II. To the Principal Arguments

12. As to Augustine [n.2] the answer is plain from his authority to the opposite [n.5], because although the end is the more principal condition belonging to the goodness of an act, it is however not sufficient; and yet speaking simply of the goodness of merit (which adds over and above moral goodness), this comes principally from the end, because, when complete moral goodness is presupposed, meritorious goodness is a further addition coming from due relation of the act to the end, and this ‘due relation’ happens to the extent the act is elicited by charity; and in reference to this can the authorities about the end be expounded, because, namely, meritorious goodness comes from the end.

13. To the second argument [n.3] I say that the efficient cause of the act of understanding - the one that is on the side of the act of understanding - acts naturally and cannot act in a way not conformed to the object, and so it always acts rightly; the will does not always in this way act in conformity with its object, because it is a free cause and not a natural one. So when there is rightness on the part of the moving principle, the whole act [sc. of the intellect] is right; not so here [sc. in an act of the will] on the part of the end.

14. To the third [n.4] I say that the single goodness integrates together in itself all the perfections befitting the act - and there is not some one single perfection, just as neither is there some one beauty in the body [n.7]..