Bonaventure

## Commentarius in Distinctionem XLVII.

De voluntate Dei quoad efficaciam.

Voluntas quippe Dei semper efficax est.

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 removit Magister dubitationes, ex quibus videbatur voluntas¹ Dei aliquando impediri. Hic determinat veritatem ostendens, voluntatem Dei semper esse efficacem et nunquam impediri. Et haec pars habet quatuor partes.

In prima auctoritate Augustini ostendit, voluntatem Dei semper esse efficacem et nunquam impediri. In secunda vero, ne hoc intelligeretur de voluntate signi, distinguit voluntatem, ut ostendat, hoc esse dictum de voluntate beneplaciti, ibi: Verum, ut supra diximus. In tertia Magister ostendit, quod contra quandam voluntatem signi non² potest fieri, ibi: Multa enim fiunt contra Dei praeceptum etc. In quarta vero epilogat breviter praedeterminata, et hoc ibi: Ex praedictis liquet, quod voluntas Dei, quae ipse est etc.

Tractatio quaestionum.

Ad intelligentiam eorum quae dicuntur in hac parte quatuor quaeruntur.

Primo quaeritur, utrum voluntas beneplaciti possit impediri.

Secundo, utrum aliquis possit facere contra voluntatem signi.

Tertio, utrum Deus debeat mala permittere.

Quarto et ultimo, utrum Deus possit mala praecipere.

---

## Commentary on Distinction XLVII.

On the will of God with respect to its efficacy.

"For the will of God is always efficacious."

Division of the text.

Above the Master removed the doubts from which it seemed that the will¹ of God could sometimes be impeded. Here he determines the truth, showing that the will of God is always efficacious and is never impeded. And this part has four parts.

In the first, by the authority of Augustine, he shows that the will of God is always efficacious and is never impeded. In the second, however, lest this should be understood of the will of sign, he distinguishes the will, in order to show that this was said of the will of good pleasure, there: "But, as we said above." In the third the Master shows that something can be done against a certain will of sign, [namely that] it cannot² be done [against it], there: "For many things come to pass against the precept of God," etc. In the fourth he briefly epilogizes what has been predetermined, and this there: "From what has been said before it is clear that the will of God, which He Himself is," etc.

Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of the things which are said in this part, four [questions] are asked.

First, it is asked whether the will of good pleasure can be impeded.

Second, whether anyone can act against the will of sign.

Third, whether God ought to permit evils.

Fourth and finally, whether God can command evils.

---