Dist. 47, 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/4/d/47/q/bon-sent-IV-d47-a1-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article I. *On those who judge and those who are judged.*
### Question I. *Whether the Apostles will judge.*

As to the first point, then, one proceeds thus, and it is shown that the Apostles will judge.

1. Matthew nineteen: *You shall sit upon twelve seats* etc. *If you say* that they will only assist the judge and will not judge; *on the contrary:* in Matthew twelve the Lord, speaking of the Apostles, says to the Jews: *They shall be your judges;* the Gloss there says that they will have the authority of judging.

2. Likewise, this same thing is shown *by reason:* because, if they were to judge only by comparison, this would not be a prerogative; for the wicked too will judge by comparison, according to what is said in Matthew twelve: *The men of Nineveh and the queen of the south shall rise up in judgement against this generation.*

3. Likewise, this seems so: because the Lord gave judgement to the Son for this reason, that He, though He was just, was judged as though impious, Job thirty-six: *Thy cause hath been judged as that of the impious; cause and judgement thou shalt recover;* but the Apostles, though they were just, were judged as though impious: therefore they too will judge in like manner.

4. Likewise, although Christ was our redeemer and saviour, He nevertheless dispensed to us the salvation of souls through the preaching of the Apostles: therefore if glory ought to correspond to grace, it seems that He will likewise pronounce the sentence of retribution through the Apostles.

**Contra:** 1. Acts ten: *He it is who was appointed by God to be judge of the living and of the dead:* therefore judgement is owed to Christ alone, and therefore not to the Apostles.

2. Likewise, a judge ought to be free from the sin of which he condemns another; but Christ alone was without every contagion of sin: therefore it belongs to Him alone to judge.

Likewise, it is asked: why is judiciary power attributed to the Apostles rather than to the other Saints, since it is said in Wisdom three: *The Saints shall judge nations and shall have dominion?*

Likewise, if all the Apostles will have judiciary power, why does He say: *upon twelve seats?* because according to this, since Paul was not of the twelve, it seems that it does not pertain to him to judge.

Likewise, since they do not have power over other tribes than over the *tribes of Israel*, how does He say: *judging the twelve tribes of Israel*?

### Conclusion

> *Christ alone will pronounce the sentence in the judgement; but the Apostles and their perfect imitators are judges as assisting the one who judges and as approving.*

**I respond:** It must be said that someone is called a judge in a matter for a twofold reason: either because it belongs to him *to pronounce the sentence*, or because he *assists the one pronouncing it*, according as some judges assist and in a certain manner advise the principal judge. He therefore who pronounces the sentence, he is the principal judge; and such is Christ alone, as is clear in Matthew twenty-five, where it is expressed how He pronounces the sentence. But those who assist the one judging also obtain the name and the dignity of *one judging;* and such are perfect men, who beyond the works of the necessity of the precepts have supererogated the perfection of the counsels; and such are the Apostles principally, as heads, and their perfect imitators. That assistance, however, will not be for advising, because the Lord has no need of counsel; but it will be as it were for a certain honour and an approach to the judge, which, according to the word of the Lord, we may call an *honourable session together.*

The *meritorious* ground of this honourable session together is the perfection of supererogation; but the *final* ground is directed to the condemnation of the wicked by the comparison of their own life, and to the glory of Christ by the approbation of His sentence. For they will approve the sentence of the Lord as just, and by comparison with themselves will condemn the life of the wicked.

And from these things the objections to the first part are clear. For I concede that certain ones will judge in dignity, yet not as Christ does. The reasons for the opposite side are likewise clear; for they conclude that it does not belong to them to pronounce the sentence.

But as to that which is asked, why rather to the Apostles, and in the number twelve; the answer is clear from what has been said: for by the *twelve Apostles* all perfect men are understood, and by the *twelve tribes* the totality of those to be judged. — But since totality is designated by the *septenary number*, why did He not say: *in the septenary number?* And the response to this is that in the *septenary* totality is noted, which is composed of three and four. These, multiplied into one another, make the number twelve. — But the ground why twelve rather than seven is twofold: the *literal*, because He was speaking to the Apostles, who were twelve; but the *mystical* is that the duodenary is an abundant number, for its parts exceed it; and *again*, it is divided into two senaries, in which is signified perfection in the twofold life, namely in the active and the contemplative with the supererogation of the counsels; and it is this which claims for itself the judiciary dignity: therefore etc.