1:14); and thus it seems that the mission of the angels is
directed
to
the guardianship of men.
the guardianship of men.
Summa Theologica
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. But those which are conferred by God on man as a rational
being, are bestowed on him at his birth, for then it is that he
receives that nature. Among the latter benefits we must count the
guardianship of angels, as we have said above ([926]AA[1],4). Wherefore
from the very moment of his birth man has an angel guardian appointed
to him.
Reply to Objection 1: Angels are sent to minister, and that
efficaciously indeed, for those who shall receive the inheritance of
salvation, if we consider the ultimate effect of their guardianship,
which is the realizing of that inheritance. But for all that, the
angelic ministrations are not withdrawn for others although they are
not so efficacious as to bring them to salvation: efficacious,
nevertheless, they are, inasmuch as they ward off many evils.
Reply to Objection 2: Guardianship is ordained to enlightenment by
instruction, as to its ultimate and principal effect. Nevertheless it
has many other effects consistent with childhood; for instance to ward
off the demons, and to prevent both bodily and spiritual harm.
Reply to Objection 3: As long as the child is in the mother's womb it
is not entirely separate, but by reason of a certain intimate tie, is
still part of her: just as the fruit while hanging on the tree is part
of the tree. And therefore it can be said with some degree of
probability, that the angel who guards the mother guards the child
while in the womb. But at its birth, when it becomes separate from the
mother, an angel guardian is appointed to it; as Jerome, above quoted,
says.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angel guardian ever forsakes a man?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angel guardian sometimes forsakes
the man whom he is appointed to guard. For it is said (Jer. 51:9) in
the person of the angels: "We would have cured Babylon, but she is not
healed: let us forsake her. " And (Is. 5:5) it is written: "I will take
away the hedge"---that is, "the guardianship of the angels"
[gloss]---"and it shall be wasted. "
Objection 2: Further, God's guardianship excels that of the angels. But
God forsakes man at times, according to Ps. 21:2: "O God, my God, look
upon me: why hast Thou forsaken me? " Much rather therefore does an
angel guardian forsake man.
Objection 3: Further, according to Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii, 3),
"When the angels are here with us, they are not in heaven. " But
sometimes they are in heaven. Therefore sometimes they forsake us.
On the contrary, The demons are ever assailing us, according to 1 Pet.
5:8: "Your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goeth about, seeking
whom he may devour. " Much more therefore do the good angels ever guard
us.
I answer that, As appears above [927](A[2]), the guardianship of the
angels is an effect of Divine providence in regard to man. Now it is
evident that neither man, nor anything at all, is entirely withdrawn
from the providence of God: for in as far as a thing participates
being, so far is it subject to the providence that extends over all
being. God indeed is said to forsake man, according to the ordering of
His providence, but only in so far as He allows man to suffer some
defect of punishment or of fault. In like manner it must be said that
the angel guardian never forsakes a man entirely, but sometimes he
leaves him in some particular, for instance by not preventing him from
being subject to some trouble, or even from falling into sin, according
to the ordering of Divine judgments. In this sense Babylon and the
House of Israel are said to have been forsaken by the angels, because
their angel guardians did not prevent them from being subject to
tribulation.
From this the answers are clear to the first and second objections.
Reply to Objection 3: Although an angel may forsake a man sometimes
locally, he does not for that reason forsake him as to the effect of
his guardianship: for even when he is in heaven he knows what is
happening to man; nor does he need time for his local motion, for he
can be with man in an instant.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether angels grieve for the ills of those whom they guard?
Objection 1: It would seem that angels grieve for the ills of those
whom they guard. For it is written (Is. 33:7): "The angels of peace
shall weep bitterly. " But weeping is a sign of grief and sorrow.
Therefore angels grieve for the ills of those whom they guard.
Objection 2: Further, according to Augustine (De Civ. Dei xiv, 15),
"sorrow is for those things that happen against our will. " But the loss
of the man whom he has guarded is against the guardian angel's will.
Therefore angels grieve for the loss of men.
Objection 3: Further, as sorrow is contrary to joy, so penance is
contrary to sin. But angels rejoice about one sinner doing penance, as
we are told, Lk. 15:7. Therefore they grieve for the just man who falls
into sin.
Objection 4: Further, on Numbers 18:12: "Whatsoever first-fruits they
offer," etc. the gloss of Origen says: "The angels are brought to
judgment as to whether men have fallen through their negligence or
through their own fault. " But it is reasonable for anyone to grieve for
the ills which have brought him to judgment. Therefore angels grieve
for men's sins.
On the contrary, Where there is grief and sorrow, there is not perfect
happiness: wherefore it is written (Apoc. 21:4): "Death shall be no
more, nor mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow. " But the angels are
perfectly happy. Therefore they have no cause for grief.
I answer that, Angels do not grieve, either for sins or for the pains
inflicted on men. For grief and sorrow, according to Augustine (De Civ.
Dei xiv, 15) are for those things which occur against our will. But
nothing happens in the world contrary to the will of the angels and the
other blessed, because they will cleaves entirely to the ordering of
Divine justice; while nothing happens in the world save what is
effected or permitted by Divine justice. Therefore simply speaking,
nothing occurs in the world against the will of the blessed. For as the
Philosopher says (Ethic. iii, 1) that is called simply voluntary, which
a man wills in a particular case, and at a particular time, having
considered all the circumstances; although universally speaking, such a
thing would not be voluntary: thus the sailor does not will the casting
of his cargo into the sea, considered universally and absolutely, but
on account of the threatened danger of his life, he wills it. Wherefore
this is voluntary rather than involuntary, as stated in the same
passage. Therefore universally and absolutely speaking the angels do
not will sin and the pains inflicted on its account: but they do will
the fulfilment of the ordering of Divine justice in this matter, in
respect of which some are subjected to pains and are allowed to fall
into sin.
Reply to Objection 1: These words of Isaias may be understood of the
angels, i. e. the messengers, of Ezechias, who wept on account of the
words of Rabsaces, as related Is. 37:2 seqq. : this would be the literal
sense. According to the allegorical sense the "angels of peace" are the
apostles and preachers who weep for men's sins. If according to the
anagogical sense this passage be expounded of the blessed angels, then
the expression is metaphorical, and signifies that universally speaking
the angels will the salvation of mankind: for in this sense we
attribute passions to God and the angels.
The reply to the second objection appears from what has been said.
Reply to Objection 3: Both in man's repentance and in man's sin there
is one reason for the angel's joy, namely the fulfilment of the
ordering of the Divine Providence.
Reply to Objection 4: The angels are brought into judgment for the sins
of men, not as guilty, but as witnesses to convict man of weakness.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether there can be strife or discord among the angels?
Objection 1: It would seem that there can be strife or discord among
the angels. For it is written (Job 25:2): "Who maketh peace in His high
places. " But strife is opposed to peace. Therefore among the high
angels there is no strife.
Objection 2: Further, where there is perfect charity and just authority
there can be no strife. But all this exists among the angels. Therefore
there is no strife among the angels.
Objection 3: Further, if we say that angels strive for those whom they
guard, one angel must needs take one side, and another angel the
opposite side. But if one side is in the right the other side is in the
wrong. It will follow therefore, that a good angel is a compounder of
wrong; which is unseemly. Therefore there is no strife among good
angels.
On the contrary, It is written (Dan. 10:13): "The prince of the kingdom
of the Persians resisted me one and twenty days. " But this prince of
the Persians was the angel deputed to the guardianship of the kingdom
of the Persians. Therefore one good angel resists the others; and thus
there is strife among them.
I answer that, The raising of this question is occasioned by this
passage of Daniel. Jerome explains it by saying that the prince of the
kingdom of the Persians is the angel who opposed the setting free of
the people of Israel, for whom Daniel was praying, his prayers being
offered to God by Gabriel. And this resistance of his may have been
caused by some prince of the demons having led the Jewish captives in
Persia into sin; which sin was an impediment to the efficacy of the
prayer which Daniel put up for that same people.
But according to Gregory (Moral. xvii), the prince of the kingdom of
Persia was a good angel appointed to the guardianship of that kingdom.
To see therefore how one angel can be said to resist another, we must
note that the Divine judgments in regard to various kingdoms and
various men are executed by the angels. Now in their actions, the
angels are ruled by the Divine decree. But it happens at times in
various kingdoms or various men there are contrary merits or demerits,
so that one of them is subject to or placed over another. As to what is
the ordering of Divine wisdom on such matters, the angels cannot know
it unless God reveal it to them: and so they need to consult Divine
wisdom thereupon. Wherefore forasmuch as they consult the Divine will
concerning various contrary and opposing merits, they are said to
resist one another: not that their wills are in opposition, since they
are all of one mind as to the fulfilment of the Divine decree; but that
the things about which they seek knowledge are in opposition.
From this the answers to the objections are clear.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE ASSAULTS OF THE DEMONS (FIVE ARTICLES)
We now consider the assaults of the demons. Under this head there are
five points of inquiry:
(1) Whether men are assailed by the demons?
(2) Whether to tempt is proper to the devil?
(3) Whether all the sins of men are to be set down to the assaults or
temptations of the demons?
(4) Whether they can work real miracles for the purpose of leading men
astray?
(5) Whether the demons who are overcome by men, are hindered from
making further assaults?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether men are assailed by the demons?
Objection 1: It would seem that men are not assailed by the demons. For
angels are sent by God to guard man. But demons are not sent by God:
for the demons' intention is the loss of souls; whereas God's is the
salvation of souls. Therefore demons are not deputed to assail man.
Objection 2: Further, it is not a fair fight, for the weak to be set
against the strong, and the ignorant against the astute. But men are
weak and ignorant, whereas the demons are strong and astute. It is not
therefore to be permitted by God, the author of all justice, that men
should be assailed by demons.
Objection 3: Further, the assaults of the flesh and the world are
enough for man's exercise. But God permits His elect to be assailed
that they may be exercised. Therefore there is no need for them to be
assailed by the demons.
On the contrary, The Apostle says (Eph. 6:12): "Our wrestling is not
against flesh and blood; but against Principalities and Powers, against
the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of
wickedness in the high places.
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. But those which are conferred by God on man as a rational
being, are bestowed on him at his birth, for then it is that he
receives that nature. Among the latter benefits we must count the
guardianship of angels, as we have said above ([926]AA[1],4). Wherefore
from the very moment of his birth man has an angel guardian appointed
to him.
Reply to Objection 1: Angels are sent to minister, and that
efficaciously indeed, for those who shall receive the inheritance of
salvation, if we consider the ultimate effect of their guardianship,
which is the realizing of that inheritance. But for all that, the
angelic ministrations are not withdrawn for others although they are
not so efficacious as to bring them to salvation: efficacious,
nevertheless, they are, inasmuch as they ward off many evils.
Reply to Objection 2: Guardianship is ordained to enlightenment by
instruction, as to its ultimate and principal effect. Nevertheless it
has many other effects consistent with childhood; for instance to ward
off the demons, and to prevent both bodily and spiritual harm.
Reply to Objection 3: As long as the child is in the mother's womb it
is not entirely separate, but by reason of a certain intimate tie, is
still part of her: just as the fruit while hanging on the tree is part
of the tree. And therefore it can be said with some degree of
probability, that the angel who guards the mother guards the child
while in the womb. But at its birth, when it becomes separate from the
mother, an angel guardian is appointed to it; as Jerome, above quoted,
says.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether the angel guardian ever forsakes a man?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angel guardian sometimes forsakes
the man whom he is appointed to guard. For it is said (Jer. 51:9) in
the person of the angels: "We would have cured Babylon, but she is not
healed: let us forsake her. " And (Is. 5:5) it is written: "I will take
away the hedge"---that is, "the guardianship of the angels"
[gloss]---"and it shall be wasted. "
Objection 2: Further, God's guardianship excels that of the angels. But
God forsakes man at times, according to Ps. 21:2: "O God, my God, look
upon me: why hast Thou forsaken me? " Much rather therefore does an
angel guardian forsake man.
Objection 3: Further, according to Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii, 3),
"When the angels are here with us, they are not in heaven. " But
sometimes they are in heaven. Therefore sometimes they forsake us.
On the contrary, The demons are ever assailing us, according to 1 Pet.
5:8: "Your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goeth about, seeking
whom he may devour. " Much more therefore do the good angels ever guard
us.
I answer that, As appears above [927](A[2]), the guardianship of the
angels is an effect of Divine providence in regard to man. Now it is
evident that neither man, nor anything at all, is entirely withdrawn
from the providence of God: for in as far as a thing participates
being, so far is it subject to the providence that extends over all
being. God indeed is said to forsake man, according to the ordering of
His providence, but only in so far as He allows man to suffer some
defect of punishment or of fault. In like manner it must be said that
the angel guardian never forsakes a man entirely, but sometimes he
leaves him in some particular, for instance by not preventing him from
being subject to some trouble, or even from falling into sin, according
to the ordering of Divine judgments. In this sense Babylon and the
House of Israel are said to have been forsaken by the angels, because
their angel guardians did not prevent them from being subject to
tribulation.
From this the answers are clear to the first and second objections.
Reply to Objection 3: Although an angel may forsake a man sometimes
locally, he does not for that reason forsake him as to the effect of
his guardianship: for even when he is in heaven he knows what is
happening to man; nor does he need time for his local motion, for he
can be with man in an instant.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether angels grieve for the ills of those whom they guard?
Objection 1: It would seem that angels grieve for the ills of those
whom they guard. For it is written (Is. 33:7): "The angels of peace
shall weep bitterly. " But weeping is a sign of grief and sorrow.
Therefore angels grieve for the ills of those whom they guard.
Objection 2: Further, according to Augustine (De Civ. Dei xiv, 15),
"sorrow is for those things that happen against our will. " But the loss
of the man whom he has guarded is against the guardian angel's will.
Therefore angels grieve for the loss of men.
Objection 3: Further, as sorrow is contrary to joy, so penance is
contrary to sin. But angels rejoice about one sinner doing penance, as
we are told, Lk. 15:7. Therefore they grieve for the just man who falls
into sin.
Objection 4: Further, on Numbers 18:12: "Whatsoever first-fruits they
offer," etc. the gloss of Origen says: "The angels are brought to
judgment as to whether men have fallen through their negligence or
through their own fault. " But it is reasonable for anyone to grieve for
the ills which have brought him to judgment. Therefore angels grieve
for men's sins.
On the contrary, Where there is grief and sorrow, there is not perfect
happiness: wherefore it is written (Apoc. 21:4): "Death shall be no
more, nor mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow. " But the angels are
perfectly happy. Therefore they have no cause for grief.
I answer that, Angels do not grieve, either for sins or for the pains
inflicted on men. For grief and sorrow, according to Augustine (De Civ.
Dei xiv, 15) are for those things which occur against our will. But
nothing happens in the world contrary to the will of the angels and the
other blessed, because they will cleaves entirely to the ordering of
Divine justice; while nothing happens in the world save what is
effected or permitted by Divine justice. Therefore simply speaking,
nothing occurs in the world against the will of the blessed. For as the
Philosopher says (Ethic. iii, 1) that is called simply voluntary, which
a man wills in a particular case, and at a particular time, having
considered all the circumstances; although universally speaking, such a
thing would not be voluntary: thus the sailor does not will the casting
of his cargo into the sea, considered universally and absolutely, but
on account of the threatened danger of his life, he wills it. Wherefore
this is voluntary rather than involuntary, as stated in the same
passage. Therefore universally and absolutely speaking the angels do
not will sin and the pains inflicted on its account: but they do will
the fulfilment of the ordering of Divine justice in this matter, in
respect of which some are subjected to pains and are allowed to fall
into sin.
Reply to Objection 1: These words of Isaias may be understood of the
angels, i. e. the messengers, of Ezechias, who wept on account of the
words of Rabsaces, as related Is. 37:2 seqq. : this would be the literal
sense. According to the allegorical sense the "angels of peace" are the
apostles and preachers who weep for men's sins. If according to the
anagogical sense this passage be expounded of the blessed angels, then
the expression is metaphorical, and signifies that universally speaking
the angels will the salvation of mankind: for in this sense we
attribute passions to God and the angels.
The reply to the second objection appears from what has been said.
Reply to Objection 3: Both in man's repentance and in man's sin there
is one reason for the angel's joy, namely the fulfilment of the
ordering of the Divine Providence.
Reply to Objection 4: The angels are brought into judgment for the sins
of men, not as guilty, but as witnesses to convict man of weakness.
__________________________________________________________________
Whether there can be strife or discord among the angels?
Objection 1: It would seem that there can be strife or discord among
the angels. For it is written (Job 25:2): "Who maketh peace in His high
places. " But strife is opposed to peace. Therefore among the high
angels there is no strife.
Objection 2: Further, where there is perfect charity and just authority
there can be no strife. But all this exists among the angels. Therefore
there is no strife among the angels.
Objection 3: Further, if we say that angels strive for those whom they
guard, one angel must needs take one side, and another angel the
opposite side. But if one side is in the right the other side is in the
wrong. It will follow therefore, that a good angel is a compounder of
wrong; which is unseemly. Therefore there is no strife among good
angels.
On the contrary, It is written (Dan. 10:13): "The prince of the kingdom
of the Persians resisted me one and twenty days. " But this prince of
the Persians was the angel deputed to the guardianship of the kingdom
of the Persians. Therefore one good angel resists the others; and thus
there is strife among them.
I answer that, The raising of this question is occasioned by this
passage of Daniel. Jerome explains it by saying that the prince of the
kingdom of the Persians is the angel who opposed the setting free of
the people of Israel, for whom Daniel was praying, his prayers being
offered to God by Gabriel. And this resistance of his may have been
caused by some prince of the demons having led the Jewish captives in
Persia into sin; which sin was an impediment to the efficacy of the
prayer which Daniel put up for that same people.
But according to Gregory (Moral. xvii), the prince of the kingdom of
Persia was a good angel appointed to the guardianship of that kingdom.
To see therefore how one angel can be said to resist another, we must
note that the Divine judgments in regard to various kingdoms and
various men are executed by the angels. Now in their actions, the
angels are ruled by the Divine decree. But it happens at times in
various kingdoms or various men there are contrary merits or demerits,
so that one of them is subject to or placed over another. As to what is
the ordering of Divine wisdom on such matters, the angels cannot know
it unless God reveal it to them: and so they need to consult Divine
wisdom thereupon. Wherefore forasmuch as they consult the Divine will
concerning various contrary and opposing merits, they are said to
resist one another: not that their wills are in opposition, since they
are all of one mind as to the fulfilment of the Divine decree; but that
the things about which they seek knowledge are in opposition.
From this the answers to the objections are clear.
__________________________________________________________________
OF THE ASSAULTS OF THE DEMONS (FIVE ARTICLES)
We now consider the assaults of the demons. Under this head there are
five points of inquiry:
(1) Whether men are assailed by the demons?
(2) Whether to tempt is proper to the devil?
(3) Whether all the sins of men are to be set down to the assaults or
temptations of the demons?
(4) Whether they can work real miracles for the purpose of leading men
astray?
(5) Whether the demons who are overcome by men, are hindered from
making further assaults?
__________________________________________________________________
Whether men are assailed by the demons?
Objection 1: It would seem that men are not assailed by the demons. For
angels are sent by God to guard man. But demons are not sent by God:
for the demons' intention is the loss of souls; whereas God's is the
salvation of souls. Therefore demons are not deputed to assail man.
Objection 2: Further, it is not a fair fight, for the weak to be set
against the strong, and the ignorant against the astute. But men are
weak and ignorant, whereas the demons are strong and astute. It is not
therefore to be permitted by God, the author of all justice, that men
should be assailed by demons.
Objection 3: Further, the assaults of the flesh and the world are
enough for man's exercise. But God permits His elect to be assailed
that they may be exercised. Therefore there is no need for them to be
assailed by the demons.
On the contrary, The Apostle says (Eph. 6:12): "Our wrestling is not
against flesh and blood; but against Principalities and Powers, against
the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of
wickedness in the high places.
