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

WHETHER AND WHAT IS THE MERIT OF GOOD WORKS.

Note 1. The name of merit is used in four ways in the Sacred Scriptures. First, it is taken at times in a good sense, at times in a bad sense, when something is attributed to good and to evil works; for the former are worthy of retribution of reward, the latter of retribution of punishment. To good works indeed the name of merit is attributed in Ecclesiasticus 16: Mercy will make a place to every man according to the merit of his works; but to evil works the same name of merit is ascribed in 2 Paralipomenon 19: Thou hast deserved the wrath of the Lord. And Job 6: Would that my sins were weighed, by which I have merited wrath. Second, the name of merit, taken in a good sense, is extended generally to every work to which some reward corresponds, whether from the dignity of the one working or from the liberality of the bestower; on which account not only infants newly baptized are said to merit the kingdom of heaven, but also the Church in the blessing of the Paschal candle says: O happy fault, which merited to have such and so great a Redeemer! Third, the name of merit is used more strictly to signify sometimes the well-earned reward itself; in which manner among the holy Fathers celestial glory and eternal felicity is called the merit of good works passively, namely because it is truly the recompense and crown of those good works. Finally, the name of merit is used most strictly and most properly insofar as it signifies a free action ordered toward a reward promised to it, whether from the dignity of the person working, or from the excellence of the work itself, or from the congruity or justice of the one rewarding. Hence merit is customarily distinguished threefold: the first, to which a reward is owed by the rigor of law, and which therefore is called merit of the rigor of justice; the second, to which a reward is owed by justice on account of the dignity of the work, and which is called merit of condignity; the third finally is that to which a reward is conferred from fittingness and congruity and the liberality of the one rewarding, which therefore is called merit of congruity.

Note 2. The name of merit in this fourth and last acceptation is so odious to the heretics of this age that Calvin did not hesitate to write in book 3 of his Institutes, chapter 5, that whoever first adapted it to human works compared with the judgment of God consulted very badly for the sincerity of faith; wherefore he there calls this name most arrogant. Certainly, he says, as it is most arrogant, nothing can more obscure the grace of God and diminish men than pride. For that most shameless heresiarch judges that we can merit nothing before God by our works; for he says in the same place:

We do not divide the praise of good works between God and man, as the Sophists do, but we preserve it whole and unimpaired for the Lord. We assign only this much to man, that those very things which were good he polluted and contaminated with his own impurity; for there will be nothing from man however perfect which is not stained with some blemish. Let the Lord therefore call into judgment those things which are best in human works: he will acknowledge in them his own justice indeed, but the disgrace and shame of man. Therefore good works please God, nor are they unfruitful to their authors. What more? He appoints the most ample benefits of God in place of remuneration, not because they so deserve it, but because the divine benignity appoints this reward for them of itself.

From these words it must be gathered that Calvin holds that our good works procure for us a reward and prize not by their own dignity, but from the liberality of God.

Note 3. And although absolutely speaking God should not be called a debtor with respect to a creature — since there is nothing in us which is not the work of his divine omnipotence and munificence — nevertheless out of goodness and fidelity he constitutes himself our debtor; or, as St. Augustine says in Psalm 109: God made himself a debtor to us, not by receiving anything from us, but by promising so much to us. And in Sermon 151 De tempore: The promiser God was made a debtor by his own goodness, not by our prerogative. What have we given him, that we might hold him a debtor? St. Cyprian concurs, in the book De opere et elemosyna, at the end, where he says of the true Merciful One: He merits Christ as judge, he reckons God a debtor to himself. And Fulgentius in the prologue on Paul to Monimus: Of his own bounty he deigned to make himself a debtor. And Bernard in the book De Gratia et libero Arbitrio: A promise indeed to be paid out of mercy, yet nonetheless to be discharged out of justice. For since God is faithful and true (Apocalypse 19), true indeed in promising and faithful in fulfilling what he has promised, thence it is that where he has promised something he is bound to fulfill it by truth and fidelity: and presently, since he has pledged ⟦leg.? raw: pluribi⟧ that he will give eternal life to those who worthily receive the sacraments and fulfill the divine commandments, no one ought to doubt that when man has rendered these, he has God as his debtor.

These things thus premised, two points remain for us to determine: first, whether truly good works elicited by a just man merit anything; second, what is the definition and nature of merit.

First Conclusion. — TRULY THE JUST MAN CAN BY HIS GOOD WORKS MERIT SOMETHING FROM GOD VERILY AND PROPERLY. For this is determined by faith in the Council of Trent, Session 6, chapter 16, in these words:

To men justified, whether they have preserved perpetually the grace received or recovered what was lost, the words of the Apostle are to be set forth: Abound in every good work, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord; for God is not unjust, that he should forget your work and the love which you have shown in his name, and do not lose your confidence, which hath a great reward. And therefore to those who work well even unto the end and hope in God, everlasting life is to be proposed both as a grace mercifully promised to the sons of God through Christ Jesus, and as a reward faithfully to be rendered by the promise of God himself for their good works and merits.

Hence Canon 32 thus decrees:

If anyone shall say that the good works of a justified man are so gifts of God, that they are not also the good merits of the justified man himself; or that the justified man, by the good works which are done by him through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, of whose living member he is, does not truly merit an increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life itself, if however he die in grace, and also an increase of glory: let him be anathema.

Proof 1. this truth from various oracles of Sacred Scripture. First indeed from all those in which it is asserted that God rewards the good works of the just with a recompense, for reward and merit are correlates. Thus Genesis 15, God promises Abraham: I am thy reward exceeding great. Wisd. 5. But the just shall live for evermore, and their reward is with the Lord. Ecclesiasticus 18. Be not wanting in justice until death, for the reward of good works is with the Lord. Matthew 5. Your reward is very great in heaven. 1 Cor. 15. Every one shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. Likewise from those texts in which God is said to render or repay to man according to his works. Thus Ps. 61. Thou wilt render to every man according to his works. The same is found in Matthew 16 and 25, and Romans 2. Now to render to every man according to his works is to assign a reward due to good works. Likewise from those passages in which the just are said to do something worthy before God, which dignity surely is none other than that of works which are worthy of reward and recompense. Wisd. ch. 3. God tempted them, and found them worthy of himself. Colossians 1. That you may walk worthy of God in all things pleasing, being fruitful in every good work. 2 Thessalonians 1. That you may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God. Finally from those places in which it is expressly stated that God renders a reward for good works as merits. Thus Ecclesiasticus 16. Mercy makes place to every one according to the merit of his works. There although the Greek text has not "according to the merit of his works," but only "according to his works," yet greater account must be had of the Vulgate, which was taken from Greek exemplars more correct than those now extant, and which alone is authentic, and without doubt expresses the true sense of Scripture. For it is the same thing to make place to anyone according to his works, and to make place to him according to the merit of his works. For if ⟦illegible: page ends mid-sentence; raw "Si enim er nperilus. imm non est", possibly "ex operibus, iam non est…"⟧ …grace. Rom. 11. And, To him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned according to grace...

Proof second from the Council of Orange, Can. 18. A reward is owed to good works if they are done; but grace, which is not owed, goes before, that they may be done. From the Lateran Council under Innocent III., and it is cited in the chapter Firmiter: Pleasing God by right faith and good works, they deserve to attain eternal blessedness. From the Florentine Council in the decree of union with the Greeks, where, treating of Purgatory, he says that the souls even of those who after Baptism received have incurred no stain of sin whatever, and also those who, after contracting the stain of sin, either in their bodies or when stripped of the same bodies, are purged, are received straightway into heaven, and clearly behold God himself three and one as he is; yet, on account of the diversity of merits, one more perfectly than another.

It is proved thirdly from Pope Celestine, Epist. to the Bishops of Gaul, cap. 12. So great, he says, is the goodness of God toward men, that he wills our merit to be what are his own gifts, and that for those things which he has bestowed he is going to give eternal rewards.

It is proved fourthly from the Fathers; Cyprian, Epist. 56, and the book De unitate Ecclesiae, in these words: Our merits receive their reward. Hilary, Can. 9 on Matthew. Ambrose on chapter 17 of Luke, and Serm. 7 on Ps. 118, where speaking of the just man he says: He knows that the kingdom of heaven, the fellowship of Angels, and also a crown laid up of merits, is reserved for him. And St. Augustine, Epist. 105. Are the merits of the just then none at all? Plainly they are, since they are just. And afterwards: As by the merit of sin death is rendered as it were a stipend, so by the merit of justice eternal life is rendered as it were a stipend. And afterwards: What merit therefore is there before grace? by which merit does he receive grace, since every good merit of ours is wrought in us only by grace, and since when God crowns our merits, he crowns nothing else than his own gifts? Whence in the book De gestis Pelagii, cap. 11, and in the book De Gratia et libero Arbitrio, cap. 8: When grace has been given, our merits also begin to be good through it, however; for if it withdraw itself, man falls, not raised up, but precipitated, by free will. And afterwards: Considering those words of the Apostle: I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, etc., he subjoins: He commemorates these surely now as his good merits, that he may obtain the crown after good merits, who obtained grace after evil merits. Finally mark what follows: There is laid up for me, he says, a crown of justice, which the Lord, the just judge, will render to me in that day — which crown would the just judge render, if the merciful Father had not given grace, etc. And cap. 7. If therefore thy good merits are the gifts of God, God does not crown thy merits as thy merits, but as his own gifts. And Serm. 18 De verbis Apostoli, cap. 5. When God crowns thy merit, he crowns nothing but his own gifts. — To these subscribes St. Prosper, in answer to cap. 6 of the Gauls: Man, being justified, he says, received a gift whereby he might acquire merit, and merit. And St. Bernard, Serm. 68 on the Canticles: Dost thou dare, he says, to have merit? Know what thou hast received, thou hast held; pernicious pride is a want of merits.

Reason also lends its support; for there place is given to merit where place is given to justice: whereas between man and God there is place for justice, not indeed according to absolute equality, but according to a certain proportion, inasmuch namely as each operates according to his own mode; God indeed by ordaining man to the ultimate end, man truly by acting according to the ordination of God.

They object, the heretics adduce various texts of Scripture, by which they endeavour to prove, first, that all our works are unclean: thus Isaiah 64. We are become all of us as an unclean thing, and all our justices as the rag of a menstruous woman: therefore so far are our works from meriting any reward before God, that rather they provoke divine indignation.

Secondly, that all our works are unprofitable: thus Luke 15(?). When you shall have done all things that are commanded you, say: We are unprofitable servants. Thirdly, that eternal life is given to us as an inheritance as to sons, out of mercy and grace: therefore not on account of good works. The antecedent is evident from that Isaiah 55. All you that thirst, come to the waters: come, buy without money, and without any exchange. Likewise from that Romans 8. If sons, heirs also; heirs indeed of God. The consequence also appears true from that Romans 11. To him that worketh, the reward is reckoned not according to grace, but according to debt; and consequently, since eternal life is conferred upon us gratis, it is evident that it is not given on account of merits.

I answer, all these contexts of Sacred Scripture are not opposed to us. Not indeed the first: for, as even Calvin confesses, the mind of Isaiah is only to repress the complaint of the Jews, who, sent into exile, felt the anger of God against themselves: but the Prophet is not treating of the whole human race. And I say with St. Jerome that there speech is instituted only concerning the Jews, whose justices, that is, their sacrifices, observances, and legal ceremonies, which both there and elsewhere are often called justice in Scripture, were reputed unclean at the coming of Christ, for the reason that the Jewish people at that time provoked divine wrath by adding many things perversely against the commands of the law, and honoured God with lips only and outward rite. The text itself favours this exposition; for the chapter from which the aforesaid words were drawn is wholly about the coming of the Messiah; for so it begins: Who would rend the heavens, and come down. And afterwards: Thou art gone down, and at thy presence the mountains melted away.

To the second text I say that the passage has a threefold sense; of which the first is, that we are unprofitable servants because we do nothing useful for eternal life according to the condition of nature and human birth, but only according to the benefit of grace and divine adoption. Thus St. Ambrose expounds it, lib. 8 on Luke; Know therefore, he says, that thou art a servant bound by very many services of homage; prefer not thyself, because thou art called a son of God: grace must be acknowledged, but nature must not be ignored. The second sense is, that we are unprofitable servants in respect of God, who has no need of our goods, although we are useful in respect of ourselves, because whatsoever good we do by the observance of the commandments redounds to our own commodity and utility. Thus Bede interprets this passage. The third sense is, that we are unprofitable servants according to the common manner of speaking, whereby we are wont to call an unprofitable servant him who does nothing of himself, but performs only those things which are commanded; which interpretation seems to fit the mind of Christ the Lord; for he subjoins: what we ought to do, we have done. — To the third objection I say that, although eternal life is given out of grace, yet it is given as a reward: because, as the Council of Orange rightly said, Can. 18. A reward is owed to good works if they are done; but grace, which is not owed, goes before, that they may be done.

They object secondly. A servant is not held to merit anything, when he performs all that he owes to pay as due obedience to his Lord: but men who are the servants of God owe to God all that they bestow upon his honour and service: therefore under this title they merit nothing. — I answer first, denying the major; both because a servant by the service bestowed upon his Lord merits what is needful to himself for food and clothing, according to that word of 1 Corinthians 9: Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. And also because when the Lord covenants with a servant about wages, then the servant, in virtue of the pact and promise, can merit something: but God covenants with men about the conferring of eternal felicity upon those who keep the divine commandments, and who do or suffer something for the glory of God. I answer secondly, that men are not only the servants of God but adopted sons, and endowed with that liberty which Christ merited for us: and henceforth by that liberty they can merit something before God through their good works.

They object thirdly. Since Christ has merited eternal life for us, either his own merit suffices us for obtaining it, or it does not. If it suffices, our merits are superfluous: if it does not suffice, his oblation was insufficient for our salvation, which to assert is impious and blasphemous. — I answer, that the merit of Christ is most sufficient, nor is its sufficiency in any way diminished by the cooperation of our merits, but only applied: for as the operative power of creatures in natural works does not argue insufficiency of the divine omnipotence, but rather demonstrates and makes known that omnipotence, opening namely how God not only gave being to creatures, but communicated to them the power of operating: so the meritorious power and cooperation of the just argues rather the sufficiency and excellence of the merits of Christ, who not only could grant to the just supernatural being, but also the virtue of operating supernaturally and of meriting. Whence as the sufficiency of the good works of Christ, his prayer, love, abstinence, and other acts, does not exclude our prayer, love, abstinence, and other good works, so neither does the sufficiency of the merits of Christ exclude our good merits.

Finally they object St. Augustine, who seems in several places to exclude human merits, especially lib. De Praedest. sanctorum, cap. 15, where he says: Human merits here waste away, which perished through Adam; that what reigns may be the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord. — I answer, that St. Augustine by these words excludes only human merits elicited by the sole powers of nature: for in that chapter he institutes a comparison between Christ and the Christian; and proves that as Christ did not merit his own Incarnation, so neither can the Christian merit his own vocation. Hence after the aforesaid words he subjoins: Whosoever in our Head beholds the antecedent merits of that singular generation, let him seek in ourselves, his members, the proceeding merits of our multiplied regeneration; for that generation was not rendered back to Christ, but given, that he might be born of the Spirit and the Virgin alien from every obligation of sin; so also to us, that we might be born again of water and the Spirit, it was not rendered back for any merit, but given gratis.

Conclusion second. — MERIT IS AN ACT OF FREE AND HONEST POWER, ELICITED BY MAN AS WAYFARER, AND ACCEPTED BY GOD, AS WORTHY OF A REWARD DUE UNDER SOME TITLE OF GOODNESS OR JUSTICE.

WORTHY OF A REWARD DUE UNDER SOME TITLE OF GOODNESS OR JUSTICE.

It is gathered from the Doctor Subtle in 2 dist. 17 n. 1, where he says: I say that merit is something accepted or to be accepted in someone, for which something is to be rendered back by the accepter to him in whom it is, quasi as due to him for that merit, or beyond that for which he merited. And there the Doctor notes that since in respect of God nothing is to be accepted which was not accepted from eternity, therefore, he says, in the description of merit one need not place "to be accepted" in order to God. — The work is said therefore first to be free: for since natural acts, or coerced and involuntary ones, merit no praise nor reward whatever. There is added honest, whereby it is signified that the meritorious work ought to be an act of some virtue: for vicious and sinful works provoke not reward, but punishment and vengeance. There follows, elicited by man as wayfarer. For, says the Doctor in 1 dist. 21 qu. 2, to posit merit of congruity or of condignity in the soul after death does not seem consonant with Theological doctrine, which posits that state as immune from these. — The remaining parts are added to explain the diversity of merits. For to merits of condignity a reward is owed under the title of justice, but to merits of congruity only under the title of goodness and mercy. Moreover all the aforementioned parts of the definition will more clearly appear, and will be confirmed, in the following third Question, in which we shall open the conditions necessary to merit.