Chapter XXI. Question 21 the justice and mercy of God

AFTER considering the divine love, we must treat of God’s justice and mercy. For they are virtues that reside in the will, the principal act of which is love. Then providence will be discussed, which is a virtue of the practical intellect, inasmuch as it analogically corresponds to our prudence and especially to that part which provides for future things.*

There are no other virtues in God, because the rest imply imperfection. For it is evident that faith, which is obscure, cannot be in God; nor can there be hope, which concerns future good that is difficult of attainment. But charity corresponds to the uncreated act of love, which was discussed in the previous question. Nor can there be any moral virtues in God by which He is referred to another either as His superior or equal, such as religion and piety; nor are there in Him those virtues that regulate the passions, such as temperance and fortitude, which in us reside in the sensitive appetite as directed by reason, although fortitude bears a certain resemblance to omnipotence, which is discussed in a subsequent question.?

But this twenty-first question decides: (1) whether there is justice in God and of what kind; (2) whether justice is identical with truth of which Holy Scripture speaks, associating it with mercy: (3) whether mercy is in God, and how it can be analogically and properly attributed to Him without denoting imperfection; (4) whether mercy and justice are to be found in every work of God.

FIRST ARTICLE WHETHER THERE IS JUSTICE IN GoD

State of the question. The principal difficulty is that the act of justice 1s to pay what is due, or what is peculiarly one’s own. There- fore justice is not attributed properly to God, not even analogically, but only metaphorically.

Yet the answer is: Justice belongs properly to God, and there are very many texts in Holy Scripture that show this to be of faith. Thus we read: “The Lord is just and hath loved justice.” 3

In these texts God’s justice is clearly seen as His constant will of giving to all what is due to them, in accordance with their nature and condition, and in view of their merits as ordained and promised by God.

It must be noted that Luther implicitly denied God’s justice, asserting that the just person, even though he was a murderer and unchaste, can never be punished by the supreme Judge. Likewise, in our times, those impious persons who deny punishments in the future life, also contradict God’s justice.

There is only the difficulty as to what kind of justice is properly attributed to God. Now justice, as explained in the treatise on this virtue, is divided into general and particular, which is again subdivided into commutative and distributive.

General justice, however, is of two kinds. There is legal justice, that refers to the common good in accordance with law, and equity or epikeia, which regards the spirit of the law more than its letter, which, if it were applied in certain cases, would be more severe, according to the saying: “extreme law, extreme injustice.” But since this twofold general justice is, as St. Thomas says,* by way of a mastercraft in the king who commands, and administratively in his subjects, it is evident that this exists formally in God, who is the King of kings and the Lord of lords. Thus God takes care of all things, providing for the common good of all things in the universe, as befitting the manifestation of divine goodness.

Therefore this leaves only the difficulty concerning distributive and commutative justice to be considered. St. Thomas examines this difficulty in the body of this article.®

Reply. Commutative justice does not belong properly and formally to God, because the obligation of commutative justice arises from this, that another gave us something belonging to himself over which we had no dominion. But man and angel can give God nothing that is not already His and under His dominion. Even our free action is under God's dominion, just as all created beings are. Hence St. Paul says: “Who hath first given to Him, and recompense shall be made him?” € Therefore commutative justice does not exist properly and formally in God.

3 Ps. 10:8. See also Deut. 10:17; 32:4; Prov. 8:18; Jer. 23:6; Dan. g: 14; Zach. g: g; Acts 10: 34; Eph. 6:9; Col. 3: 25; II Tim. 4: 8; I Pet. 1: 17; I John 1: 9; Apoc. 16:5.

6 See also Contra Gentes, Bk. I, chap. 93.

Objection. One who is under obligation by reason of a pact or promise to reward another, if a certain work is performed, is bound by commutative justice. But God put Himself under such an obligation, for He says of Himself: “Call the laborers and pay them their hire.” 7 In fact, St. Thomas says: “This form of the divine judgment is in accordance with the conditions of commutative justice, in so far as rewards are apportioned to merits, and punishments to sins.” 8

Reply. I distinguish the major: That one who is thus under obligation by reason of a pact or promise to reward another, is bound by commutative justice, if what is given is not already belonging to the other by right, this I concede; otherwise, I deny the major. I contradistinguish the minor in like manner. Hence, on God’s part, the obligation is one of fidelity, but not of commutative justice. But if it is said that the kingdom of heaven is obtained by good works, then this is said metaphorically.

As for the difficulty arising from the text quoted by St. Thomas, it must be said that God in rewarding adheres to the mode of commutative justice, because He gives so much for so much; but this divine act is not properly and formally an act of commutative justice, for the reason already given. Similarly vindictive justice, in so far as it exists in God, pertains to commutative justice only as regards the mode of retribution; but as regards the debt incurred, it seems to belong more to legal or distributive justice.®

Distributive justice, however, is found formally in God. It is that justice whereby a ruler or a steward gives to each what his rank deserves. But this is perfection that excludes all imperfection, and it most fittingly applies to God as the supreme lord and ruler of the universe. Therefore distributive justice is found formally in God. Experience clearly shows that God distributes to all creatures what is necessary so that they can attain their end, although all do not actually do so.

Objection. Distributive justice implies the payment of what is due. But God is debtor to nobody. Therefore distributive justice does not properly and formally belong to God.

In accordance with the reply to the third objection of this article, we may say: I distinguish the major: I concede that distributive justice implies the payment of what is due, sometimes as dependent on the proper ordering of the one who distributes, as in the distribution of one’s own as reward; I deny that the payment of what is due is always independent of this ordering. I contradistinguish the minor: that God is debtor to nobody, independently of His ordering, this I

9 See below after the second article, corollaries concerning vindictive justice.

concede; as dependent on it, this I deny. Hence it is said that God is a debtor to Himself to give to all creatures what is necessary so that they can attain their end. Wherefore it is stated in the reply to the third objection: “It is due to God that there should be fulfilled in creatures what His will and wisdom require, and what manifests His goodness. In this respect God's justice regards what befits Him inasmuch as He renders to Himself what is due to Himself.” Similarly, St. Thomas says: “Since our action has the character of merit only on the supposition of the divine ordination, it does not follow that God is made our debtor simply, but His own, inasmuch as it is right that His will should be carried out.” 1°

But I insist. In distributive justice he who disposes of anything abdicates his right over the thing disposed of and transfers it to another. But God cannot abdicate His right over created things. Therefore distributive justice does not belong formally to God.

Reply. I distinguish the major: that sometimes he who disposes of something abdicates his right over the thing disposed of, this I concede; that he does so always, this I deny. Thus the sovereign preserves intact distributive justice by bestowing goods in common use by way of emphyteusis, though retaining direct dominion over them. Thus God, though retaining His supreme dominion over all created things, grants us dominion inferior and subordinate to His,*

SECOND ARTICLE WHETHER THE JUSTICE OF GOD IS TRUTH

State of the question. The purpose of this article is to explain these words: ‘‘Mercy and truth have met each other; justice and peace have kissed,” 1? in which, according to the context and tradition, truth stands for justice.

The difficulty is, however, that truth resides in the intellect, whereas justice is in the will. If there is a virtue that is called truth or rather veracity, it is a virtue that is annexed to justice, but is not, however, justice itself.

But the answer is: God’s justice is fittingly called truth. The reason is that, since the divine intellect is the rule and measure of things, the truth of these things consists in their conformity with the divine intellect. Similarly, our works are called just according as they are in conformity with the divine law. But God’s justice establishes things in the order conformable to the rule of His wisdom, which is

the law of His justice. Therefore God’s justice is fittingly called truth. Reply to first objection. Justice, as to the law that governs, resides in the intellect; but God’s knowledge is the cause of things in so far as His will is joined to it, and command is an act in which the intellect and will concur. Reply to second objection. The truth of justice is thus distinct from God’s veracity, but they are interrelated.

COROLLARIES THE PRINCIPAL ACTS OF DIVINE JUSTICE

There are three acts: (1) to give everyone his due in accordance with his nature and condition; (2) to inflict the punishment that is due to sins; (3) to assign the reward that is due to one’s merits. This second aspect of justice is called vindictive, and the third remunerative.

1. Divine justice is the just distribution of natural goods and supernatural helps, without which it is impossible for any creature to attain its end. St. Thomas says on this point: “As then the proper order displayed in ruling a family or any kind of multitude evinces justice of this kind in the ruler, so the order of the universe, which is seen both in things of nature and in things of the will, shows forth the justice of God.”¹ i

This is afirmed by Christ our Lord in His Sermon on the Mount: “Do not be solicitous for your life, what you shall eat; nor for your body, what you shall put on. Is not the life more than the meat, and the body more than the raiment? Behold the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not you of much more value than they? . . . For your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things. Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God and His justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.” 14 If there is a just distribution of material goods, far more so must there be a just distribution of spiritual goods: “Is not the life more than the meat?”

Nevertheless, without injustice on God's part, there is great inequality of both natural and supernatural conditions. The inequality of natural conditions in the human race already existed in the state of original justice, for, as St. Thomas says: “Man is naturally a social being, and so in the state of innocence he would have led a social life. Now a social life cannot exist among a number of people unless under the presidency of one to look after the common good; for many, as such, seek many things, whereas one attends only to one. . . . The natural order of things requires this; and thus did God make man.” 15 Similarly, there are hierarchies among the angels, for some dominate others. In fact, inequality among creatures, which is necessary so as to make them specifically different, is required for the fitting manifestation of divine goodness, and this cannot be sufficiently made manifest by one creature or by several that are absolutely equal. Thus no one collects a thousand copies of Virgil of the same edition and binding for his library. St. Thomas shows farther on ** that the universe would not be perfect if only one grade of goodness were found in things. Similarly, the plant would not be perfect if all its parts consisted of flowers, nor would the human body be perfect if all its parts were equal in dignity to the eye. Thus God has established inequality among creatures, and also inequality of conditions in the human race.

But after original sin, as also by reason of the concupiscence of the flesh, the eyes, and the pride of life, this inequality of natural conditions has been very much increased and accentuated, so that some are extremely wealthy and others are in dire need and distress. Hence Christ said: “But woe to you that are rich, for you have your consolation; woe to you that are filled, for you shall hunger; woe to you that now laugh, for you shall mourn and weep.” 17 These words are a condemnation of the inordinate love of riches. The Gospel also records what our Lord said about the wicked rich man and the good beggar Lazarus.:

Wherefore, among the signs of His Messianic office, Jesus declares that “the poor have the gospel preached to them”; 1° and in the beginning of His Sermon on the Mount, in proclaiming the evangelical beatitudes, He shows that inequality of natural conditions is not infrequently compensated by inequality of graces inasmuch as “God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.” 2° Thus He says: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are the meek, for they shall possess the land. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. . . . Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” #2

In this we see clearly that the highest degree of distributive justice is joined indeed to mercy, and this justice is also expressed in the

Magnificat in these words: “He hath put down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble. He hath filled the hungry with good things, and the rich He hath sent empty away.” 22

This distributive justice as regards the distribution of graces is clearly seen in this, that, as St. Augustine says, “God commands not impossibilities, but, by commanding both admonishes thee to do what thou art able, and to ask for what thou art not able (to do).” 23 Thus the common saying: To one who does what he can (with the help of actual grace) God does not refuse to give (habitual) grace. Thus God gives sufficient grace to all adults, by which the fulfillment of an actually pressing obligation is made really possible. The efficacious grace is offered to us in the sufficient grace, just as the fruit is contained in the flower; but if man resists this sufficient grace, he deserves to be deprived of the efficacious grace by which de facto he could have effectively observed God’s commandments.

Hence God’s distributive justice is preserved intact even as regards infidels, as Pius IX declared in the following statement: “It is known to us and to you that those who labor under invincible ignorance concerning our most holy religion and who, diligently observing the natural law and its precepts that are engraved in the hearts of all by God, and being ready to obey Him, lead an honest and upright life, can, through the operative power of divine light and grace, attain eternal life, since God, who clearly intuits, scrutinizes, and knows the minds, impulses, thoughts, and habits of all, because of His supreme goodness and clemency, by no means will allow anyone to be punished eternally who was not guilty of any willful offense.” ** Similarly, St. Thomas had said: “If anyone, brought up as a savage, were guided by the light of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, it must be held as most certain that God would make known to such a person either by an interior revelation what must be believed, or else He would direct someone to preach the faith to such a person, just as He sent Peter to Cornelius.” 25

All these things pertain to distributive justice whereby God distributes to all creatures what is necessary so that they can attain their end. Thus God sees to it that the adult is not without the necessary help to escape damnation and, if such a person is lost, it is his own fault.

Not all indeed received five talents, for some received only one; but if they did not resist this divine grace, they would receive many

others. Not infrequently, as we said, it is by inequality of graces that there is compensation on God's part for this inequality of natural conditions, especially so in the case of poverty. Hence in these cases not only does distributive justice remain unimpaired, but it is often wonderfully made manifest.

2. Another act of distributive justice is to inflict the punishment that is due to sin. Thus the Gospel records the following words as being addressed to the wicked rich man after his death: “Son, remember that thou didst receive good things in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted; and thou art tormented.” 2° As St. Thomas clearly explains: “Whatever rises up against an order to which it belongs, is put down by that order or by the principle thereof. . . . (But) whoever sins, . . . acts against reason, and against human divine law. Wherefore he incurs a threefold punishment; one, inflicted by himself, namely, remorse of conscience; another, inflicted by man; and a third, inflicted by God,?" as the just judge who, without any passion, inflicts the punishment through love of His justice and infinite goodness that must be loved above all things. Thus vindictive justice belongs properly or formally to God.?s

In this there is most just retribution, which is according to the proportion between the punishment and the sin. Thus venial sin is punished by temporal punishment, and mortal sin that is not forgiven in this life, but that has become irreparable through the sin of final impenitence, is justly punished by eternal punishment, for as St. Thomas says: “Sin incurs a debt of punishment through disturbing an order. But the effect remains so long as the cause remains. Therefore so long as the disturbance of the order remains, the debt of punishment must remain also. . . . Consequently, if a sin destroys the principle of the order whereby man’s will is subject to God, there will be a deordination such as to be considered in itself irreparable, although it is possible to repair this by the power of God. Now the principle of this order is the last end to which man

28 It is quite clear that eternal punishments, of which there is evidence in Holy Scripture (Matt. 25: 41, 46), because of their eternity can be only vindictive; for they are not inflicted either to correct the damned or to deter them from evil, although the punishments are medicinal for others.

From what has been said it is also apparent that vindictive justice follows as a result of God’s sanctity. For the moral order, which is the image of God’s sanctity that is freely willed by Him, cannot be maintained unless there can be a recourse to punishments for sins, and punishments that are vindictive and not merely corrective of a will confirmed in malice and refusing any correction.

adheres by charity. Therefore whatever sins turn man away from God, so as to destroy charity, considered in itself, they incur a debt of eternal punishment.” ?°

If therefore these sins are not forgiven before death, final impenitence, supervening upon this irreparable perversion of the order, is made permanent, and it is then de facto punished by eternal punishment. Proportionate contrition and satisfaction are required in strictest justice for a deliberate sin, and when these are wanting punishment is inflicted so that the order may be preserved.*°

It is a manifestation of mercy, however, that sinners who have many times fallen into mortal sin, frequently and repeatedly turn again to God; but they must fear lest, falling again into mortal sin, it may never be forgiven, because they did not know the time of God’s visitation. This concerns the question of the inscrutable mystery of predestination. Nevertheless we must always hope in God’s mercy.

3. Finally, there is another act of divine justice, which consists in the admirable assignment of rewards, and these in just proportion.

Thus we read: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are the meek, blessed are they that mourn,

30 As St. Thomas says (ibid., ad gum): “God does not delight in punishments for their own sake; but He does delight in the order of His justice, which requires them.” He wills the manifestation of His justice by proclaiming the inalienable right of His infinite goodness to be loved above all things. The act of supreme legal justice consists in this, that it must compensate for the imperfections of human justice which does not always punish as it ought or assign the fitting reward; for great crimes committed here below sometimes go unpunished, and heroic virtues, since they remain hidden, are unrewarded. But on Judgment Day all these things will be revealed, and then the splendor of divine justice will be made manifest.

It is not derogatory to God's goodness and mercy to impose eternal punishment upon one for mortal sin that is not forgiven or for final impenitence. In inflicting this punishment God freely and rightly wills to manifest His most holy love for justice, and consequently His hatred of iniquity, having set aside the manifestation of His mercy. In fact, those are unworthy of this mercy who depart this life in a state of final impenitence, not asking for forgiveness. Nevertheless, as stated farther on (q.21. a.4 ad 1um), “even in the damnation of the reprobates mercy is scen, since God punishes them short of their deserts.”

Hermes, although he did not deny eternal punishments, asserted that vindictive justice is derogatory to the ultimate end of God’s operation ad extra, because he considered that this end was the happiness of creatures rather than the manifestation of God's goodness and perfections. It must be observed, however, that God is most free in the exercise of His vindictive justice, so that He can pardon the repentant sinner, without inflicting any punishment. For it is the privilege of the supreme legislator and supreme judge that he can grant pardon outright for an offense. (Cf. infra, q.21, a.3 ad 2um). j 31 Cf. Luke 19: 44.

blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice, blessed are the merciful, blessed are the clean of heart, blessed are the peacemakers, blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” *? But there must be purity of intention and a certain proportion between merit and reward. Therefore our Lord says: “Take heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them; otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven.” ** In these words our Lord admonishes us to strive for the simplicity of a pure intention. Hence He says of the hypocrites who give alms so as to be honored by men, that “they have received their reward,” ** namely, human praise. On the contrary, “that thy alms may be in secret; and thy Father who seeth in secret, will repay thee.” 85

God’s mercy and justice both intervene here in accordance with the following text from St. Paul: “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. As to the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of justice, which the Lord, the just judge, will render to me in that day; and not only to me, but to them also that love His coming.” 3° And the degree of the light of glory will correspond to the degree of charity in each of the blessed.

THIRD ARTICLE WHETHER MERCY CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO GOD

State of the question. The difficulty is that mercy seems to be a kind of sorrow. But there is no sorrow in God. Moreover, it seems that mercy is a relaxation of justice. But God cannot remit what appertains to His justice; for He cannot deny Himself. Hence it seems that mercy is only metaphorically in God, just as anger is.

Yet the answer is: Mercy belongs properly or formally to God.

1. It is of faith, as attested by many texts in Holy Scripture and by the common interpretation of the Church, although there is no special and solemn definition on this point that is already most certain.

The following are some of the texts from Holy Scripture: “The Lord is compassionate and merciful, longsuffering and plenteous in mercy.” 37 “The mercies of the Lord I will sing forever.” ** “Show

forth Thy wonderful mercies; Thou who savest them that trust in Thee.” 39 “From the morning watch even until night, let Israel hope in the Lord. Because with the Lord there is mercy, and with Him plentiful redemption.” ¢° In the psalms and the prophetical books often the same three ideas are found inseparable, namely, man in his misery invoking God’s mercy that the glory of God may be made manifest. Thus we read: “Help us, O God, our Savior; and for the glory of Thy name, O Lord, deliver us and forgive us our sins for Thy name’s sake.” 41 “We have sinned . . . and trespassed in all things . . . ; but deal with us according to Thy meekness and according to the multitude of Thy mercies. And deliver us according to Thy wonderful works, and give glory to Thy name, O Lord.” 4? Thus the prophets see that God’s mercy in its effect is the highest manifestation of His goodness and omnipotence. In fact, they say: “The earth, O Lord, is full of Thy mercy.” + The ideal of this revelation is reached in the following text of the New Testament: “For God so loved the world as to give His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him may not perish, but may have life everlasting.” 44 Thus mercy was the motive of the incarnation.* St. Paul often speaks of the riches of God’s mercy and grace, as in the following text: “God, who is rich in mercy, for His exceeding charity wherewith He loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ.” 4 God's mercy toward the children of Israel is described at length in the Old Testament,“ and the mercy of Christ, the good Shepherd, is taught in all the parables, as in the parable of the prodigal son, and throughout the Gospel.

But it must be shown by a theological argument that what is formally meant by mercy implies no imperfection, and, as St. Thomas says, “is especially to be attributed to God.” This is clearly shown in the argumentative part of the article.

The holy doctor distinguishes in human mercy toward those who are in misery between being affected with sorrow at the misery of another and dispelling the misery of this other. But this sorrow, by reason of the subject of this sorrow, constitutes the material part of mercy; whereas, on the other hand, by reason of the object of this

sorrow, the inclination of the will to alleviate the misery of another constitutes the formal element in sorrow.

But, although sorrow over the misery of another does not belong to God, to dispel the misery of another implies no imperfection, and belongs especially to God. For defects are not removed except by the perfection of some kind of goodness. But the primary source of goodness is God, who is essential goodness. Therefore mercy, according to its formal signification, belongs properly and not merely metaphorically to God.

Mercy in this sense is a most beautiful example of the analogy of proper proportionality. There is a relation of proportion between God’s merciful attitude toward sinners imploring His pardon and that of man toward those who are in misery, all imperfections being removed, such as sorrow or a feeling of compassion.

In like manner, St. Thomas says in discussing the virtue of mercy: “A virtue may take precedence of other virtues in two ways: first, in itself; secondly, in comparison with its subject. In itself, mercy takes precedence of other virtues, for it belongs to mercy to be bountiful to others, and, what is more, to succor others in their wants, which pertains chiefly to one who stands above. Hence mercy is accounted as being proper to God, and therein His omnipotence and goodness are declared to be chiefly manifested.

On the other hand, with regard to its subject, mercy is not the greatest virtue, unless that subject is greater than all others, surpassed by none and excelling all, since for him that has anyone above him it is better to be united to that which is above than to supply the defect of that which is beneath.” 4 Hence in us the most sublime of all virtues is charity, which unites us with God, but “of all the virtues which relate to our neighbor, mercy is the greatest.” 4°

St. Thomas most correctly distinguishes between the virtue of mercy and the emotion of commiseration, which is a praiseworthy inclination of the sensitive appetite, and is not a virtue.®® So also there is a distinction between the virtue of chastity and a sense of shame; but chastity implies imperfection, whereas the virtue of mercy does not. In fact, as St. Thomas remarks,*! if the weak and timid are especially inclined to feeling compassion for others, on account of the possibility of suffering, in like manner the virtue of mercy pertains especially to the perfect, who so excel in goodness and fortitude that they can dispel the misery of others. Thus mercy be-

longs especially to God. “God takes pity on us through love alone, inasmuch as He loves us as belonging to Him.” 5? Consequently, there is neither anthropomorphism nor sentimentality in this, but purely revealed truth that has been theologically explained. The motive of divine mercy is not properly the misery of the creature (this being the matter about which it is concerned), but it is God's goodness to _ be made manifest in the alleviation of a person’s misery.

First doubt. What is the difference between God’s mercy, goodness, justice, and liberality?

Reply. As stated in the body of the article, “to bestow perfections appertains not only to God’s goodness, but also to His justice, liberality, and mercy; yet under different aspects. The communicating of perfections, absolutely considered, appertains to goodness. But, in so far as perfections are given to things in proportion, the bestowal of them belongs to justice. In so far as God does not bestow them for His own use, but only on account of His goodness, it belongs to liberality. In so far as perfection given to things by God expels defects, it belongs to mercy.” What is here said explains the doctrine of the following article.

Second doubt. How is it that mercy which forgives sin that has been committed, is not a relaxation of vindictive justice that must inflict the punishment for sin?

The reply to the second objection answers this as follows: “God acts mercifully, not indeed by going against His justice, but by doing something more than justice. Thus a man who pays another person two hundred pieces of money, though owing him only one hundred, does nothing against justice, but acts liberally or mercifully. The case is the same with one who pardons an offense committed against him, for.in remitting it he may be said to bestow a gift. Hence the Apostle calls remission a forgiving. “Forgiving one another even as God hath forgiven you in Christ.” 5 Hence it is clear that mercy does not destroy justice, but in a sense is the fullness thereof. And thus it is said: “Mercy exalteth itself above judgment.” $4

I insist. But the human judge is in justice bound to inflict the penalty for the crime, and he cannot show mercy by remitting it. Therefore neither can God do so, if justice belongs formally and properly to Him.

Reply. I distinguish the antecedent: #5 The subordinate judge cannot, of course, without violating justice, let the offense go unpunished; but the supreme legislator can do so, and this right is a

privilege that belongs either to the king of a country, or to the president of a republic, that he can pardon criminals imploring his mercy. Thus the goodness of either the king or the president is strikingly made manifest, and the common good is preserved intact as well as the king’s honor. St. Thomas explains this very well: “Even this justice (which exacts reparation for sin) depends on the divine will, requiring satisfaction for sin from the human race. But if He had willed to free man from sin without any satisfaction, He would not have acted against justice. For a judge, while preserving justice, cannot pardon the offense without imposing a penalty, for he must punish the offense committed against another, for instance, against another man, or against the state, or any prince in higher authority. But God has no one higher than Himself, for He is the sovereign and common good of the whole universe. Consequently, if He forgives sin, Which has the formality of fault in that it is committed against Himself, He wrongs no one; just as anyone else, overlooking a personal trespass, without demanding satisfaction, acts mercifully and not unjustly. And so David exclaimed when he sought mercy: “To Thee only have I sinned” (Ps. 50: 6), as if to say: “Thou canst pardon me without injustice.” 5# This means that the exercise of God’s justice and mercy depends on His free will. Therefore St. Augustine says: “Why He draws this (sinner) and not another, seek not to judge, if thou dost not wish to err.” * On this point St. Thomas says: “The reason for the predestination of some, and the reprobation of others, must be sought for in the goodness of God.” #8 This remains for us a mystery, namely, how infinite justice, mercy, and supreme liberty are intimately reconciled in the eminence of the Deity. Now in this article it is shown that God’s mercy in sparing sinners is not a relaxation of His vindictive justice, but transcends it, for, as the Apostle says, “mercy exalteth itself above judgment.” 5 But how some divine perfection can ina certain way excel another, will be discussed in the following article and in the corollaries on divine mercy.

FOURTH ARTICLE WHETHER IN EVERY WORK OF GOD THERE ARE MERCY AND JUSTICE

State of the question. The purpose of this article is to explain the scriptural text: “All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth,” 6°

This difficulty arises chiefly for the following reasons: (1) Some works of God are attributed to mercy, as the justification of the ungodly; and others are attributed to justice, as the damnation of the wicked. (2) Many just persons are afflicted in this world, and this does not appear to be just. (3) The works of justice and mercy presuppose creation, which does not manifest these divine perfections.

Yet the answer is: “All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth.” © It must be observed that this assertion is verified, if mercy is taken in the broad sense as meaning the removal of any kind of defect, but not if it refers to mercy only in the strict sense of the term, as stated in the body of this article and in the reply to the fourth objection.

The reason is that the work of divine justice always presupposes the work of mercy, and has its foundation in this latter. For nothing is due to creatures (for instance, either help or reward or punishment) except on account of something pre-existing in them. In the final analysis, it must be because of something that depends solely on the goodness of the divine will that has gratuitously created and ordained us to a supernatural end. Thus we see that mercy (at least in the broad sense) is the primary source of all God's works.

First corollary. It is stated in the body of the article that “the power of this primary source of all God’s works remains in all that follows therefrom, and operates indeed with greater force, just as the influence of the first cause is more intense than that of second causes.” Thus all God’s works have their foundation in His love for creatures, and it is manifested first by mercy, either in the broad or in the strict sense of the term, rather than by justice, which may be considered the branch in this tree of God’s love; whereas mercy is, as it were, the principal part of the tree, its trunk, so to speak, which comes directly from the root. Nor is it to be wondered at that a certain’order prevails between the infinite perfections of God; for, as the divine will is logically preceded by the divine intellect, so also mercy and justice presuppose God’s goodness and love. But mercy is the first manifestation of love, whereas justice is, so to speak, its second manifestation. In mercy it is God's goodness as self-diffusive that is manifested, whereas it is especially in vindictive justice that the inalienable right of supreme goodness to be loved above all things is made manifest. Thus mercy is the primary source of God’s works. St. Thomas says: “It is more proper to God to have mercy and to spare, than to punish.” 6?

Second corollary. In the argumentative part of this article occurs

the following statement: “For this reason God out of the abundance of His goodness bestows upon creatures what is due to them more bountifully than is proportionate to their deserts: since less would suffice for preserving the order of justice than what the divine goodness confers; because between creatures and God's goodness there can be no proportion.” Thus the psalmist says: “The earth is full of the mercy of the Lord.” ®* God gives generally to all creatures more than is strictly necessary for the attainment of their end; for He gives in the majority of cases what is befitting for their well-being, in the material, moral, and spiritual orders. Thus in all God’s works mercy is the result of His superabundant good; but justice results from His operation, since He gives what is proportionately due to each.

Reply to first objection. In the damnation of the reprobate it is justice, indeed, that is more in evidence; nevertheless mercy is made manifest in it, as somewhat alleviating the punishment, because the reprobates are punished short of what is deserved.%

Reply to third objection. Prior to the works of mercy and justice taken in their strict sense, the ideas of these perfections are in some manner preserved in creation, inasmuch as beings are, as it were, mercifully changed from non-existence to existence, and justice is seen in the production of these beings in a manner that accords with the divine goodness and wisdom, particularly in sparing and having mercy. Therefore the psalmist says: “Help us, O God, our Savior, and for the glory of Thy name, O Lord, deliver us; and forgive us our sins for Thy name's sake.” ® Thus in this prayer, the sinner in his profound misery invokes God’s most sublime attribute of mercy, not only that his misery may be alleviated, but also that God may be glorified, and that His goodness and omnipotence may be made manifest. Likewise, the Scripture says: “We have sinned and committed iniquity . . . but deal with us according to the multitude of Thy mercies, O Lord.” °% Anyone who prays in this manner with humility, piety, and perseverance, is always heard.** The abyss of misery invokes the abyss of mercy, and God’s goodness and omnipotence are made manifest.

2. Inso far as God in His mercy bestows upon creatures more than is strictly necessary, punishes short of what is deserved, and rewards

64 Summa theol., Ia Uae, q.99; see also Tabula aurea, under the word “mercy,” no. 26.

beyond what is deserved, in these three acts His mercy in a certain manner transcends His justice.°

A. God in the majority of cases bestows upon creatures more than is strictly necessary. Thus He could have created us merely in the natural order; yet de facto He raised us to the supernatural order. After Adam’s sin, God could have left us in the state of fallen nature, or He could have afforded us some relief by simply forgiving the sin on certain conditions, this being announced to us through some prophet. As a matter of fact, “God so loved the world as to give His only begotten Son.” 7° “Mercy and truth have met each other.” 74 “Mercy exalteth itself above judgment.” 7 Christ manifested His love for us even by dying on the Cross. Moreover, of His superabundant mercy He gave us baptismal grace or the grace of regeneration, and actual graces to persevere, and also the Holy Eucharist and other sacraments. In all this it is quite clear that God in His mercy bestows upon creatures more than is strictly required by rigorous justice.

B. In like manner, as stated in this article, God punishes short of what is deserved. For He often reinstates sinners who throughout their lives have repeatedly fallen into sin. He raises up souls to make reparation for them, and as St. Thomas observes: “It is a remarkable sign of God’s mercy when He punishes sinners in this life, in accordance with the saying of St. Augustine: Burn, cut here, provided Thou spare in eternity.” ™ Even the damned, as stated in this article, are punished short of what they deserve.’

C. God also rewards beyond what justice demands, and of His fullness we have received graces beyond our merits. Certainly the first grace of justification, which is the principle of merit, is not the object of merit; and this also applies to the grace of final perseverance, which means to die in the state of grace.?> The same is to be said of sacramental graces. Especially so is the nourishing grace which we receive in Holy Communion which is not the object of merit, for it is given without being merited by us; and, according to God's dispensation, every Communion, by increasing charity in us, if there is no venial sin of negligence on our part, ought to dispose us for a more substantially fervent Communion the following day.

God’s mercy is especially made manifest toward the laborers in the Lord’s vineyard who came to work at the last hour, shortly before

69 Consult the Tabula aurea of St. Thomas’ works, under the word “mercy,” no. 26,

78 Com. in Ep. ad Hebraeos, chap. 3, lect. 2 (at the end). 74 CÉ. ad 1um. 75 Cf. Ia Hae, q.114, a.g.

their death,7®° and toward those in whom are found verified these words of Scripture: “Whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.” 17

But the splendor of mercy will be made manifest in behalf of those to whom the Lord will say: “Come, ye blessed of My Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry, and you gave Me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me to drink. . . . As long as you did it to one of these, My least brethren, you did it to Me.” 78

This infinite mercy of God is the foundation of our hope, and is a most remarkable example for us of mercy and compassion toward our neighbor, being in agreement with the Gospel, which says: “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.” 7° “This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.” 8°

Finally, how are infinite mercy and justice intimately reconciled? There is inexorable justice as regards the damned, who, besides, do not ask for forgiveness. It is only by directly seeing the eminent Deity in which all the divine perfections are so united as not to be in the least destructive of one another, that we shall know how justice and mercy are reconciled. Hence Pius IX says: “When, freed from the trammels of this corporeal life, we see God as He is, we shall certainly understand how close and beautiful is the interrelation between divine mercy and justice.” §! Then, as stated farther on, we shall clearly understand the teaching of the Church when it says that “the gifts of heavenly grace are by no means wanting to those who sincerely will and ask to be directed anew by this light.” ° Thus, although the elect are by God’s mercy more loved and helped than others,®* yet for all it is true to say that God does not command impossibilities, but by commanding both admonishes us to do what we are able, and to ask for what we are not able to do. Thus in the obscurity of faith, especially in infused contemplation, the reconcilia-

83 This follows from what St. Paul says (I Cor. 4:7): “For who distinguisheth thee? Or what hast thou that thou hast not received?” Cf. Ia, q.23, 4.4, 5. If it is because of a special act of God’s mercy that one of two sinners is converted, far more so is this the reason why the just person is continually preserved from falling into sin, especially so if it is the case of one who was baptized in infancy.

tion of infinite mercy, justice, and supreme liberty in the eminence of the Deity is in a certain manner attained. Yet as long as we are in this life we always make use of limited analogical concepts, and these represent God's spiritual attributes after the manner of a mosaic, the little colored stones of which cannot express its charm of appeal. Our concepts of mercy, justice, and liberty are too much disconnected, and not enough united that we may know what properly constitutes the Deity.

Footnotes

1. Summa theol., la, q.21, a.1, c. See also ad gum. 14 Matt, 6: 25 f. Consult St. Thomas’ Commentary on St. Matthew. ↩