Salmanticenses on the Necessity of Explicit Faith for Salvation
Translation of Salmanticenses, *Cursus Theologicus*, Tr. XVII, Disp. VI, Dub. I, § III, Conclusion IV
**Explanation of Terms.** For this and similar difficulties, theologians commonly distinguish a twofold necessity, one of precept, the other of means. The former consists in an obligation arising from the precept of a superior; for just as absence of sin is required for salvation, so also, supposing knowledge and power, the fulfillment of the precept is required, without which guilt is not avoided. The latter, however, is *in re* necessarily conducive to salvation (*in re necessario conducente ad salutem*), whether this connection be from the nature of the thing (*ex natura rei*), as grace is related to glory; or from the institution of God (*ex institutione Dei*), as Baptism is related to first grace. And although both necessities are accustomed to concur with regard to the same thing, as happens in Baptism, whence the aforesaid distinction seems to be impugned; nevertheless, several considerations quite clearly persuade that these necessities ought to be distinguished, and the said distinction admitted.
First, because the necessity of precept has place only in human acts, as is clear in itself; but the necessity of means is found also in things which are not acts, as is established in Baptism and the habit of grace, without which no one is saved.
Second (which is a difference founded on the preceding), because the necessity of precept has place only in adults, but the necessity of means extends also to little children; for they cannot attain salvation without Baptism and grace.
Third, because even with respect to adults, those things which are necessary by necessity of precept alone can be excused on account of ignorance or inability, so that their absence does not impede salvation: but they are not thus excused by necessity of means, rather the involuntary omission of them impedes salvation.
Furthermore, those things which are necessary in this latter way can be required and contribute to salvation in two ways. In one way absolutely and _in re_: in another way _secundum quid_ and _in voto_. In the former way grace is necessary for attaining glory; for it cannot happen that anyone be blessed without grace. In the latter way, however, Baptism is required for salvation, because although speaking _per se_ it is required *in re*, it can nevertheless happen that it be supplied through desire, or the resolution to receive it contained in an act of charity.
**Conclusion IV.** After the promulgation of the Gospel, explicit faith is, speaking *per se*, a necessary means for salvation, but *per accidens* it can happen even after the promulgation of the Gospel that someone may attain salvation without such faith.
This assertion is held by Domingo de Soto in Commentary on Sentences, Bk. 4, Dist. 5, Q. 1, Art. 2, Concl. 3; Pedro de Ledesma, Segunda parte de la Summa, Tr. 1, Ch. 2, Concl. 3; Michael de Medina, ch. 10; Francisco Suarez, Commentary in Tertia Pars, Bk. 4, Disp. 4, Sect. 2; Juan Azor, Tome 1, Bk. 3, Ch. 6, Qu. 6; [John or Francisco?] de Lugo, Disp. 2, Sect. 4, Num. 106; Serra [?], quaest. 2, art. 7, concl. 2; Martinez de Prado, Qu. 4, § 3, num. 14; [Pierre?] Labat, dub. 7, § 2, pag. 167, et alii.
John of St. Thomas acknowledges it to be probable in art. 1, proposit. 4, § _Respondeo ergo_; Pedro de Lorca, disp. 22, memb. 2, n. 11; [Vincentius?] Ferre, qu. 9, § 3, num. 52; and et alii..
