], when assigning the
cause of visions in dreams, that "when an animal sleeps, the blood
descends in abundance to the sensitive principle, and movements descend
with it," that is, the impressions left from the movements are
preserved in the animal spirits, "and move the sensitive principle"; so
that a certain appearance ensues, as if the sensitive principle were
being then changed by the external objects themselves.
cause of visions in dreams, that "when an animal sleeps, the blood
descends in abundance to the sensitive principle, and movements descend
with it," that is, the impressions left from the movements are
preserved in the animal spirits, "and move the sensitive principle"; so
that a certain appearance ensues, as if the sensitive principle were
being then changed by the external objects themselves.
Summa Theologica
(Did.
) vol.
ii, p.
218] asserted that the forms which are in matter are caused by
immaterial forms, because they said that the material forms are
participations of immaterial forms. Avicenna followed them in this
opinion to some extent, for he said that all forms which are in matter
proceed from the concept of the "intellect"; and that corporeal agents
only dispose [matter] for the forms. They seem to have been deceived on
this point, through supposing a form to be something made "per se," so
that it would be the effect of a formal principle. But, as the
Philosopher proves (Metaph. vii, Did. vi, 8), what is made, properly
speaking, is the "composite": for this properly speaking, is, as it
were, what subsists. Whereas the form is called a being, not as that
which is, but as that by which something is; and consequently neither
is a form, properly speaking, made; for that is made which is; since to
be is nothing but the way to existence.
Now it is manifest that what is made is like to the maker, forasmuch as
every agent makes its like. So whatever makes natural things, has a
likeness to the composite; either because it is composite itself, as
when fire begets fire, or because the whole "composite" as to both
matter and form is within its power; and this belongs to God alone.
Therefore every informing of matter is either immediately from God, or
form some corporeal agent; but not immediately from an angel.
Reply to Objection 1: Our soul is united to the body as the form; and
so it is not surprising for the body to be formally changed by the
soul's concept; especially as the movement of the sensitive appetite,
which is accompanied with a certain bodily change, is subject to the
command of reason. An angel, however, has not the same connection with
natural bodies; and hence the argument does not hold.
Reply to Objection 2: Whatever an inferior power can do, that a
superior power can do, not in the same way, but in a more excellent
way; for example, the intellect knows sensible things in a more
excellent way than sense knows them. So an angel can change corporeal
matter in a more excellent way than can corporeal agents, that is by
moving the corporeal agents themselves, as being the superior cause.
Reply to Objection 3: There is nothing to prevent some natural effect
taking place by angelic power, for which the power of corporeal agents
would not suffice. This, however, is not to obey an angel's will (as
neither does matter obey the mere will of a cook, when by regulating
the fire according to the prescription of his art he produces a dish
that the fire could not have produced by itself); since to reduce
matter to the act of the substantial form does not exceed the power of
a corporeal agent; for it is natural for like to make like.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether bodies obey the angels as regards local motion?
Objection 1: It would seem that bodies do not obey the angels in local
motion. For the local motion of natural bodies follows on their forms.
But the angels do not cause the forms of natural bodies, as stated
above [897](A[2]). Therefore neither can they cause in them local
motion.
Objection 2: Further, the Philosopher (Phys. viii, 7) proves that local
motion is the first of all movements. But the angels cannot cause other
movements by a formal change of the matter. Therefore neither can they
cause local motion.
Objection 3: Further, the corporeal members obey the concept of the
soul as regards local movement, as having in themselves some principle
of life. In natural bodies, however, there is not vital principle.
Therefore they do not obey the angels in local motion.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Trin. iii, 8,9) that the angels use
corporeal seed to produce certain effects. But they cannot do this
without causing local movement. Therefore bodies obey them in local
motion.
I answer that, As Dionysius says (Div. Nom. vii): "Divine wisdom has
joined the ends of the first to the principles of the second. " Hence it
is clear that the inferior nature at its highest point is in
conjunction with superior nature. Now corporeal nature is below the
spiritual nature. But among all corporeal movements the most perfect is
local motion, as the Philosopher proves (Phys. viii, 7). The reason of
this is that what is moved locally is not as such in potentiality to
anything intrinsic, but only to something extrinsic---that is, to
place. Therefore the corporeal nature has a natural aptitude to be
moved immediately by the spiritual nature as regards place. Hence also
the philosophers asserted that the supreme bodies are moved locally by
the spiritual substances; whence we see that the soul moves the body
first and chiefly by a local motion.
Reply to Objection 1: There are in bodies other local movements besides
those which result from the forms; for instance, the ebb and flow of
the sea does not follow from the substantial form of the water, but
from the influence of the moon; and much more can local movements
result from the power of spiritual substances.
Reply to Objection 2: The angels, by causing local motion, as the first
motion, can thereby cause other movements; that is, by employing
corporeal agents to produce these effects, as a workman employs fire to
soften iron.
Reply to Objection 3: The power of an angel is not so limited as is the
power of the soul. Hence the motive power of the soul is limited to the
body united to it, which is vivified by it, and by which it can move
other things. But an angel's power is not limited to any body; hence it
can move locally bodies not joined to it.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether angels can work miracles?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels can work miracles. For
Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ): "Those spirits are called virtues
by whom signs and miracles are usually done. "
Objection 2: Further, Augustine says (QQ. 83, qu. 79) that "magicians
work miracles by private contracts; good Christians by public justice,
bad Christians by the signs of public justice. " But magicians work
miracles because they are "heard by the demons," as he says elsewhere
in the same work [*Cf. Liber xxi, Sentent. , sent. 4: among the
supposititious works of St. Augustine]. Therefore the demons can work
miracles. Therefore much more can the good angels.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says in the same work [*Cf. Liber xxi,
Sentent. , sent. 4: among the supposititious works of St. Augustine]
that "it is not absurd to believe that all the things we see happen may
be brought about by the lower powers that dwell in our atmosphere. " But
when an effect of natural causes is produced outside the order of the
natural cause, we call it a miracle, as, for instance, when anyone is
cured of a fever without the operation of nature. Therefore the angels
and demons can work miracles.
Objection 4: Further, superior power is not subject to the order of an
inferior cause. But corporeal nature is inferior to an angel. Therefore
an angel can work outside the order of corporeal agents; which is to
work miracles.
On the contrary, It is written of God (Ps. 135:4): "Who alone doth
great wonders. "
I answer that, A miracle properly so called is when something is done
outside the order of nature. But it is not enough for a miracle if
something is done outside the order of any particular nature; for
otherwise anyone would perform a miracle by throwing a stone upwards,
as such a thing is outside the order of the stone's nature. So for a
miracle is required that it be against the order of the whole created
nature. But God alone can do this, because, whatever an angel or any
other creature does by its own power, is according to the order of
created nature; and thus it is not a miracle. Hence God alone can work
miracles.
Reply to Objection 1: Some angels are said to work miracles; either
because God works miracles at their request, in the same way as holy
men are said to work miracles; or because they exercise a kind of
ministry in the miracles which take place; as in collecting the dust in
the general resurrection, or by doing something of that kind.
Reply to Objection 2: Properly speaking, as said above, miracles are
those things which are done outside the order of the whole created
nature. But as we do not know all the power of created nature, it
follows that when anything is done outside the order of created nature
by a power unknown to us, it is called a miracle as regards ourselves.
So when the demons do anything of their own natural power, these things
are called "miracles" not in an absolute sense, but in reference to
ourselves. In this way the magicians work miracles through the demons;
and these are said to be done by "private contracts," forasmuch as
every power of the creature, in the universe, may be compared to the
power of a private person in a city. Hence when a magician does
anything by compact with the devil, this is done as it were by private
contract. On the other hand, the Divine justice is in the whole
universe as the public law is in the city. Therefore good Christians,
so far as they work miracles by Divine justice, are said to work
miracles by "public justice": but bad Christians by the "signs of
public justice," as by invoking the name of Christ, or by making use of
other sacred signs.
Reply to Objection 3: Spiritual powers are able to effect whatever
happens in this visible world, by employing corporeal seeds by local
movement.
Reply to Objection 4: Although the angels can do something which is
outside the order of corporeal nature, yet they cannot do anything
outside the whole created order, which is essential to a miracle, as
above explained.
__________________________________________________________________
THE ACTION OF THE ANGELS ON MAN (FOUR ARTICLES)
We now consider the action of the angels on man, and inquire: (1) How
far they can change them by their own natural power; (2) How they are
sent by God to the ministry of men; (3) How they guard and protect men.
Under the first head there are four points of inquiry:
(1) Whether an angel can enlighten the human intellect?
(2) Whether he can change man's will?
(3) Whether he can change man's imagination?
(4) Whether he can change man's senses?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can enlighten man?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel cannot enlighten man. For man
is enlightened by faith; hence Dionysius (Eccl. Hier. iii) attributes
enlightenment to baptism, as "the sacrament of faith. " But faith is
immediately from God, according to Eph. 2:8: "By grace you are saved
through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God. "
Therefore man is not enlightened by an angel; but immediately by God.
Objection 2: Further, on the words, "God hath manifested it to them"
(Rom. 1:19), the gloss observes that "not only natural reason availed
for the manifestation of Divine truths to men, but God also revealed
them by His work," that is, by His creature. But both are immediately
from God---that is, natural reason and the creature. Therefore God
enlightens man immediately.
Objection 3: Further, whoever is enlightened is conscious of being
enlightened. But man is not conscious of being enlightened by angels.
Therefore he is not enlightened by them.
On the contrary, Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. iv) that the revelation of
Divine things reaches men through the ministry of the angels. But such
revelation is an enlightenment as we have stated ([898]Q[106], A[1];
[899]Q[107], A[2]). Therefore men are enlightened by the angels.
I answer that, Since the order of Divine Providence disposes that lower
things be subject to the actions of higher, as explained above
([900]Q[109], A[2]); as the inferior angels are enlightened by the
superior, so men, who are inferior to the angels, are enlightened by
them.
The modes of each of these kinds of enlightenment are in one way alike
and in another way unlike. For, as was shown above ([901]Q[106], A[1]),
the enlightenment which consists in making known Divine truth has two
functions; namely, according as the inferior intellect is strengthened
by the action of the superior intellect, and according as the
intelligible species which are in the superior intellect are proposed
to the inferior so as to be grasped thereby. This takes place in the
angels when the superior angel divides his universal concept of the
truth according to the capacity of the inferior angel, as explained
above ([902]Q[106], A[1]).
The human intellect, however, cannot grasp the universal truth itself
unveiled; because its nature requires it to understand by turning to
the phantasms, as above explained ([903]Q[84], A[7]). So the angels
propose the intelligible truth to men under the similitudes of sensible
things, according to what Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. i), that, "It is
impossible for the divine ray to shine on us, otherwise than shrouded
by the variety of the sacred veils. " On the other hand, the human
intellect as the inferior, is strengthened by the action of the angelic
intellect. And in these two ways man is enlightened by an angel.
Reply to Objection 1: Two dispositions concur in the virtue of faith;
first, the habit of the intellect whereby it is disposed to obey the
will tending to Divine truth. For the intellect assents to the truth of
faith, not as convinced by the reason, but as commanded by the will;
hence Augustine says, "No one believes except willingly. " In this
respect faith comes from God alone. Secondly, faith requires that what
is to be believed be proposed to the believer; which is accomplished by
man, according to Rom. 10:17, "Faith cometh by hearing"; principally,
however, by the angels, by whom Divine things are revealed to men.
Hence the angels have some part in the enlightenment of faith.
Moreover, men are enlightened by the angels not only concerning what is
to be believed; but also as regards what is to be done.
Reply to Objection 2: Natural reason, which is immediately from God,
can be strengthened by an angel, as we have said above. Again, the more
the human intellect is strengthened, so much higher an intelligible
truth can be elicited from the species derived from creatures. Thus man
is assisted by an angel so that he may obtain from creatures a more
perfect knowledge of God.
Reply to Objection 3: Intellectual operation and enlightenment can be
understood in two ways. First, on the part of the object understood;
thus whoever understands or is enlightened, knows that he understands
or is enlightened, because he knows that the object is made known to
him. Secondly, on the part of the principle; and thus it does not
follow that whoever understands a truth, knows what the intellect is,
which is the principle of the intellectual operation. In like manner
not everyone who is enlightened by an angel, knows that he is
enlightened by him.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angels can change the will of man?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels can change the will of man.
For, upon the text, "Who maketh His angels spirits and His ministers a
flame of fire" (Heb. 1:7), the gloss notes that "they are fire, as
being spiritually fervent, and as burning away our vices. " This could
not be, however, unless they changed the will. Therefore the angels can
change the will.
Objection 2: Further, Bede says (Super Matth. xv, 11), that, "the devil
does not send wicked thoughts, but kindles them. " Damascene, however,
says that he also sends them; for he remarks that "every malicious act
and unclean passion is contrived by the demons and put into men" (De
Fide Orth. ii, 4); in like manner also the good angels introduce and
kindle good thoughts. But this could only be if they changed the will.
Therefore the will is changed by them.
Objection 3: Further, the angel, as above explained, enlightens the
human intellect by means of the phantasms. But as the imagination which
serves the intellect can be changed by an angel, so can the sensitive
appetite which serves the will, because it also is a faculty using a
corporeal organ. Therefore as the angel enlightens the mind, so can he
change the will.
On the contrary, To change the will belongs to God alone, according to
Prov. 21:1: "The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord,
whithersoever He will He shall turn it. "
I answer that, The will can be changed in two ways. First, from within;
in which way, since the movement of the will is nothing but the
inclination of the will to the thing willed, God alone can thus change
the will, because He gives the power of such an inclination to the
intellectual nature. For as the natural inclination is from God alone
Who gives the nature, so the inclination of the will is from God alone,
Who causes the will.
Secondly, the will is moved from without. As regards an angel, this can
be only in one way---by the good apprehended by the intellect. Hence in
as far as anyone may be the cause why anything be apprehended as an
appetible good, so far does he move the will. In this way also God
alone can move the will efficaciously; but an angel and man move the
will by way of persuasion, as above explained ([904]Q[106], A[2]).
In addition to this mode the human will can be moved from without in
another way; namely, by the passion residing in the sensitive appetite:
thus by concupiscence or anger the will is inclined to will something.
In this manner the angels, as being able to rouse these passions, can
move the will, not however by necessity, for the will ever remains free
to consent to, or to resist, the passion.
Reply to Objection 1: Those who act as God's ministers, either men or
angels, are said to burn away vices, and to incite to virtue by way of
persuasion.
Reply to Objection 2: The demon cannot put thoughts in our minds by
causing them from within, since the act of the cogitative faculty is
subject to the will; nevertheless the devil is called the kindler of
thoughts, inasmuch as he incites to thought, by the desire of the
things thought of, by way of persuasion, or by rousing the passions.
Damascene calls this kindling "a putting in" because such a work is
accomplished within. But good thoughts are attributed to a higher
principle, namely, God, though they may be procured by the ministry of
the angels.
Reply to Objection 3: The human intellect in its present state can
understand only by turning to the phantasms; but the human will can
will something following the judgment of reason rather than the passion
of the sensitive appetite. Hence the comparison does not hold.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change man's imagination?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel cannot change man's
imagination. For the phantasy, as is said De Anima iii, is "a motion
caused by the sense in act. " But if this motion were caused by an
angel, it would not be caused by the sense in act. Therefore it is
contrary to the nature of the phantasy, which is the act of the
imaginative faculty, to be changed by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, since the forms in the imagination are spiritual,
they are nobler than the forms existing in sensible matter. But an
angel cannot impress forms upon sensible matter ([905]Q[110], A[2]).
Therefore he cannot impress forms on the imagination, and so he cannot
change it.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 12): "One
spirit by intermingling with another can communicate his knowledge to
the other spirit by these images, so that the latter either understands
it himself, or accepts it as understood by the other. " But it does not
seem that an angel can be mingled with the human imagination, nor that
the imagination can receive the knowledge of an angel. Therefore it
seems that an angel cannot change the imagination.
Objection 4: Further, in the imaginative vision man cleaves to the
similitudes of the things as to the things themselves. But in this
there is deception. So as a good angel cannot be the cause of
deception, it seems that he cannot cause the imaginative vision, by
changing the imagination.
On the contrary, Those things which are seen in dreams are seen by
imaginative vision. But the angels reveal things in dreams, as appears
from Mat. 1:20;[2]:13,[19] in regard to the angel who appeared to
Joseph in dreams. Therefore an angel can move the imagination.
I answer that, Both a good and a bad angel by their own natural power
can move the human imagination. This may be explained as follows. For
it was said above ([906]Q[110], A[3]), that corporeal nature obeys the
angel as regards local movement, so that whatever can be caused by the
local movement of bodies is subject to the natural power of the angels.
Now it is manifest that imaginative apparitions are sometimes caused in
us by the local movement of animal spirits and humors. Hence Aristotle
says (De Somn. et Vigil. ) [*De Insomniis iii.
], when assigning the
cause of visions in dreams, that "when an animal sleeps, the blood
descends in abundance to the sensitive principle, and movements descend
with it," that is, the impressions left from the movements are
preserved in the animal spirits, "and move the sensitive principle"; so
that a certain appearance ensues, as if the sensitive principle were
being then changed by the external objects themselves. Indeed, the
commotion of the spirits and humors may be so great that such
appearances may even occur to those who are awake, as is seen in mad
people, and the like. So, as this happens by a natural disturbance of
the humors, and sometimes also by the will of man who voluntarily
imagines what he previously experienced, so also the same may be done
by the power of a good or a bad angel, sometimes with alienation from
the bodily senses, sometimes without such alienation.
Reply to Objection 1: The first principle of the imagination is from
the sense in act. For we cannot imagine what we have never perceived by
the senses, either wholly or partly; as a man born blind cannot imagine
color. Sometimes, however, the imagination is informed in such a way
that the act of the imaginative movement arises from the impressions
preserved within.
Reply to Objection 2: An angel changes the imagination, not indeed by
the impression of an imaginative form in no way previously received
from the senses (for he cannot make a man born blind imagine color),
but by local movement of the spirits and humors, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 3: The commingling of the angelic spirit with the
human imagination is not a mingling of essences, but by reason of an
effect which he produces in the imagination in the way above stated; so
that he shows man what he [the angel] knows, but not in the way he
knows.
Reply to Objection 4: An angel causing an imaginative vision, sometimes
enlightens the intellect at the same time, so that it knows what these
images signify; and then there is not deception. But sometimes by the
angelic operation the similitudes of things only appear in the
imagination; but neither then is deception caused by the angel, but by
the defect in the intellect to whom such things appear. Thus neither
was Christ a cause of deception when He spoke many things to the people
in parables, which He did not explain to them.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change the human senses?
Objection 1: It seems that an angel cannot change the human senses. For
the sensitive operation is a vital operation. But such an operation
does not come from an extrinsic principle. Therefore the sensitive
operation cannot be caused by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, the sensitive operation is nobler than the
nutritive. But the angel cannot change the nutritive power, nor other
natural forms. Therefore neither can he change the sensitive power.
Objection 3: Further, the senses are naturally moved by the sensible
objects. But an angel cannot change the order of nature ([907]Q[110],
A[4]). Therefore an angel cannot change the senses; but these are
changed always by the sensible object.
On the contrary, The angels who overturned Sodom, "struck the people of
Sodom with blindness or {aorasia}, so that they could not find the
door" (Gn. 19:11). [*It is worth noting that these are the only two
passages in the Greek version where the word {aorasia} appears. It
expresses, in fact, the effect produced on the people of
Sodom---namely, dazzling (French version, "eblouissement"), which the
Latin "caecitas" (blindness) does not necessarily imply. ] The same is
recorded of the Syrians whom Eliseus led into Samaria (4 Kings 6:18).
I answer that, The senses may be changed in a twofold manner; from
without, as when affected by the sensible object: and from within, for
we see that the senses are changed when the spirits and humors are
disturbed; as for example, a sick man's tongue, charged with choleric
humor, tastes everything as bitter, and the like with the other senses.
Now an angel, by his natural power, can work a change in the senses
both ways. For an angel can offer the senses a sensible object from
without, formed by nature or by the angel himself, as when he assumes a
body, as we have said above ([908]Q[51], A[2]). Likewise he can move
the spirits and humors from within, as above remarked, whereby the
senses are changed in various ways.
Reply to Objection 1: The principle of the sensitive operation cannot
be without the interior principle which is the sensitive power; but
this interior principle can be moved in many ways by the exterior
principle, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 2: By the interior movement of the spirits and
humors an angel can do something towards changing the act of the
nutritive power, and also of the appetitive and sensitive power, and of
any other power using a corporeal organ.
Reply to Objection 3: An angel can do nothing outside the entire order
of creatures; but he can outside some particular order of nature, since
he is not subject to that order; thus in some special way an angel can
work a change in the senses outside the common mode of nature.
__________________________________________________________________
THE MISSION OF THE ANGELS (FOUR ARTICLES)
We next consider the mission of the angels. Under this head arise four
points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any angels are sent on works of ministry?
(2) Whether all are sent?
(3) Whether those who are sent, assist?
(4) From what orders they are sent.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angels are sent on works of ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels are not sent on works of
ministry. For every mission is to some determinate place. But
intellectual actions do not determine a place, for intellect abstracts
from the "here" and "now. " Since therefore the angelic actions are
intellectual, it appears that the angels are not sent to perform their
own actions.
Objection 2: Further, the empyrean heaven is the place that beseems the
angelic dignity. Therefore if they are sent to us in ministry, it seems
that something of their dignity would be lost; which is unseemly.
Objection 3: Further, external occupation hinders the contemplation of
wisdom; hence it is said: "He that is less in action, shall receive
wisdom" (Ecclus. 38:25). So if some angels are sent on external
ministrations, they would seemingly be hindered from contemplation. But
the whole of their beatitude consists in the contemplation of God. So
if they were sent, their beatitude would be lessened; which is
unfitting.
Objection 4: Further, to minister is the part of an inferior; hence it
is written (Lk. 22:27): "Which is the greater, he that sitteth at
table, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at table? " But the
angels are naturally greater than we are. Therefore they are not sent
to administer to us.
On the contrary, It is written (Ex. 23:20): "Behold I will send My
angels who shall go before thee. "
I answer that, From what has been said above ([909]Q[108], A[6]), it
may be shown that some angels are sent in ministry by God. For, as we
have already stated ([910]Q[43], A[1]), in treating of the mission of
the Divine Persons, he is said to be sent who in any way proceeds from
another so as to begin to be where he was not, or to be in another way,
where he already was. Thus the Son, or the Holy Ghost is said to be
sent as proceeding from the Father by origin; and begins to be in a new
way, by grace or by the nature assumed, where He was before by the
presence of His Godhead; for it belongs to God to be present
everywhere, because, since He is the universal agent, His power reaches
to all being, and hence He exists in all things ([911]Q[8], A[1]). An
angel's power, however, as a particular agent, does not reach to the
whole universe, but reaches to one thing in such a way as not to reach
another; and so he is "here" in such a manner as not to be "there. " But
it is clear from what was above stated ([912]Q[110], A[1]), that the
corporeal creature is governed by the angels. Hence, whenever an angel
has to perform any work concerning a corporeal creature, the angel
applies himself anew to that body by his power; and in that way begins
to be there afresh. Now all this takes place by Divine command. Hence
it follows that an angel is sent by God.
Yet the action performed by the angel who is sent, proceeds from God as
from its first principle, at Whose nod and by Whose authority the
angels work; and is reduced to God as to its last end. Now this is what
is meant by a minister: for a minister is an intelligent instrument;
while an instrument is moved by another, and its action is ordered to
another. Hence angels' actions are called 'ministries'; and for this
reason they are said to be sent in ministry.
Reply to Objection 1: An operation can be intellectual in two ways. In
one way, as dwelling in the intellect itself, as contemplation; such an
operation does not demand to occupy a place; indeed, as Augustine says
(De Trin. iv, 20): "Even we ourselves as mentally tasting something
eternal, are not in this world. " In another sense an action is said to
be intellectual because it is regulated and commanded by some
intellect; in that sense the intellectual operations evidently have
sometimes a determinate place.
Reply to Objection 2: The empyrean heaven belongs to the angelic
dignity by way of congruity; forasmuch as it is congruous that the
higher body should be attributed to that nature which occupies a rank
above bodies. Yet an angel does not derive his dignity from the
empyrean heaven; so when he is not actually in the empyrean heaven,
nothing of his dignity is lost, as neither does a king lessen his
dignity when not actually sitting on his regal throne, which suits his
dignity.
Reply to Objection 3: In ourselves the purity of contemplation is
obscured by exterior occupation; because we give ourselves to action
through the sensitive faculties, the action of which when intense
impedes the action of the intellectual powers. An angel, on the
contrary, regulates his exterior actions by intellectual operation
alone. Hence it follows that his external occupations in no respect
impede his contemplation; because given two actions, one of which is
the rule and the reason of the other, one does not hinder but helps the
other. Wherefore Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "the angels do not go
abroad in such a manner as to lose the delights of inward
contemplation. "
Reply to Objection 4: In their external actions the angels chiefly
minister to God, and secondarily to us; not because we are superior to
them, absolutely speaking, but because, since every man or angel by
cleaving to God is made one spirit with God, he is thereby superior to
every creature. Hence the Apostle says (Phil. 2:3): "Esteeming others
better than themselves. "
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels are sent in ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels are sent in ministry.
For the Apostle says (Heb. 1:14): "All are ministering spirits, sent to
minister" [Vulg. 'Are they not all . . . ? '].
Objection 2: Further, among the orders, the highest is that of the
Seraphim, as stated above ([913]Q[108], A[6]). But a Seraph was sent to
purify the lips of the prophet (Is. 6:6,7). Therefore much more are the
inferior orders sent.
Objection 3: Further, the Divine Persons infinitely excel all the
angelic orders. But the Divine Persons are sent. Therefore much more
are even the highest angels sent.
Objection 4: Further, if the superior angels are not sent to the
external ministries, this can only be because the superior angels
execute the Divine ministries by means of the inferior angels. But as
all the angels are unequal, as stated above ([914]Q[50], A[4]), each
angel has an angel inferior to himself except the last one. Therefore
only the last angel would be sent in ministry; which contradicts the
words, "Thousands of thousands ministered to Him" (Dan. 7:10).
On the contrary, Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), quoting the
statement of Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), that "the higher ranks
fulfil no exterior service. "
I answer that, As appears from what has been said above ([915]Q[106],
A[3]; [916]Q[110], A[1]), the order of Divine Providence has so
disposed not only among the angels, but also in the whole universe,
that inferior things are administered by the superior. But the Divine
dispensation, however, this order is sometimes departed from as regards
corporeal things, for the sake of a higher order, that is, according as
it is suitable for the manifestation of grace. That the man born blind
was enlightened, that Lazarus was raised from the dead, was
accomplished immediately by God without the action of the heavenly
bodies. Moreover both good and bad angels can work some effect in these
bodies independently of the heavenly bodies, by the condensation of the
clouds to rain, and by producing some such effects. Nor can anyone
doubt that God can immediately reveal things to men without the help of
the angels, and the superior angels without the inferior. From this
standpoint some have said that according to the general law the
superior angels are not sent, but only the inferior; yet that
sometimes, by Divine dispensation, the superior angels also are sent.
It may also be said that the Apostle wishes to prove that Christ is
greater than the angels who were chosen as the messengers of the law;
in order that He might show the excellence of the new over the old law.
Hence there is no need to apply this to any other angels besides those
who were sent to give the law.
Reply to Objection 2: According to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), the
angel who was sent to purify the prophet's lips was one of the inferior
order; but was called a "Seraph," that is, "kindling " in an equivocal
sense, because he came to "kindle" the lips of the prophet. It may also
be said that the superior angels communicate their own proper gifts
whereby they are denominated, through the ministry of the inferior
angels. Thus one of the Seraphim is described as purifying by fire the
prophet's lips, not as if he did so immediately, but because an
inferior angel did so by his power; as the Pope is said to absolve a
man when he gives absolution by means of someone else.
Reply to Objection 3: The Divine Persons are not sent in ministry, but
are said to be sent in an equivocal sense, as appears from what has
been said ([917]Q[43], A[1]).
Reply to Objection 4: A manifold grade exists in the Divine ministries.
Hence there is nothing to prevent angels though unequal from being sent
immediately in ministry, in such a manner however that the superior are
sent to the higher ministries, and the lower to the inferior
ministries.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels who are sent, assist?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels who are sent also assist.
For Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ): "So the angels are sent, and
assist; for, though the angelic spirit is limited, yet the supreme
Spirit, God, is not limited. "
Objection 2: Further, the angel was sent to administer to Tobias. Yet
he said, "I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven who stand before the
Lord" (Tob. 12:15). Therefore the angels who are sent, assist.
Objection 3: Further, every holy angel is nearer to God than Satan is.
Yet Satan assisted God, according to Job 1:6: "When the sons of God
came to stand before the Lord, Satan also was present among them. "
Therefore much more do the angels, who are sent to minister, assist.
Objection 4: Further, if the inferior angels do not assist, the reason
is because they receive the Divine enlightenment, not immediately, but
through the superior angels. But every angel receives the Divine
enlightenment from a superior, except the one who is highest of all.
Therefore only the highest angel would assist; which is contrary to the
text of Dan. 7:10: "Ten thousand times a hundred thousand stood before
Him. " Therefore the angels who are sent also assist.
On the contrary, Gregory says, on Job 25:3: "Is there any numbering of
His soldiers? " (Moral. xvii): "Those powers assist, who do not go forth
as messengers to men. " Therefore those who are sent in ministry do not
assist.
I answer that, The angels are spoken of as "assisting" and
"administering," after the likeness of those who attend upon a king;
some of whom ever wait upon him, and hear his commands immediately;
while others there are to whom the royal commands are conveyed by those
who are in attendance---for instance, those who are placed at the head
of the administration of various cities; these are said to administer,
not to assist.
We must therefore observe that all the angels gaze upon the Divine
Essence immediately; in regard to which all, even those who minister,
are said to assist. Hence Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "those who are
sent on the external ministry of our salvation can always assist and
see the face of the Father. " Yet not all the angels can perceive the
secrets of the Divine mysteries in the clearness itself of the Divine
Essence; but only the superior angels who announce them to the
inferior: and in that respect only the superior angels belonging to the
highest hierarchy are said to assist, whose special prerogative it is
to be enlightened immediately by God.
From this may be deduced the reply to the first and second objections,
which are based on the first mode of assisting.
Reply to Objection 3: Satan is not described as having assisted, but as
present among the assistants; for, as Gregory says (Moral. ii), "though
he has lost beatitude, still he has retained a nature like to the
angels. "
Reply to Objection 4: All the assistants see some things immediately in
the glory of the Divine Essence; and so it may be said that it is the
prerogative of the whole of the highest hierarchy to be immediately
enlightened by God; while the higher ones among them see more than is
seen by the inferior; some of whom enlighten others: as also among
those who assist the king, one knows more of the king's secrets than
another.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels of the second hierarchy are sent?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels of the second hierarchy
are sent. For all the angels either assist, or minister, according to
Dan. 7:10. But the angels of the second hierarchy do not assist; for
they are enlightened by the angels of the first hierarchy, as Dionysius
says (Coel. Hier. viii). Therefore all the angels of the second
hierarchy are sent in ministry.
Objection 2: Further, Gregory says (Moral. xvii) that "there are more
who minister than who assist. " This would not be the case if the angels
of the second hierarchy were not sent in ministry. Therefore all the
angels of the second hierarchy are sent to minister.
On the contrary, Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. viii) that the
"Dominations are above all subjection. " But to be sent implies
subjection. Therefore the dominations are not sent to minister.
I answer that, As above stated [918](A[1]), to be sent to external
ministry properly belongs to an angel according as he acts by Divine
command in respect of any corporeal creature; which is part of the
execution of the Divine ministry. Now the angelic properties are
manifested by their names, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii); and
therefore the angels of those orders are sent to external ministry
whose names signify some kind of administration. But the name
"dominations" does not signify any such administration, but only
disposition and command in administering. On the other hand, the names
of the inferior orders imply administration, for the "Angels" and
"Archangels" are so called from "announcing"; the "Virtues" and
"Powers" are so called in respect of some act; and it is right that the
"Prince," according to what Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), "be
first among the workers. " Hence it belongs to these five orders to be
sent to external ministry; not to the four superior orders.
Reply to Objection 1: The Dominations are reckoned among the
ministering angels, not as exercising but as disposing and commanding
what is to be done by others; thus an architect does not put his hands
to the production of his art, but only disposes and orders what others
are to do.
Reply to Objection 2: A twofold reason may be given in assigning the
number of the assisting and ministering angels. For Gregory says that
those who minister are more numerous than those who assist; because he
takes the words (Dan. 7:10) "thousands of thousands ministered to Him,"
not in a multiple but in a partitive sense, to mean "thousands out of
thousands"; thus the number of those who minister is indefinite, and
signifies excess; while the number of assistants is finite as in the
words added, "and ten thousand times a hundred thousand assisted Him. "
This explanation rests on the opinion of the Platonists, who said that
the nearer things are to the one first principle, the smaller they are
in number; as the nearer a number is to unity, the lesser it is than
multitude. This opinion is verified as regards the number of orders, as
six administer and three assist.
Dionysius, however, (Coel. Hier. xiv) declares that the multitude of
angels surpasses all the multitude of material things; so that, as the
superior bodies exceed the inferior in magnitude to an immeasurable
degree, so the superior incorporeal natures surpass all corporeal
natures in multitude; because whatever is better is more intended and
more multiplied by God. Hence, as the assistants are superior to the
ministers there will be more assistants than ministers. In this way,
the words "thousands of thousands" are taken by way of multiplication,
to signify "a thousand times a thousand. " And because ten times a
hundred is a thousand, if it were said "ten times a hundred thousand"
it would mean that there are as many assistants as ministers: but since
it is written "ten thousand times a hundred thousand," we are given to
understand that the assistants are much more numerous than the
ministers. Nor is this said to signify that this is the precise number
of angels, but rather that it is much greater, in that it exceeds all
material multitude. This is signified by the multiplication together of
all the greatest numbers, namely ten, a hundred, and a thousand, as
Dionysius remarks in the same passage.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE GOOD ANGELS (EIGHT ARTICLES)
We next consider the guardianship exercised by the good angels; and
their warfare against the bad angels. Under the first head eight points
of inquiry arise:
(1) Whether men are guarded by the angels?
(2) Whether to each man is assigned a single guardian angel?
(3) Whether the guardianship belongs only to the lowest order of
angels?
(4) Whether it is fitting for each man to have an angel guardian?
(5) When does an angel's guardianship of a man begin?
(6) Whether the angel guardians always watch over men?
218] asserted that the forms which are in matter are caused by
immaterial forms, because they said that the material forms are
participations of immaterial forms. Avicenna followed them in this
opinion to some extent, for he said that all forms which are in matter
proceed from the concept of the "intellect"; and that corporeal agents
only dispose [matter] for the forms. They seem to have been deceived on
this point, through supposing a form to be something made "per se," so
that it would be the effect of a formal principle. But, as the
Philosopher proves (Metaph. vii, Did. vi, 8), what is made, properly
speaking, is the "composite": for this properly speaking, is, as it
were, what subsists. Whereas the form is called a being, not as that
which is, but as that by which something is; and consequently neither
is a form, properly speaking, made; for that is made which is; since to
be is nothing but the way to existence.
Now it is manifest that what is made is like to the maker, forasmuch as
every agent makes its like. So whatever makes natural things, has a
likeness to the composite; either because it is composite itself, as
when fire begets fire, or because the whole "composite" as to both
matter and form is within its power; and this belongs to God alone.
Therefore every informing of matter is either immediately from God, or
form some corporeal agent; but not immediately from an angel.
Reply to Objection 1: Our soul is united to the body as the form; and
so it is not surprising for the body to be formally changed by the
soul's concept; especially as the movement of the sensitive appetite,
which is accompanied with a certain bodily change, is subject to the
command of reason. An angel, however, has not the same connection with
natural bodies; and hence the argument does not hold.
Reply to Objection 2: Whatever an inferior power can do, that a
superior power can do, not in the same way, but in a more excellent
way; for example, the intellect knows sensible things in a more
excellent way than sense knows them. So an angel can change corporeal
matter in a more excellent way than can corporeal agents, that is by
moving the corporeal agents themselves, as being the superior cause.
Reply to Objection 3: There is nothing to prevent some natural effect
taking place by angelic power, for which the power of corporeal agents
would not suffice. This, however, is not to obey an angel's will (as
neither does matter obey the mere will of a cook, when by regulating
the fire according to the prescription of his art he produces a dish
that the fire could not have produced by itself); since to reduce
matter to the act of the substantial form does not exceed the power of
a corporeal agent; for it is natural for like to make like.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether bodies obey the angels as regards local motion?
Objection 1: It would seem that bodies do not obey the angels in local
motion. For the local motion of natural bodies follows on their forms.
But the angels do not cause the forms of natural bodies, as stated
above [897](A[2]). Therefore neither can they cause in them local
motion.
Objection 2: Further, the Philosopher (Phys. viii, 7) proves that local
motion is the first of all movements. But the angels cannot cause other
movements by a formal change of the matter. Therefore neither can they
cause local motion.
Objection 3: Further, the corporeal members obey the concept of the
soul as regards local movement, as having in themselves some principle
of life. In natural bodies, however, there is not vital principle.
Therefore they do not obey the angels in local motion.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Trin. iii, 8,9) that the angels use
corporeal seed to produce certain effects. But they cannot do this
without causing local movement. Therefore bodies obey them in local
motion.
I answer that, As Dionysius says (Div. Nom. vii): "Divine wisdom has
joined the ends of the first to the principles of the second. " Hence it
is clear that the inferior nature at its highest point is in
conjunction with superior nature. Now corporeal nature is below the
spiritual nature. But among all corporeal movements the most perfect is
local motion, as the Philosopher proves (Phys. viii, 7). The reason of
this is that what is moved locally is not as such in potentiality to
anything intrinsic, but only to something extrinsic---that is, to
place. Therefore the corporeal nature has a natural aptitude to be
moved immediately by the spiritual nature as regards place. Hence also
the philosophers asserted that the supreme bodies are moved locally by
the spiritual substances; whence we see that the soul moves the body
first and chiefly by a local motion.
Reply to Objection 1: There are in bodies other local movements besides
those which result from the forms; for instance, the ebb and flow of
the sea does not follow from the substantial form of the water, but
from the influence of the moon; and much more can local movements
result from the power of spiritual substances.
Reply to Objection 2: The angels, by causing local motion, as the first
motion, can thereby cause other movements; that is, by employing
corporeal agents to produce these effects, as a workman employs fire to
soften iron.
Reply to Objection 3: The power of an angel is not so limited as is the
power of the soul. Hence the motive power of the soul is limited to the
body united to it, which is vivified by it, and by which it can move
other things. But an angel's power is not limited to any body; hence it
can move locally bodies not joined to it.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether angels can work miracles?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels can work miracles. For
Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ): "Those spirits are called virtues
by whom signs and miracles are usually done. "
Objection 2: Further, Augustine says (QQ. 83, qu. 79) that "magicians
work miracles by private contracts; good Christians by public justice,
bad Christians by the signs of public justice. " But magicians work
miracles because they are "heard by the demons," as he says elsewhere
in the same work [*Cf. Liber xxi, Sentent. , sent. 4: among the
supposititious works of St. Augustine]. Therefore the demons can work
miracles. Therefore much more can the good angels.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says in the same work [*Cf. Liber xxi,
Sentent. , sent. 4: among the supposititious works of St. Augustine]
that "it is not absurd to believe that all the things we see happen may
be brought about by the lower powers that dwell in our atmosphere. " But
when an effect of natural causes is produced outside the order of the
natural cause, we call it a miracle, as, for instance, when anyone is
cured of a fever without the operation of nature. Therefore the angels
and demons can work miracles.
Objection 4: Further, superior power is not subject to the order of an
inferior cause. But corporeal nature is inferior to an angel. Therefore
an angel can work outside the order of corporeal agents; which is to
work miracles.
On the contrary, It is written of God (Ps. 135:4): "Who alone doth
great wonders. "
I answer that, A miracle properly so called is when something is done
outside the order of nature. But it is not enough for a miracle if
something is done outside the order of any particular nature; for
otherwise anyone would perform a miracle by throwing a stone upwards,
as such a thing is outside the order of the stone's nature. So for a
miracle is required that it be against the order of the whole created
nature. But God alone can do this, because, whatever an angel or any
other creature does by its own power, is according to the order of
created nature; and thus it is not a miracle. Hence God alone can work
miracles.
Reply to Objection 1: Some angels are said to work miracles; either
because God works miracles at their request, in the same way as holy
men are said to work miracles; or because they exercise a kind of
ministry in the miracles which take place; as in collecting the dust in
the general resurrection, or by doing something of that kind.
Reply to Objection 2: Properly speaking, as said above, miracles are
those things which are done outside the order of the whole created
nature. But as we do not know all the power of created nature, it
follows that when anything is done outside the order of created nature
by a power unknown to us, it is called a miracle as regards ourselves.
So when the demons do anything of their own natural power, these things
are called "miracles" not in an absolute sense, but in reference to
ourselves. In this way the magicians work miracles through the demons;
and these are said to be done by "private contracts," forasmuch as
every power of the creature, in the universe, may be compared to the
power of a private person in a city. Hence when a magician does
anything by compact with the devil, this is done as it were by private
contract. On the other hand, the Divine justice is in the whole
universe as the public law is in the city. Therefore good Christians,
so far as they work miracles by Divine justice, are said to work
miracles by "public justice": but bad Christians by the "signs of
public justice," as by invoking the name of Christ, or by making use of
other sacred signs.
Reply to Objection 3: Spiritual powers are able to effect whatever
happens in this visible world, by employing corporeal seeds by local
movement.
Reply to Objection 4: Although the angels can do something which is
outside the order of corporeal nature, yet they cannot do anything
outside the whole created order, which is essential to a miracle, as
above explained.
__________________________________________________________________
THE ACTION OF THE ANGELS ON MAN (FOUR ARTICLES)
We now consider the action of the angels on man, and inquire: (1) How
far they can change them by their own natural power; (2) How they are
sent by God to the ministry of men; (3) How they guard and protect men.
Under the first head there are four points of inquiry:
(1) Whether an angel can enlighten the human intellect?
(2) Whether he can change man's will?
(3) Whether he can change man's imagination?
(4) Whether he can change man's senses?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can enlighten man?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel cannot enlighten man. For man
is enlightened by faith; hence Dionysius (Eccl. Hier. iii) attributes
enlightenment to baptism, as "the sacrament of faith. " But faith is
immediately from God, according to Eph. 2:8: "By grace you are saved
through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God. "
Therefore man is not enlightened by an angel; but immediately by God.
Objection 2: Further, on the words, "God hath manifested it to them"
(Rom. 1:19), the gloss observes that "not only natural reason availed
for the manifestation of Divine truths to men, but God also revealed
them by His work," that is, by His creature. But both are immediately
from God---that is, natural reason and the creature. Therefore God
enlightens man immediately.
Objection 3: Further, whoever is enlightened is conscious of being
enlightened. But man is not conscious of being enlightened by angels.
Therefore he is not enlightened by them.
On the contrary, Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. iv) that the revelation of
Divine things reaches men through the ministry of the angels. But such
revelation is an enlightenment as we have stated ([898]Q[106], A[1];
[899]Q[107], A[2]). Therefore men are enlightened by the angels.
I answer that, Since the order of Divine Providence disposes that lower
things be subject to the actions of higher, as explained above
([900]Q[109], A[2]); as the inferior angels are enlightened by the
superior, so men, who are inferior to the angels, are enlightened by
them.
The modes of each of these kinds of enlightenment are in one way alike
and in another way unlike. For, as was shown above ([901]Q[106], A[1]),
the enlightenment which consists in making known Divine truth has two
functions; namely, according as the inferior intellect is strengthened
by the action of the superior intellect, and according as the
intelligible species which are in the superior intellect are proposed
to the inferior so as to be grasped thereby. This takes place in the
angels when the superior angel divides his universal concept of the
truth according to the capacity of the inferior angel, as explained
above ([902]Q[106], A[1]).
The human intellect, however, cannot grasp the universal truth itself
unveiled; because its nature requires it to understand by turning to
the phantasms, as above explained ([903]Q[84], A[7]). So the angels
propose the intelligible truth to men under the similitudes of sensible
things, according to what Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. i), that, "It is
impossible for the divine ray to shine on us, otherwise than shrouded
by the variety of the sacred veils. " On the other hand, the human
intellect as the inferior, is strengthened by the action of the angelic
intellect. And in these two ways man is enlightened by an angel.
Reply to Objection 1: Two dispositions concur in the virtue of faith;
first, the habit of the intellect whereby it is disposed to obey the
will tending to Divine truth. For the intellect assents to the truth of
faith, not as convinced by the reason, but as commanded by the will;
hence Augustine says, "No one believes except willingly. " In this
respect faith comes from God alone. Secondly, faith requires that what
is to be believed be proposed to the believer; which is accomplished by
man, according to Rom. 10:17, "Faith cometh by hearing"; principally,
however, by the angels, by whom Divine things are revealed to men.
Hence the angels have some part in the enlightenment of faith.
Moreover, men are enlightened by the angels not only concerning what is
to be believed; but also as regards what is to be done.
Reply to Objection 2: Natural reason, which is immediately from God,
can be strengthened by an angel, as we have said above. Again, the more
the human intellect is strengthened, so much higher an intelligible
truth can be elicited from the species derived from creatures. Thus man
is assisted by an angel so that he may obtain from creatures a more
perfect knowledge of God.
Reply to Objection 3: Intellectual operation and enlightenment can be
understood in two ways. First, on the part of the object understood;
thus whoever understands or is enlightened, knows that he understands
or is enlightened, because he knows that the object is made known to
him. Secondly, on the part of the principle; and thus it does not
follow that whoever understands a truth, knows what the intellect is,
which is the principle of the intellectual operation. In like manner
not everyone who is enlightened by an angel, knows that he is
enlightened by him.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angels can change the will of man?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels can change the will of man.
For, upon the text, "Who maketh His angels spirits and His ministers a
flame of fire" (Heb. 1:7), the gloss notes that "they are fire, as
being spiritually fervent, and as burning away our vices. " This could
not be, however, unless they changed the will. Therefore the angels can
change the will.
Objection 2: Further, Bede says (Super Matth. xv, 11), that, "the devil
does not send wicked thoughts, but kindles them. " Damascene, however,
says that he also sends them; for he remarks that "every malicious act
and unclean passion is contrived by the demons and put into men" (De
Fide Orth. ii, 4); in like manner also the good angels introduce and
kindle good thoughts. But this could only be if they changed the will.
Therefore the will is changed by them.
Objection 3: Further, the angel, as above explained, enlightens the
human intellect by means of the phantasms. But as the imagination which
serves the intellect can be changed by an angel, so can the sensitive
appetite which serves the will, because it also is a faculty using a
corporeal organ. Therefore as the angel enlightens the mind, so can he
change the will.
On the contrary, To change the will belongs to God alone, according to
Prov. 21:1: "The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord,
whithersoever He will He shall turn it. "
I answer that, The will can be changed in two ways. First, from within;
in which way, since the movement of the will is nothing but the
inclination of the will to the thing willed, God alone can thus change
the will, because He gives the power of such an inclination to the
intellectual nature. For as the natural inclination is from God alone
Who gives the nature, so the inclination of the will is from God alone,
Who causes the will.
Secondly, the will is moved from without. As regards an angel, this can
be only in one way---by the good apprehended by the intellect. Hence in
as far as anyone may be the cause why anything be apprehended as an
appetible good, so far does he move the will. In this way also God
alone can move the will efficaciously; but an angel and man move the
will by way of persuasion, as above explained ([904]Q[106], A[2]).
In addition to this mode the human will can be moved from without in
another way; namely, by the passion residing in the sensitive appetite:
thus by concupiscence or anger the will is inclined to will something.
In this manner the angels, as being able to rouse these passions, can
move the will, not however by necessity, for the will ever remains free
to consent to, or to resist, the passion.
Reply to Objection 1: Those who act as God's ministers, either men or
angels, are said to burn away vices, and to incite to virtue by way of
persuasion.
Reply to Objection 2: The demon cannot put thoughts in our minds by
causing them from within, since the act of the cogitative faculty is
subject to the will; nevertheless the devil is called the kindler of
thoughts, inasmuch as he incites to thought, by the desire of the
things thought of, by way of persuasion, or by rousing the passions.
Damascene calls this kindling "a putting in" because such a work is
accomplished within. But good thoughts are attributed to a higher
principle, namely, God, though they may be procured by the ministry of
the angels.
Reply to Objection 3: The human intellect in its present state can
understand only by turning to the phantasms; but the human will can
will something following the judgment of reason rather than the passion
of the sensitive appetite. Hence the comparison does not hold.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change man's imagination?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel cannot change man's
imagination. For the phantasy, as is said De Anima iii, is "a motion
caused by the sense in act. " But if this motion were caused by an
angel, it would not be caused by the sense in act. Therefore it is
contrary to the nature of the phantasy, which is the act of the
imaginative faculty, to be changed by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, since the forms in the imagination are spiritual,
they are nobler than the forms existing in sensible matter. But an
angel cannot impress forms upon sensible matter ([905]Q[110], A[2]).
Therefore he cannot impress forms on the imagination, and so he cannot
change it.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 12): "One
spirit by intermingling with another can communicate his knowledge to
the other spirit by these images, so that the latter either understands
it himself, or accepts it as understood by the other. " But it does not
seem that an angel can be mingled with the human imagination, nor that
the imagination can receive the knowledge of an angel. Therefore it
seems that an angel cannot change the imagination.
Objection 4: Further, in the imaginative vision man cleaves to the
similitudes of the things as to the things themselves. But in this
there is deception. So as a good angel cannot be the cause of
deception, it seems that he cannot cause the imaginative vision, by
changing the imagination.
On the contrary, Those things which are seen in dreams are seen by
imaginative vision. But the angels reveal things in dreams, as appears
from Mat. 1:20;[2]:13,[19] in regard to the angel who appeared to
Joseph in dreams. Therefore an angel can move the imagination.
I answer that, Both a good and a bad angel by their own natural power
can move the human imagination. This may be explained as follows. For
it was said above ([906]Q[110], A[3]), that corporeal nature obeys the
angel as regards local movement, so that whatever can be caused by the
local movement of bodies is subject to the natural power of the angels.
Now it is manifest that imaginative apparitions are sometimes caused in
us by the local movement of animal spirits and humors. Hence Aristotle
says (De Somn. et Vigil. ) [*De Insomniis iii.
], when assigning the
cause of visions in dreams, that "when an animal sleeps, the blood
descends in abundance to the sensitive principle, and movements descend
with it," that is, the impressions left from the movements are
preserved in the animal spirits, "and move the sensitive principle"; so
that a certain appearance ensues, as if the sensitive principle were
being then changed by the external objects themselves. Indeed, the
commotion of the spirits and humors may be so great that such
appearances may even occur to those who are awake, as is seen in mad
people, and the like. So, as this happens by a natural disturbance of
the humors, and sometimes also by the will of man who voluntarily
imagines what he previously experienced, so also the same may be done
by the power of a good or a bad angel, sometimes with alienation from
the bodily senses, sometimes without such alienation.
Reply to Objection 1: The first principle of the imagination is from
the sense in act. For we cannot imagine what we have never perceived by
the senses, either wholly or partly; as a man born blind cannot imagine
color. Sometimes, however, the imagination is informed in such a way
that the act of the imaginative movement arises from the impressions
preserved within.
Reply to Objection 2: An angel changes the imagination, not indeed by
the impression of an imaginative form in no way previously received
from the senses (for he cannot make a man born blind imagine color),
but by local movement of the spirits and humors, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 3: The commingling of the angelic spirit with the
human imagination is not a mingling of essences, but by reason of an
effect which he produces in the imagination in the way above stated; so
that he shows man what he [the angel] knows, but not in the way he
knows.
Reply to Objection 4: An angel causing an imaginative vision, sometimes
enlightens the intellect at the same time, so that it knows what these
images signify; and then there is not deception. But sometimes by the
angelic operation the similitudes of things only appear in the
imagination; but neither then is deception caused by the angel, but by
the defect in the intellect to whom such things appear. Thus neither
was Christ a cause of deception when He spoke many things to the people
in parables, which He did not explain to them.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change the human senses?
Objection 1: It seems that an angel cannot change the human senses. For
the sensitive operation is a vital operation. But such an operation
does not come from an extrinsic principle. Therefore the sensitive
operation cannot be caused by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, the sensitive operation is nobler than the
nutritive. But the angel cannot change the nutritive power, nor other
natural forms. Therefore neither can he change the sensitive power.
Objection 3: Further, the senses are naturally moved by the sensible
objects. But an angel cannot change the order of nature ([907]Q[110],
A[4]). Therefore an angel cannot change the senses; but these are
changed always by the sensible object.
On the contrary, The angels who overturned Sodom, "struck the people of
Sodom with blindness or {aorasia}, so that they could not find the
door" (Gn. 19:11). [*It is worth noting that these are the only two
passages in the Greek version where the word {aorasia} appears. It
expresses, in fact, the effect produced on the people of
Sodom---namely, dazzling (French version, "eblouissement"), which the
Latin "caecitas" (blindness) does not necessarily imply. ] The same is
recorded of the Syrians whom Eliseus led into Samaria (4 Kings 6:18).
I answer that, The senses may be changed in a twofold manner; from
without, as when affected by the sensible object: and from within, for
we see that the senses are changed when the spirits and humors are
disturbed; as for example, a sick man's tongue, charged with choleric
humor, tastes everything as bitter, and the like with the other senses.
Now an angel, by his natural power, can work a change in the senses
both ways. For an angel can offer the senses a sensible object from
without, formed by nature or by the angel himself, as when he assumes a
body, as we have said above ([908]Q[51], A[2]). Likewise he can move
the spirits and humors from within, as above remarked, whereby the
senses are changed in various ways.
Reply to Objection 1: The principle of the sensitive operation cannot
be without the interior principle which is the sensitive power; but
this interior principle can be moved in many ways by the exterior
principle, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 2: By the interior movement of the spirits and
humors an angel can do something towards changing the act of the
nutritive power, and also of the appetitive and sensitive power, and of
any other power using a corporeal organ.
Reply to Objection 3: An angel can do nothing outside the entire order
of creatures; but he can outside some particular order of nature, since
he is not subject to that order; thus in some special way an angel can
work a change in the senses outside the common mode of nature.
__________________________________________________________________
THE MISSION OF THE ANGELS (FOUR ARTICLES)
We next consider the mission of the angels. Under this head arise four
points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any angels are sent on works of ministry?
(2) Whether all are sent?
(3) Whether those who are sent, assist?
(4) From what orders they are sent.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angels are sent on works of ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels are not sent on works of
ministry. For every mission is to some determinate place. But
intellectual actions do not determine a place, for intellect abstracts
from the "here" and "now. " Since therefore the angelic actions are
intellectual, it appears that the angels are not sent to perform their
own actions.
Objection 2: Further, the empyrean heaven is the place that beseems the
angelic dignity. Therefore if they are sent to us in ministry, it seems
that something of their dignity would be lost; which is unseemly.
Objection 3: Further, external occupation hinders the contemplation of
wisdom; hence it is said: "He that is less in action, shall receive
wisdom" (Ecclus. 38:25). So if some angels are sent on external
ministrations, they would seemingly be hindered from contemplation. But
the whole of their beatitude consists in the contemplation of God. So
if they were sent, their beatitude would be lessened; which is
unfitting.
Objection 4: Further, to minister is the part of an inferior; hence it
is written (Lk. 22:27): "Which is the greater, he that sitteth at
table, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at table? " But the
angels are naturally greater than we are. Therefore they are not sent
to administer to us.
On the contrary, It is written (Ex. 23:20): "Behold I will send My
angels who shall go before thee. "
I answer that, From what has been said above ([909]Q[108], A[6]), it
may be shown that some angels are sent in ministry by God. For, as we
have already stated ([910]Q[43], A[1]), in treating of the mission of
the Divine Persons, he is said to be sent who in any way proceeds from
another so as to begin to be where he was not, or to be in another way,
where he already was. Thus the Son, or the Holy Ghost is said to be
sent as proceeding from the Father by origin; and begins to be in a new
way, by grace or by the nature assumed, where He was before by the
presence of His Godhead; for it belongs to God to be present
everywhere, because, since He is the universal agent, His power reaches
to all being, and hence He exists in all things ([911]Q[8], A[1]). An
angel's power, however, as a particular agent, does not reach to the
whole universe, but reaches to one thing in such a way as not to reach
another; and so he is "here" in such a manner as not to be "there. " But
it is clear from what was above stated ([912]Q[110], A[1]), that the
corporeal creature is governed by the angels. Hence, whenever an angel
has to perform any work concerning a corporeal creature, the angel
applies himself anew to that body by his power; and in that way begins
to be there afresh. Now all this takes place by Divine command. Hence
it follows that an angel is sent by God.
Yet the action performed by the angel who is sent, proceeds from God as
from its first principle, at Whose nod and by Whose authority the
angels work; and is reduced to God as to its last end. Now this is what
is meant by a minister: for a minister is an intelligent instrument;
while an instrument is moved by another, and its action is ordered to
another. Hence angels' actions are called 'ministries'; and for this
reason they are said to be sent in ministry.
Reply to Objection 1: An operation can be intellectual in two ways. In
one way, as dwelling in the intellect itself, as contemplation; such an
operation does not demand to occupy a place; indeed, as Augustine says
(De Trin. iv, 20): "Even we ourselves as mentally tasting something
eternal, are not in this world. " In another sense an action is said to
be intellectual because it is regulated and commanded by some
intellect; in that sense the intellectual operations evidently have
sometimes a determinate place.
Reply to Objection 2: The empyrean heaven belongs to the angelic
dignity by way of congruity; forasmuch as it is congruous that the
higher body should be attributed to that nature which occupies a rank
above bodies. Yet an angel does not derive his dignity from the
empyrean heaven; so when he is not actually in the empyrean heaven,
nothing of his dignity is lost, as neither does a king lessen his
dignity when not actually sitting on his regal throne, which suits his
dignity.
Reply to Objection 3: In ourselves the purity of contemplation is
obscured by exterior occupation; because we give ourselves to action
through the sensitive faculties, the action of which when intense
impedes the action of the intellectual powers. An angel, on the
contrary, regulates his exterior actions by intellectual operation
alone. Hence it follows that his external occupations in no respect
impede his contemplation; because given two actions, one of which is
the rule and the reason of the other, one does not hinder but helps the
other. Wherefore Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "the angels do not go
abroad in such a manner as to lose the delights of inward
contemplation. "
Reply to Objection 4: In their external actions the angels chiefly
minister to God, and secondarily to us; not because we are superior to
them, absolutely speaking, but because, since every man or angel by
cleaving to God is made one spirit with God, he is thereby superior to
every creature. Hence the Apostle says (Phil. 2:3): "Esteeming others
better than themselves. "
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels are sent in ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels are sent in ministry.
For the Apostle says (Heb. 1:14): "All are ministering spirits, sent to
minister" [Vulg. 'Are they not all . . . ? '].
Objection 2: Further, among the orders, the highest is that of the
Seraphim, as stated above ([913]Q[108], A[6]). But a Seraph was sent to
purify the lips of the prophet (Is. 6:6,7). Therefore much more are the
inferior orders sent.
Objection 3: Further, the Divine Persons infinitely excel all the
angelic orders. But the Divine Persons are sent. Therefore much more
are even the highest angels sent.
Objection 4: Further, if the superior angels are not sent to the
external ministries, this can only be because the superior angels
execute the Divine ministries by means of the inferior angels. But as
all the angels are unequal, as stated above ([914]Q[50], A[4]), each
angel has an angel inferior to himself except the last one. Therefore
only the last angel would be sent in ministry; which contradicts the
words, "Thousands of thousands ministered to Him" (Dan. 7:10).
On the contrary, Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), quoting the
statement of Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), that "the higher ranks
fulfil no exterior service. "
I answer that, As appears from what has been said above ([915]Q[106],
A[3]; [916]Q[110], A[1]), the order of Divine Providence has so
disposed not only among the angels, but also in the whole universe,
that inferior things are administered by the superior. But the Divine
dispensation, however, this order is sometimes departed from as regards
corporeal things, for the sake of a higher order, that is, according as
it is suitable for the manifestation of grace. That the man born blind
was enlightened, that Lazarus was raised from the dead, was
accomplished immediately by God without the action of the heavenly
bodies. Moreover both good and bad angels can work some effect in these
bodies independently of the heavenly bodies, by the condensation of the
clouds to rain, and by producing some such effects. Nor can anyone
doubt that God can immediately reveal things to men without the help of
the angels, and the superior angels without the inferior. From this
standpoint some have said that according to the general law the
superior angels are not sent, but only the inferior; yet that
sometimes, by Divine dispensation, the superior angels also are sent.
It may also be said that the Apostle wishes to prove that Christ is
greater than the angels who were chosen as the messengers of the law;
in order that He might show the excellence of the new over the old law.
Hence there is no need to apply this to any other angels besides those
who were sent to give the law.
Reply to Objection 2: According to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), the
angel who was sent to purify the prophet's lips was one of the inferior
order; but was called a "Seraph," that is, "kindling " in an equivocal
sense, because he came to "kindle" the lips of the prophet. It may also
be said that the superior angels communicate their own proper gifts
whereby they are denominated, through the ministry of the inferior
angels. Thus one of the Seraphim is described as purifying by fire the
prophet's lips, not as if he did so immediately, but because an
inferior angel did so by his power; as the Pope is said to absolve a
man when he gives absolution by means of someone else.
Reply to Objection 3: The Divine Persons are not sent in ministry, but
are said to be sent in an equivocal sense, as appears from what has
been said ([917]Q[43], A[1]).
Reply to Objection 4: A manifold grade exists in the Divine ministries.
Hence there is nothing to prevent angels though unequal from being sent
immediately in ministry, in such a manner however that the superior are
sent to the higher ministries, and the lower to the inferior
ministries.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels who are sent, assist?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels who are sent also assist.
For Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ): "So the angels are sent, and
assist; for, though the angelic spirit is limited, yet the supreme
Spirit, God, is not limited. "
Objection 2: Further, the angel was sent to administer to Tobias. Yet
he said, "I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven who stand before the
Lord" (Tob. 12:15). Therefore the angels who are sent, assist.
Objection 3: Further, every holy angel is nearer to God than Satan is.
Yet Satan assisted God, according to Job 1:6: "When the sons of God
came to stand before the Lord, Satan also was present among them. "
Therefore much more do the angels, who are sent to minister, assist.
Objection 4: Further, if the inferior angels do not assist, the reason
is because they receive the Divine enlightenment, not immediately, but
through the superior angels. But every angel receives the Divine
enlightenment from a superior, except the one who is highest of all.
Therefore only the highest angel would assist; which is contrary to the
text of Dan. 7:10: "Ten thousand times a hundred thousand stood before
Him. " Therefore the angels who are sent also assist.
On the contrary, Gregory says, on Job 25:3: "Is there any numbering of
His soldiers? " (Moral. xvii): "Those powers assist, who do not go forth
as messengers to men. " Therefore those who are sent in ministry do not
assist.
I answer that, The angels are spoken of as "assisting" and
"administering," after the likeness of those who attend upon a king;
some of whom ever wait upon him, and hear his commands immediately;
while others there are to whom the royal commands are conveyed by those
who are in attendance---for instance, those who are placed at the head
of the administration of various cities; these are said to administer,
not to assist.
We must therefore observe that all the angels gaze upon the Divine
Essence immediately; in regard to which all, even those who minister,
are said to assist. Hence Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "those who are
sent on the external ministry of our salvation can always assist and
see the face of the Father. " Yet not all the angels can perceive the
secrets of the Divine mysteries in the clearness itself of the Divine
Essence; but only the superior angels who announce them to the
inferior: and in that respect only the superior angels belonging to the
highest hierarchy are said to assist, whose special prerogative it is
to be enlightened immediately by God.
From this may be deduced the reply to the first and second objections,
which are based on the first mode of assisting.
Reply to Objection 3: Satan is not described as having assisted, but as
present among the assistants; for, as Gregory says (Moral. ii), "though
he has lost beatitude, still he has retained a nature like to the
angels. "
Reply to Objection 4: All the assistants see some things immediately in
the glory of the Divine Essence; and so it may be said that it is the
prerogative of the whole of the highest hierarchy to be immediately
enlightened by God; while the higher ones among them see more than is
seen by the inferior; some of whom enlighten others: as also among
those who assist the king, one knows more of the king's secrets than
another.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels of the second hierarchy are sent?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels of the second hierarchy
are sent. For all the angels either assist, or minister, according to
Dan. 7:10. But the angels of the second hierarchy do not assist; for
they are enlightened by the angels of the first hierarchy, as Dionysius
says (Coel. Hier. viii). Therefore all the angels of the second
hierarchy are sent in ministry.
Objection 2: Further, Gregory says (Moral. xvii) that "there are more
who minister than who assist. " This would not be the case if the angels
of the second hierarchy were not sent in ministry. Therefore all the
angels of the second hierarchy are sent to minister.
On the contrary, Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. viii) that the
"Dominations are above all subjection. " But to be sent implies
subjection. Therefore the dominations are not sent to minister.
I answer that, As above stated [918](A[1]), to be sent to external
ministry properly belongs to an angel according as he acts by Divine
command in respect of any corporeal creature; which is part of the
execution of the Divine ministry. Now the angelic properties are
manifested by their names, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii); and
therefore the angels of those orders are sent to external ministry
whose names signify some kind of administration. But the name
"dominations" does not signify any such administration, but only
disposition and command in administering. On the other hand, the names
of the inferior orders imply administration, for the "Angels" and
"Archangels" are so called from "announcing"; the "Virtues" and
"Powers" are so called in respect of some act; and it is right that the
"Prince," according to what Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), "be
first among the workers. " Hence it belongs to these five orders to be
sent to external ministry; not to the four superior orders.
Reply to Objection 1: The Dominations are reckoned among the
ministering angels, not as exercising but as disposing and commanding
what is to be done by others; thus an architect does not put his hands
to the production of his art, but only disposes and orders what others
are to do.
Reply to Objection 2: A twofold reason may be given in assigning the
number of the assisting and ministering angels. For Gregory says that
those who minister are more numerous than those who assist; because he
takes the words (Dan. 7:10) "thousands of thousands ministered to Him,"
not in a multiple but in a partitive sense, to mean "thousands out of
thousands"; thus the number of those who minister is indefinite, and
signifies excess; while the number of assistants is finite as in the
words added, "and ten thousand times a hundred thousand assisted Him. "
This explanation rests on the opinion of the Platonists, who said that
the nearer things are to the one first principle, the smaller they are
in number; as the nearer a number is to unity, the lesser it is than
multitude. This opinion is verified as regards the number of orders, as
six administer and three assist.
Dionysius, however, (Coel. Hier. xiv) declares that the multitude of
angels surpasses all the multitude of material things; so that, as the
superior bodies exceed the inferior in magnitude to an immeasurable
degree, so the superior incorporeal natures surpass all corporeal
natures in multitude; because whatever is better is more intended and
more multiplied by God. Hence, as the assistants are superior to the
ministers there will be more assistants than ministers. In this way,
the words "thousands of thousands" are taken by way of multiplication,
to signify "a thousand times a thousand. " And because ten times a
hundred is a thousand, if it were said "ten times a hundred thousand"
it would mean that there are as many assistants as ministers: but since
it is written "ten thousand times a hundred thousand," we are given to
understand that the assistants are much more numerous than the
ministers. Nor is this said to signify that this is the precise number
of angels, but rather that it is much greater, in that it exceeds all
material multitude. This is signified by the multiplication together of
all the greatest numbers, namely ten, a hundred, and a thousand, as
Dionysius remarks in the same passage.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE GOOD ANGELS (EIGHT ARTICLES)
We next consider the guardianship exercised by the good angels; and
their warfare against the bad angels. Under the first head eight points
of inquiry arise:
(1) Whether men are guarded by the angels?
(2) Whether to each man is assigned a single guardian angel?
(3) Whether the guardianship belongs only to the lowest order of
angels?
(4) Whether it is fitting for each man to have an angel guardian?
(5) When does an angel's guardianship of a man begin?
(6) Whether the angel guardians always watch over men?
