← Back to Distinction 18

Dist. 18, Art. 2, Q. 3

Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 18

Textus Latinus
p. 391

Quaestio III. Utrum Christus meruerit nobis ianuae apertionem.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum Christus meruerit nobis ianuae apertionem. Et quod sic, videtur:

1. Auctoritate Augustini super Epistolam ad Hebraeosp391-6: « Per aliam hostiam non potuit nobis aperiri aditus et fieri salus nisi per mortem Unigeniti, cuius tanta fuit humilitas et patientia, ut eius merito pateret credentibus in eum aditus regni ».

p. 392

2. Item, hoc videtur auctoritate Magistri in litterap392-1: « Christi humilitas, qua mortem gustavit, ingressum regni caelestis omnibus suis, impleto Dei decreto, aperire valuit »; quod si verum est, redit idem quod prius.

3. Item, nullus introibat in caelum, antequam Christus pateretur et moreretur, sed descendebat ad limbum, sicut patet per vetus Testamentump392-2; sed modo ascendunt: ergo videtur, quod modo aperta sit ianua per Christi meritum.

4. Item, si aliter quam per Christi merita potuissemus introire in gloriam paradisi, ergo sine morte et passione Christi possemus salvari; et si hoc: ergo Christus mortuus esset gratisp392-3. Quodsi hoc est inconveniens, constat, quod non fuit aperta ianua paradisi nisi per merita Christi.

Sed contra: 1. Si Christus meruit nobis apertionem ianuae paradisi, aut ergo paradisi terrestris, aut caelestis. Paradisi terrestris non, quia morientes non ingrediuntur illuc; et praeterea, Henoch et Elias ingressi fuerunt ante Christi adventump392-4. Paradisi caelestis non, quoniam in caelo nulla posita fuit custodia vel clausura; homo enim non fuit de eo eiectus: ergo non videtur, quod per merita Christi sit aperta ianua alicuius paradisi.

2. Item, si Christus aperuit nobis ianuam meritis suis, aut ergo merito actionum, aut merito passionum. Si merito actionum: ergo videtur, quod frustra fuerit passus, ex quo actiones suae sufficiebant quantum ad meritum. Si passionibus: ergo videtur, quod Christus profecerit quantum ad meritump392-5.

3. Item, omne meritum consistit in radice caritatis, et caritas in Christo non crevit, ergo omne quod Christus meruit, ab initio meruit; sed aditum regni ab initio nobis non meruit, alioquin non oportuisset ipsum patip392-6: ergo nunquam videtur, quod aditum illum potuisset nobis deinceps mereri.

4. Item, aut iustum erat, nobis ianuam aperiri, aut iniustum. Si iustum: ergo circumscriptis meritis Christi, debebat nobis patere aditus regni. Si iniustum; sed Christus nihil meruit nisi iustum: ergo Christus non meruit nobis apertionem.

5. Item, caritas meretur gloriam ex condigno; sed Abraham habuit caritatem, sicut nos habemus: aut igitur Deus cum eo iniuste egit, aut eum in gloriam introduxit; et si hoc, aditus regni patuit ante adventum Christi: non ergo aperta fuit ianua per merita eius.

6. Item, fides Christi ante adventum Christi ita introducebat hominem a statu culpae in statum gratiae, sicut et post adventum: ergo et pari ratione sic debuit introducere a statu viae in statum gloriae tunc, sicut nunc: ergo si nunc fidelibus morientibus patet ingressus in caelum, videtur, quod et ante adventum Christi: ergo ianua caeli non fuit aperta per eius merita.

Conclusio.

Christus per suam satisfactionem meruit nobis paradisi caelestis apertionem.

Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod est paradisus terrestris, et est paradisus caelestis, et Adam peccante, utriusque ianua clausa fuit. Clausio autem ianuae paradisi terrestris signum fuit clausionis ianuae paradisi caelestisp392-7. Est autem paradisus caelestis aperta visio Deip392-8; clausio autem huius ianuae fuit impossibilitas videndi Deum facie ad faciem, quae impossibilitas consurgebat ex merito peccati Adae et ex decreto divinae sententiae, quo scilicet Deus decreverat neminem ad sui aspectum admittere, nisi facta esset sibi emenda et satisfactio pro illo peccato. Et quoniam emenda et satisfactio facta est ei per Christum, sicut melius infrap392-9 manifestabitur; hinc est, quod per meritum Christi patuit nobis ingressus in caelum. — Unde concedendae sunt rationes et auctoritates, quae hoc ostendunt.

Ad argumenta:

1. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur de paradiso caelesti et terrestri; dicendum, quod per meritum Christi patuit nobis aditus in paradisum caelestem, cuius ianuae clausio facta fuit nobis per divinam sententiam, sicut praedictum est, et Magister recitat in litterap392-10. Propter hoc ratio inducta procedit per suppositionem falsi.

p. 393

2. Ad illud quod quaeritur, utrum meruerit nobis apertionem ianuae actione, vel passione; dicendum, quod per passionemp393-1. Per passionem enim satisfecit et pretium persolvit; nec sequitur propter hoc, quod in merito profecerit, quia non sibi, sed nobis meruit; et ideo non potest concludi ex hoc, quod ipse profecerit, sed quod nos profecerimus.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod meritum totum consistit in radice caritatis; dicendum, quod est meritum adeptionis vitae aeternae, et est meritum dimissionis poenae. Meritum vitae aeternae consistit in radice caritatis, meritum autem remissionis poenae non tantum consistit in caritate, sed etiam in passionis acerbitate. Apertio autem ianuae principaliter consistebat quantum ad meritum dimissionis poenae, pro eo quod illa apertio fieri habebat per opus satisfactionis; satisfactio autem fit maxime per opera poenaliap393-2.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod aut erat iustum, aut iniustum, nobis ianuam aperiri; dicendum, quod ante satisfactionem, reatu manente, iustum erat, ianuam nobis claudi; sed satisfactione iam facta, iustum erat, nobis ianuam aperiri. Unde Christus satisfaciendo fecit nobis de indebito debitum, ac per hoc vere et proprie nobis meruit aperiri caelum. Unde cump393-3 dicitur, quod Christus nihil meruit nisi iustum; dicendum, quod illud habet veritatem, si intelligatur, quod illud retineat rationem iniustitiae post meritoriam interventionem; sic autem non est hic, sicut visum est.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod caritas meretur gloriam aeternam ex condigno; dicendum, quod post lapsum hominis caritas non meretur nisi praeambulo motu fidei; fides autem absoluta non sufficit, nisi sit fides Creatoris et Mediatoris, sine qua nemo potest iustificarip393-4; ideo efficacia omnis meriti fundata est super merita Christi. Et propterea non sequitur, quod caritas mereatur gloriam, circumscriptis meritis Christi, vel introducat in ipsam, pro eo quod meritum caritatis nostrae non excludit merita Christi, sed potius includit.

6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod fides Christi ante passionem introducebat in gratiam, ergo pari ratione et in gloriam; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia status gratiae bene compatitur secum obligationem ad poenam; non sic autem status gloriae, qui excludit omnem imperfectionem poenae et culpae. Ideo, quamvis Dominus daret gratiam propter satisfactionem promissamp393-5, non tamen debuit dare gloriam, nisi satisfactione soluta. Et ideo non patebat ingressus in regnum, nisi prius interveniret passio Christi, per quam solveretur pretium satisfactorium, et nos non tantum liberaremur a culpa, sed etiam absolveremur a reatu. Haec autem melius inferiusp393-6 manifestabuntur.

Scholion

II. Conclusio seq. (3.) quaestionis est manifesta. Ianua paradisi caelestis dicitur clausa, « in quantum est aliquod obstaculum prohibens ab introitu paradisi. Obstaculum autem potest esse duplex: unum ex parte personae, quod est per peccatum actuale; aliud ex parte naturae, quod est per peccatum originale.... Et hoc quidem obstaculum auferri non potuit, nisi per eum cuius operatio in totam naturam potuit, scilicet Christum... et quantum ad hoc apertionem ianuae meruit » (S. Thom., hic a. 6. quaestiunc. 2. 3; cfr. S. III. q. 52. a. 5.).

De eadem quaestione: Alex. Hal., loc. cit. q. 18. m. 6. a. i. — B. Albert., hic a. 12. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 4. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. q. 3. — Dionys. Carth., III. Sent. d. 19. q. 1. in fine.

---

English Translation

Question III. Whether Christ merited for us the opening of the gate.

Thirdly it is asked, whether Christ merited for us the opening of the gate. And that he did, it seems:

1. By the authority of Augustine on the Epistle to the Hebrewsp391-6: « By another victim the entrance could not be opened to us, nor salvation be effected, except through the death of the Only-begotten, whose humility and patience were so great, that by his merit the entrance of the kingdom might lie open to those who believe in him ».

2. Likewise, this is seen by the authority of the Master in the textp392-1: « Christ's humility, by which he tasted death, was able to open the entrance of the heavenly kingdom to all his own, the decree of God being fulfilled »; and if this is true, the same returns as before.

3. Likewise, no one entered heaven before Christ suffered and died, but he descended to limbo, as is clear from the Old Testamentp392-2; but now they ascend: therefore it seems that now the gate is opened through Christ's merit.

4. Likewise, if we could have entered into the glory of paradise otherwise than through Christ's merits, then we could be saved without the death and passion of Christ; and if so: then Christ would have died in vainp392-3. But if this is unfitting, it is established that the gate of paradise was not opened except through the merits of Christ.

On the contrary: 1. If Christ merited for us the opening of the gate of paradise, then either of the earthly paradise, or of the heavenly. Not of the earthly paradise, because those who die do not enter there; and besides, Enoch and Elijah entered before the coming of Christp392-4. Not of the heavenly paradise, since in heaven no guard or barrier was set; for man was not cast out of it: therefore it does not seem that through Christ's merits the gate of any paradise was opened.

2. Likewise, if Christ opened the gate to us by his merits, then either by the merit of actions, or by the merit of passions. If by the merit of actions: then it seems that he suffered in vain, since his actions sufficed as to merit. If by passions: then it seems that Christ profited as to meritp392-5.

3. Likewise, all merit consists in the root of charity, and charity in Christ did not grow, therefore all that Christ merited, he merited from the beginning; but he did not merit for us the entrance of the kingdom from the beginning, otherwise it would not have been necessary for him to sufferp392-6: therefore it never seems that he could afterward have merited that entrance for us.

4. Likewise, either it was just that the gate be opened to us, or unjust. If just: then, the merits of Christ being set aside, the entrance of the kingdom ought to lie open to us. If unjust; but Christ merited nothing except what is just: therefore Christ did not merit for us the opening.

5. Likewise, charity merits glory by condignity; but Abraham had charity, just as we have it: therefore either God dealt unjustly with him, or he led him into glory; and if this, the entrance of the kingdom lay open before the coming of Christ: therefore the gate was not opened through his merits.

6. Likewise, the faith of Christ before the coming of Christ led man from the state of guilt into the state of grace, just as also after the coming: therefore by parity of reasoning it ought then to have led from the state of the wayfarer into the state of glory, just as now: therefore if now the entrance into heaven lies open to the faithful who die, it seems that it did so also before the coming of Christ: therefore the gate of heaven was not opened through his merits.

Conclusion.

Christ by his satisfaction merited for us the opening of the heavenly paradise.

I respond: For the understanding of the foregoing it must be noted that there is an earthly paradise, and there is a heavenly paradise, and when Adam sinned, the gate of each was closed. Now the closing of the gate of the earthly paradise was a sign of the closing of the gate of the heavenly paradisep392-7. Now the heavenly paradise is the open vision of Godp392-8; and the closing of this gate was the impossibility of seeing God face to face, which impossibility arose from the merit of Adam's sin and from the decree of the divine sentence, by which namely God had decreed to admit no one to his sight, unless reparation and satisfaction were made to him for that sin. And since reparation and satisfaction were made to him through Christ, as will be better shown belowp392-9; hence it is that through the merit of Christ the entrance into heaven lay open to us. — Hence the reasons and authorities that show this are to be conceded.

To the arguments:

1. As for that which is objected concerning the heavenly and earthly paradise; it must be said that through the merit of Christ the entrance into the heavenly paradise lay open to us, the closing of whose gate was made for us by the divine sentence, as has been said, and as the Master recounts in the textp392-10. On account of this the reason adduced proceeds by the supposition of something false.

2. As for that which is asked, whether he merited for us the opening of the gate by action or by passion; it must be said that it was by passionp393-1. For by passion he made satisfaction and paid the price; nor does it follow on this account that he profited in merit, because he merited not for himself, but for us; and therefore it cannot be concluded from this that he himself profited, but that we profited.

3. As for that which is objected, that all merit consists in the root of charity; it must be said that there is a merit of the attainment of eternal life, and there is a merit of the remission of punishment. The merit of eternal life consists in the root of charity, but the merit of the remission of punishment consists not only in charity, but also in the bitterness of the passion. Now the opening of the gate consisted principally as to the merit of the remission of punishment, for the reason that that opening had to be effected through the work of satisfaction; and satisfaction is made chiefly through penal worksp393-2.

4. As for that which is objected, that it was either just or unjust that the gate be opened to us; it must be said that before satisfaction, the guilt remaining, it was just that the gate be closed to us; but satisfaction now having been made, it was just that the gate be opened to us. Hence Christ by making satisfaction made for us a debt out of what was not owed, and through this truly and properly merited for us that heaven be opened. Hence whenp393-3 it is said that Christ merited nothing except what is just; it must be said that this holds true, if it be understood that it would retain the character of injustice after the meritorious intervention; but it is not so here, as has been seen.

5. As for that which is objected, that charity merits eternal glory by condignity; it must be said that after the fall of man charity does not merit except by a preceding movement of faith; and absolute faith does not suffice, unless it be faith in the Creator and Mediator, without which no one can be justifiedp393-4; therefore the efficacy of every merit is founded upon the merits of Christ. And on this account it does not follow that charity merits glory, the merits of Christ being set aside, or leads into it, for the reason that the merit of our charity does not exclude the merits of Christ, but rather includes them.

6. As for that which is objected, that the faith of Christ before the passion led into grace, therefore by parity of reasoning also into glory; it must be said that there is no likeness, because the state of grace is well compatible with itself an obligation to punishment; but not so the state of glory, which excludes every imperfection of punishment and of guilt. Therefore, although the Lord gave grace on account of the promised satisfactionp393-5, he nevertheless was not obliged to give glory, except the satisfaction being paid. And therefore the entrance into the kingdom did not lie open, unless first the passion of Christ should intervene, through which the satisfactory price might be paid, and we be not only freed from guilt, but also absolved from punishment. But these things will be better manifested belowp393-6.

Scholion

II. The conclusion of the following (3rd) question is manifest. The gate of the heavenly paradise is said to be closed, « inasmuch as there is some obstacle preventing entry into paradise. Now the obstacle can be twofold: one on the part of the person, which is through actual sin; the other on the part of the nature, which is through original sin.... And this obstacle indeed could not be removed, except through him whose operation extended to the whole nature, namely Christ... and as to this he merited the opening of the gate » (St. Thomas, here a. 6, little-question 2, 3; cf. Summa III, q. 52, a. 5.).

On the same question: Alexander of Hales, loc. cit., q. 18, m. 6, a. i. — Bl. Albert, here a. 12. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 4, a. 2. — Richard of Middleton, loc. cit., q. 3. — Denis the Carthusian, III Sent., d. 19, q. 1, at the end.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. In cod. N adiectum invenimus et habetur in littera, ubi a Magistro (hic c. 5.) verba, quae hic Augustino tribuuntur, allata sunt ad illustrandum testimonium Ambrosii (re vera est Alcuini, in Hebr. 9, 15.) ibi adductum. Cfr. August., XIII. de Trin. c. 10. n. 13. seqq., de quo etiam infra agetur d. 20. q. 6. in testimonio allegato.
    In codex N we found it added, and it is contained in the text, where by the Master (here c. 5) the words which are here attributed to Augustine are adduced to illustrate the testimony of Ambrose (it is in reality Alcuin's, on Heb. 9, 15) adduced there. Cf. Augustine, On the Trinity XIII, c. 10, n. 13 ff., concerning whom it will also be treated below, d. 20, q. 6, in the testimony alleged.
  2. Hic c. 5. — In dicto Magistri pro aperire valuit, quod et originale exhibet, maior pars codd. nec non edd. aperire voluit.
    Here c. 5. — In the saying of the Master, instead of was able to open (aperire valuit), which the original also gives, the greater part of the codices and likewise the editions read willed to open (aperire voluit).
  3. Cfr. IV. Sent. d. 45. a. I. q. I, ubi specialiter de limbo tractatur et in testimonium eius ex vet. Test. afferuntur illa verba Iacob, Gen. 37, 35: « Descendam ad filium meum lugens in infernum »; nec non illa eiusdem, ibid. 42, 38: « Deducetis canos meos cum dolore ad inferos »; et verba Iob 17, 13: Si sustinuero, infernus domus mea est. — Post pauca pro ianua codd. A b porta.
    Cf. IV Sent., d. 45, a. I, q. I, where limbo is specially treated and in its support there are adduced from the Old Testament those words of Jacob, Gen. 37, 35: « I will go down to my son mourning into hell »; and likewise those of the same, ibid. 42, 38: « You will bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the dead »; and the words of Job 17, 13: If I wait, hell is my house. — A little after, instead of ianua (gate) codices A b read porta (door).
  4. Gal. 2, 21. Cfr. supra pag. 66, nota 7.
    Gal. 2, 21. Cf. above p. 66, note 7.
  5. De Henoch vide Eccli. 44, 16. Cfr. Gen. 5, 24, et Hebr. 11, 5. De Elia vide IV. Reg. 2, 11; Eccli. 48, 9. et 13; I. Mach. 2, 58. — Paulo inferius pro de eo, quod habent edd., codd. de ea [clausura?], codd. A b de illa.
    Concerning Enoch see Sir. 44, 16. Cf. Gen. 5, 24, and Heb. 11, 5. Concerning Elijah see 4 Kings 2, 11; Sir. 48, 9 and 13; 1 Macc. 2, 58. — A little below, instead of de eo (out of it), which the editions have, the codices read de ea [the barrier?], the codices A b de illa.
  6. Magister hic in lit. c. 4: Per passionem nil sibi meruit quod non ante per virtutes meruit.
    The Master here in the text, c. 4: Through the passion he merited for himself nothing that he had not before merited through the virtues.
  7. Luc. 24, 26: Nonne haec oportuit pati Christum etc. — De maiori cfr. supra pag. 387, nota 3.
    Luke 24, 26: Did it not behoove Christ to suffer these things, etc. — Concerning the major [premise] cf. above p. 387, note 3.
  8. Secundum August., XI. de Gen. ad lit. c. 40. n. 55. Cfr. II. de Gen. contra Manich. c. 22. n. 34. — In propositione seq. respicitur illud 1. Cor. 13, 12: Videmus... tunc autem facie ad faciem. — In eadem propositione pro decreverat edd. exhibent determinaverat, et pro admittere cod. X venire.
    According to Augustine, On Genesis according to the Letter XI, c. 40, n. 55. Cf. On Genesis against the Manicheans II, c. 22, n. 34. — In the following proposition reference is made to that of 1 Cor. 13, 12: We see... but then face to face. — In the same proposition, instead of decreverat (had decreed) the editions give determinaverat (had determined), and instead of admittere (to admit) codex X venire (to come).
  9. Cfr. IV. Sent. d. 49. p. I. q. 5, ubi in solut. ad I. etiam explicatur, quod sensu visio Dei vocetur tota merces.
    Cf. IV Sent., d. 49, p. I, q. 5, where in the solution to the first it is also explained in what sense the vision of God is called the whole reward.
  10. Dist. 19. a. 1. q. I. seqq. et d. 20. q. 5.
    Dist. 19, a. 1, q. I, ff., and d. 20, q. 5.
  11. Hic c. 5. Vide fundam. 2. — Subinde pro inducta codd. U X praeinducta.
    Here c. 5. See the 2nd ground. — Thereupon, instead of inducta (adduced) codices U X praeinducta (previously adduced).
  12. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 5.
    Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 5.
  13. Cfr. infra d. 19. a. 1. q. 4.
    Cf. below d. 19, a. 1, q. 4.
  14. Pro cum non pauci codd. quod. Subinde pro nisi iustum Vat. iniustum. Paulo inferius pro iniustitiae codd. A I K Z bb falso iustitiae. Nam immediate praecedens vox illud significat apertionem ianuae caelestis.
    Instead of cum (when) not a few codices read quod. Thereupon, instead of nisi iustum (except what is just) the Vatican edition reads iniustum (unjust). A little below, instead of iniustitiae (of injustice) codices A I K Z bb falsely read iustitiae (of justice). For the immediately preceding word illud signifies the opening of the heavenly gate.
  15. Vide supra pag. 236, nota 10. — In initio solut. pro gloriam aeternam cod. K vitam aeternam. Paulo inferius post omnis meriti codd. A K bb subdunt nostri. Circa finem solut. pro non excludit codd. G I L N T U V Z aa non excludat.
    See above p. 236, note 10. — At the beginning of the solution, instead of eternal glory codex K reads eternal life. A little below, after of every merit codices A K bb add our. Near the end of the solution, instead of non excludit (does not exclude, indic.) codices G I L N T U V Z aa read non excludat (subj.).
  16. Edd. verbo promissam praemittunt nobis.
    The editions prefix to us to the word promised.
  17. Dist. 19. a. 1. q. 2. et 4. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.
    Dist. 19, a. 1, q. 2 and 4. — See the scholion to the preceding question. ---
← Dist. 18, Art. 2, Q. 2Dist. 18, Dubia→