TryingToLearn
Puritan Board Freshman
This question is raised after reading Aquinas on merit here: https://www.newadvent.org/summa/2114.htm#article1 He argues that "Merit and reward refer to the same, for a reward means something given anyone in return for work or toil, as a price for it".
In my reading of the Reformed, they agree that eternal life itself may be called a reward for our works (the works being a dispositional cause of the possession of eternal life), but the meritorious cause of eternal life (that which procures the right to it) is always Christ's obedience.
But what if we were to apply this paradigm to eternal rewards themselves (not eternal life itself, but the rewards graciously bestowed upon us in accordance with our obedience). Does it make sense to refer to our works as a type of meritorious cause of eternal rewards insofar as the reward is given in return for the work as Aquinas says? Both Aquinas and the Reformed agree that the eternal rewards we receive are not based upon the merit of the rewards considered in themselves, but only on the faithfulness of God who promises to reward them (thus Aquinas says "but there may be a certain manner of justice, as when we speak of a father's or a master's right (Ethic. v, 6), as the Philosopher says. And hence where there is justice simply, there is the character of merit and reward simply. But where there is no simple right, but only relative, there is no character of merit simply, but only relatively, in so far as the character of justice is found there, since the child merits something from his father and the slave from his lord"). Can not then our works be considered a sort of meritorious cause as far as eternal rewards go, on analogy with how Adam's works would be a meritorious cause for eternal life itself in the sense that both arise out of a consideration of the means to an end, an obtaining of the right to a reward, but are not based simply on the merit of the works considered in themselves?
Or if we deny that this is so, then what is the meritorious cause of our eternal rewards, if any? Does it make sense to say it is Christ's obedience as well? But this seems strange, for Christ would then have merited differing levels of rewards for people (without consideration of their own obedience, but only from His). Or ought we to deny altogether that it is even necessary for there to be a meritorious cause of eternal rewards? But what then is the relation and efficacy of our works to the relative rewards?
In my reading of the Reformed, they agree that eternal life itself may be called a reward for our works (the works being a dispositional cause of the possession of eternal life), but the meritorious cause of eternal life (that which procures the right to it) is always Christ's obedience.
But what if we were to apply this paradigm to eternal rewards themselves (not eternal life itself, but the rewards graciously bestowed upon us in accordance with our obedience). Does it make sense to refer to our works as a type of meritorious cause of eternal rewards insofar as the reward is given in return for the work as Aquinas says? Both Aquinas and the Reformed agree that the eternal rewards we receive are not based upon the merit of the rewards considered in themselves, but only on the faithfulness of God who promises to reward them (thus Aquinas says "but there may be a certain manner of justice, as when we speak of a father's or a master's right (Ethic. v, 6), as the Philosopher says. And hence where there is justice simply, there is the character of merit and reward simply. But where there is no simple right, but only relative, there is no character of merit simply, but only relatively, in so far as the character of justice is found there, since the child merits something from his father and the slave from his lord"). Can not then our works be considered a sort of meritorious cause as far as eternal rewards go, on analogy with how Adam's works would be a meritorious cause for eternal life itself in the sense that both arise out of a consideration of the means to an end, an obtaining of the right to a reward, but are not based simply on the merit of the works considered in themselves?
Or if we deny that this is so, then what is the meritorious cause of our eternal rewards, if any? Does it make sense to say it is Christ's obedience as well? But this seems strange, for Christ would then have merited differing levels of rewards for people (without consideration of their own obedience, but only from His). Or ought we to deny altogether that it is even necessary for there to be a meritorious cause of eternal rewards? But what then is the relation and efficacy of our works to the relative rewards?
Last edited: