Dist. 48, Art. 2, Q. 1
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 48
Articulus II. De innovatione corporum superiorum.
Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur de renovatione corporum superiorum. Et circa hoc quaeruntur quatuor.
Primo quaeritur, utrum corpora supercaelestia remunerabuntur.
Secundo, utrum quietabuntur.
Tertio, utrum innovabuntur elementa.
Quarto, utrum innovabuntur plantae et animalia.
Quaestio I. Utrum corpora supercaelestia remunerabuntur.
Numeratio Quaracchiana notarum in singulis paginis impressis iterum incipit. Ideo notae infra scriptae paginis suis adscribuntur: notae 6–8 paginae 989, notae 1–8 paginae 990. Paginae 991 notae ad quaestionem sequentem pertinent.
Quantum ergo ad primum proceditur sic, et ostenditur, quod corpora supercaelestia remunerabuntur.
1. Isaiae trigesimo6 habetur ex textu et Glossa: Erit lux lunae sicut lux solis, et lux solis sicut lux septem dierum, et Glossa ibi dicit, id est, «sol et luna praemium sui laboris percipient».
2. Item, hoc videtur ratione: quia pronior est Deus ad praemiandum quam ad puniendum; sed «corporum supercaelestium, homine peccante, lux est diminuta», sicut dicit ibi7 Glossa: ergo homine glorificato debet augeri.
3. Item, ordo est in universo convenientissimus: ergo uno meliorato, quod est de perfectione universi, necesse est, cetera meliorari, quae sunt de eius constitutione8; sed corpora supercaelestia sunt de constitutione universi: ergo aut ordo corrumpitur, aut si homo nobilitatur, necesse est, illa magis nobilitari.
4. Item, habitatio debet congruere habitatori: ergo si homo, propter quem factus est mundus, est nobilior factus; ergo et totus mundus: ergo et corpora mundi nobilissima.
Contra: 1. Nihil quod perit, remunerabitur; sed caeli peribunt: ergo corpora supercaelestia non remunerabuntur. Minor patet ex Psalmo et ad Hebraeos primo1: Et: tu in principio etc.; et post: Ipsi peribunt.
2. Item, ratione videtur: quia nihil praemiatur, nisi quod meretur, et nihil meretur, nisi quod voluntarie servit, et nihil voluntarie servit, nisi quod habet liberum arbitrium2; talia autem non sunt corpora supercaelestia: ergo etc.
3. Item, dupliciter contingit mereri ex opere: aut quia factum ex caritate, aut quia laboriosum; per opus enim laboriosum meretur quis de congruo; sed corpora supercaelestia non faciunt quidquam ex caritate nec moventur cum labore, quia dicit Philosophus3, quod «moventur sine labore et poena»: ergo etc.
4. Item, cum duplex sit corporum superiorum proprietas, scilicet calor et lux, et serviant nobis quantum ad utramque: ergo remunerari debent quantum ad utramque: ergo cum non remuneretur sol in calore, nec luna in frigiditate4: ergo nec debent remunerari in maiori lumine.
Conclusio
Corpora caelestia aliquo modo praemiabuntur in augmento lucis et splendoris, quatenus homo praemiatur in illis.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod tripliciter est aliquid remunerabile: primo modo, quod est aptum natum mereri, et hoc est liberum arbitrium; alio modo, quod est ipsi merenti coniunctum, ut corpus humanum; tertio modo, quod est ad ipsum ordinatum sicut ad obsequium. Secundum hoc praemiatur homo aliquando in se ipso, aliquando in corpore, aliquando ex5 eis quae sibi sunt utilia; sic etiam praemiatur in se ipso, in corpore suo, et etiam in ipso mundo, qui eius est habitaculum. Unde dico, quod corpora supercaelestia praemiari non est aliud, quam hominem praemiari in illis, quia Dominus totum mundum hominis amore faciet pulcriorem. Et ideo, quia propter hominem praemiantur corpora supercaelestia, secundum eam proprietatem praemiantur, secundum quam sunt consona corporibus gloriosis; haec autem est lux: et ideo in luce et splendore augebuntur et crescent, ut probant primae rationes.
Ad argumenta in oppositum:
1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod peribunt; dicendum, quod ipse textus consequenter6 exponit: velut amictum mutabis eos, et mutabuntur; ideo non dicuntur perire, quia desinant, sed quia pulcriora efficiuntur et innovantur.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non habent voluntatem; dicendum, quod ipsa non merentur proprie, sed homo meretur et in eis remuneratur.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non laborant; dicendum, quod labor dicitur dupliciter: uno modo proprie, et sic dicitur opus poenale7, et hoc modo nec corpora supercaelestia nec Angeli boni laborant; alio modo communiter, et sic dicitur labor quodcumque obsequium, secundum quem modum Angeli dicuntur laborare in vinea Domini et circa nos, quia nobis obsequuntur; sic et corpora caelestia.
4. Ad ultimum, quare non remunerentur in calore, patet8: quia in his proprietatibus debent remunerari, quae conveniunt corporibus nostris et faciunt ad gloriam nostram.
I. De origine locutionum tropicarum, quod sol recipit mercedem pro labore, vel quod caeli remunerabuntur, vide lit. Magistri (hic c. 5.). Eandem explicationem affert S. Thom. (hic q. 2. a. 1. ad 5; Suppl. q. 91. a. 1. ad 5.).
De 1. quaestione: Alex. Hal., S. p. III. q. 25. m. 1. a. 1. — S. Thom., q. cit. a. 1. 3. — B. Albert., hic a. 8. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 1. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 1. — De toto articulo Dionys. Carth., hic q. 3.
II. Cum communi doctorum sententia Durand. (hic q. 3.) dicit: «Tenendum est absolute, quod motus caeli cessabit post resurrectionem, quamvis illud non possit clare probari nec per auctoritatem Scripturae nec aliqua necessaria ratione». Idem nititur probare, quod textus s. Scripturae vulgo allegati etiam alio modo possint exponi; denique rationes Aristotelis pro continuatione motus oppugnat et quasdam rationes persuasivas pro communi sententia affert. Ante hunc magistrum eodem fere sensu et modo etiam Scot. (hic q. 2.) disputavit. — S. Thom. (locis citt. a. 2.) dicit, quod haec motus cessatio fiat, «non est aliqua naturali causa, sed divina voluntate faciente», et opinionem aliorum, qui hoc naturaliter fieri dicebant, improbat tanquam falsam et impossibilem. Notum tamen est, nostra aetate non deesse physicos, qui ex modo, quo calor in motum commutatur, et e converso, arguunt, tandem aliquando motum corporum caelestium naturaliter cessaturum.
De 2. quaestione praeter laudatos: B. Albert., hic a. 9. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. q. 2. 3. 4.
III. Quoad 3. quaestionem S. Thom. (locis citt. a. 4.) innovationem elementorum intelligit esse augmentum claritatis, quia scilicet «omnia elementa claritate quadam vestientur, non tamen aequaliter, sed secundum modum suum». Idem docet S. Bonav. (q. 1. in fine corp.).
De 3. quaestione: Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 3. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. a. 5.
IV. In solvenda 4. quaestione Scholastici communiter negative respondent; et S. Thom. etiam metalla et omnia corpora mixta non remansura esse dicit. Aliter tamen loquitur incertus auctor operis Elucidarii (lib. III. c. 15.), quod inter opera S. Anselmi, t. II. in appendice, editor Maurinus recepit, sed indignum esse nomine Anselmi iudicavit. Alii recentiores putant, communem sententiam saltem quoad nonnulla esse incertam.
De eadem quaestione: S. Thom., locis citt. a. 5. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 4. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. a. 6. — Durand., supra d. 47. q. 3. n. 7.
---
Article II. On the renewal of the higher bodies.
Next, as to the second article, inquiry is made concerning the renewal of the higher bodies. And concerning this four things are asked.
First it is asked, whether the supercelestial bodies will be rewarded.
Second, whether they will come to rest.
Third, whether the elements will be renewed.
Fourth, whether plants and animals will be renewed.
Question I. Whether the supercelestial bodies will be rewarded.
As to the first, then, one proceeds thus, and it is shown that the supercelestial bodies will be rewarded.
1. In Isaiah, chapter thirty6, one has from the text and the Gloss: The light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun as the light of seven days, and the Gloss there says, that is, "the sun and the moon shall receive the reward of their labour."
2. Likewise, this seems to follow by reason: because God is more inclined to reward than to punish; but "the light of the supercelestial bodies was diminished when man sinned," as the Gloss says there7: therefore, with man glorified, it ought to be increased.
3. Likewise, the order in the universe is most fitting: therefore, when one thing which belongs to the perfection of the universe is bettered, it is necessary that the rest which belong to its constitution8 be bettered; but the supercelestial bodies belong to the constitution of the universe: therefore either the order is corrupted, or, if man is ennobled, it is necessary that they be the more ennobled.
4. Likewise, a dwelling ought to be suited to its dweller: therefore if man, for whose sake the world was made, has been made nobler; then also the whole world: therefore also the noblest bodies of the world.
On the contrary: 1. Nothing which perishes will be rewarded; but the heavens will perish: therefore the supercelestial bodies will not be rewarded. The minor is clear from the Psalm and from Hebrews, chapter one1: And: Thou in the beginning etc.; and afterwards: They shall perish.
2. Likewise, it seems so by reason: because nothing is rewarded except what merits, and nothing merits except what serves voluntarily, and nothing serves voluntarily except what has free choice2; but the supercelestial bodies are not such: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, it happens in two ways that one merits from a work: either because it is done out of charity, or because it is laborious; for by a laborious work one merits by congruity; but the supercelestial bodies do nothing out of charity, nor are they moved with labour, since the Philosopher says3 that "they are moved without labour and pain": therefore etc.
4. Likewise, since the property of the higher bodies is twofold, namely heat and light, and they serve us in respect of both: therefore they ought to be rewarded in respect of both: therefore, since the sun is not rewarded in heat, nor the moon in coldness4: therefore neither ought they to be rewarded in greater light.
Conclusion
The heavenly bodies will in some way be rewarded by an increase of light and splendour, inasmuch as man is rewarded in them.
I respond: It must be said that something is rewardable in three ways: in the first way, that which is of a nature apt to merit, and this is free choice; in another way, that which is joined to the one meriting, as the human body; in the third way, that which is ordered to him as to his service. According to this, man is rewarded sometimes in himself, sometimes in his body, sometimes from5 those things which are useful to him; so also he is rewarded in himself, in his own body, and also in the world itself, which is his dwelling-place. Hence I say that for the supercelestial bodies to be rewarded is nothing else than for man to be rewarded in them, because the Lord will make the whole world more beautiful out of love for man. And therefore, since the supercelestial bodies are rewarded for man's sake, they are rewarded according to that property according to which they are consonant with the glorious bodies; and this is light: and therefore they will be increased and will grow in light and splendour, as the first arguments prove.
To the arguments to the contrary:
1. To that, then, which is objected, that they will perish; it must be said that the text itself consequently6 explains it: as a garment thou shalt change them, and they shall be changed; therefore they are not said to perish because they cease, but because they are made more beautiful and are renewed.
2. To that which is objected, that they do not have will; it must be said that they do not merit properly, but man merits and is rewarded in them.
3. To that which is objected, that they do not labour; it must be said that labour is spoken of in two ways: in one way properly, and thus a penal work is called labour7, and in this way neither the supercelestial bodies nor the good Angels labour; in another way commonly, and thus any service is called labour, in which manner the Angels are said to labour in the vineyard of the Lord and about us, because they serve us; and so too the heavenly bodies.
4. To the last, why they are not rewarded in heat, it is clear8: because they ought to be rewarded in those properties which are suited to our bodies and conduce to our glory.
I. On the origin of the figurative expressions, that the sun receives a wage for its labour, or that the heavens will be rewarded, see the text of the Master (here c. 5). St. Thomas brings forward the same explanation (here q. 2. a. 1. ad 5; Suppl. q. 91. a. 1. ad 5).
On the 1st question: Alexander of Hales, S. p. III. q. 25. m. 1. a. 1. — St. Thomas, in the question cited, a. 1. 3. — Bl. Albert, here a. 8. — Peter of Tarantaise, here q. 2. a. 1. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 2. q. 1. — On the whole article, Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 3.
II. With the common opinion of the doctors Durandus (here q. 3) says: "It is to be held absolutely that the motion of the heaven will cease after the resurrection, although this cannot be clearly proved either by the authority of Scripture or by any necessary reason." The same author endeavours to prove that the texts of Sacred Scripture commonly alleged can also be expounded in another way; finally he attacks Aristotle's arguments for the continuation of the motion and brings forward certain persuasive arguments for the common opinion. Before this master, Scotus too (here q. 2) disputed in nearly the same sense and manner. — St. Thomas (in the places cited, a. 2) says that this cessation of motion comes about "not from any natural cause, but by the divine will effecting it," and he rejects the opinion of others, who said that it comes about naturally, as false and impossible. Yet it is well known that in our own age there is no lack of physicists who, from the manner in which heat is converted into motion, and conversely, argue that at length the motion of the heavenly bodies will naturally cease.
On the 2nd question, besides those already praised: Bl. Albert, here a. 9. — Peter of Tarantaise, in the place cited, a. 2. — Richard of Middleton, in the place cited, q. 2. 3. 4.
III. As to the 3rd question, St. Thomas (in the places cited, a. 4) understands the renewal of the elements to be an increase of brightness, namely because "all the elements will be clothed with a certain brightness, yet not equally, but according to their own mode." St. Bonaventure teaches the same (q. 1. at the end of the body).
On the 3rd question: Peter of Tarantaise, in the place cited, a. 3. — Richard of Middleton, in the place cited, a. 5.
IV. In solving the 4th question the Scholastics commonly answer in the negative; and St. Thomas says that even metals and all mixed bodies will not remain. The uncertain author of the work Elucidarium (bk. III. c. 15) speaks otherwise; this work the Maurist editor received among the works of St. Anselm, vol. II, in the appendix, but judged it unworthy of Anselm's name. Other more recent authors think that the common opinion is uncertain at least as regards some points.
On the same question: St. Thomas, in the places cited, a. 5. — Peter of Tarantaise, in the place cited, a. 4. — Richard of Middleton, in the place cited, a. 6. — Durandus, above, d. 47. q. 3. n. 7.
---
- 6Vers. 26. Post et lux solis Vulgata et cod. aa (F a secunda manu) addunt erit septempliciter. — Glossa ordinaria apud Strabum et Lyranum formata est ex Hieron. (in hunc loc.) dicente: Quando dederit Dominus caelum novum... ut luna et sol laboris et cursus sui praemia consequantur.Verse 26. After and the light of the sun the Vulgate and codex aa (F by a second hand) add it shall be sevenfold. — The ordinary Gloss in Strabus and Lyranus is formed from Jerome (on this passage), who says: When the Lord shall have given a new heaven... that the moon and the sun may obtain the rewards of their labour and their course.
- 7Isai. 30, 26. — Glossa est interlinearis apud Lyranum; cfr. supra pag. 886, nota 8. — De maiori vide supra pag. 333, nota 3. — Pro supercaelestium cod. L caelestium.Isaiah 30:26. — The Gloss is the interlinear one in Lyranus; cf. above, p. 886, note 8. — On the major [premise] see above, p. 333, note 3. — For supercaelestium codex L reads caelestium.
- 8Vide I. Sent. d. 44. a. 1. q. 1. seqq. — Cod. S addit et perfectione.See I Sent., d. 44, a. 1, q. 1 ff. — Codex S adds and perfection.
- 1Vers. 10. seq., et Psalm. 101, 26. seq.Verse 10 f., and Psalm 101:26 f.
- 2Bernard., in Cantic. serm. 81. n. 6: Ubi autem non est libertas, nec meritum. — Superius Vat. omittit nisi quod meretur, et nihil meretur.Bernard, On the Canticle, sermon 81, n. 6: But where there is no freedom, neither is there merit. — Above, the Vatican edition omits except what merits, and nothing merits.
- 3Libr. II. de Caelo et mundo, text. 3. (c. 1.), et IX. Metaph. text. 17. (VIII. c. 8.).Book II, On the Heaven and the World, text 3 (c. 1), and Metaphysics IX, text 17 (VIII, c. 8).
- 4Cfr. supra fundam. 1.Cf. above, foundation 1.
- 5Vat. in. Mox pro sic etiam codd. K Z bb sicut etiam, cod. G et sic. Subinde fortasse stat praemiatur pro praemiabitur.The Vatican edition reads in. Shortly after, for sic etiam codices K Z bb read sicut etiam, codex G et sic. Thereupon perhaps praemiatur stands for praemiabitur.
- 6Loc. cit. Hebr. 1, 12. et Ps. 101, 27. — Edd. exponitur per illud, codd. I K exponit se.In the place cited, Hebrews 1:12 and Psalm 101:27. — The editions read exponitur per illud, codices I K exponit se.
- 7Gen. 3, 17: In laboribus comedes ex ea etc. — Inferius post obsequium Vat. addit praestitum hominibus.Genesis 3:17: In labours shalt thou eat thereof, etc. — Below, after obsequium the Vatican edition adds rendered to men.
- 8Edd. supplent responsio.The editions supply responsio ["the answer"]. ---