Page:Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism, and Socialism.djvu/98

the defeat of God a real defeat? What can be the nature of this victory, which is necessarily followed by the defeat of the victor; and what can be the nature of the defeat which terminates in the elevation of the conquered? What is the meaning of paradise as the reward of defeat, and of hell as the punishment of victory? If in my defeat is my reward, why reject that which saves me; and if my condemnation is in my victory, why desire that which condemns me?

These questions have occupied the minds of all the great doctors of past ages. The petulant sophists of to-day affect to despise them, and yet they cannot even lift from the ground the formidable weapons which these holy doctors, in Catholic ages, easily and humbly wielded. In the present age, it is considered an inexcusable folly to examine with humility, and aided by grace, the high designs of God in his profound mysteries; as if man could comprehend anything without an investigation of these profound and high designs. All the great questions upon God are now considered as idle and sterile; as if it were possible to study God, who is intelligence and truth, without acquiring truth and intelligence.

Regarding the tremendous question which is the subject of this chapter, and which I shall endeavor to confine within as narrow limits as possible, I affirm, that the opinion generally entertained respecting free will is in every respect false. Free will does not consist, as is commonly supposed, in the power of choice between good and evil, which importune man with contrary solicitations. If free will consisted in this faculty, the following consequences would necessarily result—the one relative to man, and the other relative to God, and both