GODARD
G21
GODDEN
from the grace by which slory is obtained. Now, (1)
speaking of prcilestination in execution, all Catholic
theologians maintain in opposition to C'alvinists that
it is not entirely gratuituns, but in the case of adults
depends partly on the free mercy of God and partly
on human co-operation; the actual bestowal of glory
is at least partly a reward of true merit. (2) Speaking
of predestination in intention and in the adequate
sense, Catholic theologians agree that it is gratuitous;
so understood it includes the first grace which cannot
be merited by man. (3) But if we speak of predes-
tination in intention and in the inadequate sen.se, i. e.
to glory in al^straction from grace, there is no longer
unanimity of opinion. Most Thomists and several
other theologians maintain that predestination in this
sense is gratuitous, i. e. God first destines a man to
glory antecedently to any foreseen merits, and conse-
quently upon this decrees to give the efficacious grace
by which it is obtained. Predestination to grace is
the result of an entirely gratuitous predestination to
glory, and with this is comliined for those not included
in the decree of election what is known as a nega-
tive reprobation. Other theologians maintain on the
contrary that there is no such thing as negative repro-
bation, and that predestination to glory is not gratui-
tous but dependent on foreseen merits. The order of
dependence, according to these theologians, is the
same in predestination in intention as it is in predes-
tination in execution, and as already stated the be-
stowal of glory only follows upon actual merit in the
case of adults. These have been the two prevailing
opinions followed for the most part in the schools,
but a third opinion, which is a somewhat subtle via
media, lias been put forward by certain other theo-
logians and defended with great skill by so recent an
authority as Billot. The gist of this view is that
while negative reprobation must be rejected, gratui-
tous election to glory ante pravisa merita must be re-
tained, and an effort is made to prove that these two
may be logically separated, a possibility overlooked
by the advocates of the first two opinions. Without
entering into details here, it is enough to observe that
the success of this subtle expedient is very question-
able.
Fourth, as regards reprobation, (1) all Catholic theologians are agreed that God foresees from eternity and permits the final defection of some, but that the decree of His will destining them to eternal damnation is not antecedent to but consequent upon foreknowl- edge of their sin and their death in the state of sin. The first part of this proposition is a simple corollary from Divine omniscience and supremacy, and the second part is directed against Calvinistic and Jansen- istic teaching, according to which Ciod expressly created some for the purpose of punishing them, or at least that subsequently to the fall of .\dam. He leaves them in the state of damnation for the sake of exhibiting His wrath. Catholic teaching on this point re- echoes II Peter, iii, 9, according to which God does not wish that any should perish but that all should return to penance, and it is the teaching implied m Christ's own description of the sentence that is to be pronounced on the damned, condemnation being grounded not on the antecedent \vill of God, but on the actual demerits of men themselves (e. g. Matt., XXV, 41). (2) So-called negative reprobation, which is commonly defended by those who maintain election to glory antecedently to foreseen merits, means that simultaneously with the predestination of the elect God either positively excludes the damned from the the decree of election to glory or at least fails to in- clude them in it, without, however, destining them to positive punishment except consequently on their foreseen demerits. It is this last qualification that distinguishes the doctrine of negative reprobation from Calvinistic and Jansenistic teaching, leaving room, for instance, for a condition of perfect natural
happiness for those dying with only original sin on
their souls. But, notwithstanding this difference,
the doctrine ought to be rejected; for it is opposed
very plainly to the teaching of St. Paul regarding the
universality of God's will to save all (I Tim., ii, 4),
and from a rational point of view itis difficult to recon-
cile with a worthy concept of Divine justice.
.\ pretty full bibliography of Theism (especially of modern uon-CathoUc works) will be found in Baldwin, Diet, of Philos- ophy, III, 745-811. We will mention here only a few select works: (a) as good samples of patristic and medieval treatment; St. AtJGtjSTlNE, C. Academicos and Dc Civitatc Dei; St. An- SELM, Monologium and Prosologiuvi; St. Thomas, Summa TheoL, I, Q. ii, and C. Gentes, I, xiii; (b) as valuable guides to patristic teaching; Petavius and Thomassinus, De Dogmati- bus Theologicis; (c) as modern systematic treatises; Fran- ZELIN, De Deo Una C3rd ed., Rome, 1883) ; Billot, De Deo Vno et Trino (1895), and other standard writers in Latin on dog- matic theology-: Piat, De La Croyance en Dieu (Paris, 1907); MicHELET, Dieu et VAgnosticisme Conietnporaine (Paris, 1909); .^VELiNG, The God of Philosophy (London, 1906); Boedder, Natural rAcoiom/ (Stonyhurst Series, 2nd ed, 1906); Dhiscoll, God {2nd ed.. New York): and among non-Catholics: Flint, Theism (Edinburgh, 1877); Martineau, Study of Religion (Bks. II and III); Hall, The Being and Attributes of God (Lon- ilon, 1909; this work is rich in bibliographical references). See also Deism; Theism; Trinity; Predestination; Providence; etc.
P. J. Toner.
Godard (Gothabd, Godehard), Saint, Bishop of Hildesheim in Lower Saxony; b. about the year 960, in a village of Upper Bavaria, near the Abbey of Altaich, in the Diocese of Passau; d. on 4 May, 1038; canonized by Innocent II in 1131. After a lengthy course of studies he received the Benedictine habit in 991. Having entered the Abbey of Altaich, his learning and sanctity speedily procured his elevation to the dignity of prior, and afterwards that of abbot, in the discharge of which sacred duties Godard went far towards enforcing rigorous observance of rule among those placed under his care. His special fitness in this department led to his being chosen to effect the work of reform in the Abbeys of Hersfeld, in Hesse; Tegern- see, in the Diocese of Freising; and Kremsmiinster, in the Diocese of Passau. On the death of St. Bernard, Bishop of Hildesheim (1021), Godard was chosen to succeed him; but his modesty yielded only to the urgent admonitions of Emperor St. Henry II. His zeal ami prudence kept up the high tradition of Godard's cloistered activity. The monastic observ- ance was established, as far as possible, in his cathe- dral chapter. He built schools for the education of youth in which he always manifested an active inter- est; maintained a rigorous personal surveillance over his seminary; and fostered a strict observance of the liturgy whilst attending to the building and upkeep of churches. He also exercised a paternal care for the material needs of his people. Many churches in Ger- many honour Godard as patron and several bear his name. His letters which have come down to us ex- hibit a lofty spiritual tone throughout. Godard was buried in his cathedral. In 1132, the year following his canonization and the translation of his relics, the erection of a Benedictine monastery, under the pat- ronage of St. Godard, was begun, and two altars were dedicated to him in the cathedral church.
MuLLER in Kirchenlex., s. v. Gotthard: Wolfher, VitmGode- hardi, prior et posterior ia Man. Germ. Hist.: Seriptores, XI, 167 sq • HiJFFER, Die Lebensbesehreibung der Bischofe Bemu-ard u. Godehard (Beriin, 1858); Sdlzbeck, Leben des hi. Gotthard (Ratisbon, 1S63); Kratz, Der Dom zu Hildesheim, III (Hildes- heim, 1840), 53 sqq.; Luntzel, Gesch. der Diucese u. StadI Hildesheim, I (Hildesheim. 185S), 195 sqq.; Mabillon, Acta SS. Bened. (1701), VI, i, 395-96.
P. J. MacAuley.
Godden (true name Tylden), Thomas, b. at Add- ington, Kent, 1624, d. in London, 1 Dec, 1688. His father, William Tylden, was able to provide a liberal education for his son and Thomas was sent first to a private school in Holburn, conducted by a Mr. Gill, and in his fifteenth year entered Queen's College, Oxford. The next year found him at St. John's
