brianberean:
Let’s say a Catholic is in the state of justification for 10 years or so and does all kinds of meritorious acts in Grace. Let’s say then he commits adultery. (Or even starts fantasizing about adultery, (lusts for a woman in his heart, same thing right? Matt 5)
According to Catholic theology, a mortal sin is one that is a sin of grave matter, done deliberately and with full consciousness of the gravity of the sin. So, I’d say merely fantasizing about adultery is certainly a sin, but most likely a venial sin and not likely to be a mortal sin, depending upon the deliberateness of the will, the consciousness of the intellect, and the gravity of the sin. The gravity of fantasizing is far lower than that of the act of adultery. Both are the sin of adultery, but I’d say the act is mortal whereas the thought is venial.
He then loses his justification and, I assume, can only gain it back after having his mortal sin absolved by confessing to a priest.
Your assumption is incorrect. If his sin was mortal, he is no longer in a state of grace (justified). However, God forgives sinners who have truly contrite hearts. The Catholic is still bound to confess his sin to a priest, otherwise he cannot recieve Holy Communion. The binding acts of the penitent is contrition, confession, and satisfaction.
According to Pope St. Pius X:
Contrition or sorrow for sin is a grief of the soul leading us to detest sins committed and to resolve not to commit them any more. … Contrition means a crushing or breaking up into pieces as when a stone is hammered and reduced to dust. … The name of contrition is given to sorrow for sin to signify that the hard heart of the sinner is in a certain way crushed by sorrow for having offended God. … Of all the parts of the sacrament of Penance the most necessary is contrition, because without it no pardon for sins is obtainable, while with it alone, perfect pardon can be obtained, provided that along with it there is the desire, at least implicit, of going to confession. (Catechism of Pius X)
If the sinner had true contrition and at least an implicit desire to go to confession, his sin is forgiven. This distinction is not well understood by most Protestants, as I am often asked “What if he dies before he goes to confession?”
When he gains his justification back, does he get to keep the credit for all the previous meritorious acts done in Grace, or does he start over?
It is my understanding that his merit was not lost, but it was impeded by his wickedness. So it is not a matter of restoration of merit lost, although you’ll hear that term often used. But it is more a matter of “merit impeded by the obstacle which is in him … by subsequent sin, there arises an impediment to the preceding merit, so that it does not obtain its effect” (St. Thomas Aquinas, *Summa Theologica, *IIa, 114, 7). Once the obstacle is removed, it no longer impedes the preceding merit. I’m sure different scholars will use different terminology to express the same thing as St. Thomas. But, as I understand it, the efficacy of his meritorious acts are no longer impeded (and in this sense, restored) once his state of justification is restored by God. I don’t have Dr. Ott’s book handy at the moment, but if I remember correctly, he discusses this. I don’t know that this doctrine is dogmatically defined, however.
St. Athanasius commented on something similar, but refered to “grace” which remains, vice using the word “reward” or “merit.” The reward given by God for faithful deeds is indeed a grace. At any rate, one does not start over.
**St. Athanasius (ca. AD 358): **"when someone falls from the Spirit through any wickedness—that grace indeed remains irrevocably with those who are willing to repent after such a fall. (Discourses Against the Arians, 3, 24-25, ca. AD 358 )
