which is shown outwardly to God alone. — *(To the question.)* But by the fact that he adds *reverence,* he comprehends both; and thus the difference of these three is clear, because love refers to the interior worship, sacrifice to the exterior, reverence to both. — *(Otherwise.)* Or otherwise: love refers to the motive principle, sacrifice refers to the act, reverence to the form and the manner.

To that which is objected concerning adoration and prostration, it must be said that this can be comprehended under the name of sacrifice; it can also be said that he does not name it, because it is not a worship owed to God alone. For we are prostrated not only before God, but also before man. Hence it is not to be understood that Rabanus means to say that we ought not prostrate ourselves before the humanity, but that, in prostrating ourselves before the humanity, we ought not profess that we were created by reason of the humanity, but of the divinity. — *(Otherwise.)* It could also be said that adoration is comprehended under

this which is called *reverence,* just as faith too is understood through love. And thus the response to what follows is clear.

### Doubt II.

Likewise it is asked concerning that saying of the Damascene: *We adore Christ with the Father and the Holy Spirit by one adoration.* But *on the contrary:* the Father and the Holy Spirit are distinct persons; and to each of them one adoration is owed of itself: therefore if to the multiplication of the object there follows a multiplication of the act, it seems that those persons are to be adored by a multiple, not by a single adoration. — Likewise, adoration follows upon the directing of faith; but faith distinguishes between the persons: therefore the one adoring also, as such, distinguishes between the persons; and if this is so, the same thing returns as before.

**I respond:** It must be said that the three persons are to be adored by one and simple adoration. — *(The ground.)* And the ground of this is that that according to which it belongs to be adored, namely the supreme majesty, is one, in no way multiplied; and so, just as they are loved by one love, because in them there is one supreme goodness, so they are adored by one adoration.

To that which is objected, that those persons are distinguished; it must be said that if they are distinguished by reason of *emanation and origin,* yet they are not distinguished by reason of *adoration;* therefore it does not follow that with respect to these they have diverse *adorations,* but that they have diverse *relations;* and this indeed sound faith dictates, upon which adoration follows. — And by this the following objection is clear. Adoration follows upon faith, not insofar as it distinguishes the three persons by the plurality of the relations, but insofar as it unites them by the unity of the majesty.

### Doubt III.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says: *I adore the Lord's flesh in Christ for this reason, that it was assumed by the divinity.* For if in Christ both the divinity and the humanity are adored, and in the other persons the divinity, it seems that Christ is to be adored more than the other persons. — Likewise, we are bound to give thanks to Christ more after the incarnation than before: therefore we ought to adore and venerate him more: therefore if this is so, we are bound to adore the incarnate Son more than the non-incarnate; and if this is so, the Son more than the Father or the Holy Spirit. If you say that we ought to adore the Word more not intensively, but extensively; *on the contrary:* «more goods are more to be sought than fewer goods»: therefore more honorable things are more to be venerated and honored.

**I respond:** It must be said that Christ is not to be adored more than the Father or the Holy Spirit; nor ought the incarnate Word to be adored more after the incarnation than before. — *(The ground.)* And the ground of this is that adoration regards majesty and dignity; and since no dignity accrued to the Word from the assumption of the human nature, therefore he ought not be adored by a greater adoration. — Nor does it avail what he objects, that more goods are to be preferred to fewer; this, however, admits of many counter-instances. *(Counter-instance 1.)* One is, «when one thing is for the sake of another, there is only one thing there». Hence just as to hold a horse and the bridle is not to hold more than the horse; so to adore God and the flesh is not more than to adore God. — *(Counter-instance 2.)* Another counter-instance is, when one of those goods is incommensurable with the other; for then it does not add anything so as to make it greater, just as a point does not add to a line so as to make it greater; and in this way the creature stands toward the Creator.

To that which is objected, that we are bound to a greater giving of thanks; it must be said that it is not similar, because the giving of thanks regards not only the excellence of the *giver,* but also the excellence of the *gift;* but it is not so concerning adoration.

### Doubt IV.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says: *No one eats his flesh unless he first adore.* But *on the contrary:* in the sixth chapter of John: *It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing:* therefore if it profits nothing, it is not to be eaten nor adored. — Likewise, the flesh of Christ is truly under the Sacrament, therefore it is truly eaten, since it is received under the Sacrament; but the reception of the Sacrament can occur without a preceding adoration: therefore so too can true eating.

**I respond:** It must be said that that word is understood of *spiritual* eating, which is called *true* eating, because it has a true efficacy. Hence to eat *truly* is to eat *efficaciously;* and in this way no one eats well unless he adores, because he does not eat *efficaciously* unless he eats *reverently.* — And by this the response to the last [objection] is clear: for he objects concerning sacramental eating, and that is understood of spiritual eating.

*(To be noted.)* To that which is objected, that the flesh profits nothing; it must be said that *flesh* means a carnal understanding, as Augustine says: «The flesh profits nothing of itself, if it be separated from the spirit; but it profits insofar as it is united to the Word and deified». And in this way it is to be adored with the adoration of latria, not of dulia. But concerning this more fully is treated in the fourth book.

---