But Malebranche cleverly or obstinately avoids the epistemological question that interests Arnauld. But what does this mean for the Malebranchean theodicy? On True and False Ideas. So, Malebranche cannot hold that creation is an act required by Order. God has these important reasons when the glory He derives from the perfection of His work counterbalances that which He receives from the uniformity of His conduct. So, in acting, God must not violate the demands of Order. Translated by Patrick Riley.
While Malebranche is clear that God needed to act by particular volitions for initial creation, we now have to ask why He did so. Asking God to intervene directly to help us is presumptuous, but we may pray for the help of an angel.
Pierre Daniel Huet, Ode, cum inter aulae tumultus patriae desiderio teneretur. According to PC all volitions of God have particular contents, general volitions have particular contents that follow the laws, and particular volitions have particular contents that do not follow the laws. Unless otherwise stated, translations are our own. We argue that beyond creation and these five categories of general volitions along with a few other rather peculiar general volitionsit is very difficult to see any room for  particular volitions.
Second, given that creation did occur, we must ask how God creates.
Controversies on Legality Malebranche most often defines divine particular volitions  in contradistinction to general ones. Arnauld is committed to both the metaphysical existence of miracles and our having knowledge of them. We begin in malebrancne 1 with metaphysics.
Johns Hopkins University Press, Avec une discution particuliere du grand principe des Cartesiens [New dissertation on the Search after Truth, containing the response to the critique of the critique of the Search after Truth, in which the errors of the dogmatists, both ancient and new, are revealed, together with a particular discussion on the great principle of the Cartesians] Paris, Even rare phenomena are governed by laws whose conditions are at least in principle discoverable.
For some years he held the position of honorary canon at Dijon, but he resigned in order to take up his residence in Paris. A Reply to Nadler. If there are such varying sets of simple laws, then God would create whichever set is conducive to a world containing both a Christ figure and the most good. Logic or the Art of Thinking.
Walsh, Mqlebranche, and Thomas Eecherche. God loves His vérjté and goodness invincibly, by nature and necessity. He marvels at the complexity and variety of organic bodies, and the manner in which they are organized to assure propagation. As we argued above, original sin is a central although not necessary component of this world. His innovation is to shift the recherch of a recherhe  feature of Christian theology: For Malebranche, God only acts for His own glory.
In other words, without Christ, God would be forced to save any and all souls by particular volitions, a way unworthy of Him. Here we see an analogous situation in the realm of grace as we saw above in the realm of nature. The general laws that give angels, both good and bad, power over bodies, substances that are inferior to their nature—the malebrancche causes of these laws are their practical desires.
Simon Foucher – Wikipedia
Help Center Find new research papers in: A third part of Foucher’s De la sagesse des anciens was never printed. The explanation for why creation itself was executed by particular volitions is masterful in its simplicity.
The natural order is largely governed by 1—4 above. He graduated at the Sorbonnehaving studied theologyand spent the remainder of his life in literary work in Paris, where he died.
The starting point for achieving this understanding is the appreciation of the place of the human mind as mid-way between the infinite and the finite. But, Malebranche is careful to note, just as rain sometimes falls on the sea instead of the earth, sometimes grace is given to hardened hearts rather than souls well- prepared for salvation.
In his day Foucher enjoyed considerable reputation as a keen opponent of Malebranche and Leibniz.
On True and False Ideas. Yale University Press,