153
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D 
F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E 
S O U L :  T H E  F I R S T  L E V E L 
O F  S T .  B O N A V E N T U R E ’ S 
I N T R O S P E C T I V E  A E S T H E T I C S 
F R O M  I T S  I N S P I R I N G 
S O U R C E S
J o s é  M a r í a  S a l v a d o r - G o n z á l e z
Introduction1
Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio (c. 1221–1274) was a Franciscan 
thinker whose immense doctrinal prestige earned him the well-deserved 
privilege of being named a Church Doctor, known as a “Seraphic Doc-
tor.” Among his abundant writings, the philosophical,2 theological,3 
exegetical,4 ascetic and mystical, and those on common Franciscan 
1  I sincerely thank the copyeditor of Poligrafi for the extensive and very professional work 
carried out in editing my article, as well as for the numerous and appropriate corrections and 
suggestions that she made.
2 On the philosophy of Saint Bonaventure, see Johannes Hirschberger, Historia de la Fi-
losofía, Tomo I: Antigüedad, Edad Media, Renacimiento (Barcelona: Herder, 1981), 368‒371; 
and Étienne Gilson, La philosophie au Moyen Âge. Des origines patristiques à la fin du XIVe. Siècle 
(Paris: Payot, 1962), offer brief synthesis. José Antonio Merino Abad, Historia de la filosofía 
franciscana (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1993), 29‒105 is much broader and 
more explicit. The most comprehensive study on this subject is Étienne Gilson’s monograph, 
La philosophie de Saint Bonaventure, 2nd ed., 3rd print (Paris: Vrin, 1948). 
3  His theological works are recorded in León Amorós, Bernardo Aperribay and Míguel 
Oromí, Obras de San Buenaventura. Edición bilingüe. Tomo I. Dios y las criaturas (Madrid: Bib-
lioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1968), 43‒44.
4  His theological works are indicated in Amorós, Aperribay and Oromí, Obras de San Bue-
naventura, 45.
https://doi.org/10.35469/poligrafi.2021.287 Poligrafi, no. 103/104, vol. 26, 2021, pp. 153–173
P O L I G R A F I
154
themes5 stand out. This extensive opus has generated a broad set of 
studies both on his philosophy as a whole and on some of his thematic 
treatises or specific theses.6 
Saint Bonaventure, although he enjoys much universal recognition 
for his theological, exegetical, mystical, catechetical, and religious writ-
ings, he is not generally valued as a philosopher. This devaluation as a 
genuine philosopher is due, above all, to the fact that for him, philoso-
phy lacks autonomous validity if it tries to place itself beyond theology, 
that is, of revelation and faith. However, there are many scholars who 
give a prominent place to the Seraphic in the field of philosophy, and 
more specifically as the founder and undisputed leader of Franciscan 
Scholasticism.
Now, in addition to writing extensive philosophical treatises on met-
aphysical, cosmological, epistemological, anthropological, and ethical 
issues, Bonaventure was also interested in formulating his own Aes-
thetics, in which he knew how to integrate a complex accumulation of 
philosophical and theological ideas. Despite his preference for theologi-
cal, exegetical, spiritual, and mystical themes, Saint Bonaventure did 
not neglect Aesthetics (with its valorization of the sensible, material 
world),7 considering it a valuable way of attaining spiritual access to 
God. 
In his Itinerarium mentis in Deum, Bonaventure constructs the es-
sential elements of his Aesthetics, building upon the central thesis that 
contemplation of the material world allows us to rise contemplatively 
5  His works on Franciscan themes are listed in Amorós, Aperribay and Oromí, Obras de San 
Buenaventura, 46‒49.
6  You can see a part of the extensive bibliography on St. Bonaventure in Amorós, Aperribay 
and Oromí, Obras de San Buenaventura, 43‒70; in the registered by Pietro Miranesi, “Per una 
bibliografía bonaventuriana,” in Dizionario Bonaventuriano: filosofía, teología, spiritualità, ed. 
Ernesto Caroli (Padova: Editrici Francescane, 2008), 25‒46; or in recently (2016) collected by 
Isabel María León Sanz, El arte creador en San Buenaventura. Fundamentos para una teología de 
la belleza (Pamplona: EUNSA, 2016).
7  For a brief exposition of Seraphic’s Aesthetics, see Étienne Gilson, La Filosofía en la Edad 
Media. Desde los orígenes patrísticos hasta el fin del siglo XIV (Madrid: Gredos, 1999), 432‒443; 
Edgar de Bruyne, Estudios de Estética medieval, Vol. III: El siglo XIII (Madrid: Gredos, 1959), 
201‒240; and Tatarkiewicz, Historia de la estética, vol. II: La estética medieval (Madrid: Akal, 
2007 [1970]), 244‒252. Much deeper is the study done by León Sanz, El arte creador en San 
Buenaventura. 
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
155
to God. According to him, the ascent to God from the material world 
must take place in three steps:
a) The first step consists of contemplating God outside of us, by ap-
preciating corporeal, temporal, and external beings as vestiges of 
deity. This constitutes the stage that we have called the immanent 
phase of the Aesthetics of the Seraphic. In this immanent stage, 
Bonaventure already establishes two possibilities of contemplat-
ing God outside of us: that of contemplating him through his ves-
tiges, and that of contemplating in his vestiges in created things.
b) The second intermediate stage, which we have designated as the 
introspective phase of the Bonaventurian Aesthetics, offers two 
other more profound possibilities of contemplating God entering 
within us: that of contemplating him through his spiritual image 
imprinted in the powers of our soul, as a mirror of the Trinity; 
and that of contemplating it as through a mirror and as in a mirror.
c) The third step of the ascent towards God, which we have desig-
nated as the transcendent stage of the Aesthetic of the Seraphic, 
consists of raising ourselves above us to God himself, contem-
plating and revering Him as the First Principle, highly spiritual, 
eternal, and superior of all creation, and rejoicing to know God 
and revere his divine Majesty.
Now, among the complex universe of Bonaventurian Aesthetics, our 
focus in this paper is exclusively concentrated on the first contemplative 
modality of the immanent stage of Bonaventurian Aesthetics: that of 
contemplating it through his spiritual image imprinted in the powers of 
our soul, as a mirror of the Trinity.8 
With this we will try to vindicate the epistemic value and the con-
ceptual originality of such Aesthetics in the face of those who deny or 
undervalue them. Our research contribution will be substantiated here 
in two aspects: firstly, in the intrinsic analysis of the Seraphic theses on 
the aspect under study; secondly, in the extrinsic comparative analysis 
of these Bonaventurian theses with ideas of other philosophers, to try to 
specify some possible influences on our thinker. Lastly, this article will 
8  Neither de Bruyne, Estudios de Estética medieval, Vol. III, nor Tatarkiewicz, Historia de la 
estética, vol. II, explain this introspective Aesthetics.
P O L I G R A F I
156
complement what we have discussed in other papers regarding the first 
two levels of these Aesthetics.9
The introspective stage of Bonaventure’s Aesthetics
The Seraphic Doctor expressed his aesthetic ideas10 in a somewhat 
scattered way, through numerous isolated thoughts in writings of vari-
ous kinds, although he managed to systematize them in a relatively co-
herent, complete manner in his Itinerarium mentis in Deum (1259).11 
In this book, he exposes the intricate details of the ascent that the hu-
man being must embark upon from the created world to God, whom 
he can contemplate through six successive degrees or levels. According 
to our author, in the first two levels–the nucleus of what we have called 
the “immanent,” “material,” or “empirical” stage of the Bonaventurian 
Aesthetics–, man achieves an embryonic contemplation of the Creator 
by considering His signs or vestiges upon objects. Our Franciscan phi-
losopher develops the intermediate stage of that contemplative ascent 
–which we have called the “introspective” stage of Saint Bonaventure’s 
Aesthetics–in Chapters 3 and 4 of Itinerarium mentis in Deum. Chapter 
9  See the papers of José María Salvador-González, “Per imaginem et in imagine: El esta-
dio introspectivo de la estética de San Buenaventura en su Itinerarium mentis in Deum, un 
discurso barroco avant la lettre,” in Del Barroco al Neobarroco: Realidades y transferencias cul-
turales, ed. R. de la Fuente Ballesteros, J. Pérez-Magallón, and J.R. Jouve-Martin (Valladolid: 
Universitas Castellae, 2011), 295‒309; José María Salvador-González, “Ascensio in Deum per 
vestigia et in vestigios: La Estética inmanente de S. Buenaventura y sus posibles refle¬jos en 
la iconografía de la Basílica de San Francisco,” Mirabilia Journal 16 (2013): 79‒117, http://
dx.doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4150.6245; José María Salvador-González, “La Estética inmanente 
de San Buenaventura desde sus fuentes de inspiración,” Revista de Filosofía 48 (2022) (in 
press); José María Salvador-González, “The concept vestigium in the immanent Aesthetics of 
St. Bonaventure” (under revisión in an academic journal). We have also partially studied the 
“transcendent” phase of Bonaventurian Aesthetics in the article José María Salvador-González, 
“The second level of St. Bonaventure’s Transcendent Aesthetics: Speculating the divine Trinity 
through the good,” Mirabilia Journal 31 (2020): 741‒755, https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/mirabilia/
mirabilia_a2020n31/mirabilia_a2020n31p741.pdf.
10  On the aesthetic scope in the writings of Saint Bonaventure, see Orlando Todisco, “Di-
mensione estetica del pensare bonaventuriano,” Doctor Seraphicus 54 (2007): 17‒76.
11  Bonaventura de Balneoregio, »Itinerarium mentis in Deum,« in S. Bonaventurae Opera 
Omnia (Quaracchi): Q V, 285‒316. In the text of this article, we will cite this work with the 
abbreviation “It,” followed by the chapter in Roman numerals, and its section or epigraph in 
Arabic numerals.
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
157
3 deals with how man speculates on God by the imprinted image of 
Him in his natural human potencies; Chapter 4 discusses how man 
speculates on God through his image of Him, reformed by grace.12 In 
the last two levels of the contemplative ascent towards God, which con-
stitute what we could call the “mystical” phase of the Bonaventurian 
Aesthetics, man can achieve “mental excesses” through ecstatic contem-
plation of God by meditating on His essential attributes as Supreme 
Being (fifth level) and His personal properties as absolute Good (sixth 
level). 13
Unable to explain in this brief article each of these complex six levels 
established by our author, we will now specify the details of the first 
level of the introspective stage of Bonaventure’s Aesthetics.
This first level of the introspective stage is indeed the third level of 
the contemplative ascent to God in the Bonaventurian system. It con-
sists of entering into our soul to see the Creator through a mirror.
At the beginning of Chapter 3 of Itinerarium mentis in Deum, the 
Seraphic Doctor recalls that in the two preceding contemplative levels –
which constitute what we have called the “immanent” phase of his Aes-
thetics14–created beings are seen as vestiges of God; and through these 
vestiges man, after entering his mind, “where the divine image shines 
forth,”15 has already made a rudimentary contemplation of the Creator 
(It, III, 1). The Franciscan mystic adds that in climbing the third step 
12  On the Bonaventurian idea of man as the image of God, see Manuel Barbosa de Costa 
Freitas, “A doutrina bonaventuriana do homem-imagem e a coexistencia da fê e do saber,” in 
San Bonaventura Maestro di vita francescana, Vol. II, ed. Alfonso Pompei (Roma: Pontificia 
Facoltà teologica S. Bonaventura, 1976), 441‒453.
13  On the third level of the Aesthetics of Bonaventure, see Cornelio Fabro, “Contemplazione 
mística e intuizione artística del Seraphicus,” Doctor Seraphicus 9 (1962): 5‒13; and J. E. Arias 
Rueda, “Conocimiento de lo bello desde una perspectiva estética de la sensibilidad trascenden-
tal en los capítulos VI y VII del Itinerarium mentís in Deum de San Buenaventura,” Francisca-
num 44 (2002): 137‒220.
14  Edgar De Bruyne, L’Esthétique du Moyen Âge (Louvain: Université Catholique de Louvain, 
1947), 101‒109, employs the term “immediate Aesthetic” (Esthétique immédiate) when refer-
ring to this Aesthetic based on the sensitive beauty of bodily beings, which he studies above all 
in the thinkers of the Saint-Victor School. 
15  Giuseppe Beschin, “La creatura simbolo del Creatore in S. Bonaventura alla luce della 
ragione e della fede,” Doctor Seraphicus 47 (2000): 46‒47, explains this Bonaventurian thesis of 
the analogy of creatures with respect to the Creator, highlighting the differences between mate-
rial creatures that are only distant vestiges of God, and creatures composed of matter and spirit, 
P O L I G R A F I
158
of the ascent towards the Supreme Being,16 we must see God through a 
mirror, entering our mind,17 in which the light of truth18 and the image 
of the Trinity shines (It. III, 1).
Now, our author has no qualms about invoking the Christian dog-
ma of the divine Trinity. He considers it evident that if entering within 
himself, man reflects on the operations of his three spiritual powers 
(memory, intellect, and will),19 he will be able intellectually contemplate 
God as by an image,20 “which is to see Him as through a mirror and 
as in an enigma” (It. III, 1). As you can see, here our author begins to 
draw not a few theological presuppositions, quite problematic from the 
perspective of a purely rational, secular philosophy. In later paragraphs, 
we will discuss some of these a-rational assumptions.
What we have outlined so far is the part of the Bonaventurian Aes-
thetics that we could define as his “introspective” phase. To better un-
derstand it, one may find it helpful to follow step by step the complex 
and twisted–at times somewhat obscure–reasoning of our author about 
the skills that each of these three spiritual aptitudes (memory, intellect, 
and will) have to allow us to contemplate God intellectually.
such as men, who are close images of God, for they have attributes common to the three divine 
persons.
16  Numerous commentators, among whom we can mention Giovanni Santinello, “S. Bo-
naventura e la nozione dell'essere,” Doctor Seraphicus 10 (1983): 69-80, and Orlando Todisco, 
“Esse. Esentia,” in Dizionario Bonaventuriano: filosofía, teología, spiritualità, ed. Ernesto Caroli 
(Padova: Editrici Francescane, 2008), 345–346, explain this thesis of Saint Bonaventure on the 
need to be in and of itself, which is the first essential attribute of God.
17  On the third level of the Aesthetics of Bonaventure, see, among others, Fabro, “Contem-
plazione mística,” 5‒13, and Arias Rueda, “Conocimiento de lo bello,” 137‒220.
18  On the philosophical, theological, anthropological and moral projections that according 
to the Seraphic Doctor are derived from that illuminating presence of God in the human soul, 
see Elisa Cuttini, Ritorno a Dio. Filosofia, teologia, etica della mens nel pensiero di Bonaventura 
da Bagnoregio (Soveria Manelli (Catanzaro): Rubbetino Editore, 2002).
19  Jacques Guy Bougerol, “San Bonaventura: il sapere e il credere,” Doctor Seraphicus 22 
(1975): 12‒13, explains accurately the Bonaventurian thesis according to which man, by his 
three powers of the soul, memory, intelligence and will, is a true analogous image of the Word 
of God.
20  Chavero Blanco, Imago Dei. Aproximación a la antropología teológica de san Buenaven-
tura (Murcia: Espigas, 1993), goes on to extensively explain this anthropological-philosophical 
thesis of Saint Bonaventure according to which the human being, due to his essential mental 
qualities, is a clear image of God.
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
159
a) According to Bonaventure, memory–being able to retain and 
represent both present things, which are corporeal and temporal, 
and successive things, which are simple and eternal (It. III, 2)–
has three fundamental skills: 21
1. to retain past things by recollection, present things by suspicion 
and future things by foresight (It. III, 2);
2. to retain simple things, such as the principles of discrete and con-
tinuous quantity, namely, the point, the instant, and the unit, 
which are three essential elements to understand everything de-
rived from them (It. III, 2);
3. to retain the principles and axioms of the sciences as eternal cog-
nitive contents and eternally, since we neither forget them nor 
deny them, since reason accepts them as something familiar and 
connatural (It, III, 2).
The Bagnoregio philosopher adds that thanks to his first retention 
of temporal things past, present, and future, memory is an image of 
eternity whose indivisible present encompasses all times (It, III, 2); 
thanks to its second retention of things past by recollection, present by 
suspicion, and future by foresight, memory is not only capable of being 
informed of what exists outside of man through phantoms, but it can 
also receive simple forms from above. Elusive by the senses or through 
representations of sensible objects (It, III, 2); thanks to its third re-
tention of scientific principles and axioms, memory has an immutable 
light in the mind, in which it is capable of remembering immutable 
truths (It, III, 2). Hence, the Seraphic infers that by memory operations 
the human soul is the divine image and likeness, capable of having God 
present and knowing in action and participating in Him in potentiality 
(It, III, 3).
Now, it is evident that our Franciscan scholastic introduces several 
free presuppositions here, hardly acceptable to a rationalist mind. To 
refer to only one of them as an example, to pretend that by retaining 
things past, present, and future, memory is an image of eternity is en-
tirely gratuitous: in fact, no memory can keep at the present moment 
21  On this point, see, among others, Prini, “‘Ars aeterna’ e ‘memoria’ nel pensiero di S. Bo-
naventura,” Doctor Seraphicus 22 (1975): 21‒29.
P O L I G R A F I
160
(in which supposedly it would be an “image of eternity”) future things, 
which have not yet happened and we do not even know if they will or 
will not happen one day.
b) After analyzing the intellect, Bonaventure points out that his 
power consists of knowing the meaning of the terms, the propo-
sitions, and the sentences (It, III, 3).
According to him, the intellect knows the meanings of the terms 
when it understands what each of them is by definition (It, III, 3). As 
the definition is necessarily given by more general terms, and these must 
be defined by even more general terms, until reaching the supreme and 
most general terms, the Seraphic concludes that if we ignore the latter, 
we will never be able to define the lower terms (It, III, 3). Therefore, if 
we do not know Being by itself, we will not fully define a particular be-
ing; nor can we know Being by itself, without knowing it with its three 
essential properties: unity, truth, and goodness (It, III, 3).
The Seraphic again incurs gratuitous presuppositions: since from the 
knowledge of some terms and definitions (a gnoseological status), it is 
impossible to jump without more to the existence of being by itself 
(an ontological status of the Supreme Being). From the simple definition 
of an entity, we cannot necessarily go on to its effective existence. For 
example, the definition of “the number infinite” is clear and precise, 
without implying that we can specify it by the existence of a specific 
number. As if that were not enough, nor can we admit that this alleged 
Being by itself essentially possesses the transcendental properties of uni-
ty, truth, and goodness. Where does the author get such characteristics?
Our author adds that, on the other hand, the intellect is capable of 
thinking of being according to antithetical possibilities, namely, as di-
minished or complete, as perfect or imperfect, as being in potentiality 
or being in the act, as conditioned or unconditioned, as partial. or total, 
as changing or permanent, as being by another or by itself, as mixed 
with non-being or as pure being, as dependent or absolute, as anterior 
or posterior, as changeable or immutable, as simple or compound (It, 
III, 3). Hence, he believes he can affirm that as denials and defects are 
known only through the corresponding affirmations, our understand-
ing cannot fully know any created being without knowing the pur-
est, complete and absolute Being, an unconditioned and eternal Being, 
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
161
which in its purity possesses the reasons for all things;22 in fact, the 
intellect cannot know that something is defective and incomplete with-
out knowing in some way the Being exempt from all defects (It, III, 3).
Without stopping now to discuss each of the various gratuitous 
statements made here by the Seraphic, let us insist only on the idea that 
the possibility of thinking that there could be a “very pure, complete 
and absolute Being” does not allow us to affirm that it really exists: 
thinking or defining a centaur or a Martian does not necessarily imply 
that one or the other exists.
Analyzing the ability to know the propositions, Bonaventure asserts 
that the intellect understands the meaning of these when it knows with 
certainty that they are true and that such truth is absolute and immu-
table (It, III, 3); but, because it is changeable, our intellect cannot see 
the truth shine in such an immutable way if it is not thanks to another 
immutable light, which is Christ (It, III, 3).
Regarding the competence to know the inference, the author asserts 
that our intellect perceives the meaning of this inference by seeing that 
the conclusion necessarily derives from the premises (even if they are 
formed by contingent terms), a necessary relationship that the intellect 
discovers both in existing things and in non-existent ones (It, III, 3). In 
his view, the need for this inference does not derive from the existence 
of being in matter, since such existence is contingent, nor from the ex-
istence of things in the soul, since they do not really exist in it (It, III, 
3), but it derives from the “exemplary nature of eternal art, in which 
things have mutual aptitude and relationship, as they are represented 
in eternal art.” (It, III, 3). Our author highlights the indissoluble link 
of our intellect with eternal truth 23 since nothing true can be known 
without it (It, III, 3).
22  In this respect Gilson, La Filosofía en la Edad Media, 439, points out that according to 
Saint Bonaventure, man can reach eternal reasons or ideas as they are in God, only as his reflec-
tion and also in a confused way. Despite this, divine Ideas or eternal reasons are the immediate 
rule of our knowledge, so that we see the truth not simply for eternal reasons, but in eternal 
reasons.
23  As do many other commentators, Davide Riserbato, “Bonaventura e il fondamento di ogni 
conoscenza certa,” Rivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica 109, no. 4 (2017): 879‒888, https://www.
jstor.org/stable/26477238, highlights the Bonaventurian theory on the role of divine illumination to 
enable man to know the truth.
P O L I G R A F I
162
Again, you can find here a petitio principii: from the necessary infer-
ence between the conclusion that my cat, because it is an animal, will 
die one day, because every animal is mortal, neither the “exemplary na-
ture of eternal art” is necessarily inferred, nor is our intellect necessarily 
linked to “eternal truth.”
c) Saint Bonaventure then considers the will, the operation of which 
he appreciates in advice, judgment, and desire. Regarding the ad-
vice to suggest the best among several alternatives (It, III, 4), the 
Seraphic states that nothing can be qualified as the best except by 
resemblance to the optimal: “nobody knows if one thing is better 
than another without knowing that is closer to the optimum” (It, 
III, 4). Hence, he deduces that whoever advises on the best neces-
sarily carries the notion of the highest good (It, III, 4).
Again, it is worth asking how our scholastic can justify that the good, 
the best, and the optimum in contingent and relative beings necessarily 
require the existence of the highest and absolute Good.
Regarding the operation of the will in the judgment, Bonaventure 
believes that the true judgment about something that the advice appre-
ciates necessarily derives from a law whose absolute rectitude is known 
with certainty by the person issuing the judgment. That is why this law 
is superior to our mind, and it judges by this law, as it is imprinted on 
it (It, III, 4). He concludes that since there is nothing superior to the 
human mind but its Creator, our will, when it thoroughly judges and 
decides, touches “the divine laws” (It, III, 4).
Finally, explaining the third operation of the will, desire, the author 
claims that it tends towards what it loves in the highest degree, that is, the 
supreme happiness which is only achieved by possessing the optimum 
and the ultimate end (It, III, 4). As a result, he concludes that the human 
desire for the will only craves the highest Good, or what is ordered to the 
highest Good, or what has the appearance of the highest Good (It, III, 
4). In his opinion, so great is the force with which the highest Good at-
tracts us,24 that just by wanting it, the creature can love something (Cf, It, 
24  Orlando Todisco, “Bonum,” in Dizionario Bonaventuriano: filosofía, teología, spiritualità, 
ed. Ernesto Caroli (Padova: Editrici Francescane, 2008), 221‒227, explains with clarity and 
abundant documentary apparatus that ontological or transcendental category of God accord-
ing to the Seraphic.
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
163
V, 1), to the point of committing a serious error when it accepts as true 
what it is a simple image or simulacrum of good (It, III, 4).
Not very different is the level of gratuity that Saint Bonaventure 
shows when exposing the capacity of the will to judge and desire: it is 
not seen why appreciating the rectitude or correctness of a judgment 
necessarily implies “touching the divine laws”; nor is it explained why 
wanting some good and some happiness necessarily implies the exist-
ence of supreme happiness and the highest and last Good.
In any case, from what has been stated so far it is clear that for the 
Seraphic–firmly based on the foundations of his unshakable Christian 
faith–our soul maintains great proximity to God, taking into account 
that “memory leads us to eternity, the intelligence to the truth, and the 
elective power [the will] to the utmost goodness, according to their 
respective operations” (It, III, 4).
After exposing that third degree of the contemplative ascent of man 
towards God, Saint Bonaventure concludes that by speculating in its 
principle one (a single substantial entity) and triune (through its three 
powers), which make it the image of God, the human soul is aided by 
the lights of philosophy and science, which, by perfecting and inform-
ing it, represent the Trinity in three ways (It, III, 6). Taking his primor-
dial theological presuppositions to the last consequences, the mystic 
Doctor states that all philosophy is natural, rational, or moral. On this 
basis, he asserts that natural philosophy, which deals with the cause of 
existence, leads to the power of God the Father; rational philosophy, 
which studies the reason for understanding, leads to the wisdom of the 
Word of God; and moral philosophy, by taking care of the order of liv-
ing, leads to the goodness of the Holy Spirit (It, III, 6).
Our mystical author thus confirms with absolute frankness the sig-
nificant theological-trinitarian presuppositions that solidly sustain his 
entire philosophical-aesthetic system, not only in its central parts but 
also in each statement derived from those.
After these disquisitions, Bonaventure develops the second level of 
the introspective phase of his Aesthetics,25 which consists of the human 
25  According to Bonaventure’s theoretical approach, the second level of the introspective 
phase of his Aesthetics constitutes the fourth degree of man’s ascent to God.
P O L I G R A F I
164
being having to contemplate God from within his soul as an image 
of God (It, IV, 1).26 According to him, this is only achieved through 
Christ (It, IV, 2), for which man needs to clothe himself with the faith, 
hope, and charity of Christ to enjoy the absolute divine Truth (It, IV, 
2). As if that were not enough, he asserts that to reach the fourth degree 
of contemplation,27 the human being needs an abundance of devotion 
and the support of the grace of God, reformed by the theological vir-
tues, by the delights of the spiritual senses, and by ecstatic suspensions 
(It, IV, 3).28 Furthermore, the Seraphic argues that in this fourth degree 
of contemplative ascent to God, the means of the argument are the 
Holy Scriptures (and not Philosophy), which hierarchically illuminate 
the works of reparation, especially on faith, hope, and charity, all vir-
tues–above all, charity–that must repair and reform the soul (It, IV, 3).
It is thus evident that Bonaventure introduces in this fourth contem-
plative degree a plexus of gratuitous religious assumptions and complex 
Christocentric reflections, which enter fully into Christian dogmatic 
theology, entirely outside of natural and non-confessional philosophy. 
So, due to the theological presuppositions and the dogmatic–almost 
mystical–corollaries that it contains, we will not develop this fourth 
degree of the intellectual ascent towards divinity, which, as previously 
mentioned, is the second level of the introspective phase of the Se-
raphic’s Aesthetics.
26  Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 264, considers that in this thesis Saint Bonaventure is 
inspired by Plotinus. According to this historian Plotinus, he affirms that the metaphysical re-
turn to the one, that is, to God, is carried out in an ethical way in the individual soul when man 
frees himself from his fall and transcends his individuality that distances him from the original 
unity, and tends towards new to the one,transcending matter, the principle of multiplicity, and 
becoming more and more spiritual.
27  This Bonaventurian topic of the aesthetic contemplation of the human being in his ascent 
is analyzed by among others Macario Ofilada Mina, “St. Bonaventure: Aesthetics and Contem-
plation in the Journey towards God,” Studies in Spirituality 16 (2006): 151‒164, https://doi.
org/10.2143/SIS.16.0.2017796.
28  In this thesis Bonaventure is doubtlessly inspired by Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita, whose 
thought at this point Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 326, synthesizes. According to this 
historian, Pseudo-Dionysius maintains that if every movement is a yearning and tending to-
wards the beautiful and the good, it turns out that the whole world is animated by a movement 
towards God; And in the concrete case of the human soul, this return to God is made through 
faith and prayer until reaching the ecstatic union with the One.
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
165
Background to the first level of the introspective phase of 
Bonaventurian Aesthetics
It is now time to analyze some philosophical sources in which our 
author bases three essential theses of the introspective stage of his Aes-
thetics. He proposes these theses after subtly reformulating specific the-
ories consolidated as traditional doctrine under the aegis of conspicu-
ous ancient and medieval philosophers.
In the paragraphs that follow, we do not pretend to exhaust all the 
sources that inspire the Seraphic in the subject analyzed. We believe, 
however, that what we present below could reflect some influences 
which may have inspired the Seraphic when proposing his central the-
sis in this field.
Fundamental presupposition
As previously mentioned, Bonaventure bases his introspective Aes-
thetics on the postulate that if a man enters within himself and consid-
ers the operations and habits of his three powers, memory, intellect, 
and will, he will be able by himself to see God as though an image, “as 
through a mirror and as in an enigma” (It, III, 1).
Such a consideration of the three powers of the human soul (memo-
ria, intellectus, voluntas) seems to be taken from Saint Augustine, who, 
according to Johannes Hirschberger,29 is inspired in turn by Plotinus, 
when he highlights as essential attributes of the One (God) intelligence, 
freedom, and will.30
From this basic assumption, the Seraphic derives these three core 
theses, whose sources of inspiration we are now trying to elucidate.
29   In this respect, Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 264, points out that according 
to Plotinus, in the One freedom and will develop in all their fullness. Hersberger adds that these 
voluntarist concepts of Plotinus “will help [Saint] Augustine to see God as love and the Holy 
Spirit, within the Trinity, as the substantial bond that unites the Father and the Son, also as will 
and love (memoria - intelllectus - voluntas).” (Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 264)
30  According to Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 262, Christian speculation on the Trin-
ity is inspired by the system of Plotinus, for whom Trinitarian speculation must refer only to 
God who is identical with the one, endowed with intelligence, freedom and will in all its full-
ness. 
P O L I G R A F I
166
Memory as a means of contemplative access to God
In Bonaventure’s e opinion, thanks to memory, in its ability to retain 
the principles and axioms of science as eternal knowledge and in an 
eternal way, the soul is the image and divine likeness (It, III, 1), capable 
of knowing God in the act, and able to participate in Him in potential-
ity (It, III, 2).
In proclaiming such a momentous theophanic role to memory, the 
Franciscan mystic seems to have no background influences. It only oc-
curs to us to partially relate this Bonaventurian proposal with Plato in 
his theory of reminiscence or anamnesis (ἀνάμνησις). According to this 
Platonic theory, man, when seeing in this material world the individual 
entities (each of them a fictitious shadow of the corresponding uni-
versal, abstract idea subsisting in hyperuranium (ὑπερουράνιος τόπος), 
recalls the true ideas which he knew in hyperuranium when his soul 
had not yet been imprisoned in matter (the human body).
Now, although Plato and Bonaventure put memory as the cen-
tral axis here, the differences between the conceptions of each one are 
substantial, to the point of making them practically incompatible. To 
begin with, the Seraphic completely rejects the Platonic thesis of the 
preexistence of the soul in contemplation of the real and true ideas in 
hyperuranium. As a logical consequence, he also discards the a priori 
and innate knowledge of the truth on the part of man, since, according 
to him, everything that man knows, he knows through his sensory and 
intellectual experience, without any innateness.
The intellect as a means of contemplative access to God
As we have seen before, another basic thesis of Bonaventure is also 
that the intellect, thanks to its ability to know the meaning of terms, 
propositions, and statements (It, III, 2), maintains an indissoluble link 
with the eternal truth (God), because without it, human understanding 
cannot know anything true (It, III, 3). In this centrality of the intellect 
in its contemplative ascent towards God and relation to relative similar-
ity or concordance between God and the human intellect, the Seraphic 
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
167
seems to be inspired by some ideas of Plotinus, Saint Augustine, and 
Hugh of Saint-Victor.
For Plotinus (205-270), in effect, the source of beauty is only spir-
it, never matter, to the point that the sensory world is beautiful only 
thanks to the idea, to the model or archetype, to the inner form of 
the spirit.31 Tatarkiewicz explains this thesis of the Neoplatonic master, 
saying that “Only the spirit is capable of recognizing the spirit and, 
therefore, only he can perceive beauty, precisely managing to capture 
and receive it because of their mutual kinship.”32 In that order of ideas, 
Plotinus expresses:
What he sees must be applied to contemplation after having become akin 
and similar to what is seen. For no eye would have ever seen the sun if it had 
not become similar to the sun, and no soul could see beauty without having 
become beautiful. Make yourself, then, first everything deiform and beautiful 
if you intend to contemplate God and beauty.33
And in another passage Plotinus raises his transcendentalist and al-
most mystical approach even more, stating: “Inner contemplation and 
communion not with the statue or with the image, but with the divin-
ity itself […] and this may not be a contemplation, but another way of 
seeing, an ecstasy.”
However, much more than in Plotinus, it is in Saint Augustine of 
Hippo (354‒430) that Bonaventure bases his thesis on the theophanic 
capacity of human understanding. For Augustine, ideas remain immu-
table and eternal in the mind of God, in which they give true form to 
created things. This is how St. Augustine points it out:
Ideas are given, which are permanent, essential, immutable forms of things; 
They were not themselves formed but remain eternally identical and are in the 
mind of God. And while they are neither born nor perish, everything that has 
a beginning and an end and is really born and dies is configured according to 
them. 34
31  Tatarkiewicz, Historia de la estética, I: La estética antigua (Madrid: Akal, 2000), 329, ex-
plains the significant spiritualist thesis of Plotinus in a synthetic way. 
32  Tatarkiewicz, Historia de la estética, I, 330.
33  Plotinus, cited in Tatarkiewicz, Historia de la estética, I, 337.
34  Augustinus, De div. Quaest. 83, qu, 46, 2, cited in Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 303.
P O L I G R A F I
168
For Saint Augustine, man can apprehend true ideas through spir-
itual intellect from this original source in God’s mind. In his treatise De 
vera religione, when wondering where to find the necessary, absolute, 
and eternal value of truth, he affirms that it is not found in sensory 
experience but in the spirit of man. This is how he puts it: “Don’t go 
outside, come back to yourself; in the inner man dwells the truth; and 
if you find your nature to be changeable, transcend yourself ”.35 
In an earlier passage in the same book, he notes: “I delight in the 
utmost equality, which I do not perceive with the eyes of the body, but 
with those of the mind; for this reason, I judge that the things that I 
perceive with the eyes are so much better the closer they are by their 
nature to those that I perceive with the spirit”.36
The bishop of Hippo complements this thesis with his theory of 
enlightenment, a theory according to which God radiates truth into 
the spirit of man, not through supernatural revelation, but natural il-
lumination. In his opinion, even in the case of being blinded by lust, 
every rational spirit, when he thinks and reasons, can arrive at the truth, 
but this should not be attributed to himself, but in the light of the 
truth, which enlightens in your capacity so that you can feel the truth 
by reasoning.37
Similarly, Saint Bonaventure, by necessarily linking the capacities 
of the human intellect with God, who illuminates it, also seems to be 
inspired by some theses of Hugh of Saint-Victor (c. 1096‒1141), such 
as the one he formulates as follows:
Our spirit cannot ascend towards the truth of invisible entities, unless it is 
illustrated by the consideration of visible things, that is, in such a way that it 
judges that visible forms are images of invisible beauty.38
And a few lines later, Hugh of Saint Victor adds:
35  Augustinus, “De vera religione, XLI, 77,” J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series 
Latina, vol. 34, col. 151.
36  Augustinus, “De vera religione, XLI, 77,” J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series 
Latina, vol. 34, col. 147.
37  Augustinus, cited in Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 295.
38  Hugo de Sancto Victore, Exp. in Hierarchia Coelesti S. Dionysii, Liber II, J.-P. Migne, Pa-
trologiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina, vol. 175, col. 949..
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
169
there is some similarity between visible beauty and invisible beauty, ac-
cording to the similarity or emulation that the invisible creator [God] consti-
tuted to one and the other, similarity in which both configure, as in a mirror, 
a single image of different proportions.39
The will as a means of contemplative access to God
As previously explained, Saint Bonaventure maintains that the will 
expresses itself in advice (which necessarily implies the notion of the 
highest Good) (It, III, 4), in judgment (which requires having the divine 
laws printed) (It, III, 4), and in desire (which is only achieved by pos-
sessing the optimum and the ultimate end (It, III, 4), since man only 
desires the highest Good, or what is ordered to the highest Good, or 
what has the appearance of supreme Good) (It, III, 4).
Plotinus, by granting the will a leading role in the face of the pri-
macy of intellect in Greek intellectualism, may have been able to inspire 
the Franciscan mystic. This is how Plotinus expresses his thesis: “The 
works of the one are the manifestations of his will since he does nothing 
without wanting to. But his actions are in a way his substance. His will 
and his substance are therefore the same”.40
However, at this point, the Seraphic is inspired above all by Saint 
Augustine, whose voluntarism is reflected in lapidary phrases like this: 
“You made us, Lord, for yourself, and our heart is restless until it rests 
in you”.41 Or this other sentence: “The will is always present; even the 
movements of the soul are nothing but will”.42 Or when the bishop of 
Hippo states:
Just as, before being happy, the notion of happiness is already imprinted in 
our minds; and through it, we already know, and with faith and without any 
doubt, we say that we want to be happy; so also before being wise, we have 
39  Hugo de Sancto Victore, Exp. In Hierarch. Coel., PL 175, 949.
40  Plotinus, Enneada VI, 8,13, cited in Hirschberger, Historia de la Filosofía, 264.
41  Augustinus, “Confessiones, I, 1,” in Obras completas de San Agustín (Madrid: Biblioteca de 
Autores Cristianos, 1998, col. II), 73.
42  Augustinus, “De civitate Dei, XIV, 6,” J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series 
Latina, vol. 42, col. 1040. 
P O L I G R A F I
170
already imprinted in our spirit the notion of wisdom, by which each one of us, 
when asked if he wants to be wise, answers yes, without a shadow of a doubt.43
Nor can it be ruled out that Saint Bonaventure had at this point been 
influenced by Johannes Scotus Eriugena (c. 810‒c. 877), for whom 
“visible forms […] are figurations of invisible beauty, through which 
Divine Providence guides the human soul towards the pure and invis-
ible beauty of its truth”.44 Or, as Gilson puts it, interpreting Eriugena: 
“everything is essentially a sign, a symbol, through which God makes 
himself known to us: nihil enim visibiliium rerum corporaliumque est, 
ut arbitror,  quod non incorporale quid et intelligibile significet (De div. 
Nat., V, 3).”45 
Conclusions
We could synthesize what we have highlighted thus far about the in-
trospective phase of Bonaventurian Aesthetics in these brief assertions:
1. At the third level of his contemplative ascent to God, man can see 
Him as in the mirror image of his soul by considering the opera-
tions of his three spiritual powers, his memory, intellect, and will.
2. As these three spiritual powers, totally different from each other, 
are proper to a single substance (the individual human soul), they 
are analogous images that reveal God one in substance and triune 
in Persons.
3. Bonaventure has no qualms here about mixing rational philoso-
phy with Christian dogmatic theology. For him, reason and rev-
elation are not two separate or antithetical elements but integrate 
the same human way of thinking. For him, man’s rational intel-
ligence needs to know the truth, to be illuminated by God.
4. In formulating the various theses that structure the first level of 
the introspective stage of his Aesthetics, Bonaventure draws in-
spiration from more than a few statements by other pagan and 
43  Augustinus, “De libero arbitrio, Liber II, 9, 26,” J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, 
Series Latina, vol. 32, 1254‒1255)
44  Johannes Scotus Erigena, In Hierarchia Coelesti Dionysii I, PL 122, 138‒139.
45  Cited in Gilson, La Filosofía en la Edad Media, 210.
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
171
Christian authors. In one or another of these Bonaventurian aes-
thetic theses, we believe we have seen some traces of Plato, Ploti-
nus, Saint Augustine, Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita, Johannes 
Scotus Eriugena, and Hugh of Saint-Victor.
5. Apart from these foreseeable influences, the Seraphic–even grant-
ing himself numerous unjustified theological-dogmatic presup-
positions–shows in his aesthetic theory unquestionable origi-
nality, in which he succeeds in balancing the intellectual and 
volitional dimensions.
B i b l i o g r a p h y
Augustinus. “De vera religione, XLI, 77.” J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus 
Completus, Series Latina, vol. 34, 12‒173.
Augustinus. “De libero arbitrio. Liber II, 9, 26.” J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae 
Cursus Completus, Series Latina, vol. 32, 1254‒1255. 
Bonaventura de Balneoregio. Doctoris Seraphici S. Bonaventurae Opera Om-
nia, edita, studio et cura PP. Collegi a $. Bonaventura. ad plurimos codices mss. 
emendata, anecdotis aut a prolegomenis scollis notisque illustrata Ad Claras Ac-
quas (Quaracchi): Ex Typographia Collegii S. Bonaventurae, 1882‒1902, 10 vols. 
Bonaventura de Balneoregio. »Itinerarium mentis in Deum.« In S. Bonaven-
turae Opera Omnia (Quaracchi): Q V, 295‒316.
Bonaventura de Balneoregio. Obras de San Buenaventura. Edición bilingüe. 
Tomo I. Dios y las criaturas. Edición dirigida por León Amorós, Bernardo Aper-
ribay y Miguel Oromí. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1968.
Joannes Scotus Erigena. “In Hierarchia Coelesti Dionysii, I.” J.-P. Migne, 
Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina, vol. 122, 138‒139. 
Hugo de Sancto Victore. “Exp. in Hierarchia Coelesti S. Dionysii. Liber II.” 
J.-P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina, vol. 175, 949. 
Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita. “De coelesti Hierarchia, 3.” J.-P. Migne, Patro-
logiae Cursus Completus, Series Graeca, vol. 3, 121.
Amorós, León, Aperribay, Bernardo y Oromí, Míguel. Obras de San Bue-
naventura. Edición bilingüe. Tomo I. Dios y las criaturas. Madrid: Biblioteca de 
Autores Cristianos, 1968.
Arias Rueda, J. E. “Conocimiento de lo bello desde una perspectiva estética 
de la sensibilidad trascendental en los capítulos VI y VII del Itinerarium mentís 
in Deum de San Buenaventura.” Franciscanum 44 (2002): 137‒220.
P O L I G R A F I
172
Barbosa de Costa Freitas, Manuel. “A doutrina bonaventuriana do homem-
imagem e a coexistencia da fê e do saber.” In San Bonaventura Maestro di vita 
francescana e di sapienza cristiana, Vol. II, edited by Alfonso Pompei, 441‒453. 
Roma: Pontificia Facoltà teologica S. Bonaventura, 1976. 
Beschin, Giuseppe. “La creatura simbolo del Creatore in S. Bonaventura alla 
luce della ragione e della fede.” Doctor Seraphicus 47 (2000): 43–64.
Bougerol, Jacques Guy. “San Bonaventura: il sapere e il credere.” Doctor 
Seraphicus 22 (1975): 7‒20.
Chavero Blanco, Francisco de Asís. Imago Dei. Aproximación a la antropología 
teológica de san Buenaventura. Murcia: Espigas, 1993. 
Cuttini, Elisa. Ritorno a Dio. Filosofia, teologia, etica della mens nel pensiero 
di Bonaventura da Bagnoregio. Soveria Manelli (Catanzaro): Rubbetino Editore, 
2002.
de Bruyne, Edgar. Estudios de Estética medieval, Vol. III: El siglo XIII. Madrid: 
Gredos, 1959b.
de Bruyne, Edgar. L’Esthétique du Moyen Âge. Louvain: Université Catholique 
de Louvain, 1947.
Fabro, Cornelio. “Contemplazione mística e intuizione artística del Seraphi-
cus.” Doctor Seraphicus 9 (1962): 5‒13.
Gilson, Étienne. La philosophie au Moyen Âge. Des origines patristiques à la fin 
du XIVe siècle. Paris: Payot, 1962.
Gilson, Étienne. La Filosofía en la Edad Media. Desde los orígenes patrísticos 
hasta el fin del siglo XIV. Madrid: Gredos, 19992.
Gilson, Étienne. La philosophie de Saint Bonaventure, 2nd ed., 3rd print. 
Paris: Vrin, 1948. (Translated into Spanish: La filosofía de San Buenaventura. 
Buenos Aires: Desclée de Brouwer).
Hirschberger, Johannes. Historia de la Filosofía, Tomo I: Antigüedad, Edad 
Media, Renacimiento. Barcelona: Herder, 1981.
León Sanz, Isabel María. El arte creador en San Buenaventura. Fundamentos 
para una teología de la belleza. Pamplona: Eunsa, 2016. 
Merino Abad, José Antonio. Historia de la filosofía franciscana. Madrid: Bibli-
oteca de Autores Cristianos, 1993.
Miranesi, Pietro. “Per una bibliografía bonaventuriana.” In Dizionario Bon-
aventuriano: : filosofía, teología, spiritualità, 25‒46. Padova: Editrici Francescane, 
2008.
Ofilada Mina, Macario. “St. Bonaventure: Aesthetics and Contemplation in 
the Journey towards God.” Studies in Spirituality 16 (2006): 151‒164. https://doi.
org/10.2143/SIS.16.0.2017796.
C O N T E M P L A T I N G  G O D  F R O M  T H E  M I R R O R  O F  T H E  S O U L
173
Pompei, Alfonso, ed. San Bonaventura, Maestro di vita francescana e di sapi-
enza cristiana. Atti del Congresso Internazionale per il VII Centenario di San Bon-
aventura, 3 vols. Rome: Pontificia Facoltà Teologica “San Bonaventura,” 1976.
Prini, Pietro. “‘Ars aeterna’ e ‘memoria’ nel pensiero di S. Bonaventura.” Doc-
tor Seraphicus 22 (1975): 21‒29.
Riserbato, Davide. “Bonaventura e il fondamento di ogni conoscenza certa.” 
Rivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica 109, no. 4 (2017): 879‒888. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/26477238.
Salvador-González, José María. “Per imaginem et in imagine. El estadio 
introspectivo de la estética de San Buenaventura en su Itinerarium mentis in 
Deum, un discurso barroco avant la lettre.” In Del Barroco al Neobarroco: Reali-
dades y transferencias culturales, edited by R. de la Fuente Ballesteros, J. Pérez-
Magallón, and J.R. Jouve-Martin, 295‒309. Valladolid: Universitas Castellae, 
2011. 
Salvador-González, José María. “Ascensio in Deum per vestigia et in ves-
tigiis. La Estética inmanente de S. Buenaventura y sus posibles refle jos en la 
iconografía de la Basílica de San Francisco.” Mirabilia Journal 16 (2013): 79‒117. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4150.6245.
Salvador-González, José María. “The Second Level of St. Bonaventure’s 
Transcendent Aesthetics: Speculating the Divine Trinity through the Good.” 
Mirabilia Journal 31 (2020): 741‒755. https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/mirabilia/mira-
bilia_a2020n31/mirabilia_a2020n31p741.pdf.
Salvador-González, José María. “La Estética inmanente de San Buenaventura 
desde sus fuentes de inspiración.” Revista de Filosofía 47 (2021) (in press). 
Salvador-González, José María. “The Concept Vestigium in the Immanent 
Aesthetics of St. Bonaventure” (article submitted to an academic journal).
Santinello, Giovanni, “S. Bonaventura e la nozione dell'essere,” Doctor Se-
raphicus 10 (1983): 69–80.
Tatarkiewicz, Wladyslaw. Historia de la estética, I: La estética antigua. Madrid: 
Akal, 2000.
Tatarkiewicz, Wladyslaw. Historia de la estética, II: La estética medieval. Ma-
drid: Akal, 2007 [1970].
Todisco, Orlando. “Dimensione estetica del pensare bonaventuriano.” Doctor 
Seraphicus 54 (2007): 17‒76.
Todisco, Orlando. “Bonum.” In Dizionario Bonaventuriano: filosofía, teología, 
spiritualità. Padova: Editrici Francescane, 2008: 221‒227.
Todisco, Orlando. “Esse. Essentia.” In Dizionario Bonaventuriano: filosofía, 
teología, spiritualità, edited by Ernesto Caroli, 345–346. Padova: Editrici Frances-
cane, 2008.