|
Objection 1: It would seem that suffrages do not profit even those
who are in purgatory. For purgatory is a part of hell. Now "there
is no redemption in hell" [Office of the Dead, Resp. vii], and
it is written (Ps. 6:6), "Who shall confess to Thee in
hell?" Therefore suffrages do not profit those who are in purgatory.
Objection 2: Further, the punishment of purgatory is finite.
Therefore if some of the punishment is abated by suffrages, it would
be possible to have such a great number of suffrages, that the
punishment would be entirely remitted, and consequently the sin
entirely unpunished: and this would seem incompatible with Divine
justice.
Objection 3: Further, souls are in purgatory in order that they may
be purified there, and being pure may come to the kingdom. Now
nothing can be purified, unless something be done to it. Therefore
suffrages offered by the living do not diminish the punishment of
purgatory.
Objection 4: Further, if suffrages availed those who are in
purgatory, those especially would seem to avail them which are offered
at their behest. Yet these do not always avail: for instance, if a
person before dying were to provide for so many suffrages to be offered
for him that if they were offered they would suffice for the remission
of his entire punishment. Now supposing these suffrages to be delayed
until he is released from punishment, they will profit him nothing.
For it cannot be said that they profit him before they are discharged;
and after they are fulfilled, he no longer needs them, since he is
already released. Therefore suffrages do not avail those who are in
purgatory.
On the contrary, As quoted in the text (Sent. iv, D, 45),
Augustine says (Enchiridion cx): "Suffrages profit those who are
not very good or not very bad." Now such are those who are detained
in purgatory. Therefore, etc.
Further, Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. vii) that the "godlike
priest in praying for the departed prays for those who lived a holy
life, and yet contracted certain stains through human frailty." Now
such persons are detained in purgatory. Therefore, etc.
I answer that, The punishment of purgatory is intended to supplement
the satisfaction which was not fully completed in the body.
Consequently, since, as stated above (Articles 1,2; Question
13, Article 2), the works of one person can avail for another's
satisfaction, whether the latter be living or dead, the suffrages of
the living, without any doubt, profit those who are in purgatory.
Reply to Objection 1: The words quoted refer to those who are in
the hell of the damned, where there is no redemption for those who are
finally consigned to that punishment. We may also reply with
Damascene (Serm.: De his qui in fide dormierunt) that such
statements are to be explained with reference to the lower causes, that
is according to the demands of the merits of those who are consigned to
those punishments. But according to the Divine mercy which transcends
human merits, it happens otherwise through the prayers of the
righteous, than is implied by the expressions quoted in the aforesaid
authorities. Now "God changes His sentence but not his counsel,"
as Gregory says (Moral. xx): wherefore the Damascene (Serm.:
De his qui in fide dormierunt) quotes as instances of this the
Ninevites, Achab and Ezechias, in whom it is apparent that the
sentence pronounced against them by God was commuted by the Divine
mercy [FP, Question 19, Article 7, ad 2].
Reply to Objection 2: It is not unreasonable that the punishment of
those who are in purgatory be entirely done away by the multiplicity of
suffrages. But it does not follow that the sins remain unpunished,
because the punishment of one undertaken in lieu of another is credited
to that other.
Reply to Objection 3: The purifying of the soul by the punishment
of purgatory is nothing else than the expiation of the guilt that
hinders it from obtaining glory. And since, as stated above
(Question 13, Article 2), the guilt of one person can be
expiated by the punishment which another undergoes in his stead, it is
not unreasonable that one person be purified by another satisfying for
him.
Reply to Objection 4: Suffrages avail on two counts, namely the
action of the agent ["Ex opere operante" and "ex opere operato"]
and the action done. By action done I mean not only the sacrament of
the Church, but the effect incidental to that action---thus from
the giving of alms there follow the relief of the poor and their prayer
to God for the deceased. In like manner the action of the agent may
be considered in relation either to the principal agent or to the
executor. I say, then, that the dying person, as soon as he
provides for certain suffrages to be offered for him, receives the full
meed of those suffrages, even before they are discharged, as regards
the efficacy of the suffrages that results from the action as proceeding
from the principal agent. But as regards the efficacy of the suffrages
arising from the action done or from the action as proceeding from the
executor, he does not receive the fruit before the suffrages are
discharged. And if, before this, he happens to be released from his
punishment, he will in this respect be deprived of the fruit of the
suffrages, and this will fall back upon those by whose fault he was
then defrauded. For it is not unreasonable that a person be defrauded
in temporal matters by another's fault---and the punishment of
purgatory is temporal---although as regards the eternal retribution
none can be defrauded save by his own fault.
|
|