Dist. 44, Part 1, Art. 3, Q. 2
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 44
Quaestio II. Utrum deformitates resurgant in corporibus damnatorum.
Secundo quaeritur, utrum deformitates resurgant in corporibus damnatorum. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. Per Augustinum in Enchiridio4: «Nulla debet esse quaestio de pulcritudine, ubi est certitudo de damnatione»; si ergo certi sumus, quod reprobi damnabuntur, certi sumus etiam, quod pulcritudine non decorabuntur.
2. Item, a corporibus damnatorum non tolletur tarditas nec passibilitas: ergo nec deformitas consimili ratione. Prima patet, quoniam passibilia erunt damnatorum corpora et gravia1: ergo etc.
3. Item, quod deformitates tollantur ab electis, hoc gratiae est; sed nulla gratia debet fieri damnatis: ergo ab eis deformitates non debent auferri.
4. Item, deformitates animarum ab animabus non tolluntur: ergo nec a corporibus ratione consimili, immo a causa2, quia deformitas culpae est causa deformitatis poenae.
5. Item, corpus damnatis animabus redditur non propter perfectionem, sed propter maiorem punitionem; sed deformitas corporis redundat in poenam animae: cum ergo non debeat in eis poena minui, sed augeri; non debet corpus eorum deformitatibus exui, sed reindui.
Contra: 1. Deformitates in effectu veniunt ex errore virtutis producentis3; sed corpora resurgentium sola virtus divina reficiet: ergo si illa non potest errare, impossibile est, quod habeant deformitatem.
2. Item, artifex, qui effectum cum deformitatibus producit, non dicitur reformator, sed deformator: ergo si Deus corpora damnatorum cum deformitatibus facit resurgere, non debet dici reformator, sed deformator. Sed hoc est facere contumeliam ipsi artifici, quam oportet longe a Deo relegare: ergo nullo modo cum deformitatibus producit.
3. Item, «optimi est optimum producere»4: si ergo Deus optimus est artifex, ergo optima artificiata producit; sed ipse est artifex in resurrectione, et corpora deformia non sunt bene facta nec ordinata: ergo etc.
4. Item, est ordo partium in toto, et ordo rei ad finem, et primus respicit sapientiam, secundus respicit bonitatem5; sed Deus, cum sit bonus, non potest facere rem fine carentem sive a fine deordinatam: ergo cum sit summe sapiens, non potest rem producere deordinatam quantum ad ordinem, qui est partium in toto: ergo nec deformitates.
5. Item, a damnatis6 auferetur deformitas quae est per diminutionem; unde si caret manu non carebit manu: ergo pari ratione et deformitas quae est ex superfluitate, et ita, ut videtur, omnis deformitas.
Conclusio.
Corpora reproborum resurgent cum suis deformitatibus.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod Augustinus in Enchiridio7 istam quaestionem dimittit insolutam, quasi non sit magnae utilitatis; attamen cum assignet rationem, quare circa hoc non debet laborari, determinationem quaestionis nobis tribuit. Dum enim dicit, quod non debet nos molestare inquisitio circa pulcritudinem, ubi est certitudo circa damnationem; si enim ad hoc resurgunt, ut damnentur, non ut melioris, sed ut peioris sint conditionis; manifeste apparet, quod non dabitur eis pulcritudo, quam non habuerunt, nec auferetur deformitas, quam habuerunt. Unde Deus quantum ad eos est purus reformator, quia secundum eandem formam reformat, quam eis natura dedit in generatione primaria. — In qua reformatione apparet Dei sapientia et iustitia: sapientia, quia scit omnino eodem modo reparare, sicut ante fuit8; iustitia, ut, sicut qui meruit in corpore pulcro, remuneretur in eius pulcritudine; sic qui in turpi peccavit in eius turpitudine cruciari debet; nec debet auferri, sed potius confirmari. — Et rationes hoc ostendentes concedendae sunt.
1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur primo, quod venit ex errore virtutis; dicendum, quod verum est in operatione naturae, quae producit effectum, quanto melius potest; sed non sic in operatione Dei, qui non reparat, secundum quod melius potest, sed secundum quod meritis eius melius congruit.
2. Ad illud, quod9 producens effectum deformem est deformator; dicendum, quod effectus deformis productus potest dupliciter considerari: aut absolute, aut in comparatione. Si absolute, verum est; si autem in comparatione ad meritum, aut ad praecedentem statum, non est verum. Et quoniam effectus competit meritis damnatorum, competit nihilominus statui praeterito; ideo talis reparatio non deformatio, sed reformatio et conformatio debet dici. — Et est exemplum in artifice, qui picturam diaboli facit turpem; ipse enim non dicitur deformator, sed conformator, quia conformem statui diabolico picturam facit, quamvis in se pictura sit deformis. Sic etiam in proposito intelligendum.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod optimi est optima producere; dicendum, quod verum est in ordine1, et corpus deforme optime ordinatur in inferno, sicut pulcrum in caelo.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de ordine duplici, dicendum quod ordo creaturae quantum ad finem est dupliciter: vel quantum ad finem creatum, vel quantum ad finem ultimum, qui Deus est, qui est finis universalis. Similiter ordo partium est duplex, scilicet partium in toto, et rerum in universo. Et sicut creatura non potest produci a Deo deordinata a fine ultimo, ita quod illam deordinationem habeat a Deo; sic nec ab ordinatione, quae est in universo; et quamvis deforme corpus sit deordinatum in se, est tamen ordinatum in mundo.
5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod auferetur deformitas per diminutionem: ergo etc.; dicendum, quod hoc est propter perfectam punitionem voluntatis, quae, quoniam omnium membrorum fuit rectrix et omnia habere voluit, licet non habuerit; ideo in omnibus puniri debet et torqueri2.
---
Question II. Whether deformities rise again in the bodies of the damned.
Secondly it is asked, whether deformities rise again in the bodies of the damned. And that they do, it seems:
1. By Augustine in the Enchiridion4: «There ought to be no question about beauty, where there is certainty about damnation»; if therefore we are certain that the reprobate will be damned, we are certain also that they will not be adorned with beauty.
2. Likewise, from the bodies of the damned there will not be removed sluggishness nor passibility: therefore neither deformity, by like reasoning. The first is clear, because the bodies of the damned will be passible and heavy1: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, that deformities be removed from the elect, this is [a matter] of grace; but no grace ought to be shown to the damned: therefore from them deformities ought not to be removed.
4. Likewise, the deformities of souls are not removed from souls: therefore neither from bodies, by like reasoning; nay rather from the cause2, because the deformity of guilt is the cause of the deformity of punishment.
5. Likewise, a body is restored to damned souls not for the sake of perfection, but for the sake of greater punishment; but the deformity of the body redounds to the punishment of the soul: since therefore the punishment in them ought not to be diminished, but increased; their body ought not to be stripped of deformities, but reclothed [with them].
On the contrary: 1. Deformities in an effect come from the error of the producing power3; but the bodies of the rising [dead] the divine power alone will restore: therefore if that [power] cannot err, it is impossible that they should have deformity.
2. Likewise, a craftsman who produces an effect with deformities is not called a reformer, but a deformer: therefore if God makes the bodies of the damned rise again with deformities, he ought not to be called a reformer, but a deformer. But this is to do insult to the craftsman himself, which must be set far from God: therefore in no way does he produce [them] with deformities.
3. Likewise, «it belongs to the best to produce the best»4: if therefore God is the best craftsman, therefore he produces the best works of craft; but he is the craftsman in the resurrection, and deformed bodies are not well made nor ordered: therefore etc.
4. Likewise, there is an order of the parts in the whole, and an order of the thing to its end, and the first regards wisdom, the second regards goodness5; but God, since he is good, cannot make a thing lacking an end or disordered from its end: therefore since he is supremely wise, he cannot produce a thing disordered as to the order which is of the parts in the whole: therefore neither deformities.
5. Likewise, from the damned6 there will be removed the deformity which is by diminution; whence if one lacks a hand, he will not lack a hand: therefore by parity of reasoning also the deformity which is from superfluity, and thus, as it seems, every deformity.
Conclusion.
The bodies of the reprobate will rise again with their deformities.
I respond: It must be said that Augustine in the Enchiridion7 leaves this question unresolved, as though it were not of great usefulness; nevertheless, since he assigns a reason why one ought not to labor over this, he grants us the determination of the question. For when he says that the inquiry about beauty ought not to trouble us, where there is certainty about damnation; if indeed they rise again for this, that they be damned, not that they be of a better, but of a worse condition; it manifestly appears that there will not be given to them a beauty which they did not have, nor will there be removed a deformity which they had. Whence God, as regards them, is a pure reformer, because he reforms according to the same form which nature gave them in their first generation. — In which reformation there appears God's wisdom and justice: wisdom, because he knows how to repair altogether in the same way as it was before8; justice, that, just as he who merited in a beautiful body may be rewarded in its beauty, so he who sinned in a foul [body] ought to be tormented in its foulness; nor ought it to be removed, but rather confirmed. — And the reasons showing this are to be conceded.
1. To that, therefore, which is objected first, that [deformity] comes from the error of the power; it must be said that it is true in the operation of nature, which produces its effect as well as it can; but not so in the operation of God, who does not repair according to what is best possible, but according to what better befits their merits.
2. To that9 [which objects] that one producing a deformed effect is a deformer; it must be said that a deformed effect, once produced, can be considered in two ways: either absolutely, or in comparison. If absolutely, it is true; but if in comparison to merit, or to a preceding state, it is not true. And since the effect befits the merits of the damned, it befits nonetheless the past state; therefore such a repair ought to be called not deformation, but reformation and conformation. — And there is an example in a craftsman who makes an ugly picture of the devil; for he himself is not called a deformer, but a conformer, because he makes the picture conformed to the diabolical state, although in itself the picture is deformed. So too it is to be understood in the matter proposed.
3. To that which is objected, that it belongs to the best to produce the best; it must be said that it is true in [respect of] order1, and a deformed body is best ordered in hell, just as a beautiful one in heaven.
4. To that which is objected concerning the twofold order, it must be said that the order of a creature with respect to its end is twofold: either with respect to a created end, or with respect to the ultimate end, which is God, who is the universal end. Likewise the order of parts is twofold, namely of parts in the whole, and of things in the universe. And just as a creature cannot be produced by God disordered from its ultimate end, such that it should have that disordering from God; so neither from the ordering which is in the universe; and although a deformed body is disordered in itself, it is nonetheless ordered in the world.
5. To that which is objected, that the deformity which is by diminution will be removed: therefore etc.; it must be said that this is on account of the perfect punishment of the will, which, since it was the ruler of all the members and willed to have them all, though it did not have [them]; therefore in all it ought to be punished and tormented2.
---
- 4Cap. 92. n. 23. Verba vide hic in lit. Magistri, c. 4.Ch. 92, n. 23. See the words here in the Master's text, c. 4.
- 1Cfr. supra lit. Magistri, d. XLIII. c. 7, et infra d. 49. p. II. sect. 2. a. 3. q. 1.Cf. above, the Master's text, d. XLIII, c. 7, and below, d. 49, p. II, sect. 2, a. 3, q. 1.
- 2Vide supra pag. 103, nota 10.See above, p. 103, note 10.
- 3Cfr. Aristot., II. Phys. text. 82. seqq. (c. 8.).Cf. Aristotle, Physics II, text 82ff. (c. 8).
- 4Secundum Dionys., de Div. Nom. c. 4. § 19. Cfr. tom. I. pag. 720, nota 7.According to Dionysius, On the Divine Names, c. 4, § 19. Cf. vol. I, p. 720, note 7.
- 5Vide I. Sent. d. 44. a. 1. q. 3. in corp. — Mox pro deordinatam edd. deordinantem.See I Sent., d. 44, a. 1, q. 3, in the body. — Shortly, for deordinatam the editions read deordinantem.
- 6Cod. bb reprobis, alii codd. et ed. 1 electis, cod. F electis et etiam reprobis. Post unde si cod. O supplet nunc, Vat. modo, quae etiam verbis non carebit praemittit tunc.Codex bb [reads] reprobis, other codices and ed. 1 electis, codex F electis et etiam reprobis. After unde si codex O supplies nunc, the Vatican [edition] modo, which also prefixes tunc to the words non carebit.
- 7Cap. 92. n. 23. — Inferius pro tribuit edd. innuit.Ch. 92, n. 23. — Below, for tribuit the editions read innuit.
- 8Edd. fecit, cod. V facit.The editions [read] fecit, codex V facit.
- 9Codd. L Z aa addunt obiicitur, quod. Pro deformis edd. deformiter.Codices L, Z, aa add obiicitur, quod. For deformis the editions read deformiter.
- 1Cfr. I. Sent. d. 44. a. 1. q. 2. ad 4. Ibid. q. 3. agitur de seq. solut. (ad 4.).Cf. I Sent., d. 44, a. 1, q. 2, ad 4. Ibid., q. 3, treats of the following solution (ad 4).
- 2Cfr. II. Sent. d. 41. a. 2. q. 2. seq. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.Cf. II Sent., d. 41, a. 2, q. 2, and following. — See the scholion on the preceding question.