Another central theme of Bonaventure’s trinitarian theology is the role of Jesus as the center of all creation and the role of the Holy Spirit in all of creation.85In the first book of the Sentences, distinctiones i–xv, Peter Lombard discussed the Trinity ad intra. However, in distinctiones xv–xviii, he focused on the missio and manifestatio of the Logos and the Spirit ad extra.86In other words, Bonaventure moves from the Trinity ad intrato the Trinity ad extra. Included in the one divine action ad extraare three realities: the creation of the entire universe, the sending and manifesting of the Logos (incarnation), and the sending and mani-festation of the Spirit. Both Bonaventure and Scotus stress the radical interconnection of these three actiones ad extra. In the Franciscan the-ological tradition, the theology of creation cannot be developed apart from the theology of incarnation and the sending of the Spirit.
Peter Lombard, Bonaventure, and Scotus defer a detailed analysis of the incarnational actio ad extra (the sending of the Logos) to Liber ii of the Sentences. Consequently, the sending of the Spirit receives considerable attention in distinctiones xv–xviii. Bonaventure affirms:
Missio Filii et Spiritus sancti sunt indivisae(“The mission of the Son and that of the Spirit are undivided”).87 When creation is connected to a theology of these two sendings, the incarnation cannot be seen as
“caused” or “motivated” by the sin of Adam.
Contemporary Western theologians have begun to acknowledge the tremendous contribution of Bonaventure, namely J ¨urgen Moltmann, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Karl Barth, Leonardo Boff, Catherine Mowry LaCugna, Karl Rahner, Anselm Min, Anne Hunt, Ted Peters, Thomas Torrance, Elizabeth Johnson, and Raimon Panikkar. Too often, how-ever, these authors give only a limited treatment of Bonaventure’s trinitarian vision. Other theologians such as Zachary Hayes, Konrad Fischer, Olegario Gonz ´alez, Robert Karris, Johannes Freyer, A. Van Si
Nguyen, Blanco Chavero, Tito Szab ´o, and Giovanni Iammarrone have made the study of Bonaventure’s unique trinitarian theology a contem-porary imperative.
Notes
1. Bonaventure, Commentarium in libros sententiarum, in S. Bonaventu-rae opera omnia, i–iv (Quarrachi: Typographia Collegii S. BonaventuBonaventu-rae, 1882–89), cited henceforth as Commentarium.
2. From 1248 to 1254, Bonaventure taught at the Franciscan house of studies in Paris, the Convent des Cordeliers. In 1254 he became regent-master at the University of Paris.
3. Unlike other theologians of the thirteenth century, Bonaventure never wrote a volume or a long essay on De Deo Uno (“On the One God”).
In his Summa theologiae, Thomas Aquinas devotes about a hundred pages to De Deo Uno (questions 2–26). Only with question 27 does he begin his elaboration of De Deo Trino (“On the Trine God”). See Summa theologiaei, qq. 2–27; Eng. trans., Blackfriars edn. (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1966–80).
4. Bonaventure, Quaestiones disputatae de mysterio trinitatis, in Opera omnia, v (Quarrachi: Typographia Collegii S. Bonaventurae, 1891), 45–
115; trans. Zachary Hayes as Disputed Questions on the Mystery of the Trinity(St. Bonaventure, ny: Franciscan Institute, 1979).
5. Bonaventure, Disputed Questions, 26.
6. Bonaventure, Breviloquium, in Opera omnia, v, 199–313.
7. Jacques Guy Bougerol, Introduction `a l’ ´etude de Saint Bonaventure (Tournai: Descl ´ee, 1961); trans. Jos ´e de Vinck as Introduction to the Works of Bonaventure(Paterson, nj: St. Anthony’s Guild Press, 1964), 123.
8. Bonaventure, Itinerarium mentis in Deum, in Opera omnia, v, 297–313.
9. Bonaventure, Itinerarium, c. 6, 1.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid., c. 6, 2.
12. Ibid.
13. Bonaventure, Collationes in Hexa ¨emeron, in Opera omnia, v, 327–449.
14. Bougerol, Introduction, 19.
15. The faculty of arts at the University of Paris had by this time become a stronghold of “Latin Averr ¨oism.” For the Sermones de Trinitate, see Bonaventure, Disputed Questions, 26.
16. Maurice de Wulf, Histoire de la philosophie m ´edi ´evale, i–iii (Louvain: Publications universitaires, 1934, 1936, 1947); Fernand van Steenberghen, La philosophie au xiii si `ecle (Louvain: Publications universitaires, 1966) and Introduction `a l’ ´etude de la philosophie m ´edi ´evale(Louvain: Publications universitaires, 1974).
17. Antonie Vos, The Philosophy of John Duns Scotus (Edinburgh Uni-versity Press, 2006), 542. The Dutch De Rijk School under Cornelia Johanna de Vogel (1905–1986) and Lambertus Marie de Rijk (b. 1924)
has developed a new approach to historical hermeneutics during the scholastic period.
18. Vos, Philosophy of John Duns Scotus, 5. For a Bonaventure lexicon, see Bougerol, Introduction, 55–56. See also Mary Beth Ingham, “Letting Scotus Speak for Himself,” Medieval Philosophy and Theology, 10:2 (2001), 173–216, and Th ´eodore de R ´egnon, ´Etudes de th ´eologie positive sur la sainte Trinit ´e, 4 vols. (Paris: Victor Retaux et Fils, 1892–98).
19. Olegario Gonz ´alez de Cardedal, Misterio trinitario y existencia humana: estudio hist ´orico teol ´ogico en torno a san Buenaventura (Madrid: Ediciones Rialp, 1966).
20. Two other passages in Bonaventure focus on God’s being and our knowl-edge of God: Commentarium, L. 1, d. 8, p. 1, a. 1, q. 2, conclusio; and Quaestiones disputatae, q. 1, a. 1, conclusio (in these references, L.
= lectio, d. = distinctio, p. = pars, a. = ad, q. = quaestio). In both passages, Bonaventure argues that God is readily known by men and women when they use their faculties of intellect and will correctly.
21. Ibid., L. 1, d. 2, a. 1, q. 1, respondeo.
22. While Bonaventure categorically states that every human person can intellectually conclude that there is a God, Thomas Aquinas main-tains both the possibility and the limits of the human intellect vis- `a-vis the knowledge of God. See John Wippel, The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas(Washington, dc: Catholic University of America Press, 2000), 501–75.
23. Commentarium, L. 1, d. 2, a. 1, q. 1, respondeo; L. 1, d. 2, a. 1, q. 2. The quaestiois only two pages in length.
24. Bonaventure’s formal treatment of the Trinity begins in Commentar-ium, on p. 53 and ends on p. 859. See Quaestiones disputatae, q. 1, a. 1, respondeoad 9; Disputed Questions, 121–37.
25. Bonaventure, Quaestiones disputatae, q. 1, a. 1, respondeo ad 9; Dis-puted Questions, 121–37.
26. Cf. John P. Dourley, “The Relationship between Knowledge of God and Knowledge of the Trinity in Bonaventure’s De mysterio Trinitatis,”
San Bonaventura maestro di vita francescana e di sapienza cristiana, ii (Rome: Pontificia Facolt `a Teologica “San Bonaventura,” 1976), 41–48.
27. See R. H. Rouse and M. A. Rouse, “The Verbal Concordance of the Scriptures,” Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum, 44 (1974), 5–30. In this article the authors convincingly show that there was no full-fledged biblical concordance until the end of the thirteenth century.
28. See Dominic Monti, “Bonaventure’s Use of ‘The Divine Word’ in Aca-demic Theology,” in Michael Cusato and Edward Coughlin, eds., That Others may Know and Love(St. Bonaventure, ny: Franciscan Institute, 1997), 65–88; Thomas Reist, Saint Bonaventure as a Biblical Commen-tator(Lanham, md: University Press of America, 1985); Hans-Joseph Klauck, “Theorie der Exegese bei Bonaventura,” S. Bonaventura 1274–
1974, iv: Theologica (Grottaferrata: Collegio S. Bonaventura, 1974), 71–128; Robert Karris, “Introduction,” in The Works of Bonaventure:
Commentary on the Gospel of Luke(St. Bonaventure, ny: Franciscan Institute, 2001), vi–xxxvii; Jacques Guy Bougerol, “Doctor Scripturae
Evangelicae,” in Introduction to the Works of Bonaventure, 85–98;
Hans Mercker, Schriftauslegung als Weltauslegung: Untersuchungen zur Stellung der Schrift in der Theologie Bonaventuras(Munich: Ferdi-nand Sch ¨oningh, 1971).
29. Bonaventure, Breviloquium, Prologus, n. 6. Eng. trans. by Dominic Monti as cited in Timothy Johnson’s Bonaventure: Mystic of God’s Word(Hyde Park, ny: New City Press, 1999), 43.
30. Bonaventure, Breviloquium, Prologus, n. 4.
31. Bonaventure, Collationes in Hexa ¨emeron, n. 7; trans. Karris, in Com-mentary on the Gospel of Luke, xxi.
32. See Andreas Speer, “Bonaventure and the Question of Medieval Philos-ophy,” Medieval Philosophy and Theology, 6:1 (1997), 26–29.
33. Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 3, d. 3, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1.
34. Bonaventure, Breviloquium, p. 3, c. 8. See also his accolades of Augus-tine in Commentarium, L. 3, d. 38, a. 1, q. 4, and L. 4, d. 44, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1.
35. Bonaventure, however, was very explicit on his non-acceptance of the Platonic positions of Avicenna and Avicebron.
36. Hayes, “Bonaventure: Mystery of the Triune God,” in K. Osborne, ed., The History of Franciscan Theology(St. Bonaventure, ny: Franciscan Institute, 2007), 43.
37. J. de Ghellinck, Le mouvement th ´eologique du 12 si `ecle (Louvain: Pub-lications universitaires, 1948), 233.
38. Latin citations of these Greek Fathers are found in the writings of Peter Lombard, Gratian, and Walfrid Strabo.
39. For a reference to the importance of Dionysius, see Gonz ´alez, Misterio trinitario, 197–211.
40. Paul G. Kuntz, “The Hierarchical Vision of St. Bonaventure,” San Bonaventura maestro di vita francescana e di sapienza cristiana, ii (Rome: Pontificia Facolt `a Teologica “San Bonaventura,” 1976), 233–48.
41. Hexa ¨emeron, Collatio 1, ad 17.
42. Ibid., Collatio 3, ad 2.
43. See Gonz ´alez, Misterio trinitario, 212–33.
44. John F. Quinn, The Historical Constitution of St. Bonaventure’s Phi-losophy(Toronto: Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1973), 881–82; Scott Matthews, “Arguments, Texts and Contexts: Anselm’s Argument and the Friars,” Medieval Philosophy and Theology, 8:1 (1999), 84; Bonaven-ture, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 8, a. 1, q. 2, conclusio; Quaestiones dis-putatae, q. a. 1, conclusio and solutio, 1, 1, 3. The issue is also treated in the Itinerarium, cc. 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7. See Matthews, “Arguments, Texts and Contexts,” 84–93, 102–03.
45. On this radical change regarding Richard’s sources, see Gonz ´alez, Mis-terio trinitario.
46. Bonaventure, Disputed Questions, 21–23, at 22.
47. Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 2, praelocutio.
48. Ibid., L. 2, d. 23, a. 2, q. 3. The Summa alexandrina was a work in which Alexander played a leading role. Other major authors of this work were John de la Rochelle and Bonaventure.
49. Alexander, “De verbo incarnato,” Quaestiones disputatae antequam esset frater, q. 9 (Quarrachi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1960), i, 80–
141. Cf. Johannes Freyer, Homo viator: Der Mensch im Lichte der Heils-geschichte. Eine theologische Anthropologie aus franziskaner Perspec-tive(Kevelaer: Butzon und Bercker, 2001), 79–81.
50. Bonaventure, Questiones disputatae, q. 1, a. 1, conclusio; Disputed Questions, 115.
51. Ibid.
52. Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 2, a. 1, q. 2.
53. Both Aristotle and Augustine accepted human intellect and will as cor-relative. Thomas Aquinas stressed the intellect over the will.
54. Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. I, d. 2, a. 1, q. 2, respondeo.
55. Ibid., L. 1, d. 28, a. 1, titulus.
56. Ibid., q. 1, titulus.
57. Ibid., respondeo, final paragraph.
58. Cf. Hayes, “Bonaventure: Mystery of the Triune God,” 57. In this sec-tion Hayes speaks of the internal emanasec-tions which are all positive.
59. Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 28, a. 1, q. 1, respondeo, final paragraph.
60. Hayes, “Bonaventure: Mystery of the Triune God,” 75. See Bonaventure, Quaestiones disputatae, q. 8, ad 7.
61. Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 28, a. 1, q. 1.
62. Ibid., L. 1, d. 28, a. 1, q. 2.
69. Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 39, a. 1, q. 1, respondeo.
70. Ibid., in respondeo.
71. John Damascene, Liber I De fide orthodoxa: Versions of Burgundio and Cornabus, ed. Eligius M. Buytaert (St. Bonaventure, ny: Franciscan Institute, 1955), c. 9; Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 43, a. 1, q. 2, respondeo. He repeats the reference to pelagus in d. 45, a. 2, q. 1, respondeo.
72. For the relationship of Aquinas to Augustine, see Anselm Min, Paths to the Triune God: An Encounter Between Aquinas and Recent Theologies (University of Notre Dame Press, 2005), 125, 126, 170, 171, 174. See also Anne Hunt, Trinity: Nexus of the Mysteries of Christian Faith (Maryknoll, ny: Orbis, 2005), 20–23.
73. See Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 45, a. 1, q. 1; see also L. 1, d. 45, a. 1, q. 2, respondeo.
74. Ibid., L. 1, d. 45, a. 2, q. 1, respondeo.
75. Ibid., L. 1, d. 45, a. 2, q. 2, respondeo. The generation of the Son involves both ratio and voluntas; see ibid., L. 1, d. 6, a. 1, qq. 1–3.
76. Hayes, “Bonaventure: Mystery of the Triune God,” 49, citing Quaes-tiones disputatae, q. 1, a. 2, 131.
77. Ibid., citing Bonaventure, Hexa ¨emeron, Collatio 1, 1.
78. Bonaventure, Hexa ¨emeron, Collatio 8, ad 9: “Isti sunt duae radices fidei.”
79. See, for example, Bonaventure, Commentarium, L. 1, d. 21, a. 1, q. 2;
also L. 1, d. 23, a. 1, qq. 2 and 3.
80. See Aristotle, Categoriae, c. 5.
81. ´Etienne Gilson’s The Philosophy of St. Bonaventure, trans. Illtyd Trethowan and Frank Sheed (Paterson, nj: St. Anthony’s Guild Press, 1965), has tended to dominate the contemporary interpretation of Bonaventure, an interpretation which is now dated.
82. Bonaventure, Breviloquium, 2, 12.
83. See the above section on “Bonaventure’s understanding of God.”
84. Bonaventure, Itinerarium, c. 7, n. 5.
85. Bonaventure, Commentary, L. 1, dd. xv–xviii.
86. I have analyzed this same distinction on the basis of John Duns Scotus in “A Scotistic Foundation for Christian Spirituality,” in M. Cusato and J. F. Godet-Calogeras, eds., Vita evangelica (St. Bonaventure, ny:
Franciscan Institute, 2006), 363–405.
87. Bonaventure, Commentary, L. 1, d. 15, a. 1, q. 2.
Further reading
Bougerol, Jacques Guy, Introduction to the Works of Bonaventure, trans. Jos ´e de Vinck (Paterson, nj: St. Anthony’s Guild Press, 1964).
Freyer, Johannes, Homo viator: Der Mensch im Lichte der Heilsgeschite. Eine theologische Anthropologie aus franziskanischer Perspective (Kevelaer:
Butzon und Bercker, 2001).
Gilson, ´Etienne, The Philosophy of St. Bonaventure, trans. Illtyd Trethowan and Frank Sheed (Paterson, nj: St. Anthony’s Guild Press, 1965).
Gonz ´alez de Cardedal, Olegario, Misterio trinitario y existencia humana: studio hist ´orico teol ´ogico en torno a san Buenaventura(Madrid: Ediciones Rialp, 1966).
Hayes, Zachary, “Bonaventure: Mystery of the Triune God,” in K. Osborne, ed., The History of Franciscan Theology (St. Bonaventure, ny: Franciscan Institute, 2007), 39–125.
Hellmann, Wayne, Divine and Created Order in Bonaventure’s Theology (St. Bonaventure, ny: Franciscan Institute, 2001).
Osborne, Kenan, A Theology of the Church for the New Millennium: A Francis-can Approach(Leiden: Brill, 2009).
“Trinitarian Doctrine: 500 to 1500 ad,” in Joseph R. Strayer, ed., Dictionary of the Middle Ages(New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1989).