Bonaventure

Quaestio IV. Utrum generatio Filii sit prior spiratione Spiritus sancti secundum rationem intelligendi.

Quarto et ultimo quaeritur, quae istarum duarum emanationum, scilicet generationis et processionis, sit prior secundum rationem intelligendi. Et quod generatio Filii, ostenditur sic.

Fundamenta:

1. In imagine creata sic est, quod secundum ordinem intelligendi prior est emanatio notitiae a mente quam amoris, sicut vult Augustinus¹: «quia incognita non possumus diligere», sicut dicit Augustinus in decimo de Trinitate²: ergo si ordo attenditur in imagine secundum conformitatem ad Trinitatem increatam, ergo secundum rationem intelligendi prior est processus Verbi quam Amoris in divinis, maxime cum per imaginem creatam intelligamus Trinitatem increatam.

2. Item, sicut vult Philosophus³, «voluntas est, cuius principium est in ipso cognoscente singularia», ergo voluntas ut voluntas praesupponit cognitionem: ergo emanationem Verbi [praesupponit] emanatio Amoris.

3. Item, omne principium secundum rationem intelligendi prius est quam principiatum; sed Filius est principium Spiritus sancti: ergo secundum rationem intelligendi oportet praeintelligere Filium Spiritui sancto⁴: ergo et generationem, quae est emanatio Filii, prius quam processionem, quae est Spiritus sancti.

4. Item, in omni natura⁵ agente per modum naturae et voluntatis, productio per modum naturae intelligitur ante productionem voluntatis: ergo cum Pater sit natura intellectualis, producens Filium connaturalem et per modum naturae et Spiritum sanctum per modum voluntatis, ut supra tactum est⁶: ergo emanatio Filii prior est secundum rationem intelligendi emanatione Spiritus sancti.

Ad oppositum:

1. Augustinus nono de Trinitate⁷: «Partum mentis praecedit appetitus, quo id quod nosse volumus quaerendo, nascitur proles ipsa notitia»: ergo ante est in imagine creata appetitus, quam sit proles notitia, ergo ante amor quam verbum: ergo et processio ante generationem.

2. Item, nullus videns rem cognoscit eam⁸ nisi intentio voluntatis applicet vim cognoscentem ipsi cognoscibili, ut patet de homine eunte per viam, qui cum ivit et alibi cogitavit, perfecte nescit, qua transierit, sicut dicit Augustinus in undecimo de Trinitate⁹. Ergo voluntas praecedit ipsam cognitionem, ergo amor verbum in creaturis: ergo pari ratione in Deo, saltem secundum intellectum.

3. Item, sicut vult Philosophus, primum et immediatum est idem. Unde ipse in libro Posteriorum¹⁰, definiens propositionem immediatam, dicit, quod «immediata propositio est illa qua non est altera prior»; sed aeque immediate Spiritus sanctus procedit a Patre, ut Filius, ergo aeque primo: ergo nec secundum rem, nec secundum rationem intelligendi generatio Filii praecedit processionem Spiritus sancti.

4. Item, quanto aliquid communius, tanto prius est secundum rationem intelligendi¹¹; sed communis spiratio est communior quam generatio, quia convenit Patri et Filio, sed generatio soli Patri: ergo prior est secundum rationem intelligendi spiratio quam generatio.

Conclusio. Secundum rationem intelligendi generatio Filii prior est spiratione Spiritus sancti, quod triplici ratione probatur.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod, quidquid sit de ordine reali, de quo infra dicetur¹², tamen secundum rationem intelligendi prior est emanatio Verbi, tum quia Verbum est Spiritus sancti principium, tum etiam quia Verbum procedit per modum naturae, sed Spiritus sanctus per modum liberalis voluntatis, tum etiam quia intelligimus emanationes in personis per emanationes repertas in imagine. In imagine autem constat, quod cognitio et intelligentia praecedit amorem et voluntatem; non tamen volo dicere, quod in divinis sit emanatio ita¹³ natura posterior emanatione, sicut reperimus in imagine creata.

Ad argumenta in oppositum:

Ad 1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur in contrarium, quod appetitus praecedit partum mentis; dicendum, quod ille appetitus habet secundum duplicem statum dupliciter considerari¹⁴:

uno modo secundum rationem inhiantis ante habitam cognitionem; alio modo secundum rationem complectentis, et hoc est post habitam cognitionem; et secundum primum statum est imperfectionis, quantum vero ad secundum est perfectionis. Et ideo quia quod perfectionis est in Deo ponimus, non quod est imperfectionis, ideo appetitus secundo modo assimilatur Spiritui sancto, et hic tenet rationem tertii. Et quod primus sit imperfectionis, patet, quia est ignorantis et desiderantis scientiam acquirere, quod non convenit Deo.

Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod intentio praeexigitur ad cognitionem; dicendum, quod verum est ad cognitionem acquirendam; sed notitia, prout est in acquirendo, non habet similitudinem cum illo Verbo, ut vult Augustinus in decimo quinto de Trinitate¹⁵.

Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod aeque immediate procedit Spiritus sanctus; dicendum, quod verum est; sed tamen Spiritus sanctus ita procedit immediate, quod etiam mediante Filio; et ita ex illa ratione oportet praeintelligi emanationem Filii.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod quanto aliquid communius, tanto prius; dicendum, quod verum est in absolutis, sed non tenet in respectivis, ut patet in generatione et creatione. — Potest tamen dici, quod istud intelligitur de eo quod est commune¹⁶ communitate praedicationis; sed communis spiratio est communis communitate non tantum praedicationis, quia dicitur de Patre et Filio, sed etiam cuiusdam concordiae et connexionis; et tale commune secundum rationem concordiae et amicitiae praesupponit concordantes et connexos, non praeit: et sic patet illud.

Question IV. Whether the generation of the Son is prior to the spiration of the Holy Spirit in the order of understanding.

Fourthly and last it is asked, which of these two emanations — namely generation and procession — is prior in the order of understanding. And that [it is] the generation of the Son is shown thus.

Foundations:

1. In the created image, it is so that according to the order of understanding the emanation of cognition from the mind is prior to that of love, as Augustine intends¹: «because we cannot love what is unknown», as Augustine says in De Trin. X²: therefore if the order in the image is observed by conformity to the uncreated Trinity, then in the order of understanding the procession of the Word is prior to that of Love in the divine being — especially since through the created image we understand the uncreated Trinity.

2. Likewise, as the Philosopher intends³, «will is that whose principle is in the very one cognizing the singulars», therefore will as will presupposes cognition: therefore the emanation of Love [presupposes] the emanation of the Word.

3. Likewise, every principle is prior in the order of understanding to what is principiated by it; but the Son is principle of the Holy Spirit: therefore in the order of understanding the Son must be pre-understood to the Holy Spirit⁴: therefore generation, which is the emanation of the Son, [is prior] to procession, which is [the emanation] of the Holy Spirit.

4. Likewise, in every nature⁵ acting both by mode of nature and by mode of will, production by mode of nature is understood before production by will: therefore since the Father is intellectual nature, producing the Son connatural and by mode of nature, and the Holy Spirit by mode of will, as was touched on above⁶: therefore the emanation of the Son is prior in the order of understanding to the emanation of the Holy Spirit.

On the contrary:

1. Augustine, De Trin. IX⁷: «The birth of the mind is preceded by appetite, by which, in seeking what we will to know, the offspring itself, [namely] cognition, is born»: therefore in the created image appetite is before the offspring [which is] cognition, therefore love before word: therefore also procession before generation.

2. Likewise, no one seeing a thing knows it⁸ unless the intention of the will applies the cognitive power to the cognizable [thing] itself, as is plain in a man going along a road who, when he has gone and was thinking elsewhere, does not perfectly know where he passed, as Augustine says in De Trin. XI⁹. Therefore will precedes cognition itself, therefore love [precedes] word in creatures: therefore by parity of reasoning in God, at least in the [order of] understanding.

3. Likewise, as the Philosopher intends, first and immediate are the same. Hence in the Posterior [Analytics]¹⁰, defining the immediate proposition, he says that «an immediate proposition is one which has no other prior»; but the Holy Spirit proceeds equally immediately from the Father as the Son does, therefore equally first: therefore neither in reality nor in the order of understanding does the generation of the Son precede the procession of the Holy Spirit.

4. Likewise, the more common a thing is, the prior it is in the order of understanding¹¹; but common spiration is more common than generation, because it belongs to the Father and the Son, but generation only to the Father: therefore spiration is prior in the order of understanding to generation.

Conclusion. In the order of understanding the generation of the Son is prior to the spiration of the Holy Spirit, which is proved on three grounds.

I respond: It must be said that, whatever the case may be in the real order, of which more below¹², yet in the order of understanding the emanation of the Word is prior — both because the Word is principle of the Holy Spirit, and because the Word proceeds by mode of nature, while the Holy Spirit by mode of liberal will, and because we understand the emanations in the [divine] persons through the emanations found in the [created] image. In the image, however, it is established that cognition and understanding precede love and will. I do not, however, mean to say that in the divine being there is an emanation thus¹³ posterior in nature to [another] emanation, as we find in the created image.

To the arguments to the contrary:

To 1. To that, then, which is objected to the contrary — that appetite precedes the birth of the mind — it must be said that appetite, according to a twofold state, is to be considered in two ways¹⁴: in one way according to the formal character of yearning [for] before cognition is had; in another way according to the formal character of embracing, and this is after cognition is had; and in the first state it is of imperfection, but in the second of perfection. And therefore, because we posit in God what is of perfection, not what is of imperfection, therefore appetite in the second mode is likened to the Holy Spirit, and here it holds the formal character of a third. And that the first is of imperfection is plain, because it is of one ignorant and desiring to acquire knowledge — which does not befit God.

To 2. To what is objected, that intention is required prior to cognition; it must be said that this is true for cognition to be acquired; but cognition, insofar as it is in being acquired, has no likeness to that Word, as Augustine intends in De Trin. XV¹⁵.

To 3. To what is objected, that the Holy Spirit proceeds equally immediately; it must be said that this is true; but yet the Holy Spirit so proceeds immediately, that He also [proceeds] with the Son as medium; and so on this account the emanation of the Son must be pre-understood.

To 4. To what is objected, that the more common, the prior; it must be said that this is true in absolute [terms], but does not hold in respective [terms], as is plain in generation and creation. — Yet it can be said that this is understood of what is common¹⁶ by the commonness of predication; but common spiration is common by a commonness not only of predication — because it is said of the Father and the Son — but also of a certain concord and connection; and such a common, according to the formal character of concord and friendship, presupposes the concordant and connected, [and] does not precede [them]: and so that [point] is plain.