Article — Billuart, Summa Summae · from Schola Thomistica
On the manner in which the will is moved: freely, or necessarily?
I say 1°: The will is moved naturally and necessarily, by a necessity of specification, to the good in common, because it is its object1. But the power naturally tends to its object, so that it cannot tend to the opposite; likewise to the ultimate end, or beatitude, as apprehended under its common notion; because the ultimate end stands to things desirable just as first principles stand to things speculative. But the intellect knows first principles naturally. Therefore the will wills the ultimate end naturally. Add that on the part of the opposite of the good in common and of beatitude in common no reason of good can be apprehended. 1 Here q. 10, a. 1, o.
Dico 1° : Voluntas movetur naturaliter et necessario, necessitate specificationis, ad bonum in communi, quia est ejus objectum1. Potentia autem naturaliter tendit in suum objectum, ita ut non possit oppositum : item ad ultimum finem, seu beatitudinem, sub communi notione apprehensam; quia sic se habet ultimus finis in appetibilibus, sicut prima principia in speculabilibus. Intellectus autem cognoscit naturaliter prima principia. Ergo voluntas vult naturaliter ultimum finem. Adde quod in opposito boni in communi et beatitudinis in communi nulla possit apprehendi ratio boni. 1 Hic q. 10, a. 1, o.
I say 2°: The will can be moved by necessity with respect to specification by no particular good; because there is none which under any consideration, whether by reason of itself or by reason of something annexed to it, cannot be apprehended as not good, or as deficient from some good, since none is so perfect that nothing is wanting to it1. Nor with respect to exercise; because anyone, whatever particular good it be, can not think of it, and consequently not will it2. 1 Ibid., a. 2, o. 2 Ibid.
Dico 2° : Voluntas a nullo bono particulari moveri potest necessario quoad specificationem; quia nullum est quod secundum aliquam considerationem, sive ratione sui, sive ratione adjuncti, non possit apprehendi ut non bonum, seu ab aliquo bono deficiens, cum nullum sit ita perfectum, ut nihil ei deficiat1. Neque quoad exercitium; quia aliquis de quocumque bono particulari potest non cogitare, et per consequens non velle illud2. 1 Ibid., a. 2, o. 2 Ibid.
I say 3°: The will is not moved by God of necessity, neither with respect to exercise nor with respect to specification, except in those things to which it is moved naturally3 3 Ibid., a. 4, o.
Dico 3° : Voluntas non movetur de necessitate a Deo, neque quoad exercitium, neque quoad specificationem, nisi in his ad quae naturaliter movetur3 3 Ibid., a. 4, o.
It is proved.4 It does not belong to the divine providence, as Dionysius says, c. 4 of the De Divin. nomin., to corrupt the nature of things, but to preserve it. Hence he moves all things according to their condition, so that from necessary causes necessary effects follow through the divine motion, but from contingent causes contingent effects follow. Since therefore the will is an active principle not determined to one thing, but standing indifferently toward many things, God moves it in such a way that he does not determine it of necessity to one thing, but its motion remains contingent and not necessary, except in those things to which it is moved naturally. 4 Ibid., ad 1.
Prob.4 Ad providentiam divinam non pertinet, ut dicit Dionys., c. 4 de Divin. nomin., naturam rerum corrumpere, sed servare. Unde omnia movet secundum eorum conditionem, ita quod ex causis necessariis per motionem divinam sequuntur effectus ex necessitate, ex causis autem contingentibus sequuntur effectus contingentes. Quia igitur voluntas est activum principium non determinatum ad unum, sed indifferenter se habens ad multa, sic Deus ipsam movet, quod non ex necessitate ad unum determinat, sed remanet motus ejus contingens et non necessarius, nisi in his ad quae naturaliter movetur. 4 Ibid., ad 1.
You will object 1°: Every agent that cannot be resisted moves of necessity. And who resists God's motion upon his will? Therefore.
Obj. 1° : Omne agens cui resisti non potest, ex necessitate movet. Atqui Dei ad sui motionem voluntatis quis resistit? Ergo.
I answer.5 The divine will extends not only that something be done through the thing it moves, but also that it be done in that manner which suits its nature. And therefore it would repugn the divine motion more if the will were moved of necessity, which does not suit its nature, than if it were moved freely, as suits its nature. 5 Ibid., ad 1.
Resp.5 quod voluntas divina non solum se extendit ut aliquid fiat per rem quam movet, sed ut etiam eo modo fiat quo congruit natura ipsius. Et ideo magis repugnaret divinae motioni, si voluntas ex necessitate moveretur, quod suae natura non competit, quam si moveretur libere, prout competit suae natura. 5 Ibid., ad 1.