Among thirteenth-century intellectuals, Bonaventure was one of the first philosophers to exhaustively examine and appropriate Anselm’s ontological argument. Bonaventure believed the God and the human soul belong to the intelligible order (I Sent. 3, 1, 1, ad 2m). On the basis of this shared intelligibility, Bonaventure reasoned that humanity is enabled to apprehend God. The soul is imprinted with knowledge of God, which nourishes the soul. In the Disputed Questions on the Mystery of the Trinity, Bonaventure offers a sustained disputation concerning the existence of God. In this important text, Bonaventure asserts three ‘‘ways,’’ or ‘‘proofs,’’ that provide incontrovertible proofs of God’s existence.
The first proof of God’s existence is grounded in the innate nature of the soul, or mind (De myst. Trin. 1,1). For Bonaventure, this innate knowledge is only related to God’s existence, with no reference to God’s essence. This is the case, according to Bonaventure, when humanity prescribes a false view of God, while simultaneously assuming God’s existence (I Sent. 8, 1, 1, 2; De myst. Trin. 1, 1, ad 1m). Bonaventure argues that innate knowledge of an immutable and eternal being is proved by the mind’s desire for the true and the good. According to Bonaventure, the search for truth presupposes a perfect and absolute truth; consequently, every assertion of truth is simultaneously a positing of God’s existence (De myst. Trin. 1, 1, 5-8). Further, one presupposes the truth when denying the existence of truth; therefore, the denial of truth, or God, only affirms the reality of God and the truth (De myst. Trin. 1, 1, 26, t. v). More so, the soul’s desire for the true and the good in their eternal and perfect forms resides within humanity as an innate predisposition. The intelligibility of God is recognized, even if in an imperfect state, within the intelligibility ofthe human soul (De myst. Trin. 1,1,10, t. V). Human knowledge of God is rooted in this relationship between the cause (God) and the image or likeness (soul) (De myst. Trin. 1, 1, Concl. t. V).
The second proof of God’s existence is arrived at through an analysis of cause and effect demonstrated in the relationship between God and creation. Since God is the cause of creation, Bonaventure reasons one is able to gain knowledge of divinity through these sensible effects. For Bonaventure, it is easier to approach God through the senses, rather than purely spiritual means. Consequently, Bonaventure asserts it is permissible to begin with creation in order to apprehend God (I Sent. 3, 1,2, Contra 2 and Concl. t.1). Bonaventure appeals to arguments of cause and effect in order to demonstrate that there is necessarily an absolute being that all other beings derive their being (I Sent. 3, 1, 2, Concl. t. 1). Bonaventure was not concerned with a formal starting point, or a strictly defined set of proofs derived from creation. Rather, Bon-aventure believed God was attested throughout all creation to such a degree that God’s existence is readily apparent. All creation witnesses to a Creator God (De myst. Trin. 1, 1, 10-20, t. V). The human intellect recognizes the mind’s knowledge of the First Being when it compares the perfections of God with the insufficiency of humanity (Iten. III, 3). Creation enables one to discover the innate conception of God within the soul, which is the foundation for the existence of God. For Bonaventure, humanity is certain God exists because of the innate capacity of the soul, which makes it impossible to think God does not exist (De myst. Trin. 1, 1, 20, t. V).
Bonaventure’s third proof asserts that God’s existence is immediately and absolutely apparent. With this assertion, Bonaventure demonstrates his steadfast adherence to Anselm’s thesis, which he held throughout his theological work. God, as the first principle, does not require further demonstration beyond the fact that the predicate is assumed in the subject. Bonaventure simplifies Anselm’s dictum, ‘‘God as the being than which no greater can be conceived.’’ Accordingly, Bonaventure translates Anselm’s ontological definition into an immediate experience. Further, Bonaventure posits since that which cannot not-be is greater than that which can not-be. Consequently, according to Bonaventure, the being which none greater can be thought of necessarily exists (I Sent. 8, 1, 1, t. 1). More so, Bonaventure refines the above assertion by stating that if God is God, where the antecedent is readily evident, the conclusion is likewise plainly evident (De myst. Trin. 1, 1, 29, t. V). Bonaventure recognizes the infinite gap between humanity and God; however, the soul and the Creator, which are both intelligibles, analogously share a nature even if only by largely different degrees. Bonaventure differentiates between the ‘‘order of being’’ and the ‘‘order of knowledge.’’ God and humanity may be infinitely separated in the order of being; however, there may be a level of communion within the order of knowledge. Divine grace makes God knowable proportionately to our apprehension as an interior object of recollection (I Sent. 1, 3, 1, ad 2m, t. 1). Bonaventure advances Anselm’s ontological proof within his own synthesis through positing the interiority of the soul as the epistemological foundation for knowledge of God. In sum, according to Bonaventure, divine illumination makes the denial of God’s existence an impossibility (In Hex. IV, 1, t. v).
The above three arguments for God’s existence are closely interrelated. Each of the three proofs is grounded in the kindred relationship between God and the soul, which has the innate capacity to apprehend God (I Sent. 1, 3, 2, Concl. t. 1). Aquinas’ doctrine differs from Bona-venture on the above point, for the Dominican asserts that the intellect does not possesses an innate idea of God (Sum. theol. 1, 2, 1, ad 1m, 3m). For AQuinas, contra Bonaventure, knowledge of God is derived from nature, or outside objects, rather than an innate capacity within the human mind (Quinn 1973).
See also: > Alexander of Hales > Anselm of Canterbury
> Aristotelianism in the Greek, Latin, Syriac, Arabic, and Hebrew Traditions > Augustine > Being > Bernard of Clairvaux > Ibn Rushd, Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Hafld (Averroes) > Proofs of the Existence of God
> Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite > Richard of St. Victor > Thomas Aquinas