← Back to Distinction 4

Dist. 4, Art. 1, Q. 1

Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 4

Textus Latinus
p. 131

ARTICULUS I. Quales creati sunt Angeli quoad gloriam et gratiam.

QUAESTIO I. Utrum Angeli creati sint in beatitudine sive gloria.

Quaeritur ergo primo, utrum Angeli creati sint in beatitudine sive gloria. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Ezechielis vigesimo octavo1: Tu plenus sapientia et perfectus decore in deliciis paradisi fuisti; sed esse in deliciis paradisi et esse plenum sapientia est ipsa beatitudo, quam dicimus aeternam gloriam: ergo etc.

2. Item, Augustinus in libro de Mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae2: «Angelus in summo sui ordinis honore constitutus lapsus est» — loquitur de Angelo ante lapsum — sed summus honor ordinis angelici est beatitudo et gloria: ergo etc.

3. Item, Augustinus de Fide ad Petrum3: «Angelici spiritus, pro eo quod rationales facti sunt, aeternitatis et beatitudinis donum in ipsa naturae suae spiritualis creatione divinitus acceperunt».

4. Item, idem de Ecclesiasticis Dogmatibus4: «Angeli, qui in illa qua creati sunt beatitudine perseverant, non natura possident, ut non mutentur»: ergo si modo habent veram beatitudinem, patet, quod in beatitudine creati sunt.

5. Item, ratione videtur: quia Angelus a sua creatione habuit habilitatem ad diligendum Deum propter se et super omnia5, ergo habuit habilitatem ad fruendum Deo; sed ipse non habuit aliquod retardativum ex parte affectus, nec obumbrativum ex parte intellectus: ergo totaliter ferebatur in ipsum Deum amore fruitionis: ergo cum talis status et actus sit beatitudo et gloria, patet etc.

6. Item, Deus fecit liberum arbitrium vertibile: ergo cum possit habere creatura rationalis ipsum invertibile, ut patet modo in sanctis Angelis, aliquibus debuit hoc modo facere; sed non est invertibilitas liberi arbitrii in Beato6 nisi per gloriam: ergo etc. Aut si dicas, quod non debuit facere; hoc non videtur, quia debuit facere res optimo modo; sed iste est optimus status ipsius Angeli: ergo aliquem in hoc statu debuit facere.

Contra: 1. Ioannis octavo7: «Ille in veritate non stetit»; sed beatitudo est «status omnium bonorum congregatione perfectus»: ergo est status in veritate: ergo lucifer non fuit factus beatus. Sed inter omnes perfectus et nobilis est conditus: ergo etc.

2. Item, obiicitur, quod perseverantia sive securitas est de essentia sive substantia beatitudinis — beatus enim non est qui potest amittere bonum, quod habet8 — sed Angeli potuerunt amittere, quia amiserunt: ergo etc.

3. Item, nullus laudatur vel vituperatur in his quae habet a natura vel conditione9; sed sicut damnationi essentiale est vituperium, ita beatitudini essentialis est laus: ergo impossibile est, quod aliquis beatus sit a conditione, immo est repugnantia in adiecto.

4. Item, aut omnes fecit Deus beatos, aut aliquos. Non omnes; constat, quia plures ex eis ceciderunt. Non aliquos, ut videtur, quia tunc illi praecellerent alios quasi praeexcellentia improportionali: ergo lucifer non fuisset ausus se eis praeponere. Quod si ausus est, videtur, quod nulli conditi sunt beati. Si tu dicas, quod maiorem audaciam praesumsit, scilicet aequiparari Deo, quanto magis praeesse Beatis; adhuc non solvit. Si enim Deus beatos condidit Angelos ab ipsa conditione, hoc fuit, quia naturae eorum consonabat, ut sub tali perfectione et tam nobili fierent: si ergo lucifer, ut dicunt Sancti, et Magister dicit in sequentibus10, splendidissima habuit naturalia, magis debuit et congruum fuit, ipsius naturam gloria insigniri. Quod si ipse, ut patet, beatus factus non est, patet etc.

Conclusio. Angeli non fuerunt creati in statu beatitudinis per visionem Dei perfectae, tamen sine malo culpae et poenae.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod, sicut praetactum est supra11, quorundam opinio fuit, quod Angeli, quia sunt spirituales et actuales, in instanti suae creationis fuerunt in actu conversionis et aversionis; et sicut in prima aversione sunt damnati aeternaliter illi qui aversi sunt, ita in prima conversione illi glorificati sunt aeternaliter qui conversi sunt; ita dicunt intellexisse Augustinum, et fuisse eius p. 132positionem, quod aliqui sunt creati beati et formati, quia simul tempore, licet posterius natura, factum est caelum et lux, id est angelica natura informis et formata. «Lux enim, ut dicit Augustinus undecimo de Civitate12, dicuntur Angeli, quia illuminati sunt, ut beate sapienterque viverent». — Sed tamen haec positio supra13 improbata est tanquam falsa et erronea ratione illius partis, quae dicit, primo instanti fuisse aversos. Ratione alterius partis pari ratione improbata est, et patet falsitas per Augustinum de Correctione et gratia14, ubi dicit, «quod Angeli etsi beati facti sunt, erat tamen adhuc, quod eorum beatitudini adderetur, si permansissent». Constat, quod beatitudini et gloriae, cum sit invariabilis, non fit additio; constat etiam, quod loquitur communiter de bonis et malis, cum dicit: «si permansissent».

Et ideo aliter est dicendum, quod beatitudo dupliciter potest dici. Uno modo status perfectus plenitudine omnis boni, et haec ponit visionem Dei claram et tentionem perfectam; et hoc modo Angeli non sunt creati15, nec aliqui nec omnes, sed habuerunt quidam ex eis in ipsa confirmatione. Alio modo dicitur beatitudo status perfectus privatione omnis mali, tam poenae quam culpae; et tales creati sunt Angeli, quia innocentes et impassibiles. Et de hac beatitudine loquitur Augustinus; sed haec non est perfecta, nisi cum additur ei altera, et in hac currunt auctoritates probantes, quod beati facti sunt.

1. Ad illud enim quod dicit Ezechiel: In deliciis paradisi fuisti; dicendum, quod sicut primus homo conditus est et positus in deliciis paradisi, quae tamen non erant deliciae beatitudinis perfectae; et sicut data est ei sapientia ad cognoscendum omnia mundana, sed non illa quae est visio Dei in patria16: simili modo intelligendum est in Angelo.

2. 3. 4. Quod dicit Augustinus de Mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae, intelligit quantum ad naturalia, quia ita bona habuit, quod non erat habiturus meliora. Unde et in illo loco conditus est, in quo erat beatificandus17. — Duae vero sequentes auctoritates loquuntur de beatitudine secundum illas duas differentias, quas dixi.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod habebant fruitionem sine retardatione; dicendum, quod verum est; non tamen habebant in perfecta completione, quia Deum non videbant facie ad faciem, sed in effectibus cognoscebant et in se ipsis maxime, sicut melius patebit infra18.

6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod debuit dare aliquibus invertibile; dicendum est, quod quantum est de conditione, nullis debuit dari, quamvis possit, quia «homines et Angelos meliores iudicavit Deus, si ei liberaliter deservirent19»; ideo utrumque posuit in manu consilii sui.

Scholion

I. Haec quaestio cohaeret cum iis, quae d. 3. p. II. a. 1. q. 2, et a. 2. q. 2. discussa sunt, et ipsa nunc ab omnibus in sensu negativo solvitur, si de facto quaeritur. Quidam autem antiquitus de hoc dubitaverunt propter quaedam testimonia S. Augustini vel male intellecta, vel ex libris non genuinis desumta, ut sunt ea quae hic in argg. ad opposit. citata sunt. Deus certe eis beatitudinem sine meritis a principio dare potuit (cfr. hic q. 2. ad 4. 5.), utrum autem gloriam in primo instanti potuerint mereri, controvertitur; cfr. Schol. loc. cit. a. 1. q. 2.

II. Scot., II. Sent. d. 6. q. 2; Report. hic q. unica. — S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 1; S. I. q. 62. a. 1. — B. Albert., hic q. 2. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 1. — Richard. a Med., hic q. 2. q. 1. — Aegid. R., hic a. 1. — Durand., hic q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 1. — Biel, de hac et seq. q. hic q. unica.

English Translation
p. 131

ARTICLE I. What the Angels were created like with respect to glory and grace.

QUESTION I. Whether the Angels were created in blessedness or glory.

It is asked, then, first, whether the Angels were created in blessedness or glory. And that [they were], it seems.

1. Ezekiel 281: You were full of wisdom and perfect in beauty in the delights of paradise; but to be in the delights of paradise and to be full of wisdom is blessedness itself, which we call eternal glory: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, Augustine in the book On the Marvels of Sacred Scripture2: «An Angel, constituted in the highest honor of his order, fell» — he speaks of the Angel before the fall — but the highest honor of the angelic order is blessedness and glory: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, Augustine On the Faith, to Peter3: «The angelic spirits, by the fact that they were made rational, received the gift of eternity and blessedness divinely in the very creation of their spiritual nature».

4. Likewise, the same, On Ecclesiastical Dogmas4: «The Angels who persevere in that blessedness in which they were created do not possess [it] by nature, so as not to be changed»: therefore if they now have true blessedness, it is clear that they were created in blessedness.

5. Likewise, it seems by reason: because the Angel from his creation had the aptitude to love God for his own sake and above all things5, therefore he had the aptitude to enjoy God; but he had no retardant on the part of the affection, nor anything obscuring on the part of the intellect: therefore he was borne wholly into God himself with the love of fruition: therefore, since such a state and act is blessedness and glory, it is clear etc.

6. Likewise, God made free choice changeable: therefore, since a rational creature can have it unchangeable, as is now evident in the holy Angels, he ought to have made [it so] for some in this way; but there is no unchangeableness of free choice in the Blessed6 except through glory: therefore etc. Or if you say that he ought not to have done [so]; this does not seem [right], because he ought to make things in the best way; but this is the best state of the Angel itself: therefore he ought to have made someone in this state.

On the contrary: 1. John 87: «He did not stand in the truth»; but blessedness is «a state made perfect by the gathering together of all goods»: therefore it is a state in the truth: therefore lucifer was not made blessed. But he was created perfect and noble among all: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, it is objected that perseverance or security is of the essence or substance of blessedness — for he is not blessed who can lose the good that he has8 — but the Angels could lose [it], since they did lose [it]: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, no one is praised or blamed for the things he has by nature or by condition9; but just as blame is essential to damnation, so praise is essential to blessedness: therefore it is impossible that anyone be blessed from [his] condition; rather, it is a contradiction in the term.

4. Likewise, either God made all [the Angels] blessed, or some. Not all; it is established, since many of them fell. Not some, as it seems, because then those would surpass the others by a disproportionate pre-excellence: therefore lucifer would not have dared to set himself above them. But if he did dare, it seems that none were created blessed. If you say that he presumed a greater audacity, namely to be equaled to God, [and] how much more to be set above the Blessed; still that does not resolve [it]. For if God created the Angels blessed from their very condition, this was because it was consonant with their nature that they should be made under such perfection and so noble: if therefore lucifer, as the Saints say, and the Master says in what follows10, had the most splendid natural endowments, it was the more fitting and congruous that his nature should be marked with glory. But if he, as is evident, was not made blessed, it is clear etc.

Conclusion. The Angels were not created in a state of blessedness through the perfect vision of God, yet without the evil of fault and of punishment.

I respond: It must be said that, as was touched on above11, it was the opinion of certain [people] that the Angels, because they are spiritual and actual, in the instant of their creation were in the act of conversion and aversion; and just as in the first aversion those who turned away were damned eternally, so in the first conversion those who turned [to God] were glorified eternally; and thus they say Augustine understood [it], and that it was his p. 132position, that some were created blessed and formed, since at the same time in time, though posterior in nature, the heaven and the light were made, that is, the angelic nature, unformed and formed. «For "light," as Augustine says in the eleventh [book] On the City of God12, the Angels are called, because they were illumined so that they might live blessedly and wisely». — But nevertheless this position was disproved above13 as false and erroneous by reason of that part which says that at the first instant [some] were turned away. By reason of the other part it is disproved on a like ground, and its falsity is evident through Augustine On Correction and Grace14, where he says «that, although the Angels were made blessed, there was still something to be added to their blessedness, if they had remained». It is established that nothing is added to blessedness and glory, since it is unchangeable; it is established also that he speaks in common of the good and the evil [Angels], when he says: «if they had remained».

And therefore it must be said otherwise, that blessedness can be spoken of in two ways. In one way, a state made perfect by the fullness of every good, and this posits the clear vision of God and perfect holding [of him]; and in this way the Angels were not created [blessed]15, neither some nor all, but certain of them had [it] in the confirmation itself. In another way blessedness is called a state made perfect by the privation of every evil, both of punishment and of fault; and in this way the Angels were created, since [they were] innocent and impassible. And of this blessedness Augustine speaks; but this is not perfect unless the other is added to it, and to this run the authorities proving that they were made blessed.

1. To that, then, which Ezekiel says: You were in the delights of paradise; it must be said that just as the first man was created and placed in the delights of paradise, which nevertheless were not the delights of perfect blessedness; and just as wisdom was given to him for knowing all worldly things, but not that [wisdom] which is the vision of God in the fatherland16: in a like way it must be understood in the Angel.

2. 3. 4. What Augustine says On the Marvels of Sacred Scripture he understands with respect to the natural [endowments], because he had goods so [great] that he was not going to have better ones. Whence also he was created in that place in which he was to be beatified17. — But the two following authorities speak of blessedness according to those two differences which I have stated.

5. To that which is objected, that they had fruition without retardation; it must be said that it is true; yet they did not have [it] in perfect completion, because they did not see God face to face, but knew [him] in effects and most of all in themselves, as will be shown better below18.

6. To that which is objected, that he ought to have given to some [the gift of being] unchangeable; it must be said that, as far as concerns [their] condition, it ought to be given to none, although it can [be], because «God judged men and Angels better, if they served him freely19»; therefore he placed both in the hand of their own counsel.

Scholion

I. This question coheres with those which were discussed in d. 3, p. II, a. 1, q. 2, and a. 2, q. 2, and it is now resolved by all in the negative sense, if it is asked as a matter of fact. But certain [people] in antiquity doubted about this on account of certain testimonies of St. Augustine either badly understood or taken from non-genuine books, such as are those cited here in the arguments ad oppositum. God certainly could have given them blessedness without merits from the beginning (cf. here q. 2, ad 4, 5); but whether they could have merited glory in the first instant is disputed; cf. the Scholion at the cited place, a. 1, q. 2.

II. Scotus, II Sent. d. 6, q. 2; Reportatio here, q. unica. — St. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 1; S. I, q. 62, a. 1. — B. Albert, here q. 2. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 1. — Richard of Mediavilla, here q. 2, q. 1. — Aegidius Romanus, here a. 1. — Durandus, here q. 1. — Dionysius Carthusianus, here q. 1. — Biel, on this and the following q., here q. unica.

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Vers. 12.
    Verse 12.
  2. Libr. I. c. 2, ubi textus originalis verbis transpositis habet in summo honoris sui ordine.
    Book I, c. 2, where the original text, with the words transposed, has in summo honoris sui ordine.
  3. Cap. 3. n. 32, in quo textu codd. cum tribus primis edd. perperam spirituali pro spiritualis.
    C. 3, n. 32, in which text the codices, with the first three editions, wrongly [read] spirituali for spiritualis.
  4. Cap. 29, ubi in textu originali ultima sententiae pars ita exhibetur: non natura possident bonum, ut non mutarentur cum ceteris.
    C. 29, where in the original text the last part of the sentence is presented thus: non natura possident bonum, ut non mutarentur cum ceteris.
  5. Cfr. supra d. 3. p. II. a. 3. q. 1.
    Cf. above, d. 3, p. II, a. 3, q. 1.
  6. Plures codd. propter abbreviationem sunt dubiae lectionis; potest enim legi vel in Beato vel in bono.
    Several codices, on account of the abbreviation, are of doubtful reading; for it can be read either in Beato or in bono.
  7. Vers. 44. — Beatitudinis definitio, quae mox affertur, est in Boeth., III. de Consol. prosa 2.
    Verse 44. — The definition of blessedness, which is presently adduced, is in Boethius, Consolation III, prose 2.
  8. Cfr. August., de Beata Vita, n. 11; XI. de Gen. ad lit. c. 17. n. 22.
    Cf. Augustine, On the Blessed Life, n. 11; On the Literal Meaning of Genesis XI, c. 17, n. 22.
  9. Vide supra pag. 113, nota 8.
    See above, p. 113, note 8.
  10. Dist. VI. c. 1. — Paulo superius plures codd. cum edd. 1, 2, 3 quia natura eorum pro quia naturae eorum.
    Dist. VI, c. 1. — A little above, several codices with editions 1, 2, 3 [read] quia natura eorum for quia naturae eorum.
  11. Dist. 3. p. II. a. 1. q. 2.
    Dist. 3, p. II, a. 1, q. 2.
  12. Cap. 11: Quae cum ita sint, nullo quidem modo secundum aliquod temporis spatium prius erant illi spiritus tenebrarum quos Angelos dicimus, sed simul ut facti sunt, lux facti sunt; non tamen ita tantum creati, ut quoquo modo essent et quoquo modo viverent, sed etiam illuminati, ut sapienter beateque viverent. Ab hac illuminatione aversi quidam Angeli non obtinuerunt excellentiam sapientis beataeque vitae, quae procul dubio non nisi aeterna est aeternitatisque suae certa atque secura. Cfr. ibid. c. 9; I. de Gen. ad lit. c. 1. n. 3, c. 5. 10. et c. 17. n. 32, quod etiam supra in lit. Magistri, d. 3. c. 4. affertur; XII. Confess. c. 9. n. 9. et XIII. c. 10. n. 11.
    C. 11: Since these things are so, in no way were those spirits of darkness whom we call Angels prior according to any space of time, but as soon as they were made, they were made light; yet they were not so created merely that they should be in any way and live in any way, but also illumined, that they might live wisely and blessedly. Turned away from this illumination, certain Angels did not obtain the excellence of the wise and blessed life, which without doubt is nothing if not eternal and certain and secure of its own eternity. Cf. ibid. c. 9; On the Literal Meaning of Genesis I, c. 1, n. 3, c. 5, 10, and c. 17, n. 32, which is also adduced above in the Master's text, d. 3, c. 4; Confessions XII, c. 9, n. 9, and XIII, c. 10, n. 11.
  13. Dist. 3. p. II. a. 1. q. 2.
    Dist. 3, p. II, a. 1, q. 2.
  14. Cap. 10. n. 27: Diabolus vero et angeli eius, etsi beati erant, antequam caderent, et se in miseriam casuros esse nesciebant, erat tamen adhuc quod eorum adderetur beatitudini, si per liberum arbitrium in veritate stetissent.
    C. 10, n. 27: But the devil and his angels, although they were blessed before they fell, and did not know that they were going to fall into wretchedness, there was nevertheless still [something] that would be added to their blessedness, if through free choice they had stood in the truth.
  15. Vat. addit beati. Cod. cc et ed. 1 in principio huius prop. et in hac pro et hoc modo. Mox post habuerunt supple cum cod. aa eam, vel cum cod. A hanc, vel cum cod. F hoc.
    The Vatican edition adds beati. Codex cc and ed. 1, at the beginning of this proposition, [read] et in hac for et hoc modo. Presently, after habuerunt, supply, with codex aa, eam, or with codex A, hanc, or with codex F, hoc.
  16. Cfr. infra d. 23. a. 2. q. 1. et 3.
    Cf. below, d. 23, a. 2, q. 1 and 3.
  17. Scil. in caelo empyreo, de quo vide supra d. 2. p. II. a. 1. q. 1. et a. 2. q. 1.
    Namely in the empyrean heaven, concerning which see above, d. 2, p. II, a. 1, q. 1, and a. 2, q. 1.
  18. Art. 3. q. 1.
    Art. 3, q. 1.
  19. August., de Vera Relig. c. 14. n. 27: Tales enim servos suos meliores esse Deus iudicavit, si ei servirent liberaliter. Cfr. de Agone christ. c. 10. n. 11. — In principio solutionis post aliquibus supple cum Vat. et nonnullis codd. liberum arbitrium.
    Augustine, On True Religion c. 14, n. 27: For God judged such servants of his to be better, if they served him freely. Cf. On the Christian Combat c. 10, n. 11. — At the beginning of the solution, after aliquibus, supply, with the Vatican edition and several codices, liberum arbitrium.
← Dist. 4, Divisio TextusDist. 4, Art. 1, Q. 2→