Lecture 307

307. Merit, Grace, and Reparation After Lapse

Summary
This lecture examines whether humans can merit first grace, whether they can merit grace for others, and whether one can merit reparation after falling into sin. Berquist walks through Articles 5-7 of Question 114 in Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae, clarifying the distinctions between merit ex condigno (by worthiness) and merit ex congruo (by fittingness), and establishing that grace is always the beginning of merit, never its result.

Listen to Lecture

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Article 5: Can One Merit First Grace? #

  • Augustine initially believed the beginning of faith came from human effort, with only the consummation from God
  • Augustine later retracted this view in his Retractions
  • The correct teaching: the beginning of faith comes from God through first grace, not from human merit
  • Acts of faith follow first grace and therefore cannot be meritorious of it
  • Council of Trent: “None of those things which precede justification, whether faith or works, merits the grace of justification”
  • Grace does not reward those already worthy; rather, God makes worthy those to whom He gives grace

Article 6: Can One Merit First Grace for Another? #

  • One cannot merit first grace for another ex condigno (by strict worthiness/justice)
  • Christ alone can merit first grace for others ex condigno, because His soul is moved by grace not only for His own glory but to bring others to salvation as Head of the Church
  • One can merit first grace for another ex congruo (by fittingness/congruity) through prayer and intercession
  • This merit is based on mercy and the proportion of friendship, not strict justice
  • Example: Monica’s prayers for Augustine; the prayers of the just are efficacious
  • Authority of Jeremiah 15: Even Moses and Samuel cannot merit first grace for another through their prayers alone, showing God’s sovereignty

Article 7: Can One Merit Reparation After a Future Lapse? #

  • One cannot merit reparation after a future lapse, neither ex condigno nor ex congruo
  • The Problem of Merit and Effect: If one merited eternal life through charity, logically one would need to merit reparation to achieve that end
  • Aquinas’s Resolution: One can merit eternal life through acts of charity absolutely, but the effect is impeded by subsequent sin
  • The Impediment: The motion of divine grace is interrupted by sin, so the benefit of preceding merit does not extend to the sinner
  • Analogy: A stone deserves to fall to the ground, but if someone catches it, the natural effect is impeded
  • Ezekiel 18:24: “If the just man turns away from his justice and commits iniquity, all the justices which he had done shall not be remembered”
  • Council citation on this topic: God must give the gift of reparation gratuitously, not as a result of prior merit

Key Arguments #

Why Grace Cannot Be Merited #

  • Repugnance of Merit to Grace: If something is merited, it is not gratuitous (Romans 11:6: “If from works, already not from grace”)
  • God Makes Worthy: God does not give grace to those already worthy; He makes them worthy through grace
  • Grace as Beginning: Grace is always the beginning of all merit, never the result; therefore what depends solely on grace cannot be merited
  • Sin as Impediment: In the state of sin, man has an impediment to meriting grace—sin itself

The Two Kinds of Merit #

  • Merit ex condigno: Based on strict justice and worthiness; what is owed as a debt; depends on divine ordering through motion of grace
  • Merit ex congruo: Based on fittingness and proportion; what is fitting according to friendship, not strictly owed; can obtain grace for others through prayer

Important Definitions #

Meritum (Merit) #

  • Ex condigno: Merit of worthiness; based on strict justice; what God owes as a debt
  • Ex congruo: Merit of fittingness; what is fitting according to friendship and proportion, not strictly owed
  • Merit depends on two things: (1) divine ordering toward a good, and (2) free will acting voluntarily

Gratia (Grace) #

  • A supernatural gift that exceeds the proportion of created nature
  • Always the beginning of meritorious action, never its result
  • God makes worthy those to whom it is given; it does not reward those already worthy
  • Requires the indwelling of the Holy Spirit

Poenitentia (Reparation/Repentance) #

  • Recovery of grace after lapse into sin
  • Cannot be merited by the sinner, as the impediment of sin blocks both kinds of merit
  • Given gratuitously by God alone

Examples & Illustrations #

The Sidewalk Counselor Story #

  • A man praying loudly outside an abortion clinic; his voice carried into the clinic where a woman was on the table
  • The woman heard him praying and left the clinic, deciding to keep her baby
  • Illustrates merit ex congruo: his intercession and prayers merited grace for the woman through fittingness, not worthiness
  • Shows the efficacy of prayer in obtaining grace for others

The Couple at the Clinic #

  • A couple drove to an abortion clinic but was approached by someone asking them not to go in
  • They paused, reconsidered, and left, deciding to keep their baby
  • Illustrates how intercession and charitable witness can merit grace for others through fittingness

The Missing Money #

  • Berquist recounts forgetting to count church money on Monday; the pastor was returning from the Holy Land
  • The group had to search everywhere for the money; it was eventually found
  • Used to illustrate the distinction between seeking alms (mammon of iniquity) and receiving in eternal tabernacles—which requires grace

Notable Quotes #

“If from works, already not from grace.” (Romans 11:6)

  • Cited to demonstrate the absolute repugnance between merit and grace

“God does not give grace except to the worthy. Not that they are before worthy, but because he, through grace, makes them worthy.”

  • Berquist’s articulation of Aquinas’s teaching on the paradox of grace and worthiness

“The beginning of faith is from God, not from us.”

  • Augustine’s retracted position versus his later correction

“When my power, strength fails, do not abandon me.” (Psalm 70)

  • Used to show that seeking reparation is just, though not based on justice as merit

“If the just man turns away from his justice and commits iniquity, all the justices which he had done shall not be remembered.” (Ezekiel 18:24)

  • Demonstrates that preceding merit’s effect is impeded by subsequent sin

Questions Addressed #

Can One Merit First Grace? #

  • Objection: Augustine says “faith merits justification”; man is justified through first grace; therefore one can merit first grace
  • Resolution: Augustine retracted this view. First grace and the beginning of faith come from God, not human merit. Acts of faith follow grace and thus cannot merit it.

Can One Merit First Grace for Another? #

  • Objection: The faith of others can help with salvation; prayers of the just are efficacious; therefore one can merit first grace for another
  • Resolution: Ex condigno, only Christ can (as Head of the Church). Ex congruo, yes—through prayer and intercession based on friendship and proportion.

Can One Merit Reparation After Lapse? #

  • Objection: One merited eternal life through charity; without reparation one cannot reach that end; therefore one must merit reparation
  • Resolution: One can merit eternal life absolutely, but the effect is impeded by subsequent sin. The motion of grace is interrupted by sin, so the preceding merit does not extend to produce reparation.

Pedagogical Notes #

Berquist’s Methodological Approach #

  • Follows the Dominican principle: “Never affirm, seldom deny, always distinguish”
  • Emphasizes that Scripture (especially Christ’s statements) sometimes does not explicitly distinguish what theologians must distinguish to avoid heresy (e.g., Sabellianism)
  • Uses concrete personal examples to illustrate abstract principles
  • Carefully tracks the Latin terminology and its English equivalents

Key Teaching Moment on Christ and the Father #

  • Berquist notes that when Christ says “The Father and I are one,” He does not explicitly distinguish between unity of nature and unity of person
  • Yet the distinction is necessary: they are one God but not one person
  • Suggests that Christ’s statement makes a specific theological point in context rather than providing an exhaustive treatment
  • References John 1:1-2 on the Word being “toward” God (indicating distinction) yet being God (indicating unity)