FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Immutability of God's Will and Petitionary Prayer
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Can you post links to where Aquinas argues that this isn't the best of possible worlds?

I can't agree with Leibniz on that.  If he's right, I will curse the day I was conceived for all eternity.  

If what Leibniz is saying is not heretical, I may need to find a new church.
(06-27-2019, 03:17 PM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]Can you post links to where Aquinas argues that this isn't the best of possible worlds?

I can't agree with Leibniz on that.  If he's right, I will curse the day I was conceived for all eternity.  

If what Leibniz is saying is not heretical, I may need to find a new church.

Honestly I don't see why you think the quoted section of Leibniz was heretical.

Anyway the main source in Aquinas is his Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard. There is not a public domain English translation of the relevant section, so here's a link to the Latin: Commentary on the Sentences I.44. 1. 2.

Here Aquinas kind of says what you say, namely, that the world could have been qualitatively better (i.e., less sin), although Aquinas does think in a world with free will there will be sin. Aquinas also argues that the world could be quantitatively better, namely, more creatures.

The one way Aquinas thinks the world is perfect is in its order; namely, it is perfectly ordered towards God. This has to do with the world's hierarchy of being, not with its moral imperfection.

There are a couple of other ways to argue from St. Thomas' thought that this is not the best possible world, and they have to do with God's will not being caused by anything; so the best possible good of creation does not cause God to choose it.
(06-27-2019, 03:36 PM)Filiolus Wrote: [ -> ]There are a couple of other ways to argue from St. Thomas' thought that this is not the best possible world, and they have to do with God's will not being caused by anything; so the best possible good of creation does not cause God to choose it.

If God's will is uncaused in this, and the best possible good is irrelevant in his will for this particular world, is it possible to know why he willed this world as opposed to any other?
(06-27-2019, 03:41 PM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-27-2019, 03:36 PM)Filiolus Wrote: [ -> ]There are a couple of other ways to argue from St. Thomas' thought that this is not the best possible world, and they have to do with God's will not being caused by anything; so the best possible good of creation does not cause God to choose it.

If God's will is uncaused in this, and the best possible good is irrelevant in his will for this particular world, is it possible to know why he willed this world as opposed to any other?

Aquinas thinks not. God's will is ultimately a mystery. Although in some things Aquinas argues from fittingness (for example, it was fitting that the Second Person of the Trinity be Incarnate to save man from sin and death), but these arguments are not demonstrative.
(06-27-2019, 03:17 PM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]Can you post links to where Aquinas argues that this isn't the best of possible worlds?

I can't agree with Leibniz on that.  If he's right, I will curse the day I was conceived for all eternity.  

If what Leibniz is saying is not heretical, I may need to find a new church.

Also I'm sorry if my tone has injured your faith in the Catholic Church in any way. Was I too abrasive in the beginning? And too cold now? Like, I want to share what I know about Aquinas without my tone being the reason you're turned off. I'm sorry if I've caused some kind of crisis. I'll keep trying to answer questions if you have any.
(06-27-2019, 03:54 PM)Filiolus Wrote: [ -> ]Also I'm sorry if my tone has injured your faith in the Catholic Church in any way. Was I too abrasive in the beginning? And too cold now? Like, I want to share what I know about Aquinas without my tone being the reason you're turned off. I'm sorry if I've caused some kind of crisis. I'll keep trying to answer questions if you have any.

Oh no, not at all!  You actually remind me of MagisterMusicae in your tone.  I didn't perceive any abrasiveness in it.  

I'm just dealing with the shittiness of existence in this world and trying to reconcile the act of loving God with knowing the shit that causes you misery was something he willed for you, and even thought necessary for a perfect world.
Yeah the problem of evil is not a serious threat to philosophical arguments for the existence of God... but I do think it's a very tough problem to understand nonetheless. I have a really hard time with it, too.

From Aquinas' viewpoint there may be a reason for specific evil, and for every evil occurrence we are supposed to use it for our salvation, but that doesn't mean God planned it that way in such a way that it couldn't have been otherwise. It's kind of a hard pill to swallow that things could have been better but that God let these evil things happen. Even with free will in the equation it's tough.
(06-27-2019, 04:15 PM)Filiolus Wrote: [ -> ]From Aquinas' viewpoint there may be a reason for specific evil, and for every evil occurrence we are supposed to use it for our salvation, but that doesn't mean God planned it that way in such a way that it couldn't have been otherwise. It's kind of a hard pill to swallow that things could have been better but that God let these evil things happen. Even with free will in the equation it's tough.

That's the only way I'm able to reconcile it.  This world isn't the best possible, and God didn't will the individual evils that took place, but the only way he could allow for people to truly love him was if he allowed for the possibility of these evils to take place, and he almost never steps in to right the wrongs done, because that would mean he loves us unequally.  He is an all-but-deistic deity.

If that isn't true, I don't really know how to love God anymore.
(06-27-2019, 04:50 PM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-27-2019, 04:15 PM)Filiolus Wrote: [ -> ]From Aquinas' viewpoint there may be a reason for specific evil, and for every evil occurrence we are supposed to use it for our salvation, but that doesn't mean God planned it that way in such a way that it couldn't have been otherwise. It's kind of a hard pill to swallow that things could have been better but that God let these evil things happen. Even with free will in the equation it's tough.

That's the only way I'm able to reconcile it.  This world isn't the best possible, and God didn't will the individual evils that took place, but the only way he could allow for people to truly love him was if he allowed for the possibility of these evils to take place, and he almost never steps in to right the wrongs done, because that would mean he loves us unequally.  He is an all-but-deistic deity.

If that isn't true, I don't really know how to love God anymore.

I sympathize for the most part, but... doesn't he love us unequally? It'd be a bit unjust for him to love me as much as he loves the Virgin Mary, for example.
(06-27-2019, 05:05 PM)Filiolus Wrote: [ -> ]I sympathize for the most part, but... doesn't he love us unequally? It'd be a bit unjust for him to love me as much as he loves the Virgin Mary, for example.

My guess is only in relation to Christ, although the idea that the whole Trinity favors her over the rest of humanity does not really bother me.  If God just decides he likes some guy better than me, or me better than some guy, though, that affects my ability to trust him.  It would always mean that, wherever my best interests and someone else's best interests, whom God favors more, are in conflict, God will not act in my best interests.  Assuming I have sufficient knowledge to act in my best interest, I would, at least sometimes, do better to trust in myself rather than God; trusting in God absolutely would be foolhardy.
Pages: 1 2 3 4