|
State of the question. The purpose of this article is to explain that
diversity of wills, which was discussed in the preceding article, was
not such as to induce real contrariety, either between the divine will
and the human will, or between the human will and the sensitive
appetite; because the diverse movements of these wills, although they
are sometimes concerned about the same thing, yet they are considered
under different aspects.
Reply. There was no contrariety of wills in Christ. It is of
faith, having been decided in the Third Council of Constantinople,
and quoted in the counterargument of the article, the council
declaring: "We confess two natural wills, not in opposition...,
but following His human will, and neither withstanding nor striving
against but rather being subject to His divine and omnipotent
will."[1466]
Theological proof. Contrariety is opposition in the same subject and
for the same reason. But this opposition was not in Christ, for the
sensual will and the natural will shrank from death as harmful to
nature, whereas the divine will and the rational will, in that it was
free, willed death as good for the human race.
Moreover, Christ by His divine will and His rational will willed
that both His sensual will and His natural will be moved according to
the inclination of each, yet so that there be no deordination in them.
|
|
