Course on Grace
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION |
||||||
PART ONE: GRACE CONSIDERED EXTENSIVELY |
||||||
 |
I. | Why Grace? | ||||
| II. | What Is Grace? | |||||
| III. | Grace to the Angels | |||||
| IV. | Grace to Adam | |||||
| V. | Grace in the Old Testament | |||||
| VI. | Grace to Christ | |||||
| VII. |
Chapter VII.Justification in the New TestamentINFANTS In the Old Testament justification came to infants by way of the “sacrament of nature” or the “sacrament of circumcision.” But with the promulgation of the gospel of Christ, these two “sacraments” were replaced by the sacrament of baptism, a sacrament that is not merely an occasion or condition of justification but its instrumental cause. In how many ways, then, can infants be justified now? Abstractly, there might seem to be three possibilities: baptism of water, of blood, of desire. Baptism of Water. This is the ordinary way for the justification of infants. Is it the only way (apart from martyrdom or baptism of blood)? Theologians commonly say, Yes, and add that this is theologically certain. Their arguments are very strong. They cite: 1) the Council of Florence: “they cannot be helped by any remedy but the sacrament of baptism;” 2) the Roman Catechism: “infants have no other manner of reaching salvation, if baptism is not administered to them” (p. II c. II. N. 34); 3) the Council of Cologne: “adults who are prevented from actually receiving baptism can be saved by the desire of it. But infants… since they are incapable of this desire, are excluded from heavenly kingdom, if they die without being reborn through baptism” (Coll. Lac. V, 320); 4) Pope Pius XII: “an act of love can suffice for an adult to acquire sanctifying grace and supply for the lack of baptism; to the unborn or newly born infant this way is not open” (AAS: XLIII (1951) p. 84). These arguments, in their cumulative force seem inescapable. Limbo. What happens to infants who die unbaptized – in original sin – without sanctifying grace? They undergo the pain of loss of the Beatific Vision for all eternity. Where do they go? We usually say: to Limbo. Where is that? We actually do not know; but as the conciliar documents say: “in infernum” (DB 464, 693) we may perhaps call it the “ante-chamber of heaven.” Do they also undergo a pain of sense, besides the pain of loss? St. Augustine seems to subject to a mild pain of sense. But his real mind on this point is not clear. Moreover he was battling against a Pelagian error in this field. However, his supposed “rigorism” influenced others for a long time, and produced some followers called “torturers of infants.” Some other theologians, among them Bellarmine, while not assigning to these infants a strict pain of sense (i.e. of fire), do ascribe to them a “sadness” over the loss of the Beatific Vision. But most theologians hold, with St. Thomas, that these infants undergo simply the pain of loss, without pain of sense or sadness. Why no sadness over their loss? Because they will not know of it. St. Thomas says in one text (De Malo q5a3). Because their knowledge of it will not make them sad; in another text (2d33q2a2), since their perfectly ordered minds will “see things God’s way.” Some have indulged in various speculations about the Limboites, e.g., that they may now and then “visit heaven” or that Heavenites may visit Limbo, or that there may be “fusion days” on earth where Limboites and Heavenites may meet and mingle (the Beatific Vision would be no problem, for the Heavenites take it with them wherever they go – Our Lord had it on earth). How old will the Limboites be? Will they mature? Perhaps to an “ideal” age. But all this is conjecture. The Church neither affirms nor condemns such speculations; it simply makes no declaration. The common opinion of theologians today is that infants dying without sanctifying grace will have the highest natural happiness. Baptism of Blood. Martyrdom or baptism of blood, as instanced by the Holy Innocents, is an extraordinary way to salvation for infants. Some few theologians have tried to extend this way to all (or many other) infants. Schell tried to make their death a real imitation of the death of Christ and a quasi-martyrdom by which original sin would be deleted. But this theory was condemned by the Congregation of the Index in 1898. More recently Dom Bruno Webb varied this view by having Mother Church exercise her own faith and charity at the moment of their death in the souls of infants who die unbaptized, operating through the quasi-sacrament of death – by virtue of the sacrament of baptism. But he offers no real evidence. Baptism of Desire. Some theologians do not believe it is theologically certain as yet that infants who die without the sacrament of baptism (or martyrdom) are automatically excluded from the Beatific Vision in perpetuity. They have looked to some form of “baptism of desire” as a way of saving infants who die without sacramental baptism. Thus a) some have proposed the illumination theory, according to which dying children receive a sudden illumination, which enables them to receive baptism of desire by making an act of perfect love (Klee, Fangauer); b) others placed the desire of baptism not in the infants themselves but in the parents, the mother or father; c) others placed this desire on behalf of the infant in the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ so that thus – the Church desires salvation for them, and the Church is very powerful. The illumination theory is beset with difficulties. There is no convincing scriptural or patristic evidence for it. And it would seem, practically speaking, to do away with the existence of Limbo or at least with the occupants of Limbo (if it is applied to all infants). For every infant, sufficiently illuminated by grace would have to make a free choice: if it said Yes to the grace given, it would go to heaven; if it said No, it would go to hell. Then what is Limbo? While its existence is not a matter of faith, like that of heaven, hell and purgatory, still it seems to be theologically certain, according to most theologians. But if nobody went to it, it would be a place (or state) without occupants. What if the desire is ascribed to the parents? The Dominican, Cajetan, espoused this view, but Pope St. Pius V had the passage expunged from Cajetan’s works. In 1947, a Dominican professor of theology defended the tenability of Cajetan’s position. But if this theory had any real validity, the Church would tell parents to desire salvation for unborn infants who die without baptism: but she does not. Is there a saving desire on the part of the Church? If the Church had such power, she would certainly know it and put it to use. But there is no sign in her prayers or consciousness that it is her role to obtain the salvation of unbaptized infants through the “votum ecclesiae.” The following judgment by a modern theologian summarizes this critical question. “We are in the presence of a common theological teaching and a conviction which runs through a number of documents of the Church contrary to the new positions,” suggesting the possibility of baptism in voto for infants. “This evidence of a common teaching of theologians and of a sensus Ecclesiae blocks the way to the various solutions seeking salvation for the infants dying without baptism. Nor does the recent wave of literature change the situation. Analysis of this literature reveals clearly that we are not in the presence of a new theological movement, properly so called.” On the other hand further clarification and certainly more definitive declaration are still open. “As matters stand now, the question is not definitively closed. We are in the presence of a theological tradition whose critical evaluation may well call for more delicately nuanced positions; and of a gensus Ecclesiae whose dogmatic force can be determined ultimately only by a dogmatic decision of the magisterium.” (Gregorianum, 1954, p. 406-473; Theology Digest, Winter, 1955, p. 3-9). INFIDELS Infidels make up the majority of mankind. All can be saved; to be saved they must die in sanctifying grace. Therefore all can get sanctifying grace. But how? They must do something, since they are adults: they must dispose themselves for justification, for sanctifying grace. How? By salutary (grace-elevated) acts of faith and fear and repentance and love etc. God, then, must first “lean down” and give them grace, for nature alone cannot produce salutary acts. Sequence of Actual Graces for them. Just when does God give the first actual grace to an infidel – which can gradually or quickly lead him to the “big” graces of revelation and faith (i.e. assent to this revelation in a salutary act of faith)? At the time that God judges to be opportune, which according to many theologians is the infidel’s first full use of reason, when he distinguishes between good and evil. Just what is the first grace God gives to a particular infidel, we do not know. It could take many forms. It might be a grace to turn to God, to acknowledge Him, to express his need of God or of divine help. It could involve both an external grace and an internal grace (e.g. of prayer). But sometime, somehow every adult infidel will get this remote vocation to faith and sanctifying grace. If he cooperates properly with this, God gives him further graces and ultimately the grace that is proximately sufficient for the act of faith, i.e. the grace of revelation and the grace of faith to assent to this revelation. What is the minimum of revealed truths that he must believe in this act of faith? This is disputed. Thomists usually hold that he must believe explicitly at least four revealed truths: that God exists and is Rewarder, the Trinity and the Incarnation. Many other theologians hold that more probably it is not absolutely necessary to believe explicitly in the Trinity and Incarnation. But if it is, God will put these revealed truths also within the infidel’s grasp. To be justified, is it enough for the infidel to believe, to make this act of faith? No. He will be further drawn by grace to make an act of hope and fear and repentance and love – and to receive the sacrament of baptism. And by the grace of this sacrament he will be justified. But what if he knows nothing of this sacrament, or is unable to receive it? Can he still be justified? Yes, by what is called baptism of desire, if with the help of grace he elicits the act of perfect love of God (and contrition). For in this act of love he really wills whatever God desires, and hence, implicitly desires the sacrament of baptism, (for that is what God desires), even though he is invincibly ignorant of the sacrament. If this act of love were intense and perfect enough, and he were to die immediately after making it, it seems that he would be ready for immediate entry into heaven. If, however, he lived on and later heard of the sacrament of baptism and its necessity, he would have to receive it; its reception would bring him added sanctifying grace and make it possible for him to receive other sacraments and their special graces. Outside the Church. Where is the Church in this picture? It is a matter of dogma that outside the Church there is no salvation! How then can an infidel be saved, unless he actually becomes a member of the Roman Catholic Church, or at least explicitly desires this? The Holy Office wrote in the so called Boston heresy case: “No one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff… But… that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing… This may be an implicit desire – when a person is in invincible ignorance – but it must be animated by perfect charity – and suppose… supernatural faith.” (AER Oct., 1952, 311). Thus there are two “salvational” ways of being related to the Church: a) as actual members by baptism of water and b) by intention and longing (explicit or implicit) through baptism of desire, Without the Church, without being related to the Church, in one of these two ways, there is no salvation: this is why we say there is no salvation outside the Church. Where there is real inability to pertain to the Church in the first way (e.g. a man does not know of the church or its necessity or cannot get baptism), the second way is open to him. In Summary, then, we may say that God gives all adult infidels sufficient grace for salvation, and if they use it properly they will be saved. Their way to justification, to sanctifying grace is as follows:
Infants have objectively sufficient means of salvation in the Church and sacraments. But it seems that not all of them get subjectively sufficient means – actual graces. SINNERS “Faithful” Sinners. We now turn to sinners, “faithful” sinners, those who had sanctifying grace and lost it, but did not lose the infused virtues of faith and hope. Other sinners are infidels. We may divide “faithful” sinners into two classes: ordinary sinners and obstinate sinners. In the first class are those who, although in mortal sin, still fear God and hell, and dread punishment and desire to come out of their sin; but their desire is not yet an efficacious will to do so. Obstinate sinners are those who have become hardened in their sins by repeatedly and maliciously transgressing God’s laws, and now seem to have no fear of God or hell, and no desire to get out of their sins. Does God give to all these sinners grace sufficient for conversion and salvation? Yes, for He sincerely wills every sinner to be saved. Even the obstinate? Yes, though it seems that He does not grant as much grace to these as to ordinary sinners. But the grace He gives is not always proximately sufficient for the necessary act of contrition. Especially in the case of the obstinate sinners, it seems to many theologians that the grace God gives them at first is only remotely sufficient, e.g. a grace to pray or give alms or do some good work that will lead to illumination of mind and compunction of heart. But if the sinner uses this grace it will be followed by a more proximately sufficient grace. When do sinners receive grace? Not at every single moment but at a time and place opportune for a good work or repentance. Such a time and place are had when exterior graces are present, such as a sermon, tribulations, danger of death, the death a relative or friend, a First Communicant, example of a saint and the like. Since the grace given to sinners is so often a grace to pray, in our dealings with them we should urge and help them to pray; and pray for them constantly. They will get more graces if they have people praying for them. Conversion can be extremely hard for them, unless someone interested in their welfare commends their needs to God. Chaplains during the last war were often disturbed about the number of Catholic boys who did not know the act of perfect contrition, or thought it was too hard to make. For they realized that this act could mean eternal life for many boys. They wished that all our young people would be taught its power and importance, taught how to make it, taught to make it regularly, so that if they ever really needed it to regain sanctifying grace, it would do just that for them. This act can be of vital importance to non-Catholics. For if they should fall into mortal sin after baptism, it is the only way for them to regain sanctifying grace. It would be a great act of charity, if Catholics told their Protestant and Jewish friends about this act of perfect contrition: what kind of love of God it involves, what kind of sorrow for sin it means, and how to make it. |
|||||