Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that man can rise from sin without the help of grace. For what is presupposed to grace, takes place without grace. But to rise to sin is presupposed to the enlightenment of grace; since it is written (Eph. 5:14): "Arise from the dead and Christ shall enlighten thee." Therefore man can rise from sin without grace.

Objection 2: Further, sin is opposed to virtue as illness to health, as stated above (Question 71, Article 1, ad 3). Now, man, by force of his nature, can rise from illness to health, without the external help of medicine, since there still remains in him the principle of life, from which the natural operation proceeds. Hence it seems that, with equal reason, man may be restored by himself, and return from the state of sin to the state of justice without the help of external grace.

Objection 3: Further, every natural thing can return by itself to the act befitting its nature, as hot water returns by itself to its natural coldness, and a stone cast upwards returns by itself to its natural movement. Now a sin is an act against nature, as is clear from Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii, 30). Hence it seems that man by himself can return from sin to the state of justice.

On the contrary, The Apostle says (Gal. 2:21; Cf. Gal. 3:21): "For if there had been a law given which could give life---then Christ died in vain," i.e. to no purpose. Hence with equal reason, if man has a nature, whereby he can he justified, "Christ died in vain," i.e. to no purpose. But this cannot fittingly be said. Therefore by himself he cannot be justified, i.e. he cannot return from a state of sin to a state of justice.

I answer that, Man by himself can no wise rise from sin without the help of grace. For since sin is transient as to the act and abiding in its guilt, as stated above (Question 87, Article 6), to rise from sin is not the same as to cease the act of sin; but to rise from sin means that man has restored to him what he lost by sinning. Now man incurs a triple loss by sinning, as was clearly shown above (Question 85, Article 1; Question 86, Article 1; Question 87, Article 1), viz. stain, corruption of natural good, and debt of punishment. He incurs a stain, inasmuch as he forfeits the lustre of grace through the deformity of sin. Natural good is corrupted, inasmuch as man's nature is disordered by man's will not being subject to God's; and this order being overthrown, the consequence is that the whole nature of sinful man remains disordered. Lastly, there is the debt of punishment, inasmuch as by sinning man deserves everlasting damnation.

Now it is manifest that none of these three can be restored except by God. For since the lustre of grace springs from the shedding of Divine light, this lustre cannot be brought back, except God sheds His light anew: hence a habitual gift is necessary, and this is the light of grace. Likewise, the order of nature can only be restored, i.e. man's will can only be subject to God when God draws man's will to Himself, as stated above (Article 6). So, too, the guilt of eternal punishment can be remitted by God alone, against Whom the offense was committed and Who is man's Judge. And thus in order that man rise from sin there is required the help of grace, both as regards a habitual gift, and as regards the internal motion of God.

Reply to Objection 1: To man is bidden that which pertains to the act of free-will, as this act is required in order that man should rise from sin. Hence when it is said, "Arise, and Christ shall enlighten thee," we are not to think that the complete rising from sin precedes the enlightenment of grace; but that when man by his free-will, moved by God, strives to rise from sin, he receives the light of justifying grace.

Reply to Objection 2: The natural reason is not the sufficient principle of the health that is in man by justifying grace. This principle is grace which is taken away by sin. Hence man cannot be restored by himself; but he requires the light of grace to be poured upon him anew, as if the soul were infused into a dead body for its resurrection.

Reply to Objection 3: When nature is perfect, it can be restored by itself to its befitting and proportionate condition; but without exterior help it cannot be restored to what surpasses its measure. And thus human nature undone by reason of the act of sin, remains no longer perfect, but corrupted, as stated above (Question 85); nor can it be restored, by itself, to its connatural good, much less to the supernatural good of justice.

Articulus 7

Argumentum 1

Ad septimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod homo possit resurgere a peccato sine auxilio gratiae.

Illud enim quod praeexigitur ad gratiam, fit sine gratia.

Sed resurgere a peccato praeexigitur ad illuminationem gratiae, dicitur enim ad Ephes. V, exurge a mortuis, et illuminabit te christus.

Ergo homo potest resurgere a peccato sine gratia.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, peccatum virtuti opponitur sicut morbus sanitati, ut supra dictum est.

Sed homo per virtutem naturae potest resurgere de aegritudine ad sanitatem sine auxilio exterioris medicinae, propter hoc quod intus manet principium vitae, a quo procedit operatio naturalis. Ergo videtur quod, simili ratione, homo possit reparari per seipsum, redeundo de statu peccati ad statum iustitiae, absque auxilio exterioris gratiae.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, quaelibet res naturalis potest redire ad actum convenientem suae naturae, sicut aqua calefacta per seipsam redit ad naturalem frigiditatem, et lapis sursum proiectus per seipsum redit ad suum naturalem motum. Sed peccatum est quidam actus contra naturam; ut patet per Damascenus, in II libro.

Ergo videtur quod homo possit per seipsum redire de peccato ad statum iustitiae.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod apostolus dicit, ad Gal. II, si data est lex quae potest iustificare, ergo christus gratis mortuus est, idest sine causa. Pari ergo ratione, si homo habet naturam per quam potest iustificari, christus gratis, idest sine causa, mortuus est. Sed hoc est inconveniens dicere.

Ergo non potest homo per seipsum iustificari, idest redire de statu culpae ad statum iustitiae.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod homo nullo modo potest resurgere a peccato per seipsum sine auxilio gratiae. Cum enim peccatum transiens actu remaneat reatu, ut supra dictum est; non est idem resurgere a peccato quod cessare ab actu peccati. Sed resurgere a peccato est reparari hominem ad ea quae peccando amisit.

Incurrit autem homo triplex detrimentum peccando, ut ex supradictis patet, scilicet maculam, corruptionem naturalis boni, et reatum poenae. Maculam quidem incurrit, inquantum privatur decore gratiae ex deformitate peccati. Bonum autem naturae corrumpitur, inquantum natura hominis deordinatur voluntate hominis deo non subiecta, hoc enim ordine sublato, consequens est ut tota natura hominis peccantis inordinata remaneat. Reatus vero poenae est per quem homo peccando mortaliter meretur damnationem aeternam. Manifestum est autem de singulis horum trium, quod non possunt reparari nisi per deum. Cum enim decor gratiae proveniat ex illustratione divini luminis, non potest talis decor in anima reparari, nisi deo denuo illustrante, unde requiritur habituale donum, quod est gratiae lumen. Similiter ordo naturae reparari non potest, ut voluntas hominis deo subiiciatur, nisi deo voluntatem hominis ad se trahente, sicut dictum est.

Similiter etiam reatus poenae aeternae remitti non potest nisi a deo, in quem est offensa commissa, et qui est hominum iudex. Et ideo requiritur auxilium gratiae ad hoc quod homo a peccato resurgat, et quantum ad habituale donum, et quantum ad interiorem dei motionem.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod illud indicitur homini quod pertinet ad actum liberi arbitrii qui requiritur in hoc quod homo a peccato resurgat.

Et ideo cum dicitur, exsurge, et illuminabit te christus, non est intelligendum quod tota exurrectio a peccato praecedat illuminationem gratiae, sed quia cum homo per liberum arbitrium a deo motum surgere conatur a peccato, recipit lumen gratiae iustificantis.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod naturalis ratio non est sufficiens principium huius sanitatis quae est in homine per gratiam iustificantem; sed huius principium est gratia, quae tollitur per peccatum. Et ideo non potest homo per seipsum reparari, sed indiget ut denuo ei lumen gratiae infundatur, sicut si corpori mortuo resuscitando denuo infunderetur anima.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, quando natura est integra, per seipsam potest reparari ad id quod est sibi conveniens et proportionatum, sed ad id quod superexcedit suam proportionem, reparari non potest sine exteriori auxilio. Sic igitur humana natura defluens per actum peccati, quia non manet integra sed corrumpitur, ut supra dictum est, non potest per seipsam reparari neque etiam ad bonum sibi connaturale; et multo minus ad bonum supernaturalis iustitiae.