 |
|
| A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
The third and greatest of the Divine virtues enumerated bySt. Paul (1 Corinthians 13:13), usually called charity, defined: a divinely infused habit, inclining the human will to cherishGod for his own sake above all things, and man for the sake ofGod.
This definition sets off the main characteristics of charity:
(1) Itsorigin, by Divine infusion. "The charity ofGod is poured forth in our hearts, by theHoly Ghost" (Romans 5:5). It is, therefore, distinct from, and superior to, the inborn inclination or the acquired habit of lovingGod in the natural order.Theologians agree in saying that it is infused together withsanctifying grace, to which it is closely related either by way of real identity, as some few hold, or, according to the more common view, by way of connatural emanation.
(2) Itsseat, in the human will. Although charity is at times intensely emotional, and frequently reacts on our sensory faculties, still it properly resides in the rational will a fact not to be forgotten by those who would make it an impossiblevirtue.
(3) Itsspecific act, i.e. the love of benevolence and friendship. To loveGod is to wish Him allhonour and glory and every good, and to endeavour, as far as we can, to obtain it for Him. St. John (14:23;15:14) emphasizes the feature of reciprocity which makes charity a veritable friendship of man withGod.
(4) Itsmotive, i.e., the Divinegoodness or amiability taken absolutely and as made known to us byfaith. It matters not whether thatgoodness be viewed in one, or several, or all of theDivine attributes, but, in all cases, it must be adhered to, not as a source of help, or reward, orhappiness for ourselves, but as a good in itselfinfinitely worthy of our love, in this sense alone isGod loved for His own sake. However, the distinction of the two loves:concupiscence, which prompts hope; and benevolence, which animates charity, should not be forced into a sort of mutual exclusion, as theChurch has repeatedly condemned any attempts at discrediting the workings ofChristian hope.
(5) Itsrange, i.e., bothGod and man. WhileGod alone is all lovable, yet, inasmuch as all men, by grace and glory, either actually share or at least are capable of sharing in the Divinegoodness, it follows thatsupernatural love rather includes than excludes them, according toMatthew 22:39, andLuke 10:27. Hence one and the same virtue of charity terminates in bothGod and man,God primarily and man secondarily.
Man's paramountduty of lovingGod is tersely expressed inDeuteronomy 6:5;Matthew 22:37; andLuke 10:27. Quite obvious is the imperative character of the words "thou shalt".Innocent XI (Denzinger, nos. 1155-57) declares that the precept is not fulfilled by an act of charity performed once in a lifetime, or every five years, or on the rather indefinite occasions when justification cannot be otherwise procured.
Moralists urge theobligation at the beginning of the moral life when reason has attained its full development; at the point of death; and from time to time during life, an exact count being neither possible nornecessary since theChristian habit of dailyprayer surely covers theobligation.
The violation of the precept is generally negative, i.e., by omission or indirect, i.e., implied in every grievous fault; there are, however,sins directly opposed to the love ofGod: spiritualsloth, at least when it entails avoluntary loathing of spiritual goods, and thehatred ofGod, whether it be an abomination ofGod's restrictive and punitivelaws or an aversion for His Sacred Person (seeSLOTH;HATRED).
The qualifications, "with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength", do not mean a maximum of intensity, for intensity of action never falls under a command; still less do they imply the necessity of feeling more sensible love forGod than for creatures, for visible creatures, howsoever imperfect, appeal to our sensibility much more than the invisibleGod. Theirtrue significance is that, both in ourmental appreciation and in ourvoluntary resolve,God should stand above all the rest, not excepting father or mother, son or daughter (Matthew 10:37).St. Thomas (II-II.44.5) would assign a special meaning to each of the four Biblical phrases; others, with more reason, take the whole sentence in its cumulative sense, and see in it the purpose, not only of raising charity above the lowMaterialism of theSadducees or the formal Ritualism of thePharisees, but also of declaring that "to loveGod above all things is to insure thesanctity of our whole life" (Le Camus, "Vie de Notre-Seigneur Jesus-Christ", III, 81).
The love ofGod is even more than a precept binding thehumanconscience; it is also, asLe Camus observes, "the principle and goal ofmoral perfection."
As theprinciple ofmoral perfection in thesupernatural order, withfaith as foundation and hope as incentive, the love ofGod ranks first among the means ofsalvation styled bytheologiansnecessary, necessitate medii". By stating that "charity never falleth away" (1 Corinthians 13:8), St Paul clearly intimates that there is no difference of kind, but only of degree, between charity here below and glory above; as a consequence Divine love becomes thenecessary inception of that God-like life which reaches its fullness inheaven only. The necessity of habitual charity is inferred from its close communion withsanctifying grace. The necessity of actual charity is no less evident. Apart from the cases of the actual reception ofbaptism, penance, or extreme unction, wherein the love of charity by a specialdispensation ofGod, admits of attrition as a substitute, all adults stand in need of it, according to 1 John, iii, 14: "He that loveth not, abideth in death".
As thegoal ofmoral perfection, always in thesupernatural order, the love ofGod is called "the greatest and the first commandment" (Matthew 22:38), "the end of the commandment" (1 Tim., i, 5), "the bond of perfection" (Colossians 3:14). It stands as an all-important factor in the two main phases of our spiritual life, justification and the acquisition of merits. The justifying power of charity, so well expressed inLuke 7:47, and 1 Pet., iv, 8, has in no way been abolished or reduced by the institution of the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance asnecessary means of moral rehabilitation; it has only been made to include a willingness to receive thesesacraments where and when possible. Its meritorious power, emphasized bySt. Paul (Romans 8.28), covers both the acts elicited or commanded by charity.St. Augustine (De laudibus quartets) calls charity the "life of virtues" (vita virtutum); andSt. Thomas (II-II, Q. xxiii, a. 8), the "form of virtues" (forma virtutum). The meaning is that the other virtues, while possessing a real value of their own, derive a fresh and greater excellence from their union with charity, which, reaching out directly toGod, ordains all our virtuous actions to Him.
As to the manner and degree of influence which charity should exercise over our virtuous actions in order to render them meritorious ofheaven,theologians are far from being agreed, some requiring only the state of grace, or habitual charity, others insisting upon the more or less frequent renewal of distinct acts of divine love.
Of course, the meritorious power of charity is, like the virtue itself, susceptible of indefinite growth.St. Thomas (II-II, Q. xxiv, 24 a. 4 and 8) mentions three principal stages:
To these,ascetic writers like Alvarez de Paz,St. Teresa, St. Francis of Sales, add many more degrees, thus anticipating even in this world the "many mansions in the Father's house". The prerogatives of charity should not, however, be construed so as to include inamissibility. The saying of St. John (1 Ep., iii, 6), "Whosoever abideth in him [God], sinneth not", means indeed the special permanence of charity chiefly in its higher degrees, but it is no absolute guarantee against the possible loss of it; while the infused habit is never diminished by venialsins, a single grievous fault is enough to destroy it and so end man's union and friendship withGod.
While charity embraces all the children ofGod inheaven, on earth, and inpurgatory (seeCOMMUNION OF SAINTS), it is taken here as meaning man'ssupernatural love for man, and that in this world; as such, it includes both love of self and love of neighbour.
St. Gregory the Great (Hom. XIII in Evang.) objects to the expression "charity towards self", on the plea that charity requires two terms, andSt. Augustine (De bono viduitatis, xxi) remarks that no command was needed to make man love himself. Obviously,St. Gregory's objection is purely grammatical;St. Augustine's remark applies to natural self-love. As a matter of fact, the precept ofsupernatural love of self is not only possible or needed, but also clearly implied inChrist's command to love our neighbour as ourselves. Itsobligation, however, bears in a vague manner on thesalvation of oursoul (Matthew 16:26), the acquisition of merits (Matthew 6:19 sqq.), theChristian use of our body (Romans 6:13;1 Corinthians 6:19;Colossians 3:5). and can hardly be brought down to practical points not already covered by more specificprecepts.
TheChristianidea of brotherly love as compared with thepagan or Jewish concept has been touched upon elsewhere (seeCHARITY AND CHARITIES). Briefly, its distinctive feature, and superiority as well, is to be found less in its commands, or prohibitions, or even results, than in the motive which prompts itslaws and prepares its achievements. The faithful carrying out of the "new commandment" is called the criterion oftrueChristiandiscipleship (John xiii, 34 sq.), the standard by which we shall be judged (Matthew 25:34 sqq.), the bestproof that we loveGod Himself (1 John 3:10), and the fulfilment of the whole law (Galatians 5:14), because, viewing the neighbour inGod and throughGod, it has the same value as the love ofGod. The expression "to love the neighbour for the sake ofGod" means that we rise above the consideration of mere natural solidarity and fellow-feeling to the higher view of our common Divine adoption and heavenly heritage; in that sense only could our brotherly love be brought near to the love whichChrist had for us (John 13:35), and a kind of moral identity between Christ and the neighbour (Matthew 25:40), become intelligible. From this high motive the universality of fraternal charity follows as anecessary consequence. Whosoever sees in his fellow-men, not the human peculiarities, but the God-given and God-like privileges, can no longer restrict his love to members of thefamily, or co-religionists, or fellow-citizens, or strangers within the borders (Leviticus 19:34), but must needs extend it, without distinction ofJew orGentile (Romans 10:12), to all the units of the human kind, to social outcasts (Luke 10:33 sqq.), and even to enemies (Matthew 5:23 sq.). Very forcible is the lesson wherein Christ compels His hearers to recognize, in the much despisedSamaritan, thetrue type of the neighbour, and truly new is the commandment whereby He urges us to forgive our enemies, to be reconciled with them, to assist and love them.
The exercise of charity would soon become injudicious and inoperative unless there be in this, as in all the moral virtues, a well-defined order. Theordo caritatis, astheologians a term it, possibly from a wrong rendering into Latin of Cant., ii, 4 (ordinavit in me charitatem), takes into account these different factors:
The precedence is plain enough when these factors are viewed separately. Regarding thepersons alone, the order is somewhat as follows: self, wife, children,parents, brothers and sisters, friends, domestics, neighbours, fellow-countrymen, and all others. Considering the goods by themselves, there is a triple order:
Viewing apart the various kinds of necessity, the following order would obtain:
When the three factors are combined, they give rise to complicated rules, the principal of which are these:
TANQUEREY,De virtute caritatis inSynopsis Theologiae Moralis, II (New York, 1906), 426; SLATER,A Manual of Moral Theology, I (New York, 1909), 179 sqq.; BATIFFOL,L'Enseignement de Jésus (Paris 1905); NORTHCOTE,The Bond of Perfection (London, 1907); GAFFRE,La Loi d'Amour (Paris, 1908); DE SALES,Traité de l'amour de Dieu; PESCHPraelectiones Dogmaticae, VIII (Freiburg im Br., 1898), 226 sqq.; DUBLANCHY inDict. de Théol. Cath. s.v.Charité, with an exhaustive bibliography of the theologians and mystics who have dealt with this matter.
APA citation.Sollier, J.(1910).Love (Theological Virtue). InThe Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09397a.htm
MLA citation.Sollier, Joseph."Love (Theological Virtue)."The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 9.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1910.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09397a.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Gerard Haffner.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor.Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmasterat newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.