Part II (Pars Prima Secundae) Part 183 (2/2)

Obj. 2: Further, whoever is tending onward, ought not to look back, according to Phil. 3:13, 14: ”Forgetting the things that are behind, and stretching forth myself to those that are before, I press towards the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation.” But whoever is stretching forth to righteousness has his sins behind him. Hence he ought to forget them, and not stretch forth to them by a movement of his free-will.

Obj. 3: Further, in the justification of the unG.o.dly one sin is not remitted without another, for ”it is irreverent to expect half a pardon from G.o.d” [*Cap., Sunt. plures: Dist. iii, De Poenit.]. Hence, in the justification of the unG.o.dly, if man's free-will must move against sin, he ought to think of all his sins. But this is unseemly, both because a great s.p.a.ce of time would be required for such thought, and because a man could not obtain the forgiveness of such sins as he had forgotten. Hence for the justification of the unG.o.dly no movement of the free-will is required.

_On the contrary,_ It is written (Ps. 31:5): ”I will confess against myself my injustice to the Lord; and Thou hast forgiven the wickedness of my sin.”

_I answer that,_ As stated above (A. 1), the justification of the unG.o.dly is a certain movement whereby the human mind is moved by G.o.d from the state of sin to the state of justice. Hence it is necessary for the human mind to regard both extremes by an act of free-will, as a body in local movement is related to both terms of the movement.

Now it is clear that in local movement the moving body leaves the term _whence_ and nears the term _whereto._ Hence the human mind whilst it is being justified, must, by a movement of its free-will withdraw from sin and draw near to justice.

Now to withdraw from sin and to draw near to justice, in an act of free-will, means detestation and desire. For Augustine says on the words ”the hireling fleeth,” etc. (John 10:12): ”Our emotions are the movements of our soul; joy is the soul's outpouring; fear is the soul's flight; your soul goes forward when you seek; your soul flees, when you are afraid.” Hence in the justification of the unG.o.dly there must be two acts of the free-will--one, whereby it tends to G.o.d's justice; the other whereby it hates sin.

Reply Obj. 1: It belongs to the same virtue to seek one contrary and to avoid the other; and hence, as it belongs to charity to love G.o.d, so likewise, to detest sin whereby the soul is separated from G.o.d.

Reply Obj. 2: A man ought not to return to those things that are behind, by loving them; but, for that matter, he ought to forget them, lest he be drawn to them. Yet he ought to recall them to mind, in order to detest them; for this is to fly from them.

Reply Obj. 3: Previous to justification a man must detest each sin he remembers to have committed, and from this remembrance the soul goes on to have a general movement of detestation with regard to all sins committed, in which are included such sins as have been forgotten.

For a man is then in such a frame of mind that he would be sorry even for those he does not remember, if they were present to his memory; and this movement cooperates in his justification.

________________________

SIXTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 113, Art. 6]

Whether the Remission of Sins Ought to Be Reckoned Amongst the Things Required for Justification?

Objection 1: It would seem that the remission of sins ought not to be reckoned amongst the things required for justification. For the substance of a thing is not reckoned together with those that are required for a thing; thus a man is not reckoned together with his body and soul. But the justification of the unG.o.dly is itself the remission of sins, as stated above (A. 1). Therefore the remission of sins ought not to be reckoned among the things required for the justification of the unG.o.dly.

Obj. 2: Further, infusion of grace and remission of sins are the same; as illumination and expulsion of darkness are the same. But a thing ought not to be reckoned together with itself; for unity is opposed to mult.i.tude. Therefore the remission of sins ought not to be reckoned with the infusion of grace.

Obj. 3: Further, the remission of sin follows as effect from cause, from the free-will's movement towards G.o.d and sin; since it is by faith and contrition that sin is forgiven. But an effect ought not to be reckoned with its cause; since things thus enumerated together, and, as it were, condivided, are by nature simultaneous. Hence the remission of sins ought not to be reckoned with the things required for the justification of the unG.o.dly.

_On the contrary,_ In reckoning what is required for a thing we ought not to pa.s.s over the end, which is the chief part of everything. Now the remission of sins is the end of the justification of the unG.o.dly; for it is written (Isa. 27:9): ”This is all the fruit, that the sin thereof should be taken away.” Hence the remission of sins ought to be reckoned amongst the things required for justification.

_I answer that,_ There are four things which are accounted to be necessary for the justification of the unG.o.dly, viz. the infusion of grace, the movement of the free-will towards G.o.d by faith, the movement of the free-will towards sin, and the remission of sins. The reason for this is that, as stated above (A. 1), the justification of the unG.o.dly is a movement whereby the soul is moved by G.o.d from a state of sin to a state of justice. Now in the movement whereby one thing is moved by another, three things are required: first, the motion of the mover; secondly, the movement of the moved; thirdly, the consummation of the movement, or the attainment of the end. On the part of the Divine motion, there is the infusion of grace; on the part of the free-will which is moved, there are two movements--of departure from the term _whence,_ and of approach to the term _whereto_; but the consummation of the movement or the attainment of the end of the movement is implied in the remission of sins; for in this is the justification of the unG.o.dly completed.

Reply Obj. 1: The justification of the unG.o.dly is called the remission of sins, even as every movement has its species from its term. Nevertheless, many other things are required in order to reach the term, as stated above (A. 5).

Reply Obj. 2: The infusion of grace and the remission of sin may be considered in two ways: first, with respect to the substance of the act, and thus they are the same; for by the same act G.o.d bestows grace and remits sin. Secondly, they may be considered on the part of the objects; and thus they differ by the difference between guilt, which is taken away, and grace, which is infused; just as in natural things generation and corruption differ, although the generation of one thing is the corruption of another.

Reply Obj. 3: This enumeration is not the division of a genus into its species, in which the things enumerated must be simultaneous; but it is division of the things required for the completion of anything; and in this enumeration we may have what precedes and what follows, since some of the principles and parts of a composite thing may precede and some follow.

________________________

SEVENTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 113, Art. 7]

Whether the Justification of the UnG.o.dly Takes Place in an Instant or Successively?

Objection 1: It would seem that the justification of the unG.o.dly does not take place in an instant, but successively, since, as already stated (A. 3), for the justification of the unG.o.dly, there is required a movement of free-will. Now the act of the free-will is choice, which requires the deliberation of counsel, as stated above (Q. 13, A. 1). Hence, since deliberation implies a certain reasoning process, and this implies succession, the justification of the unG.o.dly would seem to be successive.

Obj. 2: Further, the free-will's movement is not without actual consideration. But it is impossible to understand many things actually and at once, as stated above (I, Q. 85, A. 4). Hence, since for the justification of the unG.o.dly there is required a movement of the free-will towards several things, viz. towards G.o.d and towards sin, it would seem impossible for the justification of the unG.o.dly to be in an instant.

Obj. 3: Further, a form that may be greater or less, e.g. blackness or whiteness, is received successively by its subject. Now grace may be greater or less, as stated above (Q. 112, A. 4). Hence it is not received suddenly by its subject. Therefore, seeing that the infusion of grace is required for the justification of the unG.o.dly, it would seem that the justification of the unG.o.dly cannot be in an instant.

<script>