Bonaventure

Quaestio III. Utrum latria sit virtus cardinalis, vel theologica.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum latria sit virtus cardinalis, an theologica. Et quod theologica, videtur.

1. (Ad oppositum.) Augustinus, decimi de Civitate Dei capitulo tertio¹: « Sacrificamus Deo hostiam humilitatis et laudis in ara cordis igne fervidae caritatis ». Et post: « Hic est Dei cultus, haec vera religio, haec recta pietas et tantum Deo debita servitus »: ergo videtur, quod si haec omnia circumloquuntur latriam, nihil aliud est latria quam ipsa caritas: ergo latria est virtus theologica.

2. Item, Augustinus, decimo quarto de Trinitate²: « Sapientia vera est verus ac praecipuus Dei cultus, quae uno nomine Graece theosebia appellatur, quod nomen nostri pietatem dixerunt, cum pietas apud Graecos usitatius eusebia nuncupetur ». Sed latria, ut dicit Augustinus decimo de Civitate Dei, non est aliud quam theosebia, et theosebia non est aliud quam sapientia; sapientia autem se tenet ex parte virtutum theologicarum, non cardinalium: ergo et ipsa latria.

3. Item, latria est virtus, per quam Deus colitur eo cultu, qui est adoratio; sed virtus dictans nobis, Deum esse adorandum, est ipsa fides, vel etiam caritas: quia, sicut dicit Rabanus super Genesim³, « adorare est eum qui adorandus est tota mentis intentione quaerere »: ergo videtur, quod latria sit virtus theologica, scilicet fides, vel caritas.

4. Item, in latria est impletio primi praecepti;

sed praecepta primae tabulae implentur virtutibus theologicis⁴, sicut patet de secundo, quod impletur per fidem, et de tertio, quod impletur per caritatem: ergo videtur, quod si primum impletur per latriam, quod sit virtus theologica.

5. Item, haec est differentia inter virtutes cardinales et theologicas, quod cardinales consistunt in medio circa superfluum et diminutum⁵, in theologicis autem non est reperire superfluum; sed circa latriam, qua est Deum colere, non est superfluum invenire: ergo videtur, quod latria non sit in genere virtutum cardinalium, sed theologicarum.

6. Item, virtus theologica dicitur, quia habet Deum pro obiecto; sed latria habet Deum pro obiecto — sicut enim fides credit primam veritatem, et caritas diligit summam bonitatem, sic latria reveretur et colit summam maiestatem — videtur igitur, quod latria sit virtus theologica.

Sed contra: 1. (Fundamenta.) « Religio est virtus, qua colitur ille qui est superioris naturae », sicut vult Augustinus decimo de Civitate Dei, et Tullius in secundo Rhetoricae⁶; sed religio est species iustitiae, ut dicit Tullius ibidem, et iustitia est virtus cardinalis: si ergo latria continetur sub specie religionis, latria est de genere virtutis cardinalis.

2. Item, sicut obedientia respicit debitum mandati, sic latria respicit debitum honoris divini, « est enim latria cultus Deo debitus⁷ »; sed obedientia, quia respicit debitum praecepti, est virtus cardinalis contenta sub debita iustitia, non theologica: ergo pari ratione et ipsa latria.

3. Item, nullius virtutis theologicae actus cadit sub coactione — credere enim non potest quis non volens⁸ — sed actus latriae cadit sub coactione, ut adorare et thura ponere: ergo latria non continetur sub genere virtutis theologicae.

4. Item, omnis virtus theologica vel est fides, vel spes, vel caritas; sed latria non est fides, pro eo quod non considerat summam veritatem secundum se; nec caritas, quia non considerat summam bonitatem, sed magis summam maiestatem; nec spes, hoc constat: ergo etc.

Conclusio

Conclusio. Latria, proprie dicta, est virtus cardinalis, in genere propinquo iustitiae et proximo religionis.

Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod licet latria notificetur per cultum, sive per servitutem, ut dicatur latria esse⁹ servitus, sive cultus Deo debitus, et ista duo quasi pro eodem accipiantur; differunt tamen secundum propriam acceptionem. (Differunt cultus et servitus.) Cultus enim Dei respicit actum interiorem et exteriorem, et magis interiorem quam exteriorem; servitus vero proprie respicit actum exteriorem. Et ideo cum latria de ratione sui vocabuli idem sit quod servitus, secundum quod exponit Augustinus in libro de Trinitate¹⁰, latria proprie respicit actum exteriorem (Quid sit latria); theosebia vero, vel eusebia idem est quod cultus divinus, sive bonus cultus, et ideo proprie respicit actum interiorem. Et quoniam virtus, quae respicit actum exteriorem, versatur quodam modo circa actionem et est in genere virtutis cardinalis¹¹; hinc est, quod latria est virtus cardinalis (Conclusio 1). Et quia considerat actum exteriorem sub ratione debiti et in comparatione ad alterum, et hoc est ipsius iustitiae; ideo latria continetur sub virtute cardinali, quae quidem est iustitia (Conclusio 2). — Rursus, quia species iustitiae, secundum quam ordinatur¹² ad venerandam naturam superiorem, est ipsa religio, sicut dicit Tullius; hinc est, quod latria non solum est in genere virtutis tanquam in genere remoto, sed in genere virtutis cardinalis tanquam in genere subalterno; in genere vero iustitiae, sicut in genere propinquo: in genere vero religionis, sicut in genere proximo (Conclusio 3, generalis).

Et hoc est quod innuit Augustinus de Civitate (Confirmatur)

Dei decimi capitulo primo¹³, ubi dicit, quod idem est apud Graecos latria, quod apud nos religio, excepto quod nomen religionis est in plus. Unde (Corollaria) ibidem dicit, quod cultus Deo debitus quatuor nominibus nuncupatur: duobus apud Graecos, et duobus apud nos. Apud Graecos namque dicitur latria et theosebia sive¹⁴ eusebia. Apud nos vero dicitur pietas et religio, ita quod ista duo nomina respondent illis duobus, licet quodam modo sint in plus quantum ad modum consuetum. — Differunt autem latria et theosebia secundum propriam acceptionem, licet aliquando accipiantur pro eodem, quia theosebia dicit cultum interiorem, qui proprie spectat ad virtutes theologicas, sed latria servitutem exteriorem, quae spectat ad iustitiam, scilicet virtutem cardinalem. — Concedendum est ergo, latriam esse virtutem cardinalem. Concedenda sunt etiam argumenta hoc probantia.

Ad argumenta pro parte theologica:

(Solutio oppositorum.) Ad 1, 2. Ad duas autem auctoritates Augustini patet responsio per iam dicta. Cum enim dicit Augustinus, quod cultus Deo debitus est ipsa dilectio, vel sapientia, loquitur de cultu interiori; cum autem dicimus, latriam esse cultum, intelligimus de cultu exteriori, nisi¹⁵ vocabulo abutimur. Et hoc patet per oppositum, quia non dicitur idololatra, qui credit, idolum esse Deum, vel amat ipsum sicut Deum, sed infidelis. Tunc autem dicitur idololatrare, cum exterius colit; et sic per oppositum intelligimus in proposito.

Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod virtus, per quam adoratur Deus, est fides et caritas; dicendum, quod sicut est cultus interior et exterior, sic et adoratio interior et exterior. (Adoratio interna et externa.) « Adorare interius est tota mente in Deum tendere », sicut dicit Rabanus^1b; adorare exterius est aliquam reverentiam corporaliter exhibere. Cum ergo dicitur, quod per fidem et caritatem adoratur Deus; dicendum, quod verum est de adoratione interiori, quae incipit in fide et terminatur in caritate, sed non habet veritatem de adoratione exteriori, quae ortum habet a virtute cardinali. Et si tu obiicias: tam fides quam caritas dictat tam interius quam exterius adorandum; (Notandum.) dicendum breviter, quod aliquis actus potest esse alicuius virtutis multipliciter: aut sicut imperantis, aut sicut elicientis. Licet autem exterior adoratio sit ipsius fidei et caritatis sicut imperantis, et maxime fidei, quae dictat Deum adorandum; alterius tamen est ut elicientis, scilicet latriae, quae, quoniam elicit actum sub ratione debiti, ideo continetur sub iustitia, quae est virtus cardinalis^5b.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod impletio primi praecepti spectat ad virtutem theologicam, sicut impletio secundi; dicendum, quod impletio secundi, videlicet: Non assumas tibi nomen Dei tui in vanum^6b (Notandum), quantum ad actum exteriorem est virtutis cardinalis, quantum ad actum interiorem impletur virtute theologica, quae quidem est fides. Per hunc modum intelligendum est in primo praecepto; et quia per latriam impletur per actum exteriorem, ideo non necesse est, eam esse virtutem theologicam.

Ad 5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod circa actum latriae non consistit superfluum, vel diminutum; responderi potest, quod falsum est, quia, licet quantum ad actum interiorem non contingat excedere in colendo Deum; tamen quantum ad actum exteriorem et modum contingit reperire excessum, utpote sicut si aliquis sacerdos vellet decem Missas in uno die cantare ad laudem Dei, non servaret modum.

Ad 6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod latria habet obiectum Deum; (Notandum.) dicendum, quod si^8b latria habeat obiectum Deum, aliquo modo tamen cum hoc respicit aliquod creatum. Unde sicut obedientia, qua quis obedit Deo, respicit ipsum Deum, ut cui obediendum est, ipsum autem mandatum et eius obligationem respicit sicut illud quod implendum est; sic et ipsa latria respicit Deum, ut^9b cui honor exhibendus est; respicit etiam cultum exteriorem exhibendum; respicit etiam rationem exhibendi, videlicet rationem debiti; et haec est quasi ratio formalis ipsius et est quid creatum. Hinc est, quod cum virtus ponatur in specie, vel in genere formali ex parte obiecti, quod habet rationem formalis et motivi; quod^10b latria est in genere virtutis cardinalis, sicut obedientia. — Quod ergo obiicitur, quod virtus theologica est illa quae respicit obiectum increatum; dicendum, quod obiectum principale virtutis theologicae non est aliquid creatum, sed est bonum increatum sub conditionibus increatis, quae

quidem sunt summa bonitas et summa veritas^1c. Hoc autem non est reperire in proposito; et ideo non tenet ratio illa.

Haec autem dicta sunt de latria, secundum quod proprie accipitur pro habitu dirigente ad cultum exteriorem, qui proprie dicitur servitus Dei et adoratio. (De latria non proprie dicta.) Et hoc modo non est idem latria et theosebia, ut a principio dictum est. Si autem latria dicatur cultus interior, cum ille consistat in credendo et diligendo et sperando Deum, sicut dicit Augustinus in Enchiridio^2c; sic non ponitur esse virtus cardinalis, sed theologica, non, inquam, ab aliis distincta, sed consequens ad omnes illas. Sed hoc modo non accipitur ita proprie, sicut modo praedicto, cum latria, proprie loquendo, sit species religionis, sicut dulia; et nomen eius impositum fuit a servitute, sicut dictum fuit a principio. (Notandum.) Utroque tamen modo contingit reperiri eam dici, et secundum hoc doctorum positiones diversificari, ut quidam ponunt^3c eam speciem virtutis cardinalis, scilicet iustitiae, quidam vero tres theologicas circumplecti. Et utrumque vere potest dici sine contrarietate propter diversum modum accipiendi^4c.

---

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 three¹: "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 fourteen²: "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 Genesis³, "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 virtues⁴, 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 deficient⁵, 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 Rhetoric⁶; 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 God⁷"; 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 unwillingly⁸ — 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 be⁹ 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 Trinity¹⁰, 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 virtue¹¹; 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 ordered¹² 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 one¹³, 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 or¹⁴ 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, unless¹⁵ 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^1b; 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^5b.

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^6b (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^8b 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^9b 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^10b 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^1c. 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^2c; 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^3c 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]^4c.

---