Secunda Secundae · chapter 168 of 184 · ▶ Speed Read

Greco-Christian stream·Opera Omnia Sancti Thomae (Complete Works of Thomas Aquinas)·Summa Theologiae·Secunda Secundae·Q173. The manner in which prophetic knowledge is conveyed

Source context
Theme
modes of transmission in prophetic knowledge — rapture, vision, and the relationship between intellect and divine illumination in prophetic reception
Soul-faculty
Consciousness Soul

Steiner

not engaged in the GA corpus

Cross-tradition

  • Jewish prophetic tradition (Maimonides, Guide for the Perplexed II.36–38)Maimonides distinguishes degrees of prophetic reception — from intellectual overflow to imaginative vision — structuring a hierarchy of prophetic modes that Aquinas's Q173 engages scholastically.
  • Neoplatonic illumination doctrine (Plotinus, Enneads V.3)Plotinus's account of intellect receiving the One's light without discursive mediation presents a cross-tradition congruence with Aquinas's treatment of how the prophetic intellect is elevated above ordinary cognitive process.
  • Islamic prophetology (Ibn Sina, De Anima / Avicenna's Active Intellect)Avicenna's doctrine of the prophetic soul receiving emanated forms directly from the Active Intellect parallels the scholastic structure of prophetic illumination described in Q173.

Q173. The manner in which prophetic knowledge is conveyed

Article 1

[II-II.q.173.a.1.arg.1] It would seem that the prophets see the very essence of God, for a gloss on Isaiah 38:1, "Take order with thy house, for thou shalt die and not live," says: "Prophets can read in the book of God's foreknowledge in which all things are written." Now God's foreknowledge is His very essence. Therefore prophets see God's very essence.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod prophetæ ipsam Dei essentiam videant. Quia super illud Isa., xxxviii: Dispone domui tuæ, etc., dicit Glossa: « Prophetæ in ipso libro præscientia Dei in quo omnia scripta sunt, legere possunt. » Sed præscientia Dei est ipsa ejus essentia. Ergo prophetæ vident ipsam Dei essentiam.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.arg.2] Further, Augustine says (De Trin. ix, 7) that "in that eternal truth from which all temporal things are made, we see with the mind's eye the type both of our being and of our actions." Now, of all men, prophets have the highest knowledge of Divine things. Therefore they, especially, see the Divine essence.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, Augustinus dicit in IX De Trinit., c. vii, col. 967, t. 8, quod « in illa æterna veritate, ex qua temporalia facta sunt omnia, formam secundum quam sumus, et secundum quam operamur, visu mentis aspicimus. » Sed prophetæ inter omnes homines altissimam habent divinorum cognitionem. Ergo ipsi maxime divinam essentiam vident.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.arg.3] Further, future contingencies are foreknown by the prophets "with unchangeable truth." Now future contingencies exist thus in God alone. Therefore the prophets see God Himself.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, futura contingentia præcognoscuntur a prophetis secundum im- Aliter de Sybillis sentire S. Thomas videbatur. Sylvius tamen vult nostrum doctorem nunquam affirmasse Sybillas fuisse fideles ex eo quod de Christo prophetarunt. Certum est plurima falsa in libris sybillinis inveniri. mobilem veritatem. Sic autem non sunt nisi in ipso Deo. Ergo prophetæ ipsum Deum vident.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.sc] The vision of the Divine essence is not made void in heaven; whereas "prophecy is made void" (1 Corinthians 13:8). Therefore prophecy is not conveyed by a vision of the Divine essence.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod visio divinæ essentiæ non evacuatur in patria. Prophetia autem evacuatur, ut habetur I ad Cor., xiii, 13. Ergo prophetia non fit per visionem divinæ essentiæ.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.co] Prophecy denotes Divine knowledge as existing afar off. Wherefore it is said of the prophets (Hebrews 11:13) that "they were beholding . . . afar off." But those who are in heaven and in the state of bliss see, not as from afar off, but rather, as it were, from near at hand, according to Psalm 139:14, "The upright shall dwell with Thy countenance." Hence it is evident that prophetic knowledge differs from the perfect knowledge, which we shall have in heaven, so that it is distinguished therefrom as the imperfect from the perfect, and when the latter comes the former is made void, as appears from the words of the Apostle (1 Corinthians 13:10).

Some, however, wishing to discriminate between prophetic knowledge and the knowledge of the blessed, have maintained that the prophets see the very essence of God (which they call the "mirror of eternity") [Cf. De Veritate, xii, 6; Sent. II, D, XI, part 2, art. 2, ad 4, not, however, in the way in which it is the object of the blessed, but as containing the types [Cf. I, 15] of future events. But this is altogether impossible. For God is the object of bliss in His very essence, according to the saying of Augustine (Confess. v, 4): "Happy whoso knoweth Thee, though he know not these," i.e. creatures. Now it is not possible to see the types of creatures in the very essence of God without seeing It, both because the Divine essence is Itself the type of all things that are made--the ideal type adding nothing to the Divine essence save only a relationship to the creature--and because knowledge of a thing in itself--and such is the knowledge of God as the object of heavenly bliss--precedes knowledge of that thing in its relation to something else--and such is the knowledge of God as containing the types of things. Consequently it is impossible for prophets to see God as containing the types of creatures, and yet not as the object of bliss. Therefore we must conclude that the prophetic vision is not the vision of the very essence of God, and that the prophets do not see in the Divine essence Itself the things they do see, but that they see them in certain images, according as they are enlightened by the Divine light.

Wherefore Dionysius (Coel. Hier. iv), in speaking of prophetic visions, says that "the wise theologian calls that vision divine which is effected by images of things lacking a bodily form through the seer being rapt in divine things." And these images illumined by the Divine light have more of the nature of a mirror than the Divine essence: since in a mirror images are formed from other things, and this cannot be said of God. Yet the prophet's mind thus enlightened may be called a mirror, in so far as a likeness of the truth of the Divine foreknowledge is formed therein, for which reason it is called the "mirror of eternity," as representing God's foreknowledge, for God in His eternity sees all things as present before Him, as stated above (Question 172, Article 1).

[II-II.q.173.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod prophetia importat cognitionem divinam ut procul existentem. Unde et de prophetis dicitur Hebr., xi, quod erant a longe aspicientes. Illi autem qui sunt in patria, in statu beatitudinis existentes, non vident ut aremotis, sed magis quasi ex propinquo, secundum illud psalm. cxxxix, 14: Habitabunt recti cum vultu tuo. Unde manifestum est quod cognitio prophetica alia est a cognitione perfecta, quæ erit in patria: unde et distinguitur ab ea sicut imperfectum a perfecto, et ea adveniente evacuatur, ut patet per Apostolum, I ad Cor., xiii. Fuerunt autem quidam qui cognitionem propheticam a cognitione beatorum distinguere volentes, dixerunt quod prophetæ vident ipsam divinam essentiam, quam vocant « speculum aternitatis, » non tamen secundum quod est objectum beatorum, sed secundum quod sunt in ea rationes futurorum eventuum: quod qui dem est omnino impossibile. Deus enim est objectum beatitudinis secundum ipsam sui essentiam, secundum illud quod Augustinus dicit in V Confess., cap. iv, col. 708, t. 1: « Beatus est qui te scit, etiam si illas, » id est, creaturas, « nesciat. » Non est autem possibile quod aliquis videat rationes creaturarum in ipsa divina essentia, ita quod eam non videat: tum quia ipsa divina essentia est ratio omnium eorum quæ fiunt; ratio autem idealis non addit supra divinam essentiam nisi respectum ad creaturam: tum etiam quia prius est cognoscere aliquid in se, quod est cognoscere Deum ut est objectum beatitudinis, quam cognoscere illud per comparisonem ad alterum, quod est cognoscere Deum secundum rationes rerum in ipso existentes. Et ideo non potest esse quod prophetæ videant Deum secundum rationes creaturarum, et non prout est objectum beatitudinis. Et ideo dicendum est quod visio prophetica non est visio ipsius divinæ essentiæ, neque in ipsa divina essentia vident ea quæ vident, sed in quibusdam similitudinibus, secundum illustrationem divini luminis. Unde Dionysius dicit in iv cap. Cæl. hierar., § 3, col. 179, t. 1, de visionibus propheticis loquens, quod « sapiens theologus visionem illam dicit esse divinam, quæ fit per similitudinem rerum forma corporali carentium ex reductione videntium in divina. » Et hujusmodi similitudines divino lumine illustratæ magis habent rationem speculi quam Dei essentia: nam in speculo resultant species ab aliis rebus; quod non potest dici de Deo. Sed hujusmodi illustratio mentis propheticæ potest dici speculum, inquantum resultatibi similitudo veritatis divinæ præsentiæ, et propter hoc dicitur speculum aternitatis, quasi repræsentans Dei præscientiam, qui in sua aternitate omnia præsentialiter videt, ut dictum est.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.ad.1] The prophets are said to read the book of God's foreknowledge, inasmuch as the truth is reflected from God's foreknowledge on the prophet's mind.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod prophetæ dicuntur inspicere in libro præscientiae Dei, inquantum ex ipsa præscientia Dei resultat veritas in mentem prophetæ.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.ad.2] Man is said to see in the First Truth the type of his existence, in so far as the image of the First Truth shines forth on man's mind, so that he is able to know himself.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod in prima veritate dicitur homo videre propriam formam, qua existit, inquantum primæ veritatis similitudo refulget in mente humana, ex qua anima habet quod seipsam cognoscat.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.ad.3] From the very fact that future contingencies are in God according to unalterable truth, it follows that God can impress a like knowledge on the prophet's mind without the prophet seeing God in His essence.

[II-II.q.173.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod ex hoc ipso quod in Deo futura contingentia sunt secundum immobilem veritatem, potest imprimere menti prophetæ similem cognitionem, absque eo quod prophetæ Deum per essentiam videant.

Article 2

[II-II.q.173.a.2.arg.1] It would seem that in prophetic revelation no new species of things are impressed on the prophet's mind, but only a new light. For a gloss of Jerome on Amos 1:2 says that "prophets draw comparisons from things with which they are conversant." But if prophetic vision were effected by means of species newly impressed, the prophet's previous experience of things would be inoperative. Therefore no new species are impressed on the prophet's soul, but only the prophetic light.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.arg.2] Further, according to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. xii, 9), "it is not imaginative but intellective vision that makes the prophet"; wherefore it is declared (Daniel 10:1) that "there is need of understanding in a vision." Now intellective vision, as stated in the same book (Gen. ad lit. xii, 6) is not effected by means of images, but by the very truth of things. Therefore it would seem that prophetic revelation is not effected by impressing species on the soul.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, sicut Augustinus dicit XII Super Gen. ad litt., cap. 1x, col. 461, t. 3, « visio imaginaria non facit prophetam, sed solum visio intellectualis. » Unde etiam Danielis x, 1, dicitur quod intelligentia opus est in visione. Sed visio intellectualis, sicut in eodem lib., c. xxvi, § 54, col. 476, dicitur, non fit per aliquas similitudines, sed per ipsam rerum veritatem. Ergo videtur quod prophetica revelatio non fiat per impressionem aliquarum specierum.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.arg.3] Further, by the gift of prophecy the Holy Ghost endows man with something that surpasses the faculty of nature. Now man can by his natural faculties form all kinds of species of things. Therefore it would seem that in prophetic revelation no new species of things are impressed, but merely an intellectual light.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, per donum prophetia Spiritus sanctus exhibet homini id quod est supra facultatem naturæ humanæ. Sed formare quascumque rerum species potest homo ex facultate naturali. Ergo videtur quod in prophetica revelatione non infundatur aliqua rerum species, sed solum intelligibile lumen.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.sc] It is written (Hosea 12:10): "I have multiplied" their "visions, and I have used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets." Now multiplicity of visions results, not from a diversity of intellectual light, which is common to every prophetic vision, but from a diversity of species, whence similitudes also result. Therefore it seems that in prophetic revelation new species of things are impressed, and not merely an intellectual light.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Oseæ, xii, 10: Ego visiones* multiplicavi eis, et in manibus prophetarum assimilatus sum. Sed multiplicatio visionum non fit secundum lumen intelligibile, quod est commune in omni prophetica visione, sed solum secundum diversitatem specierum, secundum quas etiam est assimilatio. Ergo videtur quod in prophetica revelatione imprimantur novæ species rerum, et non solum intelligibile lumen.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.co] As Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 9), "prophetic knowledge pertains most of all to the intellect." Now two things have to be considered in connection with the knowledge possessed by the human mind, namely the acceptance or representation of things, and the judgment of the things represented. Now things are represented to the human mind under the form of species: and according to the order of nature, they must be represented first to the senses, secondly to the imagination, thirdly to the passive intellect, and these are changed by the species derived from the phantasms, which change results from the enlightening action of the active intellect. Now in the imagination there are the forms of sensible things not only as received from the senses, but also transformed in various ways, either on account of some bodily transformation (as in the case of people who are asleep or out of their senses), or through the coordination of the phantasms, at the command of reason, for the purpose of understanding something. For just as the various arrangements of the letters of the alphabet convey various ideas to the understanding, so the various coordinations of the phantasms produce various intelligible species of the intellect.

As to the judgment formed by the human mind, it depends on the power of the intellectual light.

Now the gift of prophecy confers on the human mind something which surpasses the natural faculty in both these respects, namely as to the judgment which depends on the inflow of intellectual light, and as to the acceptance or representation of things, which is effected by means of certain species. Human teaching may be likened to prophetic revelation in the second of these respects, but not in the first. For a man represents certain things to his disciple by signs of speech, but he cannot enlighten him inwardly as God does.

But it is the first of these two that holds the chief place in prophecy, since judgment is the complement of knowledge. Wherefore if certain things are divinely represented to any man by means of imaginary likenesses, as happened to Pharaoh (Genesis 41:1-7) and to Nabuchodonosor (Daniel 4:1-2), or even by bodily likenesses, as happened to Balthasar (Daniel 5:5), such a man is not to be considered a prophet, unless his mind be enlightened for the purpose of judgment; and such an apparition is something imperfect in the genus of prophecy. Wherefore some [Rabbi Moyses, Doct. Perplex. II, xxxvi] have called this "prophetic ecstasy," and such is divination by dreams. And yet a man will be a prophet, if his intellect be enlightened merely for the purpose of judging of things seen in imagination by others, as in the case of Joseph who interpreted Pharaoh's dream. But, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 9), "especially is he a prophet who excels in both respects, so," to wit, "as to see in spirit likenesses significant of things corporeal, and understand them by the quickness of his intellect."

Now sensible forms are divinely presented to the prophet's mind, sometimes externally by means of the senses--thus Daniel saw the writing on the wall (Daniel 5:25)--sometimes by means of imaginary forms, either of exclusively Divine origin and not received through the senses (for instance, if images of colors were imprinted on the imagination of one blind from birth), or divinely coordinated from those derived from the senses--thus Jeremiah saw the "boiling caldron . . . from the face of the north" (Jeremiah 1:13)--or by the direct impression of intelligible species on the mind, as in the case of those who receive infused scientific knowledge or wisdom, such as Solomon or the apostles.

But intellectual light is divinely imprinted on the human mind--sometimes for the purpose of judging of things seen by others, as in the case of Joseph, quoted above, and of the apostles whose understanding our Lord opened "that they might understand the scriptures" (Luke 24:45); and to this pertains the "interpretation of speeches"--sometimes for the purpose of judging according to Divine truth, of the things which a man apprehends in the ordinary course of nature--sometimes for the purpose of discerning truthfully and efficaciously what is to be done, according to Isaiah 63:14, "The Spirit of the Lord was their leader."

Hence it is evident that prophetic revelation is conveyed sometimes by the mere infusion of light, sometimes by imprinting species anew, or by a new coordination of species.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, XII Super Gen. ad litt., c. 1x, col. 461, t. 3, « cognitio prophetica maxime ad mentem pertinet. » Circa cognitionem autem humanæ mentis duo oportet considerare; scilicet acceptanceem, sive repræsentationem rerum, et judicium de rebus repræsentatis. Quando autem repræsentantur menti humanæ res aliquæ secundum aliquas species, et secundum naturæ ordinem, primo oportet quod species repræsententur sensui, secundo imaginationi, tertio intellectui possibili, qui immutatur a speciebus phantasmatum secundum illustrationem intellectus agentis. In imaginatione autem non solum sunt formæ rerum sensibilium, secundum quod accipiuntur a sensu, sed transmutantur diversimode, vel propter aliquam transmutationem corporalem, sicut accidit in dormientibus et furiosis, vel etiam secundum imperium rationis disponuntur phantasmata in ordine ad id quod est intelligendum. Sicut enim ex diversa ordinatione earumdem litterarum accipiuntur diversi intellectus; ita etiam secundum diversam dispositionem phantasmatum resultant in intellectu diversæ species intelligibiles. Judicium autem humanæ mentis fit secundum vim intellectualis luminis. Per donum autem prophetia confertur aliquid humanæ menti supra id quod pertinet ad naturalem facultatem, quantum ad utrumque; scilicet et quantum ad judicium per influxum luminis intellectualis, et quantum ad acceptanceem, seu repræsentationem rerum, quæ fit per aliquas species. Et quantum ad hoc secundum potest assimilari doctrina humana revelationi propheticæ, non autem quantum ad primum. Homo enim suo discipulo repræsentat aliquas res per signa locutionum; non autem potest interius illuminare, sicut facit Deus. Horum autem duorum principalius est primum in prophetia, quia judicium est completivum cognitionis. Et ideo si cui fiat divinitus repræsentatio aliquarum rerum per similitudines imaginarias, ut Pharaoni et Nabuchodonosor, aut etiam per similitudines corporales, ut Balthasar, non est talis censendus propheta, nisi illuminetur ejus mens ad judicandum: sed talis apparitio est quiddam imperfectum in genere prophetia. Unde a quibusdam vocatur casus prophetia, sicut et divinatio somniorum. Erit autem propheta, si solummodo intellectus ejus illuminetur ad judicandum etiam ea quæ ab aliis imaginarie visa sunt, ut patet de Joseph, qui exposuit somnium Pharaonis. Sed, sicut Augustinus dicit, XII Super Gen. ad litt., cap. 1x, col. 461, t. 3: « Maxime propheta est qui utroque præcellit, ut » scilicet « videat in spiritu corporalium rerum significativas similitudines, et eas vivacitate mentis intelligat. » Repræsentantur autem divinitus menti prophetæ quandoque quidem mediante Ex Hieronymo desumpta, col. 993, t. 5. sensu exterius quædam formæ sensibiles; sicut Daniel vidit scripturam parietis, ut legitur Daniel v; quandoque autem per formas imaginarias, sive omnino divinitus impressas, non per sensum acceptas, puta si alicui cæco nato imprimerentur in imaginatione colorum similitudines, vel etiam divinitus ordinatas ex his quæ a sensibus sunt acceptæ; sicut Jeremias vidit ollam succensam a facie aquilonis, ut habetur Jerem., i, 13, sive etiam imprimendo species intelligibiles ipsi menti; sicut patet de his qui accipiunt scientiam, vel sapientiam infusam, sicut Salomon et Apostoli. Lumen autem intelligibile quandoque quidem imprimitur menti humanæ divinitus ad dijudicandum ea quæ ab aliis visa sunt; sicut dictum est de Joseph, et sicut patet de Apostolis, quibus Dominus aperuit sensum, ut intelligent Scripturas, ut dicitur Lucæ, xxiv, 45, et ad hoc pertinet interpretatio sermonum; sive etiam ad dijudicandum secundum divinam veritatem ea quæ cursu naturali homo apprehendit; sive etiam ad dijudicandum veraciter et efficaciter ea quæ agenda sunt, secundum illud Isa., lxiii, 14: Spiritus Domini ductor ejus fuit. Sic igitur patet quod prophetica revelatio quandoque quidem fit per solam luminis influentiam, quandoque autem etiam per species de novo impressas vel aliter ordinatas.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.ad.1] As stated above, sometimes in prophetic revelation imaginary species previously derived from the senses are divinely coordinated so as to accord with the truth to be revealed, and then previous experience is operative in the production of the images, but not when they are impressed on the mind wholly from without.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod, sicut dictum est, quandoque in prophetica revelatione divinitus ordinantur species imaginariæ præacceptæ a sensu, secundum congruentiam ad veritatem revelandam; et tunc conversatio præcedens aliquid operatur ad ipsas similitudines, non autem quando totaliter ab extrinseco imprimuntur.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.ad.2] Intellectual vision is not effected by means of bodily and individual images, but by an intelligible image. Hence Augustine says (De Trin. ix, 11) that "the soul possesses a certain likeness of the species known to it." Sometimes this intelligible image is, in prophetic revelation, imprinted immediately by God, sometimes it results from pictures in the imagination, by the aid of the prophetic light, since a deeper truth is gathered from these pictures in the imagination by means of the enlightenment of the higher light.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod visio intellectualis non fit secundum aliquas similitudines corporales et individuales; fit tamen secundum aliquam similitudinem intelligibilem. Unde Augustinus dicit IX De Trin., c. xi, col. 969, t. 8, quod « habet animus nonnullam speciei notæ similitudinem, » quæ quidem similitudo intelligibilis in revelatione prophetica quandoque immediate a Deo imprimitur, quandoque a formis imaginatis resultat secundum adjutorium prophetici luminis, quia ex eisdem formis imaginatis subtilior conspicitur veritas secundum illustrationem altioris luminis.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.ad.3] It is true that man is able by his natural powers to form all kinds of pictures in the imagination, by simply considering these pictures, but not so that they be directed to the representation of intelligible truths that surpass his intellect, since for this purpose he needs the assistance of a supernatural light.

[II-II.q.173.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod quascum-que formas imaginatas naturali virtute homo potest formare, absolute hujusmodi formas considerando; non tamen ut sint ordinatæ ad repræsentandas intelligibiles veritates, quæ hominis intellectum exceedunt; sed ad hoc necessarium est auxilium supernaturalis luminis.

Article 4

[II-II.q.173.a.4.arg.1] It would seem that the prophets always know the things which they prophesy. For, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 9), "those to whom signs were shown in spirit by means of the likenesses of bodily things, had not the gift of prophecy, unless the mind was brought into action, so that those signs were also understood by them." Now what is understood cannot be unknown. Therefore the prophet is not ignorant of what he prophesies.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.arg.1] Ad quartum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod prophetæ semper cognoscant ea quæ prophetant. Quia, ut Augustinus dicit, XII Super Genes. ad litt., c. 1x, col. 461, t. 3, « quibus signa per aliquas rerum corporalium similitudines demonstraban-tur in spiritu, nisi accessisset mentis officium, ut etiam intelligentur, non-dum erat prophetia. » Sed ea quæ intelligentur non possunt esse incognita. Ergo propheta non ignorat ea quæ prophetat.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.arg.2] Further, the light of prophecy surpasses the light of natural reason. Now one who possesses a science by his natural light, is not ignorant of his scientific acquirements. Therefore he who utters things by the prophetic light cannot ignore them.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.arg.2] 2. Præterea, lumen prophetia est excellentius quam lumen naturalis rationis. Sed quicumque lumine naturali habet scientiam, non ignorat ea quæ scit. Ergo quicumquelumine prophetico aliqua enuntiat, non potest ea ignorare.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.arg.3] Further, prophecy is directed for man's enlightenment; wherefore it is written (2 Peter 1:19): "We have the more firm prophetical word, whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place." Now nothing can enlighten others unless it be lightsome in itself. Therefore it would seem that the prophet is first enlightened so as to know what he declares to others.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.arg.3] 3. Præterea, prophetia ordinatur ad hominum illuminationem: unde dicitur II Petr., i, 19: Habemus propheticum sermonem, cui bene facitis attendentes quasi lucernæ lucenti in caliginoso loco. Sed nihil potest alios illuminare, nisi in se sit illuminatum. Ergo videtur quod propheta prius illuminetur ad cognoscendum ea quæ aliis enuntiat.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.sc] It is written (John 11:51): "And this he" (Caiphas) "spoke, not of himself, but being the High Priest of that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation," etc. Now Caiphas knew this not. Therefore not every prophet knows what he prophesies.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Joan., xi, 51: Hoc autem a semetipso Caiphas non dixit, sed cum esset Pontifex anni illius, prophetavit quod Jesus moriturus erat pro gente, etc. Sed hoc Caiphas non cognovit. Ergo non omnis qui prophetat cognoscit ea quæ prophetat.

[II-II.q.173.a.4.co] In prophetic revelation the prophet's mind is moved by the Holy Ghost, as an instrument that is deficient in regard to the principal agent. Now the prophet's mind is moved not only to apprehend something, but also to speak or to do something; sometimes indeed to all these three together, sometimes to two, sometimes to one only, and in each case there may be a defect in the prophet's knowledge. For when the prophet's mind is moved to think or apprehend a thing, sometimes he is led merely to apprehend that thing, and sometimes he is further led to know that it is divinely revealed to him.

Again, sometimes the prophet's mind is moved to speak something, so that he understands what the Holy Ghost means by the words he utters; like David who said (2 Samuel 23:2): "The Spirit of the Lord hath spoken by me"; while, on the other hand, sometimes the person whose mind is moved to utter certain words knows not what the Holy Ghost means by them, as was the case with Caiphas (John 11:51).

Again, when the Holy Ghost moves a man's mind to do something, sometimes the latter understands the meaning of it, like Jeremias who hid his loin-cloth in the Euphrates (Jeremiah 13:1-11); while sometimes he does not understand it--thus the soldiers, who divided Christ's garments, understood not the meaning of what they did.

Accordingly, when a man knows that he is being moved by the Holy Ghost to think something, or signify something by word or deed, this belongs properly to prophecy; whereas when he is moved, without his knowing it, this is not perfect prophecy, but a prophetic instinct. Nevertheless it must be observed that since the prophet's mind is a defective instrument, as stated above, even true prophets know not all that the Holy Ghost means by the things they see, or speak, or even do.

And this suffices for the Replies to the Objections, since the arguments given at the beginning refer to true prophets whose minds are perfectly enlightened from above.

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.173.a.4.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod in revelatione prophetica movetur mens prophetæ a Spiritu sancto, sicut instrumentum deficiens respectu principalis agentis. Movetur autem mens prophetæ non solum ad aliquid apprehendendum, sed etiam ad aliquid loquendum, vel ad aliquid faciendum; et quandoque quidem ad omnia tria simul, quandoque autem ad duo horum, quandoque vero ad unum tantum. Et quodlibet horum contingit esse cum aliquo cognitionis defectu. Nam cum mens prophetæ movetur ad aliquid aestimandum vel apprehendendum, quandoque quidem inducitur ad hoc quod solum apprehendat rem illam, quandoque autem ulterius ad hoc quod cognoscat hæc sibi esse divinitus revelata. Similiter etiam quandoque movetur mens prophetæ ad aliquid loquendum, ita quod intelligat id quod per hæc verba Spiritus sanctus intendit, sicut David, qui dicebat II Reg., xxiii, 2: Spiritus Domini locutus est per me. Quandoque autem ille cujus mens movetur ad aliqua verba depromenda, non intelligit quid Spiritus sanctus per hæc verba intendat, sicut patet de Caipha, Joan., x. Similiter etiam cum Spiritus sanctus movet mentem alicujus ad aliquid faciendum, quandoque quidem intelligit quid hoc significet, sicut patet de Jeremia, qui abscondit lumbare in Euphrate, ut habetur Jerem., xiii; quandoque vero non intelligit, sicut milites dividentes vestimenta Christi, non intelligebant quid hoc significaret. Cum ergo aliquis cognoscit se moveri a Spiritu sancto ad aliquid aestimandum vel significandum verbo, vel facto, hoc proprie ad prophetiam pertinet; cum autem movetur, sed non cognoscit, non est perfecta prophetia, sed quidam instinctus propheticus. Sciendum tamen quod quia mens prophetæ est instrumentum deficiens, ut dictum est, etiam veri prophetæ non omnia cognoscunt quæ in eorum visis, aut verbis, aut etiam factis Spiritus sanctus intendit. Et per hoc patet responsio ad objecta. Nam primæ rationes loquuntur de veris prophetis quorum mens divinitus illustratur perfecte.

JSON: /api/sources/opera-omnia-aquinas/summa-theologiae/secunda-secundae/q173.json

Space: play/pause · ←→: skip · ↑↓: speed · Esc: close
250 wpm