Dist. 14, Part 2, Art. 2, Q. 3
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 14
Quaestio III. Utrum poenitentia restituat homini opera bona, prius mortificata per culpam.
Tertio quaeritur, utrum poenitentia restituat homini opera bona, prius mortificata per culpam. Et quod non, videtur:
1. Hugo1: « Nemo in spe correctionis peccare debet, quia quod semel amittitur, ipsum amplius non recuperatur »: ergo si bona opera prius facta sunt amissa per culpam, impossibile est, ea restitui9; ergo nec vivificari.
2. Item, omne quod vivificatur, est aliquo modo; sed quod omnino praeteriit nullo modo est, et talia sunt opera bona prius facta: ergo nec vivificari nec recuperari possunt.
3. Item, impossibile est habitum amissum amplius illum eundem recuperare3: ergo a simili impossibile est, opera bona, prius mortificata et amissa, eadem recuperari et vivificari.
4. Item, si opera mortificantur et vivificantur, ergo idem actus secundum idem sui est susceptibilis oppositarum conditionum; quod est impossibile4, quia impossibile est, quod motus unus secundum eandem partem primo sit velox et postea tardus.
Contra: 1. Ioel secundo5b: Reddam vobis annos etc.; Glossa: « Non patiar, perire ubertatem, quam cum perturbationibus amisistis »; sed ubertas illa erat ex multitudine bonorum operum: ergo si illam non patitur perire, poenitentia restituit opera bona, mortificata per culpam.
2. Item, ratione videtur: quia opera bona facta prius digna erant remuneratione aeterna; sed quod nunc non remunerentur, hoc est, quia iste non perseverat in gratia: ergo si iste resurgit et perseverat in gratia, opera illa remunerabuntur6b: ergo etc.
3. Item, iste gaudet de bonis, quae fecit ante lapsum, et ordinate: ergo in gloria gaudebit; sed non gauderet in gloria, nisi illa fecisset: ergo ex illis operibus mortificatis per culpam accrescit gaudium aeternum: ergo etc.
4. Item, plus potest gratia poenitentiae quam culpa7b; sed culpa opera viva mortificat: ergo gratia mortificata vivificat.
Conclusio. Opera bona, quae prius fuerunt viva et deinde culpa mortificata, gratia redeunte, reviviscunt.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod hoc verum est et communis tenet opinio, quod opera, quae prius fuerunt viva, quia ex caritate facta et digna vita aeterna, postea, adveniente culpa, mortificantur in isto — quia amplius hoc, quamdiu in eo est culpa, in eo non sunt digna remuneratione propter indignitatem ipsius — sed rursus redeunte gratia, quae istum facit dignum vita aeterna, iam opera in hoc sunt digna remuneratione, et ideo restituuntur et vivificantur. — Et concedendae sunt rationes ad hoc.
Ad intelligentiam autem obiectorum notandum, quod quidam dicunt, quod opera bona, in caritate facta, quia bona sunt et a Deo, fiunt in laudem Dei8b, et inde debet laudari Deus; quia vero in unitate corporis mystici et quia in caritate, pertinent ad corpus mysticum; quia ex libera voluntate et iusta, ad radicis praemium sive facientis meritum. Unde licet iste cadat9b, qui fecit, opera nihilominus remanent in corpore mystico, quia inde alia membra gaudebunt, et Deus inde laudabitur; sed tamen non manent ad gloriam facientis, et ideo moriuntur isti, cum iste moritur; sed ipso resurgente a culpa et facto de corpore mystico, sibi bona opera reviviscunt; et quantum ad hoc dicunt intelligi illud Apocalypsis tertio10b: Tene quod habes etc.
Tamen quidquid sit de hoc, sive remaneant in corpore mystico, sive non; verum est, quod manent in memoria eius qui fecit; et dubium etiam non est, quin maneant in memoria Dei opera prius facta; et quamdiu manet culpa, manent in Dei cognitione cuncta respicientis et in memoria peccatoris. Sed ibi non manent ad remunerandum, nec in memoria peccatoris ad gaudendum, sed magis ad dolendum, quod de tantis bonis ad tanta mala devenit. Sed cum resurgit, manent in Deo ad remunerandum, et in memoria ipsius peccatoris ad gaudendum. Et ideo prius aliquo modo manebant, sed mortua, postmodum manent viva.
1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur de Hugone, dicendum, quod intelligit de illo opere bono, quod homo potuisset facere vel fecisset illo tempore, quo peccavit, quod quidem non recuperabit: quia, si alio tempore velit facere opus, quod omisit, perdit opus, quod deberet in illo tempore facere. Unde Seneca11b dicit, quod gravissima est iactura temporis, quia non potest recuperari.
2. Ad illud quod secundo obiicitur, potest responderi dupliciter: vel quod manent in corpore mystico, sicut tactum est, vel quod manent in memoria eius qui fecit, et Dei, pro quo fecit.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod impossibile est recuperare habitum amissum eundem numero; dicendum, quod aliud est vivificari, aliud recuperari. Recuperatio enim respicit esse, sed vivificatio
respicit ordinatum esse sive ordinem vel tale esse. Et quoniam quod desinit esse, si iterum incipiat esse, non est idem numero, sed aliud; ideo habitus, si corrumpatur et amittatur, idem non recuperatur. Sed quia possibile est, quod idem, manens idem, habeat alium et alium ordinem; et secundum hoc attenditur vivificatio et mortificatio in operibus et fortassis in habitibus: ideo possibile est, opus mortuum vivificari, ita quod manet idem.
4. Ex hoc solvitur ultimum: quia, quando dicitur opus vivum et mortificatum, hoc non dicit diversas dispositiones circa opus, sed dicit circa opus diversas ordinationes, scilicet ordinationem ad remunerationem, dum vivit, et privationem illius, cum iam mortuum est sive mortificatum. Sed in suscipiente sive homine dicit diversitatem penes qualitatem gratiae, quae est accidens absolutum ipsius subiecti, secundum cuius susceptionem et amissionem subiectum modo alteratur, et dicitur homo mortuus, modo vivus, modo peccator, modo iustus, et ita alteratus. Sed opus ex consequenti est ordinatum ad vitam, vel hoc ordine privatum; et hoc non dicit motum, quia « in ad aliquid per se non est motus1c ».
Scholion in articulum II (§ I–IV, quaest. 1–3) cum Quaestione I huius articuli editur. — The scholion on this article (§ I–IV, covering questions 1–3) is rendered with Question I of this article.
---
Question III. Whether penance restores to a man the good works previously mortified by sin.
Thirdly it is asked whether penance restores to a man the good works previously mortified by sin. And that it does not, seems to be the case:
1. Hugh1: "No one ought to sin in the hope of amendment, because what is once lost is no longer recovered": therefore if good works previously done have been lost through sin, it is impossible for them to be restored9; therefore neither [can they] be revived.
2. Likewise, everything that is revived exists in some way; but what has altogether passed away exists in no way, and such are the good works previously done: therefore they can be neither revived nor recovered.
3. Likewise, it is impossible to recover again that same lost habit3: therefore, by a like reasoning, it is impossible that the good works, previously mortified and lost, be recovered and revived as the same.
4. Likewise, if works are mortified and revived, then the same act in the same respect is susceptible of opposite conditions; which is impossible4, because it is impossible that one motion in the same part be first swift and afterwards slow.
On the contrary: 1. Joel chapter two5b: I will restore to you the years etc.; the Gloss: "I will not allow that abundance to perish, which you lost amid your tribulations"; but that abundance was from the multitude of good works: therefore, if He does not allow it to perish, penance restores the good works mortified by sin.
2. Likewise, it appears by reason: because good works previously done were worthy of eternal reward; but that they are not now rewarded is because this man does not persevere in grace: therefore, if this man rises again and perseveres in grace, those works will be rewarded6b: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, this man rejoices over the goods which he did before his fall, and rightly so: therefore he will rejoice in glory; but he would not rejoice in glory unless he had done them: therefore from those works mortified by sin eternal joy accrues: therefore etc.
4. Likewise, the grace of penance can do more than sin can7b; but sin mortifies living works: therefore the mortified grace [restored] revives them.
Conclusion. Good works which were first living and afterwards mortified by sin, when grace returns, come back to life.
I respond: It must be said that this is true and that common opinion holds it, that works which were previously living, because done out of charity and worthy of eternal life, afterwards, when sin comes, are mortified in this man — because, so long as sin is in him, they are no longer worthy of reward in him on account of his unworthiness — but again, when grace returns, which makes this man worthy of eternal life, the works are now worthy of reward in him, and therefore they are restored and revived. — And the reasons for this are to be conceded.
Now, for the understanding of the objections, it must be noted that some say that good works done in charity, because they are good and from God, are done unto the praise of God8b, and thence God ought to be praised; but because [they are done] in the unity of the mystical body and because in charity, they pertain to the mystical body; because [done] from a free and just will, [they pertain] to the reward of the root or to the merit of the doer. Hence, although this man, who did them, falls9b, the works nonetheless remain in the mystical body, because thence other members will rejoice, and God will thence be praised; yet nevertheless they do not remain unto the glory of the doer, and therefore they die in these men, when the man dies; but when he rises again from sin and is made [part] of the mystical body, the good works come back to life for him; and as to this they say that the saying of the Apocalypse, chapter three, is to be understood10b: Hold fast what you have etc.
Yet whatever be the case about this, whether they remain in the mystical body or not; it is true that they remain in the memory of the one who did them; and there is also no doubt that the works previously done remain in the memory of God; and so long as sin remains, they remain in the cognition of God, who beholds all things, and in the memory of the sinner. But there they do not remain unto rewarding, nor in the memory of the sinner unto rejoicing, but rather unto grieving, that from such great goods he has come to such great evils. But when he rises again, they remain in God unto rewarding, and in the memory of the sinner himself unto rejoicing. And therefore they remained before in some way, but dead, and afterwards they remain living.
1. To the objection from Hugh, therefore, it must be said that he understands it of that good work which a man could have done or would have done at the time at which he sinned, which indeed he will not recover: because, if at another time he wishes to do the work which he omitted, he loses the work which he ought to do at that [other] time. Hence Seneca11b says that the loss of time is the gravest loss, because it cannot be recovered.
2. To the second objection, it can be answered in two ways: either that they remain in the mystical body, as has been said, or that they remain in the memory of the one who did them, and of God, for whom he did them.
3. To the objection that it is impossible to recover the same habit, identical in number, that has been lost; it must be said that to be revived is one thing, to be recovered another. For recovery regards being, but revival
regards ordered being, or order, or being-such-and-such. And since that which ceases to be, if it begins to be again, is not the same in number but another; therefore a habit, if it is corrupted and lost, is not recovered as the same. But because it is possible that the same thing, remaining the same, should have one order and another; and according to this revival and mortification are reckoned in works, and perhaps in habits: therefore it is possible for a dead work to be revived, in such a way that it remains the same.
4. From this the last [objection] is solved: because, when a work is called living and mortified, this does not signify diverse dispositions about the work, but signifies about the work diverse orderings, namely an ordering to reward, while it lives, and the privation of that [ordering], when it is now dead or mortified. But in the recipient, or in the man, it signifies a diversity in respect of the quality of grace, which is an absolute accident of the subject itself, according to whose reception and loss the subject is now altered, and the man is called now dead, now living, now a sinner, now just, and so altered. But the work consequently is ordered to life, or is deprived of this order; and this does not signify a motion, because "in the relative there is per se no motion1c."
The scholion on this article (§ I–IV, covering questions 1–3) is rendered with Question I of this article. — Scholion in articulum II (§ I–IV, quaest. 1–3) cum Quaestione I huius articuli editur.
---
- 1Cfr. infra lit. Magistri, d. XV. c. 7.Cf. below, the text of the Master, d. XV, c. 7.
- 9Libr. II. de Sacram. p. XIV. c. 4. — In fine arg. pro restitui codd. I K recuperari.On the Sacraments, Book II, p. XIV, c. 4. — At the end of the argument, for restitui (to be restored) codices I K [read] recuperari (to be recovered).
- 3Cfr. Aristot. de Praedicam. c. de Oppositis, tom. II. pag. 815, nota 4. allegatus; V. Phys. text. 36. seqq. (c. 4.), et II. de Generat. et corrupt. in fine.Cf. Aristotle, Categories, c. On Opposites, adduced in tom. II, p. 815, note 4; V Physics, text 36 ff. (c. 4), and II On Generation and Corruption, at the end.
- 4Secundum Aristot., II. Periherm. c. 1. (c. 14.).According to Aristotle, II On Interpretation, c. 1 (c. 14).
- 5bVers. 25. — Glossa (secundum Hieronym. in hunc loc.) est apud Lyranum interlinearis, ubi in fine legitur quam perturbationibus animi perdidistis. Non pauci codd. Non patiatur vel Non patietur pro Non patiar.Verse 25. — The Gloss (according to Jerome on this passage) is found in Lyra as the interlinear [gloss], where at the end is read which you lost through the perturbations of the soul. Not a few codices [read] Non patiatur or Non patietur (Let Him not allow) for Non patiar (I will not allow).
- 6bHieronym., in Gal. 3, 4: Tanta passi estis sine causa, si tamen sine causa, ait: Quod quicumque ob Christi fidem laboraverit, et postea lapsus fuerit in peccatum, sicut priora sine causa dicitur passus fuisse, dum peccat; sic rursum non perdet ea, si ad pristinam fidem et ad antiquum studium revertatur. Cfr. Hebr. 6, 10, qui versus a Petro Lombardo (in hunc loc.) simili modo explicatur.Jerome, on Galatians 3:4: You have suffered so many things in vain, if indeed in vain, he says: that whoever has labored for the faith of Christ, and afterwards has fallen into sin, just as he is said to have suffered the former things in vain while he sins; so again he will not lose them, if he returns to his former faith and to his ancient zeal. Cf. Hebrews 6:10, which verse is explained in a similar way by Peter Lombard (on this passage).
- 7bVide tom. II. pag. 920, nota 4.See tom. II, p. 920, note 4.
- 8bAugust., Enarrat. in Ps. 68. serm. I. n. 5: Laudant omnia Deum, sed quae fecit Deus. Cfr. II. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. XXXVII. c. 2.Augustine, Expositions on the Psalms, on Ps. 68, sermon I, n. 5: All things praise God, but [namely] those which God made. Cf. II Sent., text of the Master, d. XXXVII, c. 2.
- 9bIta codd. H U; alii et edd. quia (cod. V quando) iste cadit, sed inepte.So codices H U; others and the editions [read] quia (codex V quando) iste cadit (because/when this man falls), but unsuitably.
- 10bVers. 11.Verse 11.
- 11bEpist. 1: « Ita fac, mi Lucili! vindica te tibi et tempus... Turpissima tamen est iactura, quae per negligentiam fit... tanta stultitia mortalium est, ut... nemo se quidquam debere iudicet, qui tempus accepit, cum interim hoc unum est, quod ne gratus quidem potest reddere ». Idem exponit in libro de Brevitate vitae, praesertim c. 8. — Pro recuperari plures codd. recuperare.Letter 1: "Do thus, my Lucilius! lay claim to yourself for yourself, and [gather] the time... Yet the most shameful loss is that which comes about through negligence... so great is the folly of mortals that... no one judges himself to owe anything who has received time, whereas meanwhile this is the one thing which not even a grateful man can repay." He expounds the same in the book On the Shortness of Life, especially c. 8. — For recuperari several codices [read] recuperare.
- 1cSecundum Aristot., V. Phys. text. 10. (c. 2.). Vide tom. II. pag. 831, nota 7. — Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.According to Aristotle, V Physics, text 10 (c. 2). See tom. II, p. 831, note 7. — See the scholion to question 1 of this article. ---