Dist. 10, Art. 1, Q. 2
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 10
Quaestio II. Utrum omnium Angelorum sit mitti.
Secundo quaeritur, utrum omnium Angelorum sit mitti. Et videtur, quod non.
Fundamenta. 1. Danielis septimo1: Millia millium ministrabant ei, et decies etc.: ergo ibi fit distinctio inter ministrantes et assistentes: ergo non omnium est ministrare, ergo nec mitti.
2. Item, Dionysius in libro de Angelica Hierarchia2: « Superna illa agmina ab intimis nunquam recedunt, quoniam ea quae praeeminent, usum exterioris officii nunquam habent ».
3. Item, ratione videtur. Plus distat actus ministrandi ab actu contemplandi, quam ministerium a ministerio — et hoc patet, quia penes primam differentiam fit distinctio hierarchiarum, penes secundam fit distinctio ordinum3 — si ergo secundum diversos ordines distincta sunt ministeria, ut unus ordo ministerium alterius ordinis non assumat, videtur, quod aliqui ordines Angelorum ita contemplationi assistant, quod ad ministeria complenda nec mittantur nec exeant.
4. Item, maior est ordinatio in hierarchia angelica, quam sit in ecclesiastica; sed in ecclesiastica ita sunt aliqui intenti contemplationi, quod non actioni: ergo multo fortius videtur in Ierusalem superna: ergo non omnium Angelorum est mitti.
Ad oppositum. Ad oppositum arguitur sic: 1. Primo auctoritate, ad Hebraeos primo4: Omnes sunt administratorii spiritus, in ministerium missi propter eos, qui haereditatem capiunt salutis.
2. Item, Isaiae sexto5: Volavit ad me unus de Seraphim: ergo aliquis de ordine Seraphim missus fuit ad Isaiam prophetam; sed constat, quod ordo Seraphim est ordo supremus: ergo si ille mittitur, videtur, quod omnes alii mittantur.
3. Item, ratione videtur. Tantum Deus dilexit salutem nostram, ut mitteret Filium et Spiritum sanctum6; sed non fecit nisi quod decebat: ergo si missio ad nos non derogat Filio, videtur, quod non deroget alicui Angelo: ergo videtur omnibus competere.
4. Item, de hominibus assumuntur ad omnes ordines Angelorum7: ergo si quilibet Angelus debet restaurationem sui ordinis procurare, et Deus debet ad hoc mittere, videtur, quod omnes Angeli aliquando ad nos mittantur.
5. Item, caritas Angelorum eminens facit, eos sollicitari circa nostram salutem, et per hoc ad nos venire divina iussione8: si ergo in supremis ordinibus est maxima caritas, videtur, quod ipsi maxime nostram salutem procurent: ergo et eos maxime debet Deus ad nos mittere.
6. Item, promptior est caritas ad adiuvandum, quam sit nequitia ad nocendum: ergo si ab Angelis, qui ceciderunt de omnibus ordinibus, impugnamur9, multo fortius videtur, quod ab Angelis persistentibus de singulis ordinibus adiuvemur: ergo si ad hoc mittuntur, ut nos adiuvent, patet etc.
Conclusio
Exteriore missione inferiores tantum Angeli ad nos mittuntur, sed interiore missione superiores ad inferiores mittuntur, et quidem propter nos.
Respondeo: Ad hoc dicendum, quod, sicut dicit Magister in littera10, diversae fuerunt opiniones propter diversas auctoritates, quae videntur in hac materia sibi contrariae. Unde quidam adhaerentes quibusdam et intelligentes eas ad litteram, alias vero exponentes, formaverunt sibi opiniones varias.
Opinio 1. Quidam enim dixerunt, quod soli Angeli ultimae hierarchiae ad nos mittuntur; et dicunt, hoc sensisse Dionysium, nec esse hoc contra Apostolum, quia illa distributio, quam facit Apostolus, intelligenda est esse accommoda11, cum dicit: Omnes sunt administratorii etc.; intelligitur enim de illis qui sunt de ultima hierarchia.
Sed quia ista expositio sensui et intentioni Apostoli non concordat — vult enim hic probare, quod Christus nobilior est omnibus Angelis, non tantum inferioribus, sed superioribus — Opinio 2. ideo est secunda opinio, quod omnium Angelorum est mitti, quae innititur illi auctoritati Apostoli. Et haec opinio dicit, verbum Apostoli non esse contrarium verbo Dionysii, qui12 dicit, superiora agmina non mitti, aut quia non ita frequenter mittuntur, aut quia non ex officio ita competit eis mitti, sicut Angelis hierarchiae inferioris.
Sed quia expositio ista verbi Dionysii videtur esse valde extranea, cum ipse dicat, quod « usum exterioris officii nunquam habent », et pro indubitanti credendum est, esse verum in hac parte tam verbum Apostoli quam verbum Dionysii; Opinio 3. ideo est tertius modus dicendi, per distinctionem utrumque verbum salvans et ad concordiam reducens et ex illis duobus expressam veritatem eliciens. Distingui enim oportet in missione. Est enim missio exterior, quae est ad nos; et est missio interior, quae est ad Angelos, sed propter nos. Si de missione exteriori loquamur; Conclusio 1. sic non competit omnibus Angelis, quia non competit superioribus agminibus, sicut dicit Dionysius, « quia ea quae praeeminent, usum exterioris officii nunquam habent »; in quo significat, quod intelligit de missione exteriori, quae est ad nos. Si autem intelligamus de missione interiori, quae est ad Angelos propter nos; Conclusio 2. sic mitti competit omnibus, quoniam superiores mittuntur ad medios, et medii ad infimos, dum revelando purgant et illuminant ea quae nobis expediunt; et hoc totum est propter nos; et ideo signanter dicit Apostolus: Missi propter eos; non inquit: missi ad eos. — Concedendae igitur sunt rationes ostendentes, quod non omnium est ad nos mitti.
Solutio oppositorum. 1. Et patet iam ex dictis responsio ad verbum Apostoli.
2. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur de sexto Isaiae, dicendum, quod Angelus missus ad eum non dicitur esse unus de Seraphim, quia esset de supremo ordine, sed quia mittebatur labia eius incendere; et haec responsio sumitur a Dionysio in libro de Angelica Hierarchia13.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod missio competit Filio, ergo cuilibet ordini angelico; dicendum, quod non valet. Missio enim aut est ad redimendum et ad salvandum, aut est ad ministrandum. Prima est tantae dignitatis, quod nulli alii potest competere nisi soli Deo; secunda vero non est tantae dignitatis, quod competat agmini supremo.
4. 5. 6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod ordines Angelorum omnes restaurabuntur per homines; dicendum tam ad hoc quam ad duo sequentia, quod revera omnes Angeli sunt nobis in adiutorium, et omnes nos adiuvant vel mediate, vel immediate, sive in ministrandis revelationibus, sive in perferendis et offerendis nostris orationibus. Dum enim agmina suprema quae sunt nobis necessaria inferioribus agminibus revelant; et dum simul cum illis pro nobis ad Deum interpellant14 et petitiones nostras Deo exponunt, non ut Deum instruant, sed ut petitiones nostras igneis suis affectionibus Deo acceptas faciant, sicut advocati decoris orationibus aliorum causam defendunt et ornant: absque dubio nobis magnum auxilium praestant, et sic faciunt ad ordinum suorum reparationem, et nihilominus sequuntur caritatis sollicitudinem et efficacius nos adiuvant, quam alii impugnent15.
---
Question II. Whether it belongs to all the Angels to be sent.
Secondly it is asked whether it belongs to all the Angels to be sent. And it seems that it does not.
The grounds. 1. Daniel, chapter seven1: Thousands of thousands ministered to him, and ten times etc.: therefore there a distinction is made between those who minister and those who stand by: therefore it does not belong to all to minister, therefore neither to be sent.
2. Likewise, Dionysius in the book On the Angelic Hierarchy2: «Those upper hosts never withdraw from the innermost things, since those which are preeminent never have the use of an outward office».
3. Likewise, it seems [so] by reason. The act of ministering is farther distant from the act of contemplating than [one] ministry [is] from [another] ministry — and this is plain, because according to the first difference the distinction of hierarchies is made, [and] according to the second the distinction of orders is made3 — if, then, the ministries are distinguished according to the diverse orders, so that one order does not assume the ministry of another order, it seems that some orders of Angels so attend upon contemplation that they are neither sent nor go out to the completing of ministries.
4. Likewise, the ordering in the angelic hierarchy is greater than [the ordering] in the ecclesiastical [hierarchy]; but in the ecclesiastical [hierarchy] some are so intent on contemplation that [they are] not [intent] on action: therefore much more strongly does it seem [so] in the heavenly Jerusalem: therefore it does not belong to all the Angels to be sent.
To the opposite. To the opposite it is argued thus: 1. First, by authority, to the Hebrews, chapter one4: They are all ministering spirits, sent into ministry for the sake of those who receive the inheritance of salvation.
2. Likewise, Isaiah, chapter six5: There flew to me one of the Seraphim: therefore someone of the order of the Seraphim was sent to Isaiah the prophet; but it is established that the order of the Seraphim is the highest order: therefore, if that one is sent, it seems that all the others are sent.
3. Likewise, it seems [so] by reason. So greatly did God love our salvation that he sent the Son and the Holy Spirit6; but he did nothing except what was fitting: therefore, if mission to us is no derogation to the Son, it seems that it is no derogation to any Angel: therefore it seems to befit all.
4. Likewise, from among men [some] are taken up into all the orders of the Angels7: therefore, if every Angel ought to procure the restoration of his own order, and God ought to send [him] for this, it seems that all the Angels are at some time sent to us.
5. Likewise, the eminent charity of the Angels makes them be solicitous about our salvation, and through this come to us by divine command8: if, then, in the highest orders there is the greatest charity, it seems that they most of all procure our salvation: therefore God ought most of all to send them to us.
6. Likewise, charity is readier to help than wickedness is to harm: therefore, if we are assailed by the Angels who fell from all the orders9, much more strongly does it seem that we are helped by the Angels persisting [in good] from the individual orders: therefore, if they are sent for this, that they may help us, the point is clear, etc.
Conclusion
By exterior mission only the lower Angels are sent to us; but by interior mission the higher are sent to the lower, and indeed for our sake.
I respond: To this it must be said that, as the Master says in the text10, there were diverse opinions on account of the diverse authorities, which seem in this matter to be contrary to one another. Hence some, adhering to certain [authorities] and understanding them according to the letter, but expounding the others, formed for themselves various opinions.
Opinion 1. For some said that only the Angels of the lowest hierarchy are sent to us; and they say that Dionysius held this, and that this is not against the Apostle, because that distribution which the Apostle makes is to be understood as being accommodated11, when he says: They are all ministering etc.; for it is understood of those who are of the lowest hierarchy.
But because this exposition does not accord with the sense and intention of the Apostle — for he wishes here to prove that Christ is nobler than all the Angels, not only the lower but the higher — Opinion 2. therefore there is a second opinion, that it belongs to all the Angels to be sent, which relies on that authority of the Apostle. And this opinion says that the word of the Apostle is not contrary to the word of Dionysius, who12 says that the upper hosts are not sent — either because they are not sent so frequently, or because it does not befit them by office to be sent in the way it does the Angels of the lower hierarchy.
But because this exposition of the word of Dionysius seems to be quite far-fetched — since he himself says that «they never have the use of an outward office» — and since it must be believed as beyond doubt that in this matter both the word of the Apostle and the word of Dionysius are true, Opinion 3. therefore there is a third manner of speaking, which by a distinction saves both words and brings [them] back to concord and draws out from the two the express truth. For a distinction must be made in mission. For there is exterior mission, which is to us; and there is interior mission, which is to the Angels, but for our sake. If we speak of exterior mission, Conclusion 1. then it does not befit all the Angels, because it does not befit the upper hosts, as Dionysius says, «because those which are preeminent never have the use of an outward office»; in which he signifies that he understands [it] of exterior mission, which is to us. But if we understand [it] of interior mission, which is to the Angels for our sake, Conclusion 2. then to be sent befits all, since the higher are sent to the middle, and the middle to the lowest, while by revealing they purge and illuminate the things which are expedient for us; and all this is for our sake; and therefore the Apostle pointedly says: Sent for the sake of those; he does not say: sent to those. — Therefore the arguments showing that it does not belong to all to be sent to us are to be conceded.
The solution of the opposing arguments. 1. And the reply to the word of the Apostle is now plain from what has been said.
2. But to that which is objected from the sixth [chapter] of Isaiah, it must be said that the Angel sent to him is not called one of the Seraphim because he was of the highest order, but because he was being sent to kindle his lips; and this reply is taken from Dionysius in the book On the Angelic Hierarchy13.
3. To that which is objected — that mission befits the Son, therefore [it befits] any angelic order — it must be said that it does not hold. For mission is either for redeeming and for saving, or it is for ministering. The first is of such great dignity that it can befit no other than God alone; but the second is not of such great dignity that it should befit the highest host.
4, 5, 6. To that which is objected — that all the orders of the Angels will be restored through men — it must be said, both to this and to the two following [arguments], that in truth all the Angels are for our help, and all help us either mediately or immediately, whether in ministering revelations or in conveying and offering our prayers. For while the upper hosts reveal to the lower hosts the things which are necessary for us, and while together with them they intercede for us before God14 and lay out our petitions to God — not that they may instruct God, but that they may make our petitions, by their fiery affections, acceptable to God, just as advocates by becoming speeches defend and adorn the cause of others — without doubt they furnish us great aid, and so they work toward the restoration of their own orders, and nonetheless they follow the solicitude of charity and more efficaciously help us than the others assail [us]15.
---
- Vers. 10. — In codd. et primis edd. deest videtur.[Daniel ch. 7,] v. 10. — In the codices and the first editions the word videtur is absent.
- Vide de hoc textu supra pag. 258, nota 2. Cfr. tamen Dionys., de Caelest. Hierarch. c. 6. § 2. et c. 5, ubi exponit, quo modo supremi ordines a theologis vocantur angeli; in cuius expositione Hugo de S. Vict. ait, illos vocari Angelos « in eo quod, licet ad exteriora nuntianda non exeant, tamen eis qui post se sequuntur ordinibus divinam illuminationem ... manifestant ».On this text see above, p. 258, note 2. Cf. nonetheless Dionysius, On the Celestial Hierarchy c. 6, § 2, and c. 5, where he sets out in what manner the highest orders are called angels by the theologians; in expounding which Hugh of St. Victor says that they are called Angels «in this, that, although they do not go out to announce outward things, they nonetheless manifest the divine illumination ... to the orders which follow after them».
- Cfr. d. 9. in praenotatis.Cf. d. 9, in the prefatory notes.
- Vers. 14.[Hebrews ch. 1,] v. 14.
- Vers. 6.[Isaiah ch. 6,] v. 6.
- Cfr. Ioan. 3, 16. et 14, 16.Cf. John 3, 16, and 14, 16.
- Vide supra d. 9. q. 5.See above, d. 9, q. 5.
- Codd. F M U V missione.Codices F, M, U, V read missione (by mission) [for iussione].
- Cfr. supra d. 6. a. 1. q. 2. et a. 2. q. 1.Cf. above, d. 6, a. 1, q. 2, and a. 2, q. 1.
- Hic c. 1. — Paulo inferius non pauci codd. contrarie pro contrariae. Dein Vat. alii pro alias.Here, c. 1. — A little below, not a few codices [read] contrarie for contrariae. Then the Vatican edition [reads] alii for alias.
- Vide tom. 1. pag. 517, nota 3.See volume 1, p. 517, note 3.
- Plurimi codd., exceptis codd. F cc et ed. 1, quia. Mox post non mitti cod. cc et ed. 1 subiungunt hoc enim dicit.Most codices, except codices F, cc, and edition 1, [read] quia [for qui]. Soon after non mitti codex cc and edition 1 add hoc enim dicit.
- Cap. 13. § 2. seq., ubi affert duas rationes, quare ille Angelus, qui fuit de infima hierarchia, vocetur Seraph, scil. propter effectum in Isaia producendum, « propter igneam et caelestem dictorum ablutionem peccatorum et purgationem in divinam obedientiam resuscitationum », vel propter exsecutionem mandati, quod acceperat ab Angelo supremae hierarchiae Seraphim, « quia propriam purgativam sacrificationem magnus ille qui tunc erat, visionem formans Angelus in docendum divina theologum, in Deum et post Deum in praeoperatricem hierarchiam reposuit ». Has autem rationes recitat Magister, hic in lit. c. 2.[On the Celestial Hierarchy] c. 13, § 2 and following, where he brings forward two reasons why that Angel, who was of the lowest hierarchy, is called a Seraph: namely, on account of the effect to be produced in Isaiah — «on account of the fiery and heavenly washing-away of the sins of [his] utterances and [their] purgation unto resuscitations into divine obedience» — or on account of the carrying-out of a command which he had received from an Angel of the highest hierarchy, the Seraphim — «because that great one who then was — an Angel forming a vision for the teaching of the theologian in divine matters — referred his own purgative sanctification to God, and after God to the hierarchy that operates beforehand». And these reasons the Master recounts here, in the text, c. 2.
- Alluditur ad Rom. 8, 34. et Hebr. 7, 25, ubi de Christo dicitur, quod interpellet pro nobis, et in seqq. ad I. Ioan. 2, 1, ubi asseritur, quod advocatum habemus apud Patrem, Iesum Christum.Allusion is made to Romans 8, 34, and Hebrews 7, 25, where it is said of Christ that he intercedes for us; and, in what follows, to I John 2, 1, where it is asserted that we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ.
- Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.See the scholion on the preceding question. ---