Condign,congruent or pactum merit

Discussion in 'Covenant Theology' started by Peairtach, Feb 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Peairtach

    Peairtach Puritan Board Doctor

    The following is a quote from Rev. Lane Keister's review of Michael Williams's book, "Far as the Curse is Found" at his "Green Baggins" blog:A Book Review of Michael Williams’s Book “Far As the Curse Is Found” « Green Baggins

    Williams blurs the distinction between the CoW and the CoG.

    Can someone "unpack" the meaning of the terms "condign, congruent and pactum merit" ?
  2. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    I'd be happy to do that, Richard. Condign merit is a situation where the action is in direct proportion to the reward, and where the action is of the kind necessary to obtain the reward. The example I use is very simple: when someone goes to purchase a car, and pays the full amount in cash, he has condignly merited the possession of the car by paying the money. In theology, there are two condign merit situations: Adam condignly merited Hell by his disobedience, and Jesus Christ condignly merited heaven for us by His obedience.

    Congruent merit is similar to condign merit in that both condign and congruent merit have an action that matches in kind the reward. However, congruent merit is not sufficient in and of itself to merit the reward. Say a person has some money, but not enough money to purchase a car. Paying the money he has would not in and of itself merit possession of the car. However, if someone else chipped in and helped him, he would be able to own it. This is "merit with a little help." Romanists use this kind of merit in their system for good works meriting salvation (Christ providing the extra help), and Reformed folk never do.

    The last kind of merit is pactum merit, merit according to agreement, according to covenant. In this situation, the action does not correspond either in quality or quantity to the reward. A father promises his son that if the son gets a perfect score on his SAT exam, the father will buy him a car. Obviously, a son could not possibly go to a car store and turn in an SAT exam result and expect to walk out with a car. However, the father had bound himself to this agreement, and so if the son got said score, that would produce the car by means of the agreement. Most Reformed scholars agree that had Adam obeyed in the Garden of Eden, he would have obtained eternal life on the basis of pactum merit. It does not correspond in quality to eternal life because Adam owed all his obedience already. It does not correspond in quantity either, since an infinite amount of righteousness would be required. However, God bound Himself, by agreement, to give Adam eternal life if Adam obeyed.

    One will notice right away that there is a lack of symmetry between Adam's obedience and his disobedience. His disobedience condignly merits Hell. However, his obedience would only have merited Heaven by pact. However, the law of God requires condign merit of us now, a condition that only Christ can meet, since He did not owe obedience for Himself, and He offered up an infinitely efficacious merit on the cross.
  3. Peairtach

    Peairtach Puritan Board Doctor

    Thanks for that Lane. I don't think I've seen that clearly explained in the Systematic Theologies I have, e.g. Berkhof, Dabney, Grudem, although it may be in there somewhere.

    So some Covenant Theologians have a tendency to make the CoW so gracious in character that the idea of merit is excluded - although it is true that it is gracious in a sense as you make clear, but Adam hadn't demerited God's goodness or even His condescension in the CoW, as all his offspring including the Israelites had.

    And some have a tendency to call the Mosaic Covenant (or Sinai Covenant, as some of them like to call it) a Republication of the Covenant of Works "in some sense" in a way that seems less than clear or possibly muddies the waters. Or maybe they're just not explaining themselves very well. What they say is a RoCoW looks so unlike the CoW with Adam as to make the expression RoCoW - in any sense - misleading.

    But the former is the greater danger/problem because it undermines the corresponding CoW fulfilment by Christ (?)
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2011
  4. Oecolampadius

    Oecolampadius Puritan Board Sophomore

    Richard, I thought you might find the following to be of interest since it is relevant to the matter that you and Rev. Keister discussed:

    [emphasis mine]

    The preceding quote arose from his discussion of the Covenant of Works. Earlier he says,
    "There was a merit ex pacto (arising from a covenant), not ex condigno. The good works of man never merit the glory of heaven; they are never of the same weight and worth (condignity)." p.544
  5. CharlieJ

    CharlieJ Puritan Board Junior

    Some of these terms vary over time. The way Thomas uses them is not necessarily the same way late medieval nominalists used them. In Thomas, I believe that there are actually three forms of merit.

    Strict merit - Giving an action what is its due, outside any consideration of grace or promise. Nothing in divine-human actually falls under this category.

    Condign merit - Merit earned in response to deeds actually performed, but under the sphere of promise and with the help of grace. That is, once I promise to pay you $100 for your water bottle, even if the thing is only worth $5, I am under an obligation to fulfill my contract. Of course, the same would be true if I promised to pay $5 for the $5 water-bottle. According to Thomas, this is the type of merit that the saints accrue while in the state of grace. So, I think parts of Lane's definition of condign merit actually fit strict merit better. Adam strictly merits hell. Also, buying the car with money is condign merit, but only because there is a prior agreement that the car costs so much money, and that the bills (or check or whatever) serves as currency. An agreed-upon price does not, strictly speaking, merit the car.

    Congruent merit - This is more like benevolence than what we generally think of merit. It is "congruent" or "fitting" that a good person shows his kindness to others. There is no obligation, however, to give congruent merit. I can throw a dollar in the sidewalk violinist's case, and that would be fitting, but I'm under no such obligation. This is the merit that God bestows when he converts people. (In late medieval nominalism, such as in Gabriel Biel, I believe this came to be more like the half-merit that Lane talked about.)

    So, the Reformed doctrine of pactum merit is actually similar to Thomas' condign merit, but it's different because Thomas believes in 'habitual grace' that actually belongs to a person, whereas Protestants describe grace as God's action on a person. The switch from habitual grace to covenantal union makes a lot of shared Protestant-Catholic terms actually behave much differently.
  6. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable

    Sproul writes:

    Merit is defined as that which is earned or deserved. Justice demands that
    merit be given where it is deserved. Merit is something due a person for a
    performance. If it is not received, an injustice is committed.

    Roman Catholic theology speaks of merit in three distinct ways. It speaks
    of condign merit, which is so meritorious as to impose an obligation for
    reward. It also speaks of congruous merit, which, though it is not as high
    as condign merit, nevertheless is “fitting or congruous” for God to reward
    it. Congruous merit is achieved by performing good works in conjunction
    with the sacrament of penance. A third type of merit is supererogatory
    merit, which is merit above and beyond the call of duty. It is the excess
    merit achieved by saints. This merit is deposited into the treasury of merit
    from which the church can draw to apply to the account of those lacking
    sufficient merit to progress from purgatory to heaven.

    Protestant theology denies and “protests” against all three forms of merit,
    declaring that the only merit we have at our disposal is the merit of Christ.

    The merit of Christ comes to us by grace through faith. Grace is the
    unmerited favor of God. It is an action or disposition of God toward us.
    Grace is not a substance that can inhabit our souls. We grow in grace, not
    by a quantative measure of some substance in us, but by the merciful
    assistance of the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, acting graciously
    toward us and upon us. The means of grace God gives to assist us in the
    Christian life include Scripture, the sacraments, prayer, fellowship, and the
    nurture of the church.

    Src: Essential Truths of the Christian Faith, Question 69

    Did he miss something here?

  7. Peairtach

    Peairtach Puritan Board Doctor

    This is all very true.

    But God having created an innocent Man would be "obliged" by His own righteousness to treat him in a certain way e.g. not to cast him into Hell unless he had sinned.
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2011
  8. CharlieJ

    CharlieJ Puritan Board Junior

    This is what Roman Catholics would deny, or at least significantly qualify. The condign merit does impose an obligation for reward, but only because of promise or grace. Thomas adamantly denies that, strictly speaking, God can ever be under obligation to man. Rather, God obligates himself through promises, which he then must honor. The reason this takes a Pelagianizing turn, from a Protestant perspective, is that "grace" for Thomas is a created habit possessed by man. So, it really is man earning the merit, though by using the grace that God has infused into him.

    So, well-informed Catholics can rebut the accusation that condign merit is simply works salvation by pointing to the context of promise and grace, but then Protestants can counter that created grace in man isn't the grace by which God justifies.
  9. Peairtach

    Peairtach Puritan Board Doctor

    Quote from Lane
    So the difference with respect to the important subject of merit, before a righteous God, between the CoW with Adam and the CoG with us in Christ is that

    (a) Adam would have merited eternal life for himself and his children by pactum merit in fulfilling the CoW for them.

    (b) Christ merited etenal life for the elect by condign merit in fulfilling the CoW for them.

    In turn the imperfect good works produced by sanctification in the regenerate merit "additional" rewards to Heaven itself by a form of pactum merit graciously ordained by God as part of the CoG.

    The typological rewards of the Old Covenant CoG period, of prosperity and secure tenure in the Land, in the context of the gracious redemption and adoption of the Passover, the Exodus and the Giving of the Land, correspond typologically to the "additional" rewards which the regenerate receive in Heaven.

    Last edited: Feb 21, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page