Mortal sin, death, repentance and salvation

[Vico]

… he just gently makes sure that the reprobate will unavoidably fall into sin by refusing to give him the efficacious Grace he absolutely needs …
…Consequently efficacious grace is essentially different from merely sufficient grace, which confers the power or ability to place salutary acts, but no more. …

Sufficient grace merely confers the power or potency to do a salutary act. The fall into sin is not unavoidable for to be so there would be no potential to do a salutary act and no free will in it. Aquinas quote states “only conditional impossibility”.

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma states:

By merely sufficient grace is understood a grace which, in consideration of the concrete circumstances, makes a salutary act possible (vere et relative sufficiens) but which, on account of the resistance of the will, remains inefficacious (mere vel pure sufficiens).

For the pig remark: The only pig is represented by double predestination which was condemned.

 

[Robert1111]

Sufficient grace merely confers the power or potency to do a salutary act. The fall into sin is not unavoidable for to be so there would be no potential to do a salutary act and no free will in it. Aquinas quote states “only conditional impossibility”.

It is FACTUALLY unavoidable.

Once again Fr. Hardon Archives - History and Theology of Grace - Analysis of Efficacious Grace

“sufficient grace confers the power or ability to place salutary acts, but no more. BEFORE THIS BARE POTENCY CAN BE REDUCED TO ACTION, ANOTHER AND DIFFERENT DIVINE HELP MUST BE RECEIVED, NAMELY EFFICACIOUS GRACE”

No efficacious Grace means you are 100% s**t outta luck and there is nothing you can do about it. It really doesn’t matter how much you try to spin it.

The “conditional impossibility” is just the lipstick on a pig i was talking about: a loophole that allows classical thomism to avoid the charge of heresy, but the end result is the exactly the same as double predestination. Remember that thomism believes in unconditional predestination (ante praevisa merita) and unconditional Reprobation (ante praevisa demerita). Actual punishment is only “conditional” in that God doesn’t punish you the sinner before he dies in mortal sin, bu the fact is that he has no way to FACTUALLY avoid death in mortal sin, because God refuses to give him the efficacious Grace needed to repent.

This is the thing. Double predestination is cleverly avoided with tecnicalities and loopholes but the fact don’t change.

 

[Vico]

…

No, reprobation is not from all time. God’s knowledge of one’s freely chosen rejection of grace is not a cause of that rejection.

Compendium of Theology, St. Thomas Aquinas, 140.​

But he wills that some things come to be necessarily and that other things come to be contingently, since each of these things is required for the complete existing of the universe. Therefore, in order that things come to be in both ways, he used necessary causes for some things, and contingent causes for other things. And so the divine will is efficaciously fulfilled when some things come to be necessarily, and other things contingently.

It is also clear that the wisdom of the divine arrangement preserves the certainty of providence, with the contingency of things abiding. … although contingent causes can fail to produce an effect insofar as it lies within their power, the effect follows without fail when some supports have been supplied. And this does not take away the effect’s contingency.

Therefore, the contingency of things clearly does not exclude the certainty of divine providence.

St. Thomas Aquinas does not conceive of any intrinsic distinction between sufficient and efficacious grace, rather he divides grace into cooperative and operative. Later proponents of two groups decided to expand from the works of St. Thomas, and in 1588 a debate: Banez and Dominicans v Molina and Jesuits.

 

[Latin]

The weakness in Molinism; Sufficient grace is inefficacious to say yes to God’s call to heaven. – God provides the wrong (sufficient which is in reality inefficacious for salvation) grace to everyone.

No, because without sufficient grace no one can say “yes”. The difference is only that it still retains the ability for man to say “no”.

First we need efficacious grace which enables us to freely say yes to God’s call to heaven.

Sufficient grace does the same

With efficacious grace, man is able to resist the grace but does not, because the grace causes him to FREELY choose the good.

Double speak

THE MYSTERY OF PREDESTINATION by John Salza. Page 119.

Hence, a sufficient grace has an operating effect only (empowering the will to act),

whereas an efficacious grace has both an operating and cooperating effect (applying the will to act).

.
Sufficient grace remains an interior impulse, whereas an efficacious grace produces an exterior act.
.
With efficacious grace, man is able to resist the grace but does not, because the grace causes him to freely choose the good. End quote.

.
According to John Salza:

When God wills a person to perform a salutary act (e.g., prayer, good works), He grants him the means (an efficacious grace) that infallibly produces the end (the act willed by God).
.
If God wills to permit a person to resist His grace, He grants him a sufficient, and not an efficacious, grace.

.
John Salza, Page 113.
However, the Church teaches that God infused Adam with sufficient grace to resist temptation and to perform his duties with charity.

God, however, willed to permit Adam to reject His grace and to sin. End quote.

.
THE QUESTION IS:

Why God willed to permit Adam to reject His grace and to sin?
.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence answers the question.
.
In spite of sin, which is due to the willful perversion of human liberty, acting with the concurrence, but contrary to the purpose and intention of God and in spite of evil which is the consequence of sin, He directs all, even evil and sin itself, to the final end for which the universe was created.
.
Sin is not ordained by the will of God, though it happens with His permission.
.
Evil He converts into good (Genesis 1:20; cf. Psalm 90:10); and suffering He uses as an instrument whereby to train men up as a father trains up his children (Deuteronomy 8:1-6; Psalm 65:2-10;
.
Nor would God permit evil at all, unless He could draw good out of evil (St. Augustine, "Enchir.", xi in "P.L.", LX, 236; "Serm."
.
Evil, therefore, ministers to God’s design (St. Gregory the Great, op. cit., VI, xxxii in "P.L.",

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm
.
God bless

 

[Latin]

Latin:

…
I like to have Vico your view on the weaknesses I pointed out in the Thomistic and in the Molinistic predestination/ salvation.

God bless

Conversion and meritorious thoughts and acts are through actual grace which involves strengthening of the will both proceeding and concurring and there is also an actual grace illuminating the intellect that may be given. Of the two actual graces mentioned earlier: Sufficient grace gives a person the power to accomplish the salutary act, and efficacious grace, in fact, secures that the salutary act is accomplished.
When a person’s free will choice is not to cooperate with the actual grace then that actual grace is not efficacious but merely sufficient.

I have to confess, until I read THE MYSTERY OF PREDESTINATION by John Salza I viewed sufficient grace as an absolutely useless grace.
.
When I read John’s teachings as follows:

When God wills a person to perform a salutary act (e.g., prayer, good works), He grants him the means (an efficacious grace) that infallibly produces the end (the act willed by God).

If God wills to permit a person to resist His grace, He grants him a sufficient, and not an efficacious, grace.
.
At this time I realized how important sufficient grace is.
.
Because with sufficient and efficacious graces God absolutely controls/ governs the entire human race, which is very important.
.
As we have the duty of care for our children, God has the duty of care for us as we always stay His little children.

.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence also says:

Again, from the fact that God has created the universe, it shows that He must also govern it; for just as the contrivances of man demand attention and guidance, so God, as a good workman, must care for His work. (St. Ambrose, "De Offic. minist.", XIII in "P.L.", XVI, 41;St. Augustine, "In Ps.", cxlv, n. 12, 13 in "P.L.)
.
All things are created and governed with a view to man, to the development of his life and his intelligence, and to the satisfaction of his needs (Aristides, "Apol.", i, v, vi, xv, xvi.
.
It extends to every individual, adapting itself to the needs of each (St. John Chrysostom, "Hom. xxviii in Matt.", n. 3 in "P.G.", LVII, 354).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm
.
God bless

 

[MT1926]

Sleeping with my daughter is in no way comparable to killing two of my children, at least to me. You are not talking about rape, here.

I think you are missing my point.

You keep concentrating on the situation. I am not trying to prove murder is not bad. If it seems like I am saying that in my responses, I am not. The point I am getting at is…

Which one of these two men are you going to invite to live in your home?

It all comes down to the heart which only a God can judge.

Your response to my question isn’t on equal ground with the examples. For instance you said…

Quite frankly, i don’t how i would react if someone killed two of my children and then he repented. Maybe i would forgive him but i doubt that i would want to hang out with him, to put it mildly.

We need to remember that God is the judge and we are all His children and unless you end up in hell you are “hanging out” with God and the rest of His children. You are basically in his home. Which is why I asked which of the above two men would you invite to live in your home?

The man who murdered your children, whom you know is sorry and will never do it again or the kid who slept with your daughter and can’t wait to get at the rest of your daughters?

If you wouldn’t invite either of these men to live with you and your family then your only other option is to send them both to Hell. Which you have already proclaimed is not just for the kid.

Does that make any more sense? It seems you can’t stop concentrating on the severity of the sin instead of the change of heart.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

When you compare Purgatory to Hell, it’s most definitely Scott free.

Could you point out what I said that makes you think my thoughts on Purgatory equals Scott free?

From my understanding the Church doesn’t have this huge detailed explanation of Purgatory. She tells us that a final purification after death exists and that it involves some kind of pain.

My personal opinion would be that repentant murderer would most likely be experiencing quite a bit of painful cleansing before entering heaven.

There is much to see in Italy that it’s a great pity that you will not travel here anymore.

No no I definitely want to come back to Italy. I just want to spend the next trip eating, drinking and relaxing with my uncle and cousins instead of running around exhausted trying to see as much as possible.

Hopefully next year if all goes well and my parents stay healthy.

God Bless

 

[Vico]

…

God’s absolute control grants free will to angels and humans and man can cooperate or not with the grace given.

Summa Theologiae > First Part of the Second Part > Question 106. The law of the Gospel, called the New Law, considered in itself > Article 2. Whether the New Law justifies?​

Reply to Objection 2. Although the grace of the New Testament helps man to avoid sin, yet it does not so confirm man in good that he cannot sin: for this belongs to the state of glory. Hence if a man sin after receiving the grace of the New Testament, he deserves greater punishment, as being ungrateful for greater benefits, and as not using the help given to him. And this is why the New Law is not said to “work wrath”: because as far as it is concerned it gives man sufficient help to avoid sin.

 

[Techno2000]

Revelations of
Saint Bridget (Birgitta) of Sweden
Chapter 13 :

Excerpt…

The Virgin Mary speaks to Lady Bridget and says: ”I want to tell you what I did
for the soul of your son Charles when it was being separated from his body. I acted
like a woman standing by another woman who is giving birth, in order that she
might help the infant, lest it die in the flow of blood or suffocate in that narrow place
through which an infant exits and so that, by her watchful care, the infant’s enemies,
who are in the same house, might not be able to kill it. I acted in the same way.

SECOND REVELATION ON THE SAME MATTER

The angel answered: ”When his mother first understood that his will was
wavering toward sin, she immediately rushed to his aid with works of mercy and
daily prayers that God might deign to have mercy on him lest he withdraw himself
from him. Because of those works of his mother, he finally obtained a godly fear so
that, as often as he fell into sin, he immediately hurried to make his confession.”

The devil answered, ”I must tell his sins.” And at the very moment he intended
to begin, he immediately started to exclaim and lament and carefully search himself,
including his head and all the limbs that he seemed to have; and he was seen to
tremble all over; and with great confusion he cried out: ”Woe to me in my misery!
How have I wasted my long labor? Not only is the text blotted out and ruined, but
even the material on which everything was written has burnt up completely.
Moreover, the material indicates the times that he sinned. And I do not recall the
times any more than the sins written down in connection with them.” The angel
answered: ”This was done by his mother’s tears and long labors and many prayers.
God sympathized with her sighs and gave to her son this grace: namely, that for
every sin he committed, he obtained contrition, making a humble confession out of
love for God. Therefore those sins have been blotted out and are unheeded by your
memory.”

continue-

 

[Techno2000]

The devil answered, asserting that he still had a sack full of those writings
according to which the above said knight had purposed to make amends for his sins
but did not take care [to do so and asserting that the writings gave grounds on
which] to torture him until, through punishment, satisfaction had been made. And
indeed that same knight had not yet taken care to amend those sins during his
lifetime. The angel answered: ”Open the sack and seek a judgment on those sins for
which you must chastise him.” At those words, the devil cried out like a madman,
saying: ”I have been plundered in my power. Not only my sack has been taken, but
also the sins that filled it! The sack in which I put all the reasons that I had to punish
him was his laziness; for, because of his laziness, he omitted many good things.”
The angel answered: ”His mother’s tears have plundered you and have burst
the sack and have destroyed the writing. So greatly did her tears please God!” The
devil answered: ”I still have here a few things to bring forth: namely, his venial sins.”
The angel answered: ”He had the intention to make a pilgrimage from his
fatherland, leaving his goods and his friends and visiting, by many labors, the holy
places. He complemented these things, furthermore, by so preparing himself that he
was worthy to gain an indulgence from Holy Church. Moreover, he desired, by
making amends for his sins, to appease God his Creator. As a result, all those
charges, which you just said that you had written down, have been pardoned.”

The devil answered: ”Nevertheless, I still must punish him for all those venial
sins that he committed; and therefore, through indulgences, they have not been
deleted at all. For there are thousands upon thousands of them, and they have all
been written on my tongue.” The angel answered: ”Extend your tongue and show
the writing.” The devil answered with loud howling and clamor like a maniac; and he
said: ”Woe is me. I have not one word to say; for my tongue has been cut off at the
root together with its strength!”

The angel answered: ”His mother did this with her continual prayers and her
labor; for she loved his soul with her whole heart. Therefore, for the sake of her love,
it pleased God to pardon all the venial sins that he committed from his infancy right
up to his death; and therefore your tongue is said to have lost its strength.”

 

[Techno2000]

The Mystical City of God: Life of the Virgin Mother of God, manifested to Sister Mary of Jesus of Agreda:

Excerpt :

The dragon in agonizing efforts to escape,
said : O Woman, give me leave to hurl myself into hell,
for I cannot bear thy presence, nor will I ever venture to
come before Thee as long as Thou livest upon this world.
Thou hast conquered, O Woman, Thou hast conquered,
and I acknowledge thy power in Him who has made
Thee his Mother. Omnipotent God, chastise us Thyself,
since we cannot resist Thee

but do not send thy punishments
through a Woman of a nature so inferior to ours.
Her charity consumes us, her humility crushes us, and
She is in all things a living manifestation of thy mercy
for men. This is a torment surpassing many others.
Assist me, ye demons! But alas, what can our united
efforts avail against this Woman, since all our power
cannot ever deliver us from her presence until She her
self casts us forth? O foolish children of Adam, who
follow me, forsaking life for the sake of death, truth or
falsehood? What absurdity and insanity
is yours, (so in despair I must confess), since you have in your midst
and belonging to your own nature the incarnate Word
and this Woman ? Greater is your ingratitude than mine
and this Woman forces me to confess the truths, which
I abhor with all my heart. Cursed be my resolve to
persecute this Daughter of Adam, who so torments and
crushes me!

 

[fhansen]

THE MYSTERY OF PREDESTINATION by John Salza. Page 119.

Here’s all the Church officially teaches on this point, man’s will still playing a role, however small:
1993 Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom . On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:

When God touches man’s heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight.42

But much of this discussion misses the overall truth regarding salvation. Man is justified all at once, formally at Baptism. And yet that is only the beginning of his being saved depending on how much he’s given (Luke 12:48): time, opportunity, revelation, grace. Salvation is worked out, cooperatively (Phil 2:12). In the end the Church affirms how man is judged, on what basis his eternal desitiny is determined, quoting St John of the Cross:
1022 "At the evening of life, we shall be judged on our love."

 

[Latin]

Latin:

THE MYSTERY OF PREDESTINATION by John Salza. Page 119.

Here’s all the Church officially teaches on this point, man’s will still playing a role, however small:

When God touches man’s heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight.42

But much of this discussion misses the overall truth regarding salvation. Man is justified all at once, formally at Baptism. And yet that is only the beginning of his being saved depending on how much he’s given (Luke 12:48): time, opportunity, revelation, grace. Salvation is worked out, cooperatively (Phil 2:12). In the end the Church affirms how man is judged, on what basis his eternal desitiny is determined, quoting St John of the Cross:
1022 "At the evening of life, we shall be judged on our love."

Eph.1:11 says:
God works all things according to the counsel of His will.
.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence says:

His wisdom He so orders all events within the universe that the end for which it was created may be realized.

God preserves the universe in being; He acts in and with every creature in each and all its activities. End quote.

.
We know if God would choose He could created this world without the existence of sin and anarchy, like the life is in heaven.

.
Yet His wisdom He so created this world where sin and anarchy is widespread and He has designed all events down to the minutest details within the universe and preordained that the end for which it was created will be realized.

All things are created and governed with a view to man, to the development of his life and his intelligence, and to the satisfaction of his needs.
.
We can be sure, at the end all creatures will manifest the glory of God, and in particular the entire human race will glorify Him, serving Him in obedience and love, and will have eternal happiness in God.

.
We not yet fully understand the reason God designed and orderd the “fall” and the reason He designed our corruption (down to the minutest degree) and corrupted us according to His design, but at the end in heaven we will see and we will understand the reason and His wisdom in it.
.
We can be certain, God DID NOT corrupted us for the reason to throw us into hell but for the reason to make us saints.
.
We may don’t understand the fine details but we know, our corruption is the cause of our sins and God coverts our sins into good and He makes us saints.

The message of the Lord Jesus Christ: ‘It was necessary that there should be sin; but all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well .’-St Julian of Norwich
.
God bless

 

[fhansen]

Yes, all manner of things shall be well. And at the evening of life we shall be judged on our love. Both of these sayings are quoted in the Catechism. And if you don’t see that God would not have allowed man to sin, to choose evil, unless for the fact that man’s will plays a very significant role in his becoming just, of his finally coming to love God with his whole heart, soul, mind, and strength IOW, and of the possibility of his failing to do so, then you won’t understand the gospel.

 

[Latin]

Yes, all manner of things shall be well. And at the evening of life we shall be judged on our love. Both of these sayings are quoted in the Catechism. And if you don’t see that God would not have allowed man to sin, to choose evil, unless for the fact that man’s will plays a very significant role in his becoming just, of his finally coming to love God with his whole heart, soul, mind, and strength IOW, and of the possibility of his failing to do so, then you won’t understand the gospel.

I agree, by the grace of God man’s will plays a very significant role in his becoming just.

And with God’s special grace The Gift of Final Perseverance every elect will infallible die in the state of grace. – DE FIDE + Infallible teachings of the Trent.
.
God bless

 

[fhansen]

Sure, and Trent also teaches that no one can know with certainty whether or not they’re numbered among the elect. And man’s will means nothing unless for the very real possibility that he’ll use it wrongly.

 

[Latin]

Sure, and Trent also teaches that no one can know with certainty whether or not they’re numbered among the elect.
And man’s will means nothing unless for the very real possibility that he’ll use it wrongly.

Answer of your first sentence.
Yes it is true.
.
Answer of your second sentence.

If God wills to permit a person to resist His grace, He grants him a sufficient grace, and not an efficacious grace.

By the aid of sufficient grace man always performs the act of sin by God’s permission and His cooperation by His provision of the powers of operation to perform the act sin, the sin is preordained from all eternity in accordance with His all-embracing purpose.
.
When God wills a person to perform a salutary act (e.g., prayer, good works), He grants him the means (an efficacious grace) that infallibly produces the end (the act willed by God), the good act is preordained from all eternity in accordance with His all-embracing purpose.
.
God bless

 

[Robert1111]

No, reprobation is not from all time. God’s knowledge of one’s freely chosen rejection of grace is not a cause of that rejection.

It’s not from all time? Of course it is. Aquinas teaches that predestination is ante praevisa merita, which logically and unavoidably means (it’s like saying 2+2=4, so there is no way you can get around it) that also Reprobation, in the thomist perspective, is ante praevisa demerita, i.e before foreseen demerits. In other words, God picks and choose whoever he likes and he lefts all the others in the dust, and this for no other reason than his own will (this is also what has been stated by Aquinas, so again, let’s stop trying to spin it). He also said that the reprobate will be deserted by Grace and, having been deserted by Grace, he will use his own free will to sin and God will allow him to die in mortal sin, since he had no business in Heaven from the very moment of birth, when God passed him over and decided to not predestine him to Glory.

Again: these are the facts as they are under the classical thomistic perspective. There is no way to get around it.

If this makes you uncomfortable because it turns God into a monster, i have both bad news and good news for ya:

1. The bad: yeah, if Aquinas and before him Augustine were right, God would be a monster (it’s not a coincidence that Aquinas was pretty much the only one among the fathers of the first centuries who believed in unconditional predestination).
2. The good: you don’t have to embrace their perspective. You can be a molinist and there are even modern thomists, such as Fr.Most, who say that God wants to predestine everyone to salvation, he only reprobates when he sees that these persons will be stubbornly and willingly unrepentant until the end. This reconciles both God’s Mercy and Justice, since God wants to be merciful to all but if you don’t want his mercy, then only Justice remains. He wants to communicate the merits of his passion to everyone, but when someone doesn’t want to, he can’t force this person, lest free will becomes a joke. To me, Fr. Most’s perspective is the best.

St. Thomas Aquinas does not conceive of any intrinsic distinction between sufficient and efficacious grace, rather he divides grace into cooperative and operative. Later proponents of two groups decided to expand from the works of St. Thomas, and in 1588 a debate: Banez and Dominicans v Molina and Jesuits.

I was aware of that, but the substance doesn’t change. According to Aquinas, some people are reprobated and deserted by Grace for no other reason than God’s will. Period. It is literally stated in the Summa, First part, Question 23.

 

[Robert1111]

The man who murdered your children, whom you know is sorry and will never do it again or the kid who slept with your daughter and can’t wait to get at the rest of your daughters?

If you wouldn’t invite either of these men to live with you and your family then your only other option is to send them both to Hell.

No man, there is plenty of people i wouldn’t invite to live with me, but this doesn’t mean that i wish them torture and suffering, much less eternal torture and suffering. If i knew that if i don’t invite these men to live with me they will experience eternal torture, you can bet your pint that i would accept them in my house.

But if i’m not faced with such a terrible perspective, i think i have better people to hang out with. In other words, your analogy doesn’t work.

It’s an “all or nothing” that really doesn’t work in the real world. The real world is not populated mostly by people we would either live with or consign to eternal torment. If i don’t want to live with someone it doesn’t mean i want him to suffer.

Could you point out what I said that makes you think my thoughts on Purgatory equals Scott free?

Can you imagine living in Auschwitz-Birkenau for a million years with the nice addendum of having your teeth and nails pulled out over and over again after having being subjected to acid baths over and over again every single day? Ok, even that is scott free compared to eternal suffering with no way out whatsoever.

Could you point out what I said that makes you think my thoughts on Purgatory equals Scott free?

It’s not “what you said”. Purgatory is by definition “Scott free” compared to Hell, since you know that Purgatory WILL end and you will be happy sooner or later. In Hell there is no hope.

The “Scott Free” part shouldn’t be taken as an absolute. It’s Scott free only by comparison. When compared to Hell, there is literally no painful experience that isn’t Scott free in comparison.

My personal opinion would be that repentant murderer would most likely be experiencing quite a bit of painful cleansing before entering heaven.

I agree.

No no I definitely want to come back to Italy. I just want to spend the next trip eating, drinking and relaxing with my uncle and cousins instead of running around exhausted trying to see as much as possible.

Hopefully next year if all goes well and my parents stay healthy.

Wow, that’s great. Hope you’ll enjoy it.

 

[Robert1111]

@ Vico

Let me elaborate on this point a little more

I was aware of that, but the substance doesn’t change. According to Aquinas, some people are reprobated and deserted by Grace for no other reason than God’s will. Period. It is literally stated in the Summa, First part, Question 23.

What i meant is that Banez has only drawn the logical conclusions from Aquinas work (i.e there must be a Grace that infallibly brings you to Heaven (efficacious Grace) and another Grace that is absolutely powerless to save you but nonetheless is enough to make you accountable for your sin (sufficient Grace) ). And those are the logical conclusions because of what Aquinas said about the reprobate being deserted by Grace. Since without Grace it’s literally impossibile for man not to sin, there must be a Grace that makes you accountable for your sin by at least giving you the POTENCY to do good. But, since God hasn’t rejected you for your own demerits but only because he wanted to (this is what Aquinas said, to me this is just plain blasfemy to God, this is way i always say “according to Aquinas” etc because i want no part whatsoever of those ideas), this Grace can only serve the purpose of making you accountable, it cannot really save you. It this Grace had a truly salvific potential, your refusal to accept it would be the reason of your reprobation, and this cannot be admitted once it has been declared that God predestines and rejects for no other reason than his good will. This is how thomistic “sufficient Grace” was born.

For the same reason, if the elect are elected ante praevisa merita, their acceptance of the Grace cannot be the reason of the efficacy of said Grace otherwise their predestination wouldn’t have been ante praevisa merita. Henceforth, here we are with intrinsically efficacious Grace.

Really, once you posit that man are predestined and rejected for no other reason than God’s will, you have no choice but to posit an intrinsic difference between sufficient and efficacious Grace, otherwise, if said intrinsic difference is not recognized, the entire part about Predestination before foreseen merits and Reprobation before foreseen demerits become utterly nonsensical.

EDIT: the only thing i want to add about Fr.Most is that i think he is wrong when he says that he is doing nothing but explicating the true thomistic perspective on Grace, Free Will, Predestination and Reprobation.

In fact, Saint Thomas opinion on predestination is quite clear and it’s different than his, notwithstanding his claims to the contrary. But i also think that his (Fr.Most’s) theological speculation really reconciled the existence of Reprobation and Hell with God’s Love and Mercy without needing to posit that God just creates some persons for the sole purpose of sending them to Hell.