The Father
BONAVENTURE'S TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
IV. THE FATHER
"It is proper to the Father to be innascible or unbegotten; to be the principle that proceeds from no other principle; to be Father as such." Brevil. 1, 3 (V, 212).
Characteristic of Bonayenture's doctrine-of the-trinity is the peculiar emphasis given to the first person whose personal property is expressed in the title Father. Here it becomes more apparent how the concept of primacy is applied to the inner-divine life. The basis of the emanation of the created world is found in the two innerdivine emanations from which arise the Son and the Spirit; but the basis of the inner-divine emanations lies in the innascibility of the Father in whom the fontal fullness of the Godhead is focused in a unique way. Thus, the Father receives an emphasis that would be foreign to the thought of either Augustine or Aquinas, and is similar to the theology of the classical Greek Fathers. It is here that we find the pivotal point of Bonayenture's entire metaphysics of exitus and reditus, for it is the Father who is source and goal of all created reality; in Him is found ultimately the status in which the entire creative process finds its fulfillment.48
To speak of the Father as innascible or unbegotten seems at first glance to be a purely negative way of defining the property of the first person; and so it had appeared to Aquinas. But in Bonaventure's view, innascibility is not a mere negation; for it involves both a negative and a positive aspect. Negatively, it affirms a lack of origin. But to exist as one who has no origin is to be first in an absolute sense, and to exist as first is the highest of all pertections.*®
Here again we encounter Bonaventure's concept of primacy. That person in God who is first is the fontal fullness; precisely as the person who is innascible, He is the richest source of all the immanent processions and the external productions.*°
If from revelation we know that God eternally generates a Son, then we know also that God as Father is the mystery of absolute
48 I Sent. d. 2, a.u., q. 2, ad 4 (1, 54). "In personis divinis est una persona, a qua sunt aliae et ad quam, et in illa est status originis, quia illa a nullo; et haec est persona patris."
49 J Sent. d. 27, p. 1, a.u., q. 2, ad 3 (I, 470). "...innascibilitas est privatio quae secundum rem est pertecta positio. Innascibilis enim dicitur Pater, quia non est ab alio; et non esse ab alio est esse primum, et primitas est nobilis positio...
Unde quia primum, ideo principium... ratio primitatis in aliquo genere est ratio principiandi... Pater principium totius divinitatis, quia a nullo."
50 I Sent. d. 27, p. 1, a.un., q. 2, ad 3 (I, 470) and Brevi/. 1, 3 (V, 212). That we are here dealing with a particular concern of Bonaventure is reflected not only in the content but also in the length of the treatment given to the question in the Sentence Commentary.
INTRODUCTION
origin and is therefore innascible, since there is nothing prior to Him.*! It appears, then, that we come to know the Father by the relation of origin. But if generation is the act of a person who begets, is that person constituted as person by the act of generation ? Or is that person constituted in his personal property prior to the act of generation >? For Bonaventure, the act of generation is logically prior to paternity, though in reality paternity and generation are identical.54 Viewed from the negative perspective (innascibility), the Father can be said to be constituted in His personal property prior to the act of generation, though this negative dimension is not adequate for a full understanding of the Father. Corresponding to the bipolar concept of the first person described above, we must go beyond the negative to the complementary positive which would lead to the conclusion that the Father is constituted as Father in the full sense in the act of generation: "Ideo Pater, quia generat."
The constitution of the Father, therefore, is understood in a less full and in a fuller sense corresponding to the negative pole of innascibility and the positive pole of fecundity and primacy. This is the ultimate extension of the principle: '"'Principium quia primum."
Because the Father is innascible, He is absolutely first; and because He is absolutely first, He is the fecund source of others. Because He is innascible, He is known as Father, but He is Father in the fullest sense in the act of generation. The philosophical principle drawn from the Liber de causis has been fully exploited to single out the Father as dynamic source whose fecundity finds its first expression in the two inner-divine emanations.*® Paternity, then, is the notion that best designates the first person in His personal property; since it designates
Him in a positive sense 51 This bipolar concept of the Father may be seen as underlying much of the dialectical style of Bonaventure's thought. It is seen by E. Cousins as the real basis for the thought pattern described as the coincidence of opposites, and which Cousins traces throughout Bonaventure's system. In this instance, innascibility and fecundity are mutually complementary opposites which cannot be formally reduced to one or the other; the Father is generative power precisely because He is unbegotten. Cf. Cousins, ibid.
52 T Sent. d. 27, p. 1, a.un., q. 2 (I, 468) where the question is raised: "...utrum hypostasis Patris sive Pater ideo generat, quia Pater est, vel ideo sit pater, quia generat." Bonaventure's position favors the latter: "Pater, quia generat."
58 Loc cit., p. 469: "...prius est generare quam esse patrem secundum ordinem intelligendi."
54 I Sent. d. 27, p. 1, a.un., q. 1 (1, 468): "...omnino sunt eadem proprietas secundum rem." However, they signify in different ways at the logical level.
55 I Sent. d. 27, p. 1, a.un., q. 2, resp. (I, 469).
5° I Sent. d. 27, p. 1, a.u., q. 2, ad 3 (I, 471): "...primitas in prima persona est ratio producendi alias; et quia innascibilis dicit primitatem, hinc est quod dicit fontalem plenitudinem respectu productionis personalis."
BONAVENTURE'S TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
and_in.terms_of His relation to the Son, which is properto—the Father alone. Even though innascibility or primacy lies at the root of the personal character of the Father, it is in paternity that He finds the fullness of His personal reality.6? While innascibility is logically prior, paternity is that which distinguishes the Father fully from the other persons.58
Other notions that pertain to the Father are spirator and principle. Spirator designates Him, together with the Son, as the source of the Spirit while principle designates Him as the point of origin for the immanent processions and as ultimate source of all creation.
Thus, He is principle in a two-fold sense; namely, principle precisely as point of origin for another when no causal relationship is involved; and principle as cause with respect to created reality.
In this understanding of the proper characteristic of the Father, we see the ultimate basis of Bonaventure's. metaphysical system whereby all comes forth from the Father and returns to.the Father.5®
Not only does the gift of existence flow from the Father, but the gifts of knowledge and grace as well, coming to us from the loving
Father who loves us with the same act of love by which he loves the Son and the Spirit. The religious development of the human person is nothing other than the entrance of the created spirit into that lifegiving and beatifying movement of all reality from the Father and to the Father; and in this is rooted the spiritual journey of humankind.®°
V. THE SON
"Sacred Scripture says that God has an offspring whom He loves supremely, a Word coequal with Him 'whom
He has begotten in eternity and in whom He has disposed all things." Brevil. 1, 2 (V, 211).
As we have seen above, God is by His very nature a mystery a self-diffusive good. It is, therefore, the emanations from that primal goodness, focused most radically in the Father, that give rise to the two other divine persons. The emanations, consequently, are modes
57 I Sent. d. 29, dub. (I, 517); d. 28, q. 3, resp. (I, 501). "Proprietas personalis
Patris est paternitas, non innascibilitas."
58 I Sent. d. 28, dub. 1 (1, 504). "Distinctio... quasi inchoatur in innascibilitate... consummatur in paternitate."
59 Flex. 1, 17 (V, 332): "Per primariam veritatem omnes redire debent, ut, sicut Filius dixit: Exivi a Patre et veni in mundum; iterum relinquo mundum et vado ad Patrem; sic dicat quilibet: Domine, exivi a te summo, venio ad te summum et per te summum."
60 Qg. Dd. q. 8, ad 7 (V, 115).
INTRODUCTION
of production immanent to the life of God. To clarify more exactly the meaning of these productive emanations, Bonaventure reaches to the philosophy of Aristotle. There are three types of emanations, writes the Philosopher, fortuitous, natural, and voluntary.®! But since Bonaventure could see nothing fortuitous in God, he considers only the latter two and concludes that there are only two perfect modes of emanation which are found in God who is the supremely communicative good. Thus are derived the two terms per modum naturae and per modum voluntatis to designate the two inner-divine emanations.® Since generation is a mode of communicating reality from one being to another, and since God is supremely communicative and the source of all coummnication, generation ought to be present in Him in some way.® In searching for an analogue to clarify the meaning of generation in God, Bonaventure chooses that sort of generation by which one organic, living being emerges from another." The superiority of this type of production lies in the fact that here is found the most complete likeness between the producer and that which he produces. If we were to remove any type of imperfection from this example, it could serve as an analogy for speaking of God. We must say, for example, that in God the one who is produced is not separated from the producer and has no need to grow, but is produced totally in his full perfection. Nor is the one produced formed from a part of the divine substance. Rather, the one who produces communicates totally the substance of divinity to the one produced.*® When all imperfections are thus removed from the example, it is possible to say that God, as Father, generates a Son by communicating the whole of His substance to His offspring. The Son proceeds from the Father substantialiter et originaliter,®® in the sense that He has His source in the Father.
When generation is conceived in this way, the result is the existence of a total, personal similitude. Such likeness pertains to the essence of the concept of generation. Thus, while the analogy of generation provides the basis for designating the term of the ge- $1 Metaph. 6, t. 22 (Bekker 1032, a 12-13).
I Sent. d. 2, a.u., q. 4, fund. 2 (I, 56); Brevi/. 1, 3 (V, 211). sf lesent. d. Ova, qa i, resp. det).
Ibid. Other types of production which he rejects as less adequate are:
1) the manner of production whereby a ring produces an image in wax; 2) the production found in the inorganic realm, as a fire can be produced from wood
{sic generatur elementum ab elemento). These seem far less adequate than the type of production found at the level of living beings.
Selmoent. do Sya.loquz, respe(s tio) seoLbid,
BONAVENTURE'S TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
nerative act as Son, the element of perfect likeness leads to the use of the terms Word and Image."
As we have indicated above, Bonaventure's understanding of the generation of the Son is ultimately rooted in the Dionysian metaphysics of the good. This implies a certain type of necessity which is expressed in the term: emanation per modum naturae; for at this level, God is conceived in terms of a necessary self-communication which arises by reason of His very nature as the good. The term natural emanation expresses an understanding of generation different from that of Augustine and Aquinas, both of whom prefer to speak of this as an emanation by way of the intellect. Bonaventure also sees the intellect to be involved. But his guiding light is the concep: of primal, fecund goodness. The intellect precisely as intellect is not fecund; it is so only in as far as it springs from the fecund nature of God. Thus, the primary principle of the Son's generation is the divine nature; the natural fecundity of the neo-Platonic tradition dominates this understanding. The Augustinian tradition is integrated within this framework. That which flows from the divine essence naturally does so as a perfect self-expression of the Father; it is the Word of the intellect.®* The generation of the Son cannot be conceived in this way without raising the question of necessity and the relation of such generation to the divine will. Without doubt, there is a type of necessity involved here. But how is it to be conceived ? Of the many types of necessity that can be distinguished,®® only the necessity of immutability may be applied to God. It cannot be a necessity that Cr Sent d.p21..p2, as g. 1, fund. 5 A 48))sd) 277 p.2,a.0.9d.13,, resp.
(I, 488); I Sent. d. 31, p. 2, a. 1, q. 2, fund. 3 (I, 541). These names for the second person will be treated more fully below.
68 T Sent. d. 27, p. 2, a.u., q. 4, resp. (1, 496): "sic verbum intellectus a mente ptocedit per modum naturae per omnia ei simile et aequale."
69 JT Sent. d. 6, a.u., q. 1, resp. (I, 125 ff.); Og. Dd. q. 7, a. 1 & 2(V, 106-112).
The following types of necessity are distinguished: a) Disconveniens Violence.
One is moved against his nature from outside.
Coaction.
One is moved against his will from outside. b) Deficiens Indigence.
| The needs internal to a nature with respect to something external to it. E.g. food and drink as needs of human beings.
Inevitability. A necessity arising from some defect. E.g. death because of sin. c) Conventens Exigence.
Found in a principle that has a natural ordination to another. E.g. Matter has exigence for form.
Completion.
Also called "necessity of immutability." It is totally immanent to the nature involved.
INTRODUCTION
is imposed on Him from outside Himself; nor can it be any sort of divine need for a created being as the necessary condition for His existence as God. It can only be the inner necessity of the divine being to be always and completely self-sufficient and totally in conformity with itself.7? Because God is totally self-sufficient and completely true to His nature as the fecund good, He can and will communicate the totality of His substance without loosing His own identity. He who is fully sufficient in His own being, precisely for that reason can be fully self-communicative without threat to Himself.
In this sense, the necessity of immutability sheds further light on the generation of the Son.
Is there, then, no relation between this generation and the divine will > Since the divine nature and the divine will are really identical, that which pertains to the nature cannot be totally unrelated to the will. Just as there is a relation between the divine intellect and generation, so there is a relation between the divine will and generation.
The will can be viewed in two principal ways; either as the principal productive power, or as a will that accompanies and approves that which proceeds from the nature.7! The will as a productive power is reserved by Bonaventure for the analysis of the procession of the Holy Spirit. As regards the generation of the Son, since this proceeds from the nature as from its primary principle, the will accompanies the act of generation as approbans.'* Thus, Bonaventure can conclude that the Son is produced "ut omnino similis et per modum naturae, nihilominus ut dilectus;''" ee ee necessity of Peep ge ey ee creaturely categories of necessity and freedom are transcended in the dialectical unity of the necessity of immutability with the accompanying and approving will.
The Son, who proceeds from the Father as a Word, proceeds Bonaventure's thought both at the philosophical and at the theological levels. It is only exemplarity that can unlock the deepest meaning of created reality to the human mind, for it is only when we perceive the world in its symbolic nature as the objectification of the self-knowledge of God that we know it in its true reality. In the most basic sense, it is God in His own self-knowledge who is the exemplar of all else; but since God exists only as a trinity, exem70 I Sent, d. 6, a.u., q. 1, resp. (I, 126): "Quia ipse solus est qui sibi omnino sufficit et qui secum omnino convenit."
7 1 Sent. d. 6, a.u., q. 2, resp. (I, 127-128).
78 Tbid.: "...natura est primum principium, concomitante voluntate."
78 Tbid.
™ I Sent. d. 6, a.u., q. 3, fund. 1 (I, 129).
BONAVENTURE'S TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
plarity refers to the entire trinity. But in a special manner, the mystery of the trinity itself is reflected in the mystery of the second person.
As the full and total expression of God's primal fruitfulness, the Son is simultaneously the expression of all that God can be in relation to the finite. The question of exemplarity, therefore, is fundamental to any consideration of Bonaventure's treatment of the generation of the Son.
The question is raised first of all in the discussion of the generative act in God."> Here Bonaventure distinguishes two ways in which a procession of exemplarity can be understood. The. first way refers to the exemplatum in the proper sense; that is, it refers to a being which is truly other than and distinct from the original which it resembles. Understood in this way, it is the created world that is the exemplatum proceeding from God as from its exemplar.7® The second way refers to the very ratio exemplandi7" that is, to the very basis in God Himself for all exemplarity. This refers to the emanation of the Son who is the Word o ion in whom God disposes all things. Quoting St. Augustine,"® the Seraphic Doctor describes this as the divine art of all living things, whence flows the truth and beauty of all things;'® as the representation of God, the Word is also the model of all God does and can do. Such a mode of procession can only be a natural one and stands in contrast with the emanation of creatures whose production flows from a decree of the divine will. Thus, while at one level the whole of the trinity is exemplary with respect to the world, at another level the mystery of exemplarity is concentrated in a unique way in the Son. To speak of Him as exemplar designates not a mere appropriation but a property of the second person.®° The triune structure of God Himself is expressed in the Son.*! The relation between Father and Son is the first and primal relation, and the basis for all other relation. So it is that, as the Word is the inner self-expression of God, the created order is the external expression of the inner
Word. Whatever created reality exists possesses in its inner consti75 I Sent. d. 6, a.u., q. 1-3 (I, 124-130). The question of generation in God is treated in three questions: 1) Whether the generation of the Son is necessary;
2) Whether it proceeds from the will of God; and 3) Whether it proceeds in an exemplary way. The content of the first two questions has been analyzed above.
78 Loc. cit., q. 3, resp. (I, 129) "'...sic creatura procedit a Deo tanquam exemplatum ab exemplari, et sic exemplar importat causalitatem formalem respectu exemplati."
7 ibid.
78 De trin. VI, 10, n. 11 (PL 42, 931).
79 T Sent. d. 6, a.u., q. 3, resp. (I, 130); Brevi/. 1, 8(V, 216); Hex. 1, 13(V, 331).
80 T Sent. d. 6, a.u., q. 3, ad 4 (I, 130).
81 Hex. 9, 2 (V, 373); 3, 7 (V, 344):
INTRODUCTION
tution a relation to the uncreated Word; and since the Word, in turn, is the expression of the inner trinitarian structure of God, that which is created as an expression of the Word bears the imprint of the trinity.
Tue TITLES OF THE SECOND PERSON
"By the fact that He is Son, He is also Image, and for that very reason, He is Word." I Sent. d. 31, p. 2, a. 1, q. 2, tesp. (1, 54Z).
Scripture speaks of the second person not only as Son, but as Image and as Word as well. Bonaventure employs each of these titles to express particular aspects of the mystery of the second person. The Son is He who is conceived from the depths of divine goodness; Image designates Him precisely as self-likeness; but Word adds over and above this that He is the ratio exprimendi et manifestandi.®* Son. It is clear from Bonaventure's approach to the major trinitarian questions that the first title to be applied to the second person is the title of Son. This title names a person precisely in as far as he is begotten by another as a distinct person who is the perfect likeness of the generative source and who is intimately related to its source by love.® In this description can be seen the major elements involved in Bonaventure's analysis of generation. Central to that notion of generation is the likeness between the producer and the one produced.** Corresponding to the natural emanation is the idea that Brae a re te percent ine a as far as the term of the emanation is a hypostasis, itis called also a hypostatic likeness or a personal likeness.
Although the title Son is the first designation of the second person, and is in full harmony with the general framework of the theology developed by Bonaventure, yet it has decided limitations; eel Sent.od. 27, py2, a.0.,, q: 3, resp, 488);
Stal (Sentiod: 31; qu 2s auljuq.2,.resp.(l. 542) sn Grevisal wo (Veole).
84 I Sent. d. 27, p. 2, a.u., q. 1, ad 4 (1, 483). It is proper to the Father alone to beget a Word. While the Son and the Spirit know themselves, they do not beget a Word from themselves because they do not possess the /ecunditas ad generandum which is the Father's alone. It is necessary, therefore, to distinguish between the essential act of knowledge and the notional act. The first is common to all three persons; by virtue of it each knows himself and the other persons together with all created things. The second is that act by which the Father produces the Word from His fecund self-knowledge.
BONAVENTURE'S TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
for it designates the Son only in terms of His relation to the Father.® There is much more that can and must be said about the second person, and this will appear under Bonaventure's analysis of Image and Word. But even though the range of significance for this title is limited, it has the decided advantage of emphasizing the fact that the fruit of the first divine emanation is fully and totally personal being as is the Father. The term lends itself to further interpretation through the analysis of the modalities of love. While the Father is love that is totally active and communicative, and the Spirit is love that is totally receptive, the Son is that modality of love ab utroque permixtus ;°6 He is love as first receptive and then as responsive and communicative. From all eternity, therefore, the Son is one
-who is totally from the Fathet and totally sespansive to the Father, If we recall that the relation between Father and Son is the ontological basis of all other relations, it appears that created reality should bear the stamp of Sonship in the deepest core of its being. As the Son is from the Father, so all created reality is at root the pure reception of being. As the Son responds to the Father and in His response together with the Father breathes forth the Spirit, so all created reality is destined to return to the Father.8"? We see here the basis for the metaphysical structure of egressio — regressio which we have already referred to in speaking of the mystery of the Father.
The whole of creation is stamped by this law of Sonship — both in its over-arching structure and history as well as in particular creatures. It is above all in humanity that this ontological structure may be perceived, where we find created beings who are consciously present in time and who experience the polarity between origins and eschatology, exitus and reditus, in each present moment of their existence, the human person is called to the active, personal response of trust, love, and hope in the fulfillment of its being.
Thus, although from one perspective, the meaning of the title Son is limited in scope, from another perspective it has a remarkable theological depth which aids in clarifying more adequately the personal ground of the created world.
Image. The title Image adds yet another dimension of meaning to the understanding of the second person. In the Breviloquium,
Bonaventure writes that this term emphasizes the degree of like85 I Sent. d. 31, p. 2, a. 1, q. 2, resp. (1, 542): "Sed filius dicit solum respectum ad Patrem."
86 I Sent, d. 2, a.u., q. 4, resp. (I, 57); Ltn. 6, 2 (V, 311); UI Sent, d. 1, a. 2, q. 3, resp. (III, 29 ff.).
, 87 | Sent. d. 2, q. 2, ad 4 (I, 54): "In primo est status" is here applied specifically to the Father.
St. Bonaventure, Disputed Questions
INTRODUCTION
ness; it is expressed and conformed,®* and may be called a true imitation.
It means far more than a mere chance or superficial resemblance.
While the Son does not imitate the Father in the latter's strictly personal property of being without source, yet the imitation goes so far as to include the reflection of the Father's character as source of others.8® This is clarified in more detail in the Sentence Commentary. When the term Image is applied to God, SIE ceunieaneart ee eB ee oe Such an expression invotves two ele-— ments: 1) that it be One expression of one being; 2) that it be an expression in every respect. That being which is supremely one will find its highest self-expression not in a multiplicity of images, but in one only, which would be the most perfect reflecting likeness.
Unless such an image would reflect its source in every way possible, it would not express it in the highest degree.
The first element leads Bonaventure to conclude that only the Son is truly the Image of the Father, because only He proceeds from one person alone, while the Spirit proceeds from two persons, expressing both of them, and hence expressing neither of them in the —fullest degree.*!
The explanation of the second element is considerably fuller, and it is especially here that we see how the title Image has a wider range of significance than the title Son. While Son designates only the relation of the second person to the Father, Image designates the Son's relation to the Father ''a quo est" as well as His relation to the Spirit "'qui ex ipso est."® In terms of the first relation, the Son proceeds naturally from the Father as Word and Species and as a totally expressive likeness. The second relation involves the fact that the Son is coprinciple with the Father in the spiration of the Spirit. As Image, therefore, His-likeness approaches the very_
__ Property. of the Father_Himself. Though it does not push to the level ~ of innascibility in its negative side, it does include the reflection of the positive side; the Son, like the Father and together with the Father, is the active source of another.®? Thus it becomes clear why the term Image is applied only to the Son and not to the Spirit.
SeeBrevis lv o(Ver2l2)3 2D Tiaytel 90'T Sent. d. 31, p. 2, a. 1, q. 2, resp. (1,542); d. 3, p. 2, dub. 4 (I, 94); d. 27, p. 2, dub. 2 (I, 491).
91 Tbid.
82 Tbid.
93 Ibid:
BONAVENTURE'S TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
Word. Bonaventure frequently expresses a preference for the title Word, which appears to him to be the richest in meaning. In the Sentence Commentary, he contrasts it with the previous two titles briefly by saying that it expresses the relation of the second person both to the Father and to creation.® In his Commentary on John this is expressed far more elaborately:
...the term "word" expresses not only a relation to the one speaking, but to that which is expressed through the word, to the sound with which it clothes itself, and to the knowledge effected in others through the mediation of the word. And since here the Son of God is to be described not only in terms of His relation to the Father from whom He proceeds, but also in terms of His relation to the creatures which He has made, as well as to the flesh with which He was clothed and to the truth which He has given us, He is most nobly and fittingly described as the Word; for that name includes all these relations, and a more fitting name could not be found anywhere in the world.® Here the second person is related not only to the Father, but to the entire mystery of creation, revelation, and incarnation. He is seen as the one through whom all the Father's self-communications take place. As the Word is the self-expression of the Father within the Godhead, the world is the external objectification of that selfutterance in that which is not God. And the humanity of Jesus is the fullest objectification of that self-utterance within the created world.
In explicating the meaning of the Word, Bonaventure draws extensively from the human experience of self-consciousness and knowledge, making full use of the elements of the cognitive process: concept, word, and vocal expression.** Bonaventure distinguishes a two-fold speaking. There is an inner speaking to oneself, a speaking in the spirit, which is none other than our awareness of self or of another. This inner presence of that which is known is a sort of spiritual process of conception and birth which terminates in an inner word, or the conscious knowledge of that which is known.
This inner speech precedes any external speaking whereby the inner word is communicated to another spiritual being.®' Transferring the genesis of knowledge and speech analogically from the human person
4 Thid.
85 Comm. in Joan. c. 1, p. 1, q. 1 (VI, 247).
96 7 Sent. d. 27, p. 2, a.u., q. 3, resp. (1, 487).
DINE Senta Dia palsies Tesps (lj, 402).
INTRODUCTION
to God, Bonaventure shows again to what extent the generation of the Word is a natural generation. God is the supreme form of spiritual being, and as such, He is both perfectly simple and suptemely fecund. It cannot be, therefore, that He is in any way less than the created spirit found in the human person. If self-consciousness and self-knowledge are truly perfections of spiritual being, it follows that they must be found in God in the highest degree. Such self-knowledge is called an inner word.
"A word is nothing other than an expressed and expressive likeness conceived by the power of an intelligent spirit by which it knows itself or another.''®® The inner Word of God, therefore, is the self-knowledge of God precisely as goodness and love, as fecund source of all that is and can be. In His inner Word, God knows not only Himself, but all the ways in which He can communicate Himself to others, including this actual world-order and all other possible worlds which will never be created. Such self-knowledge flows from the very nature of God as spiritual being that is goodness and love, and hence is to be distinguished from the speaking of the external word which is not an act of nature but one of the will. Thus, the external word which proceeds from God is not to be identified with God; it is a creature. Though it is other than God in being, yet it reflects the mystery of God since the divine trinity is the fecund exemplar of all actual and possible things.1°° In summary, the title Word designates the second person precisely as the perfect imitative likeness of the Father who is the fecund source of all (= similitudo Patris imitativa); but precisely as such, He is simultaneously the exemplar of creation (= similitudo rerum exempla- °8 I Sent, d. 27, p. 2, au., q. 1, resp. (1, 482); q. 2, resp. (I, 485). rer Sé@ntnd. 2151p. espace Oeerespi(noe)s
100 T Sent. d. 27, p. 2, a.u., q. 1, resp. (I, 482). Bonaventure distinguishes between /oqui ad se and /oqui ad alterum. The first refers to the inner act of intellectual generation whose term is the conceived word. As it refers to God, it designates the verbum natum et aeternum. The second refers to the projection of our knowledge in an external form; it is the verbum prolatum. As applied to God, it signifies the verbum creatum et temporale. Therefore, there is a most intimate relation between God's inner speaking and His external speaking, and hence between the Word and the world. Indeed, the Word is the mundus archetypus.
I Sent. d. 27, p. 2, q. 2, resp. (I, 485); Hex. 3, 4 (V, 343-344). While there is a strong line of continuity between the inner and outer word, Bonaventure's doctrine of the analogy of being excludes any Hegelian interpretation of the Godworld relationship.