SECOND ARTICLE [III, Q. 87, Art. 2]

Whether Infusion of Grace Is Necessary for the Remission of Venial Sins?

Objection 1: It would seem that infusion of grace is necessary for

the remission of venial sins. Because an effect is not produced

without its proper cause. Now the proper cause of the remission of

sins is grace; for man's sins are not forgiven through his own

merits; wherefore it is written (Eph. 2:4, 5): "God, Who is rich in

mercy, for His exceeding charity, wherewith He loved us, even when we

were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ, by Whose

grace you are saved." Therefore venial sins are not forgiven without

infusion of grace.

Obj. 2: Further, venial sins are not forgiven without Penance. Now

grace is infused, in Penance as in the other sacraments of the New

Law. Therefore venial sins are not forgiven without infusion of grace.

Obj. 3: Further, venial sin produces a stain on the soul. Now a stain

is not removed save by grace which is the spiritual beauty of the

soul. Therefore it seems that venial sins are not forgiven without

infusion of grace.

_On the contrary,_ The advent of venial sin neither destroys nor

diminishes grace, as stated in the Second Part (II-II, Q. 24, A. 10).

Therefore, in like manner, an infusion of grace is not necessary in

order to remove venial sin.

_I answer that,_ Each thing is removed by its contrary. But venial

sin is not contrary to habitual grace or charity, but hampers its

act, through man being too much attached to a created good, albeit

not in opposition to God, as stated in the Second Part (I-II, Q. 88,

A. 1; II-II, Q. 24, A. 10). Therefore, in order that venial sin be

removed, it is not necessary that habitual grace be infused, but a

movement of grace or charity suffices for its forgiveness.

Nevertheless, since in those who have the use of free-will (in whom

alone can there be venial sins), there can be no infusion of grace

without an actual movement of the free-will towards God and against

sin, consequently whenever grace is infused anew, venial sins are

forgiven.

Reply Obj. 1: Even the forgiveness of venial sins is an effect of

grace, in virtue of the act which grace produces anew, but not

through any habit infused anew into the soul.

Reply Obj. 2: Venial sin is never forgiven without some act, explicit

or implicit, of the virtue of penance, as stated above (A. 1): it

can, however, be forgiven without the sacrament of Penance, which is

formally perfected by the priestly absolution, as stated above (Q.

87, A. 2). Hence it does not follow that infusion of grace is

required for the forgiveness of venial sin, for although this

infusion takes place in every sacrament, it does not occur in every

act of virtue.

Reply Obj. 3: Just as there are two kinds of bodily stain, one

consisting in the privation of something required for beauty, e.g.

the right color or the due proportion of members, and another by the

introduction of some hindrance to beauty, e.g. mud or dust; so too, a

stain is put on the soul, in one way, by the privation of the beauty

of grace through mortal sin, in another, by the inordinate

inclination of the affections to some temporal thing, and this is the

result of venial sin. Consequently, an infusion of grace is necessary

for the removal of mortal sin, but in order to remove venial sin, it

is necessary to have a movement proceeding from grace, removing the

inordinate attachment to the temporal thing.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part III (Tertia Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 635 / 654 题