Greco-Christian stream·Opera Omnia Sancti Thomae (Complete Works of Thomas Aquinas)·Summa Theologiae·Secunda Secundae·Q171. Prophecy
Source context
- Theme
- prophetic knowledge as a distinct cognitive gift within the hierarchy of intellectual virtues
- Soul-faculty
- Consciousness Soul
Steiner
not engaged in the GA corpus
Cross-tradition
- Hebrew prophetic tradition (Nevi'im)Cross-tradition congruence: the Hebrew prophetic framework distinguishes levels of prophetic reception (vision, voice, dream), structurally parallel to Aquinas's graded analysis of prophetic light and its relation to the intellect in Q171.
- Neoplatonic epistemology (Plotinus, Enneads)Cross-tradition congruence: Plotinus identifies a supra-rational illumination by which the intellect receives knowledge beyond discursive reasoning, structurally analogous to Aquinas's account of the prophetic lumen as an infused cognitive elevation distinct from ordinary rational operation.
Q171. Prophecy
Article 1
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.1] It would seem that prophecy does not pertain to knowledge. For it is written (Sirach 48:14) that after death the body of Eliseus prophesied, and further on (Sirach 49:18) it is said of Joseph that "his bones were visited, and after death they prophesied." Now no knowledge remains in the body or in the bones after death. Therefore prophecy does not pertain to knowledge.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod prophetia non pertineat ad cognitionem. Dicitur enim Eccli., xlviii, 14, quod corpus Elisæi mortuum prophetavit; et infra, cap. xlix, 18, dicitur de Joseph quod ossa ipsius visitata sunt, et post mortem prophetaverunt. Sed in corpore vel in ossibus post mortem non remanet aliqua cognitio. Ergo prophetia non pertinet ad cognitionem. Olim apud Hebraeos Prophetæ appellabantur « videntes » vocibus « Rhoe, Chore »; » deinde « Nabi » ex radice « Nabah », » id est prædicere, divinare. Hujus tamen vocis variæ sunt acceptiones. « Nabi » enim sumitur vel pro futurorum prænuncio, vel pro oraculorum et decretorum divinorum internuncio. « Nibba » seu prophetare significat aliquando furere; hinc quicumque, sive bono sive malo spiritu agitabantur, prophetas agere dicebantur. « Nibba » significat etiam divinas laudes saltando canere. Prophetare est etiam instrumentis sive musica canere atque choreas ducere, aut prodigium patrare, aut scripturam explicare, aut in Ecclesia verba facere. Apud Græcos, quicumque occultæ rei divinatores, oraculorum interpretes, et sacrorum antisites, nunccupabantur prophetæ. Dicebatur etiam propheta « mantis », et prophetia « manteia » et « mantiche », » quæ vox a « mainomenai dicta significat furere: per furorem enim oracula redebantur. Latini prophetam vocabant divinum, vatem, præsagum, ariolum, fatidicum, etc.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.2] Further, it is written (1 Corinthians 14:3): "He that prophesieth, speaketh to men unto edification." Now speech is not knowledge itself, but its effect. Therefore it would seem that prophecy does not pertain to knowledge.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, I ad Cor., xiv, 3, dicitur: Qui prophetat, hominibus loquitur ad exdificationem. Sed locutio est effectus cognitionis, non est autem ipsa cognitio. Ergo videtur quod prophetia non pertineat ad cognitionem.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.3] Further, every cognitive perfection excludes folly and madness. Yet both of these are consistent with prophecy; for it is written (Hosea 9:7): "Know ye, O Israel, that the prophet was foolish and mad [Vulgate: 'the spiritual man was mad']." Therefore prophecy is not a cognitive perfection.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, omnis cognoscitiva perfectio excludit stultitiam et insaniam. Sed hæc simul possunt esse cum prophetia: dicitur enim Oseæ ix, 7: Scitote Israël, stultum prophetam, et insanum. Ergo prophetia non est cognoscitiva perfectio.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.4] Further, just as revelation regards the intellect, so inspiration regards, apparently, the affections, since it denotes a kind of motion. Now prophecy is described as "inspiration" or "revelation," according to Cassiodorus [Prolog. super Psalt. i]. Therefore it would seem that prophecy does not pertain to the intellect more than to the affections.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.arg.4] 4. Præterea, sicut revelatio pertinet ad intellectum, ita inspiratio videtur pertinere ad affectum, eo quod importat motionem quamdam. Sed prophetia dicitur esse « inspiratio, » vel « revelatio, » secundum Cassiodorum in Prolog. super Psalt., col. 842, t. 1 Gl. ord. Ergo videtur quod prophetia non magis pertineat ad intellectum quam ad affectum.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.sc] It is written (1 Samuel 9:9): "For he that is now called a prophet, in time past was called a seer." Now sight pertains to knowledge. Therefore prophecy pertains to knowledge.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur I Reg., ix, 9: Qui enim propheta dicitur hodie, vocabatur olim videns. Sed visio pertinet ad cognitionem. Ergo prophetia ad cognitionem pertinet.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.co] Prophecy first and chiefly consists in knowledge, because, to wit, prophets know things that are far [procul] removed from man's knowledge. Wherefore they may be said to take their name from phanos, "apparition," because things appear to them from afar. Wherefore, as Isidore states (Etym. vii, 8), "in the Old Testament, they were called Seers, because they saw what others saw not, and surveyed things hidden in mystery." Hence among heathen nations they were known as "vates, on account of their power of mind [vi mentis]," [The Latin 'vates' is from the Greek phates, and may be rendered 'soothsayer'] (Etym. viii, 7).
Since, however, it is written (1 Corinthians 12:7): "The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man unto profit," and further on (1 Corinthians 14:12): "Seek to abound unto the edification of the Church," it follows that prophecy consists secondarily in speech, in so far as the prophets declare for the instruction of others, the things they know through being taught of God, according to the saying of Isaiah 21:10, "That which I have heard of the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, I have declared unto you." Accordingly, as Isidore says (Etym. viii, 7), "prophets" may be described as "proefatores [foretellers], because they tell from afar [porro fantur]," that is, speak from a distance, "and foretell the truth about things to come."
Now those things above human ken which are revealed by God cannot be confirmed by human reason, which they surpass as regards the operation of the Divine power, according to Mark 16:20, "They . . . preached everywhere, the Lord working withal and confirming the word with signs that followed." Hence, thirdly, prophecy is concerned with the working of miracles, as a kind of confirmation of the prophetic utterances. Wherefore it is written (Deuteronomy 34:10-11): "There arose no more a prophet in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, in all the signs and wonders."
[II-II.q.171.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod prophetia primo et principaliter consistit in cognitione, quia videlicet prophetæ cognoscunt ea quæ sunt procul remota ab hominum cognitionem. Unde possunt dici prophetæ a phanos quod est « apparitio, » quia scilicet eis aliqua, quæ sunt procul, apparent. Et propter hoc, ut Isidorus dicit in lib. VII Etymolog., cap. viii, col. 283, t. 3, « in veteri Testamento videntes appellabantur, quia videbant ea quæ cæteri non videbant, et præspiciebant ea quæ in mysterio abscondita erant. » Unde et Gentilitas eos appellabat vates a vi mentis. Sed quia, ut dicitur I ad Cor., xii, 7, Unicuique datur manifestatio spiritus ad utilitatem; et infra, cap. xiv, 12, dicitur: Ad exdificationem Ecclesiæ quærite ut abundetis; inde est quod prophetia secundario consistit in locutione, prout prophetæ ea quæ divinitus edocti cognoscunt, ad exdificationem aliorum annuntiant, secundum illud Isai., xxi, 10: Quæ audivi a Domino exercituum, Deo Israël, annuntiavi vobis. Et secundum hoc, ut Isidorus dicit in lib. Etymolog., ubī supra, possunt dici « prophetæ, » quasi « præfatores, » eo quod « porro fantur, idest, a remotis fantur, et de futuris vera prædicunt. » Ea autem quæ supra humanam cognitionem divinitus revelantur, non possunt confirmari ratione humana, quam exceedunt secundum operationem virtutis divinæ, secundum illud Marci ult., 20: Prædicaverunt ubique, Domino cooperante, et sermonem confirmante sequentibus signis. Unde tertio ad prophetiam pertinet operatio miraculorum, quasi confirmatio quædam propheticæ enuntiationis. Unde dicitur Deuteron, ult., 10: Non surrexit Propheta ultra in Israel, sicut Moyses, quem nosset Dominus facie ad faciem in omnibus signis atque portentis.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.1] These passages speak of prophecy in reference to the third point just mentioned, which regards the proof of prophecy.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod auctoritates illæ loquuntur de prophetia quantum ad hoc tertium, quod assumitur ut prophetiae argumentum.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.2] The Apostle is speaking there of the prophetic utterances.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod Apostolus ibi loquitur quantum ad propheticam enuntiationem.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.3] Those prophets who are described as foolish and mad are not true but false prophets, of whom it is said (Jeremiah 3:16): "Hearken not to the words of the prophets that prophesy to you, and deceive you; they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord," and (Ezekiel 13:3): "Woe to the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and see nothing."
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod illi qui dicuntur prophetæ insani et stulti, non sunt veri prophetæ sed falsi: de quibus dicitur Jeremiæ, xxiii, 16: Nolite audire verba prophetarum, qui prophetant vobis, et decipiunt vos: visionem cordis sui loquuntur, non de ore Domini; et Ezech., xiii, 3: Hæc dicit Dominus: Væ prophetis insipientibus, qui sequuntur spiritum suum, et nihil vident.
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.4] It is requisite to prophecy that the intention of the mind be raised to the perception of Divine things: wherefore it is written (Ezekiel 2:1): "Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak to thee." This raising of the intention is brought about by the motion of the Holy Ghost, wherefore the text goes on to say: "And the Spirit entered into me . . . and He set me upon my feet." After the mind's intention has been raised to heavenly things, it perceives the things of God; hence the text continues: "And I heard Him speaking to me." Accordingly inspiration is requisite for prophecy, as regards the raising of the mind, according to Job 32:8, "The inspiration of the Almighty giveth understanding": while revelation is necessary, as regards the very perception of Divine things, whereby prophecy is completed; by its means the veil of darkness and ignorance is removed, according to Job 12:22, "He discovereth great things out of darkness."
[II-II.q.171.a.1.ad.4] Ad quartum dicendum, quod in prophetia requiritur quod intentio mentis elevetur ad percipienda divina. Unde dicitur Ezech., ii, 1: Fili hominis, sta super pedes suos, et loquar tecum. Hæc autem elevatio intentionis fit Spiritu sancto movente: unde ibidem subditur: Et ingressus est in me spiritus, et statuit me super* pedes meos. Postquam autem intentio mentis elevata est ad superna, percipit divina: unde subditur ibidem: Et audivi loquentem ad me. Sic igitur ad prophetiam requiritur inspiratio quantum ad mentis elevationem, secundum illud Job, xxxii, 8: Inspiratio Omnipotentis dat intelligentiam; revelatio autem quantum ad ipsam perceptionem divinorum, in quo perficitur prophetia, et per ipsam removetur obscuritatis et ignorantiæ velamen, secundum illud Job, xii, 22: Qui revelat profunda de tenebris. Contra Appellitas dicentes prophetias esse falsas, et Sadducæos asserentes prophetarum dicta esse spernenda.
Article 2
[II-II.q.171.a.2.arg.1] It would seem that prophecy is a habit. For according to Ethic. ii, 5, "there are three things in the soul, power, passion, and habit." Now prophecy is not a power, for then it would be in all men, since the powers of the soul are common to them. Again it is not a passion, since the passions belong to the appetitive faculty, as stated above (I-II, 22, 2); whereas prophecy pertains principally to knowledge, as stated in the foregoing Article. Therefore prophecy is a habit.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.arg.1] Ad secundum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod prophetia sit habitus. Quia, ut dicitur in II Ethic., cap. v, « tria sunt in anima, potentia, passio et habitus. » Sed prophetia non est potentia, quia sic ineset omnibus hominibus, quibus potentiæ animæ sunt communes; similiter etiam non est passio, quia passiones pertinent ad vim appetitivam, ut supra habitum est; prophetia autem pertinet principaliter ad cognitionem, ut dictum est. Ergo prophetia est habitus.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.arg.2] Further, every perfection of the soul, which is not always in act, is a habit. Now prophecy is a perfection of the soul; and it is not always in act, else a prophet could not be described as asleep. Therefore seemingly prophecy is a habit.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, omnis perfectio animæ, quæ non semper est in actu, est habitus. Sed prophetia est quædam animæ perfectio: non autem semper est in actu; alioquin non diceretur dormiens propheta. Ergo videtur quod prophetia sit habitus.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.arg.3] Further, prophecy is reckoned among the gratuitous graces. Now grace is something in the soul, after the manner of a habit, as stated above (I-II, 110, 2). Therefore prophecy is a habit.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, prophetia computatur inter gratias gratis datas. Sed gratia est habituale quoddam in anima, ut supra habitum est. Ergo prophetia est habitus.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.sc] A habit is something "whereby we act when we will," as the Commentator [Averroes or Ibn Roshd, 1120-1198] says (De Anima iii). But a man cannot make use of prophecy when he will, as appears in the case of Eliseus (2 Kings 3:15), "who on Josaphat inquiring of him concerning the future, and the spirit of prophecy failing him, caused a minstrel to be brought to him, that the spirit of prophecy might come down upon him through the praise of psalmody, and fill his mind with things to come," as Gregory observes (Hom. i super Ezech.). Therefore prophecy is not a habit.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.sc] Sed contra, « habitus est quo quis agit cum voluerit, » ut dicit Commentator in III De anima, comment. xviii. Sed aliquis non potest uti prophetia, cum voluerit; sicut patet IV Reg., 11, de Elisæ, « quem cum Josaphat de futuris requireret, et prophetiae spiritus ei deesset, psaltem fecit applicari, ut prophetiae ad hunc spiritus per laudem psalmodiæ descenderet, atque ejus animum de venturis repleret, » ut Gregorius dicit Super Ezech., hom. 1, § 45, col. 793, t. 2. Ergo prophetia non est habitus.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.co] As the Apostle says (Ephesians 5:13), "all that is made manifest is light," because, to wit, just as the manifestation of the material sight takes place through material light, so too the manifestation of intellectual sight takes place through intellectual light. Accordingly manifestation must be proportionate to the light by means of which it takes place, even as an effect is proportionate to its cause. Since then prophecy pertains to a knowledge that surpasses natural reason, as stated above (Article 1), it follows that prophecy requires an intellectual light surpassing the light of natural reason. Hence the saying of Micah 7:8: "When I sit in darkness, the Lord is my light." Now light may be in a subject in two ways: first, by way of an abiding form, as material light is in the sun, and in fire; secondly, by way of a passion, or passing impression, as light is in the air. Now the prophetic light is not in the prophet's intellect by way of an abiding form, else a prophet would always be able to prophesy, which is clearly false. For Gregory says (Hom. i super Ezech.): "Sometimes the spirit of prophecy is lacking to the prophet, nor is it always within the call of his mind, yet so that in its absence he knows that its presence is due to a gift." Hence Eliseus said of the Sunamite woman (2 Kings 4:27): "Her soul is in anguish, and the Lord hath hid it from me, and hath not told me." The reason for this is that the intellectual light that is in a subject by way of an abiding and complete form, perfects the intellect chiefly to the effect of knowing the principle of the things manifested by that light; thus by the light of the active intellect the intellect knows chiefly the first principles of all things known naturally. Now the principle of things pertaining to supernatural knowledge, which are manifested by prophecy, is God Himself, Whom the prophets do not see in His essence, although He is seen by the blessed in heaven, in whom this light is by way of an abiding and complete form, according to Psalm 35:10, "In Thy light we shall see light."
It follows therefore that the prophetic light is in the prophet's soul by way of a passion or transitory impression. This is indicated Exodus 33:22: "When my glory shall pass, I will set thee in a hole of the rock," etc., and 1 Kings 19:11: "Go forth and stand upon the mount before the Lord; and behold the Lord passeth," etc. Hence it is that even as the air is ever in need of a fresh enlightening, so too the prophet's mind is always in need of a fresh revelation; thus a disciple who has not yet acquired the principles of an art needs to have every detail explained to him. Wherefore it is written (Isaiah 1:4): "In the morning He wakeneth my ear, so that I may hear Him as a master." This is also indicated by the very manner in which prophecies are uttered: thus it is stated that "the Lord spake to such and such a prophet," or that "the word of the Lord," or "the hand of the Lord was made upon him."
But a habit is an abiding form. Wherefore it is evident that, properly speaking, prophecy is not a habit.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut Apostolus dicit ad Ephes., v, 13: Omne quod manifestatur, lumen est; quia videlicet sicut manifestatio corporalis visionis fit per lumen corporale, ita etiam manifestatio visionis intellectualis fit per lumen intellectuale. Oportet ergo quod manifestatio proportionetur lumini per quod fit, sicut effectus proportionatur suæ causæ. Cum ergo prophetia pertineat ad cognitionem quæ supra naturalem rationem existit, ut dictum est, consequens est quod ad prophetiam requiratur quoddam lumen intelligibile 4 exceedens lumen naturalis rationis. Unde Michææ, vii, 8: Cum sedero in tenebris, Dominus lux mea est. Lumen autem dupliciter alicui inesse potest: uno modo per modum formæ permanentis, sicut lumen corporale est in sole et in igne; alio modo per modum cujusdam passionis sive impressionis transeuntis, sicut lumen est in aere. Lumen autem propheticum non inest intellectui prophetæ per modum formæ permanentis: alias oporteret quod semper prophetæ adesset facultas prophetandi: quod patet esse falsum. Dicit enim Gregorius Super Ezechielem, ubi supra, col. 792: « Aliquando prophetiae spiritus prophetis deest, nec semper eorum mentibus præsto est, quatenus cum hunc non habent, se hunc cognoscant ex dono habere, cum habent. » Unde Elisæus dixit de muliere Sunamite, IV Reg., iv, 27: Anima ejus in amaritudine est, et Dominus celavit a me, et non indicavit mihi. Et hujus ratio est, quia lumen intellectuale in aliquo existens per modum formæ permanentis et perfectæ, perficit intellectum principaliter ad cognoscendum principium illorum quæ per illud lumen manifestantur: sicut per lumen intellectus agentis præcipue intellectus cognoscit prima principia omnium illorum quæ naturaliter cognoscuntur. Principium autem eorum quæ ad supernaturalem cognitionem pertinent, quæ per prophetiam manifestantur, est ipse Deus, qui per essentiam a prophetis non videtur; videtur autem a beatis in patria, in quibus hujusmodi lumen inest per modum cujusdam formæ permanentis et perfectæ, secundum illud psal., xxxv, 10: In lumine tuo videbimus lumen. Relinquitur ergo quod lumen propheticum insit animæ prophetæ per modum cujusdam passionis vel impressionis transeuntis; et hoc significatur Exodi, xxxiii, 22: Dumque transibit gloria mea; ponam te in foramine petræ, etc.; et III Reg., xix, 11, dicitur ad Eliam: Egredere, et sta in monte coram Domino; et ecce Dominus transit, etc. Et inde est quod sicut aer semper indiget nova illuminatione, ita etiam mens prophetæ semper indiget nova revelatione, sicut discipulus, qui nondum est adeptus principia artis, indiget ut de singulis instruatur. Unde et Isaiæ, L, 4, dicitur: Mane erigit mihi aurem, ut audiam quasi magistrum. Et hoc etiam ipse modus loquendi prophetiam designat, secundum quod dicitur quod locutus est Dominus ad talem vel talem prophetam; aut quod factum est verbum Domini, sive manus Domini super eum. Habitus autem est forma permanens. Unde manifestum est quod prophetia, proprie loquendo, non est habitus.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.ad.1] This division of the Philosopher's does not comprise absolutely all that is in the soul, but only such as can be principles of moral actions, which are done sometimes from passion, sometimes from habit, sometimes from mere power, as in the case of those who perform an action from the judgment of their reason before having the habit of that action.
However, prophecy may be reduced to a passion, provided we understand passion to denote any kind of receiving, in which sense the Philosopher says (De Anima iii, 4) that "to understand is, in a way, to be passive." For just as, in natural knowledge, the possible intellect is passive to the light of the active intellect, so too in prophetic knowledge the human intellect is passive to the enlightening of the Divine light.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod illa divisio Philosophi non comprehendit absolute omnia quæ sunt in anima, sed ea quæ possunt esse principia moralium actuum: qui quandoque fiunt ex passione, quandoque autem ex habitu, quandoque autem ex potentia nuda, ut patet in his qui ex judicio rationis aliquid operantur, antequam habeant habitum. Potest autem prophetia ad passionem reduci, si tamen nomen passionis pro qualibet receptione accipiatur, prout Philosophus dicit in III De anima, text. 42, quod « intelligere pati quoddam est. » Sicut enim in cognitione naturali intellectus possibilis patitur ex lumine intellectus agentis; ita etiam in cognitione prophetica intellectus humanus patitur ex illustratione divini luminis.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.ad.2] Just as in corporeal things, when a passion ceases, there remains a certain aptitude to a repetition of the passion--thus wood once ignited is more easily ignited again, so too in the prophet's intellect, after the actual enlightenment has ceased, there remains an aptitude to be enlightened anew--thus when the mind has once been aroused to devotion, it is more easily recalled to its former devotion. Hence Augustine says (De orando Deum. Ep. cxxx, 9) that our prayers need to be frequent, "lest devotion be extinguished as soon as it is kindled."
We might, however, reply that a person is called a prophet, even while his prophetic enlightenment ceases to be actual, on account of his being deputed by God, according to Jeremiah 1:5, "And I made thee a prophet unto the nations."
[II-II.q.171.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod, sicut in rebus corporalibus, abeunte passione, remanet quædam habilitas ad hoc quod iterum patiantur, sicut lignum semel inflammatum facilius iterum inflammatur; ita etiam in intellectu prophetæ, cessante actuali illustratione, remanet quædam habilitas ad hoc quod facilius iterato illustretur: sicut etiam mens semel ad devotionem excitata, facilius postmodum ad devotionem pristinam revocatur. Propter quod Augustinus in libro De orando Deum, epist. cxxx, c. ix, col. 501, t. 2, dicit esse necessarias crebras orationes, « ne concepta devotio totaliter extinguatur. » Potest tamen dici quod aliquis dicitur propheta, etiam cessante actuali prophetica illustratione, ex deputatione divina, secundum illud Jeremiæ i, 5: Et prophetam in gentibus dedi te.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.ad.3] Every gift of grace raises man to something above human nature, and this may happen in two ways. First, as to the substance of the act--for instance, the working of miracles, and the knowledge of the uncertain and hidden things of Divine wisdom--and for such acts man is not granted a habitual gift of grace. Secondly, a thing is above human nature as to the mode but not the substance of the act--for instance to love God and to know Him in the mirror of His creatures--and for this a habitual gift of grace is bestowed.
[II-II.q.171.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod omne do-num gratiae hominem elevat ad aliquid quod est supra naturam humanam. Quod quidem potest esse dupliciter: uno modo quantum ad substantiam actus, sicut miracula facere, et cognoscere incerta et occulta divinæ sapientiæ, et ad hos actus non datur homini donum gratiae habitua-le: alio modo est supra naturam humanam quantum ad modum actus, non autem quantum ad substantiam ipsius; sicut diligere Deum et cognoscere eum in speculo creaturarum: et ad hoc datur donum gratiae habituale.
Article 3
[II-II.q.171.a.3.arg.1] It would seem that prophecy is only about future contingencies. For Cassiodorus says [Prol. super Psalt. i] that "prophecy is a Divine inspiration or revelation, announcing the issue of things with unchangeable truth." Now issues pertain to future contingencies. Therefore the prophetic revelation is about future contingencies alone.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.arg.1] Ad tertium sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod prophetia sit solum futurorum contingentium. Dicit enim Cassiodorus, in Prol. Super Psalt., col. 842, t. 4 Gl. ord., quod « prophetia est inspiratio vel revelatio divina, rerum eventus immobili veritate denuntians. » Sed eventus pertinet ad contingentia futura. Ergo de solis contingentibus futuris fit revelatio prophetica.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.arg.2] Further, according to 1 Corinthians 12, the grace of prophecy is differentiated from wisdom and faith, which are about Divine things; and from the discernment of spirits, which is about created spirits; and from knowledge, which is about human things. Now habits and acts are differentiated by their objects, as stated above (I-II, 54, 2). Therefore it seems that the object of prophecy is not connected with any of the above. Therefore it follows that it is about future contingencies alone.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.arg.2] 2. Præterea, gratia prophetiae dividitur contra sapientiam et fidem, quæ sunt de divinis, et discretionem spirituum, quæ est de spiritibus creatis; et scientiam, quæ est de rebus humanis, ut patet, I ad Cor., xii. Habitus autem et actus distinguentur secundum objecta, ut patet per ea quæ supra dicta sunt. Ergo videtur quod de nullo pertinente ad aliquod horum sit prophetia. Relinquitur ergo quod sit solum de futuris contingentibus.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.arg.3] Further, difference of object causes difference of species, as stated above (I-II, 54, 2). Therefore, if one prophecy is about future contingencies, and another about other things, it would seem to follow that these are different species of prophecy.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.arg.3] 3. Præterea, diversitas objecti causat diversitatem speciei, ut ex supra dictis patet. Si ergo prophetia quædam sit de futuris contingentibus, quædam autem de quibusdam aliis rebus, videtur sequi quod non sit eadem species prophetiae.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.sc] Gregory says (Hom. i super Ezech.) that some prophecies are "about the future, for instance (Isaiah 7:14), 'Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son'"; some are "about the past, as (Genesis 1:1), 'In the beginning God created heaven and earth'"; some are "about the present," as (1 Corinthians 14:24-25), "If all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not . . . the secrets of his heart are made manifest." Therefore prophecy is not about future contingencies alone.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.sc] Sed contra est quod Gregorius dicit Super Ezech., hom. i, § 1, col. 786, t. 2, quod « prophetia quædam est de futuro; sicut id quod dicitur Isaiæ vii,: Ecce virgo concipiet, et pariet filium; quædam de præterito, sicut id quod dicitur, Gen., i: In principio creavit Deus cælum et terram; quædam de præsenti, sicut id quod dicitur I ad Cor., xiv: Si omnes prophetent, intret autem quis infidelis, occulta cordis ejus manifesta funt. Non 1 Plenius in textu D. Gregorii. ergo est prophetia solum de contingentibus futuris.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.co] A manifestation made by means of a certain light can extend to all those things that are subject to that light: thus the body's sight extends to all colors, and the soul's natural knowledge extends to whatever is subject to the light of the active intellect. Now prophetic knowledge comes through a Divine light, whereby it is possible to know all things both Divine and human, both spiritual and corporeal; and consequently the prophetic revelation extends to them all. Thus by the ministry of spirits a prophetic revelation concerning the perfections of God and the angels was made to Isaiah 6:1, where it is written, "I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated." Moreover his prophecy contains matters referring to natural bodies, according to the words of Isaiah 40:12, "Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of His hand," etc. It also contains matters relating to human conduct, according to Isaiah 58:1, "Deal thy bread to the hungry," etc.; and besides this it contains things pertaining to future events, according to Isaiah 47:9, "Two things shall come upon thee suddenly in one day, barrenness and widowhood."
Since, however, prophecy is about things remote from our knowledge, it must be observed that the more remote things are from our knowledge the more pertinent they are to prophecy. Of such things there are three degrees. One degree comprises things remote from the knowledge, either sensitive or intellective, of some particular man, but not from the knowledge of all men; thus a particular man knows by sense things present to him locally, which another man does not know by human sense, since they are removed from him. Thus Eliseus knew prophetically what his disciple Giezi had done in his absence (2 Kings 5:26), and in like manner the secret thoughts of one man are manifested prophetically to another, according to 1 Corinthians 14:25; and again in this way what one man knows by demonstration may be revealed to another prophetically.
The second degree comprises those things which surpass the knowledge of all men without exception, not that they are in themselves unknowable, but on account of a defect in human knowledge; such as the mystery of the Trinity, which was revealed by the Seraphim saying: "Holy, Holy, Holy," etc. (Isaiah 6:3).
The last degree comprises things remote from the knowledge of all men, through being in themselves unknowable; such are future contingencies, the truth of which is indeterminate. And since that which is predicated universally and by its very nature, takes precedence of that which is predicated in a limited and relative sense, it follows that revelation of future events belongs most properly to prophecy, and from this prophecy apparently takes its name. Hence Gregory says (Hom. i super Ezech.): "And since a prophet is so called because he foretells the future, his name loses its significance when he speaks of the past or present."
[II-II.q.171.a.3.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod manifestatio quæ fit per aliquod lumen, ad omnia illa se extendere potest quæ illi lumini subjiciuntur; sicut visio corporalis se extendit ad omnes colores, et cognitio naturalis animæ se extendit ad omnia illa quæ subduntur lumini intellectus agentis. Cognitio autem prophetica est per lumen divinum, quo possunt omnia cognosci tam divina quam humana, tam spiritualia quam corporalia: et ideo revelatio prophetica ad omnia hujusmodi se extendit; sicut de his quæ pertinent ad Dei excellentiam et angelorum, spirituum ministerio revelatio prophetica facta est Isaiæ cap. vi, 1, ubi dicitur: Vidi Dominum sedentem super solium excelsum et elevatum. Cujus etiam prophetia continet ea quæ pertinent ad corpora naturalia, secundum illud Isaiæ, xl, 12: Quis mensus est pugillo aquas? etc. Continet etiam ea quæ ad mores hominum pertinent, secundum illud Isaiæ, lviii, 7: Frange esurienti panem tuum, etc. Continet etiam ea quæ pertinent ad futuros eventus, secundum illud Isaiæ, xlvii, 9: Venient tibi duo subito in die una, sterili-tas et viduitas. Considerandum tamen est, quod, quia prophetia est de his quæ procul a nostra cognitione sunt, tanto aliqua magis ad prophetiam pertinent, quanto longius ab humana cognitione existunt. Horum autem est triplex gradus. Quorum unus est eorum quæ sunt procul a cognitione hujus hominis sive secundum sensum, sive secundum intellectum, non autem a cognitione omnium hominum: sicut sensu cognoscit aliquis homo quæ sunt sibi præsentia secundum locum; quæ tamen alius humano sensu, utpote sibi absentia, non cognoscit. Et sic Elisæus prophetice cognovit quæ Giezi discipulus ejus in absentia fecerat, ut habetur IV Reg., v; et similiter cogitationes cordis unius alteri prophetice manifestur, ut dicitur I ad Cor., xiv; et per hunc modum etiam ea quæ unus scit demonstrative, alii possunt prophetice revelari. Secundus autem gradus est eorum quæ excedunt universaliter cognitionem omnium hominum, non quia secundum se non sint cognoscibilia, sed propter defectum cognitionis humana; sicut mysterium Trinitatis, quod revelatum est per Seraphim dicentia: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, etc., ut habetur Isaiæ, vi. Ultimus autem gradus est eorum quæ sunt procul ab omnium cognitione, quia in seipsis non sunt cognoscibilia; ut contingentia futura, quorum veritas non est determinata. Et quia quod est universaliter et secundum se, potius est eo quod est particulariter et per aliud, ideo ad prophetiam propriissime pertinet revelatio eventuum futurorum: unde et nomen prophetiae sumi videtur. Unde Gregorius dicit Super Ezech., ubi supra: « Et cum ideo prophetia dicta sit, quod futura prædicat, quando de praeterito vel præsenti loquitur, rationem sui nominis amittit. »
[II-II.q.171.a.3.ad.1] Prophecy is there defined according to its proper signification; and it is in this sense that it is differentiated from the other gratuitous graces.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod prophetia ibi definitur secundum id quod proprie significatur nomine prophetiae: et per hunc etiam modum prophetia dividitur contra alias gratias gratis datas. Unde patet responsio ad secundum. Quamvis possit dici quod omnia quæ sub prophetia cadunt, conveniunt in hac ratione quod non sunt ab homine cognoscibilia nisi per revelationem divinam; ea vero quæ pertinent ad sapientiam et scientiam, etinterpretationem sermonum, possunt naturali ratione ab homine cognosci; sed altiori modo manifestantur per illustrationem divini luminis. Fides autem etsi sit de invisibilibus homini, tamen ad ipsam non pertinet eorum cognitio quæ creduntur, sed quod homo per certitudinem assentiat his quæ sunt ab aliis cognita.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.ad.2] This is evident from what has just been said. We might also reply that all those things that are the matter of prophecy have the common aspect of being unknowable to man except by Divine revelation; whereas those that are the matter of "wisdom," "knowledge," and the "interpretation of speeches," can be known by man through natural reason, but are manifested in a higher way through the enlightening of the Divine light. As to "faith," although it is about things invisible to man, it is not concerned with the knowledge of the things believed, but with a man's certitude of assent to things known by others.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.ad.3] The formal element in prophetic knowledge is the Divine light, which being one, gives unity of species to prophecy, although the things prophetically manifested by the Divine light are diverse.
[II-II.q.171.a.3.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod formale in cognitione prophetica est lumen divinum, a cujus unitate prophetia habet unitatem speciei, licet sint diversa, quæ per divinum lumen prophetice manifestur.
Article 4
[II-II.q.171.a.4.arg.1] It would seem that by the Divine revelation a prophet knows all that can be known prophetically. For it is written (Amos 3:7): "The Lord God doth nothing without revealing His secret to His servants the prophets." Now whatever is revealed prophetically is something done by God. Therefore there is not one of them but what is revealed to the prophet.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.arg.1] Ad quartum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod propheta per divinam revelationem cognoscat omnia quæ possunt prophetice cognosci. Dicitur enim Amos, iii, 7: Non * faciet Dominus Deus verbum, nisi* Non facit. revelaverit secretum suum ad servos suos prophetas. Sed omnia quæ prophetice revelantur, sunt verba divinitus facta. Nihil ergo eorum est quod non reveletur prophetæ.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.arg.2] Further, "God's works are perfect" (Deuteronomy 32:4). Now prophecy is a "Divine revelation," as stated above (Article 3). Therefore it is perfect; and this would not be so unless all possible matters of prophecy were revealed prophetically, since "the perfect is that which lacks nothing" (Phys. iii, 6). Therefore all possible matters of prophecy are revealed to the prophet.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.arg.2] 2. Præterea, Dei perfecta sunt opera, ut dicitur Deuter., xxxii, 4. Sed prophetia est divina revelatio, ut dictum est. Ergo est perfecta; quod non esset nisi 4 omnia prophetabilia prophetice revelarentur, quia « perfectum est cui nihil deest, » ut dicitur in III Physic., text. 63. Ergo prophetæ omnia prophetabilia revelantur.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.arg.3] Further, the Divine light which causes prophecy is more powerful than the right of natural reason which is the cause of human science. Now a man who has acquired a science knows whatever pertains to that science; thus a grammarian knows all matters of grammar. Therefore it would seem that a prophet knows all matters of prophecy.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.arg.3] 3. Præterea, lumen divinum, quod causat prophetiam, est potentius quam lumen naturalis rationis, ex quo causatur humana scientia. Sed homo qui habet aliquam scientiam, cognoscit omnia quæ ad illam scientiam pertinent; sicut grammaticus cognoscit omnia grammaticalia. Ergo videtur quod propheta cognoscit omnia prophetabilia.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.sc] Gregory says (Hom. i super Ezech.) that "sometimes the spirit of prophecy indicates the present to the prophet's mind and nowise the future; and sometimes it points not to the present but to the future." Therefore the prophet does not know all matters of prophecy.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.sc] Sed contra est quod Gregorius dicit Super Ezech., hom. i, § 4, col. 788, t. 2, quod « aliquando spiritus prophetiæ ex præsenti tangit animum prophetantis, et ex futuro nequaquam tangit; aliquando autem ex futuro tangit, ex præsenti non tangit. » Non ergo propheta cognoscit omnia prophetabilia.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.co] Things which differ from one another need not exist simultaneously, save by reason of some one thing in which they are connected and on which they depend: thus it has been stated above (I-II, 65, 1 and 2) that all the virtues must needs exist simultaneously on account of prudence and charity. Now all the things that are known through some principle are connected in that principle and depend thereon. Hence he who knows a principle perfectly, as regards all to which its virtue extends, knows at the same time all that can be known through that principle; whereas if the common principle is unknown, or known only in a general way, it does not follow that one knows all those things at the same time, but each of them has to be manifested by itself, so that consequently some of them may be known, and some not.
Now the principle of those things that are prophetically manifested by the Divine light is the first truth, which the prophets do not see in itself. Wherefore there is no need for their knowing all possible matters of prophecy; but each one knows some of them according to the special revelation of this or that matter.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod diversa non est necesse esse simul, nisi propter aliquod unum, in quo connectuntur, et a quo dependent: sicut supra dictum est, quod virtutes omnes necesse est esse simul propter prudentiam vel charitatem. Omnia autem quæ per aliquod principium cognoscuntur, connectuntur in illo principio, et ab illo dependent. Et ideo qui cognoscit perfecte principium secundum totam ejus virtutem, simul cognoscit omnia quæ per illud principium cognoscuntur; ignorato autem communi principio, vel communiter apprehenso, nulla necessitas est simul omnia cognoscendi; sed unumquodque eorum per se oportet manifestari; et per consequens aliqua eorum possunt cognosci, et alia non cognosci. Principium autem eorum quæ divino lumine prophetice manifestantur, est ipsa veritas prima, quam prophetæ in seipsa non vident. Et ideo non oportet quod omnia prophetabilia cognoscant; sed quilibet eorum cognoscit ex eis ali-qua secundum specialem revelationem hujus vel illius rei.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.ad.1] The Lord reveals to the prophets all things that are necessary for the instruction of the faithful; yet not all to every one, but some to one, and some to another.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod Dominus omnia quæ sunt necessaria ad instructionem fidelis populi, revelat prophetis; non tamen omnia omnibus, sed quædam uni, quædam alii.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.ad.2] Prophecy is by way of being something imperfect in the genus of Divine revelation: hence it is written (1 Corinthians 13:8) that "prophecies shall be made void," and that "we prophesy in part," i.e. imperfectly. The Divine revelation will be brought to its perfection in heaven; wherefore the same text continues (1 Corinthians 13:10): "When that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away." Consequently it does not follow that nothing is lacking to prophetic revelation, but that it lacks none of those things to which prophecy is directed.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod prophetia est sicut quiddam imperfectum in genere divinæ revelationis: unde dicitur I ad Corinth., xiii, 8, quod prophetiæ evacuabuntur, et quod ex parte prophetamus, id est imperfecte. Perfectio autem divinæ revelationis erit in patria; unde subditur: Cum venerit quod perfectum est, evacuabuntur quod ex parte est. Unde non oportet quod propheticæ revelationi nihil desit, sed quod nihil desit eorum ad quæ prophetia ordinatur.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.ad.3] He who has a science knows the principles of that science, whence whatever is pertinent to that science depends; wherefore to have the habit of a science perfectly, is to know whatever is pertinent to that science. But God Who is the principle of prophetic knowledge is not known in Himself through prophecy; wherefore the comparison fails.
[II-II.q.171.a.4.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum quod ille qui habet aliquam scientiam, cognoscit principia illius scientiæ ex quibus omnia quæ sunt illius scientiæ dependent; et ideo qui perfecte habet habitum alicujus scientiæ, scit omnia quæ ad illam scientiam pertinent. Sed per prophetiam non cognoscitur in seipso principium prophetalium cognitionum, quod est Deus. Unde non est similis ratio.
Article 5
[II-II.q.171.a.5.arg.1] It would seem that the prophet always distinguishes what he says by his own spirit from what he says by the prophetic spirit. For Augustine states (Confess. vi, 13) that his mother said "she could, through a certain feeling, which in words she could not express, discern betwixt Divine revelations, and the dreams of her own soul." Now prophecy is a Divine revelation, as stated above (Article 3). Therefore the prophet always distinguishes what he says by the spirit of prophecy, from what he says by his own spirit.
[II-II.q.171.a.5.arg.1] Ad quintum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod propheta discernat semper quid dicat per spiritum proprium, et quid per spiritum prophetiæ. Dicit enim Augustinus in VI Conf., cap. xiii, col. 734, t. 4, quod « mater sua dicebat discernere se, nescio quo sapore quem verbis explicare non poterat, quid interesset inter Deum revelantem et animam suam somniantem. » Sed prophetia est revelatio divina, ut dictum est. Ergo propheta semper discernit id quod dicit per spiritum prophetiæ ab eo quod loquitur spiritu proprio.
[II-II.q.171.a.5.arg.2] Further, God commands nothing impossible, as Jerome [Pelagius, Ep. xvi, among the supposititious works of St. Jerome] says. Now the prophets were commanded (Jeremiah 23:28): "The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath My word, let him speak My word with truth." Therefore the prophet can distinguish what he has through the spirit of prophecy from what he sees otherwise.
[II-II.q.171.a.5.arg.2] 2. Præterea, « Deus non praecipit aliquid impossibile, » sicut Hieronymus dicit. Præcipitur autem prophetis, Jerem., xxiii, 28: Propheta qui habet somnium, narret somnium; et qui habet sermonem meum loquatur sermonem meum vere. Ergo propheta potest discernere quid habeat per spiritum prophetiæ ab eo quod aliter videt.
[II-II.q.171.a.5.arg.3] Further, the certitude resulting from a Divine light is greater than that which results from the light of natural reason. Now he that has science, by the light of natural reason knows for certain that he has it. Therefore he that has prophecy by a Divine light is much more certain that he has it.
[II-II.q.171.a.5.arg.3] 3. Præterea, major est certitudo quæ est per divinum lumen, quam quæ est per lumen rationis naturalis. Sed per lumen rationis naturalis ille qui habet scientiam, pro certo scit se habere. Ergo ille qui habet prophetiam per lumen divinum, multo magis certus est se habere.
[II-II.q.171.a.5.sc] Gregory says (Hom. i super Ezech.): "It must be observed that sometimes the holy prophets, when consulted, utter certain things by their own spirit, through being much accustomed to prophesying, and think they are speaking by the prophetic spirit."
[II-II.q.171.a.5.sc] Sed contra est quod Gregorius dicit Super Ezech., hom. i, § 16, col. 793, t. 2: « Sciendum est quod aliquando prophetæ sancti, dum consuluntur, ex magno usu prophetandi quædam ex suo spiritu proferunt, et se hæc ex prophetia spiritu dicere suspicantur. »
[II-II.q.171.a.5.co] The prophet's mind is instructed by God in two ways: in one way by an express revelation, in another way by a most mysterious instinct to "which the human mind is subjected without knowing it," as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. ii, 17). Accordingly the prophet has the greatest certitude about those things which he knows by an express revelation, and he has it for certain that they are revealed to him by God; wherefore it is written (Jeremiah 26:15): "In truth the Lord sent me to you, to speak all these words in your hearing." Else, were he not certain about this, the faith which relies on the utterances of the prophet would not be certain. A sign of the prophet's certitude may be gathered from the fact that Abraham being admonished in a prophetic vision, prepared to sacrifice his only-begotten son, which he nowise would have done had he not been most certain of the Divine revelation.
On the other hand, his position with regard to the things he knows by instinct is sometimes such that he is unable to distinguish fully whether his thoughts are conceived of Divine instinct or of his own spirit. And those things which we know by Divine instinct are not all manifested with prophetic certitude, for this instinct is something imperfect in the genus of prophecy. It is thus that we are to understand the saying of Gregory. Lest, however, this should lead to error, "they are very soon set aright by the Holy Ghost [For instance, cf. 2 Samuel 7:3 seqq.], and from Him they hear the truth, so that they reproach themselves for having said what was untrue," as Gregory adds (Hom. i super Ezech.).
The arguments set down in the first place consider the revelation that is made by the prophetic spirit; wherefore the answer to all the objections is clear.
[II-II.q.171.a.5.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod mens prophetæ dupliciter a Deo instruitur: uno modo per expressam revelationem; alio modo per quemdam instinctum « quem interdum et nescientes humanæ mentes patiuntur, » ut Augustinus dicit II Super Gen. ad litt., c. xvii, § 37, col. 278, t. 3. De his ergo quæ expresse per spiritum prophetia propheta cognoscit, maximam certitudinem habet, et pro certo habet quod hæc sunt divinitus sibi revelata: unde dicitur Jerem., xxvi, 15: In veritate misit me Dominus ad vos, ut loquerer in aures * vestras omnia verba hæc: alioquin si de hoc ipse certitudinem non haberet, fides quæ dictis Prophetarum innititur, certa non esset. Et signum propheticæ certitudinis accipere possumus ex hoc quod Abraham admonitus in prophetica visione se præparavit ad filium unigenitum immolandum: quod nullatenus fecisset, nisi de divina revelatione fuisset certissimus. Sed ad ea quæ cognoscit per instinctum aliquando sic se habet, ut non plene discernere possit, utrum hæc cogitaverit aliquo divino instinctu, vel per spiritum proprium. Non autem omnia quæ cognoscimus divino instinctu, sub certitudine prophetica nobis manifestantur: talis enim instinctus est quiddam imperfectum in genere prophetia. Et hoc modo intelligendum est verbum Gregorii. Ne tamen error ex hoc possit accidere, « per sanctum Spiritum citius correcti, ab eo quæ vera sunt, audiunt; et semetipsos, quia falsa dixerint, reprehendunt, » ut ibidem Gregorius subdit. Primæ autem rationes procedunt quantum ad ea quæ prophetico spiritu revelantur. Unde patet responsio ad omnia objecta.
Article 6
[II-II.q.171.a.6.arg.1] It would seem that things known or declared prophetically can be false. For prophecy is about future contingencies, as stated above (Article 3). Now future contingencies may possibly not happen; else they would happen of necessity. Therefore the matter of prophecy can be false.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.arg.1] Ad sextum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod ea quæ prophetice cognoscuntur vel annuntiantur, possint esse falsa. Prophetia enim est de futuris contingentibus, ut dictum est. Sed futura contingentia possunt non evenire; alioquin ex necessitate contingentent. Ergo prophetia potest subesse falsum.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.arg.2] Further, Isaias prophesied to Ezechias saying (Isaiah 38:1): "Take order with thy house, for thou shalt surely die, and shalt not live," and yet fifteen years were added to his life (2 Kings 20:6). Again the Lord said (Jeremiah 18:7-8): "I will suddenly speak against a nation and against a kingdom, to root out and to pull down and to destroy it. If that nation against which I have spoken shall repent of their evil, I also will repent of the evil that I have thought to do them." This is instanced in the example of the Ninevites, according to John 3:10: "The Lord [Vulgate: 'God'] had mercy with regard to the evil which He had said that He would do to them, and He did it not." Therefore the matter of prophecy can be false.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.arg.2] 2. Præterea, Isaias prophetice prænuntiavit Ezechiæ, dicens: Dispone domui tuæ, quia morieris tu, et non vives; et tamen additi sunt vitæ ejus postea quindecim anni, ut habetur IV Reg., xx, 7; et Isaiae, xxxviii, 1. Similiter et Jerem., xviii, 7, Dominus dicit: Repente loquar adversum gentem et adversum regnum, uteradicem et destruam, et disperdam illud. Si pænitentiam egerit gens illa a malo suo quod locutus sum adversus eam, agam et ego pænitentiam super malo quod cogitavi ut facerem ei. Et hoc apparet per exemplum Ninivitarum, secundum illud Jonæ, 11, 10: Misertus est Dominus* super malitiam quam dixit ut faceret eis, et non fecit. Ergo prophetia potest subesse falsum.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.arg.3] Further, in a conditional proposition, whenever the antecedent is absolutely necessary, the consequent is absolutely necessary, because the consequent of a conditional proposition stands in the same relation to the antecedent, as the conclusion to the premises in a syllogism, and a syllogism whose premises are necessary always leads to a necessary conclusion, as we find proved in I Poster. 6. But if the matter of a prophecy cannot be false, the following conditional proposition must needs be true: "If a thing has been prophesied, it will be." Now the antecedent of this conditional proposition is absolutely necessary, since it is about the past. Therefore the consequent is also necessary absolutely; yet this is unfitting, for then prophecy would not be about contingencies. Therefore it is untrue that the matter of prophecy cannot be false.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.arg.3] 3. Præterea, omnis conditionalis, cujus antecedens est necessarium absolute, consequens est necessarium absolute; quia ita se habet consequens in conditionali ad antecedens, sicut conclusio ad præmissas in syllogismo. Ex necessariis autem nunquam contingit syllogizare nisi necessarium, ut probatur in I Posterior., text. 17. Sed si prophetia non potest subesse falsum, oportet hanc conditionalem esse Non Hieronymus, sed Pelagius hæreticus in expositione fidei suæ ad Damasum Papam. veram: Si aliquid est prophetatum, erit. Hujus autem conditionalis antecedens est necessarium absolute, cum sit de praeterito. Ergo et consequens erit necessarium absolute: quod est inconveniens, quia sic prophetia non esset contingentium. Falsum est ergo quod prophetia non possit subesse falsum.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.sc] Cassiodorus says [Prol. in Psalt. i] that "prophecy is a Divine inspiration or revelation, announcing the issue of things with invariable truth." Now the truth of prophecy would not be invariable, if its matter could be false. Therefore nothing false can come under prophecy.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.sc] Sed contra est quod Cassiodorus dicit in Prol. Super Ps., col. 842, t. 1 Gl. ord., quod «prophetia est inspiratio vel revelatio divina, rerum eventus immobili veritate denuntians. » Non autem esset immobilis veritas prophetia, si posset ei falsum subesse. Ergo non potest ei subesse falsum.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.co] As may be gathered from what has been said (1 and 3 and 5), prophecy is a kind of knowledge impressed under the form of teaching on the prophet's intellect, by Divine revelation. Now the truth of knowledge is the same in disciple and teacher since the knowledge of the disciple is a likeness of the knowledge of the teacher, even as in natural things the form of the thing generated is a likeness of the form of the generator. Jerome speaks in this sense when he says [Comment. in Daniel 2:10 that "prophecy is the seal of the Divine foreknowledge." Consequently the same truth must needs be in prophetic knowledge and utterances, as in the Divine knowledge, under which nothing false can possibly come, as stated in I, 16, 8. Therefore nothing false can come under prophecy.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut ex dictis patet, prophetia est quædam cognitio intellectui prophetæ impressa ex revelatione divina per modum cujusdam doctrinæ. Veritas autem cognitionis est eadem in discipulo et in docente; quia cognitio addiscentis est similitudo cognitionis docentis: sicut etiam in rebus naturalibus forma generati est similitudo quædam formæ generantis. Et per hunc etiam modum Hieronymus dicit Super II, v. 10, col. 499, t. 5, quod «prophetia est quoddam signum divinæ præscientiæ. » Oportet igitur eamdem essse veritatem propheticæ cognitionis et enuntiationis, quæ est cognitionis divinæ, cui impossibile est subesse falsum, ut dictum est. Unde prophetia non potest subesse falsum.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.ad.1] As stated in I, 14, 13 the certitude of the Divine foreknowledge does not exclude the contingency of future singular events, because that knowledge regards the future as present and already determinate to one thing. Wherefore prophecy also, which is an "impressed likeness" or "seal of the Divine foreknowledge," does not by its unchangeable truth exclude the contingency of future things.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod, sicut dictum est, certitudo divinæ præscientiæ non excludit contingentiam singularium futurorum; quia fertur in ea, secundum quod sunt præsentia et jam determinata ad unum. Et ideo etiam prophetia, quæ est divinæ præscientiæ similitudo impressa vel signum, sua immobili veritate futurorum contingentiam non excludit.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.ad.2] The Divine foreknowledge regards future things in two ways. First, as they are in themselves, in so far, to wit, as it sees them in their presentiality: secondly, as in their causes, inasmuch as it sees the order of causes in relation to their effects. And though future contingencies, considered as in themselves, are determinate to one thing, yet, considered as in their causes, they are not so determined but that they can happen otherwise. Again, though this twofold knowledge is always united in the Divine intellect, it is not always united in the prophetic revelation, because an imprint made by an active cause is not always on a par with the virtue of that cause. Hence sometimes the prophetic revelation is an imprinted likeness of the Divine foreknowledge, in so far as the latter regards future contingencies in themselves: and such things happen in the same way as foretold, for example this saying of Isaiah 7:14: "Behold a virgin shall conceive." Sometimes, however, the prophetic revelation is an imprinted likeness of the Divine foreknowledge as knowing the order of causes to effects; and then at times the event is otherwise than foretold. Yet the prophecy does not cover a falsehood, for the meaning of the prophecy is that inferior causes, whether they be natural causes or human acts, are so disposed as to lead to such a result. On this way we are to understand the saying of Isaiah 38:1: "Thou shalt die, and not live"; in other words, "The disposition of thy body has a tendency to death": and the saying of Jonah 3:4, "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be destroyed," that is to say, "Its merits demand that it should be destroyed." God is said "to repent," metaphorically, inasmuch as He bears Himself after the manner of one who repents, by "changing His sentence, although He changes not His counsel" [Cf. I, 19, 7, ad 2].
[II-II.q.171.a.6.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod divina præscientia respicit futura secundum duo: scilicet secundum quod sunt in seipsis, in quantum scilicet ipsa præsentialiter intuetur; et secundum quod sunt in suis causis, in quantum scilicet videt ordinem causarum ad effectus. Et quamvis contingentia futura, prout sunt in seipsis, sint determinata ad unum, tamen prout sunt in suis causis, non sunt determinata, quin possint aliter evenire. Et quamvis ista duplex cognitio semper in intellectu divino conjungatur, non tamen conjungitur semper in revelatione prophetica, quia impressio agentis non semper adæquat ejus virtutem. Unde quando revelatio prophetica est impressa quædam similitudo divinæ præscientiæ, prout respicit ipsa futura contingentia in seipsis: et talia sic eveniunt sicut prophetantur; sicut illud Isa., VII, 14: Ecce virgo concipiet. Quandoque vero prophetica revelatio est impressa similitudo divinæ præscientiæ, prout scilicet cognoscit ordinem causarum ad effectus: et tunc quando aliter evenit quam prophetetur, nec tamen prophetia subest falsum: nam sensus prophetia est quod inferiorum causarum dispositio sive naturalium, sive humanorum actuum, hoc habet ut talis effectus eveniat. Et secundum hoc intelligitur verbum Isa., xxxvIII, 1, dicentis: Morieris, et non vives; id est, dispositio corporis tui ad mortem ordinatur: et quod dicitur Jonæ, III, 4: Adhuc quadraginta dies, et Ninive subvertetur; id est, hoc merita ejus exigunt ut subvertatur. Dicitur autem Deus pœnitere metaphorice, inquantum ad modum pœnitentis se habet, prout scilicet mutat sententiam, etsi non mutet consilium.
[II-II.q.171.a.6.ad.3] Since the same truth of prophecy is the same as the truth of Divine foreknowledge, as stated above, the conditional proposition: "If this was prophesied, it will be," is true in the same way as the proposition: "If this was foreknown, it will be": for in both cases it is impossible for the antecedent not to be. Hence the consequent is necessary, considered, not as something future in our regard, but as being present to the Divine foreknowledge, as stated in I, 14, 13, ad 2.
The 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
[II-II.q.171.a.6.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod quia eadem est veritas prophetia et divinæ præscientiæ, ut dictum est, hoc modo illa conditionalis est vera: Si aliquid est prophetatum, erit, sicut ista: Si aliquid est præscitum, erit; in utraque enim antecedens est impossibile non esse. Unde et consequens est necessarium, non secundum quod est futurum respectu nostro, sed ut consideratur in suo præsenti, prout subditur præscientiæ divinæ, ut in primo dictum est.
JSON: /api/sources/opera-omnia-aquinas/summa-theologiae/secunda-secundae/q171.json