Section — Koch–Preuss
Section 4: The Evangelical Counsels
- THESIS. —Besides those precepts which must be observed by all under pain of sin, there are others which are intended rather as counsels for those who wish to do more than the minimum and to attain Christian perfection, so far as this is attainable on earth. These Counsels (consilia evangelica) are: voluntary poverty (paupertas voluntaria), perpetual chastity (continentia, castitas sive virginitas perpetua), and voluntary obedience to a spiritual superior (obedientia voluntaria).1
1 Cfr. Matth. XIX, 12, 21; XVI, 24; Luke IX, 23.
All men without exception are bound to strive after perfection, but not in the same way or by the same means.2 The so-called Evangelical Counsels do not in themselves constitute perfection. They are merely surer and more effective means of attaining perfection (instrumenta perfectionis). Their superior efficacy arises from the fact that they aid powerfully in removing the obstacles which obstruct the way to Heaven.3
2 Cfr. Matth. V, 48; XIX, 12. — St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 184, art. 3: "In itself, Christian perfection consists essentially in charity, principally according to the love of God and secondarily according to the love of one's neighbor, concerning which the principal precepts of the divine law are given. ... Secondarily and instrumentally, however, perfection consists in the counsels, all of which, like the precepts, are ordered to charity, but in different ways. For precepts other than the precepts of charity are ordered to removing those things which are contrary to charity and with which charity cannot exist; but the counsels are ordered to removing impediments to the act of charity which nevertheless are not contrary to charity, such as marriage, occupation with secular business, and other things of this kind."
3 St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 186, art. 7: "For the exercise of perfection it is required that a person remove from himself those things through which he could be hindered from directing his affection wholly toward God, in which the perfection of charity consists. There are three things of this kind: first, the desire for external goods, which is removed by the vow of poverty; second, the concupiscence of sensible pleasures, among which venereal pleasures are preeminent, which are excluded by the vow of continence; third, the disorder of the human will, which is excluded by the vow of obedience." — Ibid., qu. 189, art. 1, ad 5: "Certain precepts are principal, being as it were the ends of the precepts and counsels, namely the precepts of charity, to which the counsels are ordered—not in such a way that the precepts cannot be observed without the counsels, but so that through the counsels they may be observed more perfectly."
While all men have the same ultimate aim, their minor ideals differ according to the various offices and tasks assigned to each. The highest of these are represented by the Evangelical Counsels. How does a counsel differ from a commandment? A commandment is a matter of necessity, whereas a counsel is left to the free choice of the person to whom it is proposed, unless, indeed, it forms part of his vocational duties.4
4 St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 1a 2ae, qu. 108, art. 4: "This is the difference between a counsel and a precept: a precept imports necessity, while a counsel is placed within the choice of the person to whom it is given. Therefore counsels were fittingly added beyond the precepts in the new law, which is the law of liberty, but not in the old law, which was the law of servitude. Accordingly, the precepts of the new law must be understood to have been given concerning those things necessary for attaining the end of eternal beatitude, into which the new law immediately introduces us; but the counsels must concern those things through which man can attain the aforesaid end better and more expeditiously.”—Ibid., 2a 2ae, qu. 43, art. 7, ad 4: "Sometimes, however, the observance of the counsels is necessary for salvation, as is evident in those who have already vowed the counsels."
The Catholic doctrine of the Evangelical Counsels did not reach its full development until after the Protestant Reformation; but its main ideas are rooted in the very substance of Christian morality and clearly expressed in both Scripture and Tradition.
II. DEFINITION AND RATIONALE. —The distinction between the precepts of the Gospel and the so-called Evangelical Counsels, or counsels of perfection, is as old as the Church. It has always been Catholic teaching, (1) that there are works of supererogation, i. e. good works not enjoined as a strict duty; (2) that these works are not merely good in opposition to bad, but better in opposition to good (opera meliora), and (3) that whereas a precept binds of necessity, a counsel is a matter of free choice. 1. Justification, as effected by Baptism or Penance, is a state of grace meriting eternal life. But grace is merely in an incipient stage; it can and should be increased by good works. In performing such, man may either content himself with what is of strict duty, or he may go beyond the province of duty and perform works of charity. His reward will be in exact proportion to his merits. a) The distinction between precepts and counsels is distinctly Scriptural. When the young man asked what he should do to gain eternal life, Christ bade him "keep the commandments," and when he pressed the inquiry further, saying, "All these I have kept from my youth, what is yet wanting to me?" —Jesus told him: "If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come follow me."5 Here we have a clear distinction drawn between obedience to the commandments, and poverty as a state of higher perfection; between eternal life as the reward of ordinary good conduct, and a treasure in heaven laid up for those who sacrifice everything to serve God. This distinction is brought out even more clearly by the remark of the attending disciples, "Behold we have left all things, and have followed thee, what therefore shall we have?" and the Master's promise of a special reward: "In the regeneration [i.e. at the last judgment], when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Jesus added: "And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting." 6
5 Matth. XIX, 16 sqq.
St. Paul, in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, not only presses home the duty incumbent on all Christians of abstaining from sins of the flesh, but counsels perfect chastity on the ground that it is easier for the unmarried to serve God with an undivided heart.7 A little further on in the same Epistle he clearly distinguishes between preaching the Gospel as a duty incumbent on him by virtue of his office, and the supererogatory good works (preaching without charge) for which he expects a special reward.8 b) The common sense of mankind has always discriminated between the conscientious performance of duty and heroic virtue, and awarded special honors to the latter.
8 1 Cor. IX, 1-18. —Cfr. St. Augustine, De Opere Monack., c. 5, n. 6; c. 6, n. 7.
"The difference between matters of duty and matters of counsel has a prominent place in the universal conception of morality. There are some actions which are required of all. There are others which are strictly speaking not demanded of anybody, but regarded as specially meritorious or heroic. If there existed only duties in the strict sense, i. e. positive and negative precepts, the notion of 'moral heroism' might as well be abolished, at least so far as it implies extraordinary self-sacrifice in the performance of duty and the idea of something exceptionally difficult assumed over and above mere duty. In saying this we do not admit Ziegler's charge that Catholics regard moral heroism as super-moral. To follow the Evangelical Counsels is to perform a good work of superior moral value, something demanded of no one, not even of him who might be in a position to perform it. Is there any reason for assuming that morality does not admit of degrees? True, there are certain vocations and occupations which oblige those engaged in them to perform duties in excess of the average; but even within these vocations we find there are heroic acts not strictly required of any one but left to the free choice of volunteers." 9 2. All good works are means of attaining perfection; but some are more effective than others. These are called Evangelical Counsels in the narrower sense. They have a relatively higher value than ordinary good works, for three reasons: (1) because, being more difficult, they demand greater effort, (2) because they are directly opposed to the three principal agencies of sin, concupiscence of the eyes, concupiscence of the flesh, and pride of life,10 and (3) because they are of special importance for the Church and the entire social order.11 In recommending the three Evangelical Counsels as "bonum melius" the Church does not mean to condemn marriage, the holding of property, and the rational use of liberty as mala. On the contrary, she expressly upholds these as bona against excessive Rigorism. Voluntary chastity no more depreciates marriage than gold depreciates silver.12 Moreover, poverty and virginity are bona meliora only when chosen from truly moral, and especially religious, motives.13
9 Ph. Kneib, Die "Jenseitsmoral," pp. 96 sq.; cfr. Gen. XLI, 39-45; 1 Kings XVII, 25.
10 1 John II, 16. —Cfr. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 186, art. 7.
11 Cfr. Rom. XII, 4 sqq.; 1 Cor. VII, 7, 20. —St. Ambrose, De Virginitate, c. 6, n. 34; De Viduis, c. 14, n. 83. —On the diversitas statuum et officiorum in Ecclesia cfr. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 183, art. 2.
12 Cfr. St. Methodius of Olympus, The Banquet, or On Virginity (Συμπόσιον ἢ περὶ ἁγνείας), When virginity came, the discourse did not wholly abolish procreation. For because the moon is greater than the stars, the light of the other stars is not thereby abolished. (Migne, P. G., XVIII, 48). —St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catecheses, IV, c. 25: Again, when you successfully practice chastity, do not behave arrogantly toward those placed below it in marriage. For marriage is honorable and the bed undefiled, as the Apostle says (Hebr. XIII, 4). And you who possess chastity—were you not born of married persons? Because you possess gold, do not therefore reject silver; rather, let those who lawfully make use of marriage also be of good hope ... those who have entered marriage for the sake of begetting children and not for the sake of loving pleasure. (Migne, P. G., XXXIII, 488).— Ambrose, De Viduis, c. 12, n. 72: "Marriage is honorable, but continence is more honorable (1 Cor. VII, 38). Therefore what is good is not to be avoided; what is better is to be chosen. Thus it is not imposed, but preferred." (Migne, P. L., XVI, 256). —Cfr. IDEM, De Virginitate, c. 6, n. 33-34; "The bonds of marriage are good, therefore, but they are nevertheless bonds; marriage is good, but it takes its name from a yoke, and from the yoke of the world, so that a woman desires to please her husband rather than God. ... Therefore let neither the one who has chosen marriage reproach continence, nor the one who follows continence condemn marriage. For the Church long ago condemned the hostile interpreters of this opinion, namely those who dare to dissolve the marital bond." (P. L., XVI, 274). —St. Augustine, Contra Secundinum Manich., c. 21: "I confess that in the Catholic Church I learned that, just as the soul and also the body—of which the one is endowed and the other subjected—so the good of the soul and the goods of the body are from none but the highest good, from which are all goods, whether great or small, heavenly or earthly, spiritual or bodily, temporal or eternal; and that the latter are not therefore to be reproved because the former are to be preferred." (P. L., XLII, 597).—IDEM, De Civ. Dei, XVI, c. 36: "Let us suppose both [Abraham and Isaac] to be good; even so, certainly a married man who is most faithful and obedient to God is better than a continent man of lesser faith and lesser obedience. But if all other things are equal, who would hesitate to prefer the continent man to the married man?" (P. L., XLI, 515). —IDEM, De Bono Coniugali, c. 23, n. 28: "It must in no way be doubted that the chastity of continence is better than nuptial chastity, although each is good." —Ibid., n. 29: "Marriage and virginity are two goods, of which the one is greater." (P. L., XL, 392, 393). —IDEM, Contra Iulian. Pelag., IV, c. 7, n. 38: "The good work of marriage is the lawful union of the sexes for the sake of procreation, the fruit of which work is the orderly begetting of children." (P. L., XLIV, 758). —IDEM, De S. Virginitate, c. 18: "I admonish the male and female followers of perpetual continence and sacred virginity to prefer their good to marriage in such a way that they do not judge marriage to be evil. And let them know that what was said by the Apostle [1 Cor. VII, 28, 38, 40] was said not deceitfully but plainly and truthfully. ... This is the Lord's doctrine, this is apostolic, this is true, this is sound doctrine: so to choose the greater gifts that the lesser are not condemned. (P. L., XL, 404). —IDEM, Sermo 104 (al. de verb. Dom., 27), c. 3, n. 4: "Both [Martha and Mary] were pleasing to the Lord, both lovable, both disciples." —Ibid., c. 2, n. 3: "Therefore the Lord did not reprove the work, but distinguished the office. ... The labor of multiplicity passes away, and the charity of unity remains." (P. L., XXXVIII, 617). —St. Jerome, Epist., 48 (al. 50), n. 2: "We are not ignorant that marriage is honorable and the bed undefiled. We read God's first sentence: 'Increase and multiply and fill the earth' (Gen. I, 28). But we accept marriage in such a way that we prefer virginity, which is born from marriage. Will silver cease to be silver if gold is more precious than silver?" —Ibid., n. 17: "If I say that it is better to be a virgin than married, I have preferred what is better to what is good. But if I take another step and say that it is better to marry than to fornicate, there I have preferred not what is better to what is good, but what is good to what is evil. There is a great difference between the better thing which is placed before marriage and the thing placed before fornication." (P. L., XXII, 495, 507).—IDEM, Epist., 22, n. 19: "Someone may say: and do you dare disparage marriage, which was blessed by God? It is not to disparage marriage when virginity is preferred to it. No one compares evil with good." (P. L., XXII, 405). —Conc. Lat. IV. (a. 1215), c. 1: "Not only virgins and the continent, but also married persons who please God through right faith and good works deserve to attain eternal beatitude." (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 430). —C. Kollin, O.P. (+ 1536), Eversio Lutherani Epithalamii, Cologne 1527: "The good of marriage is in no way disparaged when the virginal good is preferred to it, just as the moon is not despised when the sun is preferred to it in the brightness of its light. ... Does one who says that gold is better than silver do an injury to silver?" According to P. Kollin, who was a prominent Dominican preacher and missionary of the 16th century, ''celibacy is in itself preferable to matrimony; but he who has not the grace of continence, does better (melius facit) if he marries." Cfr. N. Paulus, Die deutschen Dominikaner im Kampfe gegen Luther, Freiburg 1903, pp. 124 sq.; F. Falk, Die Ehe am Ausgange des Mittelalters, Freiburg, 1908.
13 Cfr. 1 Cor. XIII, 1-3.—St. Augustine, De Bono Coniugali, c. 10, n. 10: "What if, they say, all men should wish to abstain from all intercourse—from where would the human race continue? Would that all wished this, provided it were in charity from a pure heart and a good conscience and unfeigned faith." (Migne, P. L., XL, 381).—IDEM, De S. Virginitate, c. 1: "Those to whom it was said, 'He who can take it, let him take it' [Mt. 19, 12], are to be exhorted lest they be frightened, and frightened lest they be exalted. Therefore virginity is not only to be proclaimed so that it may be loved, but also admonished lest it be puffed up." (P. L., XL, 397). —IDEM, Enarr. in Ps., 99, n. 13: "Melius est humile coniugium quam superba virginitas." (P. L., XXXVII, 1280). —IDEM, Serm., (al. 44 de Diversis), n. 20: "There are no saints except those who have possessed charity. ... Of what kind, then, is charity, which alone profits greatly, without which other things profit nothing?" (P. L., XXXVIII, 44).
It is impossible to speak more respectfully of the married state than many pious monks have done at different periods in the Church's history. Thus Brother Berthold of Ratisbon (-J- 1272) says in one of his sermons: "God sanctified Matrimony by making it one of His seven Sacraments. It is holier than any order ever founded, more sacred than that of the barefooted friars, or the preachers, or the grey monks. In certain respects none of these orders can be compared with marriage, because marriage is a necessary order, and therefore strictly enjoined by God, whereas all other orders are merely of counsel. How could the predestined number of the elect ever be reached without Matrimony?" 14 The Church has one standard of morals for all because the moral law is one, though its application may vary. Christian perfection, which is the ideal of every Catholic, consists in observing the precept of charity, i. e., loving God and one's fellowmen. The Evangelical Counsels do not constitute perfection, but they are means of fulfilling the precept of charity more perfectly.15
14 Cfr. Denifle-Volz, Luther and Lutherdom, Vol. I, P. 1, pp. 261 sqq.; A. M. Weiss, O.P., Lutherpsychologie, 2nd ed., pp. 120 sqq.; Falk, Die Ehe am Ausgange des Mittelalters, Freiburg 1908.
15 Cfr. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 1a 2ae, qu. 108, art. 4: "Counsels must concern those things through which man can attain the aforesaid end better and more expeditiously." —IDEM, ibid., 2a 2ae, qu. 184, art. 3, ad 1: "From the very manner of speaking it is apparent that counsels are certain instruments for arriving at perfection."— Ibid., art. 5, ad 2: "It must be said that men assume the state of perfection not as professing themselves to be perfect, but as professing that they are tending toward perfection. ... Hence one who assumes the state of perfection does not commit a lie or simulation from the fact that he is not perfect, but from the fact that he abandons in his mind the intention of perfection." — Ibid., qu. 186, art. 1, ad 3: "Religio nominat statum perfectionis ex intentione finis." —Ibid., qu. 188, art. 7: "Religio ad perfectionem caritatis ordinatur." —Cfr. Denifle-Volz, Luther and Lutherdom, Vol. I, P. 1, pp. 146 sqq. —Weiss, Lutherpsychologie, 2nd ed., pp. 111 sqq.
"It is a mistake," writes Father A. M. Weiss, O.P., the famous apologist, "to assert, as Protestants do, that from the Catholic point of view the only genuine Christians are the members of religious orders and all others are second-rate and inferior. The only excuse for asserting such a foolish thing is that some religious have praised their state of life in exaggerated terms.... It is wrong to say that those who have embraced religion are the only real or first-rate Christians. There are no second-rate Christians or Christians improperly so called. But it is perfectly true that religious men and women strive to become perfect Christians, that they are bent on practicing their faith honestly and sincerely. True, this should be the aim of all and, generally speaking, can be attained by all who try. Yet, since the world offers innumerable impediments to the higher life, there have always been those who preferred to withdraw as much as possible from the world, in order more securely to fulfil the task incumbent upon all. This is the origin and meaning of the religious life." 16 That the Evangelical Counsels involve a bonum melius is taught in Sacred Scripture both directly and by implication.
16 Weiss, op. cit., p. 125 sqq.
Christ says: 'There are eunuchs who were born so from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it." 17 Here we have a clear-cut distinction between those who remain unmarried for God's sake and those who "take not this word" because they cannot understand it. Hence voluntary celibacy is an ethical ideal that is not enjoined on all, but may be attained by those who have a special vocation and grace.
17 Matth. XIX, 11 sq.
St. Paul says: "Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord,18 but I speak my mind,19 as one by the mercy of God rendered trustworthy. I think20 therefore that this (state) is good on account of the present distress —that it is good for a man so to be. Art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou not (so) bound? Seek not a wife. But if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Yet such (as marry) shall have affliction in the flesh; but I spare you. But this I say, brethren, the time is short: henceforth let those that have wives be as having them not, and those that weep as weeping not, and those that rejoice as rejoicing not, and those that buy as possessing not, and those that use the world as not using it to the full. For the world as we see it is passing away. My desire is to have you free from care. He that is unmarried hath a care for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; but he that is married hath a care for the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and he is drawn different ways. So also the unmarried woman and the virgin hath a care for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and soul, whilst the married woman hath a care for the things of the world, how she may please her husband. Now this I say for your own profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for the sake of seemly and devoted and undistracted service of the Lord. But if any man thinketh that he incurreth reproach as regards his virgin (daughter, by keeping her unmarried), she being past her youth, and if (in the circumstances) it ought so to be done, let him act as he wisheth: he sinneth not: let them be married.21 But he that standeth steadfast in his heart, being under no necessity but having power to accomplish his own will, and hath determined in his heart to keep his (daughter a) virgin —he shall do well. In a word, he that giveth his virgin (daughter) in marriage doth well,22 and he that giveth her not shall do better." 23 Of a widow he says: "She is free to marry whom she will: only (let it be) in the Lord. But she is more blessed if she remain as she is, in my judgment; 24 and methinks I too have the spirit of God." 25 The Apostle, therefore, though he emphasizes the cares and trials of the married state, and the great advantages of virginity, does not "cast a snare," i. e., does not bind the faithful, but, distinguishing clearly between the divine command and his personal opinion, recommends virginity for the sake of God, i. e., for a higher moral end, as something that is better than marriage —a bonum melius. Similarly, when he asks for alms to succor the needy, he makes a distinction between precept and counsel, saying: "I speak not as commanding;... I give my advice.2626."
18 ἐπιταγὴν κυρίου.
19 γνώμην.
20 νομίζω.
21 γαμείτωσαν.
22 καλῶς ποιεῖ, bene facit.
23 κρεῖσσον ποιεῖ, melius facit.
24 κατὰ τὴν ἐμὴν γνώμην.
25 1 Cor. VII, 25-40. (We use the Westminster Version). —Cfr. Conc. Trident., Sess. XXIV, can. 10. —J. Rohr, Paulus und die Gemeinde von Korinth, Freiburg 1899, pp. 62 sqq.; H. Achelis, Virgines Subintroductae, Leipsic 1902, pp. 30 sqq.; J. McRory, St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians, P. I, pp. 101 sqq.; Lutz, Die kirchliche Lehre von den evangelischen Räten, Freiburg 1909, pp. 69 sqq.
26 2 Cor. VIII, 8 sqq.; cfr. 1 Thess. IV, 2; 2 Thess. III, 6, 1 Tim. VI, 13 sq.
The so-called Apostolic Constitutions declare: "As regards virginity, we have received no precept, but leave it as a matter of conscience 27 to the decision of those who choose it freely. But we exhort them not to make a vow lightly. ... When [a virgin] has vowed chastity, her deeds must correspond with her vow, in order that people may know that she took her vow with a serious intention, not to show contempt for marriage, but to give proof of piety."28
27 ὡς εὐχήν.
28 Constit. Apost., IV, c. 14 (ed. 12; Funk, I, 235).
- A precept, as said above, is a matter of strict obligation, whereas a counsel is left to the free choice of the person to whom it is proposed. Man is at liberty to choose between what is good and what is better.29 There is no law compelling him to choose the more perfect means for attaining his end. It follows that to choose the less perfect means is no sin, and that every man is free to do so in case of doubt. But it also follows that those who feel morally certain that they are called to a life of higher perfection, are bound to obey the call.
29 1 Cor. VII, 37 sqq.; 2 Cor. VIII, 7 sqq.; IX, 7; Philem. 13 sqq. —Cfr. Conc. Trident., Sess. XXV, de Regul. et Monial., c. 17. —F. Sawicki, Katholische Kirche und sittliche Persönlichkeit, Cologne 1907, pp. 102 sqq.
"The Evangelical Counsels," says Bishop Martin, "are appointed for the perfection of the faithful in general, not of each individual in particular. There are circumstances which may render it impossible or dangerous for an individual to follow these counsels.... Hence God does not will all to follow them, but only those whom He has called and who are not prevented by other duties. On the other hand, a counsel may sometimes become a duty. Thus if I know that I cannot save my soul in the world, I am obliged to enter a religious order, because otherwise I should expose myself to great danger. But even in such a case it is not the counsel as such that binds, but the duty of choosing the right vocation." 30 III. It is unnecessary to prove our thesis from Tradition. The Catholic Church is, so to speak, erected upon the Evangelical Counsels. The ideas of poverty and obedience are embodied in Christ Himself,31 and the high value of virginity appears from His life and that of His Blessed Mother.32 The Shepherd of Hermas clearly inculcates the Catholic doctrine of supererogatory works.33 A number of treatises on virginity by St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, St. Methodius, and St. Gregory Nazianzen give testimony to the belief of the early Church in the Evangelical Counsels. St. Augustine, paradoxical though it may sound, while he did not employ the term opus supererogationis, actually created it.34 From the very beginning the Church put the Evangelical Counsels into practice and rejected the claims of Helvidius, Jovinian, Vigilantius,35 and other heretics who attacked them.36
30 C. Martin, Lehrbuch der kath. Moral, 5th ed., pp. 88 sq.; cfr. St. Thomas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, c. 134; F. X. Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, pp. 142 sqq.; A. Ott, Die Bettelorden und ihre Verteidigung durch Thomas von Aquin, Treves 1903, pp. 26 sqq.
31 Cfr. Matth. VIII, 20; XXVI, 42; Mark XIV, 36; Luke II, 7, 51; VIII, 2 sq.; XXII, 42; John IV, 34; V, 30; VI, 38; Rom. V, 19; 2 Cor. VIII, 9; Phil. II, 7 sq.; Heb. V, 8; X, 7 sqq.
32 Matt. I, 18-25; Luke I, 34-38.—Cfr. G. M. Galfano, La Vergine delle Vergini, Palermo 1882, pp. 237 sqq.; Pohle-Preuss, Mariology, 2nd ed., St. Louis 1916, pp. 83 sqq.; Schaefer-Brossart, The Mother of Jesus in Holy Scripture, New York 1913, pp. 10 sqq.; O. Bardenhewer, Marias Verkündigung, Freiburg 1905; M. Meinertz, Der Jakobusbrief, Freiburg 1905, pp. 16 sqq.; E. Neubert, Marie dans l’Église Anténicéenne, Paris 1908.—On the Jewish view of virginity see Lev. XXI, 1-3, 13; V. Zapletal, O.P., Alttestamentliches, Fribourg (Switzerland), 1904, pp. 78 sqq.; H. Weiss, Das Gelübde Jephthes, Braunsberg 1907; E. Mader, Die Menschenopfer der alten Hebräer, Freiburg 1909.—On the essential distinction between Christian and Vestal virgins, see J. Lipsius, De Vesta et Vestalibus Syntagma, Antwerp 1603, pp. 31 sqq.; St. Ambrose, De Virginibus, I, c. 4, n. 15; De Virginitate, c. 3, n. 13; Epist., XVIII, n. 11; St. Augustine, Contra Faust. Manich., XX, c. 21; Prudentius, Contra Symmach., II, v. 1054 sqq.
33 Cfr. V. Schweitzer, “Der Pastor Hermae und die Opera supererogatoria,” in the Theol. Quartalschrift, Tübingen, 1904, pp. 539 sqq.; A. Harnack, Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums, Vol. I, 2nd ed., Leipsic 1906, pp. 186 sq.
34 Cfr. St. Augustine, De S. Virginitate, c. 30: “For just as it can be said, ‘You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill,’ so it cannot be said, ‘You shall not marry.’ The former things are exacted; the latter are offered. If the latter are done, they are praised; if the former are not done, they are condemned. In the former the Lord commands what is due from you; but in the latter, if you spend anything beyond what is required, He will repay you when He returns.” (Migne, P. L., XL, 412).—The oft (but wrongly) quoted Serm. 161 de Temp. was not written by St. Augustine. Cfr. Ps.-Augustine, Append. Serm., 273 (al. 61 de Temp.), in Migne's P. L., XXXIX, 2258.
35 Cfr. St. Jerome, Liber de Perpetua Virginitate B. Mariae adv. Helvidium; Libri Duo ad Iovinianum; Liber contra Vigilantium (Migne, P. L., XXIII, 183, 212, 339). Cfr. Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 601 sqq.; W. Haller, Jovinianus, Leipsic 1897, p. 145; W. Schmidt, Vigilantius, Münster 1860, pp. 48 sqq.; A. Reville, Vigilance de Calagurris, Paris 1902.
36 Cfr. J. Wilpert, Die gottgeweihten Jungfrauen in den ersten Jahrhunderten der Kirche, Freiburg 1892, pp. 6 sqq.
The principle underlying the Catholic teaching on the counsels was never seriously challenged until the time of the so-called Reformation. Protestants maintain that the commandment of perfect charity binds all men, and that no one can go beyond it. But Christ plainly says that we love God if we "keep His commandments." 37 Hence if we wish to love God, we must perform the good deeds required of us as a matter of duty, and avoid sin. But in the choice of means we are free. We can choose either the more or the less perfect. In other words, we are not bound to love God in the most perfect manner possible, or do all the good we can do, or always choose that which is better in preference to that which is simply good. To practice the highest conceivable degree of charity (amor intensive smnmus) is a privilege reserved to the holy souls in Heaven.
37 Cfr. John XIV, 21, 23 sq.; XV, 10; 1 John II, 3-6; V, 3; 2 John VI. —St. Gregory the Great, Hom. in Evang., XXX, n. 1: "Truth says: If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. The proof of love, therefore, is the performance of the work." (Migne, P. L., LXXVI, 1220).
Another Protestant objection is that every man is bound to become constantly more perfect, and no one can achieve more or merit a greater reward than the rest. Those who raise this objection rest it on Luke XVII, 10: "When you shall have done all these things that are commanded you, say: We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which we ought to do." The command to be as perfect as possible binds all. But no one is bound to be always doing the most perfect good work he is capable of. Every man is free to choose between the various means that lead to perfection. To deduce from the general precept which bids us to strive after perfection, the strict duty of doing not only that which is good, but that which is better, nay the best we are capable of, would lead to undue rigorism. On the other hand, upon closer examination the Scriptural text quoted will be found to contain nothing more than an enunciation of the fundamental truth that whatever good there is in us we owe primarily to the grace of God, and therefore we should always be humble.38
38 John XV, 5; 1 Cor. I, 31; III, 7; 2 Cor. III, 5; X, 17. —Cfr. Conc. Trident., Sess. VI, c. 16: "Far be it that a Christian man should either trust or glory in himself and not in the Lord, whose goodness toward men is so great that He wills those things which are His gifts to be their merits." —Cfr. St. Celestine, Epist. ad Episc. Galliae, I, c. 12, n. 14 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 141).
READINGS. —St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 1a 2ae, qu. 108, art. 4; 2a 2ae, qu. 184, art. 3 and 4; qu. 186, art. 3-7. —IDEM, Summa contra Gentiles, III, c. 130-137 (Rickaby, God and His Creatures, London 1905, pp. 293 sqq.) —IDEM, An Apology for the Religious Orders, Edited by J. Procter, London 1902. —A. Winterstein, Die christliche Lehre vom Erdengut, Mayence 1898, pp. 87 sqq. —J. G. Barthier, De la Perfection Chrétienne, Vol. II, pp. 5, 39, 105, 150. —J. Mausbach, Catholic Moral Teaching and its Antagonists (tr. by Buchanan), New York 1914, pp. 270 sqq. —H. Denifle, O.P., Luther and Lutherdom (tr. by Volz), Vol. I, p. 1, pp. 146 sqq. —F. J. Lutz, Die kirchliche Lehre von den evangelischen Räten, Paderborn 1907, pp. 48 sqq. —A. S. Barnes in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, pp. 435 sq.—H. J. Cladder, S.J., Als die Zeit erfüllt war, Freiburg 1915. —Suarez, De Statu Perfectionis, c. VI sqq. —St. Francis de Sales, Treatise of the Love of God, Book VIII.—Addis and Arnold, Cath. Dictionary, 9th ed., London 1917, pp. 335 sq. —Thos. Slater, S.J., The Foundation of True Morality, N. Y. 1920, pp. 51 sqq.