Greco-Christian stream·Opera Omnia Sancti Thomae (Complete Works of Thomas Aquinas)·Summa Theologiae·Tertia Pars·Q87. The remission of venial sin
Source context
- Theme
- Remission of venial sin through acts of devotion, contrition, and sacramental disposition
- Soul-faculty
- Intellectual Soul
Steiner
not engaged in the GA corpus
Cross-tradition
- Eastern Orthodox theology (metanoia)The Orthodox tradition's understanding of metanoia as an ongoing turning of the soul toward God — beyond formal sacramental confession — shows cross-tradition congruence with Aquinas's teaching that venial sin is progressively dissolved through interior acts of love and contrition rather than requiring full sacramental absolution.
- Sufi moral psychology (nafs al-lawwama)The Sufi concept of the self-reproaching soul (nafs al-lawwama) describes a stage of moral purification in which habitual lesser faults are continuously corrected through inner vigilance, showing cross-tradition congruence with Aquinas's account of venial sin as a disorder remediable by ongoing acts of devotion rather than grave rupture with the good.
Q87. The remission of venial sin
Article 1
[III.q.87.a.1.arg.1] It would seem that venial sin can be forgiven without penance. For, as stated above (84, 10, ad 4), it is essential to true penance that man should not only sorrow for his past sins, but also that he should purpose to avoid them for the future. Now venial sins are forgiven without any such purpose, for it is certain that man cannot lead the present life without committing venial sins. Therefore venial sins can be forgiven without penance.
[III.q.87.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod corpora gloriosa non sint futura agilia. Illud enim quod de se agile est, ad motum non indiget aliquo deferente. Sed corpora glorificata deferentur post resurrectionem in nubibus obviam Christo in aera ab Angelis, ut dicit Glossa, I Thess., iv. Ergo corpora gloriosa non erunt agilia.
[III.q.87.a.1.arg.2] Further, there is no penance without actual displeasure at one's sins. But venial sins can be taken away without any actual displeasure at them, as would be the case if a man were to be killed in his sleep, for Christ's sake, since he would go to heaven at once, which would not happen if his venial sins remained. Therefore venial sins can be forgiven without penance.
[III.q.87.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, nullum corpus quod movetur cum labore et pœna, potest dici agile. Sed corpora gloriosa hoc modo movebuntur; cum motor eorum, scilicet anima, moveat in contrarium naturæ eorum; alias moverentur semper in unam partem. Ergo non erunt agilia.
[III.q.87.a.1.arg.3] Further, venial sins are contrary to the fervor of charity, as stated in the II-II, 24, 10. Now one contrary is removed by another. Therefore forgiveness of venial sins is caused by the fervor of charity, which may be without actual displeasure at venial sin.
[III.q.87.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, inter omnes operationes animales sensus est nobilior, et prior quam motus. Sed non assignatur corporibus gloriosis aliqua proprietas quæ perficiat ea ad sentiendum. Ergo nec debet eis attribui agilitas per quam perfi-ciantur ad motum.
[III.q.87.a.1.sc] Augustine says in De Poenitentia [De vera et falsa Poenitentia, the authorship of which is unknown, that "there is a penance which is done for venial sins in the Church every day" which would be useless if venial sins could be forgiven without Penance.
[III.q.87.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur I Cor., xv, 13: Seminatur in infirmitate, resurget in virtute; Glossa, « id est mobile et vivum. » Sed mobilitas non potest dicere nisi agilitatem ad motum. Ergo corpora gloriosa erunt agilia. Præterea, tarditas maxime videtur spiritualitati repugnare. Sed corpora gloriosa maxime erunt spiritualia, ut dicitur I Cor., xv. Ergo erunt agilia.
[III.q.87.a.1.co] Forgiveness of sin, as stated above (Question 86, Article 2), is effected by man being united to God from Whom sin separates him in some way. Now this separation is made complete by mortal sin, and incomplete by venial sin: because, by mortal sin, the mind through acting against charity is altogether turned away from God; whereas by venial sin man's affections are clogged, so that they are slow in tending towards God. Consequently both kinds of sin are taken away by penance, because by both of them man's will is disordered through turning inordinately to a created good; for just as mortal sin cannot be forgiven so long as the will is attached to sin, so neither can venial sin, because while the cause remains, the effect remains.
Yet a more perfect penance is requisite for the forgiveness of mortal sin, namely that man should detest actually the mortal sin which he committed, so far as lies in his power, that is to say, he should endeavor to remember each single mortal sin, in order to detest each one. But this is, not required for the forgiveness of venial sins; although it does not suffice to have habitual displeasure, which is included in the habit of charity or of penance as a virtue, since then venial sin would be incompatible with charity, which is evidently untrue. Consequently it is necessary to have a certain virtual displeasure, so that, for instance, a man's affections so tend to God and Divine things, that whatever might happen to him to hamper that tendency would be displeasing to him, and would grieve him, were he to commit it, even though he were not to think of it actually: and this is not sufficient for the remission of mortal sin, except as regards those sins which he fails to remember after a careful examination.
[III.q.87.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod corpus gloriosum erit omnino subjectum animæ glorificatæ, non solum ut nihil in eo sit quod resistat voluntati spiritus, quia hoc fuit etiam in corpore Adæ, sed etiam ut sit in eo aliqua perfectio effluens ab anima glorificata in corpus per quam habile reddatur ad prædictam subjectionem: quæ qui dem perfectio « dos glorificati corporis » dicitur. Anima autem conjungitur corpori non solum ut forma, sed etiam ut motor: et utroque modo oportet quod corpus gloriosum animæ glorificatæ sit summe subjectum. Unde, sicut per dotem subtilitatis subjicitur ei totaliter, in quantum est forma corporis dans esse specificum; ita per dotem agilitatis subjicitur ei in quantum est motor, ut scilicet sit expeditum et habile ad obediendum spiritui in omnibus motibus et actionibus animæ. Quidam tamen causam istius agilitatis attribuunt quintæ, idest, cælesti, essentiae, quæ tunc in corporibus gloriosis dominabitur. Sed de hoc frequenter dictum est, quod non videtur conveniens. Unde melius est ut attribuatur animæ, a qua gloria in corpus emanat.
[III.q.87.a.1.ad.1] When man is in a state of grace, he can avoid all mortal sins, and each single one; and he can avoid each single venial sin, but not all, as was explained in I-II, 74, 8, ad 2; I-II, 109, 8. Consequently penance for mortal sins requires man to purpose abstaining from mortal sins, all and each; whereas penance for venial sins requires man to purpose abstaining from each, but not from all, because the weakness of this life does not allow of this. Nevertheless he needs to have the purpose of taking steps to commit fewer venial sins, else he would be in danger of falling back, if he gave up the desire of going forward, or of removing the obstacles to spiritual progress, such as venial sins are.
[III.q.87.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod corpora gloriosa dicuntur ferri ab angelis et etiam in nubibus, non quasi eis indigeant, sed ad reverentiam designandam, quæ corporibus gloriosis et ab angelis et ab omnibus creaturis defertur.
[III.q.87.a.1.ad.2] Death for Christ's sake, as stated above (Question 66, Article 11), obtains the power of Baptism, wherefore it washes away all sin, both venial and mortal, unless it find the will attached to sin.
[III.q.87.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod quanto virtus animæ moventis dominatur magis supra corpus, tanto minor est labor in motu, qui etiam fit contra naturam corporis. Unde illi in quibus virtus motiva est fortior, et illi qui habent ex exercitio corpus magis habilitatum ad obediendum spiritui moventi, minus laborant in motu. Et quia post resurrectionem anima perfecte dominabitur corpori, tum propter perfectionem propriæ virtutis, tum propter habilitatem corporis gloriosi ex redundantia gloriæ ab anima in ipsum, non erit aliquis labor in motu sanctorum; et sic dici poterunt corpora sanctorum agilia.
[III.q.87.a.1.ad.3] The fervor of charity implies virtual displeasure at venial sins, as stated above (Question 79, Article 4).
[III.q.87.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod per dotem agilitatis corpus gloriosum reddetur habile non solum ad motum localem, sed etiam ad sentiendum, et ad omnes alias animæ operationes exequendas.
Article 2
[III.q.87.a.2.arg.1] It would seem that infusion of grace is necessary for the remission of venial sins. Because an effect is not produced without its proper cause. Now the proper cause of the remission of sins is grace; for man's sins are not forgiven through his own merits; wherefore it is written (Ephesians 2:4-5): "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, by Whose grace you are saved." Therefore venial sins are not forgiven without infusion of grace.
[III.q.87.a.2.arg.1] Ad secundum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod sancti agilitate sua nunquam utentur, ita quod moveantur. Quia, secundum Philosophum, lib. III Physic., text. 6, et 14, « motus est actus imperfecti. » Sed in corporibus gloriosis nulla erit imperfectio. Ergo nec aliquis motus.
[III.q.87.a.2.arg.2] Further, venial sins are not forgiven without Penance. Now grace is infused, in Penance as in the other sacraments of the New Law. Therefore venial sins are not forgiven without infusion of grace.
[III.q.87.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, omnis motus fit propter indigentiam: quia omne quod movetur, movetur propter adeptionem alicujus finis. Sed corpora gloriosa non habebunt aliquam indigentiam, quia, ut Augustinus dicit, lib. De spiritu et anima, cap. Lxiv, col. 828, t. 6, « ibi erit quidquid voles, non erit quidquid noles. » Ergo non moveuntur.
[III.q.87.a.2.arg.3] Further, venial sin produces a stain on the soul. Now a stain is not removed save by grace which is the spiritual beauty of the soul. Therefore it seems that venial sins are not forgiven without infusion of grace.
[III.q.87.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, secundum Philosophum, II De cælo et mundo, text. 64, 65 et 66, « illud quod participat divinam bonitatem sine motu, nobilius participat illam quam quod participat illam cum motu. » Sed corpus gloriosum nobilius participat divinam bonitatem quam aliquod aliud corpus. Cum ergo quædam alia corpora omnino sine motu remaneant, sicut corpora cælestia, videtur quod multo fortius corpora humana.
[III.q.87.a.2.sc] The advent of venial sin neither destroys nor diminishes grace, as stated in the II-II, 24, 10. Therefore, in like manner, an infusion of grace is not necessary in order to remove venial sin.
[III.q.87.a.2.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Isa., xl, 31: Current et non laborabunt: ambulabunt, et non deficient. Et Sap. III, 7: Tamquam scintillæ in arundineto discurrent. Ergo erit aliquis motus corporum gloriosorum.
[III.q.87.a.2.co] Each thing is removed by its contrary. But venial sin is not contrary to habitual grace or charity, but hampers its act, through man being too much attached to a created good, albeit not in opposition to God, as stated in I-II, 88, 1; II-II, 24, 10. Therefore, in order that venial sin be removed, it is not necessary that habitual grace be infused, but a movement of grace or charity suffices for its forgiveness.
Nevertheless, since in those who have the use of free-will (in whom alone can there be venial sins), there can be no infusion of grace without an actual movement of the free-will towards God and against sin, consequently whenever grace is infused anew, venial sins are forgiven.
[III.q.87.a.2.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod corpora gloriosa aliquando moveri necessarium est ponere, quia et ipsum corpus Christi motum est in ascensione; et similiter corpora sanctorum, quæ de terra resurgent, ad cælum empyreum ascendent; sed etiam postquam cælos conscenderint, verisimile est quod aliquando movebuntur pro suæ libito voluntatis; ut illud quod habent in virtute, actu exercentes, divinam sapientiam commendabilem ostendant, et ut etiam visus eorum reficiatur pulchritudine creaturarum diversarum in quibus Dei sapientia eminenter reluctebit; sensus enim non potest esse nisi præsentium, quamvis magis a longinquo possint sentire corpora gloriosa quam non gloriosa. Nec tamen per motum aliquid deperibit eorum beatitudini, quæ consistit in visione Dei, quem ubique præsentem habebunt, sicut et de angelis dicit Gregorius, Hom. xxxiv in Evang., § 13, col. 1255, t. 2, quod « intra Deum currunt quocumque mittantur. »
[III.q.87.a.2.ad.1] Even the forgiveness of venial sins is an effect of grace, in virtue of the act which grace produces anew, but not through any habit infused anew into the soul.
[III.q.87.a.2.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod localis motus non variat aliquid eorum quæ sunt intranea rei, sed solum id quod est extra rem, scilicet locum. Unde illud quod movetur motu locali, est perfectum quan- Augustino substituentus est Alcherus, cui liber De spiritu et anima communiter adscrititur. tum ad ea quæ sunt intra rem, ut dicitur in VIII Phys., text. 59, quamvis habeat imperfectionem respectu loci, quia dum est in uno loco est in potentia ad alium locum, quia non potest esse actu in pluribus locis simul, hoc enim solius Dei est. Hic autem defectus non repugnat perfectioni gloriae, sicut nec defectus quod creatura est ex nihilo. Et ideo manebunt defectus hujusmodi in corporibus gloriosis.
[III.q.87.a.2.ad.2] Venial sin is never forgiven without some act, explicit or implicit, of the virtue of penance, as stated above (Article 1): it can, however, be forgiven without the sacrament of Penance, which is formally perfected by the priestly absolution, as stated above (Question 87, Article 2). Hence it does not follow that infusion of grace is required for the forgiveness of venial sin, for although this infusion takes place in every sacrament, it does not occur in every act of virtue.
[III.q.87.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod aliquis dicitur dupliciter indigere aliquo, scilicet simpliciter, et secundum quid. Simpliciter quidem indiget aliquis eo sine quo non potest conservari in esse vel in sua perfectione, et sic motus in corporibus gloriosis non erit propter aliquam indigentiam, quia ad hæc omnia sufficiet eis sua beatitudo. Sed secundum quod indiget quis illo sine quo non potest aliquem finem intentum habere, vel ita bene, vel tali modo, et sic motus erit in beatis propter indigentiam: non enim poterunt manifestare virtutem motivam in seipsis experimento, nisi moveantur: hujusmodi enim indigentias nihil prohibet in corporibus gloriosis esse.
[III.q.87.a.2.ad.3] Just as there are two kinds of bodily stain, one consisting in the privation of something required for beauty, e.g. the right color or the due proportion of members, and another by the introduction of some hindrance to beauty, e.g. mud or dust; so too, a stain is put on the soul, in one way, by the privation of the beauty of grace through mortal sin, in another, by the inordinate inclination of the affections to some temporal thing, and this is the result of venial sin. Consequently, an infusion of grace is necessary for the removal of mortal sin, but in order to remove venial sin, it is necessary to have a movement proceeding from grace, removing the inordinate attachment to the temporal thing.
[III.q.87.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod ratio illa procederet, si corpus gloriosum non posset etiam sine motu participare divinam bonitatem multo perfectius quam corpora cælestia, quod falsum est. Unde corpora gloriosa non movebuntur ad consequendam perfectam divinæ bonitatis participationem, hanc enim habent per gloriam, sed ad demonstrandam virtutem animæ. Per motum autem corporum cælestium non posset demonstrari virtus eorum nisi quam habent in movendo corpora inferiora ad generationem et corruptionem, quod non competit illi statui. Et ideo ratio non procedit.
Article 3
[III.q.87.a.3.arg.1] It would seem that venial sins are not removed by the sprinkling of holy water, a bishop's blessing, and the like. For venial sins are not forgiven without Penance, as stated above (Article 1). But Penance suffices by itself for the remission of venial sins. Therefore the above have nothing to do with the remission of venial sins.
[III.q.87.a.3.arg.1] Ad tertium sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod sancti moveantur in instanti. Augustinus enim dicit, lib. ult. De civ. Dei, cap. ult., § 1, col. 801, t. 7, quod « ubicumque volet spiritus, ibi erit corpus. » Sed motus voluntatis secundum quem spiritus vult alicubi esse, est in instanti. Ergo et motus corporis erit in instanti.
[III.q.87.a.3.arg.2] Further, each of the above bears the same relation to one venial sin as to all. If therefore, by means of one of them, some venial sin is remitted, it follows that in like manner all are remitted, so that by beating his breast once, or by being sprinkled once with holy water, a man would be delivered from all his venial sins, which seems unreasonable.
[III.q.87.a.3.arg.2] 2. Præterea, Philosophus in IV Physic., text. 74 et seq., probat quod non fit motus per vacuum, quia oporteret aliquid moveri in instanti, quia vacuum non resistit aliquo modo, resistit autem plenum; et sic nulla proportio in velocitate esset motus qui fit in vacuo, ad motum qui fit in pleno; cum proportio motuum in velocitate sit secundum proportionem resistentiæ quæ est in medio. Omnium autem duorum motuum qui fiunt in tempore, oportet esse proportionales velocitates, quia omne tempus omni tempori proportionale est. Sed similiter nullum spatium plenum potest resistere corpori glorioso, quod potest esse cum alio corpore in eodem loco, quocumque modo fiat, sicut nec vanum alteri corpori. Ergo si moveur, in instanti movebitur.
[III.q.87.a.3.arg.3] Further, venial sins occasion a debt of some punishment, albeit temporal; for it is written (1 Corinthians 3:12-15) of him that builds up "wood, hay, stubble" that "he shall be saved, yet so as by fire." Now the above things whereby venial sins are said to be taken away, contain either no punishment at all, or very little. Therefore they do not suffice for the full remission of venial sins.
[III.q.87.a.3.arg.3] 3. Præterea, virtus animæ glorificatæ quasi improportionaliter excedit virtutem animæ non glorificatæ. Sed anima non glorificata movet corpus in tempore. Ergo anima glorificata movet corpus in instanti.
[III.q.87.a.3.sc] Augustine says in De Poenitentia [Hom. 30 inter 1; Ep. cclxv] that "for our slight sins we strike our breasts, and say: Forgive us our trespasses," and so it seems that striking one's breast, and the Lord's Prayer cause the remission of venial sins: and the same seems to apply to the other things.
[III.q.87.a.3.sc] Sed contra, in motu locali spatium et motus et tempus simul dividuntur, ut demonstrative probatur in VI Physic., text. 56 et seq. Sed spatium quod transit corpus gloriosum per suum motum est divisibile. Ergo et motus divisibilis est et tempus divisibile. Instans autem non dividitur. Ergo et motus ille non erit in instanti. Præterea, non potest esse aliquid simul totum in uno loco et partim in alio, quia sequeretur quod altera pars esset in duobus locis simul, quod esse non potest. Sed omne quod movetur partim est in termino « a quo, » et partim intermino « ad quem, » ut ostensum est in VI Physic. text. 32: omne autem quod motum est totum est in termino ad quem est motus: non autem potest esse quod simui moveatur et motum sit. Sed omne quod movetur in instanti simul movetur et motum est. Ergo motus localis corporis gloriosi non poterit esse in instanti.
[III.q.87.a.3.co] As stated above (Article 2), no infusion of fresh grace is required for the forgiveness of a venial sin, but it is enough to have an act proceeding from grace, in detestation of that venial sin, either explicit or at least implicit, as when one is moved fervently to God. Hence, for three reasons, certain things cause the remission of venial sins: first, because they imply the infusion of grace, since the infusion of grace removes venial sins, as stated above (Article 2); and so, by the Eucharist, Extreme Unction, and by all the sacraments of the New Law without exception, wherein grace is conferred, venial sins are remitted. Secondly, because they imply a movement of detestation for sin, and in this way the general confession [i.e. the recital of the Confiteor or of an act of contrition, the beating of one's breast, and the Lord's Prayer conduce to the remission of venial sins, for we ask in the Lord's Prayer: "Forgive us our trespasses." Thirdly, because they include a movement of reverence for God and Divine things; and in this way a bishop's blessing, the sprinkling of holy water, any sacramental anointing, a prayer said in a dedicated church, and anything else of the kind, conduce to the remission of venial sins.
[III.q.87.a.3.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod circa hoc est multiplex opinio. Quidam enim dicunt quod corpus gloriosum transit de uno loco in alium sine hoc quod pertranseat medium, sicut et voluntas de uno loco transfertur ad alium sine hoc quod pertranseat medium, et propter hoc potest corporis gloriosi motus esse in instanti sicut et voluntatis. Sed hoc non potest stare, quia corpus gloriosum nunquam perveniet ad dignitatem 4 naturæ spiritualis, sicut nunquam desinet esse corpus. Et præterea voluntas, cum dicitur moveri de uno loco in alium, non transfertur essentialiter de loco in locum, quia neutro locorum illorum essentialiter continetur, sed dirigitur in unum locum postquam fuerit directa per intentionem ad alium; et pro tanto dicitur moveri de loco ad locum. Et ideo alii dicunt quod corpus gloriosum habet de proprietate naturæ suæ, quia corpus est, quod pertranseat medium, et ita quod moveatur in tempore: sed virtute gloriæ qua habet infinitatem quamdam supra virtutem naturæ, habet quod possit non pertransire medium, et sic in instanti moveri. Sed hoc non potest esse, quia implicat in se contradictionem, quod sic patet. Sit aliquod corpus quod movetur ab A in B, et corpus motum sit Z: constat quod Z quamdiu est totum in A, non movetur; similiter nec quando est totum in B, quia tunc motum est. Ergo si aliquando movetur, oportet quod neque sit totum in A, neque totum in B. Ergo quando movetur, vel nusquam est, vel est partim in A et partim in B, vel totum in alio loco medio, puta in C, vel partim in A et C, vel partim in C et B. Sed non potest poni quod nusquam sit, quia sic esset aliqua quantitas dimensiva non habens situm, quod est impossibile; neque potest poni quod sit partim in A et partim in B, et non sit in medio aliquo modo; quia, cum B sit locus distans ab A, sequeretur in medio interjacente quod pars Z quæ est in B, non esset continua parti quæ est in A. Ergo restat quod vel sit totum in C, vel partim in eo et partim in alio loco, quod ponetur medium inter C et A, puta D; et sic de aliis. Ergo oportet quod Z non perveniat de A in B, nisi prius sit in omnibus mediis. Nisi dicatur quod pervenit de A in B, et nunquam movetur, quod implicat contradictionem, quia ipsa successio locorum est motus localis. Et eadem ratio est de qualibet mutatione quæ habet duos contrarios terminos, quorum utrumque est aliquid positive; secus autem est de illis mutationibus quæ habent unum terminum tantum positivum, et alterum puram privationem, quia inter affirmationem et negationem, seu privationem, non est aliqua determinata distantia: unde quod est in negatione potest esse propinquius vel remotius ab affirmatione, vel e converso, ratione alicujus quod causat alterum eorum vel disponit ad ea; et sic, dum id quod movetur est totum sub negatione, mutatur in affirmationem et e contrario: unde etiam in eis mutari præcedit mutatum esse, ut probatur in VI Physic., text. 40 et seq. Nec est simile de motu angeli, quia esse in loco æquivoce dicitur de corpore et de angelo. Et 4 Ita cum veteribus exemplis edit. Patav. Nicolai: « nobilitatem » in textu, in margine insinuat sic patet quod nullo modo potest esse quod aliquod corpus perveniat de uno loco ad alium nisi transeat omnia media. Et ideo alii hoc concedunt; sed tamen dicunt quod corpus gloriosum movetur in instanti. Sed ex hoc sequitur quod corpus gloriosum in eodem instanti sit in duobus locis simul vel pluribus, scilicet in termino ultimo, et in omnibus mediis locis; quod non potest esse. Sed ad hoc dicunt quod quamvis sit idem instans secundum rem, tamen differt ratione, sicut punctus ad quem terminantur diversæ lineæ. Sed hoc non sufficit, quia instans mensurat hoc quod est in instanti, secundum rem, non secundum quod consideratur. Unde diversa consideratio instanti non facit quod instans possit mensurare illa quæ non sunt simul tempore; sicut nec diversa consideratio puncti potest facere quod sub uno puncto loci contineantur quæ sunt distantia situ. Et ideo alii probabilius dicunt quod corpus gloriosum movetur in tempore, sed imperceptibili propter brevitatem; et tamen quod unum corpus gloriosum potest in minori tempore idem spatium pertransire quam aliud, quia tempus quantumcumque parvum accipiatur, est in infinitum divisibile.
[III.q.87.a.3.ad.1] All these things cause the remission of venial sins, in so far as they incline the soul to the movement of penance, viz., the implicit or explicit detestation of one's sins.
[III.q.87.a.3.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, « quod illud quod parum deest quasi nihil deesse videtur, » ut dicitur in II Physic., text. 56; ideo dicimus, statim facio, quod post modicum tempus fiet; et per hunc modum loquitur Augustinus quod « ubi volet spiritus, ibi protinus erit corpus. » Vel dicendum, quod voluntas nunquam erit inordinata in beatis. Unde nunquam volent corpus suum esse alicubi in aliquo instanti in quo non possit ibi esse: et sic quodcumque instans voluntas determinabit in eo corpus erit in illo loco quem voluntas determinat.
[III.q.87.a.3.ad.2] All these things, so far as they are concerned, conduce to the remission of all venial sins: but the remission may be hindered as regards certain venial sins, to which the mind is still actually attached, even as insincerity sometimes impedes the effect of Baptism.
[III.q.87.a.3.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod quidam contradixerunt illi propositioni quam Philosophus inducit in parte illa, ut Commentator ibidem dicit, dicentes quod non oportet esse proportionem totius motus ad totum motum secundum proportionem resistentis medii ad aliud medium resistens; sed oportet quod secundum proportionem mediorum per quæ transitur, attendatur porportio retardationum quæ accident in motibus ex resistentia medii. Quilibet enim motus habet determinatum tempus velocitatis et tarditatis ex victoria moventis supra mobile, etiamsi nihil resistat ex parte medii, sicut patet in corporibus cælestibus, in quibus non inventur aliquid quod obstet motui ipsorum, et tamen non moventur in instanti, sed in tempore determinato secundum proportionem potentiae moventis ad mobile. Et ita patet quod etiamsi ponatur aliquid moveri in vacuo, non oportebit quod moveatur in instanti, sed quod nihil addatur tempori quod debetur motui ex proportione prædicta moventis ad mobile, quia motus non retardatur. Sed hæc ratio, ut Commentator ibidem dicit, procedit ex falsa imaginatione qua quis imaginatur quod tarditas quæ causatur ex resistentia medii, sit aliqua pars motus addita motui naturali qui habet quantitatem secundum proportionem moventis ad mobile, sicut una linea additur lineæ, ratione cujus accidit in lineis quod non remaneat eadem proportion totius ad totam lineam quæ erat linearum additrum ad invicem: ut sic etiam non sit eadem proportion totius motus ad totum motum sensibilem quæ est retardationum contingentium ex resistentia medii. Quæ quidem imaginationo falsa est, quia quæ-libet pars motus habet tantum de velocitate quantum totius motus. Non autem quæ-libet pars lineæ habet tantum de quantitate dimensiva, quantum habet tota linea. Unde tarditas vel velocitas addita motui redundat in quamlibet partem ejus, quod de lineis non contingit; et sic tarditas addita motui non facit aliam partem motus, sicut in lineis accidebat quod additum est pars totius lineæ. Et ideo ad intelligendam probationem Philosophi, ut commentator ibidem exponit, sciendum est quod oportet accipere totum pro uno, scilicet resistentiam mobilis ad virtutem moventem et resistentiam medii per quod est motus et cujuscumque alterius resistentis, ita quod accipiatur quantitas tarditatis totius motus secundum proportionem virtutis moventis ad mobile resistens quocumque modo, vel ex se, vel ex alio extrinseco. Oportet enim semper quod mobile resistat aliquo modo moventi, cum movens et motum, agens et patiens, inquantum hujusmodi, sint contraria. Quandoque autem inventur resistere mobile moventi ex seipso, vel quia habet virtutem inclinantem ad contrarium motum, sicut patet in motibus violentis: vel saltem quia habet locum contrarium loco qui est in intentione moventis, cujus modi resistentia inventur etiam corporum cælestium ad suos motores. Quandoque autem mobile resistit virtuti moventis ex alio tantum, et non ex seipso; sicut patet in motu naturali gravium et levium, quia per ipsam formam eorum inclinantur ad motum talem; est enim forma impressio generantis quod est motor ex parte gravium et levium. Ex parte autem materiae non inventur aliqua resistentia neque virtutis inclinantis ad contrarium motum neque contrarii loci; quia locus non debetur materiae, nisi secundum quod sub dimensionibus consistens perficitur forma naturali. Unde non potest esse resistentia nisi ex parte medii; quae quidem resistentia est motui eorum connaturalis. Quandoque autem est resistentia ex utroque, sicut patet in motibus animalium. Quando ergo in motu non est resistentia nisi ex parte mobilis, sicut accidit in corporibus cælestibus, tunc tempus motus mensuratur secundum proportionem motoris ad mobile; et in talibus non procedit ratio Philosophi, quia remoto omni medio adhuc manet motus eorum in tempore. Sed in illis motibus in quibus est resistentia ex parte medii tantum, accipitur mensura temporis secundum impedimentum quod est ex medio solum, unde, si subtrahatur omnino medium, nullum impedimentum remanebit, et sic vel movebitur in instanti, vel æquali tempore movebitur secundum vacuum spatium et plenum; quia dato quod moveatur in tempore per vacuum, illud tempus in aliqua proportione se habebit ad tempus in quo movetur per plenum. Possibile est autem imaginari aliud corpus in eadem proportione subtilius corpore quo spatium plenum erat, quo si aliud spatium æquale impleatur, in tam parvo tempore movebitur per illud plenum sicut primo per vacuum: quia quantum additur ad subtilitatem medii, tantum subtrahitur de quantitate temporis: et quanto est magis subtile, minus resistit. Sed in aliis motibus in quibus est resistentia ex ipso mobili et ex medio, quantitas temporis est accipienda secundum proportionem moventis potentiae ad resistentiam mobilis et medii simul. Unde, dato quod totaliter medium subtrahatur, vel non impediat, non sequitur quod motus sit in instanti, sed quod tempus motus mensuretur tantum ex resistentia mobilis. Neque erit inconveniens, si per idem tempus movetur per vacuum et per plenum aliquo subtilissimo corpore imaginato, quia determinata subtilitas medii, quanto est major, tanto est nata facere tarditatem minorem in motu. Unde potest imaginari tanta subtilitas quod erit nata facere minorem tarditatem quam sit illa tarditas quam facit resistentia mobilis; et sic resistentia medii nullam tarditatem adjiciet ad motum. Patet ergo quod, quamvis medium non resistat corporibus gloriosis secundum hoc quod possunt esse cum alio corpore in eodem loco, nihilominus motus eorum non erit in instanti, quia ipsum corpus mobile resistet virtuti moventi ex hoc ipso quod habet determinatum situm, sicut de corporibus cælestibus dictum est.
[III.q.87.a.3.ad.3] By the above things, venial sins are indeed taken away as regards the guilt, both because those things are a kind of satisfaction, and through the virtue of charity whose movement is aroused by such things.
Yet it does not always happen that, by means of each one, the whole guilt of punishment is taken away, because, in that case, whoever was entirely free from mortal sin, would go straight to heaven if sprinkled with holy water: but the debt of punishment is remitted by means of the above, according to the movement of fervor towards God, which fervor is aroused by such things, sometimes more, sometimes less.
[III.q.87.a.3.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod quamvis virtus animæ glorificatæ excedat inæstimabiliter virtutem animæ non glorificatæ, non tamen excedit in infinitum, quia utraque virtus est finita: unde non sequitur quod moveat in instanti. Si tamen esset simpliciter infinitæ virtutis, non sequeretur quod moveret in instanti, nisi superetur totaliter resistentia quæ est ex parte mobilis. Quamvis autem resistentia, qua mobile resistit moventi, per contrarietatem quam habet ad talem motum ratione inclinationis ad contrarium motum, possit a movente infinitæ virtutis totaliter superari, tamen resistentia quam facit ex contrarietate quam habet ad locum quem intendit motor per motum, non potest totaliter superari, nisi auferatur ab eo esse in tali loco vel tali situ. Sicut enim album resistit nigro ratione albedinis, et tanto magis, quanto albedo magis distat a nigredine, ita corpus resistit alicui loco per hoc quod habet locum oppositum; et tanto est major resistentia, quanto est distantia major. Non autem potest a corpore removeri quod sit in aliquo loco vel situ, nisi auferatur ei sua corporeitas per quam debetur ei locus vel situs: unde quamdiu manet in natura corporis, nullo modo potest moveri in instanti quantumcumque sit virtus movens. Corpus autem gloriosum nunquam suam corporeitatem amittet, unde nunquam in instanti moveri poterit.
Article 4
[III.q.87.a.4.arg.1] It would seem that venial sin can be taken away without mortal sin. For, on John 8:7: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her," a gloss says that "all those men were in a state of mortal sin: for venial offenses were forgiven them through the legal ceremonies." Therefore venial sin can be taken away without mortal sin.
[III.q.87.a.4.arg.2] Further, no infusion of grace is required for the remission of venial sin. but it is required for the forgiveness of mortal sin. Therefore venial sin can be taken away without mortal sin.
[III.q.87.a.4.arg.3] Further, a venial sin differs from a mortal sin more than from another venial sin. But one venial sin can be pardoned without another, as stated above (3, ad 2; 87, 3). Therefore a venial sin can be taken away without a mortal sin.
[III.q.87.a.4.sc] It is written (Matthew 5:26): "Amen I say to thee, thou shalt not go out from thence," viz., from the prison, into which a man is cast for mortal sin, "till thou repay the last farthing," by which venial sin is denoted. Therefore a venial sin is not forgiven without mortal sin.
[III.q.87.a.4.co] As stated above (Question 87, Article 3), there is no remission of any sin whatever except by the power of grace, because, as the Apostle declares (Romans 4:8), it is owing to God's grace that He does not impute sin to a man, which a gloss on that passage expounds as referring to venial sin. Now he that is in a state of mortal sin is without the grace of God. Therefore no venial sin is forgiven him.
[III.q.87.a.4.ad.1] Venial offenses, in the passage quoted, denote the irregularities or uncleannesses which men contracted in accordance with the Law.
[III.q.87.a.4.ad.2] Although no new infusion of habitual grace is requisite for the remission of venial sin, yet it is necessary to exercise some act of grace, which cannot be in one who is a subject of mortal sin.
[III.q.87.a.4.ad.3] Venial sin does not preclude every act of grace whereby all venial sins can be removed; whereas mortal sin excludes altogether the habit of grace, without which no sin, either mortal or venial, is remitted. Hence the comparison fails.
The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas AquinasSecond and Revised Edition, 1920Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican ProvinceOnline Edition Copyright © 2009 by Kevin Knight Nihil Obstat. F. Innocentius Apap, O.P., S.T.M., Censor. Theol.Imprimatur. Edus. Canonicus Surmont, Vicarius Generalis. Westmonasterii.APPROBATIO ORDINISNihil Obstat. F. Raphael Moss, O.P., S.T.L. and F. Leo Moore, O.P., S.T.L.Imprimatur. F. Beda Jarrett, O.P., S.T.L., A.M., Prior Provincialis AngliæMARIÆ IMMACULATÆ - SEDI SAPIENTIÆ
JSON: /api/sources/opera-omnia-aquinas/summa-theologiae/tertia-pars/q087.json