Some intelligent persons have desired that this

supplement be made [to Theodicy], and I have the

more readily yielded to their wishes as in this way

I have an opportunity again to remove certain 

difficulties and to make some observations which

were not sufficiently emphasized in the work itself.

I. Objection. Whoever does not choose the best

is lacking in power, or in knowledge, or in

goodness.

God did not choose the best in creating this world.

Therefore, God has been lacking in power, or

in knowledge, or in goodness.

Answer. I deny the minor, that is, the second

premise of this syllogism; and our opponent proves

it by this:

Prosyliogism. Whoever makes things in which

there is evil, which could have been made without

out any evil, or the making of which could have

been omitted, does not choose the best.

God has made a world in which there is evil; 

a world, I say, which could have been made

without any evil, or the making of which could 

have been omitted altogether.

Therefore, God has not chosen the best.

Answer. I grant the minor of this prosyllogism;

for it must be confessed that there is evil

in this world which God has made, and that it

was possible to make a world without evil, or even

not to create a world at all, for its creation has

depended on the free will of God; but I deny the

major, that is, the first of the two premises of the

prosyllogism, and I might content myself with

simply demanding its proof; but in order to make

the matter clearer, I have wished to justify this

denial by showing that the best plan is not always

that which seeks to avoid evil, since it may

happen that the evil is accompanied by a greater good.

For example, a general of an army will

prefer a great victory with a slight wound to a

condition without wound and without victory.  We

have proved this more fully in the large work by

making it clear, by instances taken from mathematics

and elsewhere, that an imperfection in

part may be required for a greater perfection in

the whole. In this I have followed the opinion of 

St. Augustine, who has said a hundred times, that

God has permitted evil in order to bring about 

good, that is, a greater good; and that of Thomas

Aquinas (in libr. II. sent. dist. 32, qu. I, art.1)

that the permitting of evil tends to the good

the universe. I have shown that the ancients

called Adam's fall felix culpa, a happy sin, because it

had been retrieved with immense advantage by the incarnation of the Son of God, who has given to the universe something nobler than anything that ever would have been among creatures except for it. For the sake of a clearer understanding, I have added, following many good authors, that it was in accordance with order and the general good that God allowed to certain creatures the opportunity of exercising their liberty, even when he foresaw that they would turn to evil, but which he could so well rectify; because it was not fitting that, in order to hinder sin, God should al- ways act in an extraordinary manner. To over- throw this objection, therefore, it is sufficient to show that a world with evil might be better than a world without evil; but I have gone even farther, in the work, and have even proved that this universe must be in reality better than every other possible universe. 

II. Objection. If there is more evil than good in intelligent creatures, then there is more evil than good in the whole work of God. 

Now, there is more evil than good in intelli- gent creatures. 

Therefore, there is more evil than good in the whole work of God. 

Answer. I deny the major and the minor of this conditional syllogism. As to the major, I do not admit it at all, because this pretended deduction from a part to the whole, from intelligent creatures to all creatures, supposes tacitly and with- out proof that creatures destitute of reason cannot enter into comparison nor into account with those which possess it. But why may it not be that the surplus of good in the non-intelligent creatures which fill the world, compensates for, and even incomparably surpasses, the surplus of evil in the rational creatures? It is true that the value of the latter is greater; but, in compensation, the others are beyond comparison the more numerous, and it may be that the proportion of number and quantity surpasses that of value and of quality. 

As to the minor, that is no more to be admitted; that is, it is not at all to be admitted that there is more evil than good in the intelligent creatures. There is no need even of granting that there is more evil than good in the human race, 

because it is possible, and in fact very probable, that the glory and the perfection of the blessed are in- comparably greater than the misery and the imperfection of the damned, and that here the excellence of the total good in the smaller number exceeds the total evil in the greater number. The blessed approach the Divinity, by means of a Divine Mediator, as near as may suit these creatures, and make such progress in good as is impossible for the damned to make the evil, approach as nearly as they may to the nature of demons. God is infinite, and the devil is limited; the good may and does go to infinity, while evil has its bounds. It is therefore possible, and is credible, that in the comparison of the blessed and the damned, the contrary of that which I have said might happen in the comparison of intelligent and non-intelligent creatures, takes place; namely, it is possible that in the comparison of the happy and the unhappy, the proportion of degree exceeds that of number, and that in the comparison of intelligent and non-intelligent creatures, the proportion of number is greater than that of value. I have the right to suppose that a thing is possible so long as its impossibility is not proved; and indeed that which I have here advanced is more than a supposition. 

But in the second place, if I should admit that there is more evil than good in the human race, I have still good grounds for not admitting that there is more evil than good in all intelligent creatures. For there is an inconceivable number of genii, and perhaps of other rational creatures. And an opponent could not prove that in all the City of God, composed as well of genii as of rational animals without number and of an infinity of kinds, evil exceeds good. And although in order to answer an objection, there is no need of proving that a thing is, when its mere possibility suffices; yet, in this work, I have not omitted to show that it is a consequence of the supreme perfection of the Sovereign of the universe, that the kingdom of God is the most perfect of all possible states or governments, and that consequently the little evil there is, is required for the consummation of the immense good which is found there.