Scotus Academicus, Tomus octavus: De Divino Gratiae Beneficio, et initium De Virtutibus Theologicis

NOTE. 1. Concerning the first part of this proposed Question, there have been three capital erroneous opinions of heretics. The first error was that of the Jovinians, who once taught that men, having received the grace of God, cannot grow, as St. Jerome testifies in book 2 against that same heretic. The second is attributed to Kemnitz, who although he taught that justice and holiness could receive some increase, nevertheless denied that this came from good works, but only from faith in the divine promises, and consequently rather from the good pleasure of God than from the merit of the one acting. The third error finally was that of the Beghards and Beguines, who judged that men could attain in this life to such a degree of sanctity and justice that they would not be permitted to advance to a further perfection. Against this threefold error the battle will be waged in the first Conclusion.

NOTE. 2. Among Catholics it is beyond controversy that habitual and sanctifying grace can be lost through mortal sin, the Lord saying through Ezekiel, chapter 18: But if the just man turn himself away from his justice, and do iniquity according to all the abominations which the wicked man useth to work, shall he live? All his justices which he hath done shall not be remembered: in the prevarication by which he hath prevaricated, and in his sin which he hath sinned, in them he shall die. But the difficulty is whether sanctifying grace — which has been proved above to be really the same as charity — can be destroyed and corrupted by each sinful act, or indeed only by an act of hatred and aversion from God directly opposed to charity; just as faith, hope, and the other virtues are not lost except by contrary and opposing acts.

NOTE. 3. Here the difficulty is not raised whether habitual grace can be increased and diminished by the extraordinary power and disposition of God, with respect to the intensification of the degrees which are in it, and that at will, and without any respect to meritorious or demeritorious works; but it is asked whether in fact, and according to the common law, sanctifying grace can be increased by any meritorious acts whatsoever, not only of charity but also of the other virtues, both supernatural and moral; and that not only through more intense, but also through more remiss acts of those virtues; and whether it is also diminished by every venial sin. Therefore three things come here chiefly to be resolved: First, whether habitual grace can be increased, so long as we live in this mortal state, by any good works whatsoever. Second, whether truly by every mortal sin habitual grace is destroyed. Third, finally, whether by each venial sin habitual grace is diminished.

First Conclusion. — HABITUAL GRACE CAN BY ITS NATURE BE INCREASED: AND IN FACT IT IS INCREASED IN MEN BY EACH OF THEIR GOOD WORKS, SO LONG AS THEY LIVE IN THIS MORTAL STATE: SO THAT THERE IS NO ONE SO HOLY AND PERFECT WHO CANNOT MAKE

A STILL HIGHER STEP IN SANCTITY, EVEN BY REMISS AND LESS INTENSE ACTS. This Conclusion contains four parts, against as many errors declared in the first Notable.

It is proved, first indeed from Sacred Scripture exhorting in many places to progress in justice and sanctity: thus Ecclesiasticus 18: Be not judged justified until death, that is, make progress in justice. Proverbs 4: The path of the just, as a shining light, goeth forward, and increaseth even to perfect day. To the Philippians 1: And this I pray, that your charity may more and more abound. And Apocalypse 22: He that is just, let him be justified still; and he that is holy, let him be sanctified still. And 2 Corinthians 4: Though our outward man is corrupted, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.

The same truth was defined in the Council of Vienne, in the Clementine Ad nostrum, concerning heretics; and at Trent, Session 6, chapter 10, where it says: Being justified therefore, and made friends of God, and housed with Him, running from virtue to virtue they are renewed, as the Apostle says, day by day; that is, by mortifying the members of their flesh, and presenting them as instruments of justice unto sanctification, through the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church, in this justification received through the grace of Christ, their faith cooperating with good works, they grow and are justified more... which increase of justice holy Church begs when she prays: Give unto us an increase of faith, hope, and charity. Hence Canon 24 decrees thus: If anyone shall say that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, not the cause of its increase, let him be anathema.

To this truth assent all the holy Fathers, especially Jerome on chapter 1 to the Ephesians, explaining these words, Unto every one of us is given grace, etc.; Augustine, Letter 59 to Dardanus; Basil in his scholia on those words of Psalm 83, They shall go from virtue to virtue; Bernard, Sermon 9 on the Psalm Qui habitat, etc.

It is also urged by reason: Grace is a supernatural quality, and a certain participation of the divine nature; therefore it does not conflict with its being increased. The consequence is proved: that repugnance, if there were any, would be drawn either from its being a quality, or because it is supernatural, or finally because it is a participation of the divine nature. Not the first, for it is proper to a quality to be capable of intensification. Nor even the second, for from it there would follow that the act of charity, or of another infused virtue, since they are supernatural, cannot be increased, which is evidently absurd, seeing that we love God now more remissly, now more intensely, from a supernatural motive. Not finally the third, for since that participation of the divine nature is inadequate and imperfect, it does not conflict with its becoming more or less perfect with regard to degrees of intensity.

The second part is also proved, namely that sanctifying grace can be increased not only by the act of the love of God, but also by good works proceeding with the help of grace. For this truth the Apostle teaches in many places, especially Romans 6: As you have yielded your members to serve uncleanness and iniquity unto iniquity, so now yield your members to serve justice unto sanctification. By which words he exhorts the Roman faithful, that as before the reception of the grace of Baptism they had served iniquity by their evil works, so after receiving Baptism they should serve justice unto sanctification, that through good works they may become holier. But more openly he demonstrates this truth in Colossians 1, saying:

That you may walk worthy of God, pleasing him in all things, bearing fruit in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God, strengthened in all virtue.

It is confirmed from other passages of Scripture, in which an increase of glory, which is perfected justice, is promised to the good works of the just, and consequently an increase of grace or of initiated justice. Thus 1 Cor. 15: Abound in every good work, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord: because clearly even the cup of cold water given in the name of Christ, or of his disciple, will receive the reward of eternal glory, as is signified in Matt. 10. Likewise 2 Cor. 2: This momentary and light tribulation of ours, above measure, works in us an eternal weight of glory in sublimity. To these add the doctrine and definition of the Council of Trent praised above, by which it openly signifies that grace is increased in us not only through acts of charity, but also through any good works whatsoever.

The third part is proven, namely that the just are able to advance throughout their whole life in the justice received; so that they never reach that point beyond which they cannot progress so long as they are on the way, and lead a mortal life; for thus Sacred Scripture clearly teaches, Ecclus. 18: Be not afraid to be justified even unto death, for the reward of God abides forever: as if to say: do not cease, while you live, to advance by new degrees in justice, because the holier you will be, the greater and more abundant glory you will receive. So likewise Ps. 83: They shall go from virtue to virtue, the God of gods shall be seen in Sion, that is, in virtue they shall grow until they attain the blessed vision. And Galatians 6: But let us not fail in doing good, for in due time we shall reap, not failing. By which words the Apostle signifies that the whole time of this life has been given for working well and for sowing, so that we may reap in the other life, namely the seed of eternal life.

The same truth the Holy Fathers defend with their authority, especially St. Jerome upon Ps. 83, expounding those words, he hath set his tabernacle in his heart, where he says: whoever is holy daily stretches forward to what lies before, and forgets what is behind. St. Augustine, Sermon 15 On the words of the Apostle: Always add, always walk, always advance, do not remain on the way. St. Leo, Sermon 2 On Quadragesima: This, he says, is the true justice of the perfect, that they never presume themselves to be perfect, lest, ceasing under the pretense of a journey not yet finished, they fall into the danger of failing, where they have laid aside the desire of advancing. St. Prosper in the Collection of sentences of St. Augustine, Sentence 102: In this life, which is wholly temptation, in the most sublime saints that perfection is not attained which leaves no ascent remaining. Hence in book of Epigrams, elegy 26, he sang elegantly:

For ever over the saints there remains wherewith they may grow, And the glory of the perfect is a beginning. Let virtue bear virtue; out of light let light Come forth, and let every palm make a step.

Reason also favors it: for so long as man is a wayfarer, he can merit; hence Christ the Lord exhorted his disciples: Walk while you have the Light, that the darkness comprehend you not. John 12. Therefore he can always attain a new degree of grace, which may be the seed of a new degree of glory. Next, so long as the wayfarer is not at his terminus he can tend toward it with continuous steps: but while men are in the world, they have not a permanent city, says St. Paul, but they seek one to come; and thereupon they can hasten unceasingly toward their fatherland by continual increase of good works. Finally, although the obediential capacity of man for grace is finite, nevertheless according to the ordination of divine providence it is never wholly filled by the means and aids ministered by God, nor will anyone ever attain that degree of grace which Christ the Lord had; wherefore it is fitting that, so long as he is a wayfarer, since his capacity cannot be wholly filled, he be at least in such wise promoted and aided divinely through the helps of grace, that he may always advance more and more, until he attain the end of his way.

Finally the fourth part is proven, namely that habitual grace can be increased even through remiss and less intense acts: Both because Sacred Scripture and the Council of Trent openly teach that our sanctity is increased through whatever good works: but remiss acts are good works: therefore through those acts sanctifying grace is increased. And because, says the Doctor in Book 4, distinction 2, question 1, if sanctifying grace were not increased through remiss acts, since it is the seed of glory, it would follow that the adult who exercised more remiss acts after Baptism would not be happier nor endowed with greater beatitude than the infant who dies immediately after Baptism: but the consequent fights against the very rewarding justice of God, which does not suffer even the least good work, say a cup of cold water, given out of mercy, to be without reward. It is confirmed, from this, that God suffers no evil works, however remiss, to remain unpunished; for venial sins of every kind are punished in Purgatory unless in this life they be discharged: therefore by equal reason he ought not to leave any good works whatsoever, however minute, unrewarded; for God is not more inclined to vengeance for evil than to the rewarding of good. Finally, the Council of Trent, Session 6, chapter 16, after it established the conditions desired for meriting, namely that it be a work honest, voluntary, proceeding from grace, says: Nothing further is wanting to the justified themselves, that they be held truly to have merited; therefore no more intense act is required, since those assigned conditions can also fall in the remiss mode.

You will object against the first part: All our grace and justice flows down from Christ the fountain of all grace, of whose fullness we all have received: but Christ distributes graces to each one as he wills, and not according to the merit of each, as St. Paul teaches in 1 Cor. 12: therefore if any increase of grace is made, it is not made through good works. — I distinguish the minor: divides to each one as he wills first grace, and sometimes its increase, I concede: divides always the increase of grace as he wills, that is, out of mere liberality, without regard to good works meriting that increase, I deny. For the contrary was proven above from Scripture: for in vain and delusively would it urge us to summon a new degree, ⟦illegible: verba inter «gradum» et «Christi» omissa videntur; sensu requiritur aliquid quale «si is ex sola»⟧ if it hung upon the mere liberality of Christ the Lord. Add that the Apostle, upon whose authority the objection relies, there speaks only of the distribution of graces freely given.

You will insist: Whatever grace is given gratis, and from pure liberality; for if from merits, now it is no longer grace, says the Apostle: therefore since the increase of grace has the true character of grace, it ought to be granted gratis, and not from merit, and in view of good works. — I distinguish the antecedent: every grace is given gratis, either by reason of itself, or by reason of its principle, I concede: always by reason of itself, I deny. A twofold free bestowal of grace, therefore, must be distinguished: one indeed simple, which takes place with no regard had to a meritorious work; another quoad sic, namely by reason of the principle, which is given gratis. Thus eternal glory, although it is the crown of victors, the reward of laborers, and the inheritance of sons, nevertheless is called grace, because certainly it is given on account of meritorious works, which were elicited through sanctifying grace freely granted. By equal reason the increase of grace is called grace, because it is granted only by reason of the meritorious work, which was elicited through actual and habitual grace granted simply gratis.

You will object against the second part: habits cannot be increased except through acts similar to those which they elicit: therefore sanctifying grace, since it is really identical with charity, cannot be increased through acts of other virtues, but only through an act of the love of God. — I distinguish the major: acquired and acquired-by-our-acts habits cannot be increased except through acts similar to those which they elicit, and through which they were produced, I concede: infused habits, and those granted through the sole liberality of God, such as is sanctifying grace, cannot be increased except through homogeneous acts, or acts similar to those which they elicit, I deny. For since meritorious acts concur to the increase of the habit not physically, but only morally, namely by moving God by way of merit to confer that increase, and since God is moved to recompense the service of a faithful servant on account of any observance and obedience of his whatsoever: thence it comes about that the increase of sanctifying grace can be made through any good work whatsoever. Add that charity is a general virtue, which embraces the other virtues as it were in its bosom; for the fullness of the law is love, says the Apostle; hence it is that it can easily be morally increased through any acts whatsoever of the other virtues.

You will object against the third part St. Augustine in the Enchiridion, chapter 121, saying: Here one comes to so great a magnitude of charity, than which greater cannot be: therefore St. Augustine holds that charity can have, in this mortal life, a limit and terminus of accession. — I deny the consequence, for there he is not treating of charity according to the intensification of the habit, but according to the exhibition of a work of the greatest kind in its genus, such as is to despise all things for God, and to undergo death for him; according to that of John 19: Greater love than this no man hath, that he lay down his life, etc. Which most excellent effect indeed a faithful man can exercise in this mortal life, as did the Martyrs, and very many Kings and rich men; and likewise innumerable Religious, who, having sold all that they possessed, and having distributed their abundant largess of alms to the poor, followed poor Christ.

Finally you will object against the last part, that passage of Apoc. 3 where the Bishop of Sardis is reproached because his works were not full before God: but works not full are none other than remiss works: therefore so far are they from being able to merit an increase of grace, that rather they provoke the anger and indignation of God. Next, according to St. Gregory, book Moral., chapter 16, not to advance on the way of the Lord is to go back: but through remiss works we do not advance: therefore we go backward. Finally, he who negligently uses received gifts does not merit to receive an increase of the gift: but he who works remissly uses the gifts negligently: therefore he does not merit an increase of that gift: therefore remiss works nowise conduce to the increase of grace. — I deny the consequence: and to the first argument I deny the minor: for by works not full are understood not remiss works, but those which were done out of vain glory, and are wholly empty of retribution and reward. — To the second I likewise deny the minor: for just as he who exercised an act of charity, which is the most excellent of all virtues, is not said to go back when afterward he exercises an act of another less perfect virtue: so neither ought he be said to go back, who after he has exercised a perfect and intense act of some virtue, afterward elicits a less perfect act of the same or of another virtue: for he is always said to walk who makes motion toward a terminus, although he may now walk more quickly, now more slowly. — To the third I distinguish the major: he who negligently, that is sinfully uses, or rather abuses goods, does not merit their increase, I concede: he who negligently, that is remissly uses such gifts, I deny. For since there is no precept whereby it is commanded that an act be done in an intense and perfect mode, thence one is not to be said to sin while acting remissly.

You will ask: when is such an increase of grace granted by God on account of remiss works? — I answer, Authors vary in resolving this doubt: for there are those who hold that that increase is granted immediately once the meritorious work was elicited. So Gabriel in Book 1, distinction 17, question, article 3. Vasquez disp. 220. Some judge with St. Thomas, 1. 2. q. 114. art. 5. that such an increase is not given immediately, but only when man elicits a more intense act. The Cretan however with Subtili Doctore in 4. dist. 21. q. 1. teach that that increase is conferred chiefly at the instant of death: for since a remiss act does not of itself and physically increase the infused habit, but only dispositively and morally: it seems fitting that God, who keeps a gentle manner of acting, should not increase immediately, because there is not a sufficient disposition, but only at the last instant of life, lest namely he leave remiss acts without reward: and moreover the soul in that article, on account of perseverance in grace, is disposed so that such an increase be given to her.

You will say: The justified, according to the Council of Trent, through good works go from virtue to virtue, and from day to day grow in justice itself through good works, and are justified more and more: therefore they must receive an increase of their justice not only at the end of life, but also as soon as they have exercised good works, though remiss ones. — I answer, this indeed is true of intense works, but not of remiss ones; for it better suits that God keep a gentle manner of operating, namely bestowing the increase of grace according to disposition, which since it does not seem more apt than in the article of death, therefore in a more fitting order then only he confers the increase of grace for those remiss acts.

You will insist: There does not seem to be a greater disposition at the end of life than immediately after those acts were elicited: therefore the reason does not appear why that increase is deferred to the end of life. — I deny the antecedent: for ordinarily it happens that at the end of life charity is more intense. Next, on account of perseverance in grace even unto the last term of life there seems to be a greater disposition for receiving that increase of grace than there had been before. Finally, to him whose remiss merits ought not to remain without reward, that owed increase must be paid in that state, in which no disposition is required, just as on the way, which is the state of disposing oneself and meriting.

Second Conclusion. — Habitual grace can be destroyed by any mortal sin whatsoever, and not only by an act of hatred and aversion from God.

This assertion is proven by all those texts of Scripture in which it is declared that they are to be barred from the kingdom of heaven, not only those who pursue God with actual hatred, but also those who perpetrate any sin whatsoever. Thus Galatians: The works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, etc. which things I foretell you as I have foretold, because they who do such things shall not possess the kingdom of God. Where he says absolutely that those who do such things shall not attain the kingdom of God: which he declares more openly in 1 Cor. 6 where he says: But you injure and defraud, and that your brethren? Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor servers of idols, nor adulterers, etc. shall possess the kingdom of God: and these indeed you were, but you are washed, but you are sanctified, etc. Where it is manifest that he speaks of sins of any kind whatsoever. He has similar things in Eph. 5. Hence Philippians 2: With fear and trembling work out your salvation. To which accords that passage of Apoc. 3, where it is said to the just Bishop: Hold fast that which thou hast, that another take not thy crown.

Wherefore the Council of Trent, Session 6, chapter 15:

It must be asserted, he says, that the grace of justification once received is lost not only by infidelity, whereby faith itself also is lost, but by any other mortal sin whatever, though faith be not lost: because every mortal sin gravely offends God, adjudges man to eternal damnation, and renders him hateful and hostile to God: and thereupon expels sanctifying grace, by which we are friends of God, sons and heirs.

Those things that are wont to be objected against this truth by heretics are resolved below.

Third Conclusion. — Habitual grace is not destroyed, nor diminished, through venial sins.

The first part of this Conclusion is evident from Sacred Scripture, which calls those sinning venially just. Thus Proverbs 24: Lay not wait, nor seek impiety in the house of the just, nor spoil his rest: for a just man shall fall seven times, and shall rise again; as if it said: think not that you will find in him impiety or any grave fault and iniquity: for if he falls at some time, as happens to just men, nevertheless he falls only lightly, and rises again immediately. Hence the Council of Trent, Session 6, chapter 11:

Although in this mortal life, however holy and just, they sometimes fall into sins, at least light or daily, which are also called venial sins, they do not on this account cease to be just: for that voice of the just is both humble and truthful: forgive us our debts.

The latter part of the Conclusion, namely that habitual grace is not diminished through venial sins, is proven from this, that if venial sins diminished the intensification of grace, it would be chiefly because they were physically or morally repugnant to it; or because they merited its diminution: but neither can be said. Not indeed the first, because those things which mutually repugnate to each other physically or morally cannot subsist together according to the ordinary law: but a venial sin can subsist with even very intense grace, say when someone having most ardent charity commits the same venial sin as he who has only remiss charity. The second also cannot be said, namely that a venial sin moves God to take away some degrees of grace, because God does not punish lighter sins, such as venial ones are, with so grave a punishment as is the loss and privation of some part of grace and of the glory corresponding to it. Next, if a venial sin diminished grace, it would follow at length that, venial sins being multiplied, grace could be altogether lost: for since the degrees of that grace are finite, if every venial sin took away one degree or part of it, so many venial sins could be committed that at last all grace would perish and vanish: but it is absurd that grace could be lost through venial sins: otherwise man could be damned on account of a venial sin, being indeed deprived of sanctifying grace, which is absolutely necessary unto salvation.

You will say: Through venial sin a certain tepidity is contracted, and the vigor of the soul is dulled, especially when they are committed frequently and deliberately: But that tepidity and that weakness of soul arise from nothing other than from a diminution of habitual grace: therefore truly it is diminished through venial sin. — I deny the minor; for those do not arise from remission and diminution of sanctifying grace in itself; but from the subtraction of the helps of grace, which he becomes unworthy of who sins venially more freely or more frequently.

You will say 2. St. Augustine, Epistle to Seleucianus, affirms, that if venials shall have been gathered together, they will so oppress and weigh us down as would some one great sin: therefore venials multiplied can have the same effect which one mortal would have: but one mortal sin suffices not only to diminish, but even to destroy sanctifying grace: therefore likewise venial sins will be able to destroy that same grace, or at least diminish it. — I distinguish the antecedent: oppress and weigh down effectively and formally, as a mortal sin opposes and weighs down, I deny: dispositively and remotely, I concede. For venials multiplied dispose to the loss of grace and to the commission of mortal sin, inasmuch namely frequently and ordinarily it comes about that those who are very negligent in avoiding venials slip into some mortal sin, because they are deprived of greater helps of grace, with which the just were furnished; for while men, says St. Augustine, Sermon 58 On the seasons of the year, being negligent above all despise their sins because they are small, crimes are joined to the growing petty sins, and make a heap, and overwhelm.

You ask: how is sanctifying grace expelled by mortal sin, whether physically, and by reason of natural opposition: or truly morally only, and by reason of disposition and divine ordination?

I answer, that it is done not physically, but morally, because if mortal sin were the physical cause of the expulsion of grace, it would accomplish this either effectively, or formally, or positively. — The first cannot be said, because if mortal sin expelled grace effectively, it would have to produce in the soul some form physically opposed to grace itself and incompatible with it: but this it does not accomplish: for if it be a sin of pure omission, it effects nothing physically: but if it be a sin of commission, it produces no form which is physically opposed to grace; for a sin of commission produces nothing unless perhaps a vicious habit: but that neither physically nor morally conflicts with sanctifying grace, for vicious habits contracted through assiduous sin remain in the justified, and incline them to sin, as experience attests. — The second also cannot be said: both because what expels another as a form physically opposed and incompatible must have that incompatibility from its own nature: but mortal sin from its own physical nature has no such incompatibility; for the same act which is mortal sin, if it were not done freely, would be physically the same act, yet it would neither expel grace nor be sin: wherefore it has not that power of expelling from its own nature. — The third finally cannot likewise be affirmed; for a form which does not depend on physical dispositions, nor presupposes them in the subject, cannot be physically expelled through contrary dispositions, for these expel a form in no other way than by formally destroying the dispositions prerequisite to that form: but grace does not depend physically upon any dispositions, as is evident in infants, who without any disposition are justified through Baptism; but if in adults some acts are required whereby they may be disposed to sanctifying grace, those dispositions are only moral by reason of divine constitution and ordination, which prescribed that they should be had beforehand. There remains therefore, that mortal sin destroys grace only morally: either inasmuch as it moves God to the subtraction of grace, as to the infliction of other punishments: or because grace is a form ill-befitting mortal sin; seeing that the former makes man a friend of God: whereas the latter makes him an enemy: or lastly, inasmuch as sin turns man away from God and converts him to creatures: while grace on the contrary summons man away from creatures, that it may convert him to God. Here too it is wont to be asked, whether at least through an extraordinary disposition and power of God, sanctifying grace can subsist together with mortal sin. But this question will be resolved in a more fitting order in the Disputation on charity.