|
Objection 1: It would seem that the suffrages of one person cannot
profit others. For it is written (Gal. 6:8): "What things a
man shall sow, those also shall he reap." Now if one person reaped
fruit from the suffrages of another, he would reap from another's
sowing. Therefore a person receives no fruit from the suffrages of
others.
Objection 2: Further, it belongs to God's justice, that each one
should receive according to his merits, wherefore the psalm (Ps.
61:13) says: "Thou wilt render to every man according to his
works." Now it is impossible for God's justice to fail. Therefore
it is impossible for one man to be assisted by the works of another.
Objection 3: Further, a work is meritorious on the same count as it
is praiseworthy, namely inasmuch as it is voluntary. Now one man is
not praised for the work of another. Therefore neither can the work of
one man be meritorious and fruitful for another.
Objection 4: Further, it belongs to Divine justice to repay good
for good in the same way as evil for evil. But no man is punished for
the evildoings of another; indeed, according to Ezech. 18:4,
"the soul that sinneth, the same shall die." Therefore neither does
one person profit by another's good.
On the contrary, It is written (Ps. 118:63): "I am a
partaker with all them that fear Thee," etc.
Further, all the faithful united together by charity are members of
the one body of the Church. Now one member is assisted by another.
Therefore one man can be assisted by the merits of another.
I answer that, our actions can avail for two purposes. First, for
acquiring a certain state; thus by a meritorious work a man obtains the
state of bliss. Secondly, for something consequent upon a state;
thus by some work a man merits an accidental reward, or a rebate of
punishment. And for both these purposes our actions may avail in two
ways: first, by way of merit; secondly, by way of prayer: the
difference being that merit relies on justice, and prayer on mercy;
since he who prays obtains his petition from the mere liberality of the
one he prays. Accordingly we must say that the work of one person
nowise can avail another for acquiring a state by way of merit, so
that, to wit, a man be able to merit eternal life by the works which
I do, because the share of glory is awarded according to the measure
of the recipient, and each one is disposed by his own and not by
another's actions---disposed, that is to say, by being worthy of
reward. By way of prayer, however, the work of one may profit
another while he is a wayfarer, even for acquiring a state; for
instance, one man may obtain the first grace for another [FS,
Question 114, Article 6]: and since the impetration of prayer
depends on the liberality of God Whom we pray, it may extend to
whatever is ordinately subject to the Divine power. On the other
hand, as regards that which is consequent upon or accessory to a
state, the work of one may avail another, not only by way of prayer
but even by way of merit: and this happens in two ways. First, on
account of their communion in the root of the work, which root is
charity in meritorious works. Wherefore all who are united together by
charity acquire some benefit from one another's works, albeit
according to the measure of each one's state, since even in heaven
each one will rejoice in the goods of others. Hence it is that the
communion of saints is laid down as an article of faith. Secondly,
through the intention of the doer who does certain works specially for
the purpose that they may profit such persons: so that those works
become somewhat the works of those for whom they are done, as though
they were bestowed on them by the doer. Wherefore they can avail them
either for the fulfillment of satisfaction or for some similar purpose
that does not change their state.
Reply to Objection 1: This reaping is the receiving of eternal
life, as stated in Jn. 4:36, "And he that reapeth . . .
gathereth fruit unto life everlasting." Now a share of eternal life
is not given to a man save for his own works, for although we may
impetrate for another that he obtain life, this never happens except by
means of his own works, when namely, at the prayers of one, another
is given the grace whereby he merits eternal life.
Reply to Objection 2: The work that is done for another becomes his
for whom it is done: and in like manner the work done by a man who is
one with me is somewhat mine. Hence it is not contrary to Divine
justice if a man receives the fruit of the works done by a man who is
one with him in charity, or of works done for him. This also happens
according to human justice, so that the satisfaction offered by one is
accepted in lieu of another's.
Reply to Objection 3: Praise is not given to a person save
according to his relation to an act, wherefore praise is "in relation
to something" (Ethic. i, 12). And since no man is made or
shown to be well- or ill-disposed to something by another's deed, it
follows that no man is praised for another's deeds save accidentally in
so far as he is somewhat the cause of those deeds, by giving counsel,
assistance, inducement, or by any other means. on the other hand, a
work is meritorious to a person, not only by reason of his
disposition, but also in view of something consequent upon his
disposition or state, as evidenced by what has been said.
Reply to Objection 4: It is directly contrary to justice to take
away from a person that which is his due: but to give a person what is
not his due is not contrary to justice, but surpasses the bounds of
justice, for it is liberality. Now a person cannot be hurt by the
ills of another, unless he be deprived of something of his own.
Consequently it is not becoming that one should be punished for
another's sins, as it is that one should acquire some advantage from
deeds of another.
|
|