Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange - Grace

GRACE

Commentary on the Summa theologica of
St. Thomas, Ia IIae, q. 109-14

REV. REGINALD GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, O.P.

Translated by

THE DOMINICAN NUNS

Corpus Christi Monastery

Menlo Park, California

Edited by
Paul A. Ber, Sr.

Veritatis Splendor Publications
et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos

NIHIL OBSTAT

lnnocentius Swoboda, O.F.M.
Censor Librorum

IMPRIMATUR

Joseph E. Ritter
Archiepiscopus

St. Ludovici,die 25a mensis, julii, 1952

The contents of Grace by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, OP isin the public domain. However, this version is copyrighted.

Copyright 2012.Veritatis Splendor Publications.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

AUTHORS DEDICATION

To the holy Mother ofGod,
Mother of divine Grace,

WHO SWEETLY ANDSUBLIMELY TEACHES TO LITTLE
ONES THE MYSTERIES OF SALVATION,
THE AUTHOR DEDICATES THIS WORK
IN TOKEN OF GRATITUDE AND FILIAL OBEDIENCE

CONTENTS

We have already explained at length in the treatise on theone God the doctrine of St. Thomas about the knowledge and will of God,providence and predestination, and likewise in the treatise on God the Creatorhis doctrine on evil. Now it remains to apply the principles already expoundedto the questions of grace, so that these may be considered in relation to man,and also in relation to God, the author of grace, who is the subject of sacredtheology. Indeed this science considers all things in relation to God, asoptics does in relation to color and light, mathematics in relation to quantity,metaphysics in relation to being as such.

Hence the present treatise On grace depends on the treatiseabout the divine will in which we have already set forth the will for universalsalvation and the distinction between antecedent will and consequent will,which is the ultimate basis, as we shall see, of the distinction betweensufficient grace and efficacious grace.

We presuppose, likewise, St. Thomas doctrine on theintrinsic and infallible efficacy of the divine decrees, presented in Ia, q.19, a. 8, which we have explained at length in the treatise on the one God,refuting the objections based on the violation of freedom, on insufficiency ofhelp, and on affinity with Calvinism.

Our treatise on grace is especially connected with question20, Part I, on the love of God: 1. whether love exists in God; 2. whether Godloves all things; 3. whether God loves all things equally; 4. whether Godalways loves better things more. In explanation of this last article, we showthe value of the principle of predilection: Nothing would be better thananything else (as an act, easy or difficult, natural or supernatural, initialor final) unless it were more loved and sustained by God. What hast thou thatthou hast not received? (I Cor. 4:7.) As we shall see, this principle throws alight from on high upon all questions of predestination and grace. It islikewise the basis of Christian humility and of our gratitude to God, who hathfirst loved us.

At the same time, no less emphasis must be placed on anotherprinciple of St. Augustine, formulated and cited at the Council of Trent(Denz., no. 804): God does not command the impossible, but by commanding Heincites thee to do what thou canst and to ask what thou canst not, and Heassists thee so that thou mayst be able. These two principles taken togetherprevent opposing deviations; preserve balance of thought and the harmony of thedivine word in regard to these most difficult questions.

1. The teaching of the Fatherson grace

Schwane, Histoire des Dogmes, tr. Degert, 1904.

J. Tixeront, Histoire des Dogmes. Vol. I : Thologieanrnicenne, 1905; Vol. 11: S. Athanase S. Augustin, 1909; Vol. III: La finde lge patristique, 1912, p. 274 ff.

Hfele, Histoire des conciles, tr. Leclerq (Paris, 1908),II, 168.

St. Augustine, De natura et gratia; De gratia Christi;Enchiridion; Sex libr. aduersus Julianum; De gratia et libero arbitrio; Decorreptione et gratia; De praedestinatione sanctorum; De dono perseuerantiae.

St. Prosper, PL, LI, 155-276.

St. Fulgentius, De gratia et libero arbitrio.

St. Bernard, De gratia et libero arbitrio.

Peter Lombard, Sent., Bk. II, d. 26-28: De gratia.

St. Bonaventure and St. Albert the Great, In II Sent.

2. Works of St. Thomas and ofThomists on grace

St. Thomas, In II Sent., d. 26-28; la llae, q. 109-14;Contra Gentes, Quaest. disput.

Principal commentators: Capreolus, In II Sent., d. 26;Cajetan, In Iam IIae, q. 109 ff.; Medina, John of St. Thomas.

Sylvius, Gonet, the Salmanticenses, Gotti, Billuart.

Soto, De natura et gratia, 1551.

Thomas Lemos, Panoplia gratiae, 4 vols., 1676.

Alvarez, De auxiliis diuinae gratiae, 1610.

Gonzalez de Albeda, In Iam, q. 19, 1637.

Goudin, De gratia, 1874.

Reginaldus, O.P., De mente Conc. Trident. circa gratiamseipsa efficacem, 1706.

Among recent works by Thomists: Dummermuth: S. Thomas etdoctrina praemotionis physicae, Paris, 1886; Defensio doctrinae S. Thomas,1895. N. Del Prado, O.P.,: De gratia et libero arbitrio, 3 vols., Fribourg(Switzerland), 1907. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. La prdestination des saints et lagrce, 1936; Dict. thol. cath., arts., Prdestination, Prmotion.Schaezler: Natur und Gnade, Mainz, 1867.

3. Outside the Thomistic School

Molina, Concordia, Paris, 1876.

Suarez, De gratia.

St. Robert Bellarmine, De controversiis (Prague, 1721), Vol.IV.

St. Alphonsus de Liguori, De modo quo gratia operatur; Demagno orationis medio.

Scheeben, Natur und Gnade, Mainz, 1861. Strongly inclinestoward Thomism.

Billot, S.J., De gratia Christi, 2nd ed., 1921.

Van der Meersch, De divina gratia (Bruges, 1910) and Dict.thol. cath., art., Grce.

J. Ude, Doctrina Capreoli de influxu Dei in actus uoluntatishumanae, Graz, 1905. This author favors Thomism.

Ia IIae, q. 109-114

In the first place something must be said about the positionof this treatise in the Summa theologica. St. Thomas treats of grace in themoral part of his Summa, for, after the questions of human acts themselves,must be considered the principles of human acts; first, the intrinsic principles,namely, good and bad habits, or virtues and vices; secondly, the externalprinciples of human acts, namely, Gods teaching us by means of His law, andHis assistance to us by His grace.

Hence the treatise on grace belongs to the moral part oftheology no less than the treatise on law. Moral theology is not a sciencedistinct from dogmatic theology, since the formal object (objectum formale quodet quo) is ever the same: God under the aspect of His Deity so far as it fallsunder virtual revelation. It would be surprising if the moral part of sacredtheology did not treat of the necessity of grace for doing good conducive tosalvation and of the effects of grace, i.e., justification and merit. Indeed,if moral theology is deprived of these treatises, it will be reduced almost tocasuistry, which is only its lowest application, as asceticism and mysticismare its highest applications.

Among Thomistic commentators the following, along withCajetan, are especially to be read: Soto (De natura et gratia), John of St.Thomas, the Salmanticenses, Gonet, Gotti, Billuart. Cf. also among moderntheologians, Scheeben (Natur und Gnade).

This division of the whole treatise is methodical,corresponding to the division into four causes. 1. Grace is consideredbeginning with the definition of the word and with reference to its necessityfor the end of eternal life and to its existence. 2. Thus, in regard to itsend, grace, as it is the seed of glory, is defined as a participation in thedivine nature and is determined by the subject in which it resides, that is,the essence of the soul. 3. After the definition of grace, its subdivisions aregiven. Then its efficient cause and its effects are discussed. Thus all thosethings which belong to it per se are taken into consideration.