Summa summae S. Thomae sive compendium theologiae

D. Thomas, q. 62

You will ask 1° whether the angels were blessed in their creation.

I answer 1°. The angels were created in natural beatitude¹; because natural beatitude, which is not beatitude simply speaking, but only in a certain respect, consists in the perfect knowledge and love of God as natural author. But the angels had both from the beginning of their creation, as was proved in the preceding article.

If you say, that from this it follows that demons are even now blessed with natural beatitude, because in them there remains a perfect knowledge and love of God as natural author, I deny the inference; because that knowledge and love of God as author of nature is not to be called beatitude in a certain respect, except insofar as it preserves the perfect subordination owed to God as natural author. Now, the evil angels were disordered by sin from God as author of nature; because by sinning directly against God as supernatural author, they sinned indirectly against him as natural author, as we shall say below.

I answer 2°. The angels were not created in supernatural beatitude²; because supernatural beatitude is not something of nature, but the end of nature. But the end is not had at once from the beginning. Therefore. — It is confirmed. Of the nature of perfect and supernatural beatitude is stability, that is, unlosability and confirmation in good. But the angels, as soon as they were created, were not stable and confirmed in good, which the fall of some shows. Therefore.

You will ask 2° whether the angel needed actual grace in order to turn himself to God as the object of supernatural beatitude.

I answer affirmatively³. Because no will can be borne toward that which is above its nature and the powers of nature, unless it is aided by some other supernatural principle, which is called the help of grace; because the natural inclination of the will is only toward that which is fitting according to its nature. But God, as he is the object of supernatural beatitude, is above every created nature and the powers of nature. Therefore.

But that this grace was efficacious of itself, and not merely sufficient, we shall prove against the Jansenists and Molinists in the treatise de Gratia.

You will ask 3° whether the angels were created in sanctifying grace.

I answer 1°. It seems certain that all the angels had sanctifying grace before they arrived at the term of beatitude or damnation.

Proof. The good angels merited beatitude. But the principle of merit is sanctifying grace: The evil one stood not in the truth, Ioann., VIII, 44. But to stand in the truth is to remain in justice and holiness, as Chrysostom interprets, Hom. 53 in Ioann. and St. Leo, Serm. 10 de Quadrag. Likewise, they kept not their principality, in the epistle of Iudae, 6. But by the name of principality is understood the excellence of grace. Hence Jerome, on chapter III of Oseae, says: « The demons, having fallen from their own dignity and possessing nothing of their ancient grace, are greedy. »

It is confirmed. What was granted to the first man ought not to be denied to the angel. But the first man, before he sinned, had been endowed with sanctifying grace, as the Council of Trent defines, sess. V, can. 1.

I answer 2°. It is more probable that the angels received sanctifying grace in their creation⁴.

Proof, 1°, from the Fathers. Augustine, book XII de Civit., c. 9: « Who made a good will in the angels, he says, but he who created them with a good will, that is, with a chaste love by which they might cling to him, at once both founding their nature and bestowing grace upon them? » Basil, on Psal. xxxi: « In their first constitution, and as it were in the very mass of their own substance, they had implanted in them one holiness. »

Proof from a fitting reason⁵. According to Augustine, book VIII super Genes. ad litt., c. 3, n. 6, God, in the creation of corporeal nature, implanted in all things the seminal reasons of their natural effects, as is evident in animals, plants, etc. Therefore it is likely that he also implanted in the angels, elevated to the supernatural order, at their creation the seminal reasons of their supernatural effects. — I subsume. But sanctifying grace is the seed of all supernatural acts and gifts, even of supernatural beatitude itself; whence it is called, I Ioann., III, 9, the seed of God. Therefore.

You will ask 4° whether the angels obtained grace and glory according to the quantity of their natural endowments.

I answer. The angels received the supernatural gifts of grace and glory according to the quantity of their natural perfections⁶, so that the more perfect and superior they were in nature, the more grace and glory they received: not, however, as though the natural perfections of the angels were dispositions toward grace and glory — that is Pelagian — but because God, gratuitously and from mere good pleasure, willed to preserve a certain proportion between the natural endowments of the angels and his supernatural gifts, granting greater grace to those more perfect in natural endowments, and lesser to those less perfect: which he did not observe in man.

With the author in this part, theologians commonly hold, and before them the holy Fathers. Basil, de Spiritu sancto, c. 16,

says: « The powers of the heavens have from the Holy Spirit the measure of sanctification, according to the portion by which they surpass one another. » Damascene, book II de Fide orthod., c. 3: « Through the Word all the angels were created, and through the sanctification of the Holy Spirit they received all the numbers of perfection; yet in such a way that each, according to his own dignity and class, is a partaker of light and grace. »

This indeed can be demonstrated by no reason, since it depends solely on the will of God, to whom it was thus pleasing to dispose concerning the angels, and not concerning men.

There is, however, a fitting reason⁷. God, through his wisdom, established diverse degrees in angelic nature. But just as he ordained that very nature toward attaining grace and natural beatitude, so it is likely that he ordained the diverse degrees of angelic nature toward diverse degrees of grace and glory: just as, if a builder polishes stones for building a house, from the very fact that he fits some more beautifully and fittingly, he seems to ordain them for a more honored part of the house. Therefore it thus seems that God ordained the angels whom he made of a higher and more perfect nature toward greater gifts of graces and a fuller beatitude.

You will ask, 5° whether the angels merited their supernatural beatitude.

I answer affirmatively⁸; because beatitude is the reward of virtue, which ought to be conferred on account of virtuous works, which are merits. Add that it is more noble to have it thus through merits, than by a gratuitous title.

You will ask, 6° how the angels merited their supernatural beatitude: whether through works subsequent to it, or concomitant, or preceding it?

I answer that they merited it through works preceding it in time⁹; because that manner of meriting glory is the most connatural of all. For merit stands to reward as the way to the term, and cause to effect. Therefore it is to be attributed to the angels.

You will ask, 7° whether the angel had beatitude immediately after one perfectly meritorious act.

I answer affirmatively¹⁰.

For the explanation and proof of this response, it must be observed that the act of charity which the angels elicited in the instant of their creation was not free as to specification, but only as to exercise: because they did not move themselves toward it, since before this they were not in act, but were moved by God specially moving them, and therefore under the aspect of good only; for otherwise God does not move specially. But after, through this prior act, they were in act, and thence were able to move themselves, out of their own full deliberation, toward the object under indifference, so that they could choose good or evil, and thus had freedom even as to specification; the evil ones broke forth into sin, the good stood fast in good, with perfect freedom both as to specification and as to exercise.

We say, therefore, that immediately after this fully meritorious act, and not after the first, the angels received beatitude. Because, although freedom as to specification with respect to good and evil is not absolutely required for merit, and therefore we admit that through an act necessary as to specification the angels merited beatitude; nevertheless it is reasonably deferred, in a nature capable of sin, that the conferring of the reward wait until a fully perfect merit has preceded, proceeding from one's own deliberation and perfect freedom, both as to specification and as to exercise, so that he who was able to do evil and did not may thus be rewarded and crowned. And it is of this fully free act that the response is to be understood.

You will ask, 8° in how many instants the way of the angels was completed.

For the resolution of this question, note that, since the angel is above the time of corporeal things, diverse instants, in those things which pertain to angels, are taken only according to succession in their acts, so that there are as many

instants of angelic time as there are diverse operations of theirs, whether according to substance, or according to intrinsic mode, not coexisting, but succeeding one another; because, if they existed at once, however diverse, they would not constitute time, of whose nature is before and after, but would be measured by a single instant. Whence it can also happen that one angelic instant corresponds to several instants of our time, if indeed it continues the same operation for some while.

To ask, therefore, in how many instants the way of the angels was completed, is to ask how many intrinsically diverse actions they successively elicited from the first instant of their creation up to the term of damnation or glorification inclusively, that is, including also the instant in which they were either damned or glorified.

I answer 1°. The way of the evil angels was completed in three instants. This is the common opinion.

Proof. There are as many instants in the angels as there are in them distinct operations succeeding one another. But by three distinct operations succeeding one another, the evil angels completed their way: 1° they merited, like the good angels, through conversion to God; 2° they sinned; 3° they received the punishment of sin against their will. But that this last operation is distinct from the second, and cannot be simultaneous with it, is evident, because no one can be affected at once with the greatest delight and the greatest sorrow, nor be at once in the way and outside the way. But the angel, in the instant of sin, was affected with the greatest delight and complacency in his own perfection, and was in the way; in the instant of damnation he was affected with the greatest sorrow, and was outside the way. Therefore.

I answer 2°. As to the way of the good angels, theologians are divided, even the Thomists. Some hold that it was completed in three instants, like the way of the evil angels, because in the former, as in the latter, there were three distinct operations succeeding one another up to the term of glorification inclusively, namely: 1° there was in them, in the instant of creation, an act of charity free as to exercise, not as to specification, common to the good and the evil; 2° afterward there was an act of charity perfectly free as to specification and as to exercise; 3° finally, the attainment of glory. Others hold that it was completed in two instants, because they hold that the second act is not distinct from the first, but is the first continued. Either is probable, but the question is not of such moment as to detain us long.

You will ask 9° how long each of these two or three instants lasted, by correspondence to our time.

I answer. The first instant, in which the good and evil angels merited imperfectly, lasted a single instant of our time; because that instant was the instant of creation, wholly indivisible, and after it, perfect freedom having been attained, the good merited perfectly, the evil sinned, and thence became unbendable, these in evil, those in good.

The second instant, in which the good angels merited perfectly and the evil ones sinned, corresponds to a portion of our time, because in our time, after an instant, a portion follows. But how long did this time last? It is uncertain. This alone is established, that the evil angels were damned before the fall of Adam, since indeed one of them, under the guise of a serpent, tempted Eve.

The third instant, in which the good were first glorified, and the evil damned, coexists with an instant of our time; because the actions of God do not depend on time, but are instantaneous. But as to permanence, both — glorification as well as damnation — are measured by a participated eternity.