REVIVAL OF MERITS. - Merit is the right to the eternal reward (the beatific vision), acquired through good works performed in a state of Grace (v. MERITO DELL'UOMO). The works of the faithful, with respect to the eternal reward, are called "living" if they were performed in a state of Grace, "dead" if in a state of sin, "mortified" if, having been performed in a state of Grace, they have lost all relation to the eternal reward, through a subsequent mortal sin.
Accordingly, "mortified" works are said to revive (reviviscentia meritorum) when the Christian, having regained the state of Grace through an act of repentance (v. PENITENZA), is in a condition to enjoy the previous rights to the eternal reward (merits). The fact of the r. of m. is today commonly admitted, because it is founded, at least implicitly, on texts of Scripture (Ezek. 18:21; 33:12; Joel 2:18; Gal. 3:4; Heb. 6:10; above all the parable of the prodigal son [Luke 15:11-32], who is restored to all his previous rights) and on explicit affirmations of the Fathers who, commenting on that same parable, discerned in it a restitutio in integrum of the 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; St. John Chrysostom, In Ep. ad Gal., 3, 2: PL 61, 650; St. Jerome, In Gal., 3, 2: PL 26, 350) and the theological tradition (St. Thomas, Sum. Theol., 3a, q. 89, a. 5) received a definitive confirmation in the Council of Trent, sess. VI, chap. 16 (Denz-U 809).
On the manner and proportion of this restitutio a centuries-old controversy prevails. 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 restitution is absolutely integral, with the addition of an incrementum due to the good act by which the sinner returns to God. St. Thomas, on the other hand, maintained (Sum. Theol., 3a, q. 89, a. 2) that the r. of m. is proportionate to the degree of charity with which the sinner rises again. The thought of the Angelic Doctor has received various interpretations: Billot (De Sacramentis, II, 5th ed., Rome 1927, pp. 115-16) affirms that the r. takes place in proportion to the actual fervor but on a twofold title, that is, not only by reason of the act of rising from sin, but also in view of the previous merits, from which the blessed will derive a special enjoyment (praemium accidentale) for having performed them, even if in fact they do not contribute to increasing his glory (praemium essentiale). According to Dominic Soto
(IV Sent., d. 16, q. 2, a. 2) and Billuart (De Sacramentis, diss. 3, a. 5), the merits are restored in a twofold measure; if, for example, a man rises from sin with the 20th degree of fervor, the r. of m. takes place in the proportion of 40 degrees, 20 for the actual fervor, 20 for the previous merits. Since these opinions seem alien to the mind of St. Thomas and the second bound to a mathematical conception of the supernatural, the interpretation of De Letter (De ratione meriti sec. s. Thomam, Rome 1939, p. 95 ff.) and of Boyer (De Poenitentia, Rome 1942, pp. 282-83) seems more correct, according to which the previous merits, remaining objectively in acceptione Dei (cf. Sum. Theol., 3a, q. 89, a. 5), exert an influence at the moment of justification, so that the sinner rises again with a fervor proportionate to the quantity and perfection of the previous merits.