|
Objection 1: It would seem that we cannot lose charity when once we
have it. For if we lose it, this can only be through sin. Now he
who has charity cannot sin, for it is written (1 Jn. 3:9):
"Whosoever is born of God, committeth not sin; for His seed
abideth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." But
none save the children of God have charity, for it is this which
distinguishes "the children of God from the children of perdition,"
as Augustine says (De Trin. xv, 17). Therefore he that has
charity cannot lose it.
Objection 2: Further, Augustine says (De Trin. viii, 7)
that "if love be not true, it should not be called love." Now, as
he says again in a letter to Count Julian, "charity which can fail
was never true." [De Salutaribus Documentis ad quemdam comitem,
vii.] Therefore it was no charity at all. Therefore, when once we
have charity, we cannot lose it.
Objection 3: Further, Gregory says in a homily for Pentecost
(In Evang. xxx) that "God's love works great things where it
is; if it ceases to work it is not charity." Now no man loses
charity by doing great things. Therefore if charity be there, it
cannot be lost.
Objection 4: Further, the free-will is not inclined to sin unless
by some motive for sinning. Now charity excludes all motives for
sinning, both self-love and cupidity, and all such things.
Therefore charity cannot be lost.
On the contrary, It is written (Apoc. 2:4): "I have
somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first charity."
I answer that, The Holy Ghost dwells in us by charity, as shown
above (Article 2; Questions 23,24). We can, accordingly,
consider charity in three ways: first on the part of the Holy Ghost,
Who moves the soul to love God, and in this respect charity is
incompatible with sin through the power of the Holy Ghost, Who does
unfailingly whatever He wills to do. Hence it is impossible for these
two things to be true at the same time---that the Holy Ghost should
will to move a certain man to an act of charity, and that this man, by
sinning, should lose charity. For the gift of perseverance is
reckoned among the blessings of God whereby "whoever is delivered, is
most certainly delivered," as Augustine says in his book on the
Predestination of the saints (De Dono Persev. xiv).
Secondly, charity may be considered as such, and thus it is incapable
of anything that is against its nature. Wherefore charity cannot sin
at all, even as neither can heat cool, nor unrighteousness do good,
as Augustine says (De Serm. Dom. in Monte ii, 24).
Thirdly, charity can be considered on the part of its subject, which
is changeable on account of the free-will. Moreover charity may be
compared with this subject, both from the general point of view of form
in comparison with matter, and from the specific point of view of habit
as compared with power. Now it is natural for a form to be in its
subject in such a way that it can be lost, when it does not entirely
fill the potentiality of matter: this is evident in the forms of things
generated and corrupted, because the matter of such things receives one
form in such a way, that it retains the potentiality to another form,
as though its potentiality were not completely satisfied with the one
form. Hence the one form may be lost by the other being received. On
the other hand the form of a celestial body which entirely fills the
potentiality of its matter, so that the latter does not retain the
potentiality to another form, is in its subject inseparably.
Accordingly the charity of the blessed, because it entirely fills the
potentiality of the rational mind, since every actual movement of that
mind is directed to God, is possessed by its subject inseparably:
whereas the charity of the wayfarer does not so fill the potentiality of
its subject, because the latter is not always actually directed to
God: so that when it is not actually directed to God, something may
occur whereby charity is lost.
It is proper to a habit to incline a power to act, and this belongs to
a habit, in so far as it makes whatever is suitable to it, to seem
good, and whatever is unsuitable, to seem evil. For as the taste
judges of savors according to its disposition, even so does the human
mind judge of things to be done, according to its habitual
disposition. Hence the Philosopher says (Ethic. iii, 5) that
"such as a man is, so does the end appear to him." Accordingly
charity is inseparable from its possessor, where that which pertains to
charity cannot appear otherwise than good, and that is in heaven,
where God is seen in His Essence, which is the very essence of
goodness. Therefore the charity of heaven cannot be lost, whereas the
charity of the way can, because in this state God is not seen in His
Essence, which is the essence of goodness.
Reply to Objection 1: The passage quoted speaks from the point of
view of the power of the Holy Ghost, by Whose safeguarding, those
whom He wills to move are rendered immune from sin, as much as He
wills.
Reply to Objection 2: The charity which can fail by reason of
itself is no true charity; for this would be the case, were its love
given only for a time, and afterwards were to cease, which would be
inconsistent with true love. If, however, charity be lost through
the changeableness of the subject, and against the purpose of charity
included in its act, this is not contrary to true charity.
Reply to Objection 3: The love of God ever works great things in
its purpose, which is essential to charity; but it does not always
work great things in its act, on account of the condition of its
subject.
Reply to Objection 4: Charity by reason of its act excludes every
motive for sinning. But it happens sometimes that charity is not
acting actually, and then it is possible for a motive to intervene for
sinning, and if we consent to this motive, we lose charity.
|
|