Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 6.djvu/792

 GRACE

708

GRACE

explain the method and manner (modus) of this in- dwelling.

Theologians offer two explanations. The greater number hold that the indwelling must not be consid- ered a substantial information, nor a hypostatic union, but that it really means an indwelling of the Trinity (John, xiv, 23), but is more specifically appropriated to the Holy Ghost by reason of His notional character as the Hypostatic Holiness and Personal Love.

Another small group of theologians (Petavaus, Scheeben, Hurter, etc.), basing their opinion upon the teaching of the Fathers, especially the Greek, distin- guish between the inhahitatio totiits Trimtatis, and the inhabitatio Spiritus Sancti, and decide that this latter must be regarded as a union {unio, (voxm) pertaining to the Holy Ghost alone, from which the other two Per- sons are excluded. It would be difficult, if not im- possible, to reconcile this theory, in spite of its deep mystical significance, with the recognized principles of the doctrine of the Trinity, namely the law of ap- propriation and Divine mission. Hence this theory is almost universally rejected (see Franzelin, " De Deo trino ", thes. xliii-xlviii, Rome, 1881).

(3) The Characteristics of Sanctifying Grace. — The Protestant conception of justification boasts of three characteristics: absolute certainty (cerlitudo), com- plete uniformity in all the justified {ccqualitas), un- forfeitableness (inamissibilitas). According to the teaching of the Church, sanctifying grace has the op- posite characteristics: uncertainty {incertiludo), in- equality {inceqwditas), and amissibihty {amissibiiitas).

(a) Uncertainty. — The heretical doctrine of the Re- formers, that man by a fiduciary faith knows with absolute certainty that he is justified, received the at- tention of the Council of Trent (Sess. VI, cap. ix), in one entire chapter {De inani fiducid hareticoruni), three canons (loc. cit., can. xiii-xv) condemning the necessity, the alleged power, and the function of fiduciary faith. The object of the Church in defining the dogma was not to shatter the trust in God (cerlitudo spei) in the matter of personal salvation, but to repel the misleading assumptions of an unwarranted certainty of salvation (cerli- tudo fidei). In doing this the Church is altogether obedient to the instruction of Holy Writ, for, since Scripture declares that we must work out our salva- tion "with fear and trembling" (Phil., ii, 12), it is im- possible to regard our mdividual salvation as some- thing fixed and certain. Why did St. Paul (I Cor., ix, 27) chastise his body if not afraid lest, having preached to others, he might himself "become a castaway"? He says expressly (I Cor., iv, 4) : " For I am not con- scious to myself of any thing, yet am I not hereby jus- tified; but he that judgeth me, is the Lord." Tradi- tion also rejects the Lutheran idea of certainty of jus- tification. Pope Gregory the Great O'b. VII, ep. xxv) was asked by a pious lady of the court, named Gregoria, to say what was the state of her soul. He replied that she was putting to him a difficult and useless question, which he could not answer, because God had not vouchsafed to him any revelation concerning the state of her soul, and only after her death could she have any certain knowledge as to the forgiveness of her sins. No one can be absolutely certain of his or her salvation unless — as to Magdalen, to the man with the palsy, or to the penitent thief — a special revela- tion be given (Trent, Sess. VI, can. xvi). Nor can a theological certainty, any more than an absolute cer- tainty of belief, be claimed regarding the matter of salvation, for the spirit of the Gospel is strongly op- posed to anything like an unwarranted certainty of salvation. Therefore the rather hostile attitude to the Gospel spirit advanced by Ambrosius Catherinus (d. 1553), in his little work; "De certitudine gratia?", received such general opposition from other theolo- gians. Since no metaphysical certainty can be cher- ished in the matter of justification in any particular

case, we must content ourselves with a moral cer- tainty, which, of course, is but warranted in the case of baptized children, and which, in the case of adults, diminishes more or less, just as all the conditions of salvation are complied with — not an easy matter to determine. Nevertheless any excessive anxiety and disturbance may be allayed (Rom., viii, 16, 38 sq.) by the subjective conviction that we are probably in the state of grace.

(b) Inequality. — If man, as the Protestant theory of justification teaches, is justified by faith alone, by the external justice of Christ, or God, the conclusion which Martin Luther (Sermo de Nat. Mariae) drew must follow, namely that "we are all equal to Mary the Mother of God and just as holy as she". But if, on the other hand, according to the teaching of the Church, we are justified by the justice and merits of Christ in such fashion that this becomes formally our own justice and holiness, then there must result an inequality of grace in individuals, and for two reasons: first, because according to the generosity of God or the receptive condition of the soul an unequal amount of grace is infused; then, also, because the grace origi- nally received can be increased by the performance of good works (Trent, Sess. VI, cap. vii, can. xxiv). This possibility of increase in grace by good works, whence would follow its inequahty in individuals, finds its warrant in those Scriptural texts in which an in- crease of grace is either expressed or implied (Prov., iv, 18; Ecclus., xviii, 22; II Cor., ix, 10; Eph.,iv, 7; II Pet., iii, 18; Apoc, xxii, 11). Tradition had occa- sion, as early as the close of the fourth centurj^, to defend the old Faith of the Church against the heretic Jovinian, who strove to introduce into the Church the Stoic doctrine of the equalit}' of all virtue and all vice. St. Jerome (Con. Jovin., II, xxiii) was the chief de- fender of orthodoxy in this instance. The Church never recognized any other teaching than that laid down by St. Augustine (Tract, in Jo., vi, 8): "Ipsi sancti in ecclesia sunt alii aliis sanctiores, alii aliis meliores." Indeed, this view should commend itself to every thinking man.

The increase of grace is by theologians justly called a second justification (justificatio secunda), as distinct from the first justification (justificatio prima), which is coupled with a remission of sin ; for, though there be in the second justification no transit from sin to grace, there is an advance from grace to a more perfect sharing therein. If inquiry be made as to the mode of this increase, it can only be explained by the philo- sophical maxim: "Qualities are susceptible of in- crease and decrease"; for instance, light and heat by the varying degree of intensity increase or diminish. The question is not a theological but a philosophical one to decide whether the increase be effected by an add'tion of grade to grade (additio gradus ad gradum), as most theologians believe; or whether it be b}' a deeper and firmer taking of root in the soul (major radicatio in subjecto), as many Thomists claim. This question has a special connexion with that concerning the multiplication of the habitual act.

But the last question that arises has decidedly a theological phase, namel}', can the infusion of sanctify- ing grace be increased infinitely? Or is there a limit, a point at which it must be arrested? To maintain that the increase can go on to infinity, i. e. that man by successive advances in holiness can finally enter into the possession of an infinite endowment involves a manifest contradiction, for such a grade is as impos- sible as an infinite temperature in physics. Theoreti- cally, therefore, we can consider only an increase without any real limit (in indefinitum). Practically, however, two ideals of imattained and unattainable holiness have been determinc( 1, which , nevertheless, are finite. The one is the inconceivably great holiness of the human soul of Christ, the other the fullness of grace which dwelt in the soul of the Virgin Mary.