Dist. 8, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 1
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 8
ARTICULUS UNICUS.
De potestate daemonum respectu hominum.
QUAESTIO I.
Utrum daemones habitare possint in corporibus humanis.
Circa primum sic proceditur et ostenditur, quod daemones in humanis corporibus possint habitare.
Fundamenta. 1. Nullus spiritus eiicitur de aliquo corpore vel habitaculo, in quo non est; sed daemones, sicut legitur in Evangeliis1, de obsessorum corporibus sunt eiecti a Christo et eius Apostolis: ergo aliquando habitaverunt in eis.
2. Item, Augustinus de Divinatione daemonum2 loquens de daemonibus dicit: «Suadent miris et invisibilibus modis, per illam subtilitatem suorum corporum hominum corpora non sentientium penetrando»; sed si potest corpus penetrare, cum possit ibi quiescere, potest et inhabitare.
3. Item, constans est, quod aliqui a daemonibus obsidentur: ergo obsessi dicuntur, aut quia daemon habet in eis effectum, aut quia est in eis secundum substantiam. Si quia habent in eis effectum: ergo omnes peccatores essent obsessi a diabolo, quod falsum est: ergo quia sunt in eis secundum substantiam, obsessi dicuntur: ergo habitant in suis corporibus.
4. Item, nullum corpus potest praebere obstaculum spiritui: ergo si daemones spiritus sunt, nullum corpus est eis obstaculum: ergo sicut lumen penetrat aera usque in profundum et ibidem manet, sic spiritus daemoniacus corpus humanum subintrare potest per totum: ergo si non expellatur ab agente maioris potentiae, videtur, quod ibi possit inhabitare.
Ad oppositum arguitur sic. 1. Super illud Habacuc secundo3: Dominus in templo sancto suo, Glossa: «Simulacris assidere potest immundus spiritus, intrinsecus esse non potest»: ergo si non potest in simulacris, multo minus nec in corporibus humanis.
2. Item, Beda dicit, et Magister adducit in littera4, super illud Actuum: Cur tentavit satanas cor tuum: «Implet satanas cor alicuius, non quidem ingrediens in eum nec in sensum eius»: ergo non videtur, quod daemon ingrediatur secundum substantiam corpus alicuius hominis.
3. Item, anima unitur corpori ut motor et ut perfectio; sed quia coniungitur ut perfectio, impossibile est, in eodem corpore esse aliam naturam perficientem: ergo cum coniungatur ut motor, impossibile est, in eodem corpore esse alium spiritum ut moventem. Si ergo daemon in corpore humano non potest esse nec ut motor nec ut perfectio: ergo nullo modo.
4. Item, sicut supra dictum est5, nullo modo competit, duos spiritus angelicos esse simul in eodem loco primo: ergo pari ratione non videtur, quod in eodem loco primo possit esse anima et Angelus; sed anima est in toto corpore suo, sicut vult Augustinus: ergo in nulla parte corporis potest esse daemon.
CONCLUSIO.
Deo permittente, daemones possunt corpora humana intrare et vexare.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod sicut innuit textus evangelicus et Augustinus etiam in libro de Divinatione daemonum, daemones per naturam suae subtilitatis et spiritualitatis possunt quaecumque corpora penetrare et in eis sine aliquo obstaculo et impedimento subsistere; ratione vero suae potestatis possunt ea corpora, in quibus sunt, commovere et conturbare6. Ideo daemones, quantum est de potestate et subtilitate naturae, possunt corpora humana intrare, possunt etiam et vexare, nisi prohibeantur a superiori virtute. Et cum permittuntur introire et vexare, tunc dicuntur corpora obsidere.
— Permittit autem hoc Dominus sive ad gloriae suae ostensionem, sive ad peccati punitionem, sive ad peccantis correctionem, sive ad nostram eruditionem. Sed ex qua istarum causarum determinate permittat, latet hoc humanam industriam, propter hoc quod occulta sunt Dei iudicia. Hoc tamen planum est, quod non sunt iniusta; et ideo non permittit talia sine causa. — Concedendae sunt igitur rationes, quod daemones possunt humana corpora subintrare.
Solutio oppositorum. 1. Ad illud quod obiicitur de Glossa, quod intrinsecus esse non potest; dicendum, quod esse intrinsecus in aliquo, hoc potest esse dupliciter: aut sicut contentum respectu continentis, ut aqua respectu vasis; et sic daemon bene potest esse intrinsecus in simulacris. Alio modo esse intrinsecus dicitur aliquid, quod influit in intima rei et influendo conservat et perficit; et hoc modo non congruit daemoni nec respectu simulacri nec respectu hominis; et sic loquitur illa Glossa.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de Beda, quod non ingreditur in hominem; dicendum, quod non loquitur de ingressu in hominem, qui attenditur ex parte corporis, sed qui attenditur ex parte spiritus rationalis.
3. 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod anima7 comparatur ad corpus ut perfectio et motor etc.; dicendum, quod non est simile de comparatione per modum motoris et per modum perfectionis, quia unius perfectibilis una sola est perfectio8; perfectio enim appropriat sibi perfectibile, et e converso; sed unius mobilis potest esse multiplex motor, et unus motor multa potest movere, maxime quando illa habent aliquem ordinem. Et quia divino iudicio anima peccatrix subiicitur daemoni obsidenti sicut tortori et affligenti, hinc est, quod simul in eodem corpore esse possunt.
— Et per hoc patet responsio ad ultimum, quod obiiciebatur de coexistentia duorum spirituum. Non enim est simile, pro eo quod illi, ut supra9 dictum fuit, repugnat ordo universitatis; huic autem consonat ordo divinae aequitatis, secundum quem anima peccatrix affligitur; nec repugnat ordo universitatis, quia diversimode ad illud habitaculum comparantur.
I. Conclusiones fide certae sunt. — De variis tentationum generibus cfr. infra d. 21. dub. 3. et 4. Causa finalis, ob quam Deus vexationes daemonum permittit, magis explicatur I. Sent. d. 46. q. 3-6, d. 47. q. 3. et praecipue II. Sent. d. 23. a. 1. q. 2. — In solut. ad ult. observanda est sententia: «Unius perfectibilis una sola est perfectio», quod respectu formae substantialis completae ab omnibus conceditur.
II. Alex. Hal., (quoad principia) S. p. II. q. 100. m. 1. 2. — S. Thom., de hac et seq. q. hic a. unicus, q. 5. — B. Albert., hic a. 6; S. p. II. tr. 7. q. 29. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. unica, a. 5. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 1. — Aegid. R., hic q. 2. a. 4. et dub. lat. 2. — Durand., hic q. 3. — Dionys. Carth., de hac et seqq. qq. hic q. 3. — Biel, de hac et seq. q. hic q. 2.
---
ARTICLE [the only article].
On the power of the demons with respect to men.
QUESTION I.
Whether the demons can dwell in human bodies.
Concerning the first [question] one proceeds thus, and it is shown that the demons can dwell in human bodies.
Foundations. 1. No spirit is cast out of any body or dwelling-place in which it is not; but the demons, as one reads in the Gospels1, have been cast out by Christ and his Apostles from the bodies of the possessed: therefore they at some time dwelt in them.
2. Likewise, Augustine in On the Divination of Demons2, speaking of the demons, says: «They persuade in wondrous and invisible modes, by that subtlety of their bodies penetrating the bodies of men, who do not perceive [it]»; but if [a demon] can penetrate a body, since it can also rest there, it can also dwell [in it].
3. Likewise, it is settled that some are possessed by demons: therefore they are called possessed either because the demon has its effect in them, or because it is in them according to substance. If because they have an effect in them: then all sinners would be possessed by the devil, which is false: therefore [it is] because they are in them according to substance [that] they are called possessed: therefore they dwell in their bodies.
4. Likewise, no body can offer an obstacle to a spirit: therefore if the demons are spirits, no body is an obstacle to them: therefore just as light penetrates the air down to the depths and remains there, so too a demonic spirit can enter the human body throughout: therefore if it is not expelled by an agent of greater power, it seems that it can dwell there.
On the contrary, one argues thus. 1. Upon that [text] of Habakkuk 23: The Lord is in his holy temple, the Gloss [says]: «The unclean spirit can sit beside idols, [but] cannot be within [them]»: therefore if it cannot [be] in idols, much less in human bodies.
2. Likewise, Bede says, and the Master adduces [him] in the text4, upon that [verse] from the Acts: Why has Satan tempted thy heart?: «Satan fills the heart of someone, [but] not indeed by entering into him nor into his sense»: therefore it does not seem that the demon enters according to substance into the body of any man.
3. Likewise, the soul is united to the body as mover and as perfection; but since it is conjoined as perfection, it is impossible that there be in the same body another nature perfecting [it]: therefore, since it is conjoined as mover [too], it is impossible that there be in the same body another spirit as moving [it]. If, then, a demon cannot be in the human body either as mover or as perfection: therefore in no way [at all].
4. Likewise, as has been said above5, in no way is it allowed that two angelic spirits be at the same time in the same primary place: therefore, by parity of reason, it does not seem that in the same primary place there can be a soul and an Angel; but the soul is in the whole of its body, as Augustine holds: therefore in no part of the body can a demon be.
CONCLUSION.
By God's permitting [it], the demons can enter human bodies and harass [them].
I respond: It must be said that, as the Gospel text and also Augustine in the book On the Divination of Demons intimate, the demons by the nature of their subtlety and spirituality can penetrate any bodies whatever and subsist in them without any obstacle or impediment; but by reason of their power they can move and disturb6 those bodies in which they are. Therefore the demons, as far as concerns the power and subtlety of [their] nature, can enter human bodies, and can also harass [them], unless they be prevented by a higher power. And when they are permitted to enter and to harass, then they are said to possess bodies.
— And the Lord permits this either for the showing-forth of his own glory, or for the punishment of sin, or for the correction of the one sinning, or for our instruction. But from which of these causes determinately he permits [it], this lies hidden from human inquiry, on account of the fact that the judgments of God are hidden. This, however, is plain, that they are not unjust; and so he does not permit such things without a cause. — The reasons are therefore to be conceded, [namely] that the demons can enter human bodies.
Solution of the opposed [arguments]. 1. To that which is objected from the Gloss, that [a demon] cannot be within [a body]; it must be said that to be within something can [be taken] in two ways: either as that which is contained with respect to the container, as water with respect to a vessel; and in this way a demon can well be within idols. In another way, to be within is said of something which flows into the inmost [recesses] of a thing and by flowing-in conserves and perfects [it]; and in this way it befits a demon neither with respect to an idol nor with respect to a man; and so that Gloss is to be understood.
2. To that which is objected from Bede, that [the demon] does not enter into the man; it must be said that [Bede] does not speak of an entrance into man which is attended-to from the side of the body, but [of one] which is attended-to from the side of the rational spirit.
3. 4. To that which is objected, that the soul7 is compared to the body as perfection and mover etc.; it must be said that the comparison through the mode of mover and through the mode of perfection is not the same, because of one perfectible there is only one perfection8; for perfection appropriates to itself its perfectible, and conversely; but of one mobile there can be multiple movers, and one mover can move many [mobiles], especially when these have some [common] order. And because by divine judgment the sinning soul is subjected to a possessing demon as to a torturer and afflicter, hence it is that they can be at the same time in the same body.
— And by this is made plain the response to the last [objection], which was objected concerning the coexistence of two spirits. For [the case] is not similar, by reason of the fact that to them, as has been said above9, the order of the universe is repugnant; but to this [pair, soul + demon] the order of divine equity is consonant, by which the sinning soul is afflicted; nor is the order of the universe repugnant [here], because [they] are compared in different ways to that habitation.
I. The conclusions are certain by faith. — On the various kinds of temptations see below, d. 21, dub. 3 and 4. The final cause on account of which God permits the harassings of the demons is more fully explained at I Sent. d. 46, q. 3–6, d. 47, q. 3, and especially II Sent. d. 23, a. 1, q. 2. — In the solution to the last [objection] the sentence is to be observed: «Of one perfectible there is only one perfection», which, with respect to the complete substantial form, is granted by all.
II. Alex. Hal. (as to the principles), Summa p. II, q. 100, m. 1–2. — S. Thom., on this and the following question here, a. unicus, q. 5. — B. Albert., here, a. 6; Summa p. II, tr. 7, q. 29. — Petr. a Tar., here, q. unica, a. 5. — Richard. a Med., here, a. 2, q. 1. — Aegid. R., here, q. 2, a. 4, and dub. lat. 2. — Durand., here, q. 3. — Dionys. Carth., on this and the following questions, here, q. 3. — Biel, on this and the following question, here, q. 2.
---
- Matth. 8, 16. et 32; Marc. 1, 34; Luc. 11, 14. — De Apostolis cfr. Matth. 10, 1; Marc. 3, 15.Matth. 8:16 and 32; Mark 1:34; Luke 11:14. — On the Apostles cf. Matth. 10:1; Mark 3:15.
- Cap. 5. n. 9.[Augustine, On the Divination of Demons], c. 5, n. 9.
- Vers. 20. — Glossa inducta est Glossa interlinearis; cfr. Lyranus in hunc locum.[Habakkuk 2,] verse 20. — The Gloss adduced is the Interlinear Gloss; cf. Lyra on this passage.
- Hic c. 4. — Act. 8, 3.Here at c. 4 [of Lombard's text]. — Acts 8:3.
- Dist. 2. p. II. a. 2. q. 4. — Augustini sententiam de modo, quo anima est in corpore, exposuit S. Bonav. in I. Sent. d. 8. p. II. q. 3.[II Sent.] dist. 2, p. II, a. 2, q. 4. — Bonaventure expounded Augustine's view on the manner in which the soul is in the body at I Sent. d. 8, p. II, q. 3.
- In Vat. additur: Sicut enim spiritus spiritui penetrabilis esse non potest, sic nec corpus potest resistere spiritui.In the Vatican edition is added: For just as one spirit cannot be penetrable to another spirit, so neither can a body resist a spirit.
- Cod. bb anima rationalis.Codex bb [reads] the rational soul.
- Averroes, de Substantia orbis, c. 1: Unum enim subiectum habere plus quam unam formam, est impossibile.Averroes, On the Substance of the Heavenly Sphere, c. 1: For it is impossible that one subject have more than one form.
- Dist. 2. p. II. a. 2. q. 4.[II Sent.] dist. 2, p. II, a. 2, q. 4. ---