Dist. 43, Art. 2, 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/4/d/43/q/bon-sent-IV-d43-a2-q1
----------------------------------------
Consequently, as to the second part of the distinction, inquiry is made concerning the opening of the books. And two things are principally asked about this.

First, inquiry is made concerning the book of life.

Second, concerning the books of conscience.

### Article II. *On the book of life.*

Concerning the first, three things are asked.

First, inquiry is made concerning its quiddity.

Second, concerning its writing.

Third, concerning its opening.

### Question I. *On the quiddity of the book of life.*

As to the first, then, one proceeds thus; and it is shown that that book is the *Son of God* himself.

1. On that [text] of the Psalm: *Let them be blotted out of the book*, the Gloss: that is, "the knowledge of God, by which he *predestined and foreknew [them] to be made conformed to the image of the Son of God*."

2. Likewise, Apocalypse chapter twenty: *Another book was opened*, the Gloss: This book is "the predestination, in which all who are to be saved are written."

But that the book of life is *Christ according to his humanity* is shown thus:

3. Because Gregory in the *Morals* says: "The book of life is the vision of the coming Judge, because whoever shall see it, at once, with conscience as witness, understands whatever of good or of evil he has done"; but Christ is to judge in the form of a servant: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, the Gloss on Apocalypse chapter twenty says that "the book of life is Christ, who then, powerful, will appear to all"; but he will not appear to all except according to his humanity: therefore etc.

5. But that it is *a certain power*, neither the Divinity nor the humanity, Augustine seems to say in the twentieth [book] of the *City of God*: "A certain divine power is to be understood by the name of the *book*, by which it will come about that to each one the good and evil things are recalled to memory — [a power] which has received the name of a book."

6. Likewise, the purpose of a book is for reading: therefore that is properly called a book through which a man recalls good or evil things; but this is a power: therefore etc.

**On the contrary:** 1. That it is not the *knowledge of God* is shown: because in a book there is an impression of writing, but in God there is no impression: therefore, if the transferring [of the term] ought to be according to a likeness, such a transfer does not seem correct.

2. Likewise, that it is not the *humanity* is shown: because in a book there is reading; but in Christ as man there is neither good nor evil to read: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, that it is not a *power* is shown: because that power would bring evils to memory just as [it does] good things, according to what Augustine says; but evils are the ground of death: therefore it would then have to be called the book *of death*, not of life.

> **Conclusion.** The book of life is called the knowledge of God and a power according to its twofold property.

**I respond:** It must be said that a book has a twofold property: one *in itself*, namely the retention of knowledge in simultaneity and uniformity; and by reason of this property the name *book* is transferred to the knowledge of God. The other property is *toward us*, because through a book there is in us a recollection of things forgotten; and by reason of this it is transferred to *that power* by which the recollection of past things comes about. But the *humanity*, or *the vision of it*, is not called a book; and what Gregory and the Gloss say is understood by way of a certain concomitance. — It must therefore be granted that the book is called the knowledge of God, and that that divine power is so called according to a twofold property, as the reasons brought forward for this show.

*To the 1st.* To that, then, which is objected, that in that book there is no impression of writing; it must be said that as to this property it is not transferred, indeed in this they differ, because this book represents what comes to be in it, but that book represents what it does.

*To the 3rd.* To that which is objected, that that power brings evils to memory, which are the cause of death; it must be said that the book and power of God is *the cause of life in itself*, and that it is [a cause] *of death*, this is only by the occasion and ground of the other books, namely of the consciences; and therefore it is named from that to which it principally pertains. — Or it must be said that it is not called the book of life because it gives life; but the knowledge of God is called the book of life because all things there are life. Likewise, that power is called a book because it recalls; but it is called life because it does this not through the defectibility and fallibility of a creature, but according to the living truth of the divine knowledge.