b) A close analysis of the Tridentine canon under review gives rise to another difficulty. Can the _gloria prima_ be merited? In defining the _gratia secunda_ as an object of strict merit, the Council expressly excludes the _gratia prima_. It makes no such distinction in regard to glory, but names both “eternal life” (_gloria prima_) and “increase of glory” (_gloria secunda_) as objects of merit. This naturally suggests the query: Why and to what extent can the just man merit the _gloria prima_, seeing that he is unable to merit the _gratia prima_? Some theologians(1336) contend that the justified are entitled to the _gloria prima_ only as a heritage (_titulo haereditatis_), never as a reward (_titulo mercedis_). Because of its intimate causal connection with the _gratia prima_, which is beyond the reach of merit, the _gloria prima_, they argue, cannot be regarded as an object of merit except on the assumption that the merits which precede justification confer a claim to the _gloria prima_. This assumption is false, because without sanctifying grace no condign merits can be acquired.(1337) In spite of this difficulty, however, most theologians(1338) hold that, unlike the _gratia prima_, the _gloria prima_ may under certain conditions be an object of strict merit. The main reason is that, as the state of glory is not a necessary requisite of the meritoriousness of good works, while the state of grace is, the former may _positis ponendis_ be an effect of the _meritum de congruo_, though the latter may not. A mere statement of the problem shows that it cannot be satisfactorily solved unless we distinguish between and enter into a detailed examination of two distinct hypotheses. It is generally agreed that infants dying in the state of baptismal grace owe that grace, and the state of glory which they enjoy in Heaven, solely to God’s mercy and have no claim to beatitude other than that of heredity (_titulus hereditatis_). Adults who preserve their baptismal innocence until death, manifestly cannot merit the _gloria prima_ by their good works, because they already possess a legal title to it through Baptism.(1339) It follows that their good works increase, but do not merit, the _gloria prima_, to which these souls are already entitled _titulo haereditatis_. The case is quite different with catechumens and Christians guilty of mortal sin, who are justified by an act of perfect contrition before the reception of Baptism or the Sacrament of Penance. Of them it may be said, without fear of contradiction, that they merit for themselves _de condigno_, not indeed the first grace of justification, but the _gloria prima_, because perfect contrition, being an _opus operans_, at the very moment of its infusion becomes an _opus meritorium_ entitled to eternal glory.(1340) As regards the great majority of adult Catholics who, because of defective preparation, never get beyond imperfect contrition (_attritio_), and therefore are not justified until