Outside the papacy and the Filioque clause, one of the most important differences between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy is that of whether sanctifying grace is created or uncreated. To paraphrase Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, pp. 254-56 (on the ontological and theological definitions of “Sanctifying [i.e. “saving”] Grace”):
- Sanctifying
Grace is a created supernatural gift really distinct from God.
- Sanctifying
Grace is a supernatural state of being which is infused by God, and which
permanently inheres in the soul.
- Sanctifying
grace is not a substance, but a real accident, which inheres in the
soul-substance.
- Sanctifying
grace is really distinct from charity.
- Supernatural
grace is a participation in the divine nature.
Eastern Orthodox theologians argue that created graces results in
a contradiction with the concept of being “partakers in the divine nature”
(theosis) as the divine nature of God is uncreated, not created.
One was reminded of this debate while reading the following from
Dominican theologian Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange:
The Fullness of Created Grace
From His substantial and
uncreated sanctity our Lord derived created sanctifying grace, and this He
received in its fullness. And from grace derive the supernatural virtues and
the gifts of charity, wisdom, piety, humility, patience, meekness in a
proportionate degree, which is far superior to that of the saints and to that
which was realized within the soul of Mary.
Was it possible that
the soul of the Savior, which was united in the highest degree possible to God,
the source of all grace, should not have been full of grace? Was it possible
that His soul, which was to make us participants of all the supernatural gifts,
should not itself have been adorned with all of them (cf. St. Thomas, [Summa
Theologica] IIIa, q.7, a.9)?
Created grace is a
participation in divine nature which, like a second nature, increases the
stature of our souls to produce connaturally (that is to say: as if it were
naturally) supernatural and meritorious acts. It is like a divine graft in us
which elevates us to a superior life. The soul of Jesus received this grace in
its absolute plenitude. That is what St. John meant when he wrote: “And we saw
His glory, . . . full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). A few great saints, such
as St. Stephen the first martyr, and above all, Mary, received a relative
plenitude of grace, proportioned to their mission in the Church. That the
archangel Gabriel sad to Mary: “Hail, full of grace” (Luke 1:28). Jesus,
however, received grace in its absolute fullness, that is to say, in its
supreme degree.
According to the
actual plan of Providence, this grace cannot be any loftier, for it is morally
proportioned to the highest dignity, that of the person of the Word made flesh
(St. Thomas, IIIa, q.7, a. 9 ad 3; a.12 ad 2). Furthermore, in the soul of
Jesus this grace cooperates in supernatural and meritorious acts which are, by
reason of the personality of the Word, of infinite value.
Finally, this grace
possesses the maximum of extension, for it corresponds to the most universal of
all missions, that of the Savior of all men. It extends to all supernatural
effects, and it contains within itself in an eminent degree, as a superior
well-spring, all the graces necessary to the apostles, the martyrs, the
confessors, and the virgins of all lands and of all times. As St. Thomas tells
us (Ibid., a.9-12), the soul of Jesus received habitual grace just as
the sun receives light, with the greatest intensity and radiance. And since
there is probably in the physical world a center of light of even greater intensity
and radiance than the sun, let us use it as a feeble symbol of the fullness of
created grace within the soul of our Savior. This is to say that the habitual
grace within the soul of Jesus surpasses in intensity and splendor that of all
the saints and angels together, as the light of the sun excels that of the
planets and their satellites. (Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, Our Savior and
His Love for Us [trans. A. Bouchard; London: B. Herder Book Co., 1951], 137-38)
