John Capreolus
Johannes Capreolus, Defensiones theologiae divi Thomae Aquinatis, ed. Paban–Pègues, Tours 1900, vol. 2, Dist. XVII q.1, second conclusion
Datec. 1426PlaceToulouseBench / bandthomistDistinctionI d.17 · q.1, concl. 2
English
The second conclusion is that a meritorious act necessarily requires a created grace in the soul that elicits or produces such an act.
It is proved, as to the first part, that grace is required. Whence St Thomas, Summa theologiae I-II q. 109 a. 5, proves it thus: «Acts that lead to an end must be proportioned to that end. But no act exceeds the proportion of its active principle. And so we see in natural things that nothing can bring about by its operation an effect exceeding its active power, but can only produce by its operation an effect proportioned to its power. Now eternal life is an end exceeding the proportion of human nature, as has been said. And therefore man by his natural powers cannot produce meritorious works proportioned to eternal life; for this a higher power is required, which is the power of grace. And therefore without grace man cannot merit eternal life — though he can do works leading to some good connatural to man.» — Thus he. He puts the same argument at Sentences II d. 29 q. 1 a. 1.
But the second part, namely that such grace is something created in the soul, St Thomas proves at De veritate q. 27 a. 1 […]
Fresh draft (Claude), approved by Wilson Pruitt · cc-by · published at bonaventure.wrootpress.com. This page quotes it; that is its home.
Latin
Secunda conclusio est quod actus meritorius necessario requirit gratiam creatam in anima eliciente vel producente huiusmodi actum.
Probatur, quantum ad primam partem, quod gratia requiratur. Unde sanctus Thomas, 1a 2ae q. 109 art. 5, sic probat: «Actus perducentes ad finem oportet esse fini proportionatos. Nullus autem actus excedit proportionem principii activi. Et ideo videmus in rebus naturalibus quod nulla res potest perficere effectum per suam operationem qui excedat virtutem activam, sed solum potest producere per operationem suam effectum suae virtuti proportionatum. Vita autem aeterna est finis excedens proportionem humanae naturae, ut dictum est. Et ideo homo per sua naturalia non potest producere opera meritoria proportionata vitae aeternae; sed ad hoc exigitur altior virtus, quae est virtus gratiae. Et ideo sine gratia homo non potest mereri vitam aeternam; potest tamen facere opera perducentia ad aliquod bonum homini connaturale.» — Haec ille. Idem argumentum ponit 2 Sentent. dist. 29 q. 1 art. 1.
Sed secundam partem, scilicet quod huiusmodi gratia sit aliquid creatum in anima, probat sanctus Thomas de Veritate q. 27 art. 1 […]
Johannes Capreolus, Defensiones theologiae divi Thomae Aquinatis, ed. Paban–Pègues, Tours 1900, vol. 2, Dist. XVII q.1, second conclusion · pd
Notes
The Thomist answer to a question Thomas never put in this distinction. Capreolus has to reach outside d.17 for his proof — to the Summa's treatise on grace and to the De veritate — because the Scriptum's ten articles on d.17 do not contain it. That reaching is itself the evidence that the question has arrived from elsewhere. Latin restored from the 1900 print's OCR: repair of scanning damage, not expansion of abbreviation.
A created habit
Threads
- → contests · William of Ockham
The two theses are exact contradictories on the same question. Capreolus: actus meritorius necessario requirit gratiam creatam in anima eliciente vel producente huiusmodi actum. Ockham: ad hoc quod anima sit grata et accepta deo de potentia dei absoluta, nulla forma supernaturalis requiritur in anima. ⚠ Capreolus does not name Ockham anywhere in d.17 — the opponents he names are Gregory and Scotus — so this edge is drawn between the positions, not on a citation. - ← transmits · John Capreolus
The reply defends the conclusion: Ad primum Gregorii contra primam et secundam conclusiones. Capreolus's second conclusion is one of the two the staged arguments are aimed at, so the two witnesses are one act of argument split at the point where objection turns into answer.