REVIVISCENZA DEI MERITI. – Merit is the right to eternal reward (beatific vision), acquired through good works performed in a state of Grace (v. MERITO DELL'UOMO). With respect to eternal reward, the works of the faithful are called “living” if they were performed in a state of Grace, “dead” if in a state of sin, and “mortified” if, having been performed in a state of Grace, they have lost every relation to eternal reward through a subsequent mortal sin.
Works that are “mortified” are therefore said to revive (reviviscentia meritorum) when the Christian, having regained the state of Grace through an act of repentance (v. PENITENZA), is in a position to enjoy his previous rights to eternal reward (merits). The fact of the r. dei m. is commonly admitted today, because it is founded, at least implicitly, on texts of Scripture (Ez. 18:21; 33:12; Joel. 2:18; Gal. 3:4; Hebr. 6:10; above all, the parable of the prodigal son [Lk. 15:11-32], who is restored to all his previous rights) and on explicit statements by the Fathers who, commenting on the same parable, discerned in it a restitutio in integrum of merits lost through sin, effected by a kind of ius postliminii, worthy of divine mercy and generosity. The patristic tradition (Epiphanius, Haeres., 59, 2: PG 41, 1049; s. Giovanni Crisostomo, In Ep. ad Gal., 3, 2: PL 61, 650; s. Girolamo, In Gal., 3, 2: PL 26, 350) and the theological tradition (s. Tommaso, Sum. Theol., 3ª, q. 89, a. 5) received definitive confirmation at the Council of Trent, sess. VI, chap. 16 (Denz-U 809).
There has been a centuries-old controversy concerning the manner and proportion of this restitutio. Suárez (Relatio de reviviscentia meritorum, in Opuscula theologica sex, Madrid 1599), followed by numerous theologians (Vasquez, Lugo, Ripalda, Platel, Esparza, Palmieri, Pesch, De Augustinis, Sasse, Galtier), held that the restoration is absolutely complete, with the addition of an incrementum due to the good act by which the sinner returns to God. S. Tommaso, on the other hand, maintained (Sum. Theol., 3ª, q. 89, a. 2) that the r. dei m. is proportionate to the degree of charity with which the sinner rises again. Aquinas’s thought received various interpretations: Billot (De Sacramentis, II, 5ª ed., Roma 1927, pp. 115-16) asserts that the r. occurs in proportion to present fervor, but on the basis of a twofold title, namely, not only by virtue of the act of rising again from sin, but also in view of the preceding merits, from which the blessed person will derive a special enjoyment (praemium accidentale) for having performed them, even though in fact they do not contribute to increasing his glory (praemium essentiale). According to Domenico Soto
(IV Sent., d. 16, q. 2, a. 2) and Billuart (De Sacramentis, diss. 3, a. 5), merits are restored in twofold measure; if, for example, someone rises again from sin with a degree of fervor of 20, the r. dei m. takes place in the proportion of 40 degrees: 20 for present fervor and 20 for previous merits. Since these opinions seem foreign to the mind of s. Tommaso, and the second is bound to a mathematical conception of the supernatural, the interpretation of De Letter (De ratione meriti sec. s. Thomam, Roma 1939, p. 95 sgg.) and Boyer (De Poenitentia, Roma 1942, pp. 282-83) seems more correct. According to them, previous merits, remaining objectively in acceptione Dei (cf. Sum. Theol., 3ª, q. 89, a. 5), influence the moment of justification, so that the sinner rises again with a fervor proportionate to the quantity and perfection of his previous merits.