Congregatio de Auxiliis

The Congregatio de Auxiliis (Latin for "Congregation on help (by Divine Grace)") was a commission established by

Peter Lombard, Archbishop of Armagh.^[1]

Context of the dispute

The principal question, giving its name to the whole dispute, concerned the help (no) afforded by

given for the performance of an action obtains, infallibly, man's consent and that action takes place; on the other hand that, in so acting, man is free. Hence the question: How can these two—the infallible result and liberty—be harmonized?

The Dominicans solved the difficulty by their theory of

Augustine

during the 5th century, and complained that the Dominicans did not sufficiently safeguard human liberty.

Beginning of the controversy

The controversy is usually considered to have begun in the year 1581, when the Jesuit Prudencio de Montemayor defended certain theses on grace that had been vigorously attacked by the Dominican

Domingo Bañez. That this debate took place is certain, but the text of the Jesuit's theses have never been published. As to those reported to the Inquisition, neither Montemayer nor any other Jesuit ever acknowledged them as his. The controversy went on for six years, passing through three phases—in Louvain

, in Spain and in Rome.

At Louvain and the

efficacious grace

.

The discussion was kept up on both sides for a year longer, until the

Sixtus V the principal publications of both parties with a petition for a final decision. This, however, was not rendered; a controversy on the same lines had been started at Salamanca

, and attention now centered on Spain, where the two discussions were merged into one.

Publication of Molina's work

In 1588 the Spanish Jesuit

Habsburg's Viceroy of Portugal, that the work contained thirteen certain provisions that the Spanish Inquisition

had censured. The archduke forbade the sale of the book and sent a copy to Salamanca. Bañez examined it and reported to the archduke that, out of the thirteen propositions, nine were held by Molina and that in consequence the book ought not to be circulated. He also noted the passages that, as he thought, contained the errors. Albert referred his comments to Molina, who drew up the rejoinder. As the book had been approved by the Inquisition in Portugal, and its sale permitted by the Councils of Portugal and of Castille and Aragon, it was thought proper to print at the end the replies of Molina; with these the work appeared in 1589. The Dominicans attacked it, on the grounds that Molina and all the Jesuits denied efficacious grace. The latter replied that such a denial was impossible on the part of any Catholic. What the Jesuits attacked was the Dominican theory of predetermination, which they regarded as incompatible with human freedom.

The debates continued for five years and in 1594 became public and turbulent at

Apostolic See

.

The pope then asked for an expression of opinion from various universities and distinguished theologians of Spain. Between 1594 and 1597, twelve reports were submitted; by the three universities of Salamanca, Alcalà and Sigüenza; by the bishops of Coria, Segovia, Plasencia, Cartagena and Mondoñedo; by Serra, Miguel Salon (Augustinian Friar), Castro (Canon of Toledo), and Luis Coloma, Prior of the Augustinians at Valladolid. There were also forwarded to Rome some statements in explanation and defense of the Jesuit and of the Dominican theories. Clement VIII appointed a commission under the presidency of Cardinals Madrucci (Secretary of the Inquisition) and Aragone, which began its labours on 2 January 1598 and on 19 March handed in the result condemning Molina's book. Displeased at their haste in treating a question of such importance, the Pope ordered them to go over the work again, keeping in view the documents sent from Spain.

Though the examination of these would have required several years, the commission reported again in November and insisted on the condemnation of Molina. Thereupon Clement VIII ordered the generals of the Dominicans and the Jesuits, respectively, to appear with some of their theologians before the commission, explain their doctrines, and settle their differences. In obedience to this command, both generals began (22 February 1599) before the commission a series of conferences, which lasted through that year.

Cardinal Borghese

(later Paul V) and Aragone assisting, as well as the members of the former commission and various theologians summoned by the pope. Sixty-eight sessions were thus held (1602–1605).

Conclusion

Clement VIII died on 5 March 1605, and, after the brief reign of

Gregorio de Valencia, Pedro de Arrubal, Fernando de Bastida and Juan de Salas. Francis de Sales was one of the theologians consulted by the pope; according to Eunan McDonnell, the moratorium ordered by the pope was in keeping with Francis' stance.^[2]

So, after twenty years of public and private discussion, and eighty-five conferences in the presence of the popes, the question was not solved but an end was put to the disputes. The pope's decree communicated on 5 September 1607 to both Dominicans and Jesuits allowed each party to defend its own doctrine, enjoined each from censoring or condemning the opposite opinion, and commanded them to await, as loyal sons of the Church, the final decision of the Apostolic See. That decision, however, was not reached, and both orders, consequently, could maintain their respective theories, just as any other theological opinion is held. The long controversy aroused considerable feeling, and the pope, aiming at the restoration of peace and charity between the religious orders, forbade by a decree of the Inquisition (1 December 1611) the publication of any book concerning efficacious grace until further action by the Holy See. The prohibition remained in force during the greater part of the seventeenth century, although it was widely circumvented by the means of explicit commentaries of Thomas Aquinas. One of those who essayed a novel solution to the problem was Bernard Lonergan, SJ, who interpreted Summa Theologiae 1-2, q. 111, a. 2, and took a distance from both the Molinist and the Banezian positions.^[3]

References

^ Schuceman, Controversiarum de divinae gratiae liberique arbitrii concordia initia et progressos, Freiburg, 1881
^ Eunan McDonnell, The Concept of Freedom in the Writings of St. Francis de Sales (Peter Lang, 2009) 61. See F. de Sales, Lettre CDXVII: A Monseigneur Pierre-François Costa, Évêque de Savone, Nonce Apostolique à Turin, OEA XIII:326-328. Cf. also André Ravier, Francois de Sales. Un sage et un saint, 6th ed. [Nouvelle Cité, Domaine d'Arny, 2009] 42, who specifies that Francis, while recommending a moratorium on the debate, himself tended to a Molinist position. The position rejected by the saint was, according to Lajeunie, not that of St Thomas but that of one of his interpreters, Henri de Gand.
^ Cf. Bernard Lonergan, Grace and Freedom: Operative Grace in the Thought of St. Thomas Aquinas, Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, vol. 1 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000).

Sources

This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Congregatio de Auxiliis". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
Ulrich L. Lehner (ed.), Die scholastische Theologie im Zeitalter der Gnadenstreitigkeiten (monograph series, first volume: 2007) [1]