EVANGELICAL COUNSELS. – Invitations contained in the Gospel to stable forms of virtue through renunciation of natural goods that hinder union with God. Among the rules of life given by Jesus Christ, some are obligatory for all, while others are merely recommended as effective means of attaining a higher spiritual perfection in this life and a greater reward in heaven: the former constitute the precepts (v.) or commandments, the latter the e. c., of which the principal ones, so called par excellence, are three. Generally adopted in the form of vows, they constitute the basis of the “religious state” (can. 487): voluntary poverty, perpetual chastity, and perfect obedience, in opposition to the three forms of solicitude which, in fallen human nature, become occasions of sin (I Io. 2, 16). The e. c. were limited to three in the Middle Ages, with reference to s. Gregorio Magno (In Ezech. hom., II, 8, 18).
Through his words and example Jesus Christ inculcated the practice of these e. c. Poverty (v.) is recommended to the rich young man: “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give it to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come and follow me” (Mt. 19, 16-21; Mc. 10, 17-22; Lc. 18, 18-23); chastity (v.) in the response given to the disciples concerning renunciation of marriage for the Kingdom of heaven (Mt. 19, 10-12; cf. I Cor. 7, 7 ff., 25-40); obedience (v.), or the spontaneous subordination of one’s will to that of others, self-denial (v.): “If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross every day, and follow me” (Mt. 16, 24; Lc. 9, 23); and likewise in those inviting faithful following (Mt. 19, 21), since discipleship consists in conforming oneself to the directives of the teacher, or inculcating voluntary service (Mt. 20, 26; Lc. 22, 26). The earthly life of Jesus Christ gave us a perfect example of poverty (II Cor. 8, 9), chastity (Hebr. 7, 26), and obedience (Phil. 4, 8).
S. Tommaso demonstrates how appropriately Jesus Christ, in the new law, the law of freedom and perfection, added the e. c. to the precepts; through them the ultimate end can be attained more easily. For man, he says, placed between worldly goods and spiritual goods, the more he clings to the former, the more he distances himself from the latter; and although it is not necessary, in order to attain eternal beatitude, that he abandon earthly things altogether, since he may also use them according to reason, nevertheless he will attain it better and more swiftly by renouncing them.
Now, through the practice of the e. c., one renounces all the goods of the world, which are the object of the concupiscence of the eyes, the concupiscence of the flesh, and the pride of life (I Io. 2, 16). Through voluntary poverty one renounces riches; through perpetual chastity, the pleasures of the flesh; through perfect obedience, honors (Sum. Theol., 1a-2a, q. 108, a. 4). Thus man frees himself from earthly cares that delay him in the love of God, whether directed toward the administration of worldly goods, the governance of the family, or the ordering of his own acts. At the same time, he sacrifices to God all that he possesses: in his goods, his body, and his soul (Sum. Theol., 2a-2a, q. 186, a. 7).
Hence the excellence of the religious state, in which observance of the e. c. is promised to God by vow.
The Protestants, who admit only precepts and not counsels, maintain, adducing various texts of Sacred Scripture, that every good work is commanded (K. Schatzgeyer [v.] replied to Luther, and s. R. Bellarmino to Chemnitz). They cite Jesus’ words: “Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt. 5, 48), from which they infer that every possible perfection is prescribed to us. But the perfection (v.) commanded here consists in loving one’s enemies (Mt. 5, 44), as s. Luca explains in a parallel passage (6, 36). In Mt. 22, 37 perfect charity is commanded, in which perfection consists; charity (v.) appetitive summa. In Mt. 19, 17-21 the distinction is clear between the ordinary way of the Commandments (v. 17), necessary for salvation, and the higher and more arduous way, optional for anyone who wishes (v. 21) to strive toward greater perfection.
The practice of the e. c. was in force from the earliest times of Christianity. The Acts of the Apostles describe the voluntary poverty of the faithful in Jerusalem (4, 34) and mention the four virgin daughters of the deacon Filippo (Act. 21, 9), that is, women consecrated to virginity (cf. Eusebio, Hist. eccl., III, 31; PG 20, 279). The apologists of the second and third centuries, s. Giustino (Apol., I, 14-15; PG 6, 348-49), Atenagora (Supplicatio, 33), and Minucio Felice (Octavius, 31, 36; PL 351-52; 366-67), speak of many Christians who, out of love for Jesus Christ, maintained perpetual continence. At first these ascetics lived within their families; later they began to withdraw into solitude, in order to devote themselves more peacefully to the service of God. Thus Christian monasticism originated, and it continued to develop ever further, eventually giving rise to the abundant flowering of male and female religious institutes.
In addition to approving these religious institutes, the Church has always defended and vindicated the e. c. and their practice against all who attempted to disparage them; for example, against the Waldensians (Denz-U, n. 426); against Guglielmo di S. Amore (ibid., n. 458 ff.), Wieliff (ibid., nn. 600 ff.; 624, 680), the Jansenists (ibid., n. 1310 ff.), the Synod of Pistoia (ibid., nn. 1580-90), the positivists (ibid., nn. 1692, 1752 ff.), and Americanism (n. 1973).