Dist. 36
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/36/q/bon-sent-III-d36-littera
----------------------------------------
### DISTINCTION XXXVI.

### Chapter I. *On the connection of the virtues, which are not separated.*

It is also wont to be asked whether the virtues are so joined together among themselves that they cannot be possessed separately by anyone, but he who has one has all. Concerning this Jerome says: «All the virtues cohere among themselves, so that he who has lacked one lacks all. He therefore who has one has all». — And this indeed is probable. For since charity is the mother of all the virtues, in whomever the mother herself, namely charity, is, all her children also, that is, the virtues, are rightly believed to be. Hence Augustine: «Where charity is, what is there that can be lacking? But where it is not, what is there that can profit»? — Why therefore do we not say that he who has this virtue has all, since *the fullness of the Law is charity*? which, the more it is in a man, the more he is endowed with virtue; but the less, the less virtue is in him; and the less virtue is in him, the more vice is in him».

### Chapter II. *Whether all the virtues are equal, in whomever they are.*

But whether one possesses all the virtues *equally*, or some glow more, some less in a person; is a question. — For to some it seems that some are had more, some less by a person, as in Job patience shone forth, in David humility, in Moses meekness. These also concede that one merits more through some one virtue than through another, inasmuch as he has it more fully than another. Yet they do not say that one merits more through any [virtue] than through charity, nor that any is had by anyone more fully than charity. They say therefore that some are more, and some less in a person, but none more fully than charity, which begets the rest; and these they say are the many faces which the Apostle mentions, saying: *From the persons of many faces* etc.

Others say more truly that all the virtues are both together and equal in whomever they are, so that he who in one has stood equal to another, is in all equal to the same. Hence Augustine: «The virtues which are in the human soul, although each is understood in one mode and another, are nevertheless in no way separated from one another, so that whoever shall be equal, for example in fortitude, are equal also in prudence and justice and temperance. For if you shall say that these are equal in fortitude, but that one excels in prudence; it follows that the fortitude of this one is less prudent; and through this they are not equal even in fortitude, because the fortitude of that one is more prudent. And thus you will find concerning the rest of the virtues, if you run through them all with the same consideration». — From these things it becomes clear that all the virtues are not only connected, but also equal in the soul of man. When therefore someone is said to preeminent in some virtue, as Abraham in faith, Job in patience; it is to be understood according to outward uses, or in comparison with other men, because he either most displays the habit of humility, or the work of faith, or chiefly carries out [the work] of some one of the rest of the virtues. Hence he is also said to be strong above others, or to excel singularly among other men, according to this mode, namely according to the account of outward acts. — Elsewhere Augustine says that in someone one virtue is more, another less, and that one is, and not the other. For he says thus: «By your most lucid disputation it has sufficiently appeared that it did not please our authors, nay, Truth itself, that all sins are equal, even if this be true of the virtues»: «because, although it is true that he who has one has all the virtues, and he who has not one has none, yet not even thus are sins equal, because where there is no virtue, nothing is right; nor yet on that account is the more crooked not more crooked, the more distorted not more distorted. But if, as I think to be more true and more agreeable to the sacred Letters, the intentions of the soul are so [related], as the members of the body — not that they should be seen by their places, but that they should be felt by the affections — and one is illumined more, another less, another wholly lacks light; assuredly as each one is affected by the illumination of pious charity, in one act more, in another less, in some nothing, so it can be said that he has one [virtue] and has not another, and one more, another less. For we can rightly say that charity is greater in this man than in that; and some [charity] in this man, none in that, as far as pertains to the charity which is piety; and that in one man there is greater chastity than patience, and greater today than yesterday, if he advances; and that he does not yet have continence, and has no small mercy. And that I may generally and briefly comprehend the notion which I have concerning virtue: virtue is the charity by which that which is to be loved is loved; this is in some greater, in some lesser, in some none; but it is fullest, so that it can no longer be increased, so long as this man lives, in no one». — Here it seems to be in-

sinuated that someone can for this reason be said to have one virtue more than another, because through charity he is more affected in the act of one virtue than of another, and on account of the difference of acts the virtues themselves can be said to be had more or less, and one not to be had; while nevertheless he has all of them at once and equally as regards the habit or essence of each in the mind. But in act he has one more, another less, and also has not another, as a just man, using marriage, does not have continence in *act*, which nevertheless he has in *habit*. — «Why therefore are sins not said to be equal? Perhaps because he acts more against charity who sins more grievously, less who sins more lightly. For no one sins except by acting against that which is *the fullness of the Law*; therefore it is rightly said: *Whoever shall offend in one, is made guilty of all*, that is, he acts against charity, on which all things depend».

### Chapter III. *How the whole Law depends on charity.*

Since there are two precepts of charity, on which, as was set forth before, *the whole Law depends and the Prophets*; it is to be noted how this may be, since in the Law and the Prophets there were many ceremonial commandments, which, if they had pertained to the sanctification of charity, would seem not yet to *have to* cease. But because they were instituted not by the grace of justification, which charity makes, but as a *figure of what was to come* and *imposed as a burden*; therefore, the truth shining forth, they ceased like a *shadow*. Nevertheless the *ceremonial* [precepts] themselves too, according to the spiritual understanding which they contain, and all the *moral* [precepts] are referred to charity. For all things pertain to the ten commandments written on the tablets, where the sum of all is summarized, from which the rest emanate, just as in the sermon of the Lord eight virtues are set forth, to which the rest are referred; and as the rest are referred to the ten commandments of the decalogue, so those ten themselves [are referred] to the two commandments of charity. All things therefore pertain to the two commandments of charity, because they are fulfilled through charity and ought to be referred to charity as to their end. Hence Augustine: «Charity possesses the whole greatness and breadth of the divine Eloquences, the charity by which we love God and our neighbor, which is the root of all good things. Hence Truth says: *On these two commandments the whole Law depends and the Prophets*. If therefore you have not leisure to search through all the sacred Pages, to unroll all the wrappings of discourses; hold charity, on which all things depend», because it is the perfection and end of all. For then both the precepts and the counsels are rightly done, when they are referred to loving God and the neighbor for the sake of God. «But what is done from fear of punishment, or from some carnal intention, so that it is not referred to charity, is not yet done as it ought to be done, although it may seem to be done». «For he is an enemy of justice who does not sin from fear of punishment; but a friend, who does not sin from love of it». — «The sum of all therefore is this, that it be understood that the fullness of the Law and of all the divine Scriptures is the love of God and of the neighbor».

---