Dist. 27, Art. 2, Q. 6
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/3/d/27/q/bon-sent-III-d27-a2-q6
----------------------------------------
### Question VI. *Whether we are bound to love God with our whole heart, with our whole soul, and with our whole mind.*

Sixth and last, it is asked whether we are bound to fulfill that mode which the Lord implies in the precept of Matthew twenty-two: *You shall love the Lord your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.* And that we are not, it seems:

1. *First*, by the authority of Augustine, which is found in the text [of the Master]: « When there is present anything of carnal concupiscence, God is not loved in every way with the whole soul »; but it is necessary that in this life there be something of carnal concupiscence: therefore it is impossible to fulfill that precept in this life. But no one is bound to the impossible: therefore we are not bound to its fulfillment.

2. *Likewise*, « it is impossible for anything to be moved at one and the same time by opposite motions »; but the soul, while it is in the flesh, has a motion bent back toward the body, because *the body, which is corrupted, weighs down the soul*: therefore it cannot be borne wholly into God; and if a man, as long as he is in life, cannot love God with his whole heart: therefore we are not bound to love God in that mode.

3. *Likewise*, in this life we cannot be long without venial sin; but when one sins venially, he is moved by a motion which is neither into God nor ordered toward him: therefore it is impossible that a man in this life should refer all his motions to God. If therefore no one is bound to the impossible, no one is bound to the fulfillment of that mode.

**On the contrary:**

1. Matthew twenty-two: *You shall love the Lord your God* etc.; and the same [Gospel], nineteen: *If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments*: therefore if this is the chief of all the commandments, a man is bound chiefly to keep it: therefore he is bound to the fulfillment of that mode. If you say that this does not fall under a precept; against this is the fact that, if it does not fall under a precept, then that mode ought rather to have been placed among the counsels than among the precepts.

2. *Likewise*, when God commands anyone to do something at a given time, he is bound not only to that work but also to the time, and likewise too when he makes a vow: therefore by parity of reasoning, when God commands something to be done, determining the mode, one is bound not only to the carrying out of the act but also to the fulfillment of the mode. If you say that a man is excused from the obligation on account of the impossibility of fulfilling the precept; against this is what Jerome says: « Let him be anathema who says that God commanded the impossible »; and Augustine: « He would not condemn the lazy servant if he commanded things that could in no way be done ».

3. *Likewise*, to love God with the whole heart and with the whole soul and with the whole mind, according to Bernard, is to love « sweetly and wisely and bravely »; according to Augustine it is to love « without error, without contradiction, and without forgetfulness »; but all this a man can and is bound to do in the state of the wayfarer: therefore we are bound to the fulfillment of this commandment. If you say that Augustine understands [this] not only privatively but also positively, so that every motion of the intellect and of the affection is borne into God; still it seems able to be fulfilled, because an affirmative precept does not oblige for always, and that is said simply to be able to be fulfilled which can be fulfilled for a [given] place and time; but sometimes a man can think only of God and be affected concerning him: therefore it seems that that mode of love ought and can simply be fulfilled in the way.

Alongside this it is asked: if that mode cannot be fulfilled in the way, nor is anyone bound to fulfill it, to what end is it set among the divine precepts? If you say, as Augustine says, that it is so that we may know whither we ought to tend; then by parity of reasoning it seems that God ought to have commanded that we should see him face to face; and if he ought not to have done so, that reason which Augustine assigns does not seem sufficient.

> **Conclusion.** We are bound to fulfill the precept given concerning the love of God in such a way that every contrary affection is excluded from our heart; not, however, in such a way that every extraneous affection is utterly excluded.

**I respond:** For the understanding of the foregoing it must be noted that, since the holy Doctors sometimes say that the aforesaid mode can be fulfilled, and sometimes say that it cannot be fulfilled, from this we are admonished, if we can see both, that in one way we are obliged to fulfill the aforesaid mode, and in another way we are roused to desire it; whence the aforesaid mode in one way is a disposition for merit, in another way a disposition for reward.

Now this is according to a twofold mode of totality of the heart, the soul, and the mind. For it can be understood in two ways that the love of God possesses the whole heart: either so that it excludes every extraneous affection, and then it rules the heart fully and perfectly. This is the case when all the motions of the heart are referred through love into God; and this totality establishes full dominion. In another way the love of God is said to possess the whole heart when it excludes every contrary affection, that is, that nothing be loved above God, or equally with God himself; and thus he loves God with his whole heart who loves him for his own sake and above all things. — The first totality, which excludes every extraneous motion, is that of perfect dominion and cannot be had before the attainment of glory, where we shall gaze upon God himself and be borne into him continually. But the second totality can be had through the infusion of grace, which is expulsive of every mortal fault.

If therefore in that precept God is understood to be loved with the whole soul and with the whole heart and with the whole mind according to the *first* acceptation of totality; then that mode does not oblige to its fulfillment, but is expressed in the precept so that we may know whither we ought to tend through love, and so that no one may think himself perfect until he has attained that perfection. But if loving with the whole heart is taken according to the *second* acceptation; then we are bound to fulfill that mode. — And because according to both acceptations the Holy Spirit willed the aforesaid commandment to be understood; hence it is that some say it can be fulfilled in the way, while others say that it cannot be fulfilled until one arrives in the fatherland. — And according to this the arguments proceed to the opposite sides.

But if it be asked why in this precept it is rather expressed whither we ought to tend than in the other precepts; it can be answered that *the fullness of the Law is love*, and *the end of the precept is charity*, and the commandment of love is the first and greatest according to the divine testimony; therefore the Holy Spirit disposed to express concerning it the perfection

and completion to which all individual goods and commandments are ordered, more than in any of the precepts. And through these things all that is asked concerning this becomes clear.

But if anyone should contend that that mode can simply be fulfilled in the way for some time, in which a man can be borne wholly into God, so that there be in him neither motions opposed to charity nor even extraneous ones; it can be answered that, although this can be and sometimes is in certain excellent persons, nevertheless it is not commonly found in all the just. — *Moreover*, although there be there a totality of motions as for now, yet it is not simply so. And therefore there is a defect from perfect totality, which is the totality of motions and of times; and this is what simply excludes extraneous motion. And so, although that mode can in some way be fulfilled, yet not altogether, as is intimated in that precept. And this Augustine intimates when he says: « When there is yet something of carnal concupiscence, God is not loved with the whole soul in every way ». And this same thing the Master means to say when he says « that this aforesaid mode can be fulfilled according to the perfection of the way, which is the perfection of one running, not according to the perfection of the fatherland, which is the perfection of one who has arrived »; and so he means that it can be fulfilled « in part », yet not altogether perfectly and entirely.