De veritate EN 84

84

REPLY:

The expression "morning and evening knowledge" was introduce4 by Augustine so that he could hold that the things we read about as having been made in the first six days were really completed without any succession of time. Consequently, he wanted those days to be understood as referring, not to distinct times, but to distinct angelic cognitions. For, just as the presence of physical light on things here below makes a day in the temporal sense, so does the presence or operation of light from an angelic intellect on created things make a day in the spiritual sense. Consequently, as many days can be distinguished as there are relations from angelic intellects to the different classes of things to be known. Taken in this way, the order of a day would not be an order of time but an order of nature, and this would be found in angelic knowledge according to the order that the known things have to each other, that is, according as one thing is prior by nature to another. Moreover, just as morning is the beginning of a temporal day and evening its end, so the beginning and end of an angel’s knowledge of some one thing would be determined by the order in that thing. Now, the beginning of anything is to be found in the cause from which it issues; its end, in the thing itself, because it is in this that the action of the productive cause terminates. Hence, the first knowledge to be had of a thing is that in which it is considered in its cause, the eternal Word. For this reason, the knowledge of things in the Word is called morning knowledge. The last knowledge to be had of a thing is that in which it is known in itself. This is called evening knowledge.

It should be understood, however, that that distinction can have two meanings. First, it can refer to a distinction in the thing known; second, it can refer to a distinction in the medium of knowledge. Taking the distinction in the first way, we can say that a thing is said to be known in the Word when the being it has in the Word is known; and it is said to be known in its own nature in so far as the being which it has in itself is known. But this way of understanding causes difficulties, because the being which it has in the Word is not other than that of the Word itself, since, as Anselm says, the creature in the Creator is simply the creative essence. Hence, to know a creature in the Word in this manner is to know, not the creature, but rather the Creator. Consequently, this distinction between morning and evening knowledge must be referred to the medium of knowledge. Accordingly, a thing will be said to be known in the Word when it is known in its own nature through the Word; and it will be said to be known in its own nature when it is known by means of some created forms pro portioned to created things, as things are known [ angels) by innate forms or by acquired forms—if, indeed, angels did know by acquired forms, but it would make no difference as far as the present problem is concerned.

Answers to Difficulties:

1. The figure of evening and morning in angelic knowledge is not based on the fact that there are shadows in the morning and evening of a temporal day, but, as has been said, on the fact that these two have the nature of a beginning and end. Or it can be said that all intellects, being created from nothing, are shadowy in comparison will the brightness of God’s intellect. They do, however, have some brightness in so far as they imitate His intellect.

2. In the Word the angels know in the same way the things that are to be created and the things already created. But the way in which they know in the Word the things to be created differs from the way in which they know the individual natures of things already created when they know these latter by means of a similitude within them selves. It is according to this difference that their morning and evening knowledge are distinguished.

3. Even though things are more expressly represented in the Word than they are by the forms within an angel’s intellect, nevertheless, these forms are more proportioned to things and, in a way, confirmed to them. Hence, this kind of knowledge, and not knowledge in the Word, is said to be of things in their own nature.

4. Just as one general science contains within itself different particular sciences by which different conclusions can be known, so also all the knowledge an angel has, being in some sense a whole, contains within itself morning and evening knowledge as, in a way, its parts— as a temporal day has morning and evening for its parts.

5. It is not necessary that spiritual things be like material things in all respects; Hence, knowledge of things in the Word is not called morning knowledge because it grows into greater knowledge, but, as has been said, because of its relation to an inferior knowledge.

6. Morning knowledge comes before evening knowledge if we consider the natural ordering found in one and the same thing. But, if we consider different things, evening knowledge of what is prior precedes morning knowledge of what is posterior, that is, as long as knowledge is considered from the viewpoint of what is prior and posterior in the things known. Consequently, in Genesis, evening is put before morning, because the work of the first day was light, which Augustine understands as a spiritual light enkindled by knowledge of the Word. By their natural knowledge, however, angels first knew themselves in themselves, and, having known themselves, they did not remain there to enjoy their own selves and, as it were, make themselves their own ends (for then they would have become "night"- as angels who sinned); instead, they turned their knowledge back to the praise of God. Hence, from contemplation of themselves angels turned to a contemplation of the Word, in whom existed the morning of the following day, inasmuch as the angels received knowledge in the Word of the creature that was to follow, namely, the firmament. Therefore, just as we see that in continuous time the same now belongs to two times, that is, it is the end of the past and the beginning of the future, so morning knowledge of the second day is the end of the first day and the beginning of the second, and so on until the seventh day is reached.

7. The knowledge had of a work of art from its artistic concept is not the same as that had from the thing already made. The first knowledge is universal only; the second can also be particular, as, for example, when I look at a particular house that has been made.

Besides, there is no parallel at all, because created art is more pro portioned and confirmed to artificial things than uncreated art is to created things.

8. At the moment of his creation, an angel was not beatified and did not see the Word through His essence. Hence, he did not have morning knowledge, but first he had evening knowledge and from this progressed to morning. For this reason, the first day is expressly said not to have had a morning, but began as evening, and from evening passed into morning. The reason for this was that that spiritual light, namely, the angelic substance, made on the first day, knew himself as soon as he was made. This was his evening knowledge. Then he turned this knowledge to the praise of the Word, and in the Word his knowledge became morning knowledge. This is why Genesis (2:5) says: "And there was evening and morning one day."

9. Evening and morning knowledge must be distinguished will respect to the medium of knowledge, not will respect to the thing that is known. Knowledge of the Creator through creatures, therefore, is evening knowledge, just as, conversely, knowledge of creatures through the Creator is morning knowledge. To this extent, the argument is correct.

10. A strong mind intent on divine things is said to forget other things, not in the sense that it does not know them, but in the sense that it no longer esteems them. For, when we see God’s majesty, we consider as of little value creatures that previously seemed to be of very great worth.

11. Knowledge of things in the Word is more perfect than that of them in their own nature, because the Word expresses each one of them more clearly than a created species does. Moreover, the state merit that things exist more truly in themselves than they do in the Word can be understood in two ways. First, it can mean that the existence they have in themselves is more perfect than that which they have in the 'Word. But this is false, because in themselves they have a created act of existence, and in the Word, uncreated being. Consequently, the existence they have in themselves is existence only in a certain sense as compared will that which they have in the Word; Second, it can mean that the thing can be its individual self more perfectly in its own being than in the Word. This, to a certain extent, is true. For in itself a thing is material (at least materiality belongs to the nature of some things); in the Word, however, it is not material. There is merely a likeness of the thing’s matter and form in the Word. Al. though it is true that a thing in so far as it is such and such exists only in a certain fashion in the Word, nevertheless, it is known more perfectly through the 'Word than through itself, even in so far as it is such and such a thing. The reason for this is that a thing’s own nature is more perfectly represented in the Word than it is in itself, and this despite the fact that it exists more truly in itself when it exists according to its own mode of existence. For knowledge follows the representation of the form. Hence, even though a thing is not in the soul except in a qualified sense, that is, by its likeness, it is known simply as a thing.

12. God Himself is the proper and immediate cause of each and every thing, and, as Augustine says, in some way He is more closely united to each thing than the thing is to itself.

13. Forms do not flow into things from a mirror; rather, they flow into a mirror from things. From the Word, however, forms flow into things. Consequently, no parallel can be drawn between knowledge of things had from a mirror and that of them had in the Word.



ARTICLE XVII: IS AN ANGEL’S KNOWLEDGE ADEQUATELY DIVIDED INTO MORNING AND EVENING KNOWLEGE?



Parallel readings: Sec readings given for preceding article.

Difficulties:

It seems not, for

1. Augustine says that evening knowledge is that by which things are known in themselves, morning knowledge, that whereby things are referred to the praise of the Creator. Thus, morning knowledge seems to be distinguished from evening by means of distinguishing between related and non-related. But, besides this division of knowledge of creatures in themselves into knowledge related and not related to the Word, there is another knowledge of creatures—a knowledge that differs more from creatures than one of them differs from an other—namely, the knowledge of creatures in the Word. Therefore, the division of angels knowledge into morning and evening is not adequate.

2. Augustine says that a creature has three existences: one in the Word, a second in its own nature, a third in the mind of an angel. Now, the first two existences are included by morning and evening knowledge. Hence, the third should be included by a third type of knowledge.

3. Morning and evening knowledge are distinguished by this, that the first is knowledge of things in the Word, the second, knowledge of them in their own nature. They are also distinguished in so far as one is the knowledge of things to be created, the other, of things al ready created. This latter division, however, can be further divided in four ways. First, we can speak of knowing in the Word the things that will be created; second, of knowing in the Word things already created; third, of knowing in their own nature the things that are al ready created; fourth, of knowing in their own nature things that will be created. The last division, however, seems to be a useless addition, because a thing cannot be known in its own nature before it exists. At any rate, there should be at least three kinds of angelic knowledge. Hence, the twofold division is inadequate

4. Angels morning and evening knowledge get their names from their resemblance to a temporal day. Now, in a temporal day, noon lies between morning and evening. Therefore, a noonday knowledge should be placed between morning and evening knowledge.

5. Angels know not only creatures but the Creator Himself. But angels knowledge is divided into morning and evening only will reference to their knowledge of creatures. Consequently, we must assign a third knowledge to angels that is other than their morning and evening knowledge.

6. Morning and evening knowledge pertain only to knowledge had by grace; otherwise, bad angels would also have morning or evening knowledge. This does not seem true, however, because there is no day for demons, and evening and morning are parts of a day. Consequently, since angels natural knowledge is other than that which they have as a result of grace, it seems that we must assign a third type of knowledge to them.

To the Contrary:

Morning and evening knowledge are divided according to created and uncreated. Now, there is no mean between these two. Therefore, there is none between morning and evening knowledge.

85

REPLY:

We may speak of morning and evening knowledge in two ways. First, we may speak of them simply in so far as they are knowledge. No mean can fail between the two types of knowledge, considered in this manner. For, as said previously, morning is distinguished from evening knowledge by means of the medium of knowing. If the medium is created, it causes evening knowledge, no matter how it is had. If the medium is uncreated, it causes morning knowledge. And there can be no mean between created and uncreated.

On the other hand, if we consider the nature of morning and evening alone, then a mean can fall between the two for two reasons. First, morning and evening are parts of a day; and, according to Augustine, "day" exists in angels by means of the illuminating effects of grace. Consequently, morning and evening do not extend beyond the knowledge good angels have because of grace. Hence, their natural knowledge will be a third type. Second, evening as evening ends will morning, and morning ends will evening. Hence, not any knowledge of things in their own nature can be called evening knowledge, but only that which is referred to the praise of the Creator, because, in

this sense, evening returns to morning. Consequently, the knowledge demons have of things is neither morning nor evening. Therefore, these terms can be applied only to the knowledge angels have as a result of grace, and this knowledge is found only in the beatified angels.

Answers to Difficulties:

1. Knowledge of things in their own nature is always evening knowledge. Its relation to knowledge in the Word does not make it morning, but makes it merely terminate in morning knowledge. Consequently, it should not be said that an angel has morning knowledge because he refers the knowledge he has of things in their own natures to the Word, as though this knowledge, being thus related, is morning knowledge. Rather, it is because he refers this knowledge that he merits to receive morning knowledge.

2. That argument proceeds as though morning were distinguished from evening knowledge on the part of the thing known. Then there would be three kinds of knowledge based on the three kinds of intelligible existence things have. However, morning is distinguished from evening knowledge entirely on the basis of the medium of knowledge, which is either created or uncreated, and the existence of things can be known through either of these mediums. Hence, there is no need for postulating a third kind of knowledge.

3. All knowledge had in the Word is called morning knowledge, whether the thing known is already created or not. The reason for this is that such knowledge is similar to God’s knowledge who will out difference of manner knows all things before they are created just as He knows them after they are created.

However, all knowledge of things in the Word 5 of them as they are to be created whether they are already created or not. Consequently, are to be created does not signify time but merely the fact that a creature has to leave the hands of its Creator. It is like the knowledge had of a work of art by means of an artistic conception: it concerns the thing in its coming to be, even after the thing has been made.

4. Augustine calls that knowledge morning which is in full light and, for this reason, includes noon. Consequently, he sometimes calls it day knowledge, sometimes morning knowledge. Or, one could re ply that all the intellectual knowledge had by angels is mixed will shadows as far as the knower is concerned. Consequently, no knowledge had by an angelic intellect should be called noonday knowledge, but only that by which God knows all things in Himself.

5. The Word and things in the Word are known by the same knowledge. Hence, knowledge of the Word is also called morning knowledge. This is evident, because the seventh day, which signifies the day when God rested in Himself, has a morning. Hence, morning knowledge is had in so far as an angel knows God.

6. The answer is clear from what has been said.



QUESTION 9: The Communication of Angelic Knowledge





ARTICLE I: DOES ONE ANGEL ILLUMINE ANOTHER?



Parallel readings: Summa Theol., I, 106, x; x 1; II Sentences 9, I, 2; Ix, 2, 2; Comp. Theol., I, c. 126.

Difficulties:

It seems not, for

1. As Augustine says, only God can perfect a mind. But the illumination of an angel is, in a way, perfecting of the mind of the person illumined. Hence, only God can illumine an angel.

2. There are no lights in angels other than those of nature and of grace. Now, one angel does not illumine another by the light of nature, because every angel has his n powers directly from God, nor does one angel illumine another by the light of grace, because grace also comes directly from God alone. Consequently, one angel cannot illumine another.

3. As a body is related to material light, so is a spirit related to spiritual light. Now, a body illuminated by a very bright light is not illuminated simultaneously by a weaker light. For example, air illuminated by the light of the sun is not illuminated at the same time by the moon. Consequently, since God’s spiritual light surpasses any created light more than the light of the sun surpasses that of a star or of a candle, it seems one angel is not illumined by another, simply because all angels are illumined by God.

4. If one angel illumines another, he does this either through a medium or directly. But he cannot do it directly, because then he would have to be joined directly to the angel he is to illumine; and only God can be joined to minds in this manner. On the other hand, he cannot illumine another angel through a medium. He cannot illumine by means of a material medium, because such a medium cannot receive a spiritual light. Nor can he illumine by means of a spiritual medium, because this medium would have to be an angel, and then an infinite series would arise, and illumination would be utterly impossible, for it is impossible to pass through an infinite. And, if we finally arrive at a point where one angel directly illumines another, this has already been shown to be impossible. Consequently, it is impossible for one angel to illumine another.

5. If one angel illumines another, he does this by giving Mm either his own light or some other light. But he does not do it in the first manner, because, in that case, one and the same light would be in two different illuminated beings; nor does he do it in the second manner, because that light then would have to be made by the higher angel; and from this it would follow that he created that light, since such a light is not made out of matter. Therefore, it seems that one angel does not illumine another.

6. If one angel is to be illumined by another, then the illumined angel must be reduced from potency to act, because to be illumined is a kind of becoming. But whenever a thing is reduced from potency to act, something in it must undergo corruption. Now, since nothing in an- gels can corrupt, it seems that one angel is not illumined by another.

7. If one angel is illumined by another, the light which one gives to the other is either a substance or an accident. Now, it cannot be a sub stance, because, as Aristotle says, when a substantial form is added to a thing, it changes the species of the thing, just as an added unit changes the species of a number; hence, it would follow that an angel, by the fact of being illumined, would undergo a specific change. Similarly, this light cannot be an accident, because an accident does not extend beyond its subject. Hence, one angel does not illumine another.

8. Our sensible and intellectual vision needs light, because its object is only potentially visible and potentially intelligible, but, by means of light, becomes actually visible and actually intelligible. Now, the object of angelic knowledge is actually intelligible, because it is the divine essence itself or co-created species. Consequently, angels do not need intellectual light in order to know.

9. If one angel illumines another, he illumines Mm will respect to either natural or gratuitous knowledge. However, he does not illumine him will respect to natural knowledge, because the natural knowledge had by both higher and lower angels is made perfect through innate forms; nor does he illumine him will respect to the gratuitous knowledge by which angels know things in the Word, because all angels see the Word directly. Consequently, one angel does not illumine another.

10. For intellectual knowledge, all that is required is an intelligible form and an intelligible light. Now, one angel does not give another angel intelligible forms, which are co-created, nor does he give Mm an intelligible light, because every angel is illumined by God, as we read in Job (25: 3): "Is there any numbering of his soldiers? and upon whom shall not his light arise?" Therefore, one angel does not illumine another.

11. The purpose of illumination is to dispel darkness. But there is no darkness or obscurity in angelic knowledge. Consequently, the Gloss reads: "In the region of intelligible substances,"—clearly a reference to the regions where angels dwell—"the mind sees truth clearly, will out any corporeal images, and not obscured by the mists of false opinion." Hence, one angel is not illumined by another.

12. An angelic intellect is more noble than the active intellect of our soul. But the active intellect of our soul only illumines; it is never illumined. Therefore, angels are not illumined.

13. We read the following in the Apocalypse (21:23): "And the city hath no need of the sun, nor of the moon, to shine in it. For the glory of God hath enlightened it..." The Gloss expounds this text as referring to the principal and minor Doctors of the Church. There fore, since an angel is already a citizen of that city, he is illumined only by God.

14. If one angel illumines another, he does this either through the abundance of the light given to Mm by his nature or through the abundance of light given Mm gratuitously. Now, one angel cannot illumine another through the abundance of his natural light, because the angel who fell belonged to the highest angels, and possessed the highest natural gifts, which, as Dionysius says, remained will him in their full strength. Consequently, a demon would be able to illumine an angel, and this is clearly absurd. Nor does one angel illumine an other through the abundance of light given him gratuitously, because some men still living possess more grace than the lower angels do; in deed, because of their grace, they will be elevated to the ranks of the higher angels. Hence, a man still living could illumine an angel, and this is equally absurd. Therefore, one angel does not illumine another.

15. Dionysius says: "To be illumined is to receive divine knowledge." Now, divine knowledge can be only that knowledge which is about God or divine things; and, in either case, angels can receive such knowledge only from God. Consequently, one angel does not illumine another.

16. Since the potency of an angelic intellect is entirely terminated by means of innate forms, these forms suffice for an angel to know all that he can know. Consequently, an angel should not need to be illumined by a higher angel in order to know something.

17. All angels, or at least those belonging to different orders, differ specifically from one another. Now, nothing is illumined by a light belonging to another species; for example, a material thing is not illumined by a light that is spiritual. Therefore, one angel is not illumined by another.

18. The light of an angel’s intellect is more perfect than the light of our active intellect. But the light of our active intellect suffices for us to know all the species we receive from our senses. Therefore, the light of an angel’s intellect is also sufficient for an angel to know all his innate species; consequently, no other light need be added to him.

To the Contrary:

1'. Dionysius says that the angelic hierarchy is divided into "those who are illumined and those who illumine." Therefore.

2'. Just as there is a hierarchy among men, so is there a hierarchy among angels. This is clear from what Dionysius has written. Now, among men, superiors enlighten inferiors. For example, St. Paul says in the Epistle to the Ephesians (3:8-9): "To me, the least of all the saints, is given this grace, to preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to enlighten all men..."Therefore, superior angels likewise illumine inferior angels.

3’. Spiritual light is more efficacious than material light. But higher bodies illumine lower bodies. Therefore, higher angels illumine lower angels.

86

REPLY:

'We should discuss intellectual light in terms of its resemblance to material light. Now, material light is a medium by which we can see things, serving our sen5e of sight in two ways first, it makes things actually visible that were previously only potentially visible; second, its nature helps the sense of sight to see. Consequently, light must be in the very composition of the organ.

Similarly, intellectual light can be said to be the power of knowing which the intellect possesses, or even that thing by which another thing becomes known to us. There are two ways, therefore, in which a person can be illumined by another: first, his intellect can be strengthened for the acts of knowledge; second, it can be guided by something to the knowledge of some other thing. Both of these actions are found together in the intellect; and we have a clear case of both of them happening together when the medium which a person mentally conceives strengthens his intellect to see some things which it previously could not see.

Accordingly, one intellect is said to be illumined by another in so far as the latter gives it some medium of knowledge, which strengthens it, and enables it to know some things which it previously could not know. Now, among men this takes place in two ways. First, it takes place through speech, as happens when a teacher, by what he says, gives some medium to his student that strengthens the latter’s intellect, enabling him to know things which he previously could not. In this sense, a teacher is said to enlighten his pupil. Second, a person can be given a sensible sign, and this can lead him to the knowledge of some truth. In this sense, according to Dionysius, priests are said to en lighten the people, inasmuch as they display and administer to them the mysteries which lead them to divine truths.

Angels, however, do not arrive at the knowledge of divine truths by means of sensible signs; nor do they receive intellectual media in a successive and discursive way, as we do, but immaterially. This is also what Dionysius held; for, when showing how the higher angels are illumined, he writes: "The highest essences, the angels, contemplate, [not] by gazing on symbols that can be known by the senses or intellect, nor by being led to God by the elaborations found in the Scriptures, but by being filled will the higher light of spiritual knowledge Consequently, for one angel to be illumined by another means simply this, that, through something seen in a higher angel, a lower angel’s intellect is strengthened to know other things.

This can take place in the following manner. Just as among bodies, higher bodies are, as it were, act will respect to lower bodies (as lire is, will respect to air), so a higher spirit is act, as it were, will respect to lower spirits. Now, every potency is strengthened and made perfect by being joined to its act. For this reason, lower bodies are preserved in higher bodies, which are the place of the former. Similarly, there fore, the lower angels can be strengthened by their being connected will the higher, and this connection takes place through intellectual intuition. For this reason, the lower angels are said to be illumined by the higher.

Answers to Difficulties:

1. Augustine is speaking of that ultimate perfecting by which the mind is perfected will grace; and grace comes directly from God.

2. The illumining angel does not make a new light of grace or of nature; he merely shares his light. For, since whatever is known is understood by means of an intellectual light, the known as known includes in its notion a shared intellectual light that has the power to strengthen the intellect. This is evident if we consider the teacher who gives his pupil a medium of demonstration in which the light of the active intellect is contained as in an instrument; for, as the Commentator says, first principles are quasi-instruments of the active intellect; and the same is true of all second principles which contain their own means of demonstration. Consequently, when a higher an- gel shows his knowledge to another angel, the intellect of the latter is strengthened so that it knows what it previously did not. Hence, no new light of nature or of grace comes into existence in the enlightened angel, but the light that was there previously is strengthened by the light contained in the higher angel’s knowledge.

3. Material and spiritual light are not entirely similar. For all bodies can be illumined by any material light whatsoever, since all material light is equally related to all visible forms; but not all spirits can be illumined by any light whatsoever, because not all lights contain intelligible forms in the same manner. The supreme light contains intelligible forms that are more universal. Consequently, it is not sufficient for an inferior intellect to be illumined by a higher light, since such an intellect is proportioned to receive its knowledge through forms that are more particular. To be led to the knowledge of things, this intellect must be illumined by an inferior light, as, of course, takes place in the case of men. For example, a metaphysician knows all things in their universal principles. A doctor, however, considers things especially in their particulars; hence, he does not take his principles directly from a metaphysician but directly from a philosopher of nature, whose principles are less general than those of a metaphysician. However, the natural philosopher, who considers things more universally than the doctor does, can take the principles for his science directly from the metaphysician.

Consequently, since the intelligible characters of all things are united in the highest degree in the light of the divine intellect, as in single most universal principle, the lower angels are not proportioned to receive knowledge through such a light, unless there is joined to them the light of the higher angels, in whom the intelligible forms are made less universal.

4. An angel illumines another angel, sometimes through a medium, sometimes without a medium. Illumination through a medium (which is, of course, spiritual) takes place, for example, when a very high angel illumines an angel that stands halfway in the angelic hierarchy, and when the latter, by means of the light given him by the first, illumines an angel in the lowest part of the hierarchy. On the other hand, illumination without a medium takes place when, for example, a superior angel illumines an angel existing immediately below him in the hierarchy. It is not necessary that the angel who illumines be directly joined to the mind of the angel who is enlightened; the two are joined together simply by the fact that one intuits the other directly.

5. The medium that is known by the lower angel is numerically the same as that which is known by the higher; but the knowledge which the higher angel has of that medium is other than that which the lower angel has. Consequently, in some sense, it is the same light, and, in another sense, it is another light. But even in the sense that it is another light it does not follow that it is created by the higher angel, because things which do not exist substantially do not, properly speaking, come into existence, just as they do not exist substantially. For example, as we read in the Metaphysics, it is not colour but a colored thing that comes into existence. Consequently, the angel’s light does not come into existence, but the illumined angel, from being potentially enlightened, becomes actually enlightened.

6. Just as no form is removed but only the privation of light, namely, darkness, is removed when material illumination takes place, so does a similar removal take place in spiritual illumination. Consequently, it is not necessary for any corruption to take place when spiritual illumination occurs. There is merely a removal of a negation.

7. That light by which an angel is said to be illumined is not one of his essential perfections but a second perfection, which is reduced to the genus of accidents. Moreover, it does not follow that the accident extends beyond its subject, because the knowledge by which the higher angel is enlightened is not numerically the same as that which is in the lower angel. Their knowledge is the same merely in so far as it has the same nature and belongs to the same species, just as the light which is in illuminated air and that which is in the illumining sun is specifically, but not numerically, the same.

8. It is true that through light a thing which was potentially intelligible becomes actually so, but this can happen in two ways. First, it may be that that which is in itself only potentially intelligible becomes actually intelligible. This happens in our knowledge. But in this respect an angelic intellect does not need light, for it does not abstract species from phantasms. Secondly, it may be that that which is potentially intelligible to some particular knower becomes actually intelligible to him. This takes place, for example, when the higher sub stances become actually intelligible to us, that is, when we arrive at knowledge of them by reasoning. It is for such knowledge that an angel’s intellect needs light, that is, so it can be led to the actual knowledge of those things which it knows only potentially.

9. The illumination by which one angel illumines another does not concern those things that belong to angels natural knowledge, be cause, in that case, all the angels would have perfect natural knowledge from the moment when they first existed—unless we held that the higher angels caused the lower, and this position is contrary to faith. It concerns, rather, the knowledge that is revealed to angels and the things that surpass their natural knowledge, for example, mysteries pertaining to the Church in heaven or on earth. Hence, Dionysius also speaks of a hierarchical action among angels. Moreover, it does not follow from the fact that all angels see the Word that, whatever the higher angels see there, the lower also see.

When one angel is enlightened by another, new species are not infused into him, but, by the very same species which he had previously, his intellect is strengthened through a higher light, and, in the manner described, it is enabled to know more things. Similarly, when our intellect is strengthened by divine or angelic light, from the same phantasms it can come to know more things than it could know if left unaided.

11. Although there is no obscurity or error in angels intellects, an- gels do not know things which surpass their natural powers of knowing. For this reason, they need light.

12. No matter how material a thing is, it does not receive something else according to what is formal in itself, but only according to what is material in it. For example, our soul does not receive an illumination according to its active intellect but only according to its possible intellect. Similarly, material things do not receive impressions according to their own forms but merely according to their own matter. Yet our possible intellect is more simple than any material form. Similarly, an angel’s intellect is illumined only will respect to that which it possesses potentially even though it is more noble than our active intellect, which is not illumined.

13. That text should be understood as referring to the things that belong to the knowledge the blessed have. Without any intermediary God illumines all angels about these things.

14. The illumination of which we are speaking takes place through the light of grace, which perfects natural light. Moreover, it would not follow that a man, still in this life, could illumine an angel, because he possesses greater grace only virtually, not actually. He has merely grace, by which he can merit a more perfect state, just as, in the same sense, a colt, immediately after birth, is said to have greater strength than an ass, even though its strength is actually less.

15. When we say that to be illumined is to receive divine knowledge, this knowledge is called divine merely because it has its origin in a divine enlightenment.

i6. Innate forms are sufficient for an angel to know all that he can know naturally; but, to know those things that are above his natural powers, he needs a higher light.

17. It is not necessary for the intelligible lights existing in angels, who are specifically different, to be specifically different themselves. For example, colour existing in bodies that are specifically different is nevertheless specifically the same. The same principle is especially true of the light of grace, which is specifically the same both in men and in angels.

18. The light of the active intellect is sufficient for us to know those things that can be known naturally; but, to know other things, we need a higher light, such as that of faith or of prophecy.



ARTICLE II: IS AN INFERIOR ANGEL ALWAYS ILLUMINED BY A SUPERIOR ANGEL OR IS HE SOMETIMES ILLUMINED DIRECTLY BY GOD?



Parallel readings: Summa Theol., I, 107; II Sentences 3, 1, ad 4; 9, I, 2, ad 3-4.

Difficulties:

It seems that he is illumined directly by God, for

1. An inferior angel is in potency to receiving grace in his will and illuminations in his intellect. Now, he receives only as much grace from God as he is capable of receiving. Therefore, he receives only as much illumination from God as he is capable of receiving. Consequently, he is directly illumined by God, and not through an inter mediate angel.

2. Just as superior angels stand midway between God and the inferior angels, so do the inferior angels stand midway between superior angels and men. Now, the superior angels sometimes illumine us directly. For example, a Seraph illumined Isaias (Is 6,6). Consequently, the inferior angels also are sometimes illumined directly by God.

3. Just as there is a definite order of spiritual substances, so is there also a definite order of material substances. But God’s power some times acts directly on material things, passing over intermediate causes. For example, He sometimes raises a person from the dead without the co-operation of a celestial body. Consequently, He sometimes illumines inferior angels without the services of superior angels.

4. Whatever a lower power can do a high power can. Therefore, if higher angel can illumine a lower angel, God can certainly illumine the lower angel directly. Hence, it is not necessary that God’s illuminations should always be given to lower angels by means of higher.

To the Contrary:

1'. Dionysius says that God has established an unchangeable law that lower beings be led back to God through the mediation of higher beings. Consequently, God never directly illumines lower angels.

2’. Just as angels are, by their very nature, superior to bodies, so are the higher angels, by their very nature, superior to the lower. Now, in matters related to God’s rule over material things, He never causes anything to happen without the ministry of His angels. This is clear from what Augustine has written. Consequently, God likewise never causes anything to happen in lower angels without the ministry of the higher.

3'. Lower bodies are not moved by higher except through media. For example, the earth is moved by the heavens through the mediation of air. Now, the order of spirits resembles that of bodies. Consequently, the highest spirits do not illumine the lower except by means of intermediate spirits.


De veritate EN 84