ng else. In like manner a circumstance does not always add
further perfection, except in reference to something else. And, for
as much as it does, although it may add to the goodness or malice,
it does not always change the species of good or evil.
________________________
QUESTION 19
OF THE GOODNESS AND MALICE OF THE INTERIOR ACT OF THE WILL
(In Ten Articles)
We must now consider the goodness of the interior act of the will;
under which head there are ten points of inquiry:
(1) Whether the goodness of the will depends on the object?
(2) Whether it depends on the object alone?
(3) Whether it depends on reason?
(4) Whether it depends on the eternal law?
(5) Whether erring reason binds?
(6) Whether the will is evil if it follows the erring reason against
the law of God?
(7) Whether the goodness of the will in regard to the means, depends
on the intention of the end?
(8) Whether the degree of goodness or malice in the will depends on
the degree of good or evil in the intention?
(9) Whether the goodness of the will depends on its conformity to the
Divine Will?
(10) Whether it is necessary for the human will, in order to be good,
to be conformed to the Divine Will, as regards the thing willed?
________________________
FIRST ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 19, Art. 1]
Whether the Goodness of the Will Depends on the Object?
Objection 1: It would seem that the goodness of the will does not
depend on the object. For the will cannot be directed otherwise than
to what is good: since "evil is outside the scope of the will," as
Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv). If therefore the goodness of the will
depended on the object, it would follow that every act of the will
is good, and none bad.
Obj. 2: Further, good is first of all in the end: wherefore the
goodness of the end, as such, does not depend on any other. But,
according to the Philosopher (Ethic. vi, 5), "goodness of action is
the end, but goodness of making is never the end": because the latter
is always ordained to the thing made, as to its end. Therefore the
goodness of the act of the will does not depend on any object.
Obj. 3: Further, such as a thing is, such does it make a thing to be.
But the object of the will is good, by reason of the goodness of
nature. Therefore it cannot give moral goodness to the will.
Therefore the moral goodness of the will does not depend on the
object.
_On the contrary,_ the Philosopher says (Ethic. v, 1) that justice
|