[I.q.106.a.1.arg.1] It would seem that one angel does not enlighten another. For the angels possess now the same beatitude which we hope to obtain. But one man will not then enlighten another, according to Jeremiah 31:34: \"They shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother.\" Therefore neither does an angel enlighten another now.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod unus angelus non illuminet alium. Angeli enim eamdem beatitudinem possident nunc quam nos in futuro expectamus. Sed tunc unus homo non illuminabit alium, secundum illud Jer., xxxi, 34: Non docebit ultra vir proximum suum, et vir fratrem suum. Ergo etiam nunc unus angelus non illuminat alium.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.arg.2] Further, light in the angels is threefold; of nature, of grace, and of glory. But an angel is enlightened in the light of nature by the Creator; in the light of grace by the Justifier; in the light of glory by the Beatifier; all of which comes from God. Therefore one angel does not enlighten another.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, triplex est lumen in angelis: naturæ, et gratiae, et gloriæ. Sed angelus illuminatur lumine naturæ a creante, lumine gratiae a justificante, lumine gloriæ a beatificante, quod totum Dei est. Ergo unus angelus non illuminat alium.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.arg.3] Further, light is a form in the mind. But the rational mind is \"informed by God alone, without created intervention,\" as Augustine says (QQ. 83, qu. 51). Therefore one angel does not enlighten the mind of another.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, lumen est forma quædam mentis. Sed mens rationalis a solo Deo formatur nulla interposita creatura, ut Augustinus dicit in lib. LXXXIII Quæstion., q. LI, § 4, col. 33, t. 6. Ergo unus angelus non illuminat mentem alterius.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.sc] Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. viii) that \"the angels of the second hierarchy are cleansed, enlightened and perfected by the angels of the first hierarchy.\"
\n[I.q.106.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod dicit Dionysius, vii Cælest. hier., § 1 et 2, col. 239, t. 1, quod « angeli secundæ hierarchiæ purgantur et illuminantur et perficiuntur per angelos primæ hierarchiæ. »
\n[I.q.106.a.1.co] One angel enlightens another. To make this clear, we must observe that intellectual light is nothing else than a manifestation of truth, according to Ephesians 5:13: \"All that is made manifest is light.\" Hence to enlighten means nothing else but to communicate to others the manifestation of the known truth; according to the Apostle (Ephesians 3:8): \"To me the least of all the saints is given this grace . . . to enlighten all men, that they may see what is the dispensation of the mystery which hath been hidden from eternity in God.\" Therefore one angel is said to enlighten another by manifesting the truth which he knows himself. Hence Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii): \"Theologians plainly show that the orders of the heavenly beings are taught Divine science by the higher minds.\"
\nNow since two things concur in the intellectual operation, as we have said (105, 3), namely, the intellectual power, and the likeness of the thing understood; in both of these one angel can notify the known truth to another.
\nFirst, by strengthening his intellectual power; for just as the power of an imperfect body is strengthened by the neighborhood of a more perfect body --for instance, the less hot is made hotter by the presence of what is hotter; so the intellectual power of an inferior angel is strengthened by the superior angel turning to him: since in spiritual things, for one thing to turn to another, corresponds to neighborhood in corporeal things.
\nSecondly, one angel manifests the truth to another as regards the likeness of the thing understood. For the superior angel receives the knowledge of truth by a kind of universal conception, to receive which the inferior angel's intellect is not sufficiently powerful, for it is natural to him to receive truth in a more particular manner. Therefore the superior angel distinguishes, in a way, the truth which he conceives universally, so that it can be grasped by the inferior angel; and thus he proposes it to his knowledge. Thus it is with us that the teacher, in order to adapt himself to others, divides into many points the knowledge which he possesses in the universal. This is thus expressed by Dionysius (Coel. Hier. xv): \"Every intellectual substance with provident power divides and multiplies the uniform knowledge bestowed on it by one nearer to God, so as to lead its inferiors upwards by analogy.\"
\n[I.q.106.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod unus angelus illuminat alium. Ad cujus evidentiam considerandum est, quod lumen, secundum quod ad intellectum pertinet, nihil est aliud quam quædam manifestatio veritatis, secundum illud ad Ephes., v, 13: Omne quod manifestatur, lumen est. Unde illuminare nihil aliud est quam manifestationem agnitæ veritatis alii tradere; secundum quem modum Apostolus dicit ad Ephes., iii, 8 et 9: Mihi omnium sanctorum minimo data est gratia hæc, illuminare omnes, quæ sit dispensatio sacramenti absconditi a sæculis in Deo. Sic igitur unus angelus dicitur illuminare alium, inquantum ei manifestat veritatem quam ipse cognoscit. Unde Dionysius dicit, Cælest. hier., c. vii, § 3, col. 210, t. 1, quod « theologi plane monstrant cælestium substantia-rum ordines a supremis mentibus doceri deificas scientias. » Cum autem ad intellectum duo concurrant in ejus operatione, ut supra diximus, scilicet virtus intellectiva et similitudo rei intellectæ, secundum hæc duo unus angelus alteri veritatem notam notificare potest: primo quidem fortificando virtutem intellectivam ejus; sicut enim virtus imperfectioris corporis confortatur ex situali propinquitate perfectioris corporis, ut minus calidum crescit in calore ex præsentia magis calidi; ita virtus intellectiva inferioris angeli confortatur ex conversione superioris angeli ad ipsum; hoc enim facit in spiritualibus ordo conversionis, quod facit in corporalibus ordo localis propinquitatis. Secundo autem unus angelus alteri manifestat veritatem ex parte similitudinis rei intellectæ. Superior enim angelus notitiam veritatis accipit in universali qua- 1 Vide etiam vi De eccles hier., § 6, col. 538, t. 4. 2 Sensum reddit D. Thomas ex versione Joannis Sarrasini. Corderius: « Hoc igitur theologi perspicue declarant, ut inferiores quidem cælestium essentiarum ordines, a superioribus divinarum operum scientiam convenienti modo percipiant. » 3 Ita cod. cit.; Garcia et Nicolaï: « accipit, quodammodo, » etc. 4 Hic D. Thomas versione J. Scoti Erigenæ utitur dam conceptione, ad quam capiendam inferioris angeli intellectus non esset sufficiens; sed est ei connaturale ut magis particulariter veritatem accipiat. Superior ergo angelus veritatem quam universaliter accipit, quodammodo distinguit, ut ab inferiori capi possit, et sic eam cognoscendam illi proponit; sicut etiam apud nos, doctores quod in summa capiunt, multipliciter distinguent providentes capacitati aliorum. Et hoc est quod Dionysius dicit, Cælest. hier., c. xv, § 6, col. 335, t. 1: « Unaquæque substantia intellectualis datam sibi a diviniore uniformem intelligentiam provida virtute dividit et multiplicat ad inferioris sursum ductricem analogiam, » sive « proportionem. » Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod omnes angeli, tam superiores, quam inferiores, immediate vident Dei essentiam, et quantum ad hoc unus non docet alium; de hac enim doctrina Propheta loquitur; unde dicit: Non docebit vir fratrem suum dicens: Cognosce Dominum; omnes enim cognoscent me a minimo eorum usque ad maximum. Sed rationes divinorum operum, quae in Deo cognoscuntur sicut in causa, omnes quidem Deus in seipso cognoscit quia seipsum comprehendit; aliorum vero Deum videntium tanto unusquisque in Deo plures rationes cognoscit, quanto eum perfectius videt. Unde superior angelus plura in Deo de rationibus divinorum operum cognoscit quam inferior; et de his eum illuminat; et hoc est quod dicit Dionysius, c. iv De div. nom., § 1, col. 694, t. 1, quod « angeli existentium illuminantur rationibus. » Ad secundum dicendum, quod unus angelus non illuminat alium, tradendo ei lumen naturæ vel gratiae vel gloriæ, sed confortando lumen naturale ipsius, et manifestando ei veritatem de his quæ pertinent ad statum naturæ et gratiae et gloriæ, ut dictum est. Ad tertium dicendum, quod rationalis mens formatur immediate a Deo, vel sicut imago ab exemplari, quia non est facta ad aliquot miscens ex Joanne Sarrasino. Corderius: « Quin etiam eis theologia nubis speciem affingit, hoc ipso sacras intelligentias declarans arcano quodam lumine supermundialiter repletas, primilucam illam apparitionem sine fastu suscipere, atque luculenter eamdem in inferiora per remissiorem illustrationem pro illorum captu transfundere. » Corderius: « Propriis rerum rationibus illustrantur. » alterius imaginem quam Dei; vel sicut subjectum ab ultima forma completiva, quia semper mens creata reputatur informis, nisi ipsi primæ veritati inhæreat. Aliæ vero illuminationes quæ sunt ab homine vel angelo, sunt quasi dispositiones ad ultimam formam.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.ad.1] All the angels, both inferior and superior, see the Essence of God immediately, and in this respect one does not teach another. It is of this truth that the prophet speaks; wherefore he adds: \"They shall teach no more every man his brother, saying: 'Know the Lord': for all shall know Me, from the least of them even to the greatest.\" But all the types of the Divine works, which are known in God as in their cause, God knows in Himself, because He comprehends Himself; but of others who see God, each one knows the more types, the more perfectly he sees God. Hence a superior angel knows more about the types of the Divine works than an inferior angel, and concerning these the former enlightens the latter; and as to this Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv) that the angels \"are enlightened by the types of existing things.\"
\n[I.q.106.a.1.ad.2] An angel does not enlighten another by giving him the light of nature, grace, or glory; but by strengthening his natural light, and by manifesting to him the truth concerning the state of nature, of grace, and of glory, as explained above.
\n[I.q.106.a.1.ad.3] The rational mind is formed immediately by God, either as the image from the exemplar, forasmuch as it is made to the image of God alone; or as the subject by the ultimate perfecting form: for the created mind is always considered to be unformed, except it adhere to the first truth; while the other kinds of enlightenment that proceed from man or angel, are, as it were, dispositions to this ultimate form.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.arg.1] It would seem that one angel can move another angel's will. Because, according to Dionysius quoted above (Article 1), as one angel enlightens another, so does he cleanse and perfect another. But cleansing and perfecting seem to belong to the will: for the former seems to point to the stain of sin which appertains to will; while to be perfected is to obtain an end, which is the object of the will. Therefore an angel can move another angel's will.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.arg.1] Ad secundum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod unus angelus possit movere voluntatem alterius. Quia, secundum Dionysium, sicut unus angelus illuminat alium, ita pur-gat et perficit, ut patet ex auctoritate supra dicta. Sed purgatio et perfectio videntur pertinere ad voluntatem; nam purgatio videtur esse a sordibus culpæ, quæ pertinent ad voluntatem: perfectio autem videtur esse per consecutionem finis, qui est objectum voluntatis. Ergo unus angelus potest movere voluntatem alterius.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.arg.2] Further, as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii): \"The names of the angels designate their properties.\" Now the Seraphim are so called because they \"kindle\" or \"give heat\": and this is by love which belongs to the will. Therefore one angel moves another angel's will.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, sicut Dionysius dicit, c. vii Cælest. hier., § 1, col. 206, t. 1, nomina angelorum designant eorum proprietates. Seraphim enim « incendentes » dicuntur, aut « calefacientes, » quod est per amorem, qui ad voluntatem pertinet. Unus ergo angelus movet voluntatem alterius.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.arg.3] Further, the Philosopher says (De Anima iii, 11) that the higher appetite moves the lower. But as the intellect of the superior angel is higher, so also is his will. It seems, therefore, that the superior angel can change the will of another angel.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, dicit Philosophus in III De anima, text. 57, « quod appetitus superior movet appetitum inferiorem. » Sed sicut intellectus angeli superioris superior est, ita etiam appetitus. Ergo videtur quod superior angelus possit immutare voluntatem alterius.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.sc] To him it belongs to change the will, to whom it belongs to bestow righteousness: for righteousness is the rightness of the will. But God alone bestows righteousness. Therefore one angel cannot change another angel's will.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.sc] Sed contra, ejus est immutare voluntatem cujus est justificare; cum justitia sit rectitudo voluntatis. Sed solus Deus est qui justificat. Ergo unus angelus non potest mutare voluntatem alterius. Sic Corderius. Angeli juxta Durandum a solo Deo, ministerio tamen angelorum, illuminantur. Porro illuminatio angelorum non fit per infusionem novi luminis, vel novarum specierum, nec, ut voluere Bannes et Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut supra dictum est, voluntas immutatur dupliciter: uno modo ex parte objecti, alio modo ex parte ipsius potentiæ. Ex parte quidem objecti movet voluntatem et ipsum bonum, quod est voluntatis objectum, sicut appetibile movet appetitum; et ille qui demonstrat objectum, puta qui demonstrat aliquid esse bonum. Sed, sicut supra dictum est, alia quidem bona aliqualiter inclinant voluntatem: sed nihil sufficienter movet voluntatem nisi bonum universale, quod est Deus; et hoc bonum solus ipse ostendit, ut per essentiam videtur a beatis, qui dicenti Moysi: Ostende mihi gloriam tuam, respondit: Ego ostendam tibi omne bonum, ut habetur Exod., xxxiii, 18 et 19. Angelus ergo non sufficienter movet voluntatem neque ut objectum, neque ut ostendens objectum; sed inclinat eam ut amabile quoddam, et ut manifestans aliqua bona creata ordinata in Dei bonitatem; et per hoc inclinare potest ad amorem creaturæ, vel Dei per modum suadentis. Ex parte vero ipsius potentiæ voluntas nullo modo potest moveri nisi a Deo. Operatio enim voluntatis est inclinatio quædam volentis in volitum. Hanc autem inclinationem solus ille immutare potest qui virtutem volendi creaturæ contulit, sicut et naturalem inclinationem solum illud agens potest mutare quod potest dare virtutem quam consequitur inclinatio naturalis. Solus autem Deus est qui potentiam volendi tribuit creaturæ, quia ipse solus est auctor intellectualis naturæ. Unde angelus voluntatem alterius movere non potest.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.co] As was said above (Question 105, Article 4), the will is changed in two ways; on the part of the object, and on the part of the power. On the part of the object, both the good itself which is the object of the will, moves the will, as the appetible moves the appetite; and he who points out the object, as, for instance, one who proves something to be good. But as we have said above (Question 105, Article 4), other goods in a measure incline the will, yet nothing sufficiently moves the will save the universal good, and that is God. And this good He alone shows, that it may be seen by the blessed, Who, when Moses asked: \"Show me Thy glory,\" answered: \"I will show thee all good\" (Exodus 33:18-19). Therefore an angel does not move the will sufficiently, either as the object or as showing the object. But he inclines the will as something lovable, and as manifesting some created good ordered to God's goodness. And thus he can incline the will to the love of the creature or of God, by way of persuasion.
\nBut on the part of the power the will cannot be moved at all save by God. For the operation of the will is a certain inclination of the willer to the thing willed. And He alone can change this inclination, Who bestowed on the creature the power to will: just as that agent alone can change the natural inclination, which can give the power to which follows that natural inclination. Now God alone gave to the creature the power to will, because He alone is the author of the intellectual nature. Therefore an angel cannot move another angel's will.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.ad.1] Cleansing and perfecting are to be understood according to the mode of enlightenment. And since God enlightens by changing the intellect and will, He cleanses by removing defects of intellect and will, and perfects unto the end of the intellect and will. But the enlightenment caused by an angel concerns the intellect, as explained above (Article 1); therefore an angel is to be understood as cleansing from the defect of nescience in the intellect; and as perfecting unto the consummae end of the intellect, and this is the knowledge of truth. Thus Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. vi): that \"in the heavenly hierarchy the chastening of the inferior essence is an enlightening of things unknown, that leads them to more perfect knowledge.\" For instance, we might say that corporeal sight is cleansed by the removal of darkness; enlightened by the diffusion of light; and perfected by being brought to the perception of the colored object.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod secundum modum illuminationis est accipienda et purgatio et perfectio. Et quia Deus illuminat, immutando intellectum et voluntatem, purgat a defectibus intellectus et voluntatis, et perficit in finem intellectus et voluntatis. Angeli autem illuminatio refertur ad intellectum, ut dictum est; ideo etiam purgatio angeli intelligitur a defectu intellectus, qui est nescentia; perfectio autem est consumatio in finem intellectus, qui est veritas cognita. Et hoc est quod dicit Dionysius, Zumel, per unionem luminis angeli superioris cum lumine angeli inferioris, sed per solam objecti prius incogniti expositionem artificiose præparam ad captum inferioris angeli. S. Thomas docet superiorem illuminare inferiorem etiam de his quæ ad statum gloriæ pertinent; hoc negat Scotorellus. cap. vi Eccl. hier., § 6, col. 538, t. 4, quod « in cælesti hierarchia purgatio est in subjectis essentiis, tanquam ignotorum illuminatio in perfectiorem scientiam inducens; » sicut si dicamus visum corporalem purgari, inquantum removentur tenebræ; illuminari vero, inquantum perfunditur lumine; perfici vero, secundum quod perducitur ad cognitionem colorati.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.ad.2] One angel can induce another to love God by persuasion as explained above.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod unus angelus potest inducere alium ad amorem Dei per modum persuadentis, ut supra dictum est.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.ad.3] The Philosopher speaks of the lower sensitive appetite which can be moved by the superior intellectual appetite, because it belongs to the same nature of the soul, and because the inferior appetite is a power in a corporeal organ. But this does not apply to the angels.
\n[I.q.106.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod Philosophus loquitur de appetitu inferiori sensitivo, qui potest moveri a superiori intellectivo, quia pertinet ad eamdem naturam animæ, et quia inferior appetitus est virtus in organo corporali: quod in angelis locum non habet.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.arg.1] It would seem that an inferior angel can enlighten a superior angel. For the ecclesiastical hierarchy is derived from, and represents the heavenly hierarchy; and hence the heavenly Jerusalem is called \"our mother\" (Galatians 4:26). But in the Church even superiors are enlightened and taught by their inferiors, as the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 14:31): \"You may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be exhorted.\" Therefore, likewise in the heavenly hierarchy, the superiors can be enlightened by inferiors.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.arg.1] Ad tertium sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod angelus inferior superiorem illuminare possit. Ecclesiastica enim hierarchia derivata est a cælesti, et eam repræsentat; unde et superna Jerusalem dicitur mater nostra, Gal., iv, 26. Sed in Ecclesia etiam superiores illuminantur ab inferioribus et docentur, secundum illud Apostoli I ad Cor., xiv, 31: Potestis omnes per singulos prophetare, ut omnes discant, et omnes exhortentur. Ergo et in cælesti hierarchia superiores ab inferioribus possunt illuminari.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.arg.2] Further, as the order of corporeal substances depends on the will of God, so also does the order of spiritual substances. But, as was said above (Question 105, Article 6), God sometimes acts outside the order of corporeal substances. Therefore He also sometimes acts outside the order of spiritual substances, by enlightening inferior otherwise than through their superiors. Therefore in that way the inferiors enlightened by God can enlighten superiors.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.arg.2] 2. Præterea, sicut ordo corporalium substantiarum dependet ex Dei voluntate, ita et ordo substantiarum spiritualium. Sed, sicut dictum est, Deus quando præt oderm substantiarum corporalium operatur. Ergo etiam quando præt oderm spiritualium substantiarum, illuminando inferiores non per medios superiores. Sic ergo inferiores illuminati a Deo possunt superiores illuminare.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.arg.3] Further, one angel enlightens the other to whom he turns, as was above explained (1). But since this turning to another is voluntary, the highest angel can turn to the lowest passing over the others. Therefore he can enlighten him immediately; and thus the latter can enlighten his superiors.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.arg.3] 3. Præterea, unus angelus alium illuminat, ad quem se convertit, ut supra dictum est. Sed cum ista conversio sit voluntaria, potest supremus angelus ad infimum se convertere mediis prætermissis. Ergo potest eum immediate illuminare, et ita potest illuminare superiores.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.sc] Dionysius says that \"this is the Divine unalterable law, that inferior things are led to God by the superior\" (Coel. Hier. iv; Eccl. Hier. v).
\n[I.q.106.a.3.sc] Sed contra est quod Dionysius dicit, cap. v Eccl. hierar., § 4, col. 503, t. 4: « Hanc legem esse divinitatis immobiliter firmatam, ut inferiora reducantur in Deum per superiora. »
\n[I.q.106.a.3.co] The inferior angels never enlighten the superior, but are always enlightened by them. The reason is, because, as above explained (105, 6), one order is under another, as cause is under cause; and hence as cause is ordered to cause, so is order to order. Therefore there is no incongruity if sometimes anything is done outside the order of the inferior cause, to be ordered to the superior cause, as in human affairs the command of the president is passed over from obedience to the prince. So it happens that God works miraculously outside the order of corporeal nature, that men may be ordered to the knowledge of Him. But the passing over of the order that belongs to spiritual substances in no way belongs to the ordering of men to God; since the angelic operations are not made known to us; as are the operations of sensible bodies. Thus the order which belongs to spiritual substances is never passed over by God; so that the inferiors are always moved by the superior, and not conversely.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod inferiores angeli nunquam illuminant superiores, sed semper ab eis illuminantur. Cujus ratio est, quia, sicut supra dictum est, ordo continetur sub ordine, sicut causa continetur sub causa; unde sicut ordinatur causa ad causam, ita ordo ad ordinem. Et ideo non est inconveniens, si aliquando aliquid fiat præter ordinem inferioris causæ, ad ordinandum in superiorem causam, sicut in rebus humanis prætermittitur mandatum præsidis, ut obediatur principi. Et ita contingit, ut præter ordinem naturæ corporalis aliquid Deus miraculose operetur ad ordinandum homines in ejus cognitionem. Sed prætermissio ordinis qui debetur spiritualibus substantiis, in nullo pertineret ad ordinationem hominum in Deum; cum operationes angelorum non sint nobis manifestæ, sicut operationes sensibilium corporum. Et ideo ordo qui convenit spiritualibus substantiis, nunquam a Deo prætermittitur, quin semper inferiora moveantur per superiora et non e converso.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.ad.1] The ecclesiastical hierarchy imitates the heavenly in some degree, but by a perfect likeness. For in the heavenly hierarchy the perfection of the order is in proportion to its nearness to God; so that those who are the nearer to God are the more sublime in grade, and more clear in knowledge; and on that account the superiors are never enlightened by the inferiors, whereas in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, sometimes those who are the nearer to God in sanctity, are in the lowest grade, and are not conspicuous for science; and some also are eminent in one kind of science, and fail in another; and on that account superiors may be taught by inferiors.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod ecclesiastica hierarchia imitatur cælestem aliqua-liter, sed non perfecte consequitur ejus similitudinem. In cælesti enim hierarchia tota ratio ordinis est ex propinquitate ad Deum; et ideo illi qui sunt Deo propinquiores, sunt et gradu sublimiores et scientia clariores, et propter hoc superiores nun-quam ab inferioribus illuminantur. Sed in Ex versione J. Scoti Erigenæ. Corderius: « Sancte tamen etiam fateri liceat, in cælesti hierarchia rerum quas hactenus ignorarunt, illustrationem inferioribus naturis esse quamdam velut expiationem, qua et ad perfectiorem rerum divinarum scientiam adducuntur, et a rerum, quarum hactenus scientia caruerunt, ignoratione quodam inferiores non per medios superiores. Sic ergo inferiores illuminati a Deo possunt superiores illuminare. Ita edit.; in cod. Alcan. legendum « in ecclesiastica » suspicatur Thomas Madalena. Corderius: « Lex quidem hæc est sacrosanctæ summæ deitatis, ut per prima quæ sequuntur ad divinissimam ejus lucem adducantur. » In ecclesiastica hierarchia interdum qui sunt Deo per sanctitatem propinquiores, sunt gradu infimi et scientia non eminentes, et quidam in uno etiam secundum scientiam eminent, et in alio deficiunt; et propter hoc superiores ab inferioribus doceri possunt.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.ad.2] As above explained, there is no similarity between what God does outside the order of corporeal nature, and that of spiritual nature. Hence the argument does not hold.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod non est similis ratio de hoc quod Deus agat praeter ordinem naturæ corporalis et spiritualis, ut dictum est. Unde ratio non sequitur.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.ad.3] An angel turns voluntarily to enlighten another angel, but the angel's will is ever regulated by the Divine law which made the order in the angels.
\n[I.q.106.a.3.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod angelus voluntate convertitur ad alium angelum illuminandum; sed voluntas angeli semper regulatur lege divina, quæ ordinem in angelis instituit.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.arg.1] It would seem that the superior angel does not enlighten the inferior concerning all he himself knows. For Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. xii) that the superior angels have a more universal knowledge; and the inferior a more particular and individual knowledge. But more is contained under a universal knowledge than under a particular knowledge. Therefore not all that the superior angels know, is known by the inferior, through these being enlightened by the former.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.arg.1] Ad quartum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod angelus superior non illuminet inferiorem de omnibus quæ ipse novit. Dicit enim Dionysius, cap. xii Cælest. hierarch., § 2, col. 294, t. 1, quod « angeli superiores habent scientiam magis universalem, inferiores vero magis particularem et subjectam. » Sed plura continentur sub scientia universali quam sub particulari. Ergo non omnia quæ sciunt superiores angeli, cognoscunt inferiores per superiorum illuminationem.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.arg.2] Further, the Master of the Sentences (ii, D, 11) says that the superior angels had long known the Mystery of the Incarnation, whereas the inferior angels did not know it until it was accomplished. Thus we find that on some of the angels inquiring, as it were, in ignorance: \"Who is this King of glory?\" other angels, who knew, answered: \"The Lord of Hosts, He is the King of glory,\" as Dionysius expounds (Coel. Hier. vii). But this would not apply if the superior angels enlightened the inferior concerning all they know themselves. Therefore they do not do so.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.arg.2] 2. Præterea, Magister dicit in xi distinct. II Sent., quod « superiores angeli cognoverunt a sæculis mysterium Incarnationis; inferioribus vero ignotum fuit usquequo completum est. » Quod videtur per hoc quod quibusdam angelis quærentibus, ps. xxiii, 10: Quis est iste Rex gloriæ? quasi ignorantibus allii respondent quasi scientes: Dominus virtutum ipse est Rex gloriæ, ut Dionysius exponit, cap. vii Cælest. hierarchæ, § 3, col. 210, t. 1. Hoc autem non esset, si superiores angeli illuminarent infe- 1. Equivalenter habetur in Gregorio, sub his verbis: « Sic quippe in illa summa civitate specialia quædam singulorum sunt, ut tamen sint communia omnium. » Sed expresse refertur a Mag. Sentent., lib. II, dist. ix, § 3. 2. De auctoritate S. Dionysii, vide art. 1 hujus quæst. riores de omnibus quæ ipsi cognoscunt. Non ergo eos illuminant de omnibus sibi notis.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.arg.3] Further, if the superior angels enlighten the inferior about all they know, nothing that the superior angels know would be unknown to the inferior angels. Therefore the superior angels could communicate nothing more to the inferior; which appears open to objection. Therefore the superior angels do not enlighten the inferior in all things.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.arg.3] 3. Præterea, si superiores angeli inferioribus annuntiant omnia quæ cognoscunt, nihil inferioribus ignotum remanet quod superiores cognoscunt. Non ergo de cætero superiores poterunt illuminare inferiores; quod videtur inconveniens. Non ergo superiores de omnibus inferiores illuminant.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.sc] Gregory [Peter Lombard, Sent. ii, D, ix; Cf. Gregory, Hom. xxxiv, in Ev.] says: \"In that heavenly country, though there are some excellent gifts, yet nothing is held individually.\" And Dionysius says: \"Each heavenly essence communicates to the inferior the gift derived from the superior\" (Coel. Hier. xv), as quoted above (Article 1).
\n[I.q.106.a.4.sc] Sed contra est quod Gregorius dicit In Evang., hom. xxxiv, § 14, col. 1255, t. 2, quod « in illa cælesti patria licet quædam data sint excellenter, nihil tamen possidetur singulariter; » et Dionysius dicit, Cælest. hierarchæ, cap. xv, § 6, col. 335, t. 1, quod « unaquæque cælestis essentia intelligentiam sibi a superiori datam inferiori communi cat, » ut patet ex auctoritate supra inducta.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.co] Every creature participates in the Divine goodness, so as to diffuse the good it possesses to others; for it is of the nature of good to communicate itself to others. Hence also corporeal agents give their likeness to others so far as they can. So the more an agent is established in the share of the Divine goodness, so much the more does it strive to transmit its perfections to others as far as possible. Hence the Blessed Peter admonishes those who by grace share in the Divine goodness; saying: \"As every man hath received grace, ministering the same one to another; as good stewards of the manifold grace of God\" (1 Peter 4:10). Much more therefore do the holy angels, who enjoy the plenitude of participation of the Divine goodness, impart the same to those below them.
\nNevertheless this gift is not received so excellently by the inferior as by the superior angels; and therefore the superior ever remain in a higher order, and have a more perfect knowledge; as the master understands the same thing better than the pupil who learns from him.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod omnes creaturæ ex divina bonitate participant ut bonum quod habent in alia diffundant; nam de ratione boni est quod se aliis communicet. Et inde est etiam quod agentia corporalia similitudinem suam aliis tradunt quantum possibile est. Quanto igitur aliqua agentia magis in participatione divinæ bonitatis constituentur, tanto magis perfectiones suas nituntur in alios transfundere, quantum possibile est. Unde B. Petrus monet eos qui divinam bonitatem per gratiam participant, dicens, I Petr., iv, 10: Unusquisque sicut acceptit gratiam, in alterutrum illam administrantes, sicut boni dispensatores multiformis gratiæ Dei. Multo igitur magis sancti angeli, qui sunt in plenissima participatione divinæ bonitatis, quidquid a Deo percipiunt, subjectis impartiuntur. Non tamen recipitur ab inferioribus ita excellenter sicut est in superioribus; et ideo superiores semper remanent in altiori ordine et perfectiorem scientiam habent; sicut unam et eamdem rem plenius intelligit magister quam discipulus, qui ab eo addiscit.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.ad.1] The knowledge of the superior angels is said to be more universal as regards the more eminent mode of knowledge.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod superiorum angelorum scientia dicitur esse universalior quantum ad eminentiorem modum intelligendi. Juxta Scotorellum, de potentia Dei absoluta, id est de potentia qua Deus non utitur, Deus aliqua posset angelo inferiori revelare quæ superiori angelo non revelaret, et de his inferior superiori loqui posset; quæ locutio, si existeret, aliquo modo illuminatio esset.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.ad.2] The Master's words are not to be understood as if the inferior angels were entirely ignorant of the Mystery of the Incarnation but that they did not know it as fully as the superior angels; and that they progressed in the knowledge of it afterwards when the Mystery was accomplished.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod verbum Magistri non est sic intelligendum quod inferiores angeli penitus ignoraverint mysterium Incarnationis; sed quia non ita plene cognoverunt sicut superiores, et in ejus cognitionem postmodum profecerunt, dum illud mysterium impleretur.
\n[I.q.106.a.4.ad.3] Till the Judgment Day some new things are always being revealed by God to the highest angels, concerning the course of the world, and especially the salvation of the elect. Hence there is always something for the superior angels to make known to the inferior.
\nThe Summa Theologica of St. Thomas AquinasSecond and Revised Edition, 1920Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican ProvinceOnline Edition Copyright © 2009 by Kevin Knight Nihil Obstat. F. Innocentius Apap, O.P., S.T.M., Censor. Theol.Imprimatur. Edus. Canonicus Surmont, Vicarius Generalis. Westmonasterii.APPROBATIO ORDINISNihil Obstat. F. Raphael Moss, O.P., S.T.L. and F. Leo Moore, O.P., S.T.L.Imprimatur. F. Beda Jarrett, O.P., S.T.L., A.M., Prior Provincialis AngliæMARIÆ IMMACULATÆ - SEDI SAPIENTIÆ
\n[I.q.106.a.4.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod usque ad diem judicii semper nova aliqua supremis angelis revelantur divinitus de his quæ pertinent ad dispositionem mundi et præcipue ad salutem electorum. Unde semper remanet unde superiores angeli inferiores illuminent.
\n