Dist. 4
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 4
Cap. I. An perfecti et beati creati sint, an miseri et imperfecti.
Post haec videndum est, utrum perfectos et beatos creaverit Deus Angelos, an miseros et imperfectos. — Ad quod dici potest, quod nec in beatitudine nec in miseria creati sunt. Miseri enim ante peccatum esse non potuerunt, quia ex peccato miseria est1. Nam si non fuisset peccatum, nulla esset miseria. Beati quoque nunquam fuerunt illi qui ceciderunt, quia sui eventus ignari fuerunt, id est peccati et supplicii futuri. Si enim lapsum suum praescierunt, aut vitare voluerunt, sed non potuerunt, et ita erant miseri; aut potuerunt, sed noluerunt, et ita erant stulti et maligni. Ideoque dicimus, quod non erant praescii eventus sui, nec eis data est cognitio eorum quae futura erant super eos. — Boni vero et qui perstiterunt forte suae beatitudinis praescii fuerunt. Unde Augustinus super Genesim2: «Quomodo, inquit, beatus inter Angelos fuit qui futuri peccati atque supplicii praescius non fuit? Quaeritur autem, cur non fuerit. Forte Deus revelare diabolo noluit, quid facturus vel passurus esset; ceteris vero revelare voluit, quod in veritate mansuri essent». — His verbis videtur Augustinus significare, quod Angeli, qui corruerunt, non fuerunt praescii sui casus, ideoque beati non fuerunt; et quod Angeli, qui perstiterunt, beatitudinem sibi affuturam praescierunt atque de ea certi in spe exstiterunt; unde quodam modo iam beati erant. Et revera, si ita fuisset, posset dici, illos aliquo modo fuisse beatos, alios vero non, qui nescierunt eventum suum.
Sed hoc magis opinando et quaerendo dicit Augustinus quam asserendo; unde et huic opinioni opponens consequenter subdit: «Sed quare discernebantur illi a ceteris, ut Deus istis quae ad ipsos pertinerent non revelaret, aliis vero revelaret, cum non prius sit ipse ultor quam aliquis peccator? Non enim damnat ipse innocentes». — Hic videtur innuere, quod nec peccaturis futurum malum, nec permansuris futurum bonum p. 130revelaverit. Ideoque nec illi qui ceciderunt, unquam, nec illi qui perstiterunt, usque ad consummationem beati fuerunt; quia beati non poterant esse, si de beatitudine certi non erant, vel si damnationis incerti erant. Unde Augustinus in eodem3: «Dicere, inquit, de Angelis, quod in suo genere beati esse possunt, damnationis vel salutis incerti, quibus nec spes esset, quod mutandi essent in melius, nimia praesumtio est». «Quomodo enim beati esse possunt, quibus est incerta sua beatitudo»? Ex praedictis consequitur, quod Angeli, qui corruerunt, nunquam beati fuerunt, nisi beatitudinem aliquis accipiat illum statum innocentiae, in quo fuerunt ante peccatum. Illi vero qui perstiterunt, aut suam beatitudinem futuram, Deo revelante, praescierunt, et ita spei certitudine aliquo modo beati fuerunt; vel incerti exstiterunt suae beatitudinis, et ita aliter beati non fuerunt, quam reliqui qui ceciderunt4. Mihi autem quod posterius dictum est probabilius videtur.
Ad hoc autem, quod quaerebatur, utrum perfecti vel imperfecti fuerint creati, dici potest, quia quodam modo perfecti fuerunt, et quodam alio modo imperfecti. Non enim uno modo aliquid dicitur perfectum, sed pluribus. — Dicitur namque perfectum tribus modis. Est enim perfectum secundum tempus, et est perfectum secundum naturam, et est universaliter perfectum. Secundum tempus perfectum est quod habet quidquid tempus requirit, et convenit secundum tempus haberi; et hoc modo Angeli erant perfecti ante confirmationem, vel lapsum. Secundum naturam perfectum est quod habet quidquid debitum est vel expedit naturae suae ad glorificationem; et hoc modo perfecti fuerunt Angeli post confirmationem, et erunt Sancti post resurrectionem. Universaliter et summe perfectum est cui nihil unquam deest, et a quo universa proveniunt bona, quod est solius Dei. Prima ergo perfectio est naturae conditae, secunda naturae glorificatae, tertia naturae increatae.
Quales fuerint Angeli in creatione, ostensum est, boni scilicet et non mali, et iusti, id est innocentes, et perfecti quodam modo, alio vero imperfecti. Beati vero non fuerunt usque ad confirmationem, nisi beatitudo accipiatur, ut iam dictum est, ille status innocentiae et bonitatis, in quo conditi sunt.
Cap. I. Whether they were created perfect and blessed, or wretched and imperfect.
After these matters it must be considered whether God created the Angels perfect and blessed, or wretched and imperfect. — To which it can be said that they were created neither in blessedness nor in wretchedness. For they could not be wretched before sin, since wretchedness comes from sin1. For if there had been no sin, there would be no wretchedness. Blessed, too, those who fell never were, because they were ignorant of their own outcome, that is, of the sin and the punishment to come. For if they foreknew their own fall, either they wished to avoid it but could not, and so were wretched; or they could but would not, and so were foolish and malicious. And therefore we say that they were not foreknowers of their own outcome, nor was the knowledge given to them of those things that were to come upon them. — But the good ones, and those who stood fast, were perhaps foreknowers of their own blessedness. Hence Augustine on Genesis2: «How, he says, was he blessed among the Angels who was not foreknowing of the sin and punishment to come? But it is asked why he was not. Perhaps God did not wish to reveal to the devil what he would do or suffer; but to the others he willed to reveal that they would remain in the truth». — By these words Augustine seems to mean that the Angels who fell were not foreknowers of their own fall, and therefore were not blessed; and that the Angels who stood fast foreknew the blessedness that would come to them and were certain of it in hope; whence in a certain way they were already blessed. And indeed, if it had been so, it could be said that those were in some way blessed, but the others not, who did not know their own outcome.
But Augustine says this rather by way of opining and inquiring than of asserting; whence, opposing this opinion, he consequently adds: «But why were those distinguished from the rest, so that God would not reveal to these the things that pertained to them, but would reveal them to the others, since he is not an avenger before anyone is a sinner? For he does not himself condemn the innocent». — Here he seems to suggest that he revealed neither the future evil to those about to sin, nor the future good to those about to remain. p. 130Therefore neither those who fell, ever, nor those who stood fast, were blessed until the consummation; because they could not be blessed if they were not certain of their blessedness, or if they were uncertain of damnation. Hence Augustine in the same [work]3: «To say of the Angels, he says, that they can be blessed in their own kind while uncertain of damnation or of salvation, for whom there would not even be hope that they would be changed for the better, is excessive presumption». «For how can they be blessed for whom their own blessedness is uncertain»? From the foregoing it follows that the Angels who fell were never blessed, unless someone takes "blessedness" to mean that state of innocence in which they were before sin. But those who stood fast either foreknew their future blessedness, by God's revealing it, and so by the certainty of hope were in some way blessed; or they remained uncertain of their blessedness, and so were not blessed otherwise than the rest who fell4. But to me what was said last seems more probable.
Now to the question that was asked, whether they were created perfect or imperfect, it can be said that in one way they were perfect, and in another way imperfect. For a thing is not called perfect in one way only, but in several. — For "perfect" is said in three ways. For there is the perfect according to time, and the perfect according to nature, and the universally perfect. Perfect according to time is that which has whatever the time requires, and is fittingly possessed according to [that] time; and in this way the Angels were perfect before the confirmation, or the fall. Perfect according to nature is that which has whatever is due or expedient to its nature for glorification; and in this way the Angels were perfect after the confirmation, and the Saints will be after the resurrection. Universally and supremely perfect is that to which nothing is ever lacking, and from which all goods proceed, which belongs to God alone. The first perfection, therefore, is of created nature, the second of glorified nature, the third of uncreated nature.
What the Angels were like at creation has been shown: namely good and not evil, and just — that is, innocent — and perfect in one way, but imperfect in another. But they were not blessed until the confirmation, unless "blessedness" be taken, as has already been said, [to mean] that state of innocence and goodness in which they were created.
- Cfr. Prov. 14, 34: Miseros autem facit populos peccatum.Cf. Prov. 14:34: But sin makes peoples wretched.
- Lib. XI. c. 17. n. 22, unde etiam quae sequuntur sumta sunt, sed multis omissis et mutatis. Quoad totam dist. cfr. Hugo, I. de Sacram. p. 5. c. 18. 19, et Sent. tr. 2. c. 2. 3.[Augustine, On the Literal Meaning of Genesis] Book XI, c. 17, n. 22, whence also what follows is taken, but with many things omitted and altered. On the whole distinction cf. Hugh [of St. Victor], On the Sacraments I, p. 5, c. 18, 19, and Sentences tr. 2, c. 2, 3.
- Cap. 19. n. 25, et seq. loc. ibid. c. 17. — Paulo postea esse possunt Vat. cum cod. D et paucis edd. esse possent.[The same work, Book XI] c. 19, n. 25, and the following passage ibid. c. 17. — A little later, esse possunt the Vatican edition, with codex D and a few editions [reads] esse possent.
- Cfr. August., XI. de Civ. Dei, c. 13.Cf. Augustine, On the City of God XI, c. 13.