Sect. 85Moral Perfection of the Divine WillMoral Perfection of the Divine Will
I. In God there can be no moral imperfection, no sin or anything approaching thereto. With Him, the impossibility of sinning or participating in sin is absolute and metaphysical, not only because the possibility of sinning would destroy His infinite perfection, but especially because of the nature of sin. Sin consists in preferring one’s self to God; in other words, in opposing personal interests to the Supreme Good and giving them preference. But such opposition is impossible with God, because His own Self and His interests are identical with the Supreme Good. This immaculate purity and absolute freedom from all sin is termed Sanctity or Holiness, in the sense of the classical definition given by the Areopagite: “Holiness is purity free from all fault, altogether perfect and spotless in every respect.” In order to complete the concept of sanctity, it is necessary to add that God is inaccessible to sin or to contact with sin, because He positively abominates it with an abomination proportionate to the esteem He has for the Supreme Good which sin despises—that is, with an infinite abomination. Hence the Divine purity is infinite, and implies an infinite distance between God and sin. Holy Scripture frequently insists upon the Divine sanctity as here described. “God is faithful and without iniquity, He is just and right” (Deut. 32:4); “Is God unjust (ἄδικος)? God forbid” (Rom. 3:5, 6). See, also, Rom. 9:14; 1 John 3:9; Hab. 1:13; Ps. 5:5, and 44:8.
God’s infinite detestation of sin entails the impossibility not only of willing sin as an end, but also of intending it positively as a means to other ends; He can only have the will to permit sin, and to make use of such permission as an occasion to bring about good. To permit sin, when able to prevent it, would, indeed, be against moral perfection in a created being, because the creature is bound to further the honour of God as much as lies in its power, and also because it is unable to repair the disorder inherent in sin. God, on the other hand, may dispose of His honour as He chooses, not, indeed, by sacrificing it, but by furthering it in any way He pleases, either by preventing sin or by converting or punishing the sinner. Both of these ways manifest God’s abomination of sin, and are, therefore, independently of other reasons, eligible means for the manifestation of His glory. Consequently, although sin is always an evil, the permission of sin is, on the part of God, a positive good. It may even be said that the permission of sin is better than its entire prevention.
When Holy Scripture uses expressions which seem to imply that God positively intends evil, they must be understood in the above sense. Unlike man, who permits evil only when he cannot prevent it, God, in His Wisdom and power, predetermines the permission of evil and ordains it to His ultimate ends. Cf. St. Thorn., 1 2, q. 79: “Utrum Deus sit causa peccati.”
II. Positively speaking, the moral perfection of God consists in the essential and immutable direction of His Will on Himself as the supreme object of all volition, and in the infinite love and esteem of Himself included in this act, the perfection of which is enhanced by the fact that the highest Good, the ultimate object of all volition, is, for the Divine Will, the immediate and only formal object, and that all other goods are objects of the Divine Will only because and in as far as they are subordinated to the highest good. A more pure, exalted, and constant volition of what is good cannot be conceived.
In its positive aspect also the moral perfection of God is called Holiness. This name is applied to the moral goodness of creatures when considered as a direction of the will towards the highest moral object, viz. the absolute dignity and majesty of God; and the designation is the more appropriate the more the creature disposes its whole life according to the exaltedness of such an object, and develops greater purity, energy, and constancy in morals. It is, therefore, evident that sanctity is the most, and indeed the only, convenient name for the moral perfection of God.
III. God’s absolute moral perfection necessarily implies the possession of all the virtues of creatures. It is, however, evident that many of these cannot exist actually in the Creator. Thus, for instance, religion and obedience, which imply submission to a higher being; faith and hope, which presuppose a state of imperfection; and temperance, which requires a subject composed of mind and matter, are all alike impossible in God. They are only virtually contained in the Divine perfection, viz. inasmuch as they express esteem for the highest good and for the good order of things. Some moral virtues, such as fortitude and meekness, are metaphorically attributed to God, only to bring out the absence of the opposite vices of pusillanimity and anger. Those virtues alone belong formally to the moral perfection of God which manifest and bring into operation the excellence of their subject; and they belong to Him in an eminent manner, so that all the Divine virtues are purely active and regal virtues.
The royal character of the Divine virtues appears in their exercise, in their diversity, and in their organic relations, which, in the moral life of God, are widely different from what they are in creatures. In creatures, all virtues, even those which have an external object, tend to increase the inner perfection of the virtuous subject. Not so with God; His perfection would be the same if He abstained from the exercise of any external virtue; and as the only virtue essential to His perfection (viz. self-love and self-esteem) is pure act identical with the Divine Essence, it cannot be spoken of as exercised—that is, as passing from potentiality to actuality. The virtues of creatures are manifold because they bear upon many objects and admit of various degrees of perfection. In God only one object, absolutely simple and perfect, is attained by the Divine Will, and consequently a diversity of virtues can only be based upon the remote and secondary objects of the Divine volitions. The organic unity of the virtues of creatures consists in the subordination of all others under the Love of God, which, like a bond of perfection, embraces and contains them all. But in God all virtues are one, because He can will nothing but Himself and things that are subordinated to Him as their supreme good. His infinite Love is the root from which all His other virtues spring, as it is also the root and essence of His Sanctity. The ramifications of the Divine Charity can, however, be considered as special moral virtues, because they represent special forms, or a special exercise of the Divine Goodness. The moral virtues in God are united more closely than in man, so much so that even the two most opposed of them, mercy and justice, are never exercised separately.
The Divine virtues which are directed to external objects—that is, the moral virtues—can be reduced to goodness, justice and truth, the last being taken in the sense of moral wisdom and veracity. These three are the fundamental types of all the other moral virtues in God: they are manifested in all His moral actions, and represent the principal directions into which the more special moral virtues branch off. We have already dealt with the nature of the Divine Goodness in the chapter on Divine Love; it remains, therefore, to determine the absolute character of the Divine Justice, so far as it differs from created justice and is exercised in union with Divine goodness and truth. It is precisely its inseparability from Goodness and Truth which frees the Divine Justice from the restrictions and the dependence of created justice.
I. In God there can be no moral imperfection, no sin or anything approaching thereto. With Him, the impossibility of sinning or participating in sin is absolute and metaphysical, not only because the possibility of sinning would destroy His infinite perfection, but especially because of the nature of sin. Sin consists in preferring one’s self to God; in other words, in opposing personal interests to the Supreme Good and giving them preference. But such opposition is impossible with God, because His own Self and His interests are identical with the Supreme Good. This immaculate purity and absolute freedom from all sin is termed Sanctity or Holiness, in the sense of the classical definition given by the Areopagite: “Holiness is purity free from all fault, altogether perfect and spotless in every respect.” In order to complete the concept of sanctity, it is necessary to add that God is inaccessible to sin or to contact with sin, because He positively abominates it with an abomination proportionate to the esteem He has for the Supreme Good which sin despises—that is, with an infinite abomination. Hence the Divine purity is infinite, and implies an infinite distance between God and sin. Holy Scripture frequently insists upon the Divine sanctity as here described. “God is faithful and without iniquity, He is just and right” (Deut. 32:4); “Is God unjust (ἄδικος)? God forbid” (Rom. 3:5, 6). See, also, Rom. 9:14; 1 John 3:9; Hab. 1:13; Ps. 5:5, and 44:8.
God’s infinite detestation of sin entails the impossibility not only of willing sin as an end, but also of intending it positively as a means to other ends; He can only have the will to permit sin, and to make use of such permission as an occasion to bring about good. To permit sin, when able to prevent it, would, indeed, be against moral perfection in a created being, because the creature is bound to further the honour of God as much as lies in its power, and also because it is unable to repair the disorder inherent in sin. God, on the other hand, may dispose of His honour as He chooses, not, indeed, by sacrificing it, but by furthering it in any way He pleases, either by preventing sin or by converting or punishing the sinner. Both of these ways manifest God’s abomination of sin, and are, therefore, independently of other reasons, eligible means for the manifestation of His glory. Consequently, although sin is always an evil, the permission of sin is, on the part of God, a positive good. It may even be said that the permission of sin is better than its entire prevention.
When Holy Scripture uses expressions which seem to imply that God positively intends evil, they must be understood in the above sense. Unlike man, who permits evil only when he cannot prevent it, God, in His Wisdom and power, predetermines the permission of evil and ordains it to His ultimate ends. Cf. St. Thorn., 1 2, q. 79: “Utrum Deus sit causa peccati.”
II. Positively speaking, the moral perfection of God consists in the essential and immutable direction of His Will on Himself as the supreme object of all volition, and in the infinite love and esteem of Himself included in this act, the perfection of which is enhanced by the fact that the highest Good, the ultimate object of all volition, is, for the Divine Will, the immediate and only formal object, and that all other goods are objects of the Divine Will only because and in as far as they are subordinated to the highest good. A more pure, exalted, and constant volition of what is good cannot be conceived.
In its positive aspect also the moral perfection of God is called Holiness. This name is applied to the moral goodness of creatures when considered as a direction of the will towards the highest moral object, viz. the absolute dignity and majesty of God; and the designation is the more appropriate the more the creature disposes its whole life according to the exaltedness of such an object, and develops greater purity, energy, and constancy in morals. It is, therefore, evident that sanctity is the most, and indeed the only, convenient name for the moral perfection of God.
III. God’s absolute moral perfection necessarily implies the possession of all the virtues of creatures. It is, however, evident that many of these cannot exist actually in the Creator. Thus, for instance, religion and obedience, which imply submission to a higher being; faith and hope, which presuppose a state of imperfection; and temperance, which requires a subject composed of mind and matter, are all alike impossible in God. They are only virtually contained in the Divine perfection, viz. inasmuch as they express esteem for the highest good and for the good order of things. Some moral virtues, such as fortitude and meekness, are metaphorically attributed to God, only to bring out the absence of the opposite vices of pusillanimity and anger. Those virtues alone belong formally to the moral perfection of God which manifest and bring into operation the excellence of their subject; and they belong to Him in an eminent manner, so that all the Divine virtues are purely active and regal virtues.
The royal character of the Divine virtues appears in their exercise, in their diversity, and in their organic relations, which, in the moral life of God, are widely different from what they are in creatures. In creatures, all virtues, even those which have an external object, tend to increase the inner perfection of the virtuous subject. Not so with God; His perfection would be the same if He abstained from the exercise of any external virtue; and as the only virtue essential to His perfection (viz. self-love and self-esteem) is pure act identical with the Divine Essence, it cannot be spoken of as exercised—that is, as passing from potentiality to actuality. The virtues of creatures are manifold because they bear upon many objects and admit of various degrees of perfection. In God only one object, absolutely simple and perfect, is attained by the Divine Will, and consequently a diversity of virtues can only be based upon the remote and secondary objects of the Divine volitions. The organic unity of the virtues of creatures consists in the subordination of all others under the Love of God, which, like a bond of perfection, embraces and contains them all. But in God all virtues are one, because He can will nothing but Himself and things that are subordinated to Him as their supreme good. His infinite Love is the root from which all His other virtues spring, as it is also the root and essence of His Sanctity. The ramifications of the Divine Charity can, however, be considered as special moral virtues, because they represent special forms, or a special exercise of the Divine Goodness. The moral virtues in God are united more closely than in man, so much so that even the two most opposed of them, mercy and justice, are never exercised separately.
The Divine virtues which are directed to external objects—that is, the moral virtues—can be reduced to goodness, justice and truth, the last being taken in the sense of moral wisdom and veracity. These three are the fundamental types of all the other moral virtues in God: they are manifested in all His moral actions, and represent the principal directions into which the more special moral virtues branch off. We have already dealt with the nature of the Divine Goodness in the chapter on Divine Love; it remains, therefore, to determine the absolute character of the Divine Justice, so far as it differs from created justice and is exercised in union with Divine goodness and truth. It is precisely its inseparability from Goodness and Truth which frees the Divine Justice from the restrictions and the dependence of created justice.
Seção 29% da obra, de A Manual of Catholic Theology (Wilhelm & Scannell, sobre a Dogmatik de Scheeben). Ver o original.