The Necessity of Actual Grace — Article 3: The Three States (Theses IV–V)
Theological note: de fide
b) The threads of Tradition run together in the hands of St. Augustine, who has written a special treatise On the Gift of Perseverance.1
His main argument is based on the necessity of prayer. “Why,” he asks, “is that perseverance asked for from God, if it is not given by God? Is it a mocking petition inasmuch as that is asked of Him which it is known He does not give, but, although He gives it not, is in man’s power? … Or is not that perseverance, perchance, asked for from Him? He who says this, is not to be rebuked by my arguments, but must be overwhelmed with the prayers of the saints. Is there indeed one among them who do not ask for themselves from God that they may persevere in Him, when in that very prayer which is called the Lord’s—because the Lord taught it—whenever it is prayed by the saints, scarcely anything else is understood to be prayed for but perseverance?”2 He then proceeds to show, in accordance with St. Cyprian’s little treatise On the Lord’s Prayer, that the seven petitions of the “Our Father” are all prayers for perseverance, and concludes as follows: “Truly in this matter let not the Church look for laborious disputations, but consider her own daily prayers. She prays that the unbelieving may believe; therefore God converts to the faith. She prays that believers may persevere; therefore God gives perseverance to the end.”3 And again: “For who is there that would groan with a sincere desire to receive what he prays for from the Lord, if he thought that he received it from himself and not from the Lord?”4
c) From this teaching flows a corollary of great practical importance, to wit: The grace of final perseverance cannot be merited by good works, but it can be obtained by pious and unremitting prayer.
“This gift of God,” says St. Augustine, speaking of final perseverance, “may be obtained suppliantly [by prayer], but when it has been given, it cannot be lost contumaciously.”5 And again: “Since it is manifest that God has prepared some things to be given even to those who do not pray for them, such as the beginning of faith, and other things not to be given except to those who pray for them, such as perseverance unto the end, certainly he who thinks that he has this latter from himself, does not pray to obtain it.”6
Between merit (meritum) and prayer (oratio, preces) there is this great difference, that merit appeals to God’s justice, prayer to His mercy. If man were able to merit final perseverance by good works (meritum de condigno), God would be in justice bound to give him this precious grace. But this is plainly incompatible with the Catholic conception of final perseverance.
It may be asked: Is God determined by the meritum de congruo inherent in all good works to grant the gift of final perseverance as a reward to the righteous? Theologians are at variance on this point. Ripalda7 thinks that this is the case at least with the more conspicuous good works performed in the state of grace. Suarez modifies this improbable contention somewhat by saying that prayer alone can infallibly guarantee final perseverance.8 Our prayers are infallibly heard if we address the Father through Jesus Christ, because Christ has promised: “If you ask the Father anything in my name, he will give it you.”9 To insure its being infallibly heard, prayer for perseverance must be made in the state of grace and unremittingly. True, Christ did not make sanctifying grace a necessary condition of efficacious prayer. But, as Suarez points out, prayer cannot be infallibly efficacious unless it proceeds from one who is in the state of grace, because the moral conditions that render it efficacious are found only in that state.10 As to the second point, if we say that prayer for perseverance must be unremitting, we mean, in the words of the same eminent theologian, that it must continue throughout life and must be made with becoming trustfulness and zeal, especially when there is a duty to be fulfilled or a temptation to be overcome.11
Readings:—Suarez, De Gratia, l. I-II.—*Tricassin, O. Cap., De Necessaria ad Salutem Gratia.—Byonius, De Gratiae Auxiliis, in Becanus, Theologia Scholastica, Rouen, 1658.—Scheeben, Natur und Gnade, Mainz 1861.—Idem, Dogmatik, Vol. III, § 292-298, Freiburg 1882.—*Palmieri, De Gratia Divina Actuali, thes. 19-29, Gulpen 1885.—Oswald, Lehre von der Heiligung, § 9-11, 3rd ed., Paderborn 1885.—Tepe, Institutiones Theologicae, Vol. III, pp. 8-51, Paris 1896.—*Heinrich-Gutberlet, Dogmatische Theologie, Vol. VIII, § 396-416, Mainz 1897.—Chr. Pesch, Praelectiones Dogmaticae, Vol. V, 3rd ed., pp. 32 sqq., Freiburg 1908.—Schiffini, De Gratia Divina, disp. 2, Freiburg 1901.
On St. Augustine and his teaching cfr. *J. Ernst, Werke und Tugenden der Ungläubigen nach Augustinus, Freiburg 1871.—F. Wörter, Die Geistesentwicklung des hl. Augustinus bis zu seiner Taufe, Paderborn 1898.—Wolfsgruber, Augustinus, Paderborn 1898.—Boucat, Theologia Patrum Dogmatico-Scholastico-Positiva, disp. 3, Paris 1718.—*Zaccaria, Dissert. de Adiutorio sine quo non, in the Thesaurus Theol., Vol. V, Venice 1762.—O. Rottmanner, O. S. B., Geistesfrüchte aus der Klosterzelle, München 1908.
On the heresy of Pelagianism cfr. *F. Wörter, Der Pelagianismus nach seinem Ursprung und seiner Lehre, Freiburg 1874.—F. Klasen, Die innere Entwicklung des Pelagianismus, Freiburg 1882.—Schwane, Dogmengeschichte, Vol. II, 2nd ed., § 60, Freiburg 1895.—H. Zimmer, Pelagius in Irland, Berlin 1901.—Warfield, Two Studies in the History of Doctrine, New York 1897.—Tixeront, Histoire des Dogmes, Vol. II, 2nd ed. Paris 1909 (English tr., St. Louis 1914).—Pohle in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XI, pp. 604-608.
On Semi-Pelagianism cfr. Suarez, De Gratia, Prolegom., V, 5 sqq.—Livinus Meyer, De Pelag. et Semipelag. Erroribus.—Wiggers, Geschichte des Semipelagianismus, Hamburg 1835.—A. Hoch, Lehre des Johannes Cassianus von Natur und Gnade, Freiburg 1895.—*A. Koch, Der hl. Faustus, Bischof von Riez, Stuttgart 1895.—Fr. Wörter, Zur Dogmengeschichte des Semipelagianismus, Münster 1900.—Sublet, Le Semipélagianisme, Namur 1897.—Tixeront, Histoire des Dogmes, Vol. II, 2nd ed., Paris 1909 (English tr., St. Louis 1914).—Pohle in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XIII, pp. 703-706.
On Jansenism cfr. *Steph. Dechamps, De Haeresi Ianseniana, Paris 1645.—Ripalda, De Ente Supernaturali, Vol. III: “Contra Baium et Baianos,” Cologne 1648.—Duchesne, Histoire du Baianisme, Douai 1731.—*Linsenmann, Michael Bajus und die Grundlegung des Jansenismus, Tübingen 1867.—A. Schill, Die Konstitution Unigenitus, ihre Veranlassung und ihre Folgen, Freiburg 1876.—Ingold, Rome et France: La Seconde Phase du Jansénisme, Paris 1901.—P. Minges, O. F. M., Die Gnadenlehre des Duns Scotus auf ihren angeblichen Pelagianismus und Semipelagianismus geprüft, Münster 1906.—Lafiteau, Histoire de la Constitution Unigenitus, 2 vols., Liège 1738.—Van den Peereboom, Cornelius Jansenius, Septième Évêque d’Ypres, Bruges 1882.—J. Forget in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VIII, pp. 285-294.
Footnotes
-
De Dono Perseverantiae. An English translation of this treatise may be found in The Anti-Pelagian Works of Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, Translated by Peter Holmes and R. E. Wallis, Vol. III, pp. 171 sqq. (Vol. XV of Dods’ translation of the Works of St. Augustine), Edinburg 1876. ↩
-
De Dono Perseverantiae, c. 2, n. 3: “Cur autem perseverantia ista poscitur a Deo, si non datur a Deo? An et ista irrisoria petitio est, quum id ab eo petitur quod scitur non ipsum dare, sed ipso non dante esse in hominis potestate …? An non perseverantia ista forte non poscitur? Iam hoc qui dicit, non meis disputationibus refellendus, sed sanctorum orationibus onerandus est. An vero quisquam eorum est, qui non sibi poscat a Deo ut perseveret in eo, quum ipsâ oratione quae dominica nuncupatur, quia eam Dominus docuit, quando oratur a sanctis, nihil paene aliud quam perseverantia posci intelligatur?” ↩
-
Op. cit., c. 7, n. 15: “Prorsus in hac re non operosas disputationes exspectet Ecclesia, sed attendat quotidianas orationes suas. Orat ut increduli credant: Deus ergo convertit ad fidem. Orat ut credentes perseverent: Deus ergo donat perseverantiam usque in finem.” ↩
-
Op. cit., c. 23, n. 63: “Quis enim veraciter gemat desiderans accipere quod orat a Domino, si hoc a seipso se sumere existimet, non ab illo?” ↩
-
Op. cit., c. 6, n. 10: “Hoc donum suppliciter emereri potest, sed quum datum fuerit, amitti contumaciter non potest.” ↩
-
Op. cit., c. 16, n. 39: ”… quum constet Deum alia danda etiam non orantibus, sicut initium fidei, alia nonnisi orantibus praeparasse, sicut in finem perseverantiam, profecto qui ex se ipso se hanc habere putat, non orat ut habeat.” ↩
-
De Ente Supernaturali, disp. 94, sect. 2. ↩
-
Suarez, De Gratia, XII, 38: “Infallibilitas non convenit merito de congruo ratione sui, ut ita dicam, sed ratione impetrationis quae propriae soli orationi, ut talis est, respondet. Ratio est, quia haec infallibilitas solum fundatur in promissione divina, quae non invenitur facta operibus iustorum quatenus meritoriis de congruo, sed tantum orationi; quare ut fructus huius meriti certior sit, adiungenda semper est petitio perseverantiae.” ↩
-
John XVI, 23. ↩
-
Cfr. Suarez, De Gratia, XII, 38, n. 14: ”… quia ut oratio habeat perseverantiam debitam, perdurare debet cum illis circumstantiis moralibus, quas a principio habere etiam debuit, ut congrue fieret; unde eo ipso quod novum impedimentum ponitur [peccando], effectui orationis, deficit perseverantia orationis, deficit perseverantia in tali materia requisita est, ut non semel tantum aut iterum fiat, set ut toto tempore vitae duret, et praesertim ut in occurrentibus occasionibus servandi mandata aut vincendi tentationes cum debita fiducia repetatur.”—For more detailed information we must refer the reader to Palmieri, De Gratia Divina Actuali, thes. 36, n. vi sqq. The theological argument for our thesis is convincingly set forth by Gutberlet in Heinrich’s Dogmatische Theologie, Vol. VIII, § 404. The donum perseverantiae must not be confounded with the confirmatio in gratia; on this point see Schiffini, De Gratia Divina, pp. 197 sqq. ↩
-
Ibid., n. 17: “Igitur perseverantia orationis in tali materia requisita est, ut non semel tantum aut iterum fiat, set ut toto tempore vitae duret, et praesertim ut in occurrentibus occasionibus servandi mandata aut vincendi tentationes cum debita fiducia repetatur.” ↩