Search

42 verses for “Bonaventure”

Breviloquium · Part 7 7:13BonaventureHERE ENDS THE BREVILOQUIUM OF BROTHER BONAVENTURE.Breviloquium · Prooemium 1:2BonaventureOF SAINT BONAVENTURE Collationes de Decem Praeceptis · Collation 7 2:19BonaventureSAINT BONAVENTURE Collationes de Septem Donis · Collation 9 2:7BonaventureSAINT BONAVENTURE Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 1 1:1BonaventureCollation 1 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 10 1:1BonaventureCollation 10 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 11 1:1BonaventureCollation 11 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 12 1:1BonaventureCollation 12 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 13 1:1BonaventureCollation 13 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 14 1:1BonaventureCollation 14 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 15 1:1BonaventureCollation 15 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 16 1:1BonaventureCollation 16 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 17 1:1BonaventureCollation 17 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 18 1:1BonaventureCollation 18 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 19 1:1BonaventureCollation 19 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 2 1:1BonaventureCollation 2 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 20 1:1BonaventureCollation 20 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 21 1:1BonaventureCollation 21 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 22 1:1BonaventureCollation 22 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 23 1:1BonaventureCollation 23 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 3 1:1BonaventureCollation 3 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 4 1:1BonaventureCollation 4 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 5 1:1BonaventureCollation 5 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 6 1:1BonaventureCollation 6 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 7 1:1BonaventureCollation 7 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 8 1:1BonaventureCollation 8 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Collations on the Hexaemeron · Collation 9 1:1BonaventureCollation 9 - Collations on the Hexaemeron — Bonaventure Commentary on Ecclesiastes · Scholion 1:2BonaventureI. In composing this Commentary, St. Bonaventure, besides the interlinear and ordinary Gloss (which is for the most part derived from the Commentary of St. Jerome on Ecclesiastes), made use both of the aforementioned exposition of Jerome himself and of the other by Hugh of St. Victor, which, at least in the editions, does not extend beyond chapter 4, verse 7 of Ecclesiastes. From Hugh he borrowed that principal division of threefold vanity, namely of mutability, of iniquity, of penalty. That he also knew the Mystical Exposition on Ecclesiastes of Salonius, Bishop of Vienne (see Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. LIII, col. 993 ff.), who flourished around 453, a certain passage cited by us seems to suggest, unless perhaps he received that opinion as reported by other authors. Nor have we found certain evidence that he made use of the Commentaries of Alcuin and Rupert, Abbot of Toul, who in expounding Ecclesiastes closely follow Jerome.Commentary on Ecclesiastes · Scholion 1:10BonaventureOF SAINT BONAVENTURE Commentary on Ephesians · SSEph 6:79Thomas AquinasIn the field of spiritual exegesis Thomas Aquinas exhibits a marked restraint when compared to interpreters such as Richard of St. Victor or Stephen Langton, and, to a less extent, in comparison with Hugh of St. Cher or St. Bonaventure. Conformable to custom, he differentiated plainly between the literal and spiritual when he was going to offer more than a literal exegesis of the text. Normally, these two were designated as “literal” and “mystical” respectively—although it may be closer to his mind to translate his mystice by “symbolically.” He was careful not to skip over the things which the words of Scripture immediately designate, the spiritual can only be constructed on a sound knowledge of the literal sense. Yet he had no guides as to when these things were actually used by God to signify some further reality. A result was that he he frequently followed patristic sources and saw spiritual meanings in minor events.Commentary on Ephesians · SSEph 6:88Thomas AquinasThe dialectical cast of St. Thomas’ interpretation of the literal sense runs through every page. Syllogisms are disclosed in St. Paul and the correct sequence of thoughts is commended in St. John. * The chief ingredient of this approach to the Bible is the omnipresent divisions and subdivisions. Introduced by Hugh St. Cher, the method was utilized by both St. Albert and St. Bonaventure as well as St. Thomas. In the twelfth century, commentaries were content to take one verse at a time and attempt to exhaust its literal and spiritual significance; the students did not get a feel for the book as a whole. The dialectical procedure enabled Aquinas to define the main theme of a book and then relate each of its parts to this unifying center. The divisions could become as arbitrary as allegorism had been, but modern scholarship renders justice to many of Thomas’precisions. *Commentary on John 200:6Thomas AquinasThe word nature in English today is used in all sorts of loose ways. “Nature lovers” think of the great outdoors; “naturalists” usually think of plants and animals, or else of the great variety of “health foods” that help to make one strong physically. Literary people often use the term “nature” in the sense of “the universe out there,” a meaning more or less synonymous with that of the Greek word kosmos (from which we get our English word “cosmetics”). Intellectuals with a deeper understanding of medicine, sociology, or even law, think of nature as a “normal course of events,” or “behavior that is found among many,” or “laws of behavior” acceptable in civilized society and codifiable. While all these meanings (and many others) can be traced back to ancient usage, none of them focuses fully on the precise philosophical meaning the word had for the ancient Greeks and Latins and on through the Middle Ages as well. Renaissance humanists often distinguished between Nature with a capital N, meaning God acting in the universe ( Natura naturans ), and nature with a small n, meaning the created universe as an instrument of God ( natura naturata ). This distinction was also utilized by St. Thomas, St. Bonaventure, and many philosophers of the thirteenth century. Even in that context, a certain dynamic character was thought to belong to the universe as God created it. That is to say, in most of these usages the implication is that there is some innate source within things for their “normal,” “usual,” “codifiable” behavior. In all of these usages derived from antiquity, there is implied an inner dynamism that defies our every attempt to turn them into machines.Questions 1-68 · Question 25 2:8Thomas AquinasHence, according to others, indulgences have precisely the efficacy claimed for them, provided that he who grants them have the authority, that the recipient have charity, and that, as regards the cause, there be piety which includes the honor of God and the profit of our neighbor. Nor in this view have we "too great a market of the Divine mercy" [*St. Bonaventure, Sent. iv, D, 20], as some maintain, nor again does it derogate from Divine justice, for no punishment is remitted, but the punishment of one is imputed to another.Questions 1-68 · Question 42 2:19Thomas AquinasHence others [*St. Bonaventure, Sent. iv, D, 26] say that matrimony, inasmuch as it is contracted in the faith of Christ, is able to confer the grace which enables us to do those works which are required in matrimony. and this is more probable, since wherever God gives the faculty to do a thing, He gives also the helps whereby man is enabled to make becoming use of that faculty; thus it is clear that to all the soul's powers there correspond bodily members by which they can proceed to act. Therefore, since in matrimony man receives by Divine institution the faculty to use his wife for the begetting of children, he also receives the grace without which he cannot becomingly do so; just as we have said of the sacrament of orders (Q[35], A[1]). And thus this grace which is given is the last thing contained in this sacrament.TREATISE ON THE INCARNATION · Question 12 1:22Thomas AquinasBut as regards the habit of knowledge, it is plain that His habit of infused knowledge did not increase, since from the beginning He had perfect infused knowledge of all things; and still less could His beatific knowledge increase; while in the FP, Q[14], A[15], we have already said that His Divine knowledge could not increase. Therefore, if in the soul of Christ there was no habit of acquired knowledge, beyond the habit of infused knowledge, as appears to some [*Blessed Albert the Great, Alexander of Hales, St. Bonaventure], and sometime appeared to me (Sent. iii, D, xiv), no knowledge in Christ increased in essence, but merely by experience, i.e. by comparing the infused intelligible species with phantasms. And in this way they maintain that Christ's knowledge grew in experience, e.g. by comparing the infused intelligible species with what He received through the senses for the first time. But because it seems unfitting that any natural intelligible action should be wanting to Christ, and because to extract intelligible species from phantasms is a natural action of man's active intellect, it seems becoming to place even this action in Christ. And it follows from this that in the soul of Christ there was a habit of knowledge which could increase by this abstraction of species; inasmuch as the active intellect, after abstracting the first intelligible species from phantasms, could abstract others, and others again.TREATISE ON THE INCARNATION · Question 26 2:7Thomas AquinasThe question is answered thus: St. Thomas as a Doctor of the Church and in matters which were not then "de fide," is a witness to the expression of the faith of his time. Hence his line of argument coincides with, because it follows, that of St. Bernard, Peter Lombard, Alexander of Hales, Albert the Great, St. Bonaventure. It was not likely that St. Thomas would differ from the great masters of his time, who failed to understand that the grace of redemption might at the same time be one of preservation and prevention. Nor is it likely that St. Thomas had any reliable information about the movement* in progress at that time towards a belief in the Immaculate Conception. [*Principally in England, where, owing to the influence of St. Anselm (1109), the doctrine was maintained by Eadmer (1137). Nicolas of St. Albans (1175), Osbert of Clare (1170), Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln (1253), William of Ware (1300), who was the master of Duns Scotus (1308)]. No doubt he knew something of it, but the names of its promoters would have weighed little with him as against those of Bernard, Albert, Peter, Alexander, and Bonaventure. And it must not be forgotten that among those who upheld the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, not a few ascribed the privilege as being absolute and not one of preservation and Redemption. Hence it is that St. Thomas insists on two things: (1) that the Mother of God was redeemed, and (2) that the grace of her sanctification was a grace of preservation. And, be it remarked in conclusion, these two points, so much insisted on by St. Thomas, are at the very basis of the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.TREATISE ON THE RESURRECTION · Question 74 3:23Thomas AquinasI answer that, Some [*St. Bonaventure, Sentent. iv, D, 47, A[2], Q[3]] say that the fire in question will rise to the summit of the space containing the four elements: so that the elements would be entirely cleansed both from the stain of sin by which also the higher parts of the elements were infected (as instanced by the smoke of idolatry which stained the higher regions), and again from corruption, since the elements are corruptible in all their parts. But this opinion is opposed to the authority of Scripture, because it is written ( 2 Pet. 3:7 ) that those heavens are "kept in store unto fire," which were cleansed by water; and Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xx, 18) that "the same world which perished in the deluge is reserved unto fire." Now it is clear that the waters of the deluge did not rise to the summit of the space occupied by the elements, but only 15 cubits above the mountain tops; and moreover it is known that vapors or any smoke whatever rising from the earth cannot pierce the entire sphere of fire so as to reach its summit; and so the stain of sin did not reach the aforesaid space. Nor can the elements be cleansed from corruptibility by the removal of something that might be consumed by fire: whereas it will be possible for the impurities of the elements arising from their mingling together to be consumed by fire. And these impurities are chiefly round about the earth as far as the middle of the air: wherefore the fire of the final conflagration will cleanse up to that point, since the waters of the deluge rose to a height which can be approximately calculated from the height of the mountains which they surpassed in a fixed measure.TREATISE ON THE SACRAMENTS · Question 72 1:23Thomas AquinasReply to Objection 1: Concerning the institution of this sacrament there are three opinions. Some (Alexander of Hales, Summa Theol. P. IV, Q. IX; St. Bonaventure, Sent. iv, D, 7) have maintained that this sacrament was instituted neither by Christ, nor by the apostles; but later in the course of time by one of the councils. Others (Pierre de Tarentaise, Sent. iv, D, 7) held that it was instituted by the apostles. But this cannot be admitted; since the institution of a new sacrament belongs to the power of excellence, which belongs to Christ alone.TREATISE ON THE SACRAMENTS · Question 75 4:16Thomas AquinasReply to Objection 1: Some [*Cf. Albert the Great, Sent. iv, D, 11; St. Bonaventure, Sent., iv, D, 11] do not grant simply that there is a mid-time between every two instants. For they say that this is true of two instants referring to the same movement, but not if they refer to different things. Hence between the instant that marks the close of rest, and another which marks the beginning of movement, there is no mid-time. But in this they are mistaken, because the unity of time and of instant, or even their plurality, is not taken according to movements of any sort, but according to the first movement of the heavens, which is the measure of all movement and rest.Treatise on The Theological Virtues · Question 5 1:13Thomas AquinasIt follows then, that the absence of faith in them could only be explained by their being altogether ignorant of the object of faith. And if man and the angels were created in a purely natural state, as some [*St. Bonaventure, Sent. ii, D, 29] hold, perhaps one might hold that there was no faith in the angels before their confirmation in grace, or in man before sin, because the knowledge of faith surpasses not only a man's but even an angel's natural knowledge about God.July 14:2The Roman MartyrologyAt Lyon, the holy Confessor Bonaventure of the Order of Friars Minors, Cardinal Bishop of Albano, Doctor of the Church, very famous for his teaching and the holiness of his life, [in the year 1279.]October 4:2The Roman MartyrologyAt Assisi, in Umbria, the holy Confessor Francis, (1182-1226,) Founder of the Order of Friars Minor, whose life, full of holiness and miracles, hath been written by St. Bonaventure.