|
State of the question. Many men cannot understand how
the inequality in things can come from God. The
Manichaeans tried to explain this inequality by two,
opposite principles, and Origen, trying to rectify their
error, explained that in the beginning God created only
intellectual beings and that all these beings were equal.
Some of these sinned and as a punishment they were united
to bodies. In modern times some thinkers have declared
that that great inequality among animals, whereby the
strong devour the weak, cannot come from God. They ask
why there should be such a great inequality in the
intellectual and moral aptitudes of men. This is the
language of egalitarianism. As we shall see in the body
of the article, it is a materialistic theory that does not
take into account the subordination of the forms of agents
and ends.
These unfortunate inequalities, says Schopenhauer,
cannot come from a good and omnipotent God, and he
concludes that God is not omnipotent and that the
principle of all things is some kind of will that is always
trying to persevere in being. This attempt is always
associated with sorrow and is like an insatiable thirst.
Therefore in his pessimism he concluded, that this desire
for life must be eradicated so that we may come to that
negative bliss which is the ending of all sorrow.
Schopenhauer's difficulties can be reduced to the
difficulties proposed at the beginning of the present
article: the best God should have made the best things,
and therefore all equal, otherwise, according to the
third objection, it would be an injustice for God to
distribute His gifts unequally to creatures.
Reply. The reply is that the divine wisdom is the cause
of the distinction of things for the sake of the perfection
of the universe, and therefore the divine wisdom is also
the cause of inequality.
1. Proof from authority. "Why doth one day excel
another, and one light another, and one year another
year, when all come of the Lord? By the knowledge of
the Lord they were distinguished."[905] In the
canticle, "All ye works of the Lord, bless the
Lord,"[906] we see the inequality of creatures,
each of which in its own way praises the Lord. The
description of the creation in the Book of Genesis shows
the inequality of creatures, and the Fourth Council of
the Lateran declared that "God at one time and in the
beginning of time established both creatures, the
spiritual and corporeal, and then the human creature, as
it were a common being constituted by spirit and body."
2. Proof from reason: a) by the refutation of
Origen's theory; b) positively.
a) In opposing the Manichaeans, Origen declared that
God in the beginning had created spiritual beings, who
were all equal. Those that sinned were bound to bodies,
and the greater the sin the closer the union with matter.
Some of these beings did not sin, and these now
constitute the different grades of angels according to
their different merits. In this way Origen combined the
doctrine of original sin with the Platonic myths about the
pre-existence of souls.[907]
St. Thomas replies: "The totality of corporeal beings
would then not be because of the communication of God's
goodness to creatures but for the punishment of sin. But
this is contrary to the words of Genesis, "And God saw
all the things that He had made, and they were very
good."[908] St. Augustine exclaims: "What
could be more stupid than to say that by this sun, as
there is but one in the world, God was concerned not with
the splendor of beauty or the welfare of corporeal things,
but that this sun came to be because one soul
sinned?"[909]
What could be more stupid than to say that the stars are
in the sky, that the pure air exists, that the rose, the
lily, the dove, the lamb were made because someone
sinned? St. Augustine is speaking formally when he
says, "what could be more stupid," for it is
stupidity, opposed to the wisdom which explains the beauty
of even the sensible world as a manifestation of God's
goodness, while this theory explains all this by sin, not
by the highest cause but by something that is less than
nothing. Schopenhauer's doctrine is even greater folly
when he speaks of a fall of the Absolute or of God. He
tries to explain the inequalities and sorrows of the world
by a primitive, non-omnipotent, or rather impotent
will. The first cause is subsisting being itself and
therefore omnipotent, because operation follows being,
and anything that is able to possess the nature of being is
comprised in the object of divine power, which can effect
anything that has no repugnance to being.[910]
b) The positive proof is from the principle of finality,
out of which is drawn the corollary of the principle of the
subordination of ends, forms, and agents, against
materialistic egalitarianism. Leibnitz adopted St.
Thomas' argument but exaggerated it, as we shall see.
St. Thomas' argument can be reduced to the following:
The specific or formal distinction is more important than
the material or numerical distinction, because matter is
on account of the form and the individuals in any species
of corruptible beings are for the conservation of the
species. But the formal distinction always requires
inequality, since the forms of things are subordinate like
numbers, ascending from the elements to mixed beings, to
plants, and to animals, and in each instance one species
is found more perfect than the others, for example, the
diamond or radium among minerals, the rose among the
flowers, and man among the animals. Therefore the
inequality of beings is required for the perfection of the
universe so that in different ways the wisdom of God might
make known His goodness.
The major is evident, since matter is because of the
form, according to the principle of finality that the
imperfect is on account of the perfect. In the same way
the many individuals of the same species of corruptible
being are for the conservation of the species. Excluding
the subsisting spiritual soul, individuals are ordered to
the preservation of the species. Thus individuals pass
away but the species remains; it is negatively eternal in
the sense that it prescinds from the here and now, and
thus it is somehow above time, representing the divine
idea, the idea of rose, of lily, of lion, etc.
Therefore, St. Thomas says, the hen gathers the
chicks under her wing and defends them against the hawk
because the hen naturally loves the good of its species
more than its own good.[911]
The major therefore is certain, namely, the formal or
specific distinction is more important than the material or
numerical distinction; any material individual of this or
that species is of minor importance. This, however, is
not true of a person, because the soul of the person is
subsisting and immortal and thus is of greater value than
the species of lion or horse.
The minor. But the formal distinction requires the
inequality or subordination of forms. This is affirmed
with a serene mind and not lugubriously as was the case
with Origen. On this point St. Thomas differs
entirely from the pessimism of Schopenhauer. But it
should be noted that the holy doctor is speaking here of
the primary distinction and inequality existing prior to
sin; he is not now speaking of how after original and
actual sin this inequality is often increased and causes
that miserable state of servitude in which so many men
spent their entire lives before the spread of
Christianity.
The primary inequality of things pertains to their natures
independently of sin, for, as Aristotle says, "the
species of things are subordinate like
numbers."[912] For numbers vary by the addition or
subtraction of unity and the species of things differ by
the addition or subtraction of a specific difference. for
example, a substance is incorporeal or corporeal, and
here there is inequality; similarly, the corporeal
substance is living or inanimate; if living, it is
sensitive or not; if sensitive, it is rational or not.
Everywhere we find the inequality and subordination of
forms as with numbers.
Hence St. Thomas says, "In each of these we find one
species more perfect than the others," for example, man
among the animals, and the animals that have both internal
and external senses are superior to the animals that do not
possess all the senses, as the oyster and the sponge,
which appear to have only the sense of touch. So there is
also a certain subordination among plants and flowers and
among minerals; the diamond, or perhaps radium, seems to
be the most precious of minerals.
These considerations are valid against materialism and
mechanism, which take into consideration only quantity and
not quality. If quality is something prior to quantity,
the variation of heat from the tenth to the twentieth
degree is perhaps greater than between the twentieth and
thirtieth degrees. Materialism looks at everything as if
it were in the same horizontal plane, as if, for
instance, animals were machines and as if the human soul
were not essentially superior to the soul of the brute.
This is absolute egalitarianism, which reduces everything
to the lowest plane.
Spiritualism, on the other hand, considers everything as
in a vertical line, inasmuch as the species of things are
subordinated in a hierarchy for the splendor of the
universe, because those things that are united in God can
be only divisively in creatures and because the formal
distinction requires inequality. Many modern writers do
not understand this subordination, confusing it with
coordination, for example, when they compare the first
cause and the second cause with two men rowing a boat.
The conclusion is confirmed by the solution of the
objections.
Reply to first objection. The most perfect agent
produces his perfect total effect, but he produces it with
a subordination of parts, for example, with the
subordination of organs and functions in the plant and
animal organisms. The animal would be less perfect if all
its parts were equal, if all, for instance, had the
dignity or importance of the eye.
Thus the universe is more perfect with angels, men,
animals, plants, minerals than if there were only angels
and all the angels were equal. Here was Origen's
error. According to St. Thomas the angels could not be
equal, for in the angels there is a particular
subordination of forms since the angels are pure subsisting
forms. Since individuation takes place through matter,
there can be only one individual in each angelic species.
Michael is the only individual in his species. Hence
among the angels we have a perfect hierarchy or
subordination.
Reply to second objection. In the Blessed Trinity
there is equality according to the processions "ad
intra" by which the entire divine nature is
communicated. The Word and the Holy Ghost are equal to
the Father. On the other hand there must be inequality
in the procession "ad extra" because the creature
is an inadequate manifestation of the divine goodness and
many subordinate creatures are required.
Reply to third objection. The primitive inequality is
not unjust since it is because of the perfection of the
universe. This Origen was not able to understand.
Thus some are born inclined to fortitude and must acquire
meekness, others inclined to meekness must acquire
fortitude. Each must ascend the mountain of perfection by
traversing the various parts of the mountain. The justice
of God is not commutative, regulating the changes among
equals, but it is distributive according to the
requirements of the common good.[913] God is His
own law.[914] Cajetan remarks: "Therefore God is
just in condescension in order to manifest His
goodness."
Leibnitz exaggerated this doctrine of inequality when he
denied matter in his monadology and reduced all substance
to spiritual monads which are subordinated as are the
angels in St. Thomas' doctrine. Leibnitz held that
there could not be in the world two beings absolutely
similar because God would have created these perfectly
similar beings without reason, just as a man would have
two perfectly similar copies of the same edition of Virgil
in his library without reason.
Reply. Two perfectly similar individuals can exist,
especially in succession, for the preservation of the
species and they are distinguished from each other by
matter marked by quantity, as in the case of two drops of
water or two perfectly identical twins. We concede only
that there cannot be two angels perfectly similar in
species, and this would also be true of men if they were
monads without matter.
St. Thomas does admit a certain individual inequality of
souls in the same human species: the soul of Christ is
higher even in the natural order than the soul of Judas,
but this inequality is not unrelated to the body, although
on the other hand a body is better disposed because of a
higher individual soul, since causes are mutually causes
to each other in different genera of causes.
|
|