The Truths Necessarily to Be Believed

9. Declaration. Now it is asked which truths must necessarily be believed explicitly. It does not suffice that everything which the Church proposes to be believed as revealed be implicitly believed, but some truths must be believed explicitly and therefore also known. Further, some truths are to be known and believed explicitly by necessity of means, others by necessity of precept. But with respect to the remaining truths it suffices that each one believe them implicitly, being prepared also to believe explicitly any which he has known to have been proposed by the Church as to be believed.

10. Truths to be believed by necessity of means. 1. It is certain that by necessity of means unto justification and salvation this twofold truth must be explicitly known and believed: that God is, and that God is a rewarder: for a. But without faith it is impossible to please God: for he who approaches God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder to those who seek Him.¹ b. The contrary proposition, "Only faith in one God seems necessary by necessity of means, but not explicit faith in a rewarder," has been condemned.² c. Man cannot be converted to God and tend into Him unless he knows that God is, and hopes that He will pardon his sins and confer eternal beatitude upon him.

Hence it follows that never, not even in the article of death, can baptism or absolution be conferred on an adult who is ignorant of these two mysteries, the knowledge and faith of which are certainly necessary by necessity of means; for since he lacks the absolutely necessary means, he is not capable of the grace of justification.

2. Practically, it is probable that after the promulgation of the Gospel, the mysteries also of the Most Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation must be explicitly known and believed by the same necessity of means unto justification and salvation; but certainly they must be believed implicitly, and by necessity of precept also explicitly.

a. The question whether, for obtaining justification, faith also of each mystery, of the Most Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation, is required by necessity of means, is very difficult and disputed among theologians. Those who affirm the necessity of means attempt to demonstrate it not indeed from the nature of the thing, but by positive arguments. But those who deny this chiefly show from St. Paul that faith in only the twofold truth suffices, since, speaking of the necessity of faith, he teaches: Without faith it is impossible to please God: for he who approaches God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder to those who seek Him.³

The same authors argue thus: before the coming of Christ explicit faith in these mysteries was not necessary; but it cannot be admitted that gentiles after the coming of Christ can be saved with greater difficulty than before His coming, which would have to be affirmed if explicit faith in these mysteries were necessary by necessity of means.⁴

b. Although the opinion which denies this is not to be called morally certain, nevertheless it can be called truly probable, indeed theoretically more probable, and it is called sufficiently probable by St. Alphonsus, to whom the affirmative opinion seems more probable (n. 2);⁵ therefore for practice these things are to be held:

a. An adult not yet baptized who is found in the article of death and cannot be instructed because of the gravity of the illness can be baptized; in the same way a baptized adult who in the article of death cannot be instructed can be absolved conditionally, even if each is ignorant of the mysteries of the Trinity and of the Incarnation: for since their knowledge and faith is probably not absolutely necessary, it is permitted to use this probable opinion concerning the value of the sacraments where the eternal salvation of the dying person is at stake.

b. But outside the article of death, it is not permitted to baptize an adult not yet baptized, nor to absolve a baptized adult, if they are ignorant of the mysteries of the Trinity and of the Incarnation: for since the opinion affirming absolute necessity is probable, baptism and penance could be frustrated of their effect. Therefore an adult of this kind must either be dismissed until he has been sufficiently instructed, or immediately before the conferral of the sacrament he must be instructed, insofar as there is need, with the admonition added that he should acquire for himself the knowledge of those things which must be known and believed by precept.⁶

c. Therefore an adult who for some time had confessed while ignorant of the mysteries of the Most Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation need not necessarily repeat the confessions made in this state of ignorance: for confessions are not necessarily to be repeated unless it is certain that they were invalid; but those confessions were probably valid.

¹ Heb. 11:6.

² Proposition 22, condemned by Innocent XI.

³ Heb. 11:6.

⁴ Cf. Schmid, loc. cit., n. 137 ff.

⁵ Citations from the moral theology of St. Alphonsus are made according to the typical edition.

⁶ Cf. Holy Office, 3 May 1703.

11. Truths to be believed by necessity of precept. From the precept of Christ the Lord, obliging under grave matter, all the faithful, when they have arrived at the use of reason, are bound, besides those things which must be believed by necessity of means, explicitly to know and believe the principal mysteries of the Christian faith; besides this they ought to know the commandments which are to be observed by all: a. Going into the whole world, preach the Gospel to every creature. He who has believed will be saved, but he who has not believed will be condemned.¹ Therefore going, teach all nations ... teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.² b. Besides this, the state of the Christian man requires that he know and believe the principal mysteries of the Christian faith, and know and observe the precepts common to all.

¹ Mark 16:15-16.

² Matt. 28:19-20.

12. Declaration of this precept. 1. What things in particular must be known by necessity of precept and, insofar as they are revealed, also believed, we learn from the usage and practice of the Church; but according to all authors these are reduced to these four:

a. The Apostles' Creed,¹ which contains the sum of the Christian faith.

In the Apostles' Creed, however, some things are contained which must be explicitly believed not under grave obligation, but only under light obligation: a. the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Mary; b. the burial of Christ and the descent into hell, because these circumstances are of lesser moment; c. the session at the right hand of the Father and the communion of saints, because these are too difficult for the faithful to grasp. Indeed, some things need not be known even under light obligation: that Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again on the third day.

b. The precepts of the decalogue, which ought to be observed by each one, and by parity of reason the common precepts of the Church also must be added.

The precepts of the decalogue must not only be known, but also believed, for these precepts have been revealed so that they may be observed by all; but what has been revealed by God must be believed with divine faith. The precepts of the Church, however, are not to be believed, but only known and observed, because they have not been revealed.

c. The Lord's Prayer, which contains all things which are to be hoped for and asked from God.

d. The sacraments necessary for all: baptism, penance, and the Eucharist; but the other sacraments he ought to know who is about to receive them.

Besides these four, there are not other things which all the faithful must know and believe, except the manner of eliciting acts of faith, hope, charity, and contrition, even if a fixed formula for eliciting them is not held in memory; but by reason of state and condition, for example of a priest or parish priest, it can happen that someone must explicitly and distinctly know and believe many other things.

2. Generally it is not necessary that the faithful hold these truths in memory word for word or in the order in which they are proposed; nor is it required that they have a clear and distinct cognition of each one, but it suffices that they know them as to substance, that is, as to the common and simple meaning of the words.

Nevertheless most authors judge that those who do not learn word for word the symbol of faith, the Lord's Prayer, and the Angelic Salutation, commit a venial sin, unless dulness of mind excuses them, especially since it is greatly to be feared that they will entirely neglect the obligation of praying unless they have learned at least the Lord's Prayer and the Angelic Salutation.

a. Therefore under grave obligation it is necessary that the faithful, with respect to the Creed, when asked concerning the several things which are contained in it, answer rightly; with respect to the decalogue and the precepts of the Church, that, when asked, they know that those things are commanded or prohibited by God or by the Church; with respect to the Lord's Prayer, that they know that God is to be prayed to and that all goods of soul and body are to be sought from Him; with respect to the sacraments, that they know the things which are necessarily required so that they can be received with fruit.

b. From these things for practice it follows: a. that not only those who neglect to learn these things sin, gravely or lightly according to the gravity of the matter, but also pastors who do not instruct their subjects, and parents who do not instruct their children, either by themselves or through others, in those things which are necessary for salvation.

b. In confession penitents who are probably presumed to lack this knowledge are to be questioned concerning the things which are necessary to know. And since in our time, in matters pertaining to religion, those who in profane matters appear sufficiently cultivated are frequently very unformed, and these are easily offended by questions of this kind, it will be better to teach them concerning the necessary truths in such a way that acts of faith are elicited with them concerning these truths.

c. Those who are ignorant of the things necessary to know by necessity of precept cannot be absolved unless they have first promised that they are willing to learn them; and where the ignorance is gravely culpable, unless they first grieve over this sin, accuse it, and conceive the purpose of learning these things afterward.

d. It is clear that those who because of narrowness of mind are incapable of learning these things are not bound by this precept; and if there were men so unformed that they could not conceive and explicitly believe the mysteries of the Most Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation, one should not despair concerning their salvation: for although faith in these mysteries is said to be necessary for adults by necessity of means, the unformed of this kind in this respect are not to be reckoned among adults, but among infants, who cannot elicit faith concerning these mysteries.

e. Those are bound to acquire for themselves a more perfect knowledge of faith who live in circumstances in which, without greater knowledge of religion, they are in great danger of losing faith, as happens to those who must converse more frequently with unbelievers and socialists.

¹ A symbol, etymologically, signifies a collection of several things; in military usage, a sign or tessera by which true soldiers are distinguished from others; in Christian usage, a brief sum of things to be believed. The principal symbols are these three: a. the Apostolic Symbol, which the faithful recite in daily prayers and clerics in the divine office. b. The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Symbol, which was begun by the first general Council of Nicaea and was augmented by the first Council of Constantinople. This, with some explanations added, is that which the Latin Church recites in Mass. c. The Athanasian Symbol, which the Church orders to be recited in the office of Sunday at Prime; nevertheless, learned men commonly deny that it belongs to St. Athanasius. From symbols are to be distinguished professions of faith, of which the more celebrated is the Tridentine, which Pius IV composed and decreed to be emitted with an oath in certain determined circumstances.

Faith is divided into explicit and implicit, according as the object believed is unfolded or not to the mind.

(a) Faith is explicit regarding any truth, when assent is given to that truth as known in itself and expressed in terms proper to itself. Example: He has explicit faith in the Eucharist who has been instructed concerning the meaning of the mystery, and who assents to it according to that distinct knowledge.

(b) Faith is implicit regarding any truth, when that truth is not known or not accepted in itself, but is accepted in another truth. Example: He has implicit faith in the Eucharist who has not yet heard of it, but who accepts all the teachings of the Church, even those he does not know.

Faith is implicit as follows:

(a) Improperly, faith is implicit, if one does not give assent, but is prepared to give it, if necessary, or wishes to give it. These pious dispositions are not the act of faith itself, but they are its beginnings, or preparations leading up to it; they are good, but not sufficient. Example: A pagan who says he would accept the Christian creed, if he thought it were true, or who wishes that he could believe it.

(b) Properly, faith is implicit, if one gives assent to a truth by accepting another in which it is contained, as a particular is contained in a universal (e.g., he who explicitly accepts all the truths of Christianity, implicitly accepts the Eucharist, even when in good faith he thinks it is not revealed), or as an instrument is involved in its principal cause (e.g., he who explicitly believes in the Redemption implicity believes in Baptism, which is the instrument by which Redemption is applied), or as means are contained in their end (e.g., he who explicitly believes that eternal life is a reward, implicitly believes that good works must be performed as a means to that end), or as the reality is expressed in the figure (e.g., those in the Old Testament who explicitly believed in the Paschal Lamb, implicitly believed in the sacrifice of Christ of which the Paschal Lamb was the figure), or as the assent of the disciple is bound up with the assent of the teacher (e.g., the child who explicitly accepts as true the doctrines of faith taught by his pastor, implicitly believes the sense and implications contained in the latter’s instructions).

The points about which explicit faith is required can be reduced to four heads (see Catechism of the Council of Trent). These heads are:

(a) The things to be believed: “Preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth shall be saved” (Mark, xvi. 15). The Gospel doctrine is summarized in the Apostles’ Creed;

(b) The things to be done: “Teach them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matt., xxviii. 20). The Ten Commandments (see Vol. II) are called the epitome of the whole law;

(c) The ordinances to be observed; “Baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matt, xxviii. 19). The Seven Sacraments are the sacred instruments through which the merits of the Passion of Christ are applied to the soul;

(d) The petitions to be made to God: “Thus shall you pray: Our Father, etc.” (Matt., vi. 9). The prayer (see Vol. II) given us by Christ teaches us both the manner of prayer and the requests that should be offered.

The formulas of Christian teaching as summarized in the Creeds, since they must be brief and orderly, are divided into short and connected propositions, which are therefore known as articles. Brevity being the character of Creeds, not all revealed truths are expressed in them as articles, but only those that have the following characteristics:

(a) An article of the Creed deals with one of the two main objects of belief, namely, the end of man, which is eternal life (Heb., xi. 1), and the means thereto, which is Jesus Christ (John, xvii. 3). Other things, which are proposed for faith, not for their own sake, but only on account of their relation to these two main objects (e.g., the wandering of the Israelites in the desert, the details of the journeys of St. Paul, etc.), are not mentioned in the Creeds.

(b) An article of the Creed deals only with those doctrines concerning eternal life and Christ which are in a special manner unseen or difficult, for faith is “the evidence of things that appear not” (Heb., xi. 1). Other doctrines which have no special difficulty of their own are considered as implicit in those that express the general mysteries, and hence they are not mentioned. Thus, the three Persons of the Trinity are given distinct articles, because the mysteriousness of the Triune God cannot be reduced to any more general mystery, whereas the Eucharist is not mentioned, as having no mystery that is not implied in the articles on the divine omnipotence and the sanctification of man through Christ.

Has there been an increase in the articles of faith?

(a) If by increase is meant the addition through new revelation of main beliefs not contained in the primitive revelation, there has never been an increase in the articles of faith; for from the beginning God made known His own being, which includes the eternal things of God and the end or happiness of man, and His providence, which includes the temporal dispensations of God and the means for the salvation of man (Heb., xi. 6).

(b) If by increase is meant the addition of new revelations that brought out more clearly and definitely things contained in previous revelation, there was an increase in the articles of faith from the beginning of revelations down to the end of the Apostolic age. Thus, the nature of God and His purpose as regards the redemption of humanity were brought out ever more distinctly by new revelations in Old Testament times (Exod., vi. 2), and were given in final and complete form by the revelation of Christ (Heb., i. 1; Eph., iii. 5; Heb., xii. 27, 28; II Tim., i. 13).

(c) If by increase is meant a clearer and fuller explanation of the revelation once delivered to the Saints, there has been and always can be an increase of articles of faith. Thus, in the Council of Nicaea the Apostles’ Creed was amplified; in the Council of Constantinople the Creed of Nicaea was added to, and similarly today or tomorrow the Pope could add new explanations or developments to the Creed, if new heresies or necessities required that the true sense of revelation already given should be brought out more clearly or fully.

There are three principal Creeds used by the Church:

(a) the Apostles’ Creed, which according to an early tradition was composed by the Apostles themselves before they separated to preach the Gospel. It was in use from the first centuries in the Roman Church, which required that the catechumens learn and recite it before receiving Baptism. It is divided into twelve articles;

(b) the Nicene Creed, which is used in the Mass and was drawn up at the Council of Nicaea (325) against the Arian denial of the divinity of Christ, and was revised by the Council of Constantinople (381) against the Macedonians, who refused to acknowledge the divinity of the Holy Ghost;

(c) the Athanasian Creed, which is used in the Office of Prime and is a resume of the teaching of St. Athanasius on the Trinity and Incarnation. It was composed in the West some time after the beginning of the fifth century.

Summary of the teaching of the First Article of the Creed: “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.”—(a) “I believe,” i.e., I give unhesitating assent to God revealing His mysterious truths; (b) “in God,” i.e., the Supreme Being, one in nature and three in persons; (c) “the Father,” i.e., our Maker and Provider, from whom also we receive the spirit of adoption of sons; (d) “almighty,” i.e., all-powerful, and therefore all-wise and endowed with every other perfection in the highest degree; (e) “Creator,” i.e., who freely produced the world out of nothing, without external model or effort of any sort, and who preserves, rules and moves all creatures; (f) “of heaven and earth,” i.e., of the world of pure spirits, of matter, and of man, who is at the confines of matter and spirit—in other words, of all finite things, visible and invisible.

Summary of the Second Article: “And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord.”—(a) “Jesus,” a name given by command of God and meaning “Saviour”; (b) “Christ,” i.e., “the anointed,” because He was King, Priest, and Prophet; (c) “His only Son,” i.e., born of the Father before all ages, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father, by whom all things were made; (d) “our Lord,” for as God He shares all the perfections of the divine nature, as man He has redeemed us and thus deservedly acquired the title of Lord over us, while as the God-man He is the Lord of all created things. It should be noted that there is nothing imperfect or carnal in the generation of the Son, or in the procession of the Holy Ghost, for God is a spirit and all-perfect.

Summary of the Third Article: “Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.”—(a) “Who was conceived.” The Only-begotten Son, the second Person of the Trinity, for us men and for our salvation, became incarnate and was made man. Thus, the same Divine Person is in both the divine and human natures, and the union preserves the properties and the actions of both natures. (b) “By the Holy Ghost.” At the moment when Mary consented to the announcement of the angel, the body of Christ was formed in her womb from her flesh, the rational soul was infused, and the divine and human natures were united in the Person of the Word. Thus, Mary is truly the Mother of God. This conception was miraculous, accomplished without the aid of man, through the sole operation of the three Persons of the Trinity. Being an external work of God in which love towards us is especially manifested, the Incarnation is attributed to the Holy Ghost, who in the internal life of the Deity proceeds as the mutual love of Father and Son. (c) “Born of the Virgin Mary.” Mary was ever a virgin, before, during, and after childbirth; immaculate and holy in soul; the spiritual Mother of whom Christians are born in holiness.

Summary of the Fourth Article: “Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried.”—(a) The effect of that which is contained in this article is expressed in the words of the Nicene Creed, “for us.” The passion and death of Christ, willed by Himself, accomplished our salvation, as satisfaction, sacrifice and redemption; (b) The manner in which this was brought about is declared in the words above quoted. In His human nature Christ suffered agony and pain of body; He was sentenced to death by the Roman governor and nailed to the cross. His soul and body were separated in death, although the Divinity never departed from either, and His dead body was laid in the tomb.

Summary of the Fifth Article: “He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead.”—(a) “He descended.” After His death the soul of Christ went to the abode of the departed, to liberate those who were there. (b) “Into hell.” The name hell is applied in a wide sense to all those secret abodes in which are detained the souls of those who have not obtained the happiness of heaven—viz., the hell of the damned, in which the impenitent suffer eternal pain of loss and sense; purgatory, in which the souls of just men are cleansed by temporary punishments; limbo, where the fathers of the Old Testament awaited in peaceful repose the coming of Christ. It was this last abode into which the soul of Christ entered. (c) “The third day”—i.e., on Sunday morning, the third day after His burial. (d) “He rose again.” As He had laid down His life by His own power, so He took it up again by His own power. (e) “From the dead.” Christ not only returned to life, He also conquered death; He rose to die no more, and thus He is first in the final resurrection. (f) “According to the scriptures.” These words are added in the Creed of Constantinople, to call attention to the fact that the resurrection is the attestation of the truth of our Lord’s claims and doctrine (I Cor., xv. 14, 17; Matt., xii. 39, 40).

Summary of the Sixth Article: “He ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty.”—(a) “He ascended.” By His own power as God and man Christ ascended into heaven. (b) “Into heaven.” As God, He never forsook heaven, the Divinity being omnipresent; but as man, body and soul, He ascended to the abode of glory forty days after the resurrection. (c) “Sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty.” Christ is said to stand at the right hand of God, inasmuch as He is our Mediator with the Father (Acts, vii. 55; Heb., vii. 25; John, xiv. 2); He is said to sit at the right hand of the Father to express the permanent possession of royal and supreme power and glory (Eph., i. 20-22; Heb., i. 13).

Summary of the Seventh Article: “From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.”—There is a particular judgment at death; at the end of the World, of which the time is uncertain, there will be a general judgment, both of the living and the dead. Christ will come a second time, and as Judge will pass sentence either of eternal loss and pain or of eternal happiness.

Summary of the Eighth Article: “I believe in the Holy Ghost.”—The Third Person of the Trinity is equal to the Father and the Son, proceeds from them both as their mutual love, and is spoken of, therefore, by appropriation, as the Author of works of grace and sanctification, in which especially the charity of God is manifested: “The Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who spoke by the prophets” (Creed of Constantinople).

Summary of the Ninth Article: “I believe the Holy Catholic Church; the Communion of Saints.”—(a) The Church pertains to the material, not the formal object of divine faith (see 754), and hence it is not said: “I believe in the Church.” We believe of the Church that she is the visible society made up of the faithful scattered throughout the world, called also the house of God (I Tim., iii. 15), the flock of Christ, the spouse of Christ (II Cor., xi. 2), the body of Christ (Eph., i. 23; Col., i. 24); that besides the Church militant on earth, composed of both the good and the bad, and outside of which are unbelievers and the excommunicated, there is the Church triumphant in heaven and the Church suffering in purgatory; that there are four marks by which the true Church may be recognized—viz., that she is one, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic; that she is divine in her origin and possesses divinely given powers. (b) “The Communion of Saints.” The members of the Church have different offices, but there is among them a community of spiritual goods, the Sacraments being a bond of union, and each one profiting according to his condition in the good works done by others, The Church suffering is assisted by our suffrages, while we in turn are helped by the intercessions of the Church triumphant.

Summary of the Tenth Article: “The forgiveness of sins.”—God forgives all sins, when they are truly repented of, either through Baptism (in case of sins before Baptism) or through the due exercise of the power of the keys given the Church (in case of sins after Baptism). Venial sins may be forgiven by private repentance.

Summary of the Eleventh Article: “The resurrection of the body.”—The soul is immortal, the body mortal. But at the end of the world the bodies of all the dead, even though corrupted, shall be restored and reunited with their principle of life—i.e., the soul to which they belonged. Substantially, the risen body will be identical with the mortal body, but it will have certain new qualities corresponding to its new state.

Summary of the Twelfth Article: “Life everlasting.”—Those who die in the friendship of God will be received into unending happiness, in which they will be exempted from all evil and enjoy the beatific vision and other divine gifts.

— Explicitly or implicitly, whatever things God has revealed are to be believed. He who refuses to give faith even to one point derogates from the supreme truth, and consequently can no longer believe anything on account of God's authority alone. He has preferred the false evidence, or conclusion, of his own mind to this authority.

— Explicitly, some things are to be believed by necessity of means, others by necessity of precept. Each necessity of acts affects adults alone; for they alone are to be saved by their own acts.

Moreover, that is necessary by necessity of means without which man would not have, toward his end, that proportion which by God's ordination he ought to have.

For necessity in order to salvation can be taken either from the nature of the thing or from the obligation of divine law. From the nature of the thing, when there is question of a disposition required so that we may have toward the end the proportion appointed by divine ordination, or of removing an obstacle by which the end would per se be impeded (for example, of removing the state of sin). Necessity of means directly regards this positive disposition or removal of an obstacle; necessity of precept immediately and formally follows moral obligation. Although for adults the necessity of precept is superadded to the necessity of means.

From the notion is gathered the practical criterion by which they are accustomed to distinguish necessity of means from necessity of precept: involuntary omission does not excuse from necessity of means; it excuses from necessity of precept.

Necessity of means is present more strictly when the matter of the necessary thing can be supplied by no act, no disposition. A necessity of this kind is said to be of means, in reality: thus baptism for infants dying without the use of reason. But if God admits that the necessary thing can be supplied by a formal or virtual intention which is contained in some act, the thing is said to be necessary by necessity of means in desire. Thus baptism can be supplied by an act of perfect charity, for adults who do not have the occasion of baptism, or who are ignorant of its necessity.

— Now indeed, by necessity of means, God must explicitly be believed as existing and as remunerator; that is, as the Apostle says, Heb. 11, 6, "he who comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of those who seek him." And the reason itself is at hand.

It is altogether necessary that man, insofar as he is to be saved by his own acts, formally conjoin his will with the divine will through charity. But unless I know that God is my good, I shall not be able to affect union with God, which belongs to charity or love. But in the present order, where theological charity is required, knowledge by faith alone avails to introduce charity. Therefore explicit faith in God existing and in God the supernatural remunerator must have preceded the indispensable act of charity.

But the disputed question whether the very existence of some first cause distinct from the world, which is a preamble of faith, can itself at the same time be the object of faith ¹, can be passed over by us. It suffices that we teach with the Apostle (Heb. 11, 6) that supernatural and explicit faith in the existence of God is necessary by necessity of means insofar as He Himself reveals it, and besides in His remunerating providence which He exercises toward us. Now indeed, He does not reveal Himself merely as existing, but as existing either one, omnipotent, provident, as He was revealed to the Jews; or one and triune, the Father, as He is revealed to Christians (St. Thomas, lect. 2 on chapter XI of the Epistle to the Hebrews).

Wherefore, when God is proposed as to be believed as existing, He is at the same time proposed as to be believed either as one in three Persons, or as endowed with attributes whose faith is impeded by no natural evidence.

¹ In the school of St. Thomas, this is commonly denied. Cf. St. Thomas, on chapter XI of the Epistle to the Hebrews, lect. 2 toward the end; C. Billot, De virtutibus infusis, De fide, thesis XI; Van Noort, De virtutibus infusis, p. 240 ff. (ed. 1906).

— Are these other two points to be believed by necessity of means: the Trinity and the Incarnation of the Son of God? Some think that this explicit faith is required after the promulgation of the Gospel; more deny this, both because such a necessity is demonstrated from no revealed source, and because that faith is not per se required for an act of perfect charity, and because it seems more consonant with the salvific will of God that He require only that which is, as it were from the nature of the thing, necessary for salvation. Yet because in the Gospel of St. Matthew, last chapter; St. John 3, 16, 18; Acts 4, 12; Rom. 3, 22, faith in Jesus Christ is shown to be a means of justice; because explicit faith in the Most Holy Trinity is to be premised to baptism, the opinion of Suarez (De fide, d. 12, s. 4, nn. 18, 19) and Lugo (De fide, d. 12, nn. 106, 107) seems to be preferred, according to whom this faith is necessary, like baptism itself, in reality, or in desire. And so a positive disposition to first sanctification is not present in the adult except because in his act of charity there is contained the desire of believing these things explicitly. Wherefore, even after justification, he preserves the obligation of believing those two points explicitly as soon as he can, just as he preserves the obligation of receiving the sacrament of baptism.

Thence also it is clear why the necessity of means concerning these two points cannot be gathered from this 64th proposition condemned by Innocent XI: "A man is capable of absolution, however much he labors under ignorance of the mysteries of faith, and even if through negligence, even culpable negligence, he does not know the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ" (Denz., n. 1214).

— Necessity of precept, as such, denotes a mere condition required for attaining the end ¹, that is, the material observance of the thing commanded is not necessary as a means, but this alone is required, that our will be formally conformed with the divine will and so remain in charity.

But that formal conformity is indicated from conscience (cf. I, 338, 339), and hence cannot be destroyed by inculpable ignorance of precepts.

Now indeed, among the duties of the Christian state this is repeated: that the Christian religion be known as to substance, and that the common duties of Christians not be unknown. And because these are contained in the following documents, these documents are to be known under grave obligation, not indeed, at least per se, so that they can be recited, but at least in a coarse way and as to substance:

a) The Apostles' Creed, except, however, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the burial of Christ, and His descent into hell, which, as being secondary, are to be known under slight obligation; except also the name of Pontius Pilate and the circumstance of the third day as to the resurrection, which may be unknown without punishment.

The sitting at the right hand of the Father and the communion of Saints are to be known insofar as they denote the glorious reign of Christ in the heavens, and the beatitude which the Saints participate with Him.

b) The precepts of the Decalogue and those precepts of the Church which affect all;

c) The sacraments most necessary: baptism, eucharist, penance; others, when one wishes to receive them;

d) The Lord's Prayer: insofar as this at least must be known, that all goods are to be asked from God as from a Father;

e) The acts of faith, hope, charity, contrition, so that the faithful can elicit these.

¹ "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." But beware lest you infer from this that the good works of the just, among which the free fulfillment of the commandments is eminent, are not at the same time meritorious causes of eternal life.

Corollaries. — 1. Considering the probable obligation of means of knowing the four points:

a) A healthy man, ignorant of these, can be baptized or absolved before he has distinctly believed these things at the suggestion of the minister or confessor: for example, by making the sign of the cross with the unlearned man, let the minister explain the individual words. Yet it is not necessary that he already be able to recite these from memory, but he is to be admonished concerning the obligation of knowing and better learning them, according to his capacity.

b) Even in dying barbarians, as far as can be done, actual faith in these mysteries is to be obtained; but if this cannot be obtained, they will only be baptized and absolved conditionally.

— 2. Considering the moral incapacity of the unlearned to know otherwise the things which are commanded to be known, it must be inculcated with all force that they learn the same things by memory and accurately. Nor can they neglect that without at least venial fault. Yet there are not lacking, at least in certain regions, unlearned persons who are excused by their very incapacity to grasp and retain these things. But they are less excused, or rather are inexcusable, who, learned in other matters, do not care about knowing religion.

— 3. Considering the good of souls for which he must provide, a pastor sins gravely who neglects to teach children and the faithful the things which they ought to know under grave obligation.

4. Considering his office as minister of the sacrament, the confessor ought to teach those things which here and now are necessary so that the sacrament of penance can be received with fruit; but considering the duty of charity, for fulfilling which he has an easy occasion, the confessor ought to indicate some means by which the penitent can dissipate his excessive ignorance: as, for example, that he procure and read for himself a little book in which these things are clearly set forth; that he hear them from a person who is related, friendly, and competent; that he assist at a sacred function under which catechesis is handed down to the people.

5. Today they exercise a most opportune work of spiritual mercy who, whether alone or gathered together, strive industriously to propagate the knowledge of religion.

— I. Object and necessity of the act of faith. All things which God has revealed are to be believed at least implicitly, lest, derogating from the first truth in some point, we place the false opinion of our own mind before divine authority, and no longer believe anything on account of God's authority alone. Some revealed things are to be believed explicitly also by necessity of means; others, by necessity of precept alone; others, by no necessity. That has necessity of means whose influence is required so that man may attain that proportion toward his end which by God's ordination he ought to have: wherefore it is said to be necessary from the nature of the thing; whatever is required by law has necessity of precept. Involuntary omission excuses from no necessity of means, but indeed excuses from necessity of precept. Moreover, necessity of means can be stricter, in reality, when it is supplied by no act or disposition; and broader, or in desire, when it can be supplied by a formal or virtual intention contained in some other act: thus an act of perfect charity can supply baptism for those who are ignorant of its necessity or lack its occasion.

II. What things, by what necessity, are to be believed. 1. By necessity of means, God must explicitly be believed as existing and as remunerator (Heb. 11, 6); it is disputed whether the Trinity and the Incarnation of the Son of God also must be believed by necessity of means. The opinion of Suarez and Lugo is to be preferred, who affirm necessity of means, in reality or in desire, concerning this faith.

2. By necessity of precept, the Christian religion is to be known as to substance. Wherefore, the principal points of the Apostles' Creed are to be believed explicitly; and the precepts of the Decalogue and the common precepts of the Church are to be known; the sacraments most necessary; the Lord's Prayer; acts of faith, hope, charity, contrition. Per se it is not required that the formulas can be recited.

Up to this point it has been proved that actual faith is necessary for an adult man by necessity of means. Now at once the question arises: What are the truths of faith which must be believed by necessity of means?

499. Proposition 1. By at least implicit faith all things must be believed, whatever God has revealed to us and proposed to us through his Church. This is clear from what was said above, n. 484, concerning the material object of faith. But this implicit faith does not suffice; in addition, explicit faith must be had at least concerning certain truths. Hence it is established:

Proposition 2. Explicit faith a) in God existing and b) rewarding was always necessary for all adults by necessity of means.

Thus almost all theologians teach, and it is drawn a) from the words of St. Paul:²⁵ "He who comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder to those who seek him." b) From the fact that Innocent XI condemned proposition (22): "Only faith in one God seems necessary by necessity of means, but not explicit faith in the rewarder."²⁶ c) It follows from the very nature of faith that these two articles must be believed explicitly. For all men must come to God, in whom alone man's beatitude consists, as was proved above, n. 20 sqq. But no one can come to God unless a) he knows him to exist; but only by faith is it known that God (as he is in himself) exists. Therefore faith in God's existence is necessary for obtaining beatitude. Besides, b) in order that man may come, he must have a motive; this is supernatural remuneration in the other life. Moreover, since the virtues to be exercised, without which beatitude cannot be obtained, are so difficult, it is most fitting that all believe that God will reward each one according to his works. - Even in the Old Testament it was necessary for all adults to believe these two truths.

Corollary. Since faith in these two truths is necessary by necessity of means and therefore is a necessary means of salvation, never, not even in the article of death, can an adult who is ignorant of these articles of faith be baptized or sacramentally absolved.

499. Controversy. Whether besides these two truths others also must be explicitly believed by necessity of means, theologians do not agree. St. Thomas²⁷ and with him several Thomists and several other theologians alleged by St. Alphonsus²⁸ seem to teach that explicit faith in Christ the Redeemer and in the Most Holy Trinity is necessary by necessity of means. But several others absolutely deny this, e.g. Suarez, Lugo, Chr. Pesch, Bouquillon, Gutberlet, and also at least probably certain Thomists, such as Dominic Soto, Gotti, Sylvius, etc. Martin, in the work cited above, broadly defends the affirmative opinion, to which St. Paul seems to favor when writing: "But the justice of God [i.e. our justification] through the faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all who believe in him; for there is no distinction."²⁹ In a similar sense St. John says (17:3): "This is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."

This affirmative opinion must be followed in practice. Hence the Holy Office on January 25, 1703, declared that before baptism is conferred, "the missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even dying, who is not wholly incapable, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by necessity of means, as especially the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation."³⁰ It is established in addition from proposition (64) condemned by Innocent XI: "A man is capable of absolution, however much he labors under ignorance of the mysteries of faith, and even if through negligence, even culpable negligence, he does not know the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ."³¹ - Notwithstanding these decisions, since the negative opinion is at least extrinsically solidly probable, and since the sacraments are for men, in the article of death any man who is judged to have the intention of receiving the sacrament of baptism or of penance must be baptized or absolved conditionally, even if he does not have explicit faith in the mysteries of the Incarnation and of the Most Holy Trinity, provided that he at least explicitly believes God existing and rewarding. But outside the article of death the sacrament of baptism, or even of penance, cannot licitly be conferred on an adult man who is ignorant of the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation. Indeed, according to St. Alphonsus,³² a penitent burdened with grave sin, who has confessed several times without knowledge of these mysteries, must repeat confessions so made. For the rest, it must be kept before the eyes that explicit faith in these mysteries is not the same as perfect knowledge of them. But perfect knowledge is by no means necessarily required. Therefore, when the case occurs, if there is doubt concerning the sufficient faith of some dying person, let the priest (or another man) say these or similar things to him: "Let us briefly elicit an act of faith under this form: I believe in God, one and three, the just judge of the good and the wicked; I hope that I shall be saved by the merits of Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God." But if the dying person consents, then let him immediately be baptized or absolved.

²⁵ Hebr. 11, 6.

²⁶ Denz. n. 1172.

²⁷ S. theol. 2, 2, q. 2, a. 7 and 8; De verit. q. 14, a. 11; dist. 25, q. 2, a. 2, sol. 2.

²⁸ Cf. St. Alph., Theol. mor. l. 2, n. 2, where the holy Doctor calls this opinion the more common and more probable.

²⁹ Rom. 3, 22.

³⁰ Collect. de Prop. Fide n. 254. This decision of the Holy Office was confirmed by Benedict XIV, Const. "Postremo mense" n. 41, February 28, 1747, and was issued again on March 30, 1898. Cf. also the decision of the Holy Office, May 12, 1703, ad 2 (Collect. de Prop. Fide n. 256).

³¹ Denz. n. 1214.

³² Theol. mor. l. 2, n. 2.

St. Thomas, II-II, q. 1, a. 1 and 2; a. 6, ad 1; De Verit., q. 14, a. 8.

671. Thesis I. The material object of faith is all things revealed by God. - The material object of faith is that which is believed on account of the authority of God revealing. But this, as the Vatican Council teaches, sess. 3, c. 3, is all those things and only those things which have been revealed by God. - It is proved:

The material object of faith is everything which can be attained through the formal object, which is the authority of God revealing. Now the authority of God extends itself equally to all revealed things, and God is equally worthy of faith, whether He manifests truths of greater importance or things of lesser importance; on the other hand, the authority of God in speaking cannot extend itself to those things which He does not reveal. Therefore all those things and only those things which God has revealed are the material object of faith.

672. Thesis II. The primary or principal material object of faith is God Himself as supernatural end, or first truth in being. - The primary or principal material object is that which is believed per se and by reason of itself, and by reason of which the other things are believed. But this is God Himself as supernatural end; for all other things, such as the humanity of Christ, the sacraments, and other things contained in the Scriptures, "do not fall under faith except according as they have some order to God," so that we may know Him more fully as supernatural end and tend better to Him. Whence the primary material object is said to be God as He is first truth in being.

Although the object of faith is first truth, which is altogether simple, nevertheless because we do not see it in itself but conceive it in our mode according to a certain composition, it follows that the object of faith as to us is some proposition capable of being enunciated.

673. The secondary object of faith. - To this pertain:

1. those things which directly and per se conduce to the supernatural end, and which are called matters of faith and morals: these are the object of faith properly and per se;

2. those things which per se are indifferent to the supernatural end and without which Christian doctrine concerning faith and morals is complete, but which in fact together with that doctrine were attested in Sacred Letters for its manifestation, for example, the history of Abraham or of the captivity of the Jewish people, and other things of this kind which can be known by natural reason; these also must be believed, but they are not the object of faith except improperly and per accidens (q. 1, a. 6, ad 1).

674. Corollary concerning private revelations. - Since divine authority is equal in particular revelations directed to a private person and in public revelation, it follows that they are the object of divine faith, and can be believed provided that they are certainly established. In which case, at least the one to whom they were directed is obliged to believe; if he omits this, he commits the sin of infidelity, disbelieving the authority of God, which overturns faith in him; but for others it probably suffices that they do not contemn them.

For if private revelations are approved by the Church, they are not proposed to be believed by divine faith; but the Church only declares 1. that they contain nothing against faith and morals, 2. that there are sufficient indications so that they may be prudently, piously, and without superstition believed by human faith; from which it follows 3. that it is not lawful to contemn them.

675. The implicitly revealed object of faith. - Not only those things pertain to divine faith which are explicitly, that is, in themselves, in express and proper words, revealed, but also those things which are revealed implicitly and in another.

For certain things are said to be revealed:

1. Formally and immediately, although implicitly, that is, really and by their proper concept, although not in an expressed and distinct but in a confused mode, and not in proper but in equivalent terms: these are those things which are contained in things explicitly revealed as a part in the whole, for example, the definition and essentials of the defined thing in the defined thing (the metaphysical actual whole and metaphysical parts, for example, man = rational animal; sacrament = practical sign of grace); - or the particular in the universal (the potential whole and subjective parts, for example, every man, John); - or essential elements and properties in the whole (the physical or integral actual whole, and constitutive or integral parts, for example, man = body and soul; head, brain, heart; risible); - or essential powers and potencies in the essence (the potestative whole and potential parts, for example, soul, intellect and will); - or one correlative, contradictory, or contrary in the other (for example, John is the son of Zebedee; this man is the father of John). These are the object of faith because equivalently and as to the sense they are said by God, and therefore are truly, really, and properly contained in revelation: He who reveals the whole implicitly reveals the parts.

2. Those things are said to be revealed virtually and mediately implicitly which are contained in revelation as an effect in a cause, and as a consequence or conclusion in its principles. These are not the object of divine faith, since they are not immediately and in themselves revealed,¹ but only mediately, namely, in the medium from which they can be deduced: for they are not admitted because God said them, but only on account of another thing which God said, namely, not uniquely on account of the word of God but also on account of the nexus with those things which He said. He who enunciates a principle or cause does not enunciate the consequence or effect. Nevertheless these are the object of the assent of theological science; and if they are infallibly defined by the Church, they must altogether be admitted as true and are the object, not of divine faith, but of theological assent or even of ecclesiastical faith.² - Hence:

¹ That these are revealed and to be believed was formerly taught by many, among whom M. Cano, A. Vega, Vasquez, and Ripalda are customarily named. Thus also today Tuyaerts, L'Evolution du Dogme. - On the contrary is the far greater part of more recent authors. Cf. Schultes, Introductio in historiam dogmatum.

² Thus it is generally taught; nevertheless several hold that in the case they are to be believed not by ecclesiastical but by divine faith, as Suarez, Ripalda, Lugo, Schiffini, de Grandmaison, Gardeil, Marin-Sola, who thus hold a certain intermediate opinion.

a) A conclusion from one revealed premise and another naturally known is revealed and an object of faith if the second only shows that the conclusion is formally implicitly contained in the first, for example, Christ is man, therefore He has a body or is a rational animal; every man generated from Adam contracts original sin, therefore Peter contracts it; and also, as it seems, a conclusion whose knowledge depends on a contingent fact, for example, every legitimately elected pontiff is the vicar of Christ, therefore Pius XI is the vicar of Christ; - this child duly baptized has grace; this consecrated host contains Christ. Nevertheless in these examples there is not a true syllogism, because the process does not have illative force; it is not a conclusion properly so called through true demonstration and deduction of a new truth, but is a merely explicative conclusion and a simple declaration of those things which were already actually contained in the premises.

b) A conclusion from one revealed premise and another naturally known, if it is equally contained in each and is equally and truly deduced from each, is not revealed nor an object of faith, because it is admitted not on account of the authority of God alone but on account of deduction, for example, Christ is God-man; but God-man can never lack grace or the beatific vision; therefore; - the Blessed Virgin is the Mother of Christ; but St. Anne is the mother of the Blessed Virgin; therefore she is the grandmother of Christ; - Christ died under Pontius Pilate, therefore under Tiberius. Then there is a true syllogism, true and properly so called deduction, and a true illative conclusion of those things which were contained in the premises only virtually and by force of connection; namely, a conclusion of a distinct truth, not revealed, but connected with revelation. The conclusion, logicians say, follows the weaker part.

c) A conclusion from two revealed premises, according to several authors,³ is revealed and an object of faith, both because the conclusion is formally contained in the two premises, which in the case are revealed; and because God knows their connection and conclusion, but he who enunciates two premises while he sees the conclusion intends to enunciate this and manifests it in a sufficient mode. These arguments, however, do not seem probative: not the first, because a conclusion properly so called is contained in the premises not formally but only virtually, which are the true cause of arriving at the conclusion; otherwise the conclusion would not express a new truth, nor would reasoning be a means of increasing knowledge;⁴ - not the second, because for a conclusion to be properly and formally enunciated, it is not sufficient that someone know it in the premises and intend to say it, but it is also required that he manifest the connection with them in some way by human speech, namely, that he enunciate the premises not indeed separately but as premises, insofar as they are compared to one another and lead to the conclusion. Therefore in order that God, who uses human speech to men, reveal a conclusion, it is not sufficient that He know the connection with the principles and see the consequence, but it is also required that He express that connection or consequence, and place one premise immediately after the other.⁵

³ Thus Lugo, the Salamancans, Franzelin, Mazzella, Brouwer, Bouquillon, Waffelaert, the Mechlinians, Mannens, Satolli, De Groot, Tanquerey, etc. The contrary is held by all who absolutely say that true and properly so called conclusions deduced from revelation are not revealed, speaking in the same way concerning all and in no way distinguishing among conclusions, whether they are deduced from one or from two revealed premises. Thus John of St. Thomas, Gonet, Billuart, Berthier, and generally Thomists; likewise Valentia, Molina, Turrianus, Lorca, Suarez, the Wurzburgenses, Dens, Schiffini.

⁴ Thus Mercier, Logique, 3rd p., ch. I, a. 2, n. 95; and Goudin, Philosophia Thom., t. I, de demonstr., a. 1, single paragraph.

⁵ Hence Berthier, de Loc. theol., p. 1, l. 2, ap. 1, n. 478: "The certitude of a conclusion drawn from two premises certain by faith is per se less than the certitude of a proposition certain by faith. For although God is judged to have included that conclusion in the premises, nevertheless God Himself in no way asserted that this was included in them, but the ingenuity of man found and collected it; to which the infinite knowledge and veracity of God does not belong."

Therefore conclusions of this kind, from two revealed premises, do not seem necessarily and always revealed; but if they were, others could be deduced from them, and from these again others, and thus revelation would extend itself as it were to infinity. In fact, nevertheless, they are often revealed and an object of faith, either because they too are expressly revealed, or because one premise only shows what is formally implicitly contained in the other, in which case there is no truly demonstrative syllogism, but a merely explicative one, as was said under a); for example, God is one; but Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are God; therefore they are one God; - all the Apostles received the Holy Spirit; Peter is an apostle; therefore.

d) All the aforesaid conclusions, if they are considered as conclusions, that is, insofar as they have a nexus with premises even revealed and are deduced from them, are not the object of faith but of the assent of theological science, because then they are not admitted on account of the motive of faith, the authority of God revealing, but on account of the motive of science, namely, on account of the nexus with principles and rational deduction.

676. The object of faith as to itself and as to us; of divine and Catholic faith. - The object of faith can be distinguished:

1. The object of divine faith as to itself is that which in fact has been revealed and thus as to itself pertains to faith.

2. The object of faith as to us is that which in addition is sufficiently proposed as revealed and whose revelation is certainly known by us. Whence particular propositions whose knowledge depends on a contingent fact, for example, this host contains Christ, this child has grace, often will not be the object of faith as to us when the existence of the fact is not known by us with absolute certitude:1 for then the nexus with the revealed proposition does not appear.

3. The object of Catholic or universal faith as to all, and to be believed by all, is that which pertains to public revelation directed by God to all men and to the universal Church (contained in Scripture and Tradition), and in addition which the Church proposes as divinely revealed and commands all to believe. Hence private revelations cannot pertain to Catholic faith, and the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin before the definition was an object of divine faith, but not of Catholic faith (Vatican Council, sess. 3, c. 3; Code of Canon Law 1323, § 1).

Whence something can a) be of faith as to itself, and not as to us, if we are not certain that it is revealed: thus today the question is posed concerning the universal mediation of the Blessed Virgin;

b) be of faith as to one person and not as to another, for example, a private revelation;

c) be only probably of faith, if there is doubt concerning revelation; indeed probably of Catholic faith, if there is doubt concerning the proposition of the Church;

d) begin to be of Catholic faith after definition; indeed cease to be of Catholic faith as to us, if the definition or its sense is no longer established.

Therefore explicit faith can grow.

1. These particular propositions are not revealed except insofar as they are contained in a universal proposition. Whence they are not revealed unless they are necessarily connected with it: if no necessary nexus exists, they are not revealed. But only strict certitude establishes the objective nexus between a particular and universal proposition.

St. Thomas, II-II, q. 2, a. 3 and 5-8; De Verit., q. 14, a. 10-12.

706. A twofold necessity: one of means, the other of precept. - It must be noted beforehand that something is said to be necessary for the end either by necessity of means, or by necessity of precept. Necessary by necessity of means is a means which positively flows into obtaining the end, and indeed in such a way that without it, even if omitted involuntarily, the end cannot be obtained. Necessary by necessity of precept is not a means to the end, but that which is imposed by precept in such a way that, when the precept is known, its observance is a condition, just as voluntary transgression is an obstacle to attaining the end; whence it flows in not positively but negatively, by not placing an obstacle. From this definition it follows that invincible ignorance excuses from necessity of precept, because it excuses from sin, which would be an obstacle to attaining the end; but no ignorance or impossibility whatever liberates from necessity of means, for this does not supply the necessary influx of the means for attaining the end.

Necessity of means is one thing from the nature of the thing, another from positive institution; likewise one is necessity of means in reality, when the means itself is always necessary, another is necessity of means in desire, when the defect of the means can be supplied by another thing together with the desire of it. Examples for salvation are sanctifying grace and Baptism.

707. Faith is necessary by necessity of means.

I. By necessity of means for salvation, both for little children and for adults, from the nature of the thing, the habit of faith is necessary, because without it charity cannot be had. Council of Trent, sess. 6, c. 7.

II. By necessity of means for justification and in this way for salvation,1 for adults, that is, those having the use of reason, from the nature of the thing, in all times altogether, the act of faith properly so called is necessary, by which they explicitly believe, on account of divine revelation, that God, the institutor and end of the supernatural order, exists, and is a rewarder.

It is proved: 1. From Scripture, which rather often declares the absolute necessity of the voluntary reception of faith properly so called (for it recognizes no other as necessary) for attaining justification (Heb. X, 38 sq.; Rom. I, 17; III, 26; IV, 5; Gal. II, 16; Mk. XVI, 16), and professedly teaches at Heb. XI, 6, that "without faith it is impossible to please God. For he who comes to God must believe (the act of faith) that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him."

2. From the perpetual doctrine of the Church, which is established from Trent, sess. 6, c. 6, 7, 8; from the Vatican Council, sess. 3, c. 3, can. 2; and from the condemnation of propositions 22 and 23 by Innocent XI.1

3. From reason: a) No one can order himself and tend to the supernatural end, which nevertheless is required for justification, unless he know that end. But we cannot know the supernatural end by reason, but only by revelation, to which faith responds. Therefore.

b) Likewise no one can hope for salvation and have supernatural contrition concerning sin, unless he know the supernatural end and reward. But hope and supernatural contrition are required for justification (Council of Trent, sess. 6 and 14). Therefore for justification it is required that we believe the supernatural end.

From what has been said it follows a) that some true concept of one God is required, by which namely He is distinguished from creatures, and is known at least as creator, or omnipotent, or a necessary or most perfect being; otherwise we would not tend to the true God;

The material object of faith, concerning which alone we treat here, is that which we believe by divine and Catholic faith, or, as is clear from canon 1323, § 1, all those things which are contained in the written or handed-down word of God, and are proposed by the Church, whether by solemn judgment or by ordinary and universal magisterium, as divinely revealed and to be believed. - But it is not required that all revealed truths be believed explicitly, provided that all are believed implicitly. Indeed, among those truths themselves to be believed explicitly, those which are of necessity of means must be distinguished from those which are of necessity of precept. - Cf. Mazzella, disp. 2, art. 7, § 1.

[I say 3° : Explicit faith of each mystery is necessary by necessity of means, not only unto the second salvation, namely glorification, but also unto the first, namely justification.

This is against Cano and Bannez.

Proof. 1° from Holy Scripture. John., III, 14 and 15, cited in the proof of the first part of the second conclusion. Mark., XVI, 15 and 16 : Preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved ; but he who does not believe shall be condemned. John., III, 36, Christ not only says that he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but adds that the wrath of God abides upon him, that is, that he remains a sinner and unjust.

Proof 2° from the Tridentine passage cited there, where there is question, not only of glorification, but also and especially of justification. To this accords the response of the Congr. of the Holy Office, which, being asked : « Whether an adult who was in the article of death, and who promised that, after recovering his health, he would learn the truths of the faith, could be baptized, » replied on May 10, 1703 : « The promise does not suffice ; but the missionary is bound to explain to the adult, even though moribund, provided he is not altogether incapable, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by necessity of faith, such as above all the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation. »

Proof 3° by reason. The just man is an adoptive son of God and heir of glory. Therefore, if implicit faith suffices for justification, it suffices also for glory ; which the adversaries do not admit.

Several cases are objected in which implicit faith of the Incarnation and the Trinity seems to suffice for salvation. 1° A boy nourished in the woods, or among barbarous nations, if he follows the guidance of right reason in the flight of evil and the pursuit of good, will be saved, according to St. Thomas. 2° If a boy, when he has attained the age of reason, is not instructed concerning the aforementioned mysteries, provided he converts to God, he will be justified. 3° Some are so rude and stupid that they cannot apprehend these mysteries by concept. The same must be said of the deaf and mute from birth. Yet salvation cannot be said to be impossible to them : otherwise God would not provide sufficiently for them.

I answer. to the 1st, with St. Thomas, de Verit., q. 14, a. 11, ad 1 : « If one so nourished followed the guidance of natural reason in the desire of good and the flight of evil, it is most certainly to be held that God would reveal to him, either by internal inspiration, the things necessary to be believed, or would direct to him some preacher of the faith, as he sent Peter to Cornelius, Acts., x. »

I answer. to the 2nd. The age of reason is moral, having some duration, within which the boy can be instructed, whether by God, or by an angel, or by a man. These extraordinary instructions ought not to be called miraculous, because they follow naturally from the will of God to save men.

I answer. to the 3rd. Intelligence is not required for faith, but assent, nor is anyone so stupid that, helped by the aid of grace, he could not apprehend the mysteries of the Incarnation and the Trinity at least confusedly and as to their substance. But if you deny this, those are to be numbered among infants and the insane who, without actual faith, by habitual faith alone received in baptism, are saved.]

From what has been said you will gather that those who are ignorant of the aforesaid mysteries of the Incarnation and the Trinity as to their substance, even if invincibly, are incapable of absolution, and that all confessions made in this ignorance are null and to be repeated, nor does it suffice ever to have believed them, if they are now in fact unknown.

(To this tend the following propositions condemned by Innocent XI on March 2, 1679 : « Man is capable of absolution, however greatly he may labor under ignorance of the mysteries of faith, and even if, through negligence, even culpable negligence, he does not know the mystery of the most holy Trinity and the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, » n. 64. — « It suffices to have believed those mysteries once, » n. 65.]

D. Thomas says an article is named from ἄρθρον, which signifies the fitting together of the parts for motion: St. Bonaventure acknowledges this too, question 1. article 3. Calepinus, however, took the name from artus, a joint, because it is a particle into which the joints, or the members of the body, are resolved; and it is called articulus from arctando, constraining, a term applied both actively and passively to the mysteries to be believed: passively indeed, because it is a thing constrained, and just as the knots in the body are the parts into which the joints, or members, are resolved; so the articles are, as it were, the first principles into which the parts of the whole habit of FAITH are resolved: actively, however, because they constrain to belief.

HENCE St. Bonaventure gathers that the articles of faith are the first principles in faith, into which all the objects of belief are resolved, in the way that the joints are in the body, into which the members are resolved, even the tiniest of the fingers; and just as in the sciences, and in acts, there are first principles into which the conclusions are resolved, nor are those resolved into others, as Caspens also notes, disp. 1. sect. 12. Likewise they are the first distinguishers of the object of belief, in the way that the articles in Grammar distinguish the genders, and the cases. And in Rhetoric an article is called the distinction that is made in the science, and in the uttering. Since, therefore, the sciences, and the arts are the handmaids of Theology, as St. Bonaventure splendidly demonstrates in his opusc. On the reduction of the arts to Theology, for that reason it received the name of article, to signify the first heads, and principles into which all things believed are resolved, which are called the object of faith. Hence the Seraphic Doctor praises the definition of an article handed down by Richard of St. Victor: An article is an indivisible truth about God, constraining us to believe. It is called an indivisible truth, because things believed are ultimately resolved into the articles, for resolution stops at the indivisible. It is called constraining, etc., for it constrains, as a directive rule, toward all things to be believed. See Caspens, Cardinal de Lugo, Morandus, and others agreeing.

The Seraphic Doctor OBJECTS to himself against this definition, first, because an article is a divisible proposition.

HE ANSWERS that it is indivisible formally, because it is not divided into other articles, as credible things.

He objects second. If an article is an indivisible truth. Therefore it is one article, because truth is one. Then truth is God: Therefore it is not about God.

The Seraphic Doctor answers that an article is a truth as it is compared to something about God to be asserted, as that God is one; that there is a Trinity, etc.; and thus God is the subject of these truths.

He objects third. Among the articles there are some that are not about God, as the Resurrection of the flesh. It is answered that the resurrection of the flesh pertains to the Divine power.

He objects fourth. Because the articles of faith do not convince by reasonings: Therefore they do not constrain to believe. HE ANSWERS that they constrain the faithful who are enlightened, by the authority of the revealer; they constrain indeed not by compelling; but by removing every ambiguity: they constrain also by obliging; and by restricting, and by resolving into distinct principles the object of faith.

Presently the Seraphic Doctor, question 2., hands down another definition of the Article from D. Isidore. An article is a perception of Divine truth, tending to it. And he explains it thus: It is called a perception of Divine truth causally, because it is that by which we perceive the first truths of faith. It is called tending to God himself, whereby he shows that faith directs the will to God, to whom we are roused by the articles of faith. From this the Seraphic Doctor deduces the definition of the article, as it is the object of faith formed.

By this exposition the oppositions that are made against this definition collapse. See St. Bonaventure.

The ORDER of the things to be believed is given in the Symbol. Now the Symbol signifies a judgment, or mark, by which others may be distinguished from one another, and the bringing together of many into one, as D. Bonaventure notes, disp. 25. question 1. For the Symbol is said from Syn, which is together; and bole, which is opinion; hence a Symbol is the opinion of many, constituted out of several articles, by which the faithful are set apart from the unfaithful, like a watchword, as Valencia also notes, disp. 1. question 1. p. 5., from Rufinus in his exposition of the Symbol, and Cassian, book 6. de Incarn. to Leo the Pope. See also Tanner, disp. 8.

Now there is a THREEFOLD Symbol in the Church, as D. Bonaventure notes on the cited 5th question. The first is that of the Apostles, which is recited in the office. That it was composed by the twelve Apostles the old Fathers commonly assert; Clement I. epistle 1. Irenaeus book 1. chapter 2. Tertullian in the praescriptiones, Ambrose epistle 81. Rufinus in the exposition, Jerome epistle to Pammach. and on the errors of John of Jerusalem, Chrysostom homilies 1. and 2. on the Symbol, Augustine sermons 115. and 180. de tempore, Leo sermon 11. on the Passion of the Lord, and epistle 13. to Pulcheria, and with them St. Bonaventure and others.

The Seraphic Doctor adds, with Augustine and Leo above, that each Apostle set forth one article.

The SECOND Symbol is Athanasius's, which, as the Seraphic Doctor says, was drawn up chiefly against Arius. It is the one that is recited at the first Hour of Sunday. So testify Sts. Augustine on Psalm 120. in the enchiridion chapter 36. and book 5. on the Trinity, chapter 8. and epistle 174. and sermon 195. de Tempore. And St. Gregory Nazianzen on the praises of Athanasius; and, which is the chief point, the whole Church receives it. It is kept at Rome, written by him in Latin.

The THIRD Symbol is the Nicene, which is recited in the Mass with certain additions in the first Council of Constantinople: Toledo 8. and Florence; and separately by the Church there was added that clause: proceeding from the Son (Filioque), as we saw p. 2. tract. 1. disp. 10. question 2.

SUITABLY, however, the Seraphic Doctor shows that faith was ordered into articles first, that it might be Catholic, that is, a universal uniformity of faith among all peoples, which Irenaeus taught before, book 1. chapter 3.

SECOND, because Faith had to be handed on to all, even the simple, which would not be explicit enough in general terms, nor could they be instructed by profuse eruditions, as D. Augustine teaches, book on faith, and the Symbol chapter 1., Cyril of Jerusalem catech. 5.

Valencia adds, with D. Bonaventure, that it is useful, indeed most necessary, against heretics, to have a formula of faith, which, therefore, as heresies arose with the passage of the times, was enlarged, as I shall say in the following question.

The Seraphic Doctor shows, with D. Thom. question 1. article 8., that the articles are placed in a fitting order. He takes this order from the heads of things to be believed. First, then, the Divinity is to be believed: then the Trinity of persons: third the Humanity: fourth the Operations of the divinity; and last the works of Christ incarnate. As to the Divine essence, there is one article, just as the essence of God is most simple: I believe in God. As to the most holy Trinity, there are three articles. The first is: I believe in God the Father; the second is: In Jesus Christ, his son, etc.; the third: I believe in the Holy Spirit. As to the Operations of the deity, they are threefold. The first is the creation of nature, and it is noted when it is said: I believe in the Creator of heaven, and earth. The second is the bestowal of grace, and it is noted when it is said: I believe the Holy Catholic Church: the communion of Saints, the remission of sins. The third is the bestowal of glory: the resurrection of the flesh, life everlasting. And so there are seven articles concerning the divinity, looking to the divine essence itself: One looking to the Deity in itself; Three looking to the Trinity of persons, and the other three to the works of the Deity. Likewise concerning the humanity of Christ there are seven articles, according to the seven acts of the Redemption, which are ordered to our salvation. The first is the Incarnation, and on this is the article: Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit. The second is to be Born: Born of the Virgin Mary. The third is Redemption: He suffered under Pontius, and was crucified, dead, and buried. The fourth is the despoiling of hell: He descended into hell. The fifth is the triumph over death: On the third day he rose again from the dead. The sixth is the Ascension into heaven: He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father. The seventh is the Coming to judgment: From thence he shall come to judge, etc. See the Seraphic Doctor, dist. 25. question 1., assigning to each Apostle his own article.

The Seraphic Doctor marvels that these fourteen articles are set forth in Apoc. 1., where Christ was seen among seven golden candlesticks, and he had in his right hand seven stars; now the stars are the heavenly articles of the deity: but the seven golden candlesticks, of earthly substance, yet precious, are the seven articles of the humanity. The same he teaches in Hexaemer. sermon 8. and in the Centilog. sect. 38. and in the Diaeta, chapter 5. title 3.

He notes, however, that the articles are reduced to twelve; for the first contains the Deity; and the first Person, who is the Fount of all the communications of the Deity; and the work of Creation, all of which St. Peter asserts; and so there are twelve articles in a broad sense. See the Seraphic Doctor.

Therefore the Seraphic Doctor proves the sufficiency of the Symbol first from Cassian book 6. de Incarn. to Pope Leo.

SECOND, because faith is concerned with God: Now God is regarded in two ways, either in himself, as One, and Three; or in the Humanity assumed. Again. The Deity is not known on the way, except through the works; now three of these are the chief ones, Creation, Gratification, and Glorification. But the works of the humanity are related in the Symbol, which, since it was composed by the Apostles, full of the Holy Spirit, there is no doubt that it is fitting; for they were the masters of the Catholic Church. And so, although fourteen can also be counted, as St. Bonaventure teaches, loc. cit., Scotus dist. 25. question 1., nevertheless they are reduced to twelve.

Valencia, however, loc. cit., Morand. q. 4., Cardinal Lugo disp. 3. sect. 4., observes that the Symbol is not Canonical Scripture, because it was composed by the Apostles, as a brief formula for professing the faith already possessed. You will wonder, here, that the Mystery of faith, that is, the Eucharist, is omitted. But it is included in the omnipotence. See D. Th. article 8. to 6. It is also enclosed in the Church.

The COMMON opinion of Theologians is that all the articles of faith have always been believed implicitly, though not explicitly: so D. Bonaventure and D. Thomas here, where the Thomists, and all the Sententiarii with the Master, 3. dist. 25., where also Albert. art. 1 to 1. Scotus question 1. Durand. question 1. Richard. art. 3. question 2. Valencia question 1. p. 6. et others in Suarez on Faith disp. 2. sect. 6. Cardinal Lugo disp. 3. sect. 5. Aragon. here. Tanner. disp. 1. q. 1. n. 101.

I ASSERT first, that the articles of Faith, as to implicit belief, have not grown.

It is PROVED by the Seraphic Doctor first, because the Christian Faith is contained wholly in the new law, and the new law was enfolded in the old, as the whole in the wheel, as is said Ezech. 1.

It is PROVED second by the Seraphic Doctor. When the object is changed substantially, the habit is changed: Therefore if faith had a new object, believing what it did not believe before, it would be changed; but Faith, according to the diverse times, has not been changed, from D. Augustine epistle 51., Irenaeus book 4. chapter 13., and other Fathers; and so indeed what we believe, the Fathers believed explicitly as to substance, at least implicitly, so that even the holy Doctors who use this term teach, that it has not been changed as to substance, but according to accident; because what was believed implicitly of old is now believed explicitly, and so these articles were contained in the ancient ones, as more remote and more distinct concepts in the universal ones, as Valencia notes.

It is PROVED third by the Seraphic Doctor. For in ancient times all expected the Redeemer; but that he was to be a God-man, not all knew. So of the remaining articles looking to the passion, resurrection, and Ascension of Christ. The Seraphic Doctor explains this more fully in the body. These are the arguments for the opposite, granted in this sense in the replies.

It is PROVED fourth. As the object of Charity grew, so also of Faith; but all things must now be loved explicitly, even enemies; in ancient times they were to be loved implicitly: Therefore.

I ASSERT second, that not all things that are now believed explicitly were believed in the same way in ancient times.

It is proved first by the Seraphic Doctor from that of Exodus 6. I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: and my Name Adonai I did not show them, that is, I did not impart to them a clear knowledge of my Simplicity, and Unity, as D. Thom. expounds, question 174. article 6.

It is proved second by the Seraphic Doctor. As the Evangelical Law is related to the Mosaic as to morals, so also the faith of the new law to the faith of the old as to things to be believed; but the Gospel adds many counsels above the old law: Therefore the new law adds more things to be believed; yet not otherwise than by unfolding the implicit, as is clear from the foregoing. It is almost the argument of D. Irenaeus, book 4. chapter 47.

It is proved third by the Seraphic Doctor. For the Mysteries of the Incarnation, the Sacraments, and other things believed in the Church were not believed explicitly of old.

It is proved fourth by the Seraphic Doctor. The new Church knows many things that lay hidden from the Angels, as is said Ephes. 3. Therefore much more did these things lie hidden from the men of the old law.

A TWOFOLD necessity is assigned by the Theologians, after D. Bonaventure here, and in 4. dist. 12. p. 2. art. 2. quaest. 1. and dist. 3. p. 1. articulo 1. quaest. 3.

ONE is the necessity of means; another of precept. With the necessity of means, or of the end, that thing is necessary which, from the Law of God, by ordinary institution, is necessary for salvation, so much so that neither ignorance supplies for it, nor excuses it. That is necessary from precept which must be carried out necessarily, where the faculty and the occasion are at hand; yet not in such a way that, on account of ignorance or a lack of opportunity, the attainment of salvation is impeded. But some things are necessary in both ways, such as Penance after sin, the vow of Baptism, and faith, as the holy Doctor says at dist. 3. in the place cited.

THAT faith has always been necessary for the justification of adults, and for salvation, I proved in the first part of the Summa, Tract. 5. disput. 3. quaest. 10. And it is established by that passage of Hebr. 11. Without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God must believe, etc. And Ioan. 3. He who does not believe is already judged, as the holy Doctor discusses on cap. 3. Ioan. To this also pertains what is said in Sap. 9. Through wisdom they were healed, whosoever pleased thee, O Lord, from the beginning, as the holy Doctor indicates on that passage, for by wisdom he understands Doctrine from revelation. So also D. Ambrose on the First Epistle to Tim. 3. by Wisdom understands Faith.

THIS is the Catholic teaching. So D. Bonaventure in the places alleged, and in the prologue of the Breviloquium, and Lib. 2. of the Pharetra, cap. 23. where he brings forward many holy Fathers, and in the Diaeta, tit. 5. cap. 3. and tit. 9. cap. 5. in which places he proves it from the Scriptures testifying that faith is the foundation of salvation, as Matth. 16. Upon this rock I will build my Church, namely upon Peter's confession, and upon faith founded on Christ as base. And in Hebr. 11. it is called Substance, or Foundation. And in the Hexaëmeron, serm. 8. he compares it to the Firmament. He proves it from Rom. 10. With the heart we believe unto justice: but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Heb. 11. Faith is the substance of things to be hoped for. Act. 15. Purifying their hearts by faith. And in serm. 9. he pursues the same point, proving the firmness of faith from many headings. And in serm. 10. he compares it to heaven, which is the universal cause of living things.

THERE FOLLOW D. Thomas 2. 2. quaest. 2. art. 3. where the Thomists. The Master 3. dist. 23. where the Sententiarii. Cano relect. de Sacram. in genere, p. 2. quaest. 2. Peter. ad Rom. d. 17. and cap. 2. d. 8. Valentia 2. 2. disp. 1. quaest. 2. p. 2. Sanchez Lib. 2. decal. c. 2. Suarez de fide, disp. 12. sect. 1. and 2. Becan. summae p. 2. cap. 12. and it is a dogma of faith. Nor had even the heretics almost ever denied it, except the Manichaeans, and the Pelagians, as Tannerus says, quaest. 7. num. 28. Scarcely one, Zuinglius, tom. 2. art. 12. says that Socrates, Aristides, Numa, Camillus, the Catos, the Scipios, Seneca, and others, were saved without faith, and Erasmus in the Tusculan Questions says the same of Cicero.

XI. Implicitly, moreover, the Faithful must believe all the things which God has revealed in the holy Scriptures and in the word handed down, and which the catholic Church proposes to be believed.