Bonaventure

The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation; Quaracchi restart their numbering on every printed page, so the labels are qualified by page.

QUAESTIO IV.

Quae sit causa efficiens sive auctor huius libri.

Postremo ad maiorem evidentiam potest quaeri¹ de causa efficiente. Et dicitur fuisse Magister Petrus Lombardus, Parisiensis Episcopus. Sed quod non debeat dici auctor huius libri, videtur².

1. Ille solus dicendus est auctor libri, qui est doctor sive auctor doctrinae; sed, sicut dicit Augustinus in libro de Magistro³: «Solus Christus est doctor»: ergo solus debet dici huius libri auctor.

2. Item, sicut dicit Philosophus in Ethica veteri⁴: «Non quicumque facit grammaticalia vel musicalia, debet dici grammaticus vel musicus, utpote si faciat casu, vel fortuna, vel alio supponente sive dicente»; sed Magister hoc opus composuit ex aliena doctrina, sicut ipse dicit in littera⁵, quod «in hoc opere maiorum exempla doctrinamque reperies»: ergo non debet dici auctor.

Si tu dicis⁶, quod non tantum hic est doctrina Sanctorum, sed etiam sua, ratione cuius debet dici auctor; contra: «A maiori et digniori debet fieri denominatio⁷»; sed Magister dicit, quod «pauisper vox sua insonuit, et tunc a paternis limitibus non discessit»: ergo non deberet iste liber dici esse Magistri.

Contra: Constat quod Deus hoc opus non scripsit digito suo, ergo habuit alium, creatum auctorem⁸; sed non est dare alium nisi Magistrum.

Item, si auctoritas Magistri in hac causa recipitur, ipse dicit in littera⁹: «In multo labore et sudore hoc volumen, Deo praestante, compegimus»: ergo videtur, quod ipse fuit auctor praesentis libri.

Conclusio

Petrus Lombardus, Episcopus Parisiensis, est auctor huius libri.

Respondeo: Ad intelligentiam dictorum notandum, quod quadruplex est modus faciendi librum. Aliquis enim scribit aliena¹⁰, nihil addendo vel mutando; et iste mere dicitur scriptor. Aliquis scribit aliena, addendo, sed non de suo; et iste compilator dicitur. Aliquis scribit et aliena et sua, sed aliena tamquam principalia, et sua tamquam annexa ad evidentiam; et iste dicitur commentator, non auctor¹. Aliquis scribit et sua et aliena, sed sua tamquam principalia, aliena tamquam annexa ad confirmationem; et talis debet dici auctor. Talis fuit Magister, qui² sententias suas ponit et Patrum sententiis confirmat. Unde vere debet dici auctor huius libri.

1. Quod ergo obiicitur, quod solus Christus est doctor et auctor; dicendum, quod sicut dicit Augustinus in libro de Doctrina christiana³, docere est dupliciter, sicut dicitur dupliciter aliquis facere videre. Aliter enim facit videre qui visum restituit, aliter, qui visibile digito ostendit; et⁴ primum facit Deus, secundum homo. Similiter aliter docet qui scientiam, quam habet in anima⁵, verbo vel scripto offert vel ostendit, aliter, qui habitum scientiae imprimit; uterque tamen dicitur doctor et auctor, sed Deus principalius; sic⁶ in proposito.

2. Quod obiicitur, quod fecit⁷ librum, alio supponente; dicendum, quod non ideo dicitur facere aliquis, supponente alio, quia⁸ ab alio didicit — tunc enim pauci essent doctores vel grammatici — sed si omnino scientia eius dependet ab alio, ita quod non habet habitum intra, sicut illi qui faciunt bonum latinum, quia alii eis⁹ dixerunt, sed ipsi ignorant artem; hoc modo non fuit Magister. Nam a scientia, quam acquisierat longo tempore vel labore, hoc opus composuit et per doctrinas Patrum suas sententias¹⁰ confirmavit. Et quod sunt ibi multa dicta aliorum, hoc non tollit Magistro auctoritatem, sed potius eius auctoritatem confirmat¹¹ et humilitatem commendat.

---

QUESTION IV.

What the efficient cause, or the author, of this book is.

Lastly, for greater clarity, it can be asked¹ about the efficient cause. And it is said to have been Master Peter Lombard, Bishop of Paris. But that he ought not to be called the author of this book, is shown thus².

1. He alone is to be called the author of a book who is the teacher or the author of the teaching; but, as Augustine says in the book On the Teacher³: «Christ alone is teacher»: therefore he alone ought to be called the author of this book.

2. Likewise, as the Philosopher says in the old Ethics⁴: «Not everyone who makes grammatical or musical things ought to be called a grammarian or a musician — as, for instance, if he should do it by chance, or by luck, or with another prompting or dictating»; but the Master composed this work out of another's teaching, as he himself says in the text⁵, that «in this work you will find the examples and the teaching of our forebears»: therefore he ought not to be called the author.

If you say⁶, that here there is not only the teaching of the Saints but also his own, by reason of which he ought to be called the author; on the contrary: «Denomination ought to be made from the greater and the worthier⁷»; but the Master says that «for a little while his own voice sounded, and even then it did not depart from the bounds set by the fathers»: therefore this book ought not to be said to be the Master's.

On the contrary: It is certain that God did not write this work with his own finger, therefore it had another, created author⁸; but there is no other to assign except the Master.

Likewise, if the Master's authority is received in this cause, he himself says in the text⁹: «With much labour and sweat, God granting it, we have put this volume together»: therefore it seems that he was the author of the present book.

Conclusion

Peter Lombard, Bishop of Paris, is the author of this book.

I respond: For the understanding of what has been said it must be noted that there is a fourfold manner of making a book. For someone writes another's matter¹⁰, adding or changing nothing; and he is called merely a scribe. Someone writes another's matter, adding, but nothing of his own; and he is called a compiler. Someone writes both another's and his own, but another's as the principal matter and his own as annexed for clarification; and he is called a commentator, not an author¹. Someone writes both his own and another's, but his own as the principal matter and another's as annexed for confirmation; and such a one ought to be called an author. Such was the Master, who² sets down his own sentences and confirms them by the sentences of the Fathers. Hence he ought truly to be called the author of this book.

1. As to what is objected, then, that Christ alone is teacher and author; it must be said that, as Augustine says in the book On Christian Doctrine³, to teach is twofold, just as someone is said in two ways to make another see. For one makes another see in one way who restores his sight, in another way who points out the visible thing with his finger; and⁴ the first God does, the second man. Similarly, one teaches in one way who offers or shows, by word or by writing, the knowledge which he has in his soul⁵, in another way he who imprints the habit of knowledge; yet each is called teacher and author, but God more principally; so⁶ in the case before us.

2. As to what is objected, that he made⁷ the book with another prompting him; it must be said that someone is not said to make something with another prompting merely because⁸ he learned it from another — for then there would be few teachers or grammarians — but if his knowledge depends altogether on another, so that he does not have the habit within, like those who make good Latin because others have told it to them⁹, while they themselves do not know the art; in this way the Master was not. For out of the knowledge which he had acquired over long time and labour he composed this work, and by the teachings of the Fathers he confirmed his own sentences¹⁰. And that there are in it many sayings of others, this does not take away the Master's authority, but rather confirms¹¹ his authority and commends his humility.

---