Article — Billuart, Summa Summae · from Schola Thomistica
Whether, and how, the human will, to be good, must be conformed to the divine will?
I suppose that the human will, in order to be good, generally speaking, ought to be conformed to the divine will 1, because the first rule and measure of the good will of man is the divine will: for what is first in any genus is the measure of the others of that genus; but the divine will is the first and supreme good. But in what and how it ought to be conformed, there is difficulty. 1 Here q. 19, a. 9, c.
Suppono voluntatem humanam, ut sit bona, generaliter loquendo, debere esse conformem divinae voluntati1, quia prima bona voluntatis humanae regula et mensura est divina voluntas: primum enim in unoquoque genere est mensura caeterorum illius generis; divina autem voluntas est primum et summum bonum. Sed in quo et quomodo debeat conformari, difficultas est. 1 Hic q. 19, a. 9, c.
For whose elucidation it must be noted that in the object of the will two things are to be considered: one which is quasi-material, namely the thing itself willed; another which is quasi-formal, namely the very account of willing, which is the end. Conformity with respect to the thing willed is called conformity in the materially willed; and conformity with respect to the account of willing is called conformity in the formally willed. The question proceeds concerning both, supposing however that the divine will becomes known concerning the particular work; for, if it does not become known, the will can be good without conformity with respect to this work: thus II Reg., VII, 3, David is praised because he willed to build the house of the Lord, which God nevertheless did not will.
Pro cujus elucidatione notandum est, in objecto voluntatis duo esse consideranda : unum quod est quasi materiale, scilicet res ipsa volita; aliud quod est quasi formale, scilicet ipsa ratio volendi, quae est finis. Conformitas quoad rem volitam dicitur conformitas in volito materiali; et conformitas quoad rationem volendi, dicitur conformitas in volito formali. De utraque procedit quaestio, supposito tamen quod voluntas divina innotescat circa particulare opus; nam, si non innotescit, potest esse bona voluntas absque conformitate, quantum ad istud opus : sic II Reg., VII, 3, David laudatur quod voluerit aedificare domum Domini, quod tamen Deus non volebat.
But the divine will can become known to us in three ways, namely by revelation, by operation and by precept. For this very fact that God reveals something, or operates it, whether immediately through himself, or through secondary causes intervening, or commands it to be done, it is manifest that he wills that very thing.
Tripliciter autem potest nobis innotescere divina voluntas, scilicet per revelationem, per operationem et per praeceptum. Hoc ipso enim quod Deus revelat aliquid, aut operatur, sive immediate per se, sive mediantibus causis secundis, vel praecipit fieri, manifestum est id ipsum velle.
I say: The human will, in order to be right, is bound to be conformed to the divine will in the formally willed, but not in the materially willed, unless his will become known by precept or prohibition 1. It is common with the Author. 1 Ibid., a. 10, c; q. 23 de Veritate, a. 8.
Dico : Voluntas humana, ut recta sit, tenetur conformari divinae voluntati in volito formali, non autem in volito materiali, nisi ejus voluntas innotescat praecepto vel prohibitione1. Est communis cum authore. 1 Ibid., a. 10, c; q. 23 de Veritate, a. 8.
The first part is proved 2. The formally willed element of the divine will, or its motive as ultimate reason of willing, is the common and divine good, or the common good of the whole universe, insofar as it is ultimately ordered to God himself 3 and to his glory; for the Lord made all things for himself. But the human will, in order to be right, ought to will whatever it wills for the common and divine good, as its last end. Therefore. — Proof of minor 1° The natural appetite of every part is ordered to the common good of the whole. Therefore, a fortiori, what is appetited by the rational appetite ought to be referred to the common good 3. 2° The human will could not be right except insofar as it appetites the true and honest good, as we proved above. But, in appetiting the true and honest good, it virtually and implicitly appetites the divine good, of which the honest good is the beginning and participation. Therefore. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid., ad 1. 3 Ibid., ad 1.
Prob. prima pars2. Volitum formale divinae voluntatis, seu ejus motivum ut ultima ratio volendi, est bonum commune et divinum, seu bonum commune totius universi, prout ultimate ordinatur ad ipsum Deum3 et ejus gloriam; omnia enim propter semetipsum fecit Dominus. Atqui voluntas humana, ut recta sit, debet velle quodcumque vult propter bonum commune et divinum, ut ultimum finem. Ergo. — Prob. min. 1° Appetitus naturalis cujuslibet partis ordinatur in bonum commune totius. Ergo, a fortiori, quod appetitur ab appetitu rationali, debet referri in bonum commune3. 2° Voluntas humana non posset esse recta, nisi quatenus appetit bonum verum et honestum, ut probavimus supra. Atqui, appetendo bonum verum et honestum, virtualiter implicite appetit bonum divinum, cujus bonum honestum est inchoatio et participatio. Ergo. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid., ad 1. 3 Ibid., ad 1.
Proof of the second part. The same thing willed which is the material object of the will can, under diverse consideration, be good and evil. E. g., the death of a robber considered by the judge as necessary to the common good, is good; considered by the wife as harmful to the family, is evil. Consequently the will by which the judge, whose duty is to attend to the common good, wills the death of the robber, is good; and the will by which the wife, whose duty is to attend to the good of the family, does not will the death of her husband, is also good; because the will that does not will a thing under the aspect of evil is not less good than that which wills a thing under the aspect of good. But God, as universal provider, attends in willing to universal reasons, such as the common good of the universe, to which contraries must be and be conserved, and the manifestation of his attributes: according to which reasons the thing willed by God is good, which nevertheless according to particular reasons, to which man ought to attend and to which God wills him to attend, is evil. Therefore the human will, in order to be right, is not bound to be conformed to the divine will in the materially willed. — The minor will become clear by example. God, as supreme director and provider of the whole world, according to the exigency and universal reasons of the common good and of his glory, wills my father to die in heresy and be damned. That death and damnation, considered according to those universal reasons, is good, and therefore good is the will that wills it. I, a private man, whose duty it is not to attend to those universal reasons, but to particular ones, whether of my own supposit, according to the natural inclination by which I am good from God, or of a parent, according to piety, which, even at the command of God, I am bound to follow, do not will that death and damnation. That death and damnation, considered according to those particular reasons, is evil. Therefore good is the will that does not will it; so that, although on the one side I seem to depart from the divine will, yet on the other, by so willing, I am conformed indirectly to the divine will itself, because God himself wills that I so will. Whence Aug., in Enchirid., c. 101, n. 26, says: « Sometimes with a good will man wills something that God does not will... Just as if a good son should will his father to live, whom God with a good will wills to die. »
Prob. secunda pars. Eadem res volita quae est objectum materiale voluntatis, potest sub diversa consideratione esse bona et mala. V. g., mors latronis considerata a judice ut necessaria bono communi, est bona; considerata ab uxore ut noxia familiae, est mala. Consequenter voluntas qua judex, cujus est attendere ad bonum commune, vult mortem latronis, est bona, et voluntas qua uxor, cujus est attendere ad bonum familiae, non vult mortem mariti, est etiam bona; quia voluntas quae rem non vult sub ratione mali, non est minus bona, quam ea quae vult rem sub ratione boni. Atqui Deus, ut provisor universalis, attendit in volendo ad rationes universales, quales sunt bonum commune universi, ad quod necesse est esse et conservari contraria, et manifestatio suorum attributorum: secundum quas rationes res a Deo volita est bona, quae tamen secundum rationes particulares, ad quas homo debet attendere et ad quas Deus vult ipsum attendere, est mala. Ergo voluntas humana, ut sit recta, non tenetur conformari divinae voluntati in volito materiali. — Minor clarebit exemplo. Deus, ut supremus totius mundi director et provisor, secundum exigentiam et rationes universales boni communis et suae gloriae, vult patrem meum mori in haeresi et damnari. Ista mors et damnatio secundum istas rationes universales considerata, est bona, et ideo bona voluntas quae illam vult. Ego, privatus homo, cujus non est ad istas rationes universales attendere, sed ad particulares, sive proprii suppositi, secundum inclinationem naturalem qua bona est a Deo, sive parentis, secundum pietatem, quam, etiam Deo mandante, sectari teneor, nolo istam mortem et damnationem. Ista mors et damnatio, secundum istas rationes particulares considerata, est mala. Ergo bona voluntas, quae eam non vult; ita ut, quamvis videar ex una parte recedere a voluntate divina, ex alia tamen, sic volendo, conformor indirecte ipsi voluntati divinae, quia sic me velle Deus ipse vult. Unde Aug., in Enchirid., c. 101, n. 26, ait : « Aliquando bona voluntate homo vult aliquid quod Deus non vult... Tamquam si bonus filius patrem velit vivere, quem Deus bona voluntate vult mori. »
It is confirmed. No one of sound mind would say that I am bound to will all things harmful to me which, God willing, happen to me: hunger, sickness, the burning of house and barn, the rigor of cold, the heat of the sun, serpents, fleas, etc., as I was saying, the death and damnation of my parents; so that it would not be permitted me, as far as I can, to flee them or strive against them.
Confirmatur. Nemo sanae mentis dicet, me teneri velle omnia mihi nociva, quae, Deo volente, mihi accidunt : famem, morbum, conflagrationem domus et horrei, rigorem frigoris, ardorem solis, serpentes, pulices, etc., ut modo dicebam, mortem et damnationem parentum meorum; ita ut mihi non liceat, quantum possum, illa fugere aut contra conari.
I said: « Unless the divine will becomes known by precept or prohibition; » because the willing of God commanding or prohibiting has always annexed to it the will of obliging man to will and to do what he commands, or not to will nor to do what he prohibits: which the other wills have not, whether of good pleasure, of counsel, or of permission.
Dixi : « Nisi voluntas divina innotescat praecepto vel prohibitione; » quia voluntas Dei praecipiens aut prohibens habet semper annexam voluntatem obligandi hominem ad volendum et agendum quod praecipit, aut non volendum nec agendum quod prohibet : quod non habent aliae voluntates, sive beneplaciti, sive consilii, sive permissionis.
For the solution of the objections against the second part of the conclusion, it must be observed that the materially willed can be considered in two ways: first, in itself and absolutely; second, formally and reduplicatively, as it underlies the formally willed or the universal end which God intends. The second part therefore of the conclusion is to be understood of the materially willed in itself, with the particular reasons attended to, not of it reduplicatively, as it underlies the formally willed and the universal end of the divine will; for this is to be conformed to it precisely in the formally willed itself.
Pro solutione objectionum contra secundam partem conclusionis, observandum est, volitum materiale posse considerari dupliciter : primo, secundum se et absolute; secundo, formaliter et reduplicative, ut subest volito formali seu fini universali quem Deus intendit. Secunda pars itaque conclusionis intelligenda est de volito materiali secundum se, et attentis rationibus particularibus, non de illo reduplicative, ut subest volito formali et fini universali divinae voluntatis; hoc enim est ipsi conformari in ipso volito formali.