Bonaventure

Quaestio III. Utrum gratia singularis personae in Christo fuerit plena gratia atque perfecta.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum gratia singularis personae in Christo fuerit gratia plena atque perfecta. Et quod sic, videtur^p281-1.

1. Isaiae undecimo^p281-2: Replebit eum spiritu timoris Domini — dicitur de Christo; constat, quod secundum humanam naturam — sed cetera dona gratiae sunt aequalia: ergo pari ratione replevit ipsum spiritu amoris, gratiae, et sic de aliis. Sed dona talia spectant ad gratiam singularis personae: ergo etc.

2. Item, Ioannis primo^p281-3: Vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi Unigeniti a Patre, plenum gratiae et veritatis; sed Christus secundum divinam naturam non est susceptibilis gratiae, immo eius principium effectivum: ergo hoc dicitur secundum humanam naturam, quod habuerit in se gratiam plenam.

3. Item, capacitas carens plenitudine caret et perfectione, ergo ubi est ponere perfectionem est ponere plenitudinem; sed in Christo, secundum quod est singularis persona, est ponere omnimodam perfectionem virtutis et gratiae^p281-4: ergo et gratiae plenitudinem.

4. Item, nullus potest aliis gratiam perfecte communicare et influere sine defectu et diminutione, nisi prius in se perfectam habeat gratiae plenitudinem; sed de Christi plenitudine omnes accepimus^p281-5, et omnes, si plures essent, possent accipere, nec aliquis defectus intervenit: ergo videtur, quod Christus in se plenitudinem gratiae habuerit.

Sed contra: 1. Plenitudo gratiae consistit in omnibus habitibus virtutum; sed Christus non habuit fidem et spem^p281-6: ergo Christus non habuit omnis gratiae plenitudinem.

2. Item, status viatoris est ordinatus ad proficiendum; sed Christus fuit in statu viatoris: ergo potuit proficere^p281-7. Sed qui potest proficere in gratia nondum est gratia plenus: ergo videtur, quod Christus in hac vita plenitudinem gratiae non habuerit.

3. Item, Filius Dei ideo naturam humanam assumsit, ut daret nobis exemplum perveniendi ad patriam; sed via perveniendi ad gloriam est per ascensum de virtute in virtutem^p282-1; sed qui de virtute in virtutem ascendit proficit paulative et non habet gratiae plenitudinem: ergo etc. Si dicas, quod Christus videbatur proficere exterius, sicut dicit Gregorius et Magister^p282-2, et ideo exemplum dabat; contra: aut ergo secundum veritatem proficiebat interius, aut non. Si sic: ergo non erat plenus gratia. Si non: ergo aliter ostendebat, quam res se haberet: ergo mendax erat. Sed hoc est inconveniens circa ipsam veritatem mendacium ponere: ergo etc.

4. Item, Christus multa bona opera faciebat, aut ergo veraciter in eo crescebat donum gratiae, aut non. Si non: ergo cum bonitas operum ordinetur ad profectum spiritus, frustra operabatur. Si proficiebat: ergo a plenitudine deficiebat.

5. Item, sicut anima Christi unita fuit Deitati, ita et corpus; et sicut ad perfectionem unionis requiritur perfectio gratiae, ita ad perfectionem naturae perfectio aetatis; sed Christus secundum corpus crescebat veraciter et implebatur quotidie nec habuit a principio plenitudinem naturae, sive aetatis: ergo nec plenitudinem gratiae^p282-3.

6. Item, de nulla re potest capacitas aliqua impleri, ex cuius adventu capacitas non minuitur, sed augetur; sed gratia adveniens non minuit, sed auget capacitatem animae: ergo videtur, quod numquam posset ipsam implere: ergo nec in Christo nec in alio est reperire gratiae plenitudinem.

Conclusio.

Gratia Christi ab instanti suae conceptionis fuit perfecta et consummata secundum plenitudinem superabundantiae.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod absque dubio in Christo secundum humanam naturam ab ipsius conceptionis primordio fuit gratiae perfecta^p282-4 et consummata plenitudo. Non enim decebat Verbum increatum uniri animae perfectissima unione, qualis est unio in unitatem personae, quin anima esset deiformis, secundum quod erat possibile. Et ideo non tantum deiformitatem habuit gratiae et gloriae, sed etiam super omnem gratiam et gloriam. Nec tantum fuit in eo plenitudo sufficientiae, sicut in Sanctis, de qua plenitudine dicitur Actuum sexto^p282-5: Stephanus plenus gratia et fortitudine; nec tantum plenitudo praerogativae, sicut in Virgine Maria, de qua plenitudine dicitur Lucae primo: Ave Maria, gratia plena etc.; nec tantum plenitudo numerositatis et copiae, sicut est in tota Ecclesia, de qua plenitudine ad Ephesios quarto: Ascendit super caelos, ut adimpleret omnia etc.; sed etiam plenitudo superabundantiae, de qua Ioannis primo: Vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi Unigeniti a Patre, plenum gratiae et veritatis; plenum, inquam, plenitudine superabundantiae, propter quod subdit ad hoc probandum: Et de plenitudine eius nos omnes accepimus. — Concedendae sunt igitur rationes hoc ostendentes, Christum ab instanti conceptionis fuisse gratia plenum et habuisse in se plenitudinem gratiae.

1. Ad illud ergo quod primo obiicitur, quod non habuit fidem et spem; dicendum, quod fides et spes habent secum iunctam imperfectionem, habent et nihilominus aliquid perfectionis; et ratione eius quod habent de imperfectione, plenitudini plus obviant, quam ad plenitudinem faciant — unde evacuantur in gloria^p282-6 — sed ratione eius quod perfectionis est in eis, si quid est reperiri, habent esse in Christo. Et ideo illarum virtutum absentia plus attestatur plenitudini quam diminutioni.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Christus fuit in statu viatoris; dicendum, quod Christus fuit simul in statu viatoris et comprehensoris, sed in statu comprehensoris secundum partem superiorem, in statu viatoris secundum partem inferiorem et secundum carnem^p282-7. Et quoniam gratia secundum suam essentiam et complementum respicit partem superiorem et mentem; hinc est, quod Christus magis habuit gratiam perfectam quam diminutam, quia gratia magis respiciebat statum perfectum.

3. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur de exemplo Christi, dicendum, quod Christus dedit nobis exemplum in operibus^p282-8 exterioribus et in operibus virtutis perfectae; sed illa opera in Christo erant perfectionem indicantia, in nobis vero sunt ad perfectionem perducentia. Et quamvis opera exteriora praetenderent eius profectum, non tamen erat mendax, quia nullam perfectionem indicabant, quae non esset in eo. Si vero per opera non indicabat per-

fectionem suam summam, hoc non erat falsitatem praetendere, sed veritatem occultare; quod quidem licet et expedit propter nostram utilitatem.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod multa bona opera faciebat; dicendum, quod propter illa in gratia non crescebat; nec tamen operabatur frustra, quia non propter suum incrementum, sed propter nostrum illa faciebat; unde et nos maximum commodum reportamus.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod corpus habuit defectum plenitudinis in aetate; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia defectus aetatis in corpore faciebat ad humiliationem et verae naturae ostensionem, et sic ad fidei confirmationem; sed defectus gratiae in anima in nullo nobis prodesset nec Deum deceret; et ideo non est simile^p283-1. Praeterea, alia ratio est; quia dispositio ad unionem se tenet ex parte animae, non ex parte carnis, sicut prius^p283-2 ostensum est; ideo magis perfectam oportuit esse animam quam carnem.

6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod gratia ampliat capacitatem; dicendum, quod capacitatem ampliari contingit dupliciter: aut ratione possibilitatis maioris in suscipiendo, aut ratione virtutis in cooperando. Eadem enim est potentia, quae gratiam suscipit et gratiae susceptae cooperatur. Si loquamur de ampliatione capacitatis quantum ad virtutem cooperandi, sic verum est, quod gratia adveniens auget liberum arbitrium sive voluntatis bonam habilitatem et capacitatem^p283-3. Si vero loquamur de possibilitate in suscipiendo, sic habet falsitatem, quoniam gratia est sicut actus et complementum, et quanto plus datur alicui de actualitate, tanto plus recedit a possibilitate: unde et nos dicimus, quod quae multum habent de specie, cui competit agere, parum habent de materia, cui competit pati et suscipere^p283-4. Et quoniam in Christo ipsa habilitas ad bonum est per gratiam perfectam ad complementum producta; hinc est, quod eius capacitas est impleta; sicut dicimus de forma caeli, quod complet appetitum materiae, quia materia eius non appetit esse sub ulteriori forma, adeo forma ipsam statuit in actualitate completa^p283-5. Sic in gratia Christi suo modo intelligendum est; unde hic seducit mala imaginatio, quia non impletur anima dono gratiae, sicut locus vacuus impletur corpore, sed potius sicut possibilitas materiae completur actualitate formae^p283-6.

---

Question III. Whether the grace of the singular person in Christ was full and perfect grace.

Thirdly it is asked whether the grace of the singular person in Christ was full and perfect grace. And that it was so, seems to be the case^p281-1.

1. Isaiah eleven^p281-2: He shall fill him with the spirit of the fear of the Lord — this is said of Christ; it is established that it is according to his human nature — but the other gifts of grace are equal: therefore by parity of reasoning he filled him with the spirit of love, of grace, and so of the rest. But such gifts pertain to the grace of the singular person: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, John one^p281-3: We saw his glory, the glory as it were of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth; but Christ according to his divine nature is not capable of receiving grace, but rather is its effective principle: therefore this is said according to his human nature, that he had in himself full grace.

3. Likewise, a capacity lacking fullness lacks also perfection; therefore where one is to posit perfection one is to posit fullness; but in Christ, insofar as he is a singular person, one is to posit every kind of perfection of virtue and of grace^p281-4: therefore also fullness of grace.

4. Likewise, no one can perfectly communicate and pour out grace to others without defect and diminution, unless he first has in himself the perfect fullness of grace; but of Christ's fullness we have all received^p281-5, and all, if there were more, could receive, nor does any defect intervene: therefore it seems that Christ had in himself the fullness of grace.

On the contrary: 1. The fullness of grace consists in all the habits of the virtues; but Christ did not have faith and hope^p281-6: therefore Christ did not have the fullness of all grace.

2. Likewise, the state of the wayfarer is ordered to making progress; but Christ was in the state of the wayfarer: therefore he could make progress^p281-7. But one who can make progress in grace is not yet full of grace: therefore it seems that Christ in this life did not have the fullness of grace.

3. Likewise, the Son of God assumed human nature for this reason, that he might give us an example of arriving at the fatherland; but the way of arriving at glory is through ascent from virtue to virtue^p282-1; but one who ascends from virtue to virtue makes progress little by little and does not have the fullness of grace: therefore etc. If you say that Christ seemed to make progress outwardly, as Gregory and the Master say^p282-2, and therefore was giving an example; on the contrary: then either he was truly making progress inwardly, or not. If so: then he was not full of grace. If not: then he showed otherwise than the matter stood: therefore he was a liar. But it is unfitting to posit lying with regard to Truth itself: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, Christ did many good works, then either the gift of grace was truly growing in him, or not. If not: then since the goodness of works is ordered to the advancement of the spirit, he was working in vain. If he was making progress: then he was falling short of fullness.

5. Likewise, just as the soul of Christ was united to the Godhead, so also the body; and just as for the perfection of the union there is required perfection of grace, so for the perfection of the nature there is required perfection of age; but Christ according to his body grew truly and was filled daily, nor did he have from the beginning the fullness of his nature or of age: therefore neither the fullness of grace^p282-3.

6. Likewise, no capacity can be filled by anything from whose coming the capacity is not diminished but increased; but grace as it comes does not diminish but increases the capacity of the soul: therefore it seems that it could never fill it: therefore neither in Christ nor in another is the fullness of grace to be found.

Conclusion.

The grace of Christ from the instant of his conception was perfect and consummate according to the fullness of superabundance.

I respond: It must be said that without doubt in Christ according to his human nature, from the very beginning of his conception, there was the perfect^p282-4 and consummate fullness of grace. For it was not fitting that the uncreated Word be united to a soul by a most perfect union, such as is the union into the unity of person, without the soul being deiform, according as that was possible. And therefore he had not only deiformity of grace and of glory, but even above all grace and glory. Nor only was there in him the fullness of sufficiency, as in the Saints, of which fullness it is said in Acts six^p282-5: Stephen full of grace and fortitude; nor only the fullness of prerogative, as in the Virgin Mary, of which fullness it is said in Luke one: Hail Mary, full of grace etc.; nor only the fullness of number and abundance, as is in the whole Church, of which fullness it is said to the Ephesians four: He ascended above the heavens, that he might fill all things etc.; but also the fullness of superabundance, of which John one: We saw his glory, the glory as it were of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth; full, I say, with the fullness of superabundance, on account of which he adds to prove this: And of his fullness we have all received. — Therefore the reasons showing this are to be granted, that Christ from the instant of his conception was full of grace and had in himself the fullness of grace.

1. To that, then, which is first objected, that he did not have faith and hope; it must be said that faith and hope have joined to them an imperfection, and yet they have also something of perfection; and by reason of that which they have of imperfection, they stand more opposed to fullness than they make for fullness — whence they are emptied out in glory^p282-6 — but by reason of that which is of perfection in them, if anything is to be found there, they have being in Christ. And therefore the absence of those virtues attests more to fullness than to diminution.

2. To that which is objected, that Christ was in the state of the wayfarer; it must be said that Christ was at once in the state of the wayfarer and of the comprehensor, but in the state of the comprehensor according to the higher part, in the state of the wayfarer according to the lower part and according to the flesh^p282-7. And since grace according to its essence and completion regards the higher part and the mind; hence it is that Christ had grace perfect rather than diminished, because grace regarded rather the perfect state.

3. To that, then, which is objected concerning the example of Christ, it must be said that Christ gave us an example in outward works^p282-8 and in works of perfect virtue; but those works in Christ were indicative of perfection, whereas in us they are leading toward perfection. And although the outward works displayed his advancement, nevertheless he was not a liar, because they indicated no perfection which was not in him. But if through his works he did not indicate his highest perfection, this was not to display falsehood, but to conceal the truth; which indeed is permitted and is expedient on account of our benefit.

4. To that which is objected, that he did many good works; it must be said that on account of those he was not growing in grace; nor yet was he working in vain, because he did those things not on account of his own increase, but on account of ours; whence we too reap the greatest benefit.

5. To that which is objected, that the body had a defect of fullness in age; it must be said that it is not alike, because the defect of age in the body made for humiliation and for the showing forth of the true nature, and thus for the confirmation of faith; but a defect of grace in the soul would profit us in nothing nor would it befit God; and therefore it is not alike^p283-1. Furthermore, there is another reason; because the disposition to the union holds itself on the part of the soul, not on the part of the flesh, as was shown before^p283-2; therefore the soul had to be more perfect than the flesh.

6. To that which is objected, that grace enlarges the capacity; it must be said that the capacity is enlarged in two ways: either by reason of greater possibility in receiving, or by reason of power in cooperating. For it is the same potency which receives grace and cooperates with the grace received. If we speak of the enlargement of capacity as regards the power of cooperating, then it is true that grace as it comes increases free choice, that is, the good aptitude and capacity of the will^p283-3. But if we speak of the possibility in receiving, then it holds falsehood, since grace is like an act and a completion, and the more of actuality is given to anything, the more it recedes from possibility: whence we too say that those things which have much of the species, to which it belongs to act, have little of matter, to which it belongs to be acted upon and to receive^p283-4. And since in Christ the very aptitude for good is brought to its completion through perfect grace; hence it is that his capacity is filled; just as we say of the form of heaven, that it fulfills the appetite of matter, because its matter does not desire to be under a further form, so completely does the form establish it in completed actuality^p283-5. So in the grace of Christ it must be understood in its own way; whence here a bad imagining deceives, because the soul is not filled with the gift of grace as an empty place is filled with a body, but rather as the possibility of matter is completed by the actuality of form^p283-6.

---