Dist. 17, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 3
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 17
Quaestio III. Utrum necesse sit, quod attritio praecedat impii iustificationem sive contritionem.
Tertio quaeritur, utrum necesse sit, quod attritio praecedat impii iustificationem sive contritionem. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. Quoniam, si Deus iustificaret sine praeparatione, tunc etiam sine motu liberi arbitrii iustificaret; quod quidem non facit, sicut dicit Augustinus6: « Qui creavit te sine te non iustificat te sine te ». Tunc igitur quaero: per quid immediate se praeparat? Si per actum alium quam doloris; cum gratia non sit deletiva suae praeparationis, illum actum non expellet, sed formabit: ergo sine omni contritione poterit iustificari; sed hoc est falsum7: ergo etc.
2. Item, gratia per se sufficiens est delere culpam, ex quo venit in animam: ergo si requiritur actus, videtur hoc esse magis ad introducendam gratiam quam ad iuvandum introductam; sed motus doloris ante infusionem gratiae est attritio8: ergo etc.
3. Item, licet dolor sit motus instantaneus, non tamen elicitur a libero arbitrio nisi per praeparationem et collationem, quae fit in tempore; sed iustificatio fit in instanti9: ergo necesse est, quod ante illud instans liberum arbitrium dolere incipiat.
Contra: 1. Videmus Paulum iustificatum, in quo nulla praecessit praeparatio nec attritio10.
2. Item, Ambrosius11: « Nescit tarda molimina Spiritus sancti gratia »: ergo statim potest totum fieri: ergo etc.
3. Item, si requiritur dolor praecedens, aut ille dolor informatur adveniente gratia, aut non. Si sic: ergo attritio fit contritio, et opus mortuum fit vivum; quod est inconveniens12. Si non informatur, ergo necesse est, dolorem novum elici; sed similiter posset elici, si ille non praecessisset: ergo etc.
Item, iuxta hoc quaeritur, utrum attritio fiat contritio. Et quod non, videtur: quia ortum habet a timore servili, qui expellitur13, non formatur. — Quod autem fiat, videtur: quia ortum habet a fide informi, quae non expellitur, sed formatur: ergo similiter et attritio.
Conclusio. Attritio praecedit impii iustificationem secundum legem communem.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod secundum speciale privilegium potest Deus iustificare sine omni praeparatione; tamen secundum legem communem non iustificat nisi eos qui se praeparant, sicut dicitur in Zacharia1: Convertimini ad me, et ego convertar ad vos. Et quia praeparatio debet esse secundum convenientiam qua est ad iustificationem, in motu liberi arbitrii et contritio; necesse est, quod homo se praeparet motu fidei et doloris, ita quod gratia inveniat liberum arbitrium in utroque istorum actuum, vel etiam summe paratum ad utrumque, ita quod in eodem instanti paratum sit moveri, in quo gratia advenit. — Et concedendae sunt rationes ad partem istam; procedunt enim secundum legem communem, quae non praeiudicat privilegio speciali2.
Ad 1, 2. Et ideo patet de Paulo. Similiter, quod nescit tarda molimina; dicendum, quod verum est, quod gratia subito venit, sed tamen homo non subito praeparatur.
Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, utrum ille dolor formetur, aut novus eliciatur; illi qui dicunt, quod post contritio sequitur culpae remissionem, dicunt, quod novus elicitur, et post infusionem gratiae omnes virtutes habent novos actus. Sed illi qui dicunt, quod contritio est in instanti iustificationis; necesse habent dicere, quod dolor ille formatur et motus fidei sive liberi arbitrii3.
Ad illud ergo quod quaeritur, utrum attritio fiat contritio; dicendum, quod istud tripliciter potest intelligi: aut quod habitus, quo quis atteritur, formetur et illo conteratur, sicut fides informis fit formata; et hoc credo verum, credo enim, quod habitus poenitentiae informis per adventum gratiae formatur. Nec4 simile est de timore servili, in quo vivit voluntas peccandi. — Secundo modo potest intelligi quantum ad actum substratum; et adhuc concedo, quod actus, qui in principio sui est attritio, antequam interrumpatur, fit contritio, sicut patet de motu, quo quis vadit ad ecclesiam, si infundatur ei gratia in via. — Tertio modo potest intelligi quantum ad conditionem superadditam, quia opus mortuum secundum partem illam, qua mortuum est, fiat vivum; et hoc impossibile est, quia pars illa motus transiit et fuit informis et numquam formatur, quia non resumitur idem, quod praeteriit5.
---
Question III. Whether it is necessary that attrition precede the justification of the wicked, or contrition.
Thirdly it is asked whether it is necessary that attrition precede the justification of the wicked, or contrition. And that it is so seems [to be the case]:
1. Because, if God were to justify without preparation, then He would also justify without a motion of free will; which indeed He does not do, as Augustine says6: "He who created you without you does not justify you without you." Then therefore I ask: by what does one immediately prepare oneself? If by some act other than that of sorrow; since grace is not destructive of one's preparation, it will not expel that act but will inform it: therefore one will be able to be justified without any contrition; but this is false7: therefore, etc.
2. Likewise, grace is of itself sufficient to destroy guilt, from the moment it comes into the soul: therefore if an act is required, this seems to be rather for introducing grace than for assisting grace once introduced; but a motion of sorrow before the infusion of grace is attrition8: therefore, etc.
3. Likewise, although sorrow is an instantaneous motion, nevertheless it is not elicited by free will except through a preparation and a bringing-together, which happens in time; but justification happens in an instant9: therefore it is necessary that before that instant free will begin to sorrow.
On the contrary: 1. We see Paul justified, in whom no preparation nor attrition preceded10.
2. Likewise, Ambrose11: "The grace of the Holy Spirit knows no slow endeavors": therefore the whole thing can be done at once: therefore, etc.
3. Likewise, if a preceding sorrow is required, either that sorrow is informed by the coming of grace, or not. If so: then attrition becomes contrition, and a dead work becomes living; which is unfitting12. If it is not informed, then it is necessary that a new sorrow be elicited; but it could likewise be elicited if that one had not preceded: therefore, etc.
Likewise, in connection with this it is asked whether attrition becomes contrition. And that it does not, seems [to be the case]: because it takes its origin from servile fear, which is expelled13, not informed. — But that it does [become contrition] seems [to be the case]: because it takes its origin from unformed faith, which is not expelled but informed: therefore likewise also attrition.
Conclusion. Attrition precedes the justification of the wicked according to the common law.
I respond: It must be said that according to a special privilege God can justify without any preparation; nevertheless according to the common law He does not justify any but those who prepare themselves, as is said in Zechariah1: Turn to me, and I will turn to you. And because the preparation ought to be according to the fittingness by which it is ordered to justification, [there must be] in the motion of free will both contrition; it is necessary that a person prepare himself by a motion of faith and of sorrow, so that grace may find free will in both of these acts, or even supremely prepared for both, so that in the same instant it be prepared to be moved in which grace arrives. — And the arguments for this position are to be granted; for they proceed according to the common law, which does not prejudice the special privilege2.
To 1 and 2. And so it is clear in the case of Paul. Likewise, as to its knowing no slow endeavors; it must be said that it is true that grace comes suddenly, but nevertheless a person is not suddenly prepared.
To 3. As to that which is objected, whether that sorrow is informed, or a new one elicited; those who say that contrition follows after the remission of guilt say that a new one is elicited, and that after the infusion of grace all the virtues have new acts. But those who say that contrition is in the instant of justification must say that that sorrow is informed, as is the motion of faith or of free will3.
To that, then, which is asked, whether attrition becomes contrition; it must be said that this can be understood in three ways: either that the habit by which one is brought to attrition is informed and by it one is brought to contrition, just as unformed faith becomes formed; and this I believe to be true, for I believe that the unformed habit of penance is informed by the advent of grace. Nor4 is it similar in the case of servile fear, in which the will to sin lives. — In a second way it can be understood with respect to the underlying act; and here too I concede that the act which at its beginning is attrition, before it is interrupted, becomes contrition, as is clear in the case of the motion by which someone goes to church, if grace is infused into him on the way. — In a third way it can be understood with respect to a superadded condition, namely that the dead work, according to that part by which it is dead, should become living; and this is impossible, because that part of the motion passed away and was unformed and is never informed, because the same thing which has passed away is not taken up again5.
---
- 6Cfr. supra pag. 327, nota 2.Cf. above, p. 327, note 2.
- 7Ut dictum est supra a. 1. q. 3.As was said above, a. 1, q. 3.
- 8Eccli. 2, 20: Qui timent Dominum praeparabunt corda sua. Cfr. supra d. 4. p. I. dub. 1. et d. 14. p. II. dub. 1. — Pro requiritur non pauci codd. et ed. 1 relinquitur.Ecclus. 2:20: Those who fear the Lord will prepare their hearts. Cf. above, d. 4, p. I, dub. 1, and d. 14, p. II, dub. 1. — For requiritur (is required), not a few codices and the first edition read relinquitur (is left).
- 9Vide infra dub. 4. — Maior ostensa est supra d. 16. p. I. a. 3. q. 1.See below, dub. 4. — The major [premise] was shown above, d. 16, p. I, a. 3, q. 1.
- 10Cfr. Act. 9, 3. seqq.Cf. Acts 9:3ff.
- 11Libr. II. in Evang. Luc. I, 39. n. 19.Book II, on the Gospel of Luke 1:39, n. 19.
- 12Vide supra lit. Magistri, d. XVII. c. 2.See above, the text of the Master [Lombard], d. XVII, c. 2.
- 13Cfr. supra pag. 322, nota 1, et III. Sent. d. 34. p. II. a. 1. q. 3. Oppositum ostenditur ibid. d. 23. a. 2. q. 4. de fide informi.Cf. above, p. 322, note 1, and III Sent., d. 34, p. II, a. 1, q. 3. The opposite is shown there, d. 23, a. 2, q. 4, concerning unformed faith.
- 1Cap. 1, 3: Convertimini ad me, ait Dominus exercituum, et convertar ad vos etc.Ch. 1:3: Turn to me, says the Lord of hosts, and I will turn to you, etc.
- 2Hieron. in Ionam 1, 7: Privilegia singulorum non possunt legem facere communem. Et in C. Ideo permittente (16.), C. 25. q. 1. § 3.Jerome, on Jonah 1:7: The privileges of individuals cannot make a common law. And in the canon Ideo permittente (16), C. 25, q. 1, § 3.
- 3Cfr. quaest. praeced. — Verbis motus fidei codd. F G praemittunt fit, cod. aa est, sed perperam. In principio solutionis post eliciatur cod. K (I a secunda manu) addit dicendum, quod.Cf. the preceding question. — Before the words motus fidei (motion of faith) codices F and G prefix fit (becomes), codex aa est (is), but wrongly. At the beginning of the solution, after eliciatur (is elicited) codex K (and I by a second hand) adds dicendum, quod (it must be said that).
- 4Plures codd. Nec etiam. Inferius pro substratum non pauci codd. subiectum.Several codices [read] Nec etiam (Nor even). Below, for substratum (underlying), not a few codices [read] subiectum (subject).
- 5Vide supra d. 15. p. I. q. 1. 4.See above, d. 15, p. I, q. 1, [n.] 4. ---