Bonaventure

Articulus I. De iudicantibus et iudicandis.

Quaestio I. Utrum Apostoli iudicent.

Nota de apparatu. Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page. The notes below are therefore labelled by page: notes 1–10 belong to the footer of page 971, notes 1–3 to the footer of page 972. Notes 4–7 of page 972 anchor in the following question and are rendered there.

Quantum ergo ad primum proceditur sic, et ostenditur, quod Apostoli iudicent.

1. Matthaei decimo nono¹: Sedebitis super sedes duodecim etc. Si dicas, quod solum assistent iudici et non iudicabunt; contra: Matthaei duodecimo Dominus, loquens de Apostolis, Iudaeis dicit: Ipsi iudices vestri erunt; Glossa ibi dicit, quod habebunt auctoritatem iudicandi.

2. Item, hoc ipsum ostenditur ratione: quia, si solum iudicabunt comparatione, hoc non esset praerogativa; mali enim iudicabunt comparatione, secundum quod dicitur Matthaei duodecimo²: Viri Ninivitae et regina austri surgent in iudicio contra generationem hanc.

3. Item, hoc videtur: quia Dominus ideo dedit iudicium Filio, quia ipse, cum esset iustus, iudicatus est tanquam impius, Iob trigesimo sexto³: Causa tua quasi impii iudicata est, iudicium causamque recipies; sed Apostoli, cum essent iusti, iudicati sunt tanquam impii: ergo et pari modo iudicabunt.

4. Item, quamvis Christus esset redemptor et salvator noster, ipse tamen salutem animarum nobis per praedicationem Apostolorum dispensavit: ergo si gloria debet gratiae respondere, videtur, quod similiter per Apostolos proferat sententiam retributionis.

Contra: 1. Actuum decimo⁴: Ipse est, qui constitutus est a Deo iudex vivorum et mortuorum: ergo ipsi soli Christo debetur iudicium, non ergo Apostolis.

2. Item, iudex debet esse immunis a peccato, de quo alterum damnat⁵; sed solus Christus fuit absque omni contagione peccati: ergo ipsius solius est iudicare.

Item, quaeritur: quare magis Apostolis attribuitur potestas iudiciaria quam aliis Sanctis, cum dicatur Sapientiae tertio⁶: Iudicabunt Sancti nationes et dominabuntur?

Item, si omnes Apostoli habebunt potestatem iudiciariam, quare dicit: super sedes duodecim? quia secundum hoc, cum Paulus non fuerit de duodecim, videtur, quod ad ipsum non pertineat iudicare⁷.

Item, cum non habeant potestatem super alias tribus quam super tribus Israel, quomodo dicit: iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel⁸?

Conclusio

Solus Christus feret sententiam in iudicio; Apostoli autem eorumque perfecti imitatores sunt iudices ut assistentes iudicanti et approbantes.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod iudex in aliquo dicitur duplici ratione: aut quia ipsius est ferre sententiam, aut quia assistit ferenti, secundum quod aliqui iudices assistunt et quodam modo consulunt iudici principali. Qui ergo fert sententiam, ille est iudex principalis; et talis est solus Christus, sicut patet Matthaei vigesimo quinto⁹, ubi exprimitur, quomodo fert sententiam. Qui autem assistunt iudicanti etiam nomen et dignitatem iudicantis sortiuntur; et tales sunt viri perfecti, qui ultra opera necessitatis praeceptorum supererogaverunt perfectionem consiliorum; tales autem sunt Apostoli principaliter tanquam capita et eorum perfecti imitatores. Assistentia autem illa non erit ad consulendum, quia Dominus consilio non indiget; sed erit tanquam ad quendam honorem et appropinquationem ad iudicem, quam possumus appellare iuxta verbum Domini¹⁰ honorabilem consessionem.

Ratio autem huius honorabilis consessionis meritoria est perfectio supererogationis; ratio autem finalis est ad condemnationem malorum ex vitae suae comparatione, et ad gloriam Christi per sententiae eius approbationem. Sententiam enim Domini ut iustam approbabunt et malorum vitam sua comparatione condemnabunt.

Et ex his patent obiecta ad primam partem. Concedo enim, quod quidam¹ dignitate iudicabunt, non tamen ut Christus. Rationes ad oppositum similiter patent; concludunt enim, quod ipsorum non sit ferre sententiam.

Ad illud vero quod quaeritur, quare magis Apostolis, et in duodecimo numero; patet responsio ex dictis: per Apostolos enim duodecim omnes viri perfecti intelliguntur, et per duodecim tribus universitas iudicandorum. — Sed cum septenario numero universitas designetur², quare non dixit: in septenario numero? Et responsio ad hoc est, quia in septenario notatur universitas, quae componitur ex tribus et quatuor. Ista in se ducta faciunt duodecimum numerum. — Ratio autem, quare magis duodecim quam septem, duplex est: litteralis, quia ad Apostolos loquebatur, qui erant duodecim; sed mystica est, quia duodenarius est numerus abundans, partes enim eius superexcrescunt³; et rursus, dividitur in duos senarios, in quo significatur perfectio in duplici vita, scilicet in activa et contemplativa cum supererogatione consiliorum; et ista est quae vindicat sibi iudiciariam dignitatem: ergo etc.

Article I. On those who judge and those who are judged.

Question I. Whether the Apostles will judge.

As to the first point, then, one proceeds thus, and it is shown that the Apostles will judge.

1. Matthew nineteen¹: You shall sit upon twelve seats etc. If you say that they will only assist the judge and will not judge; on the contrary: in Matthew twelve the Lord, speaking of the Apostles, says to the Jews: They shall be your judges; the Gloss there says that they will have the authority of judging.

2. Likewise, this same thing is shown by reason: because, if they were to judge only by comparison, this would not be a prerogative; for the wicked too will judge by comparison, according to what is said in Matthew twelve²: The men of Nineveh and the queen of the south shall rise up in judgement against this generation.

3. Likewise, this seems so: because the Lord gave judgement to the Son for this reason, that He, though He was just, was judged as though impious, Job thirty-six³: Thy cause hath been judged as that of the impious; cause and judgement thou shalt recover; but the Apostles, though they were just, were judged as though impious: therefore they too will judge in like manner.

4. Likewise, although Christ was our redeemer and saviour, He nevertheless dispensed to us the salvation of souls through the preaching of the Apostles: therefore if glory ought to correspond to grace, it seems that He will likewise pronounce the sentence of retribution through the Apostles.

Contra: 1. Acts ten⁴: He it is who was appointed by God to be judge of the living and of the dead: therefore judgement is owed to Christ alone, and therefore not to the Apostles.

2. Likewise, a judge ought to be free from the sin of which he condemns another⁵; but Christ alone was without every contagion of sin: therefore it belongs to Him alone to judge.

Likewise, it is asked: why is judiciary power attributed to the Apostles rather than to the other Saints, since it is said in Wisdom three⁶: The Saints shall judge nations and shall have dominion?

Likewise, if all the Apostles will have judiciary power, why does He say: upon twelve seats? because according to this, since Paul was not of the twelve, it seems that it does not pertain to him to judge⁷.

Likewise, since they do not have power over other tribes than over the tribes of Israel, how does He say: judging the twelve tribes of Israel⁸?

Conclusion

Christ alone will pronounce the sentence in the judgement; but the Apostles and their perfect imitators are judges as assisting the one who judges and as approving.

I respond: It must be said that someone is called a judge in a matter for a twofold reason: either because it belongs to him to pronounce the sentence, or because he assists the one pronouncing it, according as some judges assist and in a certain manner advise the principal judge. He therefore who pronounces the sentence, he is the principal judge; and such is Christ alone, as is clear in Matthew twenty-five⁹, where it is expressed how He pronounces the sentence. But those who assist the one judging also obtain the name and the dignity of one judging; and such are perfect men, who beyond the works of the necessity of the precepts have supererogated the perfection of the counsels; and such are the Apostles principally, as heads, and their perfect imitators. That assistance, however, will not be for advising, because the Lord has no need of counsel; but it will be as it were for a certain honour and an approach to the judge, which, according to the word of the Lord¹⁰, we may call an honourable session together.

The meritorious ground of this honourable session together is the perfection of supererogation; but the final ground is directed to the condemnation of the wicked by the comparison of their own life, and to the glory of Christ by the approbation of His sentence. For they will approve the sentence of the Lord as just, and by comparison with themselves will condemn the life of the wicked.

And from these things the objections to the first part are clear. For I concede that certain ones¹ will judge in dignity, yet not as Christ does. The reasons for the opposite side are likewise clear; for they conclude that it does not belong to them to pronounce the sentence.

But as to that which is asked, why rather to the Apostles, and in the number twelve; the answer is clear from what has been said: for by the twelve Apostles all perfect men are understood, and by the twelve tribes the totality of those to be judged. — But since totality is designated by the septenary number², why did He not say: in the septenary number? And the response to this is that in the septenary totality is noted, which is composed of three and four. These, multiplied into one another, make the number twelve. — But the ground why twelve rather than seven is twofold: the literal, because He was speaking to the Apostles, who were twelve; but the mystical is that the duodenary is an abundant number, for its parts exceed it³; and again, it is divided into two senaries, in which is signified perfection in the twofold life, namely in the active and the contemplative with the supererogation of the counsels; and it is this which claims for itself the judiciary dignity: therefore etc.