God provides a holiness that is possible

 -3-

Early in this study of holiness we are told something that may not be easily believed. Namely, that holiness is attainable.

If we are going to look at a book titled “self-abandonment,” it would be rather false to maintain somewhere in the book that this act of cooperation with the grace of God is not really possible. If we are honest, we can admit that words such as “holy” and “sanctified” have left us somewhat fenced out from the real interior of the faith. We are called to think and act in new, radical ways that are to be known by us and seen by others as expressions of holiness, and yet, we are reminded that these things can’t happen and not to worry about it too much since we are, after all, forgiven. In the name of justification, sanctification is not invited to the potluck.

Father C puts it very well when he says sanctity is:

_{“… the treasure which we never find because we imagine it to be too far away to be sought.” (Page 7)}

It is disarming to hear our guide talk about holiness as “easy,” “reasonable,” and “simple.” I am mostly accustomed to words more related to “impossible,” “only in glory,” and “everybody falling short.” Holiness doesn’t have a chance in such soil, you know, “down here.”

Ultimately, I think we are defensive when it comes to matters of holiness. When Scripture addresses our need to walk in a manner worthy of our calling, to live in the light as He is in the light, to be holy as God is holy, rather than step up to these words, we tend to run inside the little theological fort we have built out of forgiveness, justification and sonship.

Perhaps it is easier to be forgiven than to be holy.

This, to Father C, is odd behavior, because who is more prepared for holy living than the justified, the forgiven children of God? Thus, holiness is not a remote theological concept, but an immediate, personal, graspable response on our part. We are to fortify our lives with holiness, rather than against it.

It is not so complicated that only the saintly or the knowledgeable can “get it.” In sum, he boils down sanctity to these two aspects – to do and to endure.

Hard as it is, we have to come to grips with works. The faithful have long been suspect of works, because works do not save us. That tends to end all discussion. But works have a great deal to do with our salvation and our sanctity. I am not myself sure what the condition of the soul would be of a workless believer. The very idea of cooperating with the grace of God is offensive to some, but these same brothers contend that some sort of evident transformation ought to be a part of the Christian experience. So worried are we that we might be acting well in the name of God for the wrong reason that we have let ourselves believe we should hang back and let God’s mercy make up the difference for our inactivity and shoddy behavior. We have developed plenty of reasons to remain the faithful inert.

 _{“The active practice of fidelity consists in accomplishing the duties imposed on us by the general laws of God and the Church, and by the particular state of life which we have embraced. Passive fidelity consists in the loving acceptance of all that God sends us at every moment.” (Page 5)}

He will add, in a few pages:

_{“… when the divine plan prescribes action, holiness for us lies in activity.” (page 15)}

My friends, hang onto that one!

What he says about active fidelity as “accomplishing duties” is fairly clear, but what he writes about passive fidelity sounds new and needful:

_{“It consists merely in accepting what most frequently cannot be avoided, and in suffering with love, that is to say with resignation and sweetness what is too often endured with weariness and discontent.” (Page 7)}