Dist. 9, Art. 2, Q. 3
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/9/q/bon-sent-III-d9-a2-q3
----------------------------------------
### Question III. *Whether latria is a cardinal virtue, or a theological one.*

Thirdly it is asked whether latria is a cardinal virtue, or a theological one. And that it is theological seems [to be the case].

1. (*To the opposite.*) Augustine, *On the City of God*, book ten, chapter three: "We sacrifice to God a victim of humility and of praise upon the altar of the heart, in the fire of fervent charity." And afterward: "This is the worship of God, this is true religion, this is right piety and the service owed to God alone": therefore it seems that, if all these phrases circumscribe latria, latria is nothing other than charity itself: therefore latria is a theological virtue.

2. Likewise, Augustine, *On the Trinity*, book fourteen: "True wisdom is the true and chief worship of God, which by one name in Greek is called *theosebia*, which name our [writers] rendered *piety*, although among the Greeks *piety* is more usually called *eusebia*." But *latria*, as Augustine says in the tenth [book] *On the City of God*, is nothing other than *theosebia*, and *theosebia* is nothing other than *wisdom*; but *wisdom* belongs on the side of the theological virtues, not the cardinal ones: therefore latria too [does].

3. Likewise, latria is a virtue by which God is worshipped with that worship which is adoration; but the virtue dictating to us that God is to be adored is faith itself, or even charity: for, as Rabanus says *on Genesis*, "to adore is to seek with the whole intention of the mind him who is to be adored": therefore it seems that latria is a theological virtue, namely faith, or charity.

4. Likewise, in latria there is the fulfillment of the first precept; but the precepts of the first tablet are fulfilled by the theological virtues, as is clear concerning the second, which is fulfilled by faith, and concerning the third, which is fulfilled by charity: therefore it seems that, if the first is fulfilled by latria, it is a theological virtue.

5. Likewise, this is the difference between the cardinal and the theological virtues, that the cardinal ones consist in a mean concerning the excessive and the deficient, whereas in the theological ones no excess is to be found; but concerning latria, which is to worship God, no excess is to be found: therefore it seems that latria is not in the genus of the cardinal virtues, but of the theological ones.

6. Likewise, a virtue is called theological because it has God for its object; but latria has God for its object — for just as faith believes the first truth, and charity loves the highest goodness, so latria reveres and worships the highest majesty — therefore it seems that latria is a theological virtue.

**On the contrary:** 1. (*The grounds.*) "Religion is the virtue by which he who is of a higher nature is worshipped," as Augustine holds in the tenth [book] *On the City of God*, and Tully in the second [book] of the *Rhetoric*; but religion is a species of justice, as Tully says in the same place, and justice is a cardinal virtue: if therefore latria is contained under the species of religion, latria is of the genus of cardinal virtue.

2. Likewise, just as obedience regards the debt of a command, so latria regards the debt of divine honor, "for latria is the worship owed to God"; but obedience, because it regards the debt of a precept, is a cardinal virtue contained under owed justice, not a theological one: therefore by parity of reasoning latria too [is].

3. Likewise, the act of no theological virtue falls under compulsion — for no one can believe unwillingly — but the act of latria falls under compulsion, such as to adore and to offer incense: therefore latria is not contained under the genus of theological virtue.

4. Likewise, every theological virtue is either faith, or hope, or charity; but latria is not faith, because it does not consider the highest truth in itself; nor charity, because it does not consider the highest goodness, but rather the highest majesty; nor hope, this is established: therefore etc.

### Conclusion

> **Conclusion.** Latria, properly speaking, is a cardinal virtue, in the proximate genus of justice and the nearest genus of religion.

**I respond:** For the understanding of what has been said, it must be noted that, although latria is made known through worship, or through service — so that latria is said to be service, or the worship owed to God, and these two are taken as though for the same thing — nevertheless they differ according to their proper acceptation. (*Worship and service differ.*) For the worship of God regards the interior and the exterior act, and more the interior than the exterior; but service properly regards the exterior act. And therefore, since latria, by the very meaning of its word, is the same as service, according as Augustine explains in the book *On the Trinity*, latria properly regards the exterior act (*What latria is*); but *theosebia*, or *eusebia*, is the same as divine worship, or good worship, and therefore properly regards the interior act. And since a virtue that regards the exterior act is concerned in a certain way with action and is in the genus of cardinal virtue; hence it is that latria is a cardinal virtue (*Conclusion 1*). And because it considers the exterior act under the account of what is owed and in comparison to another, and this belongs to justice itself; therefore latria is contained under a cardinal virtue, which indeed is justice (*Conclusion 2*). — Again, because the species of justice according to which one is ordered to venerating a higher nature is religion itself, as Tully says; hence it is that latria is not only in the genus of virtue as in a remote genus, but in the genus of cardinal virtue as in a subaltern genus; in the genus of justice, as in a proximate genus; and in the genus of religion, as in the nearest genus (*Conclusion 3, general*).

And this is what Augustine intimates *On the City of* (*Confirmed*)

*God*, book ten, chapter one, where he says that *latria* among the Greeks is the same as *religion* among us, except that the name "religion" is wider in extent. Hence (*Corollaries*) in the same place he says that the worship owed to God is named by four names: two among the Greeks, and two among us. For among the Greeks it is called *latria* and *theosebia* or *eusebia*. But among us it is called *piety* and *religion*, so that these two names correspond to those two, although in a certain way they are wider in extent as to customary usage. — But *latria* and *theosebia* differ according to their proper acceptation, although sometimes they are taken for the same thing, because *theosebia* signifies interior worship, which properly pertains to the theological virtues, but *latria* exterior service, which pertains to justice, namely the cardinal virtue. — It must therefore be conceded that latria is a cardinal virtue. The arguments proving this must also be conceded.

**To the arguments for the theological side:**

(*Solution of the opposing arguments.*) *To 1, 2.* To the two authorities of Augustine the response is clear from what has already been said. For when Augustine says that the worship owed to God is love itself, or wisdom, he is speaking of interior worship; but when we say that latria is worship, we understand it of exterior worship, unless we are misusing the word. And this is clear by the opposite, because one who believes an idol to be God, or loves it as God, is not called an idolater, but an unbeliever. But one is said to commit idolatry when he worships exteriorly; and so by the opposite we understand it in the matter at hand.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that the virtue by which God is adored is faith and charity; it must be said that just as there is interior and exterior worship, so also there is interior and exterior adoration. (*Interior and exterior adoration.*) "To adore interiorly is to tend toward God with the whole mind," as Rabanus says; to adore exteriorly is to render some reverence bodily. When therefore it is said that God is adored by faith and charity; it must be said that this is true of interior adoration, which begins in faith and is terminated in charity, but it does not hold true of exterior adoration, which has its origin from a cardinal virtue. And if you object: both faith and charity dictate adoring both interiorly and exteriorly; (*Note.*) it must be said briefly that an act can belong to some virtue in many ways: either as commanding, or as eliciting. Now although exterior adoration belongs to faith and charity as commanding, and especially to faith, which dictates that God is to be adored; yet it belongs to another as eliciting, namely to latria, which, since it elicits an act under the account of what is owed, is therefore contained under justice, which is a cardinal virtue.

*To 4.* To that which is objected, that the fulfillment of the first precept pertains to a theological virtue, just as the fulfillment of the second; it must be said that the fulfillment of the second, namely: *Thou shalt not take to thyself the name of the Lord thy God in vain* (*Note*), as to the exterior act belongs to a cardinal virtue, and as to the interior act is fulfilled by a theological virtue, which indeed is faith. In this way it is to be understood in the first precept; and because by latria [it] is fulfilled through the exterior act, therefore it is not necessary that it be a theological virtue.

*To 5.* To that which is objected, that concerning the act of latria there is no excess, or defect; it can be answered that this is false, because, although as to the interior act it does not happen that one exceed in worshipping God, nevertheless as to the exterior act and manner it does happen that excess is found, as for instance if some priest wished to sing ten Masses in one day to the praise of God, he would not observe due measure.

*To 6.* To that which is objected, that latria has God for its object; (*Note.*) it must be said that, even if latria has God for its object, nevertheless in some way along with this it regards something created. Hence just as obedience, by which one obeys God, regards God himself, as the one to be obeyed, but regards the command itself and its obligation as that which is to be fulfilled; so also latria itself regards God, as the one to whom honor is to be shown; it also regards the exterior worship to be shown; it also regards the account of showing [it], namely the account of what is owed; and this is, as it were, its formal account and is something created. Hence it is that, since a virtue is placed in a species, or in a formal genus, on the part of the object which has the character of the formal and motive element; [it follows] that latria is in the genus of cardinal virtue, like obedience. — As for what is objected, that a theological virtue is that which regards an uncreated object; it must be said that the principal object of a theological virtue is not something created, but is the uncreated good under uncreated conditions, which

indeed are the highest goodness and the highest truth. But this is not to be found in the matter at hand; and therefore that argument does not hold.

Now these things have been said of latria according as it is properly taken for the habit directing toward exterior worship, which is properly called the service of God and adoration. (*On latria not properly so called.*) And in this way latria and theosebia are not the same, as was said from the beginning. But if latria is said [to be] interior worship, since that consists in believing and loving and hoping in God, as Augustine says in the *Enchiridion*; so it is not held to be a cardinal virtue, but a theological one — not, I say, distinct from the others, but consequent upon all of them. But in this way it is not taken so properly as in the aforesaid way, since latria, properly speaking, is a species of religion, like dulia; and its name was imposed from service, as was said from the beginning. (*Note.*) Yet in both ways it happens that it is found to be spoken of, and according to this the positions of the doctors are diversified, so that some place it [as] a species of cardinal virtue, namely of justice, while others [hold it to] embrace the three theological [virtues]. And both can truly be said without contradiction on account of the different manner of taking [the term].

---