Commentaria in Summam contra Gentiles, Liber IV

After St. Thomas has treated of the sacrament of the Eucharist, he begins to treat of the sacrament of Penance.¹

Now concerning this he does two things: first, he sets forth certain things necessary to the proposed topic; secondly, he shows the necessity of this sacrament, chap. LXXII.

Concerning the first he does two things. For because, if men after receiving the grace of baptism could not sin, or after sin could not return to grace, there would be no necessity of the sacrament of Penance, before this sort of necessity is shown, he first shows that men after receiving grace do not become impeccable; secondly, that after the grace of the sacraments a man falling into sin can return to grace, in the following chapter.

Concerning the first he does two things: first, he proves the proposition; secondly, he removes certain arguments of the heretics.²

I. As to the first, he argues first thus. Gratuitous gifts are received in the soul like habitual dispositions, since man does not always act according to them. Therefore one who receives them can sin by acting against grace. — The consequence is proved. Because nothing prevents him who has a habit from acting according to the habit or against it, as is clear in the grammarian and in him who has the habit of justice. The reason is that the use of habits in us is from the will, but the will is related to both of opposites.

It should be noted that, since a habit is midway between potency and perfect act, someone is properly said to have a gift by way of a habit when he does not

actually operate according to it, but is in proximate potency to operate; but when he actually operates according to it, he is not said to have it by way of a habit. Hence one who has a habit, properly speaking of a habit, does not always operate according to it, but sometimes does not operate according to it. And therefore, wishing to prove that gratuitous gifts are received in the soul like habitual dispositions, St. Thomas adduces as a reason that man does not always act according to them.

II. Secondly. Impeccability does not belong to man before he arrives at the ultimate end. But this is not given to man in the grace that is conferred in the sacraments, since the sacraments are for the assistance of man according as he is on the way to the end. Therefore etc. — The major is proved. Because impeccability cannot be in man without the immutability of the will. But this cannot belong to man except according as he attains the ultimate end, since the will is rendered immutable from the fact that it is totally filled; but this does not belong to man except as he attains the ultimate end; for as long as something remains to be desired, the will is not filled.

It should be noted that, since it is of the nature of sin to be voluntary, it is necessary that the will of a man existing in grace be changed from good to evil while he sins; and as long as there is this sort of mutability of the will from good to evil, so long is there peccability in man. Therefore, if a man is to be rendered impeccable, it is necessary that the will be established in a state of immutability. For it cannot stand together that a man cannot sin and that the will can be turned to evil, since the very turning of the will to evil is sin. For this reason St. Thomas well says that impeccability cannot be in man without the immutability of the will. How, however, the will cannot be filled before it arrives at the ultimate end can be clear from what was said in the Third Book.³

III. Thirdly. Man is not rendered immune from all ignorance and error through the grace received in the sacraments, since this belongs to the man who gazes upon that truth which is the certainty of all truths, in which consists the ultimate end of man. Therefore etc. — The consequence is proved. Because, since every sin proceeds from some ignorance, as is clear through the Philosopher and through the Wise Man in Proverbs, then only can man be secure from sin according to the will, when according to the intellect he is secure from ignorance and error.

IV. Fourthly. The alteration that is according to the passions of the soul is not taken away through the grace conferred in the sacraments, but remains in man as long as the soul is united to a passible body. Therefore etc. — The consequence is proved. Because to the alteration of man that is according to malice and virtue, the alteration that is according to the passions of the soul contributes much: for from the fact that they are curbed by reason, man is rendered virtuous and⁴ is preserved in virtue; but from the fact that reason follows the passions, man is rendered vicious.

Concerning that proposition, The alteration according to the passions of the soul remains in man as long as the soul is united to a passible body, it should be noted that this is not said as if, when the soul will be united to an impassible body, in man there will be in no way passions of the soul—for even in the Blessed there will be some movements of the sensitive appetite, which are called passions of the soul;—but because, when the soul is united to a passible body, in man, even in the just man, there are not only foreseen passions, but also sudden ones, by which the judgment of reason can be intercepted and hindered; and not only passions with respect to good, such as joy, love, and the like, but also with respect to evil and what is harmful, such as fear, anger, and the like. And because there is properly said to be in man an alteration according to the passions of the soul according as man is affected by some sudden passion, whether vehement or remiss, and also according to a passion with respect to evil and what is harmful, therefore St. Thomas says that this sort of alteration is in man as long as the soul is united to a passible body, wishing to preserve himself from that state in which the soul is conjoined to an impassible body. For in the Blessed there will not properly be an alteration according to such passions, because, as is said in Qu. Verit., q. xxvi, a. 8, in them the passions of the sensitive appetite will not be sudden, because in them no movement of the sensitive appetite will arise except according to the dictate of reason. Nor will there be passions with respect to evil, but only with respect to good.

V. Fifthly. Through Evangelical and Apostolic doctrine the faithful who have already attained the grace of the Holy Spirit through the sacraments are admonished lest they sin, as is clear in Heb. xii, Looking diligently etc.; to the Ephesians iv, Grieve not etc.; 1 Cor. x, He that thinketh himself etc. And the Apostle also says of himself, I chastise etc. Therefore etc. — The consequence is proved. Because it seems superfluous to admonish those not to sin who cannot sin.

VI. As to the second,⁵ St. Thomas says that through this is excluded the error of certain heretics who say that man, after he has received the grace of the Holy Spirit, cannot sin, and if he sins, he never had the grace of the Holy Spirit. Which indeed they prove from what is said in 1 Cor. xiii, Charity never falleth away; and in 1 John iii it is said, Whosoever abideth in him etc., and below, Whosoever is born of God etc.

Now St. Thomas answers to the authority of the Apostle that that is not said as if he who has charity never loses it, since it is said in Apoc. ii, I have somewhat against thee etc.; but because, while the other gifts of the Holy Spirit, such as prophecy and the like, are made void when that which is perfect comes, charity will remain even in that state of perfection.

To the authority of John, however, he says that the sense of those words is that the gifts⁶ of the Holy Spirit by which man is adopted as a son of God or reborn have such great power, as far as it is of themselves, that they can preserve man without sin, nor can man sin living according to them; although he can act against them, and by departing from them can sin. And it is similar as if it were said that what is hot cannot become cold, or cool; and that the just man does not do unjust things, namely, in quantum he is just.

2. It should be noted that the sense of this response is that the word of John is understood to mean that everyone born of God through the gifts of the Spirit cannot by the power of those gifts sin; although, that is, he can do this from the freedom and mutability of the will: just as neither can anyone having some form, by the power of that form, operate against that form, although he may have from elsewhere that he can lose that form. Which sense the examples set down here favor. For although the subject of heat can, by reason of its potentiality, become cold, nevertheless what is hot cannot by the power of heat make cold. And similarly, although the man who has the habit of justice can lose it, nevertheless he cannot by the power of justice, or living according to justice, work unjust things. Thus although one having the gifts of the Holy Spirit can lose them and thus sin, nevertheless he cannot sin by the power of the gifts themselves, or living according to gifts of this sort.

3. Concerning this matter see St. Thomas IIª IIae, q. xxiv, a. 11;⁷ and in Qu. Virt., q. de Caritate, a. 12;⁸ where to the aforesaid authority he gives another response, saying that it is understood according to the power of the Holy Spirit moving the soul, by whose conservation those whom he moves as much as he wills are rendered immune from sin. For according to this interpretation, the sense of the said words is that he who is born of God cannot sin when he is so regenerated into a son of God by the power of the Holy Spirit that the Holy Spirit wills to give him a persevering movement of divine love.

VII. But concerning the aforesaid a doubt occurs. For it seems from what has been said that no one through the grace of the way can be confirmed in good, since confirmation in good includes impeccability; but it was said that through grace in the way man cannot be rendered impeccable. But this seems to be against that which is commonly held concerning the Blessed Virgin and the Apostles. Therefore etc.

It is answered, from the doctrine of St. Thomas in Qu. Verit., q. xxiv, a. 9, that someone can be understood to be confirmed in good in two ways. In one way, totally from within: namely, because there is given to him some principle sufficient for his firmness, through which he cannot sin. In another way, partly from within and partly from without: namely, because there is given to him both some gift of grace through which he is so inclined to the good that he cannot easily be deflected from the good, although through it he is not so withdrawn from evil that he cannot sin at all; and, divine providence exciting him to resist whenever the occasion of sin presents itself, he is guarded lest he sin. In the first way, no one can be confirmed in good, for the reasons stated; and of this confirmation St. Thomas speaks in this place. But in the second way someone can well be confirmed in good; and thus the Blessed Virgin and the Apostles are understood to have been confirmed, and in some way made impeccable.