ANSWER

I might content myself with denying the major or the minor, because the

term 'real' admits of interpretations capable of rendering these

propositions false. But in order to give a better explanation I will make a

distinction. 'Real' either signifies that which is positive only, or else

it includes also privative beings: in the first case, I deny the major and

I admit the minor; in the second case, I do the opposite. I might have

confined myself to that; but I was willing to go further, in order to

account for this distinction. I have therefore been well pleased to point

out that every purely positive or absolute reality is a perfection, and

that every imperfection comes from limitation, that is, from the privative:

for to limit is to withhold extension, or the more beyond. Now God is the

cause of all perfections, and consequently of all realities, when they are

regarded as purely positive. But limitations or privations result from the

original imperfection of creatures which restricts their receptivity. It is

as with a laden boat, which the river carries along more slowly or less

slowly in proportion to the weight that it bears: thus the speed comes from

the river, but the retardation which restricts this speed comes from the

load. Also I have shown in the present work how the creature, in causing

sin, is a deficient cause; how errors and evil inclinations spring from

privation; and how privation is efficacious accidentally. And I have

justified the opinion of St. Augustine (lib. I, _Ad. Simpl._, qu. 2) who

explains (for example) how God hardens the soul, not in giving it something

evil, but because the effect of the good he imprints is restricted by the

resistance of the soul, and by the circumstances contributing to this

resistance, so that he does not give it all the good that would overcome

its evil. 'Nec _(inquit)_ ab illo erogatur aliquid quo homo fit deterior,

sed tantum quo fit melior non erogatur.' But if God had willed to do more

here he must needs have produced either fresh natures in his creatures or

fresh miracles to change their natures, and this the best plan did not

allow. It is just as if the current of the river must needs be more rapid

than its slope permits or the boats themselves be less laden, if they [385]

had to be impelled at a greater speed. So the limitation or original

imperfection of creatures brings it about that even the best plan of the

universe cannot admit more good, and cannot be exempted from certain evils,

these, however, being only of such a kind as may tend towards a greater

good. There are some disorders in the parts which wonderfully enhance the

beauty of the whole, just as certain dissonances, appropriately used,

render harmony more beautiful. But that depends upon the answer which I

have already given to the first objection.

Theodicy Essays on the Goodness of God, the Freedom of Man and the Origin of Evil · 第 40 / 54 题