PENANCE (QQ[84]-90)
OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE
(SIX ARTICLES)
We must now consider the Sacrament of Penance. We shall consider (1) Penance itself;
(2) Its effect; (3) Its Parts; (4) The recipients of this sacrament; (5) The power of the
ministers, which pertains to the keys; (6) The solemnization of this sacrament.
TP Q[84] Out.
The first of these considerations will be two fold: (1) Penance as a sacrament; (2)
Penance as a virtue.
TP Q[84] Out.
Under the first head there are ten points of inquiry:
(1) Whether Penance is a sacrament?
(2) Of its proper matter;
(3) Of its form;
(4) Whether imposition of hands is necessary for this sacrament?
(5) Whether this sacrament is necessary for salvation?
(6) Of its relation to the other sacraments;
(7) Of its institution;
(8) Of its duration;
(9) Of its continuance;
(10) Whether it can be repeated?
TP Q[84] A[1] Thes.
Whether Penance is a sacrament?
TP Q[84] A[1] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that Penance is not a sacrament. For Gregory [*Cf.
Isidore, Etym.
vi, ch. 19] says: "The sacraments are Baptism, Chrism, and the Body and Blood of
Christ; which are called sacraments because under the veil of corporeal things the Divine
power works out salvation in a hidden manner." But this does not happen in Penance,
because therein corporeal things are not employed that, under them, the power of God may
work our salvation. Therefore Penance is not a sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[1] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, the sacraments of the Church are shown forth by the ministers of
Christ, according to 1 Cor. 4:1: "Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of
Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God." But Penance is not conferred by
the ministers of Christ, but is inspired inwardly into man by God, according to
Jer.
31:19: "After Thou didst convert me, I did penance." Therefore it seems that
Penance is not a sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[1] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, in the sacraments of which we have already spoken above, there is
something that is sacrament only, something that is both reality and sacrament, and
something that is reality only, as is clear from what has been stated (Q[66], A[1]). But
this does not apply to Penance. Therefore Penance is not a sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[1] OTC
On the contrary, As Baptism is conferred that we may be cleansed from sin, so also is
Penance: wherefore Peter said to Simon Magus (Acts 8:22): "Do penance . . . from this
thy wickedness." But Baptism is a sacrament as stated above (Q[66], A[1]). Therefore
for the same reason Penance is also a sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[1] Body
I answer that, As Gregory says [*Isidore, Etym. vi, ch. 19], "a sacrament consists
in a solemn act, whereby something is so done that we understand it to signify the
holiness which it confers." Now it is evident that in Penance something is done so
that something holy is signified both on the part of the penitent sinner, and on the part
of the priest absolving, because the penitent sinner, by deed and word, shows his heart to
have renounced sin, and in like manner the priest, by his deed and word with regard to the
penitent, signifies the work of God Who forgives his sins. Therefore it is evident that
Penance, as practiced in the Church, is a sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[1] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: By corporeal things taken in a wide sense we may understand also external
sensible actions, which are to this sacrament what water is to Baptism, or chrism to
Confirmation. But it is to be observed that in those sacraments, whereby an exceptional
grace surpassing altogether the proportion of a human act, is conferred, some corporeal
matter is employed externally, e.g. in Baptism, which confers full remission of all sins,
both as to guilt and as to punishment, and in Confirmation, wherein the fulness of the
Holy Ghost is bestowed, and in Extreme Unction, which confers perfect spiritual health
derived from the virtue of Christ as from an extrinsic principle. Wherefore, such human
acts as are in these sacraments, are not the essential matter of the sacrament, but are
dispositions thereto. On the other hand, in those sacraments whose effect corresponds to
that of some human act, the sensible human act itself takes the place of matter, as in the
case of Penance and Matrimony, even as in bodily medicines, some are applied externally,
such as plasters and drugs, while others are acts of the person who seeks to be cured,
such as certain exercises.
TP Q[84] A[1] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: In those sacraments which have a corporeal matter, this matter needs to be
applied by a minister of the Church, who stands in the place of Christ, which denotes that
the excellence of the power which operates in the sacraments is from Christ. But in the
sacrament of Penance, as stated above (ad 1), human actions take the place of matter, and
these actions proceed from internal inspiration, wherefore the matter is not applied by
the minister, but by God working inwardly; while the minister furnishes the complement of
the sacrament, when he absolves the penitent.
TP Q[84] A[1] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: In Penance also, there is something which is sacrament only, viz. the acts
performed outwardly both by the repentant sinner, and by the priest in giving absolution;
that which is reality and sacrament is the sinner's inward repentance; while that which is
reality, and not sacrament, is the forgiveness of sin. The first of these taken altogether
is the cause of the second; and the first and second together are the cause of the third.
TP Q[84] A[2] Thes.
Whether sins are the proper matter of this sacrament?
TP Q[84] A[2] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that sins are not the proper matter of this sacrament. Because, in
the other sacraments, the matter is hallowed by the utterance of certain words, and being
thus hallowed produces the sacramental effect. Now sins cannot be hallowed, for they are
opposed to the effect of the sacrament, viz. grace which blots out sin. Therefore sins are
not the proper matter of this sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[2] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, Augustine says in his book De Poenitentia [Cf.
Serm. cccli]: "No
one can begin a new life, unless he repent of the old." Now not only sins but also
the penalties of the present life belong to the old life. Therefore sins are not the
proper matter of Penance.
TP Q[84] A[2] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, sin is either original, mortal or venial. Now the sacrament of Penance
is not ordained against original sin, for this is taken away by Baptism, [nor against
mortal sin, for this is taken away by the sinner's confession]*, nor against venial sin,
which is taken away by the beating of the breast and the sprinkling of holy water and the
like. Therefore sins are not the proper matter of Penance. [*The words in brackets are
omitted in the Leonine edition].
TP Q[84] A[2] OTC
On the contrary, The Apostle says (2 Cor. 12:21): "(Who) have not done penance for
the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness, that they have committed."
TP Q[84] A[2] Body
I answer that, Matter is twofold, viz. proximate and remote: thus the proximate matter
of a statue is a metal, while the remote matter is water. Now it has been stated (A[1], ad
1, ad 2), that the proximate matter of this sacrament consists in the acts of the
penitent, the matter of which acts are the sins over which he grieves, which he confesses,
and for which he satisfies. Hence it follows that sins are the remote matter of Penance,
as a matter, not for approval, but for detestation, and destruction.
TP Q[84] A[2] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: This argument considers the proximate matter of a sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[2] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: The old life that was subject to death is the object of Penance, not as
regards the punishment, but as regards the guilt connected with it.
TP Q[84] A[2] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: Penance regards every kind of sin in a way, but not each in the same way.
Because Penance regards actual mortal sin properly and chiefly; properly, since, properly
speaking, we are said to repent of what we have done of our own will; chiefly, since this
sacrament was instituted chiefly for the blotting out of mortal sin. Penance regards
venial sins, properly speaking indeed, in so far as they are committed of our own will,
but this was not the chief purpose of its institution. But as to original sin, Penance
regards it neither chiefly, since Baptism, and not Penance, is ordained against original
sin, nor properly, because original sin is not done of our own will, except in so far as
Adam's will is looked upon as ours, in which sense the Apostle says (Rm. 5:12): "In
whom all have sinned." Nevertheless, Penance may be said to regard original sin, if
we take it in a wide sense for any detestation of something past: in which sense Augustine
uses the term in his book De Poenitentia (Serm. cccli).
TP Q[84] A[3] Thes.
Whether the form of this sacrament is: "I absolve thee"?
TP Q[84] A[3] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that the form of this sacrament is not: "I absolve
thee." Because the forms of the sacraments are received from Christ's institution and
the Church's custom. But we do not read that Christ instituted this form. Nor is it in
common use; in fact in certain absolutions which are given publicly in church (e.g. at
Prime and Compline and on Maundy Thursday), absolution is given not in the indicative form
by saying: "I absolve thee," but In the deprecatory form, by saying: "May
Almighty God have mercy on you," or: "May Almighty God grant you absolution and
forgiveness." Therefore the form of this sacrament is not: "I absolve
thee."
TP Q[84] A[3] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, Pope Leo says (Ep. cviii) that God's forgiveness cannot be obtained
without the priestly supplications: and he is speaking there of God's forgiveness granted
to the penitent. Therefore the form of this sacrament should be deprecatory.
TP Q[84] A[3] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, to absolve from sin is the same as to remit sin. But God alone remits
sin, for He alone cleanses man inwardly from sin, as Augustine says (Contra
Donatist. v,
21). Therefore it seems that God alone absolves from sin. Therefore the priest should say
not: "I absolve thee," as neither does he say: "I remit thy sins."
TP Q[84] A[3] Obj. 4
OBJ 4: Further, just as our Lord gave His disciples the power to absolve from sins, so
also did He give them the power "to heal infirmities," "to cast out
devils," and "to cure diseases" (Mt. 10:1; Lk. 9:1). Now the apostles, in
healing the sick, did not use the words: "I heal thee," but: "The Lord
Jesus Christ heal [Vulg.: 'heals'] thee," as Peter said to the palsied man (Acts
9:34). Therefore since priests have the power which Christ gave His apostles, it seems
that they should not use the form: "I absolve thee," but: "May Christ
absolve thee."
TP Q[84] A[3] Obj. 5
OBJ 5: Further, some explain this form by stating that when they say: "I absolve
thee," they mean "I declare you to be absolved." But neither can this be
done by a priest unless it be revealed to him by God, wherefore, as we read in Mt. 16:19
before it was said to Peter: "Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth," etc., it
was said to him (Mt. 16:17): "Blessed art thou Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and
blood have not revealed it to thee, but My Father Who is in heaven." Therefore it
seems presumptuous for a priest, who has received no revelation on the matter, to say:
"I absolve thee," even if this be explained to mean: "I declare thee
absolved."
TP Q[84] A[3] OTC
On the contrary, As our Lord said to His disciples (Mt. 28:19): "Going . . . teach
ye all nations, baptizing them," etc., so did He say to Peter (Mt. 16:19):
"Whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth," etc. Now the priest, relying on the
authority of those words of Christ, says: "I baptize thee." Therefore on the
same authority he should say in this sacrament: "I absolve thee."
TP Q[84] A[3] Body
I answer that, The perfection of a thing is ascribed to its form. Now it has been
stated above (A[1], ad 2) that this sacrament is perfected by that which is done by the
priest. Wherefore the part taken by the penitent, whether it consist of words or deeds,
must needs be the matter of this sacrament, while the part taken by the priest, takes the
place of the form.
TP Q[84] A[3] Body
Now since the sacraments of the New Law accomplish what they signify, as stated above
(Q[62], A[1], ad 1), it behooves the sacramental form to signify the sacramental effect in
a manner that is in keeping with the matter. Hence the form of Baptism is: "I baptize
thee," and the form of Confirmation is: "I sign thee with the sign of the cross,
and I confirm thee with the chrism of salvation," because these sacraments are
perfected in the use of their matter: while in the sacrament of the Eucharist, which
consists in the very consecration of the matter, the reality of the consecration is
expressed in the words: "This is My Body."
TP Q[84] A[3] Body
Now this sacrament, namely the sacrament of Penance, consists not in the consecration
of a matter, nor in the use of a hallowed matter, but rather in the removal of a certain
matter, viz. sin, in so far as sins are said to be the matter of Penance, as explained
above (A[2]). This removal is expressed by the priest saying: "I absolve thee":
because sins are fetters, according to Prov. 5:22. "His own iniquities catch the
wicked, and he is fast bound with the ropes of his own sins." Wherefore it is evident
that this is the most fitting form of this sacrament: "I absolve thee."
TP Q[84] A[3] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: This form is taken from Christ's very words which He addressed to Peter
(Mt. 16:19): "Whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth," etc., and such is the form
employed by the Church in sacramental absolution. But such absolutions as are given in
public are not sacramental, but are prayers for the remission of venial sins. Wherefore in
giving sacramental absolution it would not suffice to say: "May Almighty God have
mercy on thee," or: "May God grant thee absolution and forgiveness,"
because by such words the priest does not signify the giving of absolution, but prays that
it may be given. Nevertheless the above prayer is said before the sacramental absolution
is given, lest the sacramental effect be hindered on the part of the penitent, whose acts
are as matter in this sacrament, but not in Baptism or Confirmation.
TP Q[84] A[3] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: The words of Leo are to be understood of the prayer that precedes the
absolution, and do not exclude the fact that the priest pronounces absolution.
TP Q[84] A[3] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: God alone absolves from sin and forgives sins authoritatively; yet priests
do both ministerially, because the words of the priest in this sacrament work as
instruments of the Divine power, as in the other sacraments: because it is the Divine
power that works inwardly in all the sacramental signs, be they things or words, as shown
above (Q[62], A[4]; Q[64], AA[1],2). Wherefore our Lord expressed both: for He said to
Peter (Mt. 16:19): "Whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth," etc., and to His
disciples (Jn. 20:23): "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them."
Yet the priest says: "I absolve thee," rather than: "I forgive thee thy
sins," because it is more in keeping with the words of our Lord, by expressing the
power of the keys whereby priests absolve. Nevertheless, since the priest absolves
ministerially, something is suitably added in reference to the supreme authority of God,
by the priest saying: "I absolve thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost," or by the power of Christ's Passion, or by the authority of God.
However, as this is not defined by the words of Christ, as it is for Baptism, this
addition is left to the discretion of the priest.
TP Q[84] A[3] R.O. 4
Reply OBJ 4: Power was given to the apostles, not that they themselves might heal the
sick, but that the sick might be healed at the prayer of the apostles: whereas power was
given to them to work instrumentally or ministerially in the sacraments; wherefore they
could express their own agency in the sacramental forms rather than in the healing of
infirmities. Nevertheless in the latter case they did not always use the deprecatory form,
but sometimes employed the indicative or imperative: thus we read (Acts 3:6) that Peter
said to the lame man: "What I have, I give thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth, arise and walk."
TP Q[84] A[3] R.O. 5
Reply OBJ 5: It is true in a sense that the words, "I absolve thee" mean
"I declare thee absolved," but this explanation is incomplete. Because the
sacraments of the New Law not only signify, but effect what they signify. Wherefore, just
as the priest in baptizing anyone, declares by deed and word that the person is washed
inwardly, and this not only significatively but also effectively, so also when he says:
"I absolve thee," he declares the man to be absolved not only significatively
but also effectively. And yet he does not speak as of something uncertain, because just as
the other sacraments of the New Law have, of themselves, a sure effect through the power
of Christ's Passion, which effect, nevertheless, may be impeded on the part of the
recipient, so is it with this sacrament. Hence Augustine says (De Adult. Conjug. ii):
"There is nothing disgraceful or onerous in the reconciliation of husband and wife,
when adultery committed has been washed away, since there is no doubt that remission of
sins is granted through the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Consequently there is no
need for a special revelation to be made to the priest, but the general revelation of
faith suffices, through which sins are forgiven. Hence the revelation of faith is said to
have been made to Peter.
TP Q[84] A[3] R.O. 5
It would be a more complete explanation to say that the words, "I absolve
thee" mean: "I grant thee the sacrament of absolution."
TP Q[84] A[4] Thes.
Whether the imposition of the priest's hands is necessary for this sacrament?
TP Q[84] A[4] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that the imposition of the priest's hands is necessary for this
sacrament. For it is written (Mk. 16:18): "They shall lay hands upon the sick, and
they shall recover." Now sinners are sick spiritually, and obtain recovery through
this sacrament. Therefore an imposition of hands should be made in this sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[4] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, in this sacrament man regains the Holy Ghost Whom he had lost,
wherefore it is said in the person of the penitent (Ps. 1:14): "Restore unto me the
joy of Thy salvation, and strengthen me with a perfect spirit." Now the Holy Ghost is
given by the imposition of hands; for we read (Acts 8:17) that the apostles "laid
their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost"; and (Mt. 19:13) that
"little children were presented" to our Lord, "that He should impose hands
upon them." Therefore an imposition of hands should be made in this sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[4] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, the priest's words are not more efficacious in this than in the other
sacraments. But in the other sacraments the words of the minister do not suffice, unless
he perform some action: thus, in Baptism, the priest while saying: "I baptize
thee," has to perform a bodily washing. Therefore, also while saying: "I absolve
thee," the priest should perform some action in regard to the penitent, by laying
hands on him.
TP Q[84] A[4] OTC
On the contrary, When our Lord said to Peter (Mt. 16:19): "Whatsoever thou shalt
loose on earth," etc., He made no mention of an imposition of hands; nor did He when
He said to all the apostles (Jn. 20:13): "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are
forgiven them." Therefore no imposition of hands is required for this sacrament.
TP Q[84] A[4] Body
I answer that, In the sacraments of the Church the imposition of hands is made, to
signify some abundant effect of grace, through those on whom the hands are laid being, as
it were, united to the ministers in whom grace should be plentiful. Wherefore an
imposition of hands is made in the sacrament of Confirmation, wherein the fulness of the
Holy Ghost is conferred; and in the sacrament of order, wherein is bestowed a certain
excellence of power over the Divine mysteries; hence it is written (2 Tim. 1:6):
"Stir up the grace of God which is in thee, by the imposition of my hands."
TP Q[84] A[4] Body
Now the sacrament of Penance is ordained, not that man may receive some abundance of
grace, but that his sins may be taken away; and therefore no imposition of hands is
required for this sacrament, as neither is there for Baptism, wherein nevertheless a
fuller remission of sins is bestowed.
TP Q[84] A[4] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: That imposition of hands is not sacramental, but is intended for the
working of miracles, namely, that by the contact of a sanctified man's hand, even bodily
infirmity might be removed; even as we read of our Lord (Mk. 6:5) that He cured the sick,
"laying His hands upon them," and (Mt. 8:3) that He cleansed a leper by touching
him.
TP Q[84] A[4] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: It is not every reception of the Holy Ghost that requires an imposition of
hands, since even in Baptism man receives the Holy Ghost, without any imposition of hands:
it is at the reception of the fulness of the Holy Ghost which belongs to Confirmation that
an imposition of hands is required.
TP Q[84] A[4] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: In those sacraments which are perfected in the use of the matter, the
minister has to perform some bodily action on the recipient of the sacrament, e.g. in
Baptism, Confirmation, and Extreme Unction; whereas this sacrament does not consist in the
use of matter employed outwardly, the matter being supplied by the part taken by the
penitent: wherefore, just as in the Eucharist the priest perfects the sacrament by merely
pronouncing the words over the matter, so the mere words which the priest while absolving
pronounces over the penitent perfect the sacrament of absolution. If, indeed, any bodily
act were necessary on the part of the priest, the sign of the cross, which is employed in
the Eucharist, would not be less becoming than the imposition of hands, in token that sins
are forgiven through the blood of Christ crucified; and yet this is not essential to this
sacrament as neither is it to the Eucharist.
TP Q[84] A[5] Thes.
Whether this sacrament is necessary for salvation?
TP Q[84] A[5] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that this sacrament is not necessary for salvation. Because on Ps.
125:5, "They that sow in tears," etc., the gloss says: "Be not sorrowful,
if thou hast a good will, of which peace is the meed." But sorrow is essential to
Penance, according to 2 Cor. 7:10: "The sorrow that is according to God worketh
penance steadfast unto salvation." Therefore a good will without Penance suffices for
salvation.
TP Q[84] A[5] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, it is written (Prov. 10:12): "Charity covereth all sins," and
further on (Prov. 15:27): "By mercy and faith sins are purged away." But this
sacrament is for nothing else but the purging of sins. Therefore if one has charity,
faith, and mercy, one can obtain salvation, without the sacrament of Penance.
TP Q[84] A[5] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, the sacraments of the Church take their origin from the institution of
Christ. But according to Jn. 8 Christ absolved the adulterous woman without Penance.
Therefore it seems that Penance is not necessary for salvation.
TP Q[84] A[5] OTC
On the contrary, our Lord said (Lk. 13:3): "Unless you shall do penance, you shall
all likewise perish."
TP Q[84] A[5] Body
I answer that, A thing is necessary for salvation in two ways: first, absolutely;
secondly, on a supposition. A thing is absolutely necessary for salvation, if no one can
obtain salvation without it, as, for example, the grace of Christ, and the sacrament of
Baptism, whereby a man is born again in Christ. The sacrament of Penance is necessary on a
supposition, for it is necessary, not for all, but for those who are in sin. For it is
written (2 Paral 37 [*The prayer of Manasses, among the Apocrypha]), "Thou, Lord, God
of the righteous, hast not appointed repentance to the righteous, to Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob, nor to those who sinned not against Thee." But "sin, when it is
completed, begetteth death" (James 1:15). Consequently it is necessary for the
sinner's salvation that sin be taken away from him; which cannot be done without the
sacrament of Penance, wherein the power of Christ's Passion operates through the priest's
absolution and the acts of the penitent, who co-operates with grace unto the destruction
of his sin. For as Augustine says (Tract. lxxii in Joan. [*Implicitly in the passage
referred to, but explicitly Serm. xv de verb Apost.]), "He Who created thee without
thee, will not justify thee without thee." Therefore it is evident that after sin the
sacrament of Penance is necessary for salvation, even as bodily medicine after man has
contracted a dangerous disease.
TP Q[84] A[5] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: This gloss should apparently be understood as referring to the man who has
a good will unimpaired by sin, for such a man has no cause for sorrow: but as soon as the
good will is forfeited through sin, it cannot be restored without that sorrow whereby a
man sorrows for his past sin, and which belongs to Penance.
TP Q[84] A[5] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: As soon as a man falls into sin, charity, faith, and mercy do not deliver
him from sin, without Penance. Because charity demands that a man should grieve for the
offense committed against his friend, and that he should be anxious to make satisfaction
to his friend; faith requires that he should seek to be justified from his sins through
the power of Christ's Passion which operates in the sacraments of the Church; and
well-ordered pity necessitates that man should succor himself by repenting of the pitiful
condition into which sin has brought him, according to Prov. 14:34: "Sin maketh
nations miserable"; wherefore it is written (Ecclus. 30:24): "Have pity on thy
own soul, pleasing God."
TP Q[84] A[5] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: It was due to His power of "excellence," which He alone had, as
stated above (Q[64], A[3]), that Christ bestowed on the adulterous woman the effect of the
sacrament of Penance, viz. the forgiveness of sins, without the sacrament of Penance,
although not without internal repentance, which He operated in her by grace.
TP Q[84] A[6] Thes.
Whether Penance is a second plank after shipwreck?
TP Q[84] A[6] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that Penance is not a second plank after shipwreck. Because on Is.
3:9, "They have proclaimed abroad their sin as Sodom," a gloss says: "The
second plank after shipwreck is to hide one's sins." Now Penance does not hide sins,
but reveals them. Therefore Penance is not a second plank.
TP Q[84] A[6] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, in a building the foundation takes the first, not the second place. Now
in the spiritual edifice, Penance is the foundation, according to Heb. 6:1: "Not
laying again the foundation of Penance from dead works"; wherefore it precedes even
Baptism, according to Acts 2:38: "Do penance, and be baptized every one of you."
Therefore Penance should not be called a second plank.
TP Q[84] A[6] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, all the sacraments are planks, i.e. helps against sin. Now Penance
holds, not the second but the fourth, place among the sacraments, as is clear from what
has been said above (Q[65], AA[1],2). Therefore Penance should not be called a second
plank after shipwreck.
TP Q[84] A[6] OTC
On the contrary, Jerome says (Ep. cxxx) that "Penance is a second plank after
shipwreck."
TP Q[84] A[6] Body
I answer that, That which is of itself precedes naturally that which is accidental, as
substance precedes accident. Now some sacraments are, of themselves, ordained to man's
salvation, e.g. Baptism, which is the spiritual birth, Confirmation which is the spiritual
growth, the Eucharist which is the spiritual food; whereas Penance is ordained to man's
salvation accidentally as it were, and on something being supposed, viz. sin: for unless
man were to sin actually, he would not stand in need of Penance and yet he would need
Baptism, Confirmation, and the Eucharist; even as in the life of the body, man would need
no medical treatment, unless he were ill, and yet life, birth, growth, and food are, of
themselves, necessary to man.
TP Q[84] A[6] Body
Consequently Penance holds the second place with regard to the state of integrity which
is bestowed and safeguarded by the aforesaid sacraments, so that it is called
metaphorically "a second plank after shipwreck." For just as the first help for
those who cross the sea is to be safeguarded in a whole ship, while the second help when
the ship is wrecked, is to cling to a plank; so too the first help in this life's ocean is
that man safeguard his integrity, while the second help is, if he lose his integrity
through sin, that he regain it by means of Penance.
TP Q[84] A[6] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: To hide one's sins may happen in two ways: first, in the very act of
sinning. Now it is worse to sin in public than in private, both because a public sinner
seems to sin more from contempt, and because by sinning he gives scandal to others.
Consequently in sin it is a kind of remedy to sin secretly, and it is in this sense that
the gloss says that "to hide one's sins is a second plank after shipwreck"; not
that it takes away sin, as Penance does, but because it makes the sin less grievous.
Secondly, one hides one's sin previously committed, by neglecting to confess it: this is
opposed to Penance, and to hide one's sins thus is not a second plank, but is the reverse,
since it is written (Prov. 28:13): "He that hideth his sins shall not prosper."
TP Q[84] A[6] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: Penance cannot be called the foundation of the spiritual edifice simply,
i.e. in the first building thereof; but it is the foundation in the second building which
is accomplished by destroying sin, because man, on his return to God, needs Penance first.
However, the Apostle is speaking there of the foundation of spiritual doctrine. Moreover,
the penance which precedes Baptism is not the sacrament of Penance.
TP Q[84] A[6] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: The three sacraments which precede Penance refer to the ship in its
integrity, i.e. to man's state of integrity, with regard to which Penance is called a
second plank.
TP Q[84] A[7] Thes.
Whether this sacrament was suitably instituted in the New Law?
TP Q[84] A[7] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that this sacrament was unsuitably instituted in the New Law.
Because those things which belong to the natural law need not to be instituted. Now it
belongs to the natural law that one should repent of the evil one has done: for it is
impossible to love good without grieving for its contrary. Therefore Penance was
unsuitably instituted in the New Law.
TP Q[84] A[7] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, that which existed in the Old Law had not to be instituted in the New.
Now there was Penance in the old Law wherefore the Lord complains (Jer. 8:6) saying:
"There is none that doth penance for his sin, saying: What have I done?"
Therefore Penance should not have been instituted in the New Law.
TP Q[84] A[7] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, Penance comes after Baptism, since it is a second plank, as stated
above (A[6]). Now it seems that our Lord instituted Penance before Baptism, because we
read that at the beginning of His preaching He said (Mt. 4:17): "Do penance, for the
kingdom of heaven is at hand." Therefore this sacrament was not suitably instituted
in the New Law.
TP Q[84] A[7] Obj. 4
OBJ 4: Further, the sacraments of the New Law were instituted by Christ, by Whose power
they work, as stated above (Q[62], A[5]; Q[64], A[1]). But Christ does not seem to have
instituted this sacrament, since He made no use of it, as of the other sacraments which He
instituted. Therefore this sacrament was unsuitably instituted in the New Law.
TP Q[84] A[7] OTC
On the contrary, our Lord said (Lk. 24:46,47): "It behooved Christ to suffer, and
to rise again from the dead the third day: and that penance and remission of sins should
be preached in His name unto all nations."
TP Q[84] A[7] Body
I answer that, As stated above (A[1], ad 1, ad 2), in this sacrament the acts of the
penitent are as matter, while the part taken by the priest, who works as Christ's
minister, is the formal and completive element of the sacrament. Now in the other
sacraments the matter pre-exists, being provided by nature, as water, or by art, as bread:
but that such and such a matter be employed for a sacrament requires to be decided by the
institution; while the sacrament derives its form and power entirely from the institution
of Christ, from Whose Passion the power of the sacraments proceeds.
TP Q[84] A[7] Body
Accordingly the matter of this sacrament pre-exists, being provided by nature; since it
is by a natural principle of reason that man is moved to repent of the evil he has done:
yet it is due to Divine institution that man does penance in this or that way. Wherefore
at the outset of His preaching, our Lord admonished men, not only to repent, but also to
"do penance," thus pointing to the particular manner of actions required for
this sacrament. As to the part to be taken by the ministers, this was fixed by our Lord
when He said to Peter (Mt. 16:19): "To thee will I give the keys of the kingdom of
heaven," etc.; but it was after His resurrection that He made known the efficacy of
this sacrament and the source of its power, when He said (Lk. 24:47) that "penance
and remission of sins should be preached in His name unto all nations," after
speaking of His Passion and resurrection. Because it is from the power of the name of
Jesus Christ suffering and rising again that this sacrament is efficacious unto the
remission of sins.
TP Q[84] A[7] Body
It is therefore evident that this sacrament was suitably instituted in the New Law.
TP Q[84] A[7] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: It is a natural law that one should repent of the evil one has done, by
grieving for having done it, and by seeking a remedy for one's grief in some way or other,
and also that one should show some signs of grief, even as the Ninevites did, as we read
in Jn. 3. And yet even in their case there was also something of faith which they had
received through Jonas' preaching, inasmuch as they did these things in the hope that they
would receive pardon from God, according as we read (Jn. 3:9): "Who can tell if God
will turn and forgive, and will turn away from His fierce anger, and we shall not
perish?" But just as other matters which are of the natural law were fixed in detail
by the institution of the Divine law, as we have stated in the FS, Q[91], A[4]; FS, Q[95],
A[2]; FS, Q[99], so was it with Penance.
TP Q[84] A[7] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: Things which are of the natural law were determined in various ways in the
old and in the New Law, in keeping with the imperfection of the old, and the perfection of
the New. Wherefore Penance was fixed in a certain way in the Old Law---with regard to
sorrow, that it should be in the heart rather than in external signs, according to Joel
2:13: "Rend your hearts and not your garments"; and with regard to seeking a
remedy for sorrow, that they should in some way confess their sins, at least in general,
to God's ministers. Wherefore the Lord said (Lev. 5:17,18): "If anyone sin through
ignorance . . . he shall offer of the flocks a ram without blemish to the priest,
according to the measure and estimation of the sin, and the priest shall pray for him,
because he did it ignorantly, and it shall be forgiven him"; since by the very fact
of making an offering for his sin, a man, in a fashion, confessed his sin to the priest.
And accordingly it is written (Prov. 28:13): "He that hideth his sins, shall not
prosper: but he that shall confess, and forsake them, shall obtain mercy." Not yet,
however, was the power of the keys instituted, which is derived from Christ's Passion, and
consequently it was not yet ordained that a man should grieve for his sin, with the
purpose of submitting himself by confession and satisfaction to the keys of the Church, in
the hope of receiving forgiveness through the power of Christ's Passion.
TP Q[84] A[7] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: If we note carefully what our Lord said about the necessity of Baptism
(Jn. 3:3, seqq.), we shall see that this was said before His words about the necessity of
Penance (Mt. 4:17); because He spoke to Nicodemus about Baptism before the imprisonment of
John, of whom it is related afterwards (Jn. 3:23, 24) that he baptized, whereas His words
about Penance were said after John was cast into prison.
TP Q[84] A[7] R.O. 3
If, however, He had admonished men to do penance before admonishing them to be
baptized, this would be because also before Baptism some kind of penance is required,
according to the words of Peter (Acts 2:38): "Do penance, and be baptized, every one
of you."
TP Q[84] A[7] R.O. 4
Reply OBJ 4: Christ did not use the Baptism which He instituted, but was baptized with
the baptism of John, as stated above (Q[39], AA[1],2). Nor did He use it actively by
administering it Himself, because He "did not baptize" as a rule, "but His
disciples" did, as related in Jn. 4:2, although it is to be believed that He baptized
His disciples, as Augustine asserts (Ep. cclxv, ad Seleuc.). But with regard to His
institution of this sacrament it was nowise fitting that He should use it, neither by
repenting Himself, in Whom there was no sin, nor by administering the sacrament to others,
since, in order to show His mercy and power, He was wont to confer the effect of this
sacrament without the sacrament itself, as stated above (A[5], ad 3). On the other hand,
He both received and gave to others the sacrament of the Eucharist, both in order to
commend the excellence of that sacrament, and because that sacrament is a memorial of His
Passion, in which Christ is both priest and victim.
TP Q[84] A[8] Thes.
Whether Penance should last till the end of life?
TP Q[84] A[8] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that Penance should not last till the end of life. Because Penance
is ordained for the blotting out of sin. Now the penitent receives forgiveness of his sins
at once, according to Ezech. 18:21: "If the wicked do penance for all his sins which
he hath committed . . . he shall live and shall not die." Therefore there is no need
for Penance to be further prolonged.
TP Q[84] A[8] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, Penance belongs to the state of beginners. But man ought to advance
from that state to the state of the proficient, and, from this, on to the state of the
perfect. Therefore man need not do Penance till the end of his life.
TP Q[84] A[8] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, man is bound to observe the laws of the Church in this as in the other
sacraments. But the duration of repentance is fixed by the canons, so that, to wit, for
such and such a sin one is bound to do penance for so many years. Therefore it seems that
Penance should not be prolonged till the end of life.
TP Q[84] A[8] OTC
On the contrary, Augustine says in his book, De Poenitentia [*De vera et falsa
Poenitentia, the authorship of which is unknown]: "What remains for us to do, save to
sorrow ever in this life? For when sorrow ceases, repentance fails; and if repentance
fails, what becomes of pardon?"
TP Q[84] A[8] Body
I answer that, Penance is twofold, internal and external. Internal penance is that
whereby one grieves for a sin one has committed, and this penance should last until the
end of life. Because man should always be displeased at having sinned, for if he were to
be pleased thereat, he would for this very reason fall into sin and lose the fruit of
pardon. Now displeasure causes sorrow in one who is susceptible to sorrow, as man is in
this life; but after this life the saints are not susceptible to sorrow, wherefore they
will be displeased at, without sorrowing for, their past sins, according to Is. 65:16.
"The former distresses are forgotten."
TP Q[84] A[8] Body
External penance is that whereby a man shows external signs of sorrow, confesses his
sins verbally to the priest who absolves him, and makes satisfaction for his sins
according to the judgment of the priest. Such penance need not last until the end of life,
but only for a fixed time according to the measure of the sin.
TP Q[84] A[8] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: True penance not only removes past sins, but also preserves man from
future sins. Consequently, although a man receives forgiveness of past sins in the first
instant of his true penance, nevertheless he must persevere in his penance, lest he fall
again into sin.
TP Q[84] A[8] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: To do penance both internal and external belongs to the state of
beginners, of those, to wit, who are making a fresh start from the state of sin. But there
is room for internal penance even in the proficient and the perfect, according to Ps.
83:7: "In his heart he hath disposed to ascend by steps, in the vale of tears."
Wherefore Paul says (1 Cor. 15:9): "I . . . am not worthy to be called an apostle
because I persecuted the Church of God."
TP Q[84] A[8] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: These durations of time are fixed for penitents as regards the exercise of
external penance.
TP Q[84] A[9] Thes.
Whether Penance can be continuous?
TP Q[84] A[9] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that penance cannot be continuous. For it is written
(Jer. 31:16):
"Let thy voice cease from weeping, and thy eyes from tears." But this would be
impossible if penance were continuous, for it consists in weeping and tears. Therefore
penance cannot be continuous.
TP Q[84] A[9] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, man ought to rejoice at every good work, according to Ps. 99:1:
"Serve ye the Lord with gladness." Now to do penance is a good work. Therefore
man should rejoice at it. But man cannot rejoice and grieve at the same time, as the
Philosopher declares (Ethic. ix, 4). Therefore a penitent cannot grieve continually for
his past sins, which is essential to penance. Therefore penance cannot be continuous.
TP Q[84] A[9] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, the Apostle says (2 Cor. 2:7): "Comfort him," viz. the
penitent, "lest perhaps such an one be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow." But
comfort dispels grief, which is essential to penance. Therefore penance need not be
continuous.
TP Q[84] A[9] OTC
On the contrary, Augustine says in his book on Penance [*De vera et falsa
Poenitentia,
the authorship of which is unknown]: "In doing penance grief should be
continual."
TP Q[84] A[9] Body
I answer that, One is said to repent in two ways, actually and habitually. It is
impossible for a man continually to repent actually. for the acts, whether internal or
external, of a penitent must needs be interrupted by sleep and other things which the body
needs. Secondly, a man is said to repent habitually. and thus he should repent
continually, both by never doing anything contrary to penance, so as to destroy the
habitual disposition of the penitent, and by being resolved that his past sins should
always be displeasing to him.
TP Q[84] A[9] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: Weeping and tears belong to the act of external penance, and this act
needs neither to be continuous, nor to last until the end of life, as stated above (A[8]):
wherefore it is significantly added: "For there is a reward for thy work." Now
the reward of the penitent's work is the full remission of sin both as to guilt and as to
punishment; and after receiving this reward there is no need for man to proceed to acts of
external penance. This, however, does not prevent penance being continual, as explained
above.
TP Q[84] A[9] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: Of sorrow and joy we may speak in two ways: first, as being passions of
the sensitive appetite; and thus they can no. wise be together, since they are altogether
contrary to one another, either on the part of the object (as when they have the same
object), or at least on the part of the movement, for joy is with expansion [*Cf. FS,
Q[33], A[1]] of the heart, whereas sorrow is with contraction; and it is in this sense
that the Philosopher speaks in Ethic. ix. Secondly, we may speak of joy and sorrow as
being simple acts of the will, to which something is pleasing or displeasing. Accordingly,
they cannot be contrary to one another, except on the part of the object, as when they
concern the same object in the same respect, in which way joy and sorrow cannot be
simultaneous, because the same thing in the same respect cannot be pleasing and
displeasing. If, on the other hand, joy and sorrow, understood thus, be not of the same
object in the same respect, but either of different objects, or of the same object in
different respects, in that case joy and sorrow are not contrary to one another, so that
nothing hinders a man from being joyful and sorrowful at the same time---for instance, if
we see a good man suffer, we both rejoice at his goodness and at the same time grieve for
his suffering. In this way a man may be displeased at having sinned, and be pleased at his
displeasure together with his hope for pardon, so that his very sorrow is a matter of joy.
Hence Augustine says [*De vera et falsa Poenitentia, the authorship of which is unknown]:
"The penitent should ever grieve and rejoice at his grief."
TP Q[84] A[9] R.O. 2
If, however, sorrow were altogether incompatible with joy, this would prevent the
continuance, not of habitual penance, but only of actual penance.
TP Q[84] A[9] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: According to the Philosopher (Ethic. ii, 3,6,7,9) it belongs to virtue to
establish the mean in the passions. Now the sorrow which, in the sensitive appetite of the
penitent, arises from the displeasure of his will, is a passion; wherefore it should be
moderated according to virtue, and if it be excessive it is sinful, because it leads to
despair, as the Apostle teaches (2 Cor. 2:7), saying: "Lest such an one be swallowed
up with overmuch sorrow." Accordingly comfort, of which the Apostle speaks, moderates
sorrow but does not destroy it altogether.
TP Q[84] A[10] Thes.
Whether the sacrament of Penance may be repeated?
TP Q[84] A[10] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that the sacrament of Penance should not be repeated. For the
Apostle says (Heb. 6:4, seqq.): "It is impossible for those, who were once
illuminated, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost
. . . and are fallen away, to be renewed again to penance." Now whosoever have done
penance, have been illuminated, and have received the gift of the Holy Ghost. Therefore
whosoever sin after doing penance, cannot do penance again.
TP Q[84] A[10] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, Ambrose says (De Poenit. ii): "Some are to be found who think they
ought often to do penance, who take liberties with Christ: for if they were truly
penitent, they would not think of doing penance over again, since there is but one Penance
even as there is but one Baptism." Now Baptism is not repeated. Neither, therefore,
is Penance to be repeated.
TP Q[84] A[10] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, the miracles whereby our Lord healed bodily diseases, signify the
healing of spiritual diseases, whereby men are delivered from sins. Now we do not read
that our Lord restored the sight to any blind man twice, or that He cleansed any leper
twice, or twice raised any dead man to life. Therefore it seems that He does not twice
grant pardon to any sinner.
TP Q[84] A[10] Obj. 4
OBJ 4: Further, Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang.): "Penance consists in
deploring past sins, and in not committing again those we have deplored": and Isidore
says (De Summo Bono ii): "He is a mocker and no penitent who still does what he has
repented of." If, therefore, a man is truly penitent, he will not sin again.
Therefore Penance cannot be repeated.
TP Q[84] A[10] Obj. 5
OBJ 5: Further, just as Baptism derives its efficacy from the Passion of Christ, so
does Penance. Now Baptism is not repeated, on account of the unity of Christ's Passion and
death. Therefore in like manner Penance is not repeated.
TP Q[84] A[10] Obj. 6
OBJ 6: Further, Ambrose says on Ps. 118:58, "I entreated Thy face," etc.,
that "facility of obtaining pardon is an incentive to sin." If, therefore, God
frequently grants pardon through Penance, it seems that He affords man an incentive to
sin, and thus He seems to take pleasure in sin, which is contrary to His goodness.
Therefore Penance cannot be repeated.
TP Q[84] A[10] OTC
On the contrary, Man is induced to be merciful by the example of Divine mercy,
according to Lk. 6:36: "Be ye . . . merciful, as your Father also is merciful."
Now our Lord commanded His disciples to be merciful by frequently pardoning their brethren
who had sinned against them; wherefore, as related in Mt. 18:21, when Peter asked:
"How often shall my brother off end against me, and I forgive him? till seven
times?" Jesus answered: "I say not to thee, till seven times, but till seventy
times seven times." Therefore also God over and over again, through Penance, grants
pardon to sinners, especially as He teaches us to pray (Mt. 6:12): "Forgive us our
trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us."
TP Q[84] A[10] Body
I answer that, As regards Penance, some have erred, saying that a man cannot obtain
pardon of his sins through Penance a second time. Some of these, viz. the
Novatians, went
so far as to say that he who sins after the first Penance which is done in Baptism, cannot
be restored again through Penance. There were also other heretics who, as Augustine
relates in De Poenitentia [*De vera et falsa Poenitentia, the authorship of which is
unknown], said that, after Baptism, Penance is useful, not many times, but only once.
TP Q[84] A[10] Body
These errors seem to have arisen from a twofold source: first from not knowing the
nature of true Penance. For since true Penance requires charity, without which sins are
not taken away, they thought that charity once possessed could not be lost, and that,
consequently, Penance, if true, could never be removed by sin, so that it should be
necessary to repeat it. But this was refuted in the SS, Q[24], A[11], where it was shown
that on account of free-will charity, once possessed, can be lost, and that, consequently,
after true Penance, a man can sin mortally. Secondly, they erred in their estimation of
the gravity of sin. For they deemed a sin committed by a man after he had received pardon,
to be so grave that it could not be forgiven. In this they erred not only with regard to
sin which, even after a sin has been forgiven, can be either more or less grievous than
the first, which was forgiven, but much more did they err against the infinity of Divine
mercy, which surpasses any number and magnitude of sins, according to Ps. 50:1,2:
"Have mercy on me, O God, according to Thy great mercy: and according to the
multitude of Thy tender mercies, blot out my iniquity." Wherefore the words of Cain
were reprehensible, when he said (Gn. 4:13): "My iniquity is greater than that I may
deserve pardon." And so God's mercy, through Penance, grants pardon to sinners
without any end, wherefore it is written (2 Paral 37 [*Prayer of Manasses, among the
Apocrypha. St. Thomas is evidently quoting from memory, and omits the words in
brackets.]): "Thy merciful promise is unmeasurable and unsearchable . . . (and Thou
repentest) for the evil brought upon man." It is therefore evident that Penance can
be repeated many times.
TP Q[84] A[10] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: Some of the Jews thought that a man could be washed several times in the
laver of Baptism, because among them the Law prescribed certain washing-places where they
were wont to cleanse themselves repeatedly from their uncleannesses. In order to disprove
this the Apostle wrote to the Hebrews that "it is impossible for those who were once
illuminated," viz. through Baptism, "to be renewed again to penance," viz.
through Baptism, which is "the laver of regeneration, and renovation of the Holy
Ghost," as stated in Titus 3:5: and he declares the reason to be that by Baptism man
dies with Christ, wherefore he adds (Heb. 6:6): "Crucifying again to themselves the
Son of God."
TP Q[84] A[10] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: Ambrose is speaking of solemn Penance, which is not repeated in the
Church, as we shall state further on (XP, Q[28], A[2]).
TP Q[84] A[10] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: As Augustine says [*De vera et falsa Poenitentia the authorship of which
is unknown], "Our Lord gave sight to many blind men at various times, and strength to
many infirm, thereby showing, in these different men, that the same sins are repeatedly
forgiven, at one time healing a man from leprosy and afterwards from blindness. For this
reason He healed so many stricken with fever, so many feeble in body, so many lame, blind,
and withered, that the sinner might not despair; for this reason He is not described as
healing anyone but once, that every one might fear to link himself with sin; for this
reason He declares Himself to be the physician welcomed not of the hale, but of the
unhealthy. What sort of a physician is he who knows not how to heal a recurring disease?
For if a man ail a hundred times it is for the physician to heal him a hundred times: and
if he failed where others succeed, he would be a poor physician in comparison with
them."
TP Q[84] A[10] R.O. 4
Reply OBJ 4: Penance is to deplore past sins, and, "while deploring them,"
not to commit again, either by act or by intention, those which we have to deplore.
Because a man is a mocker and not a penitent, who, "while doing penance," does
what he repents having done, or intends to do again what he did before, or even commits
actually the same or another kind of sin. But if a man sin afterwards either by act or
intention, this does not destroy the fact that his former penance was real, because the
reality of a former act is never destroyed by a subsequent contrary act: for even as he
truly ran who afterwards sits, so he truly repented who subsequently sins.
TP Q[84] A[10] R.O. 5
Reply OBJ 5: Baptism derives its power from Christ's Passion, as a spiritual
regeneration, with a spiritual death, of a previous life. Now "it is appointed unto
man once to die" (Heb. 9:27), and to be born once, wherefore man should be baptized
but once. On the other hand, Penance derives its power from Christ's Passion, as a
spiritual medicine, which can be repeated frequently.
TP Q[84] A[10] R.O. 6
Reply OBJ 6: According to Augustine (De vera et falsa
Poenitentia, the authorship of
which is unknown), "it is evident that sins displease God exceedingly, for He is
always ready to destroy them, lest what He created should perish, and what He loved be
lost," viz. by despair.
TP Q[85] Out.
OF PENANCE AS
A VIRTUE (SIX ARTICLES)
We must now consider penance as a virtue, under which head there are six points of
inquiry:
(1) Whether penance is a virtue?
(2) Whether it is a special virtue?
(3) To what species of virtue does it belong?
(4) Of its subject;
(5) Of its cause;
(6) Of its relation to the other virtues.
TP Q[85] A[1] Thes.
Whether Penance is a virtue?
TP Q[85] A[1] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that penance is not a virtue. For penance is a sacrament numbered
among the other sacraments, as was shown above (Q[84], A[1]; Q[65], A[1]). Now no other
sacrament is a virtue. Therefore neither is penance a virtue.
TP Q[85] A[1] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. iv, 9), "shame is not a
virtue," both because it is a passion accompanied by a bodily alteration, and because
it is not the disposition of a perfect thing, since it is about an evil act, so that it
has no place in a virtuous man. Now, in like manner, penance is a passion accompanied by a
bodily alteration, viz. tears, according to Gregory, who says (Hom. xxxiv in
Evang.) that
"penance consists in deploring past sins": moreover it is about evil deeds, viz.
sins, which have no place in a virtuous man. Therefore penance is not a virtue.
TP Q[85] A[1] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. iv, 3), "no virtuous man is
foolish." But it seems foolish to deplore what has been done in the past, since it
cannot be otherwise, and yet this is what we understand by penance. Therefore penance is
not a virtue.
TP Q[85] A[1] OTC
On the contrary, The precepts of the Law are about acts of virtue, because "a
lawgiver intends to make the citizens virtuous" (Ethic. ii, 1). But there is a
precept about penance in the Divine law, according to Mt. 4:17: "Do penance,"
etc. Therefore penance is a virtue.
TP Q[85] A[1] Body
I answer that, As stated above (OBJ[2]; Q[84], A[10], ad 4), to repent is to deplore
something one has done. Now it has been stated above (Q[84] , A[9]) that sorrow or sadness
is twofold. First, it denotes a passion of the sensitive appetite, and in this sense
penance is not a virtue, but a passion. Secondly, it denotes an act of the will, and in
this way it implies choice, and if this be right, it must, of necessity, be an act of
virtue. For it is stated in Ethic. ii, 6 that virtue is a habit of choosing according to
right reason. Now it belongs to right reason than one should grieve for a proper object of
grief as one ought to grieve, and for an end for which one ought to grieve. And this is
observed in the penance of which we are speaking now; since the penitent assumes a
moderated grief for his past sins, with the intention of removing them. Hence it is
evident that the penance of which we are speaking now, is either a virtue or the act of a
virtue.
TP Q[85] A[1] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: As stated above (Q[84], A[1], ad 1; AA[2],3), in the sacrament of Penance,
human acts take the place of matter, which is not the case in Baptism and Confirmation.
Wherefore, since virtue is a principle of an act, penance is either a virtue or
accompanies a virtue, rather than Baptism or Confirmation.
TP Q[85] A[1] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: Penance, considered as a passion, is not a virtue, as stated above, and it
is thus that it is accompanied by a bodily alteration. On the other hand, it is a virtue,
according as it includes a right choice on the part of the will; which, however, applies
to penance rather than to shame. Because shame regards the evil deed as present, whereas
penance regards the evil deed as past. Now it is contrary to the perfection of virtue that
one should have an evil deed actually present, of which one ought to be ashamed; whereas
it is not contrary to the perfection of virtue that we should have previously committed
evil deeds, of which it behooves us to repent, since a man from being wicked becomes
virtuous.
TP Q[85] A[1] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: It would indeed be foolish to grieve for what has already been done, with
the intention of trying to make it not done. But the penitent does not intend this: for
his sorrow is displeasure or disapproval with regard to the past deed, with the intention
of removing its result, viz. the anger of God and the debt of punishment: and this is not
foolish.
TP Q[85] A[2] Thes.
Whether Penance is a special virtue?
TP Q[85] A[2] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that penance is not a special virtue. For it seems that to rejoice
at the good one has done, and to grieve for the evil one has done are acts of the same
nature. But joy for the good one has done is not a special virtue, but is a praiseworthy
emotion proceeding from charity, as Augustine states (De Civ. Dei xiv, 7,8,9): wherefore
the Apostle says (1 Cor. 13:6) that charity "rejoiceth not at iniquity, but rejoiceth
with the truth." Therefore, in like manner, neither is penance, which is sorrow for
past sins, a special virtue, but an emotion resulting from charity.
TP Q[85] A[2] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, every special virtue has its special matter, because habits are
distinguished by their acts, and acts by their objects. But penance has no special matter,
because its matter is past sins in any matter whatever. Therefore penance is not a special
virtue.
TP Q[85] A[2] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, nothing is removed except by its contrary. But penance removes all
sins. Therefore it is contrary to all sins, and consequently is not a special virtue.
TP Q[85] A[2] OTC
On the contrary, The Law has a special precept about penance, as stated above (Q[84],
AA[5],7).
TP Q[85] A[2] Body
I answer that, As stated in the FS, Q[54], A[1], ad 1, A[2], habits are specifically
distinguished according to the species of their acts, so that whenever an act has a
special reason for being praiseworthy, there must needs be a special habit. Now it is
evident that there is a special reason for praising the act of penance, because it aims at
the destruction of past sin, considered as an offense against God, which does not apply to
any other virtue. We must therefore conclude that penance is a special virtue.
TP Q[85] A[2] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: An act springs from charity in two ways: first as being elicited by
charity, and a like virtuous act requires no other virtue than charity, e.g. to love the
good, to rejoice therein, and to grieve for what is opposed to it. Secondly, an act
springs from charity, being, so to speak, commanded by charity; and thus, since charity
commands all the virtues, inasmuch as it directs them to its own end, an act springing
from charity may belong even to another special virtue. Accordingly, if in the act of the
penitent we consider the mere displeasure in the past sin, it belongs to charity
immediately, in the same way as joy for past good acts; but the intention to aim at the
destruction of past sin requires a special virtue subordinate to charity.
TP Q[85] A[2] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: In point of fact, penance has indeed a general matter, inasmuch as it
regards all sins; but it does so under a special aspect, inasmuch as they can be remedied
by an act of man in co-operating with God for his justification.
TP Q[85] A[2] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: Every special virtue removes formally the habit of the opposite vice, just
as whiteness removes blackness from the same subject: but penance removes every sin
effectively, inasmuch as it works for the destruction of sins, according as they are
pardonable through the grace of God if man co-operate therewith. Wherefore it does not
follow that it is a general virtue.
TP Q[85] A[3] Thes.
Whether the virtue of penance is a species of justice?
TP Q[85] A[3] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that the virtue of penance is not a species of justice. For
justice is not a theological but a moral virtue, as was shown in the SS, Q[62], A[3]. But
penance seems to be a theological virtue, since God is its object, for it makes
satisfaction to God, to Whom, moreover, it reconciles the sinner. Therefore it seems that
penance is not a species of justice.
TP Q[85] A[3] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, since justice is a moral virtue it observes the mean. Now penance does
not observe the mean, but rather goes to the extreme, according to Jer. 6:26: "Make
thee mourning as for an only son, a bitter lamentation." Therefore penance is not a
species of justice.
TP Q[85] A[3] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, there are two species of justice, as stated in Ethic. v, 4, viz.
"distributive" and "commutative." But penance does not seem to be
contained under either of them. Therefore it seems that penance is not a species of
justice.
TP Q[85] A[3] Obj. 4
OBJ 4: Further, a gloss on Lk. 6:21, "Blessed are ye that weep now," says:
"It is prudence that teaches us the unhappiness of earthly things and the happiness
of heavenly things." But weeping is an act of penance. Therefore penance is a species
of prudence rather than of justice.
TP Q[85] A[3] OTC
On the contrary, Augustine says in De Poenitentia [*De vera et falsa
Poenitentia, the
authorship of which is unknown]: "Penance is the vengeance of the sorrowful, ever
punishing in them what they are sorry for having done." But to take vengeance is an
act of justice, wherefore Tully says (De Inv. Rhet. ii) that one kind of justice is called
vindictive. Therefore it seems that penance is a species of justice.
TP Q[85] A[3] Body
I answer that, As stated above (A[1], ad 2) penance is a special virtue not merely
because it sorrows for evil done (since charity would suffice for that), but also because
the penitent grieves for the sin he has committed, inasmuch as it is an offense against
God, and purposes to amend. Now amendment for an offense committed against anyone is not
made by merely ceasing to offend, but it is necessary to make some kind of compensation,
which obtains in offenses committed against another, just as retribution does, only that
compensation is on the part of the offender, as when he makes satisfaction, whereas
retribution is on the part of the person offended against. Each of these belongs to the
matter of justice, because each is a kind of commutation. Wherefore it is evident that
penance, as a virtue, is a part of justice.
TP Q[85] A[3] Body
It must be observed, however, that according to the Philosopher (Ethic. v, 6) a thing
is said to be just in two ways, simply and relatively. A thing is just simply when it is
between equals, since justice is a kind of equality, and he calls this the politic or
civil just, because all citizens are equal, in the point of being immediately under the
ruler, retaining their freedom. But a thing is just relatively when it is between parties
of whom one is subject to the other, as a servant under his master, a son under his
father, a wife under her husband. It is this kind of just that we consider in penance.
Wherefore the penitent has recourse to God with a purpose of amendment, as a servant to
his master, according to Ps. 122:2: "Behold, as the eyes of servants are on the hands
of their masters . . . so are our eyes unto the Lord our God, until He have mercy on
us"; and as a son to his father, according to Lk. 15:21: "Father, I have sinned
against heaven and before thee"; and as a wife to her husband, according to
Jer. 3:1:
"Thou hast prostituted thyself to many lovers; nevertheless return to Me, saith the
Lord."
TP Q[85] A[3] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: As stated in Ethic. v, 1, justice is a virtue towards another person, and
the matter of justice is not so much the person to whom justice is due as the thing which
is the subject of distribution or commutation. Hence the matter of penance is not God, but
human acts, whereby God is offended or appeased; whereas God is as one to whom justice is
due. Wherefore it is evident that penance is not a theological virtue, because God is not
its matter or object.
TP Q[85] A[3] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: The mean of justice is the equality that is established between those
between whom justice is, as stated in Ethic. v. But in certain cases perfect equality
cannot be established, on account of the excellence of one, as between father and son, God
and man, as the Philosopher states (Ethic. viii, 14), wherefore in such cases, he that
falls short of the other must do whatever he can. Yet this will not be sufficient simply,
but only according to the acceptance of the higher one; and this is what is meant by
ascribing excess to penance.
TP Q[85] A[3] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: As there is a kind of commutation in favors, when, to wit, a man gives
thanks for a favor received, so also is there commutation in the matter of offenses, when,
on account of an offense committed against another, a man is either punished against his
will, which pertains to vindictive justice, or makes amends of his own accord, which
belongs to penance, which regards the person of the sinner, just as vindictive justice
regards the person of the judge. Therefore it is evident that both are comprised under
commutative justice.
TP Q[85] A[3] R.O. 4
Reply OBJ 4: Although penance is directly a species of justice, yet, in a fashion, it
comprises things pertaining to all the virtues; for inasmuch as there is a justice of man
towards God, it must have a share in matter pertaining to the theological virtues, the
object of which is God. Consequently penance comprises faith in Christ's Passion, whereby
we are cleansed of our sins, hope for pardon, and hatred of vice, which pertains to
charity. Inasmuch as it is a moral virtue, it has a share of prudence, which directs all
the moral virtues: but from the very nature of justice, it has not only something
belonging to justice, but also something belonging to temperance and fortitude, inasmuch
as those things which cause pleasure, and which pertain to temperance, and those which
cause terror, which fortitude moderates, are objects of commutative justice. Accordingly
it belongs to justice both to abstain from pleasure, which belongs to temperance, and to
bear with hardships, which belongs to fortitude.
TP Q[85] A[4] Thes.
Whether the will is properly the subject of penance?
TP Q[85] A[4] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that the subject of penance is not properly the will. For penance
is a species of sorrow. But sorrow is in the concupiscible part, even as joy is. Therefore
penance is in the concupiscible faculty.
TP Q[85] A[4] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, penance is a kind of vengeance, as Augustine states in De Poenitentia
[*De vera et falsa Poenitentia, the authorship of which is unknown]. But vengeance seems
to regard the irascible faculty, since anger is the desire for vengeance. Therefore it
seems that penance is in the irascible part.
TP Q[85] A[4] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, the past is the proper object of the memory, according to the
Philosopher (De Memoria i). Now penance regards the past, as stated above (A[1], ad 2, ad
3). Therefore penance is subjected in the memory.
TP Q[85] A[4] Obj. 4
OBJ 4: Further, nothing acts where it is not. Now penance removes sin from all the
powers of the soul. Therefore penance is in every power of the soul, and not only in the
will.
TP Q[85] A[4] OTC
On the contrary, Penance is a kind of sacrifice, according to Ps. 50:19: "A
sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit." But to offer a sacrifice is an act of the
will, according to Ps. 53:8: "I will freely sacrifice to Thee." Therefore
penance is in the will.
TP Q[85] A[4] Body
I answer that, We can speak of penance in two ways: first, in so far as it is a
passion, and thus, since it is a kind of sorrow, it is in the concupiscible part as its
subject; secondly, in so far as it is a virtue, and thus, as stated above (A[3]), it is a
species of justice. Now justice, as stated in the FS, Q[56], A[6], is subjected in the
rational appetite which is the will. Therefore it is evident that penance, in so far as it
is a virtue, is subjected in the will, and its proper act is the purpose of amending what
was committed against God.
TP Q[85] A[4] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: This argument considers penance as a passion.
TP Q[85] A[4] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: To desire vengeance on another, through passion, belongs to the irascible
appetite, but to desire or take vengeance on oneself or on another, through reason,
belongs to the will.
TP Q[85] A[4] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: The memory is a power that apprehends the past. But penance belongs not to
the apprehensive but to the appetitive power, which presupposes an act of the
apprehension. Wherefore penance is not in the memory, but presupposes it.
TP Q[85] A[4] R.O. 4
Reply OBJ 4: The will, as stated above (FP, Q[82], A[4]; FS, Q[9], A[1] ), moves all
the other powers of the soul; so that it is not unreasonable for penance to be subjected
in the will, and to produce an effect in each power of the soul.
TP Q[85] A[5] Thes.
Whether penance originates from fear?
TP Q[85] A[5] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that penance does not originate from fear. For penance originates
in displeasure at sin. But this belongs to charity, as stated above (A[3]). Therefore
penance originates from love rather than fear.
TP Q[85] A[5] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, men are induced to do penance, through the expectation of the heavenly
kingdom, according to Mt. 3:2 and Mt. 4:17: "Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is
at hand." Now the kingdom of heaven is the object of hope. Therefore penance results
from hope rather than from fear.
TP Q[85] A[5] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, fear is an internal act of man. But penance does not seem to arise in
us through any work of man, but through the operation of God, according to Jer. 31:19:
"After Thou didst convert me I did penance." Therefore penance does not result
from fear.
TP Q[85] A[5] OTC
On the contrary, It is written (Is. 26:17): "As a woman with child, when she
draweth near the time of her delivery, is in pain, and crieth out in her pangs, so ere we
become," by penance, to wit; and according to another [*The Septuagint] version the
text continues: "Through fear of Thee, O Lord, we have conceived, and been as it were
in labor, and have brought forth the spirit of salvation," i.e. of salutary penance,
as is clear from what precedes. Therefore penance results from fear.
TP Q[85] A[5] Body
I answer that, We may speak of penance in two ways: first, as to the habit, and then it
is infused by God immediately without our operating as principal agents, but not without
our co-operating dispositively by certain acts. Secondly, we may speak of penance, with
regard to the acts whereby in penance we co-operate with God operating, the first
principle [*Cf. FS, Q[113]] of which acts is the operation of God in turning the heart,
according to Lam. 5:21: "Convert us, O Lord, to Thee, and we shall be
converted"; the second, an act of faith; the third, a movement of servile fear,
whereby a man is withdrawn from sin through fear of punishment; the fourth, a movement of
hope, whereby a man makes a purpose of amendment, in the hope of obtaining pardon; the
fifth, a movement of charity, whereby sin is displeasing to man for its own sake and no
longer for the sake of the punishment; the sixth, a movement of filial fear whereby a man,
of his own accord, offers to make amends to God through fear of Him.
TP Q[85] A[5] Body
Accordingly it is evident that the act of penance results from servile fear as from the
first movement of the appetite in this direction and from filial fear as from its
immediate and proper principle.
TP Q[85] A[5] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: Sin begins to displease a man, especially a sinner, on account of the
punishments which servile fear regards, before it displeases him on account of its being
an offense against God, or on account of its wickedness, which pertains to charity.
TP Q[85] A[5] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: When the kingdom of heaven is said to be at hand, we are to understand
that the king is on his way, not only to reward but also to punish. Wherefore John the
Baptist said (Mt. 3:7): "Ye brood of vipers, who hath showed you to flee from the
wrath to come?"
TP Q[85] A[5] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: Even the movement of fear proceeds from God's act in turning the heart;
wherefore it is written (Dt. 5:29): "Who shall give them to have such a mind, to fear
Me?" And so the fact that penance results from fear does not hinder its resulting
from the act of God in turning the heart.
TP Q[85] A[6] Thes.
Whether penance is the first of the virtues?
TP Q[85] A[6] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that penance is the first of the virtues. Because, on Mt. 3:2,
"Do penance," etc., a gloss says: "The first virtue is to destroy the old
man, and hate sin by means of penance."
TP Q[85] A[6] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, withdrawal from one extreme seems to precede approach to the other. Now
all the other virtues seem to regard approach to a term, because they all direct man to do
good; whereas penance seems to direct him to withdraw from evil. Therefore it seems that
penance precedes all the other virtues.
TP Q[85] A[6] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, before penance, there is sin in the soul. Now no virtue is compatible
with sin in the soul. Therefore no virtue precedes penance, which is itself the first of
all and opens the door to the others by expelling sin.
TP Q[85] A[6] OTC
On the contrary, Penance results from faith, hope, and charity, as already stated
(AA[2],5). Therefore penance is not the first of the virtues.
TP Q[85] A[6] Body
I answer that, In speaking of the virtues, we do not consider the order of time with
regard to the habits, because, since the virtues are connected with one another, as stated
in the FS, Q[65], A[1], they all begin at the same time to be in the soul; but one is said
to precede the other in the order of nature, which order depends on the order of their
acts, in so far as the act of one virtue presupposes the act of another. Accordingly,
then, one must say that, even in the order of time, certain praiseworthy acts can precede
the act and the habit of penance, e.g. acts of dead faith and hope, and an act of servile
fear; while the act and habit of charity are, in point of time, simultaneous with the act
and habit of penance, and with the habits of the other virtues. For, as was stated in the
FS, Q[113], AA[7],8, in the justification of the ungodly, the movement of the free-will
towards God, which is an act of faith quickened by charity, and the movement of the
free-will towards sin, which is the act of penance, are simultaneous. Yet of these two
acts, the former naturally precedes the latter, because the act of the virtue of penance
is directed against sin, through love of God; where the first-mentioned act is the reason
and cause of the second.
TP Q[85] A[6] Body
Consequently penance is not simply the first of the virtues, either in the order of
time, or in the order of nature, because, in the order of nature, the theological virtues
precede it simply. Nevertheless, in a certain respect, it is the first of the other
virtues in the order of time, as regards its act, because this act is the first in the
justification of the ungodly; whereas in the order of nature, the other virtues seem to
precede, as that which is natural precedes that which is accidental; because the other
virtues seem to be necessary for man's good, by reason of their very nature, whereas
penance is only necessary if something, viz. sin, be presupposed, as stated above (Q[55],
A[2]), when we spoke of the relation of the sacrament of penance to the other sacraments
aforesaid.
TP Q[85] A[6] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: This gloss is to be taken as meaning that the act of penance is the first
in point of time, in comparison with the acts of the other virtues.
TP Q[85] A[6] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: In successive movements withdrawal from one extreme precedes approach to
the other, in point of time; and also in the order of nature, if we consider the subject,
i.e. the order of the material cause; but if we consider the order of the efficient and
final causes, approach to the end is first, for it is this that the efficient cause
intends first of all: and it is this order which we consider chiefly in the acts of the
soul, as stated in Phys. ii.
TP Q[85] A[6] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: Penance opens the door to the other virtues, because it expels sin by the
virtues of faith, hope and charity, which precede it in the order of nature; yet it so
opens the door to them that they enter at the same time as it: because, in the
justification of the ungodly, at the same time as the free-will is moved towards God and
against sin, the sin is pardoned and grace infused, and with grace all the virtues, as
stated in the FS, Q[65], AA[3],5.
TP Q[86] Out.
OF
THE EFFECT OF PENANCE, AS REGARDS THE PARDON OF MORTAL SIN (SIX ARTICLES)
We must now consider the effect of Penance; and (1) as regards the pardon of mortal
sins; (2) as regards the pardon of venial sins; (3) as regards the return of sins which
have been pardoned; (4) as regards the recovery of the virtues.
TP Q[86] Out.
Under the first head there are six points of inquiry:
(1) Whether all mortal sins are taken away by Penance?
(2) Whether they can be taken away without Penance?
(3) Whether one can be taken away without the other?
(4) Whether Penance takes away the guilt while the debt remains?
(5) Whether any remnants of sin remain?
(6) Whether the removal of sin is the effect of Penance as a virtue, or as a sacrament?
TP Q[86] A[1] Thes.
Whether all sins are taken away by Penance?
TP Q[86] A[1] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that not all sins are taken away by Penance. For the Apostle says
(Heb. 12:17) that Esau "found no place of repentance, although with tears he had
sought it," which a gloss explains as meaning that "he found no place of pardon
and blessing through Penance": and it is related (2 Macc. 9:13) of Antiochus, that
"this wicked man prayed to the Lord, of Whom he was not to obtain mercy."
Therefore it does not seem that all sins are taken away by Penance.
TP Q[86] A[1] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, Augustine says (De Serm. Dom. in Monte i) that "so great is the
stain of that sin (namely, when a man, after coming to the knowledge of God through the
grace of Christ, resists fraternal charity, and by the brands of envy combats grace
itself) that he is unable to humble himself in prayer, although he is forced by his wicked
conscience to acknowledge and confess his sin." Therefore not every sin can be taken
away by Penance.
TP Q[86] A[1] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, our Lord said (Mt. 12:32): "He that shall speak against the Holy
Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in the world to come."
Therefore not every sin can be pardoned through Penance.
TP Q[86] A[1] OTC
On the contrary, It is written (Ezech. 18:22): "I will not remember" any more
"all his iniquities that he hath done."
TP Q[86] A[1] Body
I answer that, The fact that a sin cannot be taken away by Penance may happen in two
ways: first, because of the impossibility of repenting of sin; secondly, because of
Penance being unable to blot out a sin. In the first way the sins of the demons and of men
who are lost, cannot be blotted out by Penance, because their will is confirmed in evil,
so that sin cannot displease them as to its guilt, but only as to the punishment which
they suffer, by reason of which they have a kind of repentance, which yet is fruitless,
according to Wis. 5:3: "Repenting, and groaning for anguish of spirit."
Consequently such Penance brings no hope of pardon, but only despair. Nevertheless no sin
of a wayfarer can be such as that, because his will is flexible to good and evil.
Wherefore to say that in this life there is any sin of which one cannot repent, is
erroneous, first, because this would destroy free-will, secondly, because this would be
derogatory to the power of grace, whereby the heart of any sinner whatsoever can be moved
to repent, according to Prov. 21:1: "The heart of the king is in the hand of the
Lord: whithersoever He will He shall turn it."
TP Q[86] A[1] Body
It is also erroneous to say that any sin cannot be pardoned through true Penance.
First, because this is contrary to Divine mercy, of which it is written (Joel 2:13) that
God is "gracious and merciful, patient, and rich in mercy, and ready to repent of the
evil"; for, in a manner, God would be overcome by man, if man wished a sin to be
blotted out, which God were unwilling to blot out. Secondly, because this would be
derogatory to the power of Christ's Passion, through which Penance produces its effect, as
do the other sacraments, since it is written (1 Jn. 2:2): "He is the propitiation for
our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world."
TP Q[86] A[1] Body
Therefore we must say simply that, in this life, every sin can be blotted out by true
Penance.
TP Q[86] A[1] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: Esau did not truly repent. This is evident from his saying
(Gn. 27:41):
"The days will come of the mourning of my father, and I will kill my brother
Jacob." Likewise neither did Antiochus repent truly; since he grieved for his past
sin, not because he had offended God thereby, but on account of the sickness which he
suffered in his body.
TP Q[86] A[1] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: These words of Augustine should be understood thus: "So great is the
stain of that sin, that man is unable to humble himself in prayer," i.e. it is not
easy for him to do so; in which sense we say that a man cannot be healed, when it is
difficult to heal him. Yet this is possible by the power of God's grace, which sometimes
turns men even "into the depths of the sea" (Ps. 67:23).
TP Q[86] A[1] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: The word or blasphemy spoken against the Holy Ghost is final impenitence,
as Augustine states (De Verb. Dom. xi), which is altogether unpardonable, because after
this life is ended, there is no pardon of sins. or, if by the blasphemy against the Holy
Ghost, we understand sin committed through certain malice, this means either that the
blasphemy itself against the Holy Ghost is unpardonable, i.e. not easily pardonable, or
that such a sin does not contain in itself any motive for pardon, or that for such a sin a
man is punished both in this and in the next world, as we explained in the SS, Q[14],
A[3].
TP Q[86] A[2] Thes.
Whether sin can be pardoned without Penance?
TP Q[86] A[2] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that sin can be pardoned without Penance. For the power of God is
no less with regard to adults than with regard to children. But He pardons the sins of
children without Penance. Therefore He also pardons adults without penance.
TP Q[86] A[2] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, God did not bind His power to the sacraments. But Penance is a
sacrament. Therefore by God's power sin can be pardoned without Penance.
TP Q[86] A[2] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, God's mercy is greater than man's. Now man sometimes forgives another
for offending him, without his repenting: wherefore our Lord commanded us (Mt. 5:44):
"Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you." Much more, therefore, does
God pardon men for offending him, without their repenting.
TP Q[86] A[2] OTC
On the contrary, The Lord said (Jer. 18:8): "If that nation . . . shall repent of
their evil" which they have done, "I also will repent of the evil that I have
thought to do them," so that, on the other hand, if man "do not penance,"
it seems that God will not pardon him his sin.
TP Q[86] A[2] Body
I answer that, It is impossible for a mortal actual sin to be pardoned without penance,
if we speak of penance as a virtue. For, as sin is an offense against God, He pardons sin
in the same way as he pardons an offense committed against Him. Now an offense is directly
opposed to grace, since one man is said to be offended with another, because he excludes
him from his grace. Now, as stated in the FS, Q[110], A[1], the difference between the
grace of God and the grace of man, is that the latter does not cause, but presupposes true
or apparent goodness in him who is graced, whereas the grace of God causes goodness in the
man who is graced, because the good-will of God, which is denoted by the word
"grace," is the cause of all created good. Hence it is possible for a man to
pardon an offense, for which he is offended with someone, without any change in the
latter's will; but it is impossible that God pardon a man for an offense, without his will
being changed. Now the offense of mortal sin is due to man's will being turned away from
God, through being turned to some mutable good. Consequently, for the pardon of this
offense against God, it is necessary for man's will to be so changed as to turn to God and
to renounce having turned to something else in the aforesaid manner, together with a
purpose of amendment; all of which belongs to the nature of penance as a virtue. Therefore
it is impossible for a sin to be pardoned anyone without penance as a virtue.
TP Q[86] A[2] Body
But the sacrament of Penance, as stated above (Q[88], A[3]), is perfected by the
priestly office of binding and loosing, without which God can forgive sins, even as Christ
pardoned the adulterous woman, as related in Jn. 8, and the woman that was a sinner, as
related in Luke vii, whose sins, however, He did not forgive without the virtue of
penance: for as Gregory states (Hom. xxxiii in Evang.), "He drew inwardly by
grace," i.e. by penance, "her whom He received outwardly by His mercy."
TP Q[86] A[2] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: In children there is none but original sin, which consists, not in an
actual disorder of the will, but in a habitual disorder of nature, as explained in the FS,
Q[82], A[1], and so in them the forgiveness of sin is accompanied by a habitual change
resulting from the infusion of grace and virtues, but not by an actual change. On the
other hand, in the case of an adult, in whom there are actual sins, which consist in an
actual disorder of the will, there is no remission of sins, even in Baptism, without an
actual change of the will, which is the effect of Penance.
TP Q[86] A[2] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: This argument takes Penance as a sacrament.
TP Q[86] A[2] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: God's mercy is more powerful than man's, in that it moves man's will to
repent, which man's mercy cannot do.
TP Q[86] A[3] Thes.
Whether by Penance one sin can be pardoned without another?
TP Q[86] A[3] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that by Penance one sin can be pardoned without another. For it is
written (Amos 4:7): "I caused it to rain upon one city, and caused it not to rain
upon another city; one piece was rained upon: and the piece whereupon I rained not,
withered." These words are expounded by Gregory, who says (Hom. x super
Ezech.):
"When a man who hates his neighbor, breaks himself of other vices, rain falls on one
part of the city, leaving the other part withered, for there are some men who, when they
prune some vices, become much more rooted in others." Therefore one sin can be
forgiven by Penance, without another.
TP Q[86] A[3] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, Ambrose in commenting on Ps. 118, "Blessed are the undefiled in
the way," after expounding verse 136 ("My eyes have sent forth springs of
water"), says that "the first consolation is that God is mindful to have mercy;
and the second, that He punishes, for although faith be wanting, punishment makes
satisfaction and raises us up." Therefore a man can be raised up from one sin, while
the sin of unbelief remains.
TP Q[86] A[3] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, when several things are not necessarily together, one can be removed
without the other. Now it was stated in the FS, Q[73], A[1] that sins are not connected
together, so that one sin can be without another. Therefore also one sin can be taken away
by Penance without another being taken away.
TP Q[86] A[3] Obj. 4
OBJ 4: Further, sins are the debts, for which we pray for pardon when we say in the
Lord's Prayer: "Forgive us our trespasses," etc. Now man sometimes forgives one
debt without forgiving another. Therefore God also, by Penance, forgives one sin without
another.
TP Q[86] A[3] Obj. 5
OBJ 5: Further, man's sins are forgiven him through the love of God, according to
Jer.
31:3: "I have loved thee with an everlasting love, therefore have I drawn thee,
taking pity on thee." Now there is nothing to hinder God from loving a man in one
respect, while being offended with him in another, even as He loves the sinner as regards
his nature, while hating him for his sin. Therefore it seems possible for God, by Penance,
to pardon one sin without another.
TP Q[86] A[3] OTC
On the contrary, Augustine says in De Poenitentia [*De vera et falsa
Poenitentia, the
authorship of which is unknown]: "There are many who repent having sinned, but not
completely; for they except certain things which give them pleasure, forgetting that our
Lord delivered from the devil the man who was both dumb and deaf, whereby He shows us that
we are never healed unless it be from all sins."
TP Q[86] A[3] Body
I answer that, It is impossible for Penance to take one sin away without another. First
because sin is taken away by grace removing the offense against God. Wherefore it was
stated in the FS, Q[109], A[7]; FS, Q[113], A[2] that without grace no sin can be
forgiven. Now every mortal sin is opposed to grace and excludes it. Therefore it is
impossible for one sin to be pardoned without another. Secondly, because, as shown above
(A[2]) mortal sin cannot be forgiven without true Penance, to which it belongs to renounce
sin, by reason of its being against God, which is common to all mortal sins: and where the
same reason applies, the result will be the same. Consequently a man cannot be truly
penitent, if he repent of one sin and not of another. For if one particular sin were
displeasing to him, because it is against the love of God above all things (which motive
is necessary for true repentance), it follows that he would repent of all. Whence it
follows that it is impossible for one sin to be pardoned through Penance, without another.
Thirdly, because this would be contrary to the perfection of God's mercy, since His works
are perfect, as stated in Dt. 32:4; wherefore whomsoever He pardons, He pardons
altogether. Hence Augustine says [*De vera et falsa Poenitentia, the authorship of which
is unknown], that "it is irreverent and heretical to expect half a pardon from Him
Who is just and justice itself."
TP Q[86] A[3] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: These words of Gregory do not refer to the forgiveness of the guilt, but
to the cessation from act, because sometimes a man who has been wont to commit several
kinds of sin, renounces one and not the other; which is indeed due to God's assistance,
but does not reach to the pardon of the sin.
TP Q[86] A[3] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: In this saying of Ambrose "faith" cannot denote the faith
whereby we believe in Christ, because, as Augustine says on Jn. 15:22, "If I had not
come, and spoken to them, they would not have sin" (viz. unbelief): "for this is
the sin which contains all others": but it stands for consciousness, because
sometimes a man receives pardon for a sin of which he is not conscious, through the
punishment which he bears patiently.
TP Q[86] A[3] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: Although sins are not connected in so far as they turn towards a mutable
good, yet they are connected in so far as they turn away from the immutable Good, which
applies to all mortal sins in common. and it is thus that they have the character of an
offense which needs to be removed by Penance.
TP Q[86] A[3] R.O. 4
Reply OBJ 4: Debt as regards external things, e.g. money, is not opposed to friendship
through which the debt is pardoned. hence one debt can be condoned without another. On the
other hand, the debt of sin is opposed to friendship, and so one sin or offense is not
pardoned without another; for it would seem absurd for anyone to ask even a man to forgive
him one offense and not another.
TP Q[86] A[3] R.O. 5
Reply OBJ 5: The love whereby God loves man's nature, does not ordain man to the good
of glory from which man is excluded by any mortal sin. but the love of grace, whereby
mortal sin is forgiven, ordains man to eternal life, according to Rm. 6:23: "The
grace of God (is) life everlasting." Hence there is no comparison.
TP Q[86] A[4] Thes.
Whether the debt of punishment remains after the guilt has been forgiven through
Penance?
TP Q[86] A[4] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that no debt of punishment remains after the guilt has been
forgiven through Penance. For when the cause is removed, the effect is removed. But the
guilt is the cause of the debt of punishment: since a man deserves to be punished because
he has been guilty of a sin. Therefore when the sin has been forgiven, no debt of
punishment can remain.
TP Q[86] A[4] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, according to the Apostle (Rm. 5) the gift of Christ is more effective
than the sin of Adam. Now, by sinning, man incurs at the same time guilt and the debt of
punishment. Much more therefore, by the gift of grace, is the guilt forgiven and at the
same time the debt of punishment remitted.
TP Q[86] A[4] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, the forgiveness of sins is effected in Penance through the power of
Christ's Passion, according to Rm. 3:25: "Whom God hath proposed to be a
propitiation, through faith in His Blood . . . for the remission of former sins." Now
Christ's Passion made satisfaction sufficient for all sins, as stated above (QQ[48],49,79,
A[5]). Therefore after the guilt has been pardoned, no debt of punishment remains.
TP Q[86] A[4] OTC
On the contrary, It is related (2 Kgs. 12:13) that when David penitent had said to
Nathan: "I have sinned against the Lord," Nathan said to him: "The Lord
also hath taken away thy sin, thou shalt not die. Nevertheless . . . the child that is
born to thee shall surely die," which was to punish him for the sin he had committed,
as stated in the same place. Therefore a debt of some punishment remains after the guilt
has been forgiven.
TP Q[86] A[4] Body
I answer that, As stated in the FS, Q[87], A[4], in mortal sin there are two things,
namely, a turning from the immutable Good, and an inordinate turning to mutable good.
Accordingly, in so far as mortal sin turns away from the immutable Good, it induces a debt
of eternal punishment, so that whosoever sins against the eternal Good should be punished
eternally. Again, in so far as mortal sin turns inordinately to a mutable good, it gives
rise to a debt of some punishment, because the disorder of guilt is not brought back to
the order of justice, except by punishment: since it is just that he who has been too
indulgent to his will, should suffer something against his will, for thus will equality be
restored. Hence it is written (Apoc. 18:7): "As much as she hath glorified herself,
and lived in delicacies, so much torment and sorrow give ye to her."
TP Q[86] A[4] Body
Since, however, the turning to mutable good is finite, sin does not, in this respect,
induce a debt of eternal punishment. Wherefore, if man turns inordinately to a mutable
good, without turning from God, as happens in venial sins, he incurs a debt, not of
eternal but of temporal punishment. Consequently when guilt is pardoned through grace, the
soul ceases to be turned away from God, through being united to God by grace: so that at
the same time, the debt of punishment is taken away, albeit a debt of some temporal
punishment may yet remain.
TP Q[86] A[4] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: Mortal sin both turns away from God and turns to a created good. But, as
stated in the FS, Q[71], A[6], the turning away from God is as its form while the turning
to created good is as its matter. Now if the formal element of anything be removed, the
species is taken away: thus, if you take away rational, you take away the human species.
Consequently mortal sin is said to be pardoned from the very fact that, by means of grace,
the aversion of the mind from God is taken away together with the debt of eternal
punishment: and yet the material element remains, viz. the inordinate turning to a created
good, for which a debt of temporal punishment is due.
TP Q[86] A[4] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: As stated in the FS, Q[109], AA[7],8; FS, Q[111], A[2], it belongs to
grace to operate in man by justifying him from sin, and to co-operate with man that his
work may be rightly done. Consequently the forgiveness of guilt and of the debt of eternal
punishment belongs to operating grace, while the remission of the debt of temporal
punishment belongs to co-operating grace, in so far as man, by bearing punishment
patiently with the help of Divine grace, is released also from the debt of temporal
punishment. Consequently just as the effect of operating grace precedes the effect of
co-operating grace, so too, the remission of guilt and of eternal punishment precedes the
complete release from temporal punishment, since both are from grace, but the former, from
grace alone, the latter, from grace and free-will.
TP Q[86] A[4] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: Christ's Passion is of itself sufficient to remove all debt of punishment,
not only eternal, but also temporal; and man is released from the debt of punishment
according to the measure of his share in the power of Christ's Passion. Now in Baptism man
shares the Power of Christ's Passion fully, since by water and the Spirit of Christ, he
dies with Him to sin, and is born again in Him to a new life, so that, in Baptism, man
receives the remission of all debt of punishment. In Penance, on the other hand, man
shares in the power of Christ's Passion according to the measure of his own acts, which
are the matter of Penance, as water is of Baptism, as stated above (Q[84], AA[1],3).
Wherefore the entire debt of punishment is not remitted at once after the first act of
Penance, by which act the guilt is remitted, but only when all the acts of Penance have
been completed.
TP Q[86] A[5] Thes.
Whether the remnants of sin are removed when a mortal sin is forgiven?
TP Q[86] A[5] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that all the remnants of sin are removed when a mortal sin is
forgiven. For Augustine says in De Poenitentia [*De vera et falsa Poenitentia, the
authorship of which is unknown]: "Our Lord never healed anyone without delivering him
wholly; for He wholly healed the man on the Sabbath, since He delivered his body from all
disease, and his soul from all taint." Now the remnants of sin belong to the disease
of sin. Therefore it does not seem possible for any remnants of sin to remain when the
guilt has been pardoned.
TP Q[86] A[5] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, according to Dionysius (Div. Nom. iv), "good is more efficacious
than evil, since evil does not act save in virtue of some good." Now, by sinning, man
incurs the taint of sin all at once. Much more, therefore, by repenting, is he delivered
also from all remnants of sin.
TP Q[86] A[5] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, God's work is more efficacious than man's. Now by the exercise of good
human works the remnants of contrary sins are removed. Much more, therefore, are they
taken away by the remission of guilt, which is a work of God.
TP Q[86] A[5] OTC
On the contrary, We read (Mk. 8) that the blind man whom our Lord enlightened, was
restored first of all to imperfect sight, wherefore he said (Mk. 8:24): "I see men,
as it were trees, walking"; and afterwards he was restored perfectly, "so that
he saw all things clearly." Now the enlightenment of the blind man signifies the
delivery of the sinner. Therefore after the first remission of sin, whereby the sinner is
restored to spiritual sight, there still remain in him some remnants of his past sin.
TP Q[86] A[5] Body
I answer that, Mortal sin, in so far as it turns inordinately to a mutable good,
produces in the soul a certain disposition, or even a habit, if the acts be repeated
frequently. Now it has been said above (A[4]) that the guilt of mortal sin is pardoned
through grace removing the aversion of the mind from God. Nevertheless when that which is
on the part of the aversion has been taken away by grace, that which is on the part of the
inordinate turning to a mutable good can remain, since this may happen to be without the
other, as stated above (A[4]). Consequently, there is no reason why, after the guilt has
been forgiven, the dispositions caused by preceding acts should not remain, which are
called the remnants of sin. Yet they remain weakened and diminished, so as not to domineer
over man, and they are after the manner of dispositions rather than of habits, like the
"fomes" which remains after Baptism.
TP Q[86] A[5] R.O. 1
Reply OBJ 1: God heals the whole man perfectly; but sometimes suddenly, as Peter's
mother-in-law was restored at once to perfect health, so that "rising she ministered
to them" (Lk. 4:39), and sometimes by degrees, as we said above (Q[44], A[3], ad 2)
about the blind man who was restored to sight (Mt. 8). And so too, He sometimes turns the
heart of man with such power, that it receives at once perfect spiritual health, not only
the guilt being pardoned, but all remnants of sin being removed as was the case with
Magdalen (Lk. 7); whereas at other times He sometimes first pardons the guilt by operating
grace, and afterwards, by co-operating grace, removes the remnants of sin by degrees.
TP Q[86] A[5] R.O. 2
Reply OBJ 2: Sin too, sometimes induces at once a weak disposition, such as is the
result of one act, and sometimes a stronger disposition, the result of many acts.
TP Q[86] A[5] R.O. 3
Reply OBJ 3: One human act does not remove all the remnants of sin, because, as stated
in the Predicaments (Categor. viii) "a vicious man by doing good works will make but
little progress so as to be any better, but if he continue in good practice, he will end
in being good as to acquired virtue." But God's grace does this much more
effectively, whether by one or by several acts.
TP Q[86] A[6] Thes.
Whether the forgiveness of guilt is an effect of Penance?
TP Q[86] A[6] Obj. 1
OBJ 1: It would seem that the forgiveness of guilt is not an effect of penance as a
virtue. For penance is said to be a virtue, in so far as it is a principle of a human
action. But human action does nothing towards the remission of guilt, since this is an
effect of operating grace. Therefore the forgiveness of guilt is not an effect of penance
as a virtue.
TP Q[86] A[6] Obj. 2
OBJ 2: Further, certain other virtues are more excellent than penance. But the
forgiveness of sin is not said to be the effect of any other virtue. Neither, therefore,
is it the effect of penance as a virtue.
TP Q[86] A[6] Obj. 3
OBJ 3: Further, there is no forgiveness of sin except through the power of Christ's
Passion, according to Heb. 9:22: "Without shedding of blood there is no
remission." Now Penance, as a sacrament, produces its effect through the power of
Christ's Passion, even as the other sacraments do, as was shown above (Q[62], AA[4],5).
Therefore the forgiveness of sin is the effect of Penance, not as a virtue, but as a
sacrament.
TP Q[86] A[6] OTC
On the contrary, Properly speaking, the cause of a thing is that without which it
cannot be, since every defect depends on its cause. Now forgiveness of sin can come from
God without the sacrament of Penance, but not without the virtue of penance, as stated
above (Q[84], A[5], ad 3; Q[85], A[2]); so that, even before the sacraments of the New Law
were instituted, God pardoned the sins of the penitent. Therefore the forgiveness of sin
is chiefly the effect of penance as a virtue.
TP Q[86] A[6] Body
I answer that, Penance is a virtue in so far as it is a principle of certain human
acts. Now the human acts, which are performed by the sinner, are the material element in
the sacrament of Penance. Moreover every sacrament produces its effect, in virtue not only
of its form, but also of its matter. because both these together make the one sacrament,
as stated above (Q[60], A[6], ad 2, A[7]). Hence in Baptism forgiveness of sin is
effected, in virtue not only of the form (but also of the matter, viz. water, albeit
chiefly in virtue of the form) [*The words in brackets are omitted in the Leonine edition]
from which the water receives its power---and, similarly, the forgiveness of sin is the
effect of Penance, chiefly by the power of the keys, which is vested in the ministers, who
furnish the formal part of the sacrament, as stated above (Q[84], A[3]), an |
