Quaest. 4, Art. 2
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/10/d/4/q/bon-qpe-q4-a2
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *Whether it is consonant with evangelical perfection that one bind himself by vow to obeying another.*

Secondly it is asked whether it is consonant with evangelical perfection that one bind himself by vow to obeying another. And it seems that it is not.

1. For the evangelical law is a law of liberty; but to place oneself under a man by vow is a matter of necessity: therefore to bind oneself by vow to obeying a man is repugnant to the liberty of the evangelical law.

2. Again, Anselm, in the book *Why God Became Man*: «God willed to redeem man through himself, so as to call man back into his pristine liberty»; but in the state of pristine liberty no one was bound to obey another: therefore he who has been brought back to his pristine liberty through the Redeemer ought to be bound to obey no one.

3. Again, Gregory: «Services, the less they are owed, the more welcome they are»: therefore *by the opposites,* the more they are owed, the less welcome; but one who binds himself by vow to obeying a man is held to obey him: therefore this man is less pleasing to God. But that through which a man is made less pleasing to God is contrary to evangelical perfection: therefore etc.

4. Again, the evangelical law is *a sweet yoke and a light burden*; but it is heavy for a man to comply in all things: therefore to bind oneself to obeying a man does not accord with the lightness of evangelical perfection.

5. Again, the evangelical law, because it is *a light burden,* does not bear along with itself the burden and servitude of the written law: therefore, since it is heavier to obey the precepts of a man without distinction than to comply with the determinate ceremonies and precepts of the old law, it seems that to bind oneself to obeying a man cannot stand with evangelical perfection.

6. Again, it is heavy to obey the divine commands: therefore it is far heavier to obey divine and human commands alike; but he who by vow subjects himself to a man binds himself to that man's commands: therefore etc.

7. Again, Luke the sixth: *Every one shall be perfect, if he be as his master;* but of Christ it is not read that he was under another by vow: therefore to place oneself under another by vow is not perfect, but rather, as it seems, superstitious.

8. Again, if the vow of obedience increases the perfection of the virtue of obedience, then, since that degree was not in Christ, it seems that one who fulfils this degree is more perfect than Christ; but this is absurd and unfitting: therefore it is also unfitting to say that to subject oneself to another by vow increases the perfection of the virtue of obedience.

9. Again, the Apostles had evangelical perfection in themselves most of all; but they vowed obedience to no one: therefore etc.

10. Again, it seems that to do this is *presumptuous:* because either such a man *reckons* himself sufficient for fulfilling the divine commands, or *not.* If *not:* then he acts foolishly, since, being bound to the divine precepts, he obliges himself to fulfilling human commands as well; but if he *reckons* himself sufficient for fulfilling the divine commands, he is presumptuous: therefore to oblige himself further to the commands of a man seems the greater judgment of presumption.

11. Again, if to vow this belongs to perfection, then he who professes it professes himself to be perfect; but this is presumptuous: therefore etc.

12. Again, to will to be over a just and perfect man is pride and presumption: therefore to consent to another and to cooperate with him that he may be over us is to consent to pride and presumption; but he who binds himself to obeying another consents to him and cooperates with him that he may be over him: therefore etc.

13. Again, this seems to be *dangerous:* because to commit oneself to a man of whose knowledge and conscience one is ignorant is a danger; but he who binds himself by vow to obeying a man is frequently ignorant whether he is wise, or good, or as to his knowledge and conscience: therefore etc.

14. Again, the more and the greater the things a man is bound to, the greater the dangers in which he is placed; but he who vows obedience to a man is bound to more things than he was bound to before: therefore he is exposed to greater dangers: therefore etc.

15. Again, the evangelical law dissuades from an oath because of the danger of perjury; but he who vows obedience to a man is in danger of transgressing the vow: therefore such a man exposes himself to peril.

16. Again, it is shown that this is *imperfect.* For he who sins at another's suggestion sins less than he who sins at his own motion's prompting: therefore likewise he who obeys at another's command merits less than he who acts of his own accord, or at God's command alone: therefore he who binds himself by vow to obeying another acts more imperfectly than he who does not bind himself; but what diminishes perfection is dissonant from the evangelical law: therefore etc.

17. Again, the more immediately one is borne into God, the more perfectly one is moved; but he who obeys God alone is borne more immediately into God than he who subjects himself to a man: therefore etc.

18. Again, the best kind of monks is that of the anchorites, according to what blessed Benedict says at the beginning of his Rule; but such men were not bound by vow to obeying a man: therefore to subject oneself to another out of a vow does not belong to evangelical perfection.

19. Again, he who closes off the way of health to a sick man does not care for perfection, but withdraws from perfection; but he who binds himself by vow to obeying another closes off to himself many ways to salvation, since before the vow such a man could be saved in many other ways, which he cannot after the vow: therefore such a man acts most imperfectly.

20. Again, the more one subjects oneself to more persons, the more humbly and perfectly one acts; but he who *vows obedience to several* acts badly: therefore to vow obedience to another belongs neither to humility nor to perfection.

Sᴇᴅ ᴄᴏɴᴛʀᴀ, this is objected thus. 1. Matthew the third: *So it becometh us to fulfil all justice;* the Gloss: «Perfect humility has three degrees: the first is to place oneself under a greater, the second to place oneself under an equal, the third to place oneself under a lesser, in which is all justice; and this Christ fulfilled»: therefore, if perfect justice is to place oneself under another, and this is done most of all through the vow of obedience, it seems that this is most consonant with evangelical perfection.

2. Again, the first of Peter, the second: *Be ye subject to every human creature for God's sake:* therefore the more efficaciously one does this, the more perfectly one acts; but he who subjects himself to another by vow does this most efficaciously: therefore such a man acts most perfectly.

3. Again, Gregory: «It is more to leave oneself than one's own things»; but he who leaves his own things for God's sake acts perfectly: therefore he who leaves his very self acts more perfectly. But this is done most of all in the abnegation of the will through the vow of obedience: therefore etc.

4. Again, Anselm: «As the will of God is the origin of all good, so one's own will is the origin of all evil»; but he who perfectly removes the origin of all evil acts most perfectly: therefore he who wholly abnegates his own will through the vow of obedience acts most perfectly.

5. Again, Hugh: «Obedience is a virtue which, one's own will being set aside, embraces in mind the things enjoined, to be fulfilled in deed»; but he who vows obedience to another sets aside his own will most of all: therefore etc.

6. Again, Bernard, in the forty-second homily on the Canticle: «It is little to be subject to God, unless thou be subject also to every human creature for God's sake: to place thyself under equals, to place thyself under lesser men; *for so it becometh us to fulfil all justice*»; but this is done most of all by binding oneself by vow to obeying another: therefore etc.

7. Again, *sufficient justice* is to keep the divine commands, therefore *abundant* justice is, over and above these, to keep human ones; but this he does who subjects himself to another for obeying.

8. Again, *humility* is consonant with evangelical perfection: therefore the highest humility is most consonant with it; but to bind oneself by vow to obeying another belongs to the highest humility: therefore etc.

9. Again, *liberality* is consonant with evangelical perfection; but this is the highest liberality, when a man for God's sake gives not only his own things, but his very self, setting aside his own will, through the vow of obedience: therefore etc.

10. Again, *conformity to Christ* is consonant with evangelical perfection; but Christ of pure liberality subjected himself to a man, Luke the second: *And he was subject to them:* therefore to subject one's very self to another makes one conformed to Christ. But this is done most of all through the vow of obedience: therefore etc.

11. Again, what removes us farthest from the world is most consonant with evangelical perfection; but to bind oneself by vow to obeying a man removes us farthest from the world, because *all that is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh, or the concupiscence of the eyes, or the pride of life*, from which we are removed farthest through the vow of obedience: therefore etc.

12. Again, what removes us farthest from the devil looks most of all to evangelical perfection; but to will to be under and not to be over removes us farthest from the devil's sin, who willed utterly to be over without being under: therefore etc.

13. Again, everything that *conforms us to the heavenly hierarchy* is consonant with evangelical perfection; but in the heavenly hierarchy we see that one Angel subjects himself by obeying to another, and the Angels of the lower orders obey the Angels of the higher without repugnance: therefore in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, that one man subject himself by obeying to another conforms us to the heavenly order, and through this is most consonant with evangelical perfection.

CONCLUSION.

> *To bind oneself by vow to obeying another, not in every event, but to those things which are consonant with the evangelical counsels, is constitutive, expeditive and consummative of perfection.*

Rᴇsᴘᴏɴᴅᴇᴏ: For the understanding of what has been said it is to be noted that a man can bind himself to obeying another man in two ways: either in every event and to all the good pleasure of that man's will, or to those things which are consonant with the evangelical counsels according to some determinate norm of living, derived from the fount of the evangelical law. In the first way it is neither perfect nor consonant with perfection, but rather rash and foolish; in the second way it is perfect, because this is both *constitutive* and *expeditive* and *consummative* of perfection. For to vow obedience to a man in this way is both a *constitutive part* of that perfection and a *preambular way* and its *ultimate completion.* — A *constitutive* part, I say, it is, because it is itself one of those three evangelical counsels in which the integrity of evangelical perfection principally consists.

It is a *preambular way,* because those counsels can be kept better and more perfectly and more expeditiously when one is supported by another's fellowship and help and example than if he is left to himself alone. But fellowship does not help unless it is peaceful; nor can it be peaceful unless it is connected and ordered; and this cannot be except through the reduction of many wills to the command of one, at whose nod they are ordered and directed and consequently connected.

It is also the *ultimate completion,* for this reason, that in it is most fully completed that *abundant* justice, of which kind evangelical justice is, according to that saying of Matthew the fifth: *Unless your justice abound more than that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.* — For there is a threefold act of justice, namely *to rectify, to co-ordinate* and *to recompense.* For justice is nothing else than a will *right, ordered* and *recompensing,* since through it «there is rendered to each one what is his own», according to what belongs to *the rectitude of right* and *the dignity of order.* — The perfect *rectification,* therefore, of abundant justice is attended to according to the conformity of the will to truth; but truth humbles each one, so that he think of himself lesser things than of another. He, therefore, is perfectly and abundantly rectified who, according to what truth dictates, not unwillingly but voluntarily humbles his own will under another and in a certain way reduces and takes it captive into a kind of servitude; which indeed is done through the obedience shown to another man, which is most repugnant to the arrogance and ambition by which one wishes to prefer himself to others. Whence Bernard, in the forty-second homily on the Canticle: «Fear God and do not do this most evil thing,

that the will exalt him whom truth humbles. Rather acquiesce to God, and let thy will be subject to truth».

The perfect *ordination* also, according to the rule of abundant justice, is that not only the inferior place himself under the superior, and the equal under the equal, but that even the superior voluntarily place himself under the inferior, according to what is said in Matthew the third: *So it becometh us to fulfil all justice;* where the Gloss says: «*So,* by placing himself under a servant and an inferior, *all justice,* that is humility, which is all justice, *it becometh him to fulfil.* — And this humility has three degrees: the first, to place oneself under a greater, and this is called *sufficient;* the second is to place oneself under an equal, and this is called *abundant;* the third is to be under a lesser, in which is *all justice.* This Christ fulfilled». Since, therefore, a man is then perfectly subjected to a man when he binds himself voluntarily to obey another's commands in those things which are according to God, and most of all the commands of one who was no greater than he, but either equal, and sometimes even lesser — because every man exceeds another in something, at least according to the soul — hence it is that to the perfection of *ordering* justice according to the way of the order of *deigning,* which runs according to the law of grace, whereby the greater reckons himself the lesser, obedience which is shown by one man to another contributes, and does very much.

The perfect *recompensation* of abundant justice, nonetheless, is attended to in this, that one render the whole to him who gave the whole. Since, therefore, Christ the Lord not only gave *us* to ourselves, but also gave *himself* to us; and for our sake not only made himself man, but also subjected himself to men: hence it is that, in order that, according to the measure of our weakness, we may *recompense,* as far as we can, not only God but also man, it is fitting that we place under him not only what we have and our members, but also what we are, that is our will. Whence Bernard, on the Canticle: «It is certain that God was emptied out by charity, made less than the Angels by charity, subject to his parents by charity, bowed under the Baptist's hands by charity, suffering in the weakness of the flesh by charity, at last subject to death by charity, inglorious on the cross». From which he concludes that of pure will a man ought, in recompense for these things, to place his own will under a man. — And in this perfection truly consists, when one gives for his sake the will of liberty, which is a priceless good, than which nothing greater can be given by a man; and when that is given, all things are given too. Whence, if that is truly called perfect «which lacks nothing», and which also «attains its own virtue», in this most of all does the consummation of perfection meet, so that it is begun from the renunciation of temporal goods through poverty, advances in the chastening of the bodily members through chastity, and is consummated in the dedication of the interior and mental virtues through the abnegation of the will and the vow of obedience, in which a man is properly said to abnegate himself, according to that word of the Lord in Luke the ninth: *If any man will come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me;* where the vow of obedience is chiefly and most of all commended.

From these things, therefore, it is clearly gathered that, since there are three evangelical counsels, according to the exterior, the lower and the interior good, which are opposed to the threefold origin of vices, the vow which is integrative of evangelical perfection must be threefold, namely of poverty, of continence and of obedience; among which obedience, as has now been shown, gives to the whole of evangelical perfection its highest and noblest complement. — Whence the reasons which show this are to be conceded.

1. To that which is objected first, that the evangelical law is a law of liberty, which is repugnant to necessity; it must be said that necessity is twofold: one is of *coercion,* and the other of *holding.* The first is repugnant to it, the second is not. For a precept obliges, just as a vow does, and it does not exclude the liberty of the evangelical law; the law of the Gospel is therefore called *the law of liberty,* not by the exclusion of the *obligation* which comes from a precept or a vow, but by the exclusion of the *burden of legal servitude* proceeding from servile fear.

2. To that which is objected from Anselm, that Christ, by redeeming man, called him back into his pristine liberty; it must be said that this is understood in respect of the whole species, not in respect of any particular individual. For the burden of bodily servitude can stand together with the grace of the Holy Spirit and the Sacrament of baptism; and through this, much more strongly, the burden of voluntary subjection, which flows from pure will, is not repugnant to the liberty of grace.

3. To that which is objected, that services, the less they are owed, the more welcome they are; it must be said that the account of what is owed is twofold: one which comes from a liberal promise; another which comes from the obligation of a pact and of merchant commerce. The first is in no way repugnant

to the graciousness of the service, but only the second. And the reason of this is that, although the second is founded upon a private and mercenary love, the first is founded upon a most liberal love, by which someone wills to offer to God not only the fruit of the tree, but also the trunk and the root. Whence, as Anselm illustrates it by two men, of whom one offers to God the fruit of the tree, reserving the property to himself, while the other offers both; and he is the more pleasing who offers both: so it is to be understood in the matter proposed.

4. To that which is objected, that the evangelical law is a sweet yoke; it must be said that a burden is twofold, namely a burden which *weighs down,* and a burden which *gives vigour* and supports, and consequently lightens and bears up. The yoke of obedience, therefore, added upon the evangelical burden, is like a burden which does not weigh down but comforts; just as a cart does not weigh down the horse's load, but lightens it, and the multitude of feathers lifts birds upward rather than drags them down: so also obedience, which sets a man over one like himself, excludes the weight of pride and arrogance which came from the love of one's own sense and one's own will, which was most repugnant to evangelical perfection; and therefore it makes him fit and nimble for bearing that perfection.

5. To that which is objected, that the evangelical law does not bear along with itself the servitude of the written law; it must be said that the case is not alike: because the servitude of the ceremonial and judicial precepts is dissonant from the new law both because of the veils of the figures and because of the burdens of afflicting penalties; therefore the law of the Gospel, which was introduced through Christ, through whom *grace and truth were made*, excludes both kinds of those precepts and the servitude in the observance of them, not because of their difficulty, but because of their imperfection. Since therefore, although it is difficult for a man to obey, this difficulty is repugnant neither to truth nor to grace nor to perfect virtue, which is «about the arduous and difficult»; consequently it is not repugnant to evangelical perfection, but rather gives it its complement.

6. To that which is objected, that it is heavy to obey the divine commands; the answer is already clear: because, as has been shown, the heaviness and difficulty of a work is rather consonant with evangelical perfection than repugnant to it; and he is truly perfect who bears heavy things with promptitude of will.

7. To that which is objected concerning Christ, it must be said that Christ, as far as was fitting for the redemption of the human race, subjected himself to men, and this by a will most good and perfect; and because his will was confirmed in the good and was not changeable, as ours is: therefore there was no need that it be bound by a vow.

8. To that which is objected, that the addition of a vow does not contribute to the complement of obedience, which was not in Christ; the answer is already clear: because in Christ there was something in place of a vow, in respect of obedience as much as of poverty and of chastity, namely *a confirmed will,* which is more excellent than a vow; and because we approach to that confirmed will through the strengthening of our purpose and the emission of a vow: hence it is that the vow, by binding us and in a certain way strengthening us, by its inviolability renders us conformed to Christ; and therefore the heaping up of perfection grows from it, although in Christ it was not present according to the emission of a spoken word.

9. To that which is objected, that such a vow of obedience was not in the Apostles; it must be said that it is possible to speak of obedience in three ways, namely as to *act* and *habit* and *mode.* There was, therefore, in the Apostles a promptitude of obeying through a perfect *habit;* there was also the *act,* by which they were obedient to Christ unto death and unto diverse kinds of torments, so that they were obedient not only for *operations* to be carried out, but also for *passions* to be endured. But the *mode* of obedience, by which one subjects himself to another as to a prelate, did not belong to them except for the time during which they were with Christ; because they themselves were the prelates of the Church and were acted upon by the fulness of the Holy Spirit, and rightly governed others. Yet they too were first obedient to Christ himself, and afterwards showed the reverence due to the Apostle Peter; and therefore from this it cannot and ought not to be concluded that obedience is not to be vowed, most of all by those to whom it belongs to be governed by others.

10. To that which is objected, that it is presumptuous to vow, because either one reckons himself sufficient etc.; it must be said that to attribute sufficiency to one's own virtues and free choice is a matter of presumption in respect of however small a good, since the Apostle says in the second to the Corinthians, the third: *Not that we are sufficient* etc.; but to attribute this to the divine grace, which he hopes will not fail him because of the divine munificence, is not a matter of presumption, but of confidence and of the certitude of hope, by which we believe that God is a helper to the man who wills to adhere to his counsels. For which reason the same Apostle straightway after the foregoing word subjoins: *Our sufficiency is from God;* and the same, in the last chapter to the Philippians: *I can do all things in him who strengtheneth me;* and by this hope he ought to be supported who, breathed upon by the divine Spirit, not only proposes the perfection of the evangelical counsels, but also promises it by vowing.

11. To that which is objected, that to profess oneself to be perfect is presumptuous; it must be said that there is a perfection as to *merit* and as to

*state.* To profess oneself to be perfect as to *merit* is a matter of presumption, not of perfection, since Paul says to the Philippians, the third: *Not as though I were already perfect.* But to profess oneself perfect as to *state* is not a matter of presumption, because this places the praise not about the *person* himself, who can be blameworthy through his own merits, but about the *common life* and the manner of living approved by the counsel of Christ's own mouth.

12. To that which is objected, that it is pride to will to be over a just man; it must be said that one can will to be over another in two ways: either because he wills to be over him *simply,* or because he wills to be over him *loftily,* through love of his own excellence; and thus this will is depraved both in him who wills it and in the others who consent to him, as it was in Lucifer and in the other demons adhering to him. — In another way someone wills to be over others in order to be over them *usefully,* through love of the commonwealth and of the universal Church, roused by the spirit of supernal charity; and in this way neither does he himself sin, nor do the others who consent to him, since God has so ordained that the mystical body of Christ be governed according to the pre-eminences of ranks, offices and dignities.

13. To that which is objected, that it is dangerous to commit oneself wholly to an unknown man; it must be said that if someone were to commit himself with no law, no norm, no rule laid down beforehand, but in every event, this without doubt would be foolish; but when someone vows obedience according to the form of an approved rule, there is no danger in it: because, since some things are *according to* the rule, some *short of* the rule, some *above* the rule, some *against* the rule; to the first he binds himself even without the superior's mandate, to the second by mandate, but to the third he is not bound unless he wills to do it out of perfection, as blessed Benedict says, that one who is perfectly obedient ought by all means to attempt it, if even the impossible be imposed upon him; which nevertheless is not a matter of necessity, but of supererogation, even for the perfect themselves. But what is *against the rule* he is in no way, by no pact, bound through obedience to observe; and likewise what is *against the law of God,* which is everything that tends to the loss of our salvation or of the divine honour: and therefore he incurs no danger in emitting a vow according to the aforesaid mode.

14. To that which is objected, that the more and the greater the things a man is bound to, the greater the dangers in which he is placed; it must be said that this is true, other things being equal; but here the other things are not equal, because in the emission of the vow helping grace is added, the opportunity of sinning is lessened, and the force impelling into danger is weakened; because the more one withdraws from worldly things and draws near to Christ, the less he is entangled in the snares of worldly dangers, and through this is the more freely and securely lifted up to heavenly things.

15. To that which is objected, that the evangelical law removes the oath; it must be said that the case is not alike: because an oath is of itself close to evil and is of slight usefulness; but the vow of perfection is closest to the good and the best, and through this of the greatest usefulness; and therefore it ought not to be forbidden by the law of the Gospel, but rather counselled.

16. To that which is objected, that it is imperfect, because it is done at another's command, just as a sin is less which is done at another's suggestion; it must be said that the case is not alike: because an impulsion to *sin* lessens the account of the sin, because it diminishes the account of the voluntary; but a command in respect of a *good* does not diminish the account of the voluntary, since a command can be made out of pure charity and will; whence, the liberty of the will being safe, it contributes to the complement of the will, and through this to the summit of the merit of the perfect.

17. To that which is objected, that the more immediately one is moved into God, the more perfectly one is moved; it must be said that this holds true in those who are so fully joined to God that they need no *leading* medium, as are the Blessed in the fatherland. But in those who are in the state of the way and need to ascend by degrees it does not hold true; rather they climb better, and not inordinately, when they come by the mediating degrees of creatures from the lowest up to the highest — for which reason we also pray not only to God but also to the Saints, that through them we may be led into God — thus also God willed that man be placed under man, so that through the ministry of a man he might be led back into him, and the merit of obedience be increased.

18. To that which is objected concerning the anchorites, it must be said that anchorites were chosen through obedience; and this indeed was not granted except to those already so tested in the observance of regular obedience that they were believed to be, without doubt, fit for the immediate rule of the Holy Spirit governing them within; to which they could by no means have come, unless they had first bound themselves by voluntary subjection to obeying a man.

19. To that which is objected, that through this the way of health is closed off to the weak; it must be said that this is false; but of the many ways in which one can wander and even go astray, some more certain and better one is chosen, as a shorter way and a more efficacious medicine.

20. To that which is objected, that to subject oneself to several is of greater perfection; it must be said that this is true in the way of reverence and of the condescension of kindness and the showing of honour, but it is not true in the way of the vow of obedience and of regular profession, because according to this determinate men must be subjected to determinate persons, so that in all things confusion may be avoided and the rectitude of order preserved.