Principal arguments

That not in the first place because, if God is able to make something please from what is not pleasing without such a habit, then he is manifestly able to make something pleasing from what is not that has this habit in itself. The consequent is false. Again, it follows that God is able by himself alone to make that a white thing is without producing whiteness and that man exists without producing humanity, which are false. And the consequences are clear because the argument does not seem to about one more than another.

In the second place principally, it would follow that God would be able to be the formal ratio making the will pleasing. The consequence is clear, the falsity is proved because, if so, then it follows that it would be possible there to be motion of ordered love in the created mind. The consequent is false since motion indicates an imperfection.

In the third place, if God were able to withdraw rectitude from the mind, it follows that it would be able to make a sinning mind. The consequent is false because no one is bad from God as author according to Augustine Augustinus, XXX . The consequence is clear because every mind lacking rectitude is unjust. This seems to be the opinion of Anselm, in his book , in chapter 4 Anselmus, De libero arbitrio, c. 4, xxx .

In opposition, it is argued that the first part has already shown above, but the second is proved because rectitude and the will are absolutely distinct things, therefore God is able to separate one from the other. And as a consequence he is able possible to separate and remove the will from its rectitude, therefore.