Bonaventure — Opera Omnia

Dist. 2, Dubia

Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 2

Textus Latinus

p. 59

## DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.

Dub. I.

In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo de hoc quod dicit, quod alia in remedium sunt contra peccatum. Videtur enim male dividere haec¹ Sacramenta ab invicem, quia omnia Sacramenta sunt in remedium contra peccatum.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod Magister non dicit simpliciter, quod quaedam sunt in remedium; sed dicit, quaedam sunt in remedium contra peccatum; et talia sunt quae gratiam conferunt et ornant animam.

Ex hac autem divisione, quam ponit hic Magister, innuitur sufficientia Sacramentorum. Quaedam enim est medicina praeservativa, quae cavet² a morbo, sed non liberat; et talis est matrimonium. — Quaedam est curativa, et ista liberat per gratiam; et haec variatur secundum triplicem gratiam, scilicet baptismalem, et sic baptismus; poenitentialem, et sic poenitentia; finalem, et sic unctio extrema. — Quaedam autem est medicina confortativa. Duplici autem ex causa indiget homo confortari: vel propter difficultatem pugnae, et sic confirmatio; vel propter lassitudinem itineris, et sic viaticum eucharistiae³; ordo autem est ad ministrandum utrumque et ad confortandum modo utroque. — Vel sic: confortatio et fulcimentum est tripliciter: aut confortatione virtutis, et sic confirmatio; aut subministratione cibi, et sic eucharistia; aut fulcimento alicuius subsidii, et sic est ordo. — Et sic patet, quod divisio Magistri est recta, et patet etiam ex hoc divisio Sacramentorum. Differt iste modus assignandi sufficientiam a praeassignato, quoniam ille accipitur penes morbos, hic vero penes modos curandi.

Item, quaeritur: quare Magister⁴ sic ordinat? Videtur enim, quod ratio sua contradicat enumerationi quantum ad ordinem. Si enim matrimonium est medicina praeservativa et prius etiam est institutum, videtur, quod deberet primo de ipso agere. Similiter contra alia potest obiici.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod Magister bene ordinat; et ratio sui ordinis patet sic. Sacramenta enim quaedam respiciunt communiter omnes, et sic sunt quinque praecedentia; aut aliquos specialiter, et sic sunt duo sequentia, scilicet ordo et coniugium; et sicut commune ante speciale⁵, sic prima quinque ante duo ultima. Ordo enim in quinque primis patet ex se. Baptismus enim est ad vulnerum curationem, confirmatio ad curationis habitae conservationem, eucharistia ad curationis habitae et conservatae promotionem; et quia non omnes qui recipiunt, conservant semper, ideo est poenitentia ad reparationem; quintum est unctio extrema ad ipsius consummationem. Et ex hoc patet ordo et sufficientia illorum quinque, quae respiciunt communiter omnes. — Quae autem respiciunt speciales status, duo sunt: aut enim respiciunt perfectos, et sic est ordo; aut infirmos secundum congruentiam, et sic est matrimonium; praeponitur autem⁶ ordo propter Sacramenti dignitatem. — Vel, ordo est personarum generantium spiritualiter, matrimonium vero personarum generantium corporaliter; et utraque necessaria est Ecclesiae, sed prima est de principali intentione, secunda ex consequenti. Et ita patet ordo⁷.

Dub. II.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod haec Sacramenta non debuerunt ante institui, quia ex ipsius morte et passione virtutem sortita sunt. Videtur enim male dicere, quia Sacramenta veteris legis et fides totam virtutem iustificandi habebant ex morte Christi⁸. — Item, videtur, quod magis ex resurrectione, quia ad Romanos quarto⁹ dicitur: Resurrexit propter iustificationem nostram.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod Sacramenta novae legis magnam habent virtutem, quia eam habent a

p. 60

passione, non tantum promissa, sed etiam persoluta; et persoluta astringit divinam misericordiam, ut liberalius praebeat; et hoc non fuit nisi post mortem.

Quod obiicitur de resurrectione, dicendum, quod meritum principaliter fuit in passione, sed significatio nostrae iustificationis a peccato significatur in morte et resurrectione, ut destruatur homo vetus et fiat novus¹⁰.

Dub. III.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Baptismum Christi Ioannes suo baptismo praenuntiavit; quae necessitas fuerit huiusmodi praenuntiationis. Si dicas, ut assuefaceret; quaero similiter: quare alia Sacramenta non habuerunt assuefactoria¹¹? Si dicas, quod baptismus difficilior est ad credendum; hoc non solvit, quia eucharistia magnae difficultatis est et magnae efficaciae.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod baptismus congrue habuit praeambulum; et ratio huius est, quia est Sacramentum primum et necessarium: quia enim necessarium, oportebat omnes suscipere; quia primum, ne homines inhabiles essent et imparati, oportebat, quod praecederet aliquid simile. Non sic autem est in aliis Sacramentis. Baptismus enim susceptus disponit ad cetera alia; et ideo non indigent alia¹², immo assuefactorium baptismi per consequens ad alia assuefacit.

Dub. IV.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod hominis dictus est, quia nihil ibi agebatur, quod non ageret homo. Videtur enim, quod ratio illa nulla sit: quia dicitur Evangelium hominis, ut Ioannis et Matthaei, et tamen in Evangelio aliquid agitur, quod non agit homo. Si dicas, quod Evangelium dicitur nuntium et dicit quid exterius, et hoc est ipsius nuntiantis, non tantum mandantis¹³; obiicitur de doctrina, quae dicitur esse docentis; et tamen, ut dicit Augustinus¹⁴, « solus Deus docet intus ».

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod doctrina dicitur Petri, non quia Petrus totum agat effective, quod ibi fit, sed quia nihil ibi fit, quod Petrus non faciat vel effective, sicut verbum exterius, vel dispositive, sicut est eruditio interior. Melius enim docet bonus clericus quam malus; non sic melius baptizat bonus quam malus¹⁵.

Dub. V.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Baptismus Ioannis in nomine venturi tradebatur. Videtur enim falsum, quia Ioannes sciebat, iam Christum venisse, cum baptizavit ipsum¹⁶: ergo non in nomine venturi, sed eius qui venit, potius baptizavit, vel baptizare debuit.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod Dominus venisse dicitur quantum ad assumtionem carnis; sed utilitas vel finis adventus determinatur quantum ad humani generis redemptionem et ipsius manifestationem; et quoniam, licet Christus tunc assumsisset carnem¹⁷, tamen, quia nondum erat manifestatus, baptizabat in nomine venturi de futuro; et ideo, quando Dominus se coepit per mirabilia manifestare, baptismus eius debuit cessare. Unde et Ioannes in carcere existens, volens ostendere discipulis suis, suum ministerium impletum esse, et baptismum cessasse, misit eos ad Christum, Matthaei undecimo¹⁸: Tu es qui venturus es? ut per verba Domini cognoscant discipuli, illum, in cuius nomine venisse baptizaverat Ioannes, et ideo, cum iam amplius non debeat dici venturus, Sacramentum eius cessasse. — Et haec est ratio, quare Ioannes magis baptizavit in nomine venturi quam Christi, ut ostenderet baptismum suum ad tempus esse. Nam Christus semper Christus est, sed non semper venturus; et ideo baptisma Christi, quod debuit semper durare, fuit in nomine Christi, vel Trinitatis, sed baptisma Ioannis in nomine venturi.

---

English Translation

## DOUBTS ON THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.

Dub. I.

In this part there are doubts concerning the text, and first about this which he says, that others are in remedy against sin. For it seems wrong to divide these¹ Sacraments from one another, since all the Sacraments are in remedy against sin.

I respond: It must be said that the Master does not say without qualification that some are in remedy; rather he says that some are in remedy against sin; and such are those which confer grace and adorn the soul.

But from this division, which the Master here sets down, is suggested the sufficiency of the Sacraments. For a certain one is preservative medicine, which guards² against disease but does not free from it; and such is matrimony. — A certain one is curative, and this frees through grace; and it is varied according to the threefold grace, namely the baptismal, and thus baptism; the penitential, and thus penance; the final, and thus extreme unction. — But a certain one is strengthening medicine. Now man needs to be strengthened from a twofold cause: either on account of the difficulty of the struggle, and thus confirmation; or on account of the weariness of the journey, and thus the viaticum of the Eucharist³; but order is for administering both and for strengthening in either way. — Or thus: strengthening and support is in three ways: either by the strengthening of power, and thus confirmation; or by the furnishing of food, and thus the Eucharist; or by the support of some aid, and thus is order. — And thus it is clear that the division of the Master is correct, and from this the division of the Sacraments is also clear. This manner of assigning sufficiency differs from the one previously assigned, since that is taken with respect to diseases, but this with respect to modes of curing.

Likewise it is asked: why does the Master⁴ order them thus? For it seems that his reasoning contradicts the enumeration as regards the order. For if matrimony is preservative medicine and is also instituted earlier, it seems that he ought to have treated of it first. Similarly it can be objected against the others.

I respond: It must be said that the Master orders them well; and the ground of his order is clear thus. For certain Sacraments regard all in common, and thus are the five preceding ones; or some specially, and thus are the two following ones, namely order and marriage; and just as the common comes before the special⁵, so the first five come before the last two. For the order among the first five is clear of itself. For baptism is for the curing of wounds, confirmation for the conservation of the cure once obtained, the Eucharist for the advancement of the cure obtained and conserved; and because not all who receive always conserve, therefore there is penance for the repairing; the fifth is extreme unction for its consummation. And from this is clear the order and sufficiency of those five which regard all in common. — But those which regard special states are two: for they regard either the perfect, and thus is order; or the infirm according to fittingness, and thus is matrimony; but order is set before⁶ on account of the dignity of the Sacrament. — Or, order is of persons generating spiritually, but matrimony of persons generating corporeally; and each is necessary to the Church, but the first is of the principal intention, the second by consequence. And thus the order is clear⁷.

Dub. II.

Likewise it is asked about this which he says, that these Sacraments ought not to have been instituted before, because they obtained their power from his death and passion. For it seems wrong to say this, since the Sacraments of the old law and faith had the whole power of justifying from the death of Christ⁸. — Likewise, it seems rather from the resurrection, because in Romans, chapter four⁹, it is said: He rose again for our justification.

I respond: It must be said that the Sacraments of the new law have great power, because they have it from

p. 60

the passion, not merely promised, but also fully paid; and the payment binds the divine mercy to bestow more liberally; and this was not so except after the death.

As to what is objected concerning the resurrection, it must be said that the merit was principally in the passion, but the signification of our justification from sin is signified in the death and resurrection, so that the old man may be destroyed and a new one be made¹⁰.

Dub. III.

Likewise it is asked about this which he says: John foreannounced the baptism of Christ by his own baptism; what necessity there was for such a foreannouncement. If you say, in order to accustom [men to it]; I ask likewise: why did the other Sacraments not have things to accustom [men to them]¹¹? If you say that baptism is more difficult to believe; this does not solve it, because the Eucharist is of great difficulty and of great efficacy.

I respond: It must be said that baptism fittingly had a preamble; and the ground of this is that it is the first and necessary Sacrament: for because necessary, it behooved all to receive it; because first, lest men be unfit and unprepared, it behooved that something similar should precede. But it is not so in the other Sacraments. For baptism, once received, disposes to all the rest; and therefore the others do not need it¹²; indeed, the accustoming of baptism, by consequence, accustoms [men] to the others.

Dub. IV.

Likewise it is asked about this which he says, that it was called [the Gospel] of man, because nothing was there done which man would not do. For it seems that this reasoning is null: because it is called the Gospel of a man, as of John and Matthew, and yet in the Gospel something is done which man does not do. If you say that the Gospel is called a tidings and tells something outwardly, and this belongs to the one announcing, not only to the one commanding¹³; it is objected concerning doctrine, which is said to be of the one teaching; and yet, as Augustine says¹⁴, « God alone teaches within ».

I respond: It must be said that the doctrine is called Peter's, not because Peter does the whole of what is there done effectively, but because nothing is there done which Peter does not do, either effectively, as the outward word, or dispositively, as is the inner instruction. For a good cleric teaches better than a bad one; not so does a good one baptize better than a bad one¹⁵.

Dub. V.

Likewise it is asked about this which he says: The baptism of John was handed on in the name of the one to come. For it seems false, because John knew that Christ had already come, since he baptized him¹⁶: therefore he baptized, or ought to have baptized, not in the name of the one to come, but rather of the one who had come.

I respond: It must be said that the Lord is said to have come as regards the assumption of flesh; but the usefulness or the end of his coming is determined as regards the redemption of the human race and his manifestation; and since, although Christ had then assumed flesh¹⁷, yet, because he had not yet been manifested, [John] baptized in the name of the one to come, as of the future; and therefore, when the Lord began to manifest himself through wonders, his baptism had to cease. Whence also John, being in prison, wishing to show his disciples that his ministry was fulfilled and that his baptism had ceased, sent them to Christ, in Matthew chapter eleven¹⁸: Art thou he that is to come? so that through the words of the Lord the disciples might recognize him, in whose name John had baptized as the one to come, and therefore, since he ought no longer be called the one to come, that his Sacrament had ceased. — And this is the reason why John baptized rather in the name of the one to come than of Christ, to show that his baptism was for a time. For Christ is always Christ, but not always the one to come; and therefore the baptism of Christ, which had to last forever, was in the name of Christ, or of the Trinity, but the baptism of John in the name of the one to come.

---

Apparatus Criticus

1
Ita codd. A E (K a secunda manu), codd. G I W Z hic Sacramenta, in aliis tantum haec. Mox edd. omittunt contra peccatum.
Thus codices A E (K by a second hand); codices G I W Z read here Sacramenta, in others only haec. Soon the editions omit contra peccatum (against sin).
2
Ita codd. A K, alii codd. curat, cod. B curat vel caret, edd. excusat. Paulo superius pro ornant cod. K curant, et codd. F H innuit sufficientiam pro innuitur sufficientia.
Thus codices A K; other codices read curat; codex B curat vel caret; the editions excusat. A little above, for ornant codex K reads curant, and codices F H innuit sufficientiam for innuitur sufficientia.
3
Cfr. infra d. 8. p. 1. dub. 2. et 3. — Edd. id est eucharistia. Mox pro ministrandum codd. H aa administrandum. Inferius pro tripliciter codd. F G I aa triplex, et cod. aa alieni pro alicuius.
Compare below, d. 8, p. 1, dubia 2 and 3. — The editions read id est eucharistia (that is, the Eucharist). Soon, for ministrandum codices H aa read administrandum. Below, for tripliciter codices F G I aa read triplex, and codex aa alieni for alicuius.
4
Edd. magis. Inferius pro contra alia codd. F H (K a secunda manu) et circa alia, alii codd. circa alia.
The editions read magis. Below, for contra alia codices F H (K by a second hand) read et circa alia, other codices circa alia.
5
Cfr. Aristot., de Praedicam. c. de Simul, I. Phys. text. 57. (c. 7.) et III. text. 2. (c. 1.). — Edd. et sic aut commune aut speciale. Si respiciunt communiter omnes, sic sunt prima quinque. Ordo enim trium ex quinque prius patet ex se. In-
Compare Aristotle, Categories, the chapter On the Simultaneous; Physics I, text 57 (c. 7) and III, text 2 (c. 1). — The editions read and thus either the common or the special. If they regard all in common, thus are the first five. For the order of three out of the five is first clear of itself. In-
6
Ita cod. O, cuius lectio confirmari videtur incongrua lectione multorum codd. principaliter autem; codd. G I satis bene praemittitur autem; codd. K Z aa praecedit autem; sed Vat. perperam sic habet: matrimonium principaliter, aut est ordo etc.
Thus codex O, whose reading seems confirmed by the incongruous reading of many codices principaliter autem; in codices G I autem is rather well prefixed; codices K Z aa praecedit autem; but the Vatican edition wrongly has thus: matrimonium principaliter, aut est ordo, etc.
7
Subinde pro Vel ordo codd. G I Item ordo; post matrimonium vero edd. cum pluribus codd. omittunt personarum, et post utraque cod. F (a secunda manu) supplet generatio.
Thereupon, for Vel ordo codices G I read Item ordo; but after matrimonium the editions, with several codices, omit personarum, and after utraque codex F (by a second hand) supplies generatio.
8
Cfr. supra a. 1. q. 3. — Idem dub. solvit S. Thom. et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 2.
Compare above, a. 1, q. 3. — The same doubt is resolved by St. Thomas and Richard of Mediavilla, here on the text; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 2.
9
Vers. 25. Cfr. tom. III. pag. 400, nota 9.
Verse 25. Compare tome III, page 400, note 9.
10
Cfr. III. Sent. d. 19. a. 1. q. 1. et d. 20. q. 4. in fine corp.; Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 5. m. 3. a. 5. § 7.
Compare III Sent., d. 19, a. 1, q. 1, and d. 20, q. 4, at the end of the body; Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 5, m. 3, a. 5, § 7.
11
Vat. supplet assuefactorio. — Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 6. m. 1; S. Thom., hic circa lit.
The Vatican edition supplies assuefactorio. — The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 6, m. 1; St. Thomas, here on the text.
12
Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 6. m. 3. ad ult.: Evangelium idem est quod bonum nuntium; nuntium relationem ad dominum habet mandantem et nuntium denuntiantem; unde Evangelium ad utrumque habet respectum, propter quod dicitur esse et Christi et Ioannis. — Cod. F et dicitur quasi exterius.
Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 6, m. 3, at the end: "Gospel" is the same as "good tidings"; a tidings has relation to the lord who commands and to the messenger who announces; hence the Gospel has respect to both, on account of which it is said to be both of Christ and of John. — Codex F reads et dicitur quasi exterius.
13
De Magistro, c. 11. n. 38. seqq.; V. de Gen. ad lit. c. 13. n. 30; in Epist. Ioan. tr. 3. n. 13; Enarrat. in Ps. 118. serm. 18. n. 4. et in Ps. 139. n. 15. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 690, nota 1.
[Augustine,] On the Teacher, c. 11, n. 38 ff.; On Genesis according to the Letter V, c. 13, n. 30; On the Epistle of John, tract 3, n. 13; Expositions on Psalm 118, sermon 18, n. 4, and on Psalm 139, n. 15. Compare tome II, page 690, note 1.
14
Vide supra a. 2. q. 1. in corp.; infra d. 8. a. 2. q. 1. — Edd. cum aliquot codd. omittunt et hic lit. Magistri, c. 4. — non sic melius... quam malus. — Cfr. de hoc dubio Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 6. m. 5. ad ult., ubi ait: Aliter operatur Deus in Evangelio, aliter in baptismo. In Evangelio sive doctrina evangelica Deus infudit veritatem in mentem Evangelistae, qui postea eam transfudit in mentes audientium; ipsa igitur veri-
See above, a. 2, q. 1, in the body; below, d. 8, a. 2, q. 1. — The editions, with several codices, omit et hic lit. Magistri, c. 4. — non sic melius... quam malus. — Compare on this doubt Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 6, m. 5, at the end, where he says: God works in one way in the Gospel, in another in baptism. In the Gospel, or evangelical doctrine, God infused truth into the mind of the Evangelist, who afterward transfused it into the minds of the hearers; therefore that very truth
15
[…continued from preceding note] evangelica, quia a Deo erat in mente Evangelistae, dicitur ibi esse ipsius Dei; quia denuntiatur ab ipso Evangelista in mentes audientium, dicitur esse Evangelistae. Non est sic in baptismo; non enim transfunditur munditia primo a Deo in baptizantem et postea ab eo in baptizatum, immo immediate gratia primo et per se purgans transfunditur sive infunditur a Deo. Quia igitur illud quod principale est in baptismo est a Christo immediate, ideo dicitur baptisma Christi, non Petri vel Pauli. — B. Albert., hic a. 5; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 1. quaestiunc. 3.
[…continued] evangelical, because it was from God in the mind of the Evangelist, is there said to be God's own; because it is announced by the Evangelist himself into the minds of the hearers, it is said to be the Evangelist's. It is not so in baptism; for cleanness is not transfused first from God into the baptizer and afterward from him into the baptized, but rather the grace that cleanses immediately, first and through itself, is transfused or infused by God. Therefore, because that which is principal in baptism is from Christ immediately, it is therefore called the baptism of Christ, not of Peter or of Paul. — Blessed Albert, here a. 5; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2, a. 1, little-question 3.
16
Cfr. Ioan. 1, 32. seqq. — Mox post sed codd. F H repetunt in nomine.
Compare John 1, 32 ff. — Soon, after sed, codices F H repeat in nomine.
17
In edd. desunt verba sed utilitas... assumsisset carnem. — In hac propositione vel quoniam, vel quia abundat. — Post pauca verbis de futuro cod. F praemittit et. Subinde pro mirabilia cod. K miracula, et pro existens cod. R positus.
In the editions the words sed utilitas... assumsisset carnem are lacking. — In this proposition either quoniam or quia is superfluous. — After a few [words], to the words de futuro codex F prefixes et. Thereupon, for mirabilia codex K reads miracula, and for existens codex R positus.
18
Vers. 3. Cfr. August., in Ioan. Evang. tr. 4. n. 14. — Infra pro cessasse cod. K cessare, codd. M aa cessare debuit, codd. R S T X dicitur cessasse, edd. cessavit. — Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 6. m. 3. a. 1. et m. 9; S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 1. quaestiunc. 2.
Verse 3. Compare Augustine, On the Gospel of John, tract 4, n. 14. — Below, for cessasse codex K reads cessare, codices M aa cessare debuit, codices R S T X dicitur cessasse, the editions cessavit. — The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 6, m. 3, a. 1, and m. 9; St. Thomas, here q. 2, a. 1, little-question 2.