St Bonaventure's Disputed Questions on Knowledge of Christ

102 Pages·1992·32.071 MB·English

by  Bonaventure

WORKS OF SAINT BONA VENTURE
Edited by
GEORGE MARCIL, O.F.M
Saint Bonaventure's
DISPUTED QUESTIONS
ONT HE KNOWLOEFDC GHER IST
Introduction and Translation
by
ZACHARY HAYES, O.F.M., D. TH.
THE FRANCISCAN INSTITUTE
SAINT BONA VENTURE UNIVERSITY
SAINT BONAVENNETWYU ORRKE , 14778
1992
Copyri©g 1h9 t9 2b yT heF rancisIcnasnti tute TABLE OF CONTENTS
ofS t.B onavenUtunriev ersity
Editor,s Foreword 7
Ubraoryf C ongreCsasta lCoagr Ndu mber: Translator's Fo-rewprd 15
91-78042
Introduction
CHAPfER ONE: Historical Context 21
I. From MonatsoUt neiryv ersity 22
IIF.rom ReadiQnuge stoti on 25
Ill. QueasntidDo ins putation 28
CHAPTER TWO: TheK nowledge of Christ: The
Histoofry. thPer oblem 30
I. Dogma and the QuestiKonno wolfe dCgher3i0 st's
11. HistoriRceaflle ctions 32
CHAPTER THREE: CTohnet eoxft Bonaventure's
DispuQtueeds tions 40
I. Ufea ndW ork Boofn aventure 40
IIT.he Disputed QuestioWnrsi tianngds Re41l ated
CHAPTER FOURT:h eD isputed Questions on the
Knowledof Christ 45
ge
I. General StruQcutuerset ioofn sthe 45
IIT.he Conotf theenQ tu estions 47
Questi1on 47
e
Questi2on 50
Questi3on 54
Quest4ion 55
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Questi5on 59
Questi6on 62
Questi7on 64
Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies
BinghamNt.o nY,.
ThTee xotfS t. Bonaventure,s Disputed Questions
inTr anslation
QUESTIWOhNe tIhth:ee kr n owloefCd hgreii snt ,a s far
EDITOR'FSO REWORD
asH ei ths eW orda,c tuaexltleynt doas ni nfinite
numboefor b jects. 71
QUESTIOWNh eIthIeG:ro dk nothwisn bgys means of TheDi sputed Quoenst thieo nKsn owleCdhgreh iaosrfst e cently
1
theilri kenoerbs yms eeason fsth eiprr opeesrs ence8.3 beepnu bliisnIh taeldai naidnnF renacnhd, the weoxriks theads
fors omtiem ei naS panbiislhi pnuguballi 2cB autito ntth.ri asn sla­
QUESTION Ill: Whether God knows creatures by means
tiobny ZFarc.h Haaryy e0s.F, . M., refiprrtseitsm theean tts the
ofl ikentheasatsr reees a dlilsyti· n ct. 96
thew orakp peianEr nsg lfoirsmhT. h eF rancIinssctatainktu etse
QUESTIOINVW :h ethethraw th iicsh knowwni thb y us
priidne pugbi latisth s ehfo iunrvtho luomfe its Wosrekorsf i eSts.
certiikstun doew inn the reetaesthroennmassl e lve1s1.5 3
Bonaventure.
QUESTIONW hVe:th ethres oouflC hrpiossts essed
A netrwa nsloafati B oonn aventtrueraiitisaas nnee v eTnhte.
onluyn crewaitseddoo rwm h,e thepro sistea slsseod
newtr eatiasdeds so methtoi thnegw idenpiincgtu re groefa tth e
ac reawtiesddt oomg ewthieththr e u ncreated wi1s4d5o m.
Francsicshcoalna r-theoloognCi harni.as ltTow,hni igthths e work
QUESTIOVIN:W hethers othuoelfC hrist comprehendsw orokn the Tbroithdn ointye, imne dthiese cvhaoll astic style of
theu ncrewaitsedidots me lf. 161 dispquuteesdti sohnoshw,os wB onaveansstu crheo,wl aasrth ,ea t
cent.ewrh aoCtfh ristiiaasnb iotyHu etr.we ew itnehsismp robing
QUESTIViOlN: Whtheeths eorou fl Christ comprehends
paroftth eb asic moeftha enC ihnrgi sfatiiathan n odf ohwins
althlo sthei nwghsi thcehu ncrewaitsedcdoo mm prehends. 178
piety.
Epilogue 195 Bonavenvtuerrmeyu cithhse F ranciinstu cnaen ,w ithS tw.h at
Franwcaicossn ceranbeodTu htet. o poifac s eotfd ispquuteeds ­
Indices tionwsa as maottefcr h oice, and Bonaventure made his choice in
a mancnoenrs iwsitthhe iFnsrt a ncisTchaen iusnmi.v ersity curricu­
INDEX OF BCIIBTUACTAILO NS 199
luimn gietsn ecroanltw eanqstu iftixee d.d iTshpequ uteeds tions,
INDEXO F AUTHAONRSDW ORKS 200 ane xerfocirs es tudheantdtso b, eo rganbyi thzeep dr ofesthse·o r;
____________________________
1
The Itavleirasnii sLao. cn o nosicnCe rnizwsaii thoi ,n i:roduction, i:ranslation
and commeLenttetarryi Moba yu r(oV icen1z9a8,7 ). TheQ uFersetnicohn si s
dispsuutere sle savoir chez le EC.hH r.Wi esbte0,r. P, w.( i Ptha rtriasn:s lation by
0. E. 1I9.8 5L),.
2
The Spanish translianvti ooln. i2ss eoforfuiO nebdthsr e,a s de San
Buenavencurn in Bib!iot(eMcaa dd1re9i 4dA6,u) t,o 9r5e-s2 C7r7i.s tianos
3
Vol. 1tr anissl oaafti onth e De reductionveo l2a.r tium ad theo!ogiam;
presents the Itinerarium mentisF rP.ih ni lDoethuemu,s with a translation by
Boehner;v o3la .n cdo ntains thQeu eDsitsoipnou nttsehe d MysTtreiryn iotfy ,t he
along wilthe nagi thnvytre odryu ctiFornZ. a bcyh ary Hayes, 0. F. M.
8 EDITOR'S FOREWORD EDITOR'S FOREWORD 9
topeiscp ectoi baewl olryke,od ni nm edipeevdaalg sotygliec,a l was Thisso metime-orfme oaddeeCrrhn r istsoelethosegym odern
somethithnegp rofeshsatood sr e lReelcetv.aca nmcyei tnop labyu,t ·historeivceirythziinngg.
somtoep iacrsae l wraeylse Av satundtoy.f Tthrei naintyod f th e The modehmi stothreis ccizreispF tuirrhesesst, u. p pothseel si ve,
quesotfik onnole wdgeC hirnwi aspsta rticwuolralthro loykia ntg, orparle achoifJn egsS uecso.n hdel, oo kfosrs ignsof thdee veloping
anidn d epithn,th en eswi c emte thnoodnoo lftho egyu niversity. postresurorraetrlca tidooninstia ,sth ee arClyh urch takeasn dshape
Thiisss cah owloarrEk'v.se m no rthei,s cilsa sask rionoodfm orgaintsizca etechse ticaelff oHretth se.ntr iteosp uitnp rocpeorn text
exrceisew hiiecnvh e ryionnth eel ectuharltelo oakna ctpiavret . eacho fth eN ew Testawrmietinngatss th eayp peoanrth es ceneea,ch
Despiitstem ultiple phaowevretirc,ti htepexta w natssr, e viewed writing takipnrge viothoneuie sn stoo maecco unt
lart,e thaeftce lra wsosr'aksn, id wt a psr epfoarrp eudb libcya tion In thatc osnatmtheeext m ,o dehrins torthiedc eivzeelso ping
thep rofeswshoohr a,td h e wloarjsdut s th ena osr mhaallthdye faithT.h eirse ao fJfa aimtheo sf, PoefPt aeural,n o df J ohThne.
contrwooldrli inthn elg e chtuariletsl el f. thingeys w_r othrtee lmautec mho rtoe the expereiaechthn acne of
Readsiuncagsh c hoklianordflp yu blicnaotietoa nsP yei.rs u sing twoh athte rye athdo,u ghey dthirde aEda.cho nieas ff ecatlebsdyo
anoyn oef i tss evqeune stifroonmbs e ginneinnmdga ktove esry thec ontienwx hti hcehw roaten,dth ec onttoeoxh,tsa ,vh ei storical
ltitles .es eTnehdiisrt eocorm methnedfo sl lowaistn egach niaq)u e: characteristics.
reafidr thsetq uesatnithdoe nc ompleteb )rr ee-epnlyfot;rh cbaeyt To ofowll osmeo fw haitsbe i nsga iodn,ne e eodn lgyl ance at
readthiena gr gumethnatfatsv othre posittihwoern i atonefcdr ) ; suchb ookassth em onumesntutadloy fS chilleenbteieJtlceeskxdu s
oncBeo navenptuorsoeinh't asibs e eclne arly uanldoewnrigsth t ood, Chr(iisfantc vt,o luImi eJs e saunsvd o lumeC hIrIia snitd)s , th e
thes ouershc efa vorthse,n begsitundth ye too pponeanrtsgu'­ scripwtuorroakfSl a bo5urin.
mentso,na eta ti mew,i thth eiarp prorperpilaHiteae vsis.ntu gd ied In a modern 6 osntusedh yo unolofdt Jbees uss,urprised to see
Bonatuvreevn'ise ownswe,i nlolbt es urprithsered e pblyi es he givtheesn arroaftith vele i bfeeg wiinth pthree achoifn gJ esluisk,e just
to theo bjecitino nfatsch;rt,e e polfteiner se statepo sthieti aonnd onree aiditsn th eG ospoefMl a rTkh.es toryo fJ escuosn tinues
argumentsh athvaaelt r ebaendef yo rmuilna tethde o fthbo edtext. y
withh idse ath raensdu rrTehcectinoo mnre.e flecotnthi eofa nisth
of Athpeo stlmeasr,kh eeda vbyi lthye expoefthr ei ednescacethe ne
Thmee ditehveaoll aongCdih arni stowlaoasgl ivsseotry much a
anthde r esurrOencltyi oinn. a wlioalntelfie n chada psttuedry of
phliosopahnemdre taphysician. This is by strong contrast to the
theb irothfJ esus-lailakmneao ftsetr thoFuugrhthte.r more, such a
modeCrhnr istwohloto egnidsst far mhoirset oatorn idba en a
___________________________
scrispctuhroeTl haemr e.d iweavnsao lmt u cohf hias tonroira n,
dihde h avmeu cohf hai stopreircsaplea cstti osv cer;i phtuer e, 5l nfa ct, volume one of the Scihni llebeeckx study is subtitled An
Experience
tendetdota kei ta d laim4•t teTrhe modem, soamlelowingC hforri 5tvoollotwugyom, se iu asbn tiTdhtle e Exdp eroiJfeen scauessLo rd (New York:
excepdtoieonsnog ste, n efarvaolmrle yta phyasniedcp ails temologi­Cross1r9o7aa9nd1 ds9 ,8T 1h)Lee.o poSladb ourin,C hrSi.st oJlo.gy,: study is
in (New YHooruk1s:9e 8,AlI4 bnth)a es. a comnet ext see Paula
cale nquiry. BasTiexct s Focus
Fredriksen, OriginNse w
From JleoCs h�r iTshte. oft he Testament Images of Jesus
(NeHwa vYeanUl,ne i Pvr.e1 s9s8a,8n )od;n a broader scale Jaroslav Pelikan,
____________________________ in (New Haven: Yale
JesTuhsr ougthhe C eniurHiiess .P lactehe HistCouryl toufr e
Uni.Pv re1s9s8,5 )m.o rrAeenc dse enJetlo yMh,en i er,
A MargiJneawlR: e thkiinng
◄ Medievali asec xtuqealuglcieyots meip sllb eee xgw.ii nathls i tesreanblsu et,
the vol. R1o,o ts the P(eNreYswoo rnk :
Historical JesTuhse, of the Problem and
moviensatw oh oalreor fas yp irmietuaan(lia nlglse goarniacaglo,g imcoarla)l.,
Doubl1e9d9ay1,) .
Howenvoem ra,tth eorcw o mpthleie nxt erpmriegbtahetitco onmse , for the 6 Theraera e number of models sethlathetec teodn e might choose. I have
meditheelv iatemlre aalnw iansg sstitalrlpti onithgne t, the wfohuicnhd ation on
excellentO 'sCtuodSly.l ibJny.s ,,G eIra(nlRatdme sNre.Jpy .r,:e tPianugl ist
Jesus
all aspppilriiwcatuetiabroluen i sl t.
Pre1s9s8,3 ).
10 11
EDITOR'S FOREWORD EDITOR'S FOREWORD
study, especially by a Catholic author, will contain a reflection on the In a study by Gerald O'Collins, the above descriptions fit into a
7 11
christological statement of the Council of Chalcedon. This conciliar Christology that he calls "from below." Such a Christology be­
statement declared what the faith of the Church was and is l:o be, i.e., gins with whatever human evidence is available; it begins with the
that Christ is both fully divine and fully human in one person. work of the best modern scriptural exegesis, which is itself done
In this historidzing context it is difficult and different to ask a from a historical, textually critical starting point.
question about knowledge in Jesus. In fact, the question will even Using the categories of O'Collins, the Christology of Bonaven­
6
have some ambiguity about it. Surely it will lean heavily in the ture, like that of most medievals, would appear to be "from above."
direction that Jesus, though very gifted, was an ordinary man living It begins with the clear conception of the Council of Chalcedon,
an ordinary life in his own historical setting. Consequently, the which is that Jesus, from the very first moment of his conception, is
question will lead to reflections on education, both informal and both God and man, the two natures being distinct and whole but
9
formal, and on other cultural matters. Why, for instance, was Jesus united in the person of the Word. All the scriptural texts will be
referred to as "rabbi"? Is it that he acted as if he had as much interpreted with that faith in mind. Consequently, there will be very
education as any rabbi, or is it that he had in fact the same formal little stress on the idea of development. This is so because the
training as a rabbi? How do ideas like messianism and redemption power, wisdom, and will of the divine Word that attaches to Jesus'
10
fit into the life and preaching of Jesus? Are these ideas part of humanity enriches it with so many gifts, right from the start, that
Jesus' preaching or are they developments in the faith and under­ there is very little room to allow for improvements. Jesus's humanity
standing of the Apostles after the resurrection? Furthermore, how is thus described far more like that of a saint fully glorified in
does the idea of the divinity of Jesus fit into the story of his life? heaven or of an Adam in the garden than like that of our own quite
When does the notion first appear? Certainly, the thaumaturgic fallible narure.12
activity of Jesus and his prophetic utterings, though suggestive, do Very few scriptural quotes make up the body of Bonavenrure's
not immediately and necessarily lead to the idea of his divinity. argument in the Disputed Questions. Some of the scriptural texts that
All of these reflections are made in the general atmosphere of appeared in Bonaventure's early reflections on the question of the
writers who see the historical Jesus becoming in time the Christ of knowledge of Christ are the following: "In his body lives the full­
the faith of the Church. They give a very humanistic twist to the ness of divinity" (Col 2:9); "He who comes from heaven bears
Lucan text, "And Jesus increased in wisdom, in stature, and in favor witness to the things he has seen and heard ... God gives him the
with God and men" (2:52).
11 Gerald O'Collins, S. J., What are IM)' sa)'ing about Jesus?, 2nd ed. (New
___________________________________ York: Paulist Press, 1977). There is a long history to the pr.;blem of doing
Christology. One way to err in presenting an image of Jesus is to overaccenruate
7 O'Collins, Interpreting Jesus, 172-83. his divinity; another is to exaggerate his humanity. In his short but very incisive
8 By ambiguity I mean that the question has several possible meanings. Are we study, Fr. O'Collins, a noted contemporary Christologist, refers to early Christolo­
asking, "What did Jesus know?" or, "What did Jesus show that he knew?" or still, gies as being "from above"; these begin with the divinity and have a hard time
"What impression did the apostles leave us as to what Jesus knew?" describing a humanity that is like our own. Contemporary Christologies lean far
9 O'Colhns, lnrerpreting ]e5Us, 183-90. more toward being "from below"; these begin with human and historical data,
10 Speaking here almost in medieval terms, does Jesus know that he is the established with the best historical method, and work to tell the story of how faith
messiah or that he is the appointed redeemer? Or are these ideas all pan of the in Jesus' divinity occurred.
posrresurrection reflection? It certainly appears that much of the theology of 12 In Bonaventure's Breviloquium IV, 6, 3, when speaking about innate and
redemption comes out of the writings of St. Paul, and this comes decades after the infused knowledge, there is an explicit reference to Adam, the saints, anci" the
death and resurrection of Jesus. angels as explanatory models.
12 EDITOR'S FOREWORD EDITOR'S FOREWORD 13
Spirit without reserve" On 3:32-34); and "He lived among us and as well. To preserve the note of humanness and limitation, Bona­
we saw his glory, the glory that is his as the only Son of the Father, venture falls back on a notion of mystical openness to the infinite.
13
full of grace and truth" (Jn 1:14). Jesus in his humanity is open to all the knowledge that is contained
There are three important problems in Bonaventure's Disputed in the Word, yet being finite he cannot take it all in at once. Conse­
Questions on the Knowledge of Christ. The first, studied in questions quently, Jesus remains in a kind of ecstatic tension, constantly trying
1-3, is what can we say, in this context, about knowledge in God. to take in as much as he can.
What does God know and how doe� he know it? Bonaventure re­ The discussion, as it is found, in these disputed questions, never
flects, like a good neoplatonist, that God knows all because he is be­ reaches for particulars: such as, does Jesus know this or that detail
fore all. He knows the world that he creates, but he also knows or fact. Nor does Bonaventure historicize any particular question:
about an infinity of other possible worlds. Furthermore, God has all such as, when or how does Jesus become aware of this or that. To
of this knowledge, has all of these ideas, without disrupting his great him, it appears that Jesus knows all that is relevant to his life, in
unity. Therefore, these ideas are not really distinct one from the fact, all that relates to the world he lives in.
other; they are like one giant, all inclusive idea which is identical to
God himself. The point of these reflections is to invite the contemporary reader
The second problem, studied in question 4, is about human to study Bonaventure. It may be all too obvious that Bonaventure is
knowledge in general. To Bonaventure, as an Augustinian, the not a man of the twentieth century. He does not study scripture in
human mind is touched with fallibility, and he is particularly con­ the same way a modern theologian does. His Christology may be
cerned about the very possibility of certitude. What is the ground of very different from that of an O'Collins or a Schillebeeckx. But his
our certitude, when we feel certain about anything? It cannot be, thoughts may still cause some to think along new lines and bring
according to him, the evidence in things; and it cannot be the ques­ them to gain new perspectives.
tionable force of our minds. So, we all must be aided by the wisdom Bonaventure begins with the faith of Chalcedon. He begins in
of God on high. This is, in essence, Bonaventure's theory of illumi­ the heavens and imagines a divinity coming to earth. This is not
nation. When we really know and are sure that we know it is surprising. He is a man of his time and a son of the St. Francis of
because our human efforts are supported by the divine infallibility. Greccio. But even the declared faith of Chalcedon claims that in
The third problem, questions 5-7, centers on knowledge in the some very real way the divinity that invades the humanity of Jesus
human mind of Jesus. If all human minds are illumined by God, leaves that humanity whole and intact, and that humanity must be
then much more so is the mind of Jesus. His mind is completely understood as a finite and limited being, even in its knowledge.
open to the influence of the Word with whom he is identified. But Furthermore, even if the aspect of learning is not dealt with so
somehow this holds the possibility of saying too much. The human distinctly in the Bonaventurian text translated here, the humanity of
mind of Jesus must remain precisely that, a human and finite thing. Jesus must "learn" in some way. It is certainly assumed that Jesus
Consequently, it is too much to say that Christ, in his humanity, must learn about the beauty of the world through his eyes, ears, and
knows everything that God does. This would imply that the mind of sense of touch; his senses are for something. In fact, the humanity
Jesus is not only open to the infinite but comprehends that infinity of Jesus must be such that it can learn through experience, as the
Epistle to the Hebrews says all too dearly, "Although he was Son,
_______________________________ he learned to obey through suffering'' (5:8).
In this context it is interesting to note the title Bonaventure chose
lJ These texts are quoted in Ill Sent., d. 13-14. They, along with similar ones, for these questions-de scientia Christi-and I mean to draw attention
are found in Alexander of Ha!es' study of the Sentences. Some are found as well
only to the word "scientia." The word has been translated simply,
in the original Peter Lombard Sentences and in Hugh of St. Victor's De sapientia
animae ChYis1i, all works that Zachary Hayes refers to in his excellent introduction. and quite aptly, as knowledge. However, in medieval Aristotelian
14 EDITOR'S FOREWORD
langueath gew orscdien tia alhsaoa st echnmiecaang;lith new ord
cathnu sb eu sedo ppioins tioton in tellectus adn sapientia. Inth is
mortee chnsiecanslscie enti,a retlsea mosrpeefi ccaitlorl eya soning, TRAN S LAT O R' S FO REW O RD
goinfrgo mpr eimsteoasc nocsloiun,o rm orpeoi netdlgyo,ifr nomg
thek nowtnoth eu nkwnno.W ec outhlednth inokfB onaveentur
asd eleritabeclhyoo isnthge w ortdos uggbeosththt e k nowianngd
Theta sokf m akgiu nslaetb ransloafiti mopnosrt taenxfrttso m
thel erainnagc tithvaiittyps r esienthn etm e ns Christi, "them idn fo
theth eologiacnadpl h ilosophicaolfth etW reasidtis mti oeorn
Chr"ist.
preisnnsgo wth ani nth er ecpean.tsI twfe c an sopfae c aekr tain
AcocrditonF grZ .ah caryH ayeisnh iistn rodnu,Bc otinvoaenture
14 urengcyi nth irse gathricdso, n caerrinfrs oemths e p roblewmaaytisc
treathteeq du teisoonfk nowliendJ geesfo ursm athlrleytie me .s
inw hicthhev erym eanionfag t radiitsai poopnar ch.Ie tid sn ot
Hea lspoo ionutsth tat th eraer dei effrenicnee asc ohfB onvaen­
sufficiteokn nto thwe p asotnl thyr ousgehc oannddth irhda nd
tureth'res es tued;sith eyae rn orte udcitbolo ens ei nagnlcdeo m·
.a•c couofnw tsh apta satu thors alhlaevgtheeo duhlgtyN. o ri si t
pletceelalpryo siiotnB.u Itw oulsdam yo r.Be onvaneturweas a
accepttaovb ileethw ep asatsa t reatsruorovefpe r otoefxw tshi ch
complecxhr aacatednr rweirtH.e w asth ea brsatcfotr,m athle olo­
mayb eu esdto cloptheer svoineaowilpn wtsi thth ea uaro fr epsect­
giaans,i nth esthere es tued.si Bhuewt a s also theth eexegete and
abialnihdtyi stolreigciatinlm.I a tit sni ool ongpeosrbs liteor eep­r
preacThheemrri.eg thhetr,e fobreee evn,m orsedi etsoth eq uenstio
senat tr aditisoenr ioaunsdwl iyti hten llechtuoneals tyw ithtou
thanw hati sfo undi nth esetr eaties.s thIenm ornea rtirvaaen d
15 acquiarf iirsnthga nadqcu iantanwcietha tl esatthe m ajmoorn u·
siprilwtu raitoifBn ognasv en,tuhriewso rdmiinhggts uegsgetv en
menatsn dl itedroacryu moefnth tastrt a ditionl.i aeTm sha ejroerin
moraese pctots thek nowlqeudtiegosena ngdi vnewe inisghitsn to
pedagogpircaolb lseimnth ceem onumeanntdds o cmuentsfro m
thed raomfat hheu mnal ife saannygdios fJ ess.u
manyc netuersio fth eW estetrrna dwietriweor ni ttienn LaTthien.
FrZ.a hcaryH ay,e0 s.F .M .h,a s dones earv itogc threee at
langueas gkidlelmsa nbdyeth de p edagopgrioscscoa elfe ngaging
Enlgirseha bdyet rrn asaltithnigis m ponrtwta orWke. can thhaotpe
twentieth-ceinnitunrydw si thth ei nsiagnhdctsl masio fo uorw n
studenotsfC hrtoilsowgyi glalifr nom itW.ec aanl hsoop thea at
cultupraaaslrt de i ffictou latc qaunindro oetft efonun de veanm ong
reneewnedthi uasswmi blelb orfonr a m orgee rneaslt uodfthy e
advansctuedde onftth se h iosryto fW etesrnth oughTth.e refore,
wriintgosfB onavethnetug rree,a t oDftho ecC thourr ch.
eventh oguhth eu soeftr a nlsatiioasnl sw aacy mosp ormistear,n s­la
tioni svr itualthleoy n lwya yi nw hi·cs htud enttso yd caahna ve
GerogMea r,c0 i.Fl .M .,P h.D.
anthyignth ate veanpp orachaefi sr sthaenxdp eriecanlsccsea ilof
TheF rancIinssctaintu te
texts ofthe t radition.
Novemb1e99r1,
Thep reensvtol ueim asp aorftas eer,sthi em osrte cennutm rbe
ofw hiccho ntaiBnoneadv ernestuD' isputed Questions onth e Trinity
(917)9·.W hithlete r salnatoifo nQthu ees tions on thKen owledge of
Christ appewairthsa l atesree rsniu mbethre,s qeu eosntwsie re
11 The three are: The Commenrary on the Sentences III, d. 14; these Disputed writtbeyBn o nvaentubreefo threeQ uestions onth e TrinyiT.th efa ct
Que��ons on the Knowledge of Christ; and the Breviloquium V, chap. 6. thathte t ranosnol ftha etistweo s eotsfQ u estions appearisnr everse
TheCo mmentary on the Gospel of Luke, the Questiaondns C ollations on the ordheasrn os iignfinctba earointhn egi cro ntAesna pt a., ith retw o
Gospel of John, the Lignum vitaanemd,a n y ofh isse ornmsS.eWha e t Manner of
volurmeepsr ehsiegynhs tlo phistsiepccauvteledda ,iti sicounsossn
Man? Sermons on Christ lry StBo.na vemure, tranZsa.ch aHryay es (ChicaFragnoc:i s-
metaphicyaaslnd e peimsotloigsuiescsia nlv oilnvtw eodi nrteraeetld
can Herald Press, 1974).
16 TRANSIAT OR.' S FOREWORD TRANSIATOR'S FOREWORD 17
doctrines of the Christian faith: that of the trinity and that of Chris­ take account of the most recent discussion concerning the chronolo­
tology. If these are viewed from the perspective of the eternal back­ gy of his life and works.
ground of faith, then the mystery of the trinity appears foundational. Finally, we have looked at the Questions directly, from two per•
If, on the other hand, they are viewed in terms of what Christians spectives. We have first given a general statement of the argument of
claim to be the historical manifestation of the divinity, then the the Questions so that, from the start, the reader will have a broad
mystery of Christ is foundational. We are, in fact, looking at one overview of the work as a whole; for it is, indeed, a whole and not
and the same mystery from two different perspectives. Hence, these just seven questions in juxtaposition. This general statement is
two volumes can be seen as integrally related in terms of their followed by a more detailed account of the argument of the individu­
content. However, we can begin from either perspective in the al questions, with indications of its relation to other writings of
systematic working out of the Christian mystery once the historical Bonaventure where this seemed appropriate.
revelation has been communicated to us. Bonaventure himself first In preparing .this first complete English translation, we ha,,;e
composed the Questions on the Knowledge of Christ, and then the consulted other recent translations into Spanish, French, and
Questions on the Trinity. Italian. This consultation has been both helpful and enriching for
The desire to make this translation as usable as possible has led the translator. It is our hope that it has also helped to avoid any
to the decision to treat the translation and its introduction in such major mistakes in our own work.
a way that this volume can be used independently of other works in
the series of which it is a part. This has led to a lengthy introduc­ Zachary Hayes, 0. F. M., D. Th.
tion which attempts to do a number of things. Catholic Theological Union
First, we have broadly outlined the historical circumstances that Chicago, Illinois
led to a significant change in theological locale and style for the March, 1991
period in which Bonaventure worked and which, among other
things, created the specific form in which this particular theological
discussion is cast. Since the forms of the question and disputation are
crucial to an intelligent reading of the present text, we have offered
some reflections on the historical origin of these forms.
But the christological question itself has a history. Therefore, we
felt it useful to sketch in broad strokes the nature of the problem as
a theological issue and at least some of the important moments in
the historical development of this problem. Here we have given
particular emphasis to the Augustinian background of the formula­
tion and to the level of awareness reached in discussing the issue by
Bonaventure's theological mentor, Alexander of Hales. Between
these, we have pointed out some of the important moments along
the way.
Against this background, we have situated a sketch of Bonaven­
ture's own life and career as a theologian and a brief account of the
place of these particular Questions in the context of his other writ­
ings. Our intent was to provide a summary statement that would
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER ONE
Historical Context
The development of historical consciousness in the 'modern
Western world has led ever more dearly to the awareness that theol­
Og{ is always situated in particular cultural contexts and interacts
with culture in a variety of ways. At times the relation between theol­
Og{ and culture is one of antagonism and rivalry. Theolog{ then
appears as a critic of the social order. At other times, the two seem
so intimately intertwined that they are scarcely distinguishable. Re­
ligion and theology then seem to provide the sacred underpinnings
of the social order. In yet other circumstances, theology and culture
have existed in a sort of symbiotic relationship of mutual criticism
and enrichment Whatever may be the particular relationship in a
specific instance, the implication is inescapable. Theology has never
existed in a cultural vacuum. It has always been deeply conditioned
by the cultural circumstances in which it developed. From this it
becomes clear that to understand a particular style of theology more
deeply means to come to a fuller understanding of its relationship
with the cultural situation in which it was developed.
As the student of Western thought acquires a more detailed
knowledge of the problems and viewpoints of the great medieval
theologians and philosophers, it becomes difficult to maintain the
common image of the High Middle Ages as a time of almost self-evi•
dent harmony between faith and reason. In fact, it seems clear that
the period from the middle of the twelfth to the end of the thir­
teenth century was a time of cultural and intellectual upheaval that
seriously unsettled the Christian West.
For our purposes in this introduction, it is sufficient to single out
three factors of the socio-cultural context that were of particular
importance in shaping the intellectual world of thirteenth-century
theology. The first was the development of larger cities. The second