GRACE: Commentary on the Summa theologica of St. Thomas
Chapter II: QUESTION 109 THE NECESSITY OF GRACE
Chapter III: QUESTION 110 THE GRACE OF GOD WITH RESPECT TO ITS ESSENCE
ARTICLE III. WHETHER GRACE IS IDENTICAL WITH VIRTUE, PARTICULARLY WITH CHARITY
ARTICLE IV. WHETHER HABITUAL GRACE IS IN THE ESSENCE OF THE SOUL AS IN A SUBJECT
Chapter IV: QUESTION 111 THE DIVISIONS OF GRACE
ARTICLE V. WHETHER GRACE GRATIS DATA IS SUPERIOR TO SANCTIFYING GRACE
Chapter V: I. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: STATE OF THE QUESTION
Chapter VII: EFFICACIOUS GRACE
Chapter VIII: EXCURSUS ON EFFICACIOUS GRACE
Chapter IX: QUESTION 112 THE CAUSE OF GRACE
ARTICLE I. WHETHER GOD ALONE IS THE CAUSE OF GRACE
ARTICLE IV. WHETHER GRACE IS GREATER IN ONE MAN THAN IN ANOTHER
ARTICLE V. WHETHER MAN CAN KNOW THAT HE POSSESSES GRACE
Chapter X: QUESTION 113 THE EFFECTS OF GRACE
Chapter XI: QUESTION 114 MERIT
This question is of great importance with respect to mystical theology; for example, which are higher among the works of St. Theresa, those which pertain to sanctifying grace or those pertaining to graces gratis datae?
State of the question. It seems that grace gratis data is superior: 1. because the good of the Church in general, to which graces gratis datae are ordained, is higher than the good of one man, to which sanctifying grace is ordered; 2. because that which is capable of enlightening others is of greater value than that which only perfects oneself; it is better to enlighten than merely to shine; and 3. because the graces gratis datae are not given to all Christians, but to the more worthy members of the Church, especially to the saints. However, in spite of these arguments, St. Thomas’ conclusion is in the negative; and so is that of theologians generally.
The reply is: Sanctifying grace is much more excellent than grace gratis data.
First proof, from the authority of St. Paul, who, after enumerating the graces gratis datae, continues: “And I show unto you yet a more excellent way. If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing’’ (I Cor. 12:31-13:2). But prophecy is the highest of all the graces gratis datae (cf. IIa IIae, q.171), and this is said to be below charity, which pertains to sanctifying grace. Therefore.
In his commentary on the first Epistle to the Corinthians (chap. 13), St. Thomas thus explains the words “I am nothing,” that is, with respect to the being of grace, described in Ephesians (2:10): “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works”; likewise II Cor. 5:17, and Gal. 6:15.3
In the same place it is shown that charity surpasses all these charismata in three respects:
1. From necessity, since without charity, the other gratuitous gifts do not suffice.
2. From utility, since it is through charity that every evil is avoided and every good work performed. “Charity is patient, . . . beareth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.”
3. From its permanence, for “charity never falleth away,” as St. Paul declares, whether prophecies shall be made void or tongues shall cease. Hence charity is said to be the bond of perfection uniting the soul to God and gathering together all other virtues to ordain them toward God. Therefore can Augustine say: “Love and do what you will.”
Second proof from theological argument.
The excellence of any virtue is higher according as it is ordained to a higher end; and the end is superior to the means.
But sanctifying grace ordains men immediately to union with his final end; and the graces gratis datae ordain him toward something preparatory to his final end, since by miracles and prophecies men are led to conversion.
Therefore sanctifying grace is much more excellent than grace gratis data.
In a word, sanctifying grace unites man immediately to God, who dwells in him; on the other hand, grace gratis data serves only to dispose others for union with God. This argument appears even more profound when we observe that sanctifying grace, inasmuch as it unites man immediately to God, his final supernatural end, is supernatural substantially. It is indeed the root of the theological virtues which are immediately specified by their formal supernatural object (objectum formale quo et quod), and it is the seed of glory, the beginning of eternal life which is essentially supernatural.
On the contrary, the graces gratis datae are generally supernatural. only with respect to the mode of their production, in the same way as miracles. As a matter of fact, with respect to this supernaturalness, the division of the charismata corresponds to the division of miracles given by St. Thomas (Ia, q. 105, a. 8); the comparison may be made as follows:
Thus the great difference becomes evident between the supernatural substantially and the miraculous substantially; in the former “substantially” means formally, by virtue of its formal object; in the latter “substantially” means effectively, or concerning an effect the substance of which cannot be produced by a created cause in any manner or in any subject, such, for instance, as the glorification of the body.
Hence below intrinsically supernatural knowledge, such as the beatific vision or infused faith, there exist the following three kinds of effectively supernatural knowledge the object of which is intrinsically natural.
1. Effectively, with respect to the substance of cognition, such as the prophetic knowledge of future natural events taking place at a remote time. This exceeds every created intellect, not by reason of the essential supernaturalness of its object, as would be that of the Trinity, but by reason of the uncertainty or indetermination of the future, for example, the date when some war would end.
2. Effectively, with respect to the subject in which it resides, such as the knowledge of a natural object already actually existing, but removed in regard to place or exceeding the faculty of vision of this particular man, although not of all men (IIa IIae, q. 171, a. 3). Likewise the knowledge of the secrets of hearts which are known nat-urally by the person whose secrets they are.
3. Effectively, modally, such as the instantaneous knowledge of some human science or unknown tongue without human study. Thus the supernaturalness of prophecy is of an inferior order to the supernaturalness of divine faith. Therefore St. Thomas says (III Sent., d. 24, a. 1 ad 3): “Although prophecy and faith treat of the same matter, such as the passion of Christ, they do not do so in the same way; for faith considers the Passion formally under the aspect of something which borders on the eternal, that is, according as it was God who suffered, although materially it considers a temporal event. This is not true of prophecy.”
But what has been said of the supernaturalness of prophecy, the highest of all the graces gratis datae, can be said of all the charismata, as is very evident in the case of the gift of tongues, the grace of healing, the performing of prodigies, and the discernment of spirits. The same may be said of utterances of wisdom and knowledge and of the interpretation of speech, for these latter three supply in a supernatural way for what would be attained naturally by acquired theology or hermeneutics. Thus, in general, the charismata are supernatural modally only, and therefore sanctifying grace, which is supernatural substantially, as a participation in the divine nature, is “much more excellent,’’ as St. Thomas declares.
Confirmation of the aforesaid conclusion from the refutation of objections.
First objection. The common good of the Church is better than the good of one man. But sanctifying grace is ordained only to the good of one, whereas grace gratis data is ordered to the common good of the Church. Therefore.
Reply. The major is to be distinguished: the common good which is in the Church is below the separated common good, that is, God: granted; otherwise, denied.
I distinguish the minor: sanctifying grace is ordained to the good of the individual and also to the separate common good, that is, to God to whom it unites us immediately: granted; otherwise, denied.
Hence, above the common good of the Church, which is the ecclesiastical order, there is the separate common good, which is God Himself, to whom sanctifying grace unites us immediately. Similarly, above the common good of an army, which is its order, there is the common good considered separately, namely, the good of the country.
On this account St. Thomas says later (IIa IIae, q. 182, a. 1-4) that contemplative life, which is immediately ordained to the love and praise of God, is, in an absolute sense, better, higher, and more meritorious than the active life, which is ordained toward the love of neighbor and to the common good of the Church not considered apart. Therefore did Christ say (Luke 10:42): “Mary hath chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her.” Many moderns would do well to read this response to the first objection.
Again St. Thomas declares (IIa IIae, q. 182, a. I ad I): “It not only pertains to prelates to lead the active life, but they should also excel in the contemplative life”; which St. Gregory had already expressed in the words: “Let the leader be eminent in action, and sustained in contemplation above all others.”
Second objection. It is better to enlighten others than merely to be enlightened; but by the graces gratis datae man enlightens others; by sanctifying grace he is only enlightened himself. Therefore.
Reply. I distinguish the major: it is better than merely to be enlightened to enlighten others formally: granted; to enlighten others merely by disposing them: denied.
I distinguish the minor: that man, by grace gratis data, enlightens others formally: denied; by disposing them, granted; on the contrary he is formally enlightened by sanctifying grace.
For, by the graces gratis datae man cannot produce sanctifying grace in another, but only offer him certain disposing or preparatory factors toward justification, such as preaching to him or performing miracles. God alone directly or through His sacraments infuses sanctifying grace. Similarly, in the natural order, St. Thomas maintains, the heat by which fire acts is not more estimable than the form of fire itself.
I insist. Then St. Thomas was wrong when he said later (IIa IIae, q. 188, a. 6) that the apostolic or mixed life “proceeding from the fullness of contemplation is to be preferred absolutely to contemplation, since it is a greater thing to enlighten than merely to shine.”
Reply. The apostolic life is preferred to simple contemplation inasmuch as it includes this and something more; on the contrary, grace gratis data does not include sanctifying grace and something more.
Third objection. That which is proper to the more perfect is better than that which is common to all. But the graces gratis datae are gifts proper to the more perfect members of the Church. Therefore they are higher than the grace common to all the just, as reasoning power is superior to sensation.
Reply. There is a disparity, for sensation (which is common to all animals) is ordained to ratiocination. But on the contrary the graces gratis datae (which are proper) are ordained to the conversion of men, in other words, to sanctifying or justifying grace.
First corollary. Sanctifying grace or the grace of the virtues and gifts belongs to the normal supernatural. But it exists in three degrees, that of beginners, proficients, and perfect; in other words, the purgative, illuminative, and unitive ways, the last being the age of maturity of the spiritual life.
Second corollary. The graces gratis datae belong to the extraordinary supernatural, so called not so much in relation to the Church as to the individual, for example, private revelations, visions, and internal words pertaining to prophecy.
Third corollary. Infused contemplation, proceeding from the gifts of wisdom and understanding as they exist in the perfect, is therefore not something extraordinary, like prophetic revelation, but something normal and eminent, that is, in the normal way of sanctification.
Fourth corollary. Cajetan In llam llae, q. 178, a.2 (quoted by Father Del Prado, De gratia et libero arbitrio, p. 268): “It is a most pernicious error to consider the gift of God in the working of miracles to be greater than in the works of justice. And this, contrary to the popular idea and common error of humankind, which judges men who perform miracles to be saints and, as it were, gods, whereas these dullminded people have almost no esteem whatever for just men. The complete opposite ought to be considered of high value, as it truly is.” Although the sanctity of the servants of God is outwardly manifested by miracles, the saint who performs more miracles than another is not, on that account, a greater saint.
Fifth corollary. Del Prado (op. cit., p. 261): “The graces gratis datae may exist without sanctifying grace for the manifesting of divine truth; for of themselves they do not justify. Hence St. Thomas says, commenting on I Cor. (13, lect. 1): ‘It is obvious with regard to prophecy and faith, that they may be possessed without charity. But it is to be remarked here that firm faith, even without charity, produces miracles. Wherefore the apostle Matthew (7:22), in reply to those who will ask: ‘Have we not prophesied in Thy name . . . and done many miracles?’ declares that our Lord will reply: ‘I never knew you.’ For the Holy Ghost works prodigies even by the wicked, just as He speaks truth through them.”
Sixth corollary. However, the graces gratis datae are, in the saints, also a manifestation of their sanctity (Del Prado, ibid.); cf. St. Thomas on I Cor. (12, lect. 2); whence it is said in Acts (6:8) that “Stephen, full of grace and fortitude, did great wonders and signs among the people.”