|
GRACE
Commentary on the Summa theologica
of
St. Thomas, Ia IIae, q. 109-14
By
REV. REGINALD
GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, O.P.
Translated by
THE DOMINICAN NUNS
Corpus Christi Monastery
Menlo Park, California
B. HERDER BOOK CO .
15 & 17 SOUTH BROADWAY, ST. LOUIS, MO.
AND
33 QUEEN SQUARE, LONDON, W. C.
1952
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Printed in U.S.A.
NIHIL OBSTAT
lnnocentius Swoboda, O.F.M.
Censor Librorum
IMPRIMATUR
X Joseph
E. Ritter
Archiepiscopus
St. Ludovici, die 25a mensis,
julii, 1952
Copyright 1952
B. HERDER BOOK CO.
Vail-Ballou Press, Inc.,
Binghamton and New York
To the holy Mother of God,
Mother of divine Grace,
WHO SWEETLY AND SUBLIMELY TEACHES TO LITTLE
ONES THE MYSTERIES OF SALVATION,
THE AUTHOR DEDICATES THIS WORK
IN TOKEN OF GRATITUDE AND FILIAL OBEDIENCE
PREFACE
We have already explained at length
in the treatise on the one God the doctrine of St. Thomas about the
knowledge and will of God, providence and predestination, and likewise
in the treatise on God the Creator his doctrine on evil. Now it remains
to apply the principles already expounded to the questions of grace, so
that these may be considered in relation to man, and also in relation to
God, the author of grace, who is the subject of sacred theology. Indeed
this science considers all things in relation to God, as optics does in
relation to color and light, mathematics in relation to quantity,
metaphysics in relation to being as such.
Hence the present
treatise On grace depends on the treatise about the divine will
in which we have already set forth the will for universal salvation and
the distinction between antecedent will and consequent will, which is
the ultimate basis, as we shall see, of the distinction between
sufficient grace and efficacious grace.
We presuppose,
likewise, St. Thomas’ doctrine on the intrinsic and infallible efficacy
of the divine decrees, presented in Ia, q. 19, a. 8, which we have
explained at length in the treatise on the one God, refuting the
objections based on the violation of freedom, on insufficiency of help,
and on affinity with Calvinism.
Our treatise on
grace is especially connected with question 20, Part I, on the love of
God: 1. whether love exists in God; 2. whether God loves all things; 3.
whether God loves all things equally; 4. whether God always loves better
things more. In explanation of this last article, we show the value of
the principle of predilection: “Nothing would be better than anything
else (as an act, easy or difficult, natural or supernatural, initial or
final) unless it were more loved and sustained by God.” “What hast thou
that thou hast not received?” (I Cor. 4:7.) As we shall see, this
principle throws a light from on high upon all questions of
predestination and grace. It is likewise the basis of Christian humility
and of our gratitude to God, “who hath first loved us.”
At the same time,
no less emphasis must be placed on another principle of St. Augustine,
formulated and cited at the Council of Trent (Denz., no. 804): “God does
not command the impossible, but by commanding He incites thee to do what
thou canst and to ask what thou canst not, and He assists thee so that
thou mayst be able.” These two principles taken together prevent
opposing deviations; preserve balance of thought and the harmony of the
divine word in regard to these most difficult questions.
AUTHORS TO BE CONSULTED
1.
The teaching of the Fathers on grace
Schwane,
Histoire des Dogmes, tr. Degert, 1904.
J. Tixeront,
Histoire des Dogmes. Vol. I : Théologie anérnicéenne,
1905; Vol.
11: S. Athanase à S. Augustin, 1909; Vol. III: La fin de l’âge
patristique, 1912, p. 274 ff.
Héfele, Histoire des conciles, tr. Leclerq
(Paris, 1908), II, 168.
St. Augustine, De natura et gratia; De gratia
Christi; Enchiridion; Sex libr. aduersus Julianum; De gratia et libero
arbitrio; De correptione
et gratia; De praedestinatione sanctorum; De dono perseuerantiae.
St. Prosper, PL, LI, 155-276.
St. Fulgentius, De gratia et libero arbitrio.
St. Bernard, De gratia et libero arbitrio.
Peter Lombard, Sent., Bk. II, d. 26-28: De
gratia.
St.
Bonaventure and St. Albert the Great, In II Sent.
2. Works of St. Thomas and of Thomists
on grace
St. Thomas, In
II Sent., d. 26-28; la llae, q. 109-14; Contra Gentes, Quaest.
disput.
Principal commentators: Capreolus,
In II Sent.,
d. 26; Cajetan, In Iam
IIae,
q. 109 ff.; Medina, John of St.
Thomas.
Sylvius, Gonet, the Salmanticenses,
Gotti, Billuart.
Soto, De natura et gratia, 1551.
Thomas
Lemos, Panoplia gratiae, 4 vols., 1676.
Alvarez, De auxiliis diuinae gratiae, 1610.
Gonzalez de Albeda, In Iam, q. 19, 1637.
Goudin, De gratia, 1874.
Reginaldus, O.P.,
De mente Conc. Trident. circa gratiam seipsa efficacem, 1706.
Among
recent works by Thomists: Dummermuth: S. Thomas et
doctrina praemotionis physicae,
Paris, 1886; Defensio doctrinae S. Thomas,
1895. N. Del Prado, O.P.,: De gratia et libero arbitrio,
3 vols., Fribourg (Switzerland), 1907. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
“Prédestination,”
“Prémotion.” Schaezler: Natur
und Gnade, Mainz, 1867.
3. Outside the Thomistic School
Molina, Concordia, Paris, 1876.
Suarez, De gratia.
St. Robert Bellarmine, De controversiis
(Prague, 1721), Vol. IV.
St. Alphonsus de
Liguori, De modo quo gratia
operatur; De magno
orationis
medio.
Scheeben,
Natur und Gnade, Mainz, 1861. Strongly
inclines toward
Thomism.
Billot, S.J., De gratia Christi, 2nd
ed., 1921.
Van der Meersch, De divina gratia (Bruges,
1910) and Dict. théol. cath., art., “Grâce.”
J. Ude,
Doctrina Capreoli de influxu Dei in actus uoluntatis humanae, Graz,
1905. This
author favors Thomism.
TREATISE ON GRACE
Ia IIae, q. 109-114
In the first
place something must be said about the position of this treatise in the
Summa theologica. St. Thomas treats of grace in the moral part of
his Summa, for, after the questions of human acts themselves, must be
considered the principles of human acts; first, the intrinsic
principles, namely, good and bad habits, or virtues and vices; secondly,
the external principles of human acts, namely, God’s teaching us by
means of His law, and His assistance to us by His grace.
Hence the
treatise on grace belongs to the moral part of theology no less than the
treatise on law. Moral theology is not a science distinct from dogmatic
theology, since the formal object (objectum formale quod et quo)
is ever the same: God under the aspect of His Deity so far as it falls
under virtual revelation. It would be surprising if the moral part of
sacred theology did not treat of the necessity of grace for doing good
conducive to salvation and of the effects of grace, i.e., justification
and merit. Indeed, if moral theology is deprived of these treatises, it
will be reduced almost to casuistry, which is only its lowest
application, as asceticism and mysticism are its highest applications.
Among Thomistic
commentators the following, along with Cajetan, are especially to be
read: Soto (De natura et gratia), John of St. Thomas, the
Salmanticenses, Gonet, Gotti, Billuart. Cf. also among modern
theologians, Scheeben (Natur und Gnade).
This division of
the whole treatise is methodical, corresponding to the division into
four causes. 1. Grace is considered beginning with the definition of the
word and with reference to its necessity for the end of eternal life and
to its existence. 2. Thus, in regard to its end, grace, as it is the
seed of glory, is defined as a participation in the divine nature and is
determined by the subject in which it resides, that is, the essence of
the soul. 3. After the definition of grace, its subdivisions are given.
Then its efficient cause and its effects are discussed. Thus all those
things which belong to it per se are taken into consideration.
A brief
comparison may be made between this division of St. Thomas and the
division made by various modern writers. Many modern scholars, such as
Tanquerey, divide this treatise into three parts, but this division is
rather material than formal.
This division is
less correct; in treating of the necessity of grace the necessity of
habitual grace is also treated. And in the order of knowledge it is
better to deal with justification, which is an effect of grace, after
considering the essence of grace. Hence Father Billot, S.J., after his
preliminary remarks, rightly divides his treatise on grace according to
St. Thomas. Father Hugon, O.P., does the same, as do many others. Nor
may it be said that St. Thomas did not distinguish clearly between
habitual and actual grace; this distinction is made time and time again
in the articles, and thereby is made evident how St. Thomas perfected
the Augustinian doctrine, regarding grace not only from the
psychological and moral aspects, but ontologically: 1. as an abiding
form, and 2. as a transitory movement.
This entire
treatise is a commentary on the words of our Lord in John 4:10: “If thou
didst know the gift of God,” and our Lord’s discourse by which they are
elucidated, according to St. John. At the same time it may be said that
St. Paul was the apostle of grace who opened to us the deep things of
God, predestination and grace. And the two great doctors of grace are
Augustine, who defended divine grace against Pelagius, and St. Thomas,
of whom the liturgy sings:
“Praise
to the King of glory, Christ,
Who by Thomas, light of the Church,
Filled the earth with the doctrine of grace.”
This
work is a translation of De gratia by Father Garrigou-Lagrange,
O.P.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER
PAGE
I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 3
II. The Necessity
of Grace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .. . 41
III. The Grace of
God with Respect to Its Essence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 110
IV. The Divisions of Grace . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 150
V. The Doctrine of the Church . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
182
VI. Sufficient Grace . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .202
VII. Efficacious Grace . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .239
VIII. Excursus on Efficacious Grace . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .265
IX. The Cause of Grace . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .305
X. The Effects of Grace . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .325
XI. Merit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
363
XII. Recapitulation and Supplement . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399
Appendix .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
Index . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 507
Pages numbers are
those of the book. These files are not divided into pages.
Cf. Ia IIae, q. 90, introd. With regard to this heading, it
should be noted that God assisting by His grace is an extrinsic
principle. Grace, however, is not a principle extrinsic to man,
but inhering in him, as will be explained later.
|