C3?«^€ *

THIS IS THE .

WILL OF GOD

BY

REV. JOHN J. HUGO





THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

BY

REV. JOHN J. HUGO

Second Edition 9,000

Printed in U. S. A.

March 25, 1944

By

OUR SUNDAY VISITOR PRESS
Huntington, Indiana



Nihil Obstat:

REV. T. E. DILLON

Censor Librorum

Imprimatur:

* JOHN FRANCIS NOLL, D. D.
Bishop of Fort Wayne



THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

“The Christian ideal has not been tried and

found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left

untried.” (1) In these words G. K. Chesterton points

out the difficulty and the challenge that confront

Christians today. It is a commonplace among us that

the contemporary world is in a process of change;

that the old order is going, if not already gone
;
that

there is forming in the womb of history a new

world. Everyone wonders what this new world will

be like, and books to describe it have been written

—

each to accord with the wishes of the writer. Al-

ready several systems have arisen, stating their

claim to be the heirs of power for the future age;

they are the various forms of collectivism. These

systems, arising as if by law from the collapse of

Industrial Capitalism, promise an abundance of this

world’s goods to the oppressed; they also bring

slavery—a fact, however, which cannot be perceived
by the mass of men who have been reduced to spirit-

ual blindness by the irreligion of the order that is

passing away.

Catholics, for their part, have consistently

maintained that the life of a culture comes from its

spiritual and religious roots; and that the salvation

of the world lies, therefore, in an acceptance of

Christianity. But our failure to date is sufficient

proof that the Christianity which can save the world

is not the bourgeois kind that has been practiced

in the past; nor yet the kind that we are practicing

(1) What's Wrong With the World? Ch. 5, Part 1.



today, since this, deeply infected by paganism,

scarcely marks an improvement.

We know that we have the truth because what

we hold comes from Jesus Christ; and Christ is

God's Son and alone able to satisfy the needs of a

world which “groans and travails in pain until

now.” (Rom. 8, 22) Shall we continue forever

—

we, to whom truth has been entrusted—shall we con-
tinue forever to deny, or evade, or compromise this

truth?



Chapter I

THE CHALLENGE

1. Standing on a hillside, a little above the

multitude who were listening to Him, Jesus said to

them: “You therefore are to he perfect, even as

your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5, 48).

Such words could have been spoken by one de-

mented, or by one divine; but by no one else. For

they tell us to do what, every day, we say cannot be

done by men, or even expected of us
;
they tell us to

be perfect. They prescribe this, moreover, without

limitation or mitigation of any kind, and impera-

tively. They are spoken, as it appears, almost cas-

ually, with no special vehemence or any indication

that Our Lord expected his hearers to be surprised

at His extraordinary demand. And since we know

that the speaker was not demented, but divine, we

must conclude that His words are to be taken ser-

iously—as seriously as when He said, “This is my
Body; this is the Chalice of my Blood.”

In a word, this command of Jesus fixes the life-

goal of the Christian: perfection. Henceforth, the

end of all human life and all human effort can be no

other thing than holiness. For the perfect man is

the complete man: the whole man: the holy man.

From this moment, made unforgettable by the awful

challenge of the God-man, those who claim to be

His followers, that is, Christians, will be distin-

guished from all other men by this that, laying

aside, or at least rigorously subordinating, all other

ends whatsoever, they shall give themselves up to a

unique quest for sanctity.



6 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

Let us notice that Jesus is here carrying out the

decree of His eternal Father; He is but showing us

how we are to do our part in fulfilling the divine

plan of redemption. God from all eternity desires

that we should be holy. He desires that we should

live in love and union with Him; and to do this we

must be holy: “And every one who has this hope in

him (i.e., of entering into happiness with God)

makes himself holy, just as He also is holy” (I Jo.

3, 3). It is to sanctify us that God sends His only-

begotten Son into the world: “This is the will of

God—your sanctification” (I Thess. 4, 4). And in
establishing His Church, Jesus has made it “holy

and without blemish” (Eph. 5, 27), that it might

continue the work of sanctification in souls. He will

send the Holy Spirit, who will abide with men for-

ever—to sanctify them. It could not be otherwise:
God is holy, and we must likewise be holy. The suffi-

cient reason for this enormous demand made upon

us is given by God Himself, briefly and finally:

“You shall be holy, because I am holy” (I Pet. 1,

16).

The words of Jesus tell us also what kind of

holiness we are to seek. Every day we hear men

say things like this : “You cannot be a saint and live

in the world.” Or, “God does not expect us to be

saints.” Or, “People in the world cannot live as

priests, or monks, or nuns.” Or, “Men cannot be

like angels.” But study the teaching of Our Lord.

He does not, assuredly, say that He expects us to be

as holy as Carmelites, or as priests, or as monks,

or as angels. He tells us to be holy as God is holy.

“Impossible!” you say. Yes, impossible to attain the

infinite degree of God’s holiness, but not impossible

to possess the same kind of holiness; or better, not



THE CHALLENGE 7

impossible to share in the divine holiness. And this

is what we are commanded, viz., to be holy in the

manner that God is holy. The ideal placed before us

is not the holiness of saints or angels; it is divine

holiness.

There are certain things in God that we cannot

imitate; for example, His omnipotence. There are

other divine attributes which we can imitate and

possess; for example, His mercy—and holiness.
The holiness that we are to have is nothing of our

own, but a sharing in God’s ; we are to be filled with

this as a crystal, taken from the darkness of the

earth, is filled and transformed by light.

Further : there is only one kind of holiness, and

it is intended for all, that is, for laymen and reli-

gious alike; for housewives as well as for nuns, for

the members of active religious communities quite

as much as for contemplatives, for secular priests as

well as for Trappists, for bus drivers and carpenters

as well as for priests. Consider the multitudes of

whom Jesus demanded perfection; farmers, shep-

herds, fishermen, housewives, publicans, children,

hangers-on; the only group noticeable by their ab-

sence was, probably, the learned and professionally

religious class, the Scribes and Pharisees and Doc-

tors. Over the ages Christ’s words are still ad-

dressed “to the multitudes.” He makes no distinc-

tion, not even the broad distinction between layman

and religious. Indeed, as St. John Chrysostom says,

he knows nothing of this distinction between monks

and seculars, but He would have all men live as

monks. The only difference between laymen and

religious, which this saint and doctor of the Church

will allow, lies in the fact that the laymen are mar-

ried and the religious are not; for all other things



8 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

they shall render an identical account. Indeed, if

there will be any difference at all in God's attitude

towards these two groups (we are still following

Chrysostom), laymen will have to stand the harder

judgment, for they have the advantage of human

supports not enjoyed by religious, and, accordingly,

their lapses, especially in the matter of purity, will

be the less excusable. The saint illustrates this doc-

trine by making a list of the precepts given by Jesus,

and he points out that the Divine Teacher, even in

setting down His most exacting demands, like “Let

your speech be, ‘Yes, yes'; ‘No, noY’ does not in any

case add, “But I mean this only for monks !" (2)

2. To some, this doctrine may sound strange;

if so, this can only be because we have so far for-

gotten Christian fundamentals. After all, there is

only one Christianity: “one Lord, one faith, one

Baptism; one God and Father of all . . .” (Eph. 4,

6). Why should we then make distinctions among

ourselves, as though some Christians might exempt

themselves from the Gospel law without suffering

spiritual harm? Or as though the sublime ideal of

the Christian life was meant only for a certain

spiritual elite

,

while all the rest of mankind are

doomed to wallow forever in sensuality and spiritual

mediocrity

!

Why do laymen fancy that theirs is an inferior

Christianity, and even boast of it? Would they

boast of having an inferior make of clothing? Is

their religion less important than clothing? Those

who believe in Jesus, the Scriptures say, “are sons

of God"; and there is no better way of describing

the privilege of the Christian vocation than by this

phrase. Now who is more “a son of God"—a Chris-
<2) Apology for the Monastic Life, Book III, Sect. 14.



THE CHALLENGE $

tian layman or a priest? Who deserves this high

title most—a diocesan priest, a Benedictine, a Jes-
uit, a Dominican, a Franciscan? Even the question

is silly. We are all sons of God; we are all “a
chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a pur-

chased people” (I Pet. 2, 9). No doubt there are

different degrees of grace, “according to the meas-

ure of Christ’s bestowal” (Eph. 4, 7) ; but the essen-

tial element—divine sonship and participation in
the divine nature—is possessed by all; even the dif-
ferences in grace depend on the mystery of God’s

love rather than on our position in the world.

Thomas More, a layman, was a greater saint than

the Carthusians who suffered martyrdom with him.

It is important to realize, also, that it is be-

cause we are Christians that we are “called to be

saints” (I. Cor. 1, 2). It is baptism, not ordina-

tion or religious profession, which in the first in-

stance, implants in the soul the seed of holiness and

imposes the obligation of cultivating this new life.

True indeed that a Carmelite must strive after sanc-

tity; not, in the first place, because she is a Car-

melite, but rather because she is a Christian; and

her sister in the world, who is perhaps raising a

family in a large city, has a similar duty. It is true

that a priest should be, or seek to be, a saint
;
again

however, not in the first place because he is a priest,

but rather because he is a Christian; and his rela-

tives in the world, as also his parishioners, are also

bound to seek for perfection.

A contemporary writer summarizes this doc-
trine by comparing the Church of Christ, considered

as a spiritual society, to a Church building having

two towers
;
the one is the tower of lay sanctity, the



10 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

other the tower of monastic sanctity. (3) Both towers

are essential to the Church. The latter is the taller

and more beautiful, because the master builders of

the ages, the great saints and religious founders,

have given their talents to its construction, and they

have been assisted by the innumerable men and wo-

men who have followed them by taking up the reli-

gious life. But the other tower is the older of the

two, having been founded by Christ Himself,

whereas the tower of monastic sanctity was estab-

lished by men like Benedict, Augustine, Dominic,

who, however great and holy, were still but men.

Alas, the tower of lay sanctity has been greatly ne-

glected; and yet, unless it is built up and cared for,

the Church of Christ will never reach the full pro-

portions or magnificence intended for it, never

attain “to the mature measure of the fullness of

Christ” (Eph. 4, 13).

3. The foregoing truths are of such funda-

mental importance that neglect or ignorance of them

cannot but have the most mischievous results.

Errors in this matter—and they are only too com-
mon—work such havoc in the Church that they must
be put down as diabolically inspired. One of the

most common errors comes from thinking that the

duty of pursuing sanctity derives primarily from

ordination or religious profession. It is entertained

by both religious and laymen, causing the gravest

spiritual injury to both groups and of course to the

whole Church. For the layman at once concludes

that he need not become holy ; thinking that he does

enough in fulfilling the minimum requirements of

natural law, he is prone to neglect the counsels and

commands of the Gospel.

(3) Ida Coudenhove, The Cloister and the World, p. 19. (Sheed & Ward)



THE CHALLENGE 11

Religious, on the other hand, seeing that lay-

men live careless and wordly lives, although still re-

taining the hope of supernatural life and happiness,

are led to relax their own spiritual efforts, defend-

ing their conduct by the sophism that the pursuit of

perfection, however commendable, is not absolutely

necessary. Thus both religious and laymen fall into

tepidity and, what is worse, expose themselves to

very grave danger of damnation.

We have said that the great religious founders
were but men. Accordingly, they had not the au-

thority (nor the intention) of founding new reli-

gions or of imposing on others the obligation to be-

come holy. Hence it is wrong for religious to trace

their duty in this matter to their rule or their

Founder. Only Jesus could bind men to perfection.

St. Benedict and the other founders established their

orders to enable groups of men to live in the manner

ordained by Jesus and thus attain the goal fixed by

Him; but they did not dream of setting up a new

goal or of inventing a new manner of life.

For this reason we must be careful when we use

such phrases as “Benedictine Spirituality”—or
Dominican, or Jesuit, or Franciscan, or Carmelite

spirituality. There is, after all, only one spiritual-

ity: Christ’s. No one has any right to establish

any “school” of spiritual thought that departs from

His teaching. Laity, clergy and the several religious

orders are the members, or organs, within the body

of Christ, which is the Church, and they must work

in unity for the good of the whole Church; so that

the “whole body (being closely joined and knit to-

gether through every joint of the system according

to the functioning in due measure of each single



12 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

part) derives its increase to the building up of itself

in love” (Eph. 4. 16).

But alas, the loyalties of men still imperfect be-

come easily particularised and hardened. When this

happens and the differences between layman and

religious, between clergy and laity, or clergy and

religious, or among various religious orders, become,

not mere functional differences, but “intervening

walls of partition” that divide certain groups of

Christians against others, then we are setting up

merely human divisions and distinctions to rend

and wound the body of Christ. The various fami-

lies and groups within the Church are all bound by

the same basic truths and by the same basic obliga-

tions; we all “have access in one Spirit to the

Father” (Eph. 2, 18).

It is pure nonsense (if one can forget the tragic

results!) to imagine that there is a spirituality for

religious that differs from that of layfolk, or that

there are exclusive systems of spirituality belonging

to the sundry religious families. To see how wrong

such oppositions are among us, let us consider words

of Saint Paul, applying his strictures against divis-

ions in Corinth to those we have been speaking

about among ourselves: “For I have been informed

about you, my brethren . . . that there are strifes

among you. Now this is what I mean; each of you

says, I am of Paul, or I am of Apollo, or I am of

Cephas, or I am of Christ. Has Christ been divided

up? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you bap-

tized in the name of Paul?” (I Cor. 1, 11-13) In

your mind, substitute for the names given by Paul

in this text the names of the great religious found-

ers or of the saints that may be said to stand for

clergy, laity, or religious communities,



THE CHALLENGE 13

Of course (to make a necessary modification)

there is a difference between the lay and religious

states. We are not concerned to deny or belittle

that difference, but only to point out that it does not

touch the essence or the characteristic end of the

Christian life. What this difference is exactly will

be seen from the following example. Suppose that

for a long time I fail to pay a debt that I have con-

tracted; then, upon my creditor's making an insis-

tent demand for what is due him, I take an oath to

pay off the debt. Since I owe the money already, why

take the oath? To reinforce my obligation; also to

add a second obligation, from religion, to the one

which I already have in justice. Still, even were I

not to take the oath, justice would demand that I

pay my debt.

Similarly, all Christians are bound, by the very

fact that they are Christians
,
to seek after perfec-

tion. When one takes religious vows therefore, he

does not then contract the obligation of becoming

holy; he does but acknowledge an obligation that

exists already, reinforces it, and adds a second obli-

gation. Now he is doubly bound to seek perfection:

in the first place because he is a Christian; and, in

the second, because he has entered a particular state

of life which holds him permanently to the use of

special means for obtaining this end. What is not

to be forgotten, however, is that the primary and

essential obligation comes from baptism. Because

of the particular means that the religious adopts, he

binds himself to strive for the goal of Christian life

in a more perfect way, the way of the counsels. He

is like a daredevil who, accepting a challenge to per-

form some difficult feat, says: “Not only will I do



14 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

it, but I will do it in the most dangerous and diffi-

cult manner.”

4. What is true of religious is true also of

priests. They, too, have a double obligation to seek

perfection: first because they are Christians, sec-

ondly because they are priests. This holds for sec-

ular or diocesan priests as well as priests in reli-

gious communities (although, of course, in the case

of the latter, religious profession adds a third obli-

gation).

In saying this we come upon what is certainly

the worst of all the harmful errors that are current

in this important matter. For secular priests are

commonly exempted by erroneous popular opinion,

in which they themselves sometimes share, from the

obligation of perfection. It is said that a secular

priest is to live in the world and therefore cannot be

governed by the same standards that rule the life of

a monk. This is of course true within certain limits,

since all are bound to strive after holiness in accord-

ance with the duties of their peculiar state in life.

But half-truths are dangerous when the other half

is neglected; and the allowance that must be made

for different duties of state does not free diocesan

priests from what we have seen is the common duty

of all Christians or from the urgent, additional need

for sanctity that comes from ordination.

In the great Encyclicals written by Pope Pius

X and Pope Pius XI on the Catholic priesthood there
is no difference made between secular and religious

priests in the matter of holiness. All are urged to

make the highest sanctity the primary object of

their lives; and this is a duty which is represented

as coming from the priesthood itself. Moreover, if

the duty to seek holiness which comes from ordina-



THE CHALLENGE 15

tion is secondary and supplementary to the one

which comes from baptism, it is not for that reason

unimportant. If secular priests are not holy, then

the whole Church suffers. For the particular func-

tion of the secular priesthood in the mystical body

is to extend the kingdom of God ; its work, as Dom

Chautard observes, is in the front lines of the apos-

tolate. So that if secular priests do not teach men to

become holy, and also show them the way, then

Catholics everywhere fall into tepidity and pagan-

ism.

When we examine the writings of the saints

and the doctors of the Church, we find there a doc-

trine that is diametrically opposed to the erron-

eous opinions frequently entertained on this sub-

ject. For example, St. Thomas says that a priest is

more strictly bound by his orders to possess holiness

than is a religious who is not a priest. In other

words, the priesthood itself puts upon him who is

ordained a graver need and obligation of acquiring

interior holiness than does religious profession in

the most austere and penitential orders. A secular
priest, living in the midst of the world has a graver

need and duty of becoming a saint than does a Car-

melite or Trappestine nun who gives herself to

prayer and penance in the silence of the cloister;

and if the secular priest’s Trappist brother is as

urgently bound as he, this is rather because he is a

priest than because he is a Trappist (always re-

membering that in the case of a religious priest, his

profession adds another, if lesser, obligation).

This truth, again, should not be surprising, al-

though the devil has done much to obscure it. A
religious is said, in the technical language of theol-

ogy, to be in a state of perfection
;
that is, he enters



16 THIS IS THE WILL OP GOD

a particular state in life, characterized by its con-

centration upon holiness, in which he binds himself

permanently to the use of certain means for achiev-

ing this goal. He is not expected to be already per-

fect; but he is expected to be earnestly seeking that

end.

With a priest it is different. First of all, as we

have already said, the priest is “ordained for the

highest ministrations, by which he serves Christ

Himself in the sacrament of the altar; and for this

is required a greater interior sanctity than that

necessary even for the religious state.”

(4)

Moreover,

a priest who is actively engaged in the ministry

shares his bishop’s care of souls; and this creates

another need and reason for his personal sanctifica-

tion. The responsibility which the bishop has for

the care of souls (quite aside from his priesthood)

binds him (i. e., a bishop) to a greater perfection

than that to which religious are bound. The reason

is obvious. He must feed Christ’s sheep
;
that is, He

must preach the word of God, which means that he

must preach perfection to others. Thus St. Francis

de Sales writes, “But I tell thee, dear reader, with

the great St. Denys, that it belongs principally to

bishops to conduct souls to perfection, since their

order is as supreme among men as that of the sera-

phim is among the angels.” <5) However, nemo dat

quod non habet, no one com give to others what he

does not home himself; those who would lead others

to perfection must travel the same road themselves,

as St. Francis de Sales is said to have attained sanc-

tity by dint of leading St. Jane Frances de Chantal

to that summit. St. Charles Borromeo was wont to

(4) St. Thomas II II, 184, 8, c.

(5) Introduction to the Devout Life, Preface



THE CHALLENGE 17

say that a bishop should be perfect—a truth which
he meant to be understood quite literally and which

he used as a guiding principle in dealing with the

bishops of his province.

What is true of bishops is true also, in due

measure, of all to whom they delegate the care of

souls and the ministry of the gospel. If priests,

unlike bishops, are not in a special state of life which

of itself binds them to sanctity, they are neverthe-

less bound to the extent that they share in the work

of feeding Christ’s sheep with sacred doctrine. (6)

The spiritual training in seminaries for secular

priests (not less than in the novitiates of religious

houses) must have as its end to lead seminarians to

the summits of perfection; so that afterwards, as

priests, they may fittingly discharge themselves of

the awful responsibility of preaching holiness to

others. St. Gregory, speaking of the office of preach-

ing, says that “no one who is not purged should dare

to approach the sacred ministry.” He adds words

to the effect that, unless God should designate the

alternative course, one should rather enter the reli-

gious life to seek after perfection, than the active

ministry where its possession is already in some

measure presupposed: “Seeing, then that it is diffi-

cult for any man to know whether he is purged, the

office of preaching is more safely declined; and yet

it ought not stubbornly to be declined, when the di-

vine will is discerned that it should be under-

taken.” (7) But what high duties and austere de-

mands there are for those who accept the office!

And so practical is this matter, that it is a truism

among spiritual writers that the utility of any apos-

(6) II II, 184, 6, ad 3.

(7) From Abbot Cuthbert Butler’s, Western Mysticism p. 226— (1st. ed.)



18 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

tie to the Church is in proportion to the progress

that he has made along the road to perfection
;
thus

Father Lallemant, a famous director of souls, goes

so far as to say that no apostle can render an ap-

preciable service to God without having attained

the higher reaches of the spiritual life. (8) Not less

than his Master, the apostle must say: “And for

them I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanc-

tified in truth” (Jo. 17, 19).

Such is the goal and the responsibility of Chris-

tians. Shall we say that Christianity has failed? Or

that it has been “found difficult and left untried?”

In the face of the world’s great spiritual need, will

Christians continue to leave it untried?

(8) Cfr. Saudreau, The Degrees of the Spiritual Life, Vol. II, p. 72

—

Also, Dom Chautard, The Soul of the Apostolate, esp. Part II, sect.
3 & 4.



Chapter 1

1

YOU ARE GODS

1. When a man goes hunting, he does not take

a kind of general aim at anything or everything; he

picks a definite target and shoots at it. When travel-

ing, one does not just travel “in general,” i.e., with-

out intending to go anywhere; one first chooses a

destination. Similarly, in leading a Christian life,

we must first determine our end ; those who aim at

nothing are too sure of hitting their mark. Nor may

we seek in a merely general way to be a Christian,

or “to be good,” or “to be better,” or even to be per-

fect. Our aim must be definite; we must know ex-

actly what is meant by the perfection of Christian

life and where it is to be found.

Can we know what perfection is ? Can it be de-

fined in the same precise way that “sin,” or “grace,”

or “sacrament,” is defined? Most attempts to ex-

plain the Scriptures, Chesterton said, seek in reality

to explain them away; and a favorite method of

evading the curt command of Jesus to be perfect is

to say that He is telling us only “to do the best we

can,” or that He wishes us simply to “aim high,” or

to “hitch our wagon to a star.” ; if His words were

to be taken literally, it is alleged, most men would

be driven to despair.

As a matter of fact, the word “perfection” is a

technical term in theology ; it does not point vaguely

to a dim and dreamy ideal, but has a meaning that

is perfectly precise and clear. Moreover, since per-

fection is the divinely decreed goal of human life,

there is a most urgent practical necessity that all of



20 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

us become acquainted with its meaning. Let us con-

sider the manner in which St. Thomas of Aquin de-

fines it
;
in so serious a matter we need a completely

reliable guide, and there is none better qualified than

this Saint and Doctor of the Church to help us un-

derstand and apply the teaching of Jesus.

A thing is perfect (says this holy Doctor) when
it achieves the end for ivhich it was made . (9) For

example, a knife is perfect when it cuts cleanly; a

gun is perfect when it shoots accurately. Now man’s

end is to be united to God
;
accordingly, man will be

made perfect by that which unites him to God. We

will know what it is that perfects man, therefore,

when we realize what unites him to God as to his last

end. What can this be except charity? It is charity,

or love, that joins man to God, according to the

words of the apostle, “He who abides in love, abides

in God, and God in him.” (I Jo. 4, 16) Therefore,

Christian perfection consists essentially in charity,

primarily in the love of God, secondarily in the love

of neighbor. (10)

What a wonderful truth this is ! What brilliant

light it throws over the whole plan of God and the

entire range of duties in the Christian life ! Perfec-

tion is no other thing than love! The apparently

high and remote ideal given us by Jesus is in real-

ity no farther away than that which is nearest our

hearts! Holiness, too, since it is the same as per-

fection, far from being a cold and cheerless pros-

pect, is likewise that sweet and familiar thing

—

love.

The same is true of sanctity, that awful height

whose very name would cause the stoutest heart to

(9) II n, 184, 1, c.

a0) II II, 184, 3, c.



YOU ARE GODS 21

falter and fail were it not for this knowledge that

it, too, is identical with love; and righteousness as

well—a concept which, in the Gospel, thus loses the
hardness and severity that had marked it in the Old

Testament, becoming now as winning and gracious

as Jesus Himself, in Whom, indeed, it comes to life.

Perfection, holiness, sanctity, righteousness, jus-

tice: all these are synonymous with love. Not a

mere sensual love, of course, but a love that is the

more absorbing and beautiful and satisfying be-

cause it is spiritual and supernatural; as the love

among the Three Divine Persons is all the more

perfect for being divine.

No doubt the other virtues—prudence, humil-
ity, meekness, patience, and the rest—also belong
to the character of the perfect Christian. But as

arms and legs belong to a man’s integrity, but not

to his essence, since he would still be a man though

he should lack both arms and legs, so in a parallel

way the moral virtues belong to the integrity or com-

pleteness of perfection, but not to its essence. Char-

ity alone is the essence of Christian holiness, and

the other virtues are its satellites, serving it and re-

flecting its glory.

To advance in perfection means above all else

to advance in love; day by day, if we go forward

in the love of God, we also make progress in perfec-

tion. And the day that we shall be able to say truly

(what many of us now say falsely or unthinkingly),

that we love God with our whole hearts—on that day
we shall be perfect.

Charity “is the bond of perfection,” says St.

Paul. (Col. 3, 14) We can now see why. It is a
bond because it unites us to our Creator

;
it is a bond

of perfection because it satisfies our burning thirst



22 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

for happiness, fulfills our deepest aspirations, unites

us to our true last end, and thereby completes and

perfects our nature. In fact, charity does more than

unite us to God: it makes us like Him; in a man-

ner, it divinizes us. “God is love” (I Jo. 4, 16) ; so

that the soul who is transformed by love becomes

more and more like its Creator, whose very breath

and being is love. You see then how it is that we

become holy as the Father is holy, perfect as He is

perfect. Divinized first by grace in baptism, we be-

come “partakers of the divine nature” (II Pet. 1,

4) ; then, as we advance in grace (Heaven grant that

we do!) and in divine love, which is nothing else

than grace in action, we become more and more con-

formed to the image of Jesus and, by the same token,

more perfect in our resemblance to the Father.

2. Once we have these definitions and prin-

ciples clearly in mind, the way is opened to answer

another question that begins to vex our minds as

soon as this matter of Christian perfection is

brought up, viz., “Is perfection possible?” Fre-

quently we hear men say that it is not. What shall

we answer to this? Simply scale down the words of

Jesus, as is customary among the worldly? By no

means ! To know what is meant by perfection is to

realize that this sublime ideal is within our reach;

that it does not lead to despondency by requiring of

us what is not possible to human weakness, but

rather leads us to freedom and true joy.

Let us note first of all, by way of corollary from

what has been said thus far, that there are two kinds

of perfection: the one human and natural! the

other divine and supernatural. We have the human
kind in view when we speak of the perfection of a

painter or musician, or of any human work or



YOU ARE GODS 23

workman. This kind of perfection is, in truth, im-

possible. The skilled critic can observe defects in

the work of a Michaelangelo or a da Vinci; teachers

of grammar are wont to point out, not without sat-

isfaction, grammatical mistakes in Shakespeare

;

and the old saying has it that “Even Homer nods.”

What shall be said of the rest of us poor mortals if

these towering geniuses of our race are not free

from imperfection? If Jesus had asked human per-

fection of us, we would indeed be led to despair.

Many Christians, confusing the perfection

spoken of by Jesus with this natural and human

kind, fancy that they will attain the true and highest

end in life by pursuing refinement and intellectual

culture as their proper goal. But such objects, how-

ever excellent, are but goods of the natural order

and therefore infinitely below what is least in the

supernatural order; just as the highest knowledge

obtainable by the senses is out of all proportion in-

ferior to the least achievement of thought, since the

latter belongs to a higher order of reality. This is

why carpenters and fishermen can possess Christian

perfection although having no intellectual culture;

why men like St. Joseph Cupertino or St. John

Vianney (the Cure of Ars), who seem by nature

little (if any) better than dunces, can be raised to

the altars of the Church, while the memory of most

of the great scholars and artists contemporary with

them has perished. Those who devote themselves to

the arts or sciences, or to the acquisition of culture,

as their proper end in this life, do not live as Chris-

tians at all, but rather as good pagans.

It is the other, the supernatural perfection, that

God demands of us. Here is a paradox indeed!

While human perfection is impossible, even to men



24 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

endowed with great genius, divine perfection is pos-

sible to the least! St. Thomas will again explain. (11)

It is necessary to distinguish two kinds of su-

pernatural perfection; the one may be called abso-

lute, the other relative. Now, since perfection is love

for God, absolute perfection can be this only that

God is loved as He deserves to be loved; and since

God is infinitely lovable, absolute perfection is an

infinite love for God. Is such perfection possible to

us? Clearly not; our power of loving, like all our

other powers, is bounded, finite. Only God has in-

finite powers; only God can love infinitely; there-

fore, only God is capable of absolute perfection. To

minds accustomed to view self-love solely as a de-

fect, that God loves Himself infinitely, may sound

surprising and be hard to understand. Yet even in

ourselves self-love is a fault only when it is selfish,

wrongly motivated, and inordinate; to love our own

souls and spiritual welfare, and to seek the latter

with great eagerness, is an act of virtue. So it is

with God
;
seeing that He is all-good, He cannot but

love Himself, and this infinitely ; it would be wicked

of Him to turn aside from such goodness in aver-

sion!

Relative perfection is again of two kinds: one

of which is proper to the saints in heaven, while the

other belongs to the faithful on earth. The former is

this : God is loved, not indeed as He deserves, since

this would be impossible also for saints and angels,

but with all their powers, exhausting their energies,

as it were, in a continuous act of love. This perfec-

tion is impossible to men because of the exigencies

of human life, which divert our time and talents to a

hundred necessary tasks. On earth even the saints

(11) II II, 184. 2, c.



YOU ARE GODS 25

must eat—although, like the Angelic Doctor, they
may be so lost in contemplation, that there needs to

be a kind of guardian specially appointed to remind

them of such elementary necessities! The nearest

approach among us to the perfection enjoyed by our

fellow Christians in the Church Triumphant is to be

found in those cloistered communities where many

hours are given each day to chanting the divine

praises. But even in these retreats, from which the

world and its cares are shut out as far as possible,

the religious must likewise engage in activities con-

cerned with their bodily welfare.

That (relative) perfection which is possible to

the faithful on earth is this: they do not love God

as He deserves, neither do they love Him uninter-

ruptedly with the totality of their powers, but at

any rate they remove from their souls whatever op-

poses or hinders the upward movement of their

affections to God. Man’s work in seeking perfection

is simply the negative task of removing sin and im-

perfection from his soul, so that God may pour into

it His precious gifts of grace and charity. This does

not mean that the work of perfection is itself nega-

tive; it means that the positive work of sanctifica-

tion is the effect of the Holy Spirit’s operations in

souls. Man’s part is but to clear the way for the en-

trance of grace and free the soul from whatever

would hamper the divine action.

That supernatural perfection is possible to man

is due, then, to the fact that it is in the end, not

man’s work at all, but God’s; and “with God all

things are possible” (Matt. 19, 26), even to the

making of saints from clods like ourselves

!



26 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

3. When we inquire what it is that prevents

our affections from rising to God, we come to the

practical task; and the answer will enable us to

frame a procedure that will make our program of

spiritual effort intelligent and orderly. St. Thomas,

in the article from which we have been drawing this

doctrine, briefly mentions two things that keep our

affections from God. The one is that evil which is so

far incompatible with charity that the two cannot

exist together in the same soul; this is mortal sin,

which must be removed before even the beginnings

of devout Christian life can be made. But the soul

can and should go further; and the Christian, be-

sides eliminating serious sin, which is directly con-

trary to love, should also labor to rid himself of all

that hinders the soul from giving its affection to God

wholly. What is it that prevents such total love for

God? St. Thomas does not consider the matter at

length but simply mentions such faults as are found

among beginners and proficients in the spiritual

life.
(12) These, as we learn from writers on the

spiritual life, are venial sins, attachments to creat-

ures, deliberate imperfections, preoccupations with

the fleeting joys of this world. As we free our souls

from such influences, the love of God can possess

us more and more, pushing its roots into every re-

mote corner of our souls. Christians who are not

in the state of mortal sin should not imagine that

their work is finished
;
they have scarecly begun

!

A procedure is important. If you wish to be a
typist, you must follow some method; if you desire

to draw or to paint, you must seek out a master,

who will show you what to do. Without some kind

(12) This refers to those who are in the Purgative and Illuminative ways ;
i.e., those who, having left behind serious sin, are on the way of
spiritual progress but are not yet perfect.



YOU ARE GODS 27

of a definite program, we can scarcely know how

to begin—much less how to go on. How then shall
we set about removing the obstacles to divine love?

If we may call upon a saint to comment on the words

of a saint, Francis de Sales, one of the great masters

of the spiritual life, will help us in this practical

task. In the first part of his Introduction to a De-

vout Life he outlines the steps that are to be taken

first by one desirous of advancing in virtue. Alto-

gether there are three steps, or, as he calls them,

purgations; and his insistence on them at the be-

ginning of a devout life is in perfect accord with

the Angelic Doctor’s teaching that man’s part in

the work of perfection is the negative one of re-

moving obstacles. The first purgation is that from

mortal sin (Chap. VI). The second goes deeper and

seeks to get at and destroy the “affection for sin,”

in addition to all the “affections, connections and

occasions which lead toward it” (Chap. VII).

Finally, the purpose of the third purgation is to

find and destroy, not sin, but the hidden roots of

sin. This is the one that will chiefly occupy souls

who, while not living in serious sin, have not yet

reached perfection; it consists in eliminating, first,

affections for venial sin; secondly, evil inclinations;

thirdly, affections for creature-pleasures, or, as the

saint puts it, for “unprofitable amusements,” which

include things like “play, dancing, feasting, dress,

and theatrical shows.” (Chap. 22, 23, 24).

Here, then, is a practical procedure that will

enable us to advance in the love of God day after

day. It is a program, also, which all of us must

adopt, for
—

“every Christian, each according to his

condition, must strive for the perfection of char-

ity,” and is to accomplish this by “growing in char-



28 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

ity until death.” (13) It follows, also, that every soul

receives sufficient grace, not only for salvation, but

also for sanctity. These graces are offered prog-

ressively according to the individual’s need and

merit, and will lead him, if he is faithful, to the

perfection of the Christian life. What a mean opin-

ion of the divine bounty and of the merits of Jesus

have those persons who refuse to make the effort

necessary to pursue sanctity on the pretended

grounds that they “have not the special graces,”

that it would be “presumptuous” of them to aspire

to so high an ideal, or that “no one can go beyond

the grace given him by God.” It is surely true that

no one can go beyond grace; but God gives us all

sufficient grace to be saints. “He who has not spared

even His own Son, but has delivered Him for us all,

how can He fail to grant us also all things with

Him?” (Rom. 8, 32) “I can do all things in Him

who strengthens me,” wrote St. Paul (Phil. 4, 13)

;

so can we do “all things” in union with Christ our

Lord, in virtue of the grace which comes to us from

Him. “Because in everything you have been en-

riched in Him . . . that you lack no grace” (I Cor.

5, 7) It is not God’s fault that we are not saints, it

is our fault; it is not due to any deficiency of divine

grace, but to our own meanness and want of gener-

osity. “We ought to have the holiness of Apostles.

There is no reason except our own wilful corrup-

tion, that we are not by this time walking in the

steps of St. Paul or St. John, and following them as

they followed Christ. What a thought is this!” (14>

(13) Garrigoa-Lagrange : Christian Perfection and Contemplation, p. 191.

(14) Newman: Parochial and Plain Sermons, Vol. I, Sermon VI, “The
Spiritual Mind.”



Chapter II!

THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE

1. No one doubts the sublimity of the Chris-

tian ideal of perfection. No one would deny that to

seek it is most commendable. But there is a general

impression that, although commendable, it is not

necessary. So that a further question arises, once

we have settled the important doctrinal matters

treated in the foregoing sections: granted that we

are all called to perfection, are we obliged to heed

this call? Or is this ideal one to which noble and

generous natures may aspire without, however, suf-

fering serious harm if they do not? May the or-

dinary run of men ignore the divine invitation alto-

gether? Or, to put the question in another form, is

perfection a precept or a counsel?

Let us be quite clear as to what is meant by

these terms. A precept is a commandment which
binds under pain of sin. The degree of this obliga-

tion varies according to the gravity of the matter

commanded. The precept to attend Holy Mass on

Sundays binds under pain of mortal sin, although,

if there is sufficient reason, one may miss Mass

without fault or loss of salvation. The precept to

receive confirmation binds less strictly; one does

not commit serious sin here unless there is contempt

for it, or deliberate neglect of the opportunity to

receive it. There is another class of precepts which,

since they stipulate means which are wholly indis-

pensable for salvation, carry a more serious obliga-

tion than all others; there can be no dispensation

from them, and even ignorance cannot excuse from



30 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

their fulfillment. The precept to receive baptism

binds in this way : there can be no salvation without

baptism, at least in desire. Ignorance of this law

may eliminate malice or neglect, but it cannot sup-

ply the defect which results from the failure to ob-

serve the divine decree; for Jesus said that “unless

a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he

cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (Jo. 3, 5)

On the other hand, a counsel is a direction,

given by Christ, which fixes a desirable course of

action without requiring us to follow it under pain

of sin. It is a recommendation, an optional rule of

life, intended to help men in their efforts to live

as “children of God.” St. Thomas (with the whole

of Christian tradition) teaches that there are three

main counsels, by which those who follow them re-

nounce the three general varieties of human goods

:

poverty, by which they abandon the goods of for-

tune, like wealth and reputation
;
chastity, by which

they give up bodily consolation
;
obedience, by which

they strip themselves of the most precious interior

good, namely, the will and the power of self de-

termination. (15) Other counsels in the Gospel can

be related to these three main ones, since what they

effect is a renunciation, in some particular form, of

the goods which are foresworn by poverty, chastity,

and obedience. Whenever Jesus enjoins us to adopt

some high idea, yet does not insist on it as a law

whose infringement is sinful, we may say that he

is giving a counsel. For example, he tells us not to

resist evil; if some one strikes us on one cheek, we

are to turn the other. Still, we may defend ourselves

or our property without fault; should we avail our-

(15) Summa Theol., I II, 108, 4, c.



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 31

selves of this right, we of course fail to observe the

ideal conduct recommended by Jesus, but we do not

by that fact fall into sin.

If the call to perfection is a precept, then we

are bound to observe it under pain of more or less

serious sin; if, on the contrary, it is a counsel, then

we need not strive for it, although to do so would

be most praiseworthy. What is it—precept or coun-
sel?

To answer this question, we need only keep

in mind what is meant by perfection; it is love.

Is love a precept or a counsel? “Master, what must

I do to gain eternal life?” the lawyer asked.
“
‘Thou

shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart,

and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind.’

This is the greatest and the first commandment.”

(Matt. 22, 37-38)

Perfection is a precept. The too common notion

that it is a counsel is without foundation in the

Scriptures or Christian Tradition. St. Thomas, who

poses for himself the same question that we are

discussing, says that, since perfection is love, it is

preceptive and consists primarily and essentially in

the command to love God, secondarily in the com-

mand to love our neighbor. (16) Further, this pre-

cept must be grouped with the strictest kind, those

which fix an indispensable means of salvation. For

charity is necessary for salvation
;
therefore per-

fection, at least in substance, that is in its lowest

degree, is also necessary. What is this lowest de-

gree? “To love nothing more than God, nothing as

much as God, nothing contrary to God.” (17) He who

has not this perfection does not fulfill the precept.

(16) II n, 184, 3, e.

(17) II II, 184, 3, ad 2.



32 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

There is, however, this difference between the

precept of perfection and other precepts. The oth-

ers oblige us at once. For example, I am obliged

now to attend Holy Mass on Sundays; and each

time I miss through my own fault, I am guilty of

grievous sin. On the contrary, the precept of per-

fection does not bind me now, as a thing to be re-

alized at once (since this is impossible). It binds

me as an end or goal, for which I must presently

strive, but which I can attain only after years of

struggle. We are not obliged to be perfect now;

yet we must not relax our efforts to obtain per-

fection now. St. Paul thus describes the Christian

attitude: “Not that I have already obtained this,

or already have been made perfect, but I press on

hoping that I may lay hold of that for which Christ

Jesus has laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not con-

sider that I have laid hold of it already. But one

thing I do: forgetting what is behind, I strain for-

ward to what is before, I press on towards the goal,

to the prize of God’s heavenly call in Christ Jesus.”

(Phil. 3, 12-14)

Perfection is not only a precept, it is the pre-

cept. Since it is love, it is the primary and essen-

tial law, “the whole law and the prophets.” (Matt.

22, 40) Here is the manner in which one of Christ’s

Vicars has stated this law (18) : “Christ has consti-

tuted the Church holy and the source of sanctity,

and all those who take her for guide and teacher

must, by the Divine Will, tend to holiness of .life

—

‘This is the will of God, your sanctification,’ says St.

Paul. What kind of sanctity? The Lord Himself

declared it when He said, ‘Be ye perfect as your

(18) Encyclical on the Third Centenary of St. Francis de Sales.



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 33

heavenly Father is perfect/ Let no one think that

this is addressed to a select few and that others are

permitted to remain in an inferior degree of vir-

tue . The law obliges
,
as is clear, absolutely every-

one in the world ivithout exception”

* * * *

2. Most errors concerning this doctrine come

from the misinterpretation of an incident narrated

in the Gospel. Asked by a rich young man what

is necessary to enter into eternal life, Jesus replied,

“Keep the commandments.” “Which?” countered

his questioner. And Jesus said: “Thou shalt not

kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not

steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honor thy

father and mother, and Thou shalt love thy neighbor

as thyself.” To this the young man said, “All these

I have kept from my youth
;
what is yet wanting to

me?” Then Jesus made the reply which causes all

the difficulty: “If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what

thou hast . . . and come, follow me.” (Matt. 19, 16-

21) If thou tvilt be perfect—from these words it is
concluded that perfection is optional, and that cer-

tain teachings contained in the Gospel are not

strictly necessary because “they belong to perfec-

tion.”

In considering this incident, however, we can-

not interpret it in a sense contrary to the doctrine

already explained. Surely St. Thomas was aware

of this text (indeed, in a moment we shall cite his

interpretation of it), and yet he did not see in it

any contradiction to his teaching that perfection

is a precept. Pope Pius XI was also presumably ac-

quainted with it, yet we have just seen him affirm

that perfection is a law that binds everyone in the



34 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

world without exception. Clearly the words of

Jesus cannot mean that perfection is a counsel. What

do they mean? Simply that, if one accepts Our Lord’s

challenge and strives for perfection, certain con-

ditions must be fulfilled; for since men are free,

they may reject what God decrees as law; it is this

freedom which explains the use of the word “if.”

A parallel case will help to make this clear.
Suppose that you are ill and send for a doctor. After

examining you, he says, “If you wish to get well,

you must go to bed and take the medicines which

I prescribe for you.” Now the doctor knows per-

fectly well that you wish to recover; otherwise, you

would not have sent for him ! Why then does he use
(what appears to be) a conditional form; why does

he say, “If you wish to get well . . . ”? Clearly, the

“if” does not indicate a condition at all, but a

certain logical sequence that follows upon your re-

quest. What the doctor means is this: “Since you

wish to recover, having requested my services, here

is what you must do ... ” Similarly, in saying “if” to

the young man, Jesus does not mean that it is op-

tional for him to be perfect. He is referring to

the question that had been asked (“What is yet

wanting to me?”) and explaining what the rich

young man must do if he really is earnest about

overcoming his defects.

In effect, what Jesus says is this: “Since you

would be perfect, having asked in what you are still

lacking, here is my answer ...” The “if” cannot
be taken to indicate that perfection is either a pre-

cept or a counsel. We must look elsewhere for cer-
tainty in this matter; here Jesus is simply explain-



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 35

ing how perfection is to be obtained by those who

are in earnest about seeking it.

It is a principle of Scripture study that, in

order to understand any doubtful text aright, we

should consider its “parallel places,” i.e., the words

of other sacred writings which cover the same

ground but speak from a different point of view

or mention different details or use clearer language.

Looking into the other Synoptic Gospels for the ac-

count of the rich young man, we will find the above

interpretation borne out completely. The condition-

al “if” is not here used at all, but Jesus is quoted

as saying to the young man, who has just boasted

that he has kept the whole Mosaic law, “One thing

is still lacking to thee . . . sell all thou hast . . . and

come, follow me.” (Lc. 18, 22; Me. 10, 21)

The variation in the expressions, which is suf-

ficiently explained by the difference of languages

(since St. Matthew’s Gospel as we have it is a trans-

lation from the Aramaic, while the others were writ-

ten in Greek) throws new light on the matter and

makes it clear that Jesus is not suggesting a merely

optional course of conduct, but is demanding of the

young man something over and above the Mosaic

code. Other texts point inescapably to the conclu-

sion that this demand is a genuine precept: “Love

the Lord thy God . . .,” “Be thou perfect . . . ,”

“This is the will of God . . .,” “Seek ye first the king-

dom of God and His justice,”—all of these are given
imperatively, not conditionally or by way of coun-

sel
;
so that we are dealing with a strict command.

There are other difficulties that come from this

story of the rich young man; and, while we are on

the subject, it will be worth while to consider them



36 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

all. For example, since Jesus told him that, to

enter life, he should keep the commandments, it

might seem to follow that perfection is not neces-

sary after all, but that one can enter into life by

observing the commandments (i.e., of the Mosaic

code)
;
and Our Lord’s statement is so understood

at times. The error here consists in limiting the

word “commandment” too much. When Jesus uses it

here, shall we imagine that He refers only to the

commands given through Moses, while excluding

His own “new commandment,” that of love, which

He calls the greatest and first ? That, on the contrary,

He does include the law of love among the command-

ments which He has in mind as necessary for enter-

ing into eternal life is clear from the fact that He

mentions it explicitly among the commandments

which He enumerates. “Thou shalt love thy neigh-

bor as thyself,” He said, thus showing that love is

necessary “to have eternal life.”*

Another difficulty comes of the fact that Jesus

looked on the young man and loved him, a detail

which is supplied by St. Mark (10, 21). In spite of

this, the young man refused the invitation and turn-

ed away sad. This must mean (it is concluded)

that one can refuse the call to perfection and still

be saved. It means no such thing! If you look at

the Gospel, you will see that Jesus looked lovingly

upon the young man before issuing His invitation,

and also before the other had refused to abandon

his riches and follow Jesus. After this refusal we

hear .Jesus say something quite different, something

which does not suggest, and scarcely admits, that

*In practice, the love of neighbor contains also the love of God ; it is
our practical way of manifesting this love: “he who loves his neighbor
has fulfilled the law” (Rom. 13, 8). Hence, we say that the command to
love our neighbor contains implicitly the precept of perfection.



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 37

the young man was saved, i.e., “With what difficulty

will they who have riches enter the kingdom of

God!” (Me. 10, 23)

One reason why this text presents so many dif-

ficulties is because, as St. Thomas notes, it contains

both a precept and a counsel. (19) When Jesus says,

“Go, sell whatever thou hast and give to the poor,”

these words are not to be taken as containing a

precept; they are a counsel, the counsel of poverty.

The reason that we know this is that all men are

not strictly obliged to get rid of their money and

property. The precept, St. Thomas says, is contained

in the phrase, “Follow me.”

This is an invitation to the divine companion-

ship and love; and love is perfection. In this short

phrase, so easily overlooked, especially when the

first part of Our Lord’s statement is given almost

exclusive attention, there is decisive proof that the

Divine Master is imposing perfection as a precept.

Moreover, the Angelic Doctor by this analysis

throws added light on the subsequent history of the

rich young man: if the latter rejected the precept,

then he could not have been saved
;
if he refused the

counsel only, then he may have been saved, although

surely men render their salvation diificult (to say

at least) when they do not walk in the vocation to

which they are called by God.

3. In speaking of the precepts and counsels,

people sometimes use them to designate two “kinds”

of Christianity. “We must distinguish carefully be-

tween precepts and counsels,” they say; “for al-

though all are bound by the commandments, not all

are bound by the counsels.” They go on to assert

(19) II II, 184, 3, ad 1.



38 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

that ordinary Christians are bound only by the com-

mandments, whereas religious are obliged to observe

the counsels. Since by the commandments they un-

derstand the ten commandments of the Decalogue,

they then conclude that the higher duties of the

Gospel are not meant for themselves, but only for

religious.

The distinction between commandments and

counsels is legitimate and also necessary; but what

these persons constantly forget is that perfection

itself is a precept and not a counsel. Since they

identify the commandments with the natural law,

they take it for granted that perfection belongs

among the counsels. This distinction, necessary to

form a correct conscience, thus becomes an excuse

for setting aside the lofty teachings and obligations

of the Gospel. But this is not the intention of those

for whom the distinction comes. For example, in

dealing with the love of enemies, St. Thomas says

that the commandment requires that we be prepared

to love all men including enemies in case of need,

but that it belongs to perfection to love them in in-

dividual cases aside from need. <20) Through fail-

ure to understand the mind and method of the Saint,

one might conclude wrongly from this teaching that

we have no obligation to what he says belongs only

to perfection. But we cannot forget that St. Thomas

elsewhere lays it down, as we have shown, that per-

fection is itself obligatory. The reason that he dis-

tinguishes what belongs to the commandments and

what to perfection is that, without such knowledge,

we would be prone to fall into grave errors in form-

ing our conscience, multiplying the possibilities of

(20) II H, 25, 8, c.



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 39

sin, and falling into discouragement. Offenses

against the commandments make us guilty of sin

now, whereas, since perfection binds us as an end,

we are not guilty of sin the moment that we fail

to comply with all of its requirements, but only

when we ignore it over our whole life. To be wrong

in this matter, and to think that each act that is not

perfect makes us guilty of sin would place an in-

tolerable burden upon us. On the other hand, if we

forget that perfection is a precept, although not

binding us under pain of sin in every individual

act, we will fall into tepidity and eventually commit

sin.

In a similar way we distinguish the obligations

that we have towards our parents in justice from

those that arise out of love. Justice demands that

we do not injure them, love requires that we treat

them with devotion. Now a sin against the justice

that we owe our parents would be a graver matter

than a failure to show them love in some particular

instance; thus it would be worse to shoot one’s

father than to omit some courtesy to him. Still, love

is the higher law; and who will conclude that, be-

cause injustice is the graver sin, there is no duty to

practice love? So also nature and reason require us

to observe the commandments of the Decalogue, and

whoever refuses this duty commits grievous sin

against the justice that is due to God. Because such

sins offend against an elementary duty that we owe

to God, they are more serious than the failure to

act in accordance with the duty of love, which is im-

posed by the Gospel. But may we conclude from this

that the precepts of the Gospel are unimportant?

Here also, in our relations with God as with our



40 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

parents, love is the higher law and the nobler duty.

And perfection, which is the same as love, binds

men in the manner of love.

Since it is thus not true that the commandments

and counsels divide Christianity into two separate

sections, how are we to understand the relationship

between them? St. Thomas, with his usual marvel-

lous lucidity, sums up the relationship by showing

that the precept of perfection establishes the end

of the Christian life, whereas the counsels desig-

nate the best means. We see then why the counsels

are not obligatory for all: “Since that which falls

under the precept can be fulfilled in different ways,

one does not become a transgressor of the precept

because he does not fulfill it in the best ways pos-

sible; that he fulfills it in any way at all is suffi-

cient.”
(21)

There is only one precept of perfection, and it

determines an end that is necessary for all; there

are, however, various ways of reaching this end, and

it is permissible to follow any of these. Suppose that

a man dies in New York, having left a will by which

he divides his fortune among three nephews who

live in Chicago, the only condition being that they

must go to New York to obtain their share of the

money. They go at once (we will suppose) but adopt

different modes of travel, one going by air, another

by train, another by automobile. This, of course,

they may do, for the will fixes only their destination

and does not require them to adopt any special mode

of transportation. So it is with us Christians in our

pilgrimage through this world. The Father decrees

that, to receive our inheritance as Sons of God, we

(21) II II, 184, 3, ad 2.



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 41

must all go towards a particular destination: the

perfection of charity. But He does not determine

how we are to reach this goal; of the several pos-

sible ways, He leaves us to make our own choice;

and we are safe so long as we take a means that is

fitted to obtain the end which has been set for us.

In general, we may say that there are two ways

of Christian life, two ways by which men may travel

to perfection; the one is the way of the Christian

religious, the other that of the Christian laity. To

the man who goes by plane for his inheritance, let

us compare the great hermits and saints who, cast-

ing all worldly goods and cares behind, go to God at

once
;
they want the shortest route, the fastest mode

of travel. To the one who goes by train we can com-

pare religious
;
these, having still some contact with

the world, and somewhat retarded thereby, never-

theless go in the same direction as do the greatest

saints. Finally, the man who travels by automobile,

following a route that goes up and down and winds

about, is like the Christian layman who makes his

way circuitously among the concerns of the world,

but who must yet direct his steps towards the same

sanctity which religious and saints pursue.

The way of the Christian religious, the Church

holds, is the higher way; not because there is any-

thing wrong with the way taken by the laity, but

simply because the religious life enables those who

enter upon it to put quickly aside the things that

hinder our love from going wholly and at once to

God. For by his vows, as we have said, the religious

renounces the three great human goods—those of
fortune, of the body, and of the soul—which, by
their attractiveness, tend to absorb man’s attention



42 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

and to alienate his affections from God. Bound as

we are to love God with our whole heart, we may

love other things only in and through and because

of God. By giving up all earthly goods in a heroic

renunciation, there is a greater opportunity for the

religious to keep his affections from lighting upon

the vain and fleeting pleasures of earth. He there-

fore abandons the things of the world, not because

he fancies them evil (as a Christian he calls them

“goods”), but because he is able in this way to love

and serve God with greater singleness of purpose.

If the way of the layman is not so high or so

difficult as that of the religious, yet, considered from

a certain point of view, it offers an even greater

challenge. “It is even a greater thing, it requires a

clearer, steadier, nobler faith to be surrounded with

worldly goods, yet to be self-denying; to consider

ourselves but stewards of God’s bounty and to be

faithful in all things.”
<22)

Moreover, marriage and family life, which are

the ordinary state of the layman, are a means of

perfection and a true vocation. Christ made mar-

riage a sacrament, and in it He gives to the wedded

pair special sacramental graces which will help

them attain holiness in this new condition of life, as

well as to sanctify the children who are born of their

union. “Women will be saved by child bearing, if

they continue in faith and love and holiness with

modesty.” (I Tim. 2, 15)

Through Christian marriage and family life, new

saints are to be brought into the world—converters
of souls, lovers of the cross, citizens in the Kingdom

of God. Yet not only are parents to become holy by

(22) Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, Vol, III, Sermon I.



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 43

bringing children into the world, not only are they

to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in sanctifying

these children, but there own sacramental union is

itself, no mere human bond, but a partnership in

holiness, a union transformed by charity and oblig-

ing husband and wife in a special way to support

one another in charity.

Pope Pius XI summarizes this doctrine as fol-

lows: “The love, then, of which We are speaking is
not that based on the passing lust of the moment

nor does it consist in pleasing words only, but in

the deep attachment of the heart which is expressed

in action, since love is proved by deeds. This out-

ward expression of love in the home demands not

only mutual help but must go farther
;
must have as

its primary purpose that man and wife help each

other day by day in forming and perfecting them-

selves in the interior life, so that through their part-

nership in life they may advance ever more and

more in virtue, and above all that they may grow in

true love toward God and their neighbor, on which

indeed ‘depend the whole Law and the Prophets’

(Matt. 22, 40). For all men of every condition, in

whatever honorable walk of life they may be, can

and ought to imitate that most perfect example of

holiness placed before man by God, namely Christ

Our Lord, and by God’s grace to arrive at the sum-

mit of perfection, as is proved by the example set

us of many saints.” <23)

The doctrine in this passage should be pondered

deeply and at length. Let us stop for a moment to

enumerate its chieF points. Married couples are

called to perfection, and even to the highest perfec-

(23) Casti Connubii (On Chaste Wedlock)



44 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

tion
;
the effort to achieve holiness is the noblest ex-

pression of their mutual love. They are to lead an

interior life, such a life as is ordinarily thought of

as belonging to convents and monasteries ; but

Christ’s Vicar says that it belongs also to the home.

This is, after all, not remarkable : how else can there

be saintly priests and religious, lovers of the in-

terior life, unless as children they have been spir-

itually trained in deeply religious homes? Husband

and wife are to cooperate in living a spiritual life

just as two religious might assist each other in their

efforts to reach God ; the marriage union is in very

truth a partnership in holiness.

There are other very important doctrines set

down in this short passage from Pope Pius XI. All

men can, he says, aspire to perfection. This, then,

is the doctrine of the Church, and those who say

that sanctity is impossible to laymen, or in the midst

of the activities of the world, are dangerously near

heresy. Furthermore, all men must aspire to perfec-

tion
;
there is an obligation, a duty, a law from God

;

and no one may say, “This is not for me.” Finally,

any honorable occupation is a fit means for acquir-

ing perfection. Some occupations are not honorable,

others are scarcely so. While in such walks of life, it

is certain that men cannot become saints
; but their

duty then is to change their occupation, not to

exempt themselves from their primary obligation

as Christians. This holds for all conditions of life

—

for rich and poor, for learned and unlearned, for

great and the small: all must aspire to the highest

sanctity. To the assertion thjft there are two gen-

eral ways of striving for perfection, that of the

Christian religious and that of the laity, we may



THE TWO WAYS OF CHRISTIAN LIFE 45

now add that there are innumerable particular

ways—as many, in fact, as tliere are honorable oc-
cupations and various conditions of life.

The truths we have been here explaining have

their own special Doctor: St. Francis de Sales. One

of the great spiritual writers and directors of the

Church, perhaps his chief contribution to the re-

ligious life of his times was showing that sanc-

tity, which formerly had seemed to belong to the

cloister exclusively, really obliged men and women

in the world as well. “ . . . . My intention,” said he,

“is to instruct such as live in towns, in families, or

at court, and who, by their condition, are obliged

to lead, as to the exterior, a common life; who fre-

quently, under imaginary pretense of impossibility,

will not so much as think of undertaking a devout

life. . . .
” (24) The first chapters of his An Intro-

duction to the Devout Life are devoted to affirming

and illustrating the great doctrinal truth that men

in the world can and should achieve holiness. For

this reason has the Holy See in our times recalled

the work of this saint, raised him to the dignity of

a Doctor of the Church, and designated his as the

particular guide for Christian laymen. (25)

Let us conclude this section by adding to what

has been already said one more important and ser-

ious thought. If the lay state differs from that of

religious by the fact that the latter, because of their

vows, are bound by the counsels, while the former

are not, it must nevertheless be asserted that the

laity are also held to cultivate the spirit and the

virtues of which the vows are a particular external

(24) Introduction to the Devout Life, Preface.

(25) Cfr. The Encyclical of Pope Pius XI on the Third Centenary of
St. Francis de Sales.



46 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

expression. That is to say, for example, that al-

though a married man may not take a vow of pover-

ty, since his state in life binds him to care for his

family, still he must practice poverty of spirit and

detachment of heart; or, as St. Thomas says, he

must renounce all things, if not in fact, at least

according to a certain preparation of mind, so that

he is ready to give up or distribute all his goods. (26)

St. Paul also demands the highest detachment

of those in the world, saying that “those who buy”

should be “as though not possessing
;
and those who

use this world, as though not using it.” (I Cor. 7,

30-31) The same is true in regard to the other coun-

sels. Laymen must observe chastity according to

their state. Those unmarried must observe a virgin-

al chastity as rigorously as any religious; those

married must life in accordance with the different,

but still high and exacting, demands of married

chastity: “those who have wives” should be “as if

they had none.”

Finally, laymen must practice obedience by ob-

serving the commandments of God and the precepts

of their lawful superiors, civil and ecclesiastical.

This virtue also requires them to abandon them-

selves to all providential arrangements in their re-

gard, including the trials with which they are visit-

ed in this life. In a word, all Christians are bound

to observe the spirit of the vows by practicing the

virtues of poverty, chastity and obedience.

(26) II II. 184, 7, ad I.



Chapter IV

I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL . . .

There is another serious problem to be dealt

with in considering the Christian’s obligation to

seek perfection. Let us put it in the form of an ob-

jection, an objection that is actually made quite

often to the doctrine we have been studying. “What

you say is true,” it is admitted; “all are certainly

bound to strive for holiness. However, there are de-

grees of holiness, and it is not necessary to possess

the highest degree. Even with the lowest, one can

enter into heaven; and it is sufficient for ordinary

mortals to work for this more modest attainment.”

It is easy to see the purpose and result of this

objection; it immediately releases Christians from

all higher spiritual endeavors and permits them to

adopt mediocrity as a deliberate goal. One is now

not only able to forget the command of Jesus to be

perfect; one is performing a positive act of virtue

in forgetting it.

It is true that there are degrees of perfection.

Jesus said, “In my Father’s house there are many

mansions.” (Jo. 14, 2) There is a hierarchy among

the saints. Our Lady stands above all, the Queen of

Saints; then St. John the Baptist; then the Apostles

and Evangelists; the great Doctors, martyrs, and

confessors. St. Teresa of Lisieux tells how, as a

child, she could not understand how all the saints

could be completely happy and still have different

degrees of sanctity. Then her sister filled two glass-

es, a large one and a small one, with water, and the

saint then saw how it could be that souls might be



48 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

filled with the love of God and nevertheless have

various degrees of love.

May one conclude, however, from the fact that

there are different degrees of sanctity that we are

free to choose the lowest degree as our own ideal?

If so, then all the elaborate structure of doctrine

that we have built up so far is vain, like a beautiful

palace built in a remote region where no one can

live. It would mean that we could ignore with im-

punity all the lofty legislation of the Gospel, that we

could neglect the invitation of Jesus to follow Him,

that we could almost set at nought the very purpose

of the Incarnation, which is to make men sharers of

divinity, by remaining satisfied with a natural

standard of good conduct that was already known

before the coming of Christ.

Let us once more go to the Angelic Doctor for

assistance in a matter so serious; his thoughts con-

cerning the Gospel teaching will give us the great-

est possible security. He attacks the identical prob-

lem that we are considering, although he states it

in somewhat different terms by asking whether we

should look upon the higher degrees of perfection as

of precept or counsel. That is, may we hold that,

while the lowest degree of perfection is command-

ed, and therefore necessary for salvation, the higher

degrees are counsels and accordingly do not oblige

us to concern ourselves with them? We will say
nothing here about the spiritual dwarfishness of

those who would deliberately choose a lesser ideal

when they know of greater; we will consider only

whether one may choose the lower ideal at all.

St. Thomas answers that the higher degrees of

perfection fall under the precept; yes, even the



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 49

highest degree, which can be realized only in heav-

en, is commanded as an end which we must seek al-

ready in this life. Therefore, we may not limit

ourselves to aiming for the lowest degree of perfec-

tion, but must set ourselves to try for the highest.

The saint gives two reasons for this teaching. (25)

First of all, the words, or form, of the precept

itself show that what God demands of us is a total

love : “Love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart,

with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength.”

The insistent repetition of the word “whole” where-

ever this precept is given is of the greatest doctrinal

significance. Totality and perfection mean the same

things, remarks the saint, quoting Aristotle. There-

fore a perfect love of God is enjoined by the precept.

The second reason is taken from St. Paul’s

teaching that “the end of the precept is charity.”

(I Tim. 1,5) Since all the other ordinances of God

are directed towards love, which is thus their end

and fulfillment, we may not measure or limit the

love that we will give to God. The reason is that it

is not possible tp measure an end that is desired, but

only the means which are directed towards obtain-

ing the end. For example, a doctor cannot measure

the amount of health he will give to a patient; he

cannot restore ten dollars worth of health to a poor

patient, and a hundred dollars worth to a rich man.

In both cases he must will to restore health without

limiting it in any way. Of course he may (and

must!) measure the means which he employs to

effect a cure
;
he gives his medicines in certain doses

and he fixes an exact regimen to be followed in eat-

ing and drinking.

(25) II II, 184, 3, c et ad 3.



50 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

It is the same with charity; since it is the end

of Christian effort, it cannot be measured or limit-

ed; that is, we may not limit ourselves to loving

God moderately, or up to a certain point only. Here

also we may dispose and measure only the means.

This is why a man may debate whether, in his case,

it is better to enter into the married vocation or to

follow the counsels; or whether the love of God

would have him use this particular time for prayer

or for serving the poor. But as to the end, charity

—

this is to be sought without limit: “the measure

with which we are to love God,” said St. Bernard,

“is to love Him without measure.”

2. It remains true, however, as St. Thomas

also notes,
(26) that whoever reaches the lowest

degree of perfection will be saved. What then would

happen, in practice, to one who, neglecting the full

demands of the precept, would content himself with

aiming for the lowest degree of holiness? The at-

tempt to actually realize Christian perfection pre-

sents a new difficulty, a difficulty quite distinct from

the doctrinal problem that we have been discussing

so far, a difficulty in the practical order. No doubt,

to consider the matter from a purely doctrinal point

of view, the lowest degree of perfection is sufficient

for salvation; but the question is whether, in view

of actual difficulties that must be taken into account

in living a Christian life, one can reach this lowest

degree without striving for complete holiness.

A backward student (to consider a parallel
case) may know with perfect clearness that, if he

makes 75%, he will pass in his examinations. But

suppose that, instead of making every effort pos-

(26) n XI. 184, 3, ad 2.



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 51

sible, as should be done by one deficient in talent,

he deliberately takes it easy, desiring to obtain only

the necessary 75%. It is scarcely likely that he will

succeed in getting even the passing grade! Al-

though, considered in itself, the 75% may be suffi-

cient, the student must in practice recognize his own

deficiencies and gauge his efforts accordingly;

otherwise he will fail. So also, it may be stated as a

truth abstractly true for the spiritual life that the

lowest degree of perfection is sufficient for salva-

tion; but this does not settle the practical problem

of whether imperfect men, relaxing their efforts

and not caring for high achievements, will be able

to reach even the lowest degree.

In actually seeking after perfection, of what-

ever degree, there are certain difficulties and ob-

stacles to be encountered, certain weaknesses in

ourselves that must be taken into our reckoning. In

view of these, to adopt a deliberate policy of care-

lessness and half-hearted effort is surely to expose

one’s self to the possibility, almost to the certainty,

of losing one’s soul. Practical exigencies must be al-

lowed for in our calculations; and they are so in-

stant and exacting that we must strain all our

energies to achieve even the minimum required by

God. If God does not tempt us beyond our strength,

certainly He allows us to be tempted to the limit of

our strength
;

great saints, knowing this, pray

humbly, “And lead us not into temptation !” We are
warranted then in stating as a principle that IN

PRACTICE it is necessary TO AIM at the highest
degree of perfection in order with certainty TO
OBTAIN the lowest.

Soldiers, when they fire a long-range cannon



52 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

that will shoot for miles, do not point the cannon’s

mouth directly at their target. If they were to do

this, then the projectile, because of its weight and

other influences bearing upon it, would fall to the

ground long before reaching its objective. The gun

is directed to an imaginary point high up in the air,

for the gunners know that, upon reaching that point,

the shot will, as it were, fall on their objective by a

gradual descent. Moreover, they must make many

complicated calculations, allowing for the weight of

the projectile, the curvature and movement of the

earth, the direction of the winds. If they err in any

of these, they will not hit their mark.

It is for similar reasons that, in order to reach

the lowest degree of perfection, we must aim at the

highest. We must allow for external factors that
will cause us, unless we take them into account, to

fail in our aim. We must not forget the dead-weight
of our own flesh, which pulls us towards the things

of earth and away from God. We must particularly

allow for the sinister and dangerous twist towards

evil which is in our flesh as a result of the Fall. This

is strong enough to make St. Paul cry out, “For I

do not the good that I wish, but the evil that I do

not wish, that I perform. Now if I do what I do not

wish, it is no longer I who do it, but the Sin that

dwells in me.” (Rom. 7, 19-20) Let us then not

imagine that we can safely overlook this evil ten-

dency! Furthermore, we must take account of the

greatness of temptation, the weakness of the flesh,

the violence of passion, the strength of unmortified

appetites, and the malice of the devil who, “as a

roaring lion, goes about seeking someone to devour.”

(I Pet. 5, 8) Relaxed powers, carelessness, and un-



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 53

consciousness of danger are no match for dangers

such as these. The challenge of the Christian life is

such as to demand all our strength. Yes, and more

than our strength ! “For our wrestling is not against

flesh and blood, but against the Principalities and

Powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness,

against the spiritual force of wickedness on high.”

(Eph. 6, 12) If we overcome the difficulties that

beset us in this life, it will be only because of divine

strength that is communicated to those who, by

sanctity, are united to Jesus Christ: “I can do all

things in Him who strengthens me.'’ (Phil. 4, 13)

Even the lowest degree of perfection is in real-

ity no easy hurdle. It is given a false appearance of

ease by carelessness of speech, as when it is said,

“All that we must do is to avoid mortal sin,” or “It

is necessary only to avoid mortal sin.” For the most

of us poor mortals this is already a severe demand,

and one to be satisfied only by great and sustained

effort and full correspondence with grace. If we re-

flect on the terms used by St. Thomas to describe

the minimum love necessary to avoid mortal sin, we

will see at once that this is not to be accomplished

without high spiritual endeavor; for what is re-

quired, as we have already said, is that one love

nothing more than God, nothing as much as God,

nothing contrary to God.

The love of God is a love of preference
;
and

the minimum demanded is that God be loved above

every creature, a minimum that must be expressed

in a practical way by renunciation of all attachment

to creatures that would separate us from God. “It

is an action of the providence of the Holy Ghost,



54 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

that in our ordinary version, *which His Divine

Majesty has canonized and sanctified by the Council

of Trent, the heavenly commandment of love is ex-

pressed by the word dilection rather than by the

word love; for although dilection is a kind of love,

yet is it not a simple love, but a love of choice and

election, which sense the word itself conveys, as

the glorious St. Thomas notes It is a love which

must prevail over all our loves, and reign over all

our passions. And this is what God requires of us

—

that among all our loves His be the dearest, holding

the first place in our hearts; the warmest, occupy-

ing our whole soul; the most general, employing all

our powers; the highest, filling our whole spirit;

and the strongest, exercising all our strength and

vigour.” <27)

* * * * *

3. In practice, therefore, we may, and should,

ignore the fact that there are degrees of perfection.

Our business, imposed on us by the precept, is to

strive for the highest perfection. No doubt all will

not achieve this
;
nor does Almighty God intend that

they should. He predestines different souls to var-

ious degrees of holiness, but gives to all sufficient

grace, “according to the measure of Christ’s be-

stowal” (Eph. 4, 7), to reach the height eternally

decreed for them. Hence the reader will have ob-

served that nowhere in these pages has it been said

that all men are actually TO ATTAIN the highest

degree of perfection; what has been said is that all

men must DESIRE and STRIVE FOR the highest

degree. We do not hold that a man in the world must

*That is, in the Vulgate Version of the Bible, which the Council of
Trent made official for the Church.

(27) St. Francis de Sales, Treatise on the Love of God, Bk. X, Chap. VI.



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 55

be as holy as a Carmelite, but that he must seek

such holiness.

The degree of a man’s holiness does not depend

on his own efforts, therefore, but on the endowment

of grace which he has received from God. Certainly

he must correspond with grace; but supposing that

he does this to the fullest extent possible, he would

still reach that degree of sanctity foreordained by

God, and could go no further. Here, however, notice

a startling and pivotal fact, upon which hinges the

Christian’s practical spiritual program : No one

knows the degree of grace meted out to him by Al-

mighty God.

Still God expects every man to realize all the

possibilities of the grace given to him; for, as St.

Gregory says, “he who is called to sublime sanctity,

will not be saved without it.” How, then, are we to

be saved if, on the one hand, we must achieve the

degree of holiness fixed for us by God, while, on

the other, we cannot know what this degree is? A
hunter cannot hit a target whose whereabouts he

does not know! Can we? Obviously not; so that the

only practical policy we can follow is to seek to love

God with our whole heart, i. e., for the highest de-

gree of perfection. Doing this, we can be sure of

rightly corresponding with grace and, therefore, of

reaching the perfection intended for us. Hence, St.

Francis de Sales says that the obligation to strive

for perfection is universal and equal
;

(28) that is,

all men are alike bound to strive for the highest

perfection.

A distinction current among the Scholastics
will help in understanding this matter; the distinc-

(28) Treatise on the Love of God, Bk. X, Chap. VI.



56 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

tion between the order of intention and the order of

execution. That belongs to the order of intention

which is envisioned and intended by the will; that

belongs to the order of execution which is actually

done. For example, suppose that an athlete intends

to make a jump of twenty-two feet in order to break

a record. He trains with this in mind ; on the day of

the meet, however, his actual jump is only twenty

feet. His effort, in the order of intention, is a jump

of twenty-two feet; in the order of execution, it is

twenty feet. In order to make the lower jump, he

had to try for the higher. Had he attempted to jump

only twenty feet, convinced beforehand that he

could do no better, then it is likely that he would

have gone even lower than this.

Now in the order of intention all men are ob-

liged to aim at absolute perfection, because that is

what the precept calls for
;
however, in the order of

execution, some will achieve lower degrees of holi-

ness than others. This explains a statement made

before, i. e., that to actually reach even a low degree

of holiness (in the order of execution), it is neces-

sary to aim for the highest degree (in the order of

intention). If one should deliberately seek only a

lower degree, then, like the athlete, he will undoubt-

edly go even lower. In order to arrive at that per-

fection decreed for us by God, it is necessary to aim

at absolute perfection. Otherwise, as the athlete who

makes a careless effort and fails in an easy test, he

will not fulfill even the conditions necessary for

salvation.

The reason why the athlete reaches only twenty

feet, although he intends twenty-two, is because

with the lower jump he has reached the limits of



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 57

his physical powers
;
and he is, as it were, foredoom-

ed to failure in any attempt to go higher. Likewise

the reason that John Smith reaches a lower degree

of holiness than St. Francis of Assisi (supposing

full correspondence with grace—a very dubious sup-
position for the most of us) is that less grace is

given to him and he cannot rise beyond what grace

enables him to do
;
that is, he has reached the limit

of his supernatural powers.

One’s state in life also has an important effect

on the degree of sanctity that he is able to reach
;
a

more perfect state of life, like that of a religious or

a bishop, brings special opportunities and graces

with it. In striving for holiness, every individual

must always live in accordance with the duties of

his state
;
so that the manner of striving for- perfec-

tion, i. e., the particular works and duties by which

it will be accomplished, differ according to whether

one is a priest, layman, a workman, a doctor, the

father or mother of a family. As a mariner, while

ultimately regulating his course by the north star,

nevertheless uses a compass as his proximate and

practical guide, so must we, in doing the divine will,

follow the duties that belong to our state as the

handy and immediate indicator of what God desires

of us in our particular circumstances.

Sometimes this truth, i. e., that men must seek

for holiness in accordance with duties of state, is

taken as an exemption for those living in the world

from the duty to become holy. But this is just an-

other error and evasion
;
men are to become holy by

means of the duties of their state in life, provided

only that theirs is an honorable state. Of course,

one’s vocation and state are part of the endowment



58 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

determined and apportioned by God; and the limits

which they set to the individual’s holiness, are to be

taken as providentially arranged.

These limits are as unknown to us as the quant-

ity of grace that God reserves for each soul; and it

is to be remembered that, although certain states

of life are higher than others, still God varies his

graces from person to person regardless of their

state
;
so that people in the world may be holier than

religious, and lay-brothers may outstrip bishops. In

any case, the degree of holiness intended for anyone

is God’s secret and God’s business. One cannot know

this beforehand, anymore than the athlete can know

beforehand how high he will be able to jump on the

day of trial. We should therefore allow God to take
care of His part in our sanctification. On our side,

we must take care of what has been entrusted to us

;

and this is, in the order of intention, absolute per-

fection, that is, the totality of love. There are no

degrees of perfection in the order of intention
;
here

all are equally bound to strive for the summits of

holiness. The degrees are in the order of execution

and will be taken care of by God. We need not fear
that His part will be neglected!

* sH * * *

4. Suppose that, in spite of all the considera-

tions we have put down in these pages, one would

still refuse to strive for high sanctity and of set

purpose limit himself to the lowest degree, asserting

that this is enough for him! What would be the

effect on that decision? What would happen to such

a man?

We will not attempt a private speculation in so
serious a problem. Rather, we will allow the saints



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 59

to speak, as we have done throughout. For their

mentality is the one that we need in striving for

sanctity.

Here is St. Augustine’s answer to our question

:

“If you say, ‘It is enough,’ you have already

perished.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori adds: “Do you

say that for you it is sufficient? If you do, you are

lost
”<29 >

These strong words from men who are saints

and doctors of the Church cannot be airily dismissed

as hyperbole; they are sober, doctrinal fact. It is

completely and literally true that he who says he

has done enough, has already taken the road which

will at length bear him to perdition, and a sufficient

basis for this austere teaching is provided by two

solid dogmatic reasons which we will now proceed

to describe.

The first is simply that God withdraws His

grace from those who neglect it. If every day you

were to give some little gift to a child, a niece or

nephew, and the child, instead of receiving your

gifts with thanks and caring for them, were at once

to destroy them or throw them away, surely you

would soon grow tired of such perversity and cease

from your foolish kindness. In like manner, God,

when He sees that we neglect the precious graces

that are offered to us every day, stops giving them

to us
;
and for this reason St. Alphonsus reckons as

one of the punishments for tepidity “the withdrawal

of God’s grace.”
(30)

(29) St. Augustine’s words are: “Si autem dixeris, sufficit; et periisti.*'

Sermo CLXIX, XV. It is quoted by St. Alphonsus in
.
The True

Spouse of Jesus Christ, Chapter V.

(30) op. cit. Chap. V. A definition of tepidity is given in the same place.
Bl. Henry Suso, St. Alphonsus says, represents Jesus a saying, in
his Vision of the Rocks : “These are the tpid who only seek to avoid
mortal sin.”



60 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

What a terrible penalty for carelessness! It

means in the end that like a small child lost in a

great city, the soul is left to its own resources in a

world that is forever hostile to God and all efforts

to reach Him. This could have only one result : spir-

itual ruin; for “without Me you can do NOTHING”

(Jo. 15, 5). A soul who is punished in this way is
incapable of repentance, of conversion, of growth in

faith or love, or of any other supernatural activities,

none of which can be accomplished without grace.

St. Paul describes the dreadful condition of those

souls who are thus left without God’s special aid:

“God has given them up to a reprobate sense, so

that they do what is not fitting; being filled with

all iniquity, malice, immorality. ...” (Rom. 28,1)

Spiritual blindness is the first step in the down-

ward movement that follows the withdrawal of

grace. This is commonly spoken of in the Scriptures.

“Go, and thou shalt say to this people: Hearing,

hear, and understand not: and see the vision, and

know it not. Blind the heart of this people, and make

their eyes heavy, and shut their eyes : lest they see

with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and un-

derstand with their heart, and be converted and I

heal them.” (Isa. 6, 9-10) The same effect is indicat-

ed by St. Paul when he says, in the text quoted, that

those so punished are delivered to a reprobate sense,

i. e., a dullness and deficiency of spiritual percep-

tion, which allows souls to fall into every manner

of sin, as a blind man might fall into a pit.

The carnal man, the man without spiritual per-

ceptions, cannot understand the things of God. He

has no sense to guide him in the spiritual world
;
he

is like a ground mole that can feel its way about in



I PRESS ON TOWARDS, THE GOAL 61

the darkness of the earth, but stumbles and cannot

see in broad daylight. Accordingly he has no know-

ledge of his own position in relation to God, no ap-

preciation of the malice of sin, no sensitiveness to

the presence of temptation, no awareness of his

own danger. Moreover, the loss of grace would

affect, not only his mind, but also his will. And

though he were not at once, as a result of this, to

fall into gross sin, yet he would be unable to per-

form those supernatural acts of virtue so necessary

to spiritual life and growth. Thus his soul would

slowly wither and finally die, as does the body when

it is given no nourishment or opportunity for exer-

cise and movement.

No doubt, since God desires to save all men and

gives to all sufficient grace for sanctity, He will

never turn away from one who seeks Him with sin-

cere desire. But this means no more than that

abandonment by divine grace is man’s fault and not

God’s. It is man, turning away from God, who is

responsible, and not any niggardliness on the part

of God. But the effect is in either case the same.

The second reason why he who refuses to strive

after high sanctity endangers his very salvation is

given in an ancient rule of the spiritual masters:

“In the Christian life, there is no standing still;

one goes either forward or backward.” As soon as

we slacken in our spiritual efforts, the poison which

is in us from birth begins to spread imperceptibly,

and, unless stopped, will enter the springs of our

spiritual vitality, causing first retrogression and

then death. Our nature, although good in its essen-

tial components, is nevertheless touched with disease

as a result of the Fall; as a cancer enters into the



62 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

body and, without destroying its victim’s essential

humanity, nevertheless infects all his organs and

saps his strength, so the effects of original sin, while

not changing the essential goodness of human nature

as it comes from the hands of God, still enter very

deeply into the soul, poison its actions, and under-

mine its spiritual health. “I know that in me, that is,

in my flesh, no good dwells.” (Rom. 7, 18)

True, with the help of God’s grace, we can

overcome the evil : “If by the spirit you put to death

the deeds of the flesh, you will live.” (Rom. 8, 13)

But is is equally true that whoever fails to remove

it by mortification will die: “If you live according

to the flesh you will die.” (Rom. 8, 13) Once a man

leaves off striving for holiness, he begins to live

“according to the flesh,” i.e., according to the de-

sires and appetites of his fallen nature; and in

doing so, although his life may appear externally

virtuous, he has become involved in dark laws of

spiritual disease and moral disintegration that will

in due time bring about his ruin.

Each day a mother weighs her infant, watch-

ing the scales closely for evidence of growing

strength. Should it happen that, of a sudden, the

child’s development stops and its weight remains

the same for several days, the mother becomes

alarmed and sends for a doctor. Why? The child

seems healthy. But the mother knows that, since

growth has ceased, there is something the matter;

disease, it must be, has entered the little body; and

the mother does not forget, despite the outward

appearance of health, that disease is the seed of

death.

This is what is meant by the statement that,



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 63

in the spiritual life, there is no standing still; the

fact that development ceases is already evidence

that disease has set to work. The person may be

aware of no change. He is regular in his devotions

;

he is, he feels sure, in the state of grace, and this

is, after all, sufficient for salvation. He is resolved

not to commit serious sin; and so long as he holds

to this purpose, surely he cannot be lost. No, not

all at once. He is like the infant
;
outwardly robust,

nevertheless dark laws are already operating to

bring about his death.

Mark well, we speak of this process of spir-

itual decline as under the iron compulsion of laiv.

Such is the doctrine of St. Paul, who describes

the law of the members and the law of sin (Rom. 7,

22), which gradually lead men, by a powerful inner

force, into sin and death. Of course we need not

submit to this law, but those who live according

to the flesh are already under it by their own free

choice; and once under it, unless there is a conver-

sion of heart, they must suffer its dreaded conse-

quences. The masters of the spiritual life, basing

themselves on this law, and expressing it concretely,

tell us in one of their axioms that “Imperfections

dispose the soul to venial sins, and venial sins

dispose it to mortal sin.”

That is the process of decay, once deliberate

imperfection has begun; that is, once a soul has

ceased striving for perfection. Yet the lukewarm

soul fancies himself healthy and has a great con-

tempt for imperfections and venial sins, refusing

to bother about them; he is like a man who is con-

temptuous of his ailment because it has not yet

killed him. The saints would tell the lukewarm

soul (if he would look into their teachings) that



64 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

the state of tepidity is a more dangerous condition

than mortal sin. “ . . . Remaining in a state of tepid-

ity, you will stand in greater danger of damnation

[than one who commits mortal sin]
;
because you

will easily fall from that state into mortal sin, and

then there will be but little reason to hope for your

rescusitation.”
(31)

One who falls into sin through weakness can

confidently hope for the grace of repentance and

the forgiveness of his offense; but since God with-

draws grace from the tepid, they cannot be so

confident of help when they fall
;
and as their souls

are filled with unmortified passions, disordered

affections, and worldly desires, they are scarcely in

a condition to correspond with grace even were it

to be granted them.

It is, then, because of the law of sin at work

in our members that we must affirm, with St.

Augustine, that he who says he has done enough

has already perished. Contemplating this law whose

dread workings he has just described so well, St.

Paul exclaimed: “Unhappy man that I am! Who

will deliver the body of this death ?” It sounds like

a cry of despair
;
and it would be but for the grace

of Christ. Because of Christ, however, the Apostle

can answer his own question, joyfully, in the next

breath: “The grace of God through Jesus Christ

Our Lord”
!
(Rom. 7, 24-25)

It is divine grace that gives us the power

by which we can be delivered from sin and death.

Were it not for this gift of God, every infant born

into the world would be doomed to spend an eternity

separated from God. But grace sets in motion

a law more powerful than the law of sin, and in

(31) St. Alphonsus, op. cit., Chap. 6.



I PRESS ON TOWARDS THE GOAL 65

the opposite direction. This is the Law of the

Spirit, whose end is our sanctification. If we set

to work resolutely to correspond with grace, then

sanctity will be the result; and it is only the effort

to reach sanctity that will make us safe.



Chapter V

"IN THIS SIGN. . . ."

When Germany, after World War I, was en-

gaged in the work of reconstruction, the leaders

of its several parties and interests, recognizing

that the future of the country was largely in the

hands of its youth, inaugurated a number of youth

movements through which they hoped to realize

in the coming generation the ideals in which they

placed their hopes of national greatness. Knowing

that true greatness and prosperity can be obtained

only through Christianity, German Catholics did

not fail to grasp the importance of the situation;

and they, like the others, started a movement in

which they sought to embody the noblest ideals of

Christianity in a form that would exert the great-

est influence over youth.

The method which they considered best for ob-

taining this end was to emphasize the positive as-

pects of Christianity while not making its nega-

tive side too prominent. By the positive side they

meant the privileges and dignity of the Christian

vocation, the nobility of the Christian ideal of life,

the transformation that Christ’s teaching can effect

in the lives of individuals and societies. One of

the chief means by which it was planned that this

positive Christianity should spread its beneficial

influence was through the liturgy and liturgical par-

ticipation.

The purpose of the Catholics, thus carefully

planned, was also ably carried out, as was evidenced

by the books inspired by the German Catholic



“IN. THIS SIGN. . . 67

youth movement. There was only one defect in the

program; yet so important was this that in the

end it caused the whole effort to fail. The defect

was the attitude of the Catholic leaders towards

negative Christianity. This, the shadowed side of

the Master’s teaching, was to be kept in the back-

ground, or at least not pushed too prominently into

the foreground, because, since it comprises the

avoidances entailed by moral living, together with

the sacrifices and denials that Christ demands of

us, too much attention to it (so the Catholics

thought) would tend to repel young people marked

by light-heartedness and love of life.

Here a profound mistake was made. Some-

times indeed negative Christianity is falsely under-

stood to embrace only the “Thou shaft not’s” of the

ten commandments; and there is no doubt that

insistence only on these “don’ts” would fail to in-

spire youth (or anyone else for that matter). But

then, too, if our instruction were not to go beyond

that, we would not be teaching Christianity at all,

either positive or negative; for these “Thou shalt

not’s” are the negative, not of the Gospel teaching,

but of Natural Law.

The negative practice of Christianity is the

elimination from the soul of that selfish, possessive,

merely natural love of creatures which retards the

work of grace and prevents the soul from ad-

vancing in divine love. It includes, of course, the

avoidance of sin, but goes much deeper and re-

quires a renunciation, at least interiorly, of all the

goods of earth. It is a demand for sacrifice, for a

kind of heroism, from those who would reach what

is high and holy. And to gloss over this aspect of

Christianity, we say, is a fatal mistake.



68 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

In the first place it is a psychological mistake.

For the young love heroism, high loyalty, and sac-

rifice in the name of noble ideals
;
cutting out these

elements takes from Christianity precisely that

which would most appeal to them. When dignified

Churchmen, aging theorists, tired intellectuals or

comfort-loving bourgeois formulate youth programs

they should keep this in mind. Warm-blooded youth

is not much attracted by such dull ideals as com-

fort, security, regularity, respectability; they want

adventure, surprise, novelty, insecurity, strenuous

eifort, heroism.

Moreover, an under-emphasis of negative re-

ligious practices gives a false and distorted view

of Christianity itself. For the negative is but

the reverse of the positive, and the latter is im-

possible without the former, just as it is impos-

sible to have the sun without shadows—indeed, it
is the very brightness of the sun that causes the

shadows. You must take them together, as a unit;

both, or neither. As light appears, darkness must

disappear, and you cannot imagine the coming of

light without the disappearance of darkness. So

also divine life (the positive) cannot come into

our souls except with the disappearance of that

spiritual darkness which St. John of the Cross

teaches (32) consists in a love for the vanities of

this world, a love which must be expelled through

the negative practices of renunciation, self-denial,

penance.

The final and deepest reason for the inevitable

failure of the policy we have been describing comes

(32)
“

. . All the affections which it (i.e., the soul) has for creatures

are pure darkness in the eyes of God, and, when the soul is
clothed in these affections it has no capacity for being enlightened

and possessed by the pure and simple light of God,”—Ascent of Mt,
Carmel, Book I, Chap. IV, Par. I.



IN THIS SIGN. . . 69

of the fact that neglect of negative Christianity

means disregard of the indispensable means for

realizing the positive values of supernatural living.

Only on condition of removing darkness can

the sun flood the earth with its light; only on con-

dition of removing darkness from our souls can

divine grace flood them with its light; but if men

love darkness rather than the light, and accordingly

cling to darkness, then certainly they cannot pos-

sess the light.

The negative in Christianity has the same

function as a negative in photography : it is a means

of producing the positive. If you have a picture

that you would like to have reproduced, this can-

not be done directly. First a negative must be

made with a camera; this gives the picture in

exact reverse. Then from this negative, and by

means of it, a positive print is made. It is the same

with Christian teaching. No doubt there is need

to make speeches and write books about the positive

aspects of Christianity: about grace, the splendor

of the sacramental system, the liturgy, the love

of God. But men cannot realize in their own lives

these positive values simply by listening to the

speeches or reading the books. For this they must

be purified; and only in proportion as purification

is accomplished in them will God’s grace have free-

dom to work its marvels in their souls. This puri-

fication is the work of negative Christian practice

—

of denial, of renunciation, of penance. Without

these the positive in Christianity, although it may

be known abstractly, cannot be experienced .

The German youth leaders were not free from

confusion concerning the true meaning and func-

tion of negative Christianity. They rightly wished



70 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

to avoid tiresome hammering on the “Thou shalt

not ’s” of the Decalogue. Exclusive concern with

these, the most primitive and rudimentary obliga-

tions of religious living—too often the only method
of religious instruction—does no more than weary,
repel, and provoke those whom it claims to help.

Worse yet, this “method” does not provide sufficient

motivation for realizing in practice even the ele-

mentary demands that it makes. Unfortunately,

the German leaders did more than remove this

false conception of Christianity; they discarded as

well those negative practices which are simply

inseparable from the teaching and way of life that

is truly and fully Christian; that is, they failed to

insist on the heavy demand for sacrifice that Our

Lord makes of us all. In doing this they lost the

very essence of Christianity and the source of its

life. For what is called negative Christianity is

best symbolized by the cross. Can you take the

cross from Christianity? If you do, you take away

its center and essence and the secret of its divine

vitality. Christianity is the Cross.

At the time that the Catholics were making

their supreme effort to gain the young, another

movement, dominated by an outstanding leader,

was working for the same end. The methods of

this leader, however, were quite different from

those of the Catholics. He had his own positive

ideal of a greater Germany. This was certainly

inferior to the Christian conception; nevertheless,

that it might be realized, he did not hesitate to call

upon all Germans, and especially the young, to make

heavy sacrifices. He put them in uniforms, housed

them in barracks—in short, he demanded that they
live a hard and laborious life, far different from the



'IN THIS SIGN. . . 11

softness that they had enjoyed before; he even

required that they should sacrifice their private

careers in the interest of their country. Finally, at

a time when the world was still sickened from the

slaughter of World War I, these young people

were taught that they must be prepared to give their

lives for their Fatherland. The leader of this

movement, you know, was Adolph Hitler.

There is no need to say who won the youth of

Germany. It was not the Church. Catholic leaders

were afraid to ask heroism of youth lest they lose

them altogether. Hitler won the youth of Ger-

many, or a very large section of it, precisely by

demanding the heroic. Against the apathy, indif-

ference, and even hostility, of many Germans, Hitler

was enabled to carry on his depredations in the

political and military sphere because of a vanguard

of young German men and women who had been

trained in a fanatical devotion to the Fuehrer and

his ideals.

2. Are not Catholic leaders all over the world

making the same mistake that was made by the

German Catholics? When will we come to the

realization that youth wants heroism? That the

way to win youth is to demand the most, not the

least? Of course to teach heroism to others, Catholic

leaders, both lay and clerical, must themselves have

a heroic devotion to their cause. They cannot, amid

ease and security and the comforts to life, outline

an abstractly admirable (or highly respectable and

dull) program that will be capable of winning the

loyalty of the young. The leaders must themselves

be on fire with the love of Jesus Christ; they must

have the glorious inward vision of the Christian

way of life as described in the Sermon on the



72 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

Mount; they must know from personal experience

(not simply from books!) the sublimity of the

Christian ideal, and they should be able to lead

others to it, and not merely direct them, as from

a map, over territory with which they themselves

are not personally familiar.

They must have, as Pius XI said, an “uncon-

trollable zeal for souls”* and they must be capable

and willing to spend themselves, as did their Master,

in bringing the Gospel to the poor. They must,

in a word, personify their ideal; then others will

gather round them, inspired by such devotion and

eager for sacrifice in a noble cause. Only then will

youth be aroused from spirtual torpor and indif-

ference and their enthusiasms gathered round the

standard of the cross. If on the other hand, Catholic

youth leaders fail to do this, then in our genera-

tion also they will hand over the world to Christ’s

enemies.

Why do people like novels? Is it not because

they are carried away by the imaginary exploits of

the heroes and heroines of whom they read? Would

you say, then, that average men are repelled by

heroism? On the contrary, they have the great-

est admiration for it. Nor are they content with

contemplating as from afar the actions of the hero

in the tale; they must fancy themselves in his (or

her) place that they too may enjoy these marvellous

adventures, at least vicariously. It is their own

dull and drab lives—not the heroic and strenuous
life—that they find distasteful. Moving picture
theatres testify to the same truth—crowded as they
are with seekers for adventure, even if only at

second hand.

Encyclical, Firmissimam Constantiam



IN THIS SIGN. . . 73

“But that is just the point!” perhaps you will

say. “These novel and movie addicts are enthusi-

astic enough over imaginary feats of derring

do, but it is doubtful whether they would have any

stomach for the real thing.” One can scarcely make

such an objection today, however. Living in the

midst of World War II, we are witnesses to the

fact that the girls and boys who a few months ago

were crowding neighborhood theatres to see cellu-

loid heroes and heroines are themselves capable of

the heroic. Every day we read stories of their won-

derful courage, endurance, and heroic self-sacri-

fice. We Catholics should remember that these young

men whose pictures we see in our papers receiving

medals for gallantry were a short time ago sitting

beside us in Church. Priests might well bear in

mind that these heroes were not long since sitting

in the pews before them. These are the young

people of whom we were not long since saying that

it is not well to ask too much; these are the ones

we had in mind when we maintained that our in-

struction should be confined to positive Christianity

while there should be no emphasis in this day and

age on its hard, unpleasant, sacrificial obligations.

What folly ! The government asks supreme sacrifices

—and gets them!
In our case, was it really that we had reason

to doubt the youth? Or was it perhaps that we

who were in the positions of leadership—priests,
editors, writers, educators, teachers, organizers,

heads of movements—was it not that we ourselves
were unprepared to give an example of heroic de-

votion to the cause of Jesus Christ? What if all

the glorious heroism being shown by young people

today were being employed, not in the interests of



74 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

war and destruction, but of personal devotion to

Jesus Christ! How quickly would we everywhere

establish the Kingdom of God on earth!

3. The heroes of fiction can also reveal to us

why it is that ordinary men love heroism and are

capable of it themselves. What makes a hero

heroic? It is love. Love demands sacrifice; indeed,

sacrifice is the measure of love, and heroism is noth-

ing but great sacrifice inspired by love. Because all

men are capable of love, so are all capable of sac-

rifice and heroism, for these are love’s best and

truest—nay, inevitable, expression. The hero per-
forms his deeds for love of country, or love of fam-

ily, or love of her whom he desires to make his

wife
;
and his heroism consists precisely in overcom-

ing the obstacles that hinder his love’s fulfillment.

“Sacrifice is usually difficult and irksome. Only

love can make it a joy. We are willing to give in

;
proportion as we love. And when love is perfect the

sacrifice is complete. God so loved the world that

He gave His only begotten Son; and the Son so

loved us that He gave Himself for our salvation.

‘Greater love than this no man hath, that a man

lay down his life for his friends.’ ” These are the

words of no less than the Church herself; she ad-

dresses them to couples standing before her altars

seeking to be married. That on so happy an oc-

casion as this Our heavenly Mother should thus

already speak of sacrifice, and complete sacrifice

at that, shows how inseparable it is from love.

Whether the love is that between humans, or be-

tween God and man, it is a giving of self, a sur-

render, therefore a sacrifice.

The supreme example is God Himself—giving
up His Son for love of us. For us likewise, al-



IN THIS SIGN. . . 75

though first of all for the love of the Father, Jesus

suffered His Passion and Death. How therefore

can any policy of religious instruction or pro-

gram of spiritual action hope to teach positive Chris-

tianiey without teaching also the negative? How

can there be hope of progress in love while there is

forgetfulness of sacrifice?

Men who love are capable of sacrifice for the

one they love; and if their love is perfect, their

sacrifice will be complete. So says the Church

(and, in so saying does but confirm what we know

already from experience). If then we are to strive

for perfect love of God, must we not also be ready

for complete sacrifice, that is, for heroism? If,

moreover, we wish to share with others the priv-

ilege and the joy of loving God, must we not also

dare to demand sacrifice of them? (33)

If Christians are incapable of sacrifice then it

can only be that they do not love; if they refuse

heroism, it can only be bcause their love is imper-

fect. Behind all of Christian teaching is the invita-

tion of Jesus to share in His love and enter into

His companionship. This will assuredly not bring

us a life of ease, for “the Son of Man has no-

where to lay His head” (Matt. 8,20) “Follow me!”

He says over the centuries to us all; and love

demands that we follow Him wherever His path

may lead, through whatever hardships and dangers

and trials. Those who follow Him most closely

exult, not in the honors and joys received through

association with Him, but in the sufferings and sac-

(33) Speaking of American youth particularly. Pope Pius XII said
“Only a young man and woman of self-sacrifice—We were almost
going to add, heroic self-sacrifice—will escape the flood” (i.e., the
flood of “black paganism” that is sweeping over the world).

—

Address to Eucharistic Congress, June 26, 1941.



76 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

rifices they sustain for His sake: “From the Jews

five times I received forty lashes less one. Thrice

I was scourged, once I was stoned, thrice I suffered

shipwreck, a day and a night I was adrift on the

sea; in journeyings often, in perils from floods, in

perils from robbers, in perils from my own nation,

in perils from the Gentiles, in perils in the city,

in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in

perils from false brethren; in labor and hardships,

in many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, in

fastings often, in cold and nakedness ...” (II Cor.

II, 24-27))

If Christians shrink from the slightest hard-

ship, what must be their love for Christ? If they

do not know the name of penance, and shudder at

the thought of learning it, can they follow one

whose “whole life was a cross and a martyrdom”?

Did Christ found His religion to keep us snug and

comfortable? That is not what He said. “The king-

dom of Heaven suffereth violence,” He told His

followers; “and the violent hear it away.” (Matt.

11, 12) The violence here spoken of, say the com-

mentators, is violence to one’s self. And St. Peter

asserts that it is the very vocation of Chritsians

to bear suffering and trials: “Unto this, indeed, you

have been called ...” (I Pet. 2, 21)

What would St. Paul say of us, of our love of

comforts, of our shrinking from hardship? What

would he think of this “prudent” fear of ours—the
fear that, by acknowledging sacrifice to be an es-

sential part of Christianity, we shall lose the loyalty

of Christians, young or old? Certainly if there is

genuine love of Christ among us, such fears could

not exist: “Who shall separate us from the love of

Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution,



IN THIS SIGN. . . 77

or hunger, or nakedness, or danger, or the sword?”

What splendid contempt he shows for such paltry

threats to so glorious a love! He positively revels

in sacrifice for the name of Christ! “For I am sure

that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor prin-

cipalities, nor things present, nor things to come,

nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other

creature will be able to separate us from the love

of God, which is in Christ Jesus Our Lord.” (Rom.

8, 35-39) That is not mere boasting, although it is

boasting; it is not the language of a superman.

It is the language of love.

The saint is a lover. If we want to under-

stand his austerities, his macerations of the body, his

hours given to prayer, his fasting, we must go to

the lover. To know why the saint spends such

long hours in prayer, ask the lover why he spends

such long hours in dreaming. If you want to

know why the saint keeps vigil all night, ask the

lover why he keeps vigil all night—in the snow if
needs be. If you are curious as to why the saint

does not eat, or finds no relish in his food, ask the

lover why he does not eat or finds no relish in his

food. The saint is in love; and love “bears with

all things” and “endures all things.” (I Cor. 13,

7)

The saint is therefore a hero. He is the hero

above all others, the hero of a divine adventure. He

can sustain any ordeal, he is ready for any sacrifice

for the One that he loves. If so few people can

grasp this, it is not, as we have seen, because they

are repelled by heroism, but because they do not

understand this particular kind of love. Yet it is

a simple love, a love that is required of us all as the

first commandment of God.



78 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

If we could only understand that the demand

for sanctity is in reality an invitation to divine love

!

If we would only see that we are no longer under

a law of fear, but under the law of love
;
no longer

slaves, but children and spouses of the Most High!

Then we would know that, in asking great sac-

rifice, God is not placing an intolerable burden upon

us but is giving us a glorious opportunity. We would
realize that it is unnecessary to run away from the

drabness and squalor of everyday life and waste

our energies is a dream-world of novels and moving

pictures. We have the chance for heroism right
where we are ! Men need not wait for the slaughter

of war to show courage, endurance, selflessness.

Sanctity is a kind of heroism that is within every

man’s reach. God, who gave us the appetite for

heroism, did not fail to give us the means for sat-

isfying it.

Only that is true heroism which advances some

noble cause, benefits men in some way, helps the

weak, brings true happiness to greater numbers

of our fellows, establishes the Kingdom of God on

earth. The “heroic” deeds of pirates and robbers

are a misfortune to the world. Yet because good

men prefer comfort and respectability to heroism,

mankind, with its craving for heroism, is left to give

its admiration to false heroes
;
it will do this rather

than live without them.

The heroism of war brings destruction and

suffering; and therefore, however admirable in it-

self, is very often reprehensible in its motives and

horrible in its effects. How unfortunate that today,

in what claims to be an age of enlightenment, men

still admire and glorify the physical display of

strength, brutal exercise of force, courage at the



“IN THIS SIGN. . . 79

mere animal level ! Look at the pictures in front of

theatres or the illustrations for stories in popular

magazines. The hero is forever in an aggressive

attitude, knocking down or shooting “the villian.”

It is any wonder that we remain at heart bar-

barians, that brutality entertains and pleases us,

that even the horrors of a war find us taking the

sadistic pleasure in the sufferings of our “enemies.”

From age to age men hand on a tradition of brutal-

ity for its own sake, of courage and strength exer-

cised without high purpose, or even under the im-

pulse of evil motives.

Is it not time that the appetite for the heroic

be re-directed and placed at the services of bene-

ficial forces? That men are really capable of ad-

miring heroes other than gangsters, or prize fight-

ers, or athletes, or soldiers, is clearly enough evi-

denced by the acclaim given to those heroes of science

who have exposed their lives to grave danger in

order to alleviate human suffering. Indeed, ordinary

men are capable of admiring even the high spir-

itual heroism of the saints, as is evidenced by the

huge crowds that followed such men as St. Simon

Stylites, St. Francis of Assisi, St. John Bosco. All

that Christians need to be capable of similar de-

votion is —not the gift of miracles!—but love for
the person of Jesus Christ. When we really love

Him, we shall be ready to follow Him through pov-

erty, contempt, physical suffering, or any other

hardship. “0 Beloved Word of God,” we would pray

with St. Ignatius of Loyola, “teach me to be gen-

erous, to serve Thee with that perfection which Thy

majesty claims, to give without calculation, to fight

without heeding wounds, to labor without repose,

to expand myself in Thy service without thought



80 THIS IS THE WILL OF GOD

of other reward than that of knowing that I do

Thy most holy will.”

This saint (Ignatius), so eager to form apos-

tles who would spread everywhere the name and

knowledge of Jesus, knew that heroism would be

necessary for this, and in his Exercises he sought

to nerve those whom he was directing to pray thus r

“I wish and desire, and it is my deliberate determin-

ation, provided only it be to Thy greater service and

praise, to imitate Thee in bearing all injuries, and

all reproach, and all poverty, as well actual as

spiritual, if only Thy divine Majesty be pleased to

choose and receive me to such a state.”

If we respond to this challenge; if we take

Christ at His word and seek for perfection, however

high the cost or complete the sacrifice demanded,

then Christianity, and not totalitarianism, will dom-

inate the new age. But not otherwise. We cannot

cast fire on the earth with tepid water. The Chris-

tian must be ready for the cross. Only in this sign

shall he conquer.