86. Whether God's Will Is Always Fulfilled

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Problem: God’s Will and Human Salvation #

• Objection: If God wills all men to be saved (1 Tim 4:2), why are not all men saved?
• Scriptural Foundation: Psalm 113 affirms that “all things whatever God willed, he has made”
• Core Question: Can the divine will be thwarted by defects in secondary causes?

Thomas’s Solution: The Nature of Universal Causality #

• God’s will is the universal cause of all things
• Just as nothing can fall short of being itself (the most universal form), nothing can fall short of the order of the universal cause
• When a particular cause fails, the effect is impeded only by another particular cause
• That second cause is itself contained under the order of the universal cause
• Therefore, the effect cannot escape the order of God’s will

The Antecedent/Consequent Will Distinction (Damascene’s Solution) #

• Antecedent will (voluntas antecedentis): God’s will considered in itself, apart from circumstances
  • Example: God wills all men to be saved, considered simply as men
• Consequent will (voluntas consequentis): God’s will considering all circumstances and particular conditions
  • Example: God wills some to be damned according to the requirements of his justice
• Critical Point: This distinction exists not in God’s will itself (which is utterly simple and eternal) but on the side of things willed
• What God wills simply (consequent will) always comes to pass; what he wills antecedently may not

Three Interpretations of “God Wills All Men to Be Saved” #

1. Accommodated distribution: All men who are saved are willed by God to be saved (Augustine’s approach)
2. Distribution by kinds: From each category/status of men, some are willed to be saved (Jews and Gentiles, men and women, great and small) but not all of every kind
3. Antecedent vs. Consequent: God antecedently wills all to be saved, but consequently wills some to be damned according to justice (Damascene’s approach—the one Thomas elaborates most)

Key Arguments #

On the Fulfillment of Divine Will #

• Argument from Universal Form: Nothing can fall short of the most universal forms (being, something). Similarly, nothing can fall short of the order of the most universal cause (God’s will)
• The Sinner’s Case: A sinner who recedes from God’s will by sinning falls back under it through punishment, glorifying God’s justice. “Willy-nilly you’re going to do honor to God”
• Astronomical Analogy: A star may be impeded from producing its effect, but whatever effect follows from the impediment must be reduced to the universal power of the first heavens

On the Relationship Between Antecedent and Consequent Will #

• Something can be absolutely good (considered in itself) or relatively good (when considered with additional circumstances)
• Example: Killing is bad absolutely, but good when applied to a murderer dangerous to society
• The will simply wills something when all particular circumstances are considered
• The will antecedently wills something when it is considered in isolation from circumstances
• Therefore: “That which we will antecedently, we don’t will simply. But secundum quid.”

On Knowledge vs. Will #

• Knowledge relates to the true: The true is primarily in the mind
• Will relates to the good: The good is primarily in things
• God’s perfection requires knowing everything that is true (since all truth is in his mind)
• God’s perfection does NOT require willing everything that is good (since goods exist in created things and don’t add to his goodness)
• Berquist’s geometric comparison: A point added to a line, or a line added to a square—creates insignificant increase

Important Definitions #

Antecedent Will (voluntas antecedentis) #

God’s will considered in itself, abstractly from circumstances. What God wills antecedently may not come to pass.

Consequent Will (voluntas consequentis) #

God’s will considering all particular circumstances and conditions. What God wills consequently always comes to pass and constitutes his simple will.

Simply (simpliciter) vs. In Some Respect (secundum quid) #

• Simply: According to all circumstances considered together; the full reality of a thing as it exists
• In Some Respect: According to one aspect or abstraction from other circumstances
• A just judge wills the murderer to live simpliciter? No—he wills him executed simply (considering all circumstances). He wills him to live secundum quid (as a man, in abstraction from his crime).

Examples & Illustrations #

The Judge and the Murderer #

• A judge wills antecedently that every man live (man is naturally good)
• But the judge wills consequently that the murderer be executed (considering his crime and danger to society)
• The consequent will (execution) is the simple will; the antecedent will (life) is only secundum quid

The Example of Being and Nothing #

• Something that is not a man can exist (a dog, for instance)
• Something that is not living can exist (a stone)
• But something that is not being at all cannot exist
• The same necessity applies to causality: effects can fall under particular causes, but not under the universal cause

Christ in Gethsemane #

• Did Christ will to die or not to die?
• Simply: Christ willed to die, because this was his Father’s will
• Secundum quid: Christ had a kind of natural wish not to die (his human nature recoiled from suffering)
• But considering all circumstances, he simply willed to die
• All things considered, the death of Christ is cause for rejoicing rather than sadness, because of the good it brings about

The Merchant Throwing Cargo Overboard (Aristotelian Example) #

• A merchant doesn’t will his goods to be thrown overboard (absolutely considered)
• But in a storm, considering circumstances, he simply wills them to be thrown overboard to save his life
• His antecedent will (preserve goods) differs from his consequent will (preserve life by sacrificing goods)

God and Created Possibilities #

• Many possible people could have been generated from the same parents besides you and I
• Hundreds, thousands, or millions of different people could have existed in our place
• God obviously does not will every good that could be—only one person, you or me
• This illustrates that God’s will is not bound to will every possible good

Questions Addressed #

Q: If God wills all men to be saved, why aren’t all men saved? #

A: The statement “God wills all men to be saved” must be understood in one of three ways: (1) all men who are saved are willed by God to be saved (Augustine); (2) from each class of men, some are willed to be saved (distribution by kinds); or (3) God antecedently wills all to be saved, but consequently wills some to be damned according to justice (Damascene). The third interpretation is strongest and most extensively elaborated by Thomas.

Q: Can secondary causes impede God’s will? #

A: No. When a particular cause fails, the impediment itself comes from another particular cause. But that second cause is contained under the order of the universal cause (God’s will). Therefore, the effect cannot escape the order of divine causality. Even sinners and evildoers glorify God—those who repent glorify his mercy; those who don’t repent are punished and glorify his justice.

Q: How does the distinction between what is good absolutely vs. good with circumstances apply? #

A: Something can be absolutely good or bad when considered in isolation. But when additional circumstances are added, its character may reverse. Therefore, the will simply wills something when all circumstances are considered. This explains how God can will all men to live (antecedently, as men) while willing some to be executed (consequently, as murderers dangerous to society).

Digression on Related Topics #

On the Distinction Between Simple and Relative Will (Applied Elsewhere) #

• Berquist notes that Thomas uses this same distinction when discussing whether guardian angels grieve over human damnation
• God wills all men to be saved (antecedently), but considering circumstances, allows some to be damned
• The guardian angel grieves over the damnation secundum quid (wishing the person to be saved), but accepts God’s consequent will in all things

On Authority and Understanding Statements #

• Berquist observes that when encountering seemingly contradictory statements (like “God wills all to be saved” vs. “God wills some to be damned”), we shouldn’t dismiss one interpretation as “bad” if multiple seem to make sense
• Rather, we should recognize that different Church Fathers and commentators may understand the same statement in different ways, all of which can be true
• This principle applies broadly to difficult theological texts