The purification of the soul is an effect of the mortification of the senses, of self-will, and of personal judgment; we shall see also that it is an effect of prayer.

Moreover, God, in His love for us, has placed within our reach other easy and powerful means to purify us, the sacraments, which operate by themselves, ex opere operato, and produce in the soul which has prepared itself by acts of faith and love a much more abundant grace than it would obtain by making the same acts without the sacraments.

However, if the sacraments by themselves, by the divine virtue they contain, have an essential efficacy, the measure of grace produced by them varies according to the dispositions of those who receive them; the more perfect they are, the more abundant is the grace, and the differences between a number of persons receiving the same sacrament are much greater than one ordinarily imagines.

The sacrament of penance is one of the most precious means of sanctification; it must be well received, and routine, which would considerably diminish its effect, should be avoided. It is, therefore, important for us to see how we should prepare for sacramental confession, how we should make a good confession, and what are its fruits.

PREPARATION FOR CONFESSION

To prepare worthily for confession, we should examine our consciences and arouse ourselves to contrition.

The examination of conscience requires more care in proportion as the penitent falls into more sins and has little knowledge of his interior state. However, those who each evening examine their principal failings, have no trouble at all in knowing themselves well, and they are thereby stirred to make serious efforts at amendment.

In the case of spiritual persons who confess frequently and who are careful to avoid deliberate venial sins, the examination of conscience, as St. Alphonsus remarks, does not require much time. It is advisable for such a person to ask himself: What remains of this week to be written in God, in the book of life? In what have I acted for God, in what for myself, by yielding to my temperament, my egoism, my pride? When he thus considers the state of his soul from above and asks for light, he often obtains the grace of a penetrating gaze on his own life.

We must distinguish here grave sins, more or less deliberate venial sins, and the faults of frailty.

If a man who tends towards perfection has the misfortune to commit mortal sins in a moment of weakness, he must accuse himself of them sincerely and clearly at the beginning of his confession, without seeking to cause them to pass unperceived in the multitude of venial sins. He must indicate their number, kind, and cause, and especially have a profound contrition for them accompanied by a firm purpose of avoiding in the future not only the sins themselves, but their occasions and causes. Even after receiving pardon, he must also keep alive in his heart the sincere desire to atone, by an austere life and a generous love, for the evil committed. He should also remember how the Apostle, St. Peter, wept over his denial, humbled himself profoundly, thanked infinite Mercy, and continued on his way even to martyrdom.

An isolated mortal sin, when immediately confessed and atoned for, leaves scarcely any traces in the soul, which may at once resume its ascent from the very spot where it fell, without having to retrace all the road that had already been travelled. Thus he who stumbles midway in an ascent, may, when he picks himself up, promptly continue his climb from the spot which he had reached.

Venial sins committed with full deliberation are a serious obstacle to perfection, especially when they are frequent and the soul is attached to them. They are real maladies, which weaken the Christian soul.

"Do not allow sin to grow old in thee," Christ said to St. Gertrude. Fully deliberate venial sin, when not rejected, is like a poison that is not vomited forth and that, although it does not cause death immediately, acts slowly on the organism. For instance, close attention must be paid to avoid keeping voluntarily any petty rancour, or attachment to one’s own judgment, to self-will, to habits of rash judgment, of slander, of dangerous natural affections that would be a fetter, depriving us of liberty of spirit and all spontaneous movement toward God. When we deliberately refuse the Lord these manifestly demanded sacrifices, we cannot expect from Him the graces that lead to perfection. Consequently we must plainly accuse ourselves of fully deliberate venial sins against charity, humility, the virtue of religion, and so forth, especially those which are most humiliating. Their cause must be sought with a firm resolution to avoid them. Otherwise, of course, there is no longer any real and effective tendency to perfection. This is a point of primary importance.

There are other semi-deliberate venial sins, which are committed with less reflection and into which there enters a certain amount of surprise and impulse, but to which the will adheres with a certain complacency. We must guard against them, especially if they recur frequently; they show that the soul fights too feebly and is not determined to free itself from all obstacles.

Sins of frailty are those committed inadvertently because of human weakness; the will has only a small share in them; it yields momentarily, but promptly disavows its weakness. Sins of this kind cannot be completely and continually avoided, but their number should be diminished. They are not a serious obstacle to perfection because they are quickly atoned for; yet it is well to submit them to the influence of the sacrament of penance because thereby purity of soul will become more complete.

An imperfection is distinguished from these sins of frailty because it is only an act of lesser generosity in the service of God and of slighter esteem for the evangelical counsels. This is the case with a man who has five talents and sometimes acts as if he had only two; his act is still meritorious, but weak (remissus), and he is more or less clearly conscious of this inferiority. What is less good in itself must not be confused with what is essentially evil; what is less good for us here and now must not be confused with what would even now be evil for us. The lesser good is not an evil, as the lesser evil is not a good. Evidently we must avoid confusing good and evil. But if it is theoretically easy to draw a distinction, practically and concretely it is hard to say where lesser generosity ends and where negligence and sloth begin. Moreover, a soul that wishes truly to tend to perfection must remember that not only should it not fall back, but that it should not retard its ascent; indeed, its pace should be accelerated. As a stone falls more rapidly as it approaches the earth which attracts it, so souls ought to make more rapid progress toward God as they approach nearer to Him and He draws them more (Cf. St. Thomas, in Ep. ad Hebr., 10:25). In addition, imperfection disposes to venial sin, from the fact that one does not struggle as energetically as one should against the inclinations of egoism.

THE CONFESSION ITSELF

Confession should be made with a great spirit of faith, remembering that the confessor holds the place of our Lord. He is a judge, since this sacrament is administered in the form of a judgment: Ego te absolvo . . . ; but he is also a spiritual father and a physician, who benevolently points out remedies if the penitent clearly reveals his suffering.

Consequently it is not enough to make a vague accusation that would tell the confessor nothing, as for example: I have had distractions in my prayers. It is advisable to say: I have been especially distracted during such and such an exercise of piety through negligence, because I began it badly, without recollection, or because I did not sufficiently combat distractions springing from a petty rancour or from too sensible an affection or from study. It is also fitting to recall resolutions taken and to tell whether we have failed more or less in keeping them.

Thus routine and negligence will be avoided.

We need especially to excite contrition and a firm purpose of amendment, its indispensable consequence. To do this, we should think of the genuine motives of contrition, both as regards God and as regards ourselves. We must ask for the grace to see more clearly that sin, no matter how slight it may be, is an offence against God, resistance to His will, resistance which certainly displeases Him; that it is also ingratitude toward the most loving of Fathers, ingratitude so much the greater as we have received more, and by it we refuse to give God an "accidental joy" which we ought to give Him. Our sins have increased the bitterness of the chalice that was offered to Christ in Gethsemane; He could address to us these words of the Psalmist: "For if My enemy had reviled Me, I would verily have borne with it. . . . But thou a man of one mind, My guide and My familiar, who didst take sweetmeats together with Me." (Ps. 54:13 f.) There we have indeed the motive for contrition with respect to God.

As regards ourselves, there is another motive: venial sin, though it does not of itself diminish charity, takes away its fervour, its liberty of action, and its radiation. Venial sin renders the divine friendship less intimate and less active. To lose the intimacy of a saint would be a great loss; but to lose the intimacy of our Saviour is a far greater loss.

Moreover, venial sin, especially if deliberate, causes evil inclinations to spring up again in us and thereby disposes us to mortal sin; and in certain matters the attraction to pleasure may easily cause us rapidly to cross the line which separates venial sin from mortal. We have here another motive for sincere contrition.

Confession thus practiced will, especially by virtue of absolution and the counsels of the priest, be a powerful means of purification and progress. Blessed Angela of Foligno, along with many others, exemplifies this purification and progress by means of confession. At the beginning of the book of her visions and instructions, the saint herself relates that when she first took cognisance of her sins she was greatly afraid, trembled at the thought of damnation, wept much, blushed for the first time, put off confessing them; nevertheless she went in this state to the holy table. She says:

By this very profound contrition, Blessed Angela entered on the way of sanctity. These great graces should draw our attention to the value of the aids which God offers us daily, to matters of import in the ordinary Christian life.

THE FRUITS OF CONFESSION

The fruits of confession are those of the virtues of humility and penance and especially those of sacramental absolution.

What truer and more indispensable act of humility is there than the sincere confession of sins committed? It is the remedy of the vice of pride, the root of all sin. Therefore heresy, which is the fruit of pride, suppressed confession, as we see in Protestantism. In a humble confession there is a beginning of atonement for sins of pride.

The act of penance, which is contrition, regrets sin, disavows it because it displeases God and separates us from Him. By contrition the soul is converted, turns back to the Lord from whom it had

turned away by mortal sin, or from whom it had strayed by venial sin. It draws near to Him and with confidence and love throws itself, so to speak, into the arms of mercy.

Above all, the blood of the Saviour is sacramentally poured out on our souls by sacramental absolution. The Protestant never experiences, after committing sins that may torment him, the consolation of hearing the minister of God say to him in the name of the Lord, speaking in merciful judgment: Ego te absolvo. He has not the consolation of thus being able to apply to himself Christ’s words to the apostles: "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them." (John 20:23)

On the contrary, by these words the blood of Christ is sacramentally poured out on our souls by absolution; it is like a salutary balm which, adding its power to that of the virtues of humility and penance, remits sins, greatly assists complete healing, and helps the soul to recover its lost strength.

"By confession," says St. Francis de Sales, "you not only receive absolution from venial sins you confess, but likewise strength to avoid them, light to discern them well, and grace to repair all the damage you may have sustained by them." (Introduction to a Devout Life, Bk. II, chap. 19)

We must not forget, however, that the effects of absolution are always in proportion to the excellence of the dispositions with which the sacrament is received. As St. Thomas says if a man who has five talents and loses them by mortal sin, has only sufficient contrition, he does not recover the merits lost in the degree that he had before his fall; he may recover three talents. If he has a more profound sorrow for his sins, he may again receive the five talents that he lost; or even, with a superior fervour of contrition, he will receive more, six, for instance. Such seems to have been the contrition of St. Peter after his denial of Christ; from that time on he was very generously faithful to grace, which led him even to martyrdom. "Now the intensity of the penitent’s movement may be proportionate sometimes to a greater grace than that from which man fell by sinning, sometimes to an equal grace, sometimes to a lesser. Wherefore the penitent sometimes arises to a greater grace than that which he had before, sometimes to an equal, sometimes to a lesser grace: and the same applies to the virtues, which flow from grace." (Cf. ST IIIa, q. 89, a. 2)

Among twenty people who go to confession, each receives a different measure of grace, for God discerns in each one’s acts differences which no one on earth suspects. There are many different degrees of humility, contrition, and love of God, which are more or less pure and more or less strong. They are as so many degrees of intensity of a flame.

The same principles apply to sacramental satisfaction, the effect of which depends on the sacrament, at the same time being proportioned to the fervour with which it is accomplished. Sacramental satisfaction has thus more value than a satisfaction that is not sacramental, though the first may be more or less fruitful according to our generosity. It thus obtains for us in varying degrees the remission of the punishment due to forgiven sins. This satisfaction or penance should, therefore, not be put off to a later date, but performed at once, while we thank God for the grace of absolution. The blood of Jesus flowed over our soul to purify it; we should pray that He may grant us to remain in the state of grace and to die in this state. Only the saints have a profound understanding of the value of the blood of the Saviour; this penetrating illumination on the depths of the mystery of the redemption is an immense grace.

Finally, it is fitting to accuse ourselves, at least in general, of the sins of our past life, especially of the most serious sins, in order to have a greater contrition for them so that the application of the merits of Jesus Christ to these sins, that have already been forgiven, may diminish the temporal punishment, which almost always remains after absolution.

Let us also say with the Psalmist: "From my secret ones cleanse me, O Lord." (Ps. 18:13) Cleanse me, O Lord, from my secret sins that are indirectly voluntary by reason of my negligence to know and to will what I ought to know and will.

Confession made thus with a spirit of faith is manifestly a great means of sanctification. Our Lord said to St. Veronica Juliani: "Thou shalt make progress in perfection in proportion to the fruits which thou shalt draw from this sacrament."

In a little work on confession, St. Francis de Sales remarks: "Listen attentively . . . in order to hear in spirit the words of absolution that the Saviour Himself pronounces in heaven over your soul . . . at the same time that His priest absolves you in His name here on earth." (Pratique de la confession ordinaire, § 4).

In the same work, he adds: "There is no character so intractable which, first of all by the grace of God, then by industry and diligence, cannot be subdued and conquered. For that reason, follow the orders and guidance of the prudent and zealous director." (Ibid. § 9)

To conclude with St. Francis de Sales (Divers avis touchant la confession, demande XXX) let us note that the sadness of true contrition, that is, displeasure with evil and detestation of it, is never a vexing, fretful sadness which depresses, but, on the contrary, it is a holy sadness that makes the soul prompt and diligent, that uplifts the heart by prayer and hope, that leads it to outbursts of fervour: "It is a sadness which in the height of its bitterness always produces the sweetness of an incomparable consolation, according to the precept of the great St. Augustine: ‘The penitent should ever grieve and rejoice at his grief.’" (De poenitentia, chap. 13, quoted by St. Thomas, IIIa, q.84, 9, ad 2um: "Whether penance can be continuous?")

If this sadness of contrition at the memory of past sins has this sweetness, it is because it springs from charity. The more a man grieves for his sins, the more certain it is that he loves God. This sadness, which is not vexation and melancholy, is good; it is compunction or lively sorrow for having sinned, sorrow in which are found the fruits of the Holy Ghost: namely, charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, mildness, faith, modesty, continence, and chastity. (Gal. 5:22 f.)

In the Old Testament the influence exercised on man by the good spirit of God is contrasted with the influence of the evil spirit, e.g. in the story of Saul (1 Kings 10.9; 16.14-23).

And in the New Testament:

- Christ Himself is depicted as being led by the good spirit into the desert, where He is tempted by the evil spirit (Matt. 4.1—11).

- St. John advises the faithful to "try the spirits if they be of God" and gives them signs whereby they may discern "the spirit of truth and the spirit of error" (1 John 4.1-6).

- St. Paul places the discernment of spirits among the charismata infused by the Holy Ghost (1 Cor. 12.l0—"the discerning of spirits")

Hence it is no wonder that, from the earliest Christian times, ecclesiastical authors have inculcated the necessity for discerning the spirits by which man is influenced.

The Fathers of the Desert and the other founders of the monastic life developed and perfected this doctrine. St. Anthony did so, as related in his Life written by St. Athanasius; and Cassian, more fully, in his Conferences.

In the Middle Ages, St. Bernard speaks of the discernment of spirits. In the first part of the fourteenth century, Henry of Friemar, O.S.A., wrote a whole treatise entitled On the Four Kinds of Instinct, Divine, Angelic, Diabolical, and Natural. Similar works were those of St. Bernardine of Siena, On Inspirations (A.D. 1443); Denis the Carthusian, On the Discernment and Examination of Spirits (against Friemar); likewise Gerson and Peter de Alliaco, who, however, treat principally of discerning true revelations from false.

Many of the more recent authors treat both the discernment of interior impulses and the discernment of revelations properly so called, whilst others, like St. Ignatius, deal only with the former.

We must note, however, that while the authors commonly attribute good thoughts to a good spirit and evil thoughts to an evil spirit, i.e. the devil, yet from the very beginning they were aware that many thoughts and interior impulses come from human nature itself.

Thus Origen says: "We find that the thoughts which arise in our hearts . . . come sometimes from ourselves, at times they are stirred up by counteracting virtues, and at other times they may be sent by God or the Good Angels."

Similarly, Cassian (Conferences, I, Ch. 19) says: "In truth we should be aware above all that our thoughts have three possible sources—God, the devil and ourselves."

However, in modern times the psychological sciences, especially psychopathology, have made great progress, with the result that we can now readily recognize as entirely natural (whether diseased or normal) many phenomena which earlier authors attributed to the action of good or bad angels. Nevertheless the traditional rules of conduct are very prudent and should still be retained, with the proviso, however, that they be used rather cautiously in the matter of distinguishing natural impulses from angelic inspirations. The spirit of an individual refers to his internal inclination or propensity to good or evil, and it manifests itself with such regularity that it must be considered as a personal trait. Thus, if a person has a propensity to prayer, he is said to possess the spirit of prayer; if he has a tendency to arguments and altercations, he is said to possess a spirit of contradiction, etc. Understood in this sense, the spirit of a person is usually the result of both temperament and character.

It is indispensable both for the direction of souls and for the study of extraordinary mystical phenomena to be able to distinguish between the various spirits or impulses under which individual persons act or are acted upon. Unless one is able to determine whether or not a given person is acting under the spirit of God, the spirit of darkness or the aberrations of his own illusions, it will be practically impossible to avoid error and even tragic mistakes.

But it is also possible for an individual to come under the influence of a spirit which is extrinsic to his personality, whether from God or the devil, and for that reason it is the function of the discernment of spirits to judge whether a given act or repetition of acts flows from the spirit of the individual, the spirit of God or the diabolical spirit.

There are two types of discernment of spirit: acquired and infused. Acquired discernment of spirits is a special art which is complementary to ordinary spiritual direction and can be cultivated by all who use the proper means; infused discernment of spirits is a charismatic gift or gratia gratis data which is granted by God to certain individuals. We shall discuss infused discernment of spirits in its proper place under the gratiae gratis datae; for the time being we merely state that the charismatic gift of discernment is infallible because it is the result of an interior movement or inspiration received from the Holy Ghost, who cannot err. But it is extremely rare, and not even all the saints possessed it.

Acquired discernment, on the other hand, is not infallible, and it presents many great difficulties, although it is absolutely necessary for a good spiritual director. It stands to reason that, if a director is ignorant of the various spirits that may be the cause of the acts and movements of the soul and if he is unable to decide the particular spirit that motivates a given soul, he will be unable to determine which movements should be suppressed and which should be fostered and developed. St. John of the Cross and Father Scaramelli place great stress on the importance of discernment, pointing out that the possibility of error and tragic misguidance of souls is greatly augmented when acquired discernment is lacking and that the priest who presumes to take charge of the direction of souls without such knowledge is guilty of temerity.² It is, therefore, important to examine carefully the various means to be used in order to acquire the art of discernment of spirits.

1) Prayer. This is the most important and fundamental means. Although we are speaking of an acquired art, personal effort would avail nothing without the special assistance of the Holy Ghost through the virtue of prudence and the gift of counsel. Hence it is not only a question of the constant practice of prayer, but the particular petition by which the director requests of God the prudence necessary for the direction of souls in general and the light to be able to discern the will of God for some particular soul at a given time. It does not suffice to possess a theoretical knowledge of the spiritual life and the ways to perfection; one needs in addition to know the practical and concrete application of these principles in particular cases. It is certain that God will answer these prayers with special graces which He gives to all rightly disposed souls so that they may fulfil their duties.

2) Study. The spiritual director likewise needs a vast amount of knowledge which is acquired through faithful study. He should be familiar with the general principles of spiritual theology as contained in Sacred Scripture, speculative theology, the masters of the spiritual life and the lives of the outstanding saints. He should be especially careful not to restrict himself to a particular "school" or method of spirituality, for while it is true that the individual soul will necessarily follow a particular path or way, the spiritual director must rise above this exclusive spirit and possess a broad and sympathetic understanding of the variety of schools and methods of the spiritual life. St. John of the Cross speaks with unusual severity when discussing those spiritual directors who know only one path to perfection and strive to force all the souls under their direction to follow that same path.³

3) Personal experience. Self-knowledge is a basic requirement for any kind of direction of others. While it is true that each person has his unique traits and characteristics, there is also a common pattern which is possessed by all, and, unless one understands himself, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to understand others. Under this same heading we may include that sympathy or rapport which flows from an understanding of one’s own virtues and defects and the ability to place oneself in the position and circumstances in which others find themselves, according to the statement of St. Paul: "There, but for the grace of God, go I." Moreover, if the spiritual director himself is not striving for greater perfection and has not attained some degree of virtue and self-mastery, it is not likely that he will be able to direct others or even understand their condition, especially when they enter upon the higher stages of the spiritual life. In this sense holiness of life is a most desirable trait in a spiritual director and is of inestimable value in acquiring the art of discernment of spirits.

4) Removal of obstacles. Under this heading we may place any of the defective qualities which are an impediment to the understanding and direction of souls. One of the greatest obstacles is the spirit of self-sufficiency which prevents the director from seeking the advice of those who are more learned or more experienced than himself. God refuses his graces to those who are proud, and grants them to the humble. Secondly, the director must avoid at all costs an excessive attachment to the one he is directing, for this attachment will cloud his judgment and cause him to be too sympathetic. He must strive to be as objective as possible and to maintain a strict sense of reserve in regard to his own person and a cautious vigilance as regards the one being directed. He will avoid the inclination to judge according to purely human standards and will be guided at all times by supernatural prudence. He will never be precipitous in his decisions but will subject them to mature reflection, without excessive cavilling.

As regards the diverse spirits, St. Bernard enumerates six: divine, angelic, diabolical, carnal, mundane and human.⁴

All these, however, can be summarized under three headings: the divine spirit, the human spirit and the spirit of the devil. God always inclines us to the good, working either directly or though secondary causes; the devil always inclines us to evil, working by his own power or through the allurements of the things of the world; the human spirit may be inclined to evil or to good, depending upon whether the individual follows right reason or his own concupiscence

Due to the basic indifference of many purely natural inclinations, it is evident that they may be utilized for good and for evil and that, while grace does not destroy nature but perfects and supernaturalises it, the devil avails himself of human weakness and the effects of original sin to further his evil aims. Moreover, it may happen that in one and the same inclination or action the various spirits are intermingled, thus making it more difficult to discern which spirit has the predominance at a given time. It is evident that the spirit of God and the spirit of the devil cannot be operating at one and the same time, since they tend to opposite goals, but God can direct or intensify a naturally good inclination, or the devil may exercise his power to divert those inclinations to evil. Even when it is evident that the divine spirit predominates in a given action, therefore, it does not follow that all the antecedent or consequent movements and inclinations are likewise divine and supernatural. It frequently happens that purely human and natural movements introduce themselves, consciously or unconsciously, and cause the action to lose some of its supernatural purity. This is one of the factors which makes it almost impossible for the director or theologian to discern clearly the divine element in extraordinary mystical phenomena.

Moreover, it is not at all unusual in the lives of mystics that their mystical and truly supernatural operations are interrupted by purely natural activities or that, with God’s permission, a diabolical influence is introduced. It is not easy to determine when the action of God terminates and when the natural or diabolical movement begins.⁵ If the director is familiar with the signs of the various spirit, however, he will have sufficient grounds for making a prudent judgment in each case. It will not always be a situation in which one spirit is operating exclusively, but even if there is a mixture of several spirits, one or another will always predominate.

The following characteristics are general signs of the various spirits. When we treat of the mystical phenomena in particular we shall have occasion to speak of some of these characteristics in greater detail.

1) Truth. God is truth and cannot inspire anything but truth in a soul. If a person believed to be inspired by God, therefore, maintains opinions which are manifestly against revealed truth, the infallible teaching of the Church, or proven theology or philosophy or science, it must be concluded that the individual is deluded by the devil or is the victim of his own imagination or faulty reasoning.

2) Gravity. God is never the cause of things that are useless, futile, frivolous or impertinent. When His spirit moves a soul it is always for something serious and beneficial.

3) Enlightenment. Although one may not always understand the meaning of an inspiration from God, the effect of any divine movement or impulse is always enlightenment and certitude rather than darkness and confusion. This is true both as regards the effects on the individual who receives the inspiration and its effects on others.

4) Docility. Souls that are moved by the spirit of God, recognizing their own ignorance and weakness with all humility, accept cheerfully the advice and counsel of their directors or others who have authority over them. This spirit of obedience, docility and submission is one of the clearest signs that a particular inspiration or movement is from God. This is especially true in the case of the educated, who have a greater tendency to be attached to their own opinions.

5) Discretion. The spirit of God makes the soul discreet, judicious, prudent and thoughtful in all its actions. There is nothing of precipitation, lightness, exaggeration or impetuosity; all is well balanced, edifying, serious and full of calmness and peace.

6) Humility. This is one of the most certain signs of the spirit of God. The Holy Ghost always fills the soul with sentiments of humility and self-effacement. The more lofty the communications from on high, the more profoundly the soul inclines to the abyss of its own nothingness. "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word" (Luke 1:38).

7) Peace. St. Paul speaks frequently of the peace that comes from God (Rom. 15:33; Phil. 4:9), and Jesus mentions peace as one of the manifestations of His spirit (John 14:27). This is a quality which always accompanies communications from God, and when they are received, especially in prayer, the soul experiences a profound and stable serenity in the depths of its spirit.

8) Confidence in God. This is a counterpart and necessary consequence of true humility. Recognizing that of itself it can do nothing, as St. Paul says, the soul throws itself on the power and mercy of God with a childlike trust. Then it learns that it can do all things in Him (Phil. 4:13).

9) Flexibility of will. This sign consists primarily in a certain promptness of the will to subject itself to the inspirations and invitations of God. Secondarily it consists in a facility in following the advice and counsel of others, especially if they are superiors, confessors or spiritual directors. It is opposed to the rigid and unyielding will which is characteristic of those who are filled with self-love.

10) Purity of intention. The soul seeks only the glory of God in all that it does and the perfect fulfilment of the will of God, without human interest or motivation out of self-love.

11) Patience in suffering. Suffering is frequently the best touchstone for revealing the true worth of an individual. No matter what the source of the suffering or whether it is justly received or not, the soul bears it with patience and equanimity and uses it as a means of further perfection. But this sign is not to be confused with the stoicism and insensitivity of those who are cold and phlegmatic by nature.

12) Self-abnegation. The words of Christ Himself are sufficient evidence that this is a sign of the spirit of God: "If anyone will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me" (Matt. 16:24).

13) Simplicity. Together with veracity and sincerity, this characteristic is never lacking in those who are truly motivated by the spirit of God. Any duplicity, arrogance, hypocrisy or vanity must be attributed rather to the spirit of the devil, the father of lies.

14) Liberty of spirit. First of all, there is no attachment to any created thing and not even to the gifts received from God. Secondly, all is accepted from the hands of God with gratitude and humility, whether it be a question of consolation or trial. Thirdly, while all duties and spiritual exercises are performed with promptness and punctuality, the soul is ready to leave even the most consoling and profitable exercise as soon as the charity of God calls it elsewhere. Liberty of spirit enables the soul to live in a state of constant joy and eagerness for the things of God.

15) Desire to imitate Christ. St. Paul says that it is impossible to have the spirit of God without having the spirit of Christ (Rom. 8:9). For that reason St. John of the Cross states that the soul which aspires to perfection must have a desire to imitate Christ in all things by conforming its life as much as possible to His.⁶

16) Disinterested love. We mean by this kind of love all the characteristics which St. Paul attributes to true charity (I Cor. 13:4-7). St. Augustine said of this type of love: "Love with the love of charity and do what you will; you will not sin. Whatever proceeds from interior charity cannot but be good."⁷

The devil may disguise himself as an angel of light and inspire actions which at the beginning are good, in order thus to conceal his true motives and goals. For that reason the director of souls must proceed with great caution, remembering that what is begun as good may become evil if deviations are not corrected. Even the most amazing mystical phenomena are no proof of themselves that the spirit of God is at work in the soul; it is necessary to judge from the fruits that are produced rather than from the phenomenon in question.

Since the signs of the spirit of the devil will be directly opposed to the signs of the spirit of God, we shall merely enumerate these manifestations so that the director will have at hand a ready reference.

1) Spirit of falsity. Sometimes lies are covered and concealed by truths so that they will more readily be accepted.

2) Morbid curiosity, love of novelty and attachment to useless details which kill true devotion and solid piety.

3) Confusion, anxiety and darkness of spirit.

4) Obstinacy. Stubbornness is one of the surest signs of a diabolical spirit.

5) Constant indiscretion. Whatever goes against the duties of one’s state of life, even if it be a question of exercises of piety, is a result of self-will or the spirit of the devil. The same is true of those persons who habitually go to extremes, for example, in matters of penance or activity.

8) False humility. Usually this is merely a disguise for self-love and pride.

9) Despair, lack of confidence and discouragement.

10) Presumption, vain security and unfounded optimism.

11) Disobedience and hardness of heart.

12) Selfish motives, such as self-complacency, vanity, desire to be esteemed.

13) Impatience in suffering and stubborn resentment.

14) Rebellion of the passions or violent inclinations to evil.

15) Hypocrisy, duplicity and simulation.

16) Attachment to created things or sensible consolations.

18) Feigned charity, fanatical zeal and scrupulous observance of the law. Many of the extreme reformers and defenders of the letter of the law fall under this category.

Once the spiritual director is assured that a person is under the influence of a diabolical spirit, he should concentrate his efforts on the following:

1) make the individual realize that he is a toy of the devil and that he must take arms against the enemy;

2) encourage the individual to pray earnestly to God for the grace to overcome the assaults of the devil;

3) advise the person to act quickly and with true disdain of the devil as soon as his influence is exercised, trying to perform the contrary acts to that which is suggested or felt.

These have been clearly enumerated by Thomas à Kempis in The Imitation of Christ (Bk. III, Chap. 54). His words should be pondered carefully, for he explains in a masterly fashion the struggle between grace and the human spirit, wounded by sin and inclined to its own interests and comforts.⁸

The human spirit is always inclined to its own satisfactions; it is a friend of pleasure and an enemy of suffering of any kind. It readily inclines to anything that is compatible with its own temperament, its personal tastes and caprices, or the satisfaction of self-love. It will not hear of humiliations, penance, renunciation or mortification. If any director or confessor goes against its own inclinations, he is immediately branded as inept and incompetent. It seeks success, honours, applause and pastimes. It is always a great promoter of anything that will arouse admiration or notoriety. In a word, the human spirit neither understands nor cares for anything except its own egoism.

It is sometimes difficult in practice to judge whether given manifestations proceed from the devil or from a purely human and egoistic spirit, but it is always relatively easy to distinguish between these two and the spirit of God. It will be possible in most cases, therefore, to determine that a given spirit could not possibly be from God and that it must be combated, even if one is not sure whether it is in fact from the devil or the human ego.

The following contrasts may serve as general rules for distinguishing between the diabolical and the human spirit. Natural impulses and inclinations are spontaneous; they can usually be traced back to some natural cause or disposition; the stimulation of the senses acts upon the interior powers, and they often persist in spite of prayer.⁹

Diabolical impulse or suggestion, on the other hand, is usually violent and difficult to prevent; it arises unexpectedly or with the slightest provocation; a mental suggestion excites the senses and disappears as a rule with prayer. Self-denial and rectitude of intention are excellent remedies against the spirit of egoism.

In this respect the spiritual director and confessor will do well to keep in mind the admonition of Pope Benedict XIV when writing on the beatification and canonization of the servants of God: if there is a possible natural or diabolical explanation for a given phenomenon, it cannot be presumed that it is supernatural in origin.

The following are the principal doubtful cases listed by Father Scaramelli:

1) To aspire to some other state in life after having made a prudent and deliberate selection.

2) To be attracted to rare phenomena or to singular exercises which are not proper to one’s state in life. When God desires such things He will give unmistakable proof of his will; the test is obedience and humility.

3) To seek the extraordinary in the practice of virtues, such as the "holy foolishness" of some of the saints who so acted under an impulse from the Holy Ghost.

4) An inclination to practice extreme corporal penances. God has demanded them of some souls, but this practice is not in the workings of ordinary providence.

5) A taste for sensible consolations in the practice of prayer or the exercise of the virtues. The desire for continual spiritual consolations is even more doubtful, since the spirit of God breathes where and when He wills.

6) The "gift of tears" or the strong inclination to concentrate on the sorrowful and penitential aspects of religion.

7) The exclusive devotion to some particular mystery or pious exercise, which easily leads to a distortion of orthodox theology.

8) Great extraordinary favours such as revelations, visions, stigmata, when they occur in a person of little sanctity. Although the extraordinary phenomena and gratiae gratis datae do not necessarily presuppose sanctity or even the state of grace, God does not ordinarily grant these gifts except to his servants and friends.

By way of conclusion, we again warn directors and confessors to proceed with great caution in making judgments in those matters involving the discernment of spirits. It is extremely easy to err. In cases of extraordinary phenomena, it should be noted that, as a rule, when these things proceed from God, the soul first experiences great fear and humility and then peace and consolation. If they come from the devil they usually begin with feelings of sensible consolation and satisfaction, but later they cause confusion, anxiety and restlessness.

Lastly, in regard to the rather frequent inclination which some persons experience to change their state of life (and usually to go to a higher and stricter form of life), the director will bear in mind that it is quite possible that such a desire actually proceeds from God but without God’s wanting the person actually to change his state in life. For example, a priest who is actively engaged in the apostolate may experience a strong desire to spend more time in prayer and solitude. In trying to understand the reason for this strong inclination, he may erroneously judge that it is God’s will that he enter the Carthusians or the Trappists. Such is not necessarily the case, however, for it may well be that the only thing that God is asking of the priest is that he be less involved in the whirlpool of activity and that he dedicate more time each day to prayer and recollection.’¹

As a final word on this common problem, we should state the following as a general rule for the solution of such cases. If the individual has prayerfully and seriously selected the state of life in which he is, he must present a serious positive cause for changing his state of life; otherwise, the will of God for him is the state of life in which he is. Another practical test is to see whether the individual is performing the duties of his present state in life with all fidelity; if not, he should not even think of changing to another state.

One of the greatest means of union with God for the religious soul is the psalmody, which in religious orders is the daily accompaniment of the Mass. The Mass is the great prayer of Christ; it will continue until the end of the world, as long as He does not cease to offer Himself by the ministry of His priests; as long as from His sacerdotal and Eucharistic heart there rises always the theandric (Divine/human) act of love and oblation, which has infinite value as adoration, reparation, petition, and thanksgiving. The psalmody of the Divine Office is the great prayer of the Church, the spouse of Christ; a day and night prayer, which ought never to cease on the surface of the earth, as the Mass does not.

For those who have the great honor to take part in the chant, the psalmody should be an admirable school of contemplation, of self-oblation, of holiness. That it may produce these abundant fruits, the psalmody should keep what is its very essence; it ought to have not only a body which is well organized according to harmonious rules, but also a soul. If it ceases to be the great contemplative prayer, it gradually loses its soul and, instead of being a soaring, a rising toward God, and a repose, it becomes a burden, a source of fatigue, and no longer produces great fruits. Therefore we shall discuss briefly first of all deformed and materialized chant, then true psalmody, which is a deliverance, like the chant of the Church, above all the noises of earth.

DEFORMED PSALMODY

Deformed psalmody is a body without a soul. Generally, it is marked by unseemly haste, as if undue haste, which, according to St. Francis de Sales, is the death of devotion, could replace true and

profound life. The words of the Office are badly pronounced without rhythm or measure. The antiphons, which are often beautiful, are poorly said and become unintelligible, the hymns even more so. The lessons which are not punctuated as they should be, are read as one would read the most indifferent or even the most boring passages, when, as a matter of fact, they are concerned with the splendors of divine wisdom or what is most beautiful in the lives of the saints. People wish to save time, four or five minutes which they will devote to worthless trifles, and they lose the best of the time given by God.

Father de Condren used to say: "If a master spoke to his servant as a number of people speak to God while saying the Divine Office, the servant would think that his master was insane to be jabbering in such fashion."

As a result of haste, the psalmody of which we are speaking is mechanical and not organic; just as in a body without a soul, the members are no longer vitally united, but only placed together. The Office becomes a series of words following one another. The great meaning of a psalm is no longer comprehended; to one who is trying to grasp this meaning and to follow it, this mechanical chant brings fatigue and is an obstacle to true prayer.

Is this manner of chanting a lifting of the soul toward God? Perhaps, but it is a uniformly retarded elevation, like the movement of a stone that has been thrown into the air and tends to fall back; whereas true prayer ought, like a flame, to tend spontaneously toward heaven.

What remedies can be applied to this evil? The remedy is to be found in recalling the rules for the chant. But this remedy is not effective if it alone is applied. The evil is deeper, and we must go to its roots. In reality, there is only one truly effective remedy that makes possible the utilization of the others: namely, the restoration of the spirit of prayer. Similarly, in order to restore functions to a body without a soul, life would have to be restored to it.

Deformed psalmody shows us that, for a soul which has no personal life of prayer, the recitation of the Office becomes altogether material, a wholly exterior worship. Not possessing the habit of recollection, this soul is assailed by thoughts foreign to the Office; its work, studies, or business affairs keep returning to its memory, and at times even thoroughly vain thoughts come. The most interior persons sometimes experience this distress. But in the case of those we are speaking of, it is a habitual state of negligence, and in them distraction does not remain in the imagination; it invades the higher faculties. How can anyone in this state taste the divine words of the psalms, the prophets, the Epistles, the most beautiful pages of the fathers and of the lives of the saints which are daily offered to us in the Divine Office? All these spiritual beauties remain unperceived like colorless and insipid objects. The great poetry of the Psalmist and the most profound cries of his heart become spiritless and monotonous. One day in choir, St. Bernard saw above each religious his guardian angel who was writing down the chant. The manner of writing differed greatly, however: some wrote in letters of gold, others in silver, while still others wrote with ink or with colorless water; one angel held his pen poised and wrote nothing. Routine mummifies the most profoundly living passages and reduces them to mechanically recited formulas. This manner of chanting is nothing but practical nominalism, a sort of materialism in action. The higher faculties do not live in a prayer made thus; they remain somnolent or scattered. A person may still hear the symphony of the Office, more beautiful than the most famous symphonies of Beethoven, but for lack of an interior feeling, he can no longer appreciate it. Often the Divine Office is studied from the historical point of view, or from the canonical point of view of strict obligations, and these distinctions are held to; but it is especially from the spiritual point of view that it must be considered and lived.

CONTEMPLATIVE CHANT

What should the contemplative chant be? This chant is distinguished precisely by the spirit of prayer, or at least by the aspiration which inclines us to it, which desires it, seeks it, and at length obtains it. We are thus shown how much the contemplation of the mysteries of faith is in the normal way of sanctity: this contemplation alone can give us in liturgical prayer the light, peace, and joy of the truth tasted and loved, gaudiurn de veritate.

The spirit of prayer, more intimately drawn from mental prayer, is lost as soon as one hurries to finish daily prayer, as if it were not the very respiration of the soul, spiritual contact with God, our Life. It was in the spirit of prayer that the psalms were conceived: without it, we cannot understand them or live by them. "As the hart panteth after the fountains of water, so my soul panteth after Thee. O God." (Ps. 41:2)

If the psalmody has this spirit, then in place of mechanical haste, which is a superficial life, we find profound life for which we do not need continually to recall liturgical rules, for these rules are merely the expression of its inner inclinations. Then, without excessive slowness the words are well pronounced, undue haste is avoided, and the pauses, serving as a vital rest between aspiration and respiration, are observed. The antiphons are tasted, and the soul is truly nourished with the substance of the liturgical text. Whoever has the duty of reading the lessons, which are often most beautiful, should look them over ahead of time in order not to spoil their meaning. He who reads the lessons well avoids a too evident expression of his personal piety, but the great objective meaning of Scripture explained by the fathers remains intelligible, and here and there he grasps its splendors in the midst of its divine obscurities. No effort is made to save four or five minutes, and he ceases to lose the precious time given by God. He is even led at the end of the chant to prolong prayer by some moments of mental prayer, like the religious in bygone days who, at night after Matins and Lauds, spent some time in profound recollection. Many times in the history of their lives mention is made of these secret prayers, of this heart to heart conversation with God in which they often received the greatest lights, which made them glimpse what they had sought till then during hours and hours of labor. When this spirit of prayer prevails, real life begins, and one understands that mental prayer gives the spirit of the chant; whereas the psalmody furnishes to mental prayer the best possible food, the very word of God, distributed and explained in a suitable manner, according to the cycle of the liturgical year, according to the true time, which coincides with the single instant of immobile eternity. (Cf. Dom Gréa OSB, La sainte liturgie, chapters on the Divine Office, the chant of the Church, the spouse of Christ).

Such prayer is no longer mechanical, but organic; the soul has returned to vivify the body; prayer is no longer a succession of words; we are able to seize the vital spirit running through them. Without effort, even in the most painful hours of life, we can taste the admirable poetry of the psalms and find in them light, rest, strength, renewal of all energies. Then truly this prayer is a lifting up of the soul toward God, a lifting up that is not uniformly retarded, but rather accelerated. The soul burns therein and is consumed in a holy manner like the candles on the altar.

St. Thomas Aquinas deeply loved this beautiful chant thus understood. It is told of him that ‘he could not keep back his tears when, during Compline of Lent, he chanted the antiphon: "In the midst of life we are in death: whom do we seek as our helper, but Thou, 0 Lord, who because of our sins art rightly incensed? Holy God, strong God, holy and merciful Savior, deliver us not up to a bitter death; abandon us not in the time of our old age, when our strength will abandon us." This beautiful antiphon begs for the grace of final perseverance, the grace of graces, that of the predestined. How it should speak to the heart of the contemplative theologian, who has made a deep study of the tracts on Providence, predestination, and grace!

The chant, which prepares so admirably for Mass and which follows it, is one of the greatest means by which the theologian, as well as others, may rise far above reasoning to contemplation, to the simple gaze on God and to divine union. The theologian who has spent a long time over his books in a positive and speculative study of revelation, in the refutation of numerous errors and the examination of many opinions relating to the great mysteries of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Eucharist, the life of heaven, needs, after such study, to rise above all this bookish knowledge; he needs profound recollection, truly divine light, which is superior to reasoning and gives him the spirit of the letter which he has studied. Otherwise he grows spiritually anemic and, because of insufficient contact with the light of life, he cannot give it adequately to others. His work remains too mechanical, not sufficiently organized and living, or it may be that the governing idea of his synthesis has not been drawn from a high enough source; it lacks amplitude, life, radiation, and little by little it loses its interest. The theologian needs often to find the living and splendid expression of the mysteries that he studies m the very words of God, such as the liturgy makes us taste and love: "Taste, and see that the Lord is sweet." (Ps. 33:9).

The word of God, which is thus daily recalled to us in prayer, is to its theological commentary what a simple circumference is to the polygon inscribed in it. We must forget the polygon momentarily in order to enjoy a little and in a holy manner the beauty of the circle, which the movement of contemplation follows, as Dionysius used to say. This is found during the chant, if mechanical haste is not substituted for the profound life which ought to spring from the fountain. The body of the chant must be truly vivified by the spirit of prayer.

There is great happiness in hearing the Divine Office thus chanted in many monasteries of Benedictines, Carthusians, Carmelites, Dominicans, and Franciscans. This prayer attracts good vocations, whereas the other, because it is materialized, drives them away. When we hear the great contemplative prayer in certain cloisters, we feel the current of the true life of the Church; it is its chant, both simple and splendid, which precedes and follows the sublime words of the Spouse: the Eucharistic consecration. We are made to forget all the sorrows of this world, all the more or less false complications and all the tiresome tasks imposed by human conventions. God grant that the chant may ever remain thus keenly alive day and night in our monasteries! It has been noticed that when it ceases at night in those convents where it should go on, the Lord raises up nocturnal adoration to replace it, for living prayer ought not to cease, and prayer during the night, by reason of the profound silence into which everything is plunged and for many other reasons, has special graces of contemplation: Oportet semper orare.

The chant thus understood is the holy repose which souls need after all the fatigues, agitations, and complications of the world. It is rest in God, rest that is full of life, rest which from afar resembles that of God, who possesses His interminable life tota simul, in the single instant which never passes, and which at the same time measures supreme action and supreme rest, quies in bono amato.

We may define the mutual relations of mental prayer and the Divine Office by saying that from mental prayer the Office receives the habit of recollection and the spirit of prayer. On the other hand, mental prayer finds in liturgical prayer an abundant source of contemplation and an objective rule against individual illusions. The Divine Office cures sentimentality by continually recalling the great truths in the very language of Scripture; it reminds presumptuous souls of the greatness and severity of divine justice, and it also reminds fearful souls of infinite mercy and the value of the passion of Christ. It makes sentimental souls live on the heights of true faith and charity, far above sensibility.

It will suffice here to recall one example among many: the tract from the Mass for Quadragesima Sunday taken from psalm 90: "He that dwelleth in the aid of the most High, shall abide under the protection of the God of Jacob. He shall say to the Lord: Thou art my protector and my refuge: my God, in Him will I trust. For He hath delivered me from the snare of the hunters and from the sharp word. He will overshadow thee with His shoulders: and under His wings thou shalt trust. His truth shall compass thee with a shield: thou shalt not be afraid of the terror of the night, of the arrow that flieth in the day . . . or of the noonday devil. A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand: but it shall not come nigh thee. . . . For He hath given His angels charge over thee to keep thee in all thy ways. In their hands they shall bear thee up lest thou dash thy foot against a stone. . . . He shall cry to Me, and I will hear him: I am with him in tribulation, I will deliver him and I will glorify him. I will fill him with length of days; and I will show him My salvation."

The liturgy recalls all the ages of the spiritual life by the joyful mysteries of the childhood of the Savior, by His passion, and by the glorious mysteries; it thus gives true spiritual joy which enlarges the heart: "I have run the way of Thy commandments, when Thou didst enlarge my heart." (Ps. 118:32). It prepares the soul for the more intimate and silent prayer of meditation.

It is an art in the sense that spiritual direction is a practical science, which under the guidance of supernatural prudence, applies to a particular case the principles of the theology of Christian perfection.

It is orientated to the perfection of the Christian life, but this direction must be given progressively, that is, according to the strength and need of the soul at a given time.

The direction should begin as soon as the soul has definitely resolved to travel along the road to Christian perfection and should continue through all the phases of that journey.

Spiritual direction goes further than confession. This last concerns the accusation of faults, but spiritual direction finds the causes of these faults, and seeks to remove them by suitable remedies.

We shall discuss this important subject, after some preliminary considerations concerning the importance and necessity of spiritual direction, under two heads: the spiritual director and the soul directed.

Many theologians and spiritual writers have stressed the necessity of spiritual direction. St. Vincent Ferrer states, in his Treatise on the Spiritual Life, that Christ will not give His grace to anyone who has at hand someone capable of instructing and directing him; but disdains this help in the belief that he is sufficient to himself and can provide for himself whatever is necessary for his salvation.

Although there is no text in Sacred Scripture, which refers to this particular point, there are many references regarding the need to take counsel. (cf. Tob. 4; 18 : Eccles. 4; 10 : 32; 23 : 2 Cor. 5: 20 : etc.)

The mind of the Church can be seen in the following words of Pope Leo XIII, addressed to Cardinal Gibbons:

"Moreover, it should be added that those who strive to sanctify themselves, by the very fact that they strive to follow a way that is little frequented, are more exposed to deceive themselves and therefore they, more than others, need a doctor and guide. And this method of procedure has always been seen in the Church. All those who, in the course of centuries, flourished in wisdom and sanctity unanimously taught this doctrine. And those who reject it shall not do so without temerity and danger." (cf. Testem benevolentiæ 22 Jan. 1899)

While it is true that individuals have attained sanctity without a spiritual director - which proves that spiritual direction is not absolutely necessary in all cases - the general rule is that those who have reached perfection have had the counsel and advice of a spiritual director. The road to Christian perfection is so beset with trials and pitfalls and darkness that, in the ordinary providence of God, spiritual direction of some kind is morally necessary for the attainment of Christian perfection.

Is it necessary that the spiritual director be a priest? We can answer without hesitation that normally the director should be a priest. There are many reasons for this.

First of all, in the ordinary workings of divine Providence the priest has the role of teacher, and he has both the theoretical and the practical knowledge required for the direction of souls.

Secondly, the function of spiritual director is usually closely related to the office of confessor.

Thirdly, because of the grace of the priesthood.

Fourthly, the practice of the Church forbids any person who is not a priest, even religious superiors, to probe into matters of conscience (cf. Can. 530). Nevertheless, by way of exception, it is possible that in a particular case spiritual direction could be given by a prudent and experienced person who is not a priest. There is ample testimony in the history of the Church to justify such direction because of peculiar circumstances. For example, among the hermits in the desert and the primitive monks who were not priests, the direction given by St. Francis of Assisi, St. Ignatius Loyola before his ordination, St. Catherine of Sienna and St. Teresa of Avila.

How does one receive the office of spiritual director? If it is a question of a priest, he receives the remote power from God and the Church when he is ordained to the priesthood and given the commission to sanctify souls through his priestly ministry. In a seminary he receives this office directly from his superior.

Yet the direction of a particular soul is based upon two essential factors: the free election of the one directed and the free acceptation by the director. No human power can oblige any individual to accept spiritual direction from a particular director. Even religious and seminarians retain their liberty when it is a question of the choice of a personal spiritual director. When the Church through a bishop assigns a particular priest to be confessor to religious, this is done simply to facilitate the weekly confession of the religious, but it in no way obligates any religious to take that priest as a spiritual director.

The office of confessor is not necessarily identified with the office of spiritual director, and it would require a special indult from the Holy See for any religious institute to obligate its members to accept a particular priest as spiritual director.

On the part of the director, it should be observed that a pastor and those priests who are officially given the care of souls in a parish are bound in justice to hear the confessions of their subjects whenever they reasonably request it. In case of urgent necessity, all confessors are bound in charity to hear the confessions of the faithful, and in danger of death all priests are bound by this obligation.

Spiritual direction in the strict sense of the word, however, even in those cases in which it is given during sacramental confession, is a function completely distinct from the administration of the sacrament of penance. There is no divine or ecclesiastical law, therefore, which imposes upon any priest a strict obligation to accept the office of spiritual director. In justice a priest is always free to accept or to refuse such an office, although it is true that he would be performing an excellent act of charity if he were to accept the office. A priest's refusal to act as a spiritual director would never involve a violation of justice, although it may, in peculiar circumstances, be a sin against charity. Since it frequently happens that spiritual direction is given during sacramental confession, it is necessary to point out the difference between confession and spiritual direction.

The purpose of spiritual direction is to lead a soul to the perfection of the Christian life, and therefore the spiritual director is essentially a teacher, counsellor and guide.

The confessor is above all a judge who possesses power in the internal forum and can, within the limits of his jurisdiction, strictly obligate the penitent. His basic mission is to pardon sins in the name of God, and to do this it is sometimes necessary for him to dispose the penitent for valid sacramental absolution.

The spiritual director does not possess any jurisdiction in the internal forum. He cannot obligate the person directed unless the individual has voluntarily made a special vow of obedience to the director; nor does he have as his purpose the forgiveness of sin, but the gradual perfection of the soul in view of sanctity.

Should the spiritual director also be the ordinary confessor of the one who is directed?

The answer is that it is not strictly necessary, but it is fitting and convenient. It could not be said that one's spiritual director must of necessity be the confessor, because the two functions are distinct and separable.

Moreover, it may happen that a priest is a good confessor but does not possess the qualifications necessary for the direction of a particular soul. But because of the intimate relation between the offices of confessor and spiritual director, it is most fitting that one and the same person fulfil both functions whenever possible. There are several reasons for this: it gives greater authority to the director; it makes it possible to give spiritual direction in the confessional; it enables the director to know the soul more perfectly.

We have mentioned that some priests may be qualified as confessors but would not be suitable as spiritual directors. This signifies that there are definite qualities required for the office of spiritual direction.

Some of these qualities are essential to spiritual direction as such; others are required of the person who is to give the direction. The first may be called technical qualities, and the second may be considered as moral qualities.

Perhaps no writer has outlined with such clarity and precision the technical qualities of a good spiritual director, as has St. Teresa of Avila (cf. Way of Perfection, Chap. 5). She states that a good spiritual director should be learned, prudent and experienced. If the director does not possess all three qualities, St. Teresa maintains that he must at least be prudent and experienced. St. John of the Cross maintains the same, placing, however, great emphasis on the importance of experience. Following the teachings of these two great masters of the spiritual life, we shall treat briefly of each of the technical qualities.

1) Learning. The learning of a spiritual director should be extensive. In addition to a profound knowledge of Dogmatic Theology, without which he would be exposed to error in regard to matters of faith, and of Moral Theology, without which he could not even fulfil the office of confessor, the spiritual director should have a thorough knowledge of ascetical and mystical theology.

2) Prudence. This is one of the most important qualities for a spiritual director. It comprises three basic factors: prudence in decisions, clarity in counselling, and firmness in exacting obedience. If a spiritual director lacks prudence, he is usually lacking in several other virtues as well. Prudence enables an individual to do the right thing under given circumstances. Spiritual direction is concerned, not with the general doctrine of spiritual theology, nor with theoretical situations that one may imagine, but with the individual soul placed in concrete circumstances at a given moment or in a given phase of spiritual growth.

The director is not called upon to make decisions in regard to general doctrine; most people could find such answers in any standard manual of spiritual theology. The director's role is precisely to recognize the particular circumstances of a given situation and to give the advice or decision that is needed at that moment. In order that this decision be prudent, a good spiritual director must have the empathy by which he is able to place himself in the given circumstances and make the necessary decision against the background of orthodox doctrine.

3) Experience. This is one of the most precious qualities, which a spiritual director can have. Even if he be less perfect in knowledge and somewhat deficient in prudence, experience can prove to be a means of supplementing these defects. This does not mean that the experience of the director must necessarily flow from his own spiritual life, for it is possible that he may obtain the benefits of experience from his observation and direction of others. As regards the personal experience of the director, if it is a question of the guidance of the average Christian, he needs little more than the experience which any priest can obtain from the faithful fulfilment of his duties in the sacred ministry.

If it is a question of advanced souls who have already entered the mystical stages of the spiritual life, it is most desirable that the priest himself has some experience of those higher stages. While it is true that a very delicate sense of prudence, coupled with competent knowledge of the mystical states, may suffice in the majority of cases, it is likewise true that, without any personal experience, the director could easily become confused and lose his way.

The moral qualities, which are indispensable for a good spiritual director, are the following: piety, zeal for the sanctification of souls, good character, humility and disinterestedness.

1. Piety. It is easy to understand the necessity of piety in a spiritual director, and St. John of the Cross insists upon this quality with great emphasis (cf. Living flame of love Cant. 3 30)

The reason is that one cannot give what he does not have. If a spiritual director is lacking in the spirit of piety, he is incapacitated for leading his disciple to sanctity. It is true that sanctification is the work of God and that He does not depend essentially on human instruments, but at the same time it must be admitted that God ordinarily makes use of secondary causes, even in the work of the sanctification of souls.

2. Zeal. The director's ardent zeal for the sanctification of souls is a natural consequence of his personal piety. Zeal, as St. Thomas explains, is an effect of intense love (cf. I II q.20 a.4) The love of God impels us to labour for the extension of His kingdom in souls, and the love of those souls enables us to forget ourselves so that we think of nothing but of sanctifying them in and for God. This is the zeal which urged St. Paul to become all things to all men in order to gain all and gave him that beautiful sympathy by which his whole being was united with others in their joys and sufferings and sorrows (cf. 1 Cor. 9; 22).

3. Humility. The director likewise needs a profound humility, and this for three reasons. In the first place, God resists the proud and gives His grace to the humble (cf. 1 Pet. 5; 5). Of what value is all human knowledge and wisdom if one is lacking in humility? Secondly, the spiritual director needs humility so that he will distrust himself when necessary and not rush forward to solve difficulties without reflection. Humility will cause him to study and meditate and to consult others more learned than himself. In this way he will avoid many of the mistakes and embarrassments which occur to those who are too proud to doubt themselves. Thirdly, humility in a director attracts souls, while pride repels them. In this respect also the director should imitate Christ, who said of Himself that He is meek and humble of heart and that He seeks only the glory of His Father.

4. Disinterestedness. Lastly, the director should love souls in a disinterested manner, that is, he should not seek to guide them because of any self-satisfaction or consolation that he would receive, but simply and solely to lead them to God. St. Augustine states emphatically that those who lead the sheep of Christ as if they were their own and not Christ's show that they love themselves and not the Lord. By means of this disinterested love the director will forestall many temptations that could arise in regard to pride and sensual affections, and he will also be able to respect the liberty of the souls he directs.

What should we expect in spiritual direction or from our Spiritual Director? The following seem to us to be the principal concerns of a spiritual director:

1) To know the soul that is directed. The director should have an intimate and profound knowledge of the person he is to direct, his character, temperament, good and evil inclinations, defects, likes and dislikes, powers and energy, etc.

It would help greatly if he has a general knowledge of the individual's past life, so that he will know the principal vices to which he has been subjected and for how long, the means that were used to correct those vices and with what practical results, the graces received from God, the progress realized in virtue and by what means, the individual's present dispositions, the intensity of his desire to strive for perfection, the sacrifices he is willing to make in order to attain sanctity, the temptations which afflict him at the present time, and the obstacles and difficulties which he is experiencing.

2) To give instruction. The spiritual director is expected to instruct the person under his guidance in order to form a right conscience in the individual, thus making it possible for the individual to solve his own problems and difficulties whenever possible. Spiritual direction has as its goal the perfection of the individual, and the ideal is to enable the individual to walk or even to fly to the summit of sanctity.

3) To encourage the soul. Few souls, even among those who are advanced, are so self-sufficient that they do not need to be encouraged. The spiritual director is not only called upon to give instructions and to solve difficulties, but he should be a true educator who makes a positive contribution to the spiritual formation of the soul which is under his direction. To that end, the director will try to infuse in souls the confidence in God and distrust of self.

4) To guide the soul in the spiritual life. The soul should not take any important step without the approval of the spiritual director. The plan of life, the method of prayer, the practices of piety, the practice of mortification, the work of the apostolate, the material of the examination of conscience. Yet the direction will be limited strictly to those things which concern the soul's growth in holiness.

5) To correct defects. Although the purpose of spiritual direction is eminently positive - to lead the soul to the height of perfection - he cannot achieve that goal without the negative aspect of uprooting defects. In the correction of imperfections he will consider not only moral defects but also psychological and temperamental disorders. In other words, it will not suffice for the director to be concerned simply with the correction of voluntary faults; he must likewise understand and seek to remedy the psychological predispositions to vice.

6) To direct by progressive stages. Spiritual direction will be progressive and accommodate his guidance to the soul's degree of virtue, temperament, age and circumstances of life.

7) To observe secrecy. The spiritual director is obligated to observe secrecy in regard to the confidences which he has received from the persons he directs, not only because many of these things are in some way connected with the seal of confession, but also because the office of spiritual director obligates him to natural secrecy.

Since spiritual direction involves two persons, the success of the direction is not guaranteed by the mere fact that the director possesses all the necessary qualities and understands the purpose and function of spiritual direction. There are also definite requisites demanded of the soul that submits to the spiritual director, and these requisites flow, first of all, from the nature of spiritual direction itself and, secondly, from the relationship of the person directed with the spiritual director.

As regards the direction itself, it cannot be successful unless the person directed possesses the following qualities:

1) Sincerity. This is the first and most important quality, because without it any kind of direction is impossible. The spiritual director has to know all: temptations and weaknesses, desires and resolutions, good and evil inclinations, difficulties and trials, success and failure, etc. If he is to guide the soul to the greater perfection, his hands are tied unless he has sufficient knowledge of the soul. Although the spiritual director need not also be the confessor, it would be impossible to give any spiritual direction if the director were to know nothing of the sins and imperfections of the individual. One should reveal to the director whatever has any importance in regard to the spiritual life, but it is not necessary, and it would even be an abuse, to give him a detailed account of petty trifles and insignificant events. But what is revealed should be revealed with all frankness and sincerity, without condoning or excusing one's failures or exaggerating one's virtues.

2) Obedience. The director does not possess any authority by which he can demand strict obedience. Spiritual direction is a matter of perfect liberty on the part of the director and the person directed. By the very fact that a person seeks the help of the director, however, the two are not on an equal footing, but the director is in a position of superiority as the master and guide. Granted the voluntary submission of a person to the director, the director has a right to expect docility and obedience from the one who is directed. If these are lacking, there can be no spiritual direction. For that reason the director should demand obedience of the soul in all those things that pertain to the spiritual direction, and if this is not granted he should discontinue the direction. The soul should obey simply and without discussions or personal interpretations. And it should be noted that even worse than disobedience is the duplicity by which a soul would so ingratiate itself with the director that he would command it to do only the things which the soul wants to do. St. John of the Cross severely condemns this abuse (cf. Dark Night Bk.1 chap. 2 & 6). This does not mean, however, that an individual may not take the initiative in order to make a manifestation of conscience or to point out particular difficulties or obstacles that the director perhaps did not see.

What is to be thought of the vow of obedience which some persons have taken to their spiritual director? In general, this is not advisable because of the disadvantages connected with it (i.e., too much responsibility for the director, anxiety for the person directed, too much passivity, unnecessary visits and interviews, etc.). In any case, the director should never take the initiative and suggest that a person make a vow of obedience to him, for this would be an abuse of his authority and his office. It would be an even greater abuse if a director were to add to the vow of obedience the promise never to change directors or never to consult anyone else.

But if an individual voluntarily and repeatedly requests permission to make a vow of obedience to the director (for an increase of merit), it could be permitted under the following circumstances:

a) that the vow be made for a short period of time and then renewed if desired;

b) that it be restricted to certain matters which are clearly stated, such as the time of prayer, the types of mortification, the work in the apostolate, etc.;

c) that the person making the vow be perfectly normal, serene and balanced;

d) that the vow may be revoked if any difficulties or anxieties arise.

What is to be done if a conflict arises between the commands of a lawful superior and those of a spiritual director? One must unhesitatingly obey the superior, even if he has taken a vow of obedience to his director. It should be noted that private vows taken by religious are null and void without the approval of their superiors (cf. St. Thomas II II q.88 a.6). And even if one has received permission of a religious superior to make a vow of obedience to one's director, the superior never loses the power over the subject which is the result of religious profession.

3) Perseverance. The very nature of spiritual direction requires that the person directed should persevere in seeking the help and guidance of the director. Any spiritual direction or counselling is rendered sterile by the frequent change of directors, by absenting oneself for long periods, by the constant change of spiritual exercises and means of sanctification, or by letting oneself be led by a caprice of the moment instead of following the instructions received from the director. When serious reasons justify a change, a person could find a new director, but that is something quite distinct from the fickleness and inconstancy which is manifested by some persons in changing from one director to another under the slightest pretext. In the seminary, one may not change spiritual directors excepting with the permission of the Rector.

4) Discretion. The person receiving spiritual direction should never forget that, if the director is obliged to the seal of confession or to natural secrecy, the one receiving direction is obliged to observe silence concerning the director. As a general rule, a person should never reveal to others the particular admonitions or counsels which have been received from the spiritual director. Such advice is given to a particular person in view of particular circumstances and does not apply to other persons living in different circumstances. Many directors have suffered greatly as the result of the indiscretion of their penitents, and this is sufficient reason for a director to refuse to continue the direction of such a person.

The principal qualities required of the person directed in relation to the director are respect, confidence and supernatural love.

1) Respect. The person directed must see in the director, not merely a man who is gifted with certain qualities, but the lawful representative of God and of Christ. No matter what defects or perfections he may have in the natural order, he must be regarded with respect precisely as a director and guide of the spiritual life. This profound respect will be most useful, not only in fostering the docility and obedience of the person directed, but also in serving as a brake to any abnormal confidence or affection toward the director.

2) Confidence. In addition to respect, there should be absolute confidence in the director. It should be a confidence which is truly filial, and so absolute that one can always be perfectly natural and frank when dealing with the director. If the person directed is timid and self-conscious, the spiritual direction will never be completely efficacious.

3) Supernatural love. Once a person has cultivated a filial confidence toward the director, it usually happens that a true love develops for the director. There is nothing unlawful about a love for one's spiritual director as long as the love remains entirely on a supernatural level.

Some persons are not in a position to choose their own director, for example, cloistered nuns or persons who do not have access to several priests. In such cases one must do as well as possible with the director at hand and trust in God to supply for any deficiencies in the director.

Apart from these particular cases, the choice of a spiritual director should be made in the following way.

1) The first thing to be done is to ask God in prayer for the grace and light to proceed prudently in this important matter.

2) Then one should investigate who among the available priests possesses the prudence and charity which are necessary for a good director.

3) Under no circumstances should the choice be made because of one's natural inclinations toward a particular priest, although it should be recognized that it would be more difficult to open one's heart with confidence to a priest for whom one feels repugnance or antipathy.

4) It is not advisable to ask the priest immediately to be the spiritual director, but one should test him for a time to see whether or not he will be able to fulfil the task of director.

5) All things being equal, one should seek the holiest priest for ordinary cases and the most learned priest for extraordinary cases.

6) Once the choice has been made, a person should not easily change directors.

But it may sometimes prove necessary for a person to seek a different spiritual director, although one should not readily or too easily believe that it is necessary to change directors.

Some of the insufficient reasons for changing one's director are:

1) inconstancy of character, which makes it impossible for the individual to persevere for a long time in the same spiritual exercises;

2) pride, which causes the individual to seek out the priest who is most popular;

3) excessive anxiety, which causes a person to go from one director to another, because none of them ever seem to be able to help the soul;

4) a false sense of shame, which leads the individual to avoid the regular confessor when it is a matter of confessing certain humiliating faults;

5) and injured feelings as a result of a disagreement with the director or a severe correction received from the director.

The reasons that are sufficiently serious for changing one's spiritual director can be listed under two heads: if the direction has become useless or harmful.

1) The spiritual direction becomes useless when, in spite of one's good will and sincere desire to advance in holiness, one does not feel toward the director the respect, confidence and frankness which are indispensable for the efficacy of the spiritual direction. It would also be a futile effort if one perceives that the director never dares to make corrections of one's defects, does not encourage progress in virtue, does not solve problems, and shows no special interest in the sanctification of the individual.

2) The direction would be harmful if the person directed discovers that the director lacks the necessary knowledge, prudence and discretion; when he feeds the vanity and complacence of the individual, readily tolerates one's faults and imperfections, or judges things from a point of view that is too natural; when the director wastes time by frivolous conversations, or by asking questions out of simple curiosity, or in discussing matters which are not related to growth in holiness, or when one perceives that there has developed a strong sensible affection on the part of one or both; when the director imposes obligations that are beyond one's strength or incompatible with the duties of one's state in life, or wishes that the individual promise never to seek counsel from any other priest; when one perceives clearly that the advice given has been harmful instead of helpful. It should be noted, however, that one may easily be mistaken in making judgments concerning the competence of the director and the efficacy of the direction, and for that reason it is imperative that one deliberate before making a change in spiritual directors, and, in the case of seminarians that they have the explicit permission from the Rector.

Would it be fitting to have several directors at the same time?

Although there have been cases in which a person had several spiritual directors (for example, St. Teresa of Avila), in general it is not prudent or effective to do so. There is always the danger of a difference of opinion and a conflict as a result of discrepancy in the advice that is given. Nevertheless, it is perfectly compatible with the unity of direction to seek advice from other competent persons when an especially difficult or extraordinary problem arises. As we have already stated, the director himself, if he is prudent and humble, will take the initiative and advise the penitent to consult another person. But apart from these special cases, the unity of spiritual direction must always be preserved, especially when dealing with scrupulous persons, and this unity is best preserved by having one director.

The word "ascetical" comes from the Greek verb meaning to exercise or train, and it had special reference to athletic training. In his epistles St. Paul makes frequent references to the Christian as an "athlete," one who strives, struggles and trains. In the primitive Church the "ascetics" were those who took public vows, especially of chastity, and led an austere life. Origen and St. Athanasius make reference to such persons.

The word "mystical" means hidden and was commonly used among the ancient Greeks to designate religious truths which were as yet unknown to the uninitiated. The word mysterium is found in the Septuagint version of the Book of Daniel and also in the Deutero-canonical books. In the New Testament it is found especially in St. Paul, who uses it in three different senses:

1) as a secret of God pertaining to the salvation of man;

2) as the hidden or symbolic sense of a narration or description;

3) as anything whose activity is hidden or unknown.

Yet the adjectival form "mystical" is not found in the New Testament nor in the apostolic Fathers. It was introduced in the third century, and with the passage of time it assumed three different meanings:

1) a liturgical sense, to signify something that pertains to religious cult;

2) an exegetical sense, to signify a typical or allegorical interpretation, distinct from the literal interpretation;

3) a theological sense, of which we shall now speak.

Since there is as yet no generally accepted term to designate the science of Christian spirituality, we prefer to call it simply the theology of Christian perfection.

This title has the advantage of expressing three basic points which are not clearly expressed in any of the other titles:

1) that this is a true theological science and a branch of the one theology;

2) that its proper object and purpose is to expound the theological doctrine of Christian perfection in all its amplitude and extension;

3) that there is no previous persuasion or assumption concerning such disputed questions as the necessity of infused contemplation for perfection, the dichotomy between asceticism and mysticism, the unity or duality of ways to perfection, etc.

Since theology is essentially one by reason of the identity of its formal object in all its branches, it necessarily follows that all the parts of theology are intimately interrelated.

Therefore, it should not seem strange that the theology of Christian perfection derives from dogmatic theology those grand principles of the intimate life of God which are shared by man through grace and the beatific vision: the doctrine of the indwelling of the Trinity in the souls of the just; reparation by Christ, the Redeemer of the human race; the grace of headship in Christ; the sanctifying efficacy of the sacraments; and other principles which are the foundation of Catholic dogma. Cardinal Manning spoke truly when he said that dogma is the source of true Christian spirituality.

But even more intimate is the relation between moral theology and the theology of Christian perfection. As one of the great modem theologians has said, it is evident that moral theology and ascetico-mystical theology have the very same formal object quod. The reason for this is that the moral act by essence, which is the act of charity toward God, is also the primary object of ascetico-mystical theology.

"Pastoral theology" is that part of theology which teaches the ministers of the Church, according to revealed principles, the manner in which they are to care for the souls confided to them by God. It is an eminently practical science and is closely related to the theology of Christian perfection, since one of the principal duties of the pastor of souls is to lead them to perfection. It differs from the theology of Christian perfection inasmuch as the perfecting of souls constitutes one of the partial objects of pastoral theology, while it is the proper and exclusive object of the theology of Christian perfection.

We can now attempt a definition of the theology of Christian perfection.

By taking what is common and best from all definitions given by the spiritual authors and adding the experimental aspect of the mystical state, we can formulate the following definition:

The theology of Christian perfection is that part of sacred theology which, based on the principles of divine revelation and the experience of the saints, studies the organism of the supernatural life, explains the laws of its progress and development, and describes the process which souls are wont to follow from the beginning of the Christian life to the heights of perfection.

We say that the theology of Christian perfection is a part of sacred theology in the sense that it is based on the principles of divine revelation, for it would not be theology at all if such were not the case. Theology is nothing more than the deduction of virtually revealed truths from revealed data by means of reason enlightened by faith.

The theology of the spiritual life also makes use of the experience of the saints, thus manifesting that there are two distinct but harmonious aspects of this branch of theology, one subordinate to the other. The basic element is revealed data and the virtualities contained in that revelation. This is what makes it true theology. But it is not licit to prescind entirely from the experimental element of which the mystics give testimony, for then one runs the risk of formulating an a priori system which turns its back on reality. This experimental aspect is entirely subordinate to the theological, to the extent that the theologian will reject an experimental datum which is not in accord with the certain data of theology. Nevertheless, it is beyond any doubt that this experimental aspect is of great importance and is indispensable for a complete picture of the supernatural life, its laws and vicissitudes, could not be explained sufficiently by the theologian who lacks the testimony of those souls who have lived this life in its fullness. We believe, therefore, that any definition of the theology of the Christian life would be incomplete if it did not incorporate this experimental element which constitutes to a great extent the material for the investigation of the theologian.

We further state that this branch of theology studies the organism of the supernatural life, and this is the first thing that the theologian should do before he passes on to study the growth and development of that life. In this section the theologian should restrict himself almost exclusively to the data of revelation, because it is only on this firm basis that he can establish the solid principles of the Christian life, which do not depend on the variety of experiences of individual souls or the opinions of particular schools of theology.

Spiritual theology then studies the laws of the growth and development of the supernatural life. Once the characteristics of the supernatural organism have been explained, it is necessary to investigate the progressive growth of that life until the soul reaches the summit of perfection. The theological element, based on revealed truths, still conserves its importance here and is again used almost exclusively, rather than the appeal to experimental data.

Then this theology describes the process which souls will follow from the beginning to the end of Christian perfection. Theology is both a speculative and a practical science, although as a unity it is more speculative than practical. But the theology of Christian perfection has many aspects which bear directly and immediately on the practical. It does not suffice to know the principles of the supernatural life and the theoretical laws of its growth and development; it is necessary also to examine in what manner this evolution and growth is developed in practice and the paths by which souls actually travel in their journey to perfection. And while it is true that God acts in a variety of ways upon souls and that in this sense each soul may be said to follow a path that is proper to itself, there can be found in the midst of this variety certain common characteristics which enable the theologian to point out the basic steps along which the soul is wont to journey toward perfection.

For this part of the theology of Christian perfection, the descriptive and experimental data are absolutely indispensable. The theologian should study them attentively and contrast them with theological principles in order to formulate the theoretico-practical laws which the spiritual director can apply to each soul according to the dictates of prudence. And this applies not only to certain stages in the struggle for perfection but to the entire journey, although the theology of Christian perfection aims especially at the great heights of perfection which souls ought to attain. So important is this aspect that, since res denominatur apotiori, our science derives its title from the ultimate goal, which is Christian perfection.

Having seen the definition of the theology of Christian perfection, it should be immediately evident that this study is of extraordinary importance. Nothing is so important or excellent for man as that which will teach him the path and the means to intimate union with God, his first beginning and last end. It is true that only one thing is necessary, namely, the salvation of one’s soul, but only in heaven will we be able to appreciate the great difference between salvation attained in its lowest grade and the highest and fullest measure which is the salvation of the saints. These latter will enjoy a much higher degree of glory and will glorify God in a much higher measure for all eternity. Hence there can be no object more noble or more deserving of study than that which constitutes the essence of the theology of Christian perfection.

The necessity of this study is manifest, especially for the priest as director and guide of souls. Without a profound knowledge of the speculative laws of the Christian life and the practical norms of spiritual direction, he will travel blindly in the sublime mission of leading souls to the summit of perfection. Thereby he will contract a grave responsibility before God if he should frustrate the possible making of a saint. For that reason the Church has legislated for the establishment of chairs of ascetico-mystical theology in all the higher institutions of learning for the diocesan and regular clergy.

But even for the faithful the study of this branch of theology is most useful. Observe the importance, which the Church has always placed on spiritual reading. Few things so stimulate and arouse the desire for perfection as contact with those books, which can open new horizons and explain methodically and clearly the road to intimate union with God. The knowledge of these ways facilitates and complements spiritual direction and can assist in supplying for it in those cases, not infrequent, when souls lack a director. Bearing in mind the needs of such souls, we shall in the course of this book frequently descend to practical counsels and details which would not be necessary in a book directed exclusively to priests and spiritual directors.

In approaching the study of spiritual theology one should above all possess a great spirit of faith and piety. The relationship between theory and practice is so intimate in the study of these matters that he who does not possess a vital faith and intense piety will not be able to judge correctly concerning the speculative principles of this science. Speaking of theology in general, St. Thomas says: "In the other sciences it is sufficient that a man be perfect intellectually, but in this science it is necessary that he also be perfect effectively, for we are to speak of great mysteries and explain wisdom to the perfect. But each one is wont to judge things according to his dispositions; thus he who is dominated by anger judges in a very different manner during his seizure of anger than when he is calm. Therefore, the Philosopher says that each one seeks his own end in those things to which he is particularly inclined." (In Epist. Ad Hebr. cap. 5, lect. 2)

It is also necessary to take into account the intimate relations of this part of theology with dogmatic, moral and pastoral theology. There are certain fundamental points of doctrine which we shall simply recall but whose perfect knowledge demands a deep study of those branches of theology where they are treated in their proper place. In no other science as in theology does that famous axiom of Hippocrates have such significance: "The doctor who knows nothing more than medicine does not even know medicine." One must know well all theology and the auxiliary sciences in order to direct souls, and among these auxiliary sciences rational and empirical psychology and the somatic and psychic pathology of the nervous system and mental illness hold a prominent place.

We will now discuss the various sources for the study of the theology of Christian perfection. They can be reduced to two general classes: theological and experimental.

2) Another primary source for the theology of Christian perfection, which completes and supplements Sacred Scripture, is Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church. It is known that the testimony is authentically preserved and promulgated by the teaching of the Church, either in its solemn Magisterium (dogmatic definitions, the symbols and confessions of faith) or in its ordinary Magisterium which is exercised principally by the teaching and preaching of the pastors of the Church throughout the entire world and by the practice of the Church in her liturgy, the writings of the Fathers, the unanimous consent of theologians, the Roman congregations under the vigilance of the Supreme Pontiff, and the unanimous consent and sense of the faithful.

3) Although the fundamental principles of the theology of Christian perfection have been revealed by God and accepted by faith, human reason is not a stranger to sacred science but is an absolutely indispensable auxiliary, since it is necessary to deduce the conclusions which are virtually contained in the revealed principles. This cannot be done without the exercise of reason under the light of faith. Moreover, it is necessary to confirm the revealed truths by showing that there is nothing in them that is contrary to the demands of reason. In each theological problem one must state the question, make the truths of faith more intelligible by means of analogies and comparisons, reject the arguments of the incredulous by means of arguments of reason, etc. The theologian cannot prescind in any way from the light of reason, although his fundamental argument must always be taken from the authentic sources of divine revelation.

In addition to these three primary sources, common to all theology, the theologian who attempts to construct a theology of Christian perfection must also take account of other sources which are more proper to this part of theology which treats of perfection.

Apart from the descriptive value of these works, they also have a special value conferred on them by the fact that the Church has canonized the authors and sometimes has declared them doctors of the Church. Hence the spiritual writings of certain saints have an incalculable value for the theology of Christian perfection: St. Augustine, St. Bernard, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, St. John of the Cross, St. Francis de Sales, St. Alphonsus Liguori, etc. Next to these doctors, one must place the writings of the great experts in the life of prayer, such as St. Gertrude, St. Brigid, St. Catherine of Siena, and above all, St. Teresa of Avila, of whom the Church prays liturgically that "we may be nourished with the celestial pabulum of her doctrine."²⁰ Nor can the theologian limit himself to the study of those mystics who have been raised to the altars of the Church. There is a veritable treasury of spiritual teaching in the works of pseudo-Dionysius, Cassian, Hugh and Richard of St. Victor, Eckhart, Tauler, Blessed Henry Suso, Ruysbroeck, Gerson, Dionysius the Carthusian, Thomas Kempis, Walter Hilton, Blosius, Louis of Granada, Francis of Osuna, Bernardine of Laredo, John of the Angels, Chardon, Louis of Leon, Alvarez de Paz, Alphonsus Rodriguez, Surin, Scaramelli, Olier, Berulle, Faber, Weiss, Marmion, Arintero, etc.

The lives of the saints also offer valuable descriptive material for the study of the Christian life and place before our eyes models for imitation. Among these works the autobiographies are of special value or those biographies written by a saint on the life of another saint (e.g., the autobiographies of St. Teresa of Avila and St. Theresa of Lisieux, or the life of St. Francis of Assisi by St. Bonaventure).

This is another important source of information for the theology of Christian perfection. Although Christian spirituality, like the grace on which it is founded, is basically the same in all ages and countries, it is helpful to see the application of the principles of spirituality throughout the centuries and to study the tendencies and schools of spirituality in order to avoid errors and illusions and to stress those means which experience has demonstrated to be more efficacious for the sanctification of souls. It also enables the theologian to discover the common basis of spirituality in all the various schools and to distinguish what is nothing more than the particular tendency of a given school. History is the teacher of life, and perhaps in no other branch of history can we be better instructed.

This source is subsidiary and of much less importance than the others, since the principles of Christianity differ radically from all other religions. Nevertheless, it is helpful to contrast the phenomena of the Christian religion with those of pagan religions which answer a basic need in man’s psychological structure. Thus one can study with interest and profit the states of consolation and desolation, the ascetical and purgative practices, etc.

There is no more uniformity in the division of the theology of Christian perfection than there is in its terminology. But the confusion is understandable when one considers that the subject matter is so ineffable and there are so many questions that overlap. It is generally more difficult to establish the proper order of a practico-speculative science.

While we readily admit that the ascetical and the mystical phases are two distinct aspects of the spiritual life, as are the active and the passive phases, we deplore the division of spiritual theology into these two parts. In practice the life of the Christian striving for perfection usually oscillates between the ascetical and active phase and the mystical and passive phase; therefore, it seems to be more in keeping with the facts of reality not to make a division of the theology of Christian perfection along those lines.

Moreover, there is the danger of falling into the error of postulating two different perfections: the one ascetical and the other mystical.

Therefore, in the desire to preserve and safeguard the unity of theology as well as the unity of the way to Christian perfection, we choose rather to present:

1) first the doctrinal principles upon which the theology of Christian perfection rests (PART I);

2) then to consider Christian perfection itself (PART II);

3) the negative aspect of growth in Christian perfection (the struggle against sin, the world, the flesh and the devil: PART III);

4) the principal positive means of supernatural growth (PART IV);

5) including the life of prayer (PART V),

6) and certain secondary means, both internal and external (PART VI).

The consideration of purpose is the first thing required in the study of any dynamic work. And since the Christian life is essentially dynamic and perfectible—at least during our present state as wayfarers upon earth—it is necessary that we should know where we are going and what is the end we hope to attain. For that reason St. Thomas begins the moral part of his Summa theologiae—man’s return to God— with a consideration of the ultimate end (I II, q.1).

Two ends can be proposed for the Christian life or, if one prefers, one end with two distinct modalities:

1) the absolute or ultimate end;

2) and the relative or proximate end.

We shall examine each separately.

The classical definition of glory is: clara notitia cum laude. This definition expresses something extrinsic to the one who is the subject affected by glory; yet, in a less strict sense, we can distinguish a double glory in God: the intrinsic glory which springs from His intimate divine life, and the extrinsic glory which proceeds from creatures.

The intrinsic glory of God is that which He procures for Himself in the bosom of the Trinity. The Father, by way of an intellectual generation, conceives a most perfect idea of Himself: His divine Son or His Word, in whom is reflected His life, His beauty, His immensity, His eternity and all His infinite perfections. As a result of their mutual contemplation, there is established between these two divine Persons—by way of procession—a current of indescribable love, an impetuous torrent of fire, which is the Holy Ghost. This knowledge and love of Himself, this eternal and incessant praise which God showers upon Himself in the incomprehensible mystery of His interior life, constitutes His intrinsic glory, which is rigorously infinite and exhaustive and to which no created being nor the entire universe can contribute absolutely anything. It is the mystery of the inner life of God in which He finds an intrinsic glory that is absolutely infinite.

God is infinitely happy in Himself and has no need whatever of creatures. But God is love (John 4,16) , and love is communicative. God is the infinite good, and goodness tends to diffuse itself. As the philosophers say: Bonum est diffusivum sui. Here is the reason for creation. God desired to communicate His infinite perfections to creatures, thereby intending His own extrinsic glory. The glorification of God by creatures is therefore the ultimate reason and supreme finality of creation (Cf. ST I q. 26, a.4).

The explanation of this could not be more clear, even to the light of reason deprived of the light of faith. It is a philosophical fact that every agent acts for an end, especially an intellectual agent. Therefore, God, the first and most intelligent of all agents, must always act for some end. But the attributes of God and all His operations are not distinct from His divine essence, they are identified with it. Therefore, if God had intended in the creation of the universe some end distinct from Himself, He would have had to refer and subordinate His creative action to that end—for every agent puts its operation at the service of the end which is intended—and hence God Himself would have subordinated Himself to that end, since His operation is Himself. Consequently, that end would have been above God; that is, God would not be God. It is therefore absolutely impossible that God intended by His operations any end distinct from Himself. God has created all things for His own glory; and creatures cannot exist but in Him and for Him (Cf. ST I q. 44, a. 4).

This does not presuppose a "transcendental egoism" in God, as some impious philosophers have dared to say (Kant); this is the apex of generosity and disinterest. God did not seek His own utility in creation, for He could add nothing at all to His own personal happiness and perfection; but He sought only to communicate His goodness. God knew how to organize things in such a way that creatures would find their own happiness by glorifying God. For that reason St. Thomas says that God alone is infinitely liberal and generous. He does not work because of any need, as if seeking something that He lacks, but only out of goodness, to communicate to creatures His own overflowing happiness (Cf. ST I q. 44, a.4; q. 19, a. 2, ad 3)

Sacred Scripture is filled with expressions in which God demands and exacts His own glory: "I am the Lord, this is my name; my glory I give to no other nor my praise to idols" (Isa. 42:8). "For my own sake, for my own sake, I do this; why should I suffer profanation? My glory I will not give to another" (Isa. 48:11). "Listen to me, Jacob, and Israel whom I named! I, it is I who am the first, and I am the last" (Isa. 48:12). " ‘I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end,’ says the Lord God, ‘who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty’ "(Apoc. 1:8).

Thus the glory of God is the end and purpose of all creation. Even the incarnation of the Word and the redemption of the human race have no other finality than the glory of God: "And when all things are made subject to him, then the Son himself will also be subject to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all" (1 Cor. 15:28). For that reason, St. Paul exhorts us not to take a single step which will not lead to the glory of God: "Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or do anything else, do all for the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31). For we have been predestined in Christ in order to become a perpetual praise of glory for the Blessed Trinity: "As He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish in his sight in love. He predestined us to be adopted through Jesus Christ as his sons, according to the purpose of his will, unto the praise of the glory of his grace, with which He has favoured us in his beloved Son for the praise of his glory" (Eph. 1:4-6, 14). Everything must be subordinated to this finality. Even the soul’s salvation and sanctification must be sought for the greater glory of God. Our own sanctification and salvation cannot become our absolute ultimate end; even they must be sought only because our happiness lies in the eternal praise of glory of the Blessed Trinity.

Such is the ultimate and absolute end of the entire Christian life. In practice, the soul that aspires to sanctify itself must place the glory of God as the goal of all its striving. Nothing whatever should be preferred to this, not even the desire of one’s own salvation or sanctification, which must be considered in a secondary place as the most efficacious means of giving glory to God. In this one must seek to resemble St. Alphonsus Liguori, of whom it was said that he had in his head nothing else but the glory of God, and one must take as a theme or motto the standard of the Society of Jesus set forth by St. Ignatius Loyola: "Ad majorem Dei gloriam. " All the saints adopted this attitude, following the teaching of St. Paul, who gave this axiom to the Corinthians: "Do all for the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31).

Hence the sanctification of one’s own soul is not the ultimate end of the Christian life. Beyond this is the glory of the Blessed Trinity, which is the absolute end of all that exists. And although this truth is so fundamental for those who comprehend the divine transcendence, it nevertheless does not appear to dominate the lives of the saints until rather late, when the soul is transformed through love in the unity of God, when in the transforming union the soul is fully identified with God. Only Christ and Mary, from the first moment of Their existence, realized this glorification of God which is the terminus of all sanctity on this earth. Nothing should so preoccupy the soul which aspires to sanctity as the constant forgetfulness of self and the intention to do all for the greater glory of God. At the summit of the mount of perfection, St. John of the Cross has printed the words: "Here on this mount dwell only the honour and glory of God."

After the glory of God, and perfectly subordinated to it, the Christian life has for its end or goal the sanctification of one’s own soul. This is tantamount to saying that all Christians are called to sanctity or the perfection of the Christian life, at least by a remote and sufficient call, although in various degrees, according to the measure of their predestination in Christ (Cf. 1 Cor. 10,31).

The testimony of Sacred Scripture is clear and unmistakable on this point: "Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5:48); "called to be saints" (Rom. 1:7, 8:28; 1 Cor. 1:2); "for this is the will of God, your sanctification" (1 Thess. 4:3).

But when we speak of man’s sanctification or perfection, we must necessarily make a distinction, because of the double state or condition of man. Since man’s sanctification and perfection are a participation in the divine sanctity and perfection, they will be measured by the degree of man’s union with God. But man’s union with God will be realized perfectly only in glory when, through the beatific vision, he possesses and enjoys forever the goodness, truth and beauty of the triune God. As a wayfarer here on earth, because of the soul’s obediential potency to an ever increasing influx of grace and charity, a man can grow in perfection indefinitely. Death alone will put a definitive limit to any further growth in grace and charity.

Man’s ultimate beatitude, says St. Thomas, is his supreme perfection. (Cf. ST I-II q. 3, a. 2, ad 4). When we apply the term "perfection" to a soul in glory and to a wayfarer, the term is an analogous one, and therefore the analogates are essentially diverse. Nevertheless, if we know what constitutes man’s union with God in glory, we can deduce what constitutes that union with God in the state that precedes glory, for the selfsame entity whereby man merits glory is the principle of his spiritual life here on earth.

The Angelic Doctor tells us that beatitude or perfection in glory requires two conditions: the total perfection of the one who is beatified and a knowledge of the good possessed (Cf. ST I q. 23, a. 1)

These conditions are actually verified in the happiness of the blessed because, as Pope Benedict XII declares: "The souls of the just see the divine essence by an intuitive, face-to-face vision, with no creature as a medium of vision, but with the divine essence immediately manifesting itself to them, clearly and openly." (Const. Benedictus Deus, Denz. 530)

And the Council of Florence stated: "Souls immediately upon entrance into heaven see clearly the one and triune God as He is, one more perfectly than another, depending on their merits." (Decree for the Greeks; Denz. 693)

But since the divine essence takes the place of the intelligible species for the intellect of the blessed, the intellect needs something over and above its own natural powers in order to enjoy the beatific vision. This is actually the light of glory (lumen gloriae), the need for which is upheld by the Council of Vienne, which condemned the opposite opinion (cf. Denz. 475)

The nature of the lumen gloriae is not defined, but according to Thomistic teaching it is a created quality divinely infused into the intellect whereby it is intrinsically perfect and elevated (Cf. ST I q. 12, aa. 5-7; I-II q. 5, a. 6, ad 2)

As infused charity vitalizes and supernaturalises the will, so the lumen gloriae supernaturalizes and elevates the intellect, and both somehow arise from sanctifying grace, which is infused into the essence of the soul.

What, then, is the difference between the perfection of the wayfarer and the perfection of the blessed in glory? The union of the blessed with God in glory presupposes three distinct elements in the souls of those who enjoy the beatific vision: sanctifying grace, charity and the light of glory. Here the two conditions for beatitude are fulfilled: By means of the light of glory, the soul knows the good that it possesses; by reason of the plenitude of its charity, it is completely transformed by grace (Cf. Ibid. II-II q. 24, a. 8; Suppl. Q. 93, a. 3))

If, therefore, we wish to know the elements that are required for the perfection of the wayfarer, we need only ask which of the above-mentioned elements are common to both the just soul on earth and the blessed in heaven.

What remains for the perfection and sanctification of man as a wayfarer? Not he light of glory, but the other two elements: sanctifying grace and charity. Indeed, the soul is called just and perfect precisely because it participates to some degree in the very life of God through sanctifying grace and is able to be united with God in the bond of supernatural charity. In glory there is the clear and unobstructed facial vision of God, while here on earth the soul has only the dim (but supernatural) knowledge of faith and the certain (but not infallible) confidence of hope. And since sanctifying grace, as we shall see, is the principle from which all our supernatural actions proceed, it is evident that sanctifying grace is, as St. Thomas states, the beginning of glory in us (Cf. ibid., II-II q. 24, a. 3, ad 2)

And, finally, since St. Paul tells us that faith and hope will pass away but charity will not pass away (Cf. 1 Cor. 13:10-13), we can see that the elements which effect our union with God here on earth are nothing other than those two realities which will last forever: grace and charity.

Since the theology of Christian perfection is concerned with the sanctification of man as a wayfarer and studies the supernatural organism of the spiritual life in order to discover the laws of growth in perfection, we shall now consider the supernatural organism and its faculties or powers and then proceed to investigate the nature of Christian perfection and the mystical state

Natural, in opposition to supernatural, is that which is either a part of nature, or that which proceeds out of nature as its effect, or to which nature has a claim.

Supernatural is that which is neither a part of nature, nor proceeds as effect from nature, nor can be claimed by nature, but which transcends the being, the powers and the claims of nature. The supernatural may be super-added by God over the claims and endowments of nature to the natural gifts of the creature.

The supernatural order is the ordination of rational creatures to a supernatural final goal.

We may divide the supernatural in two ways:

The "supernatural in substance" is that which by its intrinsic character goes beyond the nature of the creature, for example, actual grace, sanctifying grace, the supernatural virtues, the immediate vision of God.

"Supernatural in mode" is an effect which is indeed natural, but which in the mode and maner of its production goes beyond the natural powers of the creature, for example, a miraculous healing of a sick person.

b) Or, we may divide into absolute and relative

"The absolutely supernatural" or the supernatural pure and simple are the goods of the Divine order, which go far beyond the nature of creatures; for example, sanctifying grace, or the immediate vision of God.

"The relatively supernatural" connotes goods of the created order, which though supernatural for one creature, are not supernatural for another creature, for example, infused knowledge, which is natural for the angels, and supernatural for human beings. To the relatively supernatural belong the so-called preternatural gifts of man's primitive state, of which we will be speaking of shortly.

Man has the capacity to receive supernatural gifts. Though the supernatural is beyond nature, still man has a certain receptivity for the supernatural which God has instilled in it. The creature does nothing while God elevates it to a supernatural state of being and activity (cf. St. Thomas III q.11 a.1).

The supernatural does not exist in itself, but in something else. The creature must be of such a nature as to be able to receive the supernatural

The supernatural is not superadded merely externally to nature, but affects nature intrinsically. It permeates the being and the powers of nature, and perfects it either within the created order (e.g., the preternatural gifts) or through elevation into the divine order of being and activity (absolutely supernatural gifts). The Fathers and theologians compare the supernatural to fire which makes iron glow, or to a plant which is grafted on a tree.

God has conferred on man a supernatural Destiny. (De fide.) Man's final end consists in a participation by him in God's Vision of Himself. The attainment of this end by men gives glory to God and fills men with supernatural happiness. (cf. 1 Cor. 13; 12 : 1 John 3; 2)

The natural end of man, which consists in man's natural knowledge and love of God, and in the natural glorification of God, is subordinated and adapted to his supernatural end. The natural order is thus used as a means for the attaining of the ultimate supernatural goal. Man, by reason of his whole dependence on God, is bound to strive after the supernatural destination determined for him by God.

Our first parents, before the Fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace. (De fide.) The Council of Trent, in opposition to Pelagianism and to modern Rationalism, teaches: If anyone will not confess that when the first man Adam had transgressed the mandate of God in paradise he did not immediately lose the sanctity and justice in which he had been constituted A.S.

A scriptural proof is provided by St. Paul's teaching on the Redemption. The Apostle teaches that Christ the Second Adam, restored what the first Adam had lost; the state of holiness and justice. But if he had lost it, he must previously have received it. (cf. Rom. 5; 12 et seq. : Eph. 1; 10 : 4; 23 et seq. : 1 Cor. 6; 11 : 2 Cor. 5; 17 : Gal. 6; 15 : Rom. 5; 10 et seq. : 8; 14 et seq.)

The Fathers find the supernatural endowment with grace indicated in Gn. 1; 26 (similitudo = supernatural identity, of image and likeness with God); in Gn. 2; 7 (spiraculum vitae = supernatural life-principle; ie: Sanctifying grace)

The freedom from irregular desire. The Council of Trent explains that concupiscence was called a sin by St. Paul because it flows from sin and makes one inclined to sin. But if it does flow from sin, then it did not exist before sin. Holy Writ attests the perfect harmony between reason and sensuality. Gn. 2; 25: "And they were both naked ... and were not ashamed." It was only sin that gave rise to the feeling of shame (Gn. 3; 10).

b) The gift of bodily immortality. (De fide.)

The Council of Trent teaches that Adam fell under the sentence of death as a punishment for sin. Holy Writ records that God threatened and imposed death as punishment for the transgression of His probationary commandment. (cf. Gn. 2; 17 : 3; 19).

It is associated with corporeal immortality. Holy Writ represents suffering and sorrow as the consequences of sin. Gn. 1; 16 et seq. Before sin came into the world the progenitors of the human race lived in a condition of unalloyed happiness (cf. Gn. 2; 15) But freedom from suffering in no wise means inactivity. Our first parents immediately after their creation by God received from Him the order to till the land (cf. Gn. 2; 15), and thus, in a limited measure, to participate in the work of the Creator.

Since our first parents, according to Holy Writ, entered into existence in an adult state, and were the first teachers and educators of humanity, it was appropriate that they should be equipped by God with a natural knowledge suitable to their age and their tasks, and with that measure of supematural knowledge which was necessary to enable them to achieve their supernatural end.

Our First Parents in Paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment. (De fide.) The Council of Trent teaches that Adam lost sanctity and justice by transgressing the Divine commandment (Dz. 788). Since the punishment is proportionate to the guilt, the sin of Adam was clearly a serious sin.

We know the existence of this sinful act from revelation, ie; from the Sacred Scriptures. c¦ . Genesis 2; 17 : 3; 1 et seq.

The later Books of Holy Writ confirm it: Ecclus. 25; 33: "From the woman came the begining of sin, and by her we all die." Wis. 2; 24: "But by the envy of the devil death came into the world." 2 Cor. 11; 3: "But I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted and fall away from the simplicity which is Christ." (cf. 1 Tim 2; 14 : Rom. 5; 12 et seq : John 8; 44).

The sin of our First Parents was a sin of disobedience. Rom. 5; 19: "By the disobedience of one man many were made sinners." The root of the disobedience was pride. Tob. 4; 14: "From it (pride) all perdition took its beginning." Ecclus. 10; 15: "Pride is the beginning of all sin."

The gravity of the sin is clear when we regard its purpose and the circumstances of the Devine commandment. St. Augustine regards Adam's sin as an "inexpressibly great sin" (cf. Op. Imperf. contra Jul. 1; 105).

The consequences of original sin are, following Luke 10; 30, summarized by the scholastic theologians, in the axiom: "By Adam's sin man is deprived of the supernatural gifts and wounded in his nature." (cf. ST. I II q.85 a.1)

a) Through sin our First Parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God. (De fide.)

In Holy Writ the loss of Sanctifying Grace is indicated in the exclusion of Our First Parents from intercourse with God. (cf. Gen. 3; 10, 23). God appears as a judge and announces the sentence of punishment (cf. Gen. 3; 16 et seq.). God's displeasure finally takes effect in the eternal rejection. The Fathers of the Church generally, supported by Wis. 10; 2: "She (Wisdom) brought him out of his sin", teach that Our First Parents did atonement and "through the Blood of the Lord" were saved from eternal destruction (cf. St. Augustine, De peccat. mer. et rem. 2; 34, 55).

Another consequence of the sin, was the loss of the gift of integrity. The lack of this gift, results in man's being subject to concupiscence, suffering and death. These results remain even after the extirpation of Original Sin, not as punishment, but as the so-called "poenalitates", that is, as the means given to man to achieve the practice of virtue and moral integrity. The person stained by Original Sin finds himself in the imprisonment and slavery of the devil whom Jesus calls "the prince," and St. Paul "the god of this world" (cf. 2 Cor. 4; 4 : Hebr. 2; 14 : Peter 2; 19).

b) Wounding of Nature. The wounding of nature must not be conceived, with the Protestants and Jansenists, as the complete corruption of human nature. In the condition of Original Sin man possesses the ability of knowing natural religious truths and of performing natural morally good actions. The Vatican Council teaches that man, with his natural power of cognition, can with certainty know the existence of God. The Council of Trent teaches that free will was not lost or extinguished by the fall of Adam.

The wounding of nature extends to the body as well as to the soul. The 2nd Council of Orange (529) explained: the whole man both in body and soul was changed for the worse. Dz 174. Side by side with the two wounds of the body, sensibility to suffering, and mortality, theologians, with St. Thomas (ST. I II q.85 a.3) enumerate four wounds of the soul which are opposed to the four cardinal virtues:

Our First Parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the Devil. (De fide.) Death and the evils associated with it follow from the loss of the gifts of integrity. According to Gen. 3; 16 et seq., God imposed suffering and death as a punishment for sin. The dominion of the devil is mentioned in Gen. 3; 15, and is explicitly taught in John 12; 31 : 14; 30 : 2 Cor. 4; 4 : Hebr. 2; 14 : 2 Pet. 2; 19.

Original sin is transmitted by natural generation. (De fide.) The Council of Trent says: In the baptism of children that is expurgated which they have incurred through generation. As original sin is a sin of nature, it is transmitted in the same way as human nature, through the natural act of generation. Although according to its origin, it is a single sin, that is the sin of the head of the race alone, it is multiplied over and over again through natural generation whenever a child of Adam enters existence. In each act of generation human nature is communicated in a condition deprived of grace.

The mystery of Jesus Christ is so profound, so extraordinary, that it would seem more natural to adore Him in silence than to speak of Him. For we must rightly fear that our words, like our thoughts, are vastly inadequate to express all of the riches contained in the ineffable sanctuary which Jesus Christ is.

St. Paul certainly thinks so: "Praying withal for us also, that God may open unto us a door of speech to speak the Mystery of Christ... that I may make it manifest as I ought to speak" (Col 4; 3-4).

St. Paul's descriptions of Our Lord are marvellous, and incite us to make of Jesus Christ our life: "For to me, to live, is Christ" (Phil 1; 21), and always to become more Christian: Who is the image of the invisible God, the first born of every creature; for in Him were all things created in Heaven, and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by Him, and in Him; and He is before all, and by Him all things consist" (Col 1; 15-17).

The presence of the Incarnate God in the history of humanity cannot but be its centre, as a sun, towards which everyone goes, and from which everything comes. And if one thinks and believes that this mystery of the Incarnation is for the mystery of the Redemption, then it goes without saying that without Jesus Christ, there can be no salvation possible. Every act and every thought which is not Christian is without saving value, without merit for salvation.

To try to place this mystery, we will reproduce a beautiful page of Father Pègues in his catechism of St. Thomas Aquinas, which puts us in contact with the mystery of Jesus Christ or man's path of return to God:

What do you understand by the mystery of Jesus Christ - that is, of the Word made flesh?

I understand the fact, absolutely incomprehensible for us on this earth, that the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, the Word, the only Son of God, Who being from all eternity with His Father and the Holy Ghost, the same One and Only True God, by Whom all things were created, and who governs them as Sovereign Master, came upon earth in time by His Incarnation in the bosom of the Virgin Mary of whom He was born. He lived our mortal life, preached the Gospel to the Jewish people of Palestine to whom He was personally sent by His Father, was repudiated by this people, taken and surrendered to the Roman Governor Pontius Pilate, condemned and put to death on the cross, was buried, descended into Hell, rose from the dead on the third day, ascended into Heaven forty days after, sits at the right hand of God the Father, from whence He governs His Church, established by Him on earth, to which He sent His Spirit, which is also the Spirit of the Father, sanctifying this Church by the Sacraments of His grace, thus preparing it for His Second Coming at the end of time, when He will judge the living and the dead, having made them come out of their tombs to establish the final separation of the good from the evil, that He might take the good with Him to the kingdom of His Father where He will anchor them in eternal life, and that He might chase away the wicked, accursed by Him, and condemned to the torture of everlasting fire.

This brief diagnostic and historic survey of the mystery of the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ enlightens us somewhat on the gifts and privileges of God Incarnate, and the consequences which proceed from the Incarnation for all of humanity and for every man taken individually. For all are profoundly affected by the coming of God among them and thus the future, for eternity will depend henceforward on their relationship with Jesus Christ, whether they be conscious of it or not, whether they wish it or not.

We could never meditate enough on the riches of the treasure which is Jesus Christ. "If thou didst know the gift of God," said Jesus to the Samaritan. "There hath Stood one in the midst of you," said St. John the Baptist, "whom you know not... the latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to loose." God the Father and God the Holy Ghost manifest themselves that we might discover the mystery of Jesus: "And forthwith coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit as a dove descending, and remaining on Him. And there came a voice from heaven: Thou art My beloved Son; in Thee I am well pleased;" "I saw the Spirit coming down, as a dove from heaven, and He remained upon Him. And I knew Him not; but He who sent me to baptise with water said to me: He upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining upon Him, He it is that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and I gave testimony, that this is the Son of God."

Everything which followed confirmed this judgment of St. John the Baptist. From the Annunciation of the angel to Mary on, all events concerning Him had shown this to be true.

Jesus is indeed the Emmanuel - God among us.

If this man is God, what an abundance of gifts must fill His soul and His body! God's own taking to Himself a soul and a body confers on this man unique attributes, rights, gifts, and privileges, which surpass all that we can imagine.

Let us draw near this divine sanctuary so as to better appreciate Him and adore Him more perfectly and more profoundly, so as to consecrate ourselves, with enthusiasm and without limit, in His service. How can we not feel called, like the apostles who immediately abandoned everything in order to follow Him?

Three particular graces adorn the body of Jesus, from the moment of His conception in the womb of the Virgin Mary, and from the very infusion of the soul into the body which had been prepared for Him.

The first grace, which is also the source of the other two, is unique in all of creation. By His eternal decision to unite to His Person a soul and a body, God the Word communicated to these creatures in an ineffable and mysterious manner His own divinity in all abundance, inasmuch as these creatures, by the divine will, were capable of receiving it. It is spoken of as the Hypostatic Union, which conferred upon this soul and this body a divine dignity. All of the acts of this soul and this body are consequently divine, and are justly attributed to God, Who assumes the responsibility for every activity of this soul and this body.

Necessarily, by its very nature, this grace of union conferred upon this Person, living in this human nature, some unique titles: Mediator, Saviour, Priest and King. All mediation, all priesthood, all royalty among creatures is by participation in these properties which are the natural and proper jewels of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

How, then, can we not be convinced of the sublimity of the priesthood, which is a participation in the grace of union which is proper to Our Lord? It is, by His Priesthood that Our Lord exercises His mediation, His role as Saviour; and the essential act of His Priesthood, His Sacrifice on Calvary, by which He merited for us all the graces of salvation. The Cross appears already, by this grace of union, as the sign of the immolation of His divine body and the oblation of His holy soul to His Father, a supremely efficacious prayer.

This is the essence of the heritage which He bequeathed to the Church: His eucharistic and propitiatory Sacrifice, continued on the altars by those who are chosen to share in His unique priesthood.

Would that the seminarians, priests and bishops, find the meaning of their priesthood in these few fundamental truths on the grace of union in Our Lord. Would that they might perceive for its true worth the sublimeness of the heritage which is bequeathed to them, of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which ought to be the source of their sanctification as of their apostolate. Our Lord's act of sacrifice being the act which constitutes the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the life of Christ, Priest and Victim, must be the basis of their interior life and also the basis of their mystery: the giving of Jesus to souls.

This indissoluble union of the Sacrifice and the Sacrament which the Word Incarnate in His wisdom willed, is precisely that which the Protestants reject and that which the innovators of Vatican II have practically made disappear by ecumenism!

The grace of union confers on Our Lord's body and soul a sanctifying grace which is quite unique in the world. It is so abundant that it becomes the source of all sanctifying grace, which is but the communication of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Charity of Our Lord; "of His fullness we have all received." This sanctifying grace produces in Our Lord's body and soul marvellous effects. His soul, as soon as it came into being, received the Beatific Vision. He enjoyed this vision in His soul right throughout His existence and even on the Cross. It is indeed a great mystery that His soul was at the same time inundated with the most perfect bliss and flooded with pain and sorrow!

Since He had in His soul the Beatific Vision, Our Lord could only have the theological virtue of charity, but not faith and hope, which disappear in the Beatific Vision.

It is difficult to fully appreciate the profoundness and riches of the charity of Jesus' soul. It is quite clear that this grace, which was created although of ineffable perfection, cannot be compared to the infinite source of charity from whence it proceeded, which is none other than the divine life of Jesus in the bosom of the Trinity.

This sanctifying grace, unique in its riches, filled up the soul of Jesus with the virtues, gifts, beatitudes and fruits of the Holy Ghost.

To this grace, source of the sanctity of Jesus' soul and body, were added as well all other extraordinary graces. By these latter Jesus was able to accomplish His unique role of Saviour, Sanctifier, Glorifier: graces of healing, miracles, marvels, of diversity of languages, of interpretation of speech, and especially of prophecy. Jesus being the Prophet by His divine and human nature, no other prophet was to follow Him. The apostles were not prophets, but instruments of the Prophet, to constitute by Tradition and Scripture, the deposit of the Faith, which was closed at the death of the last of the apostles. The successors of the apostles simply have to faithfully and exactly transmit the truths contained in this deposit.

The prophetic period thus gave place to the dogmatic period, during which the popes and bishops have the charge of conserving and transmitting the deposit without alteration until the end of time.

Thus appears as of capital importance the true notion of Jesus Prophet.

Jesus' body also possessed marvellous gifts of performing miracles. It should have been glorious, as a fruit of the Beatific Vision. But it is by an additional miracle that Jesus did not manifest the glory of His body, except on the day of His Transfiguration and of His Resurrection. The entire Gospel manifests the power of the body of Jesus. Even in the sepulchre, the incorruptible body of Jesus remained united to the Word, Who returned His soul to it and caused it to rise from the dead.

Jesus' grace is such a unique and abundant source of salvation that it justly carries a name which is proper to Our Lord: Gratia Capitis, the grace of the leader, or of the head. This signifies quite clearly that it is to Jesus Christ alone, to the Son of God Incarnate, that everything in the work of salvation and all that is ordered towards supernatural good must ultimately be related to and return to.

"There is no salvation outside of Our Lord." It is based on this principle of the capital grace of Our Lord that those who work to save souls must found their actions. Anything that can be done without any regard at all for Our Lord, either directly or indirectly, is vain and is in no way profitable for eternal salvation.

This must be a directing principle of all our activities. We must strive to supernaturalise everything, by prayer and charity, refusing to involve in our activities too many participants who manifest their opposition to any religious and Christian act. But it is another thing to accept those who have good dispositions, but are ignorant and can convert to Our Lord. Since everything in God's plan is ordered to the salvation of souls by Jesus Christ, and by Him alone, we are to encourage in every domain, social, political, economical, familial, those who strive to attach their actions to the law of Our Lord, both natural and supernatural. For Our Lord rules all; His law should be that of all nations, and of all men without exception.

In time, as in eternity, the reign of Satan is opposed to that of Our Lord. Satan is not the head of the wicked in the sense that he can communicate evil from within as Jesus Christ communicates good, but in this sense that, in the order of external government, he tends to turn men away from God, like Jesus Christ tends to bring them to Him, and that all those who sin imitate the rebellion of Satan and his pride, as the good imitate the submission and obedience of Jesus Christ.

We will never fully understand the struggle between the good and the wicked throughout history, as long as we do not see it as the personal and unyielding battle for all time between Satan and Jesus Christ.

What duty befalls upon every man because of this fundamental and unyielding battle between the two opposed leaders of mankind? It is the duty never to compromise, on whatever it may be, with that which is of Satan or his followers, and to enlist ourselves beneath the standard of Jesus Christ, and there to remain always and fight valiantly.

Let us not forget that every grace, that every increase of grace, the blessings of sanctifying grace coming to us through the hands of the priest and the Catholic Church, comes to us from the inexhaustible source of the grace of Jesus, and can only come from Him, our only Saviour.

This reality of Jesus' divine life circulating in our souls and our bodies should be for us a subject of continual thanksgiving and also a source of active vigilance so that we don't let our lamps go out like those of the foolish virgins.

Let us meditate and contemplate the transpierced Heart of Jesus, whence come the fountains of eternal life.

The ornamentation of this sanctuary which Jesus is, is not limited to these three graces about which we have spoken. The union of the person of the Word to the human soul of Jesus confers on this soul the unique privilege of the Beatific Vision from the instant of His creation.

Certainly, Jesus-God has no need of this knowledge. His divine knowledge infinitely surpases the knowledge of the Beatific Vision, but nevertheless the Creator of all things, having wanted to personally assume a human soul and body, assumed also their faculties of knowledge and understanding and carried them to their greatest possible perfection.

It was thus that the soul of Jesus possessed the Beatific Vision, the infused knowledge of the angels, and experimental knowledge of men and this, to the most perfect degree which can be given to all angelic creature and a human creature.

Thus from the very first instant, the Incarnate Son of God could see by His human nature everything and all things in the Divine Word that He was Himself, in such a way that there is nothing whatsoever in the present, past or future, whether actions, words or thoughts, with respect to whomever and of whatever time period, that the Incarnate Son of God did not know from the first instant of His Incarnation, by the human nature that He hypostatically united to Himself, in the Divine Word that He was.

These divine realities in Jesus Christ clarify His intimate and personal relations with all the created spirits in Heaven and on earth. Even in His human soul, Jesus knew us all, and in all the details of our lives. Nothing escapes Him, neither as Creator nor as Saviour. And this knowledge gives rise to a boundless love for the souls who turn towards Him, who give themselves to Him, who accomplish His will. His soul ardently desires to communicate His glory to them. That is why Jesus will be the judge of all souls.

Let us be aware of these realities, of the absolute necessity of offering ourselves to Jesus, as the prayers at the Offertory of the Mass say, and of living this offering unceasingly. Let us be a part of the: "as many as received Him," in order to be His children: "He gave them power to be made sons of God." These words weigh heavily in the history of souls. They are eternally powerful and will separate the just from the unjust.

Jesus is not optional. "He who is not with Me is against Me." To deny this is the fundamental error of religious liberty and ecumenism.

The consequences of the union of the Word of God, of God Himself, with a human soul and body (over and above those of which we have just spoken in the last few pages), are such that they truly make of this human creature a subject unique in His kind, more divine than human, and more spiritual than corporal. Our Lord's entire life proves it. He lives more in Heaven than on earth, for He is Heaven. His Person has total power over His soul and body, even to separate and reunite them as He wishes and when He may so wish.

His glory, His power, His sanctity, His wisdom, the permanence of the eternal mission which comes from His Father, in the exact realisation of His temporal mission of salvation, all these shine forth in His life, in His acts and in His words.

That is what St. Thomas discloses in detail in studying every step of Jesus' life and His mysteries up to the Ascension. (ST. III q.1 - 59)

This meditation on the life of Jesus in all its details, puts us little by little in an atmosphere of supernatural reality, and delivers us from the customary way in which men live, so deceived as to take no account of this great reality. Sin, and the results of sin, have succeeded in creating a world of mirages, illusions and errors. This has developed to such an extent that men finish up by becoming accustomed to this world, sensitised, sensualised, humanized, no longer being able to see that all this is vain and ephemeral in relation to the true spiritual and supernatural life, in relation to eternal life.

The holy and admirable life of Jesus is a constant reminder of the spiritual and divine realities which are alone valuable and alone eternal. Everything in Jesus returns to God, to the truth, to reality, to wisdom and to sanctity.

Would that we might always be more convinced of the necessity of following Jesus, as He asks of His disciples: "He who follows Me does not walk in darkness. If someone wishes to be My disciple, let him carry his cross and follow Me." For there is no other choice: either follow Jesus or rejoin Satan.

It is not at all surprising if Jesus suffers to see men prefer the darkness to the Light, and what Light! It is the Light which created the world, which supports it in existence, which enlightens every man who comes into this world, which brings to them the Light of salvation and of eternal glory. But they prefer the darkness of the world, of this world which is against Our Lord, of this world of the flesh, of money, of egoism, of pride, the threshold to Hell!

Let us fix our minds on His redeeming work of salvation and on meditating on the means instituted by Jesus to communicate anew the grace of salvation, let us strive to mark indelibly in our spirits the real, living image of Jesus, Who should illuminate and direct all of our lives.

Her is the perspective of Fr. Pègues in his catechism:

Yes! When one says Jesus Christ, one indicates the only Son of God, Who, being from all eternity with His Father and the Holy Ghost the same, one and only True God, by Whom all things were created and Who sustains them, and governs them as Sovereign Master, took our human nature on Himself in time, by reason of which He is truly man like us, but yet continues to be with the Father and the Holy Ghost, the same God that He is from all eternity. Consequently He has in His human nature, and is assured of having inasmuch as He is a man like us, privileges of grace in a certain way infinite. First of all shines His quality as Saviour of mankind, which constitutes Him, as man, unique Mediator between God and men, Sovereign Priest, Supreme King, Prophet without equal, and, Leader and Head of all the assembly of the elect, angels and men, all forming His true Mystical Body.

Man is a mysterious being, composed of body and soul, of matter and spirit, intimately united to form one nature and one person. It has been said of him that he is a little universe or microcosm, a synthesis of all creation. He has existence, as do inanimate things; he is nourished, reproduces and grows, as do plants; he knows sensible objects and is moved toward them by the sense appetite or passions and has locomotion, as do animals; and, like the angels, but in a much lower degree, he can know the immaterial under the aspect of truth and his will can be drawn to the rational good. The mechanism and function of all these vital powers, in the triple order of vegetative, sensitive and rational, constitute the natural life of man. These three manifestations of his natural life are not superimposed one on the other by a kind of juxtaposition, but they compenetrate each other, are coordinated and mutually complement one another to lead to the one end or goal of the natural perfection of the whole man.

There is, however, nothing in man's nature which postulates or exacts, either proximately or remotely, the supernatural order. The elevation to this order is a totally gratuitous favor of God which infinitely transcends all the exigencies of nature. (cf. Dz. 1001 - 1007) Nevertheless, as we have seen, there is a close analogy between the natural and the supernatural orders, for grace does not destroy nature but perfects and elevates it. The supernatural order constitutes a true life for man and has an organism which is similar to the natural vital organism. As in the natural order we can distinguish four basic or fundamental elements in human life, so also we find similar elements in man's supernatural organism:

We have here in outline or summary the elements which we shall consider in the succeeding chapters.

The human soul is a spiritual substance which is independent of matter in its being and its operations, although while it is in the body it makes use of bodily powers for the exercise of certain functions. But the soul is not a complete substance, nor can the soul alone properly be called a person. The ego or the person is not the body alone nor the soul alone, but the composite which results from the substantial union of the two.

We know from reason and from sound philosophy and also from the teaching of the Church (cf. Coucil of Vienne, Dz 481) that the soul is the substantial form of the body. By reason of this substantial informing of the body by the soul, man has the being of man, of animal, of living, of body, of substance, and the very fact of existence. Consequently, the soul gives to man his essential grade of perfection and communicates to the body the same act of being by which the soul itself exists. But the soul is not immediately operative. As a substance, it is given to us in the order of being, but not in the order of action or operation. Like every created substance, it needs faculties or powers for operation, and in the case of the human soul these powers are the intellect and the will, which emanate from the essence of the soul, although they are really distinct from the soul and from each other. Such is the subject in which our supernatural life resides. Grace, which is the formal principle of that supernatural life, is rooted in the very essence of the soul in a static manner. The virtues and gifts, which are the dynamic elements in the supernatural organism, reside in the human faculties or powers precisely to elevate them to the supernatural order. We have said that sanctifying grace is the formal principle of our supernatural organism, as the spiritual soul is the formal principle of our natural vital organism. As an accidental participation in the very nature of God, grace elevates us to the status of children of God and heirs of heaven. "We are sons of God," exclaims St. Paul. "But if we are sons, we are heirs also: heirs indeed of God and joint heirs with Christ" (Rom. 8; 16 - 17). And in his famous sermon before the Areopagus he insists that we are of the race of God: "We are the offspring of God" (Acts 17; 29). This same expression is echoed by St. Thomas when he comments on the words of St. John, ex Deo nati sunt: "This generation, since it is of God, makes us sons of God."

Sanctifying grace can be defined:

Let us examine more closely the elements of this definition. A quality is an accident which modifies or disposes a substance. Four species of quality are usually distinguished:

1) If a substance is well or poorly disposed in regard to itself, we have the qualities of habit and disposition;

2) if the substance is disposed for action or operation, we have the qualities of potency and impotency;

3) if the substance is disposed to receptivity, we have the qualities of passion and passible quality;

4) and if the substance is disposed to quantity, we have the qualities of form and figure.

It should be evident at once that sanctifying grace cannot pertain to any of the last three species of quality, for grace is not ordained directly to operation, as are potency and impotency, nor is it a bodily accident, as are passion, passible quality, form and figure. By elimination, therefore, sanctifying grace must pertain to the first species of quality, and within that species it pertains to habit and not to simple disposition, since it is a quality that of itself is permanent and difficult to remove.

Grace is clearly supernatural, as the formal principle of our supernatural life; it is that which elevates us and constitutes us in this order. As supernatural, it far excels all natural things, transcending all nature and making us enter into the sphere of the divine and uncreated. St. Thomas has said that the minimum degree of sanctifying grace in one individual is greater than the natural good of the entire universe (cf. ST. I II q.113 a.9 ad.3). That grace inheres in the soul is denied by those Protestants who hold for extrinsic justification, but it is a truth of faith defined by the Council of Trent (cf. Dz 821). St. Thomas bases the distinction between human love and divine love on the theological principle: "The love of God infuses and creates goodness in things." In us, love is born of the good object, real or apparent; but God creates goodness in an object by the mere fact of loving it. And since love finds complaisance in that which is similar to itself, the grace by which God loves us with the love of a friend elevates us in a certain manner to His level and deifies us, so to speak, by means of a formal participation in the divine nature. "It is necessary that God alone deify by communicating His divine nature through a certain participation of likeness" (cf. I II q.112 a.1) Briefly, God loves with an absolutely supernatural love the man who is pleasing to Him, but since the love of God is the cause of that which He loves, it follows that He must produce in the man who is pleasing to Himself the reason for that supernatural goodness, namely, grace (cf. I II q.110 a.1).

Participation is nothing other than the assimilation and inadequate expression in an inferior thing of some perfection existing in a superior thing. St. Thomas says in this regard that that which is totally a determined thing does not participate in that thing but is identified with it; that which is not totally a thing, but has something of that thing, is properly said to participate in it.

Participation may be moral or physical. Physical participation is divided into virtual and formal, and formal participation may be univocal or analogous. The following examples should clarify the meaning of this division. The members of a corporation or association participate morally in its good or evil reputation; the moon participates physically in the light of the sun; flowers and fruits are virtually contained in the tree that will produce them and even in the seed from which the tree grows; animality is participated formally by men and brutes. If the physical participation refers to subjects that participate in the same thing and in the same way, as humanity is predicated of all men in the same sense, we have univocal participation; but if the participation refers to subjects in a different manner or proportionally, as being is predicated of God, the angels, men, animals, plants and inanimate things, we have an analogous participation.

Bearing in mind the foregoing distinctions, we may say that sanctifying grace gives us a physical, formal, analogous and accidental participation in the divine nature. That it makes us participants in the divine nature is a truth constantly repeated in Sacred Scripture. St. Peter says, for example: "He has granted us the very great and precious promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature" (2 Pet. 1; 4). The liturgy also proclaims this fact when it sings in the Preface for the feast of the Ascension: "He ascended to heaven to make us participants in His divinity." And how persuasively St. Leo speaks of this truth when he says: "Recognize your dignity, O Christian, and having been made a participant of the divine nature, do not desire to return to the baseness of your former condition" (cf. ML 54; 192).

But it is necessary to examine the manner in which sanctifying grace confers a participation in the divine nature. God is not like creatures, for He and He alone is being by His very essence, while all creatures are being by participation. Nevertheless, creatures are in some way similar to God, because as every agent produces something similar to itself, it is necessary that there be some likeness of the agent in the effect which it produces. But it cannot be said that creatures are like God by reason of a communication of form according to genus and species, but only according to a certain analogy, because God is being by essence, while creatures are being by participation. Hence there are three classes of creatures which imitate God analogically and are like Him in some respect:

But in order to be perfect, does the image of God as author of the supernatural order require a physical and formal participation in the very nature of God? Undoubtedly yes. Apart from the fact that this is a truth which is verified in revelation, there are theological arguments to support it.

First, the operations proper to a superior nature cannot become connatural to a lower or inferior nature unless the latter participates in some way in the former, because as a thing is, so it acts, and its effects cannot be greater than the cause. But some of the operations proper to God; such as the beatific vision, beatific love, etc.; are in some way connatural to man through grace. Therefore, it is evident that man, through grace, in some way participates physically and formally in the very nature of God.

Second, from grace springs an inclination to God as He is in Himself. Now every inclination is rooted in some nature and reveals the condition of that nature. But an inclination to the divine order cannot be rooted in a nature of an inferior order; it must be rooted in a nature which is divine, at least by participation. Moreover, this participation must be physical and formal, since the inclination proceeds physically and formally from that participation.

Third, the infused virtues are the faculties of supernatural operations in us, but it is evident that, since operation follows being, a supernatural operation which proceeds from the soul presupposes in the soul the presence of a supernatural nature, and this can be nothing other than a physical and formal participation in the nature of God Himself.

It now remains for us to examine in what sense this physical and formal participation of the divine nature is accidental and analogous. Analogous participation signifies that the divine nature is not communicated to us univocally, as the Father transmits it to His Son by way of the natural eternal generation or as the humanity of Christ subsists in the divinity. Man does not become God through grace, neither by natural generation nor by the hypostatic or personal union nor by any pantheistic union of our substance with the divine substance, but by an analogous participation in virtue of which that which exists in God in an infinite manner is participated by the soul in a limited and finite manner. The iron cast into the furnace retains the nature of iron and merely takes on the properties of fire; the mirror which captures the image of the sun does not acquire the nature of the sun but merely reflects its splendour. In like manner, says St. Leo, "the original dignity of our race lies in the fact that the divine goodness shines in us as in a resplendent mirror."(c. ML. 54; 168). The reason for the accidental participation of the divine nature through grace is clearly explained by St. Thomas: "Every substance constitutes either the nature of the thing of which it is the substance or it is a part of the nature, as matter and form are called substance. And because grace is above all nature, it cannot be a substance or a substantial form, but it is an accidental form of the soul. Hence what is substantially in God becomes accidental in the soul which participates in the divine goodness" (c. ST. I II q.110 a.2 ad.2). Moreover, the Council of Trent expressly teaches that habitual grace inheres in the soul of man. But that which inheres in another is not a substance but an accident, as we learn in philosophy. Nor does this in any way lessen the dignity of grace, for, as a supernatural accident, by its very essence it infinitely transcends all created or creatable natural substances. Let us not forget the words of St. Thomas to the effect that the good of grace in one individual surpasses the good of nature in the entire universe (c. I II q. 113 a. ad.2).

The principal arguments for this are as follows:

a) Grace is the connatural principle of the operations which reach God Himself under the formal aspect of deity. Therefore, grace, as the principle of these operations, must necessarily participate in the divine nature precisely as divine, that is, under the formal aspect of deity.

The antecedent of this argument is undeniable; all supernatural love and knowledge have God Himself as their object under the aspect of His deity. Such is the case with faith, charity, the beatific vision; they are fixed directly on God as He is in Himself, whether it be through the veil of faith or in the clear light of the facial vision. The consequence is a necessary conclusion from the fact that grace is the root principle of the theological virtues.

b) The supernatural participation could not otherwise be distinguished from a merely natural participation. The natural participation in the divine nature is also a formal participation, because man, as an image of God, understands, loves, etc., and is intellectual by nature as is God. Therefore, the divine, formally as such, must be the differential note between the natural and the supernatural.

c) In order to transcend all nature and constitute the supernatural, the supernatural form which is grace must be either God Himself or something which touches God under the formal aspect of His deity, for this alone transcends all nature. But grace is not God Himself, as is evident, and hence it must necessarily be something which touches God precisely under the formality of His deity. In other words, it is a participation of the divine nature precisely as divine.

These arguments seem to us to be entirely conclusive. Of course, one should not think that through grace we participate in the divine nature in such a way that it is communicated to us in the same way it is communicated to the second Person of the Blessed Trinity by the Father, or as the humanity of Christ subsists in the divinity through the hypostatic union with the Word. Nor is the participation through grace to be understood in a pantheistic sense, for we are referring to a participation that is accidental and analogous. St. Thomas says that "grace is nothing other than a certain participated likeness of the divine nature" (c. ST. III q.62 a.1). In this way there is produced in the soul a special likeness to God which infinitely transcends that which it had in the purely natural order as an image of the God of nature. By reason of this intimate likeness to the divine nature as divine, man becomes an offspring, as it were, of God. He becomes God's son by adoption and forms a part of the family of God. Such is the sublime grandeur to which we are elevated by grace.

This question must be resolved in view of another question concerning the distinction between grace and charity. The theologians who deny the distinction between grace and charity state that grace resides in the will as in its proper subject. Those who affirm the real distinction between grace and charity place charity in the will and sanctifying grace in the very essence of the soul.

The following arguments are offered in proof of the second opinion.

a) The regeneration of man is effected by sanctifying grace. But regeneration primarily affects the essence of the soul rather than the faculties, because the generative action terminates in the essence. Therefore, grace resides in the essence of the soul.

b) Spiritual accidents which pertain to being inhere in the substance of the soul, while those which pertain to operation inhere in the faculties. But sanctifying grace confers on the soul a supernatural being, while charity is ordained to operation. Therefore, sanctifying grace should inhere in the very essence of the soul, and charity in one of the faculties, namely, the will.

c) "Every perfection of the faculties of the soul has the nature of a virtue." But sanctifying grace does not have the nature of a virtue nor is it ordained by its nature to operation. Therefore, sanctifying grace is not a perfection of the faculties of the soul but of the very essence of the soul. For this reason theologians speak of sanctifying grace as a static perfection and of the virtues as dynamic perfections in the spiritual life.

Having examined the nature of sanctifying grace and the subject in which it inheres, it remains for us to discuss the effects of grace in the soul of the just. The first effect of sanctifying grace is to give us that participation in the divine nature of which we have already spoken. This is the root and foundation of all the other effects which flow from sanctifying grace. Among the other effects, the following three hold a place of pre-eminence which are mentioned by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans: "Now you have not received a spirit of bondage so as to be again in fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons, by virtue of which we cry: Abba! Father! The Spirit himself gives testimony to our spirit that we are the sons of God. But if we are sons, we are also: heirs indeed of God and joint heirs with Christ" (Rom. 8; 15 - 17). Fortified by this sublime passage, let us examine the three principal effects produced by sanctifying grace.

To be a father, it is necessary to transmit to another being one's specific nature. The artist who makes a statue is not the father of the work but only the author. On the other hand, the "author of our days" is truly our natural father because he truly transmits to us, by way of generation, his own human nature.

Is it a natural filiation of God which is communicated to us by sanctifying grace? By no means. God the Father has only one Son according to nature: the eternal Word. Only to Him is there transmitted eternally, by an ineffable intellectual generation, the divine nature in all its plenitude. By virtue of this natural generation the second Person of the Blessed Trinity possesses the selfsame divine essence of the Father and is God as fully as the Father is God. Therefore, Christ, whose human nature is hypostatically united with the Person of the Word, is not the adopted son of God, but the natural Son in all the rigor of the word. (cf. these notes pgs. 16 - 19)

Our divine filiation through grace is of a different kind. It is not a question of a natural filiation but of an adoptive filiation. But it is necessary to understand this truth correctly in order not to form a deficient concept of this great dignity. Adoption is the gratuitous admission of a stranger into a family. He is henceforth considered as a son and is given a right to inheritance of the family goods. Human adoption has three requisites:

Now sanctifying grace confers on us a divine adoption which not only fulfills all these conditions but goes far beyond them. Purely human or legal adoption is ultimately reduced to a legal fiction, entirely extrinsic to the nature of the one adopted. It confers on the one adopted, before human society, the rights of a son, but without infusing in the adopted the blood of the family, and hence without causing any intrinsic change in the nature and personality of the adopted son. On the other hand, on adopting us as His sons, the one and triune God infuses sanctifying grace in us, which gives us a mysterious real and formal participation in the divine nature itself. It is an intrinsic adoption which places in our souls, physically and formally, a divine reality which makes the blood of God circulate in our souls. (We speak metaphorically to capture a sublime truth.) In virtue of this divine infusion, the soul shares in the very life of God. It is a true generation, a spiritual birth, in imitation of natural generation, and it reflects, analogically, the eternal generation of the Word of God. As St. John says explicitly, sanctifying grace not only gives us the right to be called sons of God, but it makes us such in reality: "Behold with what manner of love the Father has bestowed upon us, that we should be called children of God; and such we are" (1 John 3; 1).

This is an inevitable consequence of our divine adoptive filiation. St. Paul says expressly: "If we are sons, we are heirs also" (Rom. 8; 17). How greatly this adoption through grace differs from legal and human adoption! Among men the sons inherit only at the death of the father, and the inheritance is less as the sons are more numerous. But our Father will live for all eternity, and we shall possess with Him an inheritance which, in spite of the number of inheritors, will never diminish or lessen. For this inheritance is basically infinite. It is God Himself, one in essence and three in persons, the principal object of our inheritance as adopted sons. "I am your shield; your reward shall be very great;" God said to Abraham (Gen. 15; 1), and He says the same to every soul in grace.

The beatific vision and the enjoyment of God which accompanies it are the principal part of the heritage which belongs, through grace, to the adopted sons of God. There will be communicated to them in addition all the riches of divinity, all that constitutes the happiness of God Himself, a joy without end. Lastly, God will place at our disposition all extrinsic goods, such as His honor, His glory, His dominions. This will cause the soul ineffable happiness, which will completely satisfy all its aspirations and longings. And the soul will receive all these benefits and gifts under the title of justice. Grace is entirely gratuitous; but, once possessed, it gives us the capacity to merit heaven under the title of justice. For the operation of a being follows its essence or nature, and the value of a work comes primarily from the dignity of the person who performs the work. And since grace is a divine form which inheres in the soul of the just, any supernatural action of which grace is the root and principle bespeaks an intrinsic relation to glory and carries with it a title to the same. Grace and glory are situated on the same plane and they are substantially the same life. There is between them only a difference of grade or degree. It is the same life in its initial or terminal stage. The child does not differ specifically from the mature man; he is an adult in potency. The same thing is true of grace and glory, and thus St. Thomas states that "grace is nothing other than the beginning of glory in us" (c. St. II II q.24 a.3 ad.2)

This relation derives immediately from the two that have already been mentioned. The reason, as St. Augustine points out, is that he who says "our Father" to the Father of Christ, what shall he say to Christ but brother? (cf. M.L. 35; 1565) By the very fact that sanctifying grace communicates to us a participation in the divine life which Christ possesses in all its plenitude, it necessarily follows that we become His brothers. He desired to be our brother according to His humanity, in order to make us His brothers according to His divinity, "that He might give us a share in His divinity." (cf. Preface of the Ascension) St. Paul states that God has predestined us "to become conformed to the image of his Son that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Rom. 8; 29). It is evident that we are not brothers of Christ in nature, nor are we sons of God by the same form that He is such. Christ is the firstborn among many brothers and also the only-begotten of the Father. In the order of nature He is the only Son; but in the order of grace and adoption He is our elder brother, as well as our Head and the cause of our salvation.

For this reason, the Father deigns to look upon us as if we were one with the Son. He loves us as He loves His Son; He looks on Christ as our brother and confers on us the title to the same heritage. We are co-heirs with Christ. He has the natural right to the divine heritage, since He is the Son who was constituted heir of all, for which reason He made the world. (cf. Heb. 1; 2) For that reason "it became him for whom are all things and through whom are all things, who had brought many sons into glory, to perfect through sufferings the author of their salvation. For both he who sanctifies and they who are sanctified are all from one. For which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying: `I will declare thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the Church I will praise thee' " (Heb. 2; 10 - 12). Therefore, the brothers of Christ must share with Him the love and heritage of the heavenly Father. God has modeled us on Christ; with Christ, we are sons of the same Father who is in heaven. All this will be effected by realizing the supreme desire of Christ: that we be one with Him as He Himself is one with the Father. (cf. John 17; 21 - 24)

The foregoing are the three principal effects of grace, but they are not the only effects. The others are as follows:

The physical and formal participation in the very nature of God, which constitutes the essence of sanctifying grace, infinitely transcends the being and exigencies of every created nature, human or angelic. By it, man is elevated not only above the human plane but even above the angelic nature. He enters into the plane of the divine, is made a member of the family of God, and begins to live in a divine manner. Grace, consequently, has communicated to him a new type of life, infinitely superior to that of nature; it is a supernatural life.

As a physical participation in the divine nature, grace necessarily gives us a sharing in the divine justice and sanctity, since all the attributes of God are really identified with His own essence. Therefore, sanctifying grace is absolutely incompatible with mortal sin, which presupposes the privation of that justice and sanctity. Hence grace makes us just and pleasing to God, as He contemplates in us an irradiation of His divine beauty and a reflection of His own sanctity. The Council of Trent teaches this when it states that the justification of the sinner through sanctifying grace "is not merely the remission of sins but also the sanctification and interior renovation of man by the voluntary reception of grace and the gifts, by which man is changed from unjust to just and from an enemy into a friend." A little farther on, the Council adds that the unique formal cause of that justification is "the justice of God, not that which makes Him just, but that which makes us just; or rather, that which given by Him, renews us interiorly and makes us not only to be reputed as just but that we should be called such and should be such in very truth." (c. Dz. 799)

Without sanctifying grace, the most heroic natural works would have absolutely no value toward eternal life. A man who lacks grace is a corpse in the supernatural order, and the dead can merit nothing. Supernatural merit radically presupposes the possession of the supernatural life. This principle is of the greatest importance in practical life. How much suffering and pain, which could have extraordinary value in the eternal life, are completely sterile and useless because the soul lacks sanctifying grace? While a man is in mortal sin, he is radically incapacitated for meriting anything at all in the supernatural order.

United as we are with God in the natural order through His divine conserving power, which makes Him truly present to all creatures by His essence, presence and power, sanctifying grace increases this union to an ineffable degree and transforms and elevates it to an infinitely higher type of union. By reason of this new union, God is really present in the just soul as a friend, and not merely as creator and conserver, establishing a mutual exchange of love and friendship between the soul and God, and a kind of mutual transfusion of life. "God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him" (1 John 4; 16). A more intimate union with God cannot be imagined, apart from the personal or hypostatic union which is proper and exclusive to Christ. The ultimate grades of development which grace can attain in this life and even the indissoluble union proceeding from the beatific vision in heaven are not substantially different from the union which is established between God and a soul that has been justified by grace even in its minimum degree. There is a difference of degree among these types of union, but they are all of the same substantial order.

This is a consequence of what we have just said, and Christ Himself revealed this truth to us when He said: "If anyone love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and will make our abode with him" (John 14; 23). It is the uncreated reality, rigorously infinite, which sanctifying grace brings with it.

Actual graces may be defined as those which dispose or move in a transient manner for doing or receiving something in regard to eternal life. Ordained by their nature to the infused habits, they serve to dispose the soul to receive those infused habits when it does not yet possess them or to put them into operation when it already possesses them. Actual graces are received into the faculties of the soul, sometimes elevating them so that they can produce indeliberate supernatural acts; as happens with operating grace (gratia operans); and at other times to produce them in a deliberate manner (cooperating grace; gratia co-operans).

Actual graces cannot be reduced to any determined species since they are transitory qualities communicated by God and impressed on the faculties of the soul after the manner of transient movements or passions. Each actual grace is reduced to the species of habit or act which it moves, for example, to faith, hope, etc. From these general notions we can readily discern the differences between actual and habitual grace:

Actual graces are absolutely necessary in the dynamic supernatural order.

1) It is impossible for a purely natural impulse to put the infused habits into operation, since the natural order cannot determine the operations of the supernatural order.

2) Nor is it possible that the supernatural powers actuate themselves, because a habit can be actuated only by the power and action of the agent which caused it; and, in regard to the infused supernatural habits, only God, who produced them, can put them in motion. The action of God in this respect is as necessary as is the influence of a being already in act to reduce a potency to act. Absolutely speaking, God could develop and perfect sanctifying grace, which is infused into the essence of our soul, simply and solely through actual graces, without infusing any supernatural operative habits into the faculties. But this would be a kind of violence. On the other hand, God could not develop sanctifying grace without using the actual graces, although He has given us the infused supernatural habits, since those habits could not be reduced to act without the previous divine motion, which in the supernatural order is nothing other than an actual grace. Every act of an infused virtue and every operation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost presupposes a previous actual grace which has set that virtue or gift in motion, although not every actual grace infallibly produces an act of virtue (e.g., a sufficient grace rejected by a sinner).

The actual grace is nothing other than the divine influence which has moved the infused habit to its operation.

Theologians through the centuries have drawn up lengthy lists of distinctions between the various actual graces. We list only the principal ones.

Gratia excitans impels us to act when we are dormant or static;

Gratia adjuvans assists or aids us in the act once we are moved to perform it.

Prevenient grace precedes the act of man by disposing or moving the will;

Concomitant grace accompanies the act by concurring with man in producing the effect;

Consequent grace bespeaks a relation to some anterior effect produced by some other grace.

Internal grace intrinsically aids the faculty and concurs formally in the production of the act;

Sufficient grace impels us to work;

As can be seen, these divisions of actual grace can easily be reduced to operating and cooperating grace. The gratia excitans and gratia preveniens are really operating graces; gratia adjuvans and gratia subsequens are cooperating graces; and sufficient grace and efficacious grace will be either an operating or a cooperating grace, depending on the particular situation in which they are given. But all these graces are transitory qualities which move the faculties of the soul to supernatural acts, either deliberate or indeliberate.

Actual graces have three functions:

a) to dispose the soul for the reception of the infused habits of sanctifying grace and the virtues;

b) to actuate these infused habits, and;

c) to prevent their loss.

A word on each function:

We say that actual grace disposes the soul for the reception of the infused habits either when the soul has never possessed them or when the soul has lost them through mortal sin. In the latter case actual grace carries with it a repentance for one's sins, the fear of punishment, confidence in the divine mercy, etc. Actual grace also serves to actuate the infused habits when they are already possessed, together with sanctifying grace (or without it, as in the case of unformed faith and hope). This actuation, presupposing the possession of sanctifying grace, carries with it the perfecting of the infused virtues and, consequently, the increase and growth of the supernatural life.

The third function of actual grace is to prevent the loss of the infused habits through mortal sin. It implies a strengthening in the face of temptations, an awareness of special dangers, mortification of the passions, inspiration through good thoughts and holy desires, etc.

It is evident, therefore, that actual grace is a priceless treasure. It gives efficacy to sanctifying grace and the infused virtues and gifts. It is the impulse of God which places our supernatural organism in operation and prevents us from forgetting that our soul, in the state of grace, is the temple of the Blessed Trinity.

There is a perfect analogy between man's natural organism and his supernatural organism. Man's soul is not immediately operative by its proper essence but operates through its faculties or powers of intellect and will, which emanate from the soul as from their proper root. The same thing occurs in regard to the supernatural organism. Sanctifying grace, which is at the very foundation of the supernatural organism, is not immediately operative. It is not a dynamic but a static element, for it is not a perfection in the order of operation but in the order of being. The reason is that, although grace itself is an accident and not a substance, it nevertheless acts as a substance in the supernatural order and, like all substances, it requires faculties or powers in order to operate. These faculties or powers are infused by God in the soul together with grace itself, from which they are inseparable. Some of these supernatural powers are nothing other than the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost.

The existence and necessity of the infused virtues follows from the very nature of sanctifying grace. Grace is a divine seed which by its nature seeks growth and development until it reaches full perfection. But since sanctifying grace itself is not immediately operative, it follows that grace demands and postulates certain immediate principles of operation which flow from grace itself and are inseparable from it. If this were not the case, man would be elevated to the supernatural order only as regards his soul but not as regards his operative powers. And although, absolutely speaking, God could elevate our faculties to the supernatural order by means of continual actual graces, this would produce a violence in the human psychological structure by reason of the tremendous disproportion between the purely natural faculty and the supernatural act to be effected. And such violence could not be reconciled with the customary suavity of Divine Providence, which moves all things according to their natures. From this we deduce the necessity of certain supernatural operative principles so that man can tend to his supernatural end in a manner that is perfectly connatural and without violence. As St. Thomas points out:

"Operative habits" is the generic element of the definition, common to all natural and supernatural virtues (cf. ST. I II q.55). From the psychological point of view, an operative habit is a quality, difficult to remove, which disposes the subject to function with facility, promptness and delight. It gives the subject facility for operation because every habit is an increase of energy in relation to its corresponding action; it gives promptness because it constitutes, so to speak, a second nature in virtue of which the subject quickly gives himself to action; and it causes delight in the operation because it produces an act which is prompt, facile and connatural.

"Infused by God" is a radical difference between the infused and acquired virtues. (cf. ST. I II q. 63 a.4 se contra). The natural or acquired virtues are engendered in man by means of repeated acts. The only cause of the supernatural or infused virtues is the divine infusion; hence their name, "infused virtues." And we say that they are infused by God into the faculties of the soul because we are speaking of operative habits that are immediately ordained to action. Their purpose is to supernaturalize the faculties by elevating them to the order of grace and making them capable of performing supernatural acts. Without them, or without the actual grace which supplies for them (as in the case of the sinner before justification), it would be impossible for man to perform an act of supernatural virtue, as it is impossible for an animal to perform an act of intelligence. Here again is evident the close similarity and analogy between the natural organism and the supernatural organism. As St. Thomas says: "As from the essence of the soul flow its powers, which are the principles of deeds, so likewise the virtues, whereby the powers are moved to act, flow into the powers of the soul from grace" (cf. ST. I II q.110 a.4 ad.1).

The motive. The principal element of specific differentiation between the acquired and the infused virtues is that by reason of the formal object the infused virtues dispose the faculties to follow the dictate or command, not of simple reason, as do the acquired virtues, but of reason illumined by faith. The motives of operation for the acquired virtues are simply and solely natural motives; the motives for the operation of the infused virtues are strictly supernatural motives. Hence the great abyss that separates the one from the other set of virtues by reason of the formal object, which is the most characteristic element of the specific difference in the definition.

But how are the infused virtues united with the natural faculties or powers to constitute with them one principle of operation? To answer this question it is necessary to bear in mind that the infused virtues are meant to perfect the natural faculties or powers by elevating them to the supernatural order. Consequently, the supernatural virtuous act will proceed from the union of the natural faculty with the supernatural virtue which perfects it. As a vital act, it has its radical power in the natural faculty, which the infused virtue essentially completes by giving it the power for a supernatural act. Hence every supernatural act springs from the natural faculty or power precisely as informed with the supernatural virtue, or from the natural faculty which has been raised to the supernatural order. The radical power, for example, is the intellect or will; the formal proximate principle of action is the corresponding infused virtue.

The teaching of St. Thomas is that the infused moral virtues are essentially distinct, by reason of their formal object, from the acquired moral virtues. These latter virtues, however heroic and perfect, could grow indefinitely and never attain the formal object of the infused virtues. There is an infinite difference between temperance according to Aristotle, regulated by right reason alone, and Christian temperance, which is regulated by reason enlightened by faith and by supernatural prudence. The magnificent article on this point in the Summa theologiae manifests the lofty idea which St. Thomas has of the infused virtues as compared with the acquired virtues. (q.63 a.4)

The infused virtues are inspired and regulated by the teaching of faith concerning the consequences of original sin and our personal sins, the infinite grandeur of our supernatural end, the necessity of loving God more than self, the need to imitate Christ, which leads us to self-abnegation and renunciation. None of this is attained by pure reason, even by a Socrates, an Aristotle or a Plato. With good reason does St. Thomas say that the specific difference between the acquired and infused virtues is evident by reason of their formal objects:

Nor does it change matters to object that habits are known by their acts and the act of infused temperance is identical with that of acquired temperance (namely, the moderation or control of the pleasures of touch) and that therefore there is no specific difference between them. St. Thomas answers this objection by conceding the identity of the material object but insisting on the specific and radical difference by reason of the formal object: "Both acquired and infused temperance moderate desires for pleasures of touch, but for different reasons as stated: wherefore their respective acts are not identical." Therefore, according to the teaching of St. Thomas, the infused virtues differ from the acquired virtues, not only by reason of their entitative elevation, but also by reason of their formal object, which makes them substantially superior to the acquired virtues.

Let us now see into what category we are to place the infused virtues. Are they potencies or habits? Properly speaking, the infused virtues do not fit exactly into either category, although they are more habits than they are potencies. They have something of a potency so far as they give a power in the dynamic supernatural order, but they are not potencies strictly and formally speaking. And this for various reasons:

Hence the infused virtues belong more to the category of habits than to potencies. But the infused virtues also lack something of the perfect definition of habits, since they do not give complete facility in operation, which is characteristic of true habits. They confer, it is true, an intrinsic inclination, ease and promptness for good, but they do not give an extrinsic facility because they do not remove all the obstacles to good, as is evident in the case of the converted sinner who experiences great difficulty in the performance of good because of his past acquired vices, in spite of the fact that he has received, together with sanctifying grace, all the infused virtues. St. Thomas distinguishes very clearly between the facility which proceeds from custom and that which proceeds from the strong inhesion regarding the object of virtue. The first is not conferred by the infused virtues from the first instant of their infusion into the soul, but they do confer the second.

"Facility in performing the acts of virtue can proceed from two sources: from custom (and the infused virtue does not give this facility from its beginning) and from a strong inhesion as regards the object of the virtue, and this is found in the infused virtue at its very beginning."

The reason why the infused virtues do not fit exactly into either of these categories - potencies and habits - is because supernatural entities cannot properly be placed in natural categories any more than God can, of whom they are a kind of participation. Nevertheless, they can be reduced more or less and by a certain analogy to natural categories. Thus sanctifying grace, as a spiritual and permanent accident, is reduced to the species of quality as an entitative habit, and the principles of supernatural operation are reduced to the species of quality as operative habits, although they do not have all the characteristics of these habits.

The principal differences between the natural and supernatural, or the acquired and infused virtues are the following:

By reason of their essence. The natural or acquired virtues are habits in the strict sense of the word. They do not give the power to act (for the faculty has that already), but they give facility in operation. The supernatural or infused virtues give the power to act supernaturally (without them it would be impossible, apart from an actual grace), but they do not always give facility in operation.

By reason of the efficient cause. The natural virtues are acquired by our own proper acts; the supernatural virtues are infused by God together with sanctifying grace.

By reason of the final cause. By means of the natural virtues man conducts himself rightly in regard to human things and performs acts in accordance with his rational nature. The supernatural virtues, on the other hand, give man the ability to conduct himself rightly in regard to his condition as an adopted son of God, destined for eternal life, and to exercise the supernatural acts proper to the divine nature by participation.

By reason of the formal object. In the natural virtues it is the good according to the dictate and light of natural reason which is the rule or formal object; in the supernatural virtues it is the good according to the dictate and supernatural light of faith or conformity with the supernatural end.

From the foregoing distinctions it is evident that the infused virtues are specifically distinct and extraordinarily superior to the corresponding acquired or natural virtues.

There are four properties which the infused virtues have in common with the acquired natural virtues:

1) they consist in the mean or medium between the two extremes (except for the theological virtues, and even these do so by reason of the subject and mode);

2) in the state of perfection they are united among themselves by prudence (and the infused virtues by charity also);

3) they are unequal in perfection or eminence;

4) those which imply no imperfection perdure after this life as to their formal elements.

Besides these characteristics, let us review the characteristics or properties which are exclusive to the infused virtues.

1) They always accompany sanctifying grace and are infused together with grace. This doctrine is common among the theologians, although it is not exactly defined by the Church.

2) They are really distinct from sanctifying grace. It suffices to recall in this respect that grace is an entitative habit infused into the essence of the soul, while the infused virtues are operative habits infused into the faculties, which are really distinct from the soul (ST. I II q.110 a.4 ad.1).

3) They are specifically distinct from the corresponding acquired natural virtues. This has been demonstrated above.

4) We possess the supernatural virtues imperfectly. We shall explain this more fully in the tract on the gifts of the Holy Ghost. This particular characteristic has great importance in solving the question of the mystical state and Christian perfection (ST. I II q.68 a.2)

5) They increase with sanctifying grace. This is clear from Scripture and the teaching of the Church. St. Paul writes to the Ephesians: "Rather are we to practice the truth in love, and so grow up in all things in him who is the head, Christ" (Eph. 4; 15). To the Philippians he says: "And this I pray, that your charity may more and more abound in knowledge and discernment" (Phil. 1; 9). And he prays for the Romans "that you may abound in hope, and in the power of the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 15; 13). St. Peter writes: "Grow in grace and in the knowledge of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Pet. 3; 18). Following the lead of the apostles, the Church asks in the liturgy for an "increase of faith, hope and charity" (cf. collect of the thirteenth Sunday after Pentecost).

6) They give us the intrinsic power for supernatural acts but not the extrinsic facility for those acts. We have already seen this fact, which explains why the repentant sinner experiences great difficulty in the practice of the virtues opposed to his former vices. It is necessary that these difficulties be overcome by the infused virtues, aided by the acquired virtues. The acquired virtues cannot assist the infused virtues intrinsically, of course, because the natural habit of the acquired virtues is absolutely incapable of intrinsically perfecting the supernatural habit of the infused virtues. But they can render such assistance extrinsically by removing the obstacles or the perverse inclinations and the disordered concupiscence. When these obstacles are removed, the infused virtues begin to work promptly and delightfully.

7) By mortal sin they all disappear, excepting faith and hope. The reason for this is that the infused virtues are like properties flowing from sanctifying grace. Hence when grace is destroyed they also are destroyed. Only faith and hope can remain, and they in an unformed and imperfect state, as the last effort of the infinite mercy of God so that the sinner may be more easily converted.(Council of Trent, Dz 838) But if a man sins directly against either of these two remaining virtues, they also are destroyed, and the soul is then deprived of every trace of the supernatural.

8) They cannot diminish directly. Mortal sin does not diminish but destroys the infused virtues. Neither can they be diminished by venial sin because this, a deviation from the path which leads to God, leaves intact the tendency to the supernatural ultimate end which is proper to the infused virtues. Nor can they be diminished by the cessation of the acts of the virtues, for as infused virtues they were not acquired by the repetition of acts, and they cannot be lessened or diminished by the cessation of acts. Nevertheless, the infused virtues may be diminished indirectly by venial sins so far as these sins stifle the fervour of charity, impede progress in virtue, and predispose to mortal sin.(ST. I II q.24 a.10)

Some of the infused virtues ordain the faculties to the end or goal, and others dispose them in regard to the means. The first group are the theological virtues; the second group are the moral virtues. The first correspond, in the order of grace, to the principles of the natural order which direct man to his natural end; the second correspond to the acquired virtues of the natural order which perfect man in regard to the means. Once again, the close similarity and analogy between the natural and the supernatural orders are evident.

The existence of the theological virtues seems to be clearly stated in Sacred Scripture, as is evident from several texts of St. Paul. "The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost who has been given to us" (Rom. 5; 5); "without faith it is impossible to please God" (Heb. 11; 6); "there abide faith, hope and. charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity" (1 Cor. 13; 13).

In the Council of Trent, the Church stated in equivalent formulas that man receives with sanctifying grace the other gifts of faith, hope, charity, etc.(Dz 799 - 800) Since the acts are not infused, it must be concluded that reference is here made to permanent habits or the infused virtues. As to the theologians, no ancient or modern theologian has ever denied the existence of the theological virtues except Peter Lombard. The Master of the Sentences erred in this matter; he identified charity with the Holy Ghost and thus destroyed it as a virtue.

The existence of the theological virtues is postulated by the very nature of sanctifying grace. Since grace is not immediately operative, it requires operative principles to grow and develop to perfection. Among these principles, some must refer to the supernatural end (theological virtues), and others must refer to the means which lead to that end (moral virtues). This argument takes its force principally from the suavity of the working of Divine Providence, made known to us through revelation.

The theological virtues are operative principles by which we are directed and ordained directly and immediately to God as our supernatural end. They have God Himself as their material object and one of His divine attributes as their formal object. Since they are strictly supernatural, only God can infuse them into the soul, and their existence can be known only through revelation.(ST. I II q.62 a.1)

There are three theological virtues: faith, hope and charity. The reason for this number is that by these three immediate union with God is realized perfectly. Faith enables us to know and unites us with God as First Truth; hope makes us desire Him as the Supreme Good for us; charity unites us to Him by the love of friendship, so far as He is infinite goodness in Himself. There are no other aspects of union with God, for although the divine perfections are infinite, they cannot be attained by human acts except under the aspect of truth (by the intellect) and goodness (by the will). And only this latter admits of a twofold aspect, namely, good for us (hope) and goodness in itself (charity).

That the theological virtues are distinct among themselves is something beyond doubt, since they can actually be separated. Charity will perdure eternally in heaven, separate from faith and hope, which will have disappeared; (cf. 1 Cor. 13; 8) and finally, in this life faith and hope can subsist without charity, as always happens when one commits a mortal sin which is not directly opposed to faith and hope. It is evident that in such instances faith and hope remain in the soul in an unformed or non-vital state, since charity is the form of the virtues, and for that reason they lack the proper and true reason of virtue. (ST. I II q.65 a.4)

One can distinguish two orders: the order of generation and the order of perfection. By the order of generation or of origin the first is to know (faith), then to desire (hope), and lastly to attain (charity). Although this gradation is by reason of acts, that by reason of the habits is the same: faith precedes hope and hope precedes charity, since the intellect precedes the will and imperfect love precedes perfect love.

According to the order of perfection, charity is the most excellent of the theological virtues ("And the greatest of these is charity" 1 Cor. 13; 13) because it is the one that unites us most intimately with God and the only one of the three that perdures in eternity. As to the other two, taken in respect to themselves, faith is more excellent than hope because it bespeaks a relationship with God in Himself while hope presents God to us as our own good, and also because faith is the foundation of hope. On the other hand, hope is more closely related to charity, and in this sense it is more perfect than faith.

According to the doctrine of St. Thomas, which is held by the majority of theologians, faith resides in the intellect, and hope and charity in the will.

The basis of this doctrine is to be found in Scripture. Thus in the Book of Wisdom we are told that nothing is more useful in the life of a man than temperance, prudence, fortitude and justice. "If one loves justice, the fruits of her works are virtues, for she takes moderation and prudence, justice and fortitude, and nothing in life is more useful for men than these" (Wisd. 8; 7). St. Peter, immediately after speaking of grace as a participation in the divine nature of God, states: "Do you accordingly on your part strive diligently to supply your faith with virtue, your virtue with knowledge, your knowledge with self-control, your self-control with patience, your patience with piety, your piety with fraternal love, your fraternal love with charity" (2 Pet. 1; 5 - 7). In these and other texts we have the scriptural basis which was later elaborated by the Fathers and theologians to give us a body of doctrine which is perfectly organized and systematic. It is true that the Church has not expressly defined anything in this question, but today the doctrine on the existence of the infused moral virtues is so general among Catholic theologians that one could not deny it without manifest temerity.

We have already indicated the reason for the existence of the infused moral virtues when we spoke of the infused virtues in general and the theological virtues in particular. The theological virtues are demanded by the very nature of grace so that it can be dynamically orientated to the supernatural end; the moral virtues are demanded by the theological virtues, in turn, because to be ordained to the end requires a disposition to the means. The relation which the moral virtues bespeak with the theological virtues in the order of grace is the same as the relation between the acquired natural virtues and the acts of synderesis and rectitude of the will.

The infused moral virtues are habits which dispose the faculties of man to follow the dictate of reason illumined by faith in relation to the means which lead to the supernatural end. They do not have God as their immediate object; and in this they are distinguished from the theological virtues; but the honest good distinct from God; yet they rightly ordain human acts to the supernatural end, and in this way they are distinguished from the corresponding acquired natural virtues.

The means which are regulated by the infused moral virtues refer, in a certain sense, to all the acts of man, including (at least on the part of prudence) the very acts of the theological virtues, in spite of the fact that these virtues are superior in perfection to the moral virtues (ST. I II q.58 a.3). For although the theological virtues, considered in themselves, cannot be excessive, and in this sense they do not consist in the mean or medium as do the moral virtues, they can nevertheless go to excess in the manner of our operation, and it is that manner or mode which falls under the moral virtues. So it is that the moral virtues must be numerous, because there are so many ways in which the faculties can operate and these must be regulated in view of man's supernatural end.

St. Thomas establishes a fundamental principle of distinction for the moral infused virtues: "For every act in which there is found a special aspect of goodness, man must be disposed by a special virtue." (ST. I II q.109 a.2) Accordingly, there will be as many moral virtues as there are species of honest objects which the appetitive faculties can discover as means leading to the supernatural end. St. Thomas studies and discusses more than fifty moral virtues in the Summa theologica, and perhaps it was not his intention to give us a complete and exhaustive treatment.

However, since ancient times it has been the custom to reduce the moral virtues to four principal ones, namely, prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance. They are expressly named in Sacred Scripture, as we have already seen, and are called the virtues most profitable for man in this life. (Wis. 8; 7) They were also known to the ancient philosophers - Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Plotinus, Cicero, etc. Among the Fathers of the Church, St. Ambrose is apparently the first to call them cardinal virtues. (ML. 15; 1738) The scholastic theologians unanimously subdivided the moral virtues on the basis of the four cardinal virtues.

The name "cardinal" virtues is derived from the Latin word cardo, the hinge of a door. The reason is that on these basic virtues hang all the moral life of man. St. Thomas maintains that these virtues can be called cardinal from two points of view: in a less proper sense, because they are certain general conditions or characteristics necessary for any virtue (in every virtue should shine forth prudence, justice, fortitude and moderation); more properly, so far as they pertain to the special matters in which principally shines forth the general material of the given virtue. (ST. I II q.61 a.4)

Hence the cardinal virtues are in fact special virtues, not merely genera of virtue which contain or comprise all the other virtues. Consequently, they have their own proper matter, which is constituted by those objects in which those general conditions of all virtue shine forth to a maximum degree. It is true that all the virtues should participate in some way in those four general conditions, but it does not follow from this that every type of discretion will be produced by prudence, all rectitude by justice, all firmness by fortitude and all moderation by temperance. These virtues are those which effect those conditions in a principal manner, but they do not do so exclusively. Other virtues also share in these qualities, although to a lesser degree.

The principality of the cardinal virtues is demonstrated precisely in the influence which they exercise over their neighbouring and subordinated virtues, which are like participations derived from the principal virtues, which communicate to the other virtues their mode, their manner of being and their influence. These are called potential parts of the cardinal virtue; their role is to function in secondary matters, reserving the principal matter for the corresponding cardinal virtue. The influence of the principal virtue is manifest in the subordinated virtues: he who has concurred the principal difficulty will more easily conquer the secondary one.

In this sense each one of the cardinal virtues can be considered as a genus which contains beneath itself the integral parts, the subjective parts and the potential parts. The integral parts refer to those useful or necessary complements which ought to concur for the perfect exercise of the virtue. Thus patience and constancy are integral parts of fortitude. The subjective parts are the various species subordinated to the principal virtue. Thus sobriety and chastity are subjective parts of temperance. The potential parts of are those other annexed virtues which do not have the full force and power of the principal virtue or are ordained to secondary acts. Thus the virtue of religion is annexed to justice because it has to do with rendering to God the cult that is due, although this cannot ever be done perfectly, because one cannot realize in this matter the condition of equality which is required for strict justice.

But does the principality of the cardinal virtues over the other virtues pertain also to their intrinsic excellence? Evidently not, for religion and penance are more excellent virtues than justice, since their object is more noble. Humility pertains to temperance, but is a more excellent virtue as a removens prohibens for all the other virtues.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to preserve the principality of the cardinal virtues as hinges of the others, and they perform their function in a more perfect manner than do the other virtues. Thus commutative justice has more of the reason of justice than do religion or penance; the matter or object of any annexed virtue may be more excellent than that of the principal or cardinal virtue, but the mode of the cardinal virtue is always more perfect.

That there are precisely four cardinal virtues can be proved by various arguments:

We reserve for a later discussion the treatment of the virtues in particular.

We shall also point out in passing the gift of the Holy Ghost, the fruit of the Holy Ghost, the beatitude which corresponds to the various virtues, and the vices which are opposed to the various virtues.

In general usage, a gift signifies anything that one person gives to another out of liberality and with benevolence. We say "out of liberality" to signify that on the part of the giver a gift excludes any notion of debt or obligation, not only in justice but in gratitude or any other kind of debt. And we say "with benevolence" to signify the intention of the giver to benefit him who receives the gift gratuitously. The exclusion of all debt of justice or gratitude is necessary by reason of the gift; otherwise there would be no way of distinguishing between a gift and a reward or recompense. Likewise, there should be no need of any compensation or recompense incurred on the part of the one who receives the gift. We are not treating here of a "do ut des" (I give in order that you give in turn) situation but of a completely gratuitous bestowal which exacts nothing in return.

A gift is something unreturnable, as St. Thomas says. Nevertheless, the notion of a gift does not exclude gratitude on the part of the one receiving the gift; even more, it sometimes demands the good use of the gift, depending on the nature of the gift and the intention of the giver, as when one gives something in order that the receiver be perfected by its use. Such are the gifts which God bestows on His creatures.

The first great gift of God is the Holy Ghost, who is the very love by which God loves Himself and loves us. It is said of the Holy Ghost in the liturgy of the Church that He is the Gift of God. (Veni Creator) The Holy Ghost is, therefore, the first gift of God, not only as substantial love in the intimate life of the Trinity, but as He dwells in us through the divine mission. From this first gift proceed all other gifts of God. In the last analysis, whatever God gives to His creatures, both in the supernatural and in the natural order, is nothing more than a completely gratuitous effect of His liberal and infinite love. In a wide sense, whatever we have received from God is a "gift of the Holy Ghost," but this expression may have various specific meanings:

1) In a wide sense, the gifts of the Holy Ghost are all those gifts of God which do not include that first gift which is the Holy Ghost Himself; for example, the natural gifts given by God to His creatures.

2) In a less wide sense, they are the gifts which, without necessarily including that first gift nor presupposing that the soul must be in the state of grace and charity, pertain nevertheless to the supernatural order. Such gifts are principally the gratiae gratis datae, actual prevenient graces, servile fear of God, supernatural attrition and unformed faith and hope.

3) In a more proper sense, they are gifts of the Holy Ghost which include the first great gift of God and presuppose or place the soul in the state of grace and friendship with God. For example, sanctifying grace, charity, faith and hope informed by charity, the infused moral virtues, the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost.

4) In the formal and most proper sense, the gifts of the Holy Ghost are those which we are now to study in particular, namely, the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost.

The existence of the gifts of the Holy Ghost can be known to us through revelation, since they are supernatural realities which completely transcend the light of natural reason. St. Thomas begins with this supposition in the treatise on the gifts of the Holy Ghost in the Summa theologiae, and says that in the doctrine on the gifts we should follow the mode of speaking as found in Sacred Scripture, where they are revealed to us. (ST. I II q.68 a.1)

Let us first investigate the scriptural foundation for the existence of the gifts, and then we shall briefly examine the doctrine of tradition, the Magisterium of the Church, and the teaching of theologians:

From the book of Isaias we read:

"And there shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of his root. And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the spirit of wisdom, and of understanding, the spirit of counsel, and of fortitude, the spirit of knowledge, and of godliness. And he shall be filled with the spirit of the fear of the Lord" (Is. 11; 1 - 3).

This text is clearly Messianic and properly refers only to the Messias. Nevertheless, the Fathers of the Church and the Church herself have extended the meaning to the faithful of Christ in virtue of the universal principle of the economy of grace which St. Paul enunciated: "For those whom he has foreknown he has also predestined to become conformed to the image of his Son, that he should be the firstborn among many brethren" (Rom. 8; 29). From this it is inferred that whatever perfection is found in Christ, our Head, if it is communicable, is found also in His members united to Him through grace. And it is evident that the gifts of the Holy Ghost pertain to communicable perfections, if we bear in mind the need we have of them. Hence, since grace is so prodigal in supplying for those things which are necessary, and at least as prodigal as nature itself, we may rightly conclude that the seven spirits which the prophet saw descend and rest upon Christ are also the patrimony of all those who are united to Him in charity.

Both the Greek and the Latin Fathers have treated extensively of the gifts of the Holy Ghost under various titles. Among the Greek Fathers the outstanding names are St. Justin, Origen, St. Cyril, St. Gregory Nazianzen and Didymus. Among the Latins, the primacy in this question goes to St. Augustine and St. Gregory the Great, and to a lesser degree to St. Victorinus, St. Hilary, St. Ambrose and St. Jerome. In St. Thomas we find a synthesis and complete summary of their teaching. Only one council of the Church speaks expressly of the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost, affirming them of Christ: the Roman Synod held in 382 under Pope St. Damasus. (Dz. 83)

The teaching of the Church is very clear in the liturgy. In the hymn Veni Creator reference is made to the sevenfold gift of the Holy Ghost:

In the Sequence of the Mass for Pentecost the Holy Ghost is asked for His seven gifts:

In the hymn for Matins of the same feast we read:

And in Vespers another reference is made to the gifts:

In the administration of the sacrament of confirmation the bishop prays with hands extended over the faithful to be confirmed:

Hence the Church, in the solemn moment of the administration of a sacrament, recognizes and applies to each of the faithful the famous Messianic text from Isaias. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, which enjoys great authority among theologians, says that "from these gifts of the Holy Ghost. . . we derive the rules of Christian living, and through them are able to know whether the Holy Ghost dwells in us." In all the Catholic catechisms throughout the world there is a section which treats of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. Lastly, Pope Leo XIII, in his admirable Encyclical Divinum Illud Munus, of May 9,1897, recalls and makes his own the testimony of Catholic tradition on the existence, necessity, nature and marvellous effects of the gifts:

On the question of the existence of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, the teaching of theologians interests us only as a witness of the tradition of the Church, since they could not create a doctrine which treats of supernatural realities. The theology of the gifts underwent a slow and laborious development through the centuries, but its existence was always universally admitted by all, except for rare exceptions. Today there is no true theologian who denies the existence of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, although there is still great discussion concerning their nature and function.

In general, we may conclude with respect to the existence of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, backed by the solid support of Scripture and the testimony of tradition, that we can be absolutely certain of the existence of the gifts of the Holy Ghost in all souls in the state of grace. Even more, there are some theologians of great authority who maintain that the existence of the gifts of the Holy Ghost is an article of faith. Although the Church has not expressly defined this point, if we consider the constant teaching of the Fathers of the Church through the centuries, the mind of the Church in her liturgy and in the administration of the sacraments, the unanimous consent of theologians, and the sense of all the faithful throughout the world, it would seem that one has sufficient basis for saying that this is a truth of faith proposed by the ordinary magisterium of the Church. Those who would not dare to say this much will at least affirm that it is a theological conclusion that is most certain and proxima fidei.

This is another question which is greatly disputed among exegetes and theologians. There are two principal difficulties involved:

1) in Sacred Scripture the number seven is classically interpreted to signify a certain indefinite plenitude;

2) in the Masoretic text of Isaias only six gifts are enumerated, for the gift of piety is not mentioned. Modern exegetes are inclined to think that the text of Isaias refers to an indefinite plenitude. It is the plenitude of the qualities of government which pertain to the Messias as king. The Fathers and the scholastic theologians, however, insist on the number seven, and on the basis of the sevenfold gift they establish their classifications and parallelisms with the infused virtues.

St. Thomas dedicates an ingenious article in his Summa theologiae to justify this number.(ST. I II q.68 a.4) What are we to think of all this? In our opinion, one should conclude as follows.

First of all, it is true that in Scripture the number seven is often used to designate an indefinite plenitude, and perhaps this is the meaning of the passage in Isaias. But one cannot draw from this any conclusive argument against the fact that there are seven gifts of the Holy Ghost. Actually, plenitude may be completely undetermined, and thus mean an indefinite number which is not known exactly; or it may be restricted to a definite number and thus express all the possible realities. According to the interpretation of the Fathers, the teaching of the Church (in her liturgy, in the administration of the sacraments, and in papal encyclicals), and the unanimous consent of theologians, the plenitude expressed by Isaias should be taken in this second sense. Hence, as the sacraments are seven in number and in them is to be found the plenitude of the graces which God grants to men ex opere operato, so the gifts of the Holy Ghost, as seven distinct habits, comprise the plenitude of the movements of the divine Spirit which are communicated to us through those gifts.

Secondly, as regards the Masoretic text which enumerates only six gifts, nothing can be concluded against the existence of the gift of piety. Various explanations have been offered for this omission in the text, but whatever the reason, it is certain that the gift of piety is mentioned in the Vulgate (which is substantiated by a declaration of the Church which states that there are no dogmatic errors in this version), (Dz. 1787) in the version of the Septuagint, in patristic tradition, in the official teachings of the Church, and in the unanimous teaching of theologians. To prescind from this enormous weight of authority because of certain textual obscurities in the Masoretic text would seem to be excessive. Many things formally revealed in Sacred Scripture did not appear in their fullness except through the interpretations of the Fathers and the Magisterium of the Church. Such seems to be the case with the gift of piety.

Whatever the text of Isaias, St. Paul marvellously describes that reality which theology recognizes as the gift of piety when he writes to the Romans: "For whoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. Now you have not received a spirit of bondage so as to be again in fear, but you have received the spirit of adoption as sons, by virtue of which we cry: Abba! Father!' The Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit that we are sons of God" (Rom. 8; 14 - 16).

St. Thomas studies the nature of the gifts of the Holy Ghost by asking whether they are habits in order to determine the proximate genus in the essential definition of the gifts. The reply is in the affirmative, and theologians of all schools hold for the same response, with a few notable exceptions. Against all opposing opinions, and in accordance with the doctrine of St. Thomas, we hold the following proposition:

The gifts of the Holy Ghost are strictly supernatural or per se infused habits. That they are strictly supernatural or infused per se is evident. Their intimate nature transcends completely the powers of nature, so that they cannot be acquired by human efforts. Therefore, either the gifts do not exist or they are necessarily infused by God. The arguments are as follows:

From the teaching of Sacred Scripture. Speaking of the Holy Ghost, the Lord stated: "He will dwell with you, and be in you" (John 14; 17). But the Holy Ghost is not in men without His gifts; the gifts also dwell in men, and hence they are not acts or transitory movements but true habits.

By analogy with the moral virtues. The moral virtues dispose the faculties of the soul to follow the rule of reason; therefore, they are habits. The gifts of the Holy Ghost dispose the faculties of the soul to follow the movement of the Holy Ghost; therefore, they also are habits. The gifts of the Holy Ghost fill the same role with respect to the Holy Ghost as the moral virtues do with respect to reason.

By reason of the necessity of the gifts for salvation. The gifts are necessary for salvation; therefore, they must be in the soul permanently, and hence they are habits. That they are necessary for salvation is demonstrated by St. Thomas, as we shall see later. That gifts of this kind are habits is proved by the authority of St. Gregory, who says: "By those gifts without which one cannot obtain life the Holy Ghost always dwells in all the elect, but He does not always dwell by His other gifts." (ML.75; 598)

Psychological argument. The dispositive qualities by which men are habitually moved or can be moved by a principal mover are the habits. But the gifts by definition are dispositive qualities by which man is habitually moved or can be moved by the Holy Ghost. Therefore, the gifts are habits. The first part of the argument is clear; it expresses the difference between a habit and a simple disposition. The second part of the argument follows from the very nature of that kind of motion which is an inspiration of the Holy Ghost, which is proper and characteristic of the gifts.

Against this doctrine, which is of capital importance in the Thomistic synthesis, various difficulties can be raised. Their solution will enable us to see more clearly the nature of the gifts.

There is no reason to multiply things without necessity.

But for a man to be moved by the inspiration or instinct of the Holy Ghost an actual grace suffices.

Therefore, the gifts are not habits but actual graces.

Response: We concede the first part of the argument, but distinguish the second. Actual grace is sufficient on the part of the principal mover, we concede; it is sufficient on the part of the soul, we subdistinguish: actual grace suffices where the motion is not produced in the manner of a habit, we concede; it suffices where the motion is produced after the manner of a habit, we deny. Therefore, in virtue of these distinctions, we deny the consequence and nexus.

We explain as follows: The movement of grace can be considered in two ways:

1) so far as it proceeds from the Holy Ghost, and thus every movement of the Holy Ghost in man can be called and is an actual grace;

2) so far as this movement is received in the soul, and this requires another distinction:

a) so far as it is a certain impulse or illumination generically considered which could be granted even to sinners;

b) as a special movement so that the soul must have some disposition to receive it and to be moved promptly and easily under its influence. And this again can happen in two ways:

i) to be moved in a human manner, according to the rule of reason enlightened by faith (and for this we have the infused virtues);

ii) to be moved in the manner of the movement itself, that is, in a divine or superhuman manner, and for this we need the habits of the gifts of the Holy Ghost.

From this it can be seen that the movement of the gifts are not identical to the movements by actual grace, for the following reasons:

1) Actual grace is required for every act of virtue, even the most imperfect; but the movement of the gifts is not required for every act of virtue. Therefore, they are two distinct things.

2) Actual grace is given even to sinners so that they will be converted; but the movement of the gifts presupposes the state of grace, from which the gifts are inseparable. Therefore, the two cannot be identified.

Until the time of St. Thomas it was not settled whether the gifts were really distinct from the infused virtues or whether there was only a rational distinction between them. But thanks to the marvellous synthesis of Aquinas, the real, specific distinction between the virtues and the gifts has been established.

In spite of certain variations in expression, the doctrine of Aquinas is the same in all his writings. He begins by listing certain erroneous opinions and answering them.

1) The gifts are not distinguished from the virtues. But if this be so, why are certain virtues called gifts and others not?

2) The gifts perfect reason; the virtues perfect the will. That would be true if all the gifts were intellectual and all the virtues were affective; but such is not the case.

3) The virtues are ordained to good operations; the gifts are ordained to resist temptation. But in fact the virtues also offer resistance to temptations.

4) The virtues are ordained simpliciter to operation; the gifts are ordained to conform us with Christ, and especially in His Passion. Yet Christ Himself impels us to be conformed to Him in humility, meekness and charity; and these are virtues, not gifts.

Having rejected the errors, St. Thomas proceeds to explain the positive doctrine. In the first place he cites St. Gregory, who distinguishes perfectly the seven gifts from the theological and cardinal virtues. The gifts are represented by the seven sons of Job; the theological virtues are represented by his three daughters; and the cardinal virtues are represented by the four corners of the house. (ML. 75; 544) The exegesis of St. Gregory may be dismissed as ingenious, but here can be no doubt of his conviction that the gifts are distinct from the virtues; the point St. Thomas wished to prove. St. Thomas then states that, if we consider simply the name "gifts," we cannot find any difference between the infused virtues and the gifts because they are all gifts received gratuitously from God:

There is no need to add any commentary to this clear exposition of the doctrine, but we shall investigate further the reasons for the specific difference between the virtues and the gifts. To do this, we need only list the common characteristics of the virtues and the gifts and then point out their differences.

The principal common properties are the following:

1) They are generically the same because both are operative habits.

2) They have the same efficient cause, namely, God, and therefore they are both infused per se and are totally supernatural.

3) They have the same subject in quo: the human faculties.

4) They have the same material object (materia circa quam): all moral matter.

5) They have the same final cause (remote end): the supernatural perfection of man, incipient in this world and consummated in the world to come.

The following are the differences between the virtues and the gifts:

1) By reason of the motor cause. As habits, the virtues and the gifts have the same efficient cause, namely, God, the author of the supernatural order. But the motor cause or principle is completely distinct. In the virtues it is human reason (for the infused virtues, reason illumined by faith and under the previous motion of God through an actual grace). The gifts, on the other hand, are under the motor principle of the Holy Ghost, who moves the habits of the gifts as His direct and immediate instruments. For that reason the habits of the infused virtues can be used when we please, presupposing an actual grace, but the gifts of the Holy Ghost are actuated only when He wishes to move them.

2) By reason of the formal object. As is known, the formal object is that which properly specifies an act or a habit. Habits and acts may have in common the same two extrinsic causes (efficient and final) and even the same material cause (which is a generic element and not specific), but if they differ by reason of their formal object, the habits must be classed as specifically distinct, though they agree in all other respects. This is precisely what happens with the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost. They have, as we have seen, the same efficient cause, final cause and material cause, and yet their specific difference is evident by reason of the distinction between their formal objects. The formal object may be considered under a double aspect:

a) that by which the act is constituted in its proper nature and is distinct from every other act by reason of a determined aspect or reason (objectum quo; ratio sub qua);

b) that which is a terminus of the act or habit under the precise aspect of being (objectum quod). For example, the act of stealing has for its formal constitutive object (objectum quo) the taking of something which is another's; it is this which is its formal cause and essentially constitutes this act an act of stealing. The formal terminative object of this act (objectum quod) is the object taken, the thing of another as such. Let us now apply these notions to the questions of the gifts and the infused virtues.

The terminative formal object (objectum formale quod). The terminative formal object of human acts, considered as moral, is the honest good, in contradistinction to the useful or delightful good which, as such, cannot be a norm of morality. Under this aspect the gifts do not differ from the virtues, for both tend to the honest good. But this honest good has two aspects, depending on whether it comes under this dictate of reason illumined by faith or the rule of the Holy Ghost. But this aspect falls into the area of the formal quo object or the ratio sub qua, which is the properly differentiating element and specifying element.

The constitutive formal object (objectum quod). The formal object quo or ratio sub qua is totally distinct in the infused virtues and in the gifts. In the infused virtues the proximate and immediate rule is human reason enlightened by faith, so that an act is good if it is in accord with this dictate and evil if it departs from it. In the gifts, on the other hand, the proximate and immediate rule of action is the Holy Ghost Himself, who directly governs and moves the gifts as His instruments, impressing on them His direction and causing the acts to be produced for divine reasons which surpass even the level of reason illumined by faith.

Thus the acts of the gifts proceed from a formal motive which is completely distinct. This argues for a specific distinction between the gifts and the virtues, for habits are specified by their acts and acts are specified by their formal objects. Hence specifically distinct objects evoke specifically distinct acts, and these latter correspond to specifically distinct habits.

3) By reason of the human and divine mode. This difference necessarily follows from the foregoing. An operation must be of the same mode as the motor cause which impels it and the norm or rule to which it is adjusted. Since the infused virtues have man as their motor cause and reason illumined by faith as their rule, they necessarily impress their acts or operations with a human mode. On the other hand, and for the same reasons, since the gifts have as their motor cause and as their rule or norm the Holy Ghost, their acts must be vested with a mode which corresponds to their motor cause and norm, namely, a divine or superhuman mode.

From this third difference flow two conclusions of exceptional importance in ascetical and mystical theology:

a) the radical imperfection of the infused virtues by reason of the human mode of their operation and the inevitable necessity that the gifts come to their aid to give them a divine mode of operation, without which the infused virtues can never reach full perfection;

b) the impossibility of an operation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost in a human mode or manner, whereas their divine mode is precisely an element of specific differentiation between the virtues and the gifts. An operation of the gifts modo humano would be a contradiction.

4) By reason of human will and divine will. We can use the infused virtues when we wish, but the gifts of the Holy Ghost operate only when He wishes. These latter habits are not under our control as regards use, and the reason is clear. All the habits which are under the control of reason are subject to our will as to their exercise because they are our acts in every sense of the word. But the gifts are habits which confer on the soul only the facility to be moved by the Holy Ghost, who is the unique motor cause in those operations; the soul can do no more than co-operate in these operations or movements, though it does so consciously and freely, by not placing any obstacle and by seconding the impulse of the Holy Ghost with its own docility.

In the actuation of these habits, we do no more than dispose ourselves (for example, by restraining the tumult of the passions, affection for creatures, distractions and phantasms which impede God's action, etc.), so that the Holy Ghost can move us as and when He pleases. In this sense we may say that our acts are the dispositive causes for the actuation of the gifts. That is what St. Teresa of Avila means when she says: "The first kind of prayer I experienced which seems to me supernatural I should describe as one which cannot, in spite of all our efforts, be acquired by industry or diligence; but we can certainly prepare for it, and it must be a great help if we do." (Spiritual Relations V)

Moreover, in a certain sense our actions can also be a meritorious cause for the actuation of the gifts, although in a remote manner, in the sense that by our supernatural acts we can merit the increase of grace, of the infused virtues, and of the gifts of the Holy Ghost as habits. And in the measure that the gifts of the Holy Ghost grow in perfection, they will be more readily actuated and will operate with greater intensity and will, in turn, conquer and resist more easily the obstacles or impediments, much as fire more quickly consumes dry wood than wet wood. But however great the degree of habitual perfection which the gifts may attain in us, their actuation will always be entirely beyond the scope of our powers and free will.

5) By reason of activity and passivity. This difference also follows from the first difference between the virtues and the gifts. In the exercise of the infused virtues, the soul is fully active; its acts are produced in a human manner or mode, and the soul is fully conscious that it works when and how it pleases. The exercise of the gifts is entirely different. The Holy Ghost is the unique motor cause of the gifts, and the soul passes to the category of a simple recipient, though conscious and free. The soul reacts vitally on receiving the motion of the gifts, and in this way we preserve freedom and merit under the operation of the gifts. And the action of the gifts will be the more pure and perfect as the soul succeeds in seconding the divine motion with greater docility, without trying to divert it by movements of human initiative, which would be to impede or obstruct the sanctifying action of the Holy Ghost.

It follows from this that the soul, when it feels the action of the Holy Ghost, should repress its own initiative and reduce its activity to seconding the divine movement. This has absolutely nothing to do with the sterile inactivity of Quietism.

The thought of St. Thomas on this question is clear: he has repeatedly affirmed that one of the most characteristic notes of difference between the virtues and the gifts is their distinct mode of operation.

We shall here establish three propositions of which the first is the most important in mystical theology.

The gifts of the Holy Ghost are necessary for the perfection of the infused virtues. The general argument is simple and clear. The gifts are necessary for the perfection of the infused virtues, if these have certain defects which cannot be corrected by themselves but only under the influence of the gifts. But this is precisely the case with the infused virtues. Therefore, the gifts are necessary for the perfection of the infused virtues.

The major premise is evident. If the virtues cannot of themselves correct certain imperfections which accompany them and if these imperfections disappear under the activity of the gifts, it is evident that the gifts are necessary for the perfection of the infused virtues. What must be proved is the minor premise. Above all, we should not forget that the infused virtues are habits, and it is necessary to examine the types of imperfection which can be found in habits and see which of these, if any, are found in the infused virtues.

There are five principal sources of imperfection in any given habit:

1) When a habit does not attain its complete material object. Such is the case of the student of theology who has not yet studied certain tracts. He knows something of theology and he has the habit of theology, but incompletely and imperfectly.

2) When the habit lacks the intensity by which it should attain its object. For example, the student who has gone over an entire assignment, but superficially and carelessly.

3) When the habit is weakly rooted in the subject (e.g., through lack of sufficient use).

4) By reason of an intrinsic imperfection, essential to the habit itself. This occurs, for example, in the habit of faith (de non visis) and hope (de non possessis). Neither the virtues themselves nor the gifts can correct these imperfections without destroying the virtues themselves.

5) Because of the disproportion between the habit and the subject in which it resides. This is precisely the case with the infused virtues. The infused virtues are supernatural habits, and the subject in which they are received is the human soul, or, more exactly, its powers and faculties. But according to the axiom, quidquid recipitur ad modum recipientis recipitur, (whatever is received, is received according to the mode of the receiver) the infused virtues, on being received into the soul, are degraded, so to speak, and acquire our human mode of operation, because of their accommodation to the psychological operations of man. This is the reason why the infused virtues, in spite of being much more perfect in themselves than the corresponding acquired virtues, do not give us the facility in operation which we obtain from the acquired virtues. This is clearly seen in the sinner who repents and confesses after a life of sin; he could easily return to his sins in spite of having received all the infused virtues with grace.

Now it is evident that if we possess imperfectly the habit of the infused virtues, the acts which proceed from them will also be imperfect unless some superior agent intervenes to perfect them. This is the purpose of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. Moved and regulated, not by human reason, as are the virtues, but by the Holy Ghost, they bestow on the virtues, and especially the theological virtues, that divine atmosphere which they need in order to develop all their supernatural virtuality.

This necessity is also seen from the formal motive which impels the act of the infused virtues. As long as the object or motive does not surpass human reason, even enlightened by faith, it will always be an imperfect motive; even though materially the act is the same as that of the Gift of the Holy Ghost.

This does not mean that the infused virtues are imperfect in themselves; on the contrary, they are most perfect realities, strictly supernatural and divine. In fact, the theological virtues are more perfect than the gifts of the Holy Ghost. (ST. I II q.68 a.2) But we possess them imperfectly by reason of the human modality which inevitably attaches to them because of their accomodation to the natural psychological functions under the control of simple reason enlightened by faith. Hence the imperfection of the infused virtues is not in themselves, but in the imperfect mode with which we possess them.

From this flows the necessity for the gifts of the Holy Ghost to come to the aid of the infused virtues, disposing the faculties of our soul to be moved by a superior agent, the Holy Ghost, who will actuate them in a divine mode, in a mode completely proportioned to the most perfect object of the infused virtues. Under the influence of the gifts, the infused virtues will be, so to speak, in their proper milieu.

Of all the infused virtues, those which most need the aid of the gifts are the theological virtues, in which Christian perfection essentially and principally consists when they have reached their full development. By their very nature they demand the divine mode of the gifts. These virtues give us a participation in the supernatural knowledge which God has of Himself (faith) and of His very love of Himself (charity), and make us desire Him for ourselves as our supreme good (hope). These lofty objects, absolutely transcendent and divine, are necessarily constrained to a modality that is human as long as they remain under the rule and control of reason, even though enlightened by faith. They demand, by their own divine perfection, a regulation or rule which is also divine; that of the gifts. This is the argument used by St. Thomas to prove the necessity of the gifts for salvation:

This argument is also valid for the infused moral virtues. Although they do not transcend the rule of reason as regards their immediate objects (since they do not refer immediately to the supernatural end but to the means to the end), they are ordered to a supernatural end and receive from charity their form and their life in that transcendent order. Therefore, to be perfect, they must receive a divine mode which will adapt and accommodate them to this orientation to the supernatural end. Therefore, the gifts embrace all the matter of the infused virtues, both theological and moral. We shall complete this proposition by answering one objection:

How can the gifts perfect the theological virtues when they are inferior to the theological virtues?

Reply: They cannot perfect the theological virtues intrinsically and formally but only extrinsically, by remedying the imperfection of the subject in which the virtues reside. The gifts elevate the subject to the divine plane which is proper to the theological virtues and thus give man a full and perfect possession of them. They eliminate the human mode of operation and bestow a divine mode. Hence the gifts do not perfect the theological virtues as such, but the faculties in which those virtues reside.

It follows from this that the gifts are necessary for Christian perfection. Without them, the infused virtues, especially the theological, could develop in all their virtuality but would always remain imperfect in their operations; not by any defect of the virtues, but because of the subject in which they reside. In this sense the theological virtues have a special need of the corresponding gifts, because their inherent supernatural perfection demands a divine modality which only the gifts can bestow.

The Angelic Doctor expressly asks this question and answers in the affirmative. In order to prove his answer, he emphasizes the imperfection with which we possess the infused virtues, as we explained in the preceding proposition:

To many theologians this doctrine has seemed excessive, but that is because they confuse the question de jure with the question de facto. As a matter of fact, many are saved without any operation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, but never without the habits of the gifts. But this is completely per accidens and in no way compromises the general thesis. In the development of the Christian life the actuation of the gifts, more or less intense, is morally and sometimes physically necessary in order to preserve grace, and in this sense the actuation of the gifts would be necessary for salvation. Such is the case of the martyr; either he makes a heroic act of fortitude in giving his life for his faith (which can scarcely be realized without the help of the gift of fortitude to make this most difficult act possible), or he commits a mortal sin by apostatizing. There are many other cases in which one must perform a heroic act of virtue or lose sanctifying grace. The reason is given by St. Thomas: the insufficiency of human reason, enlightened by faith, to lead us to the supernatural end without obstructions.

But there is still another reason, based on the corruption of human nature as a consequence of original sin. The infused virtues do not reside in a sound nature but in a nature inclined to evil, and although the virtues have sufficient power to conquer all temptations opposed to them, they cannot de facto overcome some of them without the help of the gifts, especially those violent temptations which arise unexpectedly. In those circumstances in which resistance or a fall are a decision of the moment, a man cannot depend on the slow deliberation and discursus of reason but must act quickly, as if by a supernatural instinct, that is, under the influence and movement of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. Without this movement of the gifts, a fall is almost certain, granted the vicious inclination of human nature wounded by original sin. It is true that these situations are not usually frequent in the life of a man, but it does not follow from this that the gifts of the Holy Ghost are not necessary for salvation, even though they may not be necessary for each and every salutary act.

The gifts of the Holy Ghost are not necessary for each and every salutary act. This question seems to have arisen in modern times by reason of a false interpretation of the doctrine of St. Thomas as stated in the Summa, I II q.68 a.2 ad 2. There are some who hold for the necessity of the gifts for every salutary act, and they base their opinion on the citation which follows:

But what St. Thomas seems to mean here is that man is not so perfected by the theological and moral virtues that he does not need, at times, to be inspired by the interior Master. The word semper can have two meanings: always and in every instant (semper et pro semper), and always but not in every instant (semper sed non pro semper). Undoubtedly, St. Thomas is using the word in the second sense. We admit that the text is obscure and difficult to translate, but the thought of the Angelic Doctor is clear if we keep in mind the general context of the article as a whole and the doctrine of the Summa.

The following are the proofs of the proposition as stated:

1) St. Thomas says in this article that the gifts are necessary because without them we know and love God imperfectly. Then without the gifts we do know and love God; even though imperfectly. Therefore, the gifts are not necessary for every salutary act.

2) Without the gifts, human reason cannot avoid all folly, ignorance and other defects (cf. loc. cit., ad 3). But the fact that it cannot avoid all defects implies that human reason can avoid some. Therefore, the gifts are not necessary for every act of virtue. On the other hand, it is certain that one can perform a supernatural act of faith with the help of an actual grace and without any help from the gifts. Such is the case of a Christian in the state of mortal sin, who has lost the gifts of the Holy Ghost together with Sanctifying grace and charity and can nevertheless make acts of supernatural faith under the impulse of Actual grace.

Leaving for a later treatment the discussion of the particular means for growing in perfection, we shall here discuss the fundamental laws of the growth of the supernatural organism of sanctifying grace, the virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost.

Can sanctifying grace increase and develop in us?

What is the efficient cause of this increase?

What are the laws which govern the growth of the supernatural organism?

How is this growth effected?

We shall answer these questions in the form of definite conclusions.

The proof of this principle can be stated simply. Sanctifying grace is, according to St. John (1 John 3; 9), the seed of God. This seed is sown in the soul in the sacrament of baptism. Therefore, by its very nature, sanctifying grace is meant to increase and develop in the soul.

Any living thing that has not yet reached its full perfection and development can, under normal circumstances, grow and increase until it attains that plenitude. In the natural order our bodily organism increases and grows by its own proper development, that is, it evolves by its natural powers and is increased by the incorporation of new elements of the same order. Our supernatural life cannot grow in this way. Grace is by its nature static and inert, and it must grow in the way in which it was born. But grace is born in us through a divine infusion; therefore, it cannot increase except by new divine infusions. Our natural powers would strive in vain to increase grace; they are completely impotent to effect any increase, even with the help of actual grace. Only from without can the soul receive new degrees of that divine being which is grace, and only God can produce those degrees of grace in the soul.

We can see the same truth from another point of view. Habits cannot be actuated, and consequently they cannot develop and be perfected, except by the same principle that caused them. But grace, the infused virtues and the gifts are supernatural habits caused by God alone. Therefore, only God can actuate them and increase them.

Hence the action of God is the principal efficient cause of the growth of the supernatural life. The soul in grace can merit that increase under certain specified conditions, as we shall see, but as to the increase itself, only God can cause it. (c¦ . ST. I II q.92 a.1 ad.1)

It is clear that the action of God as the direct and immediate cause of the increase of the infused habits is not arbitrary, but is subject to the laws and conditions which the divine will has designed to determine and establish.

Let us examine each of these elements separately: the sacraments, merit, and prayer.

It is a truth of faith that the sacraments instituted by Christ confer grace ex opere operato, that is, by their own intrinsic power, independently of the subject. The Council of Trent specifically states: "If anyone says that through the sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices to obtain grace, let him be anathema." (Dz. 851)

Let us recall briefly the theological doctrine on the sacraments. It is of faith that the sacraments of the New Law contain and confer grace on all those who receive them worthily. As the Council of Trent says: "omnibus non ponentibus obicem." (Dz. 851) Baptism and penance confer the first infusion of grace; the other five sacraments confer an increase of the grace already possessed. For that reason the first two sacraments are called sacraments of the dead; the other five are called sacraments of the living, since they presuppose supernatural life in the soul. Nevertheless, at times the sacraments of the dead may produce an increase of grace per accidens, and the sacraments of the living may sometimes confer the first infusion of grace per accidens. This would happen in the case of those who receive the sacraments of baptism or penance when they are already justified by charity or perfect contrition, or in those who, in good faith and with supernatural attrition, receive a sacrament of the living without knowing that they are in mortal sin.

In equal circumstances, the sacraments produce a greater or less infusion of grace according to the greater or less dignity of the sacrament. The reason for this is that a more noble cause produces a more noble effect. We say "under equal conditions," however, because an inferior sacrament received with a greater intensity of fervour may produce a greater grace than a sacrament of greater dignity received with little devotion. One and the same sacrament will produce the same degree of grace in all who receive it with identical dispositions, but will produce greater grace in those who have better dispositions. (c¦ . ST. III q.69 a.8)

The last two conclusions are very important in practice. Sometimes too much insistence is placed on the ex opere operato effect of the sacraments, as if that were the only effect or as if everything depended on that exclusively. One should not lose sight of the fact that in the reception of a sacrament the effect ex opere operato is conjoined with the effect ex opere operantis or with the dispositions of the one who receives the sacrament. Therefore, in practice it is of great importance that the recipients of the sacraments make a careful preparation and cultivate an intensity of fervour. The example of the vessel and the fountain is classical. The amount of water contained in the vessel depends not only on the fountain but also on the size of the vessel. The vessel of our soul is widened by the intensity of our fervour or devotion.

This is a most important question in the spiritual life. St. Thomas studies it at great length in various parts of his works, and in the Summa theologiae he dedicates an entire question (I - II, q.114) of ten articles to the subject. We shall summarize his doctrine here.

Merit signifies the value of an act which makes it worthy of a reward. "Actio qua efficitur ut ei qui agit, sit justum aliquid dari." (c¦ . St. Thomas, In Sent. dist. 15, q.1 a.3 ad.4)

There are two types of merit: condign merit (de condigno), which is based on reasons of justice, and congruous merit (de congruo), which is not founded on justice or even pure gratitude, but on a certain fittingness by reason of the act and a certain liberality on the part of him who recompenses. Thus the agent has a strict right (de condigno) to the wage which he has merited by his act, while the person who has done us a favor is entitled (de congruo) to our grateful recompense. Condign merit is further divided into merit in strict justice (ex toto rigore justitiae) and not of strict justice (ex condignitate). The first requires a perfect and absolute equality between the act and the reward, and in the supernatural order this type of merit is proper to Jesus Christ exclusively. The second presupposes only an equality of proportion between the good act and the reward, but because God has promised to recompense those good acts, the reward is owing in justice. (c¦ . ST. I II q.114 a.1) Moreover, some theologians further divide congruous merit into fallible congruous merit (if it bespeaks an order to a reward solely on the title of fittingness) and infallible congruous merit (if to this fittingness is added a promise by God to bestow the reward).

Man cannot, by his natural powers alone, produce acts that are meritorious for eternal life. (c¦ . ST. I II q.109 a.5) No one can merit supernaturally except in virtue of a free gift of God; hence merit presupposes grace. But so far as it proceeds from grace, the meritorious act bespeaks an order to eternal life through a merit based on justice. It is of faith that the just man can by his good works merit an increase of grace and, consequently, an increase of the infused habits (the virtues and gifts of the Holy Ghost) which accompany grace, as well as eternal life and an increase of glory. Thus canon 32 of the Decree on Justification of the Council of Trent expressly states:

Merit always presupposes liberty, and where there is no freedom there can be no merit or demerit. But a free act, if ordered to God, can be meritorious. "Our acts," says St. Thomas, "are meritorious so far as they proceed from free will moved by God through grace. Whence every human act that falls under the freedom of the will, if related to God, can be meritorious." (c¦ . ST. II II q.2 a.9)

It does not matter for merit, at least per se, what type of act is performed; what matters is the motive and manner of doing it. Whence it follows that a materially insignificant act performed with ardent charity solely to please God is of itself much more meritorious than a great deed realized with less charity or for a less perfect motive. For that reason supernatural merit is especially evaluated by the virtue of charity. The intensity of the love of God with which an act is performed determines the degree of merit. The merit of the other virtues depends on the greater or less influence which charity has in the production of their acts. "Eternal life consists in the fruition of God. But the movement of the soul toward the fruition of the divine good is the proper act of charity, through which all the acts of the other virtues are ordained to this end, since all the other virtues are imperated by charity. Therefore, the merit of eternal life pertains in the first place to charity and secondarily to the other virtues so far as their acts are imperated by charity." (c¦ . ST. I II q.114 a.4)

There is yet another reason: the acts performed under the impulse of charity are more voluntary because they proceed from love. For that reason also they are more meritorious. "It is likewise evident that what we do out of love we do with the greatest voluntariness. Whence also on the part of the voluntariness which is required for merit it is evident that merit pertains especially to charity." (c¦ . ST. I II q.114 a.4)

Notice the practical importance of this doctrine. If properly understood, it is one of the most efficacious means of combating slothfulness and tepidity in the service of God. Without acts which are constantly more fervent, our supernatural life can become practically paralysed (at least on the score of supernatural merit, since other laws govern the sacraments) even when we live in the state of grace and perform many good works, but with tepidity and indifference. An example will clarify this point. With the increase of grace and the other infused habits, something occurs which is similar to an increase on the scale of a thermometer. If a thermometer, which now registers 72 degrees, is to register 76 or 78 degrees, it is necessary that the surrounding air or water rise to that degree. If there is no rise in the surrounding element, the thermometer will not register an increase. The same thing occurs in regard to the increase of the habits. Since this increase is nothing more than a greater radication in the subject, it is impossible that an increase be effected without a more intense act. To use another simile, this more intense act is like the more powerful stroke of the hammer which drives the nail of the habit more deeply into the soul.

But must we then conclude that remiss acts, those performed with tepidity, indifference and with less intensity, are of no value whatever in the supernatural life? We must answer with a distinction. As regards the essential increase of the degree of grace which is actually possessed and of the degree of essential glory in heaven, those acts are completely sterile and useless. The degree of grace does not increase nor does the degree of glory in heaven, which corresponds to the degree of grace on earth. Nevertheless, these acts serve two purposes: first, the soul will not become cold and thus predispose itself for mortal sin which would rob it of grace, and secondly, the soul gains by them in heaven an increase of accidental glory, which is, as Bañez says, the reward of a created good and not of an infinite good.

No one can merit the first grace for himself, nor final perseverance, nor the grace to rise again from a serious fall. But one can merit the first grace for another, although only by a merit de congruo. The reason for the first three assertions is based on the theological axiom that the principle of merit does not fall under merit. This is evident as regards the first assertion, because without grace one cannot merit grace; otherwise the natural would have a claim on the supernatural, which is absurd and heretical. As to final perseverance, it is an infallible effect of predestination to glory, which is totally gratuitous. And the third assertion is also evident, because the nature of merit depends on the supernatural divine motion, which would be cut off by the grave sin. The reason why one can merit the first grace for another is pure congruence. Since the just man and friend of God does God's will, it is reasonable, according to the laws of friendship, that God should comply with man's desire for the salvation of another.

No one, however just and perfect, can merit for himself the actual efficacious graces by a strict or condign merit, but we can all merit them by congruous merit: infallibly by prayers which have the proper qualifications, and fallibly by good works. The reason for the first statement is the famous axiom cited (the principle of merit does not fall under merit), for the actual graces conservative of grace pertain to the same grace as a principle of merit. The reason for the second statement is the divine promise to grant us infallibly whatever is necessary for our salvation if we ask for it in prayer that is humble, confident and persevering. Our simple good works do not have this special promise, given in view of prayer, and for that reason their merit is only congruous and fallible. If God grants it, it will be out of pure mercy, since the works do not merit it of themselves, nor has He promised to give it to us in view of good works.

The difficulty encountered in the performance of a work does not increase the merit of the work, except perhaps indirectly and per accidens as a sign of greater charity in undertaking the work. Merit is determined by the goodness of the work in itself and by the motive which impels us to perform the work. As St. Thomas points out: "The good is of much greater importance for the basis of merit and virtue than is the difficult. Whence it does not follow that whatever is more difficult is more meritorious, but only that which, besides being more difficult, is also better." (c¦ . ST. II II q.7 a.8 ad.3)

The reason is that the principle of merit is in charity. Therefore, it is more meritorious to perform easy works with a great degree of charity than to accomplish very difficult works with a lesser degree of charity. Many lukewarm souls carry a great cross with little merit, while the Blessed Virgin, with her ardent charity, merited more by her simplest and smallest acts than all the martyrs together in the midst of their torments.

Temporal goods can also be merited de condigno, so far as they are useful for gaining eternal life. (c¦ . ST. I II q.114 a.10)

The necessary conditions of merit are outlined below:

on the part a morally good act

of the work a free act (without freedom the act would not be

human and voluntary)

CONDIGN that he be a wayfarer (in the next world one

on the part of cannot merit)

the one meriting

that he be just and friend of God

on the part of God the acceptance of the work for the reward

which He has promised

Strict – same as above

CONGRUOUS Broad – same as above, except:

1) State of grace

2) promise on part of God as rewarder

Merits which are destroyed by mortal sin revive and are of value for an eternal reward when the sinner is restored to sanctifying grace. But according to the more probable opinion, merit does not always revive in the same degree as was possessed before the mortal sin, but according to the actual dispositions of the subject when he recovers sanctifying grace, and this will be either in an inferior, an equal or a greater degree. (c¦ . ST. III q.89 a.5)

Note well the great practical importance of this doctrine. It is a pure illusion, besides being a grave imprudence, for the sinner who sins with the greatest of ease to think that after the sin he can recover everything he has lost by means of penance. Apart from the fact that God could deny him the grace of repentance (without which it would be absolutely impossible for him to leave his state of sin), it is likely that he will rise from his sin with a degree of sanctifying grace which is less than he previously possessed. It is very difficult for one to make a more intense act of repentance with powers that have been weakened by sin. This presupposes an actual grace which is more intense than that by which he made himself unworthy through the commission of sin.

Having examined the nature and organism of the supernatural life and having defined the fundamental laws of its growth to perfection, let us now see in what perfection consists. After a brief introduction on the concept of perfection in general, we shall explain the nature of Christian perfection, its obligation for all Christians, and its principal degrees.

The word "perfection" comes from the Latin word perficere, which means "to make completely," "to terminate," or "to finish." From this comes the word "perfection," which signifies the quality of being perfect. A thing is said to be perfect when it has all the being, all the reality which is due to it according to its nature. A blind man is physically imperfect because he lacks the use of a faculty which is due to human nature; but the lack of wings does not signify any imperfection in man, because man by his nature is not meant to fly.

The etymological meaning of the word perfection gives us a clue to its real definition. The very word "perfection" is an analogous term, and this allows for the true use of the word in several different senses. We may say that his picture is perfect, and then we say that book is perfect; yet, we are not saying that the picture and the book are identical. It could not be otherwise, because perfection is a transcendental concept which can be applied to all things that exist, in view of the philosophical axiom, "a thing is perfect so far as it is in act" (unumquodque in tantum est perfectum in quantum est in actu). We speak of act as sometihing that is stable. When a thing is in the process of becoming, it is not yet what it will be and so we cannot speak of its perfection as yet.

But an analogous concept derives its ultimate meaning and significance, not from its lowest application, but from its primary and principal analogate. We say a thing is perfect. But the very idea of perfection is already comparative to something of greater perfection. It follows then, that in the order of perfection, all things that have a certain perfection are compared to the source of all perfection, and so, consequently we may also speak of degrees of perfection as they approach or rescind from that same source. Thus God, who is pure act (ie; God in never in a becoming stage), is perfection in essence. In reality, He is the only absolutely perfect being; all other perfections are spoken of in relation to His perfections; and all other perfections are in some way or other a participation in His absolute perfection.

Although the term "perfection," taken in the abstract, is an analogous and transcendental concept, as soon as we speak of a particular type of perfection or descend to the order of creation, we immediately leave the realm of the transcendental and arrive at that of the created thing spoken of. Hence as soon as we begin to discuss Christian perfection we are dealing with perfection as it is applied to a creature. When we define Christian perfection we must break the term down into its elements and find the one to which that term most properly refers. We shall, therefore, review St. Thomas' division of perfection as he applies it to the spiritual life, in order to discover the nature of Christian perfection properly speaking, and the way in which the term "perfection" applies to the various aspects of Christian perfection.

St. Thomas states that anything is perfect insofar as it is in act and imperfect insofar as it is in potency. That is, when a thing is changing, it is not yet the thing into which it is about to change - we say it is in potency. Then, in his commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics, he says that there are three different ways of using the term "perfection":

a) when a thing lacks nothing due to its nature;

b) when there is neither excess nor defect as regards its powers of operation;

c) when it has attained its proper goal or end.

He further clarifies this division when he states that perfection is threefold:

Again, he sometimes speaks of perfection in slightly different words, specifying as "first perfection" that according to which a thing is substantially perfect by reason of its form (that what makes it to be what it is), and as "second perfection" the attainment of the end. But the end or goal which constitutes second perfection may be either an operation as such (as the end of the violinist is to play the violin) or something distinct that is attained through an operation (as the end of a builder is to construct a house). But the first perfection is the cause of the second because the form of a thing is the principle of its operation. From what we have seen thus far as regards perfection, it is apparent that first perfection is identical with substantial perfection or perfection in esse (see number 1 above); second perfection may be either the operation itself or the attainment of some goal distinct from the agent. Note that St. Thomas does not place perfection in operatione as a middle state between perfection in esse and perfection in assecutione finis; he states only that sometimes perfection consists merely in an operation and sometimes it consists in the attainment of an extrinsic goal. Nor does this mean that both types of perfection may not be found in one and the same agent. Thus man's formal beatitude consists in the perfection in operatione which is the beatific vision; and man's objective beatitude consists in the perfection in assecutione finis which is God. We can see from the foregoing why St. Thomas maintains that beatitude and perfection are synonymous terms.

But we have not yet finished with the divisions of perfection. St. Thomas divides perfection into

a) perfection simpliciter (straight forward) and;

b) perfection secundum quid (according to something).

The former comprises that which belongs to the very nature of a thing (an animal is perfect simpliciter if it possesses all that is required for its animal life); the latter perfection is accidental in relation to the formal and substantial perfection (an animal is perfect secundum quid as regards its blackness or whiteness, its size, etc.).

Lastly, St. Thomas speaks of that which constitutes

a) perfection essentially or per se

... and that which constitutes

b) perfection instrumentally,

... depending upon whether perfection consists in charity operating according to the precepts or according to the evangelical counsels.

We are now in a position to apply the various ways of perfection to Christian perfection, but before doing so, it is necessary to recall that the term "perfection" is an analogous term and will not apply to each and every element of the division in the same way.

From the various distinctions already given, we can list three general headings under the notion of Christian perfection:

1) perfection simpliciter (the perfection due a Christian as raised to the supernatural order);

Under this heading, we have

a) first perfection (which is also called perfection in esse or substantial perfection) and

b) second perfection (which consists either in an operation or in the attainment of an end).

2) perfection secundum quid (the perfection which is accidental to the proper perfection of the Christian);

3) instrumental perfection.

It now remains to identify the various elements of Christian perfection according to the foregoing division of perfection.

As regards first perfection (perfection in esse; substantial perfection), it is common teaching that it consists in sanctifying grace, since sanctifying grace is the very soul of the supernatural life.

As to second perfection, we have the testimony of Scripture as well as common theological teaching that...

a) second perfection in operatione is charity, either in its elicited act or as imperating the other virtues,

b) second perfection in assecutione finis is likewise charity, since charity is the virtue which unites us directly with God as our supernatural end. (ST. II II q.184 a.1)

Perfection secundum quid comprises the elicited acts of the supernatural virtues other than charity, and ...

instrumental perfection is found in the evangelical counsels.

Let us now amplify these statements by stating and explaining the conclusions which logically follow from them.

Christian perfection consists especially in the perfection of charity.

We do not mean to say that Christian perfection consists integrally and exclusively in the perfection of charity, but that charity is its principal element, its most essential and characteristic element. In this sense we must say that the measure of charity in a man is the measure of his supernatural perfection, in such wise that he who has attained the perfection of the love of God and of neighbor can be called perfect in the truest sense of the word (simpliciter), while he may be only relatively (secundum quid) perfect if he is perfect only in some other virtue. This second type of perfection alone is impossible for the soul in the state of grace because of the intimate connection of the infused virtues with grace and charity.

From Sacred Scripture. This is one of the truths which is most often repeated in Scripture. Christ Himself tells us that upon the love of God and of neighbour depends the whole Law and the prophets (Matt. 22; 35 - 40 : Mark 12; 28 - 31). The texts from St. Paul are very explicit and abundant. Here are a few of them: "But above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection" (Col. 3; 14); "love is the fulfilment of the Law" (Rom. 13; 10); "so there abide faith, hope and charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity" (1 Cor. 13; 13). Even faith, according to St. Paul, receives its value from charity: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision is of any avail, nor uncircumcision, but faith which works through charity" (Gal. 5; 6). The other virtues are nothing without charity (1 Cor. 13; 1 - 3).

From the Magisterium of the Church. This same doctrine has been amply commented upon and developed by the Fathers of the Church and has been sanctioned by the Magisterium of the Church. In the bull Ad conditorem of John XXII, one reads the following words:

"Since the perfection of the Christian life consists principally and essentially in charity, which is called the bond of perfection by the Apostle (Col. 3; 14) and which unites or joins man in some way to his end. ..."

Theological argument. The proof given by St. Thomas is that the perfection of a being consists in the attainment of its ultimate end, beyond which there is nothing more to be desired. But it is charity which unites us with God, the ultimate end of man. Therefore, Christian perfection consists especially in charity. The fundamental reason which St. Thomas gives is clarified by an examination of the nature and effects of charity. Charity alone unites us entirely with God as the ultimate supernatural end. The other virtues prepare or initiate that union, but they cannot terminate and complete it, since the moral virtues are limited to the removal of the obstacles which impede us in our progress toward God and they bring us to Him only indirectly, by establishing the proper order in the means which lead us to God. As regards faith and hope, they certainly unite us with God, since they are theological virtues, but they do not unite us with God as the absolute ultimate end or as the Supreme Good who is infinitely lovable in Himself; the perfect motive of charity. They unite us with God as the First Principle from whom there come to us the knowledge of the truth (faith) and perfect happiness (hope). Charity regards God and unites us to Him as the end; faith and hope regard God and unite us to Him as a principle. Faith gives us a knowledge of God which is necessarily obscure and imperfect (de non visis), and hope is also radically imperfect (de non possessis), while charity unites us with God in a perfect manner even in this life by giving us a real possession of God, and by establishing a current of mutual friendship between Him and ourselves. For that reason, charity is inseparable from grace, while faith and hope are compatible, in some way, even with mortal sin (unformed faith and hope). Charity presupposes faith and hope, but it surpasses them in dignity and perfection. Beyond all doubt, therefore, charity constitutes the very essence of Christian perfection; it presupposes and includes all the other virtues; without charity, these are lacking in value, as St. Paul expressly teaches.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to understand this doctrine correctly in order not to fall into lamentable error and confusion. From the fact that Christian perfection consists especially in charity, it does not follow that the role of the other virtues is purely accidental or that they do not form any part of the essence of Christian perfection. The word "especially" does not mean totally.

We must not forget that the moral virtues, and with greater reason faith and hope, have their proper excellency even when considered in themselves, independently of charity. For although all the acts of the Christian life can and should be commanded by charity, many of them are nevertheless acts elicited by the other infused virtues. It is evident that there can be a diversity of degrees of perfection in the manner of producing the elicited act of any virtue, even prescinding from the greater or lesser influence which imperating charity may have had on it. As a matter of fact, when the Church wishes to judge the sanctity of a servant of God in view of possible beatification, she does not consider charity only but also the exercise of the other virtues to a heroic degree. This means that the infused virtues are integral parts of Christian perfection.

Christian perfection consists integrally in the elicited (called upon) act of charity and in the acts of the other infused virtues imperated by charity which are of precept.

It is necessary to distinguish in the Christian virtues what is (1) of grave precept, what is (2) of light precept, and what is (3) of counsel.

We must also note that the act of the infused virtues can be considered in two ways: (a) in itself (the elicited act) and (b) as imperated by charity. An act of humility performed precisely as an act of humility is an elicited act of that virtue. The same act performed for the love of God is an elicited act of the virtue of humility and at the same time an act commanded by the virtue of charity.

Finally, perfection can be considered either (a) habitually (in actu primo) or (b) actually (in actu secundo). The first is substantial or radical perfection; the second is accidental perfection or perfection simpliciter. For the first type of perfection the simple state of grace suffices; for the second, there is required a notable degree of development of the active principles which emanate from grace.

In view of the foregoing distinctions, we say that actual perfection (perfection simpliciter and in actu secundo) consists essentially, not only in the elicited act of charity itself, but also in the acts of the other infused virtues; not in themselves, but precisely as they are imperated by charity and are of precept.

This follows likewise from the practice of the Church in the beatification of the servants of God, which requires heroism in all the Christian virtues and not only in charity. Nevertheless, one must not lose sight of the fact that the acts of the other infused virtues pertain to the essence of Christian perfection, not in themselves, but so far as they are imperated by charity, which is the form of all the other virtues. The proper function of charity as the form of all the virtues is to direct and ordain the acts of all the virtues to the ultimate supernatural end, even those of faith and hope, which without charity would be unformed although they would still retain their proper specific form.

In what way does charity exercise this command over the other infused virtues in relation to the supernatural end? Is it a mere external impulse from without? Or does it communicate something to them of its own proper virtuality?

Obviously it is necessary to reject the doctrine which makes charity the intrinsic and essential form of all the other virtues. It is impossible that it should be such, since all the virtues would be essentially the same thing as charity, unless we were to admit the absurdity that one virtue could have two distinct substantial forms. But neither should one think that the impulse of charity toward the supernatural end is purely exterior to the act of the other virtues. By reason of this impulse, the acts of the other virtues receive from charity in a passive manner a real intrinsic mode through which both the acts themselves and the virtues from which they flow are perfected.

It is evident that if there were no matter capable of being directed to the end, the directive form of charity would have nothing to inform and could not be exercised. Charity would have to be limited exclusively to its own proper act. Consequently, we must conclude that Christian perfection is not a simple form but a moral plenitude constituted principally by the act of charity and secondarily by the acts elicited by the other virtues under the impulse of charity, which directs them to the ultimate supernatural end.

This conclusion has two parts which we shall examine separately:

First, Christian perfection increases in the measure that charity produces its proper elicited act more intensively. Since we have already seen that Christian perfection consists especially in the perfection of charity, it is obvious that, in the measure that this virtue produces its elicited act with greater intensity, there is produced a greater increase of Christian perfection itself. In this sense it is certain that the degree of sanctity coincides with the degree of love. To a greater love of God and neighbor corresponds always a greater degree of holiness. But apart from its elicited act, which constitutes the essence of Christian perfection, charity, as the form of all the virtues, should imperate and direct the acts of all the virtues to the ultimate supernatural end. For that reason we must add the second part of our conclusion, namely, that Christian perfection will be greater as charity imperates the acts of the other infused virtues in a manner that is more intense.

In a more intense manner. This is a simple application and corollary of the doctrine which we have just explained regarding the elicited act of charity. In the measure that the imperating power of charity over the virtues is more actual, the acts elicited by those virtues will be more perfect, since the motive of charity is more perfect and more meritorious than that of all the other virtues. There is a great difference between an act which is performed simply for the proper and specific motive of a given virtue, such as humility, and that same act performed for the love of God, which is the perfect motive of charity.

The Council of Trent has defined that no one can absolutely avoid all venial sins during his whole life unless by a special privilege, which does not seem to have been granted to anyone except the Blessed Virgin. Therefore, there is no doubt that certain acts will be produced, namely, venial sins, which are in no way informed by charity. But in the measure that the acts informed or imperated by charity are more numerous and extend to a greater number of virtues, the integral perfection of the Christian life will be increased more and more.

It is elementary in theology that there is only one virtue and one infused habit of charity, by which we love God for Himself, and our neighbour and ourselves for God (ST. II II q.23 a.5). All the acts which proceed from charity, whatever be their end are specified by the same object, namely, the infinite goodness of God considered in itself. Whether we love God directly in Himself or whether we love our neighbour or ourselves directly, if it is a question of the true love of charity the motive of this love is always the same: the infinite goodness of God. There cannot be any true charity for our neighbour or ourselves if it does not proceed from the supernatural motive of the love of God, and it is necessary to distinguish carefully this act of charity from any inclination toward the service of our neighbour which is born of a purely human compassion or any other purely natural motive.

This being so, it is evident that the increase of the infused habit of charity will provide a greater capacity in relation to the double act of charity. The capacity of loving God cannot be increased in the soul without a corresponding increase in the same degree of the capacity for loving one's neighbour. This truth constitutes the central argument of the sublime first epistle of St. John, in which he clearly explains the intimate connection and inseparability of these two loves.

Nevertheless, in the exercise of love there is an order which is required by the very nature of things. By reason of this order the perfection of charity consists primarily in the love of God, infinitely lovable in Himself, and secondarily in the love of neighbour and ourselves for God. And even among ourselves and our neighbours it is necessary to establish an order which is based on the greater or lesser relation to God of the goods in which one shares. Hence one must love his own spiritual good in preference to the spiritual good of his neighbour, but he must prefer the spiritual good of his neighbour to his own material good. The reason for this order or scale of values is, as St. Thomas explains, because God is loved as the principle of the good on which the love of charity is based; man is loved with a love of charity so far as he directly shares in that same good.

It is therefore evident that one must first of all love God, who is the source of that good, and secondly oneself, who shares directly in that good, and lastly one's neighbour, who is a companion in the sharing of that good (ST. II II q.26 a.4).

But since the body shares in beatitude only by a certain redundance from the soul, it follows that as regards the participation in beatitude, the soul of our neighbour is closer to our soul than our own body, and therefore we must place the spiritual good of our neighbour before our own corporal good (ST II II q.26 a.5).

It is necessary to distinguish carefully the two modes of exercising charity. This is the way in which St. Francis de Sales explains it:

Since Christian perfection will be greater in the measure that charity produces its elicited act more intensively and imperates the acts of the other virtues in a more intense, actual and universal manner, it is evident that perfection depends primarily on affective charity and only secondarily on effective charity.

For its expansion and development, as is required by Christian perfection, charity must be perfected by the gift of wisdom.

This is a simple application of the general doctrine of the necessity of the gifts for the perfection of the infused virtues. Without the influence of the gifts, the infused virtues operate according to the rules of natural reason illumined by faith, according to a human mode. Since they are in themselves supernatural and divine habits, the infused virtues demand by their very nature an exercise in a divine or superhuman mode, a quality which properly corresponds to them as supernatural habits. As long as the gifts of the Holy Ghost do not impart to these virtues that divine mode which should be characteristic of them and which they lack of themselves (since they are subjected to the control and rule of natural reason illumined by faith), it is impossible that the infused virtues should attain their perfect expansion and development.

While this is true of all the infused virtues, it is especially true of charity. Being a most perfect virtue in itself, indeed the most divine and excellent of all the virtues, charity requires, by a kind of inner necessity, the divine atmosphere of the gifts of the Holy Ghost in order to give all that it is capable of giving. The rule of human reason, even when illumined by faith, is insufficient to give charity that divine modality. Natural reason is infinitely removed from the supernatural order and is absolutely incapable, not only of producing it, but even of having any claim on the supernatural order. And even when raised to the supernatural order by grace and illumined by the light of faith, the soul still exercises the infused virtues in a human mode under the control of human reason which, under the ordinary movement of grace, is the operator of the virtuous habit and must of necessity impress upon it its own human modality. In order that charity have a divine modality, it is necessary that human reason steps back as the sole rule and operator of the habit and that the habit itself be converted into a passive subject which receives without resistance the divine modality of the gifts which proceeds from the Holy Ghost Himself. Only under the influence of the gift of understanding (which without destroying faith gives it an intense penetration of the supernatural mysteries) and especially under the influence of the gift of wisdom (which makes the soul taste divine things by a certain mysterious connaturality), will charity reach its full expansion and development in the measure required for Christian perfection.

Charity itself cannot have any limit, since according to its very nature it is nothing other than a participation in infinite charity, which is the Holy Ghost Himself. Nor can charity be limited on the part of God, whose power is infinite and therefore inexhaustible. Neither on the part of the soul in which charity resides who has become partaker in the very life of God, so that in the measure that charity increases, the capacity of the soul for a further increase is likewise enlarged. Therefore, charity encounters no limitation in its development as long as man is on this earth, and it can for that reason increase indefinitely.

It will be quite different in heaven. There the soul will have reached its end and at the moment of its entrance into heaven its degree of charity will be permanently fixed according to the measure of the intensity it has attained up to the last moment on earth. We know with certainty that charity will not increase in heaven because it will have been fixed in its degree or grade by the immutable will of God and because the time of meriting will have passed.

Christian perfection consists essentially in the precepts and secondarily or instrumentally in the counsels.

St. Thomas invokes the authority of Sacred Scriptures to prove this doctrine (ST. II II q.184 a.3). We are told in Deuteronomy (6; 5): "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength." Again in Leviticus (19; 18) it is stated: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself." On these two precepts, says the Lord, depends all the Law and the prophets (Matt. 22; 40). Therefore, the perfection of charity, in which Christian perfection consists, is required of us by precept. Moreover, St. Thomas argues, we know that Christian perfection consists per se and essentially in charity: principally in the love of God and secondarily in the love of neighbour. But both the love of God and the love of neighbour constitute the first and the greatest of all the commandments. Therefore, Christian perfection consists essentially in the precepts. This is confirmed by the authority of St. Paul: "The end of the gospel is charity" (1 Tim. 1; 5), for it is evident that no limit of any kind is placed in the end but only in the means for attaining the end. Thus the doctor does not place any limit to the health that he wishes to give to the sick, but he does place a limit on the medicine which he administers to that end.

St. Thomas continues by proving that perfection consists secondarily and instrumentally in the counsels. All of them, as he says, are ordained to charity, as are the precepts, but in a different way. The precepts are ordained to remove those things which are contrary to charity, in union with which charity could not exist; the counsels are restricted to the removal of the obstacles which impede the facile exercise of charity, although these things are not totally contrary to charity. It is evident from this that the counsels are not essential for Christian perfection but are only instruments for attaining Christian perfection.

From this magnificent doctrine important practical conclusions can be drawn, especially concerning the obligation of all Christians in regard to Christian perfection. For it is evident that if Christian perfection consists principally in the precepts; which means that no Christian whatever is exempt from them, it follows that every Christian, whatever his state or condition, is obliged to aspire to perfection. We are not treating here of a counsel, but a precept, and it therefore obliges all.

The counsels do not oblige all Christians, but all Christians must sanctify themselves by the conscientious fulfilment of the precepts and by the affective practice of the counsels, which means the spirit of the counsels.

It is necessary to distinguish between the effective or material practice of the evangelical counsels (poverty, chastity and obedience), which is not universally obligatory, and the affective practice or spirit of the counsels, which obliges everyone. The first is usually verified by public vows (as in the religious state); the second affects all Christians regardless of their state in life. No one is obliged to take a vow of poverty, obedience or chastity, but all are obliged to practice those three virtues in a manner that is compatible with each one's state in life. It is also necessary to keep in mind that, in addition to the traditional evangelical counsels, there are many other particular or private counsels which proceed from interior inspirations of the Holy Ghost and pertain to works of supererogation (a greater practice of prayer, a greater spirit of sacrifice, greater detachment from worldly things, etc.). Although they do not properly constitute a true precept, these counsels represent a particular invitation or a concrete manifestation of the will of God for a particular soul, and they cannot be ignored without committing an act of infidelity to grace, which is difficult to reconcile with the complete and integral concept of Christian perfection.

This question has already been resolved in the previous conclusion, of which it is nothing more than the logical consequence. If Christian perfection does not consist in the counsels but in the precepts, it follows that it is of obligation for all, since the precepts bind all Christians. But it is well to examine more carefully the whole problem and to complete the picture with its complementary details and secondary questions.

All Christians are obliged to aspire to Christian perfection. We say all Christians in order to signify that the obligation to aspire to perfection is not restricted to priests and religious. They are obliged a fortiori by their priestly ordination or by religious profession, but the fundamental obligation regarding perfection stems from the very nature of grace, which is received as a seed at the reception of baptism and by its very nature demands an increase.

We are treating, therefore, of an obligation which is common to all Christians by reason of their baptism in Christ. They are obliged, and not simply "invited," although this obligation admits of varying degrees, as we shall see when we distinguish the various classes of persons. The obligation is to aspire or strive. By this we mean that one is not obliged to be already perfect at the beginning of the Christian life or even at any determined moment in that life, but simply to aspire positively to Christian perfection as an end which one seriously proposes to reach.

The Christian perfection to which we refer is not simply the radical perfection or perfection in first act (which would signify simply the preservation of the state of grace) but perfection simpliciter or in second act. This presupposes the eminent development of the entire supernatural organism of sanctifying grace, the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost.

We prove this thesis from various sources:

From Sacred Scripture. Let us listen to the words of Christ Himself: "You therefore are to be perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5; 48). These words were pronounced by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount, which was addressed to all men. This has been the unanimous teaching of the Fathers of the Church. The apostles insist on the commandment of the divine Master. St. Paul says that God has chosen us in Christ, "that we should be holy and without blemish in his sight" (Eph. 1; 4). He says likewise that we must struggle "until we all attain to the unity of faith and of the deep knowledge of the Son of God, to perfect manhood, to the mature measure of the fulness of Christ" (Eph. 4; 13). It is the will of God that we all sanctify ourselves: "This is the will of God, your sanctification" (1 Thess. 4; 3). St. Peter desires that we be holy, in imitation of God, who is holy: "As the One who called you is holy, be you also holy, in all your behavior; for it is written, 'You shall be holy, for I am holy' " (1 Pet. 1; 15 - 16). And in the Apocalypse we read that no one can be considered so perfect that he cannot be more perfect: "He who is just, let him be just still; and he who is holy, let him be hallowed still" (Apoc. 22; 11).

The Fathers of the Church. This doctrine is so well attested to by tradition that it would be a simple matter to give a variety of texts. The famous axiom, so often cited by the Fathers of the Church, "He who does not go forward on the road of God falls back," clearly expresses the necessity of constantly progressing in the way of Christian perfection at the risk of falling back and of compromising one's salvation.

Magisterium of the Church. The definitive teaching of Pope Pius XI in his encyclical on St. Francis de Sales will serve as ample proof from the Church's teaching:

"Let no one judge," says the Holy Father, "that this obligation pertains only to a select few and that all others are permitted to remain in an inferior grade of virtue. They are all obliged to this law, absolutely and without exception" (Rerum Omnium, Jan 16, 1923)

Theological argument. When St. Thomas teaches that perfection consists in the precepts, he implies that charity, with all its grades and modes, including that of heaven, is of precept for everyone. Charity is not commanded of us in any determined limit or degree beyond which it would be merely a matter of counsel, but it is commanded in all its extension: "With all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your strength" (Deut. 6; 5 : cf. Matt. 22; 37). Of all the spiritual elements in the Christian life, charity alone has the role of end or goal. Not only is charity the end of all the other precepts, which are given to us the better to fulfill this end, but it is also an end for us because by charity we are united to God, our ultimate end and our supreme perfection. Now when one treats of the end or goal, it is not possible to point out a determined measure; and here in the question of Christian perfection this is much less possible than in any other instance, because we are treating of the supreme end which shares in a certain way in God's own infinity.

A very important conclusion follows from this doctrine, and with it we are able to solve the objections which may be brought against it. The perfection of charity is commanded as an end or goal to which one must tend and not as the immediate material which must be practiced at once. The difference is enormous. If the perfection of charity were commanded as something to be possessed at once, all who are not perfect would be in a state of mortal sin because of the transgression of a grave precept. On the other hand, as St. Thomas explains, (II II q.184 a. ad.2) since perfection is commanded as a goal or end, he does not transgress the precept who has not yet reached full perfection, as long as he travels toward perfection and actually possesses charity at least in a minimum degree; which consists in not loving anything more than God, against God or as much as God. Only he who has not reached this lowest grade of perfection gravely violates the precept to strive for perfection.

It is clear that one must not go to the opposite extreme. The fact that one does not violate the precept as long as he possesses the substantial perfection of charity in its lowest degree does not mean that he is not obliged to travel continuously toward the full perfection of charity. For the precept aims at this full and complete perfection, not as the immediate material but certainly as an end to be sought. Consequently, he who consciously and deliberately resolves not to progress further but to be content with the lowest perfection (simply the state of sanctifying grace) would undoubtedly violate the precept of striving for perfection.

But what type of sin would he commit who acts in this way?

It depends on his state and condition in the mystical body of Christ.

In order to resolve the question, it is necessary to keep in mind the following principles:

1) All Christians are obliged to love God above all things and, consequently, to tend to perfection at least in a general manner by using the means offered them in their state of life.

2) In addition to this general obligation, the religious contracts a special obligation by reason of his religious profession, which obliges him to strive for perfection properly speaking by the practice of the evangelical counsels in the manner determined by his rule and constitutions.

3) The diocesan priest, although he is not in the canonical state of perfection, is obliged, in virtue of his priestly ordination and his ministerial office, to tend to perfection properly speaking and to surpass in perfection the non-clerical or lay religious. (ST. II II q.184 a.8)

Keeping these principles in mind, we can answer the question concerning the type of sin a person would commit who consciously and deliberately decides not to strive for a higher perfection.

If that person is consecrated to God by religious vows he would undoubtedly commit a mortal sin. St. Alphonsus Liguori expressly teaches this, (Theo. Moralis IV, n.16) and it is a conclusion which logically follows from the very nature of things. For a religious would thereby be guilty of a grave fault regarding the essential duty of his state in life, which is precisely to strive for perfection. (Canon law 487 & 593)

The same thing is true, mutatis mutandis, regarding the diocesan priest. The priest also is especially obliged to strive for Christian perfection. He is not de jure in the state of perfection as is the religious, but by reason of the lofty dignity of the priestly functions there is required of him a sanctity which is much higher even than that of the lay religious. "The worthy exercise of orders," says St. Thomas, "requires, not any kind of goodness, but excellent goodness, so that as they who receive orders are set above the people in the degree of order, they may also be above them by the merit of holiness" (ST. Suppl. q.35 a.1 ad.3)

Let us now see what St. Thomas says regarding lay religious:

Presupposing this doctrine, it is easy to establish our conclusion. If the lay religious who seriously neglects his striving for perfection sins mortally, as St. Alphonsus teaches, and if in similar conditions the secular priest who neglects his obligations sins even more seriously than the lay religious, it follows that the transgression of the precept of perfection (if it is a conscious and deliberate transgression) constitutes a mortal sin for the diocesan priest.

It is quite another matter with the laity. They also are obliged to strive for Christian perfection; not by reason of any special obligation as are the religious and the priest, however, but because of the general obligation contained in the first commandment. By reason of this principle, in order that a lay person be free of any grave transgressions of the general precept concerning perfection, it suffices that he possess charity in its minimum degree. This involves using the means that are necessary not to lose charity and not disdaining or excluding perfection positively; and this, in turn, supposes in practice a certain tendency for perfection and the exercise of certain works of supererogation. This would not suffice for the priest or religious, since they are obliged to strive for perfection not only by the general obligation which is common to all Christians but also by a special obligation proceeding from religious profession or priestly ordination. The general obligation could be fulfilled by those minimal dispositions which we have spoken of regarding the laity, but they would be lacking in their special obligation which binds them as religious or as priests.

This question is much more complex than it would appear at first glance. By gathering together certain principles from different parts of the writings of St. Thomas, we can reconstruct his thought on the matter.

1) In answering an objection, St. Thomas points out that one would transgress the precept of charity if, satisfied with possessing the substantial perfection of charity in its lowest state, he would disdain the higher grades and the total perfection of charity. (ST. II II q.186 a.2 ad.2)

2) But it is not enough simply to avoid the rejection of Christian perfection. To fulfil the precept it is necessary to desire to reach perfection.

3) Is it then necessary always to aspire to the more perfect and to practice it in reality?

In the first quotation St. Thomas stated that one may not disdain perfection; in the second quotation he stated that one must desire perfection; and in the third quotation he teaches that one must love the greater good.

Does this mean that the aspiration to the more perfect is limited to a simple affective and sentimental tendency, to a pure romanticism on the plane of love, without ever reaching the energetic and definitive "I will"?

Let us turn again to the Angelic Doctor:

This principle gives us the key to the true solution of the problem. The interior will is not a true will if, when the occasion offers itself, it is not translated into works or action. Consequently, one could not say that interiorly he loves the greater good or the more perfect if, given the opportunity to practice it, he fails to do so without a reasonable cause. The reason given by St. Thomas to prove that we are not obliged to the more perfect in the level of action is that no one is obliged to the uncertain and undetermined. There are so many things that we could do each day which are more perfect than the things that we actually do. But since they are so numerous, so uncertain and so indefinite, we cannot be obliged to practice them, nor is there any fault in omitting them and using that time in performing actions which in themselves are less perfect. But if it should happen that a better good presents itself to us as a particular and specified good, and after taking account of, all the circumstances of place, time, obligations of one's state, etc., it is presented to us as the better good here and now, we are no longer dealing with something which is merely objectively or materially the more perfect, and therefore undetermined and uncertain, but with that which is subjectively and formally more perfect, and therefore concrete and determined. Presented in this form, as a definite and concrete good, we are obliged to practice that good under pain of resisting grace. And to resist grace without a reasonable cause (and this would never happen if it is a true inspiration from the Holy Ghost) cannot fail to constitute a fault, at least an imperfection, if one does not wish to admit a true venial sin. In the majority of cases it will be a culpable negligence and therefore a venial sin.

In these cases it is evident that this would suffice to justify the doctrine of the obligation to do the more perfect or to choose the better good when it is presented here and now in view of all the circumstances. To say otherwise would be to maintain that the Holy Ghost authorizes us to commit culpable negligence. This leads us to examine briefly the concept of imperfection, with which we shall complete our discussion of the obligation to strive for Christian perfection.

There are two theological opinions on moral imperfections. The first opinion holds that there are no positive imperfections distinct from venial sin, that is, that all positive imperfections are true venial sins. The second opinion maintains that venial sin and imperfection (even positive imperfection) are two distinct things, or that there are imperfections which of themselves are not venial sins.

We may define an imperfection as the omission of a good act which is not of precept but simply of counsel or the remiss performance of an act of precept, that is, the performance of an act with a lesser degree of fervour than that of which the agent is capable. What is to be thought of this question? It seems to us that the truth can be found in a synthesis which would gather together the valid arguments for either opinion.

In theory it seems to us that it cannot be denied that there is a difference between venial sin and positive imperfection. For example, if one possesses the habit of charity with an intensity of 30 degrees, but performs an act of only 20 degrees of intensity, he has performed a remiss act and has on that account committed an imperfection. But it is not lawful to say that by that very fact he has committed a venial sin. Venial sin is evil, but the imperfect act performed is good, even though it is less good than it could have been. Nor does it suffice to say that we are obliged to practice that which here and now seems to us to be the more perfect and that, as a consequence, to fail to do the better act and to do the less perfect without sufficient motive would cease to be a good act. In this case, together with the imperfection which proceeds from a less perfect act, there would have to be a venial sin of imprudence, sloth, lack of charity, etc.

But the good imperfect act does not cease to be good simply because it is imperfect. When one recites the Rosary or some other voluntary prayer, he is performing a good action, although it may perhaps be accompanied by venial sins which proceed from voluntary distractions. On the other hand, one would have to say that the venial sin totally corrupts the good act and makes it evil, in which case it would be better not to pray than to pray imperfectly, and this is obviously absurd. One must not confuse what is less good in itself with that which is evil in itself, nor that which is less good for us here and now with that which is evil for us here and now. The lesser good is not an evil, nor is the lesser evil a good. We must not confuse good and evil nor precepts with counsels.

In spite of all this, it is very difficult in practice to decide the distinction between less generosity and actual negligence or sloth. In the majority of cases there will be true negligence, imprudence, sloth or an absence of charity, and, therefore, a venial sin. It is true that the accompanying venial sin does not compromise the goodness of the imperfect act, but it is something which is connected with the act, and for that reason there is an obligation to avoid it. But apart from this obligation, if we perform the imperfect good act, the act itself does not cease to be good in itself, although it be less good than it could have been and is accompanied by certain venial sins which proceed, not from the act itself (which would be a contradiction), but from the evil dispositions of the subject. There is an obligation to avoid the imperfection by reason of these adjacent sins and not by reason of the less perfect act which is in itself a good and not an evil.

In this way the two opinions concerning moral imperfection can be harmonized. No one is authorized to commit imperfections; he should avoid them at any cost. But the obligation to avoid them does not follow from the fact that an imperfection as such is evil, but because it is almost always accompanied by other evils, such as venial sin, which one is bound to avoid.

Configuration with Christ is the goal of our Christian life, since we thereby attain our own sanctification and at the same time give the greatest possible glory to God. In the present plan of divine Providence we cannot perfectly sanctify ourselves nor give the greatest possible glory to God except through Christ and in Christ. For that reason it is of the greatest importance to have clear notions concerning the applications of Christology to the Christian life.

We shall be saints only in the measure that we live the life of Christ, or rather, in the measure that Christ lives His life in us. The process of sanctification is a process of "Christification." The Christian must be converted into another Christ, and only when he can say in truth, "I live, now not I, but Christ liveth in me," can he be sure that he has reached the heights of perfection.

Christ's role in the life of His members is one of the predominant thoughts in the teaching of St. Paul. His entire apostolate consisted in revealing to the world the mystery of Christ (Col. 4; 3), "to enlighten all men as to what is the dispensation of the mystery which has been hidden from eternity in God" (Eph. 3; 9), in whom "dwells all the fulness of the Godhead corporeally" (Col. 2; 9), so that they "may be filled unto all the fulness of God" (Eph. 3; 19). We can summarize the application of Christology to the Christian life by taking the words which Christ spoke of Himself when He stated: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" (John 14; 6).

Jesus Christ is the only way. No one can go to the Father except through Him, for there has been given to us no other name under heaven by which we can be saved. According to the divine plan of our predestination, the sanctity to which God calls us through grace and adoption consists in a participation in the divine life which was brought to the world by Christ. This is expressly stated in divine revelation: "As he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and unspotted in his sight in charity. Who hath predestined us unto the adoption of children through Jesus Christ unto himself; according to the purpose of his will, unto the praise of the glory of his grace, in which He hath graced us in his beloved Son" (Eph.1; 4 - 6). Christ has re-established the divine plan of our salvation, which had been destroyed by the sin of Adam. "By this hath the charity of God appeared towards us, because God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world that we may live by him" (1 John 4; 9). Hence Christ is the only way by which we can go to the Father, and without Him we can do absolutely nothing. Therefore, the preoccupation of every Christian must be to live the life of Christ, to be incorporated in Him, and to let the sap of the true Vine circulate through his veins. Christ is the Vine and we are the branches, and the life of the branch depends on its union with the vine which imparts to it the vivifying sap.

St. Paul was unable to find any words in human language which could adequately express the incorporation of the Christian in the Vine. Everything about the Christian; his life, death and resurrection; must be intimately connected with Christ, and in order to express these profound truths, St. Paul had to invent expressions which had never before been used: "For if we have died with Him (conmortur) (2 Tim. 2; 11), we were buried with him (consepulti) (Rom. 6; 4), but God ... raised us up together (conresuscitati) (Eph. 2; 6), brought us to life together with Christ" (convivificavit nos) (ibid. 2; 5), so that "we shall also live with him" (et convivemus) (2 Tim. 2; 11) and sit together in heaven in Christ Jesus (et consedere) (Eph. 2; 6).

In view of the foregoing Pauline doctrine, we can heartily agree with the following observations of the saintly Dom Marmion:

Christ is, therefore, the only way of going to the Father. He is the only possible form of sanctity according to the divine plan. Only through Him, with Him and in Him can we attain the ideal intended by God in the creation, redemption and sanctification of the human race: the praise of his glory (Eph.1; 5 - 6). The Church reminds us of this daily in one of the most solemn moments of the Mass: Per ipsum, et cum ipso et in ipso est tibi Deo Patri omnipotenti in unitate Spiritus Sancti omnis honor et gloria. Only through His beloved Son will the Father accept our love and homage. For that reason the great saints, enlightened by God in a special manner to understand the mystery of Christ, wished to be dissolved and to be absorbed by Christ so that He could live their life in them. Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity, one of the souls who penetrated this mystery most profoundly, asked Christ:

Our incorporation in Christ is the very basis of our sanctification and the very substance of our spiritual life. It is from this fundamental dogma that all other ascetical and mystical teachings spring.

Christ is the Truth, the absolute and integral Truth. As the uncreated Wisdom of the Word, He communicated to His sacred humanity, and through it to us, all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. This leads us to speak of the exemplary causality of Christ, which is exercised on us through His person, His works and His teaching. As regards His person, Dom Marmion has written the following sublime doctrine:

Consequently, the entire Christian life and all sanctity, as Dom Marmion teaches, can be reduced to being by grace what Christ is by nature: a son of God. This should be the basic preoccupation of every Christian: to contemplate Jesus and especially to form the attitude of a son before the heavenly Father who is also our Father, as Jesus Himself has told us: "I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God" (John 20; 17).

There can be no doubt that this is the most important exemplary causality which Christ exercises upon us, although it is not the only one, for Christ is also our model in His works and in His virtues. Jesus practiced what He taught and preached what He practiced; His life and doctrine form a harmonious unity from which there constantly issued glory to the Father. According to St. Thomas, the primary motive of the Incarnation was the redemption of the human race. But in addition to this principal finality, the Incarnation also had other motives, and among them, doubtless, that of providing for us in Christ a most perfect model and exemplar of perfect virtue. And this was not without a special design of divine Providence.

Speaking absolutely, the prototype and eminent exemplar of all perfection and sanctity is the Eternal Word. He is, if one may use the expression, the very ideal of God Himself. The Father contemplates Himself in the Word with infinite complacency and love, for the Word is the living, infinite, personal ideal with which the Father is well pleased through all eternity. Through the Word, the Father created the angels, men and the entire universe, as St. John teaches: "All things were made through him, and without him was made nothing that was made" (John 1; 3). The Word is also the ideal of angels and man and He would have been the ideal of all the possible beings which the Father could have created through all the centuries.

Lastly, as the Eternal Word Jesus communicates His infinite wisdom to us by means of His sacred doctrine.

The intellect of Christ is an abyss in which poor human reason, even when illumined by faith, is completely submerged. There are four classes of knowledge in Christ, completely distinct and yet in perfect harmony:

a) divine knowledge, which He possesses as the Word of God;

b) beatific knowledge, which is proper to the comprehensores and which Jesus possessed even here on earth;

c) infused knowledge, which He received from God and in a degree which infinitely surpasses that of the angels;

d) and acquired knowledge, which increased or was more and more manifested throughout His life. (ST. III q.9 - 12)

Rightly did St. Paul speak of Christ as possessing all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2; 3). Christ did not wish to reserve all His treasures of knowledge for Himself, but it pleased the Father that they should be communicated to His adopted sons in the measure and degree that is necessary. Christ Himself said to the Father at the Last Supper: "The words which thou hast given me I have given to them. And they have received them, and have known of a truth that I came forth from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me" (John 17; 8). And what sublime doctrine is that Jesus has given us! Rightly did the ministers report to the Pharisees concerning the teaching of Christ: "Never has man spoken as this man" (John 7; 46).

In speaking of Christ as our life, we arrive at the most profound and the most beautiful aspect of the mystery of Christ. Christ is our life in three different manners:

a) so far as He merited grace for us, which is the life of the soul (meritorious cause);

b) so far as that supernatural life springs from Him (efficient cause); and

c) so far as He communicates that life to us (capital influence).

The merit of Christ in relation to us is intimately connected with His redemptive sacrifice. Let us review briefly the fundamental points concerning His infinite satisfaction, which merited for us and restored to us the supernatural life which had been lost through the sin of Adam. (ST. III qq. 48 - 49 ; Dom Marmion, Christ the Life of the Soul, c.3 ; c¦ . Chapter four of these notes)

It was impossible for the human race to make worthy satisfaction for the sin of Adam. If He had so desired, God could have freely forgiven the debt, but if He were to demand rigorous satisfaction, the impotence of the human race was absolute, due to the infinite distance between God and man. Only a God-man could bridge that infinite gap and offer divine justice a complete satisfaction. Presupposing all this, the incarnation of the Word was absolutely necessary for the redemption of the human race.

"And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1; 14). Since Christ united in Himself the two natures; divine and human; in one divine person, all His actions had an infinite divine value. But the redemption of the world actually was effected only through the sacrifice of the Cross. This is what the Father willed. Theologians have attempted to penetrate this mystery of the crucifixion and death of Christ to redeem the world, but it will always remain a secret of the inscrutable designs of divine Providence. Christ merited not only for Himself but for us, with the merit of strict justice; de condigno ex toto rigore justitiae, as the theologians say. This justice has its foundation in the capital grace of Christ, in virtue of which He is constituted Head of the entire human race, and in the sovereign liberty of all His actions and the ineffable love with which He accepted His passion in order to save us.

The efficacy of His merits and satisfactions is strictly infinite and for that reason inexhaustible. That should arouse in us a boundless confidence in His love and mercy. In spite of our weaknesses, the merits of Christ have a super-abundant efficacy to lead us to the heights of perfection. His merits are ours and they are at our disposition. In heaven He continues to intercede for us constantly (Heb. 7; 25). Our weakness and poverty constitute a title to the divine mercy, and when we avail ourselves of this title we give great glory to the Father, because we thereby proclaim that Jesus is the only mediator whom it has pleased the Father to send to earth. For that reason, no man should become discouraged when he considers his own weakness and misery. The inexhaustible riches of Christ are at our disposition (Eph. 3; 8).

All the supernatural graces which man has received from the fall of Adam to the coming of Christ have been granted only in reference to Christ; intuitu meritorum Christi. And all the riches which men will receive until the end of time will spring forth from the heart of Christ. We do not have the gratia Dei, as did our first parents and the angels, but we have the gratia Christi, that is, the grace of God through Christ. This grace is given to us in many ways, but the source from which it flows is Christ, the sacred humanity united to the person of the Word. This is what is meant by the phrase: "Christ, the efficient cause of grace."

Jesus is the fountain of life. His sacred humanity is the instrument united to His divinity for the efficient production of the supernatural life. Even more, the very humanity of Christ can also be a source of bodily life, for the Gospel tells us that there went forth from Christ a power which cured the sick and raised the dead to life (Luke 6; 19). But we are here interested primarily in Christ as the fountain and source of supernatural life.

In order to give us our natural life, God utilised our parents as instruments; to give us supernatural life, He utilises the sacred humanity of Christ. Christ has been constituted by the heavenly Father as Head, Pontiff, Mediator, Source and Dispenser of all graces, and particularly as Redeemer and in reference to His passion and death. St. Paul states that He "emptied himself, taking the nature of a slave and being made like unto men. And appearing in the form of man, and in habit found as man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. Therefore, God also has exalted him and has bestowed upon him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven, on earth and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father" (Phil. 2; 7 - 11).

The Gospel illustrates the manner in which Christ used His sacred humanity to confer supernatural life on souls. "Son," He said to the paralytic, "thy sins are forgiven thee." Immediately there was a reaction of surprise and scandal among the bystanders. "Who is this man who pretends to forgive sins? Only God can do this." But Jesus turns to them and gives them a convincing argument that He, as man, has the power to forgive sins. "Which is easier," He asks them, "to say thy sins are forgiven thee or to say arise, take up thy bed and walk? But that you may know that the Son of man has the power to forgive sins," and then He addresses the paralytic, "Arise, take up thy bed, and go into thy house."

Christ used the expression "Son of man" deliberately. It is true that only God (or one who through the power of God is authorised to do so) can forgive sins. Therefore, He who would dare to forgive sins, not in the name of God but in his own name, and has in addition worked a stupendous miracle to testify to his power, must indeed have the personal power to forgive sins. Christ is the Son of God and the author of grace, and He alone has power to forgive sins by His own authority; but in so doing, He used His sacred humanity as an instrument in the production of supernatural life in souls. Hence He used the expression "Son of man" in order to signify that if He as man worked miracles, conferred grace and pardoned sins, it is because His sacred humanity is of itself vivifying. In other words, His humanity is an apt instrument for producing and causing grace by reason of its personal or hypostatic union with the divine Word.

There is no difficulty in explaining the instrumental causality of the sacred humanity of Christ while He was yet on earth, but what is to be said of the influence of His humanity after His ascension into heaven? Is the influence of His sacred humanity now only a moral causality or is it still physical?

Jesus is Head of the Mystical Body which is His Church. "And all things he made subject under his feet, and him he gave as head over all the Church, which indeed is his body, the completion of him who fills all with all" (Eph. 1; 22 - 23). St. Thomas asks whether Christ as man is Head of the Church and answers the question by establishing an analogy with the natural order.

In the human head, he states, we can consider three things: order, perfection and power. Order, because the head is the first part of man, beginning from the higher part; perfection, because in the head dwell all the senses, both interior and exterior, while in the other members there is only the sense of touch; power, because the power and movement of the other members, as well as the direction of their acts, is from the head, by reason of the sensitive and motive power which rules there. Now all these characteristics are found in Christ spiritually, and therefore Christ is Head of the Church. He has the primacy of order because He is the firstborn among many brethren (Rom. 8; 29) and has been constituted "above every Principality and Power and Virtue and Dominion; in short above every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come" (Eph. 1; 21), so that "in all things he may have the first place" (Col. 1; 18). He has perfection above all others because in Him is found the plenitude of all graces, according to St. John: "full of grace and of truth" (1; 14). Lastly, He has the vital power over all the members of the Church because of His plenitude we have all received (John 1; 16).

St. Paul summarises these three characteristics in one statement when he writes to the Colossians: "He is the head of his body, the Church; he who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he may have the first place. For it has pleased God the Father that in him all his fullness should dwell, and that through him he should reconcile to himself all things, whether on the earth or in the heavens, making peace through the blood of his cross" (1; 18 - 20). And St. Thomas, in another place, (ST. de veritate 29 a.4) proves that Christ is Head of the Church by reason of His dignity, His government and His causality. But the formal reason for Christ's headship is the plenitude of His habitual grace, connoting the grace of union. Hence, according to St. Thomas, the personal grace by which the soul of Christ is sanctified is essentially the same as that by which He justifies others as Head of the Church; there is only a rational distinction between them.

How far does this capital grace of Christ extend? Who are affected by it and in what degree? According to St. Thomas, it extends to all the angels and to all men, except the damned, but in various manners and degrees.

That Christ is Head of the angels is explicitly stated in the epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians (2; 10). Christ is Head of this entire multitude because His sacred humanity, personally united to the Word, consequently shares in the graces and gifts of the Word much more perfectly than do the angels, and He also infuses in them many graces such as accidental glory, charisma, revelations of the mysteries of God, etc. Therefore, Christ is Head of the angels.

Christ is also Head of men, but in different degrees. (ST. III q.8 a.3) He is Head of the blessed in a most perfect manner, because they are united with Him definitely by confirmation in grace and glory; the same is true regarding the souls in purgatory as pertains to confirmation in grace. He is Head of all men in the state of grace, because they possess supernatural life and are united to Christ as living members through grace and charity. He is Head of Christians in the state of mortal sin, although less perfectly, since they are actually united to Christ through unformed faith and hope. Formal heretics and pagans are not actual but potential members of Christ, and those of this group who are predestined will one day pass from potential to actual members of Christ. The devils and the damned, on the other hand, are in no sense members of Christ, nor are the souls in limbo, for they are definitively separated from Christ and can never be united with Him through sanctifying grace.

But how does Christ exercise His influence on those living members who are united to Him in this life through grace and charity? He exercises it in many ways, but they can all be summarised under two headings: through the sacraments and through an indwelling by faith which is vivified by charity.

Sacramental influence. It is de fide that Christ is the author of the sacraments. It must be so, because the sacraments are defined as sensible signs which signify and produce sanctifying grace, and only Christ, who is the unique source of grace, could institute them. And He instituted them precisely to communicate His own divine life to us through them. These sensible signs have the power of communicating grace by their own intrinsic power (ex opere operato), but only as instruments of Christ, that is, in virtue of the impulse which they receive from the humanity of Christ united to the Word. For that reason the unworthiness of the human minister who confers the sacrament (whether he be sinner or heretic) is no obstacle to its validity as long as he had the intention of doing what the Church does in the administration of the sacrament. Christ wished to place the communication of His divine grace through the sacraments completely outside human weakness, with the result that we can have complete confidence in the efficacy of the sacraments as long as we ourselves do not place any obstacle to their sanctifying effects.

This last point needs special emphasis among modern Christians, for it is possible for us to place an insuperable obstacle to the sanctifying effects of a sacrament. No sacrament is valid if one does not interiorly consent to receive it. The lack of repentance impedes the reception of grace in the sacrament of penance or in the baptism of an adult in the state of mortal sin; conscious mortal sin prevents the reception of grace in the five sacraments of the living and makes the action sacrilegious. But even if one possesses the necessary dispositions for the valid and fruitful reception of the sacraments, the measure of grace received in each case will depend not only on the excellence of the sacrament itself but on the perfection and fervour of one's dispositions. If the individual approaches the sacrament with a hunger and thirst to be united to God through grace, he will receive an abundance of grace. As the classical example of the fountain and the vessel illustrates, the amount of water received will depend, not only on the fountains, but also on the size of the vessel in which the water is received. From this follows the great importance of a proper preparation for the reception of the sacraments, and especially of the Eucharist, which brings us not only grace but the very fountain and source of grace. It is through the sacraments especially that Christ exercises His vital influence on us, and we should approach them with the desire of increasing our supernatural life and our union with God. They are the authentic channels of grace, and there is nothing else that can replace them. Some souls, not realising these truths, prefer other pious practices and devotions which are infinitely less efficacious than the sacraments. It is an injury to Christ not to appreciate, or to relegate to a second place, these channels of grace which He instituted as a means of increasing our supernatural life.

Indwelling through faith. As regards our communication with Christ through a vivified faith, St. Paul uses a mysterious expression in one of his epistles. He says that Christ dwells in our hearts through faith (Eph. 3; 17). What do these words mean? Is he referring to some kind of indwelling of Christ in our souls? It would be a great error to think this. The humanity of Christ is physically present in us through Holy Communion, but this presence is so closely bound to the sacramental species that when they are substantially altered Christ's physical presence ceases entirely and there remain in the soul only His divinity (together with the Father and the Holy Ghost) and the influence of His grace.

Nevertheless, it is a fact that Christ does in some way dwell in our hearts through faith. St. Thomas does not hesitate to interpret the words of St. Paul literally: "Christ dwells in us by faith (Eph. 3; 17). Consequently, by faith Christ's power is united to us."(ST. III q.62 a.5 ad.2) In other words, it is the power of Christ which dwells in us through faith, and as often as we turn to Him through the communication of a faith vivified by charity, a sanctifying power emanates from Christ to our souls. The Christ of today is the same Christ of the Gospel, and all who approach Him through faith and love will share in the power that emanates from Him to cure the sicknesses of body and soul (Luke 6; 19). "How, then," asks Dom Marmion, "can we doubt that when we approach Him, even outside the sacraments, with humility and confidence, divine power comes forth from Him to enlighten, strengthen and help us? No one has ever approached Jesus Christ with faith without being touched by the beneficient rays that ever escape from this furnace of light and heat: Virtus de illo exibat." (Dom Marmion; Christ, the life of the soul) Therefore, the soul that would sanctify itself should increase and intensify more and more this communication with Christ through an ardent faith vivified by charity. This exercise can be performed at any moment, many times a day, while the sacramental contact through Holy Communion can be had only once daily.

The quintessence of the Christian life can be summarised in the following statement: the glory of God as the ultimate end, our sanctification as the proximate end to which we should tend continually, and incorporation in Christ as the only possible way of attaining both ends. In a word, everything can be summarised in living the mystery of Christ with ever increasing intensity. With this thought in mind, there is a formula which admirably describes all that we ought to do in order to scale the heights of Christian perfection. It is used by the Church in the Mass and constitutes one of its most august rites. Immediately before reciting the Pater Noster, the celebrant genuflects before the Blessed Sacrament which rests on the corporal, and then upon rising, he takes the Host in his hand and traces five crosses, three above the chalice and two in front of it, as he pronounces the sublime words:

As is evident from the formula, the glory of the Trinity is the absolute end of the creation of the world and of the redemption and sanctification of the human race. But in the actual economy of divine Providence, the glory of the Trinity is realised through Christ, with Christ and in Christ. Hence anything that man would use for giving glory to God apart from Christ would be completely inept for the purpose. Everything in the Christian life must be reduced to doing all things through Christ, with Christ and in Christ, under the impulse of the Holy Ghost, for the glory of the Father.

Christ is the only Way, and no one can go to the Father except through Him. Therefore, the principal preoccupation of the Christian who wishes to sanctify himself should be to incorporate himself in Christ until he does all things through Christ. Then he can offer all his works to the Father in and through Christ, and this will give great glory to the Father. For the Father has but one eternal obsession, so to speak, and it is His Word. Nothing else is of direct concern to the Father, and if He loves us it is because we love Christ and believe that He came from the Father. As Jesus Himself has stated: "For the Father himself loves you because you have loved me, and have believed that I came forth from God" (John 16; 27). This sublime mystery should convert our love of Christ into a kind of obsession. What else does the Church teach in the liturgy but this truth? Although the Church is the spouse of Christ, she does not dare to ask anything of the Father in her own name but always petitions per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum Filium tuum.

It is not even enough to do all things through Christ, but the Christian should endeavour also to do all things with Christ. The divinity of Christ, the Word of God, is present in every soul in the state of grace. And the Word can always use the instrumental power of His sacred humanity, to which He is united hypostatically, to fill us with supernatural life. Christ, the man-God, is the source and fountain of grace, and the grace that sanctifies us is His capital grace, that is, the habitual grace which He possesses in its plenitude and which He as Head diffuses on His members. Hence this notion of doing all things with Christ is not an illusion or a pious exaggeration; it is a theological fact. As long as we are in the state of grace, Christ is within us, physically in His divinity and virtually in His sacred humanity, and for that reason there is no repugnance in saying that we can do all things with Him. And what great value our works have when they are presented to the Father as having been performed with Christ! But without this union, our works are worthless, as Christ has taught (John 15; 5).

This notion, which is complementary to the preceding and preparatory for the following, appears constantly in the teaching of St. Paul. He who had been given an unequalled insight into the mystery of Christ was unable to describe adequately "the unfathomable riches of Christ' (Eph. 3; 8) and the manner in which we have been given a share in them until we are filled with "all the fullness of God" (Eph. 3; 19). All the efforts of the Christian should therefore be directed to an ever more intimate union with Christ, to the end that all his actions will be performed in unison with Christ. A single act performed by Jesus gives more glory to the Father than all the acts of all the angels and all the blessed, including the Blessed Virgin. But without Jesus, our acts are worthless, for they receive their eternal value from Him alone.

To perform one's actions through Christ and with Christ is something sublime, but to perform one's actions in Him, identified with Him, is still greater. The first two modalities are something extrinsic to us, but the third identifies us with Christ in a certain manner and makes our works His. In order to appreciate this truth, it is necessary to consider our incorporation in Christ as Head of the Mystical Body. By reason of this incorporation, the Christian forms a part of Christ. The total Christ of whom St. Augustine speaks is Christ plus ourselves. The Christian in grace forms one thing with Christ, and as a branch of the vine he lives the same life as Christ.

Once this truth is grasped, the expressions of St. Paul and the Gospel take on a more profound meaning. Our sufferings fill up "what is lacking of the sufferings of Christ" (Col.1; 24); it is Christ who works in us and triumphs (Col.1; 29). When we are persecuted, He is persecuted (Acts 9; 5); the slightest service done for us is accepted and rewarded as if it had been done for Him (Matt. 10; 42). The supreme desire of Christ is that we should be one with Him (John 17; 21), and to such a degree that we are perfect in unity in the bosom of the Father (John 17; 23).

Consequently, there can be no doubt that Christ has incorporated us in Himself and has made us His members. We are truly His body. We are not only Christ's, but we are Christ, as St. Augustine teaches: Concorporans nos sibi, faciens nos membra sua ut in illo et nos Christus essemus. ... Et omnes in illo et Christi et Christus sumus, quia quodammodo totus Christus, caput et corpus est. (Enarr. in Ps., in Ps.26 enarr.2) Hence the Christian should so live that all his works are performed through Christ, with Christ and in Christ, and he should be so identified with Christ that in looking upon the soul the Father sees His son. This was the sublime desire of Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity: "Do not see in me anything but Thy beloved Son, in whom Thou hast placed all Thy complacency." And in order to realise this sublime goal, she begged Christ to substitute Himself for her, and she asked the Holy Ghost to effect in her a new incarnation of the Word.

Est. The Church uses the indicative and not the subjunctive form of the verb, for it is not a question of desire or petition but of an accomplished fact. In these moments, when the Church is gathered around the altar to offer the body of the Lord who rests on it, God actually receives all honour and glory. The same thing is true of every action of a Christian which ascends to heaven through Christ, with Christ and in Christ. The slightest action thus acquires an infinite value and gives great glory to God. And this is another motivation for being intimately united with Christ.

"TIBI DEO PATRI OMNIPOTENTI"

Everything is directed to the Father. This was the constant and unique goal of every act performed by Christ. He sought always to do the Father's will (Matt. 26; 39) and to give glory to His Father (John 17; 1). The first words of Christ which are recorded in the Gospel are: "Did you not know that I must be about my father's business?" (Luke 2; 49). The last words which He spoke from the cross were: "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit" (Luke 23; 46). Jesus lived and died, thinking of His Father. The Christian should strive to imitate Jesus in all things, and especially in this constant aspiration to the Father. St. Paul summarises it beautifully when he says: "for all things are yours ... and you are Christ's, and Christ is God's" (1 Cor. 3; 22 - 23).

"IN UNITATE SPIRITU SANCTI"

The glory of God does not pertain exclusively to the Father; it is the glory of the divinity and hence of the entire Trinity. Consequently, the glory which the Father receives from Christ also pertains to the Holy Ghost, the ineffable bond of love and union in the adorable Trinity.

"OMNIS HONOR ET GLORIAE"

All glory must ascend to the Trinity through, with and in Christ, for He is the way. And thus is the divine circular motion completed: Jesus as Head and as mediator brings grace and supernatural life to His members; they, in turn, give glory to God by returning the selfsame supernatural gifts to God through Christ.

One of the outstanding authorities on the role of Mary in the Christian life has stated: "The more you look at Mary in your prayers, contemplations, actions and sufferings, if not in a clear and distinct manner, then at least with a general and imperceptible glance, the more perfectly will you find Jesus, who is always with Mary, great, powerful, active and incomprehensible, more than in heaven or in any other creature. (St. Louis Grignion de Montefort, True Devotion, Part 2, c.2, 5th motive, n.4)

Mary is, in a word, the shortest and most secure path to Christ. God has wished that Mary should be so intimately associated with the divine plan of redemption and sanctification that they cannot be attained without her. Consequently, this is not merely a question of another devotion, but Mary has a basic and necessary role to play in the Christian life.

Having examined the end and the basic principles of the Spiritual life, we shall now consider its growth or practice. The manner of treating this part of the theology of Christian perfection varies with different authors. Some divide the material on the basis of the traditional three ways: purgative, illuminative and unitive, and then proceed to describe the principal characteristics manifested by souls as they pass through the various ways.

Those who defend the doctrine of two distinct paths to perfection consider those same three ways, first in the ascetical, and then in the mystical phase of the spiritual life.

Others describe the whole process of the spiritual life under the aspect of the practice of prayer. Others, finally, abstract more or less from any chronological order in the treatment of the phenomena of the spiritual life and classify the material under the general principles of the means of sanctification.

All these methods, except the second, have their advantages and disadvantages. The principal advantage of using the three ways is that it is closer to the facts, but it has the serious disadvantage of isolating these three aspects of the spiritual life. In practice they do not fall into separate categories but intermingle to such an extent that at any moment or at any phase of the spiritual life one may find elements of purification, illumination and union. For that reason, the authors who use this method are forced to repeat themselves time and again and to return constantly to material which they have already treated.

Those who develop the doctrine of the spiritual life on the basis of the grades of prayer will depend greatly on confirmation from experience. They will also perhaps recall the words of St. Pius X, in which he expressly declares that there is an intimate relation between the grades of prayer treated by St. Teresa and the growth of the spiritual life. But it has this inconvenience, that it does not solve many problems which arise in regard to the Christian life in general. Those who prefer to classify the material into homogeneous sections proceed with great clarity and avoid monotonous repetitions. However, they are then forced to study separately many things which in actual life are intimately related. We do not think that there is any method which will have all the advantages and will avoid all the disadvantages.

The spiritual life is very mysterious and complex. There is such a variety of manifestations when the divine combines with the individual psychology of a particular soul that it is practically impossible to reduce the whole matter to human categories.

The Holy Ghost breathes where He will, and He leads souls in different ways to the heights of perfection. One could say that each soul follows a path that is proper to itself and never repeated in the case of any other soul. Nevertheless, it is necessary to follow some method in order to proceed with order and the greatest possible clarity in these intricate questions. Therefore, recognising its disadvantages, we intend to follow the method of dividing the material into homogeneous parts. Keeping in mind that the purpose of this work is pedagogical, we shall first give a brief summary of the growth of the spiritual life, and then we shall treat at length of the negative aspect and the positive aspect of this growth.

Each soul follows its own path to sanctity under the direction and impulse of the Holy Ghost; there are no two persons absolutely identical, either in body or in soul. The masters of the spiritual life have attempted to give various classifications by concentrating on the predominant dispositions of souls, a useful device to establish a point of reference for determining the state in which a particular soul finds itself at a given time in the spiritual life. This knowledge is very important in practice, since the spiritual direction of a soul in the first stages of the spiritual life will be very different from that which is given to those who are advanced or already perfect.

The three principal classifications which have been proposed in the history of Christian spirituality are the classic division into the three ways (purgative, illuminative and unitive), that of the three degrees (beginners, proficient and perfect), and that of St. Teresa of Avila as outlined in her Interior Castle. We shall blend these three classifications in order to construct the following schema of the entire Christian life.

The "outer court of the castle" is the stage of the sinners who live habitually in the state of sin and are not interested in abandoning it. Perhaps the majority sin through ignorance or frailty, but there are also some who give themselves to sin because of a cold indifference or even because of an obstinate and diabolical malice. In some cases there is a complete absence of remorse and a deliberate rejection of all prayer or recourse to God. They consider mortal sin to be of little importance or something that is readily pardoned. For that reason, they imprudently place themselves in all kinds of occasions of sin, and they succumb to temptation with the greatest facility. They miss Mass on Sundays frequently and for the slightest reason; their annual confession, which is sometimes omitted, is made in a mechanical fashion, without any interior devotion and without a true desire to give up their sins definitively. They sometimes make use of vocal prayers, but without attention or true piety and usually to ask God for temporal things.

When the soul begins to desire sincerely to live in a Christian manner, it enters the purgative way or the first degree of charity. Its basic dispositions are described by St. Thomas in the following words: "At first it is man's principal concern to avoid sin and resist the passions, which move him in opposition to charity. And this pertains to beginners, in whom charity must be nourished and augmented lest it be destroyed." (Ia IIae Q24 a9)

The purgative way can be subdivided into the first three mansions described by St. Teresa of Avila. The first mansions are those of the faithful souls who struggle somewhat weakly against mortal sin but sincerely repent through good confessions. Frequently, however, they voluntarily place themselves in the occasion of sin. They make no effort to avoid venial sin because they consider it to be of no importance. Their practices of piety are generally restricted to those which are commanded by the Church, and even here they sometimes fail. On rare occasions they may perform some pious work of supererogation. Their prayer is purely vocal and is accompanied by many distractions. Their petitions in prayer are usually in regard to temporal things and rarely pertain to the spiritual.

In the second mansions we find those good souls who valiantly struggle against mortal sin, although they find themselves in occasions which lead to their fall. When this happens, they repent sincerely and promptly go to confession. They still commit deliberate venial sins because their battle to overcome them is rather weak, their repentance is superficial, and they constantly fall back into the same venial sins. They frequent the sacraments, especially on the great feasts, the first Fridays, etc., and sometimes attend daily Mass, but with little preparation. They readily omit such devotions as the daily Rosary. Their prayer in general is still vocal, although at times they may attempt to make a meditation, which is often accompanied by voluntary distractions.

The third mansions of the purgative way comprise those pious souls who rarely commit mortal sin, and when they do their repentance is profound, they immediately confess their sin, and they take precautions to avoid a relapse. They sincerely combat venial sin and make use of the particular examen, although as yet it is not performed with fidelity and it produces little fruit. They usually attend Mass and receive Communion daily, but often it is with a certain spirit of routine. They confess their sins each week but with only a slight amendment of their defects. Such souls often say the Rosary daily, make frequent visits to the Blessed Sacrament, and make the stations of the Cross regularly. They practice meditation daily but often do not make a good meditation because of their many distractions. They readily omit meditation, especially in times of dryness or numerous occupations which could have been avoided without failing in the duties of their state in life. Frequently they make affective prayer, which tends to become more and more simplified. The night of the senses usually begins here as a transition to the illuminative way.

When the soul has decided to enter upon a life of solid piety and to advance along the way of virtue, it has entered upon the illuminative way. This is what many spiritual authors call the second conversion. The principal concern of the soul at this point is to grow in the Christian life by increasing and strengthening its charity. We can divide the illuminative way into the following degrees or mansions.

The beginning of the illuminative way is found in those fervent souls who are in the fourth mansions. They never commit mortal sin. If they are suddenly surprised by unexpected temptation, their mortal sin is a doubtful one and is followed immediately by profound repentance, immediate confession and acts of penance. They exercise great care to avoid venial sin, and it is rarely fully deliberate when they commit a sin. They make use of the particular examen as a means of combating all venial sin. Such souls, however, often avoid examining themselves concerning imperfections, lest they be obliged to combat them. They love abnegation and self-denial, but only to a certain point. Their daily Mass and Communion are accompanied by fervent preparation and thanksgiving. They are diligent in the weekly confession, they seek spiritual direction in order to make progress in virtue, and they have a tender devotion to Mary. They are faithful in prayer in spite of dryness or aridity in the night of the senses. They practice the prayer of simplicity, which is a transition to contemplative prayer, and in moments of particular intensity they enjoy the prayer of infused recollection and of quiet.

In the fifth mansions we find those souls that are relatively perfect. They never commit a deliberate venial sin, although sometimes they may fall by surprise or lack of advertence. Then they repent of their sin and make reparation. Any imperfections are immediately rejected and combated with all their strength. There may be some deliberate imperfections, but they are quickly repented. There are frequent acts of abnegation and renunciation, and the particular examen is now aimed at seeking perfection in a definite virtue. Their practices of piety become more simple and less numerous but are practiced with greater love. Charity is beginning to have a more intense and a more actual influence on everything they do. They love solitude; they are more and more disinterested; they experience a great longing for God, a desire for heaven, a love of the cross, a disinterested zeal, and a great hunger for Communion. Their life of prayer is so habitual that it is as natural as breathing. They have reached the contemplative prayer of union, and frequently they undergo passive purifications and manifest certain phenomena that are concomitant with the mystical state.

When the life of prayer becomes, as it were, the very breathing of the soul, even amidst its occupations and duties of state, and when intimate union with God and the attainment of complete Christian perfection constitute the supreme ideal of its life, the soul has entered the unitive way. Its fundamental preoccupation is to be united with God and to enjoy Him. The unitive way can be subdivided into two grades or mansions.

The first degree of the unitive way is that of the heroic souls who are in the sixth mansions. They never commit deliberate imperfections; at most they are only partially deliberate and are quickly rejected. They perform all their practices of piety with an exquisite fidelity, but they are concerned only with being united more intimately with God. Their disinterest in self has reached the point of forgetfulness of self. They have a great thirst for suffering and their penitential practices are severe. They would wish to offer themselves completely as a holocaust for the conversion of sinners. Frequently they offer themselves as victim souls. In their life of prayer, contemplation is practically habitual. They enjoy the prayer of union in a very high degree and it is frequently the prayer of ecstatic union. They undergo the passive purifications of the night of the spirit. The spiritual espousal occurs at this stage, as well as the concomitant mystical phenomena and sometimes graces gratis datae.

In the seventh mansions we find the great saints, in whom imperfections are scarcely apparent. Their practices of piety have been reduced to the simple exercise of love. As St. John of the Cross says: "Now loving is my only exercise." Their love has reached a point of incredible intensity, but it is still tranquil. They enjoy an unchanging peace and serenity; they manifest profound humility, unity of judgment and simplicity of intention. All that remains is the honour and glory of God. In their prayer life they enjoy what St. Teresa describes as a certain intellectual vision of the Blessed Trinity in the soul. They have reached the transforming union and mystical marriage, and sometimes confirmation in grace. Such, in its general lines, is the path which souls usually travel in their journey to sanctity. It admits of an infinite variety of modification because no two souls are exactly alike, but the expert director who pays close attention to the general characteristics which we have described will be able to determine rather accurately the degree of the spiritual life which has been attained by a soul at any given time.

We shall now examine in detail the two basic aspects of the Christian life: the negative and the positive. Although in practice these two elements are usually intermingled and sometimes inseparable, for pedagogical reasons we shall treat first of the negative aspect in its entirety and then of the positive aspect.

Sin is the worst enemy of our sanctification and is in reality the only enemy, since everything else that impedes growth in holiness either comes from sin or leads to sin. Sin is a voluntary transgression against the law of God. It always presupposes three essential elements: (1) forbidden matter, (2) deliberation on the part of the intellect, and (3) consent on the part of the will.

If the matter is grave and the deliberation and consent are complete, one has committed a mortal sin; if the matter is light or if deliberation and consent are imperfect, the sin is venial. Within these two types of sin there is an infinity of degrees. The detailed study of sin pertains to moral theology; we shall discuss only those things which pertain to the struggle for sanctity and shall be concerned principally with the manner of combating sin and voluntary imperfections.

Unfortunately, there are countless men who live habitually in mortal sin. Absorbed almost entirely by preoccupations of this life, enmeshed in professional affairs, devoured by an insatiable thirst for pleasure and diversion, and overwhelmed with a religious ignorance which sometimes reaches incredible extremes, they never ask any questions concerning the life to come. Some, especially if they received some degree of Christian education during childhood and if they still preserve some remnant of faith, react in the face of approaching death and receive the last sacraments before appearing before God. But many others go down to the grave without any regrets save the fact that they must leave this world. These unfortunate people are what St. Teresa calls "paralysed souls who, unless the Lord Himself comes and commands them to rise, are like the man who had lain beside the pool for thirty years; they are unfortunate creatures and live in great peril." They are actually in danger of eternal damnation. If death were to surprise them in this state they would be lost for all eternity. Habitual mortal sin has stained their soul to such an extent that there is, as St. Teresa says, "no darkness more black nor anything so obscure that this soul is not much more so." St. Teresa also says that if sinners could understand what happens to a soul when it sins mortally, "it would not be possible for anyone to sin, even if he had to undertake the greatest efforts that can be imagined in order to avoid the occasions of sin." Nevertheless, not all those who live habitually in the state of sin have contracted the same responsibility before God.

We can distinguish four classes of sins which serve as a basis for classifying sinners into as many categories.

We are not referring to a total and invincible ignorance, which would excuse entirely from sin, but to that ignorance which results from an anti-religious or completely indifferent education, or from an environment which is hostile or completely devoid of any religious influence. Those who live in such surroundings usually have some awareness of the malice of sin. They are perfectly conscious of the fact that certain actions which they commit with facility are not morally right. Perhaps from time to time they even feel a certain remorse. In any case, they are capable of committing deliberate mortal sin. At the same time it is necessary to recognise that the responsibility of such persons before God is greatly lessened. If they have preserved a horror for that which seems unjust or sinful to them; if, in spite of external weaknesses, they have remained basically upright; if they have practiced even in a rudimentary fashion some devotion to the Blessed Virgin which they learned in childhood; if they have refrained from attacking religion and its ministers; and if especially at the hour of death they raise their heart to God, full of remorse and confident in His mercy, there is no doubt that they will be judged with special benignity at the divine tribunal. If Christ advises us that much more will be asked of him to whom much has been given (Luke 12; 48), it is reasonable to think that little will be asked of him who has received little. Souls such as these usually turn to God with comparative readiness if the opportunity presents itself. Since their careless life did not proceed from true malice, but from a profound ignorance, any situation that makes a strong impression on the soul and causes it to enter in upon itself will suffice to cause them to turn to God. The death of a member of the family, a sermon heard at a mission, the introduction to a religious environment, etc., ordinarily suffices to lead such souls to the right path. As a rule, such souls pass through their whole life lukewarm and ignorant, and the priest charged with their care should return time and again to the task of completing their formation lest they return to their former state.

There are many persons who are sufficiently instructed in religion so that their sins cannot be attributed to the lack of a knowledge of their duties. And yet they do not sin through calculated malice. They are weak, lacking in will power, strongly inclined to sensual pleasure, intellectually dull, listless and cowardly. They lament their faults, they admire good people and would like to be one of them, but they lack the courage and energy to be so in reality. These dispositions do not excuse them from sin; on the contrary, they are more culpable than those who sin through ignorance, because they sin with a greater knowledge. But basically they are weak rather than evil. The person in charge of their spiritual welfare must be especially concerned with strengthening them in their good resolutions, leading them to the frequent reception of the sacraments, to reflection, avoidance of the occasions of sin, etc., in order to withdraw them from their sad situation and to orientate them toward the good.

These people sin, knowing that they sin, not because they will the evil as such or as an offence against God, but because they do not wish to give up their pleasures, and it does not cause them any concern that their conduct is sinful in the sight of God. They sin coldly and with indifference, without remorse of conscience, silencing the faint voice of conscience in order to continue their life of sin without reproach. The conversion of these persons is very difficult. Their constant infidelity to the inspirations of grace, their cold indifference to the postulates of reason and the most elementary morality, their systematic disdain for the advice which is given them by those who wish to help them all this hardens their heart to such an extent that it would require a veritable miracle of grace for them to return to the right path. If death should overtake them in such a state, their eternal fate would be deplorable. Perhaps the most efficacious means of leading them back to God would be to encourage them to practice certain spiritual exercises with a group of persons of the same profession or social condition as themselves. Although it may seem strange, it is not rare to find that this type of person will begin to practice some spiritual exercise in order to see what it is like, especially if it is proposed to them with a certain tenderness and affection. And it frequently happens that a great grace from God awaits them there. At times astounding conversions are effected, radical changes of life, and the beginning of a life of piety and fervour in persons who formerly lived completely forgetful of God. The priest who has the good fortune to be the instrument of such divine mercy should watch over the convert and by means of a wise and prudent direction try to assure the definitive and permanent return to God.

This class of sinners is the most culpable and the most horrible. These people do not sin through ignorance, weakness or indifference, but through a refined malice and diabolical obstinacy. Their most common sin is blasphemy, which is pronounced strictly out of hatred for God. They may have begun as good Christians, but little by little they degenerated. Having yielded more and more to their evil passions, these passions gradually assumed gigantic proportions, until the moment came when their souls were definitively conquered. Then, in the arms of despair, came the inevitable consequence of defection and apostasy. The last barriers which kept them from falling over the precipice have been broken, and they are hurled, by a kind of vengeance against God and their own conscience, into every kind of crime and moral disorder. Fiercely they attack religion; they hate the good; they may enter into a non-Catholic sect and propagate its doctrines with zeal and ardour, until, finally driven to despair by the accusations of their own conscience, which speaks to them in spite of everything, they fall more and more deeply into sin. One of these unfortunate persons said on a certain occasion: "I do not believe in the existence of hell, but if there is a hell and if I go there, at least I shall have the satisfaction of never bowing down before God." Another such person, foreseeing that perhaps at the hour of death the grace of repentance would be offered to him, deliberately closed the door to any possibility of a return to God by saying to his friends and relatives: "If at the hour of death I ask for a priest to hear my confession, do not bring him, because I shall be delirious." The conversion of one of these persons would require a miracle of grace greater than the resurrection of the dead in the natural order. It is useless to try to win these people by persuasion or advice. It will make no impression on them and may even produce contrary effects. The only method to be used with them is the strictly supernatural: prayer, fasting, tears, constant recourse to the Blessed Virgin. This requires a true miracle and only God can do it. And God will not always perform the miracle in spite of many prayers and supplications. It could almost be said that these unfortunate ones have exhausted the patience of God and are destined to be for all eternity the living testimony of inflexible and rigorous divine justice, because they have abused divine mercy.

Let us turn from these unfortunate souls whose conversion would require a miracle of grace and consider the great multitude of those who sin through weakness or ignorance. These are persons who have faith, practice some devotions at least superficially, and think now and then about their soul and eternity. But absorbed as they are in the affairs and preoccupations of the world, they live a life that is almost purely natural, rising and falling continuously and remaining at times in the state of mortal sin for a long period. Such are the majority of those Christians who observe the minimum obligations such as Sunday Mass, yearly confession, etc.

The Christian life is only slightly developed in them, and they live a life that has no supernatural horizons. The senses predominate rather than faith and reason, and they are very much in danger of being lost. What can be done to lead these poor souls to a Christian life which is more in harmony with the demands of baptism and their own eternal interests? Above all it is necessary to inspire in them a great horror for mortal sin. To do this, there is nothing better, after prayer, than the consideration of the gravity of sin and its terrible consequences. St. Teresa of Avila says in this respect:

The following is a brief schema of ideas which the director should strive to inculcate in the soul that he wishes to draw out of habitual mortal sin:

1) Mortal sin must be a most serious evil if God punishes it so terribly.

Realising that God is infinitely just and that He cannot punish anyone more than he deserves, and that He is at the same time infinitely merciful and therefore always punishes the guilty less than they deserve, we know certainly that as the result of mortal sin:

a) the rebellious angels were changed into horrible demons for all eternity and hell was created;

b) our first parents were driven out of paradise and all humanity was subjected to every manner of sickness, desolation and death;

c) God will maintain for all eternity the fire of hell as a punishment for those guilty ones who die in mortal sin (de fide);

d) Christ, the dearly beloved Son of God, when He wished to satisfy for culpable man, had to suffer the terrible torments of the Passion and experience in Himself, as the representative of sinful humanity, the indignation of divine justice, even to the point of exclaiming: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt. 27; 46).

2) Because of the injury against God's infinite majesty, sin possesses a malice which is in a certain sense infinite.

3) Mortal sin instantly produces the following disastrous effects in the soul:

a) the loss of sanctifying grace, the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost;

b) the loss of the indwelling of the Trinity in the soul;

c) the loss of all merits acquired in one's past life;

d) an ugly stain on the soul (macula animae), which leaves the soul dark and horrible;

e) slavery to Satan, an increase of evil inclinations and remorse of conscience;

f) the guilt of eternal punishment.

Mortal sin is, therefore, the death of the soul to the life of grace. If these ideas are well considered and if the soul humbly implores the help of God in prayer, it will gradually acquire a profound horror of mortal sin and eventually resolve to break with sin and even die rather than commit a mortal sin. But this decision of the will is not enough. The soul is still very weak and must be fortified by using the necessary means for acquiring the energy which it lacks. It must be advised to: (1) avoid all occasions of sin with the greatest care, (2) to frequent the sacraments, (3) to make a daily examination of conscience in order to prevent unexpected temptations, (4) to have a tender devotion to Mary, (5) to be always profitably occupied and thus combat sloth, the mother of all vices, and (6) daily to ask of God the efficacious grace to avoid offending Him.

After mortal sin there is nothing that we should avoid more carefully than venial sin. Although it is much less serious than mortal sin, it is nevertheless a moral evil, and moral evil is the greatest of all evils. Before this type of evil all others of the physical order fade away as if they were nothing. Neither sickness nor death itself can be compared to the evil of sin. It is necessary therefore to have clear ideas about the nature, classes, malice and consequences of venial sin so that one can cultivate a horror of it and put into practice the means necessary to avoid it.

This is one of the most difficult questions in all theology. For our purpose, however, it is sufficient to say that, as distinct from mortal sin, venial sin consists in a simple deviation and not a total aversion from the ultimate end. It is a sickness and not the death of the soul. The sinner who commits a mortal sin is like the traveller who, intending to reach a certain point, turns his back on it and begins to travel in the opposite direction. But he who commits a venial sin merely departs from the straight path without abandoning his orientation toward the goal to which he is travelling. It is possible to distinguish three classes of venial sins:

1) Those sins which by their very nature involve a disorder or deviation, although only a slight one, such as a small lie which does no damage to anyone.

2) Those sins which, although of themselves gravely forbidden, because of the smallness of the matter involved, constitute only a light disorder, as to steal a small amount of money.

3) Those sins which lack complete deliberation or full consent of the will in matters which would otherwise be serious sins, such as inadvertent or semi-deliberate impure thoughts.

The mere multiplication of venial sins does not of itself change the species of the sin. A thousand venial sins do not equal a single mortal sin. Nevertheless, a venial sin could become a mortal sin for any one of the following reasons:

a) Because of an erroneous conscience or a seriously doubtful conscience concerning the grave malice of a deliberate act. Thus he who erroneously believes that an action which is objectively only venially sinful is a mortal sin would commit a mortal sin if he performed that action. One would also commit a mortal sin in performing an action if he has serious doubts as to whether or not it is a mortal sin or only a venial sin, for one is obliged to solve such a doubt before performing the action.

b) By reason of an end which is gravely evil, as would occur if one performs an act which is a light sin for the purpose of causing another to commit a serious sin.

c) By reason of the proximate danger of falling into mortal sin if one commits a particular venial sin, as would be the case if one were to let himself become angry when he knows that he will very likely end by inflicting grave damage or injury on his neighbour.

d) By reason of the grave scandal which would be occasioned by the commission of a light sin, e.g., if a venial sin committed by a priest were to become the occasion of a serious sin on the part of a layman.

e) By formal contempt of a law which binds under light obligation. Contempt is called formal if it is directed against authority as such; it is called material if is directed to some other element, such as a disdain for the thing forbidden because one thinks it is of little importance.

f) By the accumulation of material which may increase until it is grave matter.

It is certain that there is a great difference between the malice of a mortal sin and that of a venial sin. The Church has condemned the following proposition of Baius: "There is no sin which is venial by its very nature, but every sin merits eternal punishment." (Dz. 1020) Nevertheless, venial sin does constitute a true offence against God, an effective disobedience of His law, and an act of ingratitude for His great benefits. On the one hand there is the will of God and His glory; on the other, our own desires and selfishness. In the case of venial sin, we in effect choose the latter. It is true that we should not prefer them if we knew that they would separate us radically from God (and in this we have the distinction between venial and mortal sin, because the latter consists in our turning away from God completely), but it is certain that the lack of respect toward God is of itself very great even in the case of venial sin. St. Teresa says in this regard:

Nevertheless, it is necessary to distinguish between venial sins committed out of weakness, surprise or lack of advertence and deliberation, and those which are committed coldly and with the complete awareness that one thereby displeases God. We can never completely avoid the former, and God, who knows very well the clay of which we are made, readily forgives us these sins of weakness. The only thing that one can do about these faults is to try to diminish their number as far as possible and to avoid discouragement, which would be fatal for one who is striving for perfection and always presupposes a self-love which is more or less dissimulated. St. Francis de Sales says in this respect:

If one acts in this way, reacting promptly against those faults of weakness with a profound repentance full of meekness, humility and confidence in the mercy of God, they will leave scarcely any trace in the soul, and they will not constitute a serious obstacle in the path of their sanctification.

But when venial sins are committed coldly, with perfect deliberation and advertence, they constitute an insuperable obstacle to perfection. They make it impossible to proceed along the road to sanctity. Those sins sadden the Holy Ghost, as St. Paul says (Eph. 4; 30), and they completely paralyse His sanctifying work in the soul. Father Lallemant says in this regard:

Venial sin has four effects in this life and certain effects in the life to come. (Tanquery para: 729 - 735)

1) It deprives us of many actual graces which God would otherwise have given us. This privation sometimes results in our falling into a temptation which we could have avoided by means of that actual grace of which we were deprived. At other times it may result in the loss of a new advance in the spiritual life. It likewise results in a lessening of the degree of glory which we would have attained through resistance to that temptation or through the increase in grace. Only in the light of eternity, and then there is no remedy, shall we realise what we have lost as a result of deliberate venial sins.

2) It lessens the fervour of charity and one's generosity in the service of God. This fervour and generosity presuppose a sincere desire for perfection and a constant striving for it, which are totally incompatible with voluntary venial sin, because the latter implies a rejection of that lofty ideal and a deliberate halt in the struggle for greater holiness.

3) It increases the difficulties in the exercise of virtue. This is a result of the two previous effects. Deprived of many actual graces which are necessary to keep us on the path of the good and having lost a good part of its fervour and generosity in the service of God, the soul is gradually weakened and loses more and more of its spiritual energy. Virtue appears to be more difficult, the effort required for growing in holiness becomes more and more demanding, the experience of past failures for which we ourselves are responsible disheartens the soul, and while the world attracts the soul with its seductions and the devil intensifies his attacks, the soul ultimately abandons the path of perfection and perhaps gives itself without resistance to sin.

4) It predisposes for mortal sin. This is clearly testified in Scripture when it is stated that he who wastes the little he has is gradually stripped bare (Eccus. 19; 1). Experience confirms this proof. The soul seldom falls directly and immediately, however violent the attack of its enemies. Usually, the ultimate fall of a soul has been prepared little by little. The soul has gradually lost ground to the enemy, it has been losing its strength through voluntary imprudence in matters which it considered of little importance, it has been losing the divine inspirations, and little by little it has lowered its defences until the moment arrives in which the enemy, in one furious assault, conquers the city.

5) The reason for the sufferings of purgatory is the punishment and purification of the soul. Every sin, in addition to the fault, carries with it the guilt of punishment which must be satisfied in this life or in the next. The punishment due to mortal sins already pardoned and that of venial sins, whether pardoned or not, not satisfied in this life is satisfied in purgatory. God cannot renounce His justice, and the soul must pay its debt completely before it can be admitted to beatific joy. And the pains which the soul will have to suffer in purgatory for those faults which on earth it considered light and of small importance surpass the greatest pains which one could suffer in this world. St. Thomas says this expressly when he teaches that there are two types of pain in purgatory: the one consists in the delay in the reception of the beatific vision and the other which consists in the torment caused by a material fire. And the smallest amount of either one surpasses the greatest suffering in this world. (Suppl. Quest. de Purg. a.3)

6) The increases of grace, of which the soul is deprived in this life because of venial sins, will have a repercussion in eternity. The soul in heaven will have a lesser glory than it could have attained had it been more faithful to grace in this life. For that reason, for all eternity it will be giving less glory to God than it could have. The degree of glory is in direct relation to the degree of grace attained in this life.

It is above all necessary to conceive a great horror for venial sin. We shall never begin to make serious progress in our sanctification until we have done this. To this end, it will be of great help to consider often what we have said concerning its malice and consequences. We must return again and again to the battle against venial sin and never give it up even for an instant.

Actually, because of pauses and vacations in the life of fervour and of constant vigilance, one readily cultivates indolence and cowardice. It is necessary to be faithful to the examination of conscience, both general and particular; to increase one's spirit of sacrifice; to be faithful to the practice of prayer; to safeguard external and internal recollection to the extent that the duties of our state permit; and to remember the example of the saints, who would rather have died than commit a deliberate venial sin. When we have succeeded in cultivating this disposition in our soul in a permanent and habitual manner, when we are disposed with promptness and facility to practice any sacrifice necessary to avoid deliberate venial sin, we shall arrive at the second negative degree of piety, which consists in flight from venial sin. It is not an easy task. If in the first degree, the avoidance of mortal sin, such a great struggle was necessary, what can we say about the avoidance and flight from venial sin? But however difficult it may be, it is possible to approach that ideal by means of a constant struggle and humble prayer until one has reached the same status as that which was achieved by the saints.

In practice, the fully voluntary imperfection has harmful effects on the spiritual life and is of itself sufficient to impede the flight of the soul to sanctity. St. John of the Cross treats of this matter with great clarity when he distinguishes between venial sin and imperfection:

As can be seen, St. John of the Cross points out the basic reason why it is necessary to renounce absolutely all voluntary imperfections. At the same time, he emphatically distinguishes between voluntary imperfections and those which proceed from pure weakness or inadvertence. He does well to distinguish between an isolated act, though deliberately imperfect, and the deeply rooted habit of voluntary imperfection. It is the latter which impedes perfect union with God.

The magnificent doctrine of this great mystic finds confirmation in the Thomistic doctrine on the increase of habits. According to St. Thomas, (c¦ . pg. 51) charity and all the other infused habits increase only by a more intense act which flows from an actual grace itself more intense than the habit. Otherwise, a more intense act of any virtue would be impossible, because one cannot give what he does not have. It follows from this that prayer is of extreme importance in this regard, because the only way in which we can obtain actual grace is by impetration, since it does not fall under merit in the proper sense of the word. Now imperfection is by its very nature a remiss act or the voluntary negation of a more intense act. Consequently, it is impossible to proceed in perfection if one does not renounce habitual voluntary imperfections.

This is the reason why in practice so many potential saints are frustrated and why there are so few true saints. There are many souls who live habitually in the grace of God, who never commit mortal sins and even exert every effort to avoid venial sins. Nevertheless, they are paralysed in the spiritual life, and they remain for many years in the same imperfections or even grow in imperfections. How can we explain this phenomenon? The answer is that they have not endeavoured to root out their voluntary imperfections; they have not tried to break that slender cord which keeps them tied to the earth and prevents them from rising in flight to the heights. With what accents of pity and sadness St. John of the Cross laments this situation:

It is therefore absolutely necessary to wage an unceasing battle against our voluntary imperfections if we wish to arrive at perfect union with God. The soul must use all its efforts and all its energies to make them disappear. It must tend always toward the more perfect and try to do all things with the greatest possible intensity. Naturally, this greater intensity should not be considered as a physical or organic intensity, as if it were necessary to keep one's nervous system in a state of constant tension or to make an act of love of God accompanied by organic or psychic intensity. We are referring here simply to the perfection of one's motives which lead one to act: doing all things with the greatest possible purity of intention, with the greatest possible desire of glorifying God, with the ardent desire that God's action invade or dominate us completely, that the Holy Ghost take complete control of our souls and do with us as He wishes in time and in eternity, without taking any account of our own tastes or desires. It consists simply in an ever more perfect and docile abandonment to the will of God until we are led by Him without the least resistance. And this will not occur before the total death of our human egoism and our full transformation in Christ, which will enable us to say with St. Paul: "It is now no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me" (Gal. 2; 20).

It is evident that this profound transformation of our being and this complete death of our ego is an enterprise that surpasses human power, even assisted by ordinary grace. As long as man takes the initiative in his Christian life through the simple practice of the acquired virtues in a human mode, it is impossible to attain that profound purification of our innermost being. It is necessary that the Holy Ghost Himself effect this transformation in its double aspect of the negative and the positive. St. John of the Cross expressly states this, and the obvious conclusion which follows is that sanctity is impossible outside the mystical life.

The second enemy against whom we must struggle is the devil. Diabolical attacks upon souls, can be divided into three basic types: temptation, obsession and possession.

According to St. Thomas, the proper office of the devil is to tempt. Nevertheless, he immediately adds that not all temptations that a man suffers proceed from the devil. Some of them are the result of man's own concupiscence, as St. James says: "But everyone is tempted by being drawn away and enticed by his own passion" (James 1; 14). It is true, however, that many temptations do proceed from the devil as a result of his hatred of men and his pride against God. Divine revelation expressly states: "Put on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the Principalities and the Powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high" (Eph. 6; 11 - 12), and St. Peter compares the devil to a roaring lion who goes about, seeking someone to devour.

There is no fixed rule or clear sign whereby one can distinguish whether a temptation proceeds from the devil or from some other cause. However, (1) if the temptation is sudden, violent and tenacious; (2) if there has been no proximate or remote cause which could have produced it; (3) if it causes a profound disturbance in the soul or suggests the desire for marvellous and spectacular things, (4) incites one to lose confidence in superiors or (5) not to reveal anything concerning it to one's spiritual director; in such circumstances one can surmise that this intervention was caused in some way by the devil.

God, as St. James teaches, never tempts anyone by inciting him to evil. When Scripture speaks of the temptations from God, it uses the word in a wide sense to designate a simple experiment or test of a person, not in respect to God's knowledge (which is ignorant of nothing), but with respect to the knowledge and benefit of man himself. God permits us to be incited to evil by our spiritual enemies in order to give us an occasion for greater merit; He will never permit us to be tempted above our strength. "God is faithful," says St. Paul, "and will not permit you to be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also give you a way out that you may be able to bear it" (1 Cor. 10; 13). (c¦ . Commentary of St. Thomas on the Our Father, 6th petition).

There are countless advantages to a temptation which has been conquered with the help and grace of God. Victory over temptation humiliates Satan, makes the glory of God shine forth, purifies our soul, fills us with humility, repentance and confidence in the divine assistance. It obliges us to be always vigilant and alert, to mistrust ourselves, to expect all things from God, to mortify our personal tastes. It arouses us to prayer, helps us grow in experience, and makes us circumspect and cautious in the struggle against our enemy. (c¦ . S.T. II II q.83 a.2 ad.1 & 2) With good reason does St. James say: "Blessed is the man who endures temptation; for when he has been tried, he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love him" (James 1; 12). But to obtain all these advantages, it is necessary to exercise oneself in the struggle in order to obtain victory with the help of God. To this end, it will be of great help to us to know the strategy of the devil and how to react against it.

Perhaps in no other page of Scripture is the strategy of the devil as a tempter depicted so clearly as in the moving description of the temptation of Eve, which resulted in the ruin of all humanity. Let us examine the biblical account and draw from it some important conclusions.

The tempter is not always at our side. Some of the Fathers and theologians taught that, in addition to the guardian angel who is assigned by God to each person, there is also a devil assigned by Satan to tempt us to evil. But this supposition cannot be substantiated by any clear and indisputable text in Sacred Scripture. It seems more probable that the presence of the devil is not permanent and continual, but that he approaches only in times of temptation. This seems to be implied in certain biblical narratives, especially that concerning the temptations of Christ, because after the temptations Scripture expressly states: "And when the devil had tried every temptation, he departed from him for a time" (Luke 4; 13). But although the devil sometimes departs from us, it is certain that many other times he tempts us. And although on certain occasions the attack occurs suddenly and without warning, at other times the devil presents himself as an angle of light, not proposing the object of his temptation at once, but leading up to it by a dialogue with the soul.

Thus he said to the woman: "Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise?" (Gen. 3; 1). As yet he is not tempting the woman, but the conversation is already in the area of the matter which he has in mind. His tactics are the same today as always. To persons particularly inclined to sensuality or to doubts against the faith, he will ask in general terms and without as yet inciting them to evil, concerning the problem of religion or of purity: "Why does God demand of you blind consent of your intellect or the complete repression of all your natural appetites?"

If the soul recognises that the simple posing of the question represents a danger, it will refuse to converse with the tempter but will turn its thoughts and imagination to other matters. Then the temptation is halted in its very earliest moment, and an easy victory is won. The tempter withdraws in disgrace. But if the soul imprudently enters into dialogue with the tempter, it is exposed to the great danger of falling.

This was Eve's mistake: "The woman answered the serpent; of the fruit of all the trees in the garden we may eat; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat, and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die" (Gen. 3; 2 - 3).

The soul recognises that God strictly forbids it (1) to perform that action, (2) to toy with that doubt, (3) to arouse that desire, or (4) to nourish that thought. The soul does not wish to disobey God, but it is wasting time in recalling that it ought not to do that. How much more simple it would be if it never had to recall its moral obligations at all but could destroy the temptation at the very start, without being bothered with weighing the reasons why it ought to do so.

The soul has yielded ground to the enemy, and now the enemy gathers his forces to make a direct attack. "But the serpent said to the woman; no, you shall not die the death; for God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil." (Gen. 3; 4 - 5).

The devil presents an enchanting possibility. Behind the sin is hidden an ineffable happiness. He would not suggest to our soul that it will be as God, but he tells us that the soul will be happy if once more it abandons itself to sin. "In any case," the tempter adds, "God is infinitely merciful and will readily forgive you. Enjoy the forbidden fruit once again. No evil will come to you. Do you not remember your past experiences, how great was your enjoyment then and how easy it was to depart from sin by immediate repentance?"

If the soul listens to these diabolical insinuations, it is lost. There is still time to withdraw, because the will has not yet given its consent, but if the soul does not stop this dialogue, it is in the proximate danger of falling. Its forces are gradually being weakened, the graces of God are becoming less intense, and sin presents itself as more and more desirable and fascinating.

"Now the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold." (Gen. 3; 6). The soul begins to vacillate and to be deeply disturbed. The soul does not wish to offend God, but the temptation is so alluring that a violent battle ensues and sometimes is prolonged for a long period of time. If the soul, in its supreme effort and under the influence of an actual grace (of which it is unworthy because of its imprudence), decides to remain faithful to its duty, it will be basically victorious; but its forces are disturbed, and it has venial sin on its conscience (a sin of negligence, semi-consent or vacillation in the face of evil). But only too often a soul which vacillates to this extent will take the fatal step to mortal sin.

"She took of its fruit and ate it, and also gave some to her husband and he ate" (Gen. 3; 6). The soul has succumbed to the temptation. It has committed sin, and often, either because of scandal or complicity, it has caused others to sin. How different the soul finds sin to be as compared with what the devil has suggested! As soon as the sin is completed, the soul experiences a great deception which casts it into misery and the darkest emptiness. "Then the eyes of both were opened, and they realised that they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings" (Gen. 3; 7). The poor soul is now aware of the fact that it has lost everything. It stands completely naked before God, without sanctifying grace, without the infused virtues, without the gifts of the Holy Ghost, without the indwelling of the Trinity. It has lost all the merits that it has ever acquired during its whole life. There has been an instantaneous death of the supernatural life, and all that remains is bitter deception and the sneering laughter of the tempter. Immediately the soul hears the terrible voice of conscience which reproaches it for the sin that has been committed. "When they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, the man and his wife hid themselves from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. But the Lord God called the man and said to him: "Where are you?" (Gen. 3; 8 - 9). This question, which the sinner's conscience also formulates, has no answer. The only thing the sinner can do is fall to his knees and ask pardon of God for his infidelity and learn from sad experience how in the future to resist the tempter from the very first moment, that is, from the first insinuation when victory is easy and triumph is assured under the loving gaze of God.

Let us now investigate what the soul ought to do before, during and after temptation. The fundamental strategy for preventing temptation was suggested by Our Lord when He said to the disciples in Gethsemane: "Watch and pray, that you may not enter into temptation" (Matt. 26; 41). This means that both vigilance and prayer are necessary even before temptations arise.

As regards vigilance, the devil never completely abdicates in his battle to win our soul. If sometimes he seems to leave us in peace and not tempt us, it is only to return to the attack when we least expect it. During the periods of calm we must be convinced that the battle will be resumed and perhaps with greater intensity than before. Therefore, it is necessary to keep an alert vigilance lest we be taken by surprise. This vigilance is manifested in the (1) avoidance of all the occasions of sin, (2) in trying to anticipate unexpected assaults, (3) in the practice of self-control, especially of the sense of sight and of the imagination, (4) in the particular examen, (5) in the frequent renewal of one's firm resolution never to sin again, (6) in avoiding sloth, the mother of vice. We are in the state of war with the devil, and we cannot abandon our post unless we wish to be overtaken during a moment of weakness or carelessness.

But vigilance alone is not enough. To remain in the state of grace and thereby to be victorious against all temptations requires an efficacious grace from God, obtainable only through prayer. The most careful vigilance and the most earnest efforts would be totally inefficacious without the help of God's grace. But with His grace victory is infallible. As we have said, efficacious grace does not fall under the merit of strict justice, and for that reason it is not owed to anyone, even to the greatest saints. But God has given us His word that He will infallibly grant us this grace if we ask for it with prayer that fulfils the necessary conditions. This should make it evident how important is the prayer of petition. With good reason does St. Alphonsus say in regard to the absolute necessity of efficacious grace that it can be obtained only through prayer: "He who prays, will be saved; and he who does not pray, will be condemned." This is the reason why Christ taught us to ask God in the Our Father: "And lead us not into temptation." It is also reasonable that in this preventative prayer we should invoke the Blessed Mother, who crushed the serpent's head with her virginal heel, and our guardian angel, who has as one of his principal duties to defend us against the assaults of the devil.

During temptation the conduct of the soul can be summarised in one important word: resist. It does not suffice merely to remain passive in the face of temptation; positive resistance is necessary. This resistance can be either direct or indirect. Direct resistance is that which faces up to the temptation itself and conquers it by doing the precise opposite from that which is suggested. For example, to begin to speak well of a person when we are tempted to criticise him, to give a generous alms when our selfishness would prompt us to refuse, to prolong our prayer when the devil suggests that we shorten it or abandon it altogether. Direct resistance can be used against any kind of temptation, except those against faith or purity, as we shall see in a moment.

Indirect resistance does not attack the temptation but withdraws from it by distracting the mind to some other object which is completely distinct. This type of resistance is especially indicated in temptations against the faith or against purity, because in these cases a direct attack would very likely increase the intensity of the temptation itself. The best practice in these cases is a rapid and energetic but calm practice of a mental exercise which will absorb our internal faculties, especially the memory and imagination, and indirectly withdraw them from the object of the temptation. The important thing is to find some hobby or pastime or activity that is interesting enough to absorb one's attention for the moment.

Sometimes the temptation does not immediately disappear, and the devil may attack again and again with great tenacity. One should not become discouraged at this. The insistence of the devil is one of the best proofs that the soul has not succumbed to the temptation. The soul should resist his attacks as often as is necessary but always with great serenity and interior peace, being careful to avoid any kind of nervousness or disturbance. Every assault repulsed is a source of new merit before God and greater strength for the soul. Far from becoming weakened, the soul gains new energies. Seeing that he has lost, the devil will finally leave the soul in peace, especially when he sees that he has not been able to disturb the interior peace of the soul, which sometimes is the only reason he caused the temptations in the first place.

It is always advisable to manifest these things to one's spiritual director, especially if it is a question of very tenacious temptations or those which have occurred repeatedly. The Lord usually recompenses this act of humility and simplicity with new and powerful helps. For that reason we should have the courage to manifest our conscience frankly and honestly, above all when we feel inclined to remain silent about these matters. One should never forget the teaching of the masters of the spiritual life: "A temptation which is declared is already half conquered."

When the temptation is over, one of three things has happened: the soul has been victorious, it has yielded to the temptation, or it remains in a state of doubt. If the soul has conquered and is certain of it, it has done so only with the help of God's grace. It should therefore give thanks and ask for a continuation of divine help on other occasions. This could be said very briefly and simply, as in the following short prayer: "Thanks be to Thee, O God; I owe all to Thee; continue to aid me in all dangerous occasions and have mercy on me."

If the soul has fallen and has no doubt about it, it should not become disheartened. It should remember the infinite mercy of God and the lesson of the prodigal son, and then cast itself in all humility and repentance into the arms of the Father, asking Him for forgiveness and promising with His help never to sin again. If the fall has been serious, the soul should not be content with a simple act of contrition, but should approach the sacrament of confession and use this sad experience of sin to redouble its vigilance and to intensify its fervour in order not to sin again. If the soul remains in doubt as to whether or not it has given consent, it should not examine its conscience minutely and with scrupulosity, for this may possibly provoke the temptation anew and even increase the danger of falling. Sometimes it is better to let a certain period of time pass until the soul becomes more tranquil, and then examine one's conscience carefully as to whether or not sin has been committed. In any event, it is well to make an act of contrition and to make known to the confessor at the proper time the temptation that has been encountered, admitting one's guilt as it appears in the sight of God. What should be done, however, in case of those persons who receive Communion daily? May they continue to receive Communion until the day of their weekly confession, even if they are in doubt as to whether they have consented to a temptation? It is impossible to give a categorical answer which will apply to all souls and to all possible circumstances. The confessor will have to make a judgment by taking into account the temperament and habitual dispositions of the penitent, and then apply the moral principle which governs the particular case. For example, if the habitual attitude of a soul is to die rather than to sin, and at the same time the soul has a tendency to scrupulosity, the confessor should advise the penitent to continue daily Communion, to ignore the doubts, and to make an act of contrition for any guilt that could have been incurred. If, on the other hand, it is a question of a soul which is accustomed to fall readily into mortal sin, of a lax conscience which is in no wise scrupulous, the presumption is against the soul, and it is probable that the soul has consented to the temptation. This soul should not be permitted to continue to receive Communion without sacramental absolution. In either case, the penitent should obey with all humility the advice of the confessor or spiritual director, without any contradiction or discussion.

As it came from the hands of God, the world and all things in it were good. So we read in Genesis that at each new production of creatures in the six phases of creation, God looked upon what He had made and saw that it was good. But with the fall of our first parents and the tragedy of original sin, not only was the human race wounded in the sinful act of Adam and Eve, but the created universe has been marked with evil and thrown into disorder. As man's lower faculties and powers rebelled against the rule of reason enlightened by faith, so also the universe and all things in it, meant originally by God to be perfectly subject to man, are now difficult to control and are at all times enemies of man and obstacles to his temporal and eternal welfare.

Nevertheless, it would not be exact to brand all created things as evil. In themselves they are good but can be used by man as instruments of spiritual destruction, depending on the use man makes of them or the great power for evil which is latent in them.

The world as such is no obstacle to salvation and sanctity. Many Christians who were in the world and very much a part of the world have become great saints. The world can be an occasion for goodness or for evil, and therefore, the only sense in which the world becomes the enemy of the Christian is when he becomes so attached to it that it prevents him from the perfect and total love of God. Therefore, for the person who is attached to created things or for the individual who is too weak to resist the allurements of creatures, the world becomes a formidable enemy of holiness.

When we speak of the world as an enemy of the Christian and an obstacle to his sanctification, we are referring not so much to the world itself as to the worldly or mundane spirit manifested by those who live in complete neglect of God and attachment to created things. Thus it may happen that entire cities or nations are infected with a mundane spirit, living only for the pleasures and satisfactions which can be drawn from created things. It is this milieu or environment which presents a great obstacle to the Christian who is earnest about making progress in holiness through detachment and the positive practice of virtue.

The worldly spirit is generally manifested in four principal ways.

The first and most deceptive is that of the false maxims which are directly opposed to the precepts of Christ. The world exalts pleasure, comfort, riches, fame, violence and might. It advises its followers to enjoy life while they can, to make the most of what the world has to offer, to find security and the maximum bodily comfort, to forget about tomorrow and give not a thought to a life hereafter. So far has this perversion of true values been carried that a common thief is considered to be efficient and adept in business, an agnostic or atheist is a man who thinks for himself, a person who rejects all authority and objective morality is one who values his personal freedom, and a woman of loose morals is considered sophisticated and mature.

The second manifestation of the mundane spirit is found in the ridicule and persecution of those who strive to live honestly and decently. The sensate person not only declares himself free of all moral restrictions and lives as he pleases, but he makes a mockery of any authority or law that would guide people along the path of self-control and obedience. Not wanting to observe the law himself, he cultivates a special hatred for those who honestly strive to lead good lives.

The third manifestation of a worldly spirit is found in the pleasures and diversions of those who observe no control in regard to their lower appetites. The unlawful use of sex, and excesses in drugs, alcoholic drinks and food are accepted as being in good taste socially. The theater, magazine and other media of entertainment know no restriction. The abnormal becomes normal in the lives of these persons.

The fourth mark of a mundane spirit is the scandal and bad example which confront the earnest Christian at every turn. And it is not a question merely of malicious and irreligious persons who give scandal by their evil lives, but what is even worse, scandal is sometimes given by those who, because of their Christian belief or state in life, should be examples of virtue. With good reason could St. John complain that "the whole world is seated in wickedness" (1 John 5; 19). And Jesus Himself warned: "Woe to the man through whom scandal does come!" (Matt. 18; 7).

The most efficacious remedy against the pernicious influence of the world and worldly persons is to flee, but since the majority of Christians must live in the world and still pursue Christian perfection, it is necessary that they strive to acquire the mind and spirit of Christ, who also lived in the world but was opposed to its spirit. Of the various remedies for avoiding contamination by the world, we can emphasize the following:

1) Avoid dangerous occasions. "He who loves danger will perish in it." The world is filled with occasions of great danger to the spiritual life and to salvation. Whether it be a question of worldly possessions, mundane pleasures or creature attachments, the Christian must at any cost keep himself from all possible temptation. The occasions that are sinful for one may not be so for another, and for that reason it is difficult to make any universal laws in this matter. Nevertheless, there are some occasions which are so poisonous that they would be harmful to any Christian. As for the rest, each one must learn by experience where his weaknesses lie and then take the necessary steps by way of self-denial and self-control. And when in doubt, the honest Christian will base his practical judgment on whether or not the occasion in question would be dangerous for the average good Christian. If so, he also should avoid it. Still another rule of thumb is simply to ask oneself: "What would Jesus do?" It is likewise helpful to remember the admonition of St. Paul to the effect that not all things that are lawful are prudent. In other words, there are times when the Christian will find it necessary to avoid occasions which in themselves are not evil or especially dangerous.

2) To vivify one's faith. St. John says: "This is the victory that overcomes the world: our faith" (1 John 5; 4). Faith is not only an intellectual assent to certain dogmas and mysteries; when it is perfected it gives us an attitude of mind or a way of judging things in a divine manner. It enables us to see things through the eyes of God, so to speak. A strong faith will enable the Christian to see God in all things and also to walk through great dangers unharmed, because he is able to rise above those things that are temptations for others. A strong faith will also enable the Christian to withstand the taunts and ridicule of worldly persons. In many works of art the martyred saint is surrounded by persecutors who wear a cynical smile or a leer on their faces. But the saint remains steadfast and tranquil amidst all manner of attack and suffering, because the eyes of his soul, through the light of faith, can peer into eternity and be focused on the divine.

3) Meditation on the vanity of the world. The world passes quickly, and life passes even more quickly. There is nothing stable and permanent in the world's judgments or friendships; there is nothing completely satisfying in its delights. Those who are applauded today are criticized tomorrow; the evil prosper, for they have their reward in this world. But the Christian, who realizes that he has not here a lasting city but is a traveler to the eternal fatherland, knows that only God is changeless and only His justice and truth will remain forever. For that reason, only he who does the will of God "abides forever" (1 John 2; 17).

4) Disregard for human respect. To be concerned about "what they will say" is one of the attitudes which is most unworthy of a Christian. Jesus said explicitly that He would deny before His heavenly Father anyone who denies Him before men (Matt. 10; 33). It is therefore necessary for the Christian to take a firm, stand in this matter and to follow the injunction of Christ to the letter: "He who is not with me is against me" (Matt. 12; 30). And St. Paul warns that he is not a disciple of Christ who would be concerned about pleasing men (Gal. 1; 10). One who desires to reach sanctity must be absolutely indifferent to what the world may think or say. His only concern must be to do the will of God, cost what it may. And it is best to make this decision from the very first, so that all may know at the outset where one stands. We have been warned by Christ that the world will hate and persecute us (John 15; 18 - 20), but if the world sees that we stand firm in our decision to follow Christ and His laws, it will ultimately leave us in peace and consider the battle lost. The best way to conquer the world is not to yield a single pace, but to take an unswerving stand in renouncing its false maxims and its vanities.

(Additional reading: Summa of the Christian Life by Louis of Granada; II pgs. 323 seq.)

The world and the devil are our principal external enemies, but we bear within ourselves an internal enemy which is a thousand times more terrible: our own flesh. The world can be conquered with relative ease by disdaining its pomps and vanity; the devil cannot withstand the supernatural power of a little holy water; but our flesh has declared war against us without ceasing, and it is most difficult to withstand its terrible attacks.

Our flesh wages war against us in two distinct manners, and thus becomes the greatest enemy of our soul:

a) by its instinctive horror of suffering and,

b) by its insatiable desire for pleasure.

The first is perhaps the greatest of all obstacles to one's own sanctification, which necessarily presupposes the perfect renunciation of self and heroic abnegation; the second can compromise our eternal salvation. It is therefore most urgent to point out the manner in which to counteract and nullify those two dangerous tendencies. We shall begin with the latter, which is of more necessary and universal application, since it is the proper and characteristic tendency of our sensuality, while the horror of suffering is nothing more than a logical consequence and the negative aspect of this desire. Victory over the desire for pleasure is necessary for all Christians in general, not only for those who are striving for sanctification. We flee from pain because we love pleasure, and the tendency to pleasure is what is known as concupiscence.

Following Aristotle, St. Thomas defines concupiscence as the appetite for pleasure. It resides properly in the sensitive appetite, but the soul also shares in it because the intimate union between soul and body causes a sensible good to be likewise a good of the whole composite. (c¦ . ST. I II q.3 a.1)

Pleasure, even sensible bodily pleasure, is not evil of itself. As the author of nature, God has placed pleasure in the exercise of certain natural operations, and especially those which pertain to the conservation of the individual and of the species. He does this in order to facilitate the use of those faculties and to stimulate man to their exercise. In the beginning the lower appetites were completely under the control of reason, but as a result of original sin, concupiscence, or the appetite for pleasure, often rises against the demands of reason and impels us to sin. No one has expressed with greater clarity and emphasis than has St. Paul this combat between the flesh and the spirit, this bloody and unceasing battle which all of us have to wage against ourselves in order to subject our bodily instincts to the control of reason illumined by faith. (c¦ . Rom. 7; 14 - 25)

A difficulty arises in attempting to designate the boundary which separates honest pleasure from disordered and forbidden pleasure, and how to keep oneself always within the boundaries of the former. The difficulty becomes evident if one observes that the use of lawful pleasures frequently serves as an occasion or incentive to disordered and unlawful pleasures. For that reason, Christian mortification has always advocated that one deprive himself of many lawful things and of many honest pleasures, not to put sin where there is no sin, but as a defense of good, which is endangered if one imprudently approaches the borderline of evil.

The satisfactions granted to one sense awaken the appetite of other senses. The reason for this is that sense pleasure, which is localized in the external senses, is diffused throughout the entire body, and when one or another of these senses is stimulated, the whole organism vibrates. This is particularly true of the sense of touch, which is present in every part of the body and, since original sin, tends to animal pleasure with a violence and intensity which are much greater than in the other senses.

In spite of the variety of bodily instincts, the principal struggle revolves around those two tendencies which are necessary for the conservation of the individual and of the species: nutrition and generation. The other sensitive inclinations are almost always placed at the service of these two, in which concupiscence seeks only pleasure without any concern for the providential and moral purpose, the conservation of the individual and the species. Hence if reason does not intervene to keep these instinctive appetites within just limits, they can easily lead to the ruin of the individual and the species. The following passage, taken from Bossuet, points out the two excesses which are the shame of man:

These two types of shameful pleasures are intimately related. The pleasures of the table prepare for those of the flesh; gluttony is the threshold of lust. Sacred Scripture associates them frequently, and experience confirms daily the truth of the words of Scripture. (c¦ . Prov. 20; 1) The root of this mutual and pernicious influence can be found in the physiological structure of man.

It is incredible how much harm an unmortified appetite can cause in us, not only as regards perfection, which is absolutely impossible without mortification, but even as regards our eternal salvation. Such a subjection to the very slime of the earth is diametrically opposed to Christian perfection. The sensual man not only is not united with God, but he loses the taste for divine things, as St. Paul teaches, for his life is in the pleasures of the body. (c¦ . 1 Cor. 2; 14) A slave of his bodily members, he has abandoned the heights of the spirit to bury himself in the vileness of the flesh. If he preserves the light of the intellect and the use of reason, it is only for human things, and to satisfy his appetites and senses in a manner that is more and more refined and degenerate. The world of faith is closed to him, and he sees in it nothing but contradiction and impossibilities. There are many degrees in this blindness of the spirit, as there are in carnal slavery, but in almost every instance there is a mutual and inevitable proportion.

All that we have said regarding the evil effects of sensuality in general is particularly true of the degradation caused by impurity. It subverts the senses completely and takes the eyes of the soul away from heaven and the judgment of God. As Bourdaloue says:

The struggle against one's sensuality ends only with life itself; but it is especially violent at the beginning of the spiritual life, during the purgative way, and particularly if the individual has turned to God after a life of sin. Reason itself suggests certain remedies which are useful, but the most efficacious remedies proceed from faith and are strictly supernatural. The following are the principal remedies, both natural and supernatural:

1) To mortify oneself in things that are lawful. The first precaution which must be taken in the struggle against one's sensuality is that of never going to the limit in regard to satisfactions that are permitted. To say that we shall stop in time and that with the use of reason we shall recognize the necessary limitation before sin begins is both foolhardy and dangerous. Of all those who attempt this, scarcely one succeeds in preserving self-control. With good reason does Clement of Alexandria say that those who do everything that is permitted will very readily do that which is not permitted. (PG. 8; 399)

On the other hand, what relationship can there be between perfection and a conduct that disregards advice and heeds nothing except strict commands? It is incredible how far one can go in the mortification of one's tastes and desires without injuring, but rather augmenting, the health of the body and the benefit of the soul. If we wish to keep ourselves far from sin and walk toward perfection in giant strides, it is necessary to restrict and reject a great number of satisfactions which would delight our eyes, our ears, our taste, our touch and our sense of smell. We shall return to this subject when we speak of the purification of the external senses.

2) To cultivate a love of suffering and the Cross. There is nothing which serves as a better safeguard against the attacks of sensuality than to suffer with calmness and equanimity of soul the pangs of sorrow and pain, and even to impose them upon oneself voluntarily. Such has always been the practice of the saints, who sometimes reached unbelievable extremes in the practice of Christian mortification. The reward for such privations is truly remarkable even here on earth. The moment arrives in which they can no longer suffer because they find their pleasure in suffering.

3) To combat sloth. The seed of sensuality finds fertile ground in a soul that is unoccupied and slothful. Sloth is the mother of all vices, as we read in Scripture, but in a special way it is fertile ground for sins of the flesh. He who wishes to preserve himself from the attacks of concupiscence must endeavor to keep himself occupied at all times in some useful and beneficial exercise. And of all occupations, those of an intellectual type are particularly apt for controlling sensuality. The reason is that the application of one faculty weakens the exercise of the other faculties, in addition to the fact that intellectual operations withdraw from the sensual passions the object on which they feed. It is a fact verified by daily experience that the sins of the flesh weaken the spirit, while temperance and chastity admirably predispose one for intellectual work. (c¦ . Prov. 24; 30 - 34)

4) To flee dangerous occasions. This is the most important and decisive of all the purely natural remedies. Even the most energetic will is disposed to succumb when subjected imprudently to an occasion of sin. St. Augustine wrote a dramatic page concerning this matter when writing to his friend, Alipius. (Conf. Bk.6 c.8) Sincere resolutions and unswerving determination are of no avail; everything is lost in the face of the terrifying fascination of an occasion of sin. The senses are aroused, the imagination is excited, passion is strongly stirred, self-control is lost, and the fatal fall takes place. It is especially necessary that one exercise scrupulous vigilance over the sense of vision, according to the axiom: "What the eyes do not see, the heart does not desire." Some temperaments are easily kept under control and are directed toward the good as long as the eyes do not see anything that would arouse concupiscence, but they readily fall before a suggestive image. Persons of this type must flee as from a pestilence anything that could make an impression on the sense of sight. Otherwise, a fall is almost certain to follow.

5) To consider the dignity of the Christian. Because of his rational nature, man is a thousand times superior to the animal. Will he, then, let himself be carried away by the shameful sensuality which he shares in common with beasts, and disdain his human dignity? And a thousand times superior to man's human dignity in the natural order is his Christian dignity, which is strictly supernatural. Through grace man is elevated in a certain manner to the level of divinity. He has received a mysterious but real participation in the very nature of God, which makes him truly God's son by a kind of intrinsic adoption, not at all like human adoption, which is purely extrinsic. In the divine adoption through grace it can be said that the very blood of God courses through the veins of the Christian. As long as he remains in this state he is an heir of heaven by proper right (Rom. 8; 17); his dignity is such that it surpasses immeasurably all creation, including the nature of the angels. For that reason, St. Thomas states that the supernatural good of an individual soul, proceeding as it does from sanctifying grace, is of more value than the natural good of the entire universe.

Is it possible, then, that a Christian who seriously believes these things would let himself be governed by his vile passions, that he would in one act cast away his divine grandeur and reduce himself to the level of a brute animal? St. Paul finds no other argument of greater force than this one to lead the early Christians from the disorders of the flesh: "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? ... Or do you not know that your members are the temple of the Holy Ghost, who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought at a great price. Glorify and bear God in your body" (1 Cor. 6; 15 - 20).

6) To consider the punishment of sin. If the nobility of these sublime motives is too exquisite to make an impression on intellects that have been dulled by sin, it will be useful to offer other lesser motives. The first of these is the consideration of the punishment which awaits gluttony and lust in purgatory or in hell. Sacred Scripture offers abundant examples. The psalmist asks God to make the fear of his judgment penetrate into his flesh so that he will remain faithful to God's commandments (Ps. 118; 120). St. Paul chastised his body and reduced it to subjection lest, having preached to others, he himself should be rejected (1 Cor. 9; 27). Against the passionate impulse of the flesh in pursuit of pleasure, there is nothing more opportune than the remembrance of the terrible torments which await the flesh in hell or the poor soul in a prolonged purgatory.

Even if a person rise from his sin and obtain forgiveness (and this for many is very uncertain), there still remains the debt of temporal punishment which must be paid either in this life with penance, or in the next life with the terrible pain of purgatory. In either case, the suffering which will have to be endured far exceeds the pleasure which the individual enjoyed in sinning. From this point of view alone the sinner should realize that it is a very poor risk.

7) The remembrance of the passion of Christ. Motives which are inspired by love and gratitude are much more noble than those which originate in fear. Jesus was nailed to the cross because of our sins. The sinner crucifies Christ anew and renews the cause of his death. The most basic gratitude toward the Redeemer ought to keep a man from sin. And even if it were true that our sin had nothing to do with the pain which Jesus suffered on Calvary, the consideration of the Savior crowned with thorns ought to make us ashamed of seeking our bodily delight, as St. Bernard reminds us. (PL. 183; 480) St. Paul insists on this argument, and makes mortification of the flesh the decisive proof of truly belonging to Christ. (c¦ . Gal. 5; 24) And St. Peter reminds us that, since Christ suffered in the flesh, it is necessary to break with sin. (c¦ . 1 Pet. 4; 1)

8) Humble and persevering prayer. Without the grace of God it is impossible to triumph completely over our concupiscence. This grace is infallibly promised to prayer that fulfills the required conditions, as is evident from the teaching of Sacred Scripture. The author of the Book of Wisdom acknowledges that he cannot remain continent without the help of God, which he implores with humility. (c¦ . Wis. 8; 21) Sirach begs to be preserved from concupiscence and lustful desires. (c¦ . Eccus. 23; 6) St. Paul asks three times of the Lord that He free him from the thorn of the flesh, and the Lord answers that His grace is sufficient and that in his weakness he will arrive at the culmination of strength. (c¦ . 2 Cor. 12; 7 - 8) This is equivalent to saying that he should have recourse to prayer, the ordinary source of grace.

9) Devotion to Mary. Mary Immaculate, the Queen of Angels, is also the Mediatrix of all graces and the refuge of sinners. A tender devotion to our heavenly Mother and an ardent appeal to her in the hour of danger is a guarantee of victory. Although placed as number nine, devotion to Mary is often the most efficacious, especially to hardened sinners

10) Reception of the sacraments. This is the most certain and efficacious remedy against all types of sin, but especially against the attacks of concupiscence. The sacrament of penance not only erases our past sins, but it gives us strength to protect ourselves from future sins. The soul that is enslaved by the vices of the flesh should approach this fountain of purification and should regulate the frequency of confession according to the strength it needs in order not to fall again. The practice of waiting until one has fallen and then approach confession simply to rise again is a mistaken one, because in this way the individual will never completely uproot the vicious habit. Rather, the habit will become more deeply rooted by the repetition of acts.

It is necessary to anticipate possible falls and to approach the sacrament of penance when one notes that he is weakening and is losing strength. In this way he can regain his strength and thereby avoid the fall which threatened him. If it is necessary at the beginning to go to confession two or three times a week in order to achieve this result, one should not hesitate to do so. Even the greatest diligence is little enough when it is a question of freeing oneself from this type of slavery and of beginning to breathe the pure air of the glorious liberty of the sons of God. It will also prove helpful to have a definite confessor to whom one can reveal his soul completely and from whom he can receive the necessary advice. If one must give an account of his soul to a particular confessor, that very fact will bind the wings of his imagination and will act as a brake on the impetus of the passions.

Holy Communion has a supreme efficacy against the concupiscence of the flesh. In it we receive the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world. He diffuses over us the graces of fortitude and resistance against the power of the passions. His most pure flesh is placed in contact with our sinful flesh to spiritualize and divinize it. It is not in vain that the Eucharist has been called the Bread of Angels. The young especially need this divine remedy to counteract the ardor of their passions. Experience in the direction of souls shows clearly that there is nothing so powerful and efficacious for keeping a young person in temperance and chastity as frequent or daily Communion.

This is the second aspect of the struggle against our own flesh. The insatiable desire for pleasure is a great obstacle to our eternal salvation; the horror of suffering, while not opposed so directly to salvation, is a great impediment to sanctification. The majority of souls who halt along the way to perfection do so because they have not dominated their horror for suffering. Only he who has determined to combat this tendency with an unswerving energy will arrive at the height of sanctity. This, says St. Teresa, is an absolutely indispensable condition for reaching perfection. (c¦ . Way of Perfection, c.21) He who does not have the spirit for this can renounce sanctity, because he will never reach it.

St. John of the Cross gives to the love of suffering an exceptional importance in the process of one's sanctification. Above all, it is necessary to have a clear idea about the necessity of suffering, both to make amends for sin and for the sanctification of the soul. We shall examine these two aspects separately.

It is a simple matter to prove this aspect of suffering. The balance of divine justice, which has been disturbed by original sin and was re-established by the Blood of Christ, whose merits are applied in Baptism, was again disturbed by actual sins. Actual or personal sin places the weight of pleasure on the scale of justice, for every sin carries with it some pleasure or satisfaction, and this is what the sinner seeks when he commits sin. It is therefore necessary from the very nature of things that the equilibrium of divine justice be re-established by the weight of sorrow which is placed on the other scale.

The principal reparation was effected by Christ's sorrowful passion and death, whose infinite value is applied to us by the sacraments; but the Christian, as a member of Christ, cannot separate himself from the divine Head. Something is lacking to the passion of Christ, as St. Paul dared to say (Col. 1; 24), which must be contributed by the members of Christ cooperating in their own redemption. Sacramental absolution does not free us from all the guilt of punishment which is due to our sins, except in the case of a most intense sorrow, which is rarely given, and therefore it is necessary to pay back either in this life or in the next unto the last farthing (Matt. 5; 26).

Sanctification consists in the ever more intense incorporation with Christ. It is truly a "Christification," for which every Christian ought to strive under pain of not reaching sanctity. When all is said and done, the saint is a faithful reproduction of Christ; he is another Christ. Now the way to unite ourselves with Christ and to be transformed in Him was traced for us by Christ Himself. "If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me" (Matt. 16; 24). There is no other way; it is necessary to embrace suffering, to take up one's cross, and to follow Christ to the height of Calvary; not to see there how they crucified Him, but to be crucified at His side. There is no sanctification without crucifixion with Christ. As a matter of fact, all the saints bleed. And St. John of the Cross was so convinced of this that he wrote the following strong words:

The excellence of Christian suffering is evident from a consideration of the great benefits which it brings to the soul. The saints are perfectly aware of this, and for that reason a thirst for suffering consumes them. If well considered, sorrow and suffering ought to be more attractive to the Christian than pleasure is to the pagan. The suffering passes, but that one has suffered well will never pass; it leaves its mark for all eternity. The following are the principal benefits which follow from Christian suffering:

1) Reparation. The guilt of punishment, which remains as a sad remembrance of the soul's sin once the sin has been pardoned, has to be repaid at the cost of suffering in this life or in the next. It is an extraordinary grace of God to enable us to repay our debt in this life, where we shall suffer much less than in purgatory, and shall at the same time greatly increase our supernatural merit and our degree of glory in heaven.

2) Subjection of the flesh. St. Paul spoke from his own experience when he wrote to the Corinthians: "I chastise my body and bring it into subjection" (1 Cor. 9; 27). The flesh tends to dominate the spirit. Only by means of severity and privations can one reverse the order and make the flesh serve the role of the slave and leave the soul at liberty. It is a fact proved many times in practice that the more comforts and pleasures one gives to the body, the more demanding the body becomes. St. Teresa warned her nuns of this because she was convinced of the great importance it had in the spiritual life. (c¦ . Way of Perfection c.11) When one subjects the body to a schedule of suffering and severe restrictions, he succeeds in reducing its demands to the minimum. To arrive at a happy state, it is well worth the suffering to impose privation and voluntary penances upon oneself.

3) To understand the vanity of the world. There is nothing that makes us understand more clearly that the earth is a desert than the pains of suffering. Through the crystal of our tears the atmosphere of this world appears dark and gloomy. The soul raises its eyes to heaven, it sighs for the eternal fatherland, and it learns to disdain the things of this world, which are not only incapable of filling its infinite aspirations for perfect happiness, but it surrounds them with thorns.

4) The purification of the soul. As gold is cleansed and purified in the furnace, so the soul is made more beautiful and glorious by the harsh lime of suffering. Every sin, however insignificant it may appear, is a disorder and by that very fact is a deformity and ugliness of the soul, since the beauty of the soul consists in the splendor of order. Consequently, whatever by its nature tends to destroy sin or to erase its marks in the soul must, by that very fact, beautify the soul. For this reason does suffering purify and beautify our soul.

5) It draws down the mercy of God. God never ignores the tears and sighs of a heart that is afflicted with sorrow and suffering. Omnipotent and infinitely happy in Himself, He cannot be overcome except by the weakness of one who suffers. He Himself declares in Sacred Scripture that He does not know how to refuse those who come to Him with tearful eyes.(c¦ . 2 Par. 34; 27) Jesus worked the stupendous miracle of raising the dead to life because He was moved by the tears of a widow who mourned the death of her only son (Luke 7; 11 - 17), of a father at the corpse of his daughter (Matt. 9; 18 - 26), and of two sisters who were desolate at the death of their brother (John 11; 1 - 44). And He proclaimed those blessed who weep and mourn because they shall be comforted (Matt. 5; 5).

6) Expiation for one another. One of the most tremendous marvels of the economy of divine grace is the intimate solidarity between all men through the Mystical Body of Christ. God accepts the suffering offered to Him by a soul in grace for the salvation of another soul or for sinners in general. Bathing this suffering in the redeeming Blood of Christ, the divine Head of that member who suffers, He places it in the scale of divine justice which has been disrupted by the sin of the unfortunate soul, and if the soul does not remain obstinate in its blindness, the grace of repentance and pardon will restore the equilibrium and give peace to the soul. It is impossible to measure the redemptive power of suffering offered to divine justice with a living faith and an ardent love through the wounds of Christ. When everything else fails, there is still recourse to suffering to obtain the salvation of a sinful soul. The saintly Cure of Ars once said to a priest who lamented the coldness of his parishioners and the sterility of his zeal: "Have you preached? Have your prayed? Have your fasted? Have you taken the discipline? Have you slept on boards? Until you have done these things, you have no right to complain." The efficacy of suffering is of paramount value for reviving the soul that is dead through sin.

This is the supreme excellence of Christian suffering. Souls illumined by God to understand the mystery of our incorporation in Christ have always felt a veritable passion for suffering. St. Paul considers it a very special grace to be able to suffer for Christ (c¦ . Phil. 1; 29) in order to be configured with Him in His sufferings and in His death. (c¦ . Phil. 3; 10) He declares that he lives crucified with Christ (c¦ . Gal. 2; 19) and that he does not wish to glory except in the Cross of Christ in which he lives crucified to the world. (c¦ . Gal. 6; 14) And considering that the majority of men do not understand this sublime mystery of suffering, but flee from it as from a pestilence, he cannot help but weep with compassion for such blindness. (c¦ . Gal. 6; 14)

And at the side of Jesus, the Redeemer, stands Mary, the co-redemptrix of the human race. Souls enamored of Mary feel a particular inclination to accompany her and to imitate her in her ineffable sorrow. Before the Queen of martyrs they feel ashamed that they have ever thought of their own comfort and pleasure. They know that, if they wish to be like Mary, they must embrace the Cross and do so with a true passion.

We should note the special sanctifying efficacy of suffering from this last point of view. Suffering configures us with Christ in a perfect manner; and sanctity does not consist in anything else but configuration with Christ. There is not, nor can there be, any way to sanctity which ignores or gives little importance to the crucifixion of self. With good reason does St. John of the Cross counsel that one should reject any doctrine that is broad and easy, even if it be substantiated by miracles. It is simply a question of repeating what St. Paul says to the Galatians: "If we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel to you other than that which you have received, let him be anathema" (Gal. 1; 8).

This is one of the principal reasons why there are so few saints. Many souls who strive for sanctity do not wish to enter upon the way of suffering. They would like to be saints, but with a sanctity that is comfortable and easy and would exempt them from the total renunciation of self to the point of crucifixion of self. And when God tests them with some painful affliction of spirit or persecutions and calumny or any other cross which, if well carried, would lead them to the heights of sanctity, they draw back in cowardice and abandon the way of perfection. There is no other reason which explains the ruin of so many souls who seem to wish to become saints. Perhaps they have even reached the point where they asked God to send them some cross, but it is later proved very clearly that what they wanted was a cross of their own choosing and, when they did not find it, they considered that they had been deceived and gave up the road to perfection.

It is therefore necessary to decide once and for all to embrace suffering as God wishes to send it to us: sickness, persecution, calumny, humiliation, disappointment, etc.; whatever He wishes and in the manner which He wishes. The attitude of soul must be one of a perpetual fiat, a total abandonment to God without reserve, a complete subjection to God's loving providence so that He may do with the soul as He wishes, both in time and in eternity. But it is not easy to reach these heights. Frequently, the soul has to advance gradually from one step to another until ultimately it reaches a passionate love for the Cross.

The following are the principal degrees manifested by a soul in its progress toward a thirst for suffering:

1) Never to omit any of our duties because of the suffering they cause us. This is the initial grade or degree, and it is absolutely necessary for all for the preservation of the state of grace. One who neglects a serious obligation without any more reason than the inconvenience or slight difficulty involved commits a mortal sin and thereby loses grace.

But even in the matter of light obligation, the omission of which would not destroy our union with God through sanctifying grace, it is necessary to perform our duties in spite of our natural repugnance for them. There are countless deluded souls who neglect some duty of their state in life and nevertheless ask permission of their confessors to practice certain penances and mortifications of their own choosing. The exact fulfillment of all our duties and obligations according to our state in life is the first degree which is absolutely indispensable for the crucifixion of self.

2) Resignation to the crosses which God permits or sends to us. The fulfillment of our duties and obligations in spite of the difficulties or inconvenience which they cause constitutes a meritorious grade or degree in the practice of the love of the Cross, but it is still more perfect to accept the crosses which God sends us directly or permits to befall us. All these contradictions and trials which constitute the pattern of our daily life have a great value for sanctification if we know how to accept them with love and resignation as coming from the hands of God. Actually, these things are utilized by divine providence as instruments of our sanctification. God frequently uses persons around us in our daily life who, in good faith, or even motivated by less noble motives, afflict us in some way and thereby offer us an opportunity of performing some act which will be of great value in our progress to perfection. St. John of the Cross speaks of this to a religious in his famous Cautions:

(c¦ . Additional reading: Trustful Surrender)

3) To practice voluntary mortification. Resignation to the crosses which God sends us is a noteworthy degree of love of the Cross, but it presupposes a certain passivity on the part of the soul which receives them. More perfect yet is the soul who takes the initiative and, in spite of the repugnance which nature feels, advances in the love of suffering by voluntarily practicing Christian mortification in its various forms. It is not possible to give a universal rule for all souls in this regard. The degree and intensity of voluntary mortification will be determined in each case by the state and condition of the soul which is being sanctified. In the measure that the soul corresponds more and more with his inspiration, the Holy Ghost will be more and more demanding, but at the same time He will increase the strength of the soul so that it can accept and carry out these inspirations. It is the duty of the spiritual director to watch over the soul and never impose sacrifices which are beyond the strength of the soul. He should especially take care lest he limit the soul's desire for immolation and oblige it to be retarded, instead of letting it fly on the wings of the eagle. If he were to do this, he would contract a great responsibility, and he would not be free from the punishment of God, as St. John of the Cross warns. (c¦ . Living flame of Love c.3) There is no other way to reach sanctity than that traced for us by Christ along the way to Calvary.

4) To prefer suffering to pleasure. There is something still more perfect than the simple practice of voluntary mortification; it is to have such a great love of suffering that one would prefer it to pleasure. However contrary this may seem to our weak nature, the saints succeeded in reaching these heights. A moment arrives in which they felt an instinctive horror for anything that would satisfy their tastes and comfort. They were not content unless they were completely submerged in suffering. When everything went badly with them and the whole world persecuted and calumniated them, they rejoiced and gave thanks to God. If others applauded or praised them, they trembled as if God had permitted those things as a punishment for their sins. They hardly took any account of themselves at all, or of the heroism which such an attitude presupposes. They were so familiar with suffering that it seemed to them the most natural thing in the world to endure pain. It is not impossible to reach these heights. Undoubtedly, they are the result of a general sanctification of the soul which is accustomed to live in a state of habitual heroism, but personal effort, aided by divine grace, can bring one closer and closer to this sublime ideal. St. John of the Cross has given us a marvelous rule for reaching this state. His words seem severe and are a torment to sensual ears, but it is only at this price that one can attain the treasure of sanctity:

5) To offer oneself to God as a victim of expiation. It would seem that it is impossible to go further in love of the Cross than to prefer sorrow to pleasure. Nevertheless, there is still another more perfect and more exquisite degree in the love of suffering: the act of offering oneself as a victim of expiation for the sins of the world. At the very outset, we must say with great insistence that this sublime act is completely above the ordinary way of grace. It would be a terrible presumption for a beginner or an imperfectly purified soul to place itself in this state. "To be called a victim is easy and it pleases self-love, but truly to be a victim demands a purity, a detachment from creatures, a heroism which is abandoned to all suffering, to all humiliation, to ineffable obscurity, that I would consider it either foolish or miraculous if one who is at the beginning of the spiritual life should attempt to do that which the divine Master did not do except by degrees.

The theological basis of offering oneself as a victim of expiation for the salvation of souls or for any other supernatural motive such as reparation for the glory of God, liberating the souls in purgatory, attracting the divine mercy to the Church, the priesthood, one's country, or a particular soul, etc., is the supernatural solidarity established by God among the members of the Mystical Body of Christ, whether actual or potential. Presupposing that solidarity in Christ which is common to all Christians, God selects certain holy souls, and particularly those who have offered themselves knowingly for this work, so that by their merits and sacrifices they may contribute to the application of the merits of the redemption by Christ. A typical example of this can be found in St. Catherine of Siena, whose most ardent desire was to give her life for the Church. "The only cause of my death," said the saint, "is my zeal for the Church of God, which devours and consumes me. Accept, O Lord, the sacrifice of my life for the Mystical body of Thy holy Church." She was also a victim soul for particular individuals, as is evident from the salvation of her own father, the promise that none of her family would be lost, etc. Other examples of victims souls are St. Theresa of Lisieux, St. Gemma Galgani and Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity.

The souls offered as victims are for Christ like a new humanity which is added to Him, as Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity referred to it. In these souls He can renew the whole mystery of redemption. The Lord is wont to accept this heroic offering, and He leads these victims to a terrifying martyrdom of body and soul. Only with the help of extraordinary graces can they support for any length of time the incredible sufferings and pains; they always terminate on the height of Calvary, totally transformed into Christ crucified. All of them at the height of martyrdom repeat the words which St. Theresa pronounced on her bed of pain several hours before her death: "No, no, I do not repent of having abandoned myself to love." (Story of a Soul c.12) Such souls have a perfect knowledge of the redemptive efficacy of their martyrdom. A multitude of souls which, without this heroic offering, would have been lost for all eternity will obtain pardon from God and eternal life. The ability to contribute in this way to the application of the redemptive merits of Christ is a source of ineffable joy to these victim souls. In heaven they will form one of the most beautiful crowns of glory.

In practice, the offering of oneself as a victim for souls should never be permitted except to souls of whom the Holy Ghost asks it with a persistent and irresistible motion of grace. It would be a ridiculous presumption for a beginner or for a soul that is not yet purified. It should be noted that, rather than contributing to the sanctification of the individual (although it does add something), this particular act is ordained, rather, to the good of others. It means that the soul which would give itself in such a way for the salvation of its brethren in Christ must itself be very intimately united to Him and must have traveled a great distance toward its own sanctification. It must be a soul that is well schooled in suffering and has a veritable thirst for suffering. Under these conditions the director could permit a soul to make this act of offering itself as a victim and thus, if God accepts, be converted in its life into a faithful reproduction of the divine martyr of Calvary.

In order to arrive at the intimate union with God in which sanctity consists, it is not sufficient to win a victory against sin and its principal allies, the world, the flesh and the devil; it is likewise necessary to achieve an intense and profound purification of all the faculties and powers of soul and body. It is not required, nor is it even possible, that such a purification be entirely previous to the intimate union with God. In the long road which the soul must travel to achieve sanctity, the purifying process is inseparably united with its progressive illumination and the intensity of its union with God. There is an intimate relation between them; in the measure that the soul is more and more purified, its light and love likewise increase.

The explanation is simple. When a soul desirous of sanctifying itself begins the process of its spiritual life, it is already in possession of sanctifying grace, without which it could not even begin on the road to perfection. Together with grace, the soul has been enriched with the incomparable treasure of the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost. The Trinity dwells in the soul as in a living temple, and the grace of adoption makes the soul an heir of heaven for all eternity. But together with these grandeurs and marvels, the soul is filled with imperfection and defects. Since grace does not of itself exclude anything more than mortal sin, it leaves man with all the natural and acquired imperfections which he had at the moment of his justification. The soul remains subject to every kind of temptation, evil inclination, acquired evil habits, etc., and the practice of virtue becomes difficult and arduous. The infused virtues, which the soul has received with sanctifying grace, give the possibility of performing the corresponding acts, but they do not rid the soul of its acquired evil habits nor of the natural indispositions which the soul may have in regard to the practice of virtue. These acquired habits and natural dispositions are destroyed only by the repetition of acts of the contrary virtues, thus ridding the faculty of the contrary evil habit and disposing it to work in conformity with virtue. When the supernatural habit no longer finds any resistance or obstacle to its exercise by reason of a natural contrary habit, the virtuous act will be produced with facility and delight. Until that time, it cannot be produced with facility, in spite of the supernatural habit from which it flows, because it lacks the physical disposition required in the faculty. (St. Thomas Ia IIae Q.65 a.3 ad.2 & 3)

The reason for the resistance and rebellion of our nature against virtue must be sought in the dogma of original sin. Human nature, as it came from the creative hands of God, was perfect, a true masterpiece of divine wisdom, but original sin wounded it profoundly. St. Thomas explains this in the following words:

We are not speaking, therefore, of mortal wounds or a substantial corruption of nature, as was taught by the Protestant doctrine condemned by the Church, but of a diminution of the natural inclination to good which human nature had in the state of original justice, and a considerable increase of obstacles to virtue.

From this follows the necessity of a profound purification of the soul and of the sensible faculties in which evil habits and vicious inclinations are rooted. One must be completely despoiled of all these traces of sin which impede or make difficult the perfect union with God in which sanctity consists. In this process of purification, God reserves to Himself the better part (passive purifications); but man, with the help of grace, must make an effort to cooperate with the divine action and achieve as much as he can (active purifications).

First, we shall study the active purification of the faculties, or that which man can and ought to do, with the help of grace, in order to purify himself of his imperfections. Then we shall examine the part which God plays in this purifying process through the passive purification.

We shall recall, first of all, some simple notions of rational psychology which are necessary for an understanding of this question.

The organs of these faculties are located in various external parts of the body and directly perceive the material characteristics of external things. Whatever the metaphysical possibility of other corporeal senses distinct from those which we actually possess, it is certain that at the present time we admit only five external senses: sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch. By reason of their certitude, the principal external senses are sight and touch. Nothing appears so certain to us as what we have seen or touched, although illusions are possible. By reason of their necessity for physical life, the principal senses are touch and taste (therefore, they are not lacking even in the imperfect animals which lack the other senses). For the intellectual and social life, the principal senses are sight and hearing, because nothing so isolates us from society as blindness and deafness.

Sensation occurs through the immediate perception in the corresponding sense of the external qualities of those bodies which are proportioned to that sense (for example, color for the eye, odor for the sense of smell, etc.). The sensation is not received in the brain but in the corresponding end organ, such as the eyes or ears, etc. It is not something merely subjective but something real and objective, as experience demonstrates.

These senses differ from the external senses by reason of the organ in which they reside and by reason of their proper objects. The internal senses are four in number, and they are distinct from one another: the common sense, the imagination, the estimative power and sensitive memory. All of these internal senses are localized in the brain, although science has not as yet agreed on the exact locality in the brain.

The common sense is the faculty which perceives as our own and unites into one all the phenomena which are experienced sensibly in the organs of the external senses. For example, when a bell rings, the ear hears only the sound, the sight perceives the color and shape of the bell, and the sense of touch is able to note the vibrations. The common sense unites all of these sensations which are so disparate and applies them to the one object, namely, the bell which has sounded. It is, therefore, the common root of the external senses, as St. Thomas refers to it. (St. Thomas Ia Q.78 a.4 ad.1 & 2)

The imagination is the faculty which conserves, reproduces and composes or divides the images apprehended by the external senses. And thus it conserves the image of an object which the sensitive memory recognizes as already seen; it evokes or reproduces whenever it pleases; or it combines sensitive elements of different kinds to create an entirely new imaginary being, such as a mountain of gold. This last function is the reason why some psychologists speak of the creative faculty of the imagination, which can exercise itself either under control of the intellect or without it. The great artists usually have a strong creative imagination. When these creations are not controlled by the intellect and the will, they can produce extravagant results.

The estimative power is the faculty by which we apprehend sensible things as useful or harmful to ourselves. In virtue of this power the sheep knows instinctively that the wolf is its enemy. In animals, one speaks of a blind instinct which is purely natural and performs marvelous services for the conservation of the animal; in man, the estimative power is greatly influenced by the intellect, and this makes it more perfect and penetrating than it is in animals. For that reason, the human faculty is called the cogitative power or particular reason.

The sensitive memory is the organic faculty of recognizing the past as past, or a sensation as previously received. Its functions are to conserve the record of a thing, to reproduce or evoke it by means of reminiscence when necessary, or to recognise a thing as past or already seen. It is distinguished from the imagination in this: the imagination conserves and reproduces images but it does not recognize them as past; this is proper to the sensitive memory. Moreover, the imagination can create, as we have said, and this is something that the memory is incapable of doing because it is limited simply to the recollection of the things of the past precisely as past.

The active purification of the external senses has for its purpose to restrain their excesses and to subject them to the rule of reason illumined by faith. A disciplined human body is an excellent instrument for sanctification, but in the present state of fallen nature it is badly inclined and has an almost irresistible tendency to anything that can give pleasure to the senses. If it is not subjected, it becomes indomitable, and its demands become more and more excessive, until it constitutes an obstacle which is incompatible with the spiritual perfection of the soul. St. Paul speaks of the necessity of mortifying the body in order to be liberated from its tyranny and to assure one's own salvation: "I chastise my body and bring it in subjection, lest perhaps after preaching to others, I myself should be rejected" (1 Cor. 9; 27). In another place he says that "they who belong to Christ have crucified their flesh with its passions and desires" (Gal. 5; 24). St. John of the Cross insists on the Pauline doctrine and gives a profound reason which is intimately connected with the divine union to which the soul travels:

Hence in addition to the great inconvenience which follows when one does not have the corporal senses well mortified, it is evident that whatever those senses can convey to the soul is not God nor anything like Him. Consequently, St. John of the Cross concludes with inflexible logic that "it would be, at the least, but vanity to set the rejoicing of the will upon pleasure caused by any of these apprehensions, and it would be hindering the power of the will from occupying itself with God and from setting its rejoicing upon Him alone. This the soul cannot perfectly accomplish, except by purging itself and remaining in darkness as to rejoicing of this kind, as also with respect to other things."

Nevertheless, it is necessary to understand this doctrine correctly in order not to draw erroneous conclusions. This doctrine does not mean to deprive the senses of their proper object but only to avoid placing one's joy and final repose in the sensible pleasure which these objects arouse without rising to God through them. Creatures are, in the words of St. John of the Cross, "mere crumbs or fragments which fall from the table of God." And when one considers in them this vestige or trace of God, they not only cease to be an obstacle to the sanctification of the soul, but they can be converted into true means and instruments for the divine union. The evil or the disorder lies in resting in creatures as if they were our ultimate end, prescinding from their relation to God. But when we enjoy their beauty, or the pleasure which they give, in order more easily to rise to God, we can and ought to use them as excellent aids for our own sanctification.

St. John of the Cross, who has been unjustly accused of being an implacable enemy of the senses and the faculties, explains this doctrine as follows:

It is evident that the senses as such are not fixed, and do not rest in anything but sensible pleasure, without any further consideration for the higher things which escape the senses completely. Therefore, the soul must be vigilant and alert in order to rectify the intention and raise to God the pleasure which is experienced by the senses. St. John of the Cross tells us when these sensible pleasures are proper or not:

This magnificent doctrine needs no explanation or commentary. St. John is not attempting to annihilate the senses but to raise them to God through creatures. What must be avoided at any cost, under pain of compromising and making sanctification of the soul impossible, is final rest and complacency in creatures, seeking in them only the pleasure they can give to us. One must pass beyond them, while using them to rise to God, the supreme beauty and the greatest good, from whom creatures have received whatever goodness and beauty they possess.

Let us now consider the bodily senses one by one, in order to find out what needs to be rectified in them, and how they can be elevated and directed to God.

This is the most noble of all the external senses, but it is also the most dangerous because of the great seductive power it exercises upon the soul by means of its impressions. Let us examine the different classes of glances and the practical conduct which the soul should follow in each case.

1) Glances that are seriously sinful. Every voluntary glance toward a person or object which is a serious occasion of sin, especially if it is accompanied by an evil desire, is a grave sin. The Gospel expressly states: "But I say to you that anyone who so much as looks with lust at a woman has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matt. 5; 28). It is not necessary to mention that one must avoid this type of glance entirely. Without this first step, not only perfection but even eternal salvation is placed in great danger.

2) Dangerous glances. When, without an evil desire but also without sufficient reason, one fixes his glance on a person or any object which could lead him to sin, he commits an extremely dangerous imprudence. As a punishment for this imprudence the soul will often be deprived of the necessary efficacious grace for resisting temptation, and the individual will fall. There are various examples in Sacred Scripture of such falls (David, Solomon, Samson, etc.), and daily experience fully confirms the biblical statement: "Through woman's beauty many perish, for lust for it burns like fire" (Eccus 9; 8). After the glance comes the arousal of the imagination, the irresistible desire and the shameful fall. Without control over the eyes it is impossible to stay on the road of virtue or even in the state of grace. The soul that aspires seriously to sanctification will flee from every dangerous occasion of this sort. One will keep a custody over the eyes, and, without going to ridiculous extremes, one will always be vigilant and alert lest he be taken by surprise.

3) Curious glances. These glances do not necessarily fall upon anything that is evil or even dangerous, but they have no other purpose than the simple joy of looking. Such glances are not in themselves reprehensible, and they may even help us to raise our minds to God. But when the soul gives itself to these things with an excessive attachment, or too frequently, they can become an obstacle to the life of prayer and recollection. A person who is constantly recreating certainly does not have recollection in prayer. He is before God with his body, but his heart is far removed from God. And if, contrary to all the merit of the soul, God would communicate some devout sentiment to the soul, this cannot remain, because, returning after his prayer to his free and uncontrolled glances, every holy affection vanishes. The spirit of the Lord is like certain liquors which evaporate if they are not tightly corked in the vessel that contains them. So also such a soul dissipates the spiritual fervor which God had imparted to it. In addition to living in a unhappy and distracted state, how is it possible that such a soul can give itself to the practice of mortification, charity, humility, penance and the other Christian virtues, when it has no thoughts or affections which could contribute to the religious life if the person lives in a cloister, or to the spiritual life if the person lives in the world?

Mortification of sight is therefore necessary even in things which are lawful. Here, as in all else, it is necessary to proceed with serenity and equilibrium, without going to extravagant or ridiculous extremes. Certain episodes in the lives of the saints are more to be admired than imitated. Without going to these extremes, which God does not demand of all, it is certain that the mortification and custody of the eyes is a very important point in the spiritual life, not only in the negative aspect of protecting us frorn great evils, but also in the positive aspect of cultivating and increasing recollection and prayer which are absolutely indispensable to reach sanctity.

Less noble than the sense of sight but more universal in its scope is the sense of hearing. Through this sense faith comes to us, as the Apostle says (Rom.10; 17). It is therefore of great importance to subject this sense to the control of reason enlightened by faith. Moreover, St. James says: "If anyone does not offend in word, he is a perfect man" (3; 2). Let us now consider the progressive purification of the sense of hearing and the use of speech.

1) Evil conversations. Simply to remain in the state of grace, it is necessary for the soul carefully to avoid any kind of sinful conversation. When one speaks or listens voluntarily and with satisfaction to things which gravely offend purity, charity, justice or any other Christian virtue, he commits a sin, and in some instancesas in the case of calumny; a sin which obliges one to restitution. It is impossible that a soul should give itself over to these shameful pastimes and still reach perfection. It places itself in great danger, and even compromises its eternal salvation. Lying, harsh words, useless discussions, murmuring, calumny, the violation of secrets, obscene or excessively free conversations, vulgar language, or envious or spiteful language, etc., must be definitively rejected by any soul that aspires to true sanctity, because without this, sanctity cannot be attained.

2) Frivolous conversations. There are conversations which, without constituting a grave sin by reason of their object or intention, are not justified either by necessity or profit to oneself or another. Under this heading fall all those idle words of which Our Lord said we shall one day have to give an account (Matt. 12; 36). To speak without usefulness to oneself or one's neighbor is to pervert the word or speech from the object which God in the plan of His divine providence has assigned to it. Instead of making it an instrument for good, one makes it serve futile things. One speaks to say nothing, and this is in itself a reprehensible act.

This doctrine has a particular application to those who are addicted to visiting and making social calls. There are countless ill effects which follow upon these frequent and interminable visits, apart from the loss of time and lack of recollection. We must see in this one of the principal reasons for the mediocrity of so many devout persons who, confessing with frequency, receiving Communion daily, and practicing a large number of pious exercises, never seem to take a step forward on the road to sanctification. In many of these interminable conversations, one of two things usually happens: either the conversation turns to uncharitable criticism or it degenerates into a childish and useless prattle.

Souls that become bored when they are alone, that seek the company of others in order to give vent to their verbal incontinence, who refuse to repress this excess, who overwhelm their unfortunate victims with useless conversations, who are always the first to know new things and to spread news and to comment on and criticize everything can readily be dismissed from Christian perfection. They will never reach it, nor will they let others reach it. The spiritual director must be very severe with these souls. Since one is treating here, not of faults of weakness, but of voluntary frivolity, after a few falls, and only a few, five or six, the director should refuse to continue a direction which would be completely useless.

3) Useful conversations. Anything that is perfectly honest in itself and harmful to no one and of benefit to one's neighbor or oneself is licit, and often advisable. This principle has a variety of applications and can be used to solve many cases. In recreation especially one will have to keep it in mind. To entertain one's neighbor with a joke in good taste could be an excellent act of charity, if one does so with the right intention. On the other hand, we should never allow ourselves, even under the pretext of cheering one who has been offended, to criticise our neighbour, to make a joke at the expense of another, to insinuate an evil suspicion, to arouse envy, or to foment rancor. Among persons who are dedicated to study, it is an excellent means for avoiding useless conversations if one introduces a discussion on some disputed point which will arouse the interest and attention of all, but one should carefully avoid passionate arguments or expressions of disrespect for those who hold the opposite opinion.

4) Holy conversations. These conversations have for their immediate purpose the spiritual welfare of oneself and one's neighbor. There is nothing so comforting or encouraging to a soul as a holy conversation with persons who are animated with a sincere desire of sanctifying themselves. The intellect is enlightened, the heart is inflamed, and the will easily makes holy resolutions. It is impossible to calculate the good that can be done with a discreet word and a timely counsel to a soul that is bothered with temptation or depressed with discouragement. With sweetness and discretion, without making oneself offensive with too much insistence, but after the fashion of a disciple rather than a master, the soul that aspires to perfection will try to encourage these holy conversations which bring so much good to souls and unite the heart more closely to God. It does not suffice to abstain from unfitting conversations nor to encourage holy conversations from time to time. It is also necessary to practice a positive mortification in hearing and speech.

1) To abstain sometimes for the love of God from certain enjoyments in music or conversation. Certain innocent recreations can and should be permitted to souls that are as yet imperfect, while these same recreations would perhaps be unfitting for souls that are more advanced in virtue. In all things, as St. Teresa warns, discretion is necessary.

2) By keeping a rigorous silence at certain periods in the day, for persons in the world, according to their own discretion, and for persons in religion, as their rule prescribes. Without the spirit of recollection and silence, the interior life and progress in virtue are impossible.

3) To renounce the desire for news and unnecessary curiosities, when one can do so without calling attention to the fact. If this cannot be done, to try to forget such things quickly and to remain in peace and solitude with God.

4) To keep in mind the following counsels of St. John of the Cross:

This doctrine is severe, but it is worth the effort to put it into practice in the hope of attaining sanctity. Because they do not have the courage to do this, many souls remain halfway along the road to holiness, bound by the bonds which hold them to the earth. Sanctity presupposes an energetic and resolute determination of dying completely to self and to the world, cost what it may. And since there are so few souls that possess this type of courage, there have been, and always will be, few saints.

This external sense is the least dangerous and the one which makes the fewest attacks upon our sanctification.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to mortify it in two ways:

a) in the tolerance of repulsive odors when charity demands it, as in visiting the poor or caring for the sick, without manifesting repugnance or without complaining;

b) by renouncing the excessive use of perfumes, which although they are not of themselves sinful, often indicate sensuality, and are indicative of an effeminate and worldly spirit. Persons consecrated to God, such as priests and religious, should be especially careful in this regard.

The sense of taste can constitute an obstacle to perfection by reason of its immoderate inclination to eat and drink. Lack of mortification in this sense is called gluttony. According to St. Thomas, gluttony is the disordered appetite for food and drink, one of the vices opposed to the cardinal virtue of temperance. God placed in nourishment a pleasure which has for its purpose the guarantee of the nutritive function for the conservation of the life of the individual. In itself, to experience that pleasure does not imply any imperfection, and not to experience it would be a physiological deformity. But since original sin, the concupiscible appetite has been withdrawn from the control of reason and tends to exceed the limits of reason. Then this sensation becomes sinful, because the nature of man is rational and that which goes contrary to reason is evil for human nature and is contrary to the will of God. Moderation of the sense of taste offers a special difficulty, since we cannot prescind entirely from it. On the one hand, it is necessary to nourish ourselves in order to preserve life; on the other hand, it is necessary to keep oneself within the limits of reason, without permitting the natural delight to become the primary purpose of eating. According to St. Gregory and St. Thomas, one can incur the vice of gluttony in the following ways: eating outside the proper time and without necessity; eating with too great an avidity; seeking exquisite fare; preparing food with excessive delicacy; eating too much in quantity. According to St. Thomas gluttony can be either a venial or a mortal sin.

It is a mortal sin when one prefers the delight of eating and drinking to God and His precepts. In other words, when one would break a grave precept for the pleasure of eating or drinking, as when one breaks a fast or abstinence; when one causes serious injury to one's health; when one loses the use of reason as in the case of drunkenness; when it presupposes a serious waste of material goods; or when one gives grave scandal through gluttony. It will be a venial sin if, without going to any of the above mentioned extremes, one goes beyond the limits of prudence and reason. Ordinarily excess in food or drink does not go beyond the limits of a venial sin, but the lack of mortification in regard to the sense of taste constitutes a great obstacle to one's sanctification.

As a capital sin, gluttony gives rise to many other vices and sins because the intellect, dulled and clouded by excessive food or drink, loses the control which it should have in the direction of our actions. St. Thomas, quoting St. Gregory, assigns the following as the daughters of gluttony: stupidity or dullness of intellect; excessive joy (especially because of drink), from which follow imprudent acts and unbecoming acts; excessive loquacity, in which there is usually sin, as Scripture states (Prov.10; 19); excess in words and in gestures, which proceeds from the lack of reason or weakness of intellect; lust, which is the most frequent evil effect of the vice of gluttony. If we add to this that excess in eating and drinking destroys the organism, impoverishes the affections, degrades good sentiments, destroys the peace of the family, undermines society (especially with the plague of alcoholism), and incapacitates one for the practice of every kind of virtue, we shall have summarized the principal disastrous effect of this ugly vice which debases a man to the level of an animal.

1) Not to eat or drink without first having rectified one's intention by directing it to the fulfillment of the will of God in the satisfaction of our bodily needs, and with a previous blessing of the meal. And never to omit thanks-giving after meals.

2) Carefully to avoid the defects which we have listed above.

3) To attempt gradually, over a period of time, to diminish the quantity of food until one reaches the amount which is necessary for the health of the organism. Many persons eat a great deal more than they really need.

4) To avoid singularity in the quality or quantity of the food taken, especially if one lives in a community.

5) To mortify oneself positively in the use of food. This can be done in many ways without attracting attention: for example, by renouncing certain lawful satisfactions in food; by abstaining from some food that is particularly tasty or taking a smaller portion; by giving up wine or liquors when one can do so prudently, or by reducing their use to a minimum.

Generosity in self-renunciation and the increasing love of God will inspire the soul with many ingenious methods of practicing a mortification which is progressively more profound, without compromising bodily health.

This sense is the most material and, in a way, the most dangerous of all, because of its extension throughout the whole body and by reason of the vehemence of some of its manifestations. It requires severe mortification in order to avoid the sad consequences which follow upon an unmortified sense of touch.

We shall not discuss the matters pertaining to lust, which is the most dangerous aspect of the sense of touch, since we have already spoken of the matter when treating of the battle against the flesh. Here we shall say only a few words concerning the manner of mortifying this sense directly.

1) by depriving it of anything that may produce unlawful pleasure, and eventually by giving up even lawful pleasure, as one's circumstances permit or one's spiritual needs require;

2) by practicing positive mortification of the sense of touch by means of bodily penances.

Mortification is necessary for all, and especially for beginners, until they succeed in dominating their passions by subjecting the flesh to the spirit. In addition to their reparatory aspect as regards past sins, bodily mortifications have two other lofty goals: the immolation of self in the imitation of Christ and a positive contribution to the Mystical Body by means of the apostolate of suffering. These two purposes pertain to the saints as much or more than to imperfect souls, for no one is excused from practicing bodily mortification in one form or another. St. Vincent de Paul says rightly:

It is necessary to proceed prudently and slowly, increasing the exercises of penance as the powers of the soul increase and as the interior invitations of grace urge one on more and more. Especially at the beginning one should avoid any kind of severe corporal penance, until the will of God is made clearly manifest. One should not diminish the hours of sleep excessively or the quantity of food, for this could be prejudicial to one's health and leave the soul incapable of fulfilling the duties of state, which are more important than the voluntary practice of mortification. And the soul should take great care not to make an end or goal of that which is only a means, believing that sanctity consists in punishing the body severely.

In the lives of the saints there are many acts worthy of admiration, but it would be imprudent to imitate them. They received a particular inspiration and a special help from God, which is not always offered to all. If the Holy Ghost wishes to lead a soul by the way of extraordinary penances, He will inspire the soul to that effect and will give the strength necessary to carry it out. Meanwhile, the majority of souls should practice ordinary bodily mortification by accepting the little crosses of daily life with a spirit of faith and perseverance. This last point is very important. It is better to practice perseveringly, and without tiring, the little daily mortifications than to give oneself to occasional periods of great penance, alternated with other periods of relaxation.

There is nothing special to be said concerning the purification of the common sense and the estimative power. The former depends entirely on the external senses, whose impressions it gathers together and unifies. Whence the mortification of the senses will suffice at the same time to preserve the common sense from anything that is dangerous or useless. As regards the estimative power, if the imagination is kept under custody and the intellectual judgment exercises its proper function, any fault or defect of the estimative power will be prevented. On the other hand, the imagination and the sensitive memory need purification.

The imagination is a very important faculty when one considers the intimate relationship between the soul and body. Every idea acquired by the natural operation of our faculties corresponds to a previous image which the imagination offered to the intellect. Without images, the intellect cannot know naturally. For that reason the use of sensible images is important for teaching abstract ideas and speculative principles, especially to the young and uneducated, who, without this sensible aid, would not be able to understand them. Our Lord continually made use of the imagination to place the great mysteries within the understanding of the simple and faithful people by means of His beautiful parables and allegories. The imagination also has a great influence over the sensitive appetite, which is moved with a great impetus toward its proper object when the imagination clothes it with special attractions.

Because of its great importance and influence, the imagination is one of the faculties which needs a most profound purification. When used in the service of the good, it can give incalculable assistance; but there is nothing which can cause greater difficulty on the way to sanctification than an imagination which has broken away from the control of reason enlightened by faith. Profoundly affected by original sin, it obeys only with difficulty the command of reason.

There are two principal obstacles which arise from an uncontrolled imagination: dissipation and temptation. Without profound recollection, an interior life and a life of prayer are impossible, and there is nothing which so impedes recollection as the inconstancy and dissipation of the imagination. As regards temptation, it is often attributed to the devil, when in reality it proceeds from one's uncontrolled imagination, which paints in vivid colors the pleasure sin will provide for the concupiscible appetite, or emphasizes the difficulty which the irascible appetite will have on the road to virtue, filling the soul with sadness and despair.

1) Custody of the external senses. It is of great importance to keep a custody over the external senses, and especially the sense of sight, because through them enter the objects which the imagination retains, reproduces and reassembles in a thousand ways, thus arousing the sensitive appetite, attracting the attention of the intellect, and encouraging the consent of the will. There is, therefore, no better way of avoiding all this than to deprive the imagination of such things by a custody of the external senses.

2) Careful selection of reading matter. It is necessary to avoid, not only reading matter that is evil or obviously dangerous, but that which is frivolous or vain, and fills the imagination with useless images. To this class of reading belong most of the modern novels, even those which would pass moral censorship, because the reading of such books (without sufficiently grave reason) does not befit persons who seriously intend to lead a life of recollection and prayer. A soul that is attached to the reading of such novels can hardly hope to sanctify itself.

3) A voidance of sloth. The imagination is never quiet. If we do not keep it occupied with good and useful work, it will itself seek material on which to spend itself. And since it has a natural propensity to do anything that appeals to the lower appetite, it will readily place us in danger of temptation. The imagination should always be occupied with something that is good and useful, and when this is done, we shall have made a great step forward to peace of soul.

4) To fill the imagination with good things. It does not suffice to keep the imagination from harmful matter, or to avoid idleness, in order to keep the imagination under control; it is likewise necessary to provide holy and profitable material, so that the imagination will not only be withdrawn from evil but will be directed positively to the good. This is the reason for "composition of place" before one begins the practice of prayer. It consists in representing as vividly as possible the particular scene upon which one is about to meditate, thus offering food to the imagination so that it will not disturb the soul with its distractions. The reading of holy books in which edifying scenes are described can contribute a great deal to this positive formation of the imagination and can put it at the service of the intellect and the will as an excellent auxiliary.

5) Attention to the duty of the moment. The axiom of the ancients, age quod agis, is filled with profound meaning. The habit of attending to the duty of the moment has the double advantage of multiplying our intellectual powers and of disciplining the imagination by preventing it from being distracted to other objects.

6) Ignoring distraction. Frequently this is the only way of combatting certain vivid imaginations and the images produced, rather than trying to attack them directly. This is the advice of St. Teresa of Avila.22 The will should be occupied in loving God even in the midst of many distractions, and the soul should be patient with the activity of the imagination until God transforms it profoundly by means of the passive purification. Meanwhile, it should take no account of it and should avoid what it must avoid and do what it must do, in spite of any contrary suggestions made by the uncontrolled imagination.

As regards Christian perfection, St. John of the Cross speaks at length to the effect that the imaginary apprehensions cannot be a means proportionate to the union with God because God is not contained in any imaginary species. He likewise speaks of the great harm that is done to the soul when it does not know how to rid itself of these imaginations or to remain detached from them when they are given in a supernatural way. One should read and meditate on this magnificent doctrine of St. John of the Cross.23

We shall treat of the purification of the memory in general, explaining the principles which can be applied both to the sensitive and the intellectual memory. The latter, according to St. Thomas, is not a faculty distinct from the intellect, but only a function of the intellect, having for its object the conservation and retention of intelligible species. (c¦ . S.T. I q.79 a.7) There is a great difference between the sensitive memory, which has for its object only the sensible, the particular and the concrete, and the intellectual memory, which deals with the suprasensible, the abstract and the universal; but the process of purification is exactly the same in each case. The means of purification affect both equally.

The memory is a very important faculty. It can give inestimable service to the intellect and can be its most powerful ally. Without it, our spirit would be like a sieve which is always empty, however much water is poured into it. For certain types of knowledge, such as languages, history, the physical and natural sciences, it is absolutely indispensable to possess an excellent memory.

Precisely because the memory stores up all kinds of knowledge, both good and evil, it is necessary to subject it to an energetic process of purification. Throughout life there is produced around us a series of acts which can be of no use whatever for the sanctification of the soul. Sometimes they are sad events regarding our own faults and sins; at other times they are certain spectacles or disedifying actions which we have witnessed (especially TV); again, they may be useless information or news which leaves our spirit deeply disturbed; or they may be the unfortunate happenings of personal or family or social life: the disgraces, the forgetfulness, the ingratitude, the injury, etc., with which our poor human life is filled. None of these memories is profitable for the soul. They all tend in one way or another to destroy the soul's peace and tranquility, which are so necessary for a life of prayer and recollection.

Let us, therefore, see what should be the practical conduct of the soul regarding the active purification of the memory.

a) To eliminate sinful memories. This is the first step, and it is absolutely indispensable for all who aspire to eternal salvation. The remembrance of one's own sins or those of another, or the remembrance of spectacles or magazines that are immoral, has a strong power for suggesting to the soul these same things by way of a new temptation, and of causing it to fall again into sin, especially if a vivid imagination is associated with the recollection. The soul must reject immediately and energetically any remembrance of this kind, and be convinced that the simple approbation or voluntary enjoyment of those past sins is sufficient to make the individual guilty again of those sins, without committing them again externally.

b) To combat useless memories. There are many other things which, without being sinful in themselves, are nevertheless completely useless as far as recollection goes, and for that reason are harmful to the soul. Such, for example, are the sad happenings of the past life, family disgraces, humiliations, misfortunes of various kinds, or successful events which perhaps filled us with pride. The remembrance of the one or the other disturbs the peace and tranquility of the soul and is of no profit to anyone, because none of the sad or unfortunate events of life can be remedied by our present suffering. As long as the soul is occupied with these vain memories, it will be incapacitated for giving itself completely to prayer and recollection.

c) To forget past injuries. This pertains to virtue and is indispensable for any soul that wishes to sanctify itself truly. In spite of the pardon which has been given, sometimes even beyond the call of strict justice, the remembrance of a past offense cannot help but disturb, at least momentarily, the peace of conscience, and present the guilty party in an unfavorable light. It is necessary to forget completely the disagreeable episode and even to give special attention to the one who voluntarily caused the injury. We should try to forget completely and forever any offenses committed against us, realizing that those we have committed against God are much greater, and that He demands of us a complete pardon in order to give us His pardon without measure. The soul that nourishes rancor, however justifiable it may seem (and it never is in the eyes of God), can forget about reaching sanctity. And if it is a question of enmity which is manifested externally, the individual is also exposed to the grave danger of losing eternal salvation.

d) To remember benefits received from God and our own ingratitude to God. This pertains to the positive purgation of the memory, and offers a wonderful means for directing the memory to God. Who can doubt that the recollection of the immense benefits which we have received from God, of the infinite number of times that He has pardoned our faults, of the dangers from which He has preserved us, of the loving care which His providence has exercised over us and of those we love; that this memory is an excellent means of arousing our gratitude toward Him and the desire of corresponding more faithfully with His graces? And if to this we add the recollection of our own misery and our own nothingness, of our disobedience and rebellion, of our constant ingratitude and resistance to grace, our soul, will be filled with humility and confusion, and will experience the need of redoubling its vigilance and its efforts to be better in the future.

e) To remember the motives for Christian hope. This is one of the most efficacious means for directing our memory to God and for purifying it of contact with earthly things. St. John of the Cross makes the memory the seat of Christian hope, and although this is not exact, there is no doubt that one could find many points of contact between the two as regards purification of the memory. The remembrance of an eternity of happiness, which is the central object of Christian hope, is most apt for making us disdain the vain recollection of the things of earth and to raise our spirit to God. Here is the way in which this doctrine was explained by Father Garrigou-Lagrange:

Proneness to forget God causes our memory to be as if immersed in time, whose relation to eternity, to the benefits and promises of God, it no longer sees. This defect inclines our memory to see all things horizontally on the line of time that flees, of which the present alone is real, between the past that is gone and the future that is not yet. Forgetfulness of God prevents us from seeing that the present moment is also on a vertical line, which attaches it to the single instant of immobile eternity, and that there is a divine manner of living the present moment in order that by merit it may enter into eternity. Whereas forgetfulness of God leaves us in this banal and horizontal view of things on the line of time which passes, the contemplation of God is like a vertical view of things which pass, and of their bond with God who does not pass. To be immersed in time is to forget the value of time, that is to say, its relation to eternity. By what virtue must this great defect of forgetfulness of God be cured? St. John of the Cross answers that the memory which forgets God must be healed by the hope of eternal beatitude, as the intellect must be purified by the progress of faith, and the will by the progress of charity. (c¦ . Three Ages of the Spiritual Life)

As regards perfection, the necessity of purifying the memory by ridding it of all earthly forms which could disturb our union with God follows the fundamental reason which was given for the purification of the other faculties: no creative form, whether sensible or intellectual, can serve as the proximate and proportionate medium for divine union. St. John of the Cross is inflexible in drawing conclusions from this principle in regard to the memory, in which he demands the forgetfulness of all the apprehensions received, naturally or supernaturally, in order to guide it solely by motives of Christian hope.

Having examined the active purification of the external and internal senses, it is necessary to turn to a consideration of the purification of the sensitive appetite, in which the passions are located. We shall begin by recalling the general teaching of psychology.

The sensitive appetite is that organic faculty through which we seek the good so far as it is material and is known through the senses. It is generically distinct from the rational appetite or the will, which seeks the good as apprehended by the intellect. (ST. I q.60 a.2) The sensitive appetite is ignorant of any good which is not purely sensual or pleasing to the senses. From this stems the battle against the rational appetite, which of itself seeks the rational good or the good of spirit. "For the flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other" (Gal. 5; 17).

The sensitive appetite, also called sensuality, is a power which is divided into two potencies, the two species of the sensitive appetite, namely, the concupiscible appetite and the irascible appetite. The former has as its object the delightful good which is easy to obtain; the latter has as its object the arduous good which is difficult to obtain. These two inclinations cannot be reduced to one unique principle, but they are two potencies which are really distinct from each other.

The intellect and the will can influence the sensitive appetite; not, however, in the despotic manner in which they govern the hands or feet, which move without resistance to the command of the will, but only with a political government, as that of a chief over a subject who is able to resist the command of his superior. The different movements of the sensitive appetite to the good as known through the senses give rise to the passions. To regulate and purify the latter is equivalent to the regulation and purification of the sensitive appetite. There are two principal ways in which the word passion is used.

In its philosophical sense, the passions are movements or energies which we can use for good or for evil. In themselves, they are neither good nor evil; it depends upon the orientation which is given to them. When placed at the service of the good, they can be of incalculable assistance, even to the point that one could say that it is morally impossible for a soul to arrive at great sanctity without possessing a great energy or passion which is directed to God. But when placed at the service of evil, the passions are converted into a destructive force which is truly terrifying. In popular language and in the works of many spiritual writers, the word passion is often used as synonymous with evil passion, which one must combat and dominate. We shall use the word in its philosophical sense to designate powers which of themselves are indifferent, but which one must channel along the way of the good; at the same time we will point out the deviations which may occur and the means of avoiding them. The passions are movements of the sensitive appetite caused by the apprehension of the sensible good or evil, accompanied by a certain change, more or less intense, in the organism.

Modern psychologists are accustomed to reserve the word passions to designate the more vehement and intense movements of the sensitive appetite, reserving the word emotion for those movements which are more gentle and

ordinary. In any case, the passions always presuppose some knowledge, at least sensitive, of the good which is sought or the evil which is feared.

The movement of passion, properly speaking, can be very intense. From this there follows an organic change or disturbance which flows from the passions as a natural consequence. For example; anger inflames the countenance with indignation and places the nerves in a state of tension; fear causes one to grow pale; love enlarges the heart, and fear restricts the heart, etc. The intensity of the bodily change is not always uniform; it will depend in each case on the physiological constitution of the individual, the intensity of the movement of passion, and the greater or less dominion which the individual has over himself. St. John of the Cross, following Boethius, lists four

fundamental passions: joy, hope, sorrow and fear.

But the scholastic division is the classical one, and it lists eleven passions: six pertaining to the concupiscible appetite and five pertaining to the irascible appetite. In the concupiscible appetite the good, which has a power of attraction, engenders three movements of passion. The simple awareness of good arouses love; if it is a question of a future good, it gives rise to desire; if it is a good already possessed and present, it produces joy. On the other hand, the apprehension of evil, which is of itself repulsive, produces hatred; if it is an impending evil, it causes a movement of flight or aversion; but if the evil has overtaken us, it causes sadness. In the irascible appetite the absent good, if it is considered possible of attainment, engenders hope; but if it is impossible of attainment, it produces despair. In like manner, the difficult evil which is absent, if it can be avoided, produces courage; but if the evil is unavoidable, it arouses fear. Lastly, the presence of a difficult evil produces anger in the irascible appetite and sadness in the concupiscible appetite, while the presence of a difficult good does not arouse any movement in the irascible appetite, but causes joy in the concupiscible appetite. For that reason, the irascible appetite has only five passions, while there are six passions in the concupiscible appetite. For greater clarity the passions can be enumerated according to the following schema:

The good simply apprehended - LOVE

The evil opposed to the good - HATRED

The future good - DESIRE

The impending evil - AVERSION OR FLIGHT

The present good - JOY

The present evil - SADNESS

The difficult good absent but possible of attainment - HOPE

The difficult good absent but impossible of attainment - DESPAIR

The difficult evil absent but superable - COURAGE

The difficult evil absent and insuperable - FEAR

The difficult evil actually present - ANGER

Bossuet observes that all the passions can be reduced to the passion of love, which is the fundamental passion and the root of all the others:

We can say, if we observe what passes within ourselves, that our passions are all reducible to love, which enfolds and arouses all the others. Hatred for some object does not come except because of the love which is had for something else. I hate sickness because I love health. I do not have any aversion to anyone unless it is because he is an obstacle to me for the possession of that which I love. Desire is nothing more than a love which extends itself to a good which is not yet possessed, and joy is a love which is satisfied in the possession of the good. Aversion and sadness are a love which turns one away from an evil which would deprive him of his good. Courage is a love which undertakes, for the possession of the subject loved, that which is very difficult; and fear is a love which, under the threat of losing that which one seeks, is tormented by that danger. Hope is a love which has the confidence that it can possess the object loved; despair is a love which is desolated on seeing itself deprived of it forever, which causes a dejection from which one cannot rise. Anger is a love which is irritated on seeing that one wishes to deprive it of its good and rouses itself to defend that good. In a word repress love, and there are no passions; arouse love, and all the other passions are born. (c¦ . Connaissance de Dieu et de Soi-même. c.1)

The great importance of the passions can be deduced from their decisive influence in the physical, intellectual and moral life of man.

1) In the physical life. Without the previous stimulation of the appetite, we would take scarcely one step in our physical life, since the stimulation of the passions is what enables us to expend an extraordinary activity for good or for evil. Add to this the fact that certain passions have a powerful influence on bodily health, and could even be a cause of death, especially the passion of sadness, which, as St. Thomas says, is able to do more harm to the body than any of the other passions. (c¦ . ST. I II q.37 a.4)

2) In the intellectual life. It is impossible to overestimate the influence of the passions upon our ideals. The greater part of betrayals and apostasies have their most profound root in the disorder of one's passions. Paul Bourget notes: "It is necessary to live as one thinks; otherwise, sooner or later, one ends by thinking as he lives." (c¦ . Le Démon de midi) How else can one explain the lamentable defections of so many brilliant men in the field of religion?

3) In the moral life. The passions increase or diminish the goodness or malice, merit or demerit of our actions. (ST. I II q.24 a.3) They diminish human responsibility when a person seeks a good or evil more because of an impulse passion than by the free choice of the will; they increase human responsibility when the will confirms the antecedent movement of passion and uses it in order to work with greater intensity.

It follows from the extraordinary importance of the passions that it is necessary to train them properly by withdrawing them from evil and placing them at the service of good. But is it possible to train the passions? Undoubtedly the answer must be in the affirmative. Since the passions are of themselves morally indifferent, their very nature demands direction and control. It is true that we do not have a despotic rule over our passions but only a political rule, but a prudent organisation of all our psychological resources can result in a near-perfect control of our passions, even to the point that one has control over everything except what is called the first movements of passion, which do not affect morality.

Daily experience confirms these statements. All of us are aware of our responsibility for the movements of passion. When we let ourselves be carried away by a disordered impulse, we feel immediately the pangs of remorse. If, on the contrary, we have resisted this impulse, we experience a sense of satisfaction at a duty fulfilled. This is convincing proof of the fact that we are free agents as regards the impulse of the passions, and that their control and government are in our hands. The history of conversions offers a new proof of the possibility of training the passions. Men who have lived for years under the domination of disorderly passions have been able to free themselves of this great force and to begin a life which is fully in harmony with the moral law. There is no doubt that there are grave difficulties and obstacles at the beginning, but gradually the individual can gain perfect control of himself.

But now let us consider the basic principles concerning the training of the passions.

1) Every idea tends to produce its corresponding act. This principle is particularly true if the idea or sentiment is accompanied by strong emotions and a vivid representation. From this principle one can deduce as a norm of conduct the necessity of formulating ideas which are in accordance with the actions which one hopes to realise, and carefully avoiding those ideas which refer to actions which one wishes to avoid. In this way one's acts are governed by one's ideas.

2) Every act arouses the sentiment of which it is a normal expression. The rule of conduct which follows from this principle is that in order to acquire the sentiment which is desired, or rather, to intensify the passion which we wish to arouse, it is necessary to work as if one already was experiencing it. In this way one's sentiments are controlled by means of one's acts.

3) Passion augments and intensifies the psychological forces of the individual until it raises them to their greatest intensity and uses them to attain that which one seeks. It follows from this that it is necessary to select a passion very carefully in order to obtain the most out of our psychological energy. In this way ideas and acts are governed by sentiment.

These are the basic principles concerning the control and government of the passions, but we shall now make more detailed applications as regards the rules of conduct in relation to good and evil.

First it is necessary to be firmly convinced of the necessity of combating disorderly passions because of the great disturbances which they cause in us.35 The passions disturb our spirit, impede reflection, make it impossible to formulate a serene and balanced judgment, weaken the will, arouse the imagination, cause a change in the bodily organs, and threaten to destroy one's peace of spirit and tranquillity of conscience.

The remedies to be applied for the control of one's passions will depend on the particular passion which must be dominated. One will struggle against the passions aroused by one's environment by means of distractions, journeys and a change of scenery; against those which proceed from the organism itself by means of a regular regime, work, custody of the senses and of the imagination; against those which have their origin in temperament or character by means of reflection and will power. From the psychological point of view, there can be no doubt that the best remedy against disorderly passions is the firm and decided will to conquer them. But a purely theoretical will or wishful thinking will not suffice; there must be an energetic and determined decision which is translated into action by use of the means necessary to obtain victory, and especially if it is a question of combating a passion that has been deeply rooted through a long period of misuse.

1) To struggle without ceasing against the causes of the passions. Passions may be aroused by reason of temperament, external influences, intellectual and sensible abilities, proximate and remote occasions, etc. As regards the occasions which give rise to disorderly passions, it is a basic rule that they must be avoided. A will which has been weakened by a violent passion will readily succumb in a dangerous occasion. It must be imposed as an indispensable rule that one will flee from anything that could be an incentive to passion. Without this, a fall is almost certain to follow.

2) To prevent energetically any new manifestation of the passion. Every new act of a passion redoubles its strength. This is the secret of the failure of so many young people in their battle against impurity. When they feel themselves strongly tempted, they yield to the passion in order to remain in peace for a few days. This is a great mistake. Rather than quieting their passions, they do nothing more than increase the demands of passion and prolong indefinitely a struggle in which they can never win the victory. It is necessary to resist, even to the shedding of blood if necessary, as St. Paul says (Heb. 12; 4). Only in this way can the force of passion be weakened until finally it leaves us in peace.

3) To provide the passion with new objects. As regards certain passions, one need only change the object of the passion in order to convert the whole activity into virtue. Sensual love can be transformed into supernatural and divine love. Ambition can become an excellent virtue when it is directed to the extension of the kingdom of God. The fear of dangers can be most useful in the flight from occasions of sin. Thus one can proceed to a positive orientation of the passions toward the good.

We shall now point out, one by one, the principal objects toward which we should direct our passions.

1) As regards love, it should be directed in the natural order to one's family, good friendships, knowledge, art, one's country, etc. In the supernatural order it should be directed to God, to Christ, to Mary, to the angels and saints, to the Church and to the souls of our neighbours.

2) Hatred must be directed toward sin, the enemies of the soul and anything that could debase us or lead us to evil in the natural or supernatural order.

3) Desire must be transformed into lawful ambition; in the natural order, to be profitable for one's family and one's country, and in the supernatural order, to obtain perfection in sanctity.

4) Flight or aversion should be used in the avoidance of' the occasions of sin and of anything that would comprise one's salvation or sanctity.

5) Joy should be experienced as a result of the perfect fulfilment of the will of God for us, of the triumph of good throughout the world, of the possession of sanctifying grace which makes one a child of God and a living member of Christ, etc.

6) Sadness will find its expression in the contemplation of' the passion of Christ, the sorrows of Mary, the sufferings and persecution of the Church and her children, the triumph of evil in the world, etc.

7) Hope must feed upon the perspective of the eternal happiness which awaits us in the life to come, in trusting confidence in the assistance of God during our life, in the assurance of the protection of Mary, now and at the hour of our death, etc.

8) Despair must be transformed into a prudent distrust of ourselves, based on the knowledge of our sins and the weakness of our powers, but counter-balanced by a confidence in the love and mercy of God and the assistance of His divine grace.

9) Courage or daring must be converted into an intrepid and valiant spirit for confronting and conquering all the obstacles and difficulties which we meet in the fulfilment of our duties and in the work of our sanctification, remembering that "the kingdom of heaven has been enduring violent assault, and the violent have been seizing it by force" (Matt. 11; 12).

10) Fear must focus itself on the possibility of sin, which is the only true evil which could befall us, and on the temporal or eternal loss of God which is the consequence of sin, but not to such an extent that one is led to discouragement, but as a stimulus to die rather than to sin.

11) Anger should be transformed into a holy indignation which will prove a strong defence against every kind of evil.

With the active purification of the external and internal senses and of the sensitive appetite, one will have taken a great step toward Christian perfection. But it is necessary that the purification reach into the very depths of one's spirit to rectify the deviations of intellect and will. Then the passive purification will complete what a man cannot do by his own efforts with the assistance of ordinary grace.

According to traditional psychology, there are two spiritual faculties of the soul, the intellect and the will. Some authors, and especially the ancient mystical authors, considered the intellectual memory to be a third faculty of the soul, distinct from the other two, but in reality it is merely a function of the intellect which preserves intellectual species. Only as an internal sense (the sensitive memory) is it an autonomous faculty distinct from the other internal senses and from the intellectual memory. (c¦ . ST. I q.78 a.4) The purification of the intellectual memory follows a process which is analogous to the purification of the sensitive memory, of which we have already spoken. We shall, therefore, speak of the active purification of the two faculties of the soul which are really distinct: the intellect and the will.

The intellect is the faculty of the soul by which we apprehend things in an immaterial way. Its proper effect is the idea which it abstracts from external objects by means of the phantasm of the imagination, which is illumined by the abstractive power of the intellect itself, called in psychology the agent intellect. (c¦ ST. I q.84 - 88) Intellectual knowledge is completely distinct and infinitely superior to the knowledge of the senses. Sensitive knowledge always refers to singular, concrete and determined objects, while the knowledge through ideas; the object of intellectual knowledge; is always universal, abstract and undetermined. We possess sensitive knowledge in common with the animals, but intellectual knowledge is proper and exclusive to intellectual beings (God, the angels and man).

When the intellect compares two ideas and affirms or denies something about them, it pronounces a judgment. If it compares two judgments in order to conclude a third judgment, it performs an act of reasoning. Explicit reasoning, in the form which we have just given, is called a syllogism.

It is well to note that our intellect functions in such a way that we can never have two thoughts at the same time. If we are occupied in some thought, it will be impossible for us at the same time to be conscious of another distinct thought. This phenomenon is the basis of the attention which is nothing other than the application of the mind to a subject. The custody of the senses, silence and tranquillity of spirit are a great help to the fostering of attention and the preservation of attention over a long period of time. For that reason these things have great importance in practice.

The intellect is very delicate and subtle in discovering almost without effort a multitude of aspects surrounding an idea. It is profound in analysing and dividing into its ultimate elements some concrete notion. It is solid if it is able to reason things out by logical deduction based upon a certain principle. It has foresight if, from past events or present events, it can deduce by means of an acute observation what will happen in the future. In spite of the simplicity of the intellect as a spiritual faculty, mystical theologians, in order to explain phenomena which otherwise would be difficult to understand, have established certain divisions or distinctions regarding the intellectual function of the soul. (c¦ ST. I q.79 a.8 - 12)

1) What the mystical authors refer to as the mind (mens) is the most spiritual and elevated part of the soul which the disturbances of the physical world can never reach. Illumined by God, it always reflects His divine splendours and is far removed from the earth. In the midst of the most painful trials and darkness, this superior part of the spirit remains tranquil, as if it were already in eternity. It is also called by some authors "the supreme heaven" or "the light of understanding."

2) What the authors call reason is further subdivided into the superior reason and the inferior reason. The superior reason always obtains its conclusions from the principles of pure understanding, that is, without any influence of the passions. It is called "the middle heaven" and it always tends upward to that which is noble and elevated. The inferior part of the soul, on the other hand, judges by means of the experiences of the senses and under the influence of the passions, and for that reason it tends downward to that which is useful or delightful for the subject. It is "the lowest heaven" and is often closer to earth than it is to heaven.

This consists in the removal of the obstacles or evil inclinations which are the result of original sin and our own personal sin, which are opposed to perfect submission of the intellect to God.

1) Useless thoughts. Our spirit is frequently occupied with a multitude of useless thoughts which cause us to waste time and divert our attention to that which is base or perishable, with the result that we pay no heed to those things which are of great interest and value to the soul in its sanctification. We should not forget that the intellect cannot be occupied at the same time with two distinct thoughts; one of the two will always be considered to the prejudice of the other. The majority of the distractions which we lament during prayer and the other exercises of piety proceed from the fact that we have previously wasted time in useless thought. The spirit cannot pass directly from one situation to another which is completely distinct. It needs time to react and adapt itself to the new occupation. For that reason it is necessary to combat useless thoughts with great energy and to reject anything that may dissipate the intellect by distracting it or withdrawing it from the great task of one's sanctification. It is necessary to renounce, as much as possible, the reading of useless books or indulging in frivolous conversations which fill our soul with useless thoughts. The reading of magazines and newspapers should also be curtailed. All of this is inconvenient, but it is precisely because they do not wish to suffer these deprivations that many who aspire to Christian perfection remain only halfway on the road to sanctity.

2) Ignorance. It is one thing to feed upon useless thoughts and it is something very different to welcome or encourage ignorance, lest one lose his tranquillity. This would be a grave error and perhaps more harmful than useless thoughts. Not every kind of ignorance is voluntary and not every kind of ignorance is a sin. All Christians are not obliged to acquire a professional knowledge of theology, but certainly all are obliged to obtain that knowledge which, according to their ability and the obligation of their state in life, can contribute to their intellectual and moral perfection. A dislike or hatred of knowledge has always been a sign of an evil spirit and has been the origin of many heresies in the Church. Sacred Scripture reproves this attitude in no uncertain terms (Os. 4; 6), and St. Paul frequently insists on the utility of knowledge for the service of God. Nevertheless, not all knowledge is useful or convenient for one's sanctification. St. Paul speaks of the knowledge which puffs up, in distinction to charity which edifies (1 Cor. 8; 1). In the acquisition of knowledge one can sin in two ways:

a) as regards the one who studies, by not following the impulse of the virtue of studiosity, (c¦ . ST. II II q.166) but studying out of curiosity, vanity or the mere pleasure which one experiences in study;

b) as regards that which is studied, when it is harmful to the soul or utterly useless.

It is especially necessary to combat ignorance in matters of religion and the spiritual life. It is certain that with the right intention we can and ought to study human sciences, and especially those which pertain to one's profession and duties of state but above all we should apply ourselves to the science of our eternal salvation. It would be an absurdity to dedicate all our efforts to human science and neglect that supreme science which concerns our eternal destiny. Such is the sad spectacle of many persons who are eminent in literary culture, in art or science, but lack the most fundamental knowledge of religion. Others dedicate themselves weakly to the acquisition of sacred science but with an attitude that is opposed to study. They are interested only in the speculative knowledge of truth, but are not concerned with letting that knowledge affect their lives. Such souls are dying of spiritual ane- mia without even realising that they have before their eyes a splendid table at which they can be nourished with holy doctrine. And even this is not so bad as those who neglect completely the practice of prayer to dedicate their time to the external works of the apostolate. Such persons should recall the teaching of St. John of the Cross, who says that a great deal more profit would be done for the Church, and it would be much more pleasing to God, if such souls would take half of that time spent in activity and devote it to prayer. (Spiritual Canticle c.29 a.3) The soul should therefore dedicate itself to the study of truth, put aside the spirit of curiosity, and seek in this knowledge only the greater glory of God, the dissipation of its own ignorance, and the means of advancing along the way to sanctity.

3) Curiosity. In direct opposition to the virtue of studiosity is the vice of curiosity. (c¦ . ST. II q.167) This is an immoderate desire to know that which does not pertain to us, or which could be harmful to us. Unfortunately, this sin is committed frequently, either in the acquisition of all types of useless knowledge or in the knowledge of those things which could only serve to give delight to the senses or arouse the senses. Under this heading belongs the unrestrained tendency to read every type of novel or book simply to pass the time or for recreation, as well as the insatiable desire for spectacles such as the theatre or sports, which are sometimes truly dangerous or opposed to Christian morality. St. Thomas points out that the attendance at such things is vicious if it inclines a person to vice or lust or cruelty because of the things that are presented there. It is impossible that persons who dedicate themselves to such things, especially if it happens with frequency, can keep their soul in the state of spiritual peace and tranquillity which is necessary for attaining sanctity.

It is also an effect of the vice of curiosity to be constantly prying into the lives and sayings of others in order to find material for criticism and murmuring. St. John of the Cross severely condemns this vice, which is very common among devout persons. He advises souls that are accustomed to meddle in the lives of others that, if they do not correct this evil habit, they will never reach sanctity, but will fall back into a worse state:

However, it is not always forbidden to be concerned with the lives of others. Sometimes it is of obligation, especially for those who are charged by their office to correct their neighbour, as parents and lawful superiors. But this must always be done for a holy and lofty purpose, either to be edified by the good example of the others and encouraged to improve one's own life, or for the spiritual good of one's neighbour by correcting his defects according to the order of charity and the duties of one's office, (c¦ . ST. II II 53 a.3) but never merely to criticise or to murmur about one's neighbour without any reason or benefit to anyone.

Another type of curiosity, which is worse than the preceding, would be to wish to verify by means that are absolutely disproportionate (by divination, magic, spiritism, etc.) things that are hidden, such as the secrets of hearts or the future. If one should wish to verify some event by a supernatural means such as interrogating God, this would constitute the sin of tempting God, which is directly opposed to the virtue of religion.4_ St. John of the Cross insists strongly on the absolute necessity of renouncing every kind of knowledge which one could acquire by supernatural means (visions, revelations, prophecies, etc.), under pain of never arriving at the nudity of pure faith, which is the only means proportionate to the union of our intellect with God. Spiritual directors who, under any pretext, however reasonable it may seem, encourage souls to this type of desire fall into a great error for which they will have to give a strict account to God.

4) Precipitation. Another great defect of the intellect is precipitation, one of the forms of the sin of imprudence. St. Thomas points out why it is evil by setting up a comparison with the natural order. If we descend by leaps down the stairway, without touching each step, we act with precipitation. In like manner, in the spiritual order reason holds a superior place and the action or external work holds the lowest place. One must descend to a decision in orderly fashion by intermediate steps: memory of the past, knowledge of the present, sagacity in the consideration of possible eventualities, reason comparing one thing with another, and docility in accepting advice from others. If we omit or ignore these steps and immediately launch into a work or make a judgment without reflection, we shall have worked or acted with precipitation and imprudence.

There are other defects which are intimately connected with this, and which it is necessary to correct. Inconsideration judges without reflecting, without considering the state of the question, without taking account of the elements of judgment and thereby running the risk of false or incomplete judgments which give rise to a multitude of illusions and disappointments; inconstancy, although it has its root in the will, finds its consummation in the intellect, which does not know how to follow the rules which have been given for working rightly, but lets itself be carried away by the caprice of passion.

In order to combat these defects it is necessary to get into the habit of proceeding calmly and with reflection, avoiding lightness and precipitation in our judgments, and inconstancy and volubility in our manner of thinking, which denote a lack of firmness in our grasp of the principles and norms of action. We should never act without reflecting carefully and without weighing in the balance of discretion the pros and cons of all things in the eyes of God.

5) Attachment to one's own judgment. This is one of the forms of pride from which scarcely anyone is completely exempt. In its most acute from, it reaches the point of subjecting to one's own judgment the dogmas of faith and the decisions of lawful superiors. Even if it does not reach this extreme, it foments and preserves the spirit of division, not in the noble sense of serene exposition and a reasonable defense of some determined school or tendency which seems to possess the truth, but on the basis of mortifying the adversary by treating with disdain and irony those opinions which are contrary to our own.

There are few souls who love and serve truth above all, and whose judgments of the opinions of others are not influenced by the satisfaction of self-love and by the triumph of their own ideas, without any more reason than the fact that they are one's own ideas, or the teaching of the school to which one belongs. Such people forget that in those questions which God has left open and subject to the discussion of men, there is no philosophical or theological school that could claim that it possesses the entire truth to the exclusion of all other schools. Almost always there is to be found in the contrary opinion some part of the truth which has not been regarded sufficiently because of the prejudices with which it was examined. Intellectual sincerity, the love of truth, humility and charity urge that we listen with attention and impartiality to our opponents and that we readily grant whatever truth is to be found in their affirmations.

In private conduct it is also necessary frequently to renounce one's own judgment and to accept that of others. St. Thomas says that since prudence regards particular and concrete things to be realized, which are almost infinite in number, it is not possible for one man alone to examine all the aspects which must be taken into account in each one of these things in order to know what he should do or not do. For that reason, as regards prudence, we need to be informed and taught by others, and especially by those who are older and whose experience has taught them many things which escape the precipitous and unreflective knowledge of the young.

Up to now we have examined the negative aspects of the purification of the intellect, or the defects which one must combat in order to destroy them completely. The positive aspect can be reduced to one point which is of capital importance to the Christian life: the soul must let itself be led exclusively by the light of Faith, which is the only proximate and proportionate means for the union of the intellect with God in this life. No one has expounded this principle so forcefully as St. John of the Cross. He repeats it unceasingly in all of his works and he demonstrates it in a masterly fashion with all rigor and exactitude.

The following are the fundamental points in his argumentation:

4) Since existing creatures cannot serve as a proximate means of the union of the intellect with God, how can creations of the phantasy or the imagination do so? They are even less able, because the concepts or images of the imagination have even less real entity than those which are known through the external senses:

The reason for this is that the imagination cannot fashion or imagine anything whatever beyond that which it has experienced through the external senses, namely, that which it has seen with the eyes, heard with the ears, etc. At most it can only compose likenesses of those things which it has seen or heard or felt, which are of no more consequence than those which have been received by the aforementioned senses, nor are they even of as much consequence. For although a man imagines palaces of pearls and mountains of gold, because he has seen gold and pearls, all this is, in truth, less than the essence of a little gold or of a single pearl, although in the imagination it be greater in quantity and in beauty. And since, as has already been said, no created thing can bear any proportion to the being of God, it follows that nothing that is imagined in their likeness can serve as proximate means to union with Him, but, as we say, quite the contrary.

5) And passing beyond the world of reality and the world of imagination, will pure ideas serve as a means of union of our intellect with God? Neither can these serve, because all of them are restricted within the limits of an intelligible species which is abstracted from the data of the senses, and God cannot be restricted by any limits whatever:

Just so, all that the imagination can imagine and the intellect can receive and understand in this Iife is not, nor can it be, a proximate means of union with God. For if we speak of natural things, since the intellect can understand nothing but that which is contained within and comes under the category of forms and imaginings of things that are received through the bodily senses, which as we have said cannot serve as means, it can make no use of natural intelligence.

6) There still remains the supernatural world. In this way, or through it, one of three things can come to the intellect: either the clear vision of God, or a clear awareness of Him which is particular and distinct, or an obscure awareness which is general and indistinct. The first is not proper to this life but to the life to come, for it constitutes the beatific vision. The second (visions, revelations, locutions and spiritual sentiments) cannot serve as a means or medium because "the wisdom of God, with which the intellect must be united, has no mode or manner and is not contained within any particular or distinct kind of intelligence because it is completely pure and simple. There remains only the supernatural awareness of God which is obscure, general and indistinct, which is basically that which is given to us by faith. For that reason, only faith can serve as the proximate and proportionate means for the union of our intellect with God in this life:

From what has been said it is to be inferred that, in order that the intellect be prepared for this divine union, it must be pure and void of all that pertains to sense, and detached and freed from all that can be clearly apprehended by the intellect, profoundly hushed and put to silence, and leaning upon faith, which alone is the proximate and proportionate means whereby the soul is united with God; for such is the likeness between itself and God that there is no other difference save that which exists between seeing God and believing in Him. For even as God is infinite, so faith sets Him before us as infinite; and as He is three and one, it sets Him before us as three and one; and as God is darkness to our intellect, even so does faith likewise blind and dazzle our intellect. Thus by this means alone God manifests Himself to the soul in divine light which surpasses all understanding. Therefore, the greater the faith of the soul, the more closely is it united with God.

Therefore, the soul must travel in pure faith if it wishes to arrive at the perfect purification of the intellect and be intimately united with God. St. Thomas had already demonstrated that "the purification of the heart is an effect of faith." (ST. II II q.7 a.2) The reason given by the Angelic Doctor is that the impurity of a thing consists in the fact that it is mixed with things that are more base than itself. Now it is evident that the rational creature is more worthy and has a greater dignity than all temporal and bodily creatures. It is, therefore, made impure if it is subjected to these things through love and purified of this impurity by the contrary motive, that is, when it tends to that which is above itself, which is God. And in this tendency to God, the first movement comes through faith. By the same token, the first principle of the purification of the heart is faith, which is consummated and perfected by supernatural charity.

It does not matter that faith is necessarily of things that are not seen (de non visis) and that it is, therefore, essentially obscure and indistinct. It is precisely because of this fact that faith can give to us the only knowledge that is possible concerning the intimate life of God, because in this life it is not possible to have a clear and distinct knowledge of those things, due to the infinite transcendence of God, who cannot be expressed in any created, intelligible species. The clear knowledge of God pertains strictly to the beatific vision. In heaven we shall see God as He is (1 John 3; 2), without any created species but with our intellect directly united to the divine essence. Nevertheless, even in this world faith enables us to attain in some way the unfathomable mystery of the infinite life of God, although it be a dark and obscure knowledge. For that reason, the knowledge of faith is of itself immeasurably superior to all sensible and intellectual evidence which we could have of God in this life. In spite of this inevitable obscurity, faith illumines the soul and fills it with the splendours of heaven.

The entire preoccupation of the soul must, therefore, consist in making the light of faith inform one's whole life with greater intensity and in a more perfect manner. It is necessary to contemplate all things through faith: one's life, the life of one's family and friends, the happy or unfortunate circumstances or events of life, etc. It is necessary to reach the point where one can, so to speak, lose the human vision of things and replace it with a certain divine instinct proceeding from the gifts of the Holy Ghost, with the clarity of faith, the only way in which one can see all things from the point of view of God. To contemplate all things in this manner is equivalent to contemplating them, in a certain way, as God Himself contemplates them.

The will, also called the rational appetite, is the faculty by which we seek the good as known by the intellect. It is distinguished from the sensitive appetite, which instinctively seeks the good as known by the senses, ignoring the proper reason of goodness as such. (c¦ . ST. I q.80 aa.1 - 2) Even the animals possess a sensitive appetite, but the rational appetite is proper to intellectual beings.

The proper object of the will is the good proposed to it by the intellect, but in the appreciation or evaluation of the good error may creep in. The intellect can judge as a true good something which is only an apparent good, and the will, which is a blind faculty and always follows the apprehension of the intellect, will be impelled toward that object which is taken as if it were a true good. (c¦ . ST. I II q.6 a.1) This is the explanation of sin: the will seeks as a good that which in reality is evil. Every sin is consummated in the will by one's free choice, but it is rooted in an error of the intellect, which has taken as a real good that which was only good apparently (e.g., the pleasure attached to the sin). For that reason the blessed are intrinsically impeccable, because their intellect, completely occupied with the infinite truth which they contemplate, cannot fall into the slightest error; and their will, completely satiated with the infinite good which they enjoy, cannot enjoy anything apart from that good; hence sin is intrinsically impossible for the blessed. (c¦ . ST. I II q.5 a.4)

The proper act of the will is love, or the effective union of the will with a known good. All the movements or partial aspects of the human acts which take place in the will, such as simple volition, efficacious tendencies, consent, election of means, active use of the faculties and fruition, proceed from love or a consequence of love.

Love can be divided in many ways. The principal division for our purposes is the following:

by reason of the object, love can be sensual or spiritual;

by reason of the end, love can be natural or supernatural;

by reason of the formal object or motive, love can be a love of concupiscence, of benevolence or of friendship.

It is called a love of concupiscence when one desires the good so far as it is good for oneself (egotistic motive);

it is a love of benevolence if one loves another precisely so far as the other is good and lovable (a most perfect and completely disinterested motive);

it is a love of friendship if one loves his friend, not only because he is good in himself, but also because he on his part returns one's love (an intermediate love between the two).

Thus the sensual man loves with a love of concupiscence the object which will give him pleasure; the blessed in heaven habitually love God with a love of benevolence, taking complacency in His infinite perfection and rejoicing that God is infinitely happy in Himself; and the blessed in heaven and the man sanctified by grace here on earth love God with a love of friendship under the impulse of the virtue of charity. (c¦ . ST. II II q.23 a.1)

Voluntary acts can be of two classes: elicited or imperated. They are called elicited if they proceed directly from the will, are emitted by the will itself, and are received under the will (e.g., to consent, to choose, to love, etc.); they are called imperated (commanded) acts when they are effected by some other faculty under the direction (command) of the intellect and the movement of the will (e.g., to study, to paint, to mortify oneself voluntarily, etc.). Command is essentially an act of the practical reason, because it places order in that which one must do, and only the reason can perceive order, but for the reason to move by imperating it needs the impulse of the will. (c¦ . ST. I II q.17 a.1)

As we have already seen, human nature and all its faculties were profoundly affected by original sin. The will became inclined to evil (vulnus malitiae). Once the orientation to God had been destroyed, which previously was perfectly subjected to the control of reason, the absolute dominion of reason over the sensible faculties was also lost,_l and it retained over them only a certain moral power, a power of persuasion; in other words, a political power, not a despotic power.

Whence the necessity of a double effort involved in the rectification of the will: one required to subject the will wholly to God by means of a total submission and conformity to His divine will, the other to fortify the authority of the will with regard to the inferior faculties until it can subject them completely to itself. In other words, one must attempt to regain, at the cost of great effort and with the help of grace, that initial rectitude which the will enjoyed when it came forth from the creative hand of God. This is not an easy task, but it is one of the most important for the attaining of perfection.

We shall treat of this double aspect of the purification of the will, but for the time being we wish merely to insist on the necessity of the purification, first on the part of the will, in order to die to all external and internal things which could impede its flight toward God, through the perfect rejection of all created things, and then through death to one's own egoism by means of the perfect abnegation of self.

This is one of the conditions which is most important if one wishes to attain sanctity. St. John of the Cross reduces his whole mystical doctrine to this detachment from creatures, as the negative element, and to union with God through love as the positive element. It is a fact that the soul is filled with God in the measure and to the degree that it empties itself of creatures.

The great mystic is inflexible in demanding total detachment of the soul which wishes to fly to God. Using the beautiful simile of the bird which is bound to earth with a thin cord which prevents the bird from flight, he does not permit the slightest voluntary attachment to any earthly thing. His faithful disciple, Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity, wrote that any kind of desire whatever was sufficient to impede perfect union with God.

The reason for the necessity of detachment from creatures for perfect union with God is given in a masterly fashion by St. John of the Cross. The following is a brief synthesis of his thought.

St. John of the Cross develops these thoughts throughout all his writings, which teach both the negative element of detachment and the positive element of the love of God. Many persons have been frightened at the terrible negation mentioned in The Ascent of Mount Carmel and in The Dark Night, and as a result they have abandoned a system of spirituality they judge to be excessively rigorous and difficult. But apart from the fact that it is impossible to arrive at the summit of the mount except by means of the mortification of one's appetites and disordered affections (because, as St. John of the Cross points out, two contraries cannot exist in the same subject), it is necessary to complete the thought of the mystical doctor with the splendours of The Spiritual Canticle and The Living Flame of Love, which illumine with great clarity the dark nights described in the two preceding works.

Actually, the system of St. John of the Cross can be reduced to one important statement: God is all. His negations rest on affirmation, because they have as their object to detach the soul from the false appearances of creatures, which are nothing, in order to enable the soul, once purified and ennobled, to lose itself in the profundity of the All. He does not disdain creatures; He wishes only to withdraw the gaze from that which is imperfect and limited and enable the soul to see in creatures the traces and vestiges of the divine being. From the summit of that mountain the saint sings of the beauty of creation with lyrical accents that have never been surpassed by any other poet.

But in order to find them in God again, now purified and ennobled, it is necessary to leave the contemplation of creatures with carnal eyes and to detach oneself energetically from the bonds which hold the soul to the chains of earth. No one can arrive at the All except by the narrow path of the absolute negation of the nothing:

In order to arrive at having pleasure in everything, desire to have pleasure in nothing.

In order to arrive at possessing everything, desire to possess nothing.

In order to arrive at being everything, desire to be nothing.

In order to arrive at knowing everything, desire to know nothing.

In order to arrive at that in which you have no pleasure, you must go by a way in which you have no pleasure.

In order to arrive at that which you do not know, you must go by a way which you do not know.

In order to arrive at that which you do not possess, you must go by a way that you do not possess.

In order to arrive at that which you are not, you must go through that which you are not. When your mind dwells on anything, you are no longer casting yourself upon the All.

In order to pass from the all to the All, you must deny yourself wholly in all.

And when you come to possess it wholly, you must possess it without desiring anything.

And if you will have anything in having all, you do not have your treasure purely in God. (c¦ . Ascent of Mt. Carmel Bk.1 c.13)

St. John of the Cross does not intend to annihilate the natural tendencies of human nature by removing them from their object and leaving them suspended in nothing, but he wishes to orientate them to God, to make God the sole object of the tendency, thus reducing all of their forces to unity. It is true that this can never be attained perfectly until the soul has been introduced by God Himself into the obscurities of the passive nights, but much can be done by one's own efforts and the help of grace. God does not usually complete the purification of the soul by means of the passive nights until the soul itself has done all that it can by using the ordinary means within its grasp. For that reason St. John of the Cross repeats with insistence that one must mortify the appetites which divide the forces of the soul to such an extent that it is spent entirely on the things of earth. When the soul shall have attained the emptiness from every creature, it will be filled with God.

True detachment from all created things is very important and absolutely indispensable for arriving at Christian perfection. But it would be of little avail to detach oneself from the bonds of external creatures if one's spirit had not likewise been detached from one's own ego, which constitutes the greatest of all the obstacles to one's free flight to God.

St. Thomas states that egoism or disordered self-love is the origin and root of all sin. He says this because every sin proceeds from the disordered appetite for some temporal good, but this would not be possible if we did not love ourselves in a disorderly fashion, for it is for ourselves that we seek the good in question. Whence it is manifest that disordered self-love is the cause of every sin. (c¦ . ST. I II q.77 a.4) From it proceed the three concupiscences of which St. John speaks (1 John 2; 16): the flesh, the eyes and pride of life, which are a compendium of all disorders.

Disordered self-love has constructed the city of the world against the city of God, as St. Augustine points out: "Two loves have erected two cities: self-love, carried to the extreme of disdain of God, has built the city of the world; the love of God, carried to the point of disdain for one's self, has constructed the city of God. The one glories it itself; the other glories in the Lord."(c¦ The City of God Bk.14 c.28)

St. Augustine has pointed out in the last words of this quotation the most pernicious tendency of self-love. Precisely because it is the root of all sins, the manifestations of self-love are varied and almost infinite; but there is no result so harmful for one's own sanctification as that notion of glorifying oneself, for it constitutes one's ego as a centre of gravity around which all other things must rotate. Some souls seek themselves in everything, even in holy things: in prayer, which they prolong when they find sweetness and consolation in it, but which they abandon when they experience desolation or aridity; in the reception of the sacraments, which they seek only for sensible consolation; in spiritual direction, which they consider a note of distinction and in which, therefore, they always seek the director who is most popular, or who will let them live in peace with their egoistic values and selfish aims; in the very desire for sanctification, which they do not subordinate to the greater glory of God and the good of souls, but which they direct to themselves as the best ornament of their souls here on earth and as the source of increased happiness and glory in heaven. We would never finish if we were to attempt to list the infinite manifestations of self-love and egoism. The soul that aspires to perfect union with God must strive energetically against no other enemies as against its own self-love, which subtly penetrates even holy things. It must examine the true motive for its actions, continually rectify its intentions, and not place as its goal or the goal of all its activities and efforts anything other than the glory of God and the perfect fulfilment of His divine will. It must keep constantly in mind the decisive words of Christ Himself, who makes perfect self-abnegation the indispensable condition for following Him: "If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me" (Luke 9; 23).

Having examined the negative aspect of growth in perfection, we shall now consider the positive means of growth. Of the principal positive means, some (the sacraments) produce their effects ex opere operato. Other means work ex opere operantis, notably the practice of the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost (which we shall discuss in the remaining chapters of this part) and the life of prayer (which we shall consider in Part V). Certain secondary means of advancement in the life of grace will furnish the subject matter of Part VI.

In this chapter we shall discuss the two sacraments which the faithful receive frequently: penance and the Eucharist. Three of the other five sacraments—baptism, confirmation and holy orders—cannot be received more than once by reason of the character which they impress upon the soul. The remaining two are ordinarily not received more than once, although absolutely speaking they could be received more frequently—extreme unction whenever one is in the danger of death and matrimony in succeeding marriages when the first marriage has been dissolved by the death of one of the spouses.

We shall omit everything that pertains to the manner of obtaining pardon of grave sins, the ecclesiastical law which obliges Christians to the annual confession, and similar matters, the study of which pertains rather to moral theology. We shall concern ourselves simply with sacramental confession as a means of growing in perfection.

It would be a sad error to think that sacramental confession is ordained simply to the absolution of faults which have been committed or is merely a disposition for the better reception of the Eucharist. The sacrament of penance has in itself and independently of the other sacraments a great value and extraordinary efficacy as regards growth in the Christian life.

The sacraments increase grace if they find it already existing in the soul, and they do so by means of an efficacy which is infallible (ex opere operato). In this sense, as instruments of God applying the merits of Christ, the sacraments have a limitless power for sanctifying man. But in practice, the measure of this sanctifying effect will be in proportion to the dispositions (ex opere operantis) with which one receives the sacraments; not because these dispositions are a co-cause in the production of grace (which proceeds exclusively from God), but because they act as a previous material disposition. Thus also the sun causes mere heat in metal than in clay because the metal is a better conductor of heat (St. Thomas IV Sent., dist. 4, q.2, a. 3, q.2, ad 1) For that reason the study of these dispositions is of great importance in spiritual theology because they admit of a great variety of degrees, and it is important that the soul be disposed as well as possible for the reception of the sacraments.

The dispositions for receiving the sacraments with he greatest possible benefit may be either habitual or actual dispositions. The habitual dispositions may be summarized under the following three headlines, which coincide with the exercise of the theological virtues:

1) Spirit of faith. The tribunal of penance is the tribunal of Christ. We must see Christ in the person of the confessor, since the latter takes the place of Christ and exercises the power which he has received from Christ (John 20:22-23). The Pharisees were right when they said that only God can forgive sin (Luke 5:2l). Consequently, we must be prompt to accept the holy counsels of the confessor as if they came from Christ Himself, and the confessor, on his part, should constantly remember the sublime dignity of his ministry and should exercise it with the fear and reverence which are demanded by his office as a legate of Christ (Cf. 2 Cor. 5:20).

2) Great confidence (hope). The tribunal of penance is the tribunal of mercy. For that reason, the confessor is not called a judge but a father. Whence the confessor should clothe himself, like Christ, in mercy, and the penitent should approach him with a heart filled with filial confidence.

3) Love of God (charity). This love should be more and more intense, and this requires that even the slightest attachment to any kind of sin should be rejected and that we should arouse in our soul sentiments of true contrition for the sins that we have had the misfortune of committing.

As regards the actual dispositions, we should first of all approach the tribunal of penance in each instance as if it were to be the last confession of our life and as an immediate preparation for receiving Viaticum and for the judgment of God. It is therefore necessary to combat energetically the spirit of routine, taking care to confess one’s sins merely out of the habit of doing so at certain definite intervals, but striving to effect in our souls, with the help of grace, a true conversion and renewal of our life.

We shall examine the dispositions required in each of the various steps which are involved in making a good confession.

1) Examination of conscience. The examination of conscience should be made with the greatest sincerity and humility, with a serene and impartial spirit, without excusing our defects and without straining scrupulously to see faults where there are none. The time given to his examination vary with the frequency of one’s confessions, the need of the soul and the degree of perfection of the soul at any given time. An excellent means of simplifying this task is to make a daily examination of conscience and to note especially those things which must be subjected to the confessor in the tribunal of penance. If one does this daily, it will take but a few moments to make a mental review before approaching confession. Moreover, this procedure has the advantage of keeping one’s faults in mind during the week and of avoiding the anxiety that would be caused by forgetting to mention some sin at the time of confession.

But it is especially important that one should not to lose himself in a multitude of unnecessary details. It is of much more importance to be able to discover the cause of distractions in prayer than to be able to recall number of times that one was distracted. Some souls endeavour to do the impossible in seeking mathematical precision regarding the number of venial sins or imperfections, when it would be much more profitable for them to attack the causes of these sins directly rather than to spend much time counting the external manifestations. This is to be understood, naturally, in regard to venial sins, because if it is a question of grave sins, it is necessary to confess the number exactly, or with the greatest possible precision.

2) Sorrow for sin. Sorrow or contrition is the fundamental disposition, together with the firm purpose of amendment, for obtaining the greatest possible benefit from the sacrament of penance. The lack of sorrow for sin would make the confession sacrilegious if it were done deliberately, or it would make the absolution invalid because of a lack of the proximate material needed for the sacrament, even if the sacrament were received in good faith. Devout persons who generally or always confess light faults should be especially careful to cultivate true repentance for their sins, however small and to avoid any spirit of routine. Although there is no obligation to accuse oneself of venial sin in the confessional, it would be an irreverence and an abuse, to accuse oneself of such things and not have sorrow for them or a purpose of amendment. That is why it is often suggested that one renew his sorrow and purpose of amendment for some serious sin from the past or for some present fault for which he is truly sorry and seriously intends not to commit again.

The intensity of repentance will be a measure of the grace which the soul will receive with sacramental absolution. By means of an intense contrition or sorrow, the soul can obtain, not only total remission of all its faults and of the temporal punishment due to them in this life or in purgatory, but also a considerable increase in sanctifying grace, which will enable him to make giant strides along the road to perfection. It is important to keep in mind that the sinner, on regaining grace in the sacrament of penance (or outside penance by means of an act of perfect contrition with the intention to receive the sacrament), does not necessarily receive that grace in the same degree that he previously possessed it, but he will receive the same or more or less grace according to his actual disposition at the time. It is, therefore, of the greatest importance to strive to have the most intense repentance and sorrow that is possible in order to regain one’s former degree of grace or even a greater degree of grace than that which one possessed before his sin. This doctrine is also of value for the increase of grace even when the soul approaches the sacrament of penance in the state of grace. Consequently, there is nothing that the soul should strive for more energetically if it wishes to sanctify itself than this intensity of sorrow which is born of the love of God, of the consideration of His infinite goodness and mercy, of the love and sufferings of Christ, of the monstrous ingratitude of the sinner for such a good Father who has given us so many great benefits, etc. But being convinced that this grace of a perfect and intense contrition is a gift from God which can be petitioned only by prayer, the soul will profoundly humble itself before the divine majesty and implore this gift through the intercession of Mary, Mediatrix of all graces.

3) Firm purpose of amendment. If the purpose of amendment is lacking, the confession is invalid, and one must therefore exercise great diligence regarding this important point. One cannot be content merely with a general resolution not to sin again, because this is too unspecified to be efficacious. Without excluding the general purpose of amendment, we should likewise make a clear, concrete and energetic resolution to use all possible means to avoid all sin and to advance in the practice of a specific virtue. It is helpful to make this type of resolution at the end of the daily examination of conscience and to relate to the confessor in the following confession how faithful or remiss we were in this regard. It is unfortunate that confessions of devout persons are sometimes less beneficial because they disregard these fundamental points.

4) Vocal confession. St. Thomas examines and justifies the sixteen qualities which the ancient theologians listed for the perfect accusation of one’s sins. They are: "The confession should be simple, humble, pure, faithful, frequent, clear, discreet, voluntary, without argument, integral, secret, sorrowful, prompt, strong, accusing and disposed to obey." (Cf. Summa; Suppl. q.9, a.4) Not all of these conditions have the same importance, although none of them is useless. In the order of their sanctifying value, we can select the following:

a) Profoundly humble. The penitent should humbly recognize his weakness and begin to make reparation by voluntarily accepting his own abasement in the eyes of the confessor. In this respect, it is a great mistake for souls, when they commit a humiliating fault, to seek a confessor other than their ordinary confessor so that he will not suspect anything, or they will not lose anything in his eyes. How can they make progress toward perfection if they still preserve such deep-rooted self-love and are so far removed from true humility of heart?

How different it is with those who sincerely desire to sanctify themselves. Without offending the truth by voluntarily exaggerating the quality or number of their sins, they strive to accuse themselves in a manner that would be humiliating to themselves. Not only do they not "palliate them and make them appear less evil, and thus go to confession to excuse themselves rather than to accuse themselves" (St. John of the Cross, The Dark Night, Bk. I, chap. 2), but they "are more anxious to speak of their faults and sins, or that these should be recognized rather than their virtues; and thus they incline to talk of their souls with those who account their actions and their spirituality of little value." (Cf. ibid., chap. 2)

b) Integral confession. We do not refer here to the integrity of confession as regards the species and number of mortal sins (for this is absolutely indispensable under the pain of making a sacrilegious confession), but of the investigation of the causes and motives of sins, so that the confessor may apply the fitting remedy and thus prevent relapses. "It is not enough," says Father Garrigou-Lagrange, "to make a vague accusation that would tell the confessor nothing, as for example: ‘I have had distractions in my prayer.’ It is advisable to say: ‘I have been especially distracted during such and such an exercise of piety through negligence, because I began it badly, without recollection, or because I did not sufficiently combat distractions springing from a petty rancor or from too sensible an affection or from study.’ It is also fitting to recall resolutions taken and to tell whether we have failed more or less in keeping them. Thus routine and negligence will be avoided." (The Three Ages, I, p. 400)

c) Sorrowful confession. One should accuse himself in the confessional in words that make it evident that he has a sincere repentance, and he should strive more and more to arouse the interior sentiments of sorrow for all of his sins and weaknesses.

d) Frequent confession. In order that confession may be an exercise which has a great sanctifying value, it is necessary that it be frequent. Canon law urges bishops to make it an obligation for their clergy frequently to purify their consciences in the sacrament of penance (can. 125). And speaking of religious and seminarians, the law of the Church expressly states that they should go to confession at least once a week (cans. 595 and 1367). It does not matter that one has no new voluntary faults of which to accuse oneself; there will always be matter for confession from one’s past life, and upon this one can again renew his sorrow and thereby justify a new absolution which will increase grace considerably. Some of the saints, such as St. Vincent Ferrer, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Ignatius Loyola, St. Francis Borgia. St. Charles Borromeo and St. Alphonsus, went to confession every day, not because of scrupulosity or anxiety of conscience, but because of their thirst for God and their realization that one of the most efficacious means for advancing in perfection is the humble and contrite reception of the sacrament of penance. The soul that aspires seriously to sanctify itself will never omit weekly confession.

5) Sacramental satisfaction. In addition to the vindictive purpose of restoring the proper order, sacramental satisfaction has a double value: the remission of the temporal punishment due to sin (and this effect is produced ex opere operato, but according to the disposition of the penitent) and the medicinal value of preserving the soul from future sin and healing the wounds of sin by the application of opportune remedies. For that reason it is necessary to fulfill one’s penance with the greatest possible fervor. Keeping in mind the great benevolence which the Church manifests today as regards the reception of the sacrament of penance, those penitents who ask their confessor for a more severe penance are to be praised, because the satisfactory value of the works imposed as a penance in confession is much greater than if one were to undertake those same works by his own initiative, for they form a part of the sacrament and they receive their value from the power of the keys.

There is no doubt that confession made with the foregoing conditions is of great efficacy in the sanctification of the soul. The following are the effects of such a worthy confession:

1) The Blood of Christ has fallen upon the soul to purify and sanctify it. Therefore, the saints who received the most vivid light concerning the infinite value of the redeeming Blood of Jesus had a veritable hunger and thirst for receiving sacramental absolution.

2) Grace is increased in us ex opere operato although in different degrees according to the disposition of the penitent. Of one hundred persons who have received absolution from the same faults, there may not be two who have received grace in the same degree. It will depend on the intensity of their repentance and the degree of humility with which they have approached the sacrament.

3) The soul is filled with peace and consolation, a psychological disposition indispensable for making progress on the road to perfection.

4) Greater lights are received concerning the ways of God. Thus after a worthy confession we understand more clearly the necessity of forgiving injuries, seeing how mercifully the Lord has pardoned us, or we understand with greater clarity the malice of venial sin, which is a stain which the soul ugly because it deprives it of some of its brilliance and beauty.

5) It increases considerably the powers of the soul imparting the energy and the strength to conquer temptations and the fortitude to fulfil one's duties perfectly.

The reception of the sacrament of penance has an extraordinary sanctifying efficacy, but it is a transitory act which cannot be repeated continuously. What should remain habitually in the soul is the virtue of penance the spirit of compunction, which will preserve in the soul the fruits of the sacrament (Summa theol., III, q. 84, aa. 8-9) For the sake of brevity, we shall summarize the fundamental points which should be kept in mind in this matter.

The virtue of penance is a supernatural habit by which we are sorry for past sins and have the intention of removing them from the soul (Summa theol., III, q. 85, a. 1). Therefore, it implies the desire of expiating them. This virtue should be manifested by acts which are proper to it, but in itself it is a habitual attitude of the soul which preserves in us the sorrow for having offended God and the desire of making reparation for our faults. This spirit of compunction is necessary for all those who have not lived in perfect innocence.

When it is profound and habitual, this sentiment of contrition gives great peace to the soul, keeps it in humility, is an excellent instrument of purification, helps the soul mortify its disorderly instincts, fortifies it against temptation, impels to use all the means at its disposal to make reparation for its sins, and is a guarantee of perseverance on the way of perfection. Many souls experience an instinctive repugnance to anything that signifies penitence and renunciation. This instinctive movement, originating in the depths of the human spirit, which moves man naturally to flee from pain, is no obstacle to the possession and practice of the virtue of penance, which, as such, resides in the will and has nothing to do with the rebellion of the instinct.

The spirit of compunction was found in all the saints; all of them were aware that they were sinners in the eyes of God. And the Church herself has placed in her liturgy various formulas of contrition, especially in the Mass, in which such expressions are multiplied in an impressive manner. This is the spirit which animates the Church, the Spouse of Christ, as long as she performs this most sublime and most holy action in this world.

Penance makes us participants in the suffering and the merits of Christ. Union with Christ in our sufferings, besides being an indispensable condition for their value, is an ineffable source of consolation. The saints did not dare to live without the Cross.

Following the thought and the intention of the Church as manifested in the formula which accompanies sacramental absolution, we must refer, by an explicit intention, the act of the virtue of penance to the sacrament itself. This practice is of singular efficacy for the remission of our sins, for the increase of grace and for the attainment of the reward which will be ours in eternal life.

The principal means for acquiring the spirit of penance and of compunction are:

1) prayer, since this is a gift from God; 2) meditation on the sufferings of Christ because of our sins and His infinite mercy in forgiving the repentant sinner; 3) the voluntary practice of mortification performed with the spirit of reparation in union with Christ.

Among all the exercises and practices of piety, there is none whose sanctifying efficacy can compare with the worthy reception of the Eucharist. Here we receive not only grace but the very source from whom grace comes: God Himself. The Eucharist, in its twofold aspect of sacrament and sacrifice, should be the point of convergence for the entire Christian life. Everything should revolve around the Eucharist.

Sanctity consists in participating more and more fully and perfectly in the divine life which is communicated to us through grace. This grace springs from Christ as its unique source, in whom dwells the fullness of grace and divinity.

Christ communicates grace to us through the sacraments and principally through the Eucharist, in which He gives us Himself as the food of our soul. However, unlike material nourishment, it is not we who assimilate Christ to ourselves, but it is He who transforms us into Himself. In the Eucharist the Christian can attain that maximum transformation in Christ in which sanctity consists.

Holy Communion, in giving us entirely to Christ, places at our disposition all the treasures of sanctity, of wisdom and of knowledge which are contained in Him. With Communion the soul receives an infinite treasure which becomes the property of the soul.

Together with the Word Incarnate, with His body, soul and divinity, there is given to us in the Eucharist the other two Persons of the Blessed Trinity, the Father and the Holy Ghost, by reason of the ineffable mystery of circuminsession which makes Them inseparable. Never as perfectly as after receiving Communion is the Christian converted into the temple and tabernacle of the divinity. By reason of this divine and ineffable contact with the Blessed Trinity, the soul (and by redundance from the soul, the body also) is made more sacred than the tabernacle or a ciborium, and even more sacred than the sacramental species themselves which contain Christ but without receiving from Him any sanctifying influence.

The Eucharistic union associates us in a mysterious but real manner with the infinite life of the Blessed Trinity. In the soul which has just received Communion, the Father engenders his only begotten Son, and from Both proceeds that current of love and veritable torrent of fire which is the Holy Ghost. The Christian, after Communion, should be rapt in an ecstasy of adoration and love and should let himself be born through the Father to the Son and through the Son to the Father in the unity of the Holy Ghost. There should be a simple movement of flaming love and intimate adoration which could be translated in this simple formula: "Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost."

These notions are fundamental and they will suffice, if meditated upon, to give us the tone and the norm of our Christian life, which should be essentially Eucharistic. But now let us speak of the preparation and thanksgiving which are of capital importance for obtaining from the Eucharist its maximum sanctifying power.

It is necessary here to distinguish a twofold preparation: remote and proximate. St. Pius X, by his decree, Sacra Tridentina Synodus, of December 20, 1905, settled once and for all the historical controversy concerning the remote dispositions required for the reception of Holy Communion. The Pope determined that, in order to receive frequent or even daily Communion, the following conditions alone were required: a) the state of grace; b) the right intention (that is, that one should not receive Communion for reasons of vanity or out of routine, but only to please God); c) freedom from venial sins so far as possible, although this is not absolutely necessary, since Communion will help to conquer them. A diligent preparation and devout thanksgiving are highly recommended, and one should follow the advice of a confessor. One who fulfills these conditions should not be deprived of frequent or daily Communion.

It is evident that persons who wish seriously to advance in Christian perfection must endeavor to intensify these conditions as much as possible. One’s remote preparation should consist in living a life that is worthy of one who has received Communion in the morning and intends to receive Communion again the following day. He must reject any attachment to venial sin, especially to deliberate venial sin, and avoid a lukewarm and imperfect manner of acting; this presupposes self-abnegation and a tendency to the practice of more perfect acts in view of given circumstances.

There are four principal proximate dispositions which the fervent soul should try to arouse, asking God for them with a humble and persevering insistence.

1) A living faith. Christ always demanded this as an indispensable condition before granting any grace, even the grace of a miracle. The Eucharist is the mysterium fidei because in it natural reason and the senses can perceive nothing of Christ. St. Thomas recalls that on the Cross only the divinity was hidden, but on the altar the holy humanity of Christ likewise is veiled to our gaze. This mystery demands of us a living faith filled with adoration.

But not only in this sense of a vital assent to the Eucharistic mystery is faith absolutely indispensable; it is also indispensable in relation to the vivifying power of contact with Christ. We must consider in our souls the leprosy of sin and repeat with the leper of the Gospel: "Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean" (Matt. 8:2), or as the blind man of Jericho, who was less unfortunate with his privation of physical vision than we are with our blindness of soul: "Lord, that I may see" (Mark 10:51).

2) Profound humility. Christ washed the feet of His apostles before He instituted the Eucharist, in order to give them an example (John l3:15). If the Blessed Virgin was prepared to receive the Word of God in her virginal womb with that profound humility which caused her to exclaim: "Behold the handmaid of the Lord." (Luke 1:38), what ought we to do in a similar situation? It does not matter that we nave repented perfectly of our sins and that we find ourselves in the state of grace. The fault was pardoned, perhaps the guilt of punishment was also remitted (if we have done sufficient penance), but the historical fact of having committed that sin will never disappear. We should never forget, whatever be the grade of sanctity which we actually possess, that we have been ransomed from hell and that we are former children of the devil. The Christian who has had the misfortune to commit a single mortal sin in his life ought always to be overwhelmed with humility. At least on approaching Communion we should repeat three times with profound sentiments of humility and a sincere repentance the sublime words of the centurion: "Lord, I am not worthy."

3) Unbounded confidence. It is necessary that the remembrance of our sins should lead us to humility but never to despair, which would be a disguised form of pride. Christ is the greater pardoner who has embraced with infinite tenderness all the sinners who approach Him in search of pardon. The conditions for this pardon have not changed; they are the same as in the Gospel. We should approach Him with humility and reverence and also with great confidence in His goodness and mercy. He is the Father, the Good Shepherd, the Healer, the Divine Friend, who wishes to hold us close to His Sacred Heart which throbs with love for us. Confidence conquers Him and He cannot resist it, for it overwhelms His heart.

4) Hunger and thirst of Communion. This is the disposition which most directly affects the sanctifying efficacy of Holy Communion. The hunger and thirst for receiving the sacramental Christ, which proceeds from love and is almost identified with love, enlarges the capacity of the soul and disposes it to receive sacramental grace from the Eucharist in great measure. The amount of water which is taken at a fountain depends in each case on the size of the vessel in which the water is received. If we strive to beg ardently of the Lord for this hunger and thirst, and if we ourselves strive to arouse it with all possible means, we shall very soon be saints. St. Catherine of Siena, St. Teresa of Avila and many other saints had such a hunger and thirst for Communion that they would rather have been exposed to the greatest sufferings and dangers rather than endure a single day in which their souls were not sustained by this divine nourishment. We should see in these dispositions, not only an effect, but also one of the most efficacious causes of their exalted sanctity. The Eucharist received with such ardent desire increased the grace in their souls to an incalculable degree, causing them to advance in giant strides along the road to perfection.

Each one of our Communions should be more fervent than the preceding one, increasing our hunger and thirst for the Eucharist. For each new Communion increases in us our sanctifying grace and disposes us, as a result, to receive the Lord on the following day with a love that not only equal but much greater than our love of the preceding day. Here, as throughout the spiritual life, the soul should advance with an accelerated movement in much the same way as a stone falls with greater rapidity as it approaches closer to the earth.

As regards the grace which will increase in us in this sacrament ex opere operato, preparation for Communion is more important than thanksgiving after Communion, because the grace is in relation to the actual disposition of the soul which receives Communion.

In any case, thanksgiving after Communion is likewise very Important. As St. Teresa said to her nuns: "Do not lose so good an opportunity of negotiating as the hour after receiving Communion." (Cf. The Way of Perfection, chap. 34, n. 10). Christ is present in us and He desires nothing so much as to fill us with blessings. The best way of giving thanks is to identify oneself through love with Christ Himself and to offer Him to the Father with all His infinite riches as a sweet oblation for the four purposes of sacrifice: adoration. reparation, petition and thanksgiving.

It is necessary to avoid at any cost a routine spirit, for this renders sterile the greater part of thanksgiving after Communion. There are many devout souls who make a thanksgiving which is composed of certain formulas or prayers read from a book, and they are not satisfied until they have recited them mechanically. There is no intimate contact with Christ, no cordial conversation with Him, no fusion of hearts, no humble petition for the graces which we need today and which may perhaps be completely different from the graces we needed yesterday or shall need tomorrow "I do not know what to say to the Lord," is the answer of some who abandon their prayer books and attempt to give themselves over to loving conversation with Christ. For that reason they do not even try to leave their routine formality. If they loved Christ truly and if they would try to carry on with Him a conversation of friendship, they would very soon experience a repugnance for those formulas which they had only read out of a prayer book and which have been written by others. The voice of Christ, sweet and tender, would resound in their souls and show them the way to heaven and establish in them that peace which "surpasses all understanding" (Phil. 4:7).

Another excellent means of giving thanks is to reproduce in one’s mind some of the scenes of the Gospel, imagining that we ourselves are present before Christ who is truly present within us in the Eucharist. Then we could present our petitions as they were presented by others when Christ was on earth: "Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick" (John 11:3); "Lord if thou canst make me clean" (Matt. 8:2); "Rabboni, that I may see" (Mark 10:51); "Lord, give me this water" (John 4:15); "Lord, increase our faith" (Luke 17:5); "I do believe; help my unbelief" (Mark 9:23); "Lord, teach us to pray" (Luke 11:1); "Lord, show us the Father and it is enough for us" (John 14:8); "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast words of everlasting life" (John 6:68). How our Lord would rejoice at seeing the simplicity, the faith and the humility of such souls, who approach Him with the same confidence and love as those recorded in the Gospel. How could it be possible that He would not answer our prayers, if he is the same now as then and if we are so wretched, and even more so, than many who are described in the Gospel? There is nothing that so moves His divine heart as a soul that thirsts for God and humbles itself by recognizing its wounds and miseries and implores a remedy for them.

It is a kind of irreverence to the divine guest to be too prompt to terminate the visit which He has condescended to make to us. With persons of the world who are deserving of all respect we would never act in this manner, but we would wait for them to bring the visit to a close. Jesus prolongs His visit within us for as long as the sacramental species remain substantially unchanged, and although one cannot give a fixed rule in this regard, since it depends on the physical condition of each person, we could say that the sacramental species normally remain in a person for a half hour. We should, therefore, try to remain during all this time at the feet of the Savior, listening to His divine teaching and receiving His sanctifying influence. Only by reason of unusual circumstances, such as an urgent duty or necessity, should we cut short our thanksgiving, and even then we should ask the Lord to supply with his goodness and mercy the time which we were not able to give.

A great help or complement to sacramental Communion and a means of prolonging its influence is the practice which is called spiritual communion. It consists essentially in a fervent desire to receive the Eucharist and in giving God a loving embrace as if He had truly entered our hearts. This pious practice, blessed and encouraged by the Church, has a sanctifying efficacy and can be repeated frequently throughout the day. We can never sufficiently praise this excellent devotion, but even in this matter one must avoid carefully anything that is routine or mechanical, because this would diminish the merit of the act.

Another excellent practice which should not be omitted is that of visiting Christ in the tabernacle. It consists in passing a short time at the feet of the Master present in the Eucharist; we should do so several times a day if possible. A most opportune time is toward the close of day. At this twilight hour everything in nature invites us to recollection and silence, and these are excellent conditions for hearing the voice of the Lord in the depths of the soul. The best method for making a visit to the Blessed Sacrament is to open one’s heart by means of a fervent conversation with Christ. It is not necessary to be educated or to be eloquent, but simply to love the Lord a great deal and to have confidence and a childlike simplicity toward Him. Books may be of help to certain individuals, but books can never take the place of the spontaneity of a soul which opens its heart to the outpourings of love which emanate from the sacramental Christ. The books of St. Alphonsus Liguori are especially suitable.

The Mass is substantially the same sacrifice as that of the Cross, and has all of its infinite value: the same victim, the same oblation, the same priest. There is only an accidental difference: the manner in which the sacrifice is realized (a bloody sacrifice on the Cross, an unbloody sacrifice on the altar). This is the teaching of the Church in the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, chap. 2; Denz. 940). As a true sacrifice, the Mass realizes the four purposes of sacrifice: adoration, reparation, petition and thanksgiving (Ibid., chap. 1; Denz. 948). Its value is infinite, but its effects, so far as they depend on us, are applied to us only in the measure of our internal dispositions.

As a reproduction of the redeeming sacrifice, the Mass has the same purposes and produces the same effects as the sacrifice of the Cross. They are also the same as those of a sacrifice in general, the supreme act of religion, but they are incomparably more sublime.

1) Adoration. The sacrifice of the Mass renders to God an adoration which is absolutely worthy of Him and is infinite in the strictest sense. This effect it always produces infallibly, ex opere operato, even if the Mass were celebrated by a priest in the state of mortal sin. The reason is that the value of adoration depends on the infinite dignity of the principal priest who offers the sacrifice (Christ) and the value of the victim offered (Christ).

We should recall the great longing of the saints to give glory to God. With the Mass we give to God all the honor which is due to Him in recognition of His sovereign grandeur and supreme dominion, and this is done in the most perfect way possible, in an infinite degree. One Mass gives more glory to God than do all the angels and saints in heaven, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God.

In return for this incomparable glory. God inclines lovingly to His creatures. From this proceeds the sanctifying value of the Mass. And to think that many Christians, even devout Christians, have not yet become aware of this, but prefer their routine practices of devotion to an incorporation and participation in this sublime sacrifice constitutes the principal act of religion and of Catholic worship!

2) Reparation. After adoration, there is no other debt which is more pressing than that of making reparation for the offenses which we have committed against the Creator. In this sense also the value of the Mass is absolutely incomparable, because by means of it offer to the Father the infinite reparation of Christ with all its redeeming efficacy.

The world is flooded with sin each day, and we may well ask why God does not punish us. The reason is that each day, indeed each hour, the Son of God, immolated on the altar, appeases the wrath of His Father and withholds the arm which is prepared to punish. Yet this reparatory effect is not applied to us in all of its infinite fullness, but in a limited and finite degree, according to our dispositions. Nevertheless, it is well to keep in mind the following points:

a) We receive ex opere operato, unless we place an obstacle to it, the actual grace which is necessary for repentance for our sins. Consequently, there is nothing more efficacious for obtaining from God the conversion of a sinner than to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for this intention, asking God at the same time to rid the heart of the sinner of the obstacles for infallibly obtaining that grace.

b) The Mass remits always and infallibly as long as there is no obstacles, at least part of the temporal punishment which is due to sin in this world or in the world to come. Hence the Mass is likewise of great profit for the souls in purgatory. The degree and measure of this remission, however, will depend on our dispositions.

No suffrage is of such efficacious value to the souls in purgatory as the sacrifice of the Mass, and no sacramental penance of greater value could be imposed by confessors on their penitents than that of having a Mass offered to God.

3) Petition. "Our indigence is immense; we constantly need light fortitude, consolation. We shall find all this in the Mass. There is, in effect, he who said: ‘I am the Light of the world, I am the Way. I am the Truth. I am the Life. Come to me, those who suffer, and I will refresh you. If anyone comes to me, I will not reject him.’" (Dom Columba Marmion, Christ the Life of the Soul. Chap. 7).

Christ is offered to the Father in the Mass in order to obtain for through the infinite merit of His oblation, all the graces of divine life which we need.

There He is "always living to make intercession for us" (Heb. 7:25), strengthening our supplications and petitions by His infinite merits. Therefore, the impetratory value of the Mass is incomparable. Of itself, ex opere operato, infallibly and immediately, it moves God to grant to men all the graces they need, without exception, although the effective distribution of those graces will be measured by the degree of our dispositions and can even be frustrated completely because of a voluntary obstacle which we may place to it (Cf. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., The Three Ages, II, chap. 31).

When incorporated with the Mass. our prayer not only enters into the river of liturgical prayer, which gives it a dignity and efficacy ex opere operantis ecclesiae, but it blends it with the infinite prayer of Christ, and in attention to Him God will grant us whatever we need. Consequently, there is no novena or triduum which can compare to the impetratory efficacy of one Mass.

What a disorientation frequently exists among the faithful as regards the objective value of things! That which we cannot obtain by means of the Holy Mass cannot be obtained in any other way. It is very and good to make use of other practices and exercises which are approved by the Church, and it is beyond doubt that God does grant many graces through them, but let us put each .thing in its proper place. The Mass is above everything.

4) Thanksgiving. The immense benefits of the natural and supernatural order which we have received from God cause us to contract with Him an infinite debt of gratitude. An entire eternity would not suffice to pay this debt if we were not able to make use of other means which we are able to offer Him on our account. But there is at our disposition a wonderful means of completely liquidating our debt: the sacrifice of the Mass. Through it we offer to the Father a Eucharistic sacrifice or a thanksgiving which is more than our debt because it is infinite. It is Christ Himself who is immolated for us, and in our place He gives thanks to God for his immense benefits At the same time, the Mass is a fountain of new graces because it pleases God to reward those who do good. The Eucharistic effect or thanksgiving is produced by the Holy Mass of itself always and infallibly ex opere operato and independently of our dispositions.

Such are, in brief, the infinite riches contained in the Mass. For that reason the saints, illumined by God, always held the Mass in the highest esteem. It was the center of their life, the fountain of their spirituality, the resplendent around which all of their activities revolved. But in order to obtain the maximum sanctifying benefits from the celebration of or attendance at Mass, it is necessary to insist on the necessary dispositions on the part of the one who celebrates or the one who attends.

Someone has said that in order to celebrate or attend one Mass worthily, three eternities would be required: one to prepare oneself, another to celebrate or attend the Mass, and a third to give thanks. Without going to his extreme, we can say that it is certain that every preparation will be too little as regards the diligence and fervor which are fitting for the Mass. The principal dispositions are of two kinds: external and internal.

1) External dispositions. For the priest, these dispositions will consist in the perfect fulfillment and observance of the rubrics and ceremonies which the Church requires. For the faithful they will consist in respect, silence and attention in assisting at Mass.

2) Internal dispositions. The best possible disposition is to identify oneself with Christ who is immolated on the altar, to offer Him to the Father and to offer oneself in Him, with Him and through Him. This is the hour of asking that we be converted into bread in order to be consumed by our brothers through the complete giving of ourselves in charity. We ask for an intimate union with Mary at the foot of the Cross, with St. John, the beloved disciple, with the priest who celebrates the Mass and is another Christ here on earth; a union with all the Masses which are being celebrated in the whole world. We should never ask anything of God without adding, as an infinite price of the grace which we desire: "Lord, by the adorable blood of Jesus, who at this moment is being elevated in the chalice by some priest somewhere in the world." There is no doubt that the Mass celebrated or attended with these dispositions is an instrument of sanctification of the first order.

After the sacraments, which are the primary fountain of our Christian life for augmenting grace ex opere operato, it is necessary to examine the fundamental means for the development of this life ex opere operantis. These means are, principally, the ever more intense practice of the infused virtues, perfected by the actuation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost (an actuation which, although it does not depend on us, we can nevertheless anticipate by disposing ourselves so that the Spirit may move us), and the progressive increase of the life of prayer. These are the great means which we shall now examine as extensively as possible. We have already considered the general theory and doctrine of the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost. Now we shall consider the method of practicing the virtues with greater intensity and perfection and what is necessary to dispose ourselves to the actuation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. We shall insist especially on the seven principal virtues, theological and cardinal, but without omitting certain indications which pertain to their derived and annexed virtues. We shall likewise add to each virtue a consideration of the gift of the Holy Ghost which corresponds to that virtue, as St. Thomas does in his Summa Theologiae.

St. Thomas assigns four distinct values to prayer: satisfactory, meritorious, impetratory and a certain spiritual delight. While we are most interested in pointing out the impetratory value of prayer, we must first say a word about the other three values.

The satisfactory value of prayer is evident. It is clear not only from the fact that it always presupposes an act of humility and subjection to God, whom we have offended by our sins which are rooted in pride, but also because prayer springs from charity, the source of all satisfaction for sin. Finally, a prayer well made is of itself a difficult task for imperfect souls, by reason of the attention and firmness of will which it requires; hence it is also satisfactory as regards the difficulty involved. (c¦ . ST. II II q.83 a.12) The Council of Trent expressly mentions the satisfactory value of prayer. (Sess. 14 can.13)

Like any other act of supernatural virtue, prayer receives its meritorious value from charity, from which it springs by means of the virtue of religion, of which it is a proper act. As a meritorious act, prayer is subjected to the conditions for any other virtuous act and is ruled by the same laws. In this sense prayer can merit de condigno whatever can be merited in this way as long as the proper conditions are fulfilled. The third effect of prayer is a certain spiritual delight of the soul. This effect is produced by the mere presence of prayer; as St. Thomas says, praesentialiter efficit. (c¦ . ST. II II q.83 a.13) But in order that prayer actually produce this spiritual delight, attention is absolutely necessary; spiritual delight is incompatible with distractions, voluntary or involuntary. For that reason, ecstatic prayer, in which the attention of the soul is the greatest possible by reason of the concentration of all one's psychological energies on the object contemplated, carries with it the greatest delight that can be attained in this life. And it is natural that this should be so. Prayer nourishes our intellect, arouses our sensibility in a holy manner, and stimulates and strengthens our will. It is truly a refectio mentis which by its very nature is meant to fill the soul with sweetness.

But it is the impetratory value of prayer which interests us most as an element of increase and development of the Christian life independent of merit. Let us first see the principal differences between the meritorious and impetratory aspects of prayer.

As a meritorious act, prayer implies a relation of justice in regard to a reward; its impetratory value implies a relation simply to the mercy of God. As meritorious, it has an intrinsic efficacy for obtaining a reward; as impetratory, its efficacy rests solely on the promise of God. The meritorious efficacy is based above all on charity; the impetratory value is based primarily on faith. The object of merit and of impetration is not always the same, although sometimes these two aspects may coincide. Let us now examine the question of the infallible efficacy of prayer.

This thesis is definitely de fide, based as it is on innumerable significant scriptural texts:

It is impossible to speak more clearly or with more insistence. The divine promise regarding an answer to prayer stands out in full certainly in the sources of revelation. But what conditions are required that prayer infallibly obtain and fulfill the divine promises? St. Thomas assigns four of them to which all the others which are listed by other authors can be reduced: that one pray for himself; that one pray for that which is necessary for salvation; that one pray piously; and that one pray with perseverance. (c¦ . ST. II II q.83 a.15 ad.2) From his sermons of Lent in 1273, however, he lists five conditions. Let us examine each of these conditions in particular.

Among all prayers the Lord's Prayer stands preeminent, for it excels in the five conditions required in prayer: confidence, rectitude, order, devotion, and humility

Prayer should be confident: "Let us go with confidence to the throne of grace"(Heb. 4; 16) (and with fullness of faith: "Let him ask in faith nothing wavering"). (James 1; 6) There can be no doubt that the Lord's Prayer affords the greatest security, since it was framed by our Advocate and most wise Petitioner, in Whom are "all the treasures of wisdom" (Col. 2; 3) and of Whom it is said: "We have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the just." (1 John 2; 1) Hence St. Cyprian says: "Seeing that we have Christ as an advocate with the Father for our sins, we should employ the words of our advocate when we seek forgiveness of our sins." (De Orat. Dom.)

The trustworthiness of this prayer is even more apparent because He Who (with the Father) hears our prayer, Himself taught us how to pray, according to Psalm 90; 15: "He shall cry to me and I will hear him." For that reason St. Cyprian says that "to plead with our Lord in His own words betokens the prayer of an intimate and devoted friend." Consequently this prayer is never fruitless, seeing that according to Augustine venial sins are forgiven by means of it.

Prayer should have rectitude, so that we ask God for that which is good for us. For St. John Damascene says that "to pray is to ask fitting things of God." It often happens that our prayers are not granted because we ask for that which is not good for us: "You ask and receive not, because you ask amiss "(James 4; 3)

Now it is no easy matter to know what we should pray for, since it is difficult to know what we ought to desire. For if it is right to pray for a certain thing, it must be right to desire it. For this reason the Apostle says that "we know not what we should pray for as we ought." (Rom. 8; 26)

Now Christ is our teacher; it belongs to Him to teach us what we ought to pray for. Thus His disciples said to Him, "Lord, teach us to pray" (Luke 11; 1). It follows, then, that we pray most rightly when we ask for what He taught us to pray for. Hence St. Augustine says, "If we would pray rightly and fittingly, we should say nothing else but what is contained in this prayer of our Lord." (Ep. 130; ad Probam)

As desire should be orderly, so should prayer, since it is the expression of desire. Now the right order is that our desires and prayers should prefer spiritual goods to carnal goods and heavenly things to earthly things: "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His justice, and all these things shall be added unto you." (Matt. 6; 33) Our Lord teaches us to observe this order in the Lord's Prayer, in which we pray first for heavenly and afterwards for earthly blessings.

Prayer should be devout, because the unction of devotion makes the sacrifice of prayer acceptable to God: "In Thy name I will lift up my hands; let my soul be filled as with marrow and fatness." (Ps. 62; 5) Yet it often happens that devotion grows cool through prayer being too long. For that reason our Lord warned us against praying at unnecessary length: "When you are praying, speak not much." (Matt. 6; 7) And St. Augustine says to Proba: "Beware of praying with many words: it is fervent attention that secures a hearing." (Ep. 130) Hence the brevity of the Lord's Prayer.

Now devotion arises from charity, which is the love of God and of our neighbour, and both of these are indicated in the Lord's Prayer. In order to express our love of God we call Him Father, and in order to indicate love of our neighbor we pray for all in general: Our Father... Forgive us our trespasses (since it is through love of our neighbour that we make this petition).

Prayer should be humble: "He hath had regard to the prayer of the humble." (Ps. 101; 18) This is seen in the story of the Pharisee and the publican, (Luke 18; 10 - 14) and is expressed in the words of Judith: "The prayer of the humble and the meek hath always pleased Thee." (Judikth 9; 16) This same humility is observed in the Lord's Prayer since true humility consists in not presuming on our own strength, but in trusting to obtain all things from the power of God.

Prayer brings about three benefits:

Prayer is an efficacious and useful remedy against all kinds of evils. Hence it delivers a man from sins already committed: "Thou hast forgiven the wickedness of my sin; for this shall every godly man pray to Thee." (Ps. 31; 5) Thus the thief on his cross prayed and obtained pardon: "This day shalt thou be with me in paradise." (Luke 23; 43) So also the publican prayed and "went down to his house justified." (Luke 18; 14)

Prayer also frees man from the fear of future sin and from trials and despondency: "Is any one of you in trouble? Let him pray" (James 5; 13) Again, it delivers him from persecutors and enemies: "Instead of making me a return for my love they decried me; but I gave myself to prayer" (Ps. 108; 4)

Prayer is efficacious and usefiul for obtaining whatever we desire: "All things whatsoever ye ask, when ye pray, believe that you shall receive." (Mark 11; 24) And if our prayer is not granted, it is either because it lacks constancy, in that "we should pray always and never faint" (Luke 18; 1) or because we ask for what is less conducive to our salvation. Thus St. Augustine says, "Of His bounty, the Lord often grants not what we seek, so as to bestow something preferable." We have an example of this in Paul who three times prayed for the removal of the thorn in his flesh, and yet was not heard. 2 Cor. 12; 7 - 9)

Prayer is profitable because it makes us the familiars of God: "Let my prayer be directed as incense in Thy sight" (Ps. 140; 2)

We are indebted to St. Teresa of Avila for the clearest and best classification of the grades of prayer which has ever been compiled. Being a contemplative by vocation, it is natural that this great saint should have traced the path of sanctity according to the grades of prayer. Her concept that the intensity of one's life of prayer coincides with the intensity of one's charity is based on solid theology and was confirmed by St. Pius X in a letter to the Carmelites, in which he stated that the grades of prayer taught by St. Teresa represent so many grades of elevation and ascent toward Christian perfection. (c¦ . Letter of March 7, 1914) These grades of prayer are: 1) vocal prayer; 2) meditation; 3) affective prayer; 4) prayer of simplicity; 5) infused recollection; 6) prayer of quiet; 7) prayer of union; 8) prayer of ecstatic union; 9) prayer of transforming union. We will discuss the first three grades of prayer, which belong to the predominantly ascetical stage of the spiritual life.

The first thing to be noted is that, although we classify the grades of prayer under the headings of ascetical and mystical, there may be mystical prayer in the early stages of the spiritual life and there may be a return to ascetical activity on the part of the souls who are well advanced in mystical ways. Hence it is important to keep in mind that what is meant by ascetical and mystical signifies that which is predominant and not that which is exclusive.

Little remains to be said concerning vocal prayer, since much of what we have already written concerning the prayer of petition applies to this first grade of prayer. By vocal prayer we mean any form of prayer which is expressed in words, whether written or spoken. This kind of prayer is practically the only form used in public or liturgical prayer, but it is also much used by private individuals. In speaking of the use of vocal prayer, St. Thomas states that the public prayers recited by the ministers of the Church, in which the faithful are expected to participate, should always be vocal. (c¦ . ST. II II q.83 a.12) He then gives three reasons why vocal prayer is also suitable for private individuals: 1) to arouse interior devotion; 2) to give homage to God with our body as well as our mind and heart; 3) to give vent, by way of overflow, to the spiritual sentiments that flood the soul in prayer.

In view of the foregoing reasons, we should observe that our consideration of vocal prayer as the first grade in the practice of prayer is not restricted to prayer of petition (although petition would surely be included); what we would wish to emphasize rather is the use of vocal prayer as a means of arousing one's devotion or of expressing one's deep love for God. In this sense, it is readily seen how vocal prayer leads naturally to the second grade of prayer, which is meditation. Moreover, the use of vocal prayer, understood in this way, depends upon, and is subordinate to, mental prayer. In this wider context of vocal prayer we include both public liturgical prayer and individual private prayer as the expression by the Church an individuals of their worship, love, thanksgiving, contrition and all the other sentiments which spring up in the human heart in reference to God.

The two requirements for vocal prayer are attention and piety. Attention may be actual or virtual. Actual attention is present when the person who prays has complete awareness of what he is doing here and now; virtual attention is that which is had at the beginning of prayer and extends throughout the prayer without being retracted, although there may be involuntary distractions. St. Teresa says in this regard:

The second requirement, piety, is complementary to that of attention. It goes without saying that we do not mean by piety the sensible consolation or sentimentality which sometimes accompanies prayer. By attention we apply our intellect to the practice of prayer; by piety we direct our will to God. Piety, therefore, involves several virtues: charity, vitalized faith, confidence, humility, devotion, reverence and perseverance. Piety should also be the measure for the duration of one's personal vocal prayers, for it is futile to attempt to pray well when one is fatigued. By the same token, public prayers should also be arranged in such a way that they arouse the devotion of the faithful and do not cause them tedium. "But in praying, do not multiply words as the Gentiles do; for they think by saying a great deal they may be heard. So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matt. 6; 7 - 8).

As regards the formulas to be used in vocal prayer, it is not possible to give any fixed rule or detailed directions. Perhaps the best principle to follow is that given for the selection of books for one's spiritual reading, namely, to use that which is beneficial. The words by which we express ourselves in vocal prayer will vary with our needs and our spiritual sentiments. Moreover, some persons find it very difficult to express themselves, and therefore they make use of the prayers composed by others. Objectively, the best prayers are usually those which have been composed by the Church and the saints and inserted in the liturgy. There is no better vocal prayer than the Our Father, which was taught us by Christ Himself, and the prayers which have been culled from the pages of Scripture: the Ave Maria, Gloria, psalms, etc. Unfortunately, their constant repetition easily causes us to recite them in a purely mechanical fashion, oblivious of the sentiments which they contain.

The necessity of fervent recitation of vocal prayer cannot be emphasized too much, because vocal prayer is one type of prayer that can never be omitted completely, even when one arrives at the height of sanctity. The time comes in the practice of mental prayer when the inferior grades yield to the superior grades as one progresses in union with God, but this never occurs with vocal prayer. It is always beneficial, either to arouse devotion or to give expression to the intensity and fervour of one's love of God. Any attacks on the practice of vocal prayer must, therefore, be interpreted as the sign of an evil spirit, and this spirit has been manifested by many deluded souls and false mystics in the history of spirituality.

Discursive meditation can be defined as a reasoned application of the mind to some supernatural truth in order to penetrate its meaning, love it and carry it into practice with the assistance of grace.

The distinguishing note of meditation is that it is a reasoned or discursive type of prayer and therefore attention is absolutely indispensable. As soon as one ceases to reason or discurse, he ceases to meditate. He may have given way to distraction, deliberately turned his mind to something else, passed on to affective prayer or contemplation, but without discursus there is no meditation.

How, then, is meditation distinguished from simple study or speculation on a supernatural truth? Unlike the latter activities, meditation is a form of prayer, and it is such by reason of its purpose or finality. Actually, meditation has a double finality, one intellectual and the other affective and practical.

The intellectual purpose is to arrive at firm convictions concerning some supernatural truth; hence the importance of the intellect in meditation. But one could acquire firm convictions by speculative study, and therefore this cannot be the principal finality of meditation nor that which makes meditation true prayer. The most important element in meditation is the act of love aroused in the will on the presentation of some supernatural truth by the intellect. If one were to spend the entire period of meditation on speculative discursus, he would not have prayed but speculated. As St. Teresa points out, meditation consists not so much in thinking a great deal but in loving a great deal. When the will bursts forth with acts of love, an intimate and profound contact is established between the soul and God, and then it is that the soul can truly be said to be praying. Far from being the goal of meditation, discursus is merely a kind of disposition and necessary preparation for the arousal of love. But neither is a meditation complete when the individual has been aroused to love the supernatural truth on which he has speculated; there is yet a final step for the contemplation and perfection of meditation; the practical resolution.

Any meditation that is properly made should terminate in a practical resolution for the future. Love cannot be idle; by its very nature it urges one to action. When the meditation has passed through the steps of discursus and acts of love, therefore, charity itself impels one to put love into action. Failure to make efficacious resolutions is the reason why many souls who practice daily meditation get little or no practical benefit from this exercise of prayer. They insist too much on that which is merely a preparation for prayer properly speaking. They pass the time in simple spiritual reading or study or in distractions of one sort or another, but there does not come forth from their hearts a single act of love, nor do they make any practical concrete resolutions. One final element of the definition of meditation requires explanation: that of the subject matter.

We have stated that meditation is the reasoned discursus on some supernatural truth, meaning any truth related to God and the spiritual life. By reason of the subject matter, some authors have made a further division of meditation into imaginative meditation, dogmatic meditation, liturgical meditation, moral meditation, etc. Whether or not such classifications are warranted, it is true that one can meditate on a variety of subjects; e.g., some scene or mystery from the life of Christ, the life and virtues of Mary or the saints, some particular virtue to be acquired or vice to be uprooted, a truth from dogmatic theology, such as the attributes of God or the indwelling of the Trinity, the prayers and actions of the sacraments, the Mass and the liturgy, etc. The basic guiding principle as regards subject matter is to select that which is needed at a particular time and will be beneficial according to one's capacities.

Consequently, it is important to insist upon prudence in the selection of the material for meditation. Not all subject matters are suited for all souls, not even for a given soul in varying circumstances. In general, young people or beginners in the practice of meditation will do well to utilize what has been called imaginative meditation (scenes from the life of Christ, Mary and the saints), liturgical meditations or moral meditations (which help one to uproot vices, avoid sin and cultivate virtue).

As regards the various methods of meditation, two extremes are to be avoided: excessive rigidity and instability. At the beginning of the practice of prayer it is generally necessary to adhere to some method or other, because as yet the soul does not know how to proceed in the life of prayer. In these early stages it is of great importance that the soul not only follow a method but that it select the most beneficial method, for the needs of souls are not identical. As the soul progresses in the practice of prayer, however, and is more at ease in conversing with God, the method becomes less and less important and eventually may even become an obstacle to further progress.

Methods of prayer are like crutches to a man with an injured leg: he needs crutches as long as he cannot walk alone, but he should put away the crutches as soon as he has regained the use of his limb; otherwise the crutches will prevent him from walking on his own two feet. It should also be noted that, since the individual is not usually the best judge of his own needs, a prudent and wise spiritual director is of great help in leading the soul from one grade of prayer to another, as long as he himself is not slavishly addicted to one method exclusively.

Although ancient writers such as Cassian and St. Bernard spoke about methods of prayer, it was not until the sixteenth century that spiritual writers began to offer detailed methods of discursive prayer. Since that time, methods of prayer have been compiled or adapted by such writers as Louis of Granada, O.P., St. Peter Alcantara, O.F.M., Jerome Gracian, O.C.D., St. Ignatius Loyola, St. Francis de Sales, St. Alphonsus Liguori, St. John Baptist de la Salle and Cardinal Berulle. We shall content ourselves with offering the outlines of the most popular methods of prayer and leave the others to the personal research of the reader.

As is evident from the outlines given above, all meditation can be reduced ultimately to a basic framework which contains all the essential parts or very soul of meditation: consideration of some supernatural truth, application of that truth to one's life and personal needs, and the resolution to do something about it. These three steps, we believe, are absolutely essential for true meditation; the other details may be used or not according to the needs of individual souls.

Before leaving the consideration of the second grade of prayer, we shall discuss briefly a few details which are related to the practice of meditation. The first is a question of the proper time for meditation.

It is better by far to select the most opportune time of the day and then to endeavour to observe that same time each day. Regularity in prayer is of extreme importance, for it is very easy for a person to alter the schedule, then change the time for any pretext whatever, and ultimately abandon the practice of prayer. As regards the most opportune time, it should be noted that not all times are equally satisfactory. As a general rule it is more difficult to meditate after a heavy meal, immediately after recreation, or when the mind is distracted or fatigued by many occupations. Most writers on the spiritual life state that the best times for meditation are early in the morning, the late afternoon before the evening meal, or late at night when one has finished all the duties and occupations of the day. But even this cannot be given as a hard and fast rule, and perhaps the best norm to be followed is to meditate when one's mind is most alert and one can be recollected.

The duration of meditation cannot be the same for all individuals or for all states of life. It should, as far as possible, be adjusted to the needs of each. Religious, however, are usually obliged by their constitutions to devote a definite period of time to mental prayer. Although it is possible to find a variety of opinions concerning the length of the time to be spent in meditation, it is reasonable to state that, if the time spent in meditation is too brief, most of the period is used in getting ready to pray and not in actual prayer; but if the time is too long, devotion is stifled and the period assigned for prayer becomes a period of penance.

St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that prayer should last as long as the soul is in a state of fervour and devotion, and that it should terminate when it can no longer be prolonged without tedium and continual distractions. (c¦ . ST. II II q.83 a.14) One must take care however, not to yield to negligence and sloth under the pretext of not being able to pray without distraction or fatigue. Whatever the length of time given to meditation, it should never be considered as a spiritual exercise which is isolated and unconnected with the rest of the spiritual life. Its influence should be felt throughout the whole day, and in this way, as St. Thomas suggests, prayer should be constant and uninterrupted.

The practice of meditation will be greatly assisted by the assiduous use of fervent ejaculatory prayers which will preserve the fire of devotion throughout the day. The important thing is that one lead a life of prayer; without it, one can hope to gain little benefit from the particular times set aside for meditation.

We have already spoken of the place and posture for prayer when we treated of vocal prayer, but something further needs to be said concerning meditation. The church is the most fitting place for meditation, because of the sanctity of the place, the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and the solitude and recollection which are usually found there.

Meditation can be made in any place, however, in which a person can be recollected and can concentrate on the material of the meditation. Here again it is a question of particular dispositions, and the best rule of conduct is that which is based on one's personal experience.

In regard to the posture during meditation, it is of great importance because of the necessity of recollection and attention in discursive prayer. The posture should be humble and respectful, but it need not be any particular posture. Some persons may find it most effective to meditate while kneeling, but for others the discomfort may prove a cause of distraction. But whether kneeling, seated or standing, two extremes should be avoided: excessive comfort and excessive mortification. If one is too comfortable, he will find it difficult to keep his mind on the material of meditation or may even fall asleep; if one's posture is too uncomfortable, it will be a cause of distraction and will soon kill devotion.

From what has been stated, it should be evident that the practice of meditation is a great spiritual help. A great number of persons who live habitually in the state of sin continue in that state simply because they never reflect seriously upon the state of their souls. Some of them do not have malicious hearts nor do they hate the things of God or their own salvation; they have simply given themselves entirely to purely natural activities and have forgotten those things that are of importance to their soul. As a result, they have been easily overwhelmed by the impetus of their disordered passions and have passed year after year in the state of sin. One of the greatest proofs that their sad condition is due not so much to malice as to the lack of reflection and introspection is the fact that when they return to the practice of their religion, or attend a retreat or mission, they usually experience a strong impression which leads them to a complete conversion of life.

With good reason does St. Alphonsus Liguori maintain that the practice of mental prayer is incompatible with the state of sin. It is, therefore, a great help for salvation to cultivate the practice of daily meditation. Sanctification, self-knowledge, profound humility, recollection, mortification and many other things which are necessary for the attainment of perfection are morally impossible to a person who does not practice meditation. A person who aspires to sanctity by giving himself completely to the active life while neglecting the life of prayer may just as well forget about Christian perfection.

Experience proves that there is absolutely nothing that can supply for the life of prayer, not even the daily reception of the Eucharist. There are many persons who receive Communion every day, yet their spiritual life is mediocre and lukewarm. The reason is none other that the lack of mental prayer, either because they omit it entirely or they practice it in a mechanical and routine fashion. We repeat that without prayer it is impossible to attain Christian perfection, no matter what our state of life or the occupation to which we dedicate ourselves. The spiritual director must insist constantly on the faithful practice of mental prayer.

Although St. Teresa of Avila does not use this expression in any of her writings, she does refer to this grade of prayer, and it has been accepted by all the schools of spirituality. One of the first writers to use the name affective prayer was Alvarez de Paz, following the Jesuit, Antonio Cordeses.

Affective prayer may be defined as a type of prayer in which the operations of the will predominate over discursus of the intellect. We do not believe that there is any specific difference between affective prayer and meditation, as there is between meditation and contemplation. It is merely a simplified meditation in which the heart predominates; nothing more. For this reason the transition from meditation to affective prayer is usually gradual and more or less easy, depending on the temperament of the individual, the effort that is made, the education received, and the method used.

Some persons are by nature so affectionate and responsive that they very easily rise from intellectual discursus to the movement of the will. Sometimes the slightest reflection is sufficient to arouse their affection. Others, on the contrary, are so cold and rigid by nature that their prayer is almost entirely discursive and they seldom give expression to affections of the will. Such individuals need more time and more practice to arrive at the practice of affective prayer.

It should be noted that the method of St. Ignatius is not as conducive to affective prayer as is the simpler method used by the Carmelites and the Franciscans.

When should one expect to make the transition from discursive meditation to affective prayer?

Two extremes must be avoided: to leave meditation too quickly or too late. In practice, however, these extremes can easily be avoided if one takes care to simplify discursive meditation gradually, without trying to force oneself. One should never use violence in order to arouse the affections of the will, but should give oneself to these movements if one feels the attraction of grace to do so.

It is almost certain that any person who practices daily meditation will from time to time experience the inclination to yield to affections of the will which have been stimulated by some particular point in the meditation. When this occurs, one should give himself gently to the movements of love, and as these moments become more and more frequent, the individual makes the transition from discursive meditation to affective prayer.

Discursive meditation is a prerequisite for the practice of affective prayer and should normally lead to this type of prayer. It would be impossible to have a prayer which is exclusively affective, because the will is a blind faculty which needs direction and enlightenment before it can love and desire the good. For that reason discursive meditation and spiritual reading play an important part in the practice of affective prayer, since they supply the material which will stimulate the activity of the will. Hence one must be careful not to terminate discursive meditation before the affections have been stimulated. This would be a waste of time and could also be the source of illusion. Neither should one force the affections; when they do not come forth spontaneously, or when they have run their course, one should return to discursive prayer and not try to prolong the affection by his own efforts. Neither should the individual be anxious to pass from one affection to another.

Rather, he should attempt gradually to simplify the movements of the will. It is important that the operations of the will be reduced to unity and that the affections be intense rather than numerous. The practice of affective prayer is best guaranteed by the use of discursive meditation, in which one considers the material point by point and pauses at any given moment in which the affections of the will have been stimulated. Gently and without any effort, one should yield to this affection until it has run its course, and then return to the next point in the meditation. This is likewise a commendable method to be followed in spiritual reading or in the use of a manual of prayer. As soon as some thought has stimulated and aroused a movement of the will, one should stop reading and allow the will to perform its operation.

If properly used, affective prayer confers many benefits on the soul.

Psychologically, it provides a delightful respite from the dry labour of discursive meditation. It also prevents the individual from becoming excessively introspective or relying too greatly upon his own efforts, as could happen easily if one were to devote himself exclusively to discursive meditation and never allow the will to break forth in acts of love.

Spiritually, since affective prayer is essentially an operation of the will, it is effective in deepening the union of the soul with God by acts of love. And since all of the infused virtues are increased with the increase of charity, affective prayer is a powerful means for growth in virtue.

It is likewise a great stimulus for the practice of the Christian virtues because of the sweetness and consolation which it gives. It is, lastly, an excellent disposition and preparation for the prayer of simplicity and eventually for infused contemplation.

But certain dangers and abuses must be avoided in the practice of affective prayer.

1) First of all, one should never use force in order to produce the affections and movements of the will. Since these affections are acts of the will and the will as such is not subject to force and violence, it is of no avail to clench one's fist, to distort one's face, and to groan or sigh in an effort to produce an intense act of the love of God. The act of love must be aroused spontaneously, and this is best effected by supernaturalising one's motives and striving in all things simply and solely to give glory to God out of pure love.

2) Another possible danger in the practice of affective prayer lies in the fact that it often fills the heart with sensible consolation. Those who are easily stimulated to movements of affection may erroneously judge themselves to be more advanced in perfection than they really are, because they feel at times as if they are going into ecstasy. Unfortunately, many of these persons see no contradiction in the fact that in their daily life they are constantly falling into imperfections and venial sins. True progress in the spiritual life consists in the ever more perfect practice of the Christian virtues and not in the sweetness which one experiences in prayer. Moreover, persons who place great value on sensible consolations are in danger of practicing prayer solely for the delight which it gives them. This is the spiritual gluttony which St. John of the Cross criticises with severity. (c¦ . Dark Night, Bk.1 c.6)

3) Lastly, there is the danger that persons who have tasted the delight and consolation of affective prayer may fall into a sterile slothfulness which will prevent them from returning to the discursive meditation which they had formerly practiced. It is a serious mistake to think that once the soul has enjoyed habitual affective prayer it need never return to the practice of meditation. St. Teresa warns her nuns that sometimes it is necessary to return to the lower grades of prayer after having been introduced to mystical contemplation. (c¦ . Interior Castle; Seventh Mansion; c.4)

There is an infallible rule for judging the value of any kind of prayer: examine the fruits which it produces.

This is the supreme norm for the discernment of spirit, as given by Christ Himself. (c¦ . Matt. 7; 16) The value of affective prayer cannot be measured by the intensity or the frequency of the sensible consolations which are experienced; it must be evaluated by the increasing perfection in the life of the individual. This means that the fruits of affective prayer should be a more intense practice of the Christian virtues, and increasing purity of intention, the practice of abnegation and detachment, an increase in charity, and the faithful and exact fulfilment of the duties of one's state in life.

Affective prayer, in spite of the consolations which it gives, is not the goal or terminus of the life of prayer; it is only a step along the way to the perfection of prayer in the mystical state.

The theological virtues are the most important virtues of the Christian life because they are the basis and foundation of all the other virtues. Their function is to unite us intimately to God as infinite truth, as supreme beatitude and as the greatest good.

They are the only virtues which are immediately related to God; all the others refer directly to things that are distinct from God. Here lies the supreme excellence of the theological virtues.

Faith, the first of the theological virtues, is a virtue infused by God in the intellect by which we firmly assent to divinely revealed truths on the authority of God who reveals them.

In these words are contained all the essential elements which should enter into a good definition: the proximate genus (theological infused virtue); the specific difference (intellectual assent, as distinct from hope and charity, by which the will loves with a love of concupiscence or a love of friendship); the material object and the formal quod object (God supernaturally known as the first truth and all the truths revealed as related to God); the formal quo object (by the authority of God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived).

In revealing to us His intimate life and the great mysteries of grace and glory, God enables us to see things from His point of view, as He Himself sees them. The assent to the truths of faith is of itself most firm and certain because it is based on the authority of God revealing. The revealed truths remain for us obscure and non-evident, however, and hence the will must intervene, under the motion of grace, to impose upon the intellect that firm assent; not by reason of intrinsic evidence, which is lacking to us concerning those truths, but simply by reason of the infallible authority of God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived. In this sense the act of faith is free, supernatural and meritorious.

Faith is incompatible with intellectual or sensible vision. Of itself it is of those things which are not seen. Therefore, faith disappears in heaven and is replaced by the face-to-face vision. Nevertheless, faith is the first of the Christian virtues so far as it is the positive foundation of all the others, (c¦ . ST. II II q.4 a.7) although charity is more excellent than faith and all the other infused virtues, inasmuch as it bespeaks a relation to God in a more perfect manner and is the form of all other virtues. (c¦ . ST. II II q.23 aa.6 - 8)

Without charity, no virtue can be perfect. The Council of Trent states that faith is the beginning, the foundation and the root of justification, and without faith it is impossible to please God and to be numbered among His sons. (c¦ . Dz. 801) It is the beginning because it establishes the first contact between ourselves and God, the Author of the supernatural order.

The first thing is to believe in God. It is the foundation, inasmuch as all the other virtues, including charity, presuppose faith, and are established upon it as an edifice on its foundation. Without faith it is impossible to hope or to love. It is the root, because in it, when informed by charity, all the other virtues live. When informed by charity, faith produces, among other things, two great effects in the soul: the filial fear of God which helps the soul keep itself from sin, and the purification of the heart which raises it to the heights and cleanses it of its affection for earthly things. (c¦ . ST. II II q.7)

It is important to have clear ideas concerning the distinct forms of faith which are distinguished in theology. Faith can be considered in the first place, by reason of the subjects who believe (subjective faith) or by reason of the object believed (objective faith).

Subjective faith admits of the following subdivisions:

1) Divine faith, by which we believe whatever has been revealed by God; Catholic faith, by which we believe whatever the Church proposes to us a divinely revealed.

2) Habitual Faith, a supernatural habit infused by God at Baptism or at the justification of the unbeliever; actual faith, the supernatural act which proceeds from the infused habit (i.e., the supernatural act by which we believe here and now that God is one and three).

3) Formed or living faith, which is united with charity when the soul is in the state of grace and is perfected by charity as the extrinsic form of all the virtues; unformed or dead faith, which is separated from charity in the soul of the believer who is in the state of mortal sin.

4) Explicit faith, by which a person believes a particular mystery concretely as revealed by God; implicit faith, by which a person believes everything revealed by God, although he may be ignorant of many details.

5) Internal faith, which remains in the interior of our soul; external faith, which is manifested externally by words or signs.

Objective faith, on the other hand, can be subdivided in the following way:

1) Catholic faith, which is constituted by the revealed truths proposed by God to all men for obtaining eternal life (or everything contained in Sacred Scripture and tradition explicitly or implicitly); private faith, which is constituted by the truths which God manifests at times in a supernatural manner to some particular person (e.g., to St. Margaret Mary). The first type obliges all men; the second type obliges only the person who has received it directly from God.

2) Defined faith, which pertains to those truths which the Church proposes explicitly to the belief of the faithful under pain of sin of heresy and of excommunication (e.g., the dogma of the Immaculate Conception); definable faith, which refers to those truths which as yet have not been defined by the Church as dogmas of faith but which can be defined because they are explicitly contained in the deposit of divine revelation (all the Catholic dogmas before their official definition).

3) Necessary faith, with a necessity of means, that which pertains to those truths whose ignorance, even inculpable ignorance, prevents the salvation of the soul; necessary faith, with a necessity of precept, which refers to all those truths which the Church proposes for the belief of the faithful but whose inculpable ignorance does not compromise one's eternal salvation (and this pertains to each and every one of the Catholic dogmas).

According to St. Thomas Aquinas (ST. II II, qq. 10 - 15), the sins opposed to the virtue of faith are:

1) Infidelity or paganism, which, when it is voluntary, is the greatest of all sins except for the direct hatred of God;

2) heresy, which denies some revealed doctrine in particular, or voluntarily doubts it;

3) apostasy, which is the complete abandonment of the Christian faith received at Baptism;

4) blasphemy, especially that against the Holy Ghost; and

5) blindness of heart and dullness of the senses, which are opposed to the gift of understanding and proceed especially from sins of the flesh.

The detailed study of these sins pertains to moral theology.

Both objectively and subjectively faith can grow and develop in our souls until it reaches an extraordinary degree. The saint reaches the point at which he lives his faith, as St. Paul says: "The just man lives by faith" (Rom. 1; 17). But it is necessary to understand this doctrine correctly. No one has explained it better than St. Thomas, and we quote his words at some length, adding in parentheses the points which clarify the doctrine for those who are not well versed in theology:

The quantity of a habit can be considered in two ways: by reason of the object and by reason of its participation in the subject. (In the present instance, this would mean objective faith and subjective faith.)

Now the object of faith (the revealed truths, objective faith) can be considered in two ways: according to its formal reason or motive (the authority of God revealing) or according to the things which are materially proposed for belief (all the truths of faith).

The formal object of faith (the authority of God) is one and simple, namely, First Truth. Whence, from this point of view, faith is not diversified in believers, but it is specifically one in all (one either accepts the authority of God or he does not; there is no middle course for anyone). But the things which are materially proposed for our belief are many (all the truths of faith), and they can be known more or less explicitly (the theologian knows many more and more clearly than the simple believer). Accordingly, one man can know and believe explicitly more truths than another person, and thus one can have a greater faith according to the greater explication of that faith.

But if faith is considered according to its participation in the subject (subjective faith), it can also have two modes, because active faith proceeds from the intellect (the intellect assents to revealed truths) and from the will (which, moved by God and man's liberty, imposes this assent on the intellect). In this sense faith can be greater in one than in another; by reason of the intellect because of the greater certitude and firmness (in its assent), and by reason of the will because of the greater promptness, devotion or confidence (by which the will commands the intellect to its assent). (ST. II II q.5 a.4)

There is nothing to add substantially to the foregoing doctrine, but it is fitting to point out the manner in which souls can intensify their faith in their Christian life.

As happens with incipient charity, the principal concern of beginners as regards their faith is to nourish and foment it so that it will not be lost or corrupted. In order to do this, certain things are required:

1) They must be convinced that faith is a completely gratuitous gift of God and no one can merit it. Consequently, they will ask the Lord in fervent prayer that He always conserve in their souls that divine light which shows them the way to heaven in the midst of the darkness of our ignorance. Their favourite ejaculation, repeated fervently throughout the day, will be that of the Gospel: "I do believe, help my unbelief" (Mark 9; 23).

2) They will reject energetically, with the help of divine grace, anything that could be a danger to their faith: diabolical suggestions by way of doubts and temptations against the faith (which they will combat indirectly by distracting themselves or thinking of something else, but never directly by confronting the temptation or disputing with it or by searching for reasons, because this would rather increase the disturbance of soul and the violence of the attack of the enemy); dangerous reading or imprudent reading, in which there is manifested a worldly or anti-Christian viewpoint concerning faith or religion in general; intellectual pride, the most radical and insuperable obstacle by which the incredulous opposes the mercy of God, who would otherwise grant the gift of faith, and an easy way to lose the faith in the case of those who already possess it, as we read in Scripture: "God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble" (1 Pet. 5; 5).

3) They will attempt to extend and increase their knowledge of the truths of faith by studying Catholic doctrine to the best of their ability, thus augmenting their religious culture and extending their knowledge to a greater number of revealed truths. This constitutes the extensive increase of objective faith.

4) As regards the increase of subjective faith, they will endeavour to augment it by the frequent and devout recitation of acts of faith and the practice of the rules for thinking with the Church as given by St. Ignatius Loyola in his Spiritual Exercises. They will repeat with fervour the supplication of the apostles to the divine Master: "Increase our faith" (Luke 17; 5).

These souls will be preoccupied with the increase of this fundamental virtue until their whole life is informed by an authentic spirit of faith which will place them on a strictly supernatural plane from which they can see and judge all things. "He who is just lives by faith" (Rom. 1; 17).

In order to do this, the following things are necessary:

1) They must see God through the light of faith, without taking any account of self-love or selfish views. God is always the same, infinitely good and merciful, and His nature does not change, regardless of the consolations or dryness which we may experience in prayer, in praise from others, in persecution, in adversity or prosperity.

2) They must strive to make their evaluation of things coincide perfectly with the teachings of faith in spite of anything that the world may say or think. Consequently, they must be convinced that poverty, meekness, tears of repentance, hunger and thirst for perfection, mercy, cleanness of heart, peace and suffering of persecution (Matt. 5; 3 - 10) are of more value toward eternal life than all the world's riches, violence, arguments, vengeance, pleasures of the flesh or the dominion of the whole world. They must see in Christian suffering an authentic blessing from God, although the world does not understand these things. They must be convinced that it is a greater evil to commit a deliberate venial sin than to lose one's health or life itself; that the supernatural good of a single individual is of much greater worth than the whole world; that the most insignificant or minimum participation in sanctifying grace is of greater value than the universe; that a long life is much less important than a holy life; and that they should not renounce their life of mortification and penance even if their austerities were to shorten their days on earth. In a word, they must see and judge all things from the point of view of God and renounce absolutely al1 worldly criteria and any points of view which are simply and purely human. Only by faith do we definitely conquer the world. "This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith" (1 John 5; 4).

3) This spirit of faith intensely lived will be for them a source of consolation in the suffering of this life and even in bodily infirmity, in bitterness and trials of soul, in the ingratitude or hatred of men, in the sorrowful loss of one's relatives and friends. It will make them see that suffering passes, but that the reward for having suffered well will never pass; that things are as God sees them and not as we would like to judge them by our mundane criterion; that those who have preceded us with the sign of faith await us in a better life (vita mutatur, non tollitur); and that after the sufferings and difficulties of this night have passed, there await us the external splendors of the city of the blessed. What great strength and fortitude are caused in the soul by these divine lights of faith for enduring suffering and even embracing it with joy, knowing that the passing tribulations of this life prepare us for the sublime and incomparable glory of eternity! It is not strange, then, that the apostles, and after them all the martyrs, inflamed by the light of faith, walked steadfastly and tranquilly to their death, joyful at being able to suffer these extremes for the name of Jesus (Acts 5; 41).

Illumined by the gifts of understanding and knowledge, cause faith to reach its greatest intensity, and in their lives it shines forth resplendently as a prelude to the beatific vision and the light of glory.

The gift of understanding can be defined as a supernatural habit, infused in the soul with sanctifying grace, by which the human intellect, under the illuminating action of the Holy Ghost, is made apt for a penetrating intuition of the speculative and practical revealed truths, and even for natural truths, so far as they are related to the supernatural end.

All the gifts of the Holy Ghost, as supernatural habits, spring from sanctifying grace. Therefore, all souls in grace possess the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and the gifts grow together with grace. (c¦ . ST. II II q.8 a.4)

The gift of understanding resides in the speculative intellect, which it perfects (the intellect having been informed previously by the virtue of faith) in order to receive in a connatural way the motion of the Holy Ghost, who puts the gift into operation. Only the Holy Ghost can put the gifts into operation. Without His divine motion they remain idle, since man is absolutely incapable of actuating them, even with the assistance of grace. The gifts are direct and immediate instruments of the Holy Ghost, and from this the divine modality of the acts of the gifts follows. All that man can do with the aid of grace is to dispose himself for the divine movement, removing obstacles, remaining faithful to grace, imploring humbly the sanctifying actuation of the gifts, and seconding freely and meritoriously the movement of the Holy Ghost when the gifts actually operate.

The formal object of the gift of understanding is a penetrating intuition, and it points out the specific difference between the gift and the virtue of faith. The virtue of faith gives to the created intellect a knowledge of supernatural truths in an imperfect manner (modo humano), which is proper to, and characteristic of the infused virtues; the gift of understanding makes the intellect apt for the profound and intuitive penetration (modo superhumano) of those same revealed truths. (c¦ . ST. II II q.8 a.6 ad.2) Simply speaking, this is infused contemplation, which consists in a simple and profound intuition of truth (simplex intuitus veritatis).

The gift of understanding is distinguished in turn from the other intellectual gifts (wisdom, knowledge and counsel), inasmuch as its proper function is the profound penetration of the truths of faith by way of a simple apprehension, without making any judgment concerning them. It pertains to the other intellectual gifts to make a right judgment concerning them. This judgment, so far as it relates to divine things, pertains to the gift of wisdom; so far as it relates to created things, to the gift of knowledge; and so far as it pertains to the application of these truths to particular actions, to the gift of counsel. (c¦ . ST. II II q.8 a.6)

The material object of the gift of understanding comprises speculative and practical revealed truths, and even natural truths so far as they are related to the supernatural end. It embraces everything that pertains to God, Christ, man and all creatures, as regards their origin and end, in such wise that its material object extends primarily to the truths of faith and secondarily to all other things which have some relation to the supernatural end.

However much the virtue of faith is used in the human and discursive manner, it can never attain its full perfection and development; for this the influence of the gift of understanding is indispensable. The reason is simple. Human knowledge is of itself discursive, by composition and division, by analysis and synthesis, and not by the simple intuition of truth. The infused virtues are not exempt from this general condition of human knowledge, since they function under the rule of reason and in a human mode. But since the primary object of faith is the first and supreme truth as it manifests itself (Veritas prima in dicendo), which is most simple, the discursive complex mode of knowing it cannot be more inadequate and imperfect. Faith is of itself an intuitive and not a discursive habit; therefore, the truths of faith cannot be comprehended in all their perfection except by the intuitive and penetrating vision which is obtained by the gift of understanding; in other words, when faith has been completely liberated from all the discursive elements and converted into a contemplative faith. Then one has reached the pure faith which is repeatedly recommended by St. John of the Cross as the only means proportionate for the union of our intellect with God.

The gift of understanding produces admirable effects in the soul, and all of them perfect the virtue of faith to the degree which was attained in the saints. It reveals truths with such clarity that, without sounding the mystery entirely, it gives an unshakable security concerning the truth of our faith. This is seen in the experimental order in those mystical souls in whom the gift of understanding has developed to an eminent degree. They were disposed to believe the contrary of what they saw with their own eyes rather than to doubt in the slightest any of the truths of faith.

This gift is most useful for theologians, and St. Thomas Aquinas possessed it to an extraordinary degree. It enables the theologian to penetrate into the depths of revealed truth and to deduce, by means of theological discursus, the conclusions which are implicit in these truths.

The Angelic Doctor points out six different manners in which the gift of understanding enables us to penetrate into the truths of faith. (c¦ . ST. II II q.8 a.1)

In virtue of this divine instinct, the mystics perceived the divine reality which is hidden under the eucharistic veils. From this follows their obsession with the Eucharist, an obsession which becomes in them a veritable martyrdom of hunger and thirst. In their visits to the tabernacle they do not pray or meditate, but merely contemplate the divine prisoner of love with a simple and penetrating gaze which fills their soul with great peace and tenderness. "I look at Him and He looks at me," as the old man said to the Cure of Ars.

This is what the Lord effected in regard to the disciples at Emmaus when "he opened their intellect so that they could understand the Scriptures" (Luke 24; 45). All the mystics have experienced this phenomenon. Without any discursus or study or any human assistance, the Holy Ghost suddenly disclosed to them with a most vivid intensity the profound meaning of some statement in Scripture which immersed them in a deluge of light. There, in this profound understanding of some scriptural passage, many of the saints found the theme of their whole spiritual life: "The mercies of the Lord I will sing forever" of St. Teresa (Ps. 88; 1); "whosoever is a little one, let him come to me" of St. Theresa of Lisieux (Prov. 9; 4); "the praise of glory" of Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity (Eph. 1; 6). For that reason also these great mystics are not at all moved by books written by men. They reach a point in which they find satisfaction only in the inspired words which come from Scripture, and especially in those which come from the lips of Christ himself.

Thus St. Paul saw Christ in the rock which gushed forth with living water to appease the thirst of the Israelites in the desert: "And the rock was Christ" (1 Cor. 10; 4). St. John of the Cross reveals to us, with a startling mystical intuition, the moral, analogical and parabolic meaning of many of the symbols and figures of the Old Testament which reached their full realization in the New Testament or in the life of grace.

The liturgy of the Church is filled with sublime symbolism which for the most part escapes the notice of superficial souls. But the saints experienced a great veneration and respect for the slightest ceremony of the Church. The gift of understanding enabled them to see the sublime realities which were hidden beneath those symbols and sensible signs.

"There is another aspect of the gift of understanding which is particularly noticeable in contemplative theologians. After the hard labor of human science, everything is suddenly illuminated under an impulse of the spirit. A new world appears in a principal or in a universal cause: Christ the Priest, the one Mediator between heaven and earth; or the mystery of the Blessed Virgin as the co-redemptrix, spiritually carrying in her bosom all the members of the Mystical Body; or the mystery of the identification of the innumerable attributes of God in His sovereign simplicity and the conciliation of the unity of essence with the trinity of persons in one deity, which infinitely surpasses the most secret investigation of all creation. Many other truths there are which the gift of understanding is able to plumb without effort and with great taste in the beatifying joy of an eternal life begun on earth in the very light of God."

In an inverse sense, the gift of understanding reveals God and His all-powerful causality in His effects without resorting to the lengthy discursive processes of human thought under its own power, but through a simple, comparative gaze and by an intuition after the manner of God Himself. In the most imperceptible signs, in the slightest events of his life, the soul that is attentive to the Holy Ghost discovers in one glance the whole plan of divine providence. Without any dialectic reasoning concerning causes, the simple view of the effects of the justice or mercy of God makes the soul comprehend the whole mystery of divine predestination, the excessive love (Eph. 2; 4) with which God pursues the soul to unite it to the beatifying Trinity. Through all things, God leads to God. (Phillipon; The Spiritual Doctrine of St. Elizabeth of the Holy Trinity c.8)

Such are the principal effects which the actuation of the gift of understanding produces in the soul. One can see that, perfected by this gift, the virtue of faith reaches an astounding intensity. The veils of mystery are never parted in this life, but the unfathomable depths are penetrated by the soul with a gaze that is so clear that it approaches an intuitive vision. St. Thomas, a model of serenity and reserve in all his statements, writes the following words: "In this very life, when the eye of the spirit is purified by the gift of understanding, one can in a certain way see God." (c¦ . ST. II II q.69 a.2 ad.3) On reaching these heights, the influence of faith is extended to all the movements of the soul, all its acts are illuminated, and it sees all things through the prism of faith. These souls seem to lose human instinct and to be guided entirely by the divine instinct. Their manner of being, of thinking, of speaking or reacting to the events of their own lives or to the lives of others is disconcerting to the world, which is incapable of understanding these souls. One could say that they suffer an intellectual stoicism in order to see all things just the opposite from the way in which the world sees them. But the truth of the matter is that the distorted vision is that of the world. These souls have had the blessed good fortune that the Holy Ghost, through the gift of understanding, has given to them the sensus Christi which makes them see all things in the light of faith. "He who is just, lives by faith" (Rom. 1; 17).

The sixth beatitude pertains to the gift of understanding: "Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God" (Matt. 5; 8). In this beatitude, as in the others, two things are indicated: first, something by way of disposition and merit (purity of heart); secondly, something by way of reward (to see God); the gift of understanding is applicable to both. There are two types of purity: purity of heart, by which all sins and disorderly affections are rejected, which is effected by virtues and the gifts which pertain to the appetitive part; and purity of mind, by which all phantasms and errors against faith are rejected, and this is proper to the gift of understanding. And as regards the vision of God there is also a double aspect: the perfect vision of God, by which one sees the very essence of God, and this is proper to heaven; and the imperfect vision of God, which is proper to the gift of understanding, by which, although we do not see what God is in Himself, we see what He is not and know Him the more perfectly in this life as we understand better that He exceeds everything that our human intellects could imagine.

As regards the fruits of the Holy Ghost, which are exquisite acts proceeding from the gifts, the fruits which pertain to the gift of understanding are faith (or the certitude of faith) and joy (spiritual joy), which pertains to the will.

St. Thomas dedicates an entire question to the study of these vices. (c¦ . ST. II II q.15) They are two in number:

The first is the complete privation of vision (blindness); the second is a notable weakening of vision (myopia). Both of them proceed from carnal sins (gluttony and lust), in the sense that there is nothing that is such an impediment to the flight of the intellect; even naturally speaking; as the vehement attachment to corporal things which are contrary to it. For that reason, lust produces spiritual blindness, which excludes almost completely the knowledge of spiritual goods, and gluttony produces dullness of the spiritual sense, for it weakens man as regards this knowledge. (c¦ . ST. II II q.8 a.3)

This blindness of mind is that which is suffered by all lukewarm souls; for they possess the gift of understanding, but their mind is engulfed with the things of this world. They are lacking in interior recollection and the spirit of prayer; they are constantly pouring themselves out through the channels of the senses, without any attentive or constant consideration of divine truths. Hence they never arrive at discovering the exalted clarity which is hidden in their obscurity. For that reason we see that very frequently they are easily deceived and mistaken when they speak of spiritual things, of the delicacy and fine points of divine love, of the first stages of the mystical life, of the heights of sanctity, and that sometimes they engage themselves in external works which are covered with the veil of human evaluations, and they consider as exaggerations or eccentricities the delicacies which the Holy Ghost of God asks of souls.

These are the souls who wish "to go by the cow path," as one says vulgarly. They are attached to earth, and for that reason the Holy Ghost cannot raise them into the air with His divine motion and breathing. They are busy making sand piles by which they think they can reach heaven. They suffer that spiritual blindness which prevents them from seeing the infinite holiness of God, the marvel which grace works in souls, the heroism of abnegation which He asks of souls to correspond to His immense love, the foolishness of love by which the soul is led to the folly of the Cross. Such lukewarm souls think nothing of venial sins and perceive only those sins which are more serious; as a result, they ignore what are commonly called imperfections. They are blind because they never take into their hands the torch that would give light in this dark space, and many times in their presumption they attempt to guide others who are blind.

He who suffers such a blindness or short-sightedness in his interior vision, which prevents him from penetrating the things of faith, cannot be free of fault because of his negligence and carelessness or because of the tedium which he experiences in regard to spiritual things, since he loves more those things which appeal to the senses. (Los dones del Espíritu Santo y la perfección cristiana, c.2; Menéndez-Reigada, O.P.)

The actuation of the gifts depends entirely on the Holy Ghost, but the soul can do much to dispose itself, with the help of grace, for that divine actuation. These are the principal means of disposing oneself:

1) The practice of a vital faith with the help of ordinary grace.

The infused virtues are perfected by the ever more intense practice of their proper acts. And although it is true that unless they go beyond the human mode of operation they can never reach their perfection, it is nevertheless an excellent disposition so that the Holy Ghost will perfect the virtues with His gifts if the soul does all that it can by the exercise of the infused virtues. It is a fact that, according to His ordinary providence, God gives His graces to those that are best disposed.

2) Perfect purity of soul and body.

As we have already seen, the sixth beatitude, which pertains to the clean of heart, corresponds to the gift of understanding. Only through perfect cleanness of soul and body is one made capable of seeing God: in this life, by the profound illumination of the gift of understanding in the obscurity of faith; in the next life, through the clear vision of glory. Impurity is incompatible with either one.

3) Interior recollection.

The Holy Ghost is the friend of recollection and solitude. Only there does He speak in silence to souls. "I shall lead her to the desert and I shall speak to her heart" (Osee 2; 14). The soul that is a friend of dissipation and worldliness will never perceive the word of God in its interior. It is necessary to empty oneself of all created things, to retire to the cell of one's own heart in order to live there with the divine guest until the soul succeeds gradually in never losing the sense of God's presence even in the midst of the most absorbing occupation. When the soul has done all that it can to be recollected and detached from the world, the Holy Ghost will do the rest.

4) Fidelity to grace.

The soul must be always attentive and careful not to deny the Holy Ghost any sacrifice that He may ask. "Oh, that today you would hear his voice: Harden not your hearts" (Ps. 94; 8). Not only must the soul avoid every voluntary thought, however small, which would sadden the Holy Ghost; according to the mysterious expression of St. Paul: "And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God" (Eph. 4; 30); but it must positively second all his divine movements until it can say with Christ: "I do always the things that are pleasing to him" (John 8; 29). It does not matter if sometimes the sacrifices which He asks of us seem to be beyond our strength. With God's grace, all things are possible. "I can do all things in him who strengthens me" (Phil. 4; 13). And there is always left to us the recourse to prayer, to ask the Lord in advance that which He wishes us to give to Him: "Give me what you ask and ask what you wish." (c¦ . St. Aug. Confessions Book 10, chap. 29) In any case, in order to avoid anxiety in the matter of positive fidelity to grace, we should always rely on the rule and counsel of a wise and experienced spiritual director.

We cannot practice any of these methods without the help and prevenient grace of the Holy Ghost. For that reason we must invoke Him frequently and with the greatest possible fervor, remembering the promise of Jesus to send the Holy Ghost to us (John 14; 16 - 17).

The Sequence of Pentecost (Veni Sancte Spiritus), the hymn for Tierce (Veni Creator Spiritus), and the liturgical prayer for the feast of Pentecost (Deus, qui corda fidelium) should be, after the Our Father, the favorite prayers of interior souls. We should repeat them often until we attain that recta sapere which the Holy Ghost can give us. And in imitation of the apostles when they retired to the Cenacle to await the coming of the Paraclete, we should associate our supplications with those of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (Acts 1; 14), the most faithful Virgin and the heavenly Spouse of the Holy Ghost. The divine Spirit will be communicated to us in the measure of our fidelity to grace and this fidelity must be obtained through Mary, the universal mediatrix of all graces.

Some authors assign to the gift of knowledge the function of perfecting the virtue of hope, but St. Thomas assigns it to the virtue of faith, while to hope he assigns the virtue of fear of the Lord. (c¦ . ST. II II q.9 & q.19)

We shall follow the teaching of the Angelic Doctor on this matter because it seems to us to be based on the very nature of things.

It is not a question of human or philosophical knowledge, which gives certain and evident knowledge of things deduced by natural reason from their principles or proximate causes, nor is it a question of theological knowledge, which deduces from revealed truths the virtualities contained therein by making use of natural reasoning. It is a question of a certain supernatural knowledge which proceeds from a special illumination by the Holy Ghost, who reveals to us and enables us to appreciate rightly the connection between created things and the supernatural ultimate end.

More briefly, it is the correct estimation of the present temporal life in relation to eternal life. It is an infused habit, supernatural, inseparable from grace, which is distinguished essentially from the acquired habits of knowledge and of theology. As a habit it resides in the intellect, as does the virtue of faith which it perfects. It is primarily speculative and secondarily practical. (c¦ . ST. II II q.9 a.3)

The Holy Ghost is the agent who puts the supernatural habit of this gift into action. In virtue of that divine motion, which is very different from the motion of ordinary grace which actuates the virtues, the human intellect apprehends and judges created things by a certain divine instinct, by a certain connaturality, which the just soul possesses potentially through the theological virtues as regards anything that pertains to God. Under the action of this gift the individual does not proceed by laborious reasoning but judges rightly concerning all created things by a superior impulse and by a higher light than that of simple reason illumined by faith.

This is the formal reason which distinguishes the gift of knowledge from the gift of understanding. The latter, as we have seen, has as its object to seize and to penetrate revealed truths by a profound supernatural intuition, but without forming any judgments concerning them (simplex intuitus veritatis). The gift of knowledge, on the other hand, under the special movement of the Holy Ghost, judges rightly concerning created things in relation to the supernatural end. In this it is likewise distinguished from the gift of wisdom, whose function it is to judge divine things and not created things. (c¦ . ST. II II q.8 a.6)

The material object of the gift of knowledge is the relation of created things to the supernatural end. It understands created things inasmuch as they have some relation to the supernatural end, and since creatures can be related to the end either by tending toward that end or by attempting to depart from that end, the gift of knowledge gives the just man a correct judgment in both respects. (c¦ . ST. II II q.9 a.4) Even more, the gift of knowledge extends also to the divine things which are contemplated in creatures, proceeding from God to manifest His glory, according to the expression of St. Paul: "His invisible attributes are clearly seen (his everlasting power also and divinity) being understood through the things that are made" (Rom. 1; 20).

The gift of knowledge is absolutely necessary if the virtue of faith is to reach its full expansion and development in yet another aspect, which is distinct from that which we have seen in relation to the gift of understanding. It is not sufficient to apprehend the revealed truth even with that profound and intuitive penetration which comes from the gift of understanding; it is necessary also that we have a supernatural instinct for discovering and judging rightly concerning the relation of those divine truths with the natural and sensible world which surrounds us. Without this supernatural instinct, faith itself would be in danger, because attracted and seduced by the allurement of created things; being ignorant of the method or manner of relating them with the supernatural order, we could easily fall into error, and, at least in the practical order, we could lose the light of faith. Daily experience confirms this all too well to make it necessary to insist upon it.

The gift of knowledge performs invaluable services for the virtue of faith, especially in the practical order. Through this gift, under the movement and illumination of the Holy Ghost, and through a certain affinity or connaturality with spiritual things, we are able to judge rightly, according to the principles of faith, concerning the use of creatures, their value, their utility or danger as regards eternal life. Consequently, he who works under the influence of the gift of knowledge can be said truly to have received the knowledge of the saints.

The effects of this gift are admirable and all of them have a great sanctifying value. The following are the principal effects:

This is proper to the gift of knowledge:

The first aspect caused St. Ignatius Loyola to exclaim, when contemplating the spectacle of a starry night: "O how vile the earth appears to me when I contemplate heaven!"; the second aspect caused St. John of the Cross to fall to his knees before the beauty of a little fountain, of a mountain, of a landscape, of the setting sun. The nothingness of created things, when contemplated through the gift of knowledge, made St. Paul esteem all things as base and wish all the more to gain Christ (Phil. 3; 8); the beauty of God reflected in the beauty and fragrance of the flowers obliged St. Paul of the Cross to speak to them in transports of love: "Be silent, little flowers, be silent." It was likewise the gift of knowledge which gave St. Teresa of Avila that extraordinary facility for explaining the things of God by making use of comparisons and examples taken from created things. The same can be said of the outstanding ascetical writer Louis of Granada.

The soul in whom the gift of knowledge operates intensely instinctively possesses the sense of faith (sensus fidei). Without having studied theology or without having had any education, such souls are aware whether or not a devotion, a doctrine, a counsel or any kind of maxim is in accord with faith or is opposed to faith. They experience this with an irresistible power and with an unflinching assurance. It is admirable how St. Teresa of Avila, in spite of her humility and her complete submission to her confessor, could never accept the erroneous doctrine which held that in certain states of prayer it was necessary to prescind from the consideration of the adorable humanity of Christ. (c¦ . Interior Castle, Sixth Mansion, c.7)

Everything is clear to the penetrating introspection of the gift of knowledge: "our interior acts, the secret movements of our heart, its qualities, its goodness, its malice, its principles, its motives, its goals and intentions, its effects and consequences, its merits and demerits." (Louis Lallemant, Spiritual Doctrine, principle 4, c.4 a.3) Rightly did St. Teresa say that "in a place where the sun enters, there is no hidden dust." (The Life c.19)

In this sense the gift of knowledge in its practical aspect influences the virtue of prudence, whose perfection is directly under the gift of counsel, according to the teaching of St. Thomas. By this gift a preacher knows what he ought to say to his hearers and what he ought to urge upon them. A director knows the state of the souls he has under his guidance, their spiritual needs, the remedies for their faults, the obstacles they put in the way of their perfection, the shortest and the surest road by which to conduct them safely; how he must console or mortify them, what God is working in them, and what they ought to do on their part in order to co-operate with God and fulfill His designs. A superior knows in what way he ought to govern his inferiors.

This is, in reality, nothing more than a consequence of that right judgment of things which constitutes the proper characteristic of the gift of knowledge. Before God, all creatures are as if they were not. For that reason it is necessary to rise above created things in order to rest in God alone. But only the gift of knowledge gives to the saints that profound vision concerning the necessity of the absolute detachment which we admire, for example, in St. John of the Cross. For a soul illuminated by the gift of knowledge, creation is an open book, for the soul discovers without effort the nothingness of creatures and the all of the Creator. "The soul passes by creatures without seeing them in order not to be detained in anything but Christ. ... The whole of all creation, is it worth even a glance from him who has experienced God, if only once?

This sentiment, which is complementary to the former, is another consequence of the right judgment of created things proper to the gift of knowledge. It is certain that created things are nothing when compared with God, and yet they are crumbs which fall from the table of God, and they speak to us of Him and lead us to Him if we know how to use them rightly. This is what is effected by the gift of knowledge. There are countless examples of this in the lives of the saints. The contemplation of created things raised their souls to God because they could see the vestige or trace of God in creation. Sometimes the most insignificant detail, which would pass unnoticed by an ordinary person, made a strong impression on these holy souls and led them to God.

This is an inevitable consequence of a right judgment concerning created things. In the resplendent light of the gift of knowledge, the souls discover the nothingness of creatures, their fragility, their vanity, their short duration, their inability to make us truly happy, the harm which attachment to them can cause to the soul. And then, on recalling other periods of life in which perhaps they were subject to such vanity and misery, holy souls feel deep within their hearts a most profound repentance which is manifested externally by intense acts of contrition and self-disdain. The pathetic accents of the Miserere spontaneously spring to their lips as a psychological necessity to alleviate the weight of sorrow that overwhelms them. For that reason, the beatitude which corresponds to the gift of knowledge is the beatitude of those who weep. (c¦ . ST. II II q.9 a.4 ad.1)

Such are the principal effects of the gift of knowledge. Through it, far from seeing creatures as obstacles to union with God, the soul uses them as instruments to be united to God more easily. Perfected by the gifts of understanding and knowledge, the virtue of faith reaches its greatest intensity and makes the soul experience the divine brilliance of the eternal vision.

To the gift of knowledge corresponds the third beatitude: "Blessed are they who mourn, for they shall be comforted" (Matt. 5; 5). This is true both as regards the merit and the reward. As regards the merit (tears), because the gift of knowledge, since it implies a right judgment and estimation of creatures in relation to eternal life, impels the just man to weep for his past errors as regards the use of creatures. In regard to the reward (consolation), because through the light of the gift of knowledge created things are rightly judged and ordained to the divine good, and from this spiritual consolation follows, which begins in this life and will reach its plenitude in the life to come. (c¦ . ST. II II q.9 a.4)

As regards the fruits of the Holy Ghost, the same ones correspond to the gift of knowledge as to the gifts of understanding and wisdom, since all three have as their object the true as related to the supernatural ultimate end. By the same token, there is produced in the intellect that special certitude concerning supernatural truths which is called faith (fides), and in the will, by redundance, a certain taste, delight and fruition which is called spiritual joy (gaudium). (c¦ . ST. II II q.8 a.8)

In the prologue to the question on the sins opposed to the gift of understanding, St. Thomas refers to ignorance as a vice opposed to the gift of knowledge. (c¦ . ST. II II q.15)

The gift of knowledge is indispensable for avoiding or rejecting completely, as by a certain divine instinct, the multitude of errors which in the matter of faith and morals are constantly threatening us by reason of our ignorance and mental weakness. Not only among uneducated persons but even among professional theologians, in spite of the sincerity of their faith and efforts of their studies, there is rampant a multitude of opinions and differing views in dogma and moral, and necessarily they must all be false except one, because truth itself is one. Who, then, will give us a sound and certain criterion so that we shall not deviate from the truth in any of these complicated questions? In the personal and subjective order, this is something which surpasses human power, even the power of theologians. Only the Holy Ghost, by the gift of knowledge, can give us that certitude by means of a divine instinct. And so it is that many persons who are uneducated and unlettered have astounded the greatest theologians by the security and depth with which they penetrate the truths of faith and the facility and clarity with which they resolve, as if by instinct, the most intricate problems of moral theology. On the other hand, how many illusions have those persons suffered in the ways of the Lord who have not been illumined by the gift of knowledge? All false mystics are so because of ignorance, which is contrary to this gift of knowledge.

This ignorance may be culpable and may constitute a true vice because it can sometimes be voluntary. And it may be voluntary because an individual occupies himself in vain or curious things, or in human sciences without the proper moderation, so that he is excessively absorbed by them and gives no time or study to the most important science of his own salvation and sanctification, or because of vain presumption by which he trusts too much in his own knowledge and thus places an obstacle to the judgments which he should form under the light of the Holy Ghost. This abuse of knowledge is the principal reason why there are many more mystics among simple and uneducated persons than among the wise and the intellectual. As long as souls do not renounce their voluntary blindness and intellectual pride, there is no likelihood that the gifts of the Holy Ghost will ever be actuated in their souls. Christ Himself warned us in the Gospel: "I praise thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and the prudent, and didst reveal them to little ones" (Matt. 11; 25). Consequently, the ignorance contrary to the gift of knowledge, which is often found in those who are considered to be very wise and intelligent, is usually indirectly voluntary and culpable and therefore constitutes a true vice against the gift of knowledge.

In addition to the recollection, fidelity to grace and invocation of the Holy Ghost which are the common means for arousing the gifts of the Holy Ghost in general, we can point out certain special means which pertain particularly to the gift of knowledge.

1) To consider the vanity of created things.

We can never attain, however much we try by means of our poor consideration, to the penetrating intuition of the gift of knowledge concerning the vanity of created things. And yet there is no doubt that we can achieve something by meditating seriously on this point by means of the discursive methods which are at our disposal. God does not ask us for more than we are able to give Him at a given time, and he who does what he can will never be refused the divine assistance for further progress.

2) To accustom oneself to refer all created things to God.

This is another psychological method for attaining gradually to the point of view in which the gift of knowledge definitely places us. We should never rest in creatures but should pass through them to God. Are not created beauties a pallid reflection of the divine beauty? We should endeavour to discover in all things the vestige or trace of God and thus prepare the way for the action of the Holy Ghost in us.

3) To oppose energetically the spirit of the world.

The world has the sad privilege of seeing all things precisely contrary to what they really are from a supernatural point of view. The world is not concerned with anything but enjoying created things, putting all its happiness in them, and turning its back upon God. For that reason there is no other attitude which is more contrary to the spirit of the gift of knowledge, which makes us disdain created things or use them only in relation to God or as a means to God. We should avoid the false maxims of life which are completely opposed to the spirit of God. We should renounce the spectacles and diversions which are saturated or greatly influenced by the poisonous atmosphere of the world. We should always be alert lest we are taken by surprise by the artful enemy, who is constantly striving to turn our gaze away from the great panorama of the supernatural world.

4) To see the hand of providence in the government of the world and in all the events of our life, whether prosperous or adverse.

It costs a great deal to acquire this point of view, and it will never be acquired completely until the gift of knowledge operates in us as well as the gift of wisdom. Nevertheless, we must endeavour to do as much as we can in this respect. It is a dogma of faith that God cares for us with a loving providence. He is our Father, and He knows much better than we what things are good for us. He governs us with an infinite love, although many times we cannot discover the secret design in that which He disposes or permits to happen to us or to our family or to the world.

5) To be preoccupied greatly with purity of heart.

This concern and preoccupation will attract the blessing of God, and He will not neglect to give us the gifts which we need to attain perfect purity of heart, if we are faithful to His grace. There is a very close relationship between the custody of the heart and the exact fulfilment of all our obligations. "I have more discernment than the elders because I observe thy precepts" (Ps. 118; 100).

Hope is a theological virtue infused by God into the will, by which we trust with complete certitude in the attainment of eternal life and the means necessary for reaching it, assisted by the omnipotent help of God.

The primary material object of hope is eternal beatitude; the secondary material object consist in all the means which lead to it.

The formal quod object is God Himself, as the objective beatitude of man, connoting formal beatitude or the beatific vision.

The formal motive of hope (formal quo object) is the assisting omnipotence of God, connoting divine mercy and God's fidelity to His promises.

Hope resides in the will, because its proper object is a movement of the rational appetite toward the good, which is the object of the will. (ST. II II q.18 a.1) Charity and faith are more perfect than hope. Absolutely speaking, faith and hope can exist without charity (unformed faith and hope), but no infused virtue can exist in the soul without faith. (ST. II II q.65 aa.4 - 5)

As St. Thomas points out, hope tends to its object with absolute certitude, a truth which requires some explaining. As the Church teaches, without a special revelation we cannot be certain that de facto we shall attain our eternal salvation, (Cc. of Trent Dz. 805) although we can and ought to have absolute certitude that with the assistance of the omnipotent help of God (the formal motive of hope) there can be no insuperable obstacle to our salvation. Hope treats, then, of a certitude of inclination and of motive, but not of a previous infallible knowledge nor of any event or exercise that cannot be frustrated. The goods of this world fall under the secondary object of hope, but only to the extent that they can be useful to us for salvation. For that reason, St. Thomas says that, apart from the salvation of our soul, we ought not ask God for any other good unless it is in some way related to our salvation. (ST. II II q.17 a.2 ad.2)

Theological hope is impossible in infidels and formal heretics, for no infused virtue can exist without faith. Sinners who have not despaired may possess unformed hope, but this virtue is properly found in the just on earth and in the souls in purgatory. Those who are in hell do not have hope because they have nothing to hope for; the blessed in heaven do no to have this virtue because they are already enjoying the infinite good for which they had hoped. For the same reason, Christ did not have hope, since He was at once a blessed (or comprehensor) and a wayfarer.

The act of hope, even of unformed hope, is of itself good and virtuous (as opposed to the teaching of Calvin, Baius and the Jansenists, who stated that any act of virtue performed out of the hope of an eternal reward was selfish and immoral). This is expressly stated in Sacred Scripture and can be demonstrated theologically, since eternal life is the supernatural ultimate end of man. (Matt 6; 33) Therefore, to work with one's gaze fixed on this end is not only good and virtuous but necessary. The contrary doctrine has been condemned by the Church in a decree of the Holy Office (December 7, 1690; Denz. 1303) condemning the errors of Jansenism.

By the same token, in this life there is no state of perfection which habitually excludes the motives of hope. The opposite view is an error of the Quietists and semi-Quietists, also condemned by the Church in various decrees (Denz. 1227, 1232, 1327 ff.). The error of the Jansenists and the Quietists consisted in the affirmation that to work out of hope is immoral and imperfect and gives evidence that the individual desires God as a good for himself, thus subordinating God to his own personal happiness. But such is not the case. As Cajetan explains (In II II q.17 a.5 n.6): "It is one thing to desire this thing for me, and it is another thing to desire it because of me." We desire God for ourselves, not because of ourselves but because of Himself. God continues to be the end or goal of the act of hope, not ourselves. On the other hand, when we desire some inferior thing, such as a created good, we desire it for ourselves and because of ourselves (nobis et propter nos).

St. Thomas explains that two vices are opposed to hope: one by defect, despair, which considers eternal salvation impossible and proceeds principally from spiritual sloth and lust; and the other by excess, presumption. Presumption takes two principal forms: that which considers eternal beatitude as attainable by one's own efforts without the aid of grace (heretical presumption), and that which expects to be saved without repentance for sin or to obtain glory without any merit (a sin against the Holy Ghost). Presumption may be caused by vainglory and pride.

Like any other virtue, hope can increase more and more. Let us consider the principal phases of its development in the various stages in the spiritual life.

Above all, beginners will avoid falling into one of the two extremes contrary at hope: presumption and despair. To avoid the first, they should consider that without the grace of God we can do absolutely nothing in the supernatural order. "Without me, you can do nothing" (John 15; 5). Without God's help one could not have a single good thought or even pronounce worthily the name of Jesus (1 Cor. 12; 3). They should keep in mind that God is infinitely good and merciful, but that He is also infinitely just and no one can laugh at Him (Gal. 6; 7). He is disposed to save us, but on the condition that we voluntarily cooperate with His grace (1 Cor. 15; 10) and that we work out our salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2; 12).

Against despair and discouragement the beginner will remember that the mercy of God is untiring in pardoning the repentant sinner; that the violence of our enemies can never overcome the omnipotent help of God; and that, if it is certain that of ourselves we can do nothing, it is likewise certain that with God's grace we can do all things (Phil. 4; 13). It is necessary, then, to rise courageously from one's falls and renew the journey with greater effort and zeal, taking occasion from the fault itself to redouble one's vigilance and effort. "All things work for the good with those who love God" (Rom. 8; 28); and St. Augustine dares to add "even sins" so far as they are an occasion of making the soul more vigilant and cautious.

Beginners should also endeavour to raise their gaze to heaven, and this for several reasons:

1) In order to disdain the things of earth.

Everything here below is shadow and vanity and deceit. No created thing can fill completely the heart of man, in whom God has placed an infinite capacity. And even in the event that such things could satisfy man completely, this would be a transitory and fleeting happiness, as is life itself on this earth. Pleasures, wealth, honours, the applause of men; all these things pass and vanish like smoke. St. Francis Borgia was right when he said: "I shall no longer serve a master who can die to me." When all is said and done, "What does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, but suffer the loss of his own soul?" (Matt. 16; 26).

2) To be consoled in the midst of their labours and sufferings.

The earth is a valley of tears and miseries. Suffering accompanies us inevitably from the cradle to the grave, and no one escapes this inexorable law. But Christian hope reminds us that all the sufferings of this life are as nothing in comparison with the glory which is to be manifested in us (Rom. 8; 13), and that if we bear them in a holy manner, these momentary and light tribulations prepare us for the eternal weight of a sublime and incomparable glory (2 Cor. 4; 17). What a consolation this is for the soul that suffers tribulation if it is able to contemplate heaven through its tears!

3) To be encouraged to be good.

The practice of virtue is arduous indeed. It is necessary to be detached from everything, to renounce one's own tastes and caprices, and to turn back the continuous attacks from the world, the devil and the flesh. Especially at the beginning of the spiritual life this constant battle is most difficult. But what great encouragement the soul can experience in raising its eyes to heaven! It is well worth while to struggle for a short time during the brief years of this life in order to obtain the possession for all eternity of the fatherland. Later, when the soul begins to advance along the paths of union with God, the motives of disinterested love will prevail over those of the soul's own happiness, but these desires for perfect happiness will never be completely abandoned. Even the greatest saints experience a kind of nostalgia for heaven, and this is one of the most powerful stimuli for advancing without discouragement along the way of heroism and sanctity.

In the measure that the soul progresses along the path of perfection, it will strive to cultivate the virtue of hope by intensifying as much as possible its confidence in God and in His divine assistance. To this end, the following practices are necessary:

1) Never to be preoccupied with anxious solicitude for tomorrow.

We are submerged in the divine and loving providence of our own good God. Nothing will be lacking to us if we trust in Him and if we hope for all things from Him. As regards the temporal order, we have the words of Christ Himself: "Look at the birds of the air. ... Consider how the lilies of the field grow. ... How much more you, O you of little faith" (Matt. 6; 25 - 34). In the order of grace, the same Christ tells us: "I come that they may have life, and have it more abundantly" (John 10; 10). And St. Paul remarks: "This grace has abounded beyond measure in us." (Eph. 1; 7 - 8).

2) To simplify their prayer as much as possible.

"But in praying, do not multiply words. ... for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him." (Matt. 6; 7 - 13). The formula of the Our Father, which came from the lips of the divine Master, will be their favorite prayer, together with those other prayers from the Gospel which are so brief and filled with confidence in the goodness and mercy of God: "Lord, he whom thou lovest is sick"; "if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean"; "Lord, that I may see"; "teach us to pray"; "increase our faith"; "show us the Father and this will suffice." What simplicity and sublimity in the Gospel, but how much complication and confusion in us when we pray! The soul must endeavor to attain that ingenuous confidence which is simple and which draws miracles from Christ.

3) To advance in detachment from all earthly things.

Of what value are all created goods when compared with a smile from God? "Since the time that I have known Jesus Christ, no created thing has seemed to me sufficiently beautiful to be desired" (Pere Lacordaire). Before the thought of the sovereign beauty of God, whose contemplation will make us intoxicated with happiness in eternal life, the soul will readily renounce all earthly things, and reach the point of conquering the threefold concupiscence to which so many souls are subject on earth and which prevents them from flying to heaven (1 John 2; 16).

4) To advance with great confidence along the path of union with God.

Nothing will be able to detain the soul if it wishes to proceed at any cost. God, who calls the soul to a life of intimate union with Himself, extends His divine hand with the absolute guarantee of His omnipotence, mercy and fi- delity to His promises. The world, the devil and the flesh will declare war against the soul, but "those who trust in the Lord will renew their strength, and they will have wings like the eagles, and they will fly speedily without tiring, and they will run without becoming weary" (Is. 40; 31). With good reason did St. John of the Cross say that hope "is that which especially makes the soul pleasing to the beloved, and that by it the soul will attain all that it desires." The soul that continues courageously in spite of all contradictions and obstacles and with all confidence in God will undoubtedly arrive at the height of perfection.

The following are the principal characteristics of the operation of the virtue of hope in perfect souls:

1) Universal confidence in God.

Nothing is able to discourage a servant of God when he enters upon an enterprise which pertains to the divine glory. One would say that contradictions and obstacles, far from diminishing the virtue of hope, intensify and augment it; such a soul's confidence in God will sometimes reach the point of audacity. One need only recall the obstacles which St. Teresa of Avila had to overcome in the reform of the Carmelites, and the most firm assurance of success with which she began that work, far beyond all human power, trusting only in God. As St. Paul said of Abraham, these holy souls hope "against hope" (Rom. 4; 18). They are disposed at any moment to repeat the heroic phrase of Job: "Slay me though he might, I will wait for him" (Job. 13; 15). This heroic confidence glorifies God greatly and is of the greatest merit for the soul.

2) Indestructible peace and serenity.

This is a natural consequence of their universal confidence in God. Nothing is capable of disturbing the tranquillity of their spirit. Ridicule, persecution, calumny, injury, sickness, misfortune; everything falls upon their soul like water on marble, without leaving the slightest trace or alteration in the serenity of their spirit. The saintly Cure of Ars received an unexpected slap, and he merely smiled and said: "Friend, the other cheek will be envious." St. Louis Bertrand inadvertently drank a poisoned drink and remained completely tranquil when he discovered it. St. Charles Borromeo remained unmoved and continued to recite the Rosary when a gun was discharged and a bullet passed by his cheek. St. Hyacinth of Poland did not defend himself when he was a victim of a terrible calumny but trusted in God to clarify the mystery. What peace, what serenity, what confidence in God these heroic examples of the saints presuppose! One would say that their souls had lost contact with the things of this world and were as "immovable and tranquil as if they were already in eternity" (Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity).

3) The desire to die in order to reach the fatherland.

This is one of the clearest signs of the perfection of hope. Nature experiences an instinctive horror of death. No one wishes to die; only when grace has taken complete possession of the soul can one desire death in order to live the true life hereafter. Then the soul gives expression to the "I die because I do not die" of St. Augustine, which was repeated later by St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross and constitutes one of the most ardent desires of all the saints. The soul which continues to be attached to the life of this earth and looks with horror on the death which approaches shows by that fact that its vision of the reality of things and its Christian hope are as yet very imperfect. All the saints desire to die in order to go to heaven.

4) Heaven begun on earth.

The saints desire to die to go to heaven, but in reality their life in heaven has already begun on earth. What do the things of this world matter to them? The servants of God live on earth only in their bodies, but their soul and their yearning are fixed in heaven. It is simply another way of stating the phrase: "But our conversation is in heaven" (Phil. 3; 20).

The sublime dispositions of the saints which we have just recorded are an obvious effect of the superhuman actuation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. The virtues, if left to themselves, would never arrive at such heights. The rule of reason, even when illumined by faith, is too imperfect to perceive these exquisite actions. According to St. Thomas, the gift which pertains to the perfection of the virtue of hope is fear of the Lord.

The gift of fear is a supernatural habit by which the just soul, under the instinct of the Holy Ghost, acquires a special docility for subjecting itself completely to the divine will out of reverence for the excellency and majesty of God, who is capable of inflicting punishment on us.

In order to understand this doctrine it is necessary, first of all, to discuss a problem which can be formulated in the following question: "Should God be feared?" The answer is that God in Himself, as supreme and infinite goodness, cannot be an object of fear, He is an object of love. But so far as He is able to inflict evil upon us in punishment for our sins, He can and ought to be feared. In answering this question, St. Thomas harmonizes fear and hope, which at first glance seem to be incompatible, by saying that in God there is justice and mercy, the first of which arouses fear in us, the second, hope. And thus, for different reasons, God is the object of fear and of hope.

It is necessary to examine the nature of this fear, however, because there are many types of fear and not all of them are gifts of the Holy Ghost. Some of them are not even virtues. Fear can be divided into mundane fear, servile fear, filial fear and initial fear.

Mundane fear is that which would not hesitate to offend God in order to avoid some temporal evil. Thus one would apostatise from the Faith in order to avoid the torments and sufferings of persecution. This fear is always evil, because it places its end and goal in this world and turns its back completely upon God. It flees temporal suffering and falls into sin before God.

Servile fear is that which serves God and fulfils His divine will because of the evils which would fall upon us if we did not do so (temporal punishment or the eternal punishment of hell). This fear, although imperfect, is substantially good; when all is said and done, it enables us to avoid sin and it is directed to God as to its end, not considering the pain or punishment as the only evil, because if that were so, the fear itself would be evil and sinful. It flees from sin to avoid punishment.

Filial fear (also called reverential or chaste fear) is that which serves God and fulfils His divine will, fleeing from sin only because it is an offence against God and for fear of being separated from Him. It is called filial fear because it is proper for sons to fear the loss and separation of their father. This fear, as is evident, is good and perfect. It flees from sin without taking any account of punishment.

Initial fear is that which occupies an intermediate place between the last two types of fear. It flees from sin principally as an offence against God, but there is mixed with this flight a certain fear of punishment. This fear is better than servile fear, but it is not as perfect as filial fear.

The question now arises: which of these fears is the gift of the Holy Ghost?

Evidently the gift of fear is not mundane or servile fear. Mundane fear is sinful because it fears more the loss of the world than the loss of God, whom it would abandon for the world. And servile fear, although not evil of itself, could be found even in a sinner by means of an actual grace which would move him to the sorrow of attrition because of the fear of punishment. This fear is a grace from God which moves one to repentance, but as yet it is not connected to charity and therefore could not be related to the gift of the Holy Ghost.

According to St. Thomas, only filial or chaste fear is the gift of fear, for it is based on charity or reverence of God as Father, and it fears to be separated from Him. But as initial fear does not differ substantially from filial fear, that also is a part of the gift of fear, although only in its incipient and imperfect manifestations. In the measure that charity increases, initial fear is gradually purified, so that it loses the servile aspect which still fears punishment and gradually considers sin simply as an offence against God.

In Sacred Scripture we are told that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Ps. 110; 10). But this must be understood, not as regards the essence of speculative wisdom, whose first principles are the articles of faith, but as regards practical wisdom, whose first effect is to subject souls to the law of God. This is done imperfectly by servile fear and perfectly by filial fear. The gift of fear, like all the other gifts, will remain in heaven, not as servile fear, which is not a gift of the Holy Ghost, nor as initial fear, since there will be no possibility of punishment in heaven, but only as filial fear. And only in its reverential aspect before the majesty of God will the gift of fear remain, not in its aspect of a fear of offending God, for this also is completely impossible because of the intrinsic impeccability of the blessed in heaven.

The necessity of the gifts in general is based on the imperfection with which the infused virtues operate, even when subjected to the rule of human reason illumined by faith. There are three principal virtues which need to be strengthened by the divine rule or government of the gift of fear: hope, temperance and humility.

A man feels a natural inclination to love himself excessively, to presume that he is something, that he is able to do much in the pursuit of eternal beatitude. Such is the sin of presumption, the contrary of the virtue of hope, which can be uprooted only by the gift of fear. For fear gives us that supernatural awareness of our absolute impotence before God and, as a consequence, inclines us to rely only on the omnipotent help of God, the formal motive of hope. Without the gift of fear, the virtue of hope would never be completely perfect in us.

St. Thomas states that the gift of fear looks principally at God, whom we must avoid offending, and in this sense it pertains to the virtue of hope, as we have already indicated. But secondarily fear can also look at any other thing which would be able to help man avoid offending God. In this sense the gift of fear helps to correct the disorderly tendency by which a man experiences a strong attraction to carnal delight, by repressing or controlling it through fear of the Lord and thus aiding and strengthening the virtue of temperance. (ST. II II q.141 a.1 ad.3)

A man especially loves his own grandeur, and he loves to be considered greater than he really is. This is the result of pride; humility reduces this self-magnification, so that a man will not pretend to be more than he is. The gift of fear acts in this matter by submerging the soul in the abyss of its own nothingness before God and in the depths of its own misery before the divine justice and majesty. And thus, when the soul is permeated with this gift, when it sees that it is nothing when compared to God, and that it has nothing of itself but misery and sin, it does not seek its own glory apart from God nor does it judge itself to be worthy of anything but disdain and punishment. Only in this way does humility reach its perfection. Such was the humility we see in the saints, who had a complete disdain for themselves.

In addition to these three fundamental virtues, the gift of fear also exercises its influence in regard to other virtues; there is no moral virtue which does not receive the influence of some gift. Thus the gift of fear acts upon the virtue of chastity, by elevating it to the most exquisite delicacy; on the virtue of meekness, by totally repressing disordered anger; on the virtue of modesty, by suppressing any disorderly internal or external bodily movements. Moreover, it combats the passions which, together with vainglory, are the daughters of pride: criticism, presumption, hypocrisy, pertinacity, discord, insolence and disobedience. (ST. II II q.132 a.5)

The effects of the gift of fear are of greatest value in the sanctification of souls. The following are the principal effects of this gift:

1) A lively sentiment of the grandeur and majesty of God, which arouses in the soul a profound adoration filled with reverence and humility.

This is the most characteristic effect of the gift of fear, and it follows from its definition. The soul that is acted upon by this gift feels itself transported by an irresistible force before the grandeur and majesty of God, which makes even the angels tremble (tremunt potestates). Before this infinite majesty the soul feels as if it is nothing or less than nothing. It is overwhelmed with a sentiment which is so strong and penetrating as regards reverence, submission and subjection that it would like, if it could, to suffer a thousand deaths for God. Humility reaches its full perfection here. The soul feels great desires to suffer and to be disdained for God (St. John of the Cross). It never occurs to the soul to have the slightest thought of vanity or presumption. It sees its own misery so clearly that, when others praise it, it seems that they are ridiculing it (St. Cure of Ars).

This respect and reverence for the majesty of God is also manifested in all the things which have any relationship to God. The church or oratory, the priest, sacred vessels, the images of the saints; all are regarded with the greatest respect and veneration. The gift of piety produces similar effects, but from another point of view, as we shall see later. This aspect of the gift of fear will continue forever in heaven. (ST. II II q.19 a.11) There it will not be possible, given the impeccability of the blessed, to have any fear of offending God, but the gift will remain for all eternity to express reverence and subjection before the infinite grandeur and majesty of God.

2) A great horror of sin and a lively sorrow for ever having committed sin.

Once its faith is illumined by the splendour of the gifts of understanding and knowledge and once its hope has been subjected to the action of the gift of fear, which brings the soul directly to the divine majesty, the soul understands as never before the almost infinite malice which is contained in any offence against God, however insignificant it may appear. The Holy Ghost, who wishes to purify the soul for the divine union, subjects it to the action of the gift of fear so that it understands the rigour with which divine justice, offended by sin, must punish in the next life if penance is not done in this life. The poor soul experiences a mortal anguish which reaches its greatest intensity in the terrifying night of the spirit. It seems to the soul that it is condemned and has nothing else to hope for. In reality, it is then that the virtue of hope reaches an incredible degree of heroism, because the soul has now reached the point of hoping against hope and gives the sublime cry of Job: "Slay me though he might, I will wait for him" (Job. 13; 15).

The horror which these souls experience before sin is so great that St. Aloysius Gonzaga fell at the feet of his confessor to accuse himself of two light venial sins. St. Alphonsus Liguori experienced a similar phenomenon on hearing a person blaspheme. St. Teresa of Jesus writes that there could be no death more terrible for her than to think that she had offended God (The Life, c.34). The repentance of such souls for the slightest fault is most profound. From it proceeds the anxious desire to make reparation, a thirst for self-immolation, an irresistible tendency to crucify oneself in a thousand ways. This is a natural consequence of the gift of fear.

3) An extreme vigilance to avoid the slightest occasion of offending God.

This is a logical consequence of the previous effect. These souls fear nothing so much as the slightest offence against God. They have seen clearly, in the contemplative light of the gifts, that in reality there is only one evil in the world and that the others do not deserve to be called evil. How far these souls are from voluntarily placing themselves in the occasion of sin! No person is as apprehensive as they are to flee with the greatest rapidity and promptness from any possibility or danger of offending God. Their extreme vigilance and constant attention cause them to live, under the special movement of the Holy Ghost, with a purity of conscience that is so great that at times it seems impossible to receive sacramental absolution because of a lack of matter and they must be satisfied with confessing some sin from their past life and thus renewing their sorrow and their repentance.

4) Perfect detachment from all created things.

We have already seen that the gift of knowledge produces this effect in the soul, but from another point of view. The gifts are mutually interrelated among themselves and with charity, and for that reason they mutually influence each other. This is perfectly understandable. The soul which has become aware of the grandeur and majesty of God must necessarily consider all created things as base and useless. Honours, wealth, power, dignity; all are considered as less than straw and unworthy of a moment of attention. We need but recall the effect produced in St. Teresa of Avila when a friend of hers showed her some precious jewellery; the saint could not understand how people could have such a great esteem for such things (The Life, c.38). Keeping this in mind, we can see why St. Thomas links the gift of fear with the first beatitude, poverty of spirit.

Two beatitudes are connected with the gift of fear: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5; 3) and "blessed are they who mourn, for they shall be comforted" (Matt. 5; 5).

The first corresponds directly to the gift of fear because, in virtue of the filial reverence which it causes us to experience before God, it impels us not to seek our own grandeur nor to exalt ourselves (pride) nor to become attached to external goods (honours and wealth). All of this pertains to poverty of spirit, whether as the annihilation of the proud and puffed-up spirit of which St. Augustine speaks, or as the detachment from all temporal things of which St. Ambrose and St. Jerome speak. (ST. II II q.19 a.12)

Indirectly the gift of fear is also related to the beatitude which pertains to those who weep and mourn. (ST. II II q.19 a.2) The reason for this is that from the knowledge of the divine excellence and of our own littleness and misery follows the disdain of all earthly things and a renunciation of all carnal delights, accompanied by weeping and mourning for one's past sins. Whence it is evident that the gift of fear moderates all the passions, whether of the irascible appetite or of the concupiscible appetite. The reverential fear of the divine majesty offended by sin restrains the impetus of the irascible passion and moderates the power and impulses of the concupiscible passions. For that reason this is a gift of indescribable value, although in the list of the gifts it occupies the last place.

As regards the fruits of the Holy Ghost, the following pertain to the gift of fear: modesty, which is a consequence of the reverence of man for the divine majesty; and continence and chastity, which follow upon the moderation of the concupiscible passions as a proper effect of the gift of fear.

The principal vice opposed to the gift of fear is pride, as St. Gregory states, (Moralia Bk.1 c.32) but in a much more profound manner than to the virtue of humility. The gift of fear is fixed especially on the eminence and majesty of God, before whom man, by an instinct from the Holy Ghost, is aware of his own nothingness and vileness. Humility likewise is fixed on the grandeur of God, in contrast to the nothingness of man, but in the light of reason illumined by faith and in a human and imperfect modality. Whence it is evident that the gift of fear excludes pride in a more lofty manner than does the virtue of humility. Fear excludes even the root and beginning of pride, as St. Thomas states. (ST. II q.19 a.9 ad.4) Therefore, pride is opposed to the gift of fear in a more profound and radical manner than it is to the virtue of humility.

Indirectly the vice of presumption is also opposed to the gift of fear because it injures the divine justice by trusting inordinately in the divine mercy. In this sense St. Thomas says that presumption is opposed to the gift of fear so far as it disdains something divine.

In addition to the general means for attracting to oneself the merciful glance of the Holy Ghost: recollection, purity of heart, fidelity to grace, frequent invocation of the Holy Ghost etc.; there are other methods which are more closely connected with the gift of fear.

1) To meditate frequently on the infinite grandeur and majesty of God.

We can never by our own poor discursive methods acquire contemplative knowledge, which is given to the soul by the gifts of the Holy Ghost. But we can do something by reflecting on the power and majesty of God, who made all things out of nothing (Gen. 1; 1), who calls all the stars in the heavens by their names (Bar. 3; 33 - 36), who is more admirable and imposing than the turbulent sea (Ps. 92; 4), who will come upon the clouds of heaven with great power and majesty to judge the living and the dead (Luke 21; 27), and before whom all the principalities and powers will tremble for all eternity.

2) To accustom oneself to converse with God with filial confidence, filled with reverence and respect.

We should never forget that God is our Father, but that He is also a God of terrible grandeur and majesty. Sometimes pious souls forget the latter and allow themselves to be excessively familiar with God and even to give expression to irreverent audacity. It is certainly incredible to see the extent to which the Lord gives expression of His familiarity with souls that are pleasing to Him, but it is necessary that He take the initiative and not the soul. Meanwhile the soul should remain in an attitude of reverence and submission, which is very far from being prejudicial to the sweet and intimate confidence of adopted children.

3) To meditate frequently on the infinite malice of sin and to arouse a great horror for sin.

In itself, love is much more powerful and efficacious than fear as a motive for avoiding sin. Nevertheless, the consideration of fear is a great help in keeping souls from sin. The recollection of the terrible punishment which God has prepared for those who definitively reject His law would be sufficient to make us flee from sin if we would meditate on it. It is a fearful thing, as St. Paul says (Heb. 10; 31), to fall into the hands of an offended God. We should think frequently of the evil of sin, especially in times of temptation. It is necessary to arouse such a deep horror of sin that we would be disposed to lose all things and even life itself rather than commit sin. To this end, it will be of great help if we avoid all dangerous occasions which may lead us to sin, practice the daily examination of conscience with fidelity (in order to avoid sin and to weep for those which we have committed), and to consider Jesus crucified as the victim of propitiation for our crimes and sins.

4) To be meek and humble in dealing with our neighbour.

He who has a clear concept of what God is in His infinite majesty and realizes that God has mercifully pardoned him thousands of times, how can he dare to exact with haughtiness and disdain that which is owed to him by his neighbour (Matt. 18; 23 - 35)? We must pardon injuries, and we must treat all our neighbours with exquisite delicacy, profound humility and meekness. We should consider them to be better than we are, at least in the sense that probably they have not resisted grace as much as we have or they would not have done what they have done if they had received the gifts which God has given us. He who has committed any mortal sin in his life can never humiliate himself sufficiently; there is no place so low that it is not too high for him who, having sinned mortally, at one time deserved a place in hell.

5) To beg frequently of the Holy Ghost a reverential fear of God.

When all is said and done, every perfect disposition is a gift of God and it can be attained only by humility and persevering prayer. Scripture is filled with sublime formulas by which we can petition holy fear: "Fulfil for your servant your promise to those who fear you" (Ps. 118; 38); etc. Such sentiments should spring frequently from our hearts and our lips, once we are convinced that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Sirach 1; 16) and that it is necessary to work out our salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2; 12), as the Holy Ghost Himself warns us through the psalmist: "Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice before him" (Ps. 2; 11).

We have already treated of the intimate relations between Christian perfection and charity. Now it is necessary to treat of certain other aspects of this virtue which is the most excellent of all virtues.

St. Thomas begins his treatise on charity by stating that it is friendship between God and man. Like every friendship, it necessarily implies a mutual benevolence which is based on the communication of good. For that reason charity necessarily presupposes sanctifying grace, which makes us children of God and heirs of glory.

Man, who by nature is nothing more than a servant of the Creator, becomes, through grace and charity, the son and friend of God. And if our servitude ennobles us so greatly, since to serve God is to reign, how much more are we elevated by the charity of God which "is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost who has been given to us" (Rom. 5; 5). Such is the incomprehensible dignity of the Christian. Charity is a created reality, a supernatural habit infused by God into the soul.

It can be defined as a theological virtue infused by God into the will, by which we love God for Himself above all things, and ourselves and our neighbour for God.

The material object of charity is primarily God, secondarily ourselves and all rational creatures which have arrived or can arrive at eternal beatitude, and even, to a certain extent, all creatures so far as they are related to the glory of God.

The formal quod object of charity is God Himself as supreme goodness in Himself and as our ultimate end.

The formal motive (ratio sub qua, objectum formale quo) of charity is the uncreated goodness of God considered in itself so far as it embraces the divine essence, all the divine attributes and the three divine Persons.

As an infused habit, charity resides in the will, since it involves a movement of love toward the supreme good, and love and the good constitute the act and the proper object of the will. It is a supernatural habit which God infuses in the degree which pleases Him, without taking into account the natural qualities or dispositions of the one who receives charity.

Charity as a virtue is specifically one, for although its material object embraces various elements (God, ourselves and our neighbours), the motive of love or its formal specifying reason is the divine goodness. From this it follows that, when we love ourselves or our neighbour for any motive other than the goodness of God, we do not make an act of charity, but an act of natural human love, whether selfish love or benevolent love. There are countless acts which seem to flow from charity but are far from being acts of charity. Purely human love as such is of no value in the supernatural order.

Charity is the most excellent of all virtues, not only because of its own intrinsic goodness as the virtue which most intimately unites us with God, but because without it no other virtue can be perfect, since it is the form of all the infused virtues. We have already explained in what sense charity is the form of all the virtues. Its intrinsic excellence derives from the fact that it is the virtue which unites us most intimately with God, since it rests in Him as He is in Himself by reason of His divine goodness. The only virtue which could challenge charity for this primacy are the other two theological virtues of faith and hope, but charity far surpasses these virtues. Faith, which is an intellectual knowledge, limits God by trying to bring His divine greatness into the limited capacity of our intellect, while through charity the will goes out from itself and rests in God in all His infinite grandeur. Moreover, the knowledge of faith is obscure, while charity loves God as He is in Himself. As regards hope, it is a desire for the divine goodness, the true possession of which is granted us through charity, imperfectly in this life and perfectly in the life to come. The excellence and superiority of charity over other the other two theological virtues, and by consequence over all the other virtues, is a dogma of faith which is contained in the deposit of revelation. "So there abide," says St. Paul, "faith, hope and charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity" (1 Cor. 13; 13).

By the proper act of charity, the will goes forth from itself to rest in God as He is in Himself. This profound doctrine gives us the key to the solution of the much debated question concerning the superiority of the intellect over the will. There is no doubt that the will in itself is inferior to the intellect, for the will is a blind faculty and cannot produce its acts if the intellect does not place the desirable object before the will. The intellect precedes and guides the will, which could not love anything without the intellect, since it is impossible to love what one does not know. But the operation of the intellect is completely distinct from that of the will. The intellect draws things to itself or absorbs them, so to speak, into its own intellectual mould. Consequently, when it knows inferior beings such as material things it ennobles them and dignifies them by raising them to the intellectual order; but when it knows superior beings such as God or the angels or supernatural truths, it limits or debases them by obliging them to assume an inferior intellectual mould.

The exact opposite is true of the will. By reason of its proper act, which is to love, the will goes forth from itself to rest in the beloved object as it is in itself. Consequently, if the will loves objects that are inferior to itself, such as the things of earth, it is degraded to an inferior level; but if it loves superior beings, such as God or the angels, it is ennobled and elevated to the level of those superior beings in which it rests through love. For that reason St. Augustine could say: "If you love the earth, you are earthly; but if you love God, what must be said except that you are God?" (In Epist. Joan. tr. 2 n.14)

It must be concluded, therefore, that although the intellect is in itself and in its natural power more perfect than the will, nevertheless, in this life, by the very nature of the operation, it is more perfect to love God than to know Him. A theologian may know a great deal about God, but in a manner that is cold and purely intellectual, while a humble and simple soul who knows almost nothing about theology may love God intensely, and this is much better. Another practical consequence of great importance follows from this sublime doctrine. The only to avoid debasing ourselves by the love of inferior created things is to love them in God, through God and for God; in other words, for the formal motive of charity. It follows from this that charity is a "magic wand" which changes to gold whatever it touches, even those things that are inferior to us but are ordained through charity to the love and glory of God.

Charity can increase in this life because it a movement toward God, our ultimate end, and as long as we are wayfarers in this life it is possible to approach more and more closely to the goal. This greater proximity is effected precisely through the increase of charity. Moreover, charity does not admit of any term or limit in this life; it can grow indefinitely. This does not mean, however, that charity cannot reach a relative perfection here on earth, as we have already explained. Like all other habits, charity increases, not by the addition of one form to another form, but by a greater radication of the virtue in the subject. (ST. II II q.24 a.5)

It cannot increase by addition because such an increase in not possible in qualitative but only in quantitative things, and habits are classified as qualities. For anything to be united by addition to another, it is necessary that it be really distinct from that other, as when a new quantity of sand is added to a quality that already exists; in this case, rather than speaking of a union, we should speak of an addition, because, in the example given, the sand is not intrinsically united to the other sand but is placed alongside it. But this is impossible in regard to qualities; whiteness cannot be added to whiteness nor can charity be added to charity, as one would add a quantitative object to another. Qualitative habits increase only by a more profound radication in their subject. Thus the will participates more and more in charity so far as it is more penetrated by charity.

Like the other virtues, charity is not increased by any act whatever, but only by an act that is more intense than the habit as actually possessed here and now. (ST. II II q.24 a.6) This is an inevitable consequence of the foregoing. If charity were increased by addition, any act of charity, however weak and remiss, would increase charity quantitatively, and thus if an individual possessing one hundred degrees of habitual charity were to perform an act of the love of God of three degrees, this would be added to the one hundred degrees to raise the total to one hundred and three degrees. In this way, simply by the multiplication of many remiss acts, the thermometer of habitual charity would rise to a surprising degree and even surpass the charity of many of the saints. It is evident that such an explanation of the increase of charity leads only to absurdity.

The true nature of the increase of charity is far different. As a qualitative form, it can increase only by a more profound radication in the subject, and this is impossible without a more intense act. The thermometer cannot register a higher degree of heat if the temperature of the air does not likewise rise in degree. This is exactly what happens in regard to the increase of charity and the other virtues.

We now have an important practical conclusion. If we live in slothfulness and tepidity, we can paralyse our Christian life completely, even if we live habitually in the grace of God and perform a large number of good but remiss works. The essential degree of charity, and consequently of grace and the other infused virtues (since all of them grow together with grace and charity), will be paralysed in spite of the number of our good works. (The exception being the effect; ex opere operato of the Sacraments) This consequence, which is an inevitable corollary of the principles which we have just explained, is amply verified in daily experience. A large number of good souls live habitually in the grace of God, without committing any serious faults and performing an infinite number of good works and acts of sacrifice, but they are far from being saints. If they are lacking anything, their laments are raised to heaven; if their superiors command something which does not please them, they murmur and complain; it anyone criticises or humiliates them, they become enemies of those persons. All this shows clearly that such individuals are still very far from Christian perfection.

But how can one explain this phenomenon after these persons have performed so many good works for so many years in the Christian life or in the religious or priestly life?

The theological explanation is simple: They have performed a great many good works, it is true; but they have performed them in a lukewarm manner and not in such a way that each new act is more fervent. Rather, each succeeding act is more remiss and more imperfect. The result of all this is that the thermometer of their charity and the degree of grace and the other virtues have been stopped completely. They are as lukewarm and imperfect as if they were at the very beginning of their conversion or their religious life.

But one may ask: "Then are all those good works which were remiss and imperfect of no avail whatever? Are remiss acts, inferior to one's habitual degree of charity, completely useless and sterile?"

To this we reply that the remiss acts are not completely useless and sterile. They serve a two-fold purpose, one in this life and the other in glory. In this life they prevent the dispositions of soul from becoming completely cold, which would put these people in the proximate occasion of committing a grave sin and thus destroying their Christian life completely. It is certain that he who does not perform an act that is more intense than the virtuous habit which he possesses will never increase the virtuous habit, but neither will he lose the habit completely. As St. Thomas teaches, (II II q.24 a.10) the grade of charity attained will never diminish of itself, even if a person lives for many years in tepidity and performs acts that are remiss or less intense. But if a mortal sin is committed, the virtue of charity is completely destroyed in the soul. The thermometer registers zero. The reason why charity cannot diminish is that the degree of intensity, once acquired, carries with it the title to an eternal reward, and the soul never loses this even though for the rest of its life it does not increase the essential degree of charity. The right or title remains before God, and God never turns back. Charity and the title to it could be lost by mortal sin, but as long as there is no serious sin committed, the merits acquired before God will have their corresponding reward in eternal life. Therefore, something is achieved by these remiss acts, because they at least help to preserve the soul in the state of grace. They likewise preserve in an essential degree all the merits already gained, although the individual may never increase the essential degree of his charity. In the life to come, remiss acts do not remain without their proper reward, although it is certain that, however numerous, they do not increase the degree of essential glory, which corresponds exactly to the habitual degree of one's grace and charity at the time of death. In addition to the essential reward in heaven, however, there are many different accidental rewards. Each remiss act, since it was good and meritorious for having been performed in a state of grace and under the influence of charity, will receive its corresponding accidental reward in heaven. As Báñez says, the increase of essential glory pertains to the more intense acts of charity; the increase of accidental glory pertains to remiss acts of charity. We should realise, however, what a great loss is caused as a result of slothfulness or lukewarmness in the exercise of the virtue of charity.

If this doctrine is true, the saint would be in a worse condition than a lukewarm Christian. For the saint, whose degree of charity is already intense, would have to make an immense effort in order to arrive at a still higher degree, while the lukewarm, who may have only a minimum degree of charity, would find it easy to perform a more intense act.

It is actually easier for the saint to perform a more intense act than it is for the lukewarm. The increase of grace and charity is accompanied by an increase in the capacity and power of the soul. Even in the purely physical order, a little child may not be able to lift a weight of ten pounds, but an older boy could easily lift a weight of thirty pounds. And although in the natural order there is a limit which cannot be surpassed, due to the limitation of human strength, this is not true as regards the increase of grace, which also causes an increase in the powers of the soul, whose obediential potency is absolutely without limit. Therefore, the saints perform more intense acts of charity with great facility.

Let us suppose that a saint makes an act of love of God which is fifty degrees in intensity and therefore greatly inferior to the degree of his habitual charity. Meanwhile, a lukewarm soul performs an act of twenty-five degrees, which is greatly superior to his habitual charity. The latter receives for his act an essential increase of grace and glory, while the saint receives nothing for his act of charity. Therefore, the condition of the saint is worse than that of the lukewarm Christian.

The saint who performs an act of fifty degrees performs an act which is remiss in relation to that which he could have done, due to his higher degree of habitual charity. For that reason, it is fitting that he should receive no reward, at least no essential reward, and this is a kind of punishment for his remiss act. On the other hand, the imperfect soul who performs a more intense act deserves an essential increase because of the fervour with which he performs the act. We should not forget that the master in the gospel demanded five talents from the servant who had received five and only two from him who had received only two (Matt. 25; 14 - 23). The remiss act of a saint is not entirely useless, however, because he will receive the corresponding accidental reward in heaven.

The Council of Trent has defined that the just man, by reason of his good works, merits an increase of grace and glory (Dz. 842). It says nothing about the remiss or less intense acts. Therefore, it is not necessary than an act of charity be more intense in order to merit an increase of grace and glory.

Three centuries before the Church made that definition, a difficulty was presented and a solution was given by St. Thomas Aquinas. "It must be said that every act of charity merits eternal life, but not that it should be given immediately, but in due time. In like manner, every act of charity merits an increase in charity, but only when the soul is disposed for this increase" (i.e., when the act is more intense). The just man merits by means of his remiss good works, but the reward is not given at once. Indeed, it could happen that he would die in mortal sin and would lose the reward of eternal life in spite of having merited it previously by his good works. Similarly, every act of charity, even a less intense act, merits an increase of grace and charity, but the increase is not given until the person produces the physical disposition which is indispensable for it, namely, the more intense act of charity. And if this act is not produced, the remiss act will still have an accidental reward, but it will in no way increase the essential reward of the soul in heaven, as we have explained previously.

De facto, it is of faith that the sacraments increase grace ex opere operato without any need for a dispositive act which is more intense. All this is required is that the recipient place no obstacle, as the Council of Trent teaches (Dz. 849). Therefore, the same can happen as regards the increase of charity outside the sacraments.

There is no comparison here. The sacraments produce or increase grace by their own intrinsic power (ex opere operato), something which does not happen in the increase of the virtues by way of merit, which is produced only by the power of the one who performs those acts with the help of grace (ex opere operantis). The two cases are different. Therefore, in the sacraments no other disposition is required but the purely negative one of not placing any obstacle, which presupposes simply the state of grace for the sacraments of the living and supernatural attrition for the sacraments of the dead. But in the increase of grace by way of extra-sacramental merit, the physical and more intense disposition is required if the increase is actually to be effective. One should keep in mind, moreover, that even in the reception of the sacraments the degree of grace conferred will vary according to the disposition of the one who receives the sacraments. Of two persons who receive Communion, it is possible that the first will receive ten degrees of grace and the other will receive one hundred. The reason is that the ex opere operato effect of the sacrament is joined with ex opere operantis dispositions of the one who receives the sacrament. The minimum ex opere operato effect which the sacrament confers of itself will be produced equally in all as long as there is no obstacle to the reception of the grace. This is the case with infants at Baptism; they all receive ex opere operato the same degree of grace which the sacrament brings with it. But the greater or less degree of grace received by adults ex opere operantis depends on the disposition of those who receive the sacrament.

How can a more intense act proceed from a habit which is less intense? How can an effect be greater that its cause?

A more intense act cannot proceed from a less intense habit unless there is a previous impulse or movement of an actual grace which is likewise more intense. Without the actual prevenient grace, man can do absolutely nothing in the supernatural order, and without the more intense grace, the more intense act is likewise impossible. That actual grace which is more intense cannot be merited, for this would be a contradiction; but it can be infallibly impetrated, although under a gratuitous title, through prayer which fulfils the necessary conditions.

1) One more intense act of charity is of greater value than countless remiss or lukewarm acts.

The intense acts will increase our habitual degree of charity, but remiss acts are absolutely incapable of doing this. Therefore, a simple prayer recited with ardent devotion is of much greater value than an many recited in a distracted manner or out of routine. This, however is seen from the point of view of charity alone. let us not forget that length of prayer has of itself a great value, for example; the generosity required for it. It is wise, however, not to impose too many prayers or particular devotions on individuals. What is important is devotion and not devotions.

2) A perfect just man is more pleasing to God than many imperfect and lukewarm men.

If an ardent act of charity is of greater value before God than a thousand imperfect acts, then the just man who continuously performs such acts is much more pleasing to God than those who perform many imperfect acts. This can be proved from a consideration of God's own love. God's love for His creatures is not only affective but effective; that is to say, it produces in others the good which God desires for them (cf. St. Thomas, Summa, I q.20). One must therefore conclude that God loves the perfect more because He bestows upon them those more intense actual graces, which are many times more valuable than less perfect graces.

3) The conversion of one sinner to lofty perfection is more pleasing to God and of greater glory to God than the conversion of many sinners to a lukewarm and imperfect life. This follows as a conclusion from the principles already stated.

4) The preacher or spiritual director is more pleasing to God and gives greater glory to God if he converts a single sinner and leads him to Christian perfection than the one who converts many sinners but leaves them imperfect and lukewarm. This is another logical conclusion from the principles already enunciated, and it ought to serve as a source of great consolation and inspiration for directors of souls who lack the eloquence necessary for preaching. In the silence of the confessional they may do much more for the glory of God and much more good for souls than the greatest preachers.

Charity does not refer to God alone, but also to one's neighbours. The love of God causes us to love whatever pertains to God or whatever reflects His goodness, and it is evident that one's neighbour is a good of God and shares, or can share, in eternal happiness. For that reason the love of charity with which we love our neighbour is exactly the same charity with which we love God. There are not two charities but only one, since the formal motive of loving one's neighbour is the goodness of God reflected in him. Hence, when we love our neighbour for any other motive distinct from God, we do not love him with the love of charity. We should also love the very habit of charity as such, as a good which we wish for ourselves and for others.

To desire a supernatural good for one's neighbour is true love and true friendship. Irrational creatures can also be loved in charity, not with the love of friendship, which requires a rational nature and the communication of goods, but in so far as they are goods which we can utilise for the glory of God and the service of our neighbour. St. Thomas does not hesitate to add: "And thus God Himself loves them likewise in charity." From this point of view, one can readily understand the apparent foolishness of St. Francis of Assisi in addressing lower creatures as his brothers and sisters.

We should also love ourselves with the love of charity. Although we cannot love ourselves as friends, since friendship requires another individual, we are a good of God, capable of receiving His grace and sharing His love. In this sense we can and ought to love ourselves. If, in our desire to provide pleasure for ourselves, we compromise with the law of God even in regard to little things, we are actually performing an act of hatred for ourselves. The reason is that we are doing ourselves harm and we are inflicting evil upon ourselves, and this is contrary to charity. We love ourselves truly only when we love ourselves in God, for God and through God. By the same token, we must love in charity our own body, inasmuch as it is a work of God and is called to share in the enjoyment of eternal happiness. But since it is inclined to sin and is often the stimulus to evil and an obstacle to our salvation, we must, under these aspects, not love our body but desire to depart from it, and say with St. Paul: "Who will deliver me from the body of this death?" (Rom. 7; 24) and "desiring to depart and to be with Christ" (Phil. 1; 23). Christian mortification, which has as its object the control of the evil tendencies of the body, is not an act of hatred against oneself but a true and authentic love. "Pardon me, my poor body," said St. Francis of Assisi, "but you know that I treat you so badly in this world because I love you much and I wish you to be eternally happy." And St. Peter of Alcantara, who, by the severe penance to which he subjected his body, was nothing but skin and bones, appeared to St. Teresa and said to her joyfully: "O blessed penance which has given to me such great glory."

This is what it means to love one's own body in charity. On the other hand, the disgrace of sin, which gives to the body every kind of sinful taste and pleasure, is preparing it for a terrible judgment in the world to come. And then one will see that what has often appeared here on earth to be a love for one's own body was actually a true hatred of the body.

Sinners as such are not worthy of our love since they are enemies of God and they voluntarily place obstacles to their eternal happiness. But as men they are images of God and capable of eternal blessings, and in this sense we can and ought to love them. "Whence, as regards sin, which makes such a person an enemy of God, every sinner is deserving of hatred, even if it be a matter of one's father or mother or relatives, as we are told in the gospel (Luke 14; 26). We must, therefore, hate in sinners what they have as sinners, and we must love what they have as men, still capable (through repentance) of eternal happiness. And this is to love them truly for God with the love of charity." This doctrine has particular application when parents are unlawfully opposed to the religious or priestly vocations of their children, thereby committing a grave offence. It is necessary to break with them in such a case because one must obey God rather than men.

Sinners naturally love themselves so far as they desire their own preservation, but in reality they fall into error in believing that the best thing in them is their sensitive nature, to which they give every kind of pleasure. If to this we add that they are walking in danger of great loss in the supernatural order, it will be clear that sinners, far from loving themselves truly, are their own worst enemies. Cardinal Cajetan makes the following commentary on this particular article of the Summa Theologiae (II II q.25 a.7):

It is also necessary to love one's enemy, or those who wish us evil, or have done some injury to us, or treat us uncharitably. It is not required that we love them precisely as enemies, for this would be to love what is evil, but to love them so far as they are human beings, with that general love which we owe to all men. And when our enemy is in need of our particular love by reason of some spiritual or corporal danger, we have the obligation of attending to him in particular as if he were not our enemy. Apart from these cases of necessity, we are not obliged to give our enemy any special signs of love because we are not obliged to love each and every human being with a particular love, since that would be impossible. It is required simply that we do not refuse our enemies the ordinary signs of affection which we owe to all our neighbours, such as a polite greeting and ordinary courtesy.

However, the saints went further than this. They loved God and each thing related to God so much that this immense love made them overlook any evil will which they discovered in their neighbours. Even more, some of the saints felt a particular attraction and love for those persons who persecuted and calumniated them, as is evident in the life of St. Teresa of Avila. This heroic love is not of obligation to all men, but the soul that wishes to sanctify itself should tend to this love with all its power, in order to be a perfect child of him "who makes his sun to rise on the good and the evil, and sends rain on the just and the unjust" (Matt. 5; 45).

By the same token, it is an obligation for all, under pain of mortal sin, not to refuse to our enemies the benefits or signs of affection which are given to all neighbours in common; e.g., not to exclude them from our general prayers, etc. But it is not necessary for salvation to make them participants of the special benefits and signs of love which are not given to all men in general but only to one's friends or relatives. It would be a grave sin to exclude one's enemy from common prayer or alms or ordinary polite association; but special signs of friendship are not required except in those circumstances where scandal would be given by refusing them, or when this would be the only means of converting the enemy from his hatred, or if the enemy himself has begged pardon and has given special signs of repentance and affection. Not to respond in these cases would be a sign of true hatred.

It is evident, however, that the perfection of charity demands much more than this. The perfect man not only takes care that he is not overcome by evil, but he also aspires to overcome evil by good (Rom. 12; 21), so that he not only avoids hatred but tries to draw forth the love of his enemy by showering benefits on him. It is necessary to love the angels, the blessed and the souls in purgatory with a true love of charity, because this type of love is based on the communication of eternal happiness which is common to them and to us. The love of the angels and of the blessed is in itself a sign of exquisite charity, and it is a great act of charity to have a love for the souls in purgatory and to manifest it by suffrages for those suffering souls.

It is not lawful to love the devils or the condemned with the love of charity. Although by nature they are creatures of God (in which respect they reflect the divine justice), they are, nevertheless, obstinate in evil and incapable of eternal beatitude, which is the basis for the love of charity. To love them would be equivalent to hating God or rejecting His infinite justice. In order to understand something of the terrible catastrophe which is involved in eternal damnation, one should consider that those doomed souls have lost for all eternity the right to be loved. As obstinate enemies of God, they must be hated for all eternity by the same hatred with which one rejects sin.

To summarise, the general list of beings or objects to which charity extends is as follows: first, God, who is the fountain of all happiness; then our own souls, which participate directly in the infinite happiness; thirdly, our neighbours, both men and angels, who are companions of our happiness; and last of all, our bodies, upon which redounds the glory of the soul, and even irrational things so far as they can be related to the love and the glory of God. Charity is the virtue par excellence which embraces heaven and earth.

Charity must observe some kind of order, because it extends to many different things which participate in eternal happiness in varying degrees.

In the first place, one must love God absolutely and above all things because He is infinitely lovable in Himself and is the first principle of eternal happiness, which consists essentially in the eternal possession of God. For that reason we ought to love God more than we love ourselves, since we merely share in the happiness which is found in God in all its plenitude, inasmuch as He is the first principle from which all other things are derived. We must love God with all our strength and in all possible ways in which He can be loved. Thus by the love of conformity we fulfil the divine precepts conscientiously and accept all the trials and difficulties which God may send, not only with a spirit of resignation, but with gratitude and joy, however difficult and painful they may be, asking God for the grace to be faithful at every moment. By the love of benevolence we would desire, if possible, to give to God some new good or some new happiness which He does not yet possess; and since this is impossible, because God is absolute and infinite good, we endeavour to increase His external glory by labouring for the salvation and sanctification of souls, thus extending His kingdom of love in all hearts. As St. Thomas says, zeal proceeds from the intensity of love. (ST. I II q.28 a.4) The love of friendship, which is based on that of benevolence, adds to it mutual correspondence and communication of good. Finally, by the love of complacency, which is a pure love without any admixture of self-interest, we rest in the infinite perfections of God, rejoicing in them because they make Him infinitely happy and blessed, and we take no account of the advantages and blessings which are reflected in us because of God's goodness. This pure love can never be habitual in this life, because we cannot and we ought not prescind from hope and the desire for our own happiness, which we shall find in God. But it is possible to experience this pure love as an isolated and transitory act, as was experienced by the saints.

Secondly, we ought to love the spiritual good of our own soul more than that of our neighbour. The reason is that our soul participates directly in blessedness, while that of our neighbour is only a companion in the participation of that infinite good. "The proof of this is that man ought not suffer the injury of committing a sin, which would be contrary to the participation of blessedness, even to free his neighbour from sin." (ST. I II q.26 a.4) Consequently, a man should not tell a deliberate lie and thereby offend God, even if by that means he could convert many sinners, free many souls from purgatory, or save a soul from hell. And if, in view of these great advantages, a man should decide to commit a small sin, he would do a great injury to God because he would consider rather the good of creatures than the honour of God whom he offends. We must always serve God rather than men.

For the same reason, it is necessary to love the spiritual good of one's neighbour more than one's own body. The soul of our neighbour shares directly with us in eternal glory, but our body shares only indirectly and by redundancy in the glory of the soul. Hence, when the eternal salvation of one's neighbour requires it, we are obliged in charity and under serious sin to go to the aid of our neighbour, even at the risk of our own life. His eternal life is of greater value than our own bodily life. The application of this principle are numerous. Thus a voluntary abortion, even to save the life of the mother, is a grave sin because it sacrifices the eternal life of the child, who dies without Baptism, in order to save the temporal life of the mother. The same thing is true in regard to the spiritual help that must be given to those who are suffering from contagious diseases.

Moreover, among our various neighbours there is a certain hierarchy of charity which we ought to observe, because not all participate equally in the divine goodness. Thus, objectively speaking, one should wish greater blessings to those who are better, to those who are more holy, to those who are closer to God, although we may have a more intense subjective love for those who are closer to us by reason of blood and, as a result, may desire that they more than anyone else should reach sanctity. But under equal conditions, one must always love more those who are closer to him by blood, and then his fellow citizens and those who are bound to him by others ties. Among our relatives, the objective order gives first place to one's parents because they are the principles of our life, and to them, after God, we owe our very being. Again, the father is more deserving of love than the mother, because he is the active principle of generation, which is more excellent than the passive principle; but this does not prevent us from having a more intense subjective love for our mother, spouse or child.

The order of charity here on earth will remain substantially the same in heaven, but in heaven God will be our all in all (1 Cor. 15; 28). For that reason the order of charity will be taken exclusively in relation to God and not in relation to ourselves. Hence we shall have a more intense subjective and objective love for those who are closer to God, in other words, for those who are most holy. We shall not necessarily love more intensely those who are closer to us, such as our relatives and friends, although we shall love these latter under a double title, namely, their nearness to God and what they mean to us.

It is more proper to charity to love than to be loved. As friendship, it necessarily presupposes both these activities, but the first is an act proper to oneself and the second is an act proper to one's friends. As an act of charity, love presupposes benevolence or well-wishing for one's friends, but it also includes affective union. For that reason benevolence is the basis of friendship.

God is infinitely lovable in Himself and charity loves Him as such, without subordinating Him to any other end. But there is something else which should also dispose us to advance in the love of God, namely, the benefits we have received from Him or which we hope to receive, as well as the punishments which we strive to avoid. It is possible to love God immediately even in this life because, unlike the intellect which draws things to itself, the will goes out in love, in order to rest immediately in the object which is loved. God cannot be loved by creatures as much as He deserves to be loved, for this would necessitate an infinite love, but we can and ought to love God completely, that is, love Him for all that He is and for everything that pertains to Him in any way, and love Him with all our being; at least habitually; by ordaining all things to Him. Objectively there can be no measure or limit to the love of God because in Himself He is infinitely lovable, but there can and must be some limit on our part, not as regards the internal limits of charity (since the more intense it is, the better), but as regards the external manifestations of charity, which cannot be continuous, although they can and ought to be habitual and under the virtual influence of God. Thus it is necessary for us to sleep or to be absorbed in other occupations which necessarily suspend the actual exercise of love.

As regards the love of one's friends and the love of one's enemies, which of the two is better and more meritorious?

To answer this question, it is necessary to make a distinction. If one's enemy is loved simply and solely for God and if one loves one's friend for God and for some other reason, then the love of one's enemy is better because it has God as its exclusive cause. But if one loves both his friends and his enemies only for God, that love would be more perfect and meritorious which is practiced with greater intensity, and this ordinarily would be the love of one's enemy, since a greater force and impetus of the love of God is required in this case. But if one loves for God both his friends and enemies and loves them both with equal intensity of love, it is more perfect and meritorious to love one's friends because the object of love is better and closer to ourselves. In like manner, if one considers separately the love of God and the love of neighbour, there is no doubt whatever that the love of God is better. But if one unites them, then the love of neighbour for God is better than the love of God alone, because the first includes both loves and the second embraces God alone. And that love of God is most perfect which extends also to one's neighbour, because we have received from God the commandment that he who loves God also loves his neighbour (1 John 4; 21).

The effects of charity are internal and external.

The internal effects are three in number:

1) Spiritual joy, which can exist at the same time with sorrow because we do not yet enjoy the perfect possession of God as we shall in the beatific vision.

2) Peace, which is the tranquillity of order, and results from the harmony of our desires and appetites through charity.

3) Mercy, which is both a special virtue and a fruit of charity (although distinct from it), and inclines us to have compassion on the miseries of our neighbours, considering them in a certain way as our own, in so far as whatever causes sorrow to our brother likewise causes sorrow to us. This is the virtue par excellence of all the virtues that refer to our neighbour. God Himself manifests mercy in an extreme degree by having compassion on us.

The external effects of charity are also three in number:

1) Beneficence, which consists in doing good to others as an external sign of our internal benevolence. It is related to justice if it is a question of what we owe to our neighbour; it is related to mercy when we assist him in his necessities; and sometimes it is connected with some other virtue.

2) Almsgiving, which is an act of charity which binds all, but in different degrees, and can be exercised through the spiritual or corporal works of mercy, although the former are greater than the latter.

3) Fraternal correction, which is an excellent remedy for the sins of our neighbours. It requires a great deal of prudence, however, in order to select the proper moment and the apt means for making this correction. It belongs not only to superiors with regard to their subjects, but even to subjects themselves, as long as prudence is observed and there is some hope of amendment. Unless these conditions are present, we should not correct our neighbour. But this prohibition does not always apply to superiors, for they have an obligation by reason of their office to correct and even to punish those who do wrong or are a threat to the common good.

There are many sins opposed to the virtue of charity, but the detailed study of them belongs to moral theology. Here only a summary treatment of these defects can be attempted.

Hatred is the first sin against charity. If it pertains to God, it is a most grave sin and indeed the greatest that man could commit. If it is directed to one's neighbour, it is also a serious sin and designates an internal disorder, even though it is not the one that is most harmful to one's neighbour. The worst is that which proceeds from envy.

Spiritual sloth, which is opposed to the joy of the divine good which proceeds from charity, is a capital sin; it usually proceeds from the sensate taste of men who find no pleasure in God and find divine things to be distasteful. The vices which flow from spiritual sloth are malice, rancour, pusillanimity, despair, indolence as regards commands, flightiness of mind and distractions by unlawful things.

Envy is opposed to spiritual joy occasioned by the good of one's neighbour. It is an ugly sin which saddens the soul because of the good seen in another, not because that particular good threatens us, but because it is seen as something that diminishes our own glory and excellence. Of itself, it is a mortal sin against charity, which commands us to rejoice in the good of our neighbour. But the first indeliberate movements of sensibility or envy regarding insignificant things could be a venial sin. From envy, as a capital vice, proceed hatred, murmuring, defamation, delight at the adversities of one's neighbour and sorrow at another's prosperity.

Discord, which is opposed to peace and concord, signifies a dissension of wills in those things that pertain to the good of God or the good of one's neighbour.

Contention is opposed to peace by means of words, either by argument, complaint or disagreement. It is a sin if it is done in a spirit of contradiction, if it is harmful to one's neighbour or to the truth, or if one defends himself by means of harsh words and in an unseemly manner.

Schism, war, strife and sedition are opposed to the peace of charity by means of deeds. Schism signifies a departure from the unity of faith and the sowing of division in religious matters. War between nations and peoples, when it is unjust, is a grave sin against charity by reason of the countless injuries and upheavals it causes. Strife, which is a kind of particular war, almost always proceeds from anger; in itself it is a great fault in him who provokes such a situation without the lawful mandate of public authority. It has its maximum manifestation in duelling, which is punished by the Church by the penalty of excommunication. It is also expressed by sedition, which consists in forming bands or parties within a nation with the object of conspiring against legitimate authority or promoting tumults or rebellions against lawful authority.

Scandal, which is also opposed to justice, is frequently a grave sin against charity because it is diametrically opposed to beneficence. Scandal consists in saying or doing anything which could be an occasion of sin for one's neighbour.

The gift of wisdom is a supernatural habit, inseparable from charity, by which we judge rightly concerning God and divine things through their ultimate and highest causes under a special instinct and movement of the Holy Ghost, who makes us taste these things by a certain connaturality and sympathy. We shall explain the definition in order to gain a clear idea of it.

Like all the gifts of the Holy Ghost, wisdom is a supernatural habit, but it is precisely that gift which perfects charity by giving it the divine modality it lacks as long as charity is subject to the rule of human reason, even illumined by faith. By reason of its connection with charity, all the souls in the state of grace possess the gift of wisdom as a habit, and it is incompatible with mortal sin. The same is true of all the other gifts.

It is proper to the gift of understanding to have a penetrating and profound intuition of the truths of faith in the order of simple apprehension, without making any judgment concerning them. Such a judgment is made by the other intellectual gifts, but in different ways: concerning divine things, by the gift of wisdom; concerning created things, by the gift of knowledge; concerning the application to our concrete acts, by the gift of counsel. (ST. II II q.8 a.6) So far as it presupposes a judgment, the gift of wisdom resides in the intellect as in its proper subject, but since it is a judgment by a kind of connaturality with divine things, it necessarily presupposes charity. Hence the gift of wisdom causaliter has its root in charity, which resides in the will. (ST. II II q.45 a.2) The consequence is that this is not a purely speculative wisdom but a practical wisdom. To be sure it belongs to the gift of wisdom, in the first place, to contemplate the divine, which is like the vision of first principles; but in the second place, it pertains to wisdom to direct human acts according to divine things. Whereas other gifts perceive, judge or act on things distinct from God, the gift of wisdom is primarily concerned with God Himself, giving us a savoury and experimental knowledge of Him which fills the soul with indescribable sweetness.

By reason of this ineffable experience of God, the soul judges all things else so far as they pertain to God, and does so in their highest and supreme reasons, that is, through divine reasons. As St. Thomas explains, he who knows and tastes the highest cause par excellence, which is God, is disposed to judge all things by their proper divine reason. Thus, though the gift of wisdom pertains properly to divine things, there is no reason why its judgment cannot also extend to created things and discover in them their ultimate causes, which connect them in some manner to God. This is like a vision from eternity which embraces all creation in one scrutinising glance, relating all things to God. Even created things are contemplated by wisdom in a divine manner.

It is evident from this that the primary object (formal quod object) of the gift of wisdom embraces the formal quod object and the material object of faith, because faith looks primarily to God and secondarily to revealed truths. But it is differentiated from faith by reason of its formal quod object, since faith is limited to believing, while the gift of wisdom experiences and tastes that which faith believes.

In like manner, the primary object or the formal quod object of the gift of wisdom embraces the formal quod object and the material object of theology, which considers God and all revealed truths with their conclusions. But they are differentiated inasmuch as theology takes revealed truths as first principles and, by reasoning, deduces conclusions from them, while the gift of wisdom contemplates the same principles by the illumination of the Holy Ghost and does not properly deduce the theological conclusions, but perceives them by a kind of intuition or by a special supernatural illumination.

Finally, the secondary or material object of the gift of wisdom can be extended to all the conclusions of the other sciences which are contemplated in that same divine light which shows their relation to the supernatural ultimate end. The philosophers defined wisdom as certain and evident knowledge of things through their ultimate causes. He who contemplates a thing without knowing its causes has only a superficial knowledge of that thing. He who contemplates a thing and knows its proximate or immediate causes has scientific knowledge. He who can reduce his knowledge to the ultimate principles of the natural being possesses philosophic wisdom, that purely natural wisdom which is called metaphysics. He who, guided by the light of faith, scrutinises with his natural reason the revealed data of revelation in order to draw from them their intrinsic virtualities and to deduce new conclusion possesses theological wisdom, the highest type of natural wisdom which is possible in this life, but based radically on the supernatural order. But he who, presupposing faith and sanctifying grace, judges divine things and human things through their ultimate causes by a kind of divine instinct possesses supernatural wisdom, and this is the gift of wisdom.

Beyond this, there is no higher type of wisdom in this life. It is surpassed only by the beatific vision and the uncreated wisdom of God. From this, it is evident that the knowledge which the gift of wisdom gives to the soul is incomparably superior to all human sciences, even theology, which already possesses something supernatural.

For that reason a simple and uneducated soul who lacks the theological knowledge acquired by study may sometimes possess, through the gift of wisdom, a profound knowledge of divine things, which causes amazement even to eminent theologians. The special instinct and movement of the Holy Ghost is characteristic of all the gifts of the Holy Ghost; this attains its highest perfection, however, in the gift of wisdom, by reason of the loftiness of its object, which is God Himself and divine things. Man does not proceed laboriously and by means of rational discursus when he acts under the influence of the gifts, but in a rapid and intuitive manner by a special instinct which proceeds from the Holy Ghost. It is useless to ask why such a person acts in this or that way, or says this or that thing, because even he himself does not always know; it is the Holy Ghost who operates in him. He has experienced something with great clarity and a certitude which far surpasses all human discursus or reason.

A certain connaturality and sympathy is another note that is typical of the gifts of the Holy Ghost which reaches its highest perfection in the gift of wisdom. Of itself, wisdom is a savoury and experimental knowledge of God and of divine things. The souls that experience these things understand very well the meaning of the words of the psalm: "Taste and see how good the Lord is" (Ps. 33; 9). They experience a divine delight which sometimes causes them to fall into ecstasy and brings to them something of the ineffable joy of eternal beatitude.

It is remarkable how precisely and profoundly St. Thomas explains this note, which is characteristic of the gift of wisdom:

The gift of wisdom is absolutely necessary if charity is to develop to its full perfection and plenitude.

Precisely because charity is the most excellent of all the virtues and the most perfect and divine, it demands by its very nature the divine regulation of the gift of wisdom. Left to itself, or to the control of man in the ascetical state, it would have to be regulated by human reason according to the human mode. Charity is a divine virtue and has wings for soaring to heaven, but it is obliged to move along the earth because it is under the control of human reason and because, in a certain sense, it is necessary to compromise in accordance with prudence, due to its weak condition. Only when it begins to receive the full influence of the gift of wisdom is there given to charity the divine atmosphere and modality which it needs as the most perfect of all the theological virtues. Then charity begins to breathe and to expand in its proper element.

As an inevitable consequence, it begins to grow and to increase rapidly, carrying the soul with it as if in flight, soaring to the regions of the mystical life and to the very summit of perfection, which it never could have done if it had remained under the control of human reason in the purely ascetical state.

From this sublime doctrine follow two inevitable conclusions which are of great importance in the theology of Christian perfection.

The first is that the mystical state is not something abnormal and extraordinary in the full development of the Christian life, but it is the normal atmosphere which grace, as a divine form, demands, so that it can develop in all its virtualities through the operative principles of the infused virtues, and especially through the theological virtues, which are substantially divine. Therefore, the mystical state ought to be something normal in the Christian life, and it is, as a matter of fact, normal in every perfect Christian.

The second conclusion is that an actuation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost in the human mode, besides being impossible and absurd, would be utterly useless for the perfecting of the infused virtues, and especially of the Holy Ghost by reason of their nature, the only perfection which they could receive from the gifts is that of the divine mode, which is exclusive and proper to the gifts, because the theological virtues, under the rule of the human reason, would remain forever in a purely human mode of operation.

By reason of its elevation and grandeur and by reason of the sublimity of the virtue which it perfects, the effects which wisdom produces in the soul are truly remarkable. The following are the more characteristic effects of this gift:

This is the most impressive of all the effects of the gift of wisdom so far as they are manifested externally. One would say that the saints have completely lost the human instinct or the human manner of judgment and that it has been replaced by a certain divine instinct by which they judge all things. They see everything from God's point of view, whether the little, commonplace episodes of daily life, or the great events of life. In all things they see the hand of God. They never attach their attention to immediate secondary causes but pass them by, to arrive immediately at the Supreme Cause who governs and rules them from above. The saints would have to do great violence to themselves in order to descend to the point of view which judges from a purely human and rational standard. An insult or any other injury that is done to them causes them to turn immediately to God, who is the one that wishes or permits that they be exercised in patience and thus increase their glory. They do not dwell for an instant on the secondary cause, which is the evil or malice of men, but they rise immediately to God and judge all things from the divine heights. They do not consider something disgraceful in the way that the men of the world do, but they consider as disgraceful only that which God would consider such, namely, sin, lukewarmness, infidelity to grace, etc. They do not understand how the world can consider as treasures those little baubles which sparkle and glitter, because they see clearly that there is no true treasure but God and the things that lead to God. As St. Aloysius Gonzaga used to say: "Of what avail is this to me for eternity?" The gift of wisdom shone most brilliantly in St. Thomas Aquinas. He possessed a remarkable supernatural instinct in discovering in all things the divine aspect by which they were related to God. There is no other way of explaining his divine instinct and insight except that the gift of wisdom operated in him in an eminent degree. In modern times, another admirable example of the operation of the gift of wisdom is Sister Elizabeth of the Trinity. According to Father Philipon, who studied her case profoundly, the gift of wisdom was the outstanding characteristic of the doctrine and life of this saintly Carmelite nun of Dijon. She was perfectly aware of her sublime vocation and even succeeded in contemplating the Trinity, so that she experienced the distinct Persons of the Trinity present in her soul. The greatest trials and sufferings were unable to disturb for a moment her ineffable peace of soul. No matter what misfortunes befell her, she remained as unmoved and tranquil as if her soul were already in eternity.

As Father Philipon says: "The gift of wisdom is the royal gift which enables one to enter most profoundly in the participation of the deiform mode of divine science. It is impossible to be elevated any higher outside of the beatific vision." Introduced by charity into the intimacy of the divine Persons and the very heart of the Trinity, the divinised soul, under the impulse of the Spirit of love, contemplates all things from this centre. God is present to the soul in all of His divine attributes and in all of His great mysteries. In the measure in which it is possible for a simple creature, the gaze of the soul tends to become identified with the vision which God has of Himself and of the entire universe. It is a godlike type of contemplation experienced in the light of the Deity, and in it the soul experiences ineffable sweetness.

In order to understand this, it is necessary to recall that God cannot see anything except in Himself and in His causality. He does not know creatures directly in themselves nor in the movement of contingent and temporal cause which regulate their activity. He contemplates all things in His Word and in an eternal mode, according to the decrees of His providence and in the light of His own essence and glory. The soul which becomes a participant in this divine mode of knowledge by means of the gift of wisdom penetrates into the unsounded depths of the divinity, and it contemplates all things through the divine. One would say that St. Paul was thinking of such souls when he wrote: "The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God" (1 Cor. 2; 10).

As Father Philipon writes: While the gift of knowledge acts by an ascending movement, raising the soul from creatures to God, and the gift of understanding penetrates all God's mysteries from without and within by a simple loving gaze, the gift of wisdom may be said never to leave the very heart of the Trinity. It looks at everything from that indivisible centre. Thus made godlike, the soul can see things only from their highest and most divine motives. The whole movement of the universe, down to its tiniest atoms, thus lies beneath its gaze in the all-pure light of the Trinity and of the divine attributes, and it beholds them in order, according to the rhythm with which these things proceed from God. Creation, redemption, hypostatic order; it sees all, even evil, ordained to the greater glory of the Trinity.

Finally it looks aloft, rising above justice, mercy, prudence and all the divine attributes. Then it suddenly discovers all these uncreated perfections in their eternal Source: in the Godhead of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost which infinitely surpasses all our narrow human concepts and leaves God incomprehensible and ineffable even to the gaze of the blessed, and even to the beatified gaze of Christ. It beholds that God, who is supereminent in His simplicity, is simultaneously Unity in Trinity, indivisible Essence and fellowship of three living Persons, really distinct according to an order of procession which does not affect their consubstantial equality. Human eye could never have discovered such a mystery, nor could human ear have caught such harmonies, and the human heart could never have suspected such beatitude had not the Godhead stooped to us by grace in Christ, in order that we might enter into the unfathomable depths of God under the guidance of His own Spirit.

The soul that has reached these heights never departs from God. If the duties of one's state should so demand, it gives itself externally to all types of work, even the most absorbing work, with an unbelievable activity; but in the most profound centre of the soul, as St. John of the Cross used to say, it experiences and perceives the divine company of the Three, and does not abandon them for an instant. In such souls Martha and Mary have been joined in an ineffable manner, so that the prodigious activity of Martha in no way compromises the peace and tranquillity of Mary, who remains day and night in silent contemplation at the feet of the divine Master. For such a soul, life on earth is the beginning of eternal beatitude.

This is precisely the purpose of the gift of wisdom. Freed from human bondage and receiving in full the divine atmosphere which the gift gives, the fire of charity reaches tremendous proportions. It is incredible what the love of God can do in souls that are under the operations of the gift of wisdom. Its most impressive effect is the complete and total death of self. Such souls love God with a pure love only for His infinite goodness and without the mixture of any human motives or self-interest. True, they do not renounce their hope for heaven; they desire it more than ever, but they desire it primarily because there they shall be able to love God with even greater intensity and without any interruption. If it were possible to glorify God more in hell than in heaven, they would without hesitation prefer the eternal torments. It is the definitive triumph of grace and the total death of one's own self. Then one begins to fulfil the first commandment of the law of God in all the fullness which is compatible with the state of misery and weakness on earth. As regards one's neighbour, charity also reaches a sublime perfection through the gift of wisdom. Accustomed to see God in all things, even in the most minute details of daily life, the saints see Him in a very special manner in their neighbour. They love their neighbour with a profound tenderness which is completely supernatural and divine. They serve their neighbour with heroic abnegation, which is at the same time filled with naturalness and simplicity. Seeing Christ in the poor, in those who suffer, in the heart of all their brothers, they hasten to aid their brethren with a soul that is filled with love. They are happy to deprive themselves of even the necessities of life in order to give them to their neighbour, whose interest they place and prefer before their own, as they would put the interests of Christ before their own. Personal egoism in relation to neighbour is completely dead. Sometimes the love of charity which inflames their heart is so great that it is manifested externally in the divine foolishness which is so disconcerting to human prudence. St. Francis of Assisi embraced a tree as a creature of God, and desired to embrace all creation because it came from the hands of God.

This is an inevitable consequence of the previous effect. Perfected by the gift of wisdom, charity extends the divine influence to all the other virtues, because charity is the form of all the other virtues. The whole pattern and organism of the Christian life experiences the divine influence of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, that perfect plenitude which is seen in the virtues of the saints and is sought in vain in souls which are less advanced. By reason of the influence of the gift of wisdom through charity, all the Christian virtues are cultivated, and they acquire a godlike modality which admits of countless shades and manifestations, according to the personal character and particular type of life of the saints. But in any case they are all so sublime that one could not say which of them is most exquisite. Having died definitively to self, being perfect in every type of virtue, the soul has arrived at the summit of the mount of sanctity, where it reads that sublime inscription written by St. John of the Cross: "Here on this mountain dwell only the honour and glory of God."

Following the teaching of St. Augustine, St. Thomas states that the seventh beatitude corresponds to the gift of wisdom: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God" (Matt. 5; 9). He proves the fittingness of this application from two points of view: as regards the reward and as regards the merit.

As regards the merit ("blessed are the peacemakers"), because peace is nothing other than the tranquillity of order, and to establish order pertains precisely to wisdom.

As regards the reward ("they shall be called the children of God"), because we are adopted children of God by reason of our participation and likeness with His only-begotten Son, who is Eternal Wisdom.

As regards the fruits of the Holy Ghost, the following three pertain especially to the gift of wisdom: charity, spiritual joy and peace.

To the gift of wisdom is opposed the vice of spiritual dullness. It consists in a certain defect of judgment and lack of spiritual sense, which prevents one from discerning or judging the things of God through that connaturality by taste or contact with God which comes from the gift of wisdom.

Worse yet is the vice of fatuity, which prevents a person from judging in any way of divine things. Dullness is opposed to the gift of wisdom by privation; fatuity is opposed to it by negation. When this dullness is voluntary because a man is submerged in earthly things, it is a true sin, according to the teaching of St. Paul, who says that the animal man does not comprehend the things that are of God. And since there is nothing that so engrosses a man with earthly things as the vice of lust, it is primarily from lust that spiritual dullness proceeds, although the vice of anger also contributes to it so far as its violent movements impede right judgment.

Apart from the general means such as recollection, a life of prayer, fidelity to grace and humility, one can dispose himself for the actuation of the gift of wisdom by using the following means, which are within the workings of ordinary grace:

How many souls, even among those who are consecrated to God, fall into the habit of judging things from a purely natural and human point of view. If things do not go their way, they accuse others of all sorts of imperfections and even malice; but when things proceed according to their personal good pleasure, they attribute everything to God. Actually, they are willing to do God's will whenever it happens to coincide with their own interests. The truly spiritual man accepts all things, whether pleasant or painful, with a spirit of equanimity, and if things are painful or even unjust, he can still see the spiritual value of such experiences, if only as means of purification and penance. Even the smallest works are seen in the light of supernatural value and merit and while he is conscious of the defects of others, he is even more aware of his own imperfections.

St. Paul speaks frequently in this manner, but the greater part of men rely on this world's wisdom. Yet Christ constantly warns us in His teaching that we should expect to be a contradiction and a paradox to the world. This does not mean that the world as such is evil, but it does mean that those who live and act for worldly goals and according to worldly standards will inevitably have to jettison the standards of God. The lives of the saints are replete with instances in which the gift of wisdom caused them to perform actions which were foolish in the eyes of the worldly men but were divine and prudent from a supernatural point of view.

Everything in its proper place. Even the most holy and most beneficial created goods can become a source of temptation and sin if a man is too attached to them. As soon as anything outside of God himself becomes a goal or end in itself rather than a means to God, the soul is diverted from its proper orientation to God. This applies not only to the obvious dangers, such as wealth and pleasure and ambition, but to the study of theology, the liturgy, devotion to particular saints, penitential practices; even the use of the means to sanctity itself. All of these, if exaggerated or sought after with a selfish spirit, can become obstacles to union with God and the operation of the gift of wisdom which flows from that union.

It is God's way to lead a soul to Him by conferring spiritual consolations, but the time comes when these consolations are removed and the soul is tested, purified and made strong in love. One must strive diligently to cultivate a true devotion, which implies a resolute will to serve God at any cost. Man naturally is drawn to those things which give pleasure, whether spiritual or sensual; hence all the more reason for detachment and self-denial. The common error is to love the gift rather than the giver, and for that reason God withdraws consolations when the soul is ready to pass on to another phase of its spiritual development. To love and serve God in darkness and privation is by far a greater proof of one's fidelity than to love Him in periods of delight and consolation.

Once the various faculties of the soul are rectified in regard to the supernatural order through theological virtues, it is necessary to rectify them in regard to the means for attaining that end. This is the role of the moral virtues, of which there are two classes: the acquired natural virtues and the infused supernatural virtues. As we have already mentioned, it is impossible to enumerate all the moral virtues, since there can be a virtue wherever there can be a morally good habit regarding a given area of human activity, and human activities are indefinite. However, theologians generally group a large number of virtues around the basic or cardinal virtues, which serve as hinges for all the other moral virtues. We shall limit ourselves to a discussion of the cardinal virtues and a brief exposition of some of the more important virtues which are connected in one way or another with these cardinal virtues. To do more would carry us too far into the domain of moral theology.

The first of the four cardinal virtues and the most important as a fulcrum for all the other moral virtues is the virtue of prudence.

Natural or acquired prudence is defined as right reason applied to actions. As an infused moral virtue, it is a special virtue infused by God into the practical intellect for the right government of one's actions in view of the supernatural end.

Prudence is a special virtue, distinct from the others. Whether acquired or infused, it resides in the practical intellect, because it is concerned with particular concrete human actions. But infused and acquired prudence are distinguished by reason of their origin, by reason of their extension, and by reason of their formal motive.

By reason of origin, acquired prudence is attained through the repetition of acts; infused prudence is given by God with sanctifying grace.

By reason of extension or application, acquired prudence governs the natural order, while infused prudence governs the supernatural order.

By reason of the formal motive, acquired prudence operates according to simple synderesis (the first law of natural morality: "Do good and avoid evil") and the natural appetite for the moral good, while infused prudence operates under reason enlightened by faith and informed with charity. (c¦ . ST. II q.47) Hence, whereas natural acquired prudence is concerned with the particular action in view of man's natural happiness and perfection, infused prudence will operate in view of man's supernatural goal of sanctity and salvation.

Prudence is the most perfect and the most necessary of all the moral virtues because its function is precisely to point out and command the just mean or measure in regard to any and all human actions. It enables a man to judge accurately what is the morally good thing to do under particular circumstances. In a certain sense, even the theological virtues come under the domain of prudence; not that they must observe a given mean, but by reason of the subject in which they inhere and the mode of their operation. In other words, there are occasions and circumstances in which supernatural prudence must dictate the proper operations of faith, hope and charity. Indeed, it can be said that, without prudence, no other virtue can be practiced with perfection.

The importance of the virtue of prudence is especially evident in certain aspects of human life:

1) To help the individual avoid sin, pointing out through experience the causes and occasions of sin as well as the opportune remedies.

2) For the increase and growth of virtue, judging in each instance what should be done or avoided in view of one's sanctification. It is sometimes difficult to judge in a given instance which of two virtues is to be practiced; for example, justice or mercy, recollection or apostolic zeal, fortitude or meekness.

3) Prudence assists greatly in the works of the apostolate, whether in the pulpit, the confessional, the works of mercy or the classroom.

Of the vices opposed to prudence, some are manifestly contrary to prudence and others have the false appearance of prudence.

The vices contrary to prudence are imprudence and negligence.

Imprudence may be manifested in three ways:

a) by precipitation, when one acts without due deliberation but out of passion or caprice;

b) by inconsideration, when one spurns making a judgment or pays no heed to those elements necessary for making a right judgment; and

c) by inconstancy, when one readily abandons, for insufficient reasons, the right judgments made under prudence.

One of the primary causes of these defects of prudence is lust, although they may also spring from envy and anger.

Negligence occurs when one lacks the solicitude required for efficaciously commanding the action which ought to be performed or is deficient in performing the action in the proper manner. It differs from inconstancy in the sense that the inconstant person fails to carry out the act commanded by prudence, whereas the negligent person fails even to command the action.

Of the vices which have the false appearance of prudence there are five:

a) carnal prudence, which consists in the ability to find ways and means of satisfying self-love and the disordered passions;

b) craftiness, which is the ability to obtain an end, whether good or evil in itself, by false, simulated or only apparently good means; it is sinful even if the end be good, for the end does not justify the use of evil means;

c) guile, which is craftiness practiced principally by words;

d) fraud which is craftiness practiced by actions;

e) excessive solicitude for temporal goods or future events, which designates an excessive concern about temporal goods or a lack of confidence in divine providence.

Most of the foregoing vices proceed from an avaricious spirit.

The practice of a given virtue will differ in the various stages of the spiritual life, and according to the age and circumstances of a given person. This is especially evident in regard to the virtue of prudence, which is usually lacking in the very young, due to their lack of experience and the predominance of emotions over reason in their lives. Consequently, it is of practical help to point out certain basic practices by which an individual can cultivate prudence according to his needs and circumstances.

Beginners, whose principal concern will be to remain in the state of grace and not turn back, will seek principally to avoid the sins opposed to prudence. They will always reflect before acting, especially before more important decisions, never postponing decisions until the last minute or being unduly influenced in their decisions by passion or selfish caprice. They will do their utmost to envisage the good or evil effects of an action and the circumstances surrounding a given act. They will endeavour to remain firm in their good resolutions and not be influenced by inconstancy or negligence. They will take special precautions against carnal prudence,which often uses subtle pretexts and rationalisation to excuse them from their obligations or to induce them to yield to the demands of the passions. They will proceed always with utmost simplicity, avoiding any duplicity or any semblance of deceit or craftiness. They will live for the day and give full attention to the duty of the moment, without being too much concerned about the morrow, having a firm trust in divine providence. So much for the negative aspect.

It is likewise necessary to have a positive orientation if one is to perfect the virtue of prudence. Hence it is salutary practice to refer all things to the ultimate end and to make sure that in every act and in the use of all created goods one refers all to God. Likewise it is of great help to keep constantly in mind the basic question: what does this profit me toward eternal salvation?

Advanced souls, who will be even more solicitous in perfecting the virtue of prudence, will gain great assistance from raising the level of their daily actions even higher, to the domain of the glory of God, seeking that first and always. More immediately concerned with personal sanctification than with salvation, they will begin to apply that higher rule of prudence which states that, even of those things that are lawful, not all are prudent in view of sanctity and the glory of God. Consequently, they will practice a more intense mortification and self-denial and will strive to be ever more docile and attentive to the movements of grace and the impulse and inspirations of the Holy Ghost. In the actual performance of their daily actions they will keep in mind the important question: what would Jesus do?

The perfect. Those who are perfect in charity will practice the virtue of prudence under the impulse of the gift of counsel, of which we shall soon speak.

As we have already explained, there are three aspects to be considered in any cardinal virtue: the integral parts, the subjective parts and the potential parts. The integral parts are those elements which are required for the perfection of a given virtue; the subjective parts are the species into which the virtue is divided; and the potential parts are the annexed or related virtues which for one reason or another are connected with the virtue in question.

Eight integral parts are required for the perfection of the virtue of prudence, five of which pertain to the intellectual aspect and three to the practical aspect. Each and every part will not necessarily function in every instance of the exercise of the virtue, but all must be possessed so that they will function when particular circumstances require.

The eight parts are:

1) Memory of the past, so that one may learn from experience what is to be done or avoided in particular circumstances.

2) Understanding of the present, so that one may judge whether a given action is lawful or unlawful, morally good or evil, fitting or unfitting.

3) Docility, so that those who lack experience may accept the counsel and advice of those who have experience.

4) Sagacity, so that one may act rightly in urgent cases when time or circumstances do not permit delay.

5) Reasoning power, so that when time permits, one may act after the required consideration and reflexion.

6) Foresight, so that one may judge the immediate means in view of the end or goal which is sought.

7) Circumspection, so that one may take into consideration the special circumstances which surround a given act, as to persons, places, etc.

8) Precaution, so that one will take into consideration the possible obstacles from without, or one's own weakness or incapacity in view of a given action.

Prudence is divided into basic species: personal prudence and social prudence. The names indicate the basis of the distinction.

Personal prudence has to do with one's government of oneself; social prudence is concerned with the government of others and the common good. We have already enumerated the integral parts which pertain to personal prudence.

Social prudence, however, admits of many other kinds according to the type of society or group under consideration: regnative prudence, military prudence, domestic prudence, political prudence, etc. These types can be studied in a manual of moral theology.

The potential parts of prudence are three in number, and they are concerned with those matters which are secondary or which lead to perfect prudence.

1) Good counsel differs from prudence in the sense that the latter commands and decides, whereas good counsel, as its name designates, merely advises what are the most apt means in view of a given end.

2) Common sense is also dispositive to the virtue of prudence, because it enables the individual to make the proper judgment according to common laws.

3) Perspicacity, which is intimately related to equity, enables an individual to make a judgment in those cases in which the law is not known, or its application fails because of certain circumstances, so that one must base a judgment on higher and more general principles.

Counsel is the gift which perfects the operation of the virtue of prudence. It is a supernatural habit by which the soul, under the inspiration and motivation of the Holy Ghost, judges rightly in particular events what ought to be done in view of its supernatural ultimate end.

Counsel is a true habit, although infused by God and operative under the Holy Ghost as the principal mover, thus resulting in a mode of action that is completely divine. While the virtue of prudence operates according to the dictates of reason enlightened by faith, the gift of counsel operates under the impulse of the Holy Ghost. Thus it often commands actions for which human reason would never be able to give an explanation, nor would human reason alone, even with the light of faith, be able of itself to come to such practical and particular judgments.

It is therefore evident that the gift of counsel is necessary in those cases in which an immediate judgment is required but there is neither the ability nor the opportunity to make the decision under the virtue of prudence, which works always in a human mode. For example, it is at times most difficult to know how to equate suavity with firmness, how to reconcile the necessity of guarding a secret with the obligation to speak the truth, the interior life with the apostolate, and affectionate love with perfect chastity. It is even more difficult for persons charged with government and administration; in religion, in the family, in civil and economic life; to be able at every instance to do that which is prudent. In many instances, the prudent action will have to be the result of the operation of the gift of counsel.

When the gift of counsel operates in souls, it produces marvellous effects, of which the principal ones are the following:

1) It preserves one from the danger of a false conscience.

2) It provides the solution to many difficult and unexpected situations and problems. If a soul is habitually faithful to grace and intent on doing all for the glory of God, the gift of counsel will frequently come into play when human reason, either alone or enlightened by faith, would be incapable of making the proper judgment. The solution may not be one which prudence would suggest or which reason would approve, but since it comes from the Holy Ghost working through the gift, it is always the right solution.

3) It inspires superiors with the most apt means for governing others. Prudence is not restricted to one's personal actions but is the primary virtue required for the government of others. Great indeed is the need for a delicate sense of judgment in the many difficult problems which are presented in the direction and government of others. Hence the gift of counsel is often necessary for the decisions and commands to be made by the religious superior, the spiritual director and even the parents of a family.

4) It increases one's docility to legitimate superiors. Strange as it may seem, the gift of counsel has as one of its most wonderful effects the beautiful practice of docility. God has determined that men should be governed by superiors in all the various phases of life, and the Holy Ghost, through the gift of counsel, inspires this subjection to lawful superiors. This spirit of docility, as we shall see, is one of the surest signs that a given revelation or vision is from God, for any mystical experience which inspires disobedience or rebellion cannot be from God.

St. Augustine assigns to the gift of counsel the fifth beatitude: blessed are the merciful. St. Thomas, however, maintains that this beatitude is related to counsel only in the sense that counsel pertains to things useful and proportionate to the end, and mercy is most proportionate to the end. In an executive or elicited sense, however, mercy belongs properly to the gift of piety. Again, there is no fruit which corresponds directly to the gift of counsel because counsel pertains to practical knowledge, which has no other fruit than the operation which it directs and in which it terminates. Nevertheless, since this gift is related to the works of mercy, one could say that it is related in a sense to the fruits of goodness and benignity.

St. Thomas assigns special vices in opposition to the speculative gifts of wisdom, understanding and science, but he assigns no special vices opposed to the practical gifts. Consequently, any vices opposed to the virtue of prudence will likewise be opposed to the gift of counsel: precipitation in acting on one's own human judgment when one should wait for the Holy Ghost; tenacity in holding to one's own judgment and depending on one's own efforts instead of deferring to the Holy Ghost; and procrastination when one should act immediately under the impulse of the gift but delays and loses the occasion for acting at all.

Apart from the general means for disposing oneself for the operation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, there are special predispositions necessary for the actuation of the gift of counsel:

1) To cultivate a profound humility, in order to recognise one's own weakness and ignorance, and thus have recourse to the Holy Ghost for light and guidance.

2) To proceed always with reflexion and without haste, realising that in some circumstances all possible human diligence is insufficient and that the Holy Ghost alone can perform the operation in us, although we must do what we can and not tempt God by waiting for divine and supernatural methods when our own strength under ordinary grace suffices.

3) To listen in silence to the voice of God, avoiding the noise and tumult of the world as much as possible.

4) To practice perfect docility and obedience to those whom God has placed over us in the Church, for there is nothing that so prevents the Holy Ghost from operating in us as does an independent and insubordinate spirit.

Our study of this important moral virtue will consider, not only the cardinal virtue itself, but its chief allied virtues (religion, piety and the gift of piety, observance, obedience). A word will also be said about some of the less important related virtues to complete our investigation of the wide and varied area of human activity which should be regulated by this hinge on which man's moral life turns.

The word justice is frequently used in Scripture as synonymous with sanctity, but as a special virtue it is a supernatural habit which inclines the will constantly and perpetually to render to each one that which is due strictly. (ST. II II q.58)

We say that justice is a constant and perpetual disposition of the will because a habit requires more than an occasional act of virtue. This virtue, moreover, perfects the will and not the intellect, for it pertains to the practical order of regulating one's relations with one's neighbours. Further, it pertains to those things which are due to another in the strict sense, unlike the virtues of charity, affability and gratitude, which are based on a certain fittingness and not on a strict obligation. Hence for justice there must always be present the three characteristics: reference to another, strict obligation and exact adequation (neither more nor less than what is owed).

After prudence, justice is the most excellent of all the moral virtues,although it is inferior to the theological virtues and even to the annexed virtue of religion. Its importance in both personal and social life is evident. It puts things in their right order and thus prepares the way for true peace, which St. Augustine defines as the tranquillity of order, and Scripture defines as the work of justice.

In every kind of justice two things are required in order that one may be called just in the full significance of the word: to refrain from evil toward one's neighbour and society, and to do the required good for one's neighbour and society. These two aspects are, therefore, the integral parts without which perfect justice is impossible. While it is important to stress the one aspect by stating that no one ever has any right to do wrong to his neighbour, it is likewise important to insist that justice demands that one render to his neighbour that which is due.

The Integral Parts. The close connection between the integral parts of justice and the first law of morality (do good; avoid evil) makes it evident that justice is essential for even natural human perfection. It is likewise required as the foundation for the perfection of charity, since it would be a strange paradox for an individual to attempt to operate according to the higher standard of charity when he ignores the demands of justice.

Moreover, it is important to realise that justice is not a purely negative virtue, not merely a matter of refraining from evil toward one's neighbour or from violating his rights. It requires, on the one hand, a rejection of such evil and, on the other hand, the faithful fulfilment of those obligations to which we are bound by various kinds of laws. And while it is generally true that it would be more serious to do evil than to omit doing the good to which we are obliged, in certain cases the sin of omission against justice is more serious by far than a sin of commission.

The virtue of justice admits of three species: legal justice, distributive justice and commutative justice.

Legal justice is the virtue which inclines the members of a society to render to that society what is due in view of the common good or goal of the society. It is called legal because it is based upon, and determined by, the laws of the society in question, which laws bind in conscience if they are just. And since the common good of society takes precedence over the particular good of any member of society, justice sometimes requires that the individual relinquish his personal goods in view of the well-being of the society as a whole.

Distributive justice is the virtue which inclines the person in charge of the distribution of goods or favours in a society to bestow these things proportionately to the dignity, merits or needs of each one. Although the titles of justice may vary with the goods or the persons involved, distributive justice works on the principle of rendering to each what is his due. Thus the distribution of goods should be according to the needs of each person, and the bestowal of favours or offices should be according to the merits or abilities of each one. And although one may think that justice is measurable in mathematical equality, when it is a question of distributive justice it is rather a question of proportion, with the result that strict equality of distribution would often be a injustice rather than justice.

Commutative justice is justice in the fullest sense of the word, since it has to do with the rights and duties of individual persons among themselves. It coincides almost exactly with the definition of justice itself: the constant and perpetual will of one individual person to render to another individual what is due in strict equality. Hence its transgression always involves the obligation to make restitution. It is violated by a great number of sins, such as homicide, calumny, injury, theft, damage and many others which are enumerated and explained in moral theology.

The potential parts of justice are those related virtues which are connected with justice by reason of one or another of its elements, namely, something owed to another by a strict obligation and in some measure of equality. On the other hand, these annexed virtues lack something of the perfect concept of justice, and for that reason they do not have the full force of justice. They are divided into two groups: those which fail through defect of the equality to be observed between what is given and what is received, and those which are not based on a title of a strict right on the part of the other party.

To the first group belong religion, which controls the cult due to God; piety, which regulates the duties to one's parents; and observance, dulia and obedience, which are concerned with one's obligations to superiors.

The second group is comprised of gratitude for benefits received, vindication or just punishment of the guilty, truth, affability and liberality in one's social contacts, and equity, which enables one to depart from the letter of the law in order to preserve its spirit. We shall discuss these virtues in particular, but first we shall indicate the principal means to be used for the growth and perfection of the virtue of justice in general.

Among the negative means of fostering the virtue of justice, we may mention the following:

1) To avoid even the slightest injustice. It is extremely easy to form a false conscience in the matter of justice, saying that one or another moral law has no importance, which opens the way to the commission of habitual venial sins. Granted that there may be smallness of matter in many instances, the evils to be sedulously avoided are the cultivation of a disdain for little things because they are little, and losing sight of the frequency of small justices which pave the way for a more serious fall.

2) To avoid contracting debts without necessity and to pay one's debts promptly. This is an excellent ascetical practice, namely, to learn to do without things which of themselves are non necessities. And when necessary debts have been contracted, the most important duty is to pay those debts owed in justice before contracting new ones.

3) To treat the possessions of others as carefully as one's own. Whether it be a question of things rented for use or shared in the family or religious community, it is common to find a lack of regard for the possessions of others. It is often the sign of selfishness if a person assumes the attitude that what is not his, need not be cared for.

4) To be extremely careful not to injure the good name of one's neighbour. One's good name is of much greater value than created goods, and yet it is often the least respected. How frequently one hears the saying that a certain fault of another is common knowledge and therefore there is no need to refrain from discussing it. Even worse is the frequency of rash judgment, ridicule, contumely, defamation, etc. One must always speak the truth when he speaks, but this does not mean that one always has the right to reveal the faults of others. Both in private conversation and in the modern newspapers and magazines many sins are committed against justice in this matter.

5) To avoid any kind of acceptance of persons, which means favouring them without sufficient reason or denying them their lawful rights. This is a sin against distributive justice; it is committed not only in civil society but even in some ecclesiastical and religious communities. The basic rule which should determine the distribution of offices and honours and the application of punishments should be simply to give to each individual what his merits or faults require in justice. As regards the distribution or assignment of offices, the objective consideration should usually be conclusive, namely, what does the given position or office require, and which person has the capacity and talents to fulfil the task? One of the surest safeguards of peace and harmony in any community or society is distributive justice on the part of the authorities or superiors.

The positive means for growing in justice can be determined under the headings of the three species of justice:

1) Commutative justice. To give to each his own is a basic rule for the observance of commutative justice. Nothing is small in the eyes of God, and everything good can be an occasion for growth in grace and holiness. One of the severest blows we can deliver to our own self-love is to maintain a delicate sense of justice toward each of our fellow men. This is not an area of like or dislike, of taste or feeling, but simply of doing what we are supposed to do, regardless of any other consideration.

2) Distributive justice. No superior is anything more than an administrator or steward in the eyes of God. Even more, he is the servant of those he governs. The common good of a society or community must be preserved at all costs, and this common good is not necessarily the selfish good of the majority; it is the good or goal for which the society exists as such. Consequently, the superior will always judge in favour of the society as a whole, and in the distribution of goods or offices he will seek the individual who will best contribute to that same common good of the society.

3) Legal justice. In a certain sense, the members of a society are the servants and stewards of that society. Every society has its common good or goal protected by the laws which will lead to the accomplishment of that goal.

In this sense, therefore, all the members of a society are bound in legal justice to comply with the laws which further the common good. Any movement of separation or rebellion is destructive of the society as such. Thus the citizen of a state, the member of the Church, the children in a family, and the religious in a religious institute must constantly keep in mind their obligations to the society to which they belong. They should be conscientious in fulfilling the laws of the society as perfectly as possible, unless special circumstances honestly allow for a dispensation of exemption.

While it is the proper domain of moral theology to discuss and examine the various virtues in particular, there are certain virtues annexed to justice which are so essential to growth in Christian perfection that they demand special treatment in any manual of the theology of Christian perfection. For that reason, we single out these virtues under justice which have a special importance for all those who are striving for the perfection of the Christian life and suggest that the reader refer to manuals of moral theology for a study of the remaining annexed virtues.

The virtue of religion may be defined as a moral virtue which inclines man to give to God the worship that is due Him as the first principle of all things.

It is the most important of all the virtues derived from justice, and in perfection it surpasses all the other moral virtues, including justice itself. This is by reason of the excellence of its object, which is the worship of God, and in this sense it closely approaches the theological virtues. (c¦ . ST. II II q.81 a.5) The material object of the virtue of religion comprises the internal and external acts by which we give worship to God; its formal object or motive is the supreme excellence of God as the first principle of all that exists.

Religion has various acts, both internal and external. The internal acts are devotion and prayer; the external acts are adoration, sacrifice, offerings, tithes, vows, oaths, adjuration and praise. (c¦ . ST. II II q.84)

Devotion consists in a promptness of will for giving oneself to the things that pertain to the service of God. Hence they are called devout who in some way devote themselves to God and remain completely subject to Him. The essential note and characteristic of devotion is promptness of will, ever disposed to give itself to the things that pertain to God's service. The truly devout are always available for the service of God.

But how, then, is the virtue of religion distinguished in this respect from the virtue of charity? If one seeks loving union with God, it is the act of devotion which proceeds from the virtue of religion, but under the imperation of charity.

Charity causes devotion because love makes us more prompt for the service of the one we love, and devotion increases charity because friendship is preserved and increased by our services for our friend. St. Thomas remarks that, as an act of religion, devotion always is directed to God and not to His creatures. Hence devotion to the saints should not terminate in the saints themselves,but it should pass through them to God. We venerate in the saints that which they have of God, that is to say, we venerate God in them.

It is evident from this how mistaken those persons are who attach their devotion, not only to a particular saint as an end in itself, but even to some particular image of a saint, without which they would have no devotion whatever. Priests and other persons who are entrusted with directing the piety of the faithful should never let these things occur under the pretext that the persons involved are ignorant, or that otherwise they would have no religion at all. It is necessary to instruct the faithful and to correct abuses.

The principal extrinsic cause of devotion is God, who calls those whom He wishes and inflames in their hearts the fire of devotion. But the intrinsic cause so far as it pertains to us in meditation on the divine goodness and the benefits received from God, together with the consideration of our misery, which excludes presumption and impels us to subject ourselves completely to God.

The most proper effect of devotion is to fill the soul with spiritual joy, even if it may sometimes cause sadness in respect to God.

Prayer is the second interior act of the virtue of religion. Unlike devotion, which is localised in the will, prayer pertains properly to the intellect. By reason of its extraordinary importance in the spiritual life, we have already dedicated an entire section to this matter.

Adoration is an external act of the virtue of religion by which we express the honour and reverence which is due to the divine excellence. (ST. II II q.84) Although of itself adoration prescinds from the presence of the body, for even angels adore God, in us, composed as we are of matter and spirit, it is usually manifested bodily.

Exterior adoration is an expression and an overflow of interior adoration, which is primary, and serves at the same time to arouse and preserve interior adoration. And because God is in all places,we can adore God both internally and externally in all places, although the most proper place is in His temple, because He resides there in a special manner. Moreover, the very atmosphere of a church or chapel helps to withdraw us from the noise and distractions of the world, while many holy objects contained there serve to arouse devotion, and the presence of other worshipers likewise nourishes the spirit of adoration.

Sacrifice is the principal act of the external and public worship of God; it consists in the external offering of a sensible thing, together with a real change or destruction of the thing, effected by the priest in honour of God, as a testimony of His supreme dominion and our complete submission to Him. (ST. II II q.85)

Under the New Testament there is no other sacrifice than the sacrifice of the Mass, which is the unbloody renewal of the sacrifice of Calvary. The Mass gives infinite glory to God and has superabundant value for drawing upon men all the graces which they need. We leave its consideration to our subject of liturgy.

Oblations signify the spontaneous offering of something for divine worship and for the veneration of God. There are two classes of oblations: one, by which something is offered for the honour of God, whether for His worship or for the sustaining of His ministers or the poor (e.g., the first fruits offered in ancient times,and modern collections for charitable causes); the other, that which is offered to the priest for his own use (e.g., tithes in ancient days, and the stipends offered in modern times for the celebration of Mass and other religious services).

The Church has the power to designate the amount of these offerings, but in many cases it is left to the custom which is prevalent in a given nation or diocese.

A vow is a free and deliberate promise made to God concerning some good which is possible and better than its contrary. When made under the proper conditions, it is an excellent act of religion, which increases the merit of one's good works by directing them to the worship and honour of God. By the same token, the voluntary transgression of a vow is a sin against religion, and if it pertains to a matter which is already forbidden by precept, it constitutes a second sin and must be declared as such in confession. If the vows which are broken pertain to a person publicly consecrated to God, the sin committed against religion is a sacrilege. Such is not the case, however, with the breaking of a private vow of chastity, although it would surely be a grave sin against the virtue of religion; of infidelity to God, and would have to be declared explicitly in confession. A detailed study of the vows pertains to the field of moral theology.

An oath is the invocation of the name of God in witness to the truth, and it cannot be taken except with truth, judgment and justice. Under these conditions it is an act of the virtue of religion. An oath may be assertory or promissory, depending on whether it is used to testify to some truth or to give assurance of the fulfilment of some promise. The validity, liceity, obligation, dispensation, etc., of a promissory oath coincide almost exactly with that of a vow.

Adjuration is an act of religion which consists in the invocation of the name of God or of some sacred thing to oblige another to perform or to cease performing some action. When performed with due respect and under the necessary conditions (truth, justice and judgment) it is licit and honest. The Church uses it principally in exorcisms against the devil. The invocation of God's holy name consists primarily in the external praise of the name of God in public or private worship as a manifestation of internal fervour. It is useful and fitting to accompany the invocation of the holy name of God with singing so that the souls of the weak may more readily be aroused to devotion.

Opposed to this act of religion by which one invokes the name of Gnd is the use of God's name in vain. The name of God is holy and should never be pronounced without due reverence and certainly never in vain or without cause. For that reason it is stated in Ecclesiasticus: "Let not your mouth form the habit of swearing, or becoming too familiar with the Holy Name. Just as a slave that is constantly under scrutiny will not be without welts, so one who swears continually by the Holy Name will not remain free from sin." (23; 9 - 11)

The principal sins opposed to the virtue of religion by way of excess can be classified under superstition, and those opposed by way of defect under various other names.

Superstition is a vice by which one offers to God a type of worship that is unworthy of Him, or renders to creatures that which belongs to God alone. The following are types of superstition:

1) unfitting worship of God by means of false or superfluous objects;

2) idolatry, which consists in giving to a creature the worship that is due to God;

3) divination, which consists in attempting to discover future events by means that are disproportionate or unsuitable;

4) vain observance, which consists in trusting in certain circumstances which are totally disproportionate or fortuitous (such as Friday the l3th) to conjecture about beneficial or adverse events, and governing one's own life or the lives of another by these conjectures.

The following vices are opposed to the virtue of religion by defect:

1) tempting God, which consists in asking or demanding, without respect for the divine majesty, the intervention of God in certain events, as if to put His omnipotence to the test, or to expect God's direct intervention in circumstances which are unworthy of Him. We tempt God whenever we expect His assistance without having done our part in those things which we can and ought to do.

2) Perjury, which consists in calling God as a witness to a falsehood; this is always a serious sin, even when the matter in which one perjures himself is only a small lie or the refusal to fulfill what has been promised under oath.

3) Sacrilege, which consists in the violation or profane treatment of something that is sacred, whether it be a person, place or some object.

4) Simony, which is the deliberate intention of buying or selling something that is intrinsically spiritual, such as the sacraments, or some material object which is inseparably united to something spiritual, such as a consecrated chalice.

This virtue, which is anolther potential part of justice, has for its object the regulation of the relationships of inferiors to superiors other than god, parents or the rulers in civil society; the regulation of these latter relationships pertains to the virtues of religion and piety respectively. Observance may be defined as that virtue by which we give due reverence and honor to those who possess some kind of special dignity. (ST. II II q.102)

Any person possessing a true dignity is deserving, by that very fact, of our respect and veneration. Thus the servant should respect his master, the soldier should respect his officers, the young should have reverence for the old, the student should respect his teacher, etc. The habitual attitude of reverence and respect toward those who surpass us by reason of some excellence or dignity proceeds basically from the virtue of observance. Persons who have positions of dignity deserve honour by reason of their excellence, and they deserve obedience from their subjects or inferiors by reason of the office which they hold over others.

For this reason, honour is due to any excellent person, but obedience is due only to those who have some kind of jurisdiction over us. Hence the virtue of observance is divided into two parts: honour and obedience. (ST. II II q.102 - 104)

As its name in Greek indicates, the word dulia (honour) in a strict sense consists in the honour and reverence which a servant owes to his master. In a wider sense, it signifies the honour which is due to any person who possesses some special dignity. And in the sense in which the word is commonly used by the Church, it signifies the honour and veneration due to the saints who now enjoy eternal happiness in heaven. By reason of her excellence above all the saints, the honour given to the Blessed Virgin is called hyperdulia, while the honour given to St. Joseph is sometimes called protodulia, signifying that the honour given to Mary is something more than simple dulia, and that St. Joseph is ranked as the first among all those who receive the simple veneration of dulia. In its philosophical meaning, the honour of dulia always presupposes some superiority or excellence in the person who is honoured. It is not necessary, however, that he be more excellent than the one who honours him, as long as he possesses some superiority over others (as when a general honours a captain as superior to a simple soldier), or even possesses some excellence in particular which is not possessed by the individual who honours him (as when the ruler of a nation honours a professor or scientist).

The honour or worship which is due to God (latria) may be merely interior, because God knows perfectly the movements of the human heart and mind. But the honour owed to human superiors must be manifested by some external sign or action, because they are to be honoured not only before God but also before men.

Obedience is a moral virtue which makes one's will prompt to carry out the commands of a superior. (ST. II II q.104 a.2) The word "commands" signifies, not only a precept which would oblige an individual in conscience, but also the simple will of the superior as manifested externally, either explicitly or tacitly. The obedience will be the more perfect as the individual is more prompt to execute the will of the superior even before an express command is given.

Moreover, one should not think that only religious are bound to practice obedience. All subjects of all legitimate superiors are obliged to obey authority, whether that authority be one's parents, the civil officials, the pastor in a parish, the teacher in a classroom, a military officer, one's employer, etc.

The basis of obedience is the authority of the superior, received directly or indirectly from God. Actually, it is God whom one obeys in the person of the lawful superior because, as St. Paul says, (Rom. 13; 1) all power comes from God. For that reason St. Paul adds that he who resists authority resists God. If one externally performs the act which has been commanded by a superior, but does so with internal rebellion, the obedience is purely material and is not a virtue in the strict sense of the word. Nevertheless, even material obedience suffices to avoid breaking the vow of obedience in case the subject is bound by vow. But when one obeys both internally and externally precisely because something has been commanded by a superior, the obedience is then called formal obedience and is an excellent act of virtue.

It follows from this that there are many acts which seem to be acts of obedience but actually are not so in the sight of God. Whenever a person performs the external act which has been commanded, but at the same time complains or criticises or rebels, the action has lost its essence as an act of the virtue of obedience. The same thing is true if one obeys exclusively out of an attachment or affection for the superior as a particular person, or because the command seems reasonable to us or suits our particular taste and liking, etc. In all of these cases the formal motive of obedience; the authority of the superior as representing God, is lacking, and for that reason, as the Angelic Doctor points out, there is no act of the supernatural virtue of obedience. (ST. II II q.104 a.2 ad.3) St. Thomas teaches that not even martyrdom would have any value if it were not directed to the fulfilment of the divine will. (ST. II II q.104 a.3)

As a virtue, obedience is inferior to the theological virtues. By reason of its object it is also inferior to some of the moral virtues (e.g., religion). But by reason of that which is sacrificed or offered to God, it is the most excellent of all the moral virtues, because through the other virtues one sacrifices external goods (poverty), corporal goods (virginity), or certain goods of the soul which are inferior to the human will, which is sacrificed in the virtue of obedience. For this reason St. Thomas does not hesitate to affirm that the religious life, primarily because of the vow of obedience, is a true holocaust offered to God.

The classical division of the grades or degrees of obedience is as follows:

a) mere external execution;

b) internal submission of the will;

c) submission of the internal judgment.

St. Ignatius Loyola explains these grades in an inspiring letter to the fathers and brothers of the Society in Portugal. The following outline gives the basic points of doctrine contained in the letter:

1) St. Ignatius desires that obedience should be the characteristic virtue of the Society because of the blessings produced by this virtue, because it is highly praised in Sacred Scripture,and because it is the compendium of all the other virtues. He states as the fundamental principle of obedience that one should see Christ in the superior, without thinking of the goodness or evil of the superior as an individual person.

2) Listing the grades of obedience, he states that the first is obedience of execution, which is of little value; the second grade is obedience of the will, which possesses the intrinsic value of the sacrifice of obedience, so that it is of great merit and it perfects man's free will; the third degree is obedience of the intellect. As regards obedience of the intellect, St. Ignatius states that it is possible because the will can control the intellect; it is just because it is reasonable to control one's judgment and to conform one's will to God's; it is necessary for the attainment of perfect subordination, for safeguarding oneself against the illusions of self-love, for preserving one's tranquillity in obedience, and for preserving union with God; and it is perfect obedience, because in this grade of obedience a man immolates that which is most excellent, which implies a marvellous victory over self.

3) Then the saint lists the general and particular means for achieving the third grade of obedience. The general means are humility and meekness. The particular means are to see God in one's superiors, to seek reasons in favour of the command that is given, and to accept the command blindly, that is, without any further inquiry, but with a docility similar to that which one should have in regard to matters of faith. This does not mean however, that it would be opposed to the perfection of obedience if one were to state reasons to the superior for desisting from that which has been commanded, as long as due conditions are observed. However, if a subject should make such a representation to his superior, he should do so with complete indifference and with full freedom.

4) In his final observation, St. Ignatius remarks that obedience also extends to those who have some charge or office under lawful authority. And he says that the prosperity of religious institutes depends on obedience because of the principle of subordination which applies to religious institutes. In his final exhortation he refers to the example of Christ in regard to obedience and the great reward that is earned through obedience.

The fundamental quality which comprises all the others is that obedience should be supernatural, that is, inspired by supernatural motives. Only then is obedience a truly Christian virtue. Obedience inspired by any purely human motive, however right and lawful in itself, cannot be supernatural. But in order that the supernatural quality of obedience may be augmented and preserved, we shall enumerate some of the more important characteristics of Christian obedience. We do not mean to imply that this list is exhaustive, but if one keeps in mind the fundamental quality which we have just mentioned, all the other characteristics of obedience will spring forth spontaneously.

1) A spirit of faith, by which the subject obeys and reveres his superior as another Christ, and looks upon the commands of the superior as coming from God Himself.

2) The firm conviction that by obeying lawful commands of superiors we are fulfilling the will of God, and that, although a superior may make a mistake in commanding, the subject never makes a mistake in obeying lawful commands.

3) Obedience out of love of God and acceptance of difficult or distasteful commands in a spirit of sacrifice.

4) Promptness in fulfilling the commands that are given, realising that we should not make Christ wait for our obedience but that we should be prompt to do His will.

5) A true devotion by which we give complete submission of our will to the superior as the representative of God.

6) Spontaneity and joy in obedience, and even the attempt to anticipate the desires of the superior, manifesting by our instant and joyful acceptance of commands that obedience makes us happy.

7) Humility and simplicity, so that we can perform the act of obedience as if it were the most natural thing in the world, without giving any attention to the heroism involved in our self-immolation.

8) Magnanimity, which gives virility to our obedience and provides us with the energy of heroes and the fortitude of martyrs.

9) Universality, so that at all times and to any superior whatever, we obey all commands without exception.

10) Perseverance, so that in times of joy or sorrow, in health or in sickness, regardless of any personal condition or taste, we would obey, realising that obedience gives power and that the obedient man shall speak of victory.

The blessings of obedience are very great, both for the intellect and the will, as well as for the heart. Obedience gives to the intellect a certitude that one knows and does the will of God. It gives the assurance of divine assistance, because God has promised that He would be with those who are obedient to His will. Obedience also gives certitude to the outcome of one's actions, because, as St. Paul says, "For those who love God all things work together unto good" (Rom. 8; 28).

Obedience is also the source of true liberty for the will, because there is nothing that so enslaves a man as attachment to his own will. It is likewise the source of fortitude; to obey to the point of heroism one needs great valour. And it is the guarantee of one's perseverance in good.

As regards the heart, obedience gives peace and tranquillity, which can come only from doing the will of God. It preserves right order in the life of the individual and in the community, because the best assurance of order is found in the subjection of inferiors to superiors.

It is, finally, one of the greatest safeguards against scrupulosity; for that reason, one of the first demands that the spiritual director must make of a scrupulous penitent is that he give complete obedience to all commands.

Without reaching the excess of formal disobedience, there are many actions which constitute a falsification or deformation of the virtue of obedience. The following are some of the principal manifestations:

1) Routine or mechanical obedience; the purely external act of obedience, without any internal spirit. One acts like a machine or a robot, and may perform the external act with the greatest precision and perfection, but he lacks the proper attention and awareness of the supernatural motive for his obedience, or he may even lack the supernatural motive entirely.

2) Legal obedience; the obedience of the person who is constantly referring to a law or rule, in order to know how far his obedience extends, or to check lest the superior exceeds his authority in commanding. Such persons are pharisaical, and very often lack the generosity of spirit which should prompt them to obey out of love.

3) Critical obedience; the obedience of those who recognise the superior's authority and obey him, but constantly find fault with the superior for being unsympathetic, too rigorous, too impulsive, lacking in tact, etc. Such persons obey the superior and at the same time criticise him for his personal defects, thus predisposing themselves to lose respect for the authority of the superior, and even to disobey him.

4) Paralysed obedience; one does not have the occasion to practice formal obedience because the superior does not dare to give commands, or is too lax or indifferent in the discharge of his duties. This defect on the part of the superiors is more frequently noticed in communities of men than in communities of women, and it is likewise true in family life in many instances. However, it is not always due to incompetent superiors. There are some subjects who do not obey because, for one reason or another, they find reasons to excuse themselves from carrying out commands that are given, or they obtain all permissions by bending the will of the superior to their own.

5) Pseudo-mystical obedience; the individual who disobeys the superior under the pretext of obeying the Holy Ghost. This is pure illusion because the general norm of obedience is that we are bound to obey the lawful commands of legitimate superiors.

6) Camouflaged disobedience; the art of inducing the superior, by means of excuses and objections, to withdraw his commands or to modify them.

7) Paradoxical obedience; the pretence of giving obedience to a superior while one does his own will, or even imposes his will upon the superior. This defect is frequently noted in those communities in which the superior has special friends in the community, or is afraid to govern as he ought.

8) Pharisaical obedience; an obedience in which one performs the act commanded but does not submit his will. This is a combination of cowardice and hypocrisy.

9) The spirit of opposition; the existence of groups or parties within a community which are opposed to the superior and are usually waging a constant war against the superior. This is a diabolical spirit, which sows the seeds of discord and division in the community.

10) Egoistic obedience; inspired by the desire to win the sympathy and affection of the superior and to obtain from him the duties or commands which are in accordance with one's own tastes and desires.

11) The spirit of murmuring; the obedience of him who accepts unwillingly the commands of his superiors and murmurs interiorly or sometimes complains to others about the superior or the task assigned.

12) Half hearted obedience; the imperfect or careless execution of orders. This is sometimes malicious, as in the case of those who do not wish to obey and therefore deliberately perform their tasks badly so that the superior will change the assignment.

13) Slothful obedience; the neglect to fulfil commands without sufficient reason. Such persons must be commanded repeatedly before they perform the task, and when they finally do it, it is often done badly because they had no desire to do it in the first place. Such are the principal falsifications and defects in the practice of the virtue of obedience. With good reason did Christ say to St. Catherine of Siena: "My dear daughter, how numerous they are who live in the practice of obedience, but how few they are who obey perfectly." But those who obey perfectly offer to God a sacrifice of praise which rises to heaven with the odour of sweetness because of the perfect immolation of their self-love.

The word "fortitude" can be understood in two principal senses. The first sense signifies in general a certain firmness of spirit and vigour of character, general conditions which must accompany all virtues if they are to be truly such. In the second sense it designates a special virtue, bearing the same name, which we shall here study in itself, in its parts and with its accompanying gift of the Holy Ghost.

As a special supernatural virtue, fortitude is infused with sanctifying grace to strengthen the irascible appetite and the will so that they will not abandon the pursuit of the arduous or difficult good, even when faced with grave danger to bodily health and life.

This virtue has as its proper subject the irascible appetite, because it is especially concerned with the control of fear and daring. However, it is necessary to mention the will because this faculty must intervene if fortitude is to be a true virtue, although the will itself is not the proper faculty in which fortitude resides.

As regards the movements of fear and daring, fortitude has for its object to prevent unreasonable fear in the face of an evil that threatens, and to restrain the individual from unreasonably attacking an impending evil. Since the greatest natural evil is the loss of one's life, the virtue of fortitude is principally concerned with the fear of death.

The two acts by which fortitude manifests itself in the external order are to attack and to endure. Since man's life on earth is a constant warfare, there will be occasions in which the individual is called upon to defend the good by means of attack, and there will be times in which the individual cannot attack but must resist by not yielding.

Of the two acts of fortitude, the principal and most difficult act is to resist or to endure. Contrary to common opinion, it is more painful and more heroic to resist an enemy or to suffer an evil than to attack.

Psychologically it is easier to attack an evil, especially when the passion of anger has been aroused. But to suffer sickness or persecution or death with a tranquil and sturdy spirit requires the fortitude of a hero. For that reason the Greek drama portrayed the hero of the tragedy as a man who knew how to accept death courageously, and Christians have always considered the martyrs as the outstanding examples of Christian fortitude.

Fortitude is especially manifested in sudden and unexpected events. It is evident that one who spontaneously reacts with courage in the face of an unexpected danger or evil has greater fortitude than he who so reacts only after deliberation.

Fortitude is an important and excellent virtue, although it is not the greatest of the moral virtues. The good of reason; the object of every virtue, pertains essentially to prudence, effectively to justice, and only defensively (in the sense of removing obstacles) to fortitude and temperance. But of the last two virtues, fortitude is the more excellent because, in the pursuit of the good, it is more difficult to overcome the dangers of death than the delights of the sense of touch.

Consequently, in the order of their perfection, the cardinal virtues are listed in the following sequence: prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance. In its double activity of attacking and resisting evil, fortitude plays an important role in the spiritual life. There are countless obstacles and difficulties to be overcome along the road which leads to perfection. To succeed in reaching the goal, one must resolutely begin the journey to perfection, he must not be surprised at the presence of the enemy, he must have courage to attack and conquer when prudence dictates, and he must have the constancy and perseverance to carry on without ever surrendering to the enemy. And even when one has made great progress in the spiritual life and has achieved a moral victory over the enemy, fortitude will still be necessary in order to endure the passive purgations which are sent by God to test and strengthen and purify the spirit.

Three vices are opposed to the virtue of fortitude. By defect of the virtue one falls into the vice of cowardice and refuses to suffer the necessary hardships which accompany the pursuit of the good or the dangers of death. By excess one falls into the vices of fearlessness or recklessness. As a vice, fearlessness is a kind of insensitivity or indifference to fear, which prevents an individual from prudently fearing and avoiding the dangers which he ought to avoid. Recklessness causes the individual to disdain the prudent judgment or right reason and to go forth to attack an evil which he cannot overcome. In both cases there is involved a lack of prudence.

The virtue of fortitude has no subjective parts or species, because it deals with a very particular matter which cannot be further subdivided.

There are, however, integral and potential parts of fortitude. They refer to the same virtues materially but are differentiated by the fact that the integral parts of fortitude refer to the dangers of death and the potential parts or annexed virtues refer to lesser dangers.

The virtues in question are magnanimity, magnificence, patience, longsuffering, perseverance and constancy.

Magnanimity is a virtue which inclines one to perform some great act which is worthy of honour. This virtue always looks to actions which are great and splendid. It is therefore incompatible with mediocrity, and in this sense it is the crown of all the other virtues. The virtue of magnanimity presupposes a noble and lofty soul. It is often described as greatness of soul or nobility of character.

There are four vices opposed to magnanimity, three by excess and one by defect.

The following vices are the result of excessive magnanimity: presumption, which inclines an individual to attempt actions or projects that are beyond his strength or ability; ambition, which impels one to seek honours which are not due to his state or merit; vainglory, which seeks fame and popularity without sufficient reason, or without directing them to their true end, which is the glory of God and the good of one's neighbour.

As a capital sin vainglory is the cause of many others sins, especially disobedience, boastfulness, hypocrisy, contention, obstinacy, discord and love of novelties.

The vice which results from a deficiency of magnanimity is that of pusillanimity. This vice is characterised by an unreasonable lack of confidence in oneself, or by a false humility which prevents the individual from using all the talents which he has received from God. It is contrary to the natural law, which obliges all beings to develop and perfect themselves by using all the talents and energies which God has given them.

Magnificence is a virtue which inclines one to undertake splendid and difficult projects without being disheartened by the magnitude of the work or the great expenses which are connected with it. It differs from magnanimity in the sense that the latter tends to that which is great in any virtue or material, while magnificence pertains only to those great works in which something is to be constructed in a material sense, such as the foundation or construction of hospitals, universities, churches, etc. In other words, while magnanimity is concerned with doing, magnificence is concerned with making or producing.

In a sense, magnificence is a virtue which should characterise the wealthy, who could scarcely find any better use for their riches than to devote them to the worship of God or the corporal works of mercy for their neighbour.

The two vices opposed to magnificence are meanness and wastefulness. In the first case, the individual intend some magnificent work, but he holds back on the expenditure of money because he is unwilling to spend that which the work requires. He fails to observe the proportion which reason demands between the expenditure and the work. (ST. II II q.135 a.1) Wastefulness, on the other hand, involves the expenditure of money far in excess of that which the work requires. It is a vice because it neglects to observe the due proportion which reason requires between the work and the expenditure, spending a great deal of money when the work could have been done with much less.

Patience enables one to bear physical and moral sufferings without sadness of spirit or dejection of heart. It is one of the most necessary virtues in the Christian life, because the trials and sufferings which all men must inevitably suffer in this life require the assistance of some virtue to keep them strong and firm lest they yield to discouragement and sorrow. Many souls lose the merit of their trials and sufferings because they fail to exercise the virtue of patience. Indeed, they suffer even more than they would have suffered because of their lack of conformity to the will of God.

The principal motives for the practice of Christian patience are the following:

1) Conformity with the loving will of God, who knows better than we the things that are good for us and therefore sometimes sends us suffering and tribulation.

2) The recollection of the suffering of Jesus and Mary, incomparable models of patience, and the sincere desire to imitate Them.

3) The necessity of making reparation for our sins by the voluntary and virtuous acceptance of suffering in atonement for the unlawful satisfactions and pleasures which we have enjoyed in our sins.

4) The necessity of co-operating with Christ in the application of the fruits of redemption, bearing our sufferings in union with His in order to make up what is wanting to His passion.

5) The prospect of an eternity of happiness which awaits us if we know how to suffer in patience. The suffering passes, but the fruit of having sanctified our suffering will never pass. As with the virtue of humility, so also with patience we distinguish various grades or degrees which give some indication of the perfection of the virtue in individual Christians.

The following constitute five fundamental degrees of patience:

1) Resignation without complaint or impatience to the crosses which God sends us or permits to come to us.

2) Peace and serenity in the face of affliction, without any of the sadness or melancholy which sometimes accompany mere resignation.

3) Sweet acceptance of one's cross for the love of God.

4) Complete and total joy, which leads one to give thanks to God for being associated with Him in the mystery of the Cross.

5) The folly of the Cross, which prefers suffering to pleasure and places all one's delight in external or internal suffering by which one is configured with Christ. As St. Teresa used to say: "To suffer or to die."

Two vices are opposed to the virtue of patience. By way of defect, impatience manifests itself externally by anger, complaints and murmuring, and internally by a feeling of antipathy to any trial or suffering, and an excessive inclination to defend oneself or to protect oneself against all discomfort. By way of excess, insensibility or hardness of heart is manifested in those who remain stoically unmoved and insensible in the face of suffering, whether it be their own or that of another.

Some individuals, because of their temperament, have a strong natural predisposition to impatience; others become impatient as the result of the lack of some other virtue, such as fraternal charity, obedience, prudence, temperance, humility, etc.

As regards the vice of insensibility, it should be noted that a purely stoical attitude toward suffering is not of itself a virtue, and that it is no defect of patience if a person is sensitive to pain. The ability to suffer is not of itself virtuous; what makes suffering a virtue is the manner in which one accepts the suffering and the motive for which he suffers.

According to St. Thomas, longanimity is a virtue which animates a man to strive for some good which is a long way off. It has to do with the attainment of some goal which involves a great deal of time. St. Thomas explains the connection of longanimity with the virtue of patience on two grounds: First, because patience, like fortitude, suffer certain evils for the sake of good, and if the good is awaited for only a short time, endurance is easier; but if the good be delayed for a long time, it is more difficult. Secondly, because the delay in attaining the good we desire is of a nature to cause sorrow. ... Accordingly, longanimity and constancy are both contained under patience, so far as both the delay of the expected good (longanimity) and the effort which a man expends in persistently accomplishing a good work (constancy) may be considered under the one aspect of grievous evil. (ST. II II q.136 a.5)

The virtue of perseverance inclines one to persist in the practice of the good in spite of the difficulties involved in this continued practice. To remain unmoved and resolute in the practice of virtue from day to day requires a fortitude of spirit which is provided by this virtue. All the virtues need the help of perseverance, because without it no virtue could be preserved and practiced over a long period of time, nor would any virtue ultimately attain its perfection.

Although every virtue is by definition a habit of operation which is difficult to remove and is, therefore, of itself a persistent and stable quality, the special difficulty which arises from a life-long fidelity in the practice of any given virtue requires the special virtue of perseverance.

Thus we see how one virtue comes to the aid of another. However, the virtue of perseverance, even when perfected, requires a special assistance of grace which theologians call the grace of perseverance.

St. Thomas briefly summarises the difference between this virtue and the grace required for its exercise: Perseverance has a double meaning.

First, it denotes the habit of perseverance which is a virtue. And as a virtue, it requires the gift of habitual grace as do the other infused virtues.

Secondly, it may be understood as signifying the act of perseverance which endures until death, and in this sense it requires not only habitual grace but also the gratuitous help of God, which sustains man in good until the end of life.

The reason for the necessity of a special grace from God to insure man's final perseverance is that sanctifying or habitual grace does not change man's free will, in the sense that grace alone is a guarantee that the just man will never sin. However just and however perfect a man may be, he is always able to sin, and for that reason he needs, over and above the infused virtue of perseverance, the special grace of final perseverance which the Council of Trent calls "that great gift." (Dz. 826)

Constancy is closely related to the virtue of perseverance, but is distinguished from the latter by reason of a special difficulty to be overcome. The essential note of perseverance is that it gives firmness and strength of soul in the face of the difficulty which is connected with the prolongation of a virtuous life; constancy strengthens the soul against the difficulties that proceed from any other external obstacle, such as the influence of bad example or special temptations from without. "Perseverance," says St. Thomas, "takes precedence over constancy as a part of fortitude, because the difficulty involved in the continuation of an action is more intrinsic to the act of virtue than that which arises from external obstacles." (ST. II II q.137 a.3)

These are inconstancy (which St. Thomas calls effeminacy or softness) and pertinacity. Inconstancy causes a man to give up the practice of virtue as soon as difficulties and obstacles are encountered. There is, therefore, a certain softness and instability or fickleness to be found in inconstant persons. The tendency to desist from the pursuit of a good which is difficult to attain, as is the faithful practice of a virtue, is especially manifested in effeminate persons, because they are specially attracted to pleasures, and as soon as pleasures are lacking in any given activity, their first impulse is to abandon that activity.

The vice of pertinacity is opposed by excess to the virtue of perseverance, and is defined as an obstinacy in the refusal to yield or to cease some effort when right reason requires it. As a vice, it is often found in those persons who are self-opinionated and headstrong, but its origin is usually vainglory. (ST. II II q.138 a.2)

Quite frequently the reason why an individual persists in his own opinion, or refuses to abandon some effort or work when reason demands, is because he wishes to make a show of his talents and abilities. In this sense the pertinacious man takes a certain pleasure in persisting unreasonably against difficulties and opposition.

The principal means of growth in the virtue of fortitude and in those virtues related to it are the following:

1) Constantly to beg it of God, for although it is true that this is a general means which applies to all the virtues, since every supernatural gift comes from God (James 1; 17), when it is a question of the virtue of fortitude we need the special assistance of God, due to the laxity and weakness of our human nature, wounded by sin. Without the help of God, we can do nothing (John 15; 5), but with His help we can do all things (Phil. 4; 13). For the son Scripture repeatedly insists on the necessity of asking help from who is our strength: "You are my rock and my fortress" (Ps. 30; 4). God of Israel ... gives power and strength to his people" (Ps. 67; 3)

2) To foresee the difficulties which we shall encounter on the path of virtue, St. Thomas recommends this practice to all Christians, and especially to who have not yet acquired the habit of working with fortitude. (ST. II II q.123 a.9) In this way one gradually overcomes his fear, and when difficulties actually arise, he will overcome them much more easily because he has anticipated them.

3) To accept with a generous spirit the little annoyances of daily life. Every vocation in life is accompanied with its own particular crosses and difficulties, even if it be merely a matter of the monotony of one's daily activities. If we do not learn to accept the inevitable inconveniences and small trials of daily life, such as cold and heat, pain and discomfort, small illnesses and aches, contradictions and ingratitude, we shall never make any progress in cultivating the Christian virtue of fortitude.

4) To meditate frequently on the passion and death of Christ. There is nothing which so animates and comforts delicate souls as the contemplation of the heroism of Christ. He was a man of sorrows and was acquainted with infirmities (Isa. 53; 3), and He left us an example of suffering so that we would follow in His footsteps. We shall never have to suffer in our sinful bodies any pains comparable to those which He voluntarily suffered out of love for us. However great our sufferings of soul or body, we can raise our eyes to the crucifix, and Christ will give us the fortitude to bear them without bitterness and without complaining. It is likewise helpful to remember the ineffable sorrows of Mary, of whom it is said: "Come, all you who pass by the way look and see whether there is any suffering like my suffering" (Lam. 1; 1

5) To intensify our love of God. Love is as strong as death (Cant. 8; 6) and it does not yield to any obstacle in the pursuit of pleasing the beloved. That is what gave St. Paul the superhuman fortitude by which he overcame tribulation, anguish, persecution, hunger, danger and the sword. "But in all these things we overcome, because of him who has loved us" (Rom. 8: 37). When one truly loves God, there are no longer any difficulties in serving Him, and one's very weakness becomes the basis for hoping in Him. "Gladly therefore I will glory in my infirmities, that the strength of Christ may dwell in me. ... For when I am weak, then I am strong" (2 Cor. 12; 9 - 10).

The gift of fortitude is a supernatural habit which strengthens the soul for the practice, under the movement of the Holy Ghost, of every type of virtue, with invincible confidence of overcoming any dangers or difficulties that may arise.

Like the other gifts and infused virtues, the gift of fortitude is a supernatural habit. Its precise function is to elevate the powers of the soul to a divine plane. The operations of this gift, as of the other gifts, is always under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, in such wise that the soul does not reason or discourse, but acts by a kind of instinctive interior impulse which proceeds directly from the Holy Ghost. And although the virtue of fortitude has the same name as the gift by which it is perfected, the gift extends to all the heroic actions of the other virtues, because this heroism demands an extraordinary fortitude which is beyond the power of the virtue alone. Therefore, the gift of fortitude, since it extends to the acts of various virtues, requires in its turn to be directed by the gift of counsel.us One of the clearest marks of distinction between the virtue of fortitude and the gift of fortitude is the confidence which one experiences in being able to overcome great dangers and difficulty. It is true that the virtue of fortitude gives strength to the soul for overcoming obstacles, but it is the gift alone which imparts the confidence of success. _9

The gift of fortitude is absolutely necessary for the perfection of the infused virtues, especially the virtue of fortitude, and sometimes it is required for perseverance in the state of grace. As to the perfection of the other virtues by the gift of fortitude, we should recall that a virtue is called perfect when its act springs from the soul with energy, promptness and perseverance. The continued perfection in any virtue is manifestly supernatural, and it can be explained only by the supernatural mode of operation of the gift of fortitude. Thus the perfection of any of the virtues will at some time or other require the operation of the gift of fortitude.

As regards the perfection of the virtue of fortitude, St. Thomas explains that, although the virtue of fortitude strengthens the soul against every kind of difficulty and danger, it cannot extend to all possible situations as long as it operates in the purely human mode of reason enlightened by faith. It is necessary that the gift of fortitude remove from the virtue of fortitude all fear and indecision, so that it can be subjected directly to the divine mode of action which is imparted by the Holy Ghost.

As regards the necessity of the gift of fortitude for perseverance in the state of grace, there are occasions in the lives of most Christians when they are confronted, suddenly and inexorably, with the decision either to practice heroic virtue in a given instance or to commit a mortal sin. If the virtue of fortitude in a given Christian is not sufficiently perfect, it will be necessary that the gift of fortitude come into play so that the individual will have the supernatural strength to perform the act of heroic virtue. Moreover, by the very fact that some of these violent temptations are sudden and unexpected, while the operation of the virtues of prudence and fortitude is usually slow and discursive, one will need the prompt intervention of the gifts of counsel and fortitude. It is precisely on this point that St. Thomas bases his teaching on the necessity of the gifts of the Holy Ghost for eternal salvation. (ST. I II q.68 a.2)

Of the remarkable effects which the gift of fortitude produces in the soul, the following are the principal ones:

1) It gives the soul a relentless vigoro in the practice of virtue. This is an inevitable result of the supernatural mode by which the virtue of fortitude operates when under the influence of the gift of fortitude. At such times the soul does not feel any weakness or lack of confidence in the practice of virtue. It may suffer from the obstacles and dangers which it encounters, but it proceeds against them with supernatural energy in spite of all difficulties. That is the reason why St. Teresa placed great emphasis on the necessary disposition of soul for the practice of perfect fortitude:

The effects of the gift of fortitude in respect to the vigour which it bestows are both interior and exterior. Internally there is a vast area of a generosity and sacrifice which frequently reaches the point of heroism. There are incessant struggles against the temptations of the devil and self-love. Externally there are magnificent victories against error and vice; sometimes the body itself, sharing in the effect of a truly divine fortitude, abandons itself with ardour to the practice of the most heroic mortification, or suffers without flinching the most cruel agonies and pains. The gift of fortitude is, therefore, the true principle and source of great things which are undertaken or suffered for the love of God.

2) It completely overcomes all lukewarmness in the service of God. This is a natural consequence of the superhuman energy which is imparted to the soul by the gift of fortitude. Lukewarmness is like a tuberculosis of the soul which retards many persons on the way to perfection. It is due almost always to a lack of vigour and fortitude in the practice of virtue. Lukewarm souls consider that it is too much of an effort to have to conquer themselves in so many things and to maintain their spirit from one day to another in the monotonous fulfilment of the details of their daily obligations. The majority of such souls give in to weariness and renounce the battle, with the result that henceforth they live a purely mechanical life of routine, if indeed they do not turn their back completely on the life of virtue and abandon the pursuit of perfection. Only the gift of fortitude, which strengthens the power of the soul in a supernatural way, is an efficacious remedy against lukewarmness in the service of God.

3) It makes the soul intrepid and valiant in every type of danger or against every kind of enemy. This is another of the great effects of the gift of fortitude and is particularly marked in the lives of the saints. The apostles themselves, gentle and meek by nature, and even cowards when abandoned by their Master on the eve of Good Friday, presented themselves once more to the world on Pentecost Sunday with a superhuman fortitude and courage. They were then afraid of no one, for they realised that it was necessary to obey God rather than man. They confessed the teachings of Christ and sealed their apostolate with their own blood. All of this was the supernatural effect of the gift of fortitude, which the apostles received in all its plenitude on the first feast of Pentecost. In addition to the apostles, we have countless examples of saints who have been raised up by God throughout the centuries to give testimony to His doctrine of love, to combat the enemies of His Church, and in many instances to lay down their lives for Christ. From the earliest days of the Church and the ages of persecution to our own century, there have been men and women and even children who have manifested in their lives the power and the valour that are imparted to holy souls by the gift of fortitude.

4) It enables souls to suffer extreme pain with patience and joy. Although resignation is a praiseworthy virtue, it is nevertheless imperfect, and the saints do not manifest it in their lives once they have reached the perfection of virtue. We mean by this that, in a strict sense, the saints did not resign themselves to suffering; rather, they sought it voluntarily. Sometimes this "folly of the Cross" was manifested in extraordinary and terrifying acts of penance, as in the case of Mary Magdalen, Henry Suso, Peter of Alcantara, etc. At other times it found expression in the heroic patience with which holy souls endured the greatest conceivable sickness and pain, their faces radiant with joy, as in the case of St. Theresa of Lisieux, who said that she had reached a point in which she could no longer suffer because all suffering had become sweet to her. This is the language of heroism which proceeds directly from the intense operation in the soul of the gift of fortitude.

5) It gives the soul the quality of heroism in great things and in small things. No greater fortitude is required to suffer the martyr's death at one stroke than to endure without failing the prolonged martyrdom of the heroic practice of virtue and the fulfilment of one's daily duties to the smallest detail. This principle is valid for every state of life, and it is a point which should be preached more frequently to the faithful. Given the weakness and instability of human nature, it is evident that for most people the most difficult test of fortitude consists in faithful perseverance in the performance of even the smallest duties of one's state in life.

Applying this doctrine to the religious life, Father Philipon makes the following observations: