St. Francis de Sales describes Charity as “the king of virtues,” which is attended upon and served by all the others. In his usual style, he likens it to the King of Bees, who never goes forth without being attended by his buzzing subjects (the good bishop was a big fan of Pliny and he uses these sorts of charming animal illustrations throughout the Introduction).
This is a point we ought never to forget; that whatever other virtues we try to acquire, whatever good works we do, it all has to be ordered and directed by Charity. Which is the paradox and the great separation between Christian and Pagan virtue: virtue, by definition, works to our own good, but we never can become truly good unless we work for the good of another. That is, unless all we do is crowned by Charity (by which we mean “Love”, not just “giving alms” by the way. See, this is why you want to use a classical language with fixed meanings that isn’t subject to shifting dialects and fashions for this stuff).
But this isn’t just saying “Love is best,” it’s that Love is the ‘king of virtues.’ This is an important distinction. We don’t occupy a flat moral universe where the higher is strictly speaking “better,” only that it holds a place further up the stream, as it were. That is, it isn’t a binary either-or choice; it is a hierarchy (hence the term ‘King’), in which each has his proper place wherein it is of infinite value. Fortitude is not ‘less’ than Charity, strictly speaking, because when Fortitude is called for, nothing else will do. But when Fortitude is or is not called for is decided by Charity. Charity “sets the policy,” as it were, and has the final say in what is and is not to be done, when the rule is to be followed and when exceptions are to be made. Justice, Prudence, Fortitude, Temperance, and so on all attend upon, advise, and obey Charity as vassals do their lord. But it is Charity that ought to reign as sovereign.
This is how God works (Who created the whole world out of Love), and how we, who are His children and disciples, should operate as well.
“If I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing…. And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.”
-1 Cor. 13: 1-3, 13
Great points, especially as to the relative stability of meaning of the classical languages for theological reflection. Of course, this never stops the Modernists from trying to redefine everything, but at least we have plenty of documentation as to the original meanings of the words. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person