Bonaventure

## Commentarius in Distinctionem XLI.

De causalitate passiva sive de causa meritoria praedestinationis et reprobationis.

Si autem quaerimus obdurationis meritum et misericordiae 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 causalitate activa praedestinationis et reprobationis. In hac parte inquirit de causalitate passiva, utrum scilicet praedestinatio et reprobatio habeant in nobis causam meritoriam; et hoc quidem principaliter intendit in hac distinctione, quae duas habet partes. In prima Magister investigat principale propositum; in secunda movet quandam quaestionem, quae ex praecedentibus habet ortum, scilicet utrum Deus desinat aliquid scire vel praescire. Ex cuius manifestatione patefacit divinae scientiae interminabilitatem, ibi: Praeterea considerari oportet.

Prima pars quatuor habet partes. In prima Magister determinat veritatem ostendens, quod reprobatio habet causam meritoriam quantum ad connotatum, quod est obduratio; non sic praedestinatio quantum ad connotatum, quod est gratificatio. In secunda vero Magister removet quandam opinionem, quae posset hominem ducere in errorem, ibi: Opinati sunt tamen quidam. In tertia removet eius defensionem, ibi: His tamen videtur adversari etc. In quarta removet praesumptuosam in hac quaestione inquisitionem ostendens, aliquos volentes reddere rationem de hoc profundo divinae praedestinationis lapsos esse in profundum erroris, ibi: Multi vero de isto profundo quaerentes reddere rationem etc.

Praeterea considerari oportet, utrum ea omnia quae semel scit etc. Haec est secunda pars, in qua determinat Magister quaestionem, utrum Deus desinat aliquid scire vel praescire; et similiter est quaestio, utrum desinat aliquem praedestinare; et haec pars habet duas. In prima determinat de praescientia, quod contingit desinere aliquid praescire. In p. 728secunda vero determinat de scientia, ibi: De scientia autem aliter dicimus, ubi dicit, quod Deus nihil desinit scire; et in utraque parte primo movet quaestionem, secundo determinat.

Tractatio quaestionum.

Ad intelligentiam praesentis¹ distinctionis duo principaliter quaeruntur.

Primo quaeritur de praedestinationis causalitate.

Secundo de divinae scientiae sempiternitate sive interminabilitate.

Quantum ad primum quaeruntur duo.

Primo quaeritur, utrum praedestinatio vel reprobatio in nobis habeant causam meritoriam.

Secundo, utrum habeant in Deo rationem motivam.

---

## Commentary on Distinction XLI.

On the passive causality, or on the meritorious cause of predestination and reprobation.

"If however we ask after the merit of hardening and of mercy, etc."

Division of the text.

Above the Master treated of the active causality of predestination and reprobation. In this part he inquires concerning the passive causality, namely whether predestination and reprobation have in us a meritorious cause; and this indeed is what he principally intends in this distinction, which has two parts. In the first the Master investigates the principal proposition; in the second he raises a certain question which arises from what precedes, namely whether God ceases to know or foreknow anything. Through the unfolding of which he manifests the unboundedness of the divine knowledge, there: "Furthermore it must be considered."

The first part has four parts. In the first the Master determines the truth by showing that reprobation has a meritorious cause as to its connoted [object], which is hardening; not so predestination as to its connoted [object], which is justification by grace. In the second the Master removes a certain opinion which could lead a man into error, there: "Yet some have held." In the third he removes its defense, there: "To these things, however, it seems to be opposed," etc. In the fourth he removes a presumptuous inquiry into this question, showing that certain men, wishing to render a reason concerning this depth of the divine predestination, have fallen into the depth of error, there: "But many, seeking concerning this depth to render a reason," etc.

"Furthermore it must be considered whether all those things which he once knows, etc." This is the second part, in which the Master determines the question whether God ceases to know or foreknow anything; and there is likewise the question whether he ceases to predestine anyone; and this part has two [parts]. In the first he determines concerning foreknowledge, that it can happen that something cease to be foreknown. In p. 728the second he determines concerning knowledge, there: "But concerning knowledge we say otherwise," where he says that God ceases to know nothing; and in each part he first raises the question, second determines [it].

Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of the present¹ distinction, two [matters] are principally asked.

First, [the question] is asked concerning the causality of predestination.

Second, concerning the eternity or unboundedness of the divine knowledge.

As to the first, two [questions] are asked.

First it is asked, whether predestination or reprobation have in us a meritorious cause.

Second, whether they have in God a motive ground.

---