VU Research Portal God as First Known Metselaar, S. 2015 document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in VU Research Portal citation for published version (APA) Metselaar, S. (2015). God as First Known: The Common Ground of Philosophy and Theology in Bonaventure s Thought. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. E-mail address: [email protected] Download date: 25. Sep. 2021 god as first known vrije universiteit God as First Known e Common Ground of Philosophy and eology in Bonaventure’s ought academisch proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad Doctor aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, op gezag van de rector magnicus prof.dr. V. Subramaniam, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van de promotiecommissie van de Faculteit der Wijsbegeerte op woensdag 11 november 2015 om 11.45 uur in de aula van de universiteit, De Boelelaan 1105 door suzanne metselaar geboren te Utrecht promotor: prof.dr. W. Goris Contents Acknowledgments vii Introduction 1 e cognitive priority of the divine before Bonaventure 6 Bonaventure’s transcendentalization of God’s cognitive priority 12 Scholarly literature on Bonaventure’s doctrine of God as rst known: an overview 17 Research questions 23 Methodological remarks 25 Overview of the Dissertation 27 1 God as rst known in Bonaventure’s metaphysica reducens. e tension between two models of foundation 31 1.1 God as rst known and reductive exemplarism 34 1.2 God as rst known and the transcendentals 49 1.3 Conclusions 64 2 Resolutio plena as the method of the doctrine of God as rst known. ree di erent critiques on the ‘semi-plena’ 67 2.1 ree types of metaphysical resolution in omas Aquinas 72 2.2 Bonaventure’s accounts of resolutio into Deus primum cognitum 84 2.3 Conclusions 106 3 e role of knowledge of the divine in Bonaventure’s theory of cognition 113 3.1 e primacy of God in all three acts of cognition 117 3.2 e capacities of the human intellect: II Sent. d.24 p.1 a.2 q.4 119 vi Contents 3.3 Bonaventure’s innatism 133 3.4 e divine and the created as the dual ground of certain knowledge: De scientia Christi IV 138 3.5 Abstraction in Christus unus omnium Magister 147 3.6 Abstraction, judgment and illumination in the Itinerarium II 152 3.7 e abstracting and the resolving intellect 161 3.8 Conclusions 163 4 e structural similarity between the Itinerarium mentis in Deum and the Collationes in Hexaemeron with regard to Bonaventure’s doctrine of God as rst known 167 4.1 Two accounts of God as rst known in the Itinerarium mentis in Deum 169 4.2 Two accounts of God as rst known in the Collationes in Hexaemeron 193 4.3 Conclusions 220 5 e dynamic doctrine of God as rst known in the Itinerarium mentis in Deum and the Collationes in Hexaemeron 223 5.1 Texts on the medieval meditative ascent: a literary- philosophical genre 224 5.2 e Itinerarium mentis in Deum as ‘transformation text’ 226 5.3 e Collationes in Hexaemeron as ‘transformation text’ 229 5.4 e epistemology of the Itinerarium and the Hexaemeron 231 5.5 Conclusions 238 Conclusions 241 Results 241 e legacy of Bonaventure’s ‘transcendental turn’ 250 Summary 259 Bibliography 267 Acknowledgments Contrary to the folklore that claims that writing a dissertation – especially in philosophy – is a solitary project, in which the philoso- pher has stoically turned away from earthly diversions and has retreated to lonely introspection and contemplation, fullling his challenging task solely by relying on his own resources, I have experienced that this process is rather a practice that involves and depends on continuous collaboration with others. Seeing only one’s own name on the cover therefore feels a bit awkward. All those who guided and supported me in so many dierent ways, and who enabled me to nd the time, energy, stamina, joy and courage necessary to complete this project are contributors to the present work. ey deserve my utmost gratitude – thank goodness for this acknowledgement section! In the rst place, I am grateful to my promotor, Wouter Goris, for providing me with the opportunity to write my PhD-thesis at the Department of Philosophy of the VU University. His vast knowledge and erudition proved an invaluable resource for my work, and his thorough feedback contributed enormously to the quality of the thesis. I would like to thank him for his patience – especially as some major life events temporarily came between my research and me – and for allowing me to grow as a philosopher. Furthermore, I would like to thank my reading committee members and the members of my oral defense committee for devoting their precious time to a scrupulous reading of my dissertation. I am also grateful to many other scholars in the eld of the history of philosophy. First of all, to the members of the history of philosophy section of the Department of Philosophy, who commented on the texts that I presented at research seminars. Other scholars did me that favor as well. Paul Bakker was so kind to invite me for his research group meetings to present and discuss my work. e same holds for the Dutch viii Acknowledgments Society for Medieval Philosophy, Medium Aevum, and the Gronings- Nijmeegs Colloquium. My work has benetted enormously from the discussions with the scholars present at these meetings. e many suggestions of Guy Guldentops, in the capacity of editor of Recherches de éologie et Philosophie méiévales, greatly improved the article that became the basis of the third chapter of this dissertation. I am especially indebted to Andreas Speer. As the director of the omas-Institut at the University of Cologne, he was exceptionally hospitable in welcoming me as a researcher at the start of my PhD- project. For half a year, I was immersed in the vivacious microcosm of this institute, buzzing with incredible expertise, where I was immedi- ately taken along in all sorts of scholarly and leisurely activities. In the company of Julia Wittschier, Tobias Schmidt, Stefan Nottelmann and Sabine Folger-Fonfara, I had a wonderful time. During my journey in medieval philosophy, I enjoyed the presence of a group of fellow travellers: Femke Kok, Sander de Boer and Han omas Adriaenssen. ank you for the joyous dinners, fruitful ex- changes and moral support! en there are the roommates and colleagues at the Department of Philosophy. ose I had the pleasure of sharing a room or a corridor with, and who all have helped to make my years as a PhD-student a great time, are Stefan Roski, Kari Marx and Hein van den Berg. Michel Heijdra was a wonderful colleague in peripatetics, and the sparkling presence of Allard den Dulk lightened up any room he happened to step into. I especially appreciated Marije Martijn’s knowledgeable and empathetic support. Gerben Groenewoud has always generously shared his passion and expertise on Bonaventure with me. Both as a student and a lecturer, I admired his (guest) lectures on medieval philosophy, especially on Augustine and Bonaventure. I would also like to thank Gerben Mey- nen for his support. I greatly enjoy working with him in the master programme Philosophy, Bioethics and Health. e kind and genial Benno van Croesdijk deserves a special mention in these acknowledgments. His sharp comments and support in the process of nishing the last bits meant a lot to me – and to the quality of the dissertation. I would like to express my utmost gratitude to and appreciation of Guy Widdershoven, the director of my current workplace: the De- partment of Medical Humanities of VU University Medical Center. I feel very privileged to be working under his supportive, inspiring Acknowledgments ix and edifying supervision. I am just as lucky because of my wonderful colleagues at Medical Humanities, who make working there a true joy: Yolande Voskes, Margreet Stolper, Bert Molewijk, Rouven Porz, Petra Verdonk, Eric Ettema, Rien Janssens, Laura Hartman, Minne Bakker, Janine Trimp, Elleke Landeweer, Hannah Edelbroek, and, last but certainly not least, the lovely Patricia Brinckman. To my friends and family, thank you for your patience with me and for supporting me in so many ways: Lotte, Martine, Annewieke, Pim and Salma, Michiel and Charlotte, Ide and Pauline, Jet and Edward, Janneke and Andre. Roel and Willemijn, thanks for the many wine- suused nights, exceptionally good food, and for your beautiful voices and minds. Two Jannekes were of special importance to me: Janneke Metselaar guided me on my way to a PhD with her wisdom based on experience. e same goes for Janneke Zinkstok, on whose good advice I can always rely. Annemiek Recourt and Renate Schepen are dear and long-time friends. I am proud to have them standing by my side as my two paranimfen, such strong and bright women who have set great examples to me.