340. Objections.
1. From Rom. 8:18 and 2 Cor. 4:17, where Paul says: the sufferings of this
present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to
us, because this sight momentary affliction is preparing for us an
eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison. Therefore the works of the just
are not a condign merit of eternal life.
I distinguish the consequent.
They are not condign with a quantitative condignness, conceded; with
a condignness of proportion, denied.
As we explained above, a twofold
condignness or equality between the merit and the reward is present—of quantity
(arithmetic) and of proportion (geometric). Really, according to the
equality of quantity we cannot merit eternal life, since the quantity of the
act of virtue can never equal the reward of glory; but with the help of grace,
which is the seed of glory, we surely can merit according to the equality of
proportion. Therefore the texts, which are cited as objections, are dealing
with quantitative equality, and say that the brief duration of suffering in
this life cannot be compared with the duration of eternal glory. But the texts
that we cite in order to prove the thesis about an equality of proportion.
2. From Rom. 6:23: but the free
gift of God is eternal life, that is, eternal life is a free gift of God,
or it is given out of mercy. Therefore no condignness is present, not even of
proportion, between the good works and the reward.
I distinguish the antecedent. Eternal
life is a free gift of God, or it is given out of mercy, radically,
inasmuch as grace, which is conferred out of mercy and gratuitously, precedes
man’s merits, conceded; it is a free gift of God, or it is given out of
mercy, formally, denied. See Indiculus, ch. 9, and Trent,
s. 6 ch. 16 (d 248, 1548-1550).
3. If eternal life were given
because of merits, a man could boast that he was saved by his own merits. But this
contradicts the words of the Apostle in Eph. 2:8. Therefore man cannot merit
eternal life.
I distinguish the antecedent.
He could boast that he was saved by his own merits as being done by grace, conceded;
as done by his own efforts, denied.
4. Eternal life is due to the just
as an inheritance. But an inheritance is not given because of some merit.
Therefore the just do not merit eternal life.
I distinguish the major.
Eternal life is due to the just as an inheritance, and on the supposition of
good works, also as a reward, conceded; it is due only as an
inheritance, I subdistinguish; the glory which responds to the grace
accepted only through the sacrament of Baptism because of the work done (ex opera
operato), conceded; otherwise, denied.
Eternal life is given to the just under
two titles: from the title of inheritance, because they are the adopted
children of God, and from the title of reward, because of the merits of good
works. But these two titles can be separated from each other, or also be
together. Thus v. gr., those who are baptized and die before the use of reason
obtain glory only under the title of inheritance. But glory is given to adults
who die in the state of grace both under the title of inheritance, because
ultimately glory is based on the grace of adoption, and also under the title of
reward, because the just man with his good works shows true submission to God.
5. All good works are already due
to God under other titles, v.gr., of gratitude, obedience, etc. But no one
merits before another through things owed to him for some other reason.
Therefore the good works of the just are not meritorious before God.
I concede the major and
distinguish the minor. No one merits before men through things owed to them for some
other reason. I bypass the minor, since also among men the nature of a
debt does not always rule out the nature of merit; no one merits before God
because of works that are due to Him for some other reason, denied.
The nature of moral merit is based
on the fact that it freely offers what God commands or what is owed to God in
any manner whatsoever. For, “God seeks from our goods not profit, but glory, i.e.,
the manifestation of his goodness; even as he seeks it also in his own works.
Now nothing accrues to him, but only to ourselves, by our worship of him. Hence
we merit from God, not that by our works anything accrues to him, but inasmuch
as we work for his glory” (I-II, q. 114, a. 1 ad 2)
6. If man merits eternal life, by
that fact he diminishes the merits of Christ, which are held to be insufficient.
Therefore it is repugnant that man should merit.
I deny the antecedent.
For, the doctrine concerning the merits of good works, not only does not argue
for the insufficiency of Christ’s merits, but it even shows their
superabundance, since they bring it about that our works have the power of
meriting eternal life, which Christ acquired for us by his blood. See Trent,
s. 6 ch. 16 (D 1545-1547). (Severino González Rivas, Sacrae Theologiae Summa,
4 vols. [trans. Kenneth Baker; Keep the Faith, Inc., 2014], 3-B: 229-30)
