304. Human Merit Before God and Divine Justice

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Problem of Human Merit #

• Whether humans can merit anything from God at all
• The apparent paradox: humans owe God everything, so how can they merit additional reward?
• The relationship between human action, divine ordering, and divine justice
• How merit differs from a transaction or strict debt

Merit as Presupposing Divine Ordering #

• Merit does not make God our debtor, but rather a debtor to Himself
• God has ordered human works to a reward; justice requires that His ordering be fulfilled
• Merit arises from the voluntary fulfillment of what one ought to do
• The divine ordering is what gives human action the character of merit

The Infinity Problem and Proportional Justice #

• Between God and man there is maximum inequality (infinita distantia)
• Absolute equality in justice between God and man is impossible
• Therefore, justice toward God must be understood according to proportion, not equality
• Each acts according to his own mode (modus): human action has its measure from God

The Question of Profit and Glorification #

• God does not seek useful goods from us but seeks glory—the making known of His goodness
• Nothing accrues to God from our works or praise, but something accrues to us
• We merit from God insofar as we do something for the manifestation of His goodness
• The distinction between what benefits the recipient and what is rewarded by the recipient

Key Arguments #

First Objection: The Infinity Problem #

Argument: We owe God everything. We cannot sufficiently recompense God what we owe. Therefore, we cannot merit additional reward.

Response:

• Merit arises from the voluntary doing of what one ought
• The act of justice by which someone renders what he owes can itself be meritorious
• God seeks glory (manifestation of goodness) from our works, not material profit
• Nothing adheres to God from our worship, but to us
• Merit proceeds from divine ordering, not from our profiting God

Second Objection: The Profit Problem #

Argument: One does not merit before one to whom another thing profits. Man profits himself or another, not God. Therefore, man cannot merit from God.

Response:

• God’s glory is the manifestation of His goodness, which He seeks through our works
• The fact that we profit ourselves does not prevent merit before God
• Merit depends on divine ordering to a reward, not on profiting the one rewarding
• The parent example: a father gives money to a child; the child buys a gift for the father; the father appreciates it and may reward the child, even though he provided the means

Third Objection: God as Debtor #

Argument: Merit makes one a debtor to another. But God is debtor to no one (Romans 11:35). Therefore, no one can merit from God.

Response:

• God is not made a simple debtor to us, but a debtor to Himself
• God is obligated to fulfill His own ordering (oportet ut ordinatio eius adimpletur)
• God has ordered human works to glory; justice requires this ordering be fulfilled
• This is a distinctive form of obligation proper to God as supreme agent

The Equality Problem in Justice #

• Aristotle teaches that justice requires a certain equality
• Between God and man there is maximum inequality (they are distant by infinity)
• Therefore, there cannot be “simply just” (simpliciter iustum) justice between God and man
• But there can be justice “in a certain way” (secundum quid iustum)—according to proportion
• The mode and measure of human virtue comes from God Himself
• Therefore, merit before God is always according to the presupposition of divine ordering

Important Definitions #

Meritum (Merit) #

• A work or action that deserves a reward or recompense
• Requires: (1) a voluntary act, (2) divine ordering of that act to a reward, (3) actual performance of the act
• Can be considered according to free will alone or according to grace
• Grounded not in making God a debtor but in divine ordering

Gloria (Glory) #

• In this context: the making known of God’s goodness through our works
• What God seeks from our worship and meritorious acts
• Not something that accrues to God’s being but the manifestation of His attributes

Ordinatio Divina (Divine Ordering) #

• God’s establishment of human works to a reward
• The presupposition necessary for any work to have the character of merit
• What grounds both the possibility and the justice of reward

Secundum Quid (In a Certain Way) vs. Simpliciter (Simply) #

• Simpliciter: absolute, unqualified, according to the whole
• Secundum quid: qualified, in a certain respect, according to a particular category
• Applied to justice: there cannot be simply just relations between God and man (due to infinite inequality), but there can be justice secundum quid (according to proportion)
• Applied to merit: the same principle operates—merit is not simple but according to a mode established by God

Examples & Illustrations #

The Child and the Allowance #

• Father gives child an allowance (2 cents, 5 cents, 10 cents per week depending on age)
• Child has no money of his own; all comes from the father
• If the child uses the allowance to buy something for the father, the father appreciates it
• The father may reward the child for this voluntary act, even though the father provided the means
• Shows how God gives us the power to act, yet appreciates and rewards our voluntary use of that power for His glory

Paying Taxes #

• Berquist mentions forced payment of income taxes to the IRS
• The IRS can seize bank accounts, garnish wages
• Contrasts with voluntary meritorious acts: forced payment is not meritorious because it lacks voluntariness
• Shows why merit requires voluntary action (insofar as by his own will)

Natural Things Achieving Their End #

• Natural things (like water heating, stones being thrown) achieve their natural ends
• They act according to the mode established by God
• Humans, being rational, have the additional character of merit because they act through free will
• Demonstrates the principle that all creatures achieve what God has ordered them to achieve

Shakespeare’s As You Like It #

• Berquist references the old servant character who serves out of loyalty, not expecting reward
• The antique world appreciated such fidelity
• Illustrates the distinction between serving from duty and serving for reward
• Shows the appreciation of natural goods and beauty

Fictional Reward Scenarios #

• A parent promises a child: “If you do this, you will get this”
• The child does not strictly deserve the reward by natural right
• But it is fitting that the parent give it
• Illustrates the concept of merit by fittingness (ex congruo)

Questions Addressed #

Does Man Merit Something from God? #

Question: If man owes God everything, how can he merit additional reward?

Answer:

• Merit does not require that God become our debtor in the strict sense
• Rather, God is obligated to Himself to fulfill His own ordering
• When man voluntarily performs what he ought, this action, according to divine ordering, deserves reward
• Merit arises from the presupposition of divine ordering, not from profiting God or creating a simple debt

Can Payment of What Is Owed Be Meritorious? #

Question: Is the act of paying one’s debts meritorious?

Answer:

• Yes, but only insofar as payment is voluntary
• Forced payment (like forced taxes) is not meritorious because it lacks voluntariness
• The voluntary rendering of what one owes can indeed be meritorious
• This shows that merit is compatible with owing, provided the action is done willingly

Is Merit Only Between Equals? #

Question: Can there be merit between unequals, such as between a son and father, or servant and lord?

Answer:

• Yes, but such merit is secundum quid (in a certain way), not simpliciter (simply)
• In cases of maximum inequality (like between God and man), merit must be understood according to proportion
• The mode and measure of human action comes from God; therefore, merit presupposes divine ordering
• A son can merit something from his father, and a servant from his lord, though not according to absolute equality

Pedagogical Notes #

Method of Argumentation #

• Berquist presents three objections before giving the body of the article
• He explains why the first objection cannot be answered without reading the body of the article
• The second and third objections can be responded to more directly
• This mirrors Thomas’s own method in the Summa

Use of Distinctions #

• The crucial distinction between simpliciter and secundum quid appears throughout
• Berquist emphasizes that modern philosophers often fail to make such distinctions
• The lecture teaches students to think in terms of proportions rather than absolute equalities
• Shows how careful conceptual analysis resolves apparent paradoxes

Connection to Scripture #

• Luke 17:10 is used to address the objection that we always owe more to God
• Romans 11:35 is cited for the claim that God is debtor to no one
• Job 30:7 is referenced regarding what benefits God receives from our justice
• These scriptural passages frame the theological problem