But the angels of the second hierarchy do not assist; for
they are enlightened by the angels of the first hierarchy, as Dionysius
says (Coel.
they are enlightened by the angels of the first hierarchy, as Dionysius
says (Coel.
Summa Theologica
"
I answer that, The will can be changed in two ways. First, from within;
in which way, since the movement of the will is nothing but the
inclination of the will to the thing willed, God alone can thus change
the will, because He gives the power of such an inclination to the
intellectual nature. For as the natural inclination is from God alone
Who gives the nature, so the inclination of the will is from God alone,
Who causes the will.
Secondly, the will is moved from without. As regards an angel, this can
be only in one way---by the good apprehended by the intellect. Hence in
as far as anyone may be the cause why anything be apprehended as an
appetible good, so far does he move the will. In this way also God
alone can move the will efficaciously; but an angel and man move the
will by way of persuasion, as above explained ([904]Q[106], A[2]).
In addition to this mode the human will can be moved from without in
another way; namely, by the passion residing in the sensitive appetite:
thus by concupiscence or anger the will is inclined to will something.
In this manner the angels, as being able to rouse these passions, can
move the will, not however by necessity, for the will ever remains free
to consent to, or to resist, the passion.
Reply to Objection 1: Those who act as God's ministers, either men or
angels, are said to burn away vices, and to incite to virtue by way of
persuasion.
Reply to Objection 2: The demon cannot put thoughts in our minds by
causing them from within, since the act of the cogitative faculty is
subject to the will; nevertheless the devil is called the kindler of
thoughts, inasmuch as he incites to thought, by the desire of the
things thought of, by way of persuasion, or by rousing the passions.
Damascene calls this kindling "a putting in" because such a work is
accomplished within. But good thoughts are attributed to a higher
principle, namely, God, though they may be procured by the ministry of
the angels.
Reply to Objection 3: The human intellect in its present state can
understand only by turning to the phantasms; but the human will can
will something following the judgment of reason rather than the passion
of the sensitive appetite. Hence the comparison does not hold.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change man's imagination?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel cannot change man's
imagination. For the phantasy, as is said De Anima iii, is "a motion
caused by the sense in act. " But if this motion were caused by an
angel, it would not be caused by the sense in act. Therefore it is
contrary to the nature of the phantasy, which is the act of the
imaginative faculty, to be changed by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, since the forms in the imagination are spiritual,
they are nobler than the forms existing in sensible matter. But an
angel cannot impress forms upon sensible matter ([905]Q[110], A[2]).
Therefore he cannot impress forms on the imagination, and so he cannot
change it.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 12): "One
spirit by intermingling with another can communicate his knowledge to
the other spirit by these images, so that the latter either understands
it himself, or accepts it as understood by the other. " But it does not
seem that an angel can be mingled with the human imagination, nor that
the imagination can receive the knowledge of an angel. Therefore it
seems that an angel cannot change the imagination.
Objection 4: Further, in the imaginative vision man cleaves to the
similitudes of the things as to the things themselves. But in this
there is deception. So as a good angel cannot be the cause of
deception, it seems that he cannot cause the imaginative vision, by
changing the imagination.
On the contrary, Those things which are seen in dreams are seen by
imaginative vision. But the angels reveal things in dreams, as appears
from Mat. 1:20;[2]:13,[19] in regard to the angel who appeared to
Joseph in dreams. Therefore an angel can move the imagination.
I answer that, Both a good and a bad angel by their own natural power
can move the human imagination. This may be explained as follows. For
it was said above ([906]Q[110], A[3]), that corporeal nature obeys the
angel as regards local movement, so that whatever can be caused by the
local movement of bodies is subject to the natural power of the angels.
Now it is manifest that imaginative apparitions are sometimes caused in
us by the local movement of animal spirits and humors. Hence Aristotle
says (De Somn. et Vigil. ) [*De Insomniis iii. ], when assigning the
cause of visions in dreams, that "when an animal sleeps, the blood
descends in abundance to the sensitive principle, and movements descend
with it," that is, the impressions left from the movements are
preserved in the animal spirits, "and move the sensitive principle"; so
that a certain appearance ensues, as if the sensitive principle were
being then changed by the external objects themselves. Indeed, the
commotion of the spirits and humors may be so great that such
appearances may even occur to those who are awake, as is seen in mad
people, and the like. So, as this happens by a natural disturbance of
the humors, and sometimes also by the will of man who voluntarily
imagines what he previously experienced, so also the same may be done
by the power of a good or a bad angel, sometimes with alienation from
the bodily senses, sometimes without such alienation.
Reply to Objection 1: The first principle of the imagination is from
the sense in act. For we cannot imagine what we have never perceived by
the senses, either wholly or partly; as a man born blind cannot imagine
color. Sometimes, however, the imagination is informed in such a way
that the act of the imaginative movement arises from the impressions
preserved within.
Reply to Objection 2: An angel changes the imagination, not indeed by
the impression of an imaginative form in no way previously received
from the senses (for he cannot make a man born blind imagine color),
but by local movement of the spirits and humors, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 3: The commingling of the angelic spirit with the
human imagination is not a mingling of essences, but by reason of an
effect which he produces in the imagination in the way above stated; so
that he shows man what he [the angel] knows, but not in the way he
knows.
Reply to Objection 4: An angel causing an imaginative vision, sometimes
enlightens the intellect at the same time, so that it knows what these
images signify; and then there is not deception. But sometimes by the
angelic operation the similitudes of things only appear in the
imagination; but neither then is deception caused by the angel, but by
the defect in the intellect to whom such things appear. Thus neither
was Christ a cause of deception when He spoke many things to the people
in parables, which He did not explain to them.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change the human senses?
Objection 1: It seems that an angel cannot change the human senses. For
the sensitive operation is a vital operation. But such an operation
does not come from an extrinsic principle. Therefore the sensitive
operation cannot be caused by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, the sensitive operation is nobler than the
nutritive. But the angel cannot change the nutritive power, nor other
natural forms. Therefore neither can he change the sensitive power.
Objection 3: Further, the senses are naturally moved by the sensible
objects. But an angel cannot change the order of nature ([907]Q[110],
A[4]). Therefore an angel cannot change the senses; but these are
changed always by the sensible object.
On the contrary, The angels who overturned Sodom, "struck the people of
Sodom with blindness or {aorasia}, so that they could not find the
door" (Gn. 19:11). [*It is worth noting that these are the only two
passages in the Greek version where the word {aorasia} appears. It
expresses, in fact, the effect produced on the people of
Sodom---namely, dazzling (French version, "eblouissement"), which the
Latin "caecitas" (blindness) does not necessarily imply. ] The same is
recorded of the Syrians whom Eliseus led into Samaria (4 Kings 6:18).
I answer that, The senses may be changed in a twofold manner; from
without, as when affected by the sensible object: and from within, for
we see that the senses are changed when the spirits and humors are
disturbed; as for example, a sick man's tongue, charged with choleric
humor, tastes everything as bitter, and the like with the other senses.
Now an angel, by his natural power, can work a change in the senses
both ways. For an angel can offer the senses a sensible object from
without, formed by nature or by the angel himself, as when he assumes a
body, as we have said above ([908]Q[51], A[2]). Likewise he can move
the spirits and humors from within, as above remarked, whereby the
senses are changed in various ways.
Reply to Objection 1: The principle of the sensitive operation cannot
be without the interior principle which is the sensitive power; but
this interior principle can be moved in many ways by the exterior
principle, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 2: By the interior movement of the spirits and
humors an angel can do something towards changing the act of the
nutritive power, and also of the appetitive and sensitive power, and of
any other power using a corporeal organ.
Reply to Objection 3: An angel can do nothing outside the entire order
of creatures; but he can outside some particular order of nature, since
he is not subject to that order; thus in some special way an angel can
work a change in the senses outside the common mode of nature.
__________________________________________________________________
THE MISSION OF THE ANGELS (FOUR ARTICLES)
We next consider the mission of the angels. Under this head arise four
points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any angels are sent on works of ministry?
(2) Whether all are sent?
(3) Whether those who are sent, assist?
(4) From what orders they are sent.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angels are sent on works of ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels are not sent on works of
ministry. For every mission is to some determinate place. But
intellectual actions do not determine a place, for intellect abstracts
from the "here" and "now. " Since therefore the angelic actions are
intellectual, it appears that the angels are not sent to perform their
own actions.
Objection 2: Further, the empyrean heaven is the place that beseems the
angelic dignity. Therefore if they are sent to us in ministry, it seems
that something of their dignity would be lost; which is unseemly.
Objection 3: Further, external occupation hinders the contemplation of
wisdom; hence it is said: "He that is less in action, shall receive
wisdom" (Ecclus. 38:25). So if some angels are sent on external
ministrations, they would seemingly be hindered from contemplation. But
the whole of their beatitude consists in the contemplation of God. So
if they were sent, their beatitude would be lessened; which is
unfitting.
Objection 4: Further, to minister is the part of an inferior; hence it
is written (Lk. 22:27): "Which is the greater, he that sitteth at
table, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at table? " But the
angels are naturally greater than we are. Therefore they are not sent
to administer to us.
On the contrary, It is written (Ex. 23:20): "Behold I will send My
angels who shall go before thee. "
I answer that, From what has been said above ([909]Q[108], A[6]), it
may be shown that some angels are sent in ministry by God. For, as we
have already stated ([910]Q[43], A[1]), in treating of the mission of
the Divine Persons, he is said to be sent who in any way proceeds from
another so as to begin to be where he was not, or to be in another way,
where he already was. Thus the Son, or the Holy Ghost is said to be
sent as proceeding from the Father by origin; and begins to be in a new
way, by grace or by the nature assumed, where He was before by the
presence of His Godhead; for it belongs to God to be present
everywhere, because, since He is the universal agent, His power reaches
to all being, and hence He exists in all things ([911]Q[8], A[1]). An
angel's power, however, as a particular agent, does not reach to the
whole universe, but reaches to one thing in such a way as not to reach
another; and so he is "here" in such a manner as not to be "there. " But
it is clear from what was above stated ([912]Q[110], A[1]), that the
corporeal creature is governed by the angels. Hence, whenever an angel
has to perform any work concerning a corporeal creature, the angel
applies himself anew to that body by his power; and in that way begins
to be there afresh. Now all this takes place by Divine command. Hence
it follows that an angel is sent by God.
Yet the action performed by the angel who is sent, proceeds from God as
from its first principle, at Whose nod and by Whose authority the
angels work; and is reduced to God as to its last end. Now this is what
is meant by a minister: for a minister is an intelligent instrument;
while an instrument is moved by another, and its action is ordered to
another. Hence angels' actions are called 'ministries'; and for this
reason they are said to be sent in ministry.
Reply to Objection 1: An operation can be intellectual in two ways. In
one way, as dwelling in the intellect itself, as contemplation; such an
operation does not demand to occupy a place; indeed, as Augustine says
(De Trin. iv, 20): "Even we ourselves as mentally tasting something
eternal, are not in this world. " In another sense an action is said to
be intellectual because it is regulated and commanded by some
intellect; in that sense the intellectual operations evidently have
sometimes a determinate place.
Reply to Objection 2: The empyrean heaven belongs to the angelic
dignity by way of congruity; forasmuch as it is congruous that the
higher body should be attributed to that nature which occupies a rank
above bodies. Yet an angel does not derive his dignity from the
empyrean heaven; so when he is not actually in the empyrean heaven,
nothing of his dignity is lost, as neither does a king lessen his
dignity when not actually sitting on his regal throne, which suits his
dignity.
Reply to Objection 3: In ourselves the purity of contemplation is
obscured by exterior occupation; because we give ourselves to action
through the sensitive faculties, the action of which when intense
impedes the action of the intellectual powers. An angel, on the
contrary, regulates his exterior actions by intellectual operation
alone. Hence it follows that his external occupations in no respect
impede his contemplation; because given two actions, one of which is
the rule and the reason of the other, one does not hinder but helps the
other. Wherefore Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "the angels do not go
abroad in such a manner as to lose the delights of inward
contemplation. "
Reply to Objection 4: In their external actions the angels chiefly
minister to God, and secondarily to us; not because we are superior to
them, absolutely speaking, but because, since every man or angel by
cleaving to God is made one spirit with God, he is thereby superior to
every creature. Hence the Apostle says (Phil. 2:3): "Esteeming others
better than themselves. "
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels are sent in ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels are sent in ministry.
For the Apostle says (Heb. 1:14): "All are ministering spirits, sent to
minister" [Vulg. 'Are they not all . . . ? '].
Objection 2: Further, among the orders, the highest is that of the
Seraphim, as stated above ([913]Q[108], A[6]). But a Seraph was sent to
purify the lips of the prophet (Is. 6:6,7). Therefore much more are the
inferior orders sent.
Objection 3: Further, the Divine Persons infinitely excel all the
angelic orders. But the Divine Persons are sent. Therefore much more
are even the highest angels sent.
Objection 4: Further, if the superior angels are not sent to the
external ministries, this can only be because the superior angels
execute the Divine ministries by means of the inferior angels. But as
all the angels are unequal, as stated above ([914]Q[50], A[4]), each
angel has an angel inferior to himself except the last one. Therefore
only the last angel would be sent in ministry; which contradicts the
words, "Thousands of thousands ministered to Him" (Dan. 7:10).
On the contrary, Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), quoting the
statement of Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), that "the higher ranks
fulfil no exterior service. "
I answer that, As appears from what has been said above ([915]Q[106],
A[3]; [916]Q[110], A[1]), the order of Divine Providence has so
disposed not only among the angels, but also in the whole universe,
that inferior things are administered by the superior. But the Divine
dispensation, however, this order is sometimes departed from as regards
corporeal things, for the sake of a higher order, that is, according as
it is suitable for the manifestation of grace. That the man born blind
was enlightened, that Lazarus was raised from the dead, was
accomplished immediately by God without the action of the heavenly
bodies. Moreover both good and bad angels can work some effect in these
bodies independently of the heavenly bodies, by the condensation of the
clouds to rain, and by producing some such effects. Nor can anyone
doubt that God can immediately reveal things to men without the help of
the angels, and the superior angels without the inferior. From this
standpoint some have said that according to the general law the
superior angels are not sent, but only the inferior; yet that
sometimes, by Divine dispensation, the superior angels also are sent.
It may also be said that the Apostle wishes to prove that Christ is
greater than the angels who were chosen as the messengers of the law;
in order that He might show the excellence of the new over the old law.
Hence there is no need to apply this to any other angels besides those
who were sent to give the law.
Reply to Objection 2: According to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), the
angel who was sent to purify the prophet's lips was one of the inferior
order; but was called a "Seraph," that is, "kindling " in an equivocal
sense, because he came to "kindle" the lips of the prophet. It may also
be said that the superior angels communicate their own proper gifts
whereby they are denominated, through the ministry of the inferior
angels. Thus one of the Seraphim is described as purifying by fire the
prophet's lips, not as if he did so immediately, but because an
inferior angel did so by his power; as the Pope is said to absolve a
man when he gives absolution by means of someone else.
Reply to Objection 3: The Divine Persons are not sent in ministry, but
are said to be sent in an equivocal sense, as appears from what has
been said ([917]Q[43], A[1]).
Reply to Objection 4: A manifold grade exists in the Divine ministries.
Hence there is nothing to prevent angels though unequal from being sent
immediately in ministry, in such a manner however that the superior are
sent to the higher ministries, and the lower to the inferior
ministries.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels who are sent, assist?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels who are sent also assist.
For Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ): "So the angels are sent, and
assist; for, though the angelic spirit is limited, yet the supreme
Spirit, God, is not limited. "
Objection 2: Further, the angel was sent to administer to Tobias. Yet
he said, "I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven who stand before the
Lord" (Tob. 12:15). Therefore the angels who are sent, assist.
Objection 3: Further, every holy angel is nearer to God than Satan is.
Yet Satan assisted God, according to Job 1:6: "When the sons of God
came to stand before the Lord, Satan also was present among them. "
Therefore much more do the angels, who are sent to minister, assist.
Objection 4: Further, if the inferior angels do not assist, the reason
is because they receive the Divine enlightenment, not immediately, but
through the superior angels. But every angel receives the Divine
enlightenment from a superior, except the one who is highest of all.
Therefore only the highest angel would assist; which is contrary to the
text of Dan. 7:10: "Ten thousand times a hundred thousand stood before
Him. " Therefore the angels who are sent also assist.
On the contrary, Gregory says, on Job 25:3: "Is there any numbering of
His soldiers? " (Moral. xvii): "Those powers assist, who do not go forth
as messengers to men. " Therefore those who are sent in ministry do not
assist.
I answer that, The angels are spoken of as "assisting" and
"administering," after the likeness of those who attend upon a king;
some of whom ever wait upon him, and hear his commands immediately;
while others there are to whom the royal commands are conveyed by those
who are in attendance---for instance, those who are placed at the head
of the administration of various cities; these are said to administer,
not to assist.
We must therefore observe that all the angels gaze upon the Divine
Essence immediately; in regard to which all, even those who minister,
are said to assist. Hence Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "those who are
sent on the external ministry of our salvation can always assist and
see the face of the Father. " Yet not all the angels can perceive the
secrets of the Divine mysteries in the clearness itself of the Divine
Essence; but only the superior angels who announce them to the
inferior: and in that respect only the superior angels belonging to the
highest hierarchy are said to assist, whose special prerogative it is
to be enlightened immediately by God.
From this may be deduced the reply to the first and second objections,
which are based on the first mode of assisting.
Reply to Objection 3: Satan is not described as having assisted, but as
present among the assistants; for, as Gregory says (Moral. ii), "though
he has lost beatitude, still he has retained a nature like to the
angels. "
Reply to Objection 4: All the assistants see some things immediately in
the glory of the Divine Essence; and so it may be said that it is the
prerogative of the whole of the highest hierarchy to be immediately
enlightened by God; while the higher ones among them see more than is
seen by the inferior; some of whom enlighten others: as also among
those who assist the king, one knows more of the king's secrets than
another.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels of the second hierarchy are sent?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels of the second hierarchy
are sent. For all the angels either assist, or minister, according to
Dan. 7:10.
But the angels of the second hierarchy do not assist; for
they are enlightened by the angels of the first hierarchy, as Dionysius
says (Coel. Hier. viii). Therefore all the angels of the second
hierarchy are sent in ministry.
Objection 2: Further, Gregory says (Moral. xvii) that "there are more
who minister than who assist. " This would not be the case if the angels
of the second hierarchy were not sent in ministry. Therefore all the
angels of the second hierarchy are sent to minister.
On the contrary, Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. viii) that the
"Dominations are above all subjection. " But to be sent implies
subjection. Therefore the dominations are not sent to minister.
I answer that, As above stated [918](A[1]), to be sent to external
ministry properly belongs to an angel according as he acts by Divine
command in respect of any corporeal creature; which is part of the
execution of the Divine ministry. Now the angelic properties are
manifested by their names, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii); and
therefore the angels of those orders are sent to external ministry
whose names signify some kind of administration. But the name
"dominations" does not signify any such administration, but only
disposition and command in administering. On the other hand, the names
of the inferior orders imply administration, for the "Angels" and
"Archangels" are so called from "announcing"; the "Virtues" and
"Powers" are so called in respect of some act; and it is right that the
"Prince," according to what Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), "be
first among the workers. " Hence it belongs to these five orders to be
sent to external ministry; not to the four superior orders.
Reply to Objection 1: The Dominations are reckoned among the
ministering angels, not as exercising but as disposing and commanding
what is to be done by others; thus an architect does not put his hands
to the production of his art, but only disposes and orders what others
are to do.
Reply to Objection 2: A twofold reason may be given in assigning the
number of the assisting and ministering angels. For Gregory says that
those who minister are more numerous than those who assist; because he
takes the words (Dan. 7:10) "thousands of thousands ministered to Him,"
not in a multiple but in a partitive sense, to mean "thousands out of
thousands"; thus the number of those who minister is indefinite, and
signifies excess; while the number of assistants is finite as in the
words added, "and ten thousand times a hundred thousand assisted Him. "
This explanation rests on the opinion of the Platonists, who said that
the nearer things are to the one first principle, the smaller they are
in number; as the nearer a number is to unity, the lesser it is than
multitude. This opinion is verified as regards the number of orders, as
six administer and three assist.
Dionysius, however, (Coel. Hier. xiv) declares that the multitude of
angels surpasses all the multitude of material things; so that, as the
superior bodies exceed the inferior in magnitude to an immeasurable
degree, so the superior incorporeal natures surpass all corporeal
natures in multitude; because whatever is better is more intended and
more multiplied by God. Hence, as the assistants are superior to the
ministers there will be more assistants than ministers. In this way,
the words "thousands of thousands" are taken by way of multiplication,
to signify "a thousand times a thousand. " And because ten times a
hundred is a thousand, if it were said "ten times a hundred thousand"
it would mean that there are as many assistants as ministers: but since
it is written "ten thousand times a hundred thousand," we are given to
understand that the assistants are much more numerous than the
ministers. Nor is this said to signify that this is the precise number
of angels, but rather that it is much greater, in that it exceeds all
material multitude. This is signified by the multiplication together of
all the greatest numbers, namely ten, a hundred, and a thousand, as
Dionysius remarks in the same passage.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE GOOD ANGELS (EIGHT ARTICLES)
We next consider the guardianship exercised by the good angels; and
their warfare against the bad angels. Under the first head eight points
of inquiry arise:
(1) Whether men are guarded by the angels?
(2) Whether to each man is assigned a single guardian angel?
(3) Whether the guardianship belongs only to the lowest order of
angels?
(4) Whether it is fitting for each man to have an angel guardian?
(5) When does an angel's guardianship of a man begin?
(6) Whether the angel guardians always watch over men?
(7) Whether the angel grieves over the loss of the one guarded?
(8) Whether rivalry exists among the angels as regards their
guardianship?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether men are guarded by the angels?
Objection 1: It would seem that men are not guarded by the angels. For
guardians are deputed to some because they either know not how, or are
not able, to guard themselves, as children and the sick. But man is
able to guard himself by his free-will; and knows how by his natural
knowledge of natural law. Therefore man is not guarded by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, a strong guard makes a weaker one superfluous.
But men are guarded by God, according to Ps. 120:4: "He shall neither
slumber nor sleep, that keepeth Israel. " Therefore man does not need to
be guarded by an angel.
Objection 3: Further, the loss of the guarded redounds to the
negligence of the guardian; hence it was said to a certain one: "Keep
this man; and if he shall slip away, thy life shall be for his life" (3
Kings 20:39). Now many perish daily through falling into sin; whom the
angels could help by visible appearance, or by miracles, or in some
such-like way. The angels would therefore be negligent if men are given
to their guardianship. But that is clearly false. Therefore the angels
are not the guardians of men.
On the contrary, It is written (Ps. 90:11): "He hath given His angels
charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. "
I answer that, According to the plan of Divine Providence, we find that
in all things the movable and variable are moved and regulated by the
immovable and invariable; as all corporeal things by immovable
spiritual substances, and the inferior bodies by the superior which are
invariable in substance. We ourselves also are regulated as regards
conclusions, about which we may have various opinions, by the
principles which we hold in an invariable manner. It is moreover
manifest that as regards things to be done human knowledge and
affection can vary and fail from good in many ways; and so it was
necessary that angels should be deputed for the guardianship of men, in
order to regulate them and move them to good.
Reply to Objection 1: By free-will man can avoid evil to a certain
degree, but not in any sufficient degree; forasmuch as he is weak in
affection towards good on account of the manifold passions of the soul.
Likewise universal natural knowledge of the law, which by nature
belongs to man, to a certain degree directs man to good, but not in a
sufficient degree; because in the application of the universal
principles of law to particular actions man happens to be deficient in
many ways. Hence it is written (Wis. 9:14): "The thoughts of mortal men
are fearful, and our counsels uncertain. " Thus man needs to be guarded
by the angels.
Reply to Objection 2: Two things are required for a good action; first,
that the affection be inclined to good, which is effected in us by the
habit of mortal virtue. Secondly, that reason should discover the
proper methods to make perfect the good of virtue; this the Philosopher
(Ethic. vi) attributes to prudence. As regards the first, God guards
man immediately by infusing into him grace and virtues; as regards the
second, God guards man as his universal instructor, Whose precepts
reach man by the medium of the angels, as above stated ([919]Q[111],
A[1]).
Reply to Objection 3: As men depart from the natural instinct of good
by reason of a sinful passion, so also do they depart from the
instigation of the good angels, which takes place invisibly when they
enlighten man that he may do what is right. Hence that men perish is
not to be imputed to the negligence of the angels but to the malice of
men. That they sometimes appear to men visibly outside the ordinary
course of nature comes from a special grace of God, as likewise that
miracles occur outside the order of nature.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether each man is guarded by an angel?
Objection 1: It would seem that each man is not guarded by an angel.
For an angel is stronger than a man. But one man suffices to guard many
men. Therefore much more can one angel guard many men.
Objection 2: Further, the lower things are brought to God through the
medium of the higher, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. iv, xiii). But as
all the angels are unequal ([920]Q[50], A[4]), there is only one angel
between whom and men there is no medium. Therefore there is only one
angel who immediately keeps men.
Objection 3: Further, the greater angels are deputed to the greater
offices. But it is not a greater office to keep one man more than
another; since all men are naturally equal. Since therefore of all the
angels one is greater than another, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. x),
it seems that different men are not guarded by different angels.
On the contrary, On the text, "Their angels in heaven," etc. (Mat.
8:10), Jerome says: "Great is the dignity of souls, for each one to
have an angel deputed to guard it from its birth. "
I answer that, Each man has an angel guardian appointed to him. This
rests upon the fact that the guardianship of angels belongs to the
execution of Divine providence concerning men. But God's providence
acts differently as regards men and as regards other corruptible
creatures, for they are related differently to incorruptibility. For
men are not only incorruptible in the common species, but also in the
proper forms of each individual, which are the rational souls, which
cannot be said of other incorruptible things. Now it is manifest that
the providence of God is chiefly exercised towards what remains for
ever; whereas as regards things which pass away, the providence of God
acts so as to order their existence to the things which are perpetual.
Thus the providence of God is related to each man as it is to every
genus or species of things corruptible. But, according to Gregory (Hom.
xxxiv in Evang. ), the different orders are deputed to the different
"genera" of things, for instance, the "Powers" to coerce the demons,
the "Virtues" to work miracles in things corporeal; while it is
probable that the different species are presided over by different
angels of the same order. Hence it is also reasonable to suppose that
different angels are appointed to the guardianship of different men.
Reply to Objection 1: A guardian may be assigned to a man for two
reasons: first, inasmuch as a man is an individual, and thus to one man
one guardian is due; and sometimes several are appointed to guard one.
Secondly, inasmuch as a man is part of a community, and thus one man is
appointed as guardian of a whole community; to whom it belongs to
provide what concerns one man in his relation to the whole community,
such as external works, which are sources of strength or weakness to
others. But angel guardians are given to men also as regards invisible
and occult things, concerning the salvation of each one in his own
regard. Hence individual angels are appointed to guard individual men.
Reply to Objection 2: As above stated ([921]Q[112], A[3], ad 4), all
the angels of the first hierarchy are, as to some things, enlightened
by God directly; but as to other things, only the superior are directly
enlightened by God, and these reveal them to the inferior. And the same
also applies to the inferior orders: for a lower angel is enlightened
in some respects by one of the highest, and in other respects by the
one immediately above him. Thus it is possible that some one angel
enlightens a man immediately, and yet has other angels beneath him whom
he enlightens.
Reply to Objection 3: Although men are equal in nature, still
inequality exists among them, according as Divine Providence orders
some to the greater, and others to the lesser things, according to
Ecclus. 33:11,12: "With much knowledge the Lord hath divided them, and
diversified their ways: some of them hath He blessed and exalted, and
some of them hath He cursed and brought low. " Thus it is a greater
office to guard one man than another.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether to guard men belongs only to the lowest order of angels?
Objection 1: It would seem that the guardianship of men does not belong
only to the lowest order of the angels. For Chrysostom says that the
text (Mat. 18:10), "Their angels in heaven," etc. is to be understood
not of any angels but of the highest. Therefore the superior angels
guard men.
Objection 2: Further, the Apostle says that angels "are sent to
minister for them who shall receive the inheritance of salvation" (Heb.
1:14); and thus it seems that the mission of the angels is directed to
the guardianship of men. But five orders are sent in external ministry
([922]Q[112], A[4]). Therefore all the angels of the five orders are
deputed to the guardianship of men.
Objection 3: Further, for the guardianship of men it seems especially
necessary to coerce the demons, which belongs most of all to the
Powers, according to Gregory (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ); and to work
miracles, which belongs to the Virtues. Therefore these orders are also
deputed to the work of guardianship, and not only the lowest order.
On the contrary, In the Psalm (90) the guardianship of men is
attributed to the angels; who belong to the lowest order, according to
Dionysius (Coel. Hier. v, ix).
I answer that, As above stated [923](A[2]), man is guarded in two ways;
in one way by particular guardianship, according as to each man an
angel is appointed to guard him; and such guardianship belongs to the
lowest order of the angels, whose place it is, according to Gregory, to
announce the "lesser things"; for it seems to be the least of the
angelic offices to procure what concerns the salvation of only one man.
The other kind of guardianship is universal, multiplied according to
the different orders. For the more universal an agent is, the higher it
is. Thus the guardianship of the human race belongs to the order of
"Principalities," or perhaps to the "Archangels," whom we call the
angel princes. Hence, Michael, whom we call an archangel, is also
styled "one of the princes" (Dan. 10:13). Moreover all corporeal
creatures are guarded by the "Virtues"; and likewise the demons by the
"Powers," and the good spirits by the "Principalities," according to
Gregory's opinion (Hom. xxxiv in Ev. ).
Reply to Objection 1: Chrysostom can be taken to mean the highest in
the lowest order of angels; for, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. x) in
each order there are first, middle, and last. It is, however, probable
that the greater angels are deputed to keep those chosen by God for the
higher degree of glory.
Reply to Objection 2: Not all the angels who are sent have guardianship
of individual men; but some orders have a universal guardianship,
greater or less, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 3: Even inferior angels exercise the office of the
superior, as they share in their gifts, and they are executors of the
superiors' power; and in this way all the angels of the lowest order
can coerce the demons, and work miracles.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether angels are appointed to the guardianship of all men?
Objection 1: It would seem that angels are not appointed to the
guardianship of all men. For it is written of Christ (Phil. 2:7) that
"He was made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. " If
therefore angels are appointed to the guardianship of all men, Christ
also would have had an angel guardian. But this is unseemly, for Christ
is greater than all the angels. Therefore angels are not appointed to
the guardianship of all men.
Objection 2: Further, Adam was the first of all men. But it was not
fitting that he should have an angel guardian, at least in the state of
innocence: for then he was not beset by any dangers. Therefore angels
are not appointed to the guardianship of all men.
Objection 3: Further, angels are appointed to the guardianship of men,
that they may take them by the hand and guide them to eternal life,
encourage them to good works, and protect them against the assaults of
the demons. But men who are foreknown to damnation, never attain to
eternal life. Infidels, also, though at times they perform good works,
do not perform them well, for they have not a right intention: for
"faith directs the intention" as Augustine says (Enarr. ii in Ps. 31).
Moreover, the coming of Antichrist will be "according to the working of
Satan," as it is written (2 Thess. 2:9). Therefore angels are not
deputed to the guardianship of all men.
On the contrary, is the authority of Jerome quoted above [924](A[2]),
for he says that "each soul has an angel appointed to guard it. "
I answer that, Man while in this state of life, is, as it were, on a
road by which he should journey towards heaven. On this road man is
threatened by many dangers both from within and from without, according
to Ps. 159:4: "In this way wherein I walked, they have hidden a snare
for me. " And therefore as guardians are appointed for men who have to
pass by an unsafe road, so an angel guardian is assigned to each man as
long as he is a wayfarer. When, however, he arrives at the end of life
he no longer has a guardian angel; but in the kingdom he will have an
angel to reign with him, in hell a demon to punish him.
Reply to Objection 1: Christ as man was guided immediately by the Word
of God: wherefore He needed not be guarded by an angel. Again as
regards His soul, He was a comprehensor, although in regard to His
passible body, He was a wayfarer. In this latter respect it was right
that He should have not a guardian angel as superior to Him, but a
ministering angel as inferior to Him. Whence it is written (Mat. 4:11)
that "angels came and ministered to Him. "
Reply to Objection 2: In the state of innocence man was not threatened
by any peril from within: because within him all was well ordered, as
we have said above ([925]Q[95], AA[1],3). But peril threatened from
without on account of the snares of the demons; as was proved by the
event. For this reason he needed a guardian angel.
Reply to Objection 3: Just as the foreknown, the infidels, and even
Anti-christ, are not deprived of the interior help of natural reason;
so neither are they deprived of that exterior help granted by God to
the whole human race---namely the guardianship of the angels. And
although the help which they receive therefrom does not result in their
deserving eternal life by good works, it does nevertheless conduce to
their being protected from certain evils which would hurt both
themselves and others. For even the demons are held off by the good
angels, lest they hurt as much as they would. In like manner Antichrist
will not do as much harm as he would wish.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel is appointed to guard a man from his birth?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel is not appointed to guard a
man from his birth. For angels are "sent to minister for them who shall
receive the inheritance of salvation," as the Apostle says (Heb. 1:14).
But men begin to receive the inheritance of salvation, when they are
baptized. Therefore an angel is appointed to guard a man from the time
of his baptism, not of his birth.
Objection 2: Further, men are guarded by angels in as far as angels
enlighten and instruct them. But children are not capable of
instruction as soon as they are born, for they have not the use of
reason. Therefore angels are not appointed to guard children as soon as
they are born.
Objection 3: Further, a child has a rational soul for some time before
birth, just as well as after. But it does not appear that an angel is
appointed to guard a child before its birth, for they are not then
admitted to the sacraments of the Church. Therefore angels are not
appointed to guard men from the moment of their birth.
On the contrary, Jerome says (vide A, 4) that "each soul has an angel
appointed to guard it from its birth. "
I answer that, as Origen observes (Tract. v, super Matt. ) there are two
opinions on this matter. For some have held that the angel guardian is
appointed at the time of baptism, others, that he is appointed at the
time of birth. The latter opinion Jerome approves (vide A, 4), and with
reason. For those benefits which are conferred by God on man as a
Christian, begin with his baptism; such as receiving the Eucharist, and
the like.
I answer that, The will can be changed in two ways. First, from within;
in which way, since the movement of the will is nothing but the
inclination of the will to the thing willed, God alone can thus change
the will, because He gives the power of such an inclination to the
intellectual nature. For as the natural inclination is from God alone
Who gives the nature, so the inclination of the will is from God alone,
Who causes the will.
Secondly, the will is moved from without. As regards an angel, this can
be only in one way---by the good apprehended by the intellect. Hence in
as far as anyone may be the cause why anything be apprehended as an
appetible good, so far does he move the will. In this way also God
alone can move the will efficaciously; but an angel and man move the
will by way of persuasion, as above explained ([904]Q[106], A[2]).
In addition to this mode the human will can be moved from without in
another way; namely, by the passion residing in the sensitive appetite:
thus by concupiscence or anger the will is inclined to will something.
In this manner the angels, as being able to rouse these passions, can
move the will, not however by necessity, for the will ever remains free
to consent to, or to resist, the passion.
Reply to Objection 1: Those who act as God's ministers, either men or
angels, are said to burn away vices, and to incite to virtue by way of
persuasion.
Reply to Objection 2: The demon cannot put thoughts in our minds by
causing them from within, since the act of the cogitative faculty is
subject to the will; nevertheless the devil is called the kindler of
thoughts, inasmuch as he incites to thought, by the desire of the
things thought of, by way of persuasion, or by rousing the passions.
Damascene calls this kindling "a putting in" because such a work is
accomplished within. But good thoughts are attributed to a higher
principle, namely, God, though they may be procured by the ministry of
the angels.
Reply to Objection 3: The human intellect in its present state can
understand only by turning to the phantasms; but the human will can
will something following the judgment of reason rather than the passion
of the sensitive appetite. Hence the comparison does not hold.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change man's imagination?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel cannot change man's
imagination. For the phantasy, as is said De Anima iii, is "a motion
caused by the sense in act. " But if this motion were caused by an
angel, it would not be caused by the sense in act. Therefore it is
contrary to the nature of the phantasy, which is the act of the
imaginative faculty, to be changed by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, since the forms in the imagination are spiritual,
they are nobler than the forms existing in sensible matter. But an
angel cannot impress forms upon sensible matter ([905]Q[110], A[2]).
Therefore he cannot impress forms on the imagination, and so he cannot
change it.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 12): "One
spirit by intermingling with another can communicate his knowledge to
the other spirit by these images, so that the latter either understands
it himself, or accepts it as understood by the other. " But it does not
seem that an angel can be mingled with the human imagination, nor that
the imagination can receive the knowledge of an angel. Therefore it
seems that an angel cannot change the imagination.
Objection 4: Further, in the imaginative vision man cleaves to the
similitudes of the things as to the things themselves. But in this
there is deception. So as a good angel cannot be the cause of
deception, it seems that he cannot cause the imaginative vision, by
changing the imagination.
On the contrary, Those things which are seen in dreams are seen by
imaginative vision. But the angels reveal things in dreams, as appears
from Mat. 1:20;[2]:13,[19] in regard to the angel who appeared to
Joseph in dreams. Therefore an angel can move the imagination.
I answer that, Both a good and a bad angel by their own natural power
can move the human imagination. This may be explained as follows. For
it was said above ([906]Q[110], A[3]), that corporeal nature obeys the
angel as regards local movement, so that whatever can be caused by the
local movement of bodies is subject to the natural power of the angels.
Now it is manifest that imaginative apparitions are sometimes caused in
us by the local movement of animal spirits and humors. Hence Aristotle
says (De Somn. et Vigil. ) [*De Insomniis iii. ], when assigning the
cause of visions in dreams, that "when an animal sleeps, the blood
descends in abundance to the sensitive principle, and movements descend
with it," that is, the impressions left from the movements are
preserved in the animal spirits, "and move the sensitive principle"; so
that a certain appearance ensues, as if the sensitive principle were
being then changed by the external objects themselves. Indeed, the
commotion of the spirits and humors may be so great that such
appearances may even occur to those who are awake, as is seen in mad
people, and the like. So, as this happens by a natural disturbance of
the humors, and sometimes also by the will of man who voluntarily
imagines what he previously experienced, so also the same may be done
by the power of a good or a bad angel, sometimes with alienation from
the bodily senses, sometimes without such alienation.
Reply to Objection 1: The first principle of the imagination is from
the sense in act. For we cannot imagine what we have never perceived by
the senses, either wholly or partly; as a man born blind cannot imagine
color. Sometimes, however, the imagination is informed in such a way
that the act of the imaginative movement arises from the impressions
preserved within.
Reply to Objection 2: An angel changes the imagination, not indeed by
the impression of an imaginative form in no way previously received
from the senses (for he cannot make a man born blind imagine color),
but by local movement of the spirits and humors, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 3: The commingling of the angelic spirit with the
human imagination is not a mingling of essences, but by reason of an
effect which he produces in the imagination in the way above stated; so
that he shows man what he [the angel] knows, but not in the way he
knows.
Reply to Objection 4: An angel causing an imaginative vision, sometimes
enlightens the intellect at the same time, so that it knows what these
images signify; and then there is not deception. But sometimes by the
angelic operation the similitudes of things only appear in the
imagination; but neither then is deception caused by the angel, but by
the defect in the intellect to whom such things appear. Thus neither
was Christ a cause of deception when He spoke many things to the people
in parables, which He did not explain to them.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel can change the human senses?
Objection 1: It seems that an angel cannot change the human senses. For
the sensitive operation is a vital operation. But such an operation
does not come from an extrinsic principle. Therefore the sensitive
operation cannot be caused by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, the sensitive operation is nobler than the
nutritive. But the angel cannot change the nutritive power, nor other
natural forms. Therefore neither can he change the sensitive power.
Objection 3: Further, the senses are naturally moved by the sensible
objects. But an angel cannot change the order of nature ([907]Q[110],
A[4]). Therefore an angel cannot change the senses; but these are
changed always by the sensible object.
On the contrary, The angels who overturned Sodom, "struck the people of
Sodom with blindness or {aorasia}, so that they could not find the
door" (Gn. 19:11). [*It is worth noting that these are the only two
passages in the Greek version where the word {aorasia} appears. It
expresses, in fact, the effect produced on the people of
Sodom---namely, dazzling (French version, "eblouissement"), which the
Latin "caecitas" (blindness) does not necessarily imply. ] The same is
recorded of the Syrians whom Eliseus led into Samaria (4 Kings 6:18).
I answer that, The senses may be changed in a twofold manner; from
without, as when affected by the sensible object: and from within, for
we see that the senses are changed when the spirits and humors are
disturbed; as for example, a sick man's tongue, charged with choleric
humor, tastes everything as bitter, and the like with the other senses.
Now an angel, by his natural power, can work a change in the senses
both ways. For an angel can offer the senses a sensible object from
without, formed by nature or by the angel himself, as when he assumes a
body, as we have said above ([908]Q[51], A[2]). Likewise he can move
the spirits and humors from within, as above remarked, whereby the
senses are changed in various ways.
Reply to Objection 1: The principle of the sensitive operation cannot
be without the interior principle which is the sensitive power; but
this interior principle can be moved in many ways by the exterior
principle, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 2: By the interior movement of the spirits and
humors an angel can do something towards changing the act of the
nutritive power, and also of the appetitive and sensitive power, and of
any other power using a corporeal organ.
Reply to Objection 3: An angel can do nothing outside the entire order
of creatures; but he can outside some particular order of nature, since
he is not subject to that order; thus in some special way an angel can
work a change in the senses outside the common mode of nature.
__________________________________________________________________
THE MISSION OF THE ANGELS (FOUR ARTICLES)
We next consider the mission of the angels. Under this head arise four
points of inquiry:
(1) Whether any angels are sent on works of ministry?
(2) Whether all are sent?
(3) Whether those who are sent, assist?
(4) From what orders they are sent.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angels are sent on works of ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels are not sent on works of
ministry. For every mission is to some determinate place. But
intellectual actions do not determine a place, for intellect abstracts
from the "here" and "now. " Since therefore the angelic actions are
intellectual, it appears that the angels are not sent to perform their
own actions.
Objection 2: Further, the empyrean heaven is the place that beseems the
angelic dignity. Therefore if they are sent to us in ministry, it seems
that something of their dignity would be lost; which is unseemly.
Objection 3: Further, external occupation hinders the contemplation of
wisdom; hence it is said: "He that is less in action, shall receive
wisdom" (Ecclus. 38:25). So if some angels are sent on external
ministrations, they would seemingly be hindered from contemplation. But
the whole of their beatitude consists in the contemplation of God. So
if they were sent, their beatitude would be lessened; which is
unfitting.
Objection 4: Further, to minister is the part of an inferior; hence it
is written (Lk. 22:27): "Which is the greater, he that sitteth at
table, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at table? " But the
angels are naturally greater than we are. Therefore they are not sent
to administer to us.
On the contrary, It is written (Ex. 23:20): "Behold I will send My
angels who shall go before thee. "
I answer that, From what has been said above ([909]Q[108], A[6]), it
may be shown that some angels are sent in ministry by God. For, as we
have already stated ([910]Q[43], A[1]), in treating of the mission of
the Divine Persons, he is said to be sent who in any way proceeds from
another so as to begin to be where he was not, or to be in another way,
where he already was. Thus the Son, or the Holy Ghost is said to be
sent as proceeding from the Father by origin; and begins to be in a new
way, by grace or by the nature assumed, where He was before by the
presence of His Godhead; for it belongs to God to be present
everywhere, because, since He is the universal agent, His power reaches
to all being, and hence He exists in all things ([911]Q[8], A[1]). An
angel's power, however, as a particular agent, does not reach to the
whole universe, but reaches to one thing in such a way as not to reach
another; and so he is "here" in such a manner as not to be "there. " But
it is clear from what was above stated ([912]Q[110], A[1]), that the
corporeal creature is governed by the angels. Hence, whenever an angel
has to perform any work concerning a corporeal creature, the angel
applies himself anew to that body by his power; and in that way begins
to be there afresh. Now all this takes place by Divine command. Hence
it follows that an angel is sent by God.
Yet the action performed by the angel who is sent, proceeds from God as
from its first principle, at Whose nod and by Whose authority the
angels work; and is reduced to God as to its last end. Now this is what
is meant by a minister: for a minister is an intelligent instrument;
while an instrument is moved by another, and its action is ordered to
another. Hence angels' actions are called 'ministries'; and for this
reason they are said to be sent in ministry.
Reply to Objection 1: An operation can be intellectual in two ways. In
one way, as dwelling in the intellect itself, as contemplation; such an
operation does not demand to occupy a place; indeed, as Augustine says
(De Trin. iv, 20): "Even we ourselves as mentally tasting something
eternal, are not in this world. " In another sense an action is said to
be intellectual because it is regulated and commanded by some
intellect; in that sense the intellectual operations evidently have
sometimes a determinate place.
Reply to Objection 2: The empyrean heaven belongs to the angelic
dignity by way of congruity; forasmuch as it is congruous that the
higher body should be attributed to that nature which occupies a rank
above bodies. Yet an angel does not derive his dignity from the
empyrean heaven; so when he is not actually in the empyrean heaven,
nothing of his dignity is lost, as neither does a king lessen his
dignity when not actually sitting on his regal throne, which suits his
dignity.
Reply to Objection 3: In ourselves the purity of contemplation is
obscured by exterior occupation; because we give ourselves to action
through the sensitive faculties, the action of which when intense
impedes the action of the intellectual powers. An angel, on the
contrary, regulates his exterior actions by intellectual operation
alone. Hence it follows that his external occupations in no respect
impede his contemplation; because given two actions, one of which is
the rule and the reason of the other, one does not hinder but helps the
other. Wherefore Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "the angels do not go
abroad in such a manner as to lose the delights of inward
contemplation. "
Reply to Objection 4: In their external actions the angels chiefly
minister to God, and secondarily to us; not because we are superior to
them, absolutely speaking, but because, since every man or angel by
cleaving to God is made one spirit with God, he is thereby superior to
every creature. Hence the Apostle says (Phil. 2:3): "Esteeming others
better than themselves. "
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels are sent in ministry?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels are sent in ministry.
For the Apostle says (Heb. 1:14): "All are ministering spirits, sent to
minister" [Vulg. 'Are they not all . . . ? '].
Objection 2: Further, among the orders, the highest is that of the
Seraphim, as stated above ([913]Q[108], A[6]). But a Seraph was sent to
purify the lips of the prophet (Is. 6:6,7). Therefore much more are the
inferior orders sent.
Objection 3: Further, the Divine Persons infinitely excel all the
angelic orders. But the Divine Persons are sent. Therefore much more
are even the highest angels sent.
Objection 4: Further, if the superior angels are not sent to the
external ministries, this can only be because the superior angels
execute the Divine ministries by means of the inferior angels. But as
all the angels are unequal, as stated above ([914]Q[50], A[4]), each
angel has an angel inferior to himself except the last one. Therefore
only the last angel would be sent in ministry; which contradicts the
words, "Thousands of thousands ministered to Him" (Dan. 7:10).
On the contrary, Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), quoting the
statement of Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), that "the higher ranks
fulfil no exterior service. "
I answer that, As appears from what has been said above ([915]Q[106],
A[3]; [916]Q[110], A[1]), the order of Divine Providence has so
disposed not only among the angels, but also in the whole universe,
that inferior things are administered by the superior. But the Divine
dispensation, however, this order is sometimes departed from as regards
corporeal things, for the sake of a higher order, that is, according as
it is suitable for the manifestation of grace. That the man born blind
was enlightened, that Lazarus was raised from the dead, was
accomplished immediately by God without the action of the heavenly
bodies. Moreover both good and bad angels can work some effect in these
bodies independently of the heavenly bodies, by the condensation of the
clouds to rain, and by producing some such effects. Nor can anyone
doubt that God can immediately reveal things to men without the help of
the angels, and the superior angels without the inferior. From this
standpoint some have said that according to the general law the
superior angels are not sent, but only the inferior; yet that
sometimes, by Divine dispensation, the superior angels also are sent.
It may also be said that the Apostle wishes to prove that Christ is
greater than the angels who were chosen as the messengers of the law;
in order that He might show the excellence of the new over the old law.
Hence there is no need to apply this to any other angels besides those
who were sent to give the law.
Reply to Objection 2: According to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xiii), the
angel who was sent to purify the prophet's lips was one of the inferior
order; but was called a "Seraph," that is, "kindling " in an equivocal
sense, because he came to "kindle" the lips of the prophet. It may also
be said that the superior angels communicate their own proper gifts
whereby they are denominated, through the ministry of the inferior
angels. Thus one of the Seraphim is described as purifying by fire the
prophet's lips, not as if he did so immediately, but because an
inferior angel did so by his power; as the Pope is said to absolve a
man when he gives absolution by means of someone else.
Reply to Objection 3: The Divine Persons are not sent in ministry, but
are said to be sent in an equivocal sense, as appears from what has
been said ([917]Q[43], A[1]).
Reply to Objection 4: A manifold grade exists in the Divine ministries.
Hence there is nothing to prevent angels though unequal from being sent
immediately in ministry, in such a manner however that the superior are
sent to the higher ministries, and the lower to the inferior
ministries.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels who are sent, assist?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels who are sent also assist.
For Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ): "So the angels are sent, and
assist; for, though the angelic spirit is limited, yet the supreme
Spirit, God, is not limited. "
Objection 2: Further, the angel was sent to administer to Tobias. Yet
he said, "I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven who stand before the
Lord" (Tob. 12:15). Therefore the angels who are sent, assist.
Objection 3: Further, every holy angel is nearer to God than Satan is.
Yet Satan assisted God, according to Job 1:6: "When the sons of God
came to stand before the Lord, Satan also was present among them. "
Therefore much more do the angels, who are sent to minister, assist.
Objection 4: Further, if the inferior angels do not assist, the reason
is because they receive the Divine enlightenment, not immediately, but
through the superior angels. But every angel receives the Divine
enlightenment from a superior, except the one who is highest of all.
Therefore only the highest angel would assist; which is contrary to the
text of Dan. 7:10: "Ten thousand times a hundred thousand stood before
Him. " Therefore the angels who are sent also assist.
On the contrary, Gregory says, on Job 25:3: "Is there any numbering of
His soldiers? " (Moral. xvii): "Those powers assist, who do not go forth
as messengers to men. " Therefore those who are sent in ministry do not
assist.
I answer that, The angels are spoken of as "assisting" and
"administering," after the likeness of those who attend upon a king;
some of whom ever wait upon him, and hear his commands immediately;
while others there are to whom the royal commands are conveyed by those
who are in attendance---for instance, those who are placed at the head
of the administration of various cities; these are said to administer,
not to assist.
We must therefore observe that all the angels gaze upon the Divine
Essence immediately; in regard to which all, even those who minister,
are said to assist. Hence Gregory says (Moral. ii) that "those who are
sent on the external ministry of our salvation can always assist and
see the face of the Father. " Yet not all the angels can perceive the
secrets of the Divine mysteries in the clearness itself of the Divine
Essence; but only the superior angels who announce them to the
inferior: and in that respect only the superior angels belonging to the
highest hierarchy are said to assist, whose special prerogative it is
to be enlightened immediately by God.
From this may be deduced the reply to the first and second objections,
which are based on the first mode of assisting.
Reply to Objection 3: Satan is not described as having assisted, but as
present among the assistants; for, as Gregory says (Moral. ii), "though
he has lost beatitude, still he has retained a nature like to the
angels. "
Reply to Objection 4: All the assistants see some things immediately in
the glory of the Divine Essence; and so it may be said that it is the
prerogative of the whole of the highest hierarchy to be immediately
enlightened by God; while the higher ones among them see more than is
seen by the inferior; some of whom enlighten others: as also among
those who assist the king, one knows more of the king's secrets than
another.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether all the angels of the second hierarchy are sent?
Objection 1: It would seem that all the angels of the second hierarchy
are sent. For all the angels either assist, or minister, according to
Dan. 7:10.
But the angels of the second hierarchy do not assist; for
they are enlightened by the angels of the first hierarchy, as Dionysius
says (Coel. Hier. viii). Therefore all the angels of the second
hierarchy are sent in ministry.
Objection 2: Further, Gregory says (Moral. xvii) that "there are more
who minister than who assist. " This would not be the case if the angels
of the second hierarchy were not sent in ministry. Therefore all the
angels of the second hierarchy are sent to minister.
On the contrary, Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. viii) that the
"Dominations are above all subjection. " But to be sent implies
subjection. Therefore the dominations are not sent to minister.
I answer that, As above stated [918](A[1]), to be sent to external
ministry properly belongs to an angel according as he acts by Divine
command in respect of any corporeal creature; which is part of the
execution of the Divine ministry. Now the angelic properties are
manifested by their names, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii); and
therefore the angels of those orders are sent to external ministry
whose names signify some kind of administration. But the name
"dominations" does not signify any such administration, but only
disposition and command in administering. On the other hand, the names
of the inferior orders imply administration, for the "Angels" and
"Archangels" are so called from "announcing"; the "Virtues" and
"Powers" are so called in respect of some act; and it is right that the
"Prince," according to what Gregory says (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ), "be
first among the workers. " Hence it belongs to these five orders to be
sent to external ministry; not to the four superior orders.
Reply to Objection 1: The Dominations are reckoned among the
ministering angels, not as exercising but as disposing and commanding
what is to be done by others; thus an architect does not put his hands
to the production of his art, but only disposes and orders what others
are to do.
Reply to Objection 2: A twofold reason may be given in assigning the
number of the assisting and ministering angels. For Gregory says that
those who minister are more numerous than those who assist; because he
takes the words (Dan. 7:10) "thousands of thousands ministered to Him,"
not in a multiple but in a partitive sense, to mean "thousands out of
thousands"; thus the number of those who minister is indefinite, and
signifies excess; while the number of assistants is finite as in the
words added, "and ten thousand times a hundred thousand assisted Him. "
This explanation rests on the opinion of the Platonists, who said that
the nearer things are to the one first principle, the smaller they are
in number; as the nearer a number is to unity, the lesser it is than
multitude. This opinion is verified as regards the number of orders, as
six administer and three assist.
Dionysius, however, (Coel. Hier. xiv) declares that the multitude of
angels surpasses all the multitude of material things; so that, as the
superior bodies exceed the inferior in magnitude to an immeasurable
degree, so the superior incorporeal natures surpass all corporeal
natures in multitude; because whatever is better is more intended and
more multiplied by God. Hence, as the assistants are superior to the
ministers there will be more assistants than ministers. In this way,
the words "thousands of thousands" are taken by way of multiplication,
to signify "a thousand times a thousand. " And because ten times a
hundred is a thousand, if it were said "ten times a hundred thousand"
it would mean that there are as many assistants as ministers: but since
it is written "ten thousand times a hundred thousand," we are given to
understand that the assistants are much more numerous than the
ministers. Nor is this said to signify that this is the precise number
of angels, but rather that it is much greater, in that it exceeds all
material multitude. This is signified by the multiplication together of
all the greatest numbers, namely ten, a hundred, and a thousand, as
Dionysius remarks in the same passage.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE GOOD ANGELS (EIGHT ARTICLES)
We next consider the guardianship exercised by the good angels; and
their warfare against the bad angels. Under the first head eight points
of inquiry arise:
(1) Whether men are guarded by the angels?
(2) Whether to each man is assigned a single guardian angel?
(3) Whether the guardianship belongs only to the lowest order of
angels?
(4) Whether it is fitting for each man to have an angel guardian?
(5) When does an angel's guardianship of a man begin?
(6) Whether the angel guardians always watch over men?
(7) Whether the angel grieves over the loss of the one guarded?
(8) Whether rivalry exists among the angels as regards their
guardianship?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether men are guarded by the angels?
Objection 1: It would seem that men are not guarded by the angels. For
guardians are deputed to some because they either know not how, or are
not able, to guard themselves, as children and the sick. But man is
able to guard himself by his free-will; and knows how by his natural
knowledge of natural law. Therefore man is not guarded by an angel.
Objection 2: Further, a strong guard makes a weaker one superfluous.
But men are guarded by God, according to Ps. 120:4: "He shall neither
slumber nor sleep, that keepeth Israel. " Therefore man does not need to
be guarded by an angel.
Objection 3: Further, the loss of the guarded redounds to the
negligence of the guardian; hence it was said to a certain one: "Keep
this man; and if he shall slip away, thy life shall be for his life" (3
Kings 20:39). Now many perish daily through falling into sin; whom the
angels could help by visible appearance, or by miracles, or in some
such-like way. The angels would therefore be negligent if men are given
to their guardianship. But that is clearly false. Therefore the angels
are not the guardians of men.
On the contrary, It is written (Ps. 90:11): "He hath given His angels
charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. "
I answer that, According to the plan of Divine Providence, we find that
in all things the movable and variable are moved and regulated by the
immovable and invariable; as all corporeal things by immovable
spiritual substances, and the inferior bodies by the superior which are
invariable in substance. We ourselves also are regulated as regards
conclusions, about which we may have various opinions, by the
principles which we hold in an invariable manner. It is moreover
manifest that as regards things to be done human knowledge and
affection can vary and fail from good in many ways; and so it was
necessary that angels should be deputed for the guardianship of men, in
order to regulate them and move them to good.
Reply to Objection 1: By free-will man can avoid evil to a certain
degree, but not in any sufficient degree; forasmuch as he is weak in
affection towards good on account of the manifold passions of the soul.
Likewise universal natural knowledge of the law, which by nature
belongs to man, to a certain degree directs man to good, but not in a
sufficient degree; because in the application of the universal
principles of law to particular actions man happens to be deficient in
many ways. Hence it is written (Wis. 9:14): "The thoughts of mortal men
are fearful, and our counsels uncertain. " Thus man needs to be guarded
by the angels.
Reply to Objection 2: Two things are required for a good action; first,
that the affection be inclined to good, which is effected in us by the
habit of mortal virtue. Secondly, that reason should discover the
proper methods to make perfect the good of virtue; this the Philosopher
(Ethic. vi) attributes to prudence. As regards the first, God guards
man immediately by infusing into him grace and virtues; as regards the
second, God guards man as his universal instructor, Whose precepts
reach man by the medium of the angels, as above stated ([919]Q[111],
A[1]).
Reply to Objection 3: As men depart from the natural instinct of good
by reason of a sinful passion, so also do they depart from the
instigation of the good angels, which takes place invisibly when they
enlighten man that he may do what is right. Hence that men perish is
not to be imputed to the negligence of the angels but to the malice of
men. That they sometimes appear to men visibly outside the ordinary
course of nature comes from a special grace of God, as likewise that
miracles occur outside the order of nature.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether each man is guarded by an angel?
Objection 1: It would seem that each man is not guarded by an angel.
For an angel is stronger than a man. But one man suffices to guard many
men. Therefore much more can one angel guard many men.
Objection 2: Further, the lower things are brought to God through the
medium of the higher, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. iv, xiii). But as
all the angels are unequal ([920]Q[50], A[4]), there is only one angel
between whom and men there is no medium. Therefore there is only one
angel who immediately keeps men.
Objection 3: Further, the greater angels are deputed to the greater
offices. But it is not a greater office to keep one man more than
another; since all men are naturally equal. Since therefore of all the
angels one is greater than another, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. x),
it seems that different men are not guarded by different angels.
On the contrary, On the text, "Their angels in heaven," etc. (Mat.
8:10), Jerome says: "Great is the dignity of souls, for each one to
have an angel deputed to guard it from its birth. "
I answer that, Each man has an angel guardian appointed to him. This
rests upon the fact that the guardianship of angels belongs to the
execution of Divine providence concerning men. But God's providence
acts differently as regards men and as regards other corruptible
creatures, for they are related differently to incorruptibility. For
men are not only incorruptible in the common species, but also in the
proper forms of each individual, which are the rational souls, which
cannot be said of other incorruptible things. Now it is manifest that
the providence of God is chiefly exercised towards what remains for
ever; whereas as regards things which pass away, the providence of God
acts so as to order their existence to the things which are perpetual.
Thus the providence of God is related to each man as it is to every
genus or species of things corruptible. But, according to Gregory (Hom.
xxxiv in Evang. ), the different orders are deputed to the different
"genera" of things, for instance, the "Powers" to coerce the demons,
the "Virtues" to work miracles in things corporeal; while it is
probable that the different species are presided over by different
angels of the same order. Hence it is also reasonable to suppose that
different angels are appointed to the guardianship of different men.
Reply to Objection 1: A guardian may be assigned to a man for two
reasons: first, inasmuch as a man is an individual, and thus to one man
one guardian is due; and sometimes several are appointed to guard one.
Secondly, inasmuch as a man is part of a community, and thus one man is
appointed as guardian of a whole community; to whom it belongs to
provide what concerns one man in his relation to the whole community,
such as external works, which are sources of strength or weakness to
others. But angel guardians are given to men also as regards invisible
and occult things, concerning the salvation of each one in his own
regard. Hence individual angels are appointed to guard individual men.
Reply to Objection 2: As above stated ([921]Q[112], A[3], ad 4), all
the angels of the first hierarchy are, as to some things, enlightened
by God directly; but as to other things, only the superior are directly
enlightened by God, and these reveal them to the inferior. And the same
also applies to the inferior orders: for a lower angel is enlightened
in some respects by one of the highest, and in other respects by the
one immediately above him. Thus it is possible that some one angel
enlightens a man immediately, and yet has other angels beneath him whom
he enlightens.
Reply to Objection 3: Although men are equal in nature, still
inequality exists among them, according as Divine Providence orders
some to the greater, and others to the lesser things, according to
Ecclus. 33:11,12: "With much knowledge the Lord hath divided them, and
diversified their ways: some of them hath He blessed and exalted, and
some of them hath He cursed and brought low. " Thus it is a greater
office to guard one man than another.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether to guard men belongs only to the lowest order of angels?
Objection 1: It would seem that the guardianship of men does not belong
only to the lowest order of the angels. For Chrysostom says that the
text (Mat. 18:10), "Their angels in heaven," etc. is to be understood
not of any angels but of the highest. Therefore the superior angels
guard men.
Objection 2: Further, the Apostle says that angels "are sent to
minister for them who shall receive the inheritance of salvation" (Heb.
1:14); and thus it seems that the mission of the angels is directed to
the guardianship of men. But five orders are sent in external ministry
([922]Q[112], A[4]). Therefore all the angels of the five orders are
deputed to the guardianship of men.
Objection 3: Further, for the guardianship of men it seems especially
necessary to coerce the demons, which belongs most of all to the
Powers, according to Gregory (Hom. xxxiv in Evang. ); and to work
miracles, which belongs to the Virtues. Therefore these orders are also
deputed to the work of guardianship, and not only the lowest order.
On the contrary, In the Psalm (90) the guardianship of men is
attributed to the angels; who belong to the lowest order, according to
Dionysius (Coel. Hier. v, ix).
I answer that, As above stated [923](A[2]), man is guarded in two ways;
in one way by particular guardianship, according as to each man an
angel is appointed to guard him; and such guardianship belongs to the
lowest order of the angels, whose place it is, according to Gregory, to
announce the "lesser things"; for it seems to be the least of the
angelic offices to procure what concerns the salvation of only one man.
The other kind of guardianship is universal, multiplied according to
the different orders. For the more universal an agent is, the higher it
is. Thus the guardianship of the human race belongs to the order of
"Principalities," or perhaps to the "Archangels," whom we call the
angel princes. Hence, Michael, whom we call an archangel, is also
styled "one of the princes" (Dan. 10:13). Moreover all corporeal
creatures are guarded by the "Virtues"; and likewise the demons by the
"Powers," and the good spirits by the "Principalities," according to
Gregory's opinion (Hom. xxxiv in Ev. ).
Reply to Objection 1: Chrysostom can be taken to mean the highest in
the lowest order of angels; for, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. x) in
each order there are first, middle, and last. It is, however, probable
that the greater angels are deputed to keep those chosen by God for the
higher degree of glory.
Reply to Objection 2: Not all the angels who are sent have guardianship
of individual men; but some orders have a universal guardianship,
greater or less, as above explained.
Reply to Objection 3: Even inferior angels exercise the office of the
superior, as they share in their gifts, and they are executors of the
superiors' power; and in this way all the angels of the lowest order
can coerce the demons, and work miracles.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether angels are appointed to the guardianship of all men?
Objection 1: It would seem that angels are not appointed to the
guardianship of all men. For it is written of Christ (Phil. 2:7) that
"He was made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. " If
therefore angels are appointed to the guardianship of all men, Christ
also would have had an angel guardian. But this is unseemly, for Christ
is greater than all the angels. Therefore angels are not appointed to
the guardianship of all men.
Objection 2: Further, Adam was the first of all men. But it was not
fitting that he should have an angel guardian, at least in the state of
innocence: for then he was not beset by any dangers. Therefore angels
are not appointed to the guardianship of all men.
Objection 3: Further, angels are appointed to the guardianship of men,
that they may take them by the hand and guide them to eternal life,
encourage them to good works, and protect them against the assaults of
the demons. But men who are foreknown to damnation, never attain to
eternal life. Infidels, also, though at times they perform good works,
do not perform them well, for they have not a right intention: for
"faith directs the intention" as Augustine says (Enarr. ii in Ps. 31).
Moreover, the coming of Antichrist will be "according to the working of
Satan," as it is written (2 Thess. 2:9). Therefore angels are not
deputed to the guardianship of all men.
On the contrary, is the authority of Jerome quoted above [924](A[2]),
for he says that "each soul has an angel appointed to guard it. "
I answer that, Man while in this state of life, is, as it were, on a
road by which he should journey towards heaven. On this road man is
threatened by many dangers both from within and from without, according
to Ps. 159:4: "In this way wherein I walked, they have hidden a snare
for me. " And therefore as guardians are appointed for men who have to
pass by an unsafe road, so an angel guardian is assigned to each man as
long as he is a wayfarer. When, however, he arrives at the end of life
he no longer has a guardian angel; but in the kingdom he will have an
angel to reign with him, in hell a demon to punish him.
Reply to Objection 1: Christ as man was guided immediately by the Word
of God: wherefore He needed not be guarded by an angel. Again as
regards His soul, He was a comprehensor, although in regard to His
passible body, He was a wayfarer. In this latter respect it was right
that He should have not a guardian angel as superior to Him, but a
ministering angel as inferior to Him. Whence it is written (Mat. 4:11)
that "angels came and ministered to Him. "
Reply to Objection 2: In the state of innocence man was not threatened
by any peril from within: because within him all was well ordered, as
we have said above ([925]Q[95], AA[1],3). But peril threatened from
without on account of the snares of the demons; as was proved by the
event. For this reason he needed a guardian angel.
Reply to Objection 3: Just as the foreknown, the infidels, and even
Anti-christ, are not deprived of the interior help of natural reason;
so neither are they deprived of that exterior help granted by God to
the whole human race---namely the guardianship of the angels. And
although the help which they receive therefrom does not result in their
deserving eternal life by good works, it does nevertheless conduce to
their being protected from certain evils which would hurt both
themselves and others. For even the demons are held off by the good
angels, lest they hurt as much as they would. In like manner Antichrist
will not do as much harm as he would wish.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether an angel is appointed to guard a man from his birth?
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel is not appointed to guard a
man from his birth. For angels are "sent to minister for them who shall
receive the inheritance of salvation," as the Apostle says (Heb. 1:14).
But men begin to receive the inheritance of salvation, when they are
baptized. Therefore an angel is appointed to guard a man from the time
of his baptism, not of his birth.
Objection 2: Further, men are guarded by angels in as far as angels
enlighten and instruct them. But children are not capable of
instruction as soon as they are born, for they have not the use of
reason. Therefore angels are not appointed to guard children as soon as
they are born.
Objection 3: Further, a child has a rational soul for some time before
birth, just as well as after. But it does not appear that an angel is
appointed to guard a child before its birth, for they are not then
admitted to the sacraments of the Church. Therefore angels are not
appointed to guard men from the moment of their birth.
On the contrary, Jerome says (vide A, 4) that "each soul has an angel
appointed to guard it from its birth. "
I answer that, as Origen observes (Tract. v, super Matt. ) there are two
opinions on this matter. For some have held that the angel guardian is
appointed at the time of baptism, others, that he is appointed at the
time of birth. The latter opinion Jerome approves (vide A, 4), and with
reason. For those benefits which are conferred by God on man as a
Christian, begin with his baptism; such as receiving the Eucharist, and
the like.
