Bonaventure

Art. 2. Reprehenditur nostra curiositas dupliciter.

Quid habet amplius homo etc. Ostendit supra rerum secundum diversa tempora varietatem, hic secundo ex hoc redarguit humanam curiositatem; et hoc quidem facit hoc ordine. Primo insinuat curiositatis inutilitatem; secundo vero in eius detestationem commendat praesentem voluptatem.

Insinuatur curiositatis inutilitas, et commendatur praesens voluptas.

(Vers. 9. 10. 11.). Redarguit nostram curiositatem propter inutilitatem, unde dicit: Quid habet amplius homo? supple: nisi mutabilitatem et varietatem et per hoc afflictionem. — Et manifestat, quod habeat afflictionem: Vidi afflictionem, quam dedit Deus filiis hominum, ut distendantur in ea; dedit, id est, dari permisit, iuxta illud ad Romanos primo⁶: « Tradidit illos Deus in reprobum sensum »; filiis hominum, id est peccatoribus; supra secundo:

p. 33 « Peccatori autem dedit Deus afflictionem et curam superfluam ». Ut distendantur, scilicet variis curis; quocirca Ecclesiastici undecimo: « Fili, ne in multis sint actus tui ». Et explanat, quae sit illa afflictio, scilicet considerationis; unde dicit: Cuncta fecit bona in tempore suo; unde Ecclesiastici trigesimo nono: « Omnia opera Domini bona, et hora sua omne opus subministrabit. Non est dicere, hoc est illo nequius; omnia enim in tempore suo comprobabuntur ». Et licet bona fecerit, tamen non dedit horum cognitionem, sed dedit ingenium ad inquisitionem; unde dicit: Et mundum tradidit disputationi eorum, scilicet ad inquirendum; Ecclesiastici decimo septimo¹: « Consilium et linguam et oculos et aures et cor dedit illis excogitandi », non ad perveniendum; unde subdit: Ut non inveniat homo opus, quod operatus est Deus, id est, ut non veniat ad perfectam cognitionem; et hoc propter dubitationem. Ab initio usque in finem, scilicet vitae suae; Iob trigesimo sexto: « Memento, quod ignores opus eius, de quo cecinerunt viri »; et infra octavo: « Intellexi, quod operum Dei nullam possem invenire rationem ».

(Vers. 12. 13.). Et cognovi etc. Hic secundo commendat praesentem voluptatem, et hoc ad arguendum curiositatem; unde dicit: Et cognovi, quod non esset melius, supple: in his bonis transitoriis, nisi laetari et facere bona in vita sua, scilicet laetari, in corde, facere bona, in opere. — Vel: laetari, in fruendo; Sapientiae secundo²: « Ubique relinquamus signa laetitiae » nostrae; facere bona, in delectabilia praeparando; Lucae duodecimo: « Anima mea, habes multa bona, posita in annos plurimos; requiesce, comede, bibe, epulare ». — Et subdit rationem; unde dicit: Omnis enim homo, qui comedit et bibit, videt bonum de labore suo, et superabundat ibi, ut sit sensus: ille qui comedit et bibit, videt bonum de labore suo, quia statim habet remunerationem; unde dicit: Et hoc donum Dei est; infra quinto: « Omni homini, cui Deus dedit divitias et potestatem illi tribuit, ut comedat ex eis, donum Dei est ».

Glossa³ exponit spiritualiter: Et cognovi, quod non esset melius, id est, utilius, nisi laetari, scilicet laetitia mentis; Ecclesiastici trigesimo: « Iucunditas cordis haec est vita hominis et thesaurus sine defectione sanctitatis »; et facere bona in vita sua, scilicet opera meritoria; ad Galatas sexto: « Itaque, dum tempus habemus, operemur bonum ad omnes ». — Omnis enim homo, qui comedit et bibit; supple: de Scriptura, comedit difficilia et bibit facilia; Proverbiorum nono dicit Sapientia: « Venite et comedite panem meum et bibite vinum, quod miscui vobis ». Et hoc donum Dei est, quia Scripturarum intellectus a Deo donatur; secundae ad Corinthios tertio: « Non quod sufficientes simus cogitare aliquid ex nobis quasi ex nobis, sed sufficientia nostra ex Deo est ».

Art. 3. Ostenditur divinorum operum immutabilitas.

Didici, quod omnia opera etc. Ostendit supra operum mutabilitatem, et ex hoc reprehendit hominum curiositatem. Hic tertio ostendit divinorum operum immutabilitatem, quia supra ostenderat variabilitatem.

(Vers. 14. 15.). Dicit ergo: Didici, quod omnia opera, quae fecit Deus, perseverant in aeternum. Ecce perpetuitas, propter quam nostra consideratio nihil potest immutare; unde dicit: Non possumus eis quidquam addere vel auferre, quae fecit Deus, ut timeatur, et ita non sunt in potestate nostra; Proverbiorum trigesimo⁴: « Non addas quidquam verbis eius, ne arguaris inveniarisque mendax ». — Et hoc monstrat, quia etiam nec ipse Deus minuit nec addit; unde dicit: Quod factum est, ipsum permanet. Non etiam addit; unde infert: Quae futura sunt iam fuerunt, quia similia praecesserunt; unde et dicit: Et Deus instaurat quod abiit, quia « unius corruptio est alterius generatio »; supra primo⁵: « Nihil novum sub sole, nec valet quisquam dicere: hoc recens est »; Genesis secundo: « Requievit Deus die septimo ».

Quaestio

Incidit hic quaestio, cum intendat determinare mutabilitatis vanitatem, ut quid determinat hic perpetuitatem?

1. Videtur extra suum propositum.

2. Item, de ipsa perpetuitate quaeritur, quia dicit: Opera, quae fecit Deus, perseverant in aeternum; sed nulla corporalia perseverant in aeternum: ergo nulla corporalia fecit Deus: ergo redit hoc ad haeresim Manichaei, qui dixit, corruptibilia non esse creata a bono Deo.

p. 34 3. Item videtur, quod ipse contradicat sibi, quia statim sequitur: Deus instaurat quod abiit: ergo aliquid de operibus Dei corrumpitur et instauratur; falsum igitur dicit, cum dicit, quod omnia opera Dei perseverant in aeternum.

Sed quod omnia opera Dei sint incorruptibilia, ut dicit in littera, videtur:

1. Eo quod causa et effectus sint proportionalia¹, ergo causae incorruptibilis debet esse effectus incorruptibilis; sed Deus permanet in aeternum et est incorruptibilis: ergo et opera Dei.

2. Item, cum opera Dei sint universa bona valde, sicut dicitur Genesis primo²; et meliora sint incorruptibilia quam corruptibilia: videtur, quod ista corruptibilia non sint a bono Deo creata.

Respondeo: ad primum, quare hic determinat perpetuitatem, dicendum, quod non ratione sui, sed occasione mutabilitatis; et hoc quidem facit triplici de causa. Prima est ad removendum errorem; quia enim supra³ in creaturis ostenderat mutabilitatem; ne crederetur, quod opera Dei omnino essent defectibilia, addit, quod aliquo modo sunt perpetua. Rursus, alia ratio est ad compescendam curiositatem, quam compescuerat, quia rerum mutabilitatem et causam et originem non possumus indagare; vult etiam compescere, quia ipsam rerum substantiam nec mutare possumus nec augere⁴. Tertia ratio est ad reprimendam elationem; quia enim videtur opera Domini depressisse per mutabilitatem; ne quis ex hoc condemnaret Deum auctorem, rursus redit ad insinuandam perpetuitatem in eis.

Quod quaeritur de permanentia, respondetur, quod triplex est esse rerum: scilicet in proprio genere, in anima, in divina praescientia; et supra⁵ ostendit, quod mutabilia sunt in proprio genere, et secundum quod sunt in anima; hic tangit earum perpetuitatem in divina praescientia.

Aliter responderi potest, quod est loqui de rebus secundum esse proprium dupliciter: aut secundum esse commune, aut individuale. Secundum esse individuale multa sunt corruptibilia; secundum esse commune, perpetua; quia Deus continue per generationem esse illarum salvat; « propter enim longe distare a principio reliquo modo complevit esse Deus, continuam in his faciens generationem⁶ ».

1. Quod obiicitur, quod sunt incorruptibilia, quia proportionalia causae; dicendum, quod illud intelligitur, ubi est generatio univoca, ubi causa producit sibi simile. Sic autem non est de Creatore et creatura, immo per infinitam potentiam facit magna et parva, corruptibilia et incorruptibilia.

2. Quod obiicitur de bonitate, dicendum, quod omnia sunt bona in se, sed valde bona in ordine; et quia, ubi est ordo, ibi magis et minus bonum: ideo quaedam corruptibilia, quaedam incorruptibilia. Propterea bonitas est in rebus non tantum secundum plus et minus, sed secundum oppositionem et similitudinem; ideo comparatur mundus pulcherrimo carmini; ideo decet, quod quaedam corruptibilia, quaedam e contrario⁷.

---

Art. 2. Our curiosity is reproved in two ways.

What hath man more etc. Above he showed the variety of things according to diverse times; here, secondly, from this he reproves human curiosity; and this indeed he does in this order. First he intimates the uselessness of curiosity; but secondly, in detestation of it, he commends present pleasure.

The uselessness of curiosity is intimated, and present pleasure is commended.

(Vers. 9. 10. 11.). He reproves our curiosity on account of its uselessness, whence he says: What hath man more? supply: except mutability and variety, and through this affliction. — And he makes plain that he has affliction: I have seen the affliction which God hath given to the sons of men, that they may be stretched in it; hath given, that is, hath permitted to be given, according to that of Romans, chapter 1⁶: « God delivered them up to a reprobate sense »; to the sons of men, that is, to sinners; above, chapter 2:

p. 33 « But to the sinner God hath given affliction and superfluous care ». That they may be stretched, namely with various cares; wherefore Ecclesiasticus, chapter 11: « Son, let not thy acts be about many things ». And he explains what that affliction is, namely of consideration; whence he says: He hath made all things good in their time; whence Ecclesiasticus, chapter 39: « All the works of the Lord are good, and every work shall minister in its hour. It is not to be said: This is worse than that; for all shall be well approved in their time ». And although he made them good, yet he did not give the cognition of them, but gave wit for inquiry; whence he says: And hath delivered the world to their disputation, namely for inquiring; Ecclesiasticus, chapter 17¹: « He gave them counsel and a tongue and eyes and ears and a heart to devise », not for arriving; whence he subjoins: So that man may not find out the work which God hath wrought, that is, so that he may not come to perfect cognition; and this because of doubt. From the beginning to the end, namely of his life; Job, chapter 36: « Remember that thou knowest not his work, of which men have sung »; and below, chapter 8: « I understood that I could find no reason of the works of God ».

(Vers. 12. 13.). And I have known etc. Here, secondly, he commends present pleasure, and this in order to argue against curiosity; whence he says: And I have known that there was nothing better, supply: in these transitory goods, than to be glad and to do good things in his life, namely to be glad, in the heart, to do good things, in work. — Or: to be glad, in enjoying; Wisdom, chapter 2²: « Let us everywhere leave tokens of gladness » of ours; to do good things, in preparing delightful things; Luke, chapter 12: « My soul, thou hast many goods laid up for very many years; take thy rest, eat, drink, make good cheer ». — And he subjoins the reason; whence he says: For every man that eateth and drinketh seeth good of his labour, and there is something superfluous there, so that the sense is: he who eats and drinks sees good of his labour, because he has his recompense at once; whence he says: And this is the gift of God; below, chapter 5: « To every man to whom God hath given riches, and hath granted him power to eat of them, it is the gift of God ».

The Gloss³ expounds it spiritually: And I have known that there was nothing better, that is, more useful, than to be glad, namely with gladness of mind; Ecclesiasticus, chapter 30: « The joyfulness of the heart, this is the life of a man, and a treasure of holiness without failing »; and to do good things in his life, namely meritorious works; Galatians, chapter 6: « Therefore, whilst we have time, let us work good to all men ». — For every man that eateth and drinketh; supply: of Scripture, eats the difficult things and drinks the easy things; in Proverbs, chapter 9, Wisdom says: « Come, eat my bread, and drink the wine which I have mingled for you ». And this is the gift of God, because the understanding of the Scriptures is given by God; II Corinthians, chapter 3: « Not that we are sufficient to think anything of ourselves, as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God ».

Art. 3. The immutability of the divine works is shown.

I have learned that all the works etc. Above he showed the mutability of works, and from this he reproves the curiosity of men. Here, thirdly, he shows the immutability of the divine works, because above he had shown their variability.

(Vers. 14. 15.). He says, then: I have learned that all the works which God hath made continue for ever. Behold the perpetuity, on account of which our consideration can change nothing; whence he says: We cannot add anything to, or take away from, those things which God hath made, that he may be feared, and so they are not in our power; Proverbs, chapter 30⁴: « Add not anything to his words, lest thou be reproved and found a liar ». — And he shows this, because not even God himself lessens or adds; whence he says: That which hath been made, the same remaineth. Nor does he add either; whence he infers: The things that shall be have already been, because like things went before; whence he also says: And God restoreth that which is past, because « the corruption of one is the generation of another »; above, chapter 1⁵: « Nothing new under the sun, nor is any man able to say: This is new »; Genesis, chapter 2: « God rested on the seventh day ».

Question

A question arises here: since he intends to determine the vanity of mutability, why does he determine perpetuity here?

1. It seems to be outside his purpose.

2. Likewise, a question is asked about this perpetuity itself, because he says: The works which God hath made continue for ever; but no bodily things continue for ever: therefore God made no bodily things: therefore this goes back to the heresy of Manichaeus, who said that corruptible things were not created by the good God.

p. 34 3. Likewise, it seems that he contradicts himself, because there follows at once: God restoreth that which is past: therefore something of the works of God is corrupted and restored; therefore he says what is false when he says that all the works of God continue for ever.

But that all the works of God are incorruptible, as he says in the letter, is shown:

1. Because cause and effect are proportional¹; therefore of an incorruptible cause the effect ought to be incorruptible; but God remains for ever and is incorruptible: therefore so too are the works of God.

2. Likewise, since the works of God are all very good, as is said in Genesis, chapter 1²; and incorruptible things are better than corruptible: it seems that these corruptible things were not created by the good God.

I respond: to the first, why he determines perpetuity here, it must be said that he does so not by reason of itself, but on the occasion of mutability; and this indeed he does for a threefold cause. The first is to remove error; for since above³ he had shown mutability in creatures, lest it should be believed that the works of God were altogether defectible, he adds that in some way they are perpetual. Again, another reason is to restrain curiosity, which he had restrained, because we cannot search out the mutability of things, nor its cause and origin; he wishes also to restrain it because we can neither change nor increase the very substance of things⁴. The third reason is to repress elation; for since he seems to have depreciated the works of the Lord through mutability, lest anyone should on this account condemn God as their author, he returns again to intimating the perpetuity in them.

As to what is asked about permanence, the answer is that the being of things is threefold: namely in their own genus, in the soul, in the divine foreknowledge; and above⁵ he showed that they are mutable in their own genus, and according as they are in the soul; here he touches on their perpetuity in the divine foreknowledge.

Otherwise it can be answered that one can speak of things according to their proper being in two ways: either according to common being, or individual. According to individual being many things are corruptible; according to common being, perpetual; because God continually preserves their being through generation; « for because of standing far distant from the principle, God completed being in the remaining way, making generation continuous in these⁶ ».

1. To the objection that they are incorruptible because proportional to their cause, it must be said that this is understood where there is univocal generation, where the cause produces what is like itself. But it is not so with the Creator and the creature; rather, through infinite power he makes great and small, corruptible and incorruptible.

2. To the objection about goodness, it must be said that all things are good in themselves, but very good in order; and because where there is order, there is more and less good: therefore some things are corruptible, some incorruptible. Therefore goodness is in things not only according to more and less, but according to opposition and likeness; therefore the world is compared to a most beautiful song; therefore it is fitting that some things be corruptible, some the contrary⁷.

---