Ad tertiam quaestionem dicendum, quod instrumentum praedicto modo virtutem non accipit nisi secundum quod principali agenti continuatur, ut virtus ejus quodammodo in instrumentum transfundatur. Principale autem et per se agens ad justificationem est Deus sicut causa efficiens, et passio Christi sicut meritoria. Huic autem causae continuatur sacramentum per fidem ecclesiae, quae et instrumentum refert ad principalem causam, et signum ad signatum; et ideo efficacia instrumentorum, sive sacramentorum, vel virtus, est ex tribus: scilicet ex institutione divina sicut ex principali causa agente, ex passione Christi sicut ex causa prima meritoria, ex fide ecclesiae sicut ex continuante instrumentum principali agenti. To the third question, it should be said that an instrument does not receive power in the mode mentioned except when it is joined with a principal agent, so that his power is in a way poured out into the instrument. But the principal agent acting per se for justification is God as efficient cause, and Christ’s Passion as the meritorious cause. A sacrament is joined to this cause by the faith of the Church, which both refers this instrument to the principal cause, and refers the sign to the signified. And thus the efficacy or power of instruments or of sacraments is from three things: namely, from divine institution as from the principal agent cause, from the Passion of Christ as from the first meritorious cause, and from the faith of the Church as from the one joining the instrument to the principal agent. Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod Christus, secundum quod homo, est causa meritoria nostrae justificationis; sed secundum quod Deus, est causa influens gratiam. Reply Obj. 1: Christ as man is the meritorious cause of our justification, but as God, he is the cause instilling grace. Ad secundum dicendum, quod resurrectio est causa justificationis quantum ad terminum ad quem; sed sacramenta magis respiciunt terminum a quo; et ideo directius respiciunt passionem, quae ad peccati deletionem principaliter quasi satisfactio quaedam ordinatur. Reply Obj. 2: The resurrection is the cause of justification as the final terminus; but the sacraments rather regard the originating terminus; and thus they more directly regard the Passion, which is ordered chiefly to the blotting-out of sin as a certain satisfaction. Ad tertium dicendum, quod fides dat efficaciam sacramentis, inquantum causae principali ea quodammodo continuat, ut dictum est; et ideo fides passionis, a qua immediate et directe sacramenta efficaciam habent, sacramentis efficaciam largitur. Reply Obj. 3: Faith gives efficacy to the sacraments inasmuch as in a way it joins them to the principal cause, as was said. And thus faith in the Passion, from which the sacraments have efficacy directly and immediately, gives abundant efficacy to the sacraments. Quaestiuncula 4 Response to Quaestiuncula 4 Ad quartam quaestionem dicendum, quod, quia omne agens agit sibi simile, ideo effectus agentis oportet quod aliquo modo sit in agente. In quibusdam enim est idem secundum speciem; et ista dicuntur agentia univoca, sicut calor est in igne calefaciente. In quibusdam vero est idem secundum proportionem sive analogiam, sicut cum sol calefacit. Est enim in sole aliquid quod ita facit eum calefacientem sicut calor facit ignem calidum; et secundum hoc calor dicitur esse in sole aequivoce, ut dicitur in libro de Substantia orbis. Ex quo patet quod illud quod est in effectu ut forma dans esse, est in agente, inquantum hujusmodi, ut virtus activa; et ideo sicut se habet agens ad virtutem activam, ita se habet ad continendam formam effectus. To the fourth question, it should be said that because every agent makes something like itself, thus it is necessary that the effect of an agent be in the agent in some way. For in some things it is the same according to species; and these things are called univocal agents, as heat is in a fire that heats another. But in certain ones it is the same according to proportion or analogy, as when the sun heats something. For there is something in the sun that makes it heat just as heat makes fire hot; and accordingly heat is said to be in the sun equivocally, as is said in the book On the Substance of the World. From this it is clear that whatever is in the effect as a form giving being, is in the agent precisely as such, as an active power; and thus as an agent stands with regard to the active power, so it stands with regard to containing the effect. Et quia agens instrumentale non habet virtutem agendi ad aliquod ens completum, sed per modum intentionis, ut dictum est, et forma introducta continetur in eo per modum intentionis, sicut sunt species colorum in aere, a quibus aer non denominatur coloratus; etiam hoc modo gratia est in sacramentis sicut in instrumento, non complete, sed incomplete quantum ad quattuor. And because an instrumental agent does not have the power of acting toward something as a complete being, but only by the mode of intention, as was said, the form introduced is also contained in it by the mode of intention, as there are species of color in the air, from which the air is said to be colored. In this way, too, grace is in the sacraments as in an instrument, not completely, but incompletely, in four respects. Primo, quia in instrumento non est forma effectus secundum completam rationem speciei, sicut est in effectu jam completo, et in causa univoca. First, because in an instrument the form of an effect does not exist according to the complete nature of the species, as it is in the effect once completed, and in a univocal cause. Secundo, quia est in eo per modum intentionis, et non secundum completum esse in natura, sicut forma effectus est in causa principali non univoca secundum esse perfectum in natura, quamvis non secundum completam rationem illius speciei sive formae quam inducit in effectu, ut calor est in sole. Second, because it is in it by the mode of intention and not according to being that is complete in nature, as the form of an effect is in a non-univocal principal cause according to being that is perfect in nature, although not according to the complete account of that species or form that it instills in its effect, as heat is in the sun. Tertio, quia non est in eo per modum intentionis quiescentis, sicut sunt intentiones rerum in anima, sed per modum intentionis fluentis duplici fluxu: quorum unus est de potentia in actum, sicut etiam in mobili est forma, quae est terminus motus, dum movetur ut fluens de potentia in actum; et inter haec cadit medium motus, cujus virtute instrumentum agit: alius de agente in patiens, inter quae cadit medium instrumentum, prout unum est movens, et alterum motum. Third, because it is not in it in the manner of a reposing intention, as there are intentions of things in the soul, but by the mode of intention flowing with a twofold flow: one of which is from potency into act, as also in a moving thing there is a form that is the terminus of motion, provided that it is moved so that it flows from potency into act, and between these things there falls the middle of motion, in the power of which an instrument acts. The other is from the agent to the thing acted upon, between which there falls the medium of the instrument, as one is moving and the other is moved. Quarto, quia sacramentum etiam instrumentaliter non attingit directe ad ipsam gratiam, ut dictum est, sed dispositive. Fourth, because a sacrament does not attain even instrumentally directly to grace itself, as was said, but only dispositively. Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod gratia non est in sacramentis sicut in subjecto, sed sicut in causa dispositiva instrumentali; sed intentio illa quae et virtus dicitur, est in sacramento sicut in subjecto. Reply Obj. 1: Grace is not in the sacraments as in a subject, but as in a dispositive instrumental cause; but that intention which is also called power is in the sacrament as in a subject. Ad secundum dicendum, quod pulcherrime dictum est, gratiam contineri in sacramentis sicut in vase per quamdam similitudinem. Sicut enim quod est in vase, non denominat vas, sed in eo conservatur, ut possit inde accipi cum libet; ita gratia quae continetur in sacramentis, non denominat ipsa, nec qualificat ea secundum aliquod esse completum, sed gratiam in eis accipere poterit qui eis uti voluerit. Reply Obj. 2: It has been said quite beautifully that grace is contained in sacraments as in a vessel, by a certain likeness. For just as what is in a vessel does not give a name to the vessel but is preserved in it, so that it could be taken from there whenever one likes, so also the grace that is contained in the sacraments does not give them a name, nor does it endow them with a quality as with some complete being, but whoever wishes to benefit from them can receive the grace in them. Ad tertium dicendum, quod forma effectus quae est in agente principali vel instrumentali, non fit eadem numero in effectu. Nec propter hoc frustra est: quia non ad hoc ordinatur ut ipsamet in effectum fluat, sed ut ab ea vel per eam similis fiat in effectu. Causa enim efficiens non reducitur in idem numero cum forma generati, sed in idem specie, ut patet in 2 Physic. Reply Obj. 3: The form of an effect either in the principal agent or in an instrument is not numerically the same form as that which is in the effect. Nor is it to no purpose on account of this fact: for its purpose is not that its very self should flow into the effect, but rather that from it or through it, something like it comes to be in the effect. For an efficient cause does not have numerically the same form as the generated, but the same form in kind, as is clear from Physics 2. Ad quartum dicendum, quod continere dicuntur, inquantum aliquo modo sunt causa ipsius. Reply Obj. 4: They are said to contain in the sense that in some way they are the cause of it. Quaestiuncula 5 Response to Quaestiuncula 5 Ad quintam quaestionem dicendum, quod, sicut in 2 Lib., 26 dist., quaest. unic., art. 3, et 4, dictum est, gratia gratum faciens est una, et est in essentia animae sicut in subjecto, et ab ipsa fluunt virtutes et dona ad perficiendum potentias animae, sicut etiam potentiae fluunt ab essentia; et distinguuntur istae virtutes secundum diversos actus, ad quos oportet potentias animae perfici. Similiter etiam a gratia illa quae est in essentia animae, effluit aliquid ad reparandum defectus qui ex peccato inciderunt; et hoc diversificatur secundum diversitatem defectuum. Sed quia hujusmodi defectus non sunt ita noti sicut actus ad quos virtutes perficiunt; ideo hic effectus ad reparandum defectum non habet speciale nomen, sicut virtus, sed retinet nomen suae causae, et dicitur gratia sacramentalis, ad quam directe sacramenta ordinantur: quae quidem non potest esse sine gratia quae respicit essentiam animae, sicut nec virtus. Sed tamen gratia quae est in essentia animae, non potest esse sine virtutibus; et ideo virtutes in ea habent connexionem. Potest autem esse sine gratia sacramentali; et ideo gratiae sacramentales connexionem non habent. Et ita patet quod gratia quam sacramentum directe continet, differt a gratia quae est in virtutibus, et donis; quamvis etiam illam gratiam per quamdam continuationem contineant. To the fifth question, it should be said that, as was said in Book 2, Distinction 26, Question 1, Articles 3 and 4, sanctifying grace is one thing, and it is in the essence of the soul as in a subject, and from it flow the virtues and gifts for perfecting the powers of the soul, just as also the powers flow from the essence. And these powers are distinguished according to their diverse acts, for which the powers of the soul must be perfected. Similarly also from that grace which is in the essence of the soul, something issues to repair the defect that occurred by sin; and this varies according to the various defects. But since defects like this are not so well known as the acts which virtues perfect, for this reason this effect for repairing does not have a special name, like virtue, but keeps the name of its cause, and is called sacramental grace, and sacraments are directly ordered to it; and indeed it could not exist without the grace that affects the essence of the soul, as neither could virtue. But nevertheless, the grace that is in the essence of the soul cannot exist without virtues, and in this way the virtues are interconnected through it. But it can exist without sacramental grace; and so sacramental graces are not connected to one another through it. And so it is clear that the grace that a sacrament contains directly differs from the grace that is in the virtues and gifts, although they may contain that grace as well by a certain connection. Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod gratia gratum faciens, prout est in essentia animae, est una, sed secundum quod fluit ad defectus potentiarum tollendos, et potentias perficiendas multiplicatur. Reply Obj. 1: Sanctifying grace, as it exists in the essence of the soul, is one, but it is manifold according as it proceeds to removing defects from powers and perfecting powers. Ad secundum dicendum, quod gratia virtutum opponitur peccato, secundum quod peccatum continet inordinationem actus; sed gratia sacramentalis opponitur ei secundum quod vulnerat naturale bonum potentiarum. Reply Obj. 2: The grace of the virtues is opposed to sin inasmuch as sin contains a disordered act; but the grace of the sacraments is opposed to it inasmuch as it injures the natural good of the powers. Ad tertium dicendum, quod recessus a peccato, prout opponitur virtuti, et accessus ad perfectionem virtutis pertinent ad eamdem gratiam, non autem recessus a peccato secundum quod vulnerat naturam: quia requirit specialem medicinam, sicut in morbo corporali etiam patet. Reply Obj. 3: Withdrawal from sin as something opposed to virtue belongs to the same grace as progress in the perfection of virtue. But withdrawal from sin as something injuring nature does not: for it requires a special medicine, as is evident also in diseases of the body. Articulus 5 Article 5 De efficacia sacramentorum Veteris Legis On the efficacy of the sacraments of the Old Law Quaestiuncula 1 Quaestiuncula 1 Ad quintum sic proceditur. Videtur quod sacramenta Veteris Legis gratiam conferebant. Ut enim supra dictum est, sacramenta a sacrando dicuntur, sicut ornatus ab ornando, et munimenta a muniendo. Sed sine gratia non potest aliquid sacrari. Ergo sacramenta Veteris Legis gratiam conferebant. Obj. 1: To the fifth we proceed thus. It seems that sacraments of the Old Law conferred grace. For, as was said above, sacraments are called from ‘making holy’, as ornaments from ‘making ornate’, and fortifications from ‘fortifying’. But without grace nothing can be made holy. Therefore, the sacraments of the Old Law conferred grace. Praeterea, in canone Missae fit oratio, ut sacrificium ecclesiae Deo sit acceptum, sicut sacrificia antiquorum accepta fuerunt; et Dan. 3, petitur ut sacrificium humiliati et contriti spiritus suscipiatur a Deo, sicut holocaustum arietum et taurorum. Sed sacrificium ecclesiae et sacrificium contriti spiritus gratiam conferunt. Ergo et sacramenta veteris legis gratiam conferebant. Obj. 2: Furthermore, a prayer is made in the canon of the Mass, that the sacrifice of the Church may be accepted by God just as the sacrifices of the ancients were accepted. And in Daniel 3 it is asked that the sacrifice of a humble and contrite spirit be received by God, like the burnt offering of rams and bulls. But the sacrifice of the Church and the sacrifice of a contrite spirit confer grace. Therefore, also the sacraments of the Old Law conferred grace. Praeterea, Hugo de sancto Victore dicit, quod ex quo homo aegrotare coepit, Deus in sacramentis suis medicinam paravit. Sed medicina non potest exhiberi contra morbum peccati nisi per gratiam. Ergo sacramenta antiquorum gratiam conferebant. Obj. 3: Furthermore, Hugh of St. Victor says that from the time man began to ail, God prepared a medicine in his sacraments. But a medicine can only be applied against the disease of sin by grace. Therefore, the sacraments of the ancients conferred grace. Praeterea, homo periculosius infirmabatur in affectu per concupiscentiam quam in intellectu per ignorantiam. Sed sacramenta contra ignorantiam figurabant futuram salutem. Ergo multo amplius contra concupiscentiam gratiam conferebant. Obj. 4: Furthermore, man was weakened more dangerously by concupiscence in his emotions than in his intellect by ignorance. But sacraments acted against ignorance as figures of future salvation. Therefore, much more did they confer grace against concupiscence. Praeterea, impossibile est sine gratia satisfacere. Sed sacramenta veteris legis erant satisfactoria; unde pro diversis peccatis diversa sacrificia injungebantur in lege, ut patet Levit. 16 et 17. Ergo gratiam conferebant. Obj. 5: Furthermore, it is impossible to make satisfaction without grace. But the sacraments of the Old Law made satisfaction; hence different sacrifices were enjoined in the law for different sins, as is clear from Leviticus 16 and 17. Therefore, they conferred grace. Sed contra, Hebr. 10, 4: impossibile est sanguine hircorum et taurorum auferri peccata. Sed gratia tollit peccatum. Ergo antiqua sacramenta gratiam non conferebant. On the contrary (1), It is impossible for the blood of goats and bulls to take away sins (Heb 10:4). But grace takes away sins. Therefore, the ancient sacraments did not confer grace. Praeterea, per gratiam est vita animae. Sed de praeceptis veterum sacramentorum dicitur Ezech. 20, 25: dedi eis praecepta non bona, et judicia in quibus non vivent. Ergo gratiam non conferebant. Furthermore (2), The soul has life by grace. But concerning the precepts of the old sacraments it is said, I gave them precepts that were not good, and judgments by which they could not live (Ezek 20:25). Therefore, they did not confer grace. Quaestiuncula 2 Quaestiuncula 2 Ulterius. Videtur quod eorum usus non erat meritorius. Nihil enim est meritorium nisi sit Deo acceptum. Sed sacramenta illa non erant Deo accepta; super illud enim Isaiae 1: sanguinem hircorum nolui, dicit Glossa: praeterito utens tempore, ostendit se nunquam sacrificia Judaeorum amasse. Ergo eorum usus non erat meritorius. Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that their use was not meritorious. For nothing is meritorious unless it is accepted by God. But those sacraments were not accepted by God; for about this verse: I did not wish the blood of . . . goats (Isa 1:11), the Gloss says, using the past tense, he shows that he never loved the sacrifices of the Jews. Therefore, their use was not meritorious. Praeterea, nullum opus inutile est meritorium. Sed occisio tot animalium erat omnino inutilis. Ergo non erat meritoria. Obj. 2: Furthermore, no useless work is meritorious. But the killing of so many animals was completely useless. Therefore, it was not meritorious. Praeterea, nihil efficit nisi hoc quod a Deo institutum est. Sed illa sacramenta imposuit Deus in onus; sicut in littera dicitur. Ergo eorum exercitium meritorium non erat. Obj. 3: Furthermore, any given thing effects only what God has established. But God imposed those sacraments as a burden, as is said in the text. Therefore, their exercise was not meritorious. Praeterea, Origenes dicit quod illa ratione permisit Deus hoc sibi fieri qua permisit libellum repudii. Sed libellus repudii semper malus fuit, et nunquam meritorius. Ergo nec praedictorum sacramentorum usus. Obj. 4: Furthermore, Origen says that God allowed this for the same reason he allowed the bill of divorce. But a bill of divorce was always bad and never meritorious. Therefore, neither was the use of the aforementioned sacraments. Sed contra, dicit Beda, quod sacramenta veteris legis suo tempore custodita vitam conferebant aeternam. Sed nihil perducit ad vitam aeternam, nisi sit meritorium. Ergo erant meritoria. On the contrary (1), Bede says that the sacraments of the Old Law, kept in their own time, conferred eternal life. But nothing leads to eternal life unless it is meritorious. Therefore, they were meritorious.