Édouard Hugon on “The Salvation of Pagans”
Introductory Note
This translation1 is being made public as background for another text by Fr. Édouard Hugon to be presented on To Be a Thomist, “The Need for Grace in Order to Observe the Natural Law.”2 Concerning questions of salvation and membership in the Church, I think that some of the later developments by thinkers like Journet, Maritain, and other orthodox Thomists are important. Nonetheless, one should have a good understanding of what conservative Thomists “of the tradition” were saying prior to such writers, for as is almost always the case writers like the aforementioned are in essential agreement with the older line of thought, all the while organically and faithfully developing the great principles and conclusions of the main lines of the Thomist fold.
Fr. Hugon’s Text
Unbelief and false liberalism reproach us for our cruelty by citing the axiom: Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, there is no salvation outside the Church. And some Catholics also find the formula inappropriate, asking us to no longer recall to modern consciences this intransigent dogma, or at least to attenuate its scope. For her part, the Church does not allow herself to be moved by these vain calls for softening her teaching but, rather, repeats with gentleness and firmness the immutable principle: There is salvation only in Christ; Christ is found only in the Church; there is no salvation outside the Church there. Yet, she explains this formula in a way that reconciles mercy with justice, declaring that one can live in accord with her soul without belonging to her body,3 and that salvation is possible for all men of good will.
Allow us to summarize, in a few words, the Catholic teaching regarding on God’s salvific will. Against [those who would hold to fatalistic theories of] predestination, the Church has defined that God does not condemn anyone to damnation, that no one is delivered to eternal torment except because of his or her faults, and that even after the original fall, the merciful designs of Providence sincerely desire the salvation of the human race.4 Against the Jansenists, it is De fide that the predestined are not the only ones for whom Jesus Christ shed his blood. Saint Paul teaches that Christ died for Christians who can be damned: scandal, he says, can cause a brother for whom Christ died to fall and perish eternally.5 Pope Innocent X, in condemning the 5th proposition of Jansenius, declared: it is impious, blasphemous, and an insult to divine mercy, and heretical to claim that the Savior died only for the salvation of the predestined. Theologians commonly say that it is De fide that Christ came into this world for the salvation of all the faithful, since all are bound to believe the words of the creed, “Who for us men and for our salvation descended from heaven…” It is a doctrine proximate to faith that God desires the salvation of all adults, even unbelievers. St. Paul, in recommending prayers for all men, points to all categories of society, kings, emperors, judges, because God, our Savior, desires that “all men be saved and to come to the knowledge of his holy name”.6 This clearly refers to the Gentiles, who are still deprived of the knowledge of the true God. The Apostle adds that the living God is the Savior of all men, and especially of the faithful.7 Divine favor falls primarily on Christians, though it extends to all men: “Salvator omnium hominum.”8
However, we also believe there is apologetic necessity to set out the teachings of theology concerning this grave and ever-present question.
I. God Wills that the Pagans be Saved
In many places, Sacred Scripture points to the Lord’s admirable inventions to bring souls back to salvation. Chapters 9 and 12of the Book of Wisdom are particularly remarkable and touching in this respect. The Egyptians are struck down so that they may learn to know the true God (Verum Deum agnoverunt);9 the Lord industriously labors over and again to call the Chananeans to penitence: warnings, solicitations, invitations of infinite delicacy, everything is put into action with the supernatural purpose of drawing these perverse nations forth from their crimes and blindness.10
The appeals of grace are not always in vain. God admits Rahab the courtesan and Ruth the Moabitess into the ranks of his chosen people; He grants the gift of faith to Naaman the Syrian; He miraculously sends a missionary to the corrupt city of Nineveh. Indeed, the book of Jonah is one of the most dramatic and moving proofs of God’s goodness and sincere desire to save all men.
The Fathers celebrated the Lord’s solicitude for ancient peoples, declaring that Christ’s merits extended in advance to all men who, without even suspecting the Incarnation, implicitly called for a Redeemer. “The Savior,” says St. Irenaeus, “came not only for the faithful who believed in Him at the time of the Emperor Tiberius, nor only for those who live today, but for all men without exception (omnes omnino homines) who have existed since the beginning of time and who, practicing virtue, fearing and loving God, observing justice and piety towards their fellow men, have desired to see Christ and hear his voice… One and the same God directed the patriarchs in their various ways and who justified by faith the circumcised and the uncircumcised (Jews and Gentiles).”11 Saint John Chrysostom explained how God has always been merciful, how He has always justified His conduct towards mankind, at the time of the flood, towards Sodom, towards Nineveh, etc.12 Saint Augustine points to three categories of people who have been saved by the grace of the Redeemer: children delivered from the law of sin and death with which we were born; adults who, abusing their free will, had prevaricated against the natural law of reason (i.e. the Gentiles); and finally those who, having received the Law of Moses, had violated its precepts and let themselves be killed by the letter (i.e. the Jews).13 The powerful genius who has remained unknown under the name of Dionysius the Areopagite teaches that God, either before or after the law, used the ministry of angels to instruct men, remove them from error, lead them out of their profane ways and into the truth.14
The divine solicitude is even more admirable in the economy of the New Law. Here, explicit knowledge of the Redeemer is necessary, but Providence has ways of providing it that are no less effective than mysterious. The Holy Spirit sends Philip to preach to the Samaritans and to the eunuch, officer of Candace, Queen of Ethiopia.15 In a vision, the centurion Cornelius clearly sees the angel of God who enters his home to instruct him; a similar revelation warns Peter of the Lord's merciful designs concerning the salvation of the Gentiles.16 “Saint Paul, having gone down to Troas, had a vision during the night: a man from Macedonia was standing and praying to him, saying, ‘Pass over to Macedonia and come to our aid.’ As soon as he saw this vision, we immediately sought to leave for Macedonia, being certain that God was calling us to preach the Gospel there.”17
Christian tradition abounds in very explicit testimonies that highlight the industrious work of God’s salvific will. As Augustine puts it: “There is no need to doubt that God will procure the knowledge of the Gospel for those whom His mercy has resolved to snatch from damnation, and they will believe after hearing the good news.”18
And St. Thomas declares: “If someone had no one to instruct him and did not hinder the divine action through his own fault, he would be enlightened from on high, and God Himself would reveal the mysteries to him.”19—"It belongs to Divine Providence to provide everyone with everything needed for salvation, unless man places obstacles in its way. Therefore if someone, raised in the wilds of the forests, far from all human communication, follows the guide of his reason in the love for the good and flight from evil, it must be taken as very certain either that God Himself by an interior inspiration will reveal to him what it is necessary to believe, or that He will send him a preacher of the faith, as He sent Peter to Cornelius.”20
It is customary to interpret Saint Thomas as saying that God would send an angel rather than let the pagan who has not made himself unworthy of this grace die without faith. This is a gloss of his thought; however, even if the words are not those of the holy doctor, they nonetheless legitimately express his thought. In point of fact, it was through the intermediary of an angel, seen in a vision, that Saint Peter was sent to Cornelius. And, elsewhere,21 the Master assures us that the angels in the Old Law instructed the Gentiles on the mystery of the Incarnation. Yet, divine mercy is no less merciful to modern pagans.
This mode of evangelization, however extraordinary it may seem to us, is not something miraculous: it is a law that Providence intervenes according to the state and conditions of each person and that the angels, who are by their very office messengers between God and us, become the ministers of salvation. Far from violating the established rules governing things, this mission is entirely in keeping with the supernatural economy of salvation.22
God also knows how to arrange the missionary’s visit at the right time. Here is an example that confirms, far better than any argument, the consoling teaching offered by Saint Thomas. An apostle from Trinidad, Fr. Cothonay O.P., had tried his hand at composing a sermon one morning after mass, which he was to preach that evening in the Cathedral of Port of Spain. Not only did he fail to come up with any ideas but, moreover, he found that he felt impatient staying in this place, feeling impelled, as if in spite of himself, to take a walk through the woods. After resisting for some time, he saddled his mount and set off down the path of the great forest. He had been walking for about an hour, only catching glimpses of a patch of cultivated land. Suddenly, at some distance, he heard the muffled groaning of a man struggling in the throes of agony. After much searching, he discovered an old man who appeared to be unconscious and on the verge of death. He questioned him, made himself understood,23 instructed him, and baptized him. It was eleven o’clock in the morning; by three o’clock in the afternoon the laborer had breathed his last. “Undoubtedly, this poor old laborer dispositions were the bare necessities, but I thought I had to baptize him, and I like to believe that the good Lord wanted to save this soul. For I consider it quite extraordinary that I should have found myself passing through this place on such a day and a few hours before his death. What is more, I wonder how I could have heard his groaning at such a distance. The poor man was lying in his hut, about fifty yards from the path I was following, and the whole time I was near him he did not utter a single one of those loud moans.”24
How many similar facts, how many pages in the golden book of eternal mercies, must the life of every missionary provide!
Pius IX, while proclaiming the obligation of all men to belong to the Church of Christ, also declared that pagans will not be condemned for their ignorance if it is invincible. “But who would dare to determine the exact limits of this ignorance, taking into account the condition and spirit of each person, the differences between peoples and countries, and a host of other causes? When, freed from bodily bonds, we see God as He is, we will understand how close and magnificent is the covenant that unites divine mercy and justice. But, as long as we bear on earth the weight of this flesh that weighs down the soul, we must hold firmly that there is one God, one faith, one baptism: to scrutinize further is not permitted. However, charity makes it our duty to pray for these souls... God’s hand is not foreshortened; the gifts of heavenly grace will never fail men who with a sincere will desire and ask for light.”25—“All those who invincibly ignore our holy religion, who faithfully observe the natural law and the precepts engraved by God Himself in the hearts of all men, who are ready to obey the Lord, who lead an morally fitting life, can with the help of divine light and grace arrive at eternal life. For God, who sees, scrutinizes and knows the minds, hearts, thoughts, and habits of all men, would not, in His goodness and clemency, allow anyone to be delivered to eternal torment without willful fault. But neither must we forget the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Church: contumacious people who resist the authority and definitions of the Church and separate themselves by their ill will from the visible unity and from the Roman Pontiff, to whom the Savior has entrusted the care of his vineyard, will be excluded from the kingdom of heaven.”26
Salvation is therefore possible for pagans; but it is also certain that no one can be justified without truly divine faith, without which none have been saved (sine qua nulli unquam contigit justification).27 How will they acquire this supernatural knowledge?
II. How pagans can come to faith.—Explanation of the axiom: God does not deny grace to him who does what is in his power to do (Facienti quod in se est Deus non denegat gratiam).
Faith is not the first of graces, and unbelievers themselves receive supernatural help, enlightenment and inspiration in due course, in order to guide them towards their eternal destiny. Clement XI condemned Quesnel’s propositions: “No grace is given except through faith; it is faith that is the first grace and the source of all others.”28 By proscribing as suspicious of heresy the assertion made by the rebels of Pistoia when they said that “the virtue of faith begins the series of all graces, and that it is the first voice that calls us to salvation and to the Church,”29 Pius VI teaches the existence of “a prior grace that comes before faith as well as even the will’s working.” In fact, the virtue of faith is not infused haphazardly or suddenly. It presupposes lengthy interior work that prepares it: in the intellect, there are lights, illuminations that shake the mind out of its torpor; in the will, there are excitements, solicitations that lead this commanding faculty to imprint its effective impulse upon man’s activity.30 It is unbelievable that God should have left so many idolatrous nations in complete darkness for so many centuries, and still does. He visits these unfortunate souls; He calls them; He rouse them by actual graes.31 On the other hand, it is inconceivable that these divine invitations are always and universally rejected. These are still very imperfect, far from justification; nonetheless, they seem to herald it, preparing and in some way beginning the work of salvation. Providence liberally arranges these supernatural aids, sending them to all souls of good will. And if the unbeliever knows how to use them, if he knows how to make use of these present graces, God will go further. He will mercifully lead such a man to faith and justification: Facienti quod in se est Deus non denegat gratiam; to those who do what is in their power with the present grace at their disposal, God does not withhold sanctifying grace.
This is how St. Thomas and his school have always understood the famous axiom: “When it is said that God bestows grace on the man who does all that is in his power, it must be said that this is in his power inasmuch as he is moved by God.”32 “There are two ways of understanding the principle to do what is in our power, or to prepare ourselves for grace: first with the resources of free will, and in this sense there is no connection between our works and grace, because the latter exceeds all the preparations of our human powers; secondly with divine motion (or actual grace), and in this case there is infallible connection, because God’s intention cannot fail to bring about its effect, and if it is God’s intention that the man whose heart He touches should receive grace, the man will infallibly receive it.”33
Molina’s followers adopt another explanation. According to them, he who does what is in his power with his native strength, or in difficult circumstances with a purely natural help from God, will receive intrinsically supernatural graces and thus achieve justification. This is what they call negative preparation for grace. Man by his own energies and natural works can remove the obstacles [to supernatural life], and then God in his liberality gives grace. To avoid any appearance of Semipelagianism, they declare that grace is not granted because of the native value of works, but in virtue of a certain merciful pact between Christ and his Father: Our Lord offered His merits and the Father promised to give grace to anyone who would use his natural faculties well; or again, the Father promised to grant these helps to men if Christ consented to merit and satisfy for them, and the Saviour accepted the condition.34
It is not only in the present matter, but in a host of analogous questions, that some theologians resort, in order to explain the supernatural, to a kind of idealism, introducing “pacts, conventions, or moral entities having existence only in the will of God and in that of Jesus Christ, then in the knowledge of men enlightened by revelation.”35
We will not reproach this idealism for being heterodox, though we will take the liberty to point out how unscientific it is. The scientist studies the phenomena of the physical world through intrinsic causes, without appealing to pacts or external laws that would smack of occasionalism and raise suspicions of a Deus ex machina operative in the world. In the same way, the theologian’s procedure will not be fully rational and scientific if, instead of reasoning according to the very notion of the supernatural, he resorts to conventions that he attributes to God gratuitously.
Returning to the subject at hand, we ask these theologians where they received revelation concerning this famous pact. Scripture and Tradition are completely silent here. What they do teach us is that our God and Redeemer sincere desires to save all men. And we too proclaim this salvific will, though by explaining it in a way that maintains the gratuity of the supernatural economy: Providence provides pagans with actual graces by which they can produce saving acts, and, if they profit from these helps, they receive others, and by a process full of harmony they finally arrive at faith and salvation.
Cardinal Mazzella himself has seen how unserious the idea of this pact is, and he proposes to call it a law: “Let it be called a law if the term ‘law’ is displeasing (Lex vocetur si displicet nomen pacti).”36 Switching out terminology does not detract from the fact that the theory is arbitrary.
No, we say with the Thomists, no, Christ could not establish with his Father a pact that is in flagrant contradiction with the very notion of grace. Grace ceases to be free as soon as man can naturally set certain conditions that infallibly lead to grace. This is the case if the axiom is true in the Molinist sense; it may be called a negative preparation, but it is so important that it is in fact chained to grace. To the Apostle’s question, “What do you have in the supernatural order that you have not received freely?”, I have my negative preparation, which distinguishes me from all the others. I obtained it by myself, and immediately divine grace was granted to me in preference to all others. Therefore, by myself, I distinguish myself from others in the supernatural order. I can give the lie to Saint Paul “What distinguishes you from your brothers?”—My negative preparation. “What do you possess that you have not received from grace?”—This same preparation, to which grace is always attached. And so too can I give the lie to the Council of Orange: divine mercy is not granted to efforts done without grace (sine gratia conantibus misericordiam non conferri).37 The man will reply: that is not true; mercy is infallibly granted to my negative preparation done without grace!—We are told: it is His good pleasure to grant it to us.—No, it is not purely gratuitous if it is infallibly attached to our natural preparation. But, the reply is quick in coming: this negative preparation consists simply in not placing any obstacle in the way of divine grace—What, then, is meant by not placing any obstacle in the way of grace? Is it just a question of avoiding a few serious faults? In that case, the axiom is obviously false: we do not infallibly receive grace because we have a few less faults than our neighbors, and the least guilty among sinners are not always those who are most quickly or easily converted. To place no obstacle in the way of grace would therefore be to remove all mortal sin; but it is impossible to achieve this total exemption without a supernatural gift, or rather, without sanctifying grace.38 Thus, let us conclude with Saint Thomas: the mere fact of not putting an obstacle in the way of grace is already the work of grace.39
In 1700, the French clergy assembly severely censured this explanation of the axiom Facienti quod in se est and declared the pact theory to be a reckless and erroneous invention, contrary to Scripture and Tradition.40
We will remain wary of pronouncing such condemnations, though we do doubt that this theory can be based on a solid, scientific foundation. Pius IX, in the documents we have reproduced, makes no allusion to this preparation or this pact, and this would have been the place to do so, since he was speaking of the salvation of pagans. He ignores the natural grace introduced by these authors and declares that the gifts of heavenly and divine grace will not be lacking to unbelievers who seek the light: The gifts of heavenly grace will by no means be lacking to those who wish and ask with a sincere heart to be renewed by this light.—By the operative power of divine light and grace, it is possible to attain eternal life. (Gratiaeque coelestis gratiaeque coelestis dona nequaquam illis defutura sunt qui hac luce recreari sincero animo velint et postulent.—Posse divinae lucis et gratiae operante virtute, aeternam consequi vitam.) In the official language of the Fathers, Councils and Popes, divine grace properly means a truly supernatural help or gift.
The Thomistic explanation, which has the merit of being theological, is still the one which, in reality, best brings to the fore God’s infinite mercy. Yes, God desires the salvation of unbelievers, though in a way that worthy of Him, not by conventions and pacts that smack too much of human invention. He truly visits idolatrous nations, not only by natural graces, which are too insufficient, but by entirely supernatural and divine influences, capable of snatching man from his miseries and effectively directing him towards his supreme destiny, for we believe that Providence does not do things by halves. When pagans respond to His advances, the Savior renews them, sowing His gifts upon the path of souls. If explicit faith in the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation is required by necessity of means,41 God owes it to himself to procure this knowledge, and He will arrange events in such a way that men of good will will be enlightened, either by the arrival of a missionary, or by the ministry of angels, or by an interior revelation. Thus prepared supernaturally and multiplying, under the divine motion, salutary works, they will produce definitive acts of faith and charity. Now, charity, which is the fullness of the law, is in itself equivalent to the desire for baptism: it includes, in fact, the firm and sincere intention to observe all the commandments, and, consequently, the precept to be baptized and enter the body of the Church. In the meantime, they are in the soul, living with Christ.42
When, in the bliss of eternity, we fully understand the ways of Providence, we will see that the history of many souls, even among those peoples who sit in the shadow of death, is above all the history of divine mercies.
III. A recent theologian’s opinion concerning the final fate of pagans
The principles we just outlined provide us with a framework for judging a recently published pamphlet entitled De la prédestination et du sort final des païens (On Predestination and the Ultimate Fate of Pagans), by a professor of theology.43 While we gladly pay tribute to the author’s intentions as an apologist and exaltation of God’s infinite goodness, we find several of his theses theologically untenable. We note three fundamental propositions: 1˚ Salvation is impossible for pagans, because they cannot come to faith, the indispensable condition of salvation. Conequently, “in fact, they remain in the natural order.”44 2˚ Many pagans live in invincible ignorance, not only concerning revelation, but even concerning God.45 3˚ After their death, these pagans of good faith will be placed neither in paradise, since they have not had grace, nor in hell, since they have not seriously violated the natural law, but in limbo, where they will enjoy a greater or lesser natural happiness, proportionate to the merits they have acquired on earth.46
A complete rebuttal of these assertions would require a great deal of elaboration. A few remarks will suffice.
1˚ We categorically deny that salvation is impossible for pagans. God sincerely desires the salvation of all men, and He gives all sufficient grace to come to the knowledge of His holy name. We have shown how adults, if they wish to take advantage of the supernatural help available to them, can turn to God and obtain the gift of faith. Although the axiom Facienti quod in se est is not explained in the same way by all theologians, it has not been seriously disputed. It is commonly accepted that all men of good will, sinners or unfaithful, have the power to prepare for salvation, and that God does not withhold the definitive grace of justification from those who have done all that depends on their cooperation. The traditional teaching is summarized in the famous phrase from St. Thomas, which we have commented on: if man does not hinder gift of faith by his resistance, God will procure it for him either by an interior illumination or by the ministry of creatures. We also explained that this intervention is not, strictly speaking, a miracle, but part of the [ordinary] plan of divine governance.
The brochure’s doctrine contradicts not only Saint Thomas and theologians, but also the declarations of Pius IX. As we saw above, the Pope affirms that unbelievers can receive divine grace and with this help obtain eternal life (aeternam consequi vitam).47
We deny that pagans remain in the natural order. It is a matter of faith that they incur and retain original sin as long as they are not repaired by sanctifying grace. However, this sin cannot be conceived without the supernatural order. The humanity that comes from Adam was elevated with our first father; all those who are part of humanity are called with it and through it to the supernatural [end]; and, in decreeing redemption, God has prepared for all the members of human nature the means to reach their sublime destiny. Since pagans are sons of Adam, they have a supernatural vocation, just like the head of humanity; by the same token, they belong to the new Adam, Christ Jesus, are subject to His rule, and will stand before His tribunal. The Savior also died for them, and they have no right to evade this supernatural destiny, which is the sole final end of the humanity in our present state.
2˚ As for good faith and invincible ignorance, as Pius IX pointed out, it is not our task to determine their limits. We readily admit that such ignorance exists in relation to certain attributes of God, His spirituality, His knowledge, His immutability, His complete role as Creator, etc., and also in relation to certain cultic practices whose absurdity is far from obvious. However, complete ignorance of God? The evidence provided by the learned professor proves that many modern pagans have no idea of the true God, but not that such ignorance is excusable. Many peoples of antiquity also ignored the Sovereign Lord, and yet they are condemned—"Buddha,” we are told, “like our modern positivists, leaves God out of the picture.”—All right, but is this an invincible error? Is the ignorance experienced by present day positivists forgivable?
Let us consider the various states of mind of those who do not know of God. We can conceive of only three hypotheses: either these men are atheists properly speaking, freethinkers who refuse to believe in a supreme being; or they are indifferent men who, without denying God, do without Him altogether in their lives; or they are polytheists, idolaters, who worship material creatures or higher spirits. Would our author dare to exonerate the first category? Is absolute indifference to God admissible? If the greatest of all duties is the duty to love God, if the first cry, the first glance of the human soul, is an aspiration towards its Creator,48 will it be maintained that a man can, with impunity, spend his whole life without caring about God? And who would absolve idolatry?49 It’s curious to compare these modern theories on the good faith of pagans with God's own judgment of them. “All men in whom there is no knowledge of God are vain and foolish. They have not been able by visible goods to understand Him who is, and have not known the Creator by contemplating His works. If they have admired the power and effects of creatures, let them thereby understand how much more powerful is He who produced them; for by the greatness and beauty of the creature we can know and see the Creator. And yet these men deserve less blame, for if they fall into error, it is perhaps in seeking God and wanting to find Him. Indeed, they seek him by examining his works, and are seduced by the beauty of the things they see. But they themselves deserve no pardon. Iterum autem nec his debet ignosci. For if they have had enough knowledge to appreciate the universe, how much more easily have they not discovered him who is its Master?”50
Moreover, even if the author were able to prove that unbelievers are excusable for not knowing God, or that they have observed the whole of natural law without any grace and without any knowledge of God,51 he would not have demonstrated his thesis about the final fate of the pagans. We would only have the right to conclude: thus, they did what was in their power; therefore God will grant them His grace to lead them further: Faciunt quod in se est; facienti quod in se est Deus non denegat gratiam.
3˚ On the subject of limbo,52 where those who die with only original sin suffer damnation without the penalty of fire, we must agree with Pius VI53 that this is not a Pelagian fable. This is a place for children who have not been justified. Adults whose mental faculties have not sufficiently developed and who are incapable of sinning should be classified as children. However, for adults who enjoy the full use of reason, it is not admissible to claim that they would be consigned to limbo. The text of Saint Gregory of Nazianzus (quoted on p. 40 of the text) is too obscure to be conclusive, and too isolated to prevail against the Augustinian tradition. St. Jerome’s words, “those who observe natural laws will be rewarded,” are susceptible to the common interpretation: Facienti quod in se est. Innocent III’s distinction between the punishment of original sin and that of actual sin does not presuppose the case of an adult who dies with original sin alone.
Theologians ignore this theory, and our professor himself admits that he wants to react against common sentiment. Saint Thomas, who taught the consoling doctrine on the fate of children who died without baptism, rejects the present hypothesis: It is impossible, he declares, for original sin to be found by itself in man with venial sin without mortal sin.54 On the other hand, it is impossible for an adult, whether pagan or Christian, to go through life without committing some venial sin, as defined by the Council of Trent.55 Thus, according to Saint Thomas, the case of an adult heathen dying with only original sin but without mortal sin is fanciful.
The56 reason for this doctrine is as follows. Man is obliged to turn to God at the origin of his rational life, to choose Him as his final end, at least implicitly by proposing to himself to practice good and avoid evil. The obligation will become more precise as his moral faculties develop. It is inconceivable that this fundamental precept could be neglected indefinitely, without serious fault. Either the pagan chooses God in this still somewhat vague way, in which case he does what is in his power, is pleasing to God, and receives more perfect graces that will sooner or later lead him to justification: his original sin will be erased, and he will have the right to supernatural beatitude. Or, otherwise, he never satisfies the first and most serious of all the commandments, in which case who can excuse him for mortal sin? Thus, for adults, there is no middle ground between heaven and hell.
Neither St. Thomas nor Pius IX, in resolving the problem of the final fate of pagans, resort to our apologist’s supposition. They declare that God does not deny heavenly light to anyone and that whoever sincerely wishes to have it can obtain eternal life.
The theology professor’s thesis does not stand up to the declarations of the Council of Florence. This famous gathering does not admit that pagans are exempt from the supernatural, nor that they can miss heaven while avoiding hell. Rather, it teaches that pagans, as well as Jews, heretics, and schismatics, are bound to have the faith of the Catholic Church and that, if they fail to do so before the end of their lives, not only will they not enjoy heavenly bliss, but they will be thrown into eternal fire: “She firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that none of those who are not within the Catholic Church—not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics—can become partakers of eternal life but, rather, that they are to go into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before the end of life they have been joined to her.”57 The definition is universal and applies to all pagans, all Jews, all heretics, and all schismatics: all those who, before leaving this world, have not at least belonged to the soul of the Church through faith and grace, will be condemned to eternal fire: In ignem aeternum ituros... nisi ante finem vitae eidem fuerint aggregati.
But then, it is argued, where would you place those upright pagans, those virgins who sacrificed their lives to preserve their purity, those pious sons who offer their lives to save those of their parents? To avoid hell it is not enough to have distinguished oneself by acts of one or more virtues; one must have observed the whole law. If the adults in question have practised all the commandments, including that of loving God, then they have done what was in their power and have received grace, for God had a duty to himself to enlighten them supernaturally: we will place them in heaven. If they seriously violated natural law, they cannot escape hell without repentance. For salvation, as for goodness, we need a harmonious set of perfections; for damnation, as for evil, we only need one serious flaw: Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu.
What is more, these pagans will have received the reward for their good deeds in this world through temporal prosperity,58 and in eternity their punishment will be less severe.
Yet, it will be said: how dare you condemn so many members of the human family on the grounds that it is impossible for them to attain heavenly bliss?—We do not condemn them for this, for we have proved that this impossibility does not exist. God is not punishing them for invincible ignorance but, rather, for breaking the natural law and failing to take advantage of the graces that enabled them to acquire sufficient knowledge for salvation.—One might claim, too: these graces are miraculous.—Not at all; they are part of the plan of Providence, which desires the salvation of all men and prepares supernatural help for each individual according to his condition. More than one missionary has noted that divine interventions are not so rare, and that these graces are not always sterile. The inner illumination of the Holy Spirit can take place so quickly and in so many ways, either during life or at death. At that supreme moment when man is suspended between time and eternity, when the soul is, as it were, abstracted from the body, the infused light penetrates more easily into its most hidden depths. A flash from above can dispel much darkness in the twinkling of an eye. The work of the intellect, the movement of the will, can be performed in an instant and change the destiny of the dying person. Who can affirm with certainty that, in this or that circumstance, the drama of agony did not end in acts of faith and contrition, which brought sanctifying grace and introduced the happy convert into the soul of the Church?
Sound, traditional theology is still the one that best exalts God’s goodness, and that best helps us understand how human history, even in the midst of paganism, can in many cases be, we repeat, the story of divine mercies.
For the original, see Édouard Hugon, “Le salut des païens,” Revue Thomiste N.S. 5 (1905): 381–399.↩︎
See Hugon, “La nécessité de la Grâce pour observer la Loi Naturelle,” Revue Thomiste N.S. 5 (1905): 554–572. Also, for the full context of his thought see his Hors de l'Église, point de salut (Paris: Téqui, 1927).↩︎
Trans. note: This use of body-soul must be attenuated, for reasons adduced in Pius XII’s Mystici corporis and as also argued well by ecclesiologists like Journet.↩︎
See definitions in Denzinger, nos. 279–287[529ff]. See also Council of Trent, Decree on Justification, can. 6 - The Second Council of Orange had already said: “Not only do we not believe that certain persons are predestined to evil by the divine power, but also, if there are any who wish to believe such a great evil, we denounce them with all detestation and declare them anathemas.” (Denzinger, no. 200[397].↩︎
“Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died” (Rom., 14:15, RSV). “And so by your knowledge this weak man is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died.” (1 Cor. 8:11, RSV).↩︎
1 Tim. 2:1–6.↩︎
1 Tim. 4:10.↩︎
On December 7, 1690, Alexander VIII condemned this proposition: “Christ gave himself as an offering to God, not for the elect alone, but for all the faithful only” (Denzinger, no. 1161[2111]).↩︎
Wis. 12:27.↩︎
Wis. 12:1–2: "O, how good and sweet is Your Spirit, O Lord, in all things! Therefore, you chastise them that err, bit by bit, and admonish them and speak to them, concerning the matters in which they offend, so that, that leaving behind their wickedness, they may believe in You, O Lord.”↩︎
Adversus Haereses, bk. 4, ch. 22 (P. G., VII, 1047).↩︎
John Chrysostom, Homily XLIII (others XLIV) in Matth (P. G., LVII, 459)↩︎
Augustine, Epist. 157 (others 89) (P. L. XXXIII, 681).↩︎
[Ps.-]Dionysius, Caelest. Hierarc., ch. 4 (P. G., III, 179).↩︎
Acts 8.↩︎
Acts, 10↩︎
Acts 16:9–10.↩︎
“There can be no doubt that whoever, by the generosity of divine grace, have been set apart from that original damnation, there is no doubt that both the hearing of the Gospel is provided for them, and, when they hear it, they believe.” (De Correptione et Gratia, ch. 7, P. L., XLIV, 924)↩︎
“Et And if someone did not have an instructor, God would reveal it to him—unless he remained without one through his own fault” (In III Sent, dist. 25, q. 2, a. 2, sol. 2). In ad 3, St. Thomas admits that in the Old Testament revelations were made to the Gentiles through the ministry of angels.↩︎
De Veritate, q. 14, a. 11, ad 1.↩︎
In III Sent, dist. 25, q. 2, a. 2, sol. 2.↩︎
Heb. 1:14: “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent to serve on behalf of those who will inherit salvation?”↩︎
"To the great admiration of his son, who for two days had not been able to wring a word out of him, this man spoke to me," said the missionary, "he repeated several times: ‘Yes, yes, I am quite content, monsieur.’"↩︎
Cf. Trinidad, Journal d'un missionnaire dominicain, pp. 273-276, Paris, Retaux.↩︎
Allocut. consistor. Singulari quadam, Dec. 9, 1854.↩︎
Encyclical to the Italian Cardinals, Archbishops, and Bishops, August 10, 1863.↩︎
Trent, Decreeon Ecumenism, ch. 7 and ch. 8 and can. 3; Vatican I, Dei filius, ch. 3.↩︎
Propos. 26 and 27 condemned by the Unigenitus bull, September 8, 1713.↩︎
Propos. 22 condemned by the bull Auctorem fidei, August 28, 1794.↩︎
Trans. note: Not, of course, that prudential command would be an act of the will.↩︎
This is what results from the condemnation made by Alexander VIII, on December 7, 1690, against the following proposition: "Pagans, Jews, heretics, and others like this receive no influence from Jesus Christ." Denzinger, 1295[2305].↩︎
ST I-II, q. 109, a. 6, ad 2.↩︎
ST I-II, q. 112, a. 3.↩︎
Cf. Suarez, De Gratia, bk. 4, c. 15.↩︎
Cf. A. Mercier, “Le supernaturel,” RT 10, p. 313.↩︎
Mazzella, De gratia Christi, no. 856.↩︎
Can. 6, Denzinger, no. 179[376].↩︎
We plan to set forth this doctrine in a later article, where we'll establish the necessity of sanctifying grace to observe the natural law.↩︎
In XII Heb., lect. 3.↩︎
“However, the pact that is asserted to exist between God and Christ is a rash and erroneous fabrication, proposed not only without the support of, but even contrary to, Sacred Scripture, the Holy Fathers, and tradition.”↩︎
This is not the place to deal with this question, but we will point out that the Holy See has publicly expressed its preference for the Thomist opinion. The Holy Office was asked whether it was permissible to baptize an adult who was at the point of death and who promised to learn the truths of the faith if he recovered his health. Congregation replied on May 10 1703: "This promise is not enough: the missionary, even in front of a dying person who is not absolutely incapable of understanding him, is obliged to explain the mysteries of the faith which are necessary by necessity, and of this number are principally the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation. Missionarium teneri... explicare mysteria fidei quae sunt necessaria necessitate medii, ut sunt praecipue mysteria trinitatis et incarnationis."-Cf. Anal. Juris pontif., ser. 2, col. 1805.↩︎
Trans. note: While presenting this note to the reading public, I will note, however, my preferences for some of the developments upon this theme offered by Jacques Maritain in his “The Immanent Dialectic of the First Act of Freedom,” a theory that was approved by Journet, Simon, J.-H. Nicolas and others (and harmonious with observations by someone like Garrigou-Lagrange, who remains, perhaps, somewhat closer to Hugon).↩︎
De la prédestination et du sort final des païens (Paris:Bloud, 1905).↩︎
Ps. 15-27.↩︎
Ps. 46ff.↩︎
Ps. 59.↩︎
Cf. Denzinger, no. 1677[2866].↩︎
Cf. Tertullian, Apolog. c. XVII, P. L., I, 377.↩︎
Cf. ST, II-II, q. 10 and q. 94.↩︎
Sap. XII, 1-10.↩︎
We will leave aside the question concerning the natural law for the moment, though we will take this up in our next article.↩︎
Trans. note: Concerning limbo, see International Theological Commission, “The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized,” https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html.↩︎
Bull Auctorem Fidei, propos. 26 against the synod of Pistoia.↩︎
ST I-II, q. 89, a. 6.↩︎
Trent, Decree on Justification, can. 23.↩︎
Trans. note: This argument, taken from the text cited above, is precisely the one developed by Maritain et al.↩︎
Decretum pro Jacobitis, Denzinger, 714 [1351].↩︎
Cf. Augustine. De civitate dei, bk. 5, ch. 12 (P. L., XLI, 154-158).↩︎
