Dist. 32, Art. 1, Q. 4
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/32/q/bon-sent-III-d32-a1-q4
----------------------------------------
### Question IV. *Whether God loves man more than the Angel, or the reverse.*

Fourthly it is asked, whether God loves man more than the Angel, or the reverse. And that [He loves] the Angel more, seems to be the case:

1. Because someone is more lovable to God in proportion as he is more like Him: if therefore the angelic nature is more like God than the human, it seems that it is more loved by Him.

2. Likewise, a greater and a lesser love is attended to according to the greater and lesser communication of divine liberality; but for one single motion God glorified the Angel, which He does not do for men: therefore He was more liberal to them than to us: therefore He loves the angelic kind more than the human.

3. Likewise, the Angels love God more than we do, in that they have no retardation by which they are hindered from being able to tend wholly into God: therefore if God loves more those who love Him more, it seems that He loves the Angels more than men.

4. Likewise, the Angels are mediators between us and God, according to what Augustine holds in the eighth book of the *City of God*; but the middle is more united to the extreme and is more familiar to it than one extreme is with respect to the other: therefore it seems that God loves the Angels more than men.

**On the contrary:** 1. To the Hebrews, chapter two: *Nowhere did He take hold of the Angels, but of the seed of Abraham;* but it was the most powerful sign of divine love and familiarity, that He should assume a created nature into the unity of His own person: therefore it seems that He loved the human nature more than the angelic.

2. Likewise, John, chapter fifteen: *Greater love has no one* etc.; but God laid down His soul for men, He did not lay it down for the Angels: therefore He loved men more than the Angels.

3. Likewise, God loves more that nature which He has set in a higher grade of honor: but God set the human nature, in both sexes, above the angelic spirits — namely Christ and His most noble Mother: therefore it seems that He loves and has loved the human nature more.

4. Likewise, one loves another more when he loves him in the state of friendship and of enmity, than only when he loves him in the state of friendship; but God loves the human kind in the state of friendship and in the state of enmity, for, when we were sinners and enemies of God, He loved us, whereas the evil Angels He neither loved nor loves: therefore it seems that He has loved the human kind above the Angels.

### Conclusion.

> *Speaking of God's love as to the effect of creation, God loved the Angels more than the human kind; but otherwise it can reasonably be said as to the effect of reparation and according to the final state.*

**I respond:** It must be said that, since God is said to love creatures by an effect, according as there is a twofold principal effect of God with respect to the rational creature, accordingly God's love can be considered greater and lesser in two ways. For there is the effect of creation and the effect of reparation. And in the effect of creation God's power is chiefly manifested, in the effect of reparation God's mercy is chiefly manifested, and in both God's wisdom is manifested.

If therefore we speak of God's love as to the effect of creation, thus He loved the Angels more, because He conferred upon them better natural endowments and made them more power-
ful, and in them divine power is more manifested. — But if we speak as to the effect of reparation, thus He loved men more than the Angels, since He deserted the Angels but raised up men. And thus it is clear that, according to diverse effects, man and the Angel mutually exceed each other in God's love.

But if you ask which of these loves exceeds the other more; then it must be answered that one may speak of the excess of love *as now*, or *absolutely*, that is, either according to the present state, or according to the final state. If we speak of the excess of love according to the present state, thus it must be conceded that He loves the Angels more than men. But if we speak according to the state of final grace, in which the reparation will be consummated, thus it seems it can reasonably enough be said that He loves men more. For man will have in paradise more reasons whereby he may stand grateful and devout to God than the angelic order does: both because of the benefit of the incarnation, and because of the benefit of redemption, and because of the benefit of his eminent glorification; which manifest toward us not only the greatness of divine charity but also its excess, according to that which is said to the Ephesians, chapter two: *God, who is rich in mercy, for His exceeding charity wherewith He loved us, even when we were dead in sin, has quickened us together in Christ.*

And thus the response to the question proposed is clear. The response to the objections is also clear: for both sets of reasons conclude truly along diverse paths. For those reasons which prove that He loves the human kind more proceed according to the effect of reparation, with regard had to the final state; and therefore they conclude truly and are to be conceded. But the reasons which are adduced on the opposite side proceed by another path, as is clear to one who looks.

1. For as to what is first objected, that the Angel is more like God; this is true as to those things which are of nature, but it need not [be true] as to the gifts of grace. Now God's love weighs the superadded gifts of nature more than those which are naturally implanted. And if you object that grace corresponds to nature; to this enough has been answered in the second book.

2. To that which is objected, that God is more liberal toward the Angels, because by one motion He beatified them; it must be said that this does not conclude concerning love absolutely, but concerning love *as now*, which regards the present state. Moreover, it was greater to give His Only-begotten for the impious than to recompense eternal reward to the Angels who merited it; for this was of justice, but that of most abundant mercy and piety.

3. To that which is objected, that the Angels love more, because they have nothing to retard them; it must be said that that reason concludes only according to the present state, in which the body, when it is corrupted, weighs down the spirit: but according to the future state, when the body will have been made spiritual, man will have no impediment and will have the chief help of grace.

4. To that which is objected, that they are mediators; the response is likewise clear. For our mediators belong to the state of present misery, in which, because of manifold defect, a manifold help is necessary for us, and because of the great distance of ourselves from God we need the help of mediators.