Dist. 40, Art. 1, Q. 1
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/40/q/bon-sent-III-d40-a1-q1
----------------------------------------
### Question I. *On the difference of the two Laws with respect to the root.*

Concerning the first point one proceeds thus, and it is asked concerning the difference which is assigned with respect to the root. Now this difference is assigned with respect to the root according to Augustine, namely that the old Law was rooted in fear, and the new Law in love. Hence Augustine says that «the difference between the Law and the Gospel is brief: fear and love». And although this difference may be drawn from many places of Scripture, it is taken chiefly from the Epistle to the Romans, chapter eight, where the Apostle says: *You have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear, but the spirit of adoption.*

But against this it is objected in many ways:

1. First, against the distinction of the roots themselves. For «every fear, as Augustine says, proceeds from love»: therefore if love is the root of fear, the one must be reduced to the other: therefore they are not distinguished from one another.

2. Likewise, since there are other affections of the soul, namely joy and grief and hope; it seems that, if a twofold Law is distinguished with respect to these affections, then by parity of reasoning it ought to be distinguished with respect to the others: therefore it seems that, if it is not distinguished with respect to the others, neither is it with respect to these.

3. Likewise, if these two Laws are distinguished with respect to these two roots; since the law of nature is distinct from these two, it seems that a third root besides these two would be necessary. Or if the law of nature does not have a root of observance different from the Law of

Moses, it seems that the Law of Moses does not differ from the Law of the Gospel with respect to this either.

4. Likewise, in Deuteronomy chapter six it is said: *You shall love the Lord your God with your whole heart and with your whole mind* etc.; and to the Philippians, chapter two, it is said in the new Law: *Work out your salvation with fear and trembling.* If therefore love is commanded in the old, and fear in the new Law; it seems that on this account the difference of these Laws is not to be regarded.

5. Likewise, in each Law promises and threats are made; but promises draw toward love, whereas threats strike fear: therefore fear and love belong to both: therefore they are not distinguished from one another with respect to these.

6. Likewise, graver threats are made in the new Law than in the old; for there a man was punished with a temporal penalty, but here God threatens an eternal penalty: if therefore a greater threat is inductive of greater fear, it seems that fear ought rather to be appropriated to the new Law than to the old: it seems therefore that with respect to these two roots the difference of the old and the new Law is not rightly assigned, both by the comparison of the roots themselves *to one another*, and by the comparison to *the Laws themselves*.

### Conclusion.

> The old Law is rightly called the law of fear, and the new Law the law of love.

**I respond:** For the understanding of the foregoing it must be noted that when we compare these Laws to one another, this can be done in two ways: either according to the *common* state, or having regard to the state *of a special person*. If having regard to the state of a special person, then with respect to these two there is no difference. For many in the evangelical Law are led by the spirit of fear, and many also in the old Law were led by the spirit of love. — But if we compare these Laws to one another, having regard to the common state; then, because the Mosaic Law had regard to the state of *imperfection*, since *the Law brought no one to perfection*, according to what the Apostle says to the Hebrews; whereas the Gospel has regard to the state of *perfection*, according to what is said in Matthew, chapter five: *Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect*;

<!-- page 886 → running head: DIST. XL. ART. UNICUS QUAEST. I. 885 -->

and it belongs to the imperfect to be led by the spirit of fear, but to the perfect by the spirit of love: hence it is that, according to the common state, the difference of these two Laws is to be assigned with respect to these two.

Now a sign of this difference is detected in the manner of bearing this twofold Law: for the old Law was given with great clamor and fear, according to what is said in Exodus, chapter nineteen, so that the people did not dare to approach; but the Law of the Gospel was given with great kindness and sweetness, since the *King of kings* himself, sitting in the midst of his disciples, taught them, saying: *Blessed are the poor in spirit* etc., according to what is written in Matthew, chapter five. And this diverse *manner* of bearing the Law intimates to us the diversity of this twofold *root* in observing, which belonged to these two Laws on account of the diverse quality of the persons and of their state, on account of which it was necessary that they be led by the hand in diverse ways. Hence, just as we see in disciplinary matters, that toward persuadable men one must use the *ostensive* syllogism, which leads directly to the true; but toward contentious men one must use the syllogism *through the impossible*, which leads to the manifestly false, so that through it he may lead back to the true: so, because in the time of the old Law men were of stiff neck and prone to evil, the Lord set forth threats and also fixed heavy penalties, that through this he might strike fear into them, by which they might be called back from evil and stirred to good; but afterward, when the *kindness and humanity of our Savior God* appeared, men began to be persuadable: and therefore the Lord set forth for them great and many promises, that through love and desire of them he might allure them to do good. And therefore the old Law is called the law of fear, the Law of the Gospel is called the law of love, according to the testimony of the Apostle and of blessed Augustine.

1. To that which is objected on the contrary, that fear is rooted in love; it must be said that love is twofold, namely that by which God is loved insofar as he is *good*, and that by which he is loved insofar as he is *beneficent*. From the first love arises *filial* fear, which fears to offend the father, on account of the fact that it loves him. From the second arises the fear *of punishment*, by which one fears to lose benefits and to incur the evils of punishment. The first love and fear belong to the evangelical Law, but the second love and fear belong to the Mosaic Law; and since the first love belongs to the state of perfection, in which love reigns, but the second to the state of imperfection, in which fear reigns: hence it is that, although in both there is love and fear, the Law of the Gospel is said to be observed more out of love than out of fear, but the Law of Moses the contrary.

2. To that which is objected, that there are other affections of the soul; it must be said that, even though there are others, nevertheless these two suffice, for the reason that all the others can be reduced to these two. For every affection is either with respect to good, or with respect to evil; and if with respect to good, it is reduced to love; if with respect to evil, it is reduced to fear. Hence these two affections are said to hold the principate among the others, because they most of all have the character of a motive, the one by inclining to good, the other by drawing back from evil; and therefore the character of a root belongs to them more than to the other affections. And *if you object* that then there ought to be but one root, since fear is reduced to love; it must be said that they are called *two* according to *immediate* comparison to their motive and to the *immediate* acts which take their origin from them. Hence where there is the root of fear, it is true that there is the root of love; but for something the immediate root is fear itself, of which love is not so immediately [the root].

3. To that which is objected concerning the law of nature, that it ought to have a third root; it must be said that the law *of nature* partly agreed with the law *of grace*, partly with the *written* law: as to *liberty* it agreed with the law *of grace*, but as to *imperfection* and obscurity with the *written* law: and therefore according to its diverse conditions it must be reduced to these two motives, nor was it necessary that it have a third root.

4. To that which is objected, that in each Law fear and love are commanded; it must be said that this is true; but nevertheless the old Law principally has an eye to fear, the new Law principally to love; and that holds in a law the character of a root, which principally moves in the observing of its commands.

5. To that which is objected, that in both threats and promises were made; it must be said that in the old Law temporal promises were made, according to what is said in Isaiah, chapter one: *If you are willing and will hear me, you shall eat the good things of the land*; but in the new Law eternal promises, by which the Lord promises his very self to us as a reward. — Likewise it is to be understood also concerning the threats. And since those threats and promises first belonged to the state of imperfection; therefore they more abundantly generated the affection of fear than of love; but the contrary is the case with the promises and threats of the new Law. Therefore that argument is not valid.

6. To that which is objected, that greater threats are made in the new Law; it can be answered in two ways: first, because a carnal and sensual man is more terrified when a penalty is threatened to him in the present than in the future. Just as many thieves fear more to steal on account of the gallows and hanging than on account of infernal punishment. Hence, even though the threat be greater, it nevertheless does not move so much, because it is not so well known. — In another way it can be said that in the new Law there is not only a great threat of punishment, but also an abundant bestowal of grace, which indeed brings forth love and confidence. But in the old Law there was a threat of punishment, nor was there so great a bestowal of grace; therefore the spirit of fear agitated them more, not on account of the threat of a greater punishment alone, but on account of the threat of punishment and the lack of help, which consists in the desire of good and the grace of the Holy Spirit.