We understand there
by charismata what the theologians call gratuitous graces (gratis
datae) as opposed to sanctifying graces (gratum facientes). They are
not distinguished from the others by the fact that they are gratuitous—for whoever
speaks of a grace speaks of a free gift—but because, in themselves, they are
not sanctifying; they contain only the notion of genus without a specific
difference. The charisma can be defined as a gratuitous, supernatural,
and transitory gift, conferred for the sake of the general good and for the
edification of the mystical body of Christ. It is gratuitous in the sense that it has no necessary
connection with sanctifying grace, and that, not being requisite for salvation,
the Holy Spirit gives it to whom he will and when he will (1 Cor 12:11),
although there is a hope of obtaining it by asking for it (1 Cor 14:27). It is supernatural,
for it is a special work of the Holy Spirit within us, (1 Cor 14:32 [πνευματα, by
meronomy]; 12:1; 14:1 [πνευματικα]) being able, however, to graft itself on a natural aptitude
in the individual, as grace in general is superimposed upon nature which it
transforms and exalts. It is also transitory, for the Holy Spirit gives
it and withdraws it at his will; it is transitory in comparison with the
theological virtues which are lasing, above all with charity which never falls
away; yet it possesses, none the less, a certain stability, in virtue of which a
man, habitually endowed with the gift of prophecy, is called a prophet.
Finally, the charisma is conferred for the sake of the general good,
as Paul expressly and aptly affirms. The comparison of the charismata to
the members of the human body, whose function is to contribute to the common
bodily activity and well-being, really proves the same thing. Moreover, the gifts
are valued in proportion to their utility. The more profitable they are to the
Christian community the more perfect they are. Bestowed for the public good
rather than for individuals, they might some day disappear without depriving
the Church of an indispensable organ. (Fernand Prat, The Theology of Saint
Paul, 2 vols. [trans. John L. Stoddard; Westminster, Md.: The Newman
Bookshop, 1926], 1:128-29)
Acts ii, 4. At the
moment when the tongues of fire (γλωσσαι ωσει
πυρος)
appeared and rested on them, the apostles were filled with the Holy Ghost: και ηρξαντο λαλειν ετεραις γλωσσαις καθως το Πνευμα εδιδου αποφθεγγεσθαι αυτοις.—Acts
ii, 11. The hearers heard them, each in his own language, celebrate τα μεγαλεια του θεου.—The
preaching begins only afterwards (Acts ii, 14). Then the admiration of some and
the insulting suspicions of others cease. But what appears from the story of St
Luke is, that under the impulse of the Holy Ghost the Apostles spoke a real language
which could be understood by those who knew it (Acts ii, 11). (Ibid., 129-30 n.
4)
On the charisma in 1 Tim 4:16; 2 Tim 1:6-7:
Evidently it is not
the purely gratuitous gift which the Holy Spirit bestows or withdraws at all,
which is not permanent, and which no one has the right to call into being or
revive. Nor is it, as some think, the episcopal character, the power of Order,
for this has no need of being revived, since it is incapable of diminution or
decline. This charisma is rather the supernatural fitness received for the worthy exercise of a sacred ministry;
something like what we call the grace of a calling—that is to say, the totality
of spiritual gifts and the right to the actual graces which the duties of the
episcopate require. Although associated with the character and power of Holy Order,
it is nevertheless distinct from them. While the character is indelible and the
power inalienable, this charisma may become enfeebled through a want of
effort or vigilance; if it does not reach the point of extinction, it needs at
least toe be rekindled. St Paul indicates very plainly the nature of this charisma,
when he adds: “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear, but [a spirit] of
power, and of love, and sobriety.” This charisma brings with it, therefore,
an increase of internal grace, together with the actual graces made necessary
by the episcopal office. Now all this is conferred “by (δια)
the laying on of the hands” of the Apostle, yet not without the co-operation
and assistance (μετα) of the presbyteral college of Ephesus if, as is probable,
it is at Ephesus that the consecration took place.
We have, therefore,
in the ordination of Timothy, the three principal elements of what the Church to-day
calls a sacrament: first, an external rite—the laying on of hands; then a
permanent grace (χαρισμα)—the source (produced by this rite) of various graces
of condition (δια); and lastly, an internal grace corresponding to the
symbol of the external rite, which symbol is determined in its signification by
a number of circumstances, which as the prophetic designation and the mission
to which Timothy was destined. Divine institution, with its direct or indirect promulgation
by Jesus Christ, acts, of course, when it is a question of imparting grace to a
rite. (Fernand Prat, The Theology of Saint Paul, 2 vols. [trans. John L.
Stoddard; Westminster, Md.: The Newman Bookshop, 1927], 2:271)