Section 2: Necessity of Charity

1. Charity, qua love of God, is absolutely necessary to salvation. St. John says: “He that loveth not, abideth in death,”¹ and St. Paul: “If any man love not our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.”² As a virtue charity corresponds to an express divine command,³ in fact, to “the greatest and the first commandment” given by Christ.⁴ The necessity of charity is, moreover, deducible from human nature itself, for, as St. Augustine says, the human heart finds no rest until it is united with God.⁵

¹ 1 John III, 14; cfr. IV, 16.

² 1 Cor. XVI, 22; cfr. Conc. Trident., Sess. VI, c. 6 sq.

³ Deut. VI, 5.

⁴ Matt. XXII, 36–38; Mark XII, 29 sq.; Luke X, 27.

⁵ Confess., l. I, c. 1: “Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our heart is restless until it rests in Thee.” (Migne, P. L., XXXII, 661).

2. Charity being necessary for salvation, its practice is a grave duty. Christ demanded of His disciples that they love Him more than their nearest kin. “He that loveth his father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me.”⁶ “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.”⁷ The Apostles insist that we must love Christ.⁸ Now not only does our faith teach that God is the highest or sovereign Good (summum bonum) in every imaginable respect, but the scriptural passages cited above, and especially the wording of the first and greatest command given by Christ Himself, show that our love of God must be the highest of which we are capable. Hence it is a postulate of charity that we must love God as the infinitely lovable Being (infinite diligibilis) above all else, that is, more than any other person or thing.⁹ It is necessary, however, to distinguish between amor appretiative summus and amor intensive summus.

⁶ Matt. X, 37.

⁷ Luke XIV, 26.

⁸ 1 Cor. XVI, 22; Col. III, 14; 1 John IV, 7, 16, 19; Jude 20 sq.

⁹ Matt. XXII, 37.—St. Augustine, De Doctr. Christ., l. I, c. 22, n. 21: “This rule of love was divinely established, that you should direct all your thoughts, your whole life, and your whole understanding toward Him from whom you have the very things that you direct. But when He says, with the whole heart, the whole soul, the whole mind, He left no part of our life vacant which ought to give place, as it were, so that it might wish to enjoy some other thing; but whatever else comes into the mind to be loved is swept there, where the whole impetus of love runs.” (Migne, P. L., XXXIV, 27).—IDEM, Confess., l. X, c. 29: “He loves Thee less who loves something together with Thee which he does not love for Thy sake.” (P. L., XXXII, 796).—IDEM, De Moribus Eccles. Cath., l. I, c. 11, n. 18: “No one doubts that the highest good, which is also called the best, must not merely be loved, but must be loved so that we ought to love nothing more; and this is signified and expressed by what was said: with the whole soul, and with the whole heart, and with the whole mind. Who, I ask, would doubt, when all these things have been established and most firmly believed, that there is nothing else best for us, toward the attainment of which we ought to hasten with all other things set aside, than God? Again, if nothing separates us from His charity, what can be not only better but also more certain than this good?” (P. L., XXXII, 1319).—Cfr. Gury, I, n. 191–193.

a) Amor appretiative summus depends on the free determination of the will and consists in appreciating God more highly than anything else and in being ready, for His sake and for the sake of our eternal salvation, to renounce all other advantages rather than lose His grace or offend Him by a mortal sin. Amor intensive summus is the highest kind of emotional love of which a man is capable. It is present in the soul of one who dreads nothing more than to lose God.

b) From the very nature of these two kinds of love it follows that the former alone can be a matter of strict duty. The essential and decisive element in all love is the amor effectivus, i. e., that which manifests itself in deeds, in a strong inclination of the will towards God, a surrender of the soul to Him, obedience to His commands, zeal for His honor and the propagation of His kingdom. “He that hath my commandments and keepeth them,” says Christ, “he it is that loveth me.”¹⁰ “If any one love me, he will keep my word.”¹¹ “He that keepeth his [God’s] word, in him in very deed the charity of God is perfected, and by this we know that we are in him.”¹²

¹⁰ John XIV, 21.

¹¹ John XIV, 23 sq.

¹² 1 John II, 5; IV, 12, 17.—St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 24, art. 8: “The perfection of charity can be understood in two ways: in one way on the part of the object loved, and in another way on the part of the one who loves. On the part of the object loved, charity is perfect when something is loved as much as it is lovable. But God is as lovable as He is good; but His goodness is infinite, and therefore He is infinitely lovable. No creature, however, can love Him infinitely, since every created power is finite. Hence in this way the charity of no creature can be perfect, but only the charity of God, by which He loves Himself. On the part of the one who loves, charity is perfect when he loves as much as he can. This happens in three ways. First, so that the whole heart of man is actually borne toward God at all times; and this is the perfection of the charity of the fatherland, which is not possible in this life, in which, because of the weakness of human life, it is impossible always actually to think about God and to be moved by love toward Him. Second, so that a man devotes his effort to being free for God and divine things, setting aside other things except so far as the necessity of the present life requires; and this is the perfection of charity which is possible on the way, but it is not common to all who have charity. Third, so that a person habitually places his whole heart in God, namely, so that he thinks or wills nothing contrary to divine love; and this perfection is common to all who have charity.”—Cfr. in St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., l. VI, n. 442.—J. Deharbe, S.J., Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes im Gegensatz zur unvollkommenen, Ratisbon 1856.—L. Lessius, De Summo Bono, ed. H. Hurter, Freiburg i. B., 1869.

Moreover, the pious emotions which constitute the so-called amor affectivus are transitory and cannot be elicited at will. We know of great Saints who were unable to banish entirely that state of spiritual dryness which mystic writers call ariditas mentis and which, according to their teaching, God purposely inflicts on His faithful servants in order to test their love and increase their merits. Nevertheless, every good Christian should strive with all his might to make his charity as intensive as possible, first, by ardent prayer, and second by carefully fostering the fire of divine love in his heart. We must therefore not only beware of expelling the Holy Spirit by mortal sin, or weakening His operation in us by committing venial transgressions, but frequently make acts of charity and thereby strive to increase and confirm this all-important theological virtue in our hearts.¹³

¹³ Luke XI, 13; Rom. V, 5; Gal. V, 22; Col. I, 8; Eph. IV, 30; Phil. I, 9; 1 Thess. V, 19.—Conc. Trident., Sess. VI, c. 10, can. 24.—St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 24, artt. 4–7.

How often such acts should be made depends largely on circumstances. It is certain that this duty binds all men in the hour of death, or when life is endangered, or when one, while unable to go to confession, is compelled to make an act of contrition, or in grievous temptations which cannot be overcome by other means. It is perhaps not too much to say that a man cannot progress steadily on the way of perfection unless he makes explicit acts of faith, hope, and charity at least once a day.¹⁴ However, no faithful Catholic need be anxious about this obligation if he strives to lead a good life and has a firm and constant purpose to avoid mortal sin, though all are advised to make explicit acts of charity frequently, in order that they may become more closely united with God and accustomed to such acts as a preparation for death.¹⁵

¹⁴ Cfr. Prop. Damnat. sub Innoc. XI., n. 5: “We do not dare to condemn as sinning mortally one who elicits an act of love of God only once in his life.”—Prop. 6: “It is probable that not even every five years does the precept of charity toward God of itself strictly bind.”—Prop. 7: “It binds only when we are obliged to be justified and have no other way by which we can be justified.” (Denzinger-Bannwart, nn. 1155 sqq.).—Cat. Rom., P. II, c. 2, qu. 52: “After Baptism the most fierce struggle of concupiscence against the spirit was left behind; yet in this contest it is not fitting for a Christian man to be broken or weakened in spirit, since, trusting in God’s kindness, we ought to rely on the best hope that by the daily practice of living rightly, whatsoever things are chaste, whatsoever just, whatsoever holy (Phil. IV, 8), these same things may also appear easy and pleasant. Let us gladly think these things; let us do these things with a cheerful spirit, that the God of peace (2 Cor. XIII, 11) may be with us.”

¹⁵ Gury, I, n. 193: “Devout faithful persons easily satisfy the precept of charity, because they frequently elicit acts of charity by rejoicing in the divine perfections; by wishing that no one offend Him and that all love and worship Him and observe His commandments; by praying devoutly that His name be sanctified and His will be done; by avoiding sin because it displeases Him, etc. The faithful, therefore, ought not to be anxious about this obligation, provided that they strive after a Christian life and constantly retain a ready will to avoid grave sins. Nevertheless, the faithful should be advised to elicit explicit acts of charity frequently in life, for greater union with God, and so that the soul may be prepared easily to elicit similar acts at death.”

The duty of fostering and promoting charity is a very important one, because charity is the very soul of the spiritual life, and without it good works, nay even miracles and extraordinary graces, would be of no effect. “If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not charity, I am become (as) sounding brass or clanging cymbal. And if I have (the gift of) prophecy, and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to displace mountains, but have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.”¹⁶

¹⁶ 1 Cor. XIII, 1–3; cfr. XVI, 14; Col. III, 14.—St. Augustine, Epist., 140 (al. 120), c. 18, n. 45: “Piety is the worship of God, nor is He worshipped except by loving. The highest and true wisdom, therefore, is in that first precept [Matt. XXII, 37], and consequently wisdom is charity.” (Migne, P. L., XXXIII, 559).

Negatively, the commandment of charity forbids all, especially mortal, sins. “He who saith that he knoweth [God], and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.”¹⁷

¹⁷ 1 John II, 4 sq.—Cfr. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 24, art. 12: “One contrary is removed by another contrary supervening. But every act of mortal sin is contrary to charity according to its proper nature, which consists in this: that God be loved above all things and that man subject himself totally to Him, referring all his things to Him. It therefore belongs to the nature of charity that a person so love God that in all things he wills to subject himself to Him and to follow the rule of His commandments in all things; for whatever is contrary to His precepts is manifestly contrary to charity, and therefore has of itself the power to exclude charity.”

It goes without saying that the theological virtue of charity, both because of its nature and on account of its object, must be supernatural,¹⁸ efficacious,¹⁹ and constant.²⁰

¹⁸ Rom. V, 5.—Cfr. Propositiones Damnat. Baii, n. 34: “That distinction of a twofold love, namely, natural, by which God is loved as the author of nature, and gratuitous, by which God is loved as beatifier, is vain and fictitious and devised for mocking the sacred writings and very many testimonies of the ancients.” (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1034).

¹⁹ John XIV, 15, 21; 1 Cor. XIII, 4–7; 1 John III, 18; V, 3; 2 John 1 sq., 6.

²⁰ John XV, 9 sq.; Rom. VIII, 35–39; Jude 21.—St. Augustine, De Moribus Eccles. Cath., l. I, c. 11, n. 19: “Let us consider each point briefly. No one separates us thence by threatening death. For that very thing by which we love God in spirit cannot die except when it does not love God, since death itself is not to love God, which is nothing other than to place something before Him in loving and following. No one separates us thence by promising life, for no one separates us from the fountain itself by promising water. An angel does not separate us, for when we cling to God our mind is not weaker than an angel. Power does not separate us; for if by power is meant here that which has some authority in this world, the mind clinging to God is altogether higher than the whole world. But if by power is meant that which is the most upright affection of our own soul, then, if it is in another, it favors our being joined to God; if it is in us, it itself joins us. Present troubles do not separate us, for we feel them the more lightly the more closely we cling to Him from whom they try to separate us. The promise of future things does not separate us, for whatever future good there will be God promises more certainly, and nothing is better than God Himself, who is assuredly already present to those who cling well to Him. Neither height nor depth separates us; for if these words perhaps signify height or depth of knowledge, I shall not be curious lest I be separated from God, nor does anyone’s teaching separate me from Him as though it were driving away error, from which no one at all would err unless separated from Him. But if by height and depth the upper and lower regions of this world are signified, who will promise me heaven so that I may be separated from the maker of heaven? Or who will terrify me with hell so that I may abandon God, whom, if I had never abandoned Him, I should not know hell? Finally, what place will tear me away from His charity, who would not be wholly everywhere if He were contained in any place?” (Migne, P. L., XXXII, 1319).

READINGS.—G. Lahousse, Tract. de Virtutibus Theol., Bruges 1900, pp. 376 sqq.—J. Deharbe, S.J., Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes in ihrem Gegensatz zur unvollkommenen, Ratisbon 1856.

L. Lessius, De Summo Bono, ed. Hurter, Freiburg i. B. 1869.—Ad. Tanquerey, Synopsis Theol. Mor., Vol. II, pp. 428 sqq.—J. Mausbach, Catholic Moral Teaching and its Antagonists, New York 1914, pp. 223 sqq.—G. H. Joyce, S.J., The Catholic Doctrine of Grace, pp. 83 sqq.—H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. II, pp. 64 sqq.