III.  “The Consideration of God through His Image Imprinted in our Natural Powers” by Bonaventure

Introduction for step 3:  The aim of this step is to explore how we might best conceive the nature of the human.  What does it mean to be human?  Or how might we best understanding what a human being is?  Paradoxically, such a question may appear simultaneously overly abstract and impossible to answer or so simple and obvious that it does not need an answer.  Furthermore, the question itself might appear superfluous:  what difference does any understanding of the human make in the real world?

To appreciate the relevance of the question, simply consider how some image or understanding of what it means to be human is presumed in almost all of our everyday activity:  economic transactions [are transactions accomplished by free, rational agents?], corporate activity [e.g., are employees in the first instance merely part of the cost analysis of a spreadsheet?], government statistics [does a 5% rise in the number of Americans living in official poverty indicate anything more than a correction in the economy?],  or even personal relationships [do we tend to view and judge each other (and ourselves!) in terms of advertising images of an ideal body?] - all these sorts of activities have varying ways of being understood depending upon what one presumes about the fundamental meaning of being human. Notice that this question is about the fundamental meaning of the human, something in light of which we view a specific human being or human activity.  Hence, as in our earlier examination of the meaning or significance of “nature,” this is not something we “prove,” but rather something for which we provide a rationale which has (or does not have) sufficient evidence to support it and to fit in with our overall experience of things.

A proper understanding of the human is, of course, a contested notion in our contemporary, secular, pluralistic world.  Some believe that human beings are nothing but the total organizational pattern of the material components that make up our bodies.  In this sense at the deepest level of understanding we humans are not all that much different from dogs and cats, except for the more complex neurological structure of our brains.  Others have an implicit tribal or nationalistic understanding of the human, with the consequence that those who are “like us” are the only ones who “count” as truly human.  Consider the intractable problems in southeastern Europe, the middle-east, northern Ireland, or in Kashmir and ask if such presuppositions are operating there?  Or consider how difficult it is for those of us in liberal, secular democracies to justify why we should endow our fellow-citizens with rights or dignity.

For someone like Bonaventure, who dwells within an intellectual understanding of the Christian tradition, the fundamental meaning of the human is immediately evident:  we are all created in the image and likeness of God, as Genesis 1:26-27 declares.  As a reflective Christian, however, Bonaventure is intent on offering an explanation or a rationale of just what that claim means.  Aside from the fact that the Bible affirms that God created us as images of the divine (something Bonaventure would not doubt), is there anything further that we can understand about this?  Bonaventure believes that if we reflect carefully on the “capacities” or “powers” of our minds, we will come to understand how the image of God is built into the very underlying structure of our conscious activity.  The aim of this chapter, then, is to provide an exercise to help the diligent reader come to analyze how the powers of our minds reveal the way in which we are an image of God.

Click here to view the complete text of Chapter III of the Itinerarium, including the paragraphs 2 and 3 where Bonaventure discusses how the image of God is present in our “memory” and in our “intellect.”

Discussion questions:

Recall that Bonaventure asked his readers to consider the order inherent in the natural world in ch. I and the way that order made impressions of proportionality and delight on our sensory processes in ch. II.  Here in ch. III what is Bonaventure asking his readers to consider in §1?  He claims that when you perform this activity, you will discover three powers of the mind.  Can you identify them?  [If you are having difficulty, look ahead to the last sentence of §4.]

Notice that §2 & §3 are omitted in this selection from the Itinerarium.  What “power” of the mind is he analyzing in §4?  [Go to the complete text of Chapter III through the link above to learn what “powers” were treated in §2 & §3.]  What is the “structure” of Bonaventure’s argument regarding “counsel”?  Regarding “judgment”?  Regarding “desire”?  Notice that there is a similar pattern in each instance, namely that a “precondition” is necessary for this power to operate in these three forms.  What is this?  Does this appear convincing to you in any way?

Bonaventure provides his most explicit statement of how he interprets the traditional biblical and Christian claim that humans are created in the “image” of God in §6.  He establishes a foundation for all human intellectual activity on the basis of this interpretation.  Can you express what it is?  Does something like this appear helpful in our cultural context?