Five Discourses On The Souls Eternal Salvation, Revised Edition (With Active Table of Contents)

Baruch Spinoza

---

In living beings, and human beings in particular, consciousness is but one psychic activity among others. Many influential ancient thinkers, both philosophers and poets, regarded the universe as a living being, not only in its parts but also and especially as whole. In the Timaeus , Plato had described in detail the structure and function of the world soul, and had recounted the way in which it was put together by a divine craftsman demiurge and conjoined with the realm of disorderly matter, upon which it controlled and imposed order.

Plotinus and his followers had a quite different view. The general idea is that Soul, qua outer activity of Consciousness, looks back at its cause in order to understand itself so as to truly be what it is. Giving birth to the entire universe and the biosphere on earth in this way, one could say that the sum total of the corporeal, sensible world rests in Soul, not the other way round, that soul resides in the bodies it animates. The precise ontological status of Soul as another hypostasis in its own right remains somewhat underdetermined, for in a manner of speaking Soul is the very process of expressing the intelligible world in the derivative form of sensible natural living beings and the lives they live.

Thus, every aspect of the natural world, even the meanest piece of inorganic and apparently useless matter, has an eternal and divine moment. For all the other-worldliness often associated with Neoplatonic philosophy, then, it needs to be emphasized that the material world they inhabited was for this reason an essentially good and beautiful place, the effortless product of cosmic providence and divine power, and worthy of reverence.

Without light, it would not make any sense to speak of darkness.

Neoplatonism

In the same way as darkness is a by-product of light, so matter, the Neoplatonists reasoned, is nothing but a by-product of the dynamic emanation of the First. In fact, it is the limit at which the energy transmitted in the chain of inner and outer activities at the various levels of reality exhausts itself and comes to an end. Just as darkness has no capacity to make itself visible, in the same way matter no longer has any inner activity that could give rise to a further outer activity. As such, it is merely passive, and the eternal process of consecutive production of ever lower levels of reality necessarily comes to an end.

But importantly for us, it is the realm at which the activity of Soul informed by Consciousness becomes phenomenal and perceptible.

Philosophy of Religion

It would be wrong to say that matter does not exist at all, or is a nothing. According to this theory, at any rate, matter exists, but not as a separate ontological principle distinct from the One with effects of its own. Rather, it is a fringe phenomenon of the life of the soul, a by-product of the activity of higher realms of Being. As such, it is no thing, an entirely immaterial and formless non-entity.

This Plotinian doctrine was destined to raise controversy among later Neoplatonists, when it was proposed that matter should at the very least have the property of undefined three-dimensionality. An even more controversial doctrine connected to matter was the explanation of evil.

Plotinus had tried to uphold the view, consistent with his entire ontology, that at no point in the great chain of Being coming from above does anything emerge that could be regarded as evil, or the cause of evil. Nevertheless, evil, and in particular moral evil, is obviously part of our experience of the world, and an explanation had to be given as to where it originated. Yet importantly, matter is not an independent principle of evil in any Manichean or Gnostic sense, as it has no active power on its own. Rather, evil arises if and when higher beings, and in particular human beings, direct their attention towards the material world below, instead of the intelligible world above, and have an all-encompassing concern for it.

The regard downwards, as it were, rather than upwards towards Consciousness and the divine essences, is what contaminates the soul and renders it morally evil. Even though it is surprising how much explanatory force for the nature and existence of moral evil this theory affords, it remained controversial even among Neoplatonists.

Proclus, in the fifth century, dedicated an entire treatise to repudiating Plotinus on this point. Proclus abandoned the comforting notion of the essential goodness of humanity and, not unlike Augustine before him, insisted on the real possibility of the moral depravity of the human soul qua soul. As human beings we are, with our bodies, part of the material world; but importantly, we are living organisms that can place ourselves in opposition to the needs and concerns of the body and reflect upon our own condition. Moreover, our souls operate on a level of consciousness and intelligence that surpasses the cognition of all other creatures.

Finally, just as everything else that has being, we are individual units and participate, again, as the Neoplatonists would express it, in the form of Unity. Looked at from this point of view, human existence is a striking representation of the cosmos as a whole, a microcosm in which all levels of being Unity, Consciousness, Soul, Nature, Matter are combined into one organic individual.

Necessarily, then, the moral precepts of the Neoplatonists concern the individual person, the goal being not the mundane fulfillment of life within the bounds of what is humanly possible, but nothing less than eudaimonia in its most expansive sense, deification. Unsurprisingly, the route to salvation turned out to be the philosophic life, a sincere and arduous effort of the mind to return to the One and forever abrogate any concerns for the body.

It was on this basis that the Neoplatonists would most vehemently protest against the latter-day Christian dogma that human salvation has already been accomplished vicariously through the life and death of a man revered as the son of god. At a time when the considered wisdom of Greece and Rome came under increasing pressure to re-articulate its commitments in the face of waves of novel movements that lay claim to revelatory truth, the Neoplatonists too strove to refine their teachings and to delineate the metaphysical architecture of the world as they saw it.

No longer would it suffice to hold forth on philosophical issues, as Plato, Cicero, and to some extent Plotinus had done, in a serious yet exploratory and protreptic spirit. In order to be heard in an increasingly competitive marketplace of ideas teeming with holy men of every kind and temperament, views had to be laid out clearly and in systematic fashion. In some of its later manifestations, like Stoicism and Epicureanism before it, Neoplatonism drifted towards scholasticism and reveled in dogmatic system building. Along the way, all kinds of refinements and modifications of nomenclature were introduced.

Distinctions were drawn up within the hypostases of Consciousness and Soul in order to try to articulate the transitions from one level of Being to another.

An entire industry of teaching and commenting sprang up to interpret a millennium of Hellenic philosophy in the light of the core commitments of Neoplatonism. Certain philosophic predecessors were elevated to the status of nearly infallible authorities, and the texts of Plato and Aristotle were comprehensively read, diligently analyzed, and ruthlessly harmonized. Finally, in an effort to stem the rising tide of all kinds of new salvation-peddling cults then inundating the Roman Empire, the ancient religious traditions of the Greeks and especially the Egyptians were brought into the fold and given new significance and meaning.

But after the untimely death of Emperor Julian , a Neoplatonist himself, none of these efforts could any longer withstand the tidal wave of Christendom. Hellenic philosophy and the teaching of its attendant disciplines went on in Alexandria and Constantinople until the end of the 6 th century, but were now being taught by people who had either embraced or otherwise come to terms with the new religion. The Arab conquest in the 7 th century obliterated and appropriated in equal measure, but the real revival of Neoplatonism occurred when humanists made the treasures of late antique Greece available to the Renaissance intelligentsia of Italy, France, and Germany.

It is an undeniable fact, although nowadays rarely acknowledged, that the general outlook and the principal doctrines of the Neoplatonists proved exceedingly influential throughout the entire history of western philosophy. In addition, by way of a pseudo-epigraphical treatise entitled Theology of Aristotle , Neoplatonic thought facilitated the integration of ancient philosophy and science into both Islam especially through Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi and Avicenna [Ibn Sina] and Judaism Maimonides.

But that the Apostle don't mean only Works of the ceremonial Law, when he excludes Works of the Law in Justification, but also of the moral Law, and all Works of Obedience, Vertue, and Righteousness what soever, may appear by the following Things. God imputeth righteousness without Works, And Chap But if it be of Works, then it is no more Grace; otherwise Grace is no more Grace.

By which, there is no Reason in the World to understand the Apostle of any other than Works in general, as correlates of a Reward, or good Works, or Works of Vertue and Righteousness. When the Apostle says we are justified or saved not by Works, without any such Term annexed, as the Law, or any other Addition to limit the Expression, what War rant have any to confine it to Works of a particular Law, or Institution, excluding others?

Are not Obser vances of other Divine Laws Works, as well as of that? It seems to be allowed by the Divines in the Arminian Scheme, in their Interpretation of several of those Texts where the Apostle only mentions Works, without any Addition, that he means our own good Works in gene ral; but then they say, he only means to exclude any proper merit in those Works. But to say the Apostle means one Thing when he says we ben't justified by Works, another when he says we ben't justified by the Works of the Law, when we find the Expressions mixed.

Their Throat is an open Sepulchre: With their Tongues they have used deceit: Their Mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; and their Feet swift to shed Blood. Now we know that whatsoever Things the Law saith, it saith to them that are under the Law, that every Mouth may be stopped, and all the World may become guilty before God. There fore by the Deeds of the Law, shall no Flesh be justi fied in his Sight. This is most evidently his Argu ment, because all had sinn'd, as it was said in the 9th ver. For all have sinn'd and come short of the Glory of God.

Therefore none at all can be justified by the Deeds of the Law: Doubtless the Apostle's Argu ment is, that the very same Law that they have broken and sinn'd against, can never justify 'em as Observers of it, because every Law don't justify, but necessarily condemns it's Violaters: And therefore our Breaches of the moral Law, argue no more, than that we can't be justified by that Law that we have broken.

And it may be noted, that the Apostle's Argu ment here is the same that I have already used. As in the 12th ver. And so the next ver. Which shew the Work of the Law written in their Hearts. And so in the 18th ver. Thou approvest the Things that are more Excellent, being in structed out of the Law.

Thou hast a form of Knowledge, and truth in the Law. Thou that sayeth a Man should not commit Adultery, dost thou commit Adultery? Thou that abhorrest Idols, dost thou commit Sacriledge? Thou that makest thy boast of the Law, through breaking the Law dishonourest thou God. Adultery, Idolatry and Sacriledge, surely are the breaking of the moral, and not the ceremonial Law. So in the 27th ver. And shall not uncircumcision which is by Nature, if it fulfil the Law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the Law. The Gentiles, that you despise because uncircumcised, if they live moral and holy Lives, in Obedience to the Moral Law, shall con demn you tho' circumcised.

And so there is not one Place in all the preceeding part of the Epistle, where the Apostle speaks of the Law, but that he most ap parently intends principally the moral Law: Now that Law by which we come to the knowledge of Sin, is the moral Law chiefly and prima rily. If the Reason be good, then where the Reason holds, the Truth holds. The plain meaning of the Apostle is, that as the Law most strictly forbids Sin, it tends to convince us of Sin, and bring our own Consciences to condemn us, instead of justifying of us; that the Use of it is to declare to us our own Guilt and Unworthiness, which is the reverse of justifying and approving of us as virtuous or worthy.

This is the Apostle's meaning, if we will allow him to be his own expositor; for he himself in this very Epistle explains to us how it is that by the Law we have the Knowledge of Sin, and that 'tis by the Law's forbidding Sin Chap. Therefore when the Apostle argues that by the Deeds of the Law no Flesh living shall be justifyed, because by the Law is the knowledge of Sin, his Argument proves, unless he was mistaken as to the force of his Argument, that we can't be justifyed by the Deeds of the Moral Law. For the promise that he should be the Heir of the World, was not to Abraham, or to his Seed through the Law, but through the Righteousness of Faith: For if they which are of the Law be Heirs, Faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Because the Law worketh Wrath; for where no Law is there is no Transgression.

Therefore it is of Faith that it might be by Grace. Now the way in which the Law works Wrath, by the Apos tles own Account, in the Reason he himself annexes, is by forbidding Sin, and aggravating the Guilt of the Transgression; for, says he, where no Law is there is Transgression: And so, Chap 7 That Sin by the Commandment might become exceeding sinful. That boasting might be excluded. To declare I say at this Time his Righteousness, that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believes in Jesus.

Not of Works left any Man should boast. But it is said that boasting is excluded, as Circumcisi on was excluded, which was what the Jews especially used to glory in, and value themselves upon, above other Nations.

Baruch Spinoza (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

To this I answer, that the Jews were not only used to boast of Circumcision, but were notorious for boast ing of their moral Righteousness. The Jews of those Days were generally Admirers, and followers of the Pharisees, who were full of their Boasts of their moral Righteousness, as we may see by the Example of the Pharisee mention'd in the 18th of Luke, which Christ mentions as describing the general Temper of that Sect; Lord, says he, I thank thee, that I am not as other Men, an Extortioner nor Unjust, nor an Adulterer.

The Works that he boasts of were chiefly moral Works: He depended on the Works of the Law for Justification; and therefore Christ tells us that the Publican, that renounced all his own Righteousness, went down to his House justified rather than he. Thou that sayeth a Man should not commit Adultery dost thou commit Adultery! Thou that ab horrest Idols, dost thou commit Sacriledge. So that this is the boasting which the Apostle condemns them for; and therefore if they were justified by the Works of this Law, then how comes he to say that their boasting is excluded?

And besides, when they boasted of the Rites of the ceremonial Law, it was under a Notion of it's being a Part of their own Goodness or Excellency, or what made them holier and more lovely in the sight of God than other Peo ple; and if they were not justified by this Part of their own supposed Goodness, or Holiness, yet if they were by another, how did that exclude boasting?

How was their boasting excluded, unless all Goodness or Excel lency of their own was excluded? The Reason given by the Apostle why we can be justified only by Faith, and not by the Works of the Law, in the 3d Chap. That they that are under the Law are under the Curse, makes it evident that he don't mean only the ceremonial Law. In that Chapter the Apostle had particularly insisted upon it that Abraham was justified by Faith, and that it is by Faith only, and not by the Works of the Law, that we can be justified and become the Children of Abra ham, and be made Partakers of the Blessing of Abra ham: And he gives this Reason for it, in the 10th v.

For as many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse; for it is written cursed is every one that conti nueth not in all Things which are written in the Book of the Law to do them. And therefore all that are justified, are redeemed from that curse, by Christ's bearing it for them; as there in the Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us; For it is written, cursed is every one that hangeth on a Tree.

The Apostle does in like Manner argue against our being justified by our own Righteousness, as he does against being justified by the Works of the Law; and evidently uses the Expressions of our own Righteous ness, and Works of the Law, promiscuously, and as sig nifying the same Thing It is particularly evident by Rom. But Israel which followed after the Law of Righteous ness, hath not attained to the Law of Righteousness: Because they sought it not by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law. And 'tis very unrea sonable, upon several Accounts, to suppose that the A postle by their own Righteousness, intends only their ceremonial Righteousness.

For when the Apostle warns us against trusting in our own Righteousness for Justification, doubtless it is fair to interpret the Ex pression in an Agreement with other Scriptures where we are warned not to think that 'tis for the sake of our own Righteousness, that we obtain God's Favour and Blessing; as particularly that in Deut.

Not for thy Righ teousness, or for the uprightness of thy Heart, dost thou go to possess their Land; but for the wickedness of these Nations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the word which he sware unto thy Fathers, Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Understand therefore that the Lord thy God giveth thee not this good Land to possess it, for thy Righteousness, for thou art a stiff necked People. None will pretend that hear the Expression thy Righteousness, signifies only a ceremonial Righteousness, but all Virtue or Goodness of their own; yea and the inward Goodness of the Heart as well as the outward Goodness of Life; which appears by the beginning of the 5 ver.

Not for thy Righteousness, or for the uprightness of thy Heart, —and also by the Antithesis in the 6. Their stiffneckedness was their moral Wickedness, Obstinacy, and perverseness of Heart: By Righteousness, therefore, on the contrary, is meant their moral Vertue, and rectitude of Heart, and Life.

Let it be an Obedience to the ceremonial Law, or a Gospel Obedience, or what it will, if it be a Righteousness of our own doing, it is excluded by the Apostle in this Affair, as is evident by Titus 3, 5. Not by Works of Righteousness which we have done. Argument, That the Apostle when he denies Jus tification by Works, and by Works of the Law, and by our own Righteousness, don't only mean Works of the ceremonial Law viz. What is said by the Apos tle in Tit 3. But after that the Kindness and Love of God our Saviour, toward Man, appeared, not by Works of Righteousness which we have done, but ac cording to his Mercy he saved us, by the washing of rege neration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which he shed on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ Our Saviour; that being justified by his Grace, we should be made Heirs, according to the Hope of eternal Life.

Works of Righte ousness that we have done, are here excluded, as what we are neither saved, nor justified by. It appears by the 3d v. For we our selves also were some times foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers Lusts and Pleasures, living in Malice and Envy, hateful, and ha ting one another. These are Breaches of the moral Law, that the Apostle observes they lived in before they were justifyed: That it was not by Works of Righteousness which they had done, that they were saved or justified.

But we need not go to the Context, 'tis most ap parent from the Words themselves, that the Apostle don't mean only Works of the ceremonial Law: If he had only said, it is not by our own Works of Righ teousness; what could we understand by Works of Righteousness, but only Righteous Works, or which is the same Thing, good Works? And to say that it is by our own righteous Works, that we are justified, tho' not by one particular kind of righteous Works, would certainly be a Contradiction to such an Assertion.

But the Words are render'd yet more strong, plain, and determined in their Sense, by those additional Words, which we have done; which shews that the Apostle intends to exclude all our own righteous or vertuous Works universally. If it should be asserted concerning any Commodity, Treasure, or precious Jewel, that it could not be procured by Money, and not only so, but to make the Assertion the more strong, it should be asserted with additional Words, that it could not be procured by Money that Men possess; how unreasonable would it be after all to say, that all that was meant was, that it could not be procured with Brass Money?

To illu strate this by the forementioned Comparison; If it should be asserted that such a Thing could not be procured by Money that Men possess, how ridiculous would it be to say that the meaning only was, that it could not be procured by counterfeit Money, and that for that Rea son, because it was not Money.

Or what one Text is there in the Bible that mayn't at this rate be explain'd all away, and per verted to any Sense Men please. But then further, if we should allow that the Apostle intends only to oppose Justification by Works of the ceremonial Law in this Text, yet 'tis evident by the Ex pression he uses that he means to oppose it under that Notion, or in that quality, of their being Works of Righteousness of our own doing.

But if the Apostle argues against our being justified by Works of the cere monial Law under the Notion of their being of that Nature and Kind, viz. Works of our own doing; then it will follow that the Apostle's Argument is strong against, not only those, but all of that Nature and Kind, even all that are of our own doing. If there were no other Text in the Bible about Justification but this, this would clearly and invincibly prove that we are not justified by any of our own Goodness, Vertue, or Righteousness or for the Excel lency or Righteousness of any Thing that we have done in Religion; because 'tis here so fully and strongly asserted: But if it be of Works, then it is no more Grace; otherwise Work is no more Work.

And the same Works as in Rom. And the same Works that are spoken of in the Context of the Therefore 'tis of Faith, that it might be by Grace. For here God's saving us according to his Mercy, and justifying us by Grace, is opposed to saving us by Works of Righteousness that we have done, in the same manner as in those Places justifying us by his Grace, is opposed to justifying us by Works of the Law.

For if we are justified by our sincere Obedience then it alters not the Case, whether the Commands be moral, or positive, provided they be God's Commands, and our Obedience be Obedience to God: And so the Case must be just the same under the Old Testament, with the Works of the moral Law, and ceremonial, according to the measure of the Vertue of Obedience, there was in either.

Obedience to the moral Law would have been concerned in the Affair of Justi fication, if sincere; and so would Obedience to the ceremonial. As now under the New-Testament, if Obedience is what we are justified by, that Obedience must doubtless comprehend Obedience to all God's Commands now in Force, to the positive Precepts of Attendance on Baptism and the Lord's Supper, as well as moral Precepts. If Obedience be the Thing, it is not because 'tis Obedience to such a kind of Commands, but because 'tis Obedience. So that by this Supposition, the Saints under the Old Testament were justified, at least in Part, by their Obedience to the ceremonial Law.

But 'tis evident that the Saints under the old Testa ment were not justified in any measure, by the Works of the ceremonial Law. This may be proved proceeding on the Foot of our Adversaries own Interpretation of the Apostle's Phrase of the Works of the Law; and supposing him to mean by it only the Works of the ceremonial Law. To Instance in David, 'tis evident that he was not justified in any wise, by the Works of the ceremonial law, by Rom. For 'tis manifest that David in the Words here cited, from the beginning of the 32d Psalm, has a special Respect to himself: He speaks of his own Sins being forgiven and not imputed to him: Let us therefore understand the Apostle which way we will, by Works, when he says, David describes the blessedness of the Man to whom the Lord imputes Righteousness without Works, whether of all manner of Works, or only Works of the ceremonial Law, yet 'tis evident at least, that David was not justified by Works of the ceremonial Law.

Therefore here is the argument; if our own Obedience be that by which Men are justified, then under the Old Testament, Men were justified partly by Obedience to the ceremonial Law, as has been proved; but the Saints under the Old Testament were not justified partly by the Works of the ceremonial Law; therefore Mens own Obedience is not that by which they are justified.

Another Argument that the Apostle when he speaks of the two opposite Ways of Justification, one by the Works of the Law, and the other by Faith, don't mean only the Works of the ceremonial Law, may be taken from that place, Rom The same Law is here meant as in the last Verses of the foregoing Chapter, where he says the Jews had not attained to the Law of Righteousness: Wherefore, because they sought it not by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law.

As is plain, because the Apostle is still speaking of the same Thing, the Words are a Continuation of the same Discourse, as may be seen at first Glance, by any one that looks on the Context. Moses therefore in those Words, which the Apostle says, are a Description of the Righteousness which is of the Law, can't mean only the ceremonial Law. And further, how can the Apostle's Description that he here gives from Moses, of this exploded Way of Justification by the Works of the Law, consist with the Arminian Scheme of a Way of Justification by the Vertue of a sincere Obedience, that still remains as the true and only Way of Justification, under the Gospel.

But how is that, that he that doth those Things shall live in them, that wherein the Way of Justification by the Works of the Law, differs, or is distinguished from that in which Christians under the Gospel are justified, ac cording to their Scheme; for still, according to them, it may be said, in the same Manner, of the Precepts of the Gospel, he that doth these Things shall live in them: The difference lies only in the Things to be done, but not at all, in that that the doing of them is not the Con dition of living in them, just in the one Case, as in the other.

The Words, He that doth them shall live in them, will serve just as well for a Description of the latter as the former. That to suppose otherwise is contrary to the Doctrine that is directly urged, and abundantly insisted on by the Apostle Paul, in his Epistles. Third Argument, viz That to suppose that we are justified by our own sincere Obedience, or any of our own Virtue or Goodness, derogates from Gospel Grace.

That Scheme of Justification that manifestly takes from, or diminishes the Grace of God, is undoubtedly to be rejected; for 'tis the declared Design of God in the Gospel to exalt the Freedom and Riches of his Grace, in that Method of Justification of Sinners, and Way of admitting them to his Favour, and the blessed Fruits of it, which it declares. The Scripture teaches that the Way of Justification that is appointed in the Gospel Covenant, is appointed, as it is, for that end, that free Grace might be express'd, and glorified; Rom.

The exercising, and magnifying the free Grace of God in the Gospel contrivance for the Justification and Salvation of Sinners, is evidently the chief Design of it: And this Freedom and Riches of the Grace of the Gospel is every where spoken of in Scripture as the chief Glory of it. Therefore that Doctrine that dero gates from the free Grace of God in justifying Sinners, as it is most opposite to God's Design, so it must be ex ceeding offensive to him. Those that maintain that we are justified by our own sincere Obedience, do pretend that their Scheme does not diminish the Grace of the Gospel; for they say that the Grace of God is wonderfully manifested in appointing such a Way and Method of Salvation, by sincere Obedience, in assisting us to perform such an O bedience, and in accepting our imperfect Obedience, instead of perfect.

This I suppose none will ever controvert or dispute. And it is not much less evident, that it doth both shew a more abundant Benevolence in the Giver when he shews kindness without Goodness or Excellency in the Object, to move him to it; and that it enhanses the Ob ligation to gratitude in the Receiver. For it certainly shews the more abun dant and overflowing Goodness, or Disposition, to com municate Good, by how much the less Loveliness or Excellency there is to entice Beneficence: Where there is most of the principle, there it is most sufficient for itself; and stands in least need of something with out to excite it: For certainly a more abundant Good ness, more easily flows forth, with less to impell or draw it.

Than where there is less; or which is the same Thing, the more any one is disposed of him self, the less he needs. From without himself, to put him upon it, or stir him up to it. And much more still when the Benevolence of the Giver not only finds nothing in the receiver to draw it, but a great deal of Hatefulness to repel it: The abun dance of Goodness is then manifested, not only in flowing forth without any Thing extrinsick to put it forward, but in overcoming great Repulsion in the Ob ject.

And then does Kindness and Love appear most Triumphant, and wonderfully Great, when the receiver is respected in the Gift, as not only wholly without all Excellency or Beauty to attract it, but altogether, yea infinitely vile and hateful. This is agreeable to the common Sense of Mankind, that the less worthy or excellent the Object of Benevolence, or the receiver of Kindness is, the more he is obliged, and the greater Gratitude is due. He therefore is most of all obliged, that receives Kindness without any Goodness or Ex cellency in himself, but with a total and universal Hate fulness.

And as 'tis agreeable to the common Sense of Mankind; so 'tis agreeable to the Word of God: How often does God in the Scripture insist on this Argument with Men, to move them to love him, and to acknow ledge his Kindness? Therefore it certainly follows, that that Doctrine that teaches that God, when he justifies a Man, and shews him that great Kindness, as to give him a Right to eter nal Life, don't do it for any Obedience, or any manner of Goodness of his; but that Justification respects a Man as ungodly, and wholly without any manner of Vertue, Beauty, or Excellency.

But I hasten to a. Fourth Argument for the Truth of the Doctrine, That to suppose that a Man is justified by his own Vertue or Obedience, derogates from the Honour of the Mediator, and ascribes that to Man's Vertue, that belongs only to the Righteousness of Christ: It puts Man in Christ stead, and makes him his own Saviour, in a respect, in which Christ only is his Saviour: Here I would 1. Explain what we mean by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness.

Prove the Thing intended by it to be true. Shew that this Doctrine is utterly inconsistent with the Doctrine of our being justified by our own Vertue, or sincere Obedience. First, I would explain what we mean by the Imputati on of Christ's Righteousness. Sometimes the Expression is taken by our Divines in a larger Sense, for the Im putation of all that Christ did and suffered for our Re demption, whereby we are free from Guilt, and stand Righteous in the sight of God; and so implies the Im putation both of Christ's Satisfaction, and Obedience.

But here I intend it in a stricter Sense, for the Imputa tion of that Righteousness, or moral Goodness, that consists in the Obedience of Christ. And by that Righ teousness being imputed to us, is meant no other than this, that that Righteousness of Christ is accepted for us, and admitted instead of that perfect inherent Righteousness that ought to be in our selves: And so we suppose that a Title to eternal Life is given us as the reward of this Righteousness. The Scripture uses the Word impute in this Sense, viz. For reckoning any Thing belonging to any Person, to ano ther Person's Account: If he have wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine Account.

To whom God imputeth Righteousness without Works. And 'tis the very same Word that is used, Rom. The opposers of this Doctrine suppose that there is an absurdity in it: They say that to suppose that God imputes Christ's Obedience to us, is to suppose that God is mistaken, and thinks that we perform'd that Obedi ence that Christ performed. But why can't that Righ teousness be reckoned to our Account, and be accepted for us, without any such absurdity? Why is there any more absurdity in it, then in a Merchant's transferring Debt or Credit from one Man's Account to another, when one Man pays a Price for another, so that it shall be accepted as if that other had paid it?

Why is there any more absurdity in supposing that Christ's Obedience is imputed to us, than that his Satisfaction is imputed? If Christ has suffered the Penalty of the Law for us, and in our stead, then it will follow, that his suffering that Penalty is imputed to us, i. That it is accepted for us, and in our stead, and is reckon'd to our Account, as tho' we had suffered it.

But why mayn't his obeying the Law of God be as rationally reckon'd to our Ac count, as his suffering the Penalty of the Law? Why may not a Price to bring into Debt, be as rationally trans ferr'd from one Person's Account to another, as a Price to pay a Debt —Having thus explain'd what we mean by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, I proceed,. One was as requisite to answer the Law as the other, This is certain, that that was the Reason why there was need that Christ suffer the Penalty for us, even that the Law might be an swered; for this the Scripture plainly teaches: This is given as the Reason why Christ was made a curse for us, that the Law threatned a curse to us, Gal.

The Law is without doubt, as much of an established Rule in one Case as in the other. Christ by suffering the Penalty, and so making At tonement for us, only removes the Guilt of our Sins and so sets us in the same State that Adam was in the first Moment of his Creation: And it is no more fit, that we should obtain eternal Life, only on that Ac count, than that Adam should have the Reward of eter nal Life, or of a confirmed and unalterable State of Hap piness, the first Moment of his existence, without any Obedience at all.

But he was to have the Reward on the Account of his Activeness in Obedience; not on the Account meerly of his not having done ill, but on the Account of his doing well. So on the same Account we han't eternal Life meerly on the Account of being void of Guilt, as Adam was at first existence, which we have by the Attonement of Christ; but on the Account of Christ's activeness in Obedience, and doing well. Head, and is called the second Adam.

When he had undertaken for us to stand in our stead, he was looked upon, and treated as tho' he were guilty with our Guilt; and by his satisfy ing, or bearing the Penalty, he did as it were free himself from this Guilt. But this be ing supposed, there was need of something further, even a positive Obedience, in order to his obtaining, as our second Adam, the Reward of eternal Life. God saw meet to place Man first in a State of Trial, and not to give him a Title to eternal Life, as soon as he had made him: God insisted upon it that his holy Majesty and Law should have their due Acknowledgement, and Honour from Man, such as became the Relation he stood in to that Being that created him, before he would be stow the Reward of confirmed and everlasting Happi ness upon him; and therefore God gave him a Law when he created him, that he might have Opportunity, by giving due Honour to his Authority in obeying it, to obtain this Happiness.

Christ came into the World to that end, to render the Honour of God's Authority and Law, con sistent with the Salvation and eternal Life of Sinners; he came to save them, and yet withal to assert and vin dicate the Honour of the Lawgiver, and his holy Law. Now if the Sinner after his Sin was satisfied for, had eternal Life bestowed upon him, without active Righ teousness, the Honour of his Law would not be suffici ently vindicated. That so glorious a Person should become subject to the Law, and fulfil it, has done much more to honour it, than if meer Man had obeyed it: It was a Thing infinitely honourable to God that a Person of infinite Dignity was not ashamed to call him his God, and to adore and obey him as such: This was more to God's Honour than if any meer Crea ture, of any possible Degree of Excellency and Dignity, had so done.

As the Gospel reverberates by means of the Church in the today of men and women[81], this social doctrine is a word that brings freedom. This means that it has the effectiveness of truth and grace that comes from the Spirit of God, who penetrates hearts, predisposing them to thoughts and designs of love, justice, freedom and peace.

Evangelizing the social sector, then, means infusing into the human heart the power of meaning and freedom found in the Gospel, in order to promote a society befitting mankind because it befits Christ: With her social doctrine not only does the Church not stray from her mission but she is rigorously faithful to it. The redemption wrought by Christ and entrusted to the saving mission of the Church is certainly of the supernatural order. This dimension is not a delimitation of salvation but rather an integral expression of it[82]. The supernatural is not to be understood as an entity or a place that begins where the natural ends, but as the raising of the natural to a higher plane.

In this way nothing of the created or the human order is foreign to or excluded from the supernatural or theological order of faith and grace, rather it is found within it, taken on and elevated by it. As this link was broken in the man Adam, so in the Man Christ it was reforged cf. Redemption begins with the Incarnation, by which the Son of God takes on all that is human, except sin, according to the solidarity established by the wisdom of the Divine Creator, and embraces everything in his gift of redeeming Love.

Man is touched by this Love in the fullness of his being: The whole man — not a detached soul or a being closed within its own individuality, but a person and a society of persons — is involved in the salvific economy of the Gospel. As bearer of the Gospel's message of Incarnation and Redemption, the Church can follow no other path: This is especially true in times such as the present, marked by increasing interdependence and globalization of social issues. Social doctrine, evangelization and human promotion. The Church's social doctrine is an integral part of her evangelizing ministry.

Nothing that concerns the community of men and women — situations and problems regarding justice, freedom, development, relations between peoples, peace — is foreign to evangelization, and evangelization would be incomplete if it did not take into account the mutual demands continually made by the Gospel and by the concrete, personal and social life of man[85].

Profound links exist between evangelization and human promotion: They also include links in the theological order, since one cannot disassociate the plan of creation from the plan of Redemption. The latter plan touches the very concrete situations of injustice to be combated and of justice to be restored.

They include links of the eminently evangelical order, which is that of charity: Understood in this way, this social doctrine is a distinctive way for the Church to carry out her ministry of the Word and her prophetic role[88]. This is not a marginal interest or activity, or one that is tacked on to the Church's mission, rather it is at the very heart of the Church's ministry of service: This is a ministry that stems not only from proclamation but also from witness. The Church does not assume responsibility for every aspect of life in society, but speaks with the competence that is hers, which is that of proclaiming Christ the Redeemer[91]: This means that the Church does not intervene in technical questions with her social doctrine, nor does she propose or establish systems or models of social organization[93].

This is not part of the mission entrusted to her by Christ. The Church's competence comes from the Gospel: This is her primary and sole purpose. There is no intention to usurp or invade the duties of others or to neglect her own; nor is there any thought of pursuing objectives that are foreign to her mission.

This mission serves to give an overall shape to the Church's right and at the same time her duty to develop a social doctrine of her own and to influence society and societal structures with it by means of the responsibility and tasks to which it gives rise. The Church has the right to be a teacher for mankind, a teacher of the truth of faith: The word of the Gospel, in fact, is not only to be heard but is also to be observed and put into practice cf.

Consistency in behaviour shows what one truly believes and is not limited only to things strictly church-related or spiritual but involves men and women in the entirety of their life experience and in the context of all their responsibilities. However worldly these responsibilities may be, their subject remains man, that is, the human being whom God calls, by means of the Church, to participate in his gift of salvation. Men and women must respond to the gift of salvation not with a partial, abstract or merely verbal acceptance, but with the whole of their lives — in every relationship that defines life — so as not to neglect anything, leaving it in a profane and worldly realm where it is irrelevant or foreign to salvation.

For this reason the Church's social doctrine is not a privilege for her, nor a digression, a convenience or interference: This right of the Church is at the same time a duty, because she cannot forsake this responsibility without denying herself and her fidelity to Christ: The warning that St. Paul addresses to himself rings in the Church's conscience as a call to walk all paths of evangelization, not only those that lead to individual consciences but also those that wind their way into public institutions: Because of the public relevance of the Gospel and faith, because of the corrupting effects of injustice, that is, of sin, the Church cannot remain indifferent to social matters [98]: Knowledge illuminated by faith.

The Church's social doctrine was not initially thought of as an organic system but was formed over the course of time, through the numerous interventions of the Magisterium on social issues. The fact that it came about in this manner makes it understandable that certain changes may have taken place with regard to its nature, method and epistemological structure. With significant allusions already being made in Laborem Exercens [], a decisive clarification in this regard was made in the Encyclical Sollicitudo Rei Socialis: It cannot be defined according to socio-economic parameters.

It is not an ideological or pragmatic system intended to define and generate economic, political and social relationships, but is a category unto itself. In fact, this social doctrine reflects three levels of theological-moral teaching: These three levels implicitly define also the proper method and specific epistemological structure of the social doctrine of the Church. The Church's social doctrine finds its essential foundation in biblical revelation and in the tradition of the Church.

From this source, which comes from above, it draws inspiration and light to understand, judge and guide human experience and history. Before anything else and above everything else is God's plan for the created world and, in particular, for the life and destiny of men and women, called to Trinitarian communion. Faith, which receives the divine word and puts it into practice, effectively interacts with reason. The understanding of faith, especially faith leading to practical action, is structured by reason and makes use of every contribution that reason has to offer.

Faith and reason represent the two cognitive paths of the Church's social doctrine: Revelation and human nature. This understanding of faith includes reason, by means of which — insofar as possible — it unravels and comprehends revealed truth and integrates it with the truth of human nature, found in the divine plan expressed in creation[].

This is the integral truth of the human person as a spiritual and corporeal being, in relationship with God, with other human beings and with other creatures[]. Being centred on the mystery of Christ, moreover, does not weaken or exclude the role of reason and hence does not deprive the Church's social doctrine of rationality or, therefore, of universal applicability. Since the mystery of Christ illuminates the mystery of man, it gives fullness of meaning to human dignity and to the ethical requirements which defend it. The Church's social doctrine is knowledge enlightened by faith, which, as such, is the expression of a greater capacity for knowledge.

It explains to all people the truths that it affirms and the duties that it demands; it can be accepted and shared by all. In friendly dialogue with all branches of knowledge. The Church's social doctrine avails itself of contributions from all branches of knowledge, whatever their source, and has an important interdisciplinary dimension.

The social doctrine makes use of the significant contributions of philosophy as well as the descriptive contributions of the human sciences. Above all, the contribution of philosophy is essential. This contribution has already been seen in the appeal to human nature as a source and to reason as the cognitive path of faith itself. By means of reason, the Church's social doctrine espouses philosophy in its own internal logic, in other words, in the argumentation that is proper to it.

Affirming that the Church's social doctrine is part of theology rather than philosophy does not imply a disowning or underestimation of the role or contribution of philosophy.

In fact, philosophy is a suitable and indispensable instrument for arriving at a correct understanding of the basic concepts of the Church's social doctrine , concepts such as the person, society, freedom, conscience, ethics, law, justice, the common good, solidarity, subsidiarity, the State.

This understanding is such that it inspires harmonious living in society. It is philosophy once more that shows the reasonableness and acceptability of shining the light of the Gospel on society, and that inspires in every mind and conscience openness and assent to the truth. A significant contribution to the Church's social doctrine comes also from human sciences and the social sciences[].

In view of that particular part of the truth that it may reveal, no branch of knowledge is excluded. The Church recognizes and receives everything that contributes to the understanding of man in the ever broader, more fluid and more complex net work of his social relationships. She is aware of the fact that a profound understanding of man does not come from theology alone, without the contributions of many branches of knowledge to which theology itself refers. This attentive and constant openness to other branches of knowledge makes the Church's social doctrine reliable, concrete and relevant.

Thanks to the sciences, the Church can gain a more precise understanding of man in society, speak to the men and women of her own day in a more convincing manner and more effectively fulfil her task of incarnating in the conscience and social responsibility of our time, the word of God and the faith from which social doctrine flows[].

An expression of the Church's ministry of teaching. The social doctrine belongs to the Church because the Church is the subject that formulates it, disseminates it and teaches it. It is not a prerogative of a certain component of the ecclesial body but of the entire community; it is the expression of the way that the Church understands society and of her position regarding social structures and changes. The whole of the Church community — priests, religious and laity — participates in the formulation of this social doctrine, each according to the different tasks, charisms and ministries found within her.

The Church's social doctrine is not only the thought or work of qualified persons, but is the thought of the Church, insofar as it is the work of the Magisterium, which teaches with the authority that Christ conferred on the Apostles and their successors: In the Church's social doctrine the Magisterium is at work in all its various components and expressions. Of primary importance is the universal Magisterium of the Pope and the Council: This doctrine in turn is integrated into the Magisterium of the Bishops who, in the concrete and particular situations of the many different local circumstances, give precise definition to this teaching, translating it and putting it into practice[].

The social teaching of the Bishops offers valid contributions and impetus to the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff. In this way, there is a circulating at work that in fact expresses the collegiality of the Church's Pastors united to the Pope in the Church's social teaching. The doctrinal body that emerges includes and integrates in this fashion the universal teaching of the Popes and the particular teaching of the Bishops. Insofar as it is part of the Church's moral teaching, the Church's social doctrine has the same dignity and authority as her moral teaching. It is authentic Magisterium , which obligates the faithful to adhere to it[].

The doctrinal weight of the different teachings and the assent required are determined by the nature of the particular teachings, by their level of independence from contingent and variable elements, and by the frequency with which they are invoked[]. For a society reconciled in justice and love.

The object of the Church's social doctrine is essentially the same that constitutes the reason for its existence: By means of her social doctrine, the Church shows her concern for human life in society, aware that the quality of social life — that is, of the relationships of justice and love that form the fabric of society — depends in a decisive manner on the protection and promotion of the human person, for whom every community comes into existence.

In fact, at play in society are the dignity and rights of the person, and peace in the relationships between persons and between communities of persons. These are goods that the social community must pursue and guarantee. In this perspective, the Church's social doctrine has the task of proclamation , but also of denunciation. In the first place it is the proclamation of what the Church possesses as proper to herself: This is done not only on the level of principles but also in practice. The Church's social doctrine, in fact, offers not only meaning, value and criteria of judgment, but also the norms and directives of action that arise from these[].

With her social doctrine the Church does not attempt to structure or organize society, but to appeal to, guide and form consciences. This social doctrine also entails a duty to denounce , when sin is present: By denunciation, the Church's social doctrine becomes judge and defender of unrecognized and violated rights, especially those of the poor, the least and the weak[].

The more these rights are ignored or trampled, the greater becomes the extent of violence and injustice, involving entire categories of people and large geographical areas of the world, thus giving rise to social questions , that is, to abuses and imbalances that lead to social upheaval. A large part of the Church's social teaching is solicited and determined by important social questions, to which social justice is the proper answer. The intent of the Church's social doctrine is of the religious and moral order [].

A message for the sons and daughters of the Church and for humanity. The first recipient of the Church's social doctrine is the Church community in its entire membership, because everyone has social responsibilities that must be fulfilled. The conscience is called by this social teaching to recognize and fulfil the obligations of justice and charity in society. This doctrine is a light of moral truth that inspires appropriate responses according to the vocation and ministry of each Christian.

In the tasks of evangelization, that is to say, of teaching, catechesis and formation that the Church's social doctrine inspires, it is addressed to every Christian, each according to the competence, charisms, office and mission of proclamation that is proper to each one[]. This social doctrine implies as well responsibilities regarding the building, organization and functioning of society, that is to say, political, economic and administrative obligations — obligations of a secular nature — which belong to the lay faithful, not to priests or religious[].

1. Biography

These responsibilities belong to the laity in a distinctive manner, by reason of the secular condition of their state of life, and of the secular nature of their vocation[]. By fulfilling these responsibilities, the lay faithful put the Church's social teaching into action and thus fulfil the Church's secular mission[]. Besides being destined primarily and specifically to the sons and daughters of the Church, her social doctrine also has a universal destination.

The light of the Gospel that the Church's social doctrine shines on society illuminates all men and women, and every conscience and mind is in a position to grasp the human depths of meaning and values expressed in it and the potential of humanity and humanization contained in its norms of action. It is to all people — in the name of mankind, of human dignity which is one and unique, and of humanity's care and promotion of society — to everyone in the name of the one God, Creator and ultimate end of man, that the Church's social doctrine is addressed[]. This social doctrine is a teaching explicitly addressed to all people of good will [], and in fact is heard by members of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, by followers of other religious traditions and by people who belong to no religious group.

Guided by the perennial light of the Gospel and ever attentive to evolution of society, the Church's social doctrine is characterized by continuity and renewal []. It shows above all the continuity of a teaching that refers to the universal values drawn from Revelation and human nature. This is the foundational and permanent nucleus of the Church's social doctrine, by which it moves through history without being conditioned by history or running the risk of fading away.

On the other hand, in its constant turning to history and in engaging the events taking place, the Church's social doctrine shows a capacity for continuous renewal. Standing firm in its principles does not make it a rigid teaching system, but a Magisterium capable of opening itself to new things , without having its nature altered by them[].

Faith does not presume to confine changeable social and political realities within a closed framework[]. Rather, the contrary is true: Mother and Teacher, the Church does not close herself off nor retreat within herself but is always open, reaching out to and turned towards man, whose destiny of salvation is her reason for being. She is in the midst of men and women as the living icon of the Good Shepherd, who goes in search of and finds man where he is, in the existential and historical circumstances of his life.

It is there that the Church becomes for man a point of contact with the Gospel, with the message of liberation and reconciliation, of justice and peace. The beginning of a new path. The Church's concern for social matters certainly did not begin with that document, for the Church has never failed to show interest in society.

Nonetheless, the Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum marks the beginning of a new path. Grafting itself onto a tradition hundreds of years old, it signals a new beginning and a singular development of the Church's teaching in the area of social matters[]. In her continuous attention to men and women living in society, the Church has accumulated a rich doctrinal heritage. This has its roots in Sacred Scripture, especially the Gospels and the apostolic writings, and takes on shape and body beginning from the Fathers of the Church and the great Doctors of the Middle Ages, constituting a doctrine in which, even without explicit and direct Magisterial pronouncements, the Church gradually came to recognize her competence.

In the nineteenth century, events of an economic nature produced a dramatic social, political and cultural impact. Events connected with the Industrial Revolution profoundly changed centuries-old societal structures, raising serious problems of justice and posing the first great social question — the labour question — prompted by the conflict between capital and labour.

In this context, the Church felt the need to become involved and intervene in a new way: A new discernment of the situation was needed, a discernment capable of finding appropriate solutions to unfamiliar and unexplored problems. From Rerum Novarum to our own day.

This Encyclical examines the condition of salaried workers, which was particularly distressing for industrial labourers who languished in inhumane misery. The labour question is dealt with according to its true dimensions. It is explored in all its social and political expressions so that a proper evaluation may be made in the light of the doctrinal principles founded on Revelation and on natural law and morality. Rerum Novarum became the document inspiring Christian activity in the social sphere and the point of reference for this activity [].

The Encyclical's central theme is the just ordering of society, in view of which there is the obligation to identify criteria of judgment that will help to evaluate existing socio-political systems and to suggest lines of action for their appropriate transformation. The principles affirmed by Pope Leo XIII would be taken up again and studied more deeply in successive social encyclicals.

The whole of the Church's social doctrine can be seen as an updating, a deeper analysis and an expansion of the original nucleus of principles presented in Rerum Novarum. At the beginning of the s, following the grave economic crisis of , Pope Pius XI published the Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno [], commemorating the fortieth anniversary of Rerum Novarum. The Pope reread the past in the light of the economic and social situation in which the expansion of the influence of financial groups, both nationally and internationally, was added to the effects of industrialization.

It was the post-war period, during which totalitarian regimes were being imposed in Europe even as the class struggle was becoming more bitter. The Encyclical warns about the failure to respect the freedom to form associations and stresses the principles of solidarity and cooperation in order to overcome social contradictions. The relationships between capital and labour must be characterized by cooperation[]. Quadragesimo Anno confirms the principle that salaries should be proportional not only to the needs of the worker but also to those of the worker's family.

The State, in its relations with the private sector, should apply the principle of subsidiarity , a principle that will become a permanent element of the Church's social doctrine. The Encyclical rejects liberalism, understood as unlimited competition between economic forces, and reconfirms the value of private property, recalling its social function. Pope Pius XI did not fail to raise his voice against the totalitarian regimes that were being imposed in Europe during his pontificate.

Already on 29 June he had protested against the abuse of power by the totalitarian fascist regime in Italy with the Encyclical Non Abbiamo Bisogno []. The text of Mit Brennender Sorge was read from the pulpit of every Catholic Church in Germany, after having been distributed in the greatest of secrecy. The Encyclical came out after years of abuse and violence, and it had been expressly requested from Pope Pius XI by the German Bishops after the Reich had implemented ever more coercive and repressive measures in , particularly with regard to young people, who were required to enrol as members of the Hitler Youth Movement.

The Pope spoke directly to priests, religious and lay faithful, giving them encouragement and calling them to resistance until such time that a true peace between Church and State would be restored. In the Christmas Radio Messages of Pope Pius XII[], together with other important interventions in social matters, Magisterial reflection on a new social order guided by morality and law, and focusing on justice and peace, become deeper. His pontificate covered the terrible years of the Second World War and the difficult years of reconstruction.

He published no social encyclicals but in many different contexts he constantly showed his concern for the international order, which had been badly shaken. One of the characteristics of Pope Pius XII's interventions is the importance he gave to the relationship between morality and law. He insisted on the notion of natural law as the soul of the system to be established on both the national and the international levels.

Another important aspect of Pope Pius XII's teaching was his attention to the professional and business classes, called to work together in a special way for the attainment of the common good. The s bring promising prospects: The social question is becoming universal and involves all countries: Inequalities that in the past were experienced within nations are now becoming international and make the dramatic situation of the Third World ever more evident. The key words in the Encyclical are community and socialization []: In this way economic growth will not be limited to satisfying men's needs, but it will also promote their dignity.

Moreover, Pacem in Terris contains one of the first in-depth reflections on rights on the part of the Church; it is the Encyclical of peace and human dignity. It continues and completes the discussion presented in Mater et Magistra , and, continuing in the direction indicated by Pope Leo XIII, it emphasizes the importance of the cooperation of all men and women.

On the tenth anniversary of Pacem in Terris , Cardinal Maurice Roy, the President of the Pontifical Commission for Justice and Peace, sent Pope Paul VI a letter together with a document with a series of reflections on the different possibilities afforded by the teaching contained in Pope John XXIII's Encyclical for shedding light on the new problems connected with the promotion of peace[].

The Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes [] of the Second Vatican Council is a significant response of the Church to the expectations of the contemporary world. Gaudium et Spes presents in a systematic manner the themes of culture, of economic and social life, of marriage and the family, of the political community, of peace and the community of peoples, in the light of a Christian anthropological outlook and of the Church's mission. For the first time, the Magisterium of the Church, at its highest level, speaks at great length about the different temporal aspects of Christian life: Another very important document of the Second Vatican Council in the corpus of the Church's social doctrine is the Declaration Dignitatis Humanae [], in which the right to religious freedom is clearly proclaimed.

The document presents the theme in two chapters. The first, of a general character, affirms that religious freedom is based on the dignity of the human person and that it must be sanctioned as a civil right in the legal order of society. The second chapter deals with the theme in the light of Revelation and clarifies its pastoral implications, pointing out that it is a right that concerns not only people as individuals but also the different communities of people.

In particular, it presents the outlines of an integral development of man and of a development in solidarity with all humanity: This same Pontiff started the tradition of writing annual Messages that deal with the theme chosen for each World Day of Peace. These Messages expand and enrich the corpus of the Church's social doctrine. At the beginning of the s, in a climate of turbulence and strong ideological controversy, Pope Paul VI returns to the social teaching of Pope Leo XIII and updates it, on the occasion of the eightieth anniversary of Rerum Novarum , with his Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens [].

The Pope reflects on post-industrial society with all of its complex problems, noting the inadequacy of ideologies in responding to these challenges: Ninety years after Rerum Novarum , Pope John Paul II devoted the Encyclical Laborem Exercens [] to work , the fundamental good of the human person, the primary element of economic activity and the key to the entire social question. Laborem Exercens outlines a spirituality and ethic of work in the context of a profound theological and philosophical reflection. Work must not be understood only in the objective and material sense, but one must keep in mind its subjective dimension, insofar as it is always an expression of the person.

Besides being a decisive paradigm for social life, work has all the dignity of being a context in which the person's natural and supernatural vocation must find fulfilment. With the Encyclical Sollicitudo Rei Socialis [], Pope John Paul II commemorates the twentieth anniversary of Populorum Progressio and deals once more with the theme of development along two fundamental lines: On the hundredth anniversary of Rerum Novarum , Pope John Paul II promulgates his third social encyclical, Centesimus Annus [], whence emerges the doctrinal continuity of a hundred years of the Church's social Magisterium.

Taking up anew one of the fundamental principles of the Christian view of social and political organization, which had been the central theme of the previous Encyclical, the Pope writes: Pope John Paul II demonstrates how the Church's social teaching moves along the axis of reciprocity between God and man: The documents referred to here constitute the milestones of the path travelled by the Church's social doctrine from the time of Pope Leo XIII to our own day.

In the formulation and teaching of this social doctrine, the Church has been, and continues to be, prompted not by theoretical motivation but by pastoral concerns. The Church sees in men and women, in every person, the living image of God himself. This image finds, and must always find anew, an ever deeper and fuller unfolding of itself in the mystery of Christ, the Perfect Image of God, the One who reveals God to man and man to himself.

It is to these men and women, who have received an incomparable and inalienable dignity from God himself, that the Church speaks, rendering to them the highest and most singular service, constantly reminding them of their lofty vocation so that they may always be mindful of it and worthy of it. All of social life is an expression of its unmistakable protagonist: The Church has many times and in many ways been the authoritative advocate of this understanding, recognizing and affirming the centrality of the human person in every sector and expression of society: The origin of social life is therefore found in the human person, and society cannot refuse to recognize its active and responsible subject; every expression of society must be directed towards the human person.

Men and women, in the concrete circumstances of history, represent the heart and soul of Catholic social thought []. The whole of the Church's social doctrine, in fact, develops from the principle that affirms the inviolable dignity of the human person []. In her manifold expressions of this knowledge, the Church has striven above all to defend human dignity in the face of every attempt to redimension or distort its image; moreover she has often denounced the many violations of human dignity.

History attests that it is from the fabric of social relationships that there arise some of the best possibilities for ennobling the human person, but it is also there that lie in wait the most loathsome rejections of human dignity. Creatures in the image of God. The fundamental message of Sacred Scripture proclaims that the human person is a creature of God cf.

God places the human creature at the centre and summit of the created order. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. The likeness with God shows that the essence and existence of man are constitutively related to God in the most profound manner.

The whole of man's life is a quest and a search for God.

This relationship with God can be ignored or even forgotten or dismissed, but it can never be eliminated. The relationship between God and man is reflected in the relational and social dimension of human nature. In this regard the fact that God created human beings as man and woman cf. Only the appearance of the woman, a being who is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones cf. In a relationship of mutual communion, man and woman fulfil themselves in a profound way, rediscovering themselves as persons through the sincere gift of themselves[].

Bibliography

Their covenant of union is presented in Sacred Scripture as an image of the Covenant of God with man cf. Hos ; Is 54; Eph 5: Indeed, the human couple can participate in God's act of creation: Man and woman are in relationship with others above all as those to whom the lives of others have been entrusted []. I will require it In this perspective, the relationship with God requires that the life of man be considered sacred and inviolable []. The respect owed to the inviolability and integrity of physical life finds its climax in the positive commandment: With this specific vocation to life, man and woman find themselves also in the presence of all the other creatures.

They can and are obliged to put them at their own service and to enjoy them, but their dominion over the world requires the exercise of responsibility, it is not a freedom of arbitrary and selfish exploitation. Man must discover and respect its value. This is a marvellous challenge to his intellect, which should lift him up as on wings [] towards the contemplation of the truth of all God's creatures, that is, the contemplation of what God sees as good in them.

The Book of Genesis teaches that human dominion over the world consists in naming things cf. In giving things their names, man must recognize them for what they are and establish with each of them a relationship of responsibility[]. Man is also in relationship with himself and is able to reflect on himself. Sacred Scripture speaks in this regard about the heart of man. The heart designates man's inner spirituality, what distinguishes him from every other creature. In the end, the heart indicates the spiritual faculties which most properly belong to man, which are his prerogatives insofar as he is created in the image of his Creator: When he listens to the deep aspirations of his heart, no person can fail to make his own the words of truth expressed by Saint Augustine: This marvellous vision of man's creation by God is inseparable from the tragic appearance of original sin.

With a clear affirmation the Apostle Paul sums up the account of man's fall contained in the first pages of the Bible: Man, against God's prohibition, allows himself to be seduced by the serpent and stretches out his hand to the tree of life, falling prey to death. By this gesture, man tries to break through his limits as a creature, challenging God, his sole Lord and the source of his life. It is a sin of disobedience cf. From revelation we know that Adam, the first man, transgresses God's commandment and loses the holiness and justice in which he was made, holiness and justice which were received not only for himself but for all of humanity: At the root of personal and social divisions, which in differing degrees offend the value and dignity of the human person, there is a wound which is present in man's inmost self.

The consequences of sin, insofar as it is an act of separation from God, are alienation, that is, the separation of man not only from God but also from himself, from other men and from the world around him. Thus the subsequent pages of Genesis show us the man and the woman as it were pointing an accusing finger at each other cf. Later we have brother hating brother and finally taking his brother's life cf. Reflecting on the mystery of sin, we cannot fail to take into consideration this tragic connection between cause and effect.

• Infanticide (Fallen Gods Saga Book 2)
• African Cookboy (Bonsela Editions)
• AC/DC Songbook: Bass Play-Along Volume 40
• The Perfect Visitor
• Vaccination & Homoeoprophylaxis?: A Review of Risks and Alternatives - 7th Edition