Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The relationship between God and creatures with respect to merit must be one of congruent merit, not condign merit.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Aquinas argues in ST I-II q.114 that grace elevates human acts to a supernatural order genuinely proportionate to eternal life as their end.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If grace renders human merit intrinsically ordered to beatitude, the incommensurability between creature and God is overcome within the economy of salvation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Therefore condign merit, properly understood as grace-elevated merit, does not require natural commensurability between creature and God.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Congruent merit, by making reward contingent solely on God's liberality rather than the act's intrinsic relation to reward, collapses the distinction between merit and pure gift.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If God is not in any sense obligated by the agent's meritorious act, the concept of merit loses its normative content and becomes indistinguishable from arbitrary divine favor.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Condign merit requires commensurability between the merits of giver and receiver.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
No creature can be commensurable with God in merit.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Congruent merit does not require the giver to reward the agent, only that the act provides sufficient cause for reward.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.