ARTICLE II: ON THE OBJECT OF FAITH

256. • The formal object of Faith, or the reason on account of which one believes, is the authority of God speaking, as endowed with infinite wisdom and veracity.

But the material object, of which alone the discussion here treats, consists of the things to be known and believed by necessity both of means (which being omitted, even inculpably, salvation is not obtained) and of precept.

§ I. On The Things Necessarily To Be Known And Believed By Necessity Of Means.

257. • It is certain that two things are to be known and believed by necessity of means: 1° that God is: He who approaches God must believe that He is;¹ - 2° that He is a rewarder: He must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder to those who seek Him.² - But whether other things must be believed explicitly by necessity of means for salvation is controverted; hence concerning them:

258. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Is explicit Faith in the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation required by necessity of means?

Resp. There is given a twofold probable opinion.

The first opinion affirms altogether. The reason is:

1° As to the Incarnation, because salvation is not given except through Christ; therefore that means must necessarily be explicitly known and believed.

2° As to the Most Holy Trinity, because Faith in this mystery is the foundation of our salvation; for Baptism, which is the Sacrament of Faith, must be conferred in the name of the Father, etc. ... But what is the foundation of salvation ought to be the primary object of Faith, and therefore to be believed according to itself and explicitly. - Thus Collet, Antoine.³ - Concerning this opinion St. Alphonsus⁴ says that it is more common and seems more probable.

The second opinion, which also seems sufficiently probable to St. Alphonsus,⁴ denies. The reason is because before Christ implicit Faith in these mysteries sufficed; therefore even after His coming it ought to suffice. For Christ did not change the means. - Thus Suarez,⁵ Lugo.⁶ Nor does the proposition condemned by Innocent XI under n. 64 stand in the way, they say; it sounds thus: A man is capable of absolution however much he labors under ignorance of the mysteries of the Most Holy Trinity and the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It does not stand in the way, they say; for it could rightly be condemned by reason of the first part, in which it is asserted that a man is capable of absolution however much he generally labors under ignorance of the mysteries of Faith. See p. XVII.

There are those who think that each opinion can be reconciled in this way. They teach, namely, that explicit faith in the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity and the Incarnation now, that is, after the coming of Christ, is required by necessity of means hypothetically, or secundum quid; namely, for all to whom the Gospel has been sufficiently announced and who are not so dull that in no way can they perceive these mysteries, explicit faith in these mysteries is absolutely necessary by necessity of means; but for those to whom the Gospel has not been preached, implicit faith in them is necessary by necessity of means, which implicit faith they recognize in him who believes that God will save men through means known to Himself; which faith, they say, certainly includes Christ the Redeemer, and consequently the Most Holy Trinity. And with this distinction indeed they say the words of Acts⁷ must be understood: In every nation, he who fears Him and works justice is acceptable to Him. With the same distinction employed, there is, they say, no necessity of a miracle for saving observers of the natural law who lack explicit knowledge of these mysteries, nor by any reason will it be possible to say that the condition of the human race after Christ was changed not for the better but for the worse, since before Christ implicit faith in these mysteries sufficed.

Quaer. 2° Can he be absolved who is ignorant of those things which are certainly of necessity of means?

Resp. Negatively. Neither licitly nor validly. Thus all. The reason is because that person, through defect of a means simply necessary, is incapable of justification; therefore he is also incapable of absolution. Otherwise no one can have hope of salvation unless he believes that God is a rewarder.

259. • Quaer. 3° Can one ignorant of the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation be absolved?

Resp. 1° He cannot licitly be absolved outside a case of necessity which altogether urges; the reason is because a confessor absolving this person exposes the Sacrament to danger of nullity, as is clear from the preceding Question 1. - Hence the confessor ought either first to instruct the penitent, or dismiss him until he has been sufficiently instructed.¹ Yet observe with St. Alphonsus² these words of St. Leonard of Port Maurice: "It is not good counsel to dismiss such ignorant persons, that these things may be taught them by others, because no other fruit will be hoped for except that they so remain ignorant; and therefore it is expedient to teach them briefly the principal aforesaid mysteries, causing at the same time that they elicit with him acts of faith, hope, charity, and contrition, obliging them nevertheless that in the future they have themselves instructed perfectly concerning the other mysteries necessary to be known by necessity of precept."

But if the question concerns penitents of this sort to whom it would be a great embarrassment or offense to be interrogated about these things, it will be fitting for the confessor simply and clearly to propose these mysteries to them, and then to elicit an act of faith with them.

Resp. 2° Speculatively it can be doubted whether he can validly be absolved who is situated in invincible ignorance of these mysteries. The reason is deduced from the things said in the second opinion of the first Question. But in practice confessions performed in good faith with such ignorance will have to be repeated (see the things said at n. 67, 2°). But whether in a case of necessity he can licitly be absolved can be doubted, since the S. Congregation of the Office on May 10, 1703 declared that "a missionary," before he confers Baptism on "an adult, even one dying, who is not altogether incapable," is held to "explain to him the mysteries of Faith which are necessary by necessity of means, such as," it says, "the principal mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation." Nevertheless in necessity, but under condition, he concerning whom it is doubted whether he perceives these things and can perceive them must be absolved,¹ as also the dying person who is altogether incapable here and now of perceiving them. But if there is not certainty concerning his present incapacity, and death is not altogether proximate, he will have to be instructed briefly; but if after absolution, conferred without previous instruction because of death which was thought altogether proximate, he survives, after brief instruction he will have to be absolved again.

§ II. On The Things Necessarily To Be Known And Believed By Necessity Of Precept.

260. • Any faithful person, in order to establish a Christian life, when he has come to the use of reason, besides those things which he must know by necessity of means, is also held, by necessity of precept, explicitly to believe and to know, at least in a rough mode, summarily and as to substance - in such a way indeed that he who did not know them in that mode would sin mortally, unless invincible ignorance or incapacity excused him - 1) the Symbol of the Apostles: as the Christian profession itself demands, because in it is compendiously contained whatever concerning God, concerning Christ, and concerning the Church must chiefly be believed; the practice of the faithful and the Roman Catechism confirm this; - 2) the Lord's Prayer; for this was commanded by Christ and contains all things to be sought from God. They add the Angelic Salutation from the use of the faithful, but under light obligation according to the common opinion; - 3) the Precepts of the Decalogue and of the Church, for that the individual ones may be observed, the individual ones must be known; - 4) the Sacraments especially necessary, as Baptism, Eucharist, and Penance; the others, when one is about to receive them, that he may rightly receive them.

I said: 1° At least in a rough mode, summarily and as to substance, from St. Charles Borromeo;² for not all are held under mortal sin to know the aforesaid things by memory, or in that order and with those words by which they are proposed in the Catechism; but as to the Symbol, the precepts of the Decalogue and of the Church, and the Sacraments, it suffices that, when asked, they answer sufficiently to the individual points. - As to the Lord's Prayer it suffices if they know that all good things are to be sought from God; for the Doctors say that not to hold it by memory is only venial, provided when asked they know how to answer in general.

I said: 2° Unless invincible ignorance or incapacity excuses; thus those are excused for whom either a teacher was lacking, or to whom the obligation of learning such things never came into mind, or who are so rude that they can in no way comprehend them or retain them by memory; for there is no obligation of impossible things.

I said: 3° When he has come to the use of reason; for then begins the obligation of learning them, since the obligation begins of directing oneself through them to the ultimate end.

261. • Quaer. Can those who are ignorant of those things which must be known by necessity of precept be absolved?

Resp. Affirmatively. If they are sorry, in the case in which the ignorance was gravely culpable, with the purpose of learning them, and have not otherwise, after being admonished, neglected to learn them - in which case they are to be treated as recidivists - they can immediately be absolved. If otherwise, let them learn these things first before they are absolved.