Reply Obj. 2: Every form inclines the subject after the mode of the subject"s nature. Now it is the mode of an intellectual nature to be inclined freely towards the objects it desires. Consequently the movement of grace does not impose necessity; but he who has grace can fail to make use of it, and can sin.
Reply Obj. 3: Although in the order of nature grace comes midway between nature and glory, nevertheless, in the order of time, in created nature, glory is not simultaneous with nature; because glory is the end of the operation of nature helped by grace. But grace stands not as the end of operation, because it is not of works, but as the principle of right operation. Therefore it was fitting for grace to be given straightway with nature.
_______________________
FOURTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 62, Art. 4]
Whether an Angel Merits His Beat.i.tude?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angel did not merit his beat.i.tude.
For merit arises from the difficulty of the meritorious act. But the angel experienced no difficulty in acting rightly. Therefore righteous action was not meritorious for him.
Obj. 2: Further, we do not merit by merely natural operations. But it was quite natural for the angel to turn to G.o.d. Therefore he did not thereby merit beat.i.tude.
Obj. 3: Further, if a beatified angel merited his beat.i.tude, he did so either before he had it, or else afterwards. But it was not before; because, in the opinion of many, he had no grace before whereby to merit it. Nor did he merit it afterwards, because thus he would be meriting it now; which is clearly false, because in that case a lower angel could by meriting rise up to the rank of a higher, and the distinct degrees of grace would not be permanent; which is not admissible. Consequently the angel did not merit his beat.i.tude.
_On the contrary,_ It is stated (Apoc. 21:17) that the "measure of the angel" in that heavenly Jerusalem is "the measure of a man."
Therefore the same is the case with the angel.
_I answer that,_ Perfect beat.i.tude is natural only to G.o.d, because existence and beat.i.tude are one and the same thing in Him. Beat.i.tude, however, is not of the nature of the creature, but is its end. Now everything attains its last end by its operation. Such operation leading to the end is either productive of the end, when such end is not beyond the power of the agent working for the end, as the healing art is productive of health; or else it is deserving of the end, when such end is beyond the capacity of the agent striving to attain it; wherefore it is looked for from another"s bestowing. Now it is evident from what has gone before (AA. 1, 2; Q. 12, AA. 4, 5), ultimate beat.i.tude exceeds both the angelic and the human nature. It remains, then, that both man and angel merited their beat.i.tude.
And if the angel was created in grace, without which there is no merit, there would be no difficulty in saying that he merited beat.i.tude: as also, if one were to say that he had grace in any way before he had glory.
But if he had no grace before entering upon beat.i.tude, it would then have to be said that he had beat.i.tude without merit, even as we have grace. This, however, is quite foreign to the idea of beat.i.tude; which conveys the notion of an end, and is the reward of virtue, as even the Philosopher says (Ethic. i, 9). Or else it will have to be said, as some others have maintained, that the angels merit beat.i.tude by their present ministrations, while in beat.i.tude. This is quite contrary, again, to the notion of merit: since merit conveys the idea of a means to an end; while what is already in its end cannot, properly speaking, be moved towards such end; and so no one merits to produce what he already enjoys. Or else it will have to be said that one and the same act of turning to G.o.d, so far as it comes of free-will, is meritorious; and so far as it attains the end, is the fruition of beat.i.tude. Even this view will not stand, because free-will is not the sufficient cause of merit; and, consequently, an act cannot be meritorious as coming from free-will, except in so far as it is informed by grace; but it cannot at the same time be informed by imperfect grace, which is the principle of meriting, and by perfect grace, which is the principle of enjoying. Hence it does not appear to be possible for anyone to enjoy beat.i.tude, and at the same time to merit it.
Consequently it is better to say that the angel had grace ere he was admitted to beat.i.tude, and that by such grace he merited beat.i.tude.
Reply Obj. 1: The angel"s difficulty of working righteously does not come from any contrariety or hindrance of natural powers; but from the fact that the good work is beyond his natural capacity.
Reply Obj. 2: An angel did not merit beat.i.tude by natural movement towards G.o.d; but by the movement of charity, which comes of grace.
The answer to the Third Objection is evident from what we have said.
_______________________
FIFTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 62, Art. 5]
Whether the Angel Obtained Beat.i.tude Immediately After One Act of Merit?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angel did not possess beat.i.tude instantly after one act of merit. For it is more difficult for a man to do well than for an angel. But man is not rewarded at once after one act of merit. Therefore neither was the angel.
Obj. 2: Further, an angel could act at once, and in an instant, from the very outset of his creation, for even natural bodies begin to be moved in the very instant of their creation; and if the movement of a body could be instantaneous, like operations of mind and will, it would have movement in the first instant of its generation.
Consequently, if the angel merited beat.i.tude by one act of his will, he merited it in the first instant of his creation; and so, if their beat.i.tude was not r.e.t.a.r.ded, then the angels were in beat.i.tude in the first instant.
Obj. 3: Further, there must be many intervals between things which are far apart. But the beatific state of the angels is very far remote from their natural condition: while merit comes midway between. Therefore the angel would have to pa.s.s through many stages of merit in order to reach beat.i.tude.
_On the contrary,_ Man"s soul and an angel are ordained alike for beat.i.tude: consequently equality with angels is promised to the saints. Now the soul separated from the body, if it has merit deserving beat.i.tude, enters at once into beat.i.tude, unless there be some obstacle. Therefore so does an angel. Now an angel instantly, in his first act of charity, had the merit of beat.i.tude. Therefore, since there was no obstacle within him, he pa.s.sed at once into beat.i.tude by only one meritorious act.
_I answer that,_ The angel was beatified instantly after the first act of charity, whereby he merited beat.i.tude. The reason whereof is because grace perfects nature according to the manner of the nature; as every perfection is received in the subject capable of perfection, according to its mode. Now it is proper to the angelic nature to receive its natural perfection not by pa.s.sing from one stage to another; but to have it at once naturally, as was shown above (A. 1; Q. 58, AA. 3, 4). But as the angel is of his nature inclined to natural perfection, so is he by merit inclined to glory. Hence instantly after merit the angel secured beat.i.tude. Now the merit of beat.i.tude in angel and man alike can be from merely one act; because man merits beat.i.tude by every act informed by charity. Hence it remains that an angel was beatified straightway after one act of charity.
Reply Obj. 1: Man was not intended to secure his ultimate perfection at once, like the angel. Hence a longer way was a.s.signed to man than to the angel for securing beat.i.tude.
Reply Obj. 2: The angel is above the time of corporeal things; hence the various instants regarding the angels are not to be taken except as reckoning the succession of their acts. Now their act which merited beat.i.tude could not be in them simultaneously with the act of beat.i.tude, which is fruition; since the one belongs to imperfect grace, and the other to consummate grace. Consequently, it remains for different instants to be conceived, in one of which the angel merited beat.i.tude, and in another was beatified.
Reply Obj. 3: It is of the nature of an angel instantly to attain the perfection unto which he is ordained. Consequently, only one meritorious act is required; which act can so far be called an interval as through it the angel is brought to beat.i.tude.
_______________________
SIXTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 62, Art. 6]
Whether the Angels Receive Grace and Glory According to the Degree of Their Natural Gifts?
Objection 1: It would seem that the angels did not receive grace and glory according to the degree of their natural gifts. For grace is bestowed of G.o.d"s absolute will. Therefore the degree of grace depends on G.o.d"s will, and not on the degree of their natural gifts.
Obj. 2: Further, a moral act seems to be more closely allied with grace than nature is; because a moral act is preparatory to grace.
But grace does not come "of works," as is said Rom. 11:6. Therefore much less does the degree of grace depend upon the degree of their natural gifts.
Obj. 3: Further, man and angel are alike ordained for beat.i.tude or grace. But man does not receive more grace according to the degree of his natural gifts. Therefore neither does the angel.
_On the contrary,_ Is the saying of the Master of the Sentences (Sent. ii, D, 3) that "those angels who were created with more subtle natures and of keener intelligence in wisdom, were likewise endowed with greater gifts of grace."
_I answer that,_ It is reasonable to suppose that gifts of graces and perfection of beat.i.tude were bestowed on the angels according to the degree of their natural gifts. The reason for this can be drawn from two sources. First of all, on the part of G.o.d, Who, in the order of His wisdom, established various degrees in the angelic nature. Now as the angelic nature was made by G.o.d for attaining grace and beat.i.tude, so likewise the grades of the angelic nature seem to be ordained for the various degrees of grace and glory; just as when, for example, the builder chisels the stones for building a house, from the fact that he prepares some more artistically and more fittingly than others, it is clear that he is setting them apart for the more ornate part of the house. So it seems that G.o.d destined those angels for greater gifts of grace and fuller beat.i.tude, whom He made of a higher nature.
Secondly, the same is evident on the part of the angel. The angel is not a compound of different natures, so that the inclination of the one thwarts or r.e.t.a.r.ds the tendency of the other; as happens in man, in whom the movement of his intellective part is either r.e.t.a.r.ded or thwarted by the inclination of his sensitive part. But when there is nothing to r.e.t.a.r.d or thwart it, nature is moved with its whole energy.
So it is reasonable to suppose that the angels who had a higher nature, were turned to G.o.d more mightily and efficaciously. The same thing happens in men, since greater grace and glory are bestowed according to the greater earnestness of their turning to G.o.d. Hence it appears that the angels who had the greater natural powers, had the more grace and glory.
Reply Obj. 1: As grace comes of G.o.d"s will alone, so likewise does the nature of the angel: and as G.o.d"s will ordained nature for grace, so did it ordain the various degrees of nature to the various degrees of grace.
Reply Obj. 2: The acts of the rational creature are from the creature itself; whereas nature is immediately from G.o.d. Accordingly it seems rather that grace is bestowed according to degree of nature than according to works.
Reply Obj. 3: Diversity of natural gifts is in one way in the angels, who are themselves different specifically; and in quite another way in men, who differ only numerically. For specific difference is on account of the end; while numerical difference is because of the matter. Furthermore, there is something in man which can thwart or impede the movement of his intellective nature; but not in the angels. Consequently the argument is not the same for both.
_______________________
SEVENTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 62, Art. 7]
Whether Natural Knowledge and Love Remain in the Beatified Angels?
Objection 1: It would seem that natural knowledge and love do not remain in the beatified angels. For it is said (1 Cor. 13:10): "When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away." But natural love and knowledge are imperfect in comparison with beatified knowledge and love. Therefore, in beat.i.tude, natural knowledge and love cease.
Obj. 2: Further, where one suffices, another is superfluous. But the knowledge and love of glory suffice for the beatified angels.
Therefore it would be superfluous for their natural knowledge and love to remain.
Obj. 3: Further, the same faculty has not two simultaneous acts, as the same line cannot, at the same end, be terminated in two points.
But the beatified angels are always exercising their beatified knowledge and love; for, as is said _Ethic._ i, 8, happiness consists not in habit, but in act. Therefore there can never be natural knowledge and love in the angels.
_On the contrary,_ So long as a nature endures, its operation remains. But beat.i.tude does not destroy nature, since it is its perfection. Therefore it does not take away natural knowledge and love.
_I answer that,_ Natural knowledge and love remain in the angels. For as principles of operations are mutually related, so are the operations themselves. Now it is manifest that nature is to beat.i.tude as first to second; because beat.i.tude is superadded to nature. But the first must ever be preserved in the second. Consequently nature must be preserved in beat.i.tude: and in like manner the act of nature must be preserved in the act of beat.i.tude.
Reply Obj. 1: The advent of a perfection removes the opposite imperfection. Now the imperfection of nature is not opposed to the perfection of beat.i.tude, but underlies it; as the imperfection of the power underlies the perfection of the form, and the power is not taken away by the form, but the privation which is opposed to the form. In the same way, the imperfection of natural knowledge is not opposed to the perfection of the knowledge in glory; for nothing hinders us from knowing a thing through various mediums, as a thing may be known at the one time through a probable medium and through a demonstrative one. In like manner, an angel can know G.o.d by His essence, and this appertains to his knowledge of glory; and at the same time he can know G.o.d by his own essence, which belongs to his natural knowledge.