The Reply to the Third
Objection
is clear from what has been said.
Summa Theologica
Hier.
v) the order
established by God among things is that "the last should be led to God
by those that are midway between. " Wherefore, since the saints who are
in heaven are nearest to God, the order of the Divine law requires that
we, who while we remain in the body are pilgrims from the Lord, should
be brought back to God by the saints who are between us and Him: and
this happens when the Divine goodness pours forth its effect into us
through them. And since our return to God should correspond to the
outflow of His boons upon us, just as the Divine favors reach us by
means of the saints intercession, so should we, by their means, be
brought back to God, that we may receive His favors again. Hence it is
that we make them our intercessors with God, and our mediators as it
were, when we ask them to pray for us.
Reply to Objection 1: It is not on account of any defect in God's power
that He works by means of second causes, but it is for the perfection
of the order of the universe, and the more manifold outpouring of His
goodness on things, through His bestowing on them not only the goodness
which is proper to them, but also the faculty of causing goodness in
others. Even so it is not through any defect in His mercy, that we need
to bespeak His clemency through the prayers of the saints, but to the
end that the aforesaid order in things be observed.
Reply to Objection 2: Although the greater saints are more acceptable
to God than the lesser, it is sometimes profitable to pray to the
lesser; and this for five reasons. First, because sometimes one has
greater devotion for a lesser saint than for a greater, and the effect
of prayer depends very much on one's devotion. Secondly, in order to
avoid tediousness, for continual attention to one thing makes a person
weary; whereas by praying to different saints, the fervor of our
devotion is aroused anew as it were. Thirdly, because it is granted to
some saints to exercise their patronage in certain special cases, for
instance to Saint Anthony against the fire of hell. Fourthly, that due
honor be given by us to all. Fifthly, because the prayers of several
sometimes obtain that which would not have been obtained by the prayers
of one.
Reply to Objection 3: Prayer is an act, and acts belong to particular
persons [supposita]. Hence, were we to say: "Christ, pray for us,"
except we added something, this would seem to refer to Christ's person,
and consequently to agree with the error either of Nestorius, who
distinguished in Christ the person of the son of man from the person of
the Son of God, or of Arius, who asserted that the person of the Son is
less than the Father. Wherefore to avoid these errors the Church says
not: "Christ, pray for us," but "Christ, hear us," or "have mercy on
us. "
Reply to Objection 4: As we shall state further on [5046](A[3]) the
saints are said to present our prayers to God, not as though they
notified things unknown to Him, but because they ask God to grant those
prayers a gracious hearing, or because they seek the Divine truth about
them, namely what ought to be done according to His providence.
Reply to Objection 5: A person is rendered worthy of a saint's prayers
for him by the very fact that in his need he has recourse to him with
pure devotion. Hence it is not unnecessary to pray to the saints.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the prayers which the saints pour forth to God for us are always
granted?
Objection 1: It would seem that the prayers which the saints pour forth
to God for us are not always granted. For if they were always granted,
the saints would be heard especially in regard to matters concerning
themselves. But they are not heard in reference to these things;
wherefore it is stated in the Apocalypse (6:11) that on the martyrs
beseeching vengeance on them that dwell on earth, "it was said to them
that they should rest for a little while till the number of their
brethren should be filled up [*Vulg. : 'till their fellow-servants and
their brethren . . . should be filled up']. " Much less therefore, are
they heard in reference to matters concerning others.
Objection 2: Further, it is written (Jer. 15:1): "If Moses and Samuel
shall stand before Me, My soul is not towards this people. " Therefore,
the saints are not always heard when they pray God for us.
Objection 3: Further, the saints in heaven are stated to be equal to
the angels of God (Mat. 22:30). But the angels are not always heard in
the prayers which they offer up to God. This is evident from Dan.
10:12,13, where it is written: "I am come for thy words: but the prince
of the kingdom of the Persians resisted me one-and-twenty days. " But
the angel who spoke had not come to Daniel's aid except by asking of
God to be set free; and yet the fulfillment of his prayer was hindered.
Therefore neither are other saints always heard by God when they pray
for us.
Objection 4: Further, whosoever obtains something by prayer merits it
in a sense. But the saints in heaven are not in the state of meriting.
Therefore they cannot obtain anything for us from God by their prayers.
Objection 5: Further, the saints, in all things, conform their will to
the will of God. Therefore they will nothing but what they know God to
will. But no one prays save for what he wills. Therefore they pray not
save for what they know God to will. Now that which God wills would be
done even without their praying for it. Therefore their prayers are not
efficacious for obtaining anything.
Objection 6: Further, the prayers of the whole heavenly court, if they
could obtain anything, would be more efficacious than all the petitions
of the Church here below. Now if the suffrages of the Church here below
for some one in purgatory were to be multiplied, he would be wholly
delivered from punishment. Since then the saints in heaven pray for
those who are in purgatory on the same account as for us, if they
obtain anything for us, their prayers would deliver entirely from
punishment those who are in purgatory. But this is not true because,
then the Church's suffrages for the dead would be unnecessary.
On the contrary, It is written (2 Macc. 15:14): "This is he that
prayeth much for the people, and for all the holy city, Jeremias the
prophet of God": and that his prayer was granted is clear from what
follows (2 Macc. 15:15): "Jeremias stretched forth his right hand, and
gave to Judas a sword of gold, saying: Take this holy sword, a gift
from God," etc.
Further, Jerome says (Ep. contra Vigilant. ): "Thou sayest in thy
pamphlets, that while we live, we can pray for one another, but that
when we are dead no one's prayer for another will be heard": and
afterwards he refutes this in the following words: "If the apostles and
martyrs while yet in the body can pray for others, while they are still
solicitous for themselves, how much more can they do so when the crown,
the victory, the triumph is already theirs! "
Further, this is confirmed by the custom of the Church, which often
asks to be assisted by the prayers of the saints.
I answer that, The saints are said to pray for us in two ways. First,
by "express" prayer, when by their prayers they seek a hearing of the
Divine clemency on our behalf: secondly, by "interpretive" prayer,
namely by their merits which, being known to God, avail not only them
unto glory, but also us as suffrages and prayers, even as the shedding
of Christ's blood is said to ask pardon for us. In both ways the
saints' prayers considered in themselves avail to obtain what they ask,
yet on our part they may fail so that we obtain not the fruit of their
prayers, in so far as they are said to pray for us by reason of their
merits availing on our behalf. But in so far as they pray for us by
asking something for us in their prayers, their prayers are always
granted, since they will only what God wills, nor do they ask save for
what they will to be done; and what God wills is always
fulfilled---unless we speak of His "antecedent" will, whereby "He
wishes all men to be saved" [*Cf. [5047]FP, Q[19], A[6], ad 1]. For
this will is not always fulfilled; wherefore no wonder if that also
which the saints will according to this kind of will be not fulfilled
sometimes.
Reply to Objection 1: This prayer of the martyrs is merely their desire
to obtain the robe of the body and the fellowship of those who will be
saved, and their consent to God's justice in punishing the wicked.
Hence a gloss on Apoc. 6:11, "How long, O Lord," says: "They desire an
increase of joy and the fellowship of the saints, and they consent to
God's justice. "
Reply to Objection 2: The Lord speaks there of Moses and Samuel
according to their state in this life. For we read that they withstood
God's anger by praying for the people. And yet even if they had been
living at the time in question, they would have been unable to placate
God towards the people by their prayers, on account of the wickedness
of this same people: and it is thus that we are to understand this
passage.
Reply to Objection 3: This dispute among the good angels does not mean
that they offered contradictory prayers to God, but that they submitted
contrary merits on various sides to the Divine inquiry, with a view of
God's pronouncing sentence thereon. This, in fact, is what Gregory says
(Moral. xvii) in explanation of the aforesaid words of Daniel: "The
lofty spirits that are set over the nations never fight in behalf of
those that act unjustly, but they justly judge and try their deeds. And
when the guilt or innocence of any particular nation is brought into
the debate of the court above, the ruling spirit of that nation is said
to have won or lost in the conflict. Yet the supreme will of their
Maker is victorious over all, for since they have it ever before their
eyes, they will not what they are unable to obtain," wherefore neither
do they seek for it. And consequently it is clear that their prayers
are always heard.
Reply to Objection 4: Although the saints are not in a state to merit
for themselves, when once they are in heaven, they are in a state to
merit for others, or rather to assist others by reason of their
previous merit: for while living they merited that their prayers should
be heard after their death.
Or we may reply that prayer is meritorious on one count, and
impetratory on another. For merit consists in a certain equation of the
act to the end for which it is intended, and which is given to it as
its reward; while the impetration of a prayer depends on the liberality
of the person supplicated. Hence prayer sometimes, through the
liberality of the person supplicated, obtains that which was not
merited either by the suppliant, or by the person supplicated for: and
so, although the saints are not in the state of meriting, it does not
follow that they are not in the state of impetrating.
Reply to Objection 5: As appears from the authority of Gregory quoted
above (ad 3), the saints and angels will nothing but what they see to
be in the Divine will: and so neither do they pray for aught else. Nor
is their prayer fruitless, since as Augustine says (De Praed. Sanct.
[*De Dono Persever. xxii]): "The prayers of the saints profit the
predestinate, because it is perhaps pre-ordained that they shall be
saved through the prayers of those who intercede for them": and
consequently God also wills that what the saints see Him to will shall
be fulfilled through their prayers.
Reply to Objection 6: The suffrages of the Church for the dead are as
so many satisfactions of the living in lieu of the dead: and
accordingly they free the dead from the punishment which the latter
have not paid. But the saints in heaven are not in the state of making
satisfaction; and consequently the parallel fails between their prayers
and the suffrages of the Church.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE SIGNS THAT WILL PRECEDE THE JUDGMENT (THREE ARTICLES)
We must next consider the signs that will precede the judgment: and
under this head there are three points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any signs will precede the Lord's coming to judgment?
(2) Whether in very truth the sun and moon will be darkened?
(3) Whether the powers of the heavens will be moved when the Lord shall
come?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether any signs will precede the Lord's coming to judgment?
Objection 1: It would seem that the Lord's coming to judgment will not
be preceded by any signs. Because it is written (1 Thess. 5:3): "When
they shall say: Peace and security; then shall sudden destruction come
upon them. " Now there would be no peace and security if men were
terrified by previous signs. Therefore signs will not precede that
coming
Objection 2: Further, signs are ordained for the manifestation of
something. But His coming is to be hidden; wherefore it is written (1
Thess. 5:2): "The day of the Lord shall come as a thief in the night. "
Therefore signs ought not to precede it.
Objection 3: Further, the time of His first coming was foreknown by the
prophets, which does not apply to His second coming. Now no such signs
preceded the first coming of Christ. Therefore neither will they
precede the second.
On the contrary, It is written (Lk. 21:25): "There shall be signs in
the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars," etc.
Further, Jerome [*St. Peter Damian, Opuscul. xlix; he quotes St.
Jerome, but the reference is not known. ] mentions fifteen signs
preceding the judgment. He says that on the "first" day all the seas
will rise fifteen cubits above the mountains; in the "second" day all
the waters will be plunged into the depths, so that scarcely will they
be visible; on the "third" day they will be restored to their previous
condition; on the "fourth" day all the great fishes and other things
that move in the waters will gather together and, raising their heads
above the sea, roar at one another contentiously; on the "fifth" day,
all the birds of the air will gather together in the fields, wailing to
one another, with neither bite nor sup; on the "sixth" day rivers of
fire will arise towards the firmament rushing together from the west to
the east; on the "seventh" day all the stars, both planets and fixed
stars, will throw out fiery tails like comets; on the "eighth" day
there will be a great earthquake, and all animals will be laid low; on
the "ninth" day all the plants will be bedewed as it were with blood;
on the "tenth" day all stones, little and great, will be divided into
four parts dashing against one another; on the "eleventh" day all hills
and mountains and buildings will be reduced to dust; on the "twelfth"
day all animals will come from forest and mountain to the fields,
roaring and tasting of nothing; on the "thirteenth" day all graves from
east to west will open to allow the bodies to rise again; on the
"fourteenth" day all men will leave their abode, neither understanding
nor speaking, but rushing hither and thither like madmen; on the
"fifteenth" day all will die and will rise again with those who died
long before.
I answer that, When Christ shall come to judge He will appear in the
form of glory, on account of the authority becoming a judge. Now it
pertains to the dignity of judicial power to have certain signs that
induce people to reverence and subjection: and consequently many signs
will precede the advent of Christ when He shall come to judgment, in
order that the hearts of men be brought to subjection to the coming
judge, and be prepared for the judgment, being forewarned by those
signs. But it is not easy to know what these signs may be: for the
signs of which we read in the gospels, as Augustine says, writing to
Hesychius about the end of the world (Ep. lxxx), refer not only to
Christ's coming to judgment, but also to the time of the sack of
Jerusalem, and to the coming of Christ in ceaselessly visiting His
Church. So that, perhaps, if we consider them carefully, we shall find
that none of them refers to the coming advent, as he remarks: because
these signs that are mentioned in the gospels, such as wars, fears, and
so forth, have been from the beginning of the human race: unless
perhaps we say that at that time they will be more prevalent: although
it is uncertain in what degree this increase will foretell the
imminence of the advent. The signs mentioned by Jerome are not asserted
by him; he merely says that he found them written in the annals of the
Hebrews: and, indeed, they contain very little likelihood.
Reply to Objection 1: According to Augustine (Ad Hesych. , Ep. lxxx)
towards the end of the world there will be a general persecution of the
good by the wicked: so that at the same time some will fear, namely the
good, and some will be secure, namely the wicked. The words: "When they
shall say: Peace and security," refer to the wicked, who will pay
little heed to the signs of the coming judgment: while the words of Lk.
21:26, "men withering away," etc. , should be referred to the good.
We may also reply that all these signs that will happen about the time
of the judgment are reckoned to occur within the time occupied by the
judgment, so that the judgment day contains them all. Wherefore
although men be terrified by the signs appearing about the judgment
day, yet before those signs begin to appear the wicked will think
themselves to be in peace and security, after the death of Antichrist
and before the coming of Christ, seeing that the world is not at once
destroyed, as they thought hitherto.
Reply to Objection 2: The day of the Lord is said to come as a thief,
because the exact time is not known, since it will not be possible to
know it from those signs: although, as we have already said, all these
most manifest sings which will precede the judgment immediately may be
comprised under the judgment day.
Reply to Objection 3: At His first advent Christ came secretly,
although the appointed time was known beforehand by the prophets. Hence
there was no need for such signs to appear at His first coming, as will
appear at His second advent, when He will come openly, although the
appointed time is hidden.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether towards the time of the judgment the sun and moon will be darkened
in very truth?
Objection 1: It would seem that towards the time of the judgment the
sun and moon will be darkened in very truth. For, as Rabanus says,
commenting on Mat. 24:29 "nothing hinders us from gathering that the
sun moon, and stars will then be deprived of their light, as we know
happened to the sun at the time of our Lord's passion. "
Objection 2: Further, the light of the heavenly bodies is directed to
the generation of inferior bodies, because by its means and not only by
their movement they act upon this lower world as Averroes says (De
Subst. Orbis. ). But generation will cease then. Therefore neither will
light remain in the heavenly bodies.
Objection 3: Further, according to some the inferior bodies will be
cleansed of the qualities by which they act. Now heavenly bodies act
not only by movement, but also by light, as stated above (OBJ[2]).
Therefore as the movement of heaven will cease, so will the light of
the heavenly bodies.
On the contrary, According to astronomers the sun and moon cannot be
eclipsed at the same time. But this darkening of the sun and moon is
stated to be simultaneous, when the Lord shall come to judgment.
Therefore the darkening will not be in very truth due to a natural
eclipse.
Further, it is not seemly for the same to be the cause of a thing's
failing and increasing. Now when our Lord shall come the light of the
luminaries will increase according to Is. 30:26, "The light of the moon
shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be
sevenfold. " Therefore it is unfitting for the light of these bodies to
cease when our Lord comes.
I answer that, If we speak of the sun and moon in respect of the very
moment of Christ's coming, it is not credible that they will be
darkened through being bereft of their light, since when Christ comes
and the saints rise again the whole world will be renewed, as we shall
state further on ([5048]Q[74]). If, however, we speak of them in
respect of the time immediately preceding the judgment, it is possible
that by the Divine power the sun, moon, and other luminaries of the
heavens will be darkened, either at various times or all together, in
order to inspire men with fear.
Reply to Objection 1: Rabanus is speaking of the time preceding the
judgment: wherefore he adds that when the judgment day is over the
words of Isaias shall be fulfilled.
Reply to Objection 2: Light is in the heavenly bodies not only for the
purpose of causing generation in these lower bodies, but also for their
own perfection and beauty. Hence it does not follow that where
generation ceases, the light of the heavenly bodies will cease, but
rather that it will increase.
Reply to Objection 3: It does not seem probable that the elemental
qualities will be removed from the elements, although some have
asserted this. If, however, they be removed, there would still be no
parallel between them and light, since the elemental qualities are in
opposition to one another, so that their action is corruptive: whereas
light is a principle of action not by way of opposition, but by way of
a principle regulating things in opposition to one another and bringing
them back to harmony. Nor is there a parallel with the movement of
heavenly bodies, for movement is the act of that which is imperfect,
wherefore it must needs cease when the imperfection ceases: whereas
this cannot be said of light.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the virtues of heaven will be moved when our Lord shall come?
Objection 1: It would seem that the virtues of heaven will not be moved
when our Lord shall come. For the virtues of heaven can de. note only
the blessed angels. Now immobility is essential to blessedness.
Therefore it will be impossible for them to be moved.
Objection 2: Further, ignorance is the cause of wonder (Metaph. i, 2).
Now ignorance, like fear, is far from the angels, for as Gregory says
(Dial. iv, 33; Moral. ii, 3), "what do they not see, who see Him Who
sees all. " Therefore it will be impossible for them to be moved with
wonder, as stated in the text (Sent. iv, D, 48).
Objection 3: Further, all the angels will be present at the Divine
judgment; wherefore it is stated (Apoc. 7:11): "All the angels stood
round about the throne. " Now the virtues denote one particular order of
angels. Therefore it should not be said of them rather than of others,
that they are moved.
On the contrary, It is written (Job 26:11): "The pillars of heaven
tremble, and dread at His beck. " Now the pillars of heaven can denote
only the virtues of heaven. Therefore the virtues of heaven will be
moved.
Further, it is written (Mat. 24:29): "The stars shall fall from heaven,
and the virtues [Douay: 'powers'] of heaven shall be moved. "
I answer that, Virtue is twofold as applied to the angels, [*Cf.
[5049]FP, Q[108], A[5], ad 1] as Dionysius states (Coel. Hier. xi). For
sometimes the name of "virtues" is appropriated to one order, which
according to him, is the middle order of the middle hierarchy, but
according to Gregory (Hom. in Evang. xxxiv) is the highest order of the
lowest hierarchy. In another sense it is employed to denote all the
angels: and then they are said to the question at issue it may be taken
either way. For in the text (Sent. iv, D, 48) it is explained according
to the second acceptation, so as to denote all the angels: and then
they are said to be moved through wonder at the renewing of the world,
as stated in the text. It can also be explained in reference to virtue
as the name of a particular order; and then that order is said to be
moved more than the others by reason of the effect, since according to
Gregory (Hom. in Evang. xxxiv) we ascribe to that order the working of
miracles which especially will be worked about that time: or again,
because that order---since, according to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xi), it
belongs to the middle hierarchy---is not limited in its power,
wherefore its ministry must needs regard universal causes. Consequently
the proper office of the virtues is seemingly to move the heavenly
bodies which are the cause of what happens in nature here below. And
again the very name denotes this, since they are called the "virtues of
heaven. " Accordingly they will be moved then, because they will no more
produce their effect, by ceasing to move the heavenly bodies: even as
the angels who are appointed to watch over men will no longer fulfill
the office of guardians.
Reply to Objection 1: This movement changes nothing pertaining to their
state; but refers either to their effects which may vary without any
change on their part, or to some new consideration of things which
hitherto they were unable to see by means of their concreated species,
which change of thought is not taken from them by their state of
blessedness. Hence Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. viii, 20) that "God
moves the spiritual creature through time. "
Reply to Objection 2: Wonder is wont to be about things surpassing our
knowledge or ability: and accordingly the virtues of heaven will wonder
at the Divine power doing such things, in so far as they fail to do or
comprehend them. In this sense the blessed Agnes said that the "sun and
moon wonder at His beauty": and this does not imply ignorance in the
angels, but removes the comprehension of God from them.
The Reply to the Third Objection is clear from what has been said.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE FIRE OF THE FINAL CONFLAGRATION (NINE ARTICLES)
We must now consider the fire of the final conflagration: and under
this head there are nine points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any cleansing of the world is to take place?
(2) Whether it will be effected by fire?
(3) Whether that fire is of the same species as elemental fire?
(4) Whether that fire will cleanse also the higher heavens?
(5) Whether that fire will consume the other elements?
(6) Whether it will cleanse all the elements?
(7) Whether that fire precedes or follows the judgment?
(8) Whether men are to be consumed by that fire?
(9) Whether the wicked will be involved therein?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the world is to be cleansed?
Objection 1: It would seem that there is not to be any cleansing of the
world. For only that which is unclean needs cleansing. Now God's
creatures are not unclean, wherefore it is written (Acts 10:15): "That
which God hath cleansed, do not thou call common," i. e. unclean.
Therefore the creatures of the world shall not be cleansed.
Objection 2: Further, according to Divine justice cleansing is directed
to the removal of the uncleanness of sin, as instanced in the cleansing
after death. But there can be no stain of sin in the elements of this
world. Therefore, seemingly, they need not to be cleansed.
Objection 3: Further, a thing is said to be cleansed when any foreign
matter that depreciates it is removed therefrom: for the removal of
that which ennobles a thing is not called a cleansing, but rather a
diminishing. Now it pertains to the perfection and nobility of the
elements that something of a foreign nature is mingled with them, since
the form of a mixed body is more noble than the form of a simple body.
Therefore it would seem nowise fitting that the elements of this world
can possibly be cleansed.
On the contrary, All renewal is effected by some kind of cleansing. But
the elements will be renewed; hence it is written (Apoc. 21:1): "I saw
a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth
was gone. " Therefore the elements shall be cleansed.
Further, a gloss [*St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei xx, 16] on 1 Cor. 7:31,
"The fashion of this earth passeth away," says: "The beauty of this
world will perish in the burning of worldly flames. " Therefore the same
conclusion follows.
I answer that, Since the world was, in a way, made for man's sake, it
follows that, when man shall be glorified in the body, the other bodies
of the world shall also be changed to a better state, so that it is
rendered a more fitting place for him and more pleasant to look upon.
Now in order that man obtain the glory of the body, it behooves first
of all those things to be removed which are opposed to glory. There are
two, namely the corruption and stain of sin---because according to 1
Cor. 15:50, "neither shall corruption possess incorruption," and all
the unclean shall be without the city of glory (Apoc. 22:15)---and
again, the elements require to be cleansed from the contrary
dispositions, ere they be brought to the newness of glory,
proportionately to what we have said with regard to man. Now although,
properly speaking, a corporeal thing cannot be the subject of the stain
of sin, nevertheless, on account of sin corporeal things contract a
certain unfittingness for being appointed to spiritual purposes; and
for this reason we find that places where crimes have been committed
are reckoned unfit for the performance of sacred actions therein,
unless they be cleansed beforehand. Accordingly that part of the world
which is given to our use contracts from men's sins a certain unfitness
for being glorified, wherefore in this respect it needs to be cleansed.
In like manner with regard to the intervening space, on account of the
contact of the elements, there are many corruptions, generations and
alterations of the elements, which diminish their purity: wherefore the
elements need to be cleansed from these also, so that they be fit to
receive the newness of glory.
Reply to Objection 1: When it is asserted that every creature of God is
clean we are to understand this as meaning that its substance contains
no alloy of evil, as the Manichees maintained, saying that evil and
good are two substances in some places severed from one another, in
others mingled together. But it does not exclude a creature from having
an admixture of a foreign nature, which in itself is also good, but is
inconsistent with the perfection of that creature. Nor does this
prevent evil from being accidental to a creature, although not mingled
with it as part of its substance.
Reply to Objection 2: Although corporeal elements cannot be the subject
of sin, nevertheless, from the sin that is committed in them they
contract a certain unfitness for receiving the perfection of glory.
Reply to Objection 3: The form of a mixed body and the form of an
element may be considered in two ways: either as regards the perfection
of the species, and thus a mixed body is more perfect---or as regards
their continual endurance; and thus the simple body is more noble,
because it has not in itself the cause of corruption, unless it be
corrupted by something extrinsic: whereas a mixed body has in itself
the cause of its corruption, namely the composition of contraries.
Wherefore a simple body, although it be corruptible in part is
incorruptible as a whole, which cannot be said of a mixed body. And
since incorruption belongs to the perfection of glory, it follows that
the perfection of a simple is more in keeping with the perfection of
glory, than the perfection of a mixed body, unless the mixed body has
also in itself some principle of incorruption, as the human body has,
the form of which is incorruptible. Nevertheless, although a mixed body
is somewhat more noble than a simple body, a simple body that exists by
itself has a more noble being than if it exist in a mixed body, because
in a mixed body simple bodies are somewhat in potentiality, whereas,
existing by themselves, they are in their ultimate perfection.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the cleansing of the world will be effected by fire?
Objection 1: It would seem that this cleansing will not be effected by
fire. For since fire is a part of the world, it needs to be cleansed
like the other parts. Now, the same thing should not be both cleanser
and cleansed. Therefore it would seem that the cleansing will not be by
fire.
Objection 2: Further, just as fire has a cleansing virtue so has water.
Since then all things are not capable of being cleansed by fire, and
some need to be cleansed by water---which distinction is moreover
observed by the Old Law---it would seem that fire will not at any rate
cleanse all things.
Objection 3: Further, this cleansing would seem to consist in purifying
the parts of the world by separating them from one another. Now the
separation of the parts of the world from one another at the world's
beginning was effected by God's power alone, for the work of
distinction was carried out by that power: wherefore Anaxagoras
asserted that the separation was effected by the act of the intellect
which moves all things (cf. Aristotle, Phys. viii, 9). Therefore it
would seem that at the end of the world the cleansing will be done
immediately by God and not by fire.
On the contrary, It is written (Ps. 49:3): "A fire shall burn before
Him, and a mighty tempest shall be around Him"; and afterwards in
reference to the judgment (Ps. 49:4): "He shall call heaven from above,
and the earth to judge His people. " Therefore it would seem that the
final cleansing of the world will be by means of fire.
Further, it is written (2 Pet. 3:12): "The heavens being on fire will
be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with the burning heat. "
Therefore this cleansing will be effected by fire.
I answer that, As stated above [5050](A[1]) this cleansing of the world
will remove from it the stain contracted from sin, and the impurity
resulting from mixture, and will be a disposition to the perfection of
glory; and consequently in this threefold respect it will be most
fitting for it to be effected by fire. First, because since fire is the
most noble of the elements, its natural properties are more like the
properties of glory, and this is especially clear in regard to light.
Secondly, because fire, on account of the efficacy of its active
virtue, is not as susceptible as the other elements to the admixture of
a foreign matter. Thirdly, because the sphere of fire is far removed
from our abode; nor are we so familiar with the use of fire as with
that of earth, water, and air, so that it is not so liable to
depreciation. Moreover, it is most efficacious in cleansing and in
separating by a process of rarefaction.
Reply to Objection 1: Fire is not employed by us in its proper matter
(since thus it is far removed from us), but only in a foreign matter:
and in this respect it will be possible for the world to be cleansed by
fire as existing in its pure state. But in so far as it has an
admixture of some foreign matter it will be possible for it to be
cleansed; and thus it will be cleanser and cleansed under different
aspects. and this is not unreasonable.
Reply to Objection 2: The first cleansing of the world by the deluge
regarded only the stain of sin. Now the sin which was most prevalent
then was the sin of concupiscence, and consequently it was fitting that
the cleansing should be by means of its contrary, namely water. But the
second cleansing regards both the stain of sin and the impurity of
mixture, and in respect of both it is more fitting for it to be
effected by fire than by water. For the power of water tends to unite
rather than to separate; wherefore the natural impurity of the elements
could not be removed by water as by fire. Moreover, at the end of the
world the prevalent sin will be that of tepidity, as though the world
were already growing old, because then, according to Mat. 24:12, "the
charity of many shall grow cold," and consequently the cleansing will
then be fittingly effected by fire. Nor is there any thing that cannot
in some way be cleansed by fire: some things, however, cannot be
cleansed by fire without being destroyed themselves, such as cloths and
wooden vessels, and these the Law ordered to be cleansed with water;
yet all these things will be finally destroyed by fire.
Reply to Objection 3: By the work of distinction things received
different forms whereby they are distinct from one another: and
consequently this could only be done by Him Who is the author of
nature. But by the final cleansing things will be restored to the
purity wherein they were created, wherefore created nature will be able
to minister to its Creator to this effect; and for this reason is a
creature employed as a minister, that it is ennobled thereby.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the fire whereby the world will be cleansed will be of the same
species with elemental fire?
Objection 1: It would seem that the fire in question is not of the same
species as elemental fire. For nothing consumes itself. But that fire
will consume the four elements according to a gloss on 2 Pet. 3:12.
Therefore that fire will not be of the same species as elemental fire.
Objection 2: Further, as power is made known by operation, so is nature
made known by power. Now that fire will have a different power from the
fire which is an element: because it will cleanse the universe, whereas
this fire cannot do that. Therefore it will not be of the same species
as this.
Objection 3: Further, in natural bodies those that are of the same
species have the same movement. But that fire will have a different
movement from the fire that is an element, because it will move in all
directions so as to cleanse the whole. Therefore it is not of the same
species.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xx, 16), and his words are
contained in a gloss on 1 Cor. 7:31, that "the fashion of this world
will perish in the burning of worldly flames. " Therefore that fire will
be of the same nature as the fire which is now in the world.
Further, just as the future cleansing is to be by fire, so was the past
cleansing by water: and they are both compared to one another, 2 Pet.
3:5. Now in the first cleansing the water was of the same species with
elemental water. Therefore in like manner the fire of the second
cleansing will be of the same species with elemental fire.
I answer that, We meet with three opinions on this question. For some
say that the element of fire which is in its own sphere will come down
to cleanse the world: and they explain this descent by way of
multiplication, because the fire will spread through finding
combustible matter on all sides. And this will result all the more then
since the virtue of the fire will be raised over all the elements.
Against this, however, would seem to be not only the fact that this
fire will come down, but also the statement of the saints that it will
rise up; thus (2 Pet. 3:10) it is declared that the fire of the
judgment will rise as high as the waters of the deluge; whence it would
seem to follow that this fire is situated towards the middle of the
place of generation. Hence others say that this fire will be generated
towards the intervening space through the focusing together of the rays
of the heavenly bodies, just as we see them focused together in a
burning-glass; for at that time in lieu of glasses there will be
concave clouds, on which the rays will strike But this again does not
seem probable: for since the effects of heavenly bodies depend on
certain fixed positions and aspects, if this fire resulted from the
virtue of the heavenly bodies, the time of this cleansing would be
known to those who observe the movements of the stars and this is
contrary to the authority of Scripture. Consequently others, following
Augustine, say that "just as the deluge resulted from an outpouring of
the waters of the world, so the fashion of this world will perish by a
burning of worldly flames" (De Civ. Dei. xx, 16). This burning is
nothing else but the assembly of all those lower and higher causes that
by their nature have a kindling virtue: and this assembly will take
place not in the ordinary course of things, but by the Divine power:
and from all these causes thus assembled the fire that will burn the
surface of this world will result. If we consider aright these
opinions, we shall find that they differ as to the cause producing this
fire and not as to its species. For fire, whether produced by the sun
or by some lower heating cause, is of the same species as fire in its
own sphere, except in so far as the former has some admixture of
foreign matter. And this will of necessity be the case then, since fire
cannot cleanse a thing, unless this become its matter in some way.
Hence we must grant that the fire in question is simply of the same
species as ours.
Reply to Objection 1: The fire in question, although of the same
species as ours, is not identically the same. Now we see that of two
fires of the same species one destroys the other, namely the greater
destroys the lesser, by consuming its matter. In like manner that fire
will be able to destroy our fire.
Reply to Objection 2: Just as an operation that proceeds from the
virtue of a thing is an indication of that virtue, so is its virtue an
indication of its essence or nature, if it proceed from the essential
principles of the thing. But an operation that does not proceed from
the virtue of the operator does not indicate its virtue. This appears
in instruments: for the action of an instrument shows forth the virtue
of the mover rather than that of the instrument, since it shows forth
the virtue of the agent in so far as the latter is the first principle
of the action, whereas it does not show forth the virtue of the
instrument, except in so far as it is susceptive of the influence of
the principal agent as moving that instrument. In like manner a virtue
that does not proceed from the essential principles of a thing does not
indicate the nature of that thing except in the point of
susceptibility. Thus the virtue whereby hot water can heat is no
indication of the nature of water except in the point of its being
receptive of heat. Consequently nothing prevents water that has this
virtue from being of the same species as water that has it not. In like
manner it is not unreasonable that this fire, which will have the power
to cleanse the surface of the world, will be of the same species as the
fire to which we are used, since the heating power therein arises, not
from its essential principles but from the divine power or operation:
whether we say that this power is an absolute quality, such as heat in
hot water, or a kind of intention as we have ascribed to instrumental
virtue (Sent. iv, D, 1, qu. 1, A[4]) [*Cf. [5051]TP, Q[62], A[4], ad
1]. The latter is more probable since that fire will not act save as
the instrument of the Divine power.
Reply to Objection 3: Of its own nature fire tends only upwards; but in
so far as it pursues its matter, which it requires when it is outside
its own sphere, it follows the site of combustible matter. Accordingly
it is not unreasonable for it to take a circular or a downward course,
especially in so far as it acts as the instrument of the Divine power.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether that fire will cleanse also the higher heavens?
Objection 1: It would seem that that fire will cleanse also the higher
heavens. For it is written (Ps. 101:26,27): "The heavens are the works
of Thy hands: they shall perish but Thou remainest. " Now the higher
heavens also are the work of God's hands. Therefore they also shall
perish in the final burning of the world.
Objection 2: Further, it is written (2 Pet. 3:12): "The heavens being
on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with the
burning heat of fire. " Now the heavens that are distinct from the
elements are the higher heavens, wherein the stars are fixed. Therefore
it would seem that they also will be cleansed by that fire.
Objection 3: Further, the purpose of that fire will be to remove from
bodies their indisposition to the perfection of glory. Now in the
higher heaven we find this indisposition both as regards guilt, since
the devil sinned there, and as regards natural deficiency, since a
gloss on Rom. 8:22, "We know that every creature groaneth and is in
labor even until now," says: "All the elements fulfill their duty with
labor: even as it is not without labor that the sun and moon travel
their appointed course. " Therefore the higher heavens also will be
cleansed by that fire.
On the contrary, "The heavenly bodies are not receptive of impressions
from without" [*Cf. Sent. Philosop. ex Arist. collect. lit. c. ---Among
the works of Bede].
Further, a gloss on 2 Thess. 1:8, "In a flame of fire giving
vengeance," says: "There will be in the world a fire that shall precede
Him, and shall rise in the air to the same height as did the waters of
the deluge. " But the waters of the deluge did not rise to the height of
the higher heavens but only 15 cubits higher than the mountain summits
(Gn. 7:20). Therefore the higher heavens will not be cleansed by that
fire.
I answer that, The cleansing of the world will be for the purpose of
removing from bodies the disposition contrary to the perfection of
glory, and this perfection is the final consummation of the universe:
and this disposition is to be found in all bodies, but differently in
different bodies. For in some this indisposition regards something
inherent to their substance: as in these lower bodies which by being
mixed together fall away from their own purity. In others this
indisposition does not regard something inherent to their substance; as
in the heavenly bodies, wherein nothing is to be found contrary to the
final perfection of the universe, except movement which is the way to
perfection, and this not any kind of movement, but only local movement,
which changes nothing intrinsic to a thing, such as its substance,
quantity, or quality, but only its place which is extrinsic to it.
Consequently there is no need to take anything away from the substance
of the higher heavens, but only to set its movement at rest. Now local
movement is brought to rest not by the action of a counter agent, but
by the mover ceasing to move; and therefore the heavenly bodies will
not be cleansed, neither by fire nor by the action of any creature, but
in lieu of being cleansed they will be set at rest by God's will alone.
Reply to Objection 1: As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xx, 18,24): "Those
words of the psalm refer to the aerial heavens which will be cleansed
by the fire of the final conflagration. " Or we may reply that if they
refer also to the higher heavens, these are said to perish as regards
their movement whereby now they are moved without cessation.
Reply to Objection 2: Peter explains himself to which heavens he
refers. For before the words quoted, he had said (2 Pet. 3:5-7): "The
heavens . . . first, and the earth . . . through water . . . perished .
. . which . . . now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto
fire unto the day of judgment. " [*The entire text differs somewhat from
St. Thomas's quotation; but the sense is the same. ] Therefore the
heavens to be cleansed are those which before were cleansed by the
waters of the deluge, namely the aerial heavens.
Reply to Objection 3: This labor and service of the creature, that
Ambrose ascribes to the heavenly bodies, is nothing else than the
successive movements whereby they are subject to time, and the lack of
that final consummation which they will attain in the end. Nor did the
empyrean heaven contract any stain from the sin of the demons, because
they were expelled from that heaven as soon as they sinned.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether that fire will consume the other elements?
Objection 1: It would seem that the fire in question will consume the
other elements. For a gloss of Bede on 2 Pet. 3:12 says: "This
exceeding great fire will engulf the four elements whereof the world
consists: yet it will not so engulf all things that they will cease to
be, but it will consume two of them entirely, and will restore two of
them to a better fashion. " Therefore it would seem that at least two of
the elements are to be entirely destroyed by that fire.
Objection 2: Further, it is written (Apoc. 21:1): "The first heaven and
the first earth have passed away and the sea is no more. " Now the
heaven here denotes the air, as Augustine states (De Civ. Dei xx, 18);
and the sea denotes the gathering together of the waters.
established by God among things is that "the last should be led to God
by those that are midway between. " Wherefore, since the saints who are
in heaven are nearest to God, the order of the Divine law requires that
we, who while we remain in the body are pilgrims from the Lord, should
be brought back to God by the saints who are between us and Him: and
this happens when the Divine goodness pours forth its effect into us
through them. And since our return to God should correspond to the
outflow of His boons upon us, just as the Divine favors reach us by
means of the saints intercession, so should we, by their means, be
brought back to God, that we may receive His favors again. Hence it is
that we make them our intercessors with God, and our mediators as it
were, when we ask them to pray for us.
Reply to Objection 1: It is not on account of any defect in God's power
that He works by means of second causes, but it is for the perfection
of the order of the universe, and the more manifold outpouring of His
goodness on things, through His bestowing on them not only the goodness
which is proper to them, but also the faculty of causing goodness in
others. Even so it is not through any defect in His mercy, that we need
to bespeak His clemency through the prayers of the saints, but to the
end that the aforesaid order in things be observed.
Reply to Objection 2: Although the greater saints are more acceptable
to God than the lesser, it is sometimes profitable to pray to the
lesser; and this for five reasons. First, because sometimes one has
greater devotion for a lesser saint than for a greater, and the effect
of prayer depends very much on one's devotion. Secondly, in order to
avoid tediousness, for continual attention to one thing makes a person
weary; whereas by praying to different saints, the fervor of our
devotion is aroused anew as it were. Thirdly, because it is granted to
some saints to exercise their patronage in certain special cases, for
instance to Saint Anthony against the fire of hell. Fourthly, that due
honor be given by us to all. Fifthly, because the prayers of several
sometimes obtain that which would not have been obtained by the prayers
of one.
Reply to Objection 3: Prayer is an act, and acts belong to particular
persons [supposita]. Hence, were we to say: "Christ, pray for us,"
except we added something, this would seem to refer to Christ's person,
and consequently to agree with the error either of Nestorius, who
distinguished in Christ the person of the son of man from the person of
the Son of God, or of Arius, who asserted that the person of the Son is
less than the Father. Wherefore to avoid these errors the Church says
not: "Christ, pray for us," but "Christ, hear us," or "have mercy on
us. "
Reply to Objection 4: As we shall state further on [5046](A[3]) the
saints are said to present our prayers to God, not as though they
notified things unknown to Him, but because they ask God to grant those
prayers a gracious hearing, or because they seek the Divine truth about
them, namely what ought to be done according to His providence.
Reply to Objection 5: A person is rendered worthy of a saint's prayers
for him by the very fact that in his need he has recourse to him with
pure devotion. Hence it is not unnecessary to pray to the saints.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the prayers which the saints pour forth to God for us are always
granted?
Objection 1: It would seem that the prayers which the saints pour forth
to God for us are not always granted. For if they were always granted,
the saints would be heard especially in regard to matters concerning
themselves. But they are not heard in reference to these things;
wherefore it is stated in the Apocalypse (6:11) that on the martyrs
beseeching vengeance on them that dwell on earth, "it was said to them
that they should rest for a little while till the number of their
brethren should be filled up [*Vulg. : 'till their fellow-servants and
their brethren . . . should be filled up']. " Much less therefore, are
they heard in reference to matters concerning others.
Objection 2: Further, it is written (Jer. 15:1): "If Moses and Samuel
shall stand before Me, My soul is not towards this people. " Therefore,
the saints are not always heard when they pray God for us.
Objection 3: Further, the saints in heaven are stated to be equal to
the angels of God (Mat. 22:30). But the angels are not always heard in
the prayers which they offer up to God. This is evident from Dan.
10:12,13, where it is written: "I am come for thy words: but the prince
of the kingdom of the Persians resisted me one-and-twenty days. " But
the angel who spoke had not come to Daniel's aid except by asking of
God to be set free; and yet the fulfillment of his prayer was hindered.
Therefore neither are other saints always heard by God when they pray
for us.
Objection 4: Further, whosoever obtains something by prayer merits it
in a sense. But the saints in heaven are not in the state of meriting.
Therefore they cannot obtain anything for us from God by their prayers.
Objection 5: Further, the saints, in all things, conform their will to
the will of God. Therefore they will nothing but what they know God to
will. But no one prays save for what he wills. Therefore they pray not
save for what they know God to will. Now that which God wills would be
done even without their praying for it. Therefore their prayers are not
efficacious for obtaining anything.
Objection 6: Further, the prayers of the whole heavenly court, if they
could obtain anything, would be more efficacious than all the petitions
of the Church here below. Now if the suffrages of the Church here below
for some one in purgatory were to be multiplied, he would be wholly
delivered from punishment. Since then the saints in heaven pray for
those who are in purgatory on the same account as for us, if they
obtain anything for us, their prayers would deliver entirely from
punishment those who are in purgatory. But this is not true because,
then the Church's suffrages for the dead would be unnecessary.
On the contrary, It is written (2 Macc. 15:14): "This is he that
prayeth much for the people, and for all the holy city, Jeremias the
prophet of God": and that his prayer was granted is clear from what
follows (2 Macc. 15:15): "Jeremias stretched forth his right hand, and
gave to Judas a sword of gold, saying: Take this holy sword, a gift
from God," etc.
Further, Jerome says (Ep. contra Vigilant. ): "Thou sayest in thy
pamphlets, that while we live, we can pray for one another, but that
when we are dead no one's prayer for another will be heard": and
afterwards he refutes this in the following words: "If the apostles and
martyrs while yet in the body can pray for others, while they are still
solicitous for themselves, how much more can they do so when the crown,
the victory, the triumph is already theirs! "
Further, this is confirmed by the custom of the Church, which often
asks to be assisted by the prayers of the saints.
I answer that, The saints are said to pray for us in two ways. First,
by "express" prayer, when by their prayers they seek a hearing of the
Divine clemency on our behalf: secondly, by "interpretive" prayer,
namely by their merits which, being known to God, avail not only them
unto glory, but also us as suffrages and prayers, even as the shedding
of Christ's blood is said to ask pardon for us. In both ways the
saints' prayers considered in themselves avail to obtain what they ask,
yet on our part they may fail so that we obtain not the fruit of their
prayers, in so far as they are said to pray for us by reason of their
merits availing on our behalf. But in so far as they pray for us by
asking something for us in their prayers, their prayers are always
granted, since they will only what God wills, nor do they ask save for
what they will to be done; and what God wills is always
fulfilled---unless we speak of His "antecedent" will, whereby "He
wishes all men to be saved" [*Cf. [5047]FP, Q[19], A[6], ad 1]. For
this will is not always fulfilled; wherefore no wonder if that also
which the saints will according to this kind of will be not fulfilled
sometimes.
Reply to Objection 1: This prayer of the martyrs is merely their desire
to obtain the robe of the body and the fellowship of those who will be
saved, and their consent to God's justice in punishing the wicked.
Hence a gloss on Apoc. 6:11, "How long, O Lord," says: "They desire an
increase of joy and the fellowship of the saints, and they consent to
God's justice. "
Reply to Objection 2: The Lord speaks there of Moses and Samuel
according to their state in this life. For we read that they withstood
God's anger by praying for the people. And yet even if they had been
living at the time in question, they would have been unable to placate
God towards the people by their prayers, on account of the wickedness
of this same people: and it is thus that we are to understand this
passage.
Reply to Objection 3: This dispute among the good angels does not mean
that they offered contradictory prayers to God, but that they submitted
contrary merits on various sides to the Divine inquiry, with a view of
God's pronouncing sentence thereon. This, in fact, is what Gregory says
(Moral. xvii) in explanation of the aforesaid words of Daniel: "The
lofty spirits that are set over the nations never fight in behalf of
those that act unjustly, but they justly judge and try their deeds. And
when the guilt or innocence of any particular nation is brought into
the debate of the court above, the ruling spirit of that nation is said
to have won or lost in the conflict. Yet the supreme will of their
Maker is victorious over all, for since they have it ever before their
eyes, they will not what they are unable to obtain," wherefore neither
do they seek for it. And consequently it is clear that their prayers
are always heard.
Reply to Objection 4: Although the saints are not in a state to merit
for themselves, when once they are in heaven, they are in a state to
merit for others, or rather to assist others by reason of their
previous merit: for while living they merited that their prayers should
be heard after their death.
Or we may reply that prayer is meritorious on one count, and
impetratory on another. For merit consists in a certain equation of the
act to the end for which it is intended, and which is given to it as
its reward; while the impetration of a prayer depends on the liberality
of the person supplicated. Hence prayer sometimes, through the
liberality of the person supplicated, obtains that which was not
merited either by the suppliant, or by the person supplicated for: and
so, although the saints are not in the state of meriting, it does not
follow that they are not in the state of impetrating.
Reply to Objection 5: As appears from the authority of Gregory quoted
above (ad 3), the saints and angels will nothing but what they see to
be in the Divine will: and so neither do they pray for aught else. Nor
is their prayer fruitless, since as Augustine says (De Praed. Sanct.
[*De Dono Persever. xxii]): "The prayers of the saints profit the
predestinate, because it is perhaps pre-ordained that they shall be
saved through the prayers of those who intercede for them": and
consequently God also wills that what the saints see Him to will shall
be fulfilled through their prayers.
Reply to Objection 6: The suffrages of the Church for the dead are as
so many satisfactions of the living in lieu of the dead: and
accordingly they free the dead from the punishment which the latter
have not paid. But the saints in heaven are not in the state of making
satisfaction; and consequently the parallel fails between their prayers
and the suffrages of the Church.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE SIGNS THAT WILL PRECEDE THE JUDGMENT (THREE ARTICLES)
We must next consider the signs that will precede the judgment: and
under this head there are three points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any signs will precede the Lord's coming to judgment?
(2) Whether in very truth the sun and moon will be darkened?
(3) Whether the powers of the heavens will be moved when the Lord shall
come?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether any signs will precede the Lord's coming to judgment?
Objection 1: It would seem that the Lord's coming to judgment will not
be preceded by any signs. Because it is written (1 Thess. 5:3): "When
they shall say: Peace and security; then shall sudden destruction come
upon them. " Now there would be no peace and security if men were
terrified by previous signs. Therefore signs will not precede that
coming
Objection 2: Further, signs are ordained for the manifestation of
something. But His coming is to be hidden; wherefore it is written (1
Thess. 5:2): "The day of the Lord shall come as a thief in the night. "
Therefore signs ought not to precede it.
Objection 3: Further, the time of His first coming was foreknown by the
prophets, which does not apply to His second coming. Now no such signs
preceded the first coming of Christ. Therefore neither will they
precede the second.
On the contrary, It is written (Lk. 21:25): "There shall be signs in
the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars," etc.
Further, Jerome [*St. Peter Damian, Opuscul. xlix; he quotes St.
Jerome, but the reference is not known. ] mentions fifteen signs
preceding the judgment. He says that on the "first" day all the seas
will rise fifteen cubits above the mountains; in the "second" day all
the waters will be plunged into the depths, so that scarcely will they
be visible; on the "third" day they will be restored to their previous
condition; on the "fourth" day all the great fishes and other things
that move in the waters will gather together and, raising their heads
above the sea, roar at one another contentiously; on the "fifth" day,
all the birds of the air will gather together in the fields, wailing to
one another, with neither bite nor sup; on the "sixth" day rivers of
fire will arise towards the firmament rushing together from the west to
the east; on the "seventh" day all the stars, both planets and fixed
stars, will throw out fiery tails like comets; on the "eighth" day
there will be a great earthquake, and all animals will be laid low; on
the "ninth" day all the plants will be bedewed as it were with blood;
on the "tenth" day all stones, little and great, will be divided into
four parts dashing against one another; on the "eleventh" day all hills
and mountains and buildings will be reduced to dust; on the "twelfth"
day all animals will come from forest and mountain to the fields,
roaring and tasting of nothing; on the "thirteenth" day all graves from
east to west will open to allow the bodies to rise again; on the
"fourteenth" day all men will leave their abode, neither understanding
nor speaking, but rushing hither and thither like madmen; on the
"fifteenth" day all will die and will rise again with those who died
long before.
I answer that, When Christ shall come to judge He will appear in the
form of glory, on account of the authority becoming a judge. Now it
pertains to the dignity of judicial power to have certain signs that
induce people to reverence and subjection: and consequently many signs
will precede the advent of Christ when He shall come to judgment, in
order that the hearts of men be brought to subjection to the coming
judge, and be prepared for the judgment, being forewarned by those
signs. But it is not easy to know what these signs may be: for the
signs of which we read in the gospels, as Augustine says, writing to
Hesychius about the end of the world (Ep. lxxx), refer not only to
Christ's coming to judgment, but also to the time of the sack of
Jerusalem, and to the coming of Christ in ceaselessly visiting His
Church. So that, perhaps, if we consider them carefully, we shall find
that none of them refers to the coming advent, as he remarks: because
these signs that are mentioned in the gospels, such as wars, fears, and
so forth, have been from the beginning of the human race: unless
perhaps we say that at that time they will be more prevalent: although
it is uncertain in what degree this increase will foretell the
imminence of the advent. The signs mentioned by Jerome are not asserted
by him; he merely says that he found them written in the annals of the
Hebrews: and, indeed, they contain very little likelihood.
Reply to Objection 1: According to Augustine (Ad Hesych. , Ep. lxxx)
towards the end of the world there will be a general persecution of the
good by the wicked: so that at the same time some will fear, namely the
good, and some will be secure, namely the wicked. The words: "When they
shall say: Peace and security," refer to the wicked, who will pay
little heed to the signs of the coming judgment: while the words of Lk.
21:26, "men withering away," etc. , should be referred to the good.
We may also reply that all these signs that will happen about the time
of the judgment are reckoned to occur within the time occupied by the
judgment, so that the judgment day contains them all. Wherefore
although men be terrified by the signs appearing about the judgment
day, yet before those signs begin to appear the wicked will think
themselves to be in peace and security, after the death of Antichrist
and before the coming of Christ, seeing that the world is not at once
destroyed, as they thought hitherto.
Reply to Objection 2: The day of the Lord is said to come as a thief,
because the exact time is not known, since it will not be possible to
know it from those signs: although, as we have already said, all these
most manifest sings which will precede the judgment immediately may be
comprised under the judgment day.
Reply to Objection 3: At His first advent Christ came secretly,
although the appointed time was known beforehand by the prophets. Hence
there was no need for such signs to appear at His first coming, as will
appear at His second advent, when He will come openly, although the
appointed time is hidden.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether towards the time of the judgment the sun and moon will be darkened
in very truth?
Objection 1: It would seem that towards the time of the judgment the
sun and moon will be darkened in very truth. For, as Rabanus says,
commenting on Mat. 24:29 "nothing hinders us from gathering that the
sun moon, and stars will then be deprived of their light, as we know
happened to the sun at the time of our Lord's passion. "
Objection 2: Further, the light of the heavenly bodies is directed to
the generation of inferior bodies, because by its means and not only by
their movement they act upon this lower world as Averroes says (De
Subst. Orbis. ). But generation will cease then. Therefore neither will
light remain in the heavenly bodies.
Objection 3: Further, according to some the inferior bodies will be
cleansed of the qualities by which they act. Now heavenly bodies act
not only by movement, but also by light, as stated above (OBJ[2]).
Therefore as the movement of heaven will cease, so will the light of
the heavenly bodies.
On the contrary, According to astronomers the sun and moon cannot be
eclipsed at the same time. But this darkening of the sun and moon is
stated to be simultaneous, when the Lord shall come to judgment.
Therefore the darkening will not be in very truth due to a natural
eclipse.
Further, it is not seemly for the same to be the cause of a thing's
failing and increasing. Now when our Lord shall come the light of the
luminaries will increase according to Is. 30:26, "The light of the moon
shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be
sevenfold. " Therefore it is unfitting for the light of these bodies to
cease when our Lord comes.
I answer that, If we speak of the sun and moon in respect of the very
moment of Christ's coming, it is not credible that they will be
darkened through being bereft of their light, since when Christ comes
and the saints rise again the whole world will be renewed, as we shall
state further on ([5048]Q[74]). If, however, we speak of them in
respect of the time immediately preceding the judgment, it is possible
that by the Divine power the sun, moon, and other luminaries of the
heavens will be darkened, either at various times or all together, in
order to inspire men with fear.
Reply to Objection 1: Rabanus is speaking of the time preceding the
judgment: wherefore he adds that when the judgment day is over the
words of Isaias shall be fulfilled.
Reply to Objection 2: Light is in the heavenly bodies not only for the
purpose of causing generation in these lower bodies, but also for their
own perfection and beauty. Hence it does not follow that where
generation ceases, the light of the heavenly bodies will cease, but
rather that it will increase.
Reply to Objection 3: It does not seem probable that the elemental
qualities will be removed from the elements, although some have
asserted this. If, however, they be removed, there would still be no
parallel between them and light, since the elemental qualities are in
opposition to one another, so that their action is corruptive: whereas
light is a principle of action not by way of opposition, but by way of
a principle regulating things in opposition to one another and bringing
them back to harmony. Nor is there a parallel with the movement of
heavenly bodies, for movement is the act of that which is imperfect,
wherefore it must needs cease when the imperfection ceases: whereas
this cannot be said of light.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the virtues of heaven will be moved when our Lord shall come?
Objection 1: It would seem that the virtues of heaven will not be moved
when our Lord shall come. For the virtues of heaven can de. note only
the blessed angels. Now immobility is essential to blessedness.
Therefore it will be impossible for them to be moved.
Objection 2: Further, ignorance is the cause of wonder (Metaph. i, 2).
Now ignorance, like fear, is far from the angels, for as Gregory says
(Dial. iv, 33; Moral. ii, 3), "what do they not see, who see Him Who
sees all. " Therefore it will be impossible for them to be moved with
wonder, as stated in the text (Sent. iv, D, 48).
Objection 3: Further, all the angels will be present at the Divine
judgment; wherefore it is stated (Apoc. 7:11): "All the angels stood
round about the throne. " Now the virtues denote one particular order of
angels. Therefore it should not be said of them rather than of others,
that they are moved.
On the contrary, It is written (Job 26:11): "The pillars of heaven
tremble, and dread at His beck. " Now the pillars of heaven can denote
only the virtues of heaven. Therefore the virtues of heaven will be
moved.
Further, it is written (Mat. 24:29): "The stars shall fall from heaven,
and the virtues [Douay: 'powers'] of heaven shall be moved. "
I answer that, Virtue is twofold as applied to the angels, [*Cf.
[5049]FP, Q[108], A[5], ad 1] as Dionysius states (Coel. Hier. xi). For
sometimes the name of "virtues" is appropriated to one order, which
according to him, is the middle order of the middle hierarchy, but
according to Gregory (Hom. in Evang. xxxiv) is the highest order of the
lowest hierarchy. In another sense it is employed to denote all the
angels: and then they are said to the question at issue it may be taken
either way. For in the text (Sent. iv, D, 48) it is explained according
to the second acceptation, so as to denote all the angels: and then
they are said to be moved through wonder at the renewing of the world,
as stated in the text. It can also be explained in reference to virtue
as the name of a particular order; and then that order is said to be
moved more than the others by reason of the effect, since according to
Gregory (Hom. in Evang. xxxiv) we ascribe to that order the working of
miracles which especially will be worked about that time: or again,
because that order---since, according to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xi), it
belongs to the middle hierarchy---is not limited in its power,
wherefore its ministry must needs regard universal causes. Consequently
the proper office of the virtues is seemingly to move the heavenly
bodies which are the cause of what happens in nature here below. And
again the very name denotes this, since they are called the "virtues of
heaven. " Accordingly they will be moved then, because they will no more
produce their effect, by ceasing to move the heavenly bodies: even as
the angels who are appointed to watch over men will no longer fulfill
the office of guardians.
Reply to Objection 1: This movement changes nothing pertaining to their
state; but refers either to their effects which may vary without any
change on their part, or to some new consideration of things which
hitherto they were unable to see by means of their concreated species,
which change of thought is not taken from them by their state of
blessedness. Hence Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. viii, 20) that "God
moves the spiritual creature through time. "
Reply to Objection 2: Wonder is wont to be about things surpassing our
knowledge or ability: and accordingly the virtues of heaven will wonder
at the Divine power doing such things, in so far as they fail to do or
comprehend them. In this sense the blessed Agnes said that the "sun and
moon wonder at His beauty": and this does not imply ignorance in the
angels, but removes the comprehension of God from them.
The Reply to the Third Objection is clear from what has been said.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE FIRE OF THE FINAL CONFLAGRATION (NINE ARTICLES)
We must now consider the fire of the final conflagration: and under
this head there are nine points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any cleansing of the world is to take place?
(2) Whether it will be effected by fire?
(3) Whether that fire is of the same species as elemental fire?
(4) Whether that fire will cleanse also the higher heavens?
(5) Whether that fire will consume the other elements?
(6) Whether it will cleanse all the elements?
(7) Whether that fire precedes or follows the judgment?
(8) Whether men are to be consumed by that fire?
(9) Whether the wicked will be involved therein?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the world is to be cleansed?
Objection 1: It would seem that there is not to be any cleansing of the
world. For only that which is unclean needs cleansing. Now God's
creatures are not unclean, wherefore it is written (Acts 10:15): "That
which God hath cleansed, do not thou call common," i. e. unclean.
Therefore the creatures of the world shall not be cleansed.
Objection 2: Further, according to Divine justice cleansing is directed
to the removal of the uncleanness of sin, as instanced in the cleansing
after death. But there can be no stain of sin in the elements of this
world. Therefore, seemingly, they need not to be cleansed.
Objection 3: Further, a thing is said to be cleansed when any foreign
matter that depreciates it is removed therefrom: for the removal of
that which ennobles a thing is not called a cleansing, but rather a
diminishing. Now it pertains to the perfection and nobility of the
elements that something of a foreign nature is mingled with them, since
the form of a mixed body is more noble than the form of a simple body.
Therefore it would seem nowise fitting that the elements of this world
can possibly be cleansed.
On the contrary, All renewal is effected by some kind of cleansing. But
the elements will be renewed; hence it is written (Apoc. 21:1): "I saw
a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth
was gone. " Therefore the elements shall be cleansed.
Further, a gloss [*St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei xx, 16] on 1 Cor. 7:31,
"The fashion of this earth passeth away," says: "The beauty of this
world will perish in the burning of worldly flames. " Therefore the same
conclusion follows.
I answer that, Since the world was, in a way, made for man's sake, it
follows that, when man shall be glorified in the body, the other bodies
of the world shall also be changed to a better state, so that it is
rendered a more fitting place for him and more pleasant to look upon.
Now in order that man obtain the glory of the body, it behooves first
of all those things to be removed which are opposed to glory. There are
two, namely the corruption and stain of sin---because according to 1
Cor. 15:50, "neither shall corruption possess incorruption," and all
the unclean shall be without the city of glory (Apoc. 22:15)---and
again, the elements require to be cleansed from the contrary
dispositions, ere they be brought to the newness of glory,
proportionately to what we have said with regard to man. Now although,
properly speaking, a corporeal thing cannot be the subject of the stain
of sin, nevertheless, on account of sin corporeal things contract a
certain unfittingness for being appointed to spiritual purposes; and
for this reason we find that places where crimes have been committed
are reckoned unfit for the performance of sacred actions therein,
unless they be cleansed beforehand. Accordingly that part of the world
which is given to our use contracts from men's sins a certain unfitness
for being glorified, wherefore in this respect it needs to be cleansed.
In like manner with regard to the intervening space, on account of the
contact of the elements, there are many corruptions, generations and
alterations of the elements, which diminish their purity: wherefore the
elements need to be cleansed from these also, so that they be fit to
receive the newness of glory.
Reply to Objection 1: When it is asserted that every creature of God is
clean we are to understand this as meaning that its substance contains
no alloy of evil, as the Manichees maintained, saying that evil and
good are two substances in some places severed from one another, in
others mingled together. But it does not exclude a creature from having
an admixture of a foreign nature, which in itself is also good, but is
inconsistent with the perfection of that creature. Nor does this
prevent evil from being accidental to a creature, although not mingled
with it as part of its substance.
Reply to Objection 2: Although corporeal elements cannot be the subject
of sin, nevertheless, from the sin that is committed in them they
contract a certain unfitness for receiving the perfection of glory.
Reply to Objection 3: The form of a mixed body and the form of an
element may be considered in two ways: either as regards the perfection
of the species, and thus a mixed body is more perfect---or as regards
their continual endurance; and thus the simple body is more noble,
because it has not in itself the cause of corruption, unless it be
corrupted by something extrinsic: whereas a mixed body has in itself
the cause of its corruption, namely the composition of contraries.
Wherefore a simple body, although it be corruptible in part is
incorruptible as a whole, which cannot be said of a mixed body. And
since incorruption belongs to the perfection of glory, it follows that
the perfection of a simple is more in keeping with the perfection of
glory, than the perfection of a mixed body, unless the mixed body has
also in itself some principle of incorruption, as the human body has,
the form of which is incorruptible. Nevertheless, although a mixed body
is somewhat more noble than a simple body, a simple body that exists by
itself has a more noble being than if it exist in a mixed body, because
in a mixed body simple bodies are somewhat in potentiality, whereas,
existing by themselves, they are in their ultimate perfection.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the cleansing of the world will be effected by fire?
Objection 1: It would seem that this cleansing will not be effected by
fire. For since fire is a part of the world, it needs to be cleansed
like the other parts. Now, the same thing should not be both cleanser
and cleansed. Therefore it would seem that the cleansing will not be by
fire.
Objection 2: Further, just as fire has a cleansing virtue so has water.
Since then all things are not capable of being cleansed by fire, and
some need to be cleansed by water---which distinction is moreover
observed by the Old Law---it would seem that fire will not at any rate
cleanse all things.
Objection 3: Further, this cleansing would seem to consist in purifying
the parts of the world by separating them from one another. Now the
separation of the parts of the world from one another at the world's
beginning was effected by God's power alone, for the work of
distinction was carried out by that power: wherefore Anaxagoras
asserted that the separation was effected by the act of the intellect
which moves all things (cf. Aristotle, Phys. viii, 9). Therefore it
would seem that at the end of the world the cleansing will be done
immediately by God and not by fire.
On the contrary, It is written (Ps. 49:3): "A fire shall burn before
Him, and a mighty tempest shall be around Him"; and afterwards in
reference to the judgment (Ps. 49:4): "He shall call heaven from above,
and the earth to judge His people. " Therefore it would seem that the
final cleansing of the world will be by means of fire.
Further, it is written (2 Pet. 3:12): "The heavens being on fire will
be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with the burning heat. "
Therefore this cleansing will be effected by fire.
I answer that, As stated above [5050](A[1]) this cleansing of the world
will remove from it the stain contracted from sin, and the impurity
resulting from mixture, and will be a disposition to the perfection of
glory; and consequently in this threefold respect it will be most
fitting for it to be effected by fire. First, because since fire is the
most noble of the elements, its natural properties are more like the
properties of glory, and this is especially clear in regard to light.
Secondly, because fire, on account of the efficacy of its active
virtue, is not as susceptible as the other elements to the admixture of
a foreign matter. Thirdly, because the sphere of fire is far removed
from our abode; nor are we so familiar with the use of fire as with
that of earth, water, and air, so that it is not so liable to
depreciation. Moreover, it is most efficacious in cleansing and in
separating by a process of rarefaction.
Reply to Objection 1: Fire is not employed by us in its proper matter
(since thus it is far removed from us), but only in a foreign matter:
and in this respect it will be possible for the world to be cleansed by
fire as existing in its pure state. But in so far as it has an
admixture of some foreign matter it will be possible for it to be
cleansed; and thus it will be cleanser and cleansed under different
aspects. and this is not unreasonable.
Reply to Objection 2: The first cleansing of the world by the deluge
regarded only the stain of sin. Now the sin which was most prevalent
then was the sin of concupiscence, and consequently it was fitting that
the cleansing should be by means of its contrary, namely water. But the
second cleansing regards both the stain of sin and the impurity of
mixture, and in respect of both it is more fitting for it to be
effected by fire than by water. For the power of water tends to unite
rather than to separate; wherefore the natural impurity of the elements
could not be removed by water as by fire. Moreover, at the end of the
world the prevalent sin will be that of tepidity, as though the world
were already growing old, because then, according to Mat. 24:12, "the
charity of many shall grow cold," and consequently the cleansing will
then be fittingly effected by fire. Nor is there any thing that cannot
in some way be cleansed by fire: some things, however, cannot be
cleansed by fire without being destroyed themselves, such as cloths and
wooden vessels, and these the Law ordered to be cleansed with water;
yet all these things will be finally destroyed by fire.
Reply to Objection 3: By the work of distinction things received
different forms whereby they are distinct from one another: and
consequently this could only be done by Him Who is the author of
nature. But by the final cleansing things will be restored to the
purity wherein they were created, wherefore created nature will be able
to minister to its Creator to this effect; and for this reason is a
creature employed as a minister, that it is ennobled thereby.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the fire whereby the world will be cleansed will be of the same
species with elemental fire?
Objection 1: It would seem that the fire in question is not of the same
species as elemental fire. For nothing consumes itself. But that fire
will consume the four elements according to a gloss on 2 Pet. 3:12.
Therefore that fire will not be of the same species as elemental fire.
Objection 2: Further, as power is made known by operation, so is nature
made known by power. Now that fire will have a different power from the
fire which is an element: because it will cleanse the universe, whereas
this fire cannot do that. Therefore it will not be of the same species
as this.
Objection 3: Further, in natural bodies those that are of the same
species have the same movement. But that fire will have a different
movement from the fire that is an element, because it will move in all
directions so as to cleanse the whole. Therefore it is not of the same
species.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xx, 16), and his words are
contained in a gloss on 1 Cor. 7:31, that "the fashion of this world
will perish in the burning of worldly flames. " Therefore that fire will
be of the same nature as the fire which is now in the world.
Further, just as the future cleansing is to be by fire, so was the past
cleansing by water: and they are both compared to one another, 2 Pet.
3:5. Now in the first cleansing the water was of the same species with
elemental water. Therefore in like manner the fire of the second
cleansing will be of the same species with elemental fire.
I answer that, We meet with three opinions on this question. For some
say that the element of fire which is in its own sphere will come down
to cleanse the world: and they explain this descent by way of
multiplication, because the fire will spread through finding
combustible matter on all sides. And this will result all the more then
since the virtue of the fire will be raised over all the elements.
Against this, however, would seem to be not only the fact that this
fire will come down, but also the statement of the saints that it will
rise up; thus (2 Pet. 3:10) it is declared that the fire of the
judgment will rise as high as the waters of the deluge; whence it would
seem to follow that this fire is situated towards the middle of the
place of generation. Hence others say that this fire will be generated
towards the intervening space through the focusing together of the rays
of the heavenly bodies, just as we see them focused together in a
burning-glass; for at that time in lieu of glasses there will be
concave clouds, on which the rays will strike But this again does not
seem probable: for since the effects of heavenly bodies depend on
certain fixed positions and aspects, if this fire resulted from the
virtue of the heavenly bodies, the time of this cleansing would be
known to those who observe the movements of the stars and this is
contrary to the authority of Scripture. Consequently others, following
Augustine, say that "just as the deluge resulted from an outpouring of
the waters of the world, so the fashion of this world will perish by a
burning of worldly flames" (De Civ. Dei. xx, 16). This burning is
nothing else but the assembly of all those lower and higher causes that
by their nature have a kindling virtue: and this assembly will take
place not in the ordinary course of things, but by the Divine power:
and from all these causes thus assembled the fire that will burn the
surface of this world will result. If we consider aright these
opinions, we shall find that they differ as to the cause producing this
fire and not as to its species. For fire, whether produced by the sun
or by some lower heating cause, is of the same species as fire in its
own sphere, except in so far as the former has some admixture of
foreign matter. And this will of necessity be the case then, since fire
cannot cleanse a thing, unless this become its matter in some way.
Hence we must grant that the fire in question is simply of the same
species as ours.
Reply to Objection 1: The fire in question, although of the same
species as ours, is not identically the same. Now we see that of two
fires of the same species one destroys the other, namely the greater
destroys the lesser, by consuming its matter. In like manner that fire
will be able to destroy our fire.
Reply to Objection 2: Just as an operation that proceeds from the
virtue of a thing is an indication of that virtue, so is its virtue an
indication of its essence or nature, if it proceed from the essential
principles of the thing. But an operation that does not proceed from
the virtue of the operator does not indicate its virtue. This appears
in instruments: for the action of an instrument shows forth the virtue
of the mover rather than that of the instrument, since it shows forth
the virtue of the agent in so far as the latter is the first principle
of the action, whereas it does not show forth the virtue of the
instrument, except in so far as it is susceptive of the influence of
the principal agent as moving that instrument. In like manner a virtue
that does not proceed from the essential principles of a thing does not
indicate the nature of that thing except in the point of
susceptibility. Thus the virtue whereby hot water can heat is no
indication of the nature of water except in the point of its being
receptive of heat. Consequently nothing prevents water that has this
virtue from being of the same species as water that has it not. In like
manner it is not unreasonable that this fire, which will have the power
to cleanse the surface of the world, will be of the same species as the
fire to which we are used, since the heating power therein arises, not
from its essential principles but from the divine power or operation:
whether we say that this power is an absolute quality, such as heat in
hot water, or a kind of intention as we have ascribed to instrumental
virtue (Sent. iv, D, 1, qu. 1, A[4]) [*Cf. [5051]TP, Q[62], A[4], ad
1]. The latter is more probable since that fire will not act save as
the instrument of the Divine power.
Reply to Objection 3: Of its own nature fire tends only upwards; but in
so far as it pursues its matter, which it requires when it is outside
its own sphere, it follows the site of combustible matter. Accordingly
it is not unreasonable for it to take a circular or a downward course,
especially in so far as it acts as the instrument of the Divine power.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether that fire will cleanse also the higher heavens?
Objection 1: It would seem that that fire will cleanse also the higher
heavens. For it is written (Ps. 101:26,27): "The heavens are the works
of Thy hands: they shall perish but Thou remainest. " Now the higher
heavens also are the work of God's hands. Therefore they also shall
perish in the final burning of the world.
Objection 2: Further, it is written (2 Pet. 3:12): "The heavens being
on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with the
burning heat of fire. " Now the heavens that are distinct from the
elements are the higher heavens, wherein the stars are fixed. Therefore
it would seem that they also will be cleansed by that fire.
Objection 3: Further, the purpose of that fire will be to remove from
bodies their indisposition to the perfection of glory. Now in the
higher heaven we find this indisposition both as regards guilt, since
the devil sinned there, and as regards natural deficiency, since a
gloss on Rom. 8:22, "We know that every creature groaneth and is in
labor even until now," says: "All the elements fulfill their duty with
labor: even as it is not without labor that the sun and moon travel
their appointed course. " Therefore the higher heavens also will be
cleansed by that fire.
On the contrary, "The heavenly bodies are not receptive of impressions
from without" [*Cf. Sent. Philosop. ex Arist. collect. lit. c. ---Among
the works of Bede].
Further, a gloss on 2 Thess. 1:8, "In a flame of fire giving
vengeance," says: "There will be in the world a fire that shall precede
Him, and shall rise in the air to the same height as did the waters of
the deluge. " But the waters of the deluge did not rise to the height of
the higher heavens but only 15 cubits higher than the mountain summits
(Gn. 7:20). Therefore the higher heavens will not be cleansed by that
fire.
I answer that, The cleansing of the world will be for the purpose of
removing from bodies the disposition contrary to the perfection of
glory, and this perfection is the final consummation of the universe:
and this disposition is to be found in all bodies, but differently in
different bodies. For in some this indisposition regards something
inherent to their substance: as in these lower bodies which by being
mixed together fall away from their own purity. In others this
indisposition does not regard something inherent to their substance; as
in the heavenly bodies, wherein nothing is to be found contrary to the
final perfection of the universe, except movement which is the way to
perfection, and this not any kind of movement, but only local movement,
which changes nothing intrinsic to a thing, such as its substance,
quantity, or quality, but only its place which is extrinsic to it.
Consequently there is no need to take anything away from the substance
of the higher heavens, but only to set its movement at rest. Now local
movement is brought to rest not by the action of a counter agent, but
by the mover ceasing to move; and therefore the heavenly bodies will
not be cleansed, neither by fire nor by the action of any creature, but
in lieu of being cleansed they will be set at rest by God's will alone.
Reply to Objection 1: As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xx, 18,24): "Those
words of the psalm refer to the aerial heavens which will be cleansed
by the fire of the final conflagration. " Or we may reply that if they
refer also to the higher heavens, these are said to perish as regards
their movement whereby now they are moved without cessation.
Reply to Objection 2: Peter explains himself to which heavens he
refers. For before the words quoted, he had said (2 Pet. 3:5-7): "The
heavens . . . first, and the earth . . . through water . . . perished .
. . which . . . now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto
fire unto the day of judgment. " [*The entire text differs somewhat from
St. Thomas's quotation; but the sense is the same. ] Therefore the
heavens to be cleansed are those which before were cleansed by the
waters of the deluge, namely the aerial heavens.
Reply to Objection 3: This labor and service of the creature, that
Ambrose ascribes to the heavenly bodies, is nothing else than the
successive movements whereby they are subject to time, and the lack of
that final consummation which they will attain in the end. Nor did the
empyrean heaven contract any stain from the sin of the demons, because
they were expelled from that heaven as soon as they sinned.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether that fire will consume the other elements?
Objection 1: It would seem that the fire in question will consume the
other elements. For a gloss of Bede on 2 Pet. 3:12 says: "This
exceeding great fire will engulf the four elements whereof the world
consists: yet it will not so engulf all things that they will cease to
be, but it will consume two of them entirely, and will restore two of
them to a better fashion. " Therefore it would seem that at least two of
the elements are to be entirely destroyed by that fire.
Objection 2: Further, it is written (Apoc. 21:1): "The first heaven and
the first earth have passed away and the sea is no more. " Now the
heaven here denotes the air, as Augustine states (De Civ. Dei xx, 18);
and the sea denotes the gathering together of the waters.
