Mercy Versus Justice?

Like many--if not most--of Pope Francis' pastoral intiatives, the real thrust of what he was trying to accomplish seems to have been derailed by pastoral leaders on account of little or no formation in Thomistic theology:  I have in mind the Extraordinary Jubilee Year of Mercy (8 December 2015-8 December 2016).  As I often said to my confreres, many parishes and schools tended to treat it as the "Year of Excuses."

This basic confusion of "mercy" and "excuse," I am convinced, follows upon not properly relating mercy to justice--as if mercy somehow 'cancells' the obligation of justice (as if virtues were cancellable).

St James said it best:  "Mercy triumphs over justice"--superexaltat autem misericordia judicium (Jas 2:13).  At first glance, it may seem as though "mercy" somehow beats "justice" as in a contest.  But how does St Thomas Aquinas understand this Scripture?  The question is all the more pressing when we consider that 'justice' is a virtue which, by its very definition, is the very principle of a good act--how could 'cancelling' a principle of a good act be a good thing?

By way of a preface, St Thomas, following Aristotle and Ambrose, defines the virtue of justice as "a habit whereby a man renders to each one his due by a constant and perpetual will" (S.th., 2a 2ae, q. 58, art. 1, resp.).  As for mercy, the Angelic Doctor takes Augustine's definition, namely a "heartfelt sympathy for another's distress, impelling us to succor himif we can." (S.th., 2a 2ae, q. 30, art. 1, resp.).  What is significant is that while 'justice' is a cardinal virtue, 'mercy' is subordinated to the theological virtue of hope--so the relation of mercy to justice is that of a theological virtue to a cardinal one.

In S.th., 1a, q. 21, art. 3, obj. 2, St Thomas voices the (now-) common idea that "mercy is a relaxation of justice" (emphasis added).  He does rightly say that "God cannot remit waht appertains to his justice"--one may even read Anselm's Satisfaction Theory here.  In reply, St Thomas explains that "God acts mercifully, not indeed by going against His justice, but by doing something more than justice..." (emphasis added).  Our Friar Preacher then uses the example of a man owing another "one hundred pieces of money" but, instead, paying back two hundred.  "thus a man..does nothing against justice, but acts liberally or mercifully" (S.th., 1a. q. 21, art. 3, ad 2).

Using another example in the same response to the objection, St Thomas says that "The case is the same with one who pardons an offence committed against him, for in remitting it he may be said to bestow a gift."  He goes on to explain:  "Hence it is clear that mercy does not destroy justice, but in a sense is the fulness thereof."

Thus St Thomas Aquinas does not think that mercy 'overrides' justice but, rather, is its "fulness."  At first glance, this may be puzzling:  How is mercy a "fulness" of justice?  Simply:  By adding "goodness" to "that which is owed."  This is evident from the respondeo of the article:

Hence it follows that he endeavors to dispel the misery of this other, as if it were his; and this is the effect of mercy.  To sorrow, therefore, over th emisery of others belongs not to God; but it does most properly belong to Him to dispel that misery, whatever be the defec we call by that name [such as sin, or want].  Now defects are not removed, except by the perfection of some kind of goodness:  and the pimary source of goodness is God...  It must, however, be considered that to bestow perfections appertains not only to the divine goodness, but also to His justice, liberality, and mercy...  

In other words, if justice is to "give that which is owed to another," it is the nature of goodness to give abundantly more than which is "owed"--and this is the definition of mercy, and this is how mercy is "superexalted" over justice.  If only enthusiasts for Pope Francis would have taken the trouble to read precisely what His Holiness wrote--

Mercy is not opposed to justice but rather expresses God’s way of reaching out to the sinner, offering him a new chance to look at himself, convert, and believe.  ... This is why God goes beyond justice with his mercy and forgiveness. Yet this does not mean that justice should be devalued or rendered superfluous. On the contrary: anyone who makes a mistake must pay the price. However, this is just the beginning of conversion, not its end, because one begins to feel the tenderness and mercy of God. God does not deny justice. He rather envelopes it and surpasses it with an even greater event in which we experience love as the foundation of true justice (Misericordiae vultus, 21).

The point of the Year of Mercy, then, was not a wholesale "overlooking" on God's part of human faults; it was, rather, an invitation to rediscover how the gift of Jesus Christ was that very goodness of God exceeding the demands of justice laid upon us on account of our sins:  Not only the pardon of guilt, but also healing and the gift of new life.

That being said, to mistake "divine excusing" as "mercy" would be to to proffer a counterfeit to divine mercy and to profoundly misunderstand justice as virtue.