WORKS ofST. BONAVENTURE

St. Bonaventure’s Commentary ON THE

GOSPEL OF L U K EChapters 17-24

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKEii

INTRODUCTION iii

WORKS ofST. BONAVENTURE

St. Bonaventure’s CommentaryON THE

GOSPEL OF L U K EChapters 17-24

With an Introduction, Translation and NotesBy Robert J. Karris, O.F.M., Th.D.

Franciscan Institute PublicationsThe Franciscan Institute

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKEiv

Saint Bonaventure UniversitySaint Bonaventure, NY 14778

2004

INTRODUCTION v

Copyright © 2004The Franciscan Institute

St. Bonaventure UniversitySt. Bonaventure, New York

All rights reserved.No part of the book may be reproduced or transmittedin any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,without permission in writing from the publisher.

Library of Congress Card Catalogue Number: 2003101961

ISBN: 1-57659-184-0

Printed in the United States of AmericaBookmastersMansfield, Ohio

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKEvi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ......................................................... vii

Chapter Seventeen ........................................... 1621

Chapter Eighteen .............................................. 1701

Chapter Nineteen ............................................. 1789

Chapter Twenty ............................................... 1893

Chapter Twenty-One ......................................... 1959

Chapter Twenty-Two ........................................ 2027

Chapter Twenty-Three ...................................... 2113

Chapter Twenty-Four ........................................ 2189

Indices ............................................................ 2251

Comprehensive Indices of the Three Volumes .....2313

INTRODUCTION vii

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKEviii

INTRODUCTION

This Introduction discusses the methods, wit, and wis-dom of St. Bonaventure as a biblical interpreter ofLuke’s Gospel and functions as an introduction to allthree volumes of his commentary on the Third Gospel.1

It also provides an up-to-date bibliography on this sub-ject.

Five recent publications have provided me with most ofthe categories I will employ in looking at St. Bonaven-ture as a biblical interpreter of St. Luke’s Gospel.2 In hisstudy of St. Ambrose’s Commentary on Luke’s GospelCelestino Corsato devoted Part I to Ambrose’s herme-neutics, Part II of his study to Ambrose’s “ExegeticalTools,” to wit, a study of numbers, etymology, and

1 An earlier version of this Introduction may be found in “St.Bonaventure as Biblical Interpreter: His Methods, Wit, and Wis-dom,” Franciscan Studies 60 (2002): 159-208, and is utilized herewith permission of the editor and publisher of Franciscan Studies.2 In my role as a professionally trained and practicing New Testa-ment exegete I will supply the category of the contemporary natureof Bonaventure’s exposition of Luke’s Gospel.

INTRODUCTION ix

names of food, animals, plants, and other objects. InPart III he investigated Ambrose’s sources.3 M. MichèleMulchahey alerted me to the use of distinctiones andtradition in medieval commentators, especially amongthe Dominicans.4 Barbara Faes de Mottoni helped me tosee Bonaventure’s commentary on Luke’s Gospel as anexposition for preachers, to discern its Franciscan em-phases, and to investigate its indebtedness to Hugh ofSt. Cher.5 It was especially Gilbert Dahan who directedme to see the scientific nature of Bonaventure’s Com-mentary on Luke’s Gospel.6 Finally, it was Gordon Fee’swidely used book on contemporary methods in the studyof the New Testament that gave me the needed founda-tion, as I engaged in comparing the relatively unknown(Bonaventure’s medieval methods) with the known (con-temporary methods).7

After describing the nature of Bonaventure’s Commen-tary on Luke’s Gospel and briefly investigatingBonaventure’s hermeneutics, I will compare Bonaven-

3 La Expositio euangelii secundum Lucam di sant’Ambrogio: Erme-neutica, simbologia, fonti, Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum 43(Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 1993).4 “First the Bow Is Bent in Study…” Dominican Education before1350, Studies and Texts 132 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediae-val Studies, 1998), especially pp. 480-526.5 See “Introduzione” in Commento al Vangelo di San Luca/1 (1-4).Introduzione, revisione e note a cura di Barbara Faes de Mottoni,Traduzione di Paola Müller (cc. I-III) e Silvana Martignoni (c. IV)(Rome: Città Nuova, 1999), 7-26.6 “Genres, Forms and Various Methods in Christian Exegesis of theMiddle Ages,” Hebrew Bible/Old Testament: The History of Its Inter-pretation. Volume I: Part 2, The Middle Ages, Magne Sæbø, ed.(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), 196-236. This is anabbreviated version of his L’exégèse chrétienne de la Bible en Occi-dent medieval XIIe-XIVe siècle (Paris: Cerf, 1999).7 New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors,third edition (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002).

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKEx

ture’s methods with the fifteen-step method found inGordon Fee’s textbook. Along the way I will make ob-servations about Bonaventure’s wit and wisdom, espe-cially as articulated in his wisdom Christology. In a fi-nal section I will delve into Bonaventure’s Franciscanemphases and the contemporary nature of his Commen-tary.

A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE NATURE OFBONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON LUKE’S GOSPEL

The critical edition of Bonaventure’s Commentary onLuke’s Gospel was published in 1895 by the Quaracchieditors, comprises almost all of the seventh volume ofhis Opera Omnia, and runs from page 3 to page 604 indouble columns.8 The paperback edition of this volume,which I have employed in my work, weighs a hefty 7.2pounds.

The best contemporary model I can find to describe thestyle of this commentary is The New Interpreter’s Biblewhich is now complete in twelve volumes from AbingdonPress. Take Volume 9 on Luke and John. The authorsare renowned scholars (R. Alan Culpepper; Gail R.O’Day), who after presenting a scholarly introduction,an outline of the gospel, and a bibliography, provide theEnglish text in two translations (NIV and NRSV) andthen offer a scientific commentary in double columns.During the course of their commentary the authors mayprovide additional bibliography or expound on a Greekword, which is given in Greek and in English translit-eration and translation. After this double column of

8 S. Bonaventurae Commentarius in Evangelium S. Lucae, VolumeVII (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1895). In what follows Iuse the abbreviation QuarEd, followed by the page number.

INTRODUCTION xi

commentary the authors provide Reflections in a singlecolumn format.

What I am saying, then, about Bonaventure’s Commen-tary on Luke’s Gospel is this: It is a scientific and schol-arly commentary with wondrous materials for preach-ers. Later I will illustrate these preaching aids morethoroughly, but for now let me just give two samples,one from Bonaventure’s use of examples and one fromhis use of bestiaries in his scientific commentary.

For an example, take Bonaventure’s anecdote in hiscommentary on Luke 6:10 (#23). This verse presents theman with a dried up hand which signified the dryness ofavarice for Bonaventure. Bonaventure writes:

Furthermore, there are the example and mani-fest experience of a certain English king, whoused to grant large alms and whose hand andarm remain integral and incorrupt. Of him it istold that one day a certain bishop said to him,when he extended his hand to give to a poor per-son the silver serving dish, which he had in hishands before him, that his hand would never dryup. This saying, it is said, has been fulfilled upuntil the present day.9

So avarice dries up a hand whereas generosity andalmsgiving preserve a hand incorrupt.

9 See St. Bonaventure’s Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, Chapters1-8. With an Introduction, Translation and Notes by Robert J. Karris(Works of St. Bonaventure VIII/Part I; St. Bonaventure, NY: Fran-ciscan Institute Publications, 2001), pp. 475-476 with n. 42. Thisvolume will be abbreviated as Gospel of Luke, Part I, followed by thepage number.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExii

Also consider Bonaventure’s description of the raven inLuke 12:24 (#35): “Consider the ravens: they do not sow,they do not reap, they have neither cellar nor barn – yetGod feeds them. How much more important are youthan the birds!” Bonaventure’s interpretation very likelydepends on a bestiary and reads: “And note that he setsforth the example of ravens rather than that of otherbirds. And one reason for this comes from their extraor-dinary gluttony. So it is said in Genesis 8:6-7 that ‘fromthe window of the ark Noah sent forth a raven, whichwent forth and did not return.’ And the reason for this isthat it fell upon a carcass. A second reason is found inthe nature of the raven. The raven does not feed itsyoung in the beginning, because it does not think theyare hers until it sees that they are black.10 Job 38:41reads: ‘Who provides the raven with its food, when heryoung ones cry out to God, wandering about, becausethey have no food?’ Therefore, it is fitting that ravenscan stand for the other birds.”11 Later on I will return tothe raven. Suffice it for now to indicate that Bonaven-

10 See Ps-Hugh of St. Victor, De bestiis et aliis rebus, Book I, chapter35 in PL 177:31A-33B, esp. 177:31D: “At hatching time the raveninspects its chicks, but does not care for them until it sees that theirbodies are clothed with black feathers.” See also The Book of Beasts:Being a Translation from a Latin Bestiary of the Twelfth CenturyMade and Edited by T. H. White (New York: Dover 1984 [1954]), pp.141-142: “The RAVEN, Corvus or Corax, takes its name from thesound of its gutteral (sic) throat, because its voice croaks. It is said tobe a bird which refuses to feed its children properly until it recog-nizes in them the appearance of the real black colour in the wings.But after it sees them to be sable feathered, it feeds those which isrecognizes, generously.”11 See St. Bonaventure’s Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, Chapters9-16. With an Introduction, Translation and Notes by Robert J. Kar-ris (Works of St. Bonaventure VIII/Part 2; St. Bonaventure, NY:Franciscan Institute Publications, 2003), 1169. This volume will beabbreviated as Gospel of Luke, Part II, followed by the page number.

INTRODUCTION xiii

ture found in a raven an example of God’s extraordinarycare that extends even to such ignoble animals.

If my description of Bonaventure’s commentary on Lukeas a mix of scientific exegesis and preachers’ aids is ac-curate, then we have to date the final version of thiscommentary, not to 1248 when Bonaventure was a bac-culareus biblicus or “biblical bachelor” and was com-menting in an elementary manner on the literal sense ofLuke’s Gospel, but to somewhere around 1257 when hewas a master and was expected to give a more thoroughcommentary on a Gospel and prepare university stu-dents to be preachers.12

We can approach Bonaventure’s Commentary on Luke’sGospel in another way by comparing it with his Com-mentary on John’s Gospel which was also scholarly andscientific. In his Johannine Commentary Bonaventureinterprets very few passages in John with quotationsfrom other biblical books whereas this is his standardprocedure in his Luke Commentary which has thou-sands upon thousands of scripture citations. Further-more, his John Commentary is replete with Questions,of which there is nary a one in his Luke Commentary.13

For example, in his commentary on John 4:6-14 he

12 See QuarEd, pp. viii-ix. See also Dominic V. Monti, “Bonaventure’sInterpretation of Scripture in his Exegetical Works” (University ofChicago Ph.D. dissertation, 1979), pp 151-155. Thomas Reist, SaintBonaventure as a Biblical Commentator: A Translation and Analysisof his Commentary on Luke, XVIII,34 – XIX, 42 (Lanham: UniversityPress of America, n.d. [1985]). See further Barbara Faes de Mottoni,“Introduzione” in Commento al Vangelo di San Luca/1 (1-4), pp. 7-26.13 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 578-579, where Bonaventure’s expo-sition on Luke 7:9 (#14-15) addresses the question of how the centu-rion’s faith could be greater than that of the Blessed Virgin or of theApostles.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExiv

raises five questions. I cite the first one from #23: “Sincethe Lord commanded his disciples that they not enterinto the towns of the Samaritans nor travel to the Gen-tiles in Matthew 10:5 and also in Matthew 15:24 hesays: I have been sent only to the sheep which are per-ishing from the house of Israel, what’s going on herethat the Lord is now preaching to the Samaritans? Forhe seems contrary to his own command and is givingbad example by doing this.”14 Bonaventure will thensystematically weigh the pros and cons of answers tothis question.

BONAVENTURE’S HERMENEUTICS

Briefly put, Bonaventure’s hermeneutical method is tointerpret scripture by scripture. The editors of the criti-cal text of Bonaventure’s Commentary on Luke proffer apractical explanation for Bonaventure’s flood of scrip-ture quotations: he was aiding preachers. The editorswrite:

Many thousands of quotations from both Testa-ments are accumulated for the purpose of sug-gesting a plurality of citations for any opinionwhatsoever. From these quotations the preachercould draw as he willed, so that he might supportwhatever he said with the authority of Scripture,as the practice of that age required. For this pur-pose, too, a continuous chain of authorities fromthe Glossa and the books of the Fathers wasfashioned. Therefore, it can truly be said thatthis book, artfully composed from so many thou-

14 S. Bonaventurae Commentarius in Evangelium S. Ioannis. VolumeVI (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1893), p. 293. I refer tothis work by Commentary on John, followed by the page number.

INTRODUCTION xv

sands of quotations from authorities, is like amosaic constructed from innumerable and variedstones. In such a great variety, however, there isthe greatest of order, for it is structured into awonderful synthesis and suffused with the pro-found thought of the seraphic mind.15

Bonaventure’s theory of interpretation may be found intwo passages. The first comes from his words “About theMode of Expounding Scripture” in the Prologue to hisBreviloquium:

“Scripture has this special mode of proceedingand should be understood and expounded in away that corresponds to it. Since it hides severalmeanings under a single text, the expositor mustbring hidden things to light (Job 28:11). That is,once a meaning has been brought forth, to clarifyit through another, more evident, scriptural pas-sage. For instance, if I were expounding thewords of the Psalm, ‘Take hold of arms andshield, and rise up to help me’ (35:2), and wantedto explain what is meant by the divine ‘arms,’ Iwould say that these are God’s truth and goodwill. I would then use a more explicit biblicalpassage to prove that this is so. For it is writtenelsewhere: ‘You have crowned us, as with ashield of your good will’ (Psalm 5:13), and again:‘His truth will compass you with a shield’ (Psalm91:5). No one will find this kind of thing an easy

15 See QuarEd, p. ix. On Bonaventure’s “seraphic mind” see Hans-Josef Klauck, “Theorie der Exegese bei Bonaventura,” in S. Bonaven-tura 1274-1974, IV Theologica (Grottaferrata: Collegio S. Bonaven-tura, 1974), pp. 71-128. In the sections below on Bonaventure’s Wis-dom Christology and his Franciscan Emphases we will shed greaterlight on his “seraphic mind.”

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExvi

task except by long practice in reading the textand committing its literal sense to memory. Oth-erwise, he will never have any real capacity toexpound the scriptures. The person who is tooproud to learn the letters that make up a wordcan never understand the meaning of thosewords or grammatical constructions. So, too, theone who scorns the letter of sacred scripture willnever rise to interpret its spiritual meanings.”16

In Collation 19.7 of his Hexaëmeron or Collations on theSix Days, Bonaventure states something similar andconcludes his description with the image of an harmoni-ous zither: “All of Scripture is like a single zither. Andthe lesser string does not produce the harmony by itself,but in union with the others. Likewise, one passage ofScripture depends upon another. Indeed, a thousandpassages are related to a single passage.”17

So it seems to me that in his exposition of Luke’s GospelBonaventure has become the accomplished zitherplayer, as he plucks on hundreds of strings at the sametime. Or if you prefer the image of the Quaracchi edi-tors, Bonaventure’s masterful memory and theologicalplan allow him to find the appropriate pieces of scrip-

16 S. Bonaventurae, Breviloquium Volume V (Quaracchi: CollegiumS. Bonaventurae, 1891), p. 207. I have adjusted the translation ofDominic Monti, contained in Timothy Johnson, Bonaventure: Mysticof God’s Word (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1999), p. 43. Readersshould note that in this citation Bonaventure has given them a lucidindication of the “literal sense” of a scripture passage.17 S. Bonaventurae, Collationes in Hexaëmeron Volume V (Quarac-chi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1891), p. 421. This is my transla-tion.

INTRODUCTION xvii

tural stone to create the marvelously beautiful andmoving mosaic of his commentary.18

BONAVENTURE’S METHOD OR BONAVENTURE’SEXEGETICAL TOOLS COMPARED TO CONTEMPORARY

EXEGETICAL TOOLS

SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY

Before I give a detailed comparison between Bonaven-ture’s exegetical tools and those proposed by Gordon Feein his highly successful contemporary textbook on thesubject, I state in advance that both Bonaventure andFee are engaged in scholarly or scientific exegesis. Ittook me some time in my translation work to realizewhat Bonaventure was doing. Just as today interpretersof Luke apply the tried-and-true methods of historicalcritical research and the latest critical methods of nar-rative criticism in their study of the third gospel, so toodid Bonaventure apply the latest methods in his day. Ina real sense he was centuries ahead of Pope Pius XII’s1943 Encyclical, Divino Afflante Spiritu , which gaveRoman Catholic biblical scholars the green light to ap-ply scientific methods to their study of God’s Word inhuman words.19 Put another way, Bonaventure’s literalexegesis is not primarily determined by ecclesiasticalcreeds or pious sentiment. It is scientific.

18 In this section I have liberally borrowed material from my“Bonaventure and Talbert on Luke 8:26-39: Christology, Disciple-ship, and Evangelization” Perspectives in Religious Studies 28(Number 1, Spring 2001): 57-66.19 For an overview by Murray Watson on and an English translationof Divino Afflante Spiritu see The Bible Documents A Parish Re-source (Chicago: Liturgy Training Resources, 2001), pp. 1-31.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExviii

Let me give five examples.20 Perhaps, Bonaventure putshis best scientific foot forward in his Prologue where heapplies the Aristotelian four causes to explain the ThirdGospel: material, formal, efficient, and final. In dis-cussing the efficient cause of Luke’s Gospel, Bonaven-ture says that it is threefold. It is supreme when it re-fers to the Holy Spirit. It is most humble when it refersto Luke himself. It is intermediate when it refers to thegrace with which Luke was anointed as author.21 On theother hand, the material cause or subject of Luke’s Gos-pel is Jesus Christ. I quote: The Gospel’s “first part fo-cuses on the mystery of the incarnation and coverschapters 1-3. The second part concerns the magisterialpreaching and extends from chapter 4 to 21. The thirdpart deals with the medicine of the passion and consistsof chapters 22-23. The fourth part treats the triumph ofthe resurrection and comprises chapter 24. – Althoughall these sections look to the perfection of history, theirprimary intent is with the priesthood of Christ and themedicine of the passion, and these required a physicianas author.”22

In making sense of Part II of Luke, namely, chapters 4-21, Bonaventure appeals to the principle of Aristotle inhis commentary on Luke 4:1 (#1) and applies it literar-

20 For more detail on the scientific nature of Bonaventure’s commen-tary, see Gilbert Dahan, “Genres, Forms and Various Methods inChristian Exegesis of the Middle Ages,” Hebrew Bible/Old Testa-ment, pp. 211-216. Cf. Barbara Faes de Mottoni, “I prologhi deicommenti al Vangelo di Luca di Giovanni della Rochelle e diBonaventura,” in Les Prologues Médiévaux, Jacqueline Hamesse, ed.,Textes et etudes du moyen âge 15 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000), pp.471-513, esp. 488-489. See further M-D. Chenu, Nature, Man, andSociety in the Twelfth Century. (Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 1968), pp. 270-309 (“The Masters of the Theological ‘Science’”).21 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 6-8 (#9-12).22 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 12 (#23).

INTRODUCTION xix

ily: “The task of the wise person is twofold, namely,through his teaching ‘not to be fallacious about thingshe knows and to expose the one who is fallacious.’”23

Bonaventure can apply a saying of the historian Lucanabout preparedness for battle in explaining Levi’sprompt leaving all behind and following Jesus in Luke5:28 (#70): “For he knew that ‘delay is fatal to those whoare prepared.’”24 Sometimes Bonaventure appeals to theprinciples derived from human experience and psychol-ogy in his scientific exegesis. See his interpretation ofthe unjust judge in Luke 18:2 (#4): “And since pride isthe bedfellow of hardheartedness, the text adds: And didnot respect men and women.”25 Bonaventure simply as-sumes the truth of the principle that pride is a booncompanion of hardheartedness and offers no proof what-soever. Finally, Bonaventure can explain the persis-tence of the wronged widow by making this observationabout Luke 18:6 (#9): “So although he might have aheart of stone, nonetheless he is moved by her frequentprayers, so that this poetic verse might be verified inthis action: ‘A drop of water hollows out a stone, not byforce, but by steady dripping.’”26 Who would contradict

23 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 289.24 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 439.25 See current volume, St. Bonaventure’s Commentary on the Gospelof Luke, Chapters 17-24, With an Introduction, Translation andNotes by Robert J. Karris, Works of St. Bonaventure VIII/Part III(St. Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2004), p.1708. This volume will be abbreviated as Gospel of Luke, Part III,followed by the page number.26 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, pp. 1712-1713. See also QuarEd, p.451, n. 4, where reference is made to Book IV, letter 10, verse 5 ofOvid’s Epistulae ex Ponto. The Latin in Loeb Classical Library is:gutta cavat lapidem, consumitur annulus usu (“drops of water hollowout a stone, a ring is worn thin by use”). Bonaventure’s Latin is:Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi, sed saepe cadendo. So his quotation andOvid’s verse have only the first three words in common. A thoughtparallel occurs in a saying of Abbot Pimenion in PL 73:1050CD: “By

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExx

this commonplace appraisal of the power of water andpersistence?!

Lest you think that Bonaventure’s style of scientificexegesis is peculiar to the Middle Ages, I quote the “sci-entific” explanation of Luke 8:1-3 provided by the notedinvestigator of the historical Jesus, John P. Meier.Meier writes: “Whatever the explanation, a fair numberof people claimed that they had been healed or exorcisedby Jesus. It only stands to reason that, after their re-covery, these people, along with their families andfriends, would have become supporters of Jesus, offeringhim shelter, food, and money when he passed throughtheir area. To be sure, this is a commonsense conclusionthat probably held true in general, though not neces-sarily in every case.”27 Meier reasonably presumes thatall will agree with his notion of “what stands to reason”and what is “a commonsense conclusion.” How muchhave our exegetical methods changed in 750 years?

GORDON FEE’S NEW TESTAMENT EXEGESIS

The contemporary handbook on exegetical tools that Ihave selected is now in its third edition and has beenand is being used by thousands of students. It is GordonD. Fee’s New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Stu-dents and Pastors.28 In his first chapter, “Guide for Full

nature water is soft, and by nature a stone is hard. If, however, wa-ter frequently falls on the stone, by falling it will make a hole in it.So too the Word of God is sweet and soft, but our heart is hard.Therefore, the person who frequently listens to and meditates onGod’s word, gives way for the fear of God to enter into him.”27 A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Volume Three:Companions and Competitors (New York: Doubleday, 2001), p. 81.28 Third edition. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002.

INTRODUCTION xxi

Exegesis,”29 Fee lists fifteen steps, each with appropri-ate tools. With the exception of the steps that mainlyinvolve analysis of the Greek text (steps 5, 6, 14),Bonaventure pretty much follows each one of thesesteps. He even anticipates the use of a Gospel synopsis(step 10) by his frequent consultation of Augustine’s Onthe Harmony of the Gospels, especially in his exegesis ofLuke 1-9. As we will see, he also has his own exegeticalmethods such as a bestiary. I list all the steps and thenshow how Bonaventure’s methodology accords withthese steps:

�1.�Survey the historical context in general, that is, whatoccasioned the document?�2.�Confirm the limits of the passage.�3.�Become thoroughly familiar with your para-graph/pericope.�4.�Analyze sentence structures and syntactical relation-ships.�5.�Establish the text.�6.�Analyze the grammar.�7.�Analyze the significant words.�8.�Research the historical-cultural background. 30

�9.�Determine the formal character of a pericope or say-ing.10.�Analyze the pericope in a Gospel synopsis.11.�Analyze the pericope in its narrative context. 31

29 New Testament Exegesis, pp. 4-38.30 New Testament Exegesis, pp. 100-103 indicates that this includesintertextuality.31 In the limited space of this article I am unable to delve intoBonaventure’s appreciation of Luke’s narrative structure. WhileBonaventure does not deal with such things as implied author andimplied reader, he assuredly knows how the entire Gospel of Lukehangs together. See QuarEd, xviii for a detailed outline of the majorsections Bonaventure detects in Luke’s narrative. See further Gospelof Luke, Part I, p. 333 on Luke 4:23 (#50) for an indication of

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxii

12.�Consider the broader biblical and theological con-texts.13.�Accumulate a bibliography of secondary sources andread widely.14.�Provide a finished translation.15.�Write the paper.

In dealing with step #1, Bonaventure bows to traditionand what St. Jerome had to say about the historical con-text of Luke’s Gospel and what occasioned its writing.Bonaventure quotes Jerome’s views in the “Prologue ofSt. Jerome,” that follows his own Prologue to Luke.Jerome writes in part: “Luke of Antioch was a Syrian bynationality, a physician by profession, and a disciple ofthe apostles. Afterwards he accompanied Paul up to hismartyrdom, serving the Lord blamelessly, for he neverhad a wife nor children.�.�.�.He dedicated his maximumefforts to elaborate primarily for the Greek faithful howevery prophecy pointed to the coming of the Christ ofGod in the flesh of palpable humanity, lest attentive toJewish fables they be captivated by a yearning for theLaw alone and lest they be seduced by heretical fablesor foolish questions and depart from the truth.”32 Whilewe today might want to ask whether Luke wrote afterthe destruction of Jerusalem and how he addressed themight of the Roman legions, Bonaventure remains con-tent to follow the tradition provided by Jerome and sayno more.

Bonaventure is brilliant in determining the limits of apassage and in doing so indicates his complete familiar-

Bonaventure’s sophisticated awareness of what Luke is doing in andthrough his narrative: “. . . one must realize that the Evangelist isnot following the order of Jesus’ activities, but the sequence of hisown intended purposes. . . .”32 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 14-15.

INTRODUCTION xxiii

ity with the passage. Also he knows a thing or two aboutdetermining the formal character of a passage (step 9). Igive as a quick example his analysis of the miraculouscure of the paralytic in Luke 5:17-26. In his The Historyof the Synoptic Tradition, Rudolf Bultmann, the pioneerof the historical critical method of form criticism, main-tains that a miracle story has four components: 1) de-scription of the situation; 2) the difficulty of the cure; 3)the cure itself; 4) the consequences of the cure.33

Bonaventure collapses the second and third compo-nents, “the difficulty of the cure” and “the cure itself,”into one. He writes (#41): “The Evangelist pursues thefollowing order in describing this wonderful cure. Forfirst comes the opportunity for performing the miracle.Next is the wholeness of the complete miracle.�.�.�.In thethird place is the fame of the miracle being broadcastabout.�.�.�.” 34 It seems to me that we didn’t have to waituntil the twentieth century to find out from RudolfBultmann what the form of a miracle story is.

When Bonaventure comes to analyze “significant words”(step 7), he does not use a verbal concordance, for a goodusable verbal concordance first came on the scenearound 1289, fifteen years after Bonaventure’s death.35

Rather he has two means at his disposal. One is etymol-ogy. The other is distinctiones.

First, etymology.36 I give three examples. When he dealswith Luke 2:7 (#14) which reads: “Because there was no

33 Rudolf Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition (NewYork: Harper & Row, 1963), pp. 220-226.34 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 416.35 See R. H. Rouse and M. A. Rouse, “The Verbal Concordance to theScriptures,” Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 44 (1974): 5-30.36 In his commentary on Luke 19:4 (#7) Bonaventure provides sometheoretical background for his quest for the etymology of words as he

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxiv

room for them in the inn,” Bonaventure writes: “For ac-cording to Isidore it is called an inn (in Latin: diver-sorium) because diverse peoples might congregatethere.”37 In commenting on Luke 9:28 (#49), Bonaven-ture says this about Peter, James, and John, who ac-companied Jesus to the Mount of Transfiguration: “Nowby the three persons Christ took with him the three vir-tues necessary for contemplation are to be understood,namely, faith, h o p e , charity. Faith by Peter, whosename means understanding. Hope by James, whosename means wrestler. Charity by John, whose namemeans in whom is grace.”38

My final example displays not only Bonaventure’s use ofetymology, but also his verbal playfulness with num-bers. His commentary on Luke 23:5 (#7) reads:39 “Aspiritual interpretation. That Christ began from Galilee,which is interpreted as transmigration,40 and passed

observes that Luke specifies the city as “Jericho,” the tree as “asycamore tree,” and the publican as “Zacchaeus.” I translateQuarEd, p. 473: “But pay close attention here. The Evangelist iscareful here to provide the names of the city, the man, and the tree.He expresses himself so, not on account of the exigency of factualnarrative, but rather on account of mystery.” See Gospel of Luke,Part III, p. 1794.37 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 149.38 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, p. 851. Also see Gospel of Luke, Part I,pp. 486-487 on Luke 6:14 (# 36) and the notes there for these inter-pretations of the Apostles' names. In QuarEd, p. 232 n. 1 there isreference to the Glossa Ordinaria on Luke 9:28: "[The three Apos-tles] signify those who have faith, hope, and charity."39 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 2119.40 Cf. Jerome’s Liber Interpretationis Hebraicorvm nominvm in S.Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera, Pars I, Opera exegetica 1 (CCSL lxxii;Turnhout: Brepols, 1959), p. 140: Galilaea uolutabilis aut transmi-gratio perpetrata (“Galilee means rollable or transmigration or re-moval having been accomplished”). I have used the Hebrew behind“Galilee” (cylinder; to roll) as the basis for translating the rare Latinadjective uolutabilis as “rollable.”

INTRODUCTION xxv

through Judea and came to Jerusalem means that thetrue preacher must preach in this order: He shouldpreach transmigration from the state of sin, confessionof the true faith, and quietude in the vision of eternalpeace,41 so that evil is deserted, truth is discerned, andgood is loved. And in these a threefold good is concealed,namely, forgiveness, grace, and glory – goodness,knowledge, and discipline – for which the Prophet peti-tions in the Psalm: “Teach me goodness and disciplineand knowledge” (118:66).”42

DISTINCTIONES43

While authors in the Middle Ages may not have hadverbal concordances of much worth until the end of thethirteenth century, what they did have at their disposalwere lists of words. Let me describe some of these listsbefore trying to give a precise definition of a distinctio. Iwill use the seemingly neutral word, raven (corvus), asmy example and trace its trajectory through the centu-ries.

The earliest list I have discovered is that of St. Eucherof Lyons (d. 449) in his Formulae spiritalis intellegen-tiae. Eucher’s list is not alphabetized nor is it arranged

41 Bonaventure is playing on the meaning of the words “Judea” and“Jerusalem.” See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 492 on Luke 6:16 (#40)and CCSL lxxii, p. 136: “Iudas, one who is confessing or glorifying.”See also Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 130 on Luke 1:79 (#140) and CCSLlxxii, p. 136: “Ierusalem, vision of peace or she will fear in a perfectway.”42 The role Bonaventure gives the preacher is awesome. Bonaven-ture’s use of threes is spectacular.43 For far greater detail on Bonaventure’s use of distinctiones see my“St. Bonaventure’s Use of Distinctiones: His Independence of andDependence on Hugh of St. Cher” in Franciscan Studies 60 (2002):209-250.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxvi

according to chapter and verse in a biblical book. In hisPart IIII “On Animals” Eucher says of the raven: “Ra-ven: the blackness of the sinner or of a demon. In Solo-mon: Let the ravens from the valleys pick it out [Prov-erbs 30:17: about the eye that mocks father andmother]. But in a good light in The Song of Songs aboutthe spouse: His locks as branches of the palm tree, blackas a raven [5:11].”44 What one sees at work in Eucher’sinterpretation of the raven is the interplay of the ra-ven’s characteristic blackness and scripture quotations.Eucher’s goal in assembling his list seems to be moralinstruction and edification.

Perhaps, the most important scripture passage for theinterpretation of the raven was Genesis 8:6: Noah sentout a raven which did not return. I give Stephen Lang-ton’s gloss on Genesis 8:6: “The raven is black, he feedson carrion, he cries ‘cras cras’; hence he signifies thewicked, blackened with sin, who feed on vanity, whoprocrastinate.”45 Ps-Rabanus Maurus interprets Genesis8:6 in this manner: “The raven is any person who is con-tumacious and impudent, as in Genesis: ‘He sent forth araven, who did not return,’ an impudent and contuma-cious person is cast out from the Church and isdamned.”46 Hugh of St. Cher, a Dominican Cardinal anda contemporary of Bonaventure, writes this of the ravenin Luke 12:24:

44 Sancti Evcherii Lvgdvnensis: Formvlae spiritalis intellegentiae, In-strvctionvm libri duo, Passio Agavnensivm martyrvm, Epistvla deLavde heremi, Carolvs Wotke, ed., CSEL xxxi (Vienna: Tempsky,1894), p. 23.45 See Beryl Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages(Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1964), p. 247 n. 3:“This particular distinctio is taken from Langton’s gloss on Genesisviii.6. P., fo. 11ª.”46 Allegoriae in universam sacram scripturam in PL 112:902D.

INTRODUCTION xxvii

The raven is the Christian. The Song of Songs5c[11]: His locks like the branches of the palms,black as the raven, brilliantly black, it seems asif anointed, etc. It is the Apostle. Psalm 140[146:9]: Who gives to beasts their food, etc.47 It isthe black monk. Proverbs 30c[17]: The eye thatmocks the father, that is, the Abbot, the ravensfrom the brooks dig out, that is, the scholasticmonks, etc. It is the penitent. 1 Kings 17a[4]: Ihave commanded the ravens to feed you, etc. It isthe apostate monk. Genesis 8a[6]: Noah, that is,rest, sent forth a raven, which did not return. Itis the detractor by example. Job 38d[41]: Whoprovides food for the raven, etc. It is the procras-tinator. Leviticus 11c[15]: All that is of the ravenkind, according to their likeness, etc.48

Although Hugh of St. Cher does not number his inter-pretations of the raven, he has seven. And if we care-fully went through Hugh’s seven instances, we wouldbegin to see that he has assembled the various spiritualmeanings of raven, each with its own scripture passage.Some of Hugh’s interpretations are more readily under-stood than others, for example, the apostate monk’s ac-tions are previewed in the raven of Genesis 8:6 who fliesaway and does not return. The moral lesson is clear:Don’t be like that raven, like that monk. We also begin 47 Hugh of St. Cher’s interpretation here is made doubly difficult.First, he refers to the wrong Psalm. The correct Psalm is 146, not140. Second, he doesn’t add the conclusion of verse 9 where the ref-erence to ravens occurs, to wit, “and to the young ravens that callupon him.”48 See Hugonis de Sancto Charo . . . Tomus Sextus in Evangeliasecundum Matthaeum, Lucam, Marcum & Joannem (Venice: NicolasPezzana, 1732), pp. 208v, g and 209g. In further references to Hughof St. Cher I use the abbreviation Hugh of St. Cher, followed by thepage number.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxviii

to catch a glimpse of how Hugh’s interpretation wouldbe a boon to preachers who would have the authority ofscripture behind their interpretation of the raven ofLuke 12:24.

So how does one define a distinctio? Let’s call it adic-tionary of biblical imagery where the various meaningsof a word are distinguished and illustrated by a text.49

And this dictionary distinguishes the various meaningsof a word by determining how they are distinct from oneanother. Hence the name “distinctio.”50 Bonaventure’scontemporaries considered the use of distinctiones to bescientific and scholarly. To support my statement Iquote someone who is very well known in Franciscancircles: Pope Innocent III. At the beginning of his Ser-mon IX, which deals with the Feast of the Conversion ofSt. Paul, the Apostle, Innocent III says: “I have oftenspoken to you by means of divisions and distinctions forthe sake of scientific instruction, but now I am speaking

49 See Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, Leland Ryken, James C. Wil-hoit, Tremper Longman III, general editors (Downers Grove, IL: In-terVarsity Press, 1998). Shortly I will consider Bonaventure’s inter-pretation of “paradise” in his commentary on Luke 23:43. Under theentry in the aforementioned dictionary for “garden” the reader willfind most of the meanings of “paradise” that Bonaventure gives inhis interpretation of Luke 23:43. To me it is indicative of much ofcontemporary New Testament exegesis that in the extensive bibliog-raphies in Gordon Fee’s New Testament Exegesis there is no refer-ence to Dictionary of Biblical Imagery. Much of contemporary exege-sis favors singleness of meaning rather than the plurality of meaningimbedded in an image.50 See Smalley, The Study of the Bible, pp. 246-247 and Richard H.and Mary A. Rouse, “Biblical Distinctions in the Thirteenth Cen-tury,” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire de moyen âge 41(1974): 27-37, who draw upon the important work of Philip S. Moore,The Works of Peter of Poitiers: Master in Theology and ChancellorParis (1193-1205), Publications in Mediaeval Studies 1 (Notre Dame,IN: University of Notre Dame, 1936), p. 79.

INTRODUCTION xxix

to you through admonitions and exhortations for thesake of the formation of life which is in Christ Jesus.”51

Let me give one example of Bonaventure’s use of dis-tinctiones in his commentary on Luke 23:43 (#52): Thedying Jesus says to the good thief: Today you will bewith me in paradise. Bonaventure comments:

“And note here that paradise in Scripture is firstsaid to be a garden of delight. Genesis 2:8 reads:‘And the Lord God planted a paradise of delightfrom the beginning.’ And the heavenly homeland.Revelation 2:7 says: ‘To the person who over-comes I will give to eat of the tree of life, which isin the paradise of my God.’ And a vision of splen-dor.52 2 Corinthians 12:4 states: ‘He was caughtup into paradise and heard there words of mys-tery,’ etc.53 – Allegorically paradise is said to bethe Church. Genesis 2:10 reads: ‘A river went outof the place of pleasure to water paradise.’ It issaid to be the Blessed Virgin. The Song of Songs4:12-13 says: “A garden enclosed, a fountainsealed up; your fruit is paradise.”54 It is said ofSacred Scripture. Sirach 24:41 states: ‘I, like anaqueduct, have come out of the paradise of

51 My translation of PL 217:498B. Cf. the wry comment of John C.Moore, “The Sermons of Pope Innocent III,” Römische historischeMitteilungen 36 (1994): 81-142 (here 90): “. . . but what followed wasstill rather academic and didactic, based on the three ways in whichPaul was led by God.”52 I have translated species by “splendor.” Bonaventure’s quotationfrom 2 Corinthians 12:4 deals with “hearing” and does not aid com-prehension of what is seen in paradise.53 The Vulgate does not read ibi (“there”).54 Bonaventure has abbreviated The Song of Songs 4:13, whichDouay translates: “Your plants are a paradise of pomegranates withthe fruits of the orchard. Cypress with spikenard.” I have translatedemissiones tuae by context: “your fruit.”

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxx

God.’55 – Tropologically, paradise is said to begrace. Sirach 40:17 reads: ‘Grace is like a para-dise in blessings.’ It is said to be the soul filledwith fear. Sirach 40:28 says: ‘The fear of the Lordis like a paradise of blessing.’ It is also said to bereligious life. Genesis 13:10 states: ‘All the coun-try about the Jordan was watered throughout .�.�.like the paradise of the Lord.’ – Therefore, para-dise stands here for the beatific vision of Christ,since as it is said in John 17:3: ‘This is everlast-ing life that they may know you, the only trueGod, and him whom you have sent, JesusChrist.’”56

Whereas it may have been hard to figure out what Hughof St. Cher was doing with his seven meanings or dis-tinctions of the word “raven,” here we find it fairly easyto follow Bonaventure’s nine distinctions of the word“paradise.” The first three are the literal meaning. Thenext three are the allegorical, and the final three aretropological or moral. Bonaventure’s conclusion that“paradise” in Luke 23:43 stands for the beatific vision ofChrist seems to come from the third meaning he givesunder the literal sense, namely, a vision of splendor independence upon 2 Corinthians 12:4.

In summary, Bonaventure’s commentary on Luke 23:43is an excellent example of one of his distinctiones andwould provide superb material for the preacher.

55 The Vulgate does not read Dei (“of God”). In the original the “I”who is speaking is Wisdom.56 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 2164-2166.

INTRODUCTION xxxi

BONAVENTURE’S USE OF A BESTIARY

Since we have just treated “the raven” at length andsince a bestiary helps a student to understand themeaning of words, I treat that topic at this point. Al-though I haven’t read Gordon Fee’s New Testament Exe-gesis word for word, I would wager that he doesn’t sayanything about using a bestiary to interpret the NewTestament.57 As I worked my way through Bonaven-ture’s Commentary on Luke, it began to dawn on methat he must be using a bestiary, some book or traditionthat told him that various beasts stood for various vicesand/or virtues. We have already seen this at work in hiscommentary on the raven of Luke 12:24. I suppose thatif I asked my readers to tell me what animals occur inLuke’s Gospel they would be initially stumped, for weusually don’t approach a gospel from this perspective.But we have shepherds of sheep in Luke 2 and Jesus’parents’ offering of a pair of turtledoves later on in Luke2. There’s the dove at Jesus’ baptism in Luke 3. SimonPeter catches fish in Luke 5. Pigs are prominent in thestory of the Gerasene demoniac in Luke 8. What aboutthe lambs amidst the wolves and the treading upon ser-pents and scorpions in Luke’s story of the mission andreturn of the 72 in Luke 10? Then there’s the fish andserpent in the sayings about prayer in Luke 11. Doesn’tJesus call Herod Antipas a fox in Luke 13? The sheepand the pigs return in Luke 15 along with new animals,the fatted calf and the kid goat. In Luke 17 the eaglesgather around the carcass. In his triumphal entry intoJerusalem Jesus rides on an ass and its colt in Luke 19.Then there are the lamb at the Passover Last Supper

57 I leave it to my readers to judge whether contemporary scientificNew Testament exegesis is impoverished because it doesn’t profes-sionally acknowledge the value of a bestiary.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxxii

and the cock that crows at Peter’s denial in Luke 22.Each one of these animals offers interpretive opportuni-ties to Bonaventure and the tradition before him.

I begin with two instances where Bonaventure intro-duces an animal that is not in the text of Luke’s Gospel.Then I will dig into the “fattened calf.”

In his commentary on Luke 9:56 (#101) on not punish-ing the inhospitable Samaritans Bonaventure observes:“Third, relative to the memorable instruction containedin the Lord's action it is said: And they went to anothervillage. In this he gave a lesson to his disciples that theyshould flee from men and women rather than fight withthem, according to the lesson he gave his disciples inMatthew 10:23: ‘When they persecute you in one town,flee to another.’ . . . Wherefore, the Apostle exhorts in 2Timothy 4:2: ‘Reprove, entreat, rebuke with all patienceand instruction.’ For in the Psalm it is said: ‘Meeknesshas come upon us, and we will be corrected’ (89:10). AndSeneca writes: ‘The soul of a generous person is moreeasily led than dragged.’58 So he said that the king of thebees has no sting.”59 Bonaventure introduces “the kingof the bees” as if everyone knows the example of amighty creature that doesn’t exercise its power.

My second example comes from Bonaventure’s long dis-cussion about the four types of sins in the matter ofclothing (costliness; superfluity; anxiety; indecency) thathe finds in Luke 16:19: “The rich man used to clothehimself in purple and fine linen.” He concludes his in- 58 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 382-383 where in his commentaryon Luke 5:3 (# 5) Bonaventure uses the identical quotation from Se-neca. The general reference is Book I, chapter 24 of Seneca's DeClementia.59 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 908-909 and n. 220.

INTRODUCTION xxxiii

terpretation of Luke 16:19 (#38) in this manner: “Nowin all these ways people were wont to be excessive intheir vesture, and in being excessive to glory, and inglorying to sin, and this glorying is vain and similar tothe glorying of the crow.”60 You ask with me: The glory-ing of a crow? The Latin is corniculus. As I searchedthrough Aesop’s Fables, I found somewhat of a parallelin the story of “The Fox and the Crow”:

A hungry crow stole a piece of cheese and flewwith it onto the branch of a tree. Just as she wasabout to take the first bite, a sly Fox spied herand called from below. “Good day, Mistress Crow,how well you are looking! How glossy your feath-ers, how shining your eyes! I am certain thatyour voice is lovely, too. Oh, if I could hear butone song from you I would surely greet you asthe Queen of the Birds.” The Crow, who was veryvain, believed every word spoken by the Fox.Fluttering her wings, she lifted her head andopened her mouth to caw. With that, the cheesedropped to the ground and was immediatelysnapped up by the Fox. As he walked away, wellfed and well pleased with his cleverness, the Foxcalled back to the Crow. “In exchange for thatdelicious cheese, I will give you a bit of advice:Remember not to trust those who praise youfalsely.”61

Most commentators pay little attention to the meaningof “the fattened calf,” in Luke 15:23, which the father 60 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, p. 1520.61 Aesop’s Fables. Retold by Ann McGovern (New York: ScholasticBook Services, 1963), p. 67. I could find nothing about the crow in St.Eucher, Alanus de Insulis, Ps-Rabanus Maurus (Angelus), or Ps-Hugh of St. Victor.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxxiv

had prepared for the celebration honoring the return ofhis prodigal son. In a society that rarely ate meat thefattened calf would be sheer delight and would feed 200people.62 But what happens if we stop with the literalsense of a particular fattened calf and begin to askabout the characteristics of the calf, especially as ananimal of sacrifice. In his commentary on Luke 15:23(#40) Bonaventure writes:

“So first, relative to the consideration of ourSavior the text reads: Bring out the fatted calfand kill it. This fatted calf is Christ slain for oursakes, who is offered to us in the Sacrament ofthe altar as most delectable food. Now Christ issaid to be a calf, for he was offered for sins. Le-viticus 1:5 states: ‘He shall immolate the calf be-fore the Lord, and the priests, the sons of Aaron,shall offer its blood, pouring it round about thealtar, which is before the door of the tabernacle.’Further, it is said to be fatted, because it is filledwith all good things and most delectable as spiri-tual food. Wherefore, the Glossa observes: ‘Christis the fatted calf, so rich with every spiritualpower that he is sufficient for the salvation of thewhole world.’ Genesis 18:7 speaks of this in thefigure of Abraham preparing a banquet for theangels: ‘Abraham ran to the herd and took fromit the best and most tender calf.’ Christ’s ser-vants bring out this calf and kill it, when theyimmolate it on the altar for the salvation of sin-ners and distribute it to us as food. So the Glossasays: ‘Christ is always being sacrificed for believ-ers.’ Another interpretation is that it is broughtforth and killed, when his death and the Sacra-

62 See “Calf,” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, p. 132.

INTRODUCTION xxxv

ment of the altar are recalled to memory by thepreacher as sustenance and food.”

From my reading of some of the distinctiones on “calf”(vitulus) I realize that Bonaventure has taken only thepositive meanings of “calf,” omitting, for example, anyreference to the golden calf of Exodus 32:8 and perhapseven to Leviticus 4:3: “He offered a calf for his sin.”

In summary, I’m not saying that Bonaventure’s use of abestiary is a key tool in his exegetical toolbox, butBonaventure, the interpreter and the preacher, seems tofind examples drawn from animals quite appealing.

BONAVENTURE RESEARCHES

THE HISTORICAL-CRITICAL BACKGROUND

Fee’s eighth step is to delve into the historical-criticalbackground, and this includes a study of the interrela-tionship between scripture texts, especially betweenthose in the Old Testament and those in the New Tes-tament. Briefly put, this step fosters the investigation of“intertextuality.”63 Through his hermeneutics of inter-preting scripture by scripture Bonaventure spends verymuch time on this step. I single out two areas for de-tailed study: Bonaventure’s use of figures;64 his non-quotations or half-quotations of scripture.

I give four examples of Bonaventure’s use of a figure,namely, that someone or something in the Old Testa-ment is a preliminary sign of what the New Testamentdescribes as actuality. In his interpretation of Luke 6:12

63 New Testament Exegesis, pp. 100-103.64 Bonaventure uses “figures” a minimum of fifty times in his Com-mentary on Luke’s Gospel.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxxvi

(#26) Bonaventure provides two figures and a model ofJesus going up to the mountain to pray:

“A figure of this occurred beforehand in Moses.In Exodus 17:10-11 it is said that ‘Moses . . .went up to the top of the hill, and when Moseslifted up his hands, Israel was victorious.’ –About these two matters, namely, withdrawalfrom the crowds and ascent to the mountain, it issaid in Matthew 14:23: ‘When he had dismissedthe crowd, he went up the mountain by himselfto pray.’ A figure of these two things occurredearlier in the person of Abraham, of whom it issaid in Genesis 22:5 that ‘he said to the youngmen: Stay here with the ass,’ that is, in the val-ley. ‘I and the boy will go as far as yonder, andafter we have worshipped, will return to you.’ –Now the holy soul must worship in the manner ofthe model we find in Judith, of whom it is said inJudith 12:7-8: ‘She went out at night into thevalley of Bethulia . . . and ascended and wor-shipped the Lord, the God of Israel.’”65

My second instance of a figure stems from Bonaven-ture’s commentary on Luke 17:32 (#55) where the Lordwarns: “Remember Lot’s wife.” Obviously, the referenceis to Genesis 19:26. Bonaventure’s exposition under-scores the example, figure, and prophetic token of Lot’swife:

“And so the Lord set up that memorial of Lot’swife as a deterrent to apostasy and recidivismand backsliding. About her Wisdom 10:7 states:‘And a standing pillar of salt is a monument of

65 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 178-179.

INTRODUCTION xxxvii

an unbelieving soul.’ Therefore, the text ex-pressly says: Remember Lot’s wife. For she wasturned into a statue of salt, so that she mightthus manifest her folly and give to others thecondiment of wisdom with the result that no onemight look back according to what is said inLuke 14:34 above: ‘Salt is good. But if even thesalt loses its strength, with what will it besalted? It is no longer of any use,’ etc.66 So theGlossa observes: ‘Lot’s wife signifies those who intribulation turn back and turn themselves awayfrom hope in the divine promise. And therefore,she became a statue of salt so that by admon-ishing men and women not to do somethingsimilar she might preserve their hearts fromfoolishness.’ Now this is not only an example, butalso a figure and prophetic token. For just as thepreviously mentioned fire signified the imminentfinal judgment, so too Lot’s wife who looked backsignifies effeminate and carnal souls, who willbackslide and apostatize during that tribula-tion.”67

Third, in his exposition of Luke 18:32 (#55) Bonaven-ture singles out two figures of “Jesus being handedover”: “A figure of this occurred earlier in Joseph, aboutwhom it is said in Genesis 37:28: ‘His brothers handed

66 Sometimes Bonaventure “remembers” Luke’s text according to thewording of Matthew, the dominant ecclesiastical gospel. In this in-stance he has read elements from Matthew 5:13 into the text of Luke14:34. Matthew 5:13 has: “… If the salt loses its strength, with whatwill it be salted? It is no longer of any use. . . .” Hugh of St. Cher, p.238v, a, comments on Lot’s wife: “She was turned into a statue ofsalt, from which a condiment comes, because by her example sheteaches all not to do similar things.”67 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, pp. 1688-1689.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExxxviii

him over to the Ishmaelites,’68 and also in Samson,about whom it is said in Judges 16:6-21 that his wifehanded him over to the Philistines.”69

Finally, in his postill on Luke 23:54 (#66) Bonaventuresays this about the Lord’s rest in the tomb: “Therefore,as a figure of this it is said in Genesis 2:2-3: ‘On the sev-enth day God rested from all the work he had done. Andhe blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because onit he had ceased from all his work.’”70

One of the most frustrating aspects of providing an an-notated translation of Bonaventure’s Commentary onLuke’s Gospel has been his ingrained habit of usinghalf-quotations or non-quotations from scripture.71 Thatis, very, very often he would cover up “the punch line” ofhis quotation from scripture with an “et cetera.” I givetwo examples. In presenting his literal interpretation ofLuke 10:31 (#55) of the parable of the Good Samaritan,“It happened that a priest was passing by, looked, andpassed by,” Bonaventure gives an extraordinary inter-pretation for the priest’s non-action. He observes: “Thisman looked away from his brother on account of avarice.What Jeremiah 6:13 says had already been verified:‘From the least of them up to the greatest all are givento avarice. And from the prophet up to the priest, all are

68 The Vulgate reads vendiderunt (“sold”) while Bonaventure hastradiderunt (“handed over”). Obviously Bonaventure has somewhatadjusted the original to make his point.69 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 1776.70 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 2181. Bonaventure’s interpretationof “the seventh day” follow upon his exposition of Luke 23:44 (#54),that is, Christ’s death at the sixth hour: “During this sixth hour andthe sixth age and the sixth day of the week Jesus was crucified formen and women who were formed on the sixth day.”71 I can easily provide the interested reader with more than one hun-dred examples.

INTRODUCTION xxxix

guilty of deceit.’ And in a similar way Isaiah 1:23 says:‘The princes are faithless, companions of thieves,’ etc.”72

Bonaventure’s “et cetera” obscures the conclusion ofIsaiah 1:23: “. . . They all love bribes; they run after re-wards. They judge not for the fatherless, and thewidow’s cause does not come to them.” Perhaps a betterexample for any Franciscan reader is what Bonaventuresays about Luke 17:31 (#54): “Likewise do not turn backto the deeds of vice, because, as it is said in Luke 9:62above: ‘No one, having put his hand to the plow andlooking back,” etc. Obviously, Luke 9:62 concludes with:“. . . is fit for the kingdom of God.”

Of course, the best explanation for Bonaventure’s half-quotations from scripture is that this is what people didin the Middle Ages to conserve precious manuscriptspace. But I just wonder whether there might be an-other method in this madness. My present theory to ex-plain the method in Bonaventure’s madness of non-quotations or half-quotations is this: This is his means,and perhaps the means of the teacher and the preacher,to engage his students and/or listeners to complete thequotation. How many of my United States readerscouldn’t complete this quotation: “Twas the night beforeChristmas, and all through the house.�.�.�.” Christians ofall stripes will find it easy to complete the followingquotation: “In the beginning was the Word, and theWord.�.�.�.” But in order to complete either of these quo-tations you had to be socialized in a certain way.Bonaventure’s habit of half-quotations and non-quotations occurs far too frequently for me to think thatit is solely due to the need to conserve space. ThisBonaventurian practice issues from his wit as he seizes

72 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, p. 983.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExl

his audience’s attention and teases his listeners to com-plete the quotation.

BONAVENTURE’S THEOLOGY BY THE NUMBERS

From the fact that Gordon Fee listed fifteen, not six ornine, steps in the process of doing exegesis, I’m surethat he has nothing or very little to say about the sig-nificance of numbers for the interpretation of twenty-sixbooks of the New Testament, including the Gospel ofLuke. With all its numbers, the twenty-seventh book ofthe New Testament, Revelation, is an exception. ButBonaventure is keen on numbers. Sometimes he ex-plores the meaning of numbers in the biblical text;sometimes he arranges his interpretation in such a waythat numbers help convey his meaning and do so in aclever and witty way. His use of numbers fits underFee’s twelfth step: Consider the broader biblical andtheological contexts.

Let me prime the pump. We don’t use numbers in anysymbolic way, do we? But don’t we say that a cat hasnine lives, and that an enterprising student went thewhole nine yards? And the British say that a person isdressed to the nines. You can search the web from dawnto dusk, and you’ll not find a conclusive explanation ofthe origins of these three uses of nine. But deep downboth my readers and I know that “nine” means perfec-tion or completion. More to my point, and this will be-come my basic image, is an experience I had in August,2002 when I found myself alone with the guide in theimmense, rotund foyer of Lincoln’s tomb in Springfield,Illinois. The guide noticed that I was admiring the al-ternating bronze and marble columns along the wallsand had even begun to count them. The guide re-marked: “Oh, you can stop your counting. I’ll tell you

INTRODUCTION xli

what’s going on. There are 16 marble columns, sinceLincoln was the sixteenth President of the U.S.A., andthere are 36 bronze columns, for there were 36 stateswhen he was president.” Now that guide robbed me ofthe pleasure of figuring those numbers out for myself,but he was pressed for time and didn’t want me spend-ing more than the allotted three minutes in the tomb.Here’s my point: You can be in the presence of a work ofart and have little clue as to what makes it attractive.It’s only when you step back and try to figure out what’sgoing on, that you begin to see the genius of the artist.And it may take yet another step to realize what 16 and36 represent. If I apply my image to Bonaventure’scommentary on Luke, I would say that it took memonths before I had a glimmer of understanding thatBonaventure’s use of numbers may involve more than aconvenient means of organizing his comments, e.g.,there are four components to this miracle story. So hereare the steps. First, you are attracted by the beauty orpower of what Bonaventure is saying. Second, you stepback and count the scripture quotations or observations.Third and final, you try to figure out what the numbersignifies. I would suggest that Bonaventure’s contempo-raries might have collapsed these three steps into one.

I give four examples, all of which deal with numbers inthe biblical text. The first two give clear indication thatBonaventure not only knew, but also used number sym-bolism. Luke 9:17, a verse which occurs in the story ofJesus’ multiplication of the loaves, reads: “And whatwas left over to them was gathered into twelve basketsof fragments.” Bonaventure (#27) observes: “The magni-tude of God’s superabundance is shown through what isin the baskets and in the number of baskets. For twelveis a superabundant even number, according to the

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExlii

teaching of arithmetic.”73 My research has led me toBoethius’ De Institutione Arithmetica. In Book I, chapter19 of this treatise Boethius describes “another divisionof even numbers according to perfect, imperfect, and su-perabundant.” In this schema 12 is a superabundant (orsuperfluous) number. Twelve, when it is compared tothe sum of its parts factored out of the total body, isfound to be larger than that sum. Half of 12 is 6, a thirdpart is 4, a fourth part is 3, and a sixth part is 2, and atwelfth part is 1. The total sum (6+4+3+2+1) amounts to16. This surpasses the total of the entire body. In thismatter, it is evident that the sum of the parts is greaterthan and exceeds the size of the original number.74 Inhis commentary Bonaventure tells his knowing readershow he has arrived at this interpretation of the numbertwelve and indicates that he knew his numbers.75 Andby knowing his numbers, Bonaventure was able to ap-preciate the magnitude of God’s superabundance.

In his commentary on Jesus’ Transfiguration Bonaven-ture begins by asking when the Transfiguration hap-pened. He notes in his exposition of Luke 9:28 (#47) thatthe parallel passage in Matthew 17:1 says that Jesus’transfiguration happened after six days, which accord-ing to Richard of St. Victor are the six kinds of contem-plation. Bonaventure writes: “Now these six kinds ofcontemplation are understood both by the six days andby the six steps, by which one climbed up to the throneof Solomon, according to what 1 Kings 10:18-19 has:

73 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, p. 822.74 In this instance I have adapted the translation of Michael Masi,Boethian Number Theory: A Translation of the De Institutione Ar-ithmetica (with Introduction and Notes) (Studies in Classical Antiq-uity 6; Amsterdam; Rodopi, 1983), p. 96.75 See also his commentary on Luke 6:13 (#29) on twelve as “anabundant prime number.”

INTRODUCTION xliii

‘Solomon made for himself a great throne of ivory andoverlaid it with the finest gold. It had six steps.’ And thenumber of perfection gives fitting expression to this, forsix is the prime number of the perfect.”76 Six is a perfectnumber according to the rule of fullness or completenessby means of its parts. That is, 1+2+3=6.77 Briefly put,Christians can experience something of Christ’s Trans-figuration if they climb the six steps of contemplationand arrive at perfection.

In his commentary on Jesus’ third prediction of his pas-sion in Luke 18:33 (#56) Bonaventure again uses thenumber 6 as he observes: “Now in these six, which weredone for our redemption, namely, being handed over,being mocked, being scourged, being spat upon, beingkilled and being raised, the universality of the works ofredemption are radically encapsulated. The result isthat just as the entire world was made perfect in sixdays, so too in these six the work of reparation consists.And lastly, the gift of the Holy Spirit follows, just as onthe seventh day. It is said of this mystery in Genesis2:2-3: ‘On the seventh day God completed all hiswork.�.�.�. And he blessed the seventh day and sanctifiedit.’ In this is understood the gift of sevenfold grace. John

76 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, p. 849.77 A helpful basic book on the meaning of numbers in the MiddleAges is Vincent Foster Hopper, Medieval Number Symbolism: ItsSources, Meaning, and Influence on Thought and Expression. (Mine-ola, NY: Dover, 2000 [1938]). See further Gilbert Dahan, “Arithmolo-gie et exegese: Un chapitre du De scriptures de Hugues de Saint-Victor,” Prisma 8 (1992): 155-173. Henri de Lubac, “Exégèse méd-iévale: Les quâtre sens de l’écriture. Seconde Partie II,” Théologie 59(Paris: Aubier, 1964): 7-40. Much number symbolism in the NewTestament occurs in Revelation. See Adela Yarbro Collins, “Numeri-cal Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Litera-ture,” Aufstieg und Niedergang der römische Welt, Principat II.21,Wolfgang Haase, ed. (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1984), pp.1221-1287.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExliv

7:39 says: ‘The Spirit had not yet been given, becauseJesus had not yet been glorified.’”78

In his commentary on the meaning of Christ’s death atthe sixth hour in Luke 23:44 (#54) Bonaventure againreveals that numbers are carriers of profound theology.He writes: “During this sixth hour and the sixth age andthe sixth day of the week Jesus was crucified for menand women who were formed on the sixth day.”79 Andlater in his commentary on Luke 23:54 (#66) he quotesBede and continues his reflection about the new crea-tion: “Therefore, Bede observes: ‘On the sixth day hu-manity was created; on the seventh God rested. So onthe sixth day when he was crucified, he fulfills the mys-tery of reparation, resting in the sepulcher on the Sab-bath as he awaits the event of resurrection.”80

Would that we could go on with Bonaventure’s numbersas his means of wit and wisdom, as his means of organ-izing his thoughts and conveying his theology andChristology!81 But my goal is merely to get us inside thefoyer of his commentary on Luke’s Gospel and to promptus to take a closer look at what Bonaventure is doingwith numbers. We are going to be surprised and led tocontemplate the superabundant goodness of God!

78 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 1178.79 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 2166-2167.80 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 2180-2181.81 Bonaventure uses number symbolism hundreds of times in hisCommentary on Luke’s Gospel. Perhaps, seven is his most frequentlyused number. In my treatment of Franciscan Emphases below I willgive the example of Bonaventure’s interpretation of Luke 7:22: thereare ten effects of poverty. In this exposition the number of perfection,ten, helps convey Bonaventure’s spiritual theology.

INTRODUCTION xlv

BONAVENTURE’S WISDOM CHRISTOLOGY

Perhaps it is significant in terms of number symbolismthat Gordon Fee’s 12th point in the exegetical process is“Consider the broader biblical and theological contexts.”I use this rubric to treat an important theme that runsthroughout his commentary, namely, his wisdom Chris-tology. I give two examples where wisdom reflections donot immediately come to mind, one example where wis-dom motifs are just beneath the surface, and two exam-ples where wisdom themes are readily expected.

In his commentary on Luke 14:28 (#57) Bonaventureexplains “the tower” a man proposes to build by meansof a seven-point distinctio. Unexpectedly the apex of thetower is deifying wisdom.82 Bonaventure observes: “Andfirst the tower is to be built with the gift of fear.�.�.�.Thesecond tower is built with compassion.�.�.�.The thirdtower is built with knowledge.�.�.�.The fourth tower isbuilt of strength.�.�.�.The fifth tower is built of coun-sel.�.�.�.The sixth tower is built of understanding.�.�.�.The seventh tower is built of wisdom.�.�.�.” 83

In Luke 23:31 Christ Jesus asks: “If they do thesethings in the case of the green wood, what is to happenin the case of the dry?” Rarely, if ever, would a contem-porary reader take “the green wood” to be wisdom, butthat is Bonaventure’s captivating interpretation: “As ifto say: If the tree that is living and fruitful and beauti-ful is cut down, what, therefore, will happen to the tree

82 Hugh of St. Cher, p. 221v, a, treats of three evil towers and eightgood towers. Hugh’s seventh tower is sacred doctrine, and his eighthis Christ.83 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 1379-1380. The perceptive readerwill also note how Bonaventure uses the perfect number, seven, toconvey his theology.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExlvi

that is dry and fruitless? Now Christ is the green wood,because it is living. So Proverbs 3:18 reads: ‘She is thetree of life to those that take hold of her.’ This is said ofWisdom.�.�.�.” 84

As you may well know, Luke has a thing about food anddescribes Jesus as either going to a meal, at a meal, orcoming from a meal. What is even more extraordinaryin Luke’s Gospel is that Jesus eats with his persecutors.Although a wisdom motif lies close to hand, it isBonaventure’s genius to draw his readers’ attention tothe Wisdom literature of the Old Testament which oftendepicts Lady Wisdom as setting a table for her friendsor inviting people to eat with her. With this as back-ground we may better appreciate what Bonaventure hasto say in his postill on Luke 7:36 (#63) as Christ as Wis-dom comes to dine with a Pharisee out of an excess oflove and condescension. Bonaventure writes:

“So first concerning the solemnity of the banquet,during which the Lord mercifully received thesinner, it is said: Now a certain Pharisee invitedhim to dine with him. There is no doubt that theperson being invited is the Lord Jesus, andrightly is he invited according to the counsel andproposal of the wise person. Wisdom 8:9 says: ‘Iproposed to take her,’85 that is Wisdom, Christ,‘to live with me, knowing that she will share withme her good things.’ Now at this point the Phari-see was not yet separated from the Lord, butrather was united with him. And therefore, withsurety he asked the Lord and invited him to abanquet, according to what Job 22 has: ‘If you

84 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, p. 2143.85 Bonaventure omits the Vulgate's mihi ("to me").

INTRODUCTION xlvii

will return to the Almighty, you will be built up’(verse 23). And then verse 27 follows with: ‘Youwill ask him, and he will listen to you.’ – And theLord accepted his invitation as the text goes onto say: And so he went into the house of thePharisee and reclined at table. He sat down toeat and thus fulfilled in a visible way, what hepromises spiritually in Revelation 3:20: ‘If any-one . . . opens the door to me, I will come in tohim and will sup with him, and he with me.’ Donot wonder at this, for as he says in Proverbs8:31, ‘My delights are to be with men andwomen.’ He says this with regard to the excess oflove, by which he became man and willingly ac-cepted and bore human needs among people, ac-cording to what Baruch 3:38 has: ‘Afterwards hewas seen on earth and had concourse with menand women.’ So these things are introduced onaccount of the solemnity of the banquet.”86

For our final passages I have chosen two in which onewould expect a wisdom theme, for “teacher” and“greater than Solomon” are in focus. When Bonaventurecomes to Jesus, “the good teacher,” in Luke 18:18 (#36),he pulls out all the stops about Jesus as God’s Wisdom.He writes:

“Now whatever his intention in raising this ques-tion, the ruler asked a profitable question. Andtherefore, the text adds: Saying: Good Teacher,what shall I do to gain eternal life? This is aproper and profitable question according to whatJeremiah 6:16 reads: ‘Stand upon your ways,87

86 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 626-627.87 The Vulgate does not read vestras (“your”).

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKExlviii

and see, and ask about the ancient ways, whichis the good way, and walk in it.’ And this is alsothe counsel of the Lord in Matthew 6:33: ‘Seekfirst the kingdom of God and his justice.’ AndTobit 4:19 has: ‘Seek counsel always from a wiseperson.’ And salvific counsel is always to besought from the one who is most wise and thegreatest teacher, Christ. And wherefore, he callshim Teacher, from whom as from a most expertteacher he seeks sound counsel according to whatSirach 6:6 states: ‘Be at peace with many, but letone of a thousand be your counselor.’ And thisone is Christ, about whom The Song of Songs5:10 says: ‘My beloved is white and ruddy, cho-sen out of thousands.’ And Qoheleth 7:29 reads:‘One man among a thousand have I found.’ Sofrom this person, who alone is the teacher, ac-cording to what Matthew 23:10 says: ‘One only isyour teacher, Christ.’ Who alone is wisdom as 1Corinthians 1:24 states: ‘We say that Christ isthe power of God and the wisdom of God.’ Whoalone is the true counselor according to whatIsaiah 9:6 reads: ‘His name will be called won-derful, counselor,’ etc. And this counsel andteaching should be sought according to whatIsaiah 48:17 notes: ‘I am the Lord who teachesyou profitable things, who governs you in theway that you are walking.’”88

In this postill Bonaventure uses the number seven in awondrous way. In your second or third inspection of thispassage you will realize that Bonaventure has utilizedseven scripture passages to interpret Christ the teacher:Sirach, The Song of Songs, Qoheleth, Matthew, 1 Corin-

88 See Gospel of Luke, Part III, pp. 1748-1749.

INTRODUCTION xlix

thians, Isaiah 9, Isaiah 48. Now seven is a perfect num-ber. Bonaventure’s theology here may be sparkling, ifwe have the eyes to see.

My final sample comes from Jesus’ claim that he isgreater than Solomon. In his commentary on Luke 11:31(#66-67) Bonaventure notes: “And behold, a greaterthan Solomon is here. For by using the word behold, heindicates that Christ was known not only by his words,but also by sight, according to what Baruch 3:38 reads:‘Afterwards he was seen on the earth,’ etc. By addingthe word here, he shows that he was not absent, butpresent, so that what Deuteronomy 30:11 has could berightly said to them: ‘The commandment that I com-mand you today is not .�.�. far from you.’ Indeed, bysaying a greater than Solomon, he shows that not onlyis he to be believed as a wise man, but as the beginningand fountain of all wisdom, according to what John 8:25has: ‘I am the beginning, who is speaking to you.’89 For

89 Bonaventure quotes John 8:25 five times in his commentary onLuke's Gospel: Luke 7:14 (# 25), Luke 8:15 (# 22), Luke 9:35 (# 65),Luke 22:44 (# 51). I make four points about Bonaventure’s extraor-dinary quotation of John 8:25. First, Jesus’ statement is a responseto the question of the Jews: “Who are you?” Second, the Vulgatereads: Principium quia et loquor vobis, which may be translated as“What I have said to you from the beginning” or by “Why do I speakto you at all?” Third, Bonaventure’s text reads: Ego principium, quiet loquor vobis (“I am the beginning, who is speaking to you”).Bonaventure’s text is distinctive in two major ways, for he has Ego(“I”) and reads qui (“who”). This second reading of “who” loses someof its distinctive character when one notes that qui (“who”) is a tex-tual variant for quia (“what”) in the Vulgate. Fourth, Bonaventure’sexposition of John 8:25 in his Commentary on St. John’s Gospelsheds some wondrous light on his interpretation of this verse. Itranslate from Commentary on John, p. 361: “First, for he is thecreator. For which reason the text says: Jesus said to them: Begin-ning, that is, I am the creating beginning. For all things have re-ceived their existence through him, as it is said above in John 1:1: ‘Inthe beginning was the Word’ and again ‘All things were made

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKEl

Christ was greater than Solomon by reason of hispower, knowledge, and justice. Therefore, what thisPsalm says is very fitting for him: ‘O God, give to theking your judgment’ (71:1).90 The Jews believed thisPsalm to have been composed in praise of Solomon,when it was said therein: ‘He will rule from sea to sea’(verse 8). And again: ‘His name outlasts the sun, and inhim all the tribes of the earth will be blessed’ (verse 17).Solomon was a temporal peacemaker, but Christ aneternal. Isaiah 9:7 reads: ‘His rule will be multiplied.’He was wise, but Christ is Wisdom. 1 Corinthians 1:24has: ‘Christ, the power and wisdom of God.’ And Colos-sians 2:3 says: ‘In whom are hidden all the treasures ofwisdom and knowledge.’ He effected justice, but he wasjustice itself. 1 Corinthians 1:30 states: ‘who has becomefor us God-given justice.’ etc.”91

In summary, Bonaventure does not provide an excursuson Luke’s Christology as some highly scientific commen-taries do today. Rather he intersperses his commentsthroughout his commentary. Sometimes the reader ex-

through him’ (1:3). – He is also the teacher – who is also speakingwith you (8:25). Hebrews 1:2 states: ‘In these last days he has spokento us through a Son, whom he established as heir of all things andthrough whom he created the world.’ In a similar way the Lord an-swered the question of the Samaritan woman: ‘I am the one who isspeaking with you’ (John 4:26). And the blind man in John 9:37 be-low. – He is also judge, even though he is not now speaking words ofcondemnation, but of instruction and invitation.” Even thoughBonaventure does not read ego (“I”) in his interpretation of John 8:25in his Johannine commentary on this verse, it is clear that he pre-supposes it. In the five times he uses John 8:25 in his commentaryon Luke’s Gospel Bonaventure supplies ego (“I”), so that his listenersand readers will know that Jesus is the beginning: “I am the begin-ning who is speaking to you.”90 In QuarEd, p. 299 n. 4 mention is made that Psalm 71 bears thetitle In Salomonem ("about Solomon").91 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 1090-1092.

INTRODUCTION li

pects them because of the context. At other times thereader is surprised and challenged. But once readers’eyes have been opened to spot Bonaventure’s emphasison Jesus Christ as God’s Wisdom incarnate, then theycan happily ponder this christological emphasis.

BONAVENTURE’S USE OF TRADITION OR SECONDARY SOURCES

Gordon Fee states that the thirteenth step in the exe-getical process is to accumulate a bibliography of secon-dary sources and read widely.92 From my work withBonaventure’s exposition of Luke’s Gospel I would em-phatically state that he has read widely. From time totime he quotes Jerome, especially relative to the mean-ing of Hebrew names. Bonaventure is very familiar withAugustine’s works, especially On the Harmony of theGospels.93 He used the Commentaries on Luke’s Gospelby St. Ambrose of Milan94 and Venerable Bede, but pri-marily through their incorporation into the Glossa Or-dinaria, which dates to about 1150 and which Bonaven-ture used so very frequently. Gregory the Great’s FortyHomilies on the Gospels were very important to Bede,who absorbs huge chunks of them into his commentary,and also to Bonaventure. I try to take to heart Bonaven-ture’s oft-cited quotation from Gregory’s Homily 12 n. 4:“The principle holds that they contemn the preaching of

92 New Testament Exegesis, pp. 32-35.93 In using Augustine’s On the Harmony of the Gospels, Bonaventurecomes close to following Fee’s tenth step: Analyze the pericope in aGospel synopsis.94 For an English translation, see Saint Ambrose of Milan, Expositionof the Holy Gospel According to Saint Luke With Fragments on theProphecy of Isaias, Theodsia Tomkinson, trans. (Etna, CA: Center forTraditionalist Orthodox Studies, 1998). See also Celestino Corsato,La Expositio euangelii secundum Lucam di sant’Ambrogio: Erme-neutica, simbologia, fonti, as cited in note 3 above.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElii

the one whose life they despise.”95 It was remarkable tome that Bonaventure quoted from the sermons of Ber-nard of Clairvaux some forty times in his commentaryon Luke’s Infancy Narrative.96 With some frequencyBonaventure will cite the Latin translation of St. JohnChrysostom’s Homilies on St. Matthew’s Gospel. Schol-ars have determined that this work was not written byChrysostom and give it the name Opus Imperfectum.When Bonaventure cites the Opus Imperfectum, he in-frequently does so in his own right,97 but is most oftendependent upon Hugh of St. Cher. From time to timeBonaventure will cite a new author or authority in hisCommentary. For example, in his commentary on theparable of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16:19-31he quotes St. Peter Chrysologus, Archbishop of Raven-na, who was the author of four sermons on this pas-sage.98 But in reality Bonaventure is quoting PeterChrysologus according to the text he found in Hugh ofSt. Cher’s commentary on St. Luke’s Gospel.

Readers who have been paying close attention can seethat the cat is almost out of the bag. Yes, indeed, theDominican Hugh of St. Cher, who later became a Cardi-nal, is an unacknowledged major source for Bonaven-ture’s citations of authorities in the second half of hiscommentary on Luke’s Gospel. I have written two long

95 See, e.g., Bonaventure’s exegesis of Luke 6:42 (#97) in Gospel ofLuke, Part I, pp. 553-554 and n. 203.96 In his commentary on Luke 14:10 (#20) Bonaventure explicitlycites Bernard of Clairvaux’s Homily 37 n. 6-7 on The Song of Songs.This is the longest quotation I’ve seen in Bonaventure’s Commentaryon Luke’s Gospel, runs for one whole column in the critical edition,and is almost verbatim.97 See, for example, his commentaries on Luke 14:13 (#30), 18:18(#35), 19:36 (#54), 19:38 (#59), and 19:39 (#60).98 See PL 52:529C - 543A.

INTRODUCTION liii

articles on this matter in Franciscan Studies99 and inthe notes of volume two of my annotated translation ofBonaventure’s Commentary on Luke 9-16 I provide ad-ditional evidence of Bonaventure’s creative borrowing.In the brief compass of this introduction I can deal verybriefly with only two of Bonaventure’s creative adapta-tions.

Earlier in my treatment of distinctiones I citedBonaventure’s nine meanings of “paradise.” For hispart, Hugh of St. Cher lists eight meanings of “para-dise,” but does not number them. Bonaventure hasmade nine meanings out of Hugh’s eight and furtherrearranged them into three sets of three. Bonaventureand Hugh have all nine scripture texts in common.100 Tome that it creative adaptation.

I offer another short example. In discussing how thecrowd prevents Zacchaeus from coming to Jesus in Luke19:3 (#5) Bonaventure gives five examples of crowd-prevention: it tried to prevent the illumination of theblind man, the cure of the paralytic, the setting free ofthe man who was deaf and dumb, the resuscitation ofthe dead, Zacchaeus from coming to Jesus. Hugh of St.Cher offers nine examples of “crowd prevention,” four ofwhich are identical to four of Bonaventure’s examples.

99 See “A Comparison of the Glossa Ordinaria, Hugh of St. Cher, andSt. Bonaventure on Luke 8:26-39,” Franciscan Studies 58 (2000):121-236 and “Bonaventure’s Commentary on Luke: Four Case Stud-ies of his Creative Borrowing from Hugh of St. Cher,” FranciscanStudies 59 (2001): 133-236. See now my “St. Bonaventure’s Use ofDistinctiones: His Independence of and Dependence on Hugh of St.Cher” Franciscan Studies 60 (2002): 209-250.100 See Hugh of St. Cher, p. 270i.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKEliv

Bonaventure alone refers to the deaf and dumb man(Mark 7:33).101

In conclusion, Bonaventure, like his contemporaries,was no wild-eyed innovator, but beholden to the best hisforebears presented him. A serious study of the indicesin the three volumes of my translation of Bonaventure’sCommentary on the Gospel of Luke will reveal in greatdetail his debt to tradition.

BONAVENTURE’S WIT IN WRITING HIS COMMENTARY

Gordon Fee’s final step is to write the paper. As I look atBonaventure’s final product or commentary, I amamazed at his clever wit as he engages in verbal play-fulness throughout his exposition, but especially at thebeginning of a section. Most of this playfulness is lost onus because it doesn’t carry over into an English transla-tion.

Here are three examples of Bonaventure’s verbal play-fulness in the area of rhyme. In his commentary onLuke 4:18 (#36) Bonaventure observes: “The Spirit ofthe Lord is upon me, etc. Here the text notes the fitting-ness of the testimony. For it gives expression to fournotes of excellence which were in our Savior. For he ismediator, teacher, restorer, and rewarder.”102 In Latineach one of the four nouns Bonaventure employs end in–or: mediator, eruditor, reparator, retributor.103

101 See Hugh of St. Cher, p. 243v, e.102 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 320.103 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 320 and n. 55. See also Gospel ofLuke, Part I, pp. 9-12, where in #17-21 of his Preface Bonaventureexegetes Isaiah 61:1 in a similar way. There, however, he used theterms: mediator, praedicator, reparator, triumphator (“mediator,preacher, restorer, conqueror”).

INTRODUCTION lv

Second, in his exposition of Luke 7:14 (#24) which oc-curs in the story of Christ’s raising of the only son of thewidow of Nain Bonaventure displays his verbal playful-ness and his logic. He writes: “And since it is fitting thatthe affection of the heart and the speech of the mouthaccompany the effect of the deed, the text continues:And he went up and touched the stretcher.�.�.�.” TheLatin involved here is: affectum cordis, affatum oris, ef-fectum operis, as Bonaventure has three nouns endingin tum followed by three nouns ending in is.104 My Eng-lish, “affection of the heart, speech of the mouth, andeffect of the deed,” tries its best to communicate Bona-venture’s verbal playfulness.

Third, in a rare instance I was able to capture in Eng-lish Bonaventure’s play on words. In his commentary onLuke 9:54 (#98): About the correction of the disciples’inordinate zeal the Evangelist makes three points: in-dignatio reprehensibilis, increpatio rationabilis, infor-matio rememborabilis. In English: “Reprehensible in-dignation, comprehensible correction, memorable in-struction.”105 In my annotated translations I have calledmy readers’ attention to Bonaventure’s witty phenome-non of verbal playfulness. Such pleasantries would en-tice his readers and listeners to follow him along andlook forward to his next play on words. And who knows:Bonaventure’s playfulness might help effect a conver-sion of heart in his readers and listeners.106

104 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 587.105 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, p. 905.106 In my section below on Bonaventure’s Franciscan emphases I willpresent his commentary on Luke 7:22 which is replete with therhymes of his ten-member distinctio on the effects of poverty.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElvi

When we looked at Bonaventure’s use of numbers, wealso saw his wit and playfulness at work. While thistype of wit may not be ours, we do appreciate the personwho is clever with words, be this by turning a phrase oreven, God forbid, by a pun on words.

THE FRANCISCAN EMPHASES IN BONAVENTURE’SCOMMENTARY ON LUKE’S GOSPEL107

Within Bonaventure’s completed commentary on Luke’sGospel two things call out for final discussion. One isthe Franciscan emphases within this massive work; theother is its contemporary nature. My comments will bebrief and indicative.

Luke’s themes of Jesus’ teaching about the rich and thepoor, Jesus’ sending out of the Twelve and of the sev-enty-two as missionary preachers, and Jesus’ embraceof sinners, outcasts, and persecutors were very attrac-tive to the heart and soul of a Franciscan interpreterlike Bonaventure.

The name of Francis occurs four times in Bonaventure’scommentary as an example. Bonaventure’s commentaryon Luke 9:1-9, which he entitles “The formation ofpreachers through divine precept,” has two instances ofBlessed Francis as an example. In commenting on Luke9:3 (#5), to take nothing for the journey, Bonaventurewrites: “And he said to them: Take nothing for yourjourney. After explaining the authority by which theApostles were commissioned, the Evangelist gives a de-

107 For helpful orientation see Brian Walter Shanahan, “Aspects ofFranciscan Life in Saint Bonaventure’s Commentary on the Gospelof Saint Luke” (Rome: S.T.L. thesis at Pontificium Athenaeum Anto-nianum, 1975).

INTRODUCTION lvii

scription of the integrity of life enjoined upon them.Now there are three components to this life style,namely, a paucity of things needed to sustain life, bareessentials in clothing, and a humble manner of life.108

First, with regard to a paucity of things needed to sus-tain life, it is said: And he said to them: Take nothingfor your journey, that is, in the form of temporal suste-nance, so that you may preach by example what 1 Timo-thy 6:7 says: ‘For we brought nothing into the world,and certainly we can take nothing out.’ And in order forhis meaning to be more clear, he gives specific instruc-tions when he says: Neither staff, namely, for support,nor wallet, for storing things, nor bread, for eating, normoney, for buying things. This verse prohibits all suste-nance, so that it may be shown that the preacher mustrely with deep hope on God alone, according to what 1Peter 5:7 reads: ‘Cast all your care upon him, becausehe cares for you.’ So also Blessed Francis, when he usedto send the brothers out to preach, used to say to themthe words of the Psalm: ‘Cast your care upon the Lord,’etc. (54:23).109 However, in this matter the Lord does notforbid, as Augustine says, careful providence, but over-wrought anxiety, according to what Matthew 6:34 says:

108 It is virtually impossible to do justice to Bonaventure's verbalplayfulness: In paupertate victus, tenuitate vestitus, et humilitateconvictus.109 See 1 Celano 12: "Accepting the command of holy obedience withmuch joy and gladness, they humbly prostrated themselves on theground before Saint Francis. Embracing them, he spoke sweetly anddevotedly to each one: ‘Cast your care upon the Lord, and he willsustain you.' He used to say this phrase whenever he transferredbrothers by obedience." Translation from Francis of Assisi: EarlyDocuments, Volume I: The Saint, Regis J. Armstrong, J. A. WayneHellmann, William J. Short, eds. (New York: New City Press, 1999),p. 207.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElviii

‘Do not be anxious about tomorrow.�.�.�.For .�.�. sufficientfor the day is its own trouble.’"110

In explaining “the bare essentials of clothing,” that is,only one tunic, found in Luke 9:3 (#7) Bonaventuredeals with the literal sense first and then moves to thespiritual understanding and writes: “But according tothe spiritual understanding the duplicity of simulationand hypocrisy is forbidden, lest they retain one garmentin hiding and use one for public appearance and lestthey be counted among those of whom it is said in Mat-thew 7:15: ‘. . . who come to you in sheep's clothing, butinwardly are ravenous wolves.’ Similarly Blessed Fran-cis avoided such duplicity, for when he was ill, he re-fused to have a piece of fur put on his chest inside hishabit if a piece of fur would not also be placed on theoutside of his habit.”111

In interpreting the meaning of taking up one’s crossdaily in Luke 9:23 (#38), Bonaventure again appeals tothe example of Francis and even draws poverty into hisexegetical purview. He writes: “Note that he says: Daily,because daily the penitence of the cross must be newand fresh, so that he may always say: ‘I said: Now Ihave begun’ (Psalm 76:11) like Blessed Francis, who,when he was dying, said that now he was beginning todo good: ‘Brothers, let us begin and make progress, for

110 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 802-803.111 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 805-806. See also 2 Celano Chap-ter 93.130. Francis of Assisi: Early Documents, Volume II: TheFounder, Regis J. Armstrong, J. A. Wayne Hellmann, William J.Short, eds. (New York: New City Press, 2000), p. 332 reads: "Theblessed Francis answered him (his guardian): 'If you want me to putup with this (piece of fox fur) under my tunic, have another piece ofthe same size sewn on the outside, telling people that a piece of fur ishidden underneath.'"

INTRODUCTION lix

up unto now we have made little progress.’112 For thecross of Christ has a renewing nature. Thus 2 Corinthi-ans 4:16 says: ‘Even though our outer man is decaying,yet our inner man is being renewed day by day.’ – Butfor perfect imitation of Christ it is not sufficient to havehumility and austerity. For poverty is also necessary. Sothe text adds: And follow me, namely, through the high-est poverty, by which he did not want to carry anythingwhatsoever on the way, so that he might rightly and ex-peditiously arrive at the homeland.”113

Bonaventure’s final reference to Blessed Francis occursin his interpretation of Luke 16:3 (#5-6) “To dig I amunable; to beg I am ashamed.“ He observes: “So the per-son who flees from the Order of the Cistercians is simi-lar to this steward, for they engage in labor. Or fleesfrom the Order of the Minors, for they beg. And none-theless, this is what sustains him, for he shrinks fromlabor and shame because of his weakness, the first asbeing unendurable, the other as contemptible. But al-though these things are difficult for the weak humanbeing, they are, nevertheless, easy for the Christianmade perfect by Christ. For Christ became poor for oursake and was in many labors, in accordance with thePsalm: ‘I am poor and in labors from my youth’ (87:16).He makes labor palatable and begging honorable, for ‘itis a great honor to follow the Lord,’ as it is said inSirach 23:38. Now the Lord himself says this abouthimself: ‘But I am a beggar and poor, and the Lord issolicitous for my welfare’ (Psalm 39:18). Now this is notsaid with regard to spiritual things, in which the Lord 112 On p. 228 n. 7 QuarEd refer to chapter 14 of Bonaventure's TheMajor Legend of Saint Francis. See Francis of Assisi: Early Docu-ments: The Founder, p. 640: "Let us begin, brothers, to serve theLord our God, for up to now we have done little."113 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, p. 838.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElx

abounds, but relative to temporal things. In these hebecame needy and a beggar for our sakes, according towhat 2 Corinthians 8:9 states: ‘You know the gracious-ness of our Lord Jesus Christ that, although he wasrich, he became poor for our sakes,’ etc.114 And there-fore, blessed Francis says in his Rule that his brothers‘must not be ashamed of begging, because the Lordmade himself poor in this world for our sakes.’115 Never-theless, the grace, which would have made the stewardperfectly conformable to Christ, had not been given tohim. So as an imperfect individual, he gives voice to hisweakness: I am ashamed to beg.116 He does not say: Idespise begging, for that would not be weakness to betolerated, but wickedness to be detested.”117

Not only does Bonaventure refer to and quote BlessedFrancis, but he also holds out for imitation one of Fran-cis’s earliest companions, Blessed Giles of Assisi. InLuke 9:28 (#48) Bonaventure is discussing the questionof when the Transfiguration or contemplation occurs.Matthew has “after six days” whereas Luke reads “aftereight days.” After discussing Augustine’s interpretationof 7+1 days, Bonaventure brings in Blessed Giles and

114 The Vulgate reads propter vos (“for your sakes”) while Bonaven-ture reads propter nos (“for our sakes”). The Vulgate concludes with:“. . . that by his poverty you might become rich.”115 Bonaventure has adapted Chapter VI n. 4 of the Regula Bullata of1223. See Fontes Franciscani, Enrico Menestò and Stefano Brufani,eds. (Assisi: Porziuncola, 1995), p. 176: Nec oportet eos verecundari,quia Dominus pro nobis se fecit pauperem in hoc mundo (“Nor mustthey be ashamed (to beg), because the Lord made himself poor in thisworld for our sakes”). Both Bonaventure and Francis allude to 2Corinthians 8:9.116 Bonaventure’s interpretation in this paragraph becomes clearerwhen the reader recalls its opening sentence: “But although thesethings are difficult for the weak human being, they are, neverthe-less, easy for the Christian made perfect by Christ.”117 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 1477-1479.

INTRODUCTION lxi

writes: “Now a certain Brother Giles, although unso-phisticated in speech, but not in knowledge and ofwhom it was proven that he was most often rapt in con-templation, distinguished the steps in this wise: Thereare seven steps of contemplation. The first is fire, thesecond is anointing, the third is ecstasy, the fourth iscontemplation, the fifth is enjoyment, the sixth is rest,the seventh is glory. And after these nothing remainsexcept eternal happiness.118 – Thus, through these sevendays one arrives at the eighth day of glory. And this iswhat the Holy Spirit wanted to designate by setting outthe days in this manner.”

From what we have just seen, I think it is safe to sug-gest that Bonaventure accentuates another aspect of aFranciscan way of life, namely, poverty.119 I give three 118 See Dicta Beati Aegidii Assisiensis Sec. Codices MSS. Emendataet Denuo Edita, Bibliotheca Franciscana Ascetica Medii Aevi 3(Quaracchi: Collegium St. Bonaventurae, 1905), p. 48: Et dixit sanc-tus frater Aegidius: 'In contemplatione sunt septem gradus: Ignis,unctio, ecstasis, contemplatio, gustus, requies, gloria.’119 But it is not clear that Bonaventure, in highlighting the value ofpoverty, voluntary and involuntary, always condemns the rich. SeeJussi Hanska, “And the Rich Man also died; and He was buried inHell”: The Social Ethos in Mendicant Sermons, Bibliotheca Historica28 (Helsinki: Suomen Historiallinen Seura, 1997), pp. 30-31, 104-106, 140-141. On p. 140 Hanska writes: “Bonaventure’s Commen-tarius in Evangelium S. Lucae is written in a very different style andlevel than his sermon preached in the 1270’s in front of a live audi-ence (probably in Saint Jacques, Paris). The social message (supportfor the poor, condemnation of the rich and riches) is presented loudand clear in the latter whereas it is by and large totally absent fromhis Bible commentary on the same passage of Saint Luke.” He refersto Bonaventure’s Sermo IV for the Second Sunday after Pentecost.But in #2 of this sermon Bonaventure talks about “the proud rich”and “the blessed poor.” And in #3 he qualifies the rich man as usinghis riches male (“evilly”). In #5 Bonaventure qualifies the poor asboni pauperes (“the good poor”). In #7 Bonaventure blends the richman with the evil and the proud. In brief, Hanska’s observationsneed qualification.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElxii

further examples. The first is taken from Luke’s InfancyNarrative. Luke is the only evangelist to mention thatthe baby Jesus was clothed in swaddling clothes in Luke2:7, and Bonaventure makes hay of this fact that hispoor Mother Mary wrapped Jesus in swaddling clothes.Bonaventure observes in #11: “And she wrapped him inswaddling clothes, that is, not in one single garment,but in many, so that he could be called a pauper in tat-ters and would clearly exemplify what the Apostle saysin 1 Timothy 6:8: ‘Having some food and something inwhich we are clothed, let us be content with these.’”120

And what Bonaventure says later on about this sameverse, Luke 2:7 (#15), sounds very Franciscan: “There-fore, the poor mother gave birth to the poor Christ insuch a way that he might invite us to embrace povertyand to be enriched by his penury, according to what 2Corinthians 8:9 says: ‘You know the graciousness of ourLord Jesus Christ, who, although he was rich, becamepoor for your sakes.’ And by means of his all-embracingindigence he condemned avaricious opulence.”121 Fi-nally, in Luke 2:7 (#16) he writes of the poor Jesus; “Al-ready by example he began to demonstrate the state ofperfection which consists of humility, austerity, andpoverty.”122

As far as I can tell, Bonaventure is unique in having adistinctio on poverty, one that has ten members.123 And 120 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 145.121 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 150-151.122 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, p. 151.123 I have been unable to find such a distinctio in the Commentary onLuke’s Gospel by Hugh of St. Cher. Under “V. De uariis nominumappellationibus,” Eucher of Lyon has entries for rich and poor: “Thebeliever who is rich abounds in spiritual goods. In the Apostle: Foryou have become rich in him in all knowledge and in all utterance (1Cor 1:5). And in a bad light: Woe to you rich in the Gospel. The poorperson is the humble person. In the Gospel: And there was a certain

INTRODUCTION lxiii

it should not escape our notice that ten is a perfectnumber. In my presentation of this distinctio I give anabbreviated version in which I eliminate all of Bonaven-ture’s scripture quotations except for those that supporthis tenth point.

In his commentary on Luke 7:22 (#42-43), “The poorhave the gospel preached to them,” Bonaventure givesthis exegesis: “And consider that poverty is able to bepreached as good news and as praiseworthy because ofits ten most excellent merits. – First, because of its un-derstanding of its own weakness.�.�.�.Second, on accountof the excellence of the virtue granted.�.�.�.Third, by rea-son of the affluence of internal joy.�.�.�.Fourth, on ac-count of the wealth of abundant sufficiency.�.�. �.Fifth,because of the custody of supernal protection.�.�.�.Sixth,on account of the pleasure of divine accep-tance.�.�.�.Seventh, because of the condescension of pa-ternal kindness.�.�.�.Eighth, by reason of the eminence ofjudiciary authority.�.�.�.Ninth, on account of the evidence

Lazarus who was poor. And again: Blessed are the poor in spirit. In abad light in the Psalm: For we have become exceedingly poor (PsGr78:8)” (CSEL xxxi, p. 33). In his Liber in distinctionibus dictionumtheologicalium in PL 210:894D Alanus de Insulis observes: “Poor, inthe proper sense. The person is also said to be humble. Thus theLord: Blessed are the poor. The person is also said to be Christ, whowas said to be poor with regard to the things of the world and withrespect to human defects. Thus David (PsGr 24:16): I am a solitaryand poor person. He is also said to be the sinner who lacks spiritualriches. Thus by comparison with its contrary the rich person is saidto be the one who has spiritual riches. Thus John: I know yourtribulation and your poverty, but you are rich, etc.” See Joseph Go-ering, William de Montibus (c. 1140-1213): The Schools and the Lit-erature of Pastoral Care, Studies and Texts 108 (Toronto: PontificalInstitute of Mediaeval Studies, 1992), p. 289 for William de Monti-bus’ observation about “poverty” in his Distinctiones theologicae:“Poverty: I am poor and sorrowful. Christ was poor in the substance(of material goods) . . . and poor in spirit, that is, humble. . . .”

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElxiv

of proven perfection.�.�.�.Tenth, on account of the excel-lence of regal precedence. James 2: 5 says: ‘Has not Godchosen the poor of this world .�.�. to be heirs of the king-dom which God has promised to those who love him?’Matthew 5:3 has: ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit, fortheirs is the kingdom of the heavens.’ – Therefore, ifpoor people are most despised and rich people are mostexalted, it is a most excellent miracle that the poor havethe good news preached to them as kings.”124

The more I studied this unique Bonaventurian distinc-tio, the more amazed and dumbfounded I was. ForBonaventure had engaged in the most elaborate wordplay in formulating this ten-member distinctio inrhyme. I present the Latin and my English translationin parallel columns. The rhymes in iam, is, and ae aretruly extraordinary:

intelligentiam infirmitatis propriae; understanding of its ownweakness

excellentiam virtutis gratuitae; excellence of the virtuegranted

affluentiam iucunditatis internae; affluence of internal joy

copiam abundantis sufficientiae; wealth of abundantsufficiency

custodiam protectionis supernae; custody of supernal protection

complacentiam acceptationis divinae; pleasure of divine acceptancecondescendentiam pietatis paternae; condescension of paternal

kindness

124 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, pp. 604-605. See further Gospel ofLuke, Part I, p. 603 for Bonaventure’s commentary on Luke 7:22(#41): “And note that the text says, The poor have the gospelpreached to them, rather than to those who are virgins or to thosewho are obedient. For poverty is the foundation of evangelical perfec-tion.”

INTRODUCTION lxv

eminentiam auctoritatis iudiciariae; eminence of judiciaryauthority

evidentiam perfectionis probatae; evidence of proven perfectionexcellentiam regalis praesidentiae. excellence of regal precedence

It seems to me that Bonaventure has used all his verbaland numerical skills to make his theological point aboutthe value of poverty. In a sense it is his verbal dance tohonor what Francis called “Lady Poverty.”

I offer a final representative passage on poverty fromBonaventure’s commentary on Luke 14:1 (#2), a versewhich introduces Jesus’ third and final meal with hisadversaries. Bonaventure comments: “So with regard toChrist's kindness the text says: And it came to pass,when he entered the house of one of the rulers of thePharisees on the Sabbath to take food. In this actionChrist's wonderful kindness is manifest. It is great inthat he was associating with mortal human beings, al-though he was God. Baruch 3:36-38 states: ‘This is ourGod, and no other will be compared to him.�.�.�. After-wards he was seen on earth and associated with humanbeings.’ Indeed, it was greater in that he was associat-ing with his persecutors. So what Ezekiel 2:6 states wasfulfilled in him: ‘Son of man,�.�.�. unbelievers and sub-versives are with you, and you live with scorpions.’ Buthis kindness is greatest, because his association tookthe form of intimate sharing of food, so that Revelation3:20 may be fulfilled: ‘I stand at the door and knock. Ifanyone .�.�. opens the door for me, I will come in to himand will sup with him, and he with me.’ So through thefact that he entered a strange house, Christ's humilityis commended. Through the fact that he entered aPharisee's house, love. Through the fact that he ate astranger's food, the poverty of Christ himself. And inthese is shown the highest kindness, by which the most

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElxvi

high wanted to be humbled for us, the most just to asso-ciate with the impious, the most rich to become pooramong men and women. Wherefore, 2 Corinthians 8:9says: ‘You know the graciousness of our Lord JesusChrist, that, although he was rich, he became poor forour sakes, so that by his poverty we125 might becomerich.’”126

In sum, I have provided a mere sample of the rich Fran-ciscan fare that is abundantly present in Bonaventure’sCommentary on Luke’s Gospel. It is not as if Bonaven-ture smuggled themes into Luke’s Gospel that were notthere to begin with. Rather certain Lukan motifs lit uphis Franciscan heart and inspired his very agile pen.

BONAVENTURE’S LUKAN COMMENTARYIS CONTEMPORARY127

During the course of this Introduction I have made somereferences to the contemporary nature of Bonaventure’sCommentary on Luke’s Gospel, e.g., his commentary isscientific. In previous publications I have underlined thefreshness of Bonaventure’s approach. My article in the

125 Bonaventure has changed the Vulgate's twofold vos ("your sakes/you") to a twofold nos ("our sakes/we").126 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 1316-1317. For other examples ofBonaventure’s emphasis on Jesus’ poverty, see his commentary onLuke 9:58 (#105), 10:4 (#8), 10:8 (#16), 11:16 (#42), 12:21 (#31), and13:31 (#66).127 I take “contemporary” in at least two senses. In what follows I willprovide samples of interpretations by Bonaventure of the thirteenthcentury that largely accord with the interpretations of exegetes ofthe twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Bonaventure is also con-temporary in the ways that his expositions provide new avenues ofinterpretation and/or challenge interpretations of today’s status quo.Unfortunately, the scope of this Introduction prevents me fromdelving further into the implications of this second meaning of “con-temporary.”

INTRODUCTION lxvii

Talbert Festschrift emphasized the contemporary na-ture of Bonaventure’s exegesis of Luke’s account of theGerasene demoniac in 8:26-39.128 In my Introduction toGospel of Luke, Part I I dealt with the contemporary na-ture of Bonaventure’s interpretation of three passages:1) Luke 8:22-25: Jesus, the Lord of nature, stills thestorm on the Sea of Galilee; 2) Luke 5:27-32: Throughtheir derogatory remarks the Pharisees are devouringLevi and the disciples of Jesus at Levi’s banquet; 3)Luke 2:7: The baby Jesus in the manger is food for theworld.129

It seems to me that a very good way to make this pointanew is to print out my translation of Bonaventure’s in-terpretation of the literal sense of Jesus’ Parable of theGood Samaritan. I surmise that most New Testamentexegetes would dismiss medieval interpretations of Je-sus’ parables as allegorical. But such a dismissal doesnot accord with the facts. I would venture to affirm thatBonaventure’s interpretation of the literal sense of theParable of the Good Samaritan is not significantly dif-ferent from that Arland J. Hultgren, who is one of theleading contemporary North American interpreters ofthe parables.130 I print out Bonaventure’s relativelyshort exposition of Luke 10:30-37 (#52-61), so that myreaders might be the judges of its power and contempo-rary meaning.

128 “Bonaventure and Talbert on Luke 8:26-39: Christology, Disciple-ship, and Evangelization.”129 See Gospel of Luke, Part I, xxii-xxxvii.130 See his The Parables of Jesus: A Commentary (Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 2000), pp. 93-101.

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElxviii

THE PARABLE OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN(Luke 10:30-37)131

52. “But looking up, Jesus said. After presenting thecommandment directive of how to live, the text nowprovides an illustration that stimulates us to under-stand, and does so through a parable. And the phrase,But, looking up, Jesus commences this part and showsthat the person who wishes to comprehend the truthmust look upwards from whence true light shines.Isaiah 60:1 has: ‘Arise, be enlightened, O Jerusalem,’etc., for Sirach 1:5 says: ‘The word of God on high is thefountain of wisdom.’ Now in this parable four items areintroduced. The first deals with the person who is needybecause of his misery. The second concerns the personwho looks away because of his hardness of heart whereverse 31 says: It happened that a certain priest, etc. Thethird treats the person who comes to aid a person be-cause of his clemency where verse 33 reads: But a Sa-maritan, etc. The fourth item is the teaching that flowsfrom the parable where verse 36 states: Which of thesethree, in your opinion, etc.

Concerning the person who is needy because of his mis-ery the Evangelist introduces two considerations. Thefirst is the removal of good, and the second is the inflic-tion of evil.

53. (Verse 30). Then, first, relative to the removal ofgood the text has: A certain man was going down fromJerusalem to Jericho, and he fell in with robbers, who

131 See Gospel of Luke, Part II, pp. 980-988. For the purposes of thisIntroduction I have eliminated most of the footnotes.

INTRODUCTION lxix

stripped him. So perhaps, they did this because he wasalone. The text mentions this when it says: A certainman, so that what Qoholeth 4:10 states appears to betrue: ‘Woe to the person who is alone. For when he falls,he has no one to lift him up.’ Rather such a person findsthose who rob him. Thus, this man could say what Job19 has: ‘He has stripped me of my glory and has takenthe crown from my head’ (verse 9). ‘Robbers have cometogether and have made a way for themselves throughme’ (verse 12). He fell among these robbers, perhaps, onaccount of the loneliness of the road, where robbers areaccustomed to hide, according to Jeremiah 3:2: ‘Youused to sit along the ways, waiting for them like a rob-ber in a lonely place.’

54. Second, with regard to the infliction of evil the textcontinues: And beating him, they went their way, leav-ing him half-dead, as if to say that they had woundedhim to the point of death, according to what is said ofrobbers in Proverbs 1:16: ‘Their feet run to evil andmake haste to shed blood.’ And the Psalmist has: ‘Theirmouth is full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet areswift to shed blood’ (13:3). Not only did they beat him,lest perchance he report them, but as it is said of Ish-mael in Jeremiah 41:7: ‘Ishmael, son of Nethaniah,killed the men coming to Gedaliah, he and the men whowere with him around the center of the pit.’ And he didthis, lest they report him as is the case here.

55. (Verse 31). But it happened that a priest, etc. After adescription of the person who was needy through a dou-bly miserable condition, the text introduces a personwho looks away because of his hardness of heart. Nowthis person is displayed in two characters, namely, onewho is superior and another who is inferior in ecclesias-tical dignity. – First, then, with regard to the person

ST. BONAVENTURE’S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKElxx

who is superior, the text says: But it happened that apriest was going down the same way. Now it was thepriest's responsibility to teach and observe the Law ofGod in accordance with what Malachi 2:7 states: ‘Thelips of a priest will guard knowledge, and they will seekthe law from his mouth.’ Further, they should be holyaccording to what Leviticus 10:3 has: ‘I will be madeholy in those who approach me, and I will be glorified inthe sight of all the people.’ Wherefore, it was the mostgrave obligation of the priests to guard the law of God,especially with regard to mercy. This one, however, didnot guard the law because of his hardness of heart. –Whence the text continues: And when he saw him, hepassed by, not heeding what Deuteronomy 22:4 reads: ‘Ifyou see your brother's ass or ox to have fallen down inthe way, you shall not look away, but you shall lift it upwith him.’ This man looked away from his brother onaccount of avarice.132 What Jeremiah 6:13 says had al-ready been verified: ‘From the least of them up to thegreatest all are given to avarice. And from the prophetup to the priest, all are guilty of deceit.’ And in a similarway Isaiah 1:23 says: ‘The princes are faithless, com-panions of thieves,’ etc.133

132 This interpretation is found neither in Ambrose nor in Bede. SeeHugh of St. Cher, p. 194v, k: “I respond. Jews are by nature avari-cious, and clerics even more avaricious, as they are wont to alwaysreceive and never give, even though it is said in Acts 20g [35]: It ismore blessed to give than to receive. And these, namely, the priestand Levite were Jews and clerics, and therefore it is no wonder thatthey passed by without showing mercy.” On p. 195h Hugh comments:“In this the avarice of all clerics and priests is noted, for neither thepriest nor the levite is moved to compassion towards the needy andinfirm man.” Hugh then has a long quotation from Jeremiah 6:12-13.It seems clear that Bonaventure is indebted to Hugh for his interpre-tation here.133 It seems that Bonaventure's main reason for quoting Isaiah 1:23is found in what follows: "Your princes are faithless, companions ofthieves. They all love bribes; they run after rewards. They judge not

INTRODUCTION lxxi

56. (Verse 32). Second, concerning the inferior personthe text has: Likewise, a Levite also, when he was nearthe place and saw him, passed him by. And this persondid not attend to what Sirach 7:38-39: ‘Be not wantingin comforting those who weep. And walk with those whoare mourning. Let it not be troublesome to you to visitthe sick.’ It was troublesome for this Levite, for, whenhe was near the place and saw him, he did not want tovisit him. This Levite was not similar to Tobit, who inTobit 4:7, taught his son: ‘Do not turn your face awayfrom any poor person.’ But this Levite turned his eyesaway from this poor man, who was naked and woundedand a member of his own people. And this behavior ismore reprehensible in priests and Levites than in otherpersons. For which reason Hosea 6:6 states: ‘I desiredmercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God morethan holocausts.’ Therefore, this lawyer is said to havestated in Mark 12:33: ‘To love one’s neighbor as oneselfis a greater thing than all holocausts and sacrifices.’

57. (Verse 33). But a certain Samaritan, etc. In the thirdplace is introduced the person who comes to aid anotherbecause of his clemency. There is a twofold effect to themercy this person extends, namely, care for his infir-mity and alleviation of his neediness.

First, then, with regard to mercy that cares for his in-firmity the text says: But a certain Samaritan, as hejourneyed, came upon him and seeing him, with the eyeof his benignity and the need to show him the greatestlove, was moved with mercy, so that he could say whatJob 30:25 states: ‘I wept heretofore for him that had

for the fatherless, and the widow's cause does not come to them." Thereader should recall my earlier remarks about Bonaventure’s half-quotations and non-quotations.