Bonaventure

## Commentarius in Distinctionem XXXV.

De scientia Dei in generali secundum se.

Cumque supra disseruerimus ac plura dixerimus etc.

Divisio textus.

The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation that follows. Each note is given first in Latin (`La.`), then in literal English (`En.`).

Supra egit Magister de sacramento Trinitatis et Unitatis; in hac parte agit de conditionibus, secundum quas est in Deo ratio causalitatis, quae sunt scilicet potentia, sapientia et voluntas. Habet autem haec pars tres partes. In quarum prima agit de scientia; in secunda de potentia, infra distinctione quadragesima secunda: Nunc de omnipotentia Dei agendum est; in tertia de voluntate, infra distinctione quadragesima quinta: Iam de voluntate Dei etc.

Prima pars habet tres¹. In prima agit de scientia in generali secundum se. In secunda agit de modis divinae cognitionis, utrum Deus cognoscat mutabiliter, vel immutabiliter, et quo modo, distinctione trigesima octava: Nunc ergo ad propositum revertentes. In tertia vero agit quantum ad speciales effectus, infra distinctione quadragesima: Praedestinatio vero est de bonis salutaribus.

Prima pars dividitur in tres. In prima Magister determinat de ipsa Dei scientia. In secunda, quia res agnitae sunt in sciente per modum scientis, determinat, quomodo res sunt in Deo, infra distinctione trigesima sexta: Solet hic quaeri, cum omnia dicantur esse in Dei cognitione. In tertia vero incidenter determinat, quomodo Deus est in rebus infra distinctione trigesima septima: Et quoniam demonstratum est ex parte.

Prima pars, quae continet praesentem distinctionem, tres habet². In prima, cum Dei scientia sit una, determinat, quomodo sortitur plura nomina. In secunda, cum Dei scientia vel praescientia sit aeterna, determinat, quomodo se habeat ad temporalia vel creata, ibi: Hic considerari oportet, utrum scientia vel praescientia. In tertia, cum Dei scientia sit ens, quomodo cognoscat non entia, ibi: Propterea omnia dicuntur esse in Deo etc.

In prima parte, se ipsum continuans dicit, quod divina essentia plura habet nomina propter connotata³. In secunda dicit, quod Dei scientia esset, si nihil futurum esset, et esset scientia, sed non diceretur praescientia. In tertia ostendit, quod omnes res⁴ habent rationes in Deo, per quas cognoscuntur et sunt in ipsa, et ita omnia sunt sibi praesentia; et sic patet divisio et sententia. Subdivisiones enim⁵ partium manifestae sunt in littera.

Tractatio quaestionum.

Ad intelligentiam praesentis distinctionis quaeritur de ratione divinae cognitionis, quae idea consuevit appellari.

Primo quaeritur, utrum in Deo sit ponenda ratio idealis.

Secundo, dato quod sic, quaeritur, utrum habeat pluralitatem secundum rem.

Tertio, utrum habeat pluralitatem secundum rationem.

Quarto, utrum habeat pluralitatem secundum numerum universalium, an singularium.

Quinto, utrum habeat pluralitatem secundum numerum finitum, vel infinitum.

Sexto, utrum in ideis sit pluralitas secundum numerum ordinatum, vel confusum.

---

## Commentary on Distinction XXXV.

On the knowledge of God in general, in itself.

"And since above we have discoursed and said many things" etc.

Division of the text.

Above the Master treated of the mystery of the Trinity and of the Unity; in this part he treats of the conditions according to which there is in God the formal character of causality, which are namely power, wisdom and will. Now this part has three divisions. In the first of which he treats of knowledge; in the second of power, below at distinction forty-two: "Now it must be treated of the omnipotence of God;" in the third of will, below at distinction forty-five: "Now of the will of God" etc.

The first part has three [divisions]¹. In the first he treats of knowledge in general, in itself. In the second he treats of the modes of divine cognition, whether God knows mutably or immutably, and in what way, at distinction thirty-eight: "Now therefore returning to our proposed subject." In the third he treats with regard to special effects, below at distinction forty: "Predestination, however, concerns saving goods."

The first part is divided into three. In the first the Master determines concerning God's knowledge itself. In the second, because things known are in the knower after the manner of the knower, he determines how things are in God, below at distinction thirty-six: "It is wont here to be asked, since all things are said to be in God's cognition." In the third he determines incidentally how God is in things, below at distinction thirty-seven: "And since it has been demonstrated in part."

The first part, which contains the present distinction, has three [divisions]². In the first, since God's knowledge is one, he determines how it receives many names. In the second, since God's knowledge or foreknowledge is eternal, he determines how it stands with respect to temporal or created things, there: "Here it must be considered, whether knowledge or foreknowledge." In the third, since God's knowledge is of being, [he determines] how it knows non-beings, there: "Therefore all things are said to be in God" etc.

In the first part, continuing himself, he says that the divine essence has many names on account of what it connotes³. In the second he says that God's knowledge would be, if nothing were future, and would be knowledge, but would not be called foreknowledge. In the third he shows that all things⁴ have their formal grounds in God, through which they are known and are in him, and thus all things are present to him; and so the division and sense are clear. For⁵ the subdivisions of the parts are evident in the letter [of the text itself].

Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of the present distinction it is asked concerning the formal character of divine cognition, which is wont to be called idea.

First it is asked, whether in God an ideal ratio is to be posited.

Second, given that it is, it is asked whether it has plurality according to the thing.

Third, whether it has plurality according to the ratio.

Fourth, whether it has plurality according to a number of universals, or of singulars.

Fifth, whether it has plurality according to a finite or an infinite number.

Sixth, whether in the ideas there is plurality according to an ordered or a confused number.

---