On Human Acts

"1. A man must annihilate his powers, and this is eternal life. - 2. To will to act actively is to offend God, who wills to be the sole agent; and therefore it is necessary to abandon oneself wholly and totally to God, and afterward to remain like a lifeless body. - 4. Natural activity is the enemy of grace, and impedes the operations of God and true perfection; because God wills to operate in us without us. - 5. By doing nothing, the soul annihilates itself, and returns to the very principle and to its origin, which is the essence of God, in which it remains transformed and divinized; and God then remains in Himself, because there are then no longer two things united, but only one, and in this way God lives and reigns in us, and the soul annihilates itself in operative being. - 6. The interior way is that in which neither light, nor love, nor resignation is known; and it is not necessary to know God, and in this manner one proceeds rightly. - 13. Free will having been resigned to God, the thought and care of everything that concerns us must be left to the same God, and one must allow Him to accomplish His divine will in us." - Condemned propositions of Michael de Molinos, condemned by Innocent XI, Const. Caelestis Pastor, 20 Nov. 1687.

"16. The immediate division of human works is that they are either virtuous or vicious; because if a man is vicious and does anything, he then acts viciously, and if he is virtuous and does anything, he then acts virtuously; because just as vice, which is called a crime or mortal sin, universally infects the acts of a vicious man, so virtue vivifies all the acts of a virtuous man." Proposition of John Hus, condemned by the Council of Constance and by Martin V, Bull Inter cunctas, Bull In eminenti, 8 Kalends of March 1418.

"7. Every deliberate human action is love of God or of the world: if of God, it is the charity of the Father; if of the world, it is the concupiscence of the flesh, that is, evil." Proposition condemned by Alexander VIII, 7 Dec. 1690.

"34. That distinction of a twofold love, namely, natural love, by which God is loved as the author of nature, and gratuitous love, by which God is loved as beatifier, is vain and fictitious, and was devised to make sport of the sacred Scriptures and very many testimonies of the ancients. - 37. He agrees with Pelagius who acknowledges any natural good, that is, any good which takes its origin from the powers of nature alone. - 62. That distinction also, by which a work is said to be good in two ways, either because it is right and good from its object and all its circumstances (which they are accustomed to call morally good), or because it is meritorious of the eternal kingdom, because it is performed by a living member of Christ through the Spirit of Charity, is to be rejected. - 63. But that distinction of a twofold justice is likewise rejected: one which is effected through the indwelling Spirit of Charity; the other which is effected indeed from an inspiration of the Holy Spirit stirring the heart to penance, but not yet dwelling in the heart and pouring forth charity in it, by which the justification of the divine law may be fulfilled." Condemned propositions of Michael Baius, condemned by St. Pius V, Bull Ex omnibus afflictionibus, 1 Oct. 1567. Cf. nn. 69, 75, 89.

"23. The doctrine of the Synod concerning a twofold love (of dominant cupidity and of dominant charity), declaring that man without grace is under the servitude of sin, and that in that state, through the general influence of dominant cupidity, he infects and corrupts all his actions; insofar as it insinuates that, in man while he is under servitude or in the state of sin, destitute of that grace by which he is freed from the servitude of sin and constituted a son of God, cupidity so dominates that, through the general influence of this cupidity, all his actions are in themselves infected and corrupted; or that all works which are done before justification, in whatever manner they are done, are sins, as though in all his acts the sinner serves dominant cupidity: false, pernicious, inducing into an error condemned as heretical by the Council of Trent, and condemned again in Baius, art. 40. - 24. But insofar as between dominant cupidity and dominant charity there are placed no intermediate affections implanted by nature itself and praiseworthy by their own nature, which, together with the love of beatitude and a natural inclination toward good, remained as the last lineaments and relics of the image of God; from St. Augustine, On the Spirit and the Letter, ch. 28; just as though between divine love, which leads us to the kingdom, and illicit human love, which is condemned, there were no licit human love which is not reprehended; from St. Augustine, sermon 349, On Charity, Maurist edition: false, previously condemned." Condemned propositions of the Synod of Pistoia, condemned by Pius VI, Const. Auctorem Fidei, 28 Aug. 1794.

"39. That which is done voluntarily, even if it is done necessarily, is nevertheless done freely. - 41. That mode of liberty which is freedom from necessity is not found in the Scriptures under the name of liberty, but only the name of liberty from sin."

"66. Violence alone is repugnant to the natural liberty of man." Condemned propositions of Michael Baius, condemned by St. Pius V.

"3. For meriting or demeriting in the state of fallen nature, liberty from necessity is not required in man, but liberty from coercion suffices." Proposition of Cornelius Jansen, condemned by Innocent X as heretical; Const. Vineam Domini, 16 July 1705.

"27. Free will, without the assistance of the grace of God, avails only for sinning. - 28. It is a Pelagian error to say that free will avails for avoiding any sin." Condemned propositions of Michael Baius, condemned by St. Pius V.

"2. Although invincible ignorance of the natural law be granted, in the state of fallen nature this ignorance does not excuse one who acts from it from formal sin." Proposition condemned by Alexander VIII, 7 Dec. 1690.

"10. That they did not sin who, not knowing Christ, crucified Him, and that whatever is done through ignorance is not to be ascribed to guilt." Chapters of Abelard condemned by the Council of Sens and by Innocent II in the year 1140.

"But this holy Synod confesses and perceives that concupiscence, or the fomes, remains in the baptized; and since it has been left for combat, it cannot harm those who do not consent, but who resist manfully through the grace of Christ Jesus; indeed, he who shall have contended lawfully shall be crowned. This concupiscence, which the Apostle sometimes calls sin, the holy Synod declares that the Catholic Church has never understood to be called sin because it is truly and properly sin in the regenerate, but because it is from sin and inclines toward sin. But if anyone shall think the contrary, let him be anathema." Council of Trent, sess. 5, Decree on Original Sin, penultimate paragraph.

"74. Concupiscence in the regenerate who have relapsed into mortal sin, in whom it now dominates, is sin, just as are other vicious habits. - 75. The evil movements of concupiscence are, for the state of corrupted man, prohibited by the precept: Thou shalt not covet; whence a man who feels them and does not consent transgresses the precept Thou shalt not covet, although the transgression is not imputed as sin. - 76. As long as anything of carnal concupiscence is in one who loves, he does not fulfill the precept: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart." Condemned propositions of Michael Baius, condemned by St. Pius V.

"19. That neither the work, nor the will, nor concupiscence, nor pleasure, when it moves the soul, is sin, nor ought we to will to extinguish it." Chapters of Abelard condemned by the Council of Sens and by Innocent II.

"17. Free will having been handed over to God, and the care and thought of our soul having been left to Him, no further account is to be taken of temptations; nor must any resistance be made to them other than a negative one, with no industry employed; and if nature is moved, it is necessary to allow it to be moved, because it is nature. - 37. On occasions of even furious temptations, the soul must not elicit explicit acts of the opposite virtues, but must remain in the aforesaid love and resignation." Condemned propositions of Michael de Molinos, condemned by Innocent XI.

"41. God permits and wills, in order to humble us and lead us to true transformation, that in some perfect souls, even those not possessed, the demon inflict violence upon their bodies and cause them to commit carnal acts, even while awake and without obscuration of mind, by physically moving their hands and other members against their will. And the same is said as regards other acts sinful in themselves; in which case they are not sins, because consent is not present in them. - 47. When violences of this kind occur, it is necessary to allow Satan to operate, employing no industry and no effort of one's own, but a man must remain in his nothingness; and even if pollutions and obscene acts with one's own hands, and even worse things, should follow, it is not necessary to disquiet oneself, but scruples, doubts, and fears must be cast out; because the soul becomes more illuminated, more strengthened, and more pure, and holy liberty is acquired. And above all, it is not necessary to confess these things, and it is most holy not to confess them; because by this means the demon is overcome and the treasure of peace is acquired." Condemned propositions of Michael de Molinos, condemned by Innocent XI.

"38. Every love of a rational creature is either vicious cupidity, by which the world is loved, which is prohibited by John, or that praiseworthy charity, poured forth in the heart through the Holy Spirit, by which God is loved." Proposition of Michael Baius condemned by St. Pius V.

"40. Without grace we can love nothing except unto our condemnation. - 44. There are only two loves from which all our volitions and actions arise: the love of God, which does all things for the sake of God and which God rewards; and the love by which we love ourselves and the world, which does not refer to God that which is to be referred to God, and for this very reason becomes evil. - 45. Since the love of God no longer reigns in the heart of sinners, it is necessary that carnal cupidity reign in it and corrupt all their actions. - 46. Cupidity or charity makes the use of the senses good or evil." Condemned propositions of Pasquier Quesnel, condemned by Clement XI, Const. Unigenitus, 8 Sept. 1713.

"15. God does not command an external act. - 16. An external act is not properly good, nor does God properly perform it. - 17. Let us bring forth the fruit, not of external acts, which do not make us good, but of interior acts, which the Father dwelling in us makes and performs. - 18. God loves souls, not the external work." Condemned propositions of Eckhart, condemned by John XXII in the year 1329.

"13. That because of works a man becomes neither better nor worse." Chapters of Abelard condemned by the Council of Sens and by Innocent II.

"40. The Blessed Virgin never performed any external work, and nevertheless she was holier than all the Saints. Therefore one can arrive at holiness without an external work." Proposition of Michael de Molinos condemned by Innocent XI.

"Moreover, it teaches (the holy Synod) that the largess of divine munificence is so great that we are able to make satisfaction before God the Father through Christ Jesus not only by punishments voluntarily undertaken by us for punishing sin, or imposed at the judgment of a priest according to the measure of the offense, but also - which is the greatest proof of love - by temporal scourges inflicted by God and patiently borne by us." Council of Trent, sess. 14, ch. 9. Cf. also ibid., ch. 13, and sess. 6, ch. 14.

"If anyone shall say that nothing is commanded in the Gospel besides faith; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or that the Ten Commandments in no way pertain to Christians: let him be anathema." Council of Trent, sess. 6, can. 19.

"61. That distinction of the doctors, that the mandates of the divine law are fulfilled in two ways - in one way only as regards the substance of the works commanded, and in the other as regards a certain mode, namely, that according to which they can lead the one acting to the eternal kingdom, that is, according to the meritorious mode - is fictitious and to be rejected." Proposition of Michael Baius condemned by St. Pius V. Cf. nn. 6, 89.

"9. He truly sins who hates sin merely because of its turpitude and incongruity with nature, without any regard for God offended. - 10. The intention by which someone detests evil and pursues good merely in order to obtain heavenly glory is not right or pleasing to God. - 11. Everything that is not from supernatural Christian faith, which works through love, is sin. - 13. Whoever also serves God with a view to eternal reward, if he should lack charity, is not free from fault whenever he acts, even with a view to beatitude. - 14. Fear of hell is not supernatural. - 15. Attrition, which is conceived from fear of hell and of punishments, without the love of benevolence for God on account of Himself, is not a good and supernatural movement." Propositions condemned by Alexander VIII, 7 Dec. 1690.

"60. If fear of punishment alone animates penance, the more violent this penance is, the more it leads to despair. - 61. Fear restrains only the hand; but the heart is devoted to sin as long as it is not led by the love of justice. - 62. He who abstains from evil only through fear of punishment commits it in his heart and is also guilty before God." Condemned propositions of Pasquier Quesnel, condemned by Clement XI.

"8. To eat and drink unto satiety for pleasure alone is not a sin, provided that it does not harm health, because the natural appetite can licitly enjoy its acts. - 9. The conjugal act exercised for pleasure alone is wholly free from all fault and venial defect." Propositions condemned by Innocent XI, Decree of 2 March 1679.

"2. Just as an evil work by its nature is meritorious of eternal death, so a good work by its nature is meritorious of eternal life. - 4. Eternal life was promised to man in his integrity and to the angel in view of good works, and good works by the law of nature suffice of themselves for attaining it. - 15. The reason of merit does not consist in this, that those who act well have grace and the indwelling Holy Spirit, but in this alone, that they obey the divine law." Condemned propositions of Michael Baius, condemned by St. Pius V.

"1. If anyone shall say that man can be justified before God by his works, whether done through human nature or through the teaching of the law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ: let him be anathema. - 2. If anyone shall say that divine grace through Christ Jesus is given only for this, that man may more easily live justly and merit eternal life, as though through free will without grace he could do both, though with hardship and difficulty: let him be anathema." Council of Trent, sess. 6, canons.