Second Article. On The Voluntary And The Involuntary

All human acts are voluntary. The voluntary and involuntary are treated so that the diverse modes may be known according to which the will tends into its object, or according to which acts proceed from the will, because this knowledge contributes much to determining the imputability of human acts and its grades.

42. What the voluntary is. The voluntary is called that which proceeds from the will, as an effect from its cause, with previous knowledge of the intellect. Therefore two things belong to the nature of the voluntary: a. that the act proceed from the will as from its cause; b. that it be placed with the knowledge of the intellect going before.

a. Something can proceed from the will positively, or through its positive influence, or negatively, or through omission of influence.

Something can proceed positively from the will in three ways: immediately, mediately, and effectively. The elicited acts themselves of the will proceed immediately; acts commanded by the will and elicited by other powers proceed mediately; the effects of these acts proceed effectively. Thus in the throwing of a stone by which a man is wounded, the intention of doing so proceeds immediately from the will, the throwing mediately, and the wound inflicted by the stone effectively.

Omissions and their effects are said to proceed negatively from the will. If someone does not extinguish a fire set to a house, the omission of extinguishing and the effect of the house burning are said to proceed negatively from the will.

Therefore four things are said to be voluntary to us: a. elicited acts of the will; b. acts commanded by the will; c. external effects of our actions; d. omissions and their effects.

b. The voluntary differs: a. from the willed: for that is called willed which is the object of the will, even if it does not depend upon the will; but only that object is called voluntary which depends upon the will; b. from the spontaneous, which proceeds from a power with sensitive knowledge; for which reason acts of the insane, of infants, and even of brutes can be called spontaneous, but cannot be called voluntary; c. from the free or from a human act: for the voluntary abstracts from whether the act proceeds from the will freely or necessarily, but a human act is a free act.

For him who kills his enemy, both the purpose of killing and the death of the enemy are voluntary; but for him who desires the death of one killed, but does not bring it about, the desire of death is voluntary, while the death is willed. The farmer's desire for rain is voluntary; the rain is willed. But for God the rain is willed and voluntary. Therefore everything voluntary is willed, but not conversely is everything willed voluntary.

43. On the divisions of the voluntary.¹ 1. The voluntary is necessary or free, according as the act of the will is so borne into the object that the will cannot abstain from it, or so that the will can, at its pleasure, place the act or not place it.

Therefore the voluntary and the free properly differ from each other in such a way that the free is a species of the voluntary. For the voluntary generically is an act which proceeds from the will with knowledge of the intellect. But an act of this sort can proceed either in such a way that man has dominion over it, or the power also of abstaining from it, which is the free; or in such a way that he does not have dominion over it, which is the necessary. Nevertheless, in moral matters voluntary and free are used promiscuously, because in man as wayfarer there are no deliberate acts of the will which are plainly necessary.

2. The voluntary is perfect and imperfect by reason of advertence. The former is done with full advertence of the mind and therefore also with full consent of the will; the latter is done with half-full advertence of the mind and therefore also with imperfect consent of the will. The imperfect voluntary is found, for example, in acts of one half asleep, in acts which are done in great disturbance of soul.

The voluntary is not called imperfect because the will embraces the object reluctantly and only with some repugnance; this is the voluntary in a qualified sense, which belongs to the perfect voluntary. Rather it is called imperfect because the will does not fully determine itself to willing the object, for example sin. For the determination by which the will determines itself to willing the object, as to the grade of perfection, depends upon knowledge more or less unimpeded, to such a degree that without full or unimpeded knowledge there cannot be a full and perfect tendency of the will into the object, such as is required for a perfectly human act.

Therefore, for example, a man who, stirred by great anger, in a quarrel with his adversary breaks forth into blasphemies or says insults to him, does not sin gravely, because the blasphemies and insults are either first-first movements on account of the defect of advertence, or are light sins, because on account of the defect of full advertence they are not perfectly voluntary, unless perhaps the blasphemies, on account of a neglected habit of blaspheming, are grave sins.

3. The voluntary is voluntary simply and voluntary in a qualified sense. The former is that which is done with the full inclination of the will without any repugnance at all; the latter is that which is done with full inclination of the will indeed, but at the same time with some repugnance of it. For example, the martyr who offers himself to death wills death simply, that is, he would not wish not to die; and the martyr who is dragged to death wills death in a qualified sense, that is, he would wish not to die.

a. In this division two diverse acts are considered and compared with each other, one of which is done without repugnance, while the other is done with repugnance. Voluntary simply is also called pure voluntary, and voluntary in a qualified sense is called mixed voluntary, because in the same act of the will an inclination is joined with repugnance.

b. The mixed voluntary, or voluntary in a qualified sense, contains in the same act an inclination or consent of the will joined with some repugnance toward that very thing into which the consent is borne, for example the migration of one who is sent into exile. Therefore the mixed voluntary is usually called voluntary simply and involuntary in a qualified sense: voluntary simply, because the will in fact wills the thing and consents to it; involuntary in a qualified sense, because the will would choose the contrary if this were possible. For example, in one who hands over a purse to a robber, handing over the purse is voluntary simply, because he absolutely wills the handing over of the purse, but it is involuntary in a qualified sense, because he would not hand it over unless moved by fear. Likewise the unjust action of one who lends at usury is voluntary simply, because he wills it absolutely, but involuntary in a qualified sense, because he knows that it is unjust.

c. Those things which are done from fear, for example denial of the faith from fear of death, are voluntary simply and involuntary in a qualified sense. A mixed voluntary of this sort is relatively imperfect on the part of consent if it is compared with the pure voluntary, but not of itself on the part of knowledge; therefore the mixed voluntary of itself constitutes a perfectly human act.

4. The voluntary is express and tacit. The former is present when elicited consent is manifested outwardly by words or other signs, as if a superior by stated words or a nod grants or denies something. The latter is present when elicited consent is not manifested outwardly, but is only gathered to be present from some fact or from the omission of a fact, as if a superior, knowing something to be done against the law, does not prohibit it; he is considered to consent tacitly or to give permission. Hence the axiom has prevailed: he who is silent seems to consent.

a. From tacit voluntary there must be distinguished presumed voluntary, which is had when in fact no act or consent of the will is present, but because of the fittingness of the matter it is supposed to be present; for if the matter were proposed, without doubt consent would in fact be present. For example, if someone says to a young man entering a tavern, from the presumed consent of the father: your father wishes you to return home. Sometimes even the tacit voluntary is called presumed, because its existence must be gathered or presumed from external signs and circumstances.

b. Concerning the saying, "he who is silent seems to consent," these things must be noted. Silence of itself signifies neither consent nor dissent; therefore in a particular case one or the other must be gathered from the circumstances. The following rules, however, are established so that the consent or dissent of one who is silent can be presumed from the circumstances according to prudent estimation:

a. One who is silent is considered to consent in favorable matters, namely where it concerns his favor and advantage, but not in odious matters, where it concerns his burden and prejudice. Hence one who is silent when another promises him something is considered to consent; but if someone asks that something be given to him by another and that other is silent, he is not considered to consent.

b. One who is silent is considered to consent even in odious matters if, not wishing to consent, he ought and could contradict; but he is not considered to consent if he is not bound to contradict or cannot. Now he is said not to be able when he cannot without harm or great inconvenience. One who takes a thing while the owner is present and not contradicting does not commit theft, because the owner is considered to consent, unless he is silent from fear or for another reason. And if a prince or superior knows that something is being done against order and does not contradict, he is considered to consent if he could easily contradict or impede it, but not if he could not easily impede it.

5. The voluntary is in itself and in another, or in the cause, which by others is called direct and indirect voluntary, by reason of the mode in which something is intended. The first is what the will immediately intends in itself; thus, for him who deliberately kills his enemy, the death of the enemy is voluntary in itself. The other is that which is not itself intended, but whose cause is intended, and which therefore is foreseen as going to follow from something which is intended in itself and immediately as from a cause; thus to one writing evil books, the sins of the readers, which he foresees but does not intend, are voluntary in the cause.²

a. In order that something be called voluntary in itself, it is not necessary that it be desired for its own sake or as an end, but it can also be desired for the sake of another thing or as a means. Thus for a shipmaster the throwing overboard of goods is voluntary in itself, although he does not will it for its own sake, but as a means for saving the life of those sailing.³ Likewise not only the cause but also the effect together with the cause can be voluntary in itself, provided the will also wills this in itself, as in one who wills, together with medicine, also the effect of health.

b. Something can be voluntary in the cause in two ways: either because by a positive action the cause is posited from which the effect is foreseen as going to follow, and this indeed is called voluntary in a positive cause; or because by omitting an action, the cause is not removed or not impeded, although it can be impeded, and this is called voluntary in a negative cause. Let the death of innocent men in a military commander who fires cannon into a fortress, and the burning of a house in one who does not extinguish a fire set by another, serve as examples.

c. Cause here in a broader sense signifies everything in which another thing is contained, whether as an effect in a cause, or as a part in a whole, or as connected with the other, so that the will cannot desire one without being considered to desire also the other.

d. Therefore the voluntary in the cause is generally an effect which is not intended but which follows apart from intention from a cause which is voluntary in itself and is intended.

6. The voluntary is actual, virtual, habitual, by reason of the influence which the act of the will exercises upon the work, or upon the effect. Since this voluntary agrees in reality with actual, virtual, and habitual intention, it is better to set forth this division under that respect. Intention is the act or tendency of the will toward some end to be obtained through apt means.

a. Actual intention is that which exists here and now, influences the work, and is adverted to reflexively when the work is placed. Thus one who here and now wills to confer baptism and in fact confers it has actual intention in conferring baptism.

It can be twofold: explicit, if the will intends what is apprehended clearly and distinctly, as if someone intends to confer the sacrament of baptism; or implicit, if that which the will intends is in some way contained in that which is explicitly known and intended, as if one baptizing intends to do what he saw the pastor doing. The former has actual explicit intention in conferring baptism; the latter actual implicit intention.

b. Virtual intention is that which, elicited previously, continues here and now, influences the work, but is not adverted to when the work is placed. Thus one who confers baptism which he had previously proposed to confer, but now, when he confers it, no longer thinks of this proposal, has virtual intention in conferring baptism.

The influence of virtual intention is discerned from this example. If someone goes walking after setting for himself the end of the walk, he does not think of the end at each step, but the intention of the end latently continues and brings it about that each step is suitably disposed to the end. This intention is called virtual from the force or virtue by which the act or intention of the will influences the action. What that force is which flows from an act of the will previously elicited into the action now to be placed, and brings it about that the action is virtually voluntary, is explained by authors in diverse ways;⁴ but all agree in this rule to be assigned for practice, by whose aid it can be judged how long a previously elicited intention continues and influences the action: namely, a previously elicited intention influences the action as long as the agent, although he does not think about the intention, nevertheless, if asked what or why he is acting, without a new act of the will and without reflection, from the mere remembrance of the prior intention, immediately says: I am doing this, or, I am doing this for that.⁵

c. Habitual intention is that which, elicited previously, no longer exists nor influences when the work is placed. Thus one who elicited the intention of offering tomorrow's sacrifice of the Mass for a deceased friend, and thinking no more about this intention celebrates tomorrow, applies the Mass from habitual intention.

a. In order that an action proceed from intention as from its cause, the intention must be actual or virtual; habitual intention does not suffice, since this no longer perseveres when the action is placed, nor influences it.

b. Nothing prevents someone from having several intentions at once, or intending several objects at once, whether these are ordered to one another, as if someone wills medicine and through it health, or are not ordered to one another, as if someone undertakes a pious pilgrimage to venerate a saint and to visit a friend.

¹ Ballerini-Palmieri I, n. 15-32. St. Thomas I-II, q. 6. Suarez, De voluntario et involuntario, disp. 10. Frins I, n. 77 ff.

² Others, who follow more exactly the way of speaking of St. Thomas, distinguish direct and indirect voluntary from voluntary in itself and in the cause, and define it so that it agrees with positive and negative voluntary. Cf. St. Thomas I-II, q. 6, a. 3; q. 77, a. 7.

³ Lehmkuhl I, n. 4.

⁴ On this matter Walsch n. 70 ff. and especially Frins I, n. 51-56 can be consulted.

⁵ Cf. Sporer-Bierbaum III, tr. 7, n. 107 ff.

44. On the involuntary. The involuntary is called that which does not proceed from the will. And since two things are required for the voluntary, consent of the will and knowledge of the intellect, it can happen in two ways that some action is involuntary to the agent: either because he is forced by an external force against the inclination of the will to place the action, as if someone is violently dragged to the shrine of an idol; or because he places the action ignorantly, as if someone kills a man thinking him to be a beast.

a. The involuntary is distinguished into negatively or privatively involuntary and positively involuntary. The former is had when no act exists in the will toward some object; the latter is had when there exists in the will toward some object an act of aversion or unwillingness.

The privatively involuntary is also called the non-voluntary. There are some who distinguish between involuntary and non-voluntary: they call involuntary what someone does while ignorant, which he would not have done if he had known, and therefore against the will; they call non-voluntary what someone indeed does while ignorant, but which he would have done even if he had known, and therefore without the will. The former is done from error, the latter with error. Thus if someone, wishing to kill a beast, kills the goat of his enemy, whom he has long intended to harm, the killing of the goat is indeed not involuntary, but nevertheless non-voluntary.

b. There is perfect and imperfect involuntary. The former is had when the will fully and, as far as lies in it, efficaciously rejects something; the latter is had when the will rejects something weakly and remissly, only with some hesitation. A temptation against faith, charity, or chastity which is entirely rejected without hesitation is perfectly involuntary; but one which is rejected with some hesitation and negligence is imperfectly involuntary.