Those who call Almsgiving by the name “Charity” are very mistaken
January 5, 2022 • 3 min
From The Spirit of St. Francis de Sales, page 116
By His friend, Jean Pierre Camus, Bishop of Belley
UPON ALMSGIVING.
Our Blessed Father had, as we know, so high an idea of the virtue of charity, which, indeed, he said was only christian perfection under another name, that he disliked to hear almsgiving called charity. It was, he said, like putting a royal crown on the head of a village maiden.
In answer to my objection that this was actually the case with Esther, who, though only a slave, was chosen by Assuerus to be his queen, and crowned by his royal hand, he replied:
You only strengthen my argument, for Esther would have remained in her state of servitude had she not become the spouse of Assuerus, and, queen though she was, she only wore her crown dependently on his will and pleasure.
So almsgiving is only pleasing to God, and worthy of its reward, the heavenly crown of justice, in as far as it proceeds from charity, and is animated by that royal gift which converts it into an infused and supernatural virtue, which may be called either almsgiving in charity or charitable almsgiving.
But, just as the two natures, the divine and the human, were not merged in one another in the mystery of the Incarnation, although joined in the unity of the hypostasis of the Word, so this conjunction of charity with almsgiving, or this subordination of almsgiving to charity, does not change the one into the other, the object of each being as different as is the Creator from the creature.
For the object of almsgiving is the misery of the needy which it tries as far as possible to relieve, and that of charity is God, Who is the sovereign Good, worthy to be loved above all things for His own sake.
“But,” I said, “when almsgiving is practised for the love of God, can we not then call it charity?”
He replied:
No, not any more than you can call Esther Assuerus, and Assuerus Esther. But you can, as I have said above, call it alms given in charity, or charitable almsgiving.
Almsgiving and charity are quite different, for not only may alms be given without charity, but even against charity, as when they are given knowing they will lead to sin.
In a remarkable passage in Theotimus the Saint asks:
Were there not heretics, who, to exalt charity towards the poor, deprecated charity towards God, ascribing man’s whole salvation to almsdeeds, as St. Augustine witnesses?
Latest book snippets
Search | Random | 1009 total | 54h 55m
May 28, 2023
The three later Fathers who speak more lowly of Mary are not speaking dogmatically
5 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his EireniconHow to determine whether a statement is an Apostolic Tradition
5 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his EireniconHow the three later Fathers can be shown to not be speaking dogmatically about Mary not being sinless
5 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his EireniconFurther proof that the Anglican understanding of the Fathers’ authority is less consistent than the Catholic
2 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his EireniconAnswers to objections about why some Fathers and Gospel passages spoke unsatisfactorily about Mary
8 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his Eirenicon
May 21, 2023
Two quotes of St. Chrysostom that enemies of Mary’s sinlessness incorrectly use against her
3 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his EireniconAn answer to the accusation that the Fathers claimed Mary was not sinless
7 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his EireniconA quote from St. Cyril which proponents of Mary’s sinfulness incorrectly use against her
3 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his EireniconA quote from St. Basil that advocates of the sinfulness of the Blessed Virgin Mary incorrectly use against her
2 min — St. John Henry Newman’s Letter to Dr. Pusey in reply to his Eirenicon