|
64
|
1 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" id="FP.viii" class="div2">
|
|
|
2 <a href="summa.FP_Q64_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
3 <a href="summa.FP_Q65.html"></a>
|
|
|
4 <h2 id="FP.viii-p0.1">TREATISE ON THE WORK OF THE SIX DAYS (QQ[65]-74)</h2>
|
|
|
5 <div id="FP_Q65" class="div3">
|
|
|
6 <a href="summa.FP.viii.html"></a>
|
|
|
7 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
8 <h3 id="FP_Q65-p0.1">THE WORK OF CREATION OF CORPOREAL CREATURES (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
9 <p id="FP_Q65-p1"></p>
|
|
|
10 <p id="FP_Q65-p2"> From the consideration of spiritual creatures we proceed to that of corporeal creatures, in the production of which, as Holy
|
|
|
11 Scripture makes mention, three works are found, namely, the work of creation, as given in the words, "In the beginning God
|
|
|
12 created heaven and earth"; the work of distinction as given in the words, "He divided the light from the darkness, and the
|
|
|
13 waters that are above the firmament from the waters that are under the firmament"; and the work of adornment,
|
|
|
14 expressed thus, "Let there be lights in the firmament."
|
|
|
15 </p>
|
|
|
16 <p id="FP_Q65-p3"> First, then, we must consider the work of creation; secondly, the work of distinction; and thirdly, the work of adornment.
|
|
|
17 Under the first head there are four points of inquiry:
|
|
|
18 </p>
|
|
|
19 <p id="FP_Q65-p4"> (1) Whether corporeal creatures are from God?</p>
|
|
|
20 <p id="FP_Q65-p5"> (2) Whether they were created on account of God's goodness?</p>
|
|
|
21 <p id="FP_Q65-p6"> (3) Whether they were created by God through the medium of the angels?</p>
|
|
|
22 <p id="FP_Q65-p7"> (4) Whether the forms of bodies are from the angels or immediately from God.</p>
|
|
|
23 <div id="FP_Q65_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
24 <a href="summa.FP_Q65.html"></a>
|
|
|
25 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
26 <h4 id="FP_Q65_A1-p0.1">Whether corporeal creatures are from God?</h4>
|
|
|
27 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
28 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p2">
|
|
|
29 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that corporeal creatures are not from God. For it is said (
|
|
|
30 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Eccl.3.14" target="asv">Eccles. 3:14</a>): "I have learned that all the works which God hath made, continue for ever." But visible bodies do not continue for ever,
|
|
|
31 for it is said (
|
|
|
32 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p2.2" href="./asv.html#iiCor.4.18" target="asv">2 Cor. 4:18</a>): "The things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal." Therefore God did not make visible
|
|
|
33 bodies.
|
|
|
34 </p>
|
|
|
35 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p3">
|
|
|
36 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is said (
|
|
|
37 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p3.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.31" target="asv">Gn. 1:31</a>): "God saw all things that He had made, and they were very good." But corporeal creatures are evil, since we find them harmful
|
|
|
38 in many ways; as may be seen in serpents, in the sun's heat, and other things. Now a thing is called evil, in so far as it
|
|
|
39 is harmful. Corporeal creatures, therefore, are not from God.
|
|
|
40 </p>
|
|
|
41 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p4">
|
|
|
42 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, what is from God does not withdraw us from God, but leads us to Him. But corporeal creatures withdraw us from God.
|
|
|
43 Hence the Apostle (
|
|
|
44 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p4.1" href="./asv.html#iiCor.4.18" target="asv">2 Cor. 4:18</a>): "While we look not at the things which are seen." Corporeal creatures, therefore, are not from God.
|
|
|
45 </p>
|
|
|
46 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p5">
|
|
|
47 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is said (
|
|
|
48 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Ps.145.6" target="asv">Ps. 145:6</a>): "Who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all things that are in them."
|
|
|
49 </p>
|
|
|
50 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p6">
|
|
|
51 <b>I answer that,</b> Certain heretics maintain that visible things are not created by the good God, but by an evil principle, and allege in proof
|
|
|
52 of their error the words of the Apostle (
|
|
|
53 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p6.1" href="./asv.html#iiCor.4.4" target="asv">2 Cor. 4:4</a>), "The god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers." But this position is altogether untenable. For, if things
|
|
|
54 that differ agree in some point, there must be some cause for that agreement, since things diverse in nature cannot be united
|
|
|
55 of themselves.
|
|
|
56 Hence whenever in different things some one thing common to all is found, it must be that these different things receive that
|
|
|
57 one thing from some one cause, as different bodies that are hot receive their heat from fire. But being is found to be common
|
|
|
58 to all things, however otherwise different. There must, therefore, be one principle of being from which all things in whatever
|
|
|
59 way existing have their being, whether they are invisible and spiritual, or visible and corporeal. But the devil is
|
|
|
60 called the god of this world, not as having created it, but because worldlings serve him, of whom also the Apostle says, speaking
|
|
|
61 in the same sense, "Whose god is their belly" (
|
|
|
62 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p6.2" href="./asv.html#Phil.3.19" target="asv">Phil. 3:19</a>).
|
|
|
63 </p>
|
|
|
64 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p7">
|
|
|
65 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> All the creatures of God in some respects continue for ever, at least as to matter, since what is created will never be annihilated,
|
|
|
66 even though it be corruptible. And the nearer a creature approaches God, Who is immovable, the more it also is immovable.
|
|
|
67 For corruptible creatures endure for ever as regards their matter, though they change as regards their substantial form. But
|
|
|
68 incorruptible creatures endure with respect to their substance, though they
|
|
|
69 are mutable in other respects, such as place, for instance, the heavenly bodies; or the affections, as spiritual creatures.
|
|
|
70 But the Apostle's words, "The things which are seen are temporal," though true even as regards such things considered in themselves
|
|
|
71 (in so far as every visible creature is subject to time, either as to being or as to movement), are intended to apply to visible
|
|
|
72 things in so far as they are offered to man as rewards. For such rewards, as consist in these visible things, are
|
|
|
73 temporal; while those that are invisible endure for ever. Hence he said before (
|
|
|
74 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p7.1" href="./asv.html#iiCor.4.17" target="asv">2 Cor. 4:17</a>): "It worketh for us . . . an eternal weight of glory."
|
|
|
75 </p>
|
|
|
76 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p8">
|
|
|
77 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Corporeal creatures according to their nature are good, though this good is not universal, but partial and limited, the consequence
|
|
|
78 of which is a certain opposition of contrary qualities, though each quality is good in itself. To those, however, who estimate
|
|
|
79 things, not by the nature thereof, but by the good they themselves can derive therefrom, everything which is harmful to themselves
|
|
|
80 seems simply evil. For they do not reflect that what is in some
|
|
|
81 way injurious to one person, to another is beneficial, and that even to themselves the same thing may be evil in some respects,
|
|
|
82 but good in others. And this could not be, if bodies were essentially evil and harmful.
|
|
|
83 </p>
|
|
|
84 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p9">
|
|
|
85 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Creatures of themselves do not withdraw us from God, but lead us to Him; for "the invisible things of God are clearly seen,
|
|
|
86 being understood by the things that are made" (
|
|
|
87 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p9.1" href="./asv.html#Rom.1.20" target="asv">Rom. 1:20</a>). If, then, they withdraw men from God, it is the fault of those who use them foolishly. Thus it is said (
|
|
|
88 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A1-p9.2" href="./asv.html#Wis.14.11" target="asv">Wis. 14:11</a>): "Creatures are turned into a snare to the feet of the unwise." And the very fact that they can thus withdraw us
|
|
|
89 from God proves that they came from Him, for they cannot lead the foolish away from God except by the allurements of some
|
|
|
90 good that they have from Him.
|
|
|
91 </p>
|
|
|
92 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p10"></p>
|
|
|
93 <p id="FP_Q65_A1-p11"></p>
|
|
|
94 <a href="summa.FP_Q65.html"></a>
|
|
|
95 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
96 </div>
|
|
|
97 <div id="FP_Q65_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
98 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
99 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
100 <h4 id="FP_Q65_A2-p0.1">Whether corporeal things were made on account of God's goodness?</h4>
|
|
|
101 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
102 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p2">
|
|
|
103 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that corporeal creatures were not made on account of God's goodness. For it is said (
|
|
|
104 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A2-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Wis.1.14" target="asv">Wis. 1:14</a>) that God "created all things that they might be." Therefore all things were created for their own being's sake, and not
|
|
|
105 on account of God's goodness.
|
|
|
106 </p>
|
|
|
107 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p3">
|
|
|
108 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, good has the nature of an end; therefore the greater good in things is the end of the lesser good. But spiritual
|
|
|
109 creatures are related to corporeal creatures, as the greater good to the lesser. Corporeal creatures, therefore, are created
|
|
|
110 for the sake of spiritual creatures, and not on account of God's goodness.
|
|
|
111 </p>
|
|
|
112 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p4">
|
|
|
113 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, justice does not give unequal things except to the unequal. Now God is just: therefore inequality not created by
|
|
|
114 God must precede all inequality created by Him. But an inequality not created by God can only arise from free-will, and consequently
|
|
|
115 all inequality results from the different movements of free-will. Now, corporeal creatures are unequal to spiritual creatures.
|
|
|
116 Therefore the former were made on account of movements of free-will, and not on
|
|
|
117 account of God's goodness.
|
|
|
118 </p>
|
|
|
119 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p5">
|
|
|
120 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is said (
|
|
|
121 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A2-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Prov.16.4" target="asv">Prov. 16:4</a>): "The Lord hath made all things for Himself."
|
|
|
122 </p>
|
|
|
123 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p6">
|
|
|
124 <b>I answer that,</b> Origen laid down [*Peri Archon ii.] that corporeal creatures were not made according to God's original purpose, but in punishment
|
|
|
125 of the sin of spiritual creatures. For he maintained that God in the beginning made spiritual creatures only, and all of equal
|
|
|
126 nature; but that of these by the use of free-will some turned to God, and, according to the measure of their conversion, were
|
|
|
127 given an higher or a lower rank, retaining their simplicity; while others
|
|
|
128 turned from God, and became bound to different kinds of bodies according to the degree of their turning away. But this position
|
|
|
129 is erroneous. In the first place, because it is contrary to Scripture, which, after narrating the production of each kind
|
|
|
130 of corporeal creatures, subjoins, "God saw that it was good" (
|
|
|
131 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A2-p6.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1" target="asv">Gn. 1</a>), as if to say that everything was brought into being for the reason that it was good for it to be. But according to Origen's
|
|
|
132 opinion, the corporeal creature was made, not because
|
|
|
133 it was good that it should be, but that the evil in another might be punished. Secondly, because it would follow that the
|
|
|
134 arrangement, which now exists, of the corporeal world would arise from mere chance. For it the sun's body was made what it
|
|
|
135 is, that it might serve for a punishment suitable to some sin of a spiritual creature, it would follow, if other spiritual
|
|
|
136 creatures had sinned in the same way as the one to punish whom the sun had been created, that many suns would exist in the
|
|
|
137 world;
|
|
|
138 and so of other things. But such a consequence is altogether inadmissible. Hence we must set aside this theory as false, and
|
|
|
139 consider that the entire universe is constituted by all creatures, as a whole consists of its parts.
|
|
|
140 </p>
|
|
|
141 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p7"> Now if we wish to assign an end to any whole, and to the parts of that whole, we shall find, first, that each and every part
|
|
|
142 exists for the sake of its proper act, as the eye for the act of seeing; secondly, that less honorable parts exist for the
|
|
|
143 more honorable, as the senses for the intellect, the lungs for the heart; and, thirdly, that all parts are for the perfection
|
|
|
144 of the whole, as the matter for the form, since the parts are, as it were, the matter of the whole.
|
|
|
145 Furthermore, the whole man is on account of an extrinsic end, that end being the fruition of God. So, therefore, in the parts
|
|
|
146 of the universe also every creature exists for its own proper act and perfection, and the less noble for the nobler, as those
|
|
|
147 creatures that are less noble than man exist for the sake of man, whilst each and every creature exists for the perfection
|
|
|
148 of the entire universe. Furthermore, the entire universe, with all its parts, is ordained towards God as its end, inasmuch
|
|
|
149 as it imitates, as it were, and shows forth the Divine goodness, to the glory of God. Reasonable creatures, however, have
|
|
|
150 in some special and higher manner God as their end, since they can attain to Him by their own operations, by knowing and loving
|
|
|
151 Him. Thus it is plain that the Divine goodness is the end of all corporeal things.
|
|
|
152 </p>
|
|
|
153 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p8">
|
|
|
154 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> In the very fact of any creature possessing being, it represents the Divine being and Its goodness. And, therefore, that
|
|
|
155 God created all things, that they might have being, does not exclude that He created them for His own goodness.
|
|
|
156 </p>
|
|
|
157 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p9">
|
|
|
158 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The proximate end does not exclude the ultimate end. Therefore that corporeal creatures were, in a manner, made for the sake
|
|
|
159 of the spiritual, does not prevent their being made on account of God's goodness.
|
|
|
160 </p>
|
|
|
161 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p10">
|
|
|
162 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Equality of justice has its place in retribution, since equal rewards or punishments are due to equal merit or demerit. But
|
|
|
163 this does not apply to things as at first instituted. For just as an architect, without injustice, places stones of the same
|
|
|
164 kind in different parts of a building, not on account of any antecedent difference in the stones, but with a view to securing
|
|
|
165 that perfection of the entire building, which could not be obtained except by
|
|
|
166 the different positions of the stones; even so, God from the beginning, to secure perfection in the universe, has set therein
|
|
|
167 creatures of various and unequal natures, according to His wisdom, and without injustice, since no diversity of merit is presupposed.
|
|
|
168 </p>
|
|
|
169 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p11"></p>
|
|
|
170 <p id="FP_Q65_A2-p12"></p>
|
|
|
171 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
172 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
173 </div>
|
|
|
174 <div id="FP_Q65_A3" class="div4">
|
|
|
175 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
176 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
177 <h4 id="FP_Q65_A3-p0.1">Whether corporeal creatures were produced by God through the medium of the angels?</h4>
|
|
|
178 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p1"></p>
|
|
|
179 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p2">
|
|
|
180 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that corporeal creatures were produced by God through the medium of the angels. For, as all things are governed
|
|
|
181 by the Divine wisdom, so by it were all things made, according to
|
|
|
182 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A3-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Ps.103.24" target="asv"> Ps. 103:24 </a>"Thou hast made all things in wisdom." But "it belongs to wisdom to ordain," as stated in the beginning of the Metaphysics
|
|
|
183 (i, 2). Hence in the government of things the lower is ruled by the higher in a certain fitting order, as Augustine
|
|
|
184 says (De Trin. iii, 4). Therefore in the production of things it was ordained that the corporeal should be produced by the
|
|
|
185 spiritual, as the lower by the higher.
|
|
|
186 </p>
|
|
|
187 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p3">
|
|
|
188 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, diversity of effects shows diversity of causes, since like always produces like. It then all creatures, both spiritual
|
|
|
189 and corporeal, were produced immediately by God, there would be no diversity in creatures, for one would not be further removed
|
|
|
190 from God than another. But this is clearly false; for the Philosopher says that some things are corruptible because they are
|
|
|
191 far removed from God (De Gen. et Corrup. ii, text. 59).
|
|
|
192 </p>
|
|
|
193 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p4">
|
|
|
194 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, infinite power is not required to produce a finite effect. But every corporeal thing is finite. Therefore, it could
|
|
|
195 be, and was, produced by the finite power of spiritual creatures: for in suchlike beings there is no distinction between what
|
|
|
196 is and what is possible: especially as no dignity befitting a nature is denied to that nature, unless it be in punishment
|
|
|
197 of a fault.
|
|
|
198 </p>
|
|
|
199 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p5">
|
|
|
200 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is said (
|
|
|
201 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A3-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.1" target="asv">Gn. 1:1</a>): "In the beginning God created heaven and earth"; by which are understood corporeal creatures. These, therefore, were produced
|
|
|
202 immediately by God.
|
|
|
203 </p>
|
|
|
204 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p6">
|
|
|
205 <b>I answer that,</b> Some have maintained that creatures proceeded from God by degrees, in such a way that the first creature proceeded from Him
|
|
|
206 immediately, and in its turn produced another, and so on until the production of corporeal creatures. But this position is
|
|
|
207 untenable, since the first production of corporeal creatures is by creation, by which matter itself is produced: for in the
|
|
|
208 act of coming into being the imperfect must be made before the perfect: and it is
|
|
|
209 impossible that anything should be created, save by God alone.
|
|
|
210 </p>
|
|
|
211 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p7"> In proof whereof it must be borne in mind that the higher the cause, the more numerous the objects to which its causation
|
|
|
212 extends. Now the underlying principle in things is always more universal than that which informs and restricts it; thus, being
|
|
|
213 is more universal than living, living than understanding, matter than form. The more widely, then, one thing underlies others,
|
|
|
214 the more directly does that thing proceed from a higher cause. Thus the thing that underlies primarily all
|
|
|
215 things, belongs properly to the causality of the supreme cause. Therefore no secondary cause can produce anything, unless
|
|
|
216 there is presupposed in the thing produced something that is caused by a higher cause. But creation is the production of a
|
|
|
217 thing in its entire substance, nothing being presupposed either uncreated or created. Hence it remains that nothing can create
|
|
|
218 except God alone, Who is the first cause. Therefore, in order to show that all bodies were created immediately by God, Moses
|
|
|
219 said: "In the beginning God created heaven and earth."
|
|
|
220 </p>
|
|
|
221 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p8">
|
|
|
222 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> In the production of things an order exists, but not such that one creature is created by another, for that is impossible;
|
|
|
223 but rather such that by the Divine wisdom diverse grades are constituted in creatures.
|
|
|
224 </p>
|
|
|
225 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p9">
|
|
|
226 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> God Himself, though one, has knowledge of many and different things without detriment to the simplicity of His nature, as
|
|
|
227 has been shown above (
|
|
|
228 <a id="FP_Q65_A3-p9.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q15_A2.html">Q[15], A[2]</a>); so that by His wisdom He is the cause of diverse things as known by Him, even as an artificer, by apprehending diverse
|
|
|
229 forms, produces diverse works of art.
|
|
|
230 </p>
|
|
|
231 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p10">
|
|
|
232 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The amount of the power of an agent is measured not only by the thing made, but also by the manner of making it; for one
|
|
|
233 and the same thing is made in one way by a higher power, in another by a lower. But the production of finite things, where
|
|
|
234 nothing is presupposed as existing, is the work of infinite power, and, as such, can belong to no creature.
|
|
|
235 </p>
|
|
|
236 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p11"></p>
|
|
|
237 <p id="FP_Q65_A3-p12"></p>
|
|
|
238 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
239 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
240 </div>
|
|
|
241 <div id="FP_Q65_A4" class="div4">
|
|
|
242 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
243 <a href="summa.FP_Q66.html"></a>
|
|
|
244 <h4 id="FP_Q65_A4-p0.1">Whether the forms of bodies are from the angels?</h4>
|
|
|
245 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p1"></p>
|
|
|
246 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p2">
|
|
|
247 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the forms of bodies come from the angels. For Boethius says (De Trin. i): "From forms that are without
|
|
|
248 matter come the forms that are in matter." But forms that are without matter are spiritual substances, and forms that are
|
|
|
249 in matter are the forms of bodies. Therefore, the forms of bodies are from spiritual substances.
|
|
|
250 </p>
|
|
|
251 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p3">
|
|
|
252 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, all that is such by participation is reduced to that which is such by its essence. But spiritual substances are
|
|
|
253 forms essentially, whereas corporeal creatures have forms by participation. Therefore the forms of corporeal things are derived
|
|
|
254 from spiritual substances.
|
|
|
255 </p>
|
|
|
256 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p4">
|
|
|
257 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, spiritual substances have more power of causation than the heavenly bodies. But the heavenly bodies give form to
|
|
|
258 things here below, for which reason they are said to cause generation and corruption. Much more, therefore, are material forms
|
|
|
259 derived from spiritual substances.
|
|
|
260 </p>
|
|
|
261 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p5">
|
|
|
262 <b>On the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. iii, 8): "We must not suppose that this corporeal matter serves the angels at their nod, but rather
|
|
|
263 that it obeys God thus." But corporeal matter may be said thus to serve that from which it receives its form. Corporeal forms,
|
|
|
264 then, are not from the angels, but from God.
|
|
|
265 </p>
|
|
|
266 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p6">
|
|
|
267 <b>I answer that,</b> It was the opinion of some that all corporeal forms are derived from spiritual substances, which we call the angels. And
|
|
|
268 there are two ways in which this has been stated. For Plato held that the forms of corporeal matter are derived from, and
|
|
|
269 formed by, forms immaterially subsisting, by a kind of participation. Thus he held that there exists an immaterial man, and
|
|
|
270 an immaterial horse, and so forth, and that from such the individual sensible things that we
|
|
|
271 see are constituted, in so far as in corporeal matter there abides the impression received from these separate forms, by a
|
|
|
272 kind of assimilation, or as he calls it, "participation" (Phaedo xlix). And, according to the Platonists, the order of forms
|
|
|
273 corresponds to the order of those separate substances; for example, that there is a single separate substance, which is horse
|
|
|
274 and the cause of all horses, whilst above this is separate life, or "per se" life, as they term it, which is the cause of
|
|
|
275 all
|
|
|
276 life, and that above this again is that which they call being itself, which is the cause of all being. Avicenna, however,
|
|
|
277 and certain others, have maintained that the forms of corporeal things do not subsist "per se" in matter, but in the intellect
|
|
|
278 only. Thus they say that from forms existing in the intellect of spiritual creatures (called "intelligences" by them, but
|
|
|
279 "angels" by us) proceed all the forms of corporeal matter, as the form of his handiwork proceeds from the forms in the mind
|
|
|
280 of
|
|
|
281 the craftsman. This theory seems to be the same as that of certain heretics of modern times, who say that God indeed created
|
|
|
282 all things, but that the devil formed corporeal matter, and differentiated it into species.
|
|
|
283 </p>
|
|
|
284 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p7"> But all these opinions seem to have a common origin; they all, in fact, sought for a cause of forms as though the form were
|
|
|
285 of itself brought into being. Whereas, as Aristotle (Metaph. vii, text. 26,27,28), proves, what is, properly speaking, made,
|
|
|
286 is the "composite." Now, such are the forms of corruptible things that at one time they exist and at another exist not, without
|
|
|
287 being themselves generated or corrupted, but by reason of the generation or corruption of the "composite";
|
|
|
288 since even forms have not being, but composites have being through forms: for, according to a thing's mode of being, is the
|
|
|
289 mode in which it is brought into being. Since, then, like is produced from like, we must not look for the cause of corporeal
|
|
|
290 forms in any immaterial form, but in something that is composite, as this fire is generated by that fire. Corporeal forms,
|
|
|
291 therefore, are caused, not as emanations from some immaterial form, but by matter being brought from potentiality into act
|
|
|
292 by
|
|
|
293 some composite agent. But since the composite agent, which is a body, is moved by a created spiritual substance, as Augustine
|
|
|
294 says (De Trin. iii, 4,5), it follows further that even corporeal forms are derived from spiritual substances, not emanating
|
|
|
295 from them, but as the term of their movement. And, further still, the species of the angelic intellect, which are, as it were,
|
|
|
296 the seminal types of corporeal forms, must be referred to God as the first cause. But in the first production of corporeal
|
|
|
297 creatures no transmutation from potentiality to act can have taken place, and accordingly, the corporeal forms that bodies
|
|
|
298 had when first produced came immediately form God, whose bidding alone matter obeys, as its own proper cause. To signify this,
|
|
|
299 Moses prefaces each work with the words, "God said, Let this thing be," or "that," to denote the formation of all things by
|
|
|
300 the Word of God, from Whom, according to Augustine [*Tract. i. in Joan. and Gen. ad lit. i. 4], is "all form and fitness and
|
|
|
301 concord of parts."
|
|
|
302 </p>
|
|
|
303 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p8">
|
|
|
304 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> By immaterial forms Boethius understands the types of things in the mind of God. Thus the Apostle says (
|
|
|
305 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q65_A4-p8.1" href="./asv.html#Heb.11.3" target="asv">Heb. 11:3</a>): "By faith we understand that the world was framed by the Word of God; that from invisible things visible things might be
|
|
|
306 made." But if by immaterial forms he understands the angels, we say that from them come material forms, not by emanation,
|
|
|
307 but by motion.
|
|
|
308 </p>
|
|
|
309 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p9">
|
|
|
310 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Forms received into matter are to be referred, not to self-subsisting forms of the same type, as the Platonists held, but
|
|
|
311 either to intelligible forms of the angelic intellect, from which they proceed by movement, or, still higher, to the types
|
|
|
312 in the Divine intellect, by which the seeds of forms are implanted in created things, that they may be able to be brought
|
|
|
313 by movement into act.
|
|
|
314 </p>
|
|
|
315 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p10">
|
|
|
316 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The heavenly bodies inform earthly ones by movement, not by emanation.
|
|
|
317 </p>
|
|
|
318 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p11"></p>
|
|
|
319 <p id="FP_Q65_A4-p12"></p>
|
|
|
320 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
321 <a href="summa.FP_Q66.html"></a>
|
|
|
322 </div>
|
|
|
323 <a href="summa.FP.viii.html"></a>
|
|
|
324 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
325 </div>
|
|
|
326 <div id="FP_Q66" class="div3">
|
|
|
327 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
328 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
329 <h3 id="FP_Q66-p0.1">ON THE ORDER OF CREATION TOWARDS DISTINCTION (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
330 <p id="FP_Q66-p1"></p>
|
|
|
331 <p id="FP_Q66-p2"> We must next consider the work of distinction; first, the ordering of creation towards distinction; secondly, the distinction
|
|
|
332 itself. Under the first head there are four points of inquiry:
|
|
|
333 </p>
|
|
|
334 <p id="FP_Q66-p3"> (1) Whether formlessness of created matter preceded in time its formation?</p>
|
|
|
335 <p id="FP_Q66-p4"> (2) Whether the matter of all corporeal things is the same?</p>
|
|
|
336 <p id="FP_Q66-p5"> (3) Whether the empyrean heaven was created contemporaneously with formless matter?</p>
|
|
|
337 <p id="FP_Q66-p6"> (4) Whether time was created simultaneously with it?</p>
|
|
|
338 <div id="FP_Q66_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
339 <a href="summa.FP_Q66.html"></a>
|
|
|
340 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
341 <h4 id="FP_Q66_A1-p0.1">Whether formlessness of created matter preceded in time its formation?</h4>
|
|
|
342 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
343 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p2">
|
|
|
344 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that formlessness of matter preceded in time its formation. For it is said (
|
|
|
345 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q66_A1-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.2" target="asv">Gn. 1:2</a>): "The earth was void and empty," or "invisible and shapeless," according to another version [*Septuagint]; by which is understood
|
|
|
346 the formlessness of matter, as Augustine says (Confess. xii, 12). Therefore matter was formless until it received its form.
|
|
|
347 </p>
|
|
|
348 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p3">
|
|
|
349 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, nature in its working imitates the working of God, as a secondary cause imitates a first cause. But in the working
|
|
|
350 of nature formlessness precedes form in time. It does so, therefore, in the Divine working.
|
|
|
351 </p>
|
|
|
352 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p4">
|
|
|
353 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, matter is higher than accident, for matter is part of substance. But God can effect that accident exist without
|
|
|
354 substance, as in the Sacrament of the Altar. He could, therefore, cause matter to exist without form.
|
|
|
355 </p>
|
|
|
356 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p5">
|
|
|
357 <b>On the contrary,</b> An imperfect effect proves imperfection in the agent. But God is an agent absolutely perfect; wherefore it is said of Him
|
|
|
358 (
|
|
|
359 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q66_A1-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Deut.32.4" target="asv">Dt. 32:4</a>): "The works of God are perfect." Therefore the work of His creation was at no time formless. Further, the formation of corporeal
|
|
|
360 creatures was effected by the work of distinction. But confusion is opposed to distinction, as formlessness to form. It, therefore,
|
|
|
361 formlessness preceded in time the formation of matter, it follows
|
|
|
362 that at the beginning confusion, called by the ancients chaos, existed in the corporeal creation.
|
|
|
363 </p>
|
|
|
364 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p6">
|
|
|
365 <b>I answer that,</b> On this point holy men differ in opinion. Augustine for instance (Gen. ad lit. i, 15), believes that the formlessness of
|
|
|
366 matter was not prior in time to its formation, but only in origin or the order of nature, whereas others, as Basil (Hom. ii
|
|
|
367 In Hexaem.), Ambrose (In Hexaem. i), and Chrysostom (Hom. ii In Gen.), hold that formlessness of matter preceded in time its
|
|
|
368 formation. And although these opinions seem mutually contradictory, in reality they differ
|
|
|
369 but little; for Augustine takes the formlessness of matter in a different sense from the others. In his sense it means the
|
|
|
370 absence of all form, and if we thus understand it we cannot say that the formlessness of matter was prior in time either to
|
|
|
371 its formation or to its distinction. As to formation, the argument is clear. For it formless matter preceded in duration,
|
|
|
372 it already existed; for this is implied by duration, since the end of creation is being in act: and act itself is a form.
|
|
|
373 To say,
|
|
|
374 then, that matter preceded, but without form, is to say that being existed actually, yet without act, which is a contradiction
|
|
|
375 in terms. Nor can it be said that it possessed some common form, on which afterwards supervened the different forms that distinguish
|
|
|
376 it. For this would be to hold the opinion of the ancient natural philosophers, who maintained that primary matter was some
|
|
|
377 corporeal thing in act, as fire, air, water, or some intermediate substance. Hence, it followed that to be made
|
|
|
378 means merely to be changed; for since that preceding form bestowed actual substantial being, and made some particular thing
|
|
|
379 to be, it would result that the supervening form would not simply make an actual being, but 'this' actual being; which is
|
|
|
380 the proper effect of an accidental form. Thus the consequent forms would be merely accidents, implying not generation, but
|
|
|
381 alteration. Hence we must assert that primary matter was not created altogether formless, nor under any one common form, but
|
|
|
382 under
|
|
|
383 distinct forms. And so, if the formlessness of matter be taken as referring to the condition of primary matter, which in itself
|
|
|
384 is formless, this formlessness did not precede in time its formation or distinction, but only in origin and nature, as Augustine
|
|
|
385 says; in the same way as potentiality is prior to act, and the part to the whole. But the other holy writers understand by
|
|
|
386 formlessness, not the exclusion of all form, but the absence of that beauty and comeliness which are now apparent in
|
|
|
387 the corporeal creation. Accordingly they say that the formlessness of corporeal matter preceded its form in duration. And
|
|
|
388 so, when this is considered, it appears that Augustine agrees with them in some respects, and in others disagrees, as will
|
|
|
389 be shown later (
|
|
|
390 <a id="FP_Q66_A1-p6.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html">Q[69], A[1]</a>;
|
|
|
391 <a id="FP_Q66_A1-p6.2" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q74_A2.html">Q[74], A[2]</a>).
|
|
|
392 </p>
|
|
|
393 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p7"> As far as may be gathered from the text of Genesis a threefold beauty was wanting to corporeal creatures, for which reason
|
|
|
394 they are said to be without form. For the beauty of light was wanting to all that transparent body which we call the heavens,
|
|
|
395 whence it is said that "darkness was upon the fact of the deep." And the earth lacked beauty in two ways: first, that beauty
|
|
|
396 which it acquired when its watery veil was withdrawn, and so we read that "the earth was void," or
|
|
|
397 "invisible," inasmuch as the waters covered and concealed it from view; secondly, that which it derives from being adorned
|
|
|
398 by herbs and plants, for which reason it is called "empty," or, according to another reading [*Septuagint], "shapeless"---that
|
|
|
399 is, unadorned. Thus after mention of two created natures, the heaven and the earth, the formlessness of the heaven is indicated
|
|
|
400 by the words, "darkness was upon the face of the deep," since the air is included under heaven; and the formlessness of
|
|
|
401 the earth, by the words, "the earth was void and empty."
|
|
|
402 </p>
|
|
|
403 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p8">
|
|
|
404 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The word earth is taken differently in this passage by Augustine, and by other writers. Augustine holds that by the words
|
|
|
405 "earth" and "water," in this passage. primary matter itself is signified on account of its being impossible for Moses to make
|
|
|
406 the idea of such matter intelligible to an ignorant people, except under the similitude of well-known objects. Hence he uses
|
|
|
407 a variety of figures in speaking of it, calling it not water only, nor earth only,
|
|
|
408 lest they should think it to be in very truth water or earth. At the same time it has so far a likeness to earth, in that
|
|
|
409 it is susceptible of form, and to water in its adaptability to a variety of forms. In this respect, then, the earth is said
|
|
|
410 to be "void and empty," or "invisible and shapeless," that matter is known by means of form. Hence, considered in itself,
|
|
|
411 it is called "invisible" or "void," and its potentiality is completed by form; thus Plato says that matter is "place" [*Timaeus,
|
|
|
412 quoted by Aristotle, Phys. iv, text. 15]. But other holy writers understand by earth the element of earth, and we have said
|
|
|
413
|
|
|
414 <a id="FP_Q66_A1-p8.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q66_A1.html">(A[1])</a> how, in this sense, the earth was, according to them, without form.
|
|
|
415 </p>
|
|
|
416 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p9">
|
|
|
417 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Nature produces effect in act from being in potentiality; and consequently in the operations of nature potentiality must
|
|
|
418 precede act in time, and formlessness precede form. But God produces being in act out of nothing, and can, therefore, produce
|
|
|
419 a perfect thing in an instant, according to the greatness of His power.
|
|
|
420 </p>
|
|
|
421 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p10">
|
|
|
422 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Accident, inasmuch as it is a form, is a kind of act; whereas matter, as such, is essentially being in potentiality. Hence
|
|
|
423 it is more repugnant that matter should be in act without form, than for accident to be without subject.
|
|
|
424 </p>
|
|
|
425 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p11"> In reply to the first argument in the contrary sense, we say that if, according to some holy writers, formlessness was prior
|
|
|
426 in time to the informing of matter, this arose, not from want of power on God's part, but from His wisdom, and from the design
|
|
|
427 of preserving due order in the disposition of creatures by developing perfection from imperfection.
|
|
|
428 </p>
|
|
|
429 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p12"> In reply to the second argument, we say that certain of the ancient natural philosophers maintained confusion devoid of all
|
|
|
430 distinction; except Anaxagoras, who taught that the intellect alone was distinct and without admixture. But previous to the
|
|
|
431 work of distinction Holy Scripture enumerates several kinds of differentiation, the first being that of the heaven from the
|
|
|
432 earth, in which even a material distinction is expressed, as will be shown later
|
|
|
433 <a id="FP_Q66_A1-p12.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q66_A3.html">(A[3];</a>
|
|
|
434 <a id="FP_Q66_A1-p12.2" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q68_A1.html">Q[68], A[1]</a>). This is signified by the words, "In the beginning God created heaven and earth." The second distinction mentioned is that
|
|
|
435 of the elements according to their forms, since both earth and water are named. That air and fire are not mentioned by name
|
|
|
436 is due to the fact that the corporeal nature of these would not be so evident as that of earth and water, to the ignorant
|
|
|
437 people to whom Moses spoke. Plato (Timaeus xxvi), nevertheless,
|
|
|
438 understood air to be signified by the words, "Spirit of God," since spirit is another name for air, and considered that by
|
|
|
439 the word heaven is meant fire, for he held heaven to be composed of fire, as Augustine relates (De Civ. Dei viii, 11). But
|
|
|
440 Rabbi Moses (Perplex. ii), though otherwise agreeing with Plato, says that fire is signified by the word darkness, since,
|
|
|
441 said he, fire does not shine in its own sphere. However, it seems more reasonable to hold to what we stated above; because
|
|
|
442 by the
|
|
|
443 words "Spirit of God" Scripture usually means the Holy Ghost, Who is said to "move over the waters," not, indeed, in bodily
|
|
|
444 shape, but as the craftsman's will may be said to move over the material to which he intends to give a form. The third distinction
|
|
|
445 is that of place; since the earth is said to be under the waters that rendered it invisible, whilst the air, the subject of
|
|
|
446 darkness, is described as being above the waters, in the words: "Darkness was upon the face of the deep." The remaining
|
|
|
447 distinctions will appear from what follows
|
|
|
448 <a id="FP_Q66_A1-p12.3" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q71.html">(Q[71])</a>.
|
|
|
449 </p>
|
|
|
450 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p13"></p>
|
|
|
451 <p id="FP_Q66_A1-p14"></p>
|
|
|
452 <a href="summa.FP_Q66.html"></a>
|
|
|
453 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
454 </div>
|
|
|
455 <div id="FP_Q66_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
456 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
457 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
458 <h4 id="FP_Q66_A2-p0.1">Whether the formless matter of all corporeal things is the same?</h4>
|
|
|
459 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
460 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p2">
|
|
|
461 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the formless matter of all corporeal things is the same. For Augustine says (Confess. xii, 12): "I find
|
|
|
462 two things Thou hast made, one formed, the other formless," and he says that the latter was the earth invisible and shapeless,
|
|
|
463 whereby, he says, the matter of all corporeal things is designated. Therefore the matter of all corporeal things is the same.
|
|
|
464 </p>
|
|
|
465 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p3">
|
|
|
466 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the Philosopher says (Metaph. v, text. 10): "Things that are one in genus are one in matter." But all corporeal
|
|
|
467 things are in the same genus of body. Therefore the matter of all bodies is the same.
|
|
|
468 </p>
|
|
|
469 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p4">
|
|
|
470 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, different acts befit different potentialities, and the same act befits the same potentiality. But all bodies have
|
|
|
471 the same form, corporeity. Therefore all bodies have the same matter.
|
|
|
472 </p>
|
|
|
473 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p5">
|
|
|
474 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, matter, considered in itself, is only in potentiality. But distinction is due to form. Therefore matter considered
|
|
|
475 in itself is the same in all corporeal things.
|
|
|
476 </p>
|
|
|
477 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p6">
|
|
|
478 <b>On the contrary,</b> Things of which the matter is the same are mutually interchangeable and mutually active or passive, as is said (De Gener.
|
|
|
479 i, text. 50). But heavenly and earthly bodies do not act upon each other mutually. Therefore their matter is not the same.
|
|
|
480 </p>
|
|
|
481 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p7">
|
|
|
482 <b>I answer that,</b> On this question the opinions of philosophers have differed. Plato and all who preceded Aristotle held that all bodies are
|
|
|
483 of the nature of the four elements. Hence because the four elements have one common matter, as their mutual generation and
|
|
|
484 corruption prove, it followed that the matter of all bodies is the same. But the fact of the incorruptibility of some bodies
|
|
|
485 was ascribed by Plato, not to the condition of matter, but to the will of the artificer,
|
|
|
486 God, Whom he represents as saying to the heavenly bodies: "By your own nature you are subject to dissolution, but by My will
|
|
|
487 you are indissoluble, for My will is more powerful than the link that binds you together." But this theory Aristotle (De Caelo
|
|
|
488 i, text. 5) disproves by the natural movements of bodies. For since, he says, the heavenly bodies have a natural movement,
|
|
|
489 different from that of the elements, it follows that they have a different nature from them. For movement in a circle, which
|
|
|
490 is proper to the heavenly bodies, is not by contraries, whereas the movements of the elements are mutually opposite, one tending
|
|
|
491 upwards, another downwards: so, therefore, the heavenly body is without contrariety, whereas the elemental bodies have contrariety
|
|
|
492 in their nature. And as generation and corruption are from contraries, it follows that, whereas the elements are corruptible,
|
|
|
493 the heavenly bodies are incorruptible. But in spite of this difference of natural corruption and incorruption,
|
|
|
494 Avicebron taught unity of matter in all bodies, arguing from their unity of form. And, indeed, if corporeity were one form
|
|
|
495 in itself, on which the other forms that distinguish bodies from each other supervene, this argument would necessarily be
|
|
|
496 true; for this form of corporeity would inhere in matter immutably and so far all bodies would be incorruptible. But corruption
|
|
|
497 would then be merely accidental through the disappearance of successive forms---that is to say, it would be corruption, not
|
|
|
498 pure and simple, but partial, since a being in act would subsist under the transient form. Thus the ancient natural philosophers
|
|
|
499 taught that the substratum of bodies was some actual being, such as air or fire. But supposing that no form exists in corruptible
|
|
|
500 bodies which remains subsisting beneath generation and corruption, it follows necessarily that the matter of corruptible and
|
|
|
501 incorruptible bodies is not the same. For matter, as it is in itself, is in potentiality to form.
|
|
|
502 </p>
|
|
|
503 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p8"> Considered in itself, then, it is in potentiality in respect to all those forms to which it is common, and in receiving any
|
|
|
504 one form it is in act only as regards that form. Hence it remains in potentiality to all other forms. And this is the case
|
|
|
505 even where some forms are more perfect than others, and contain these others virtually in themselves. For potentiality in
|
|
|
506 itself is indifferent with respect to perfection and imperfection, so that under an imperfect form it is in
|
|
|
507 potentiality to a perfect form, and "vice versa." Matter, therefore, whilst existing under the form of an incorruptible body,
|
|
|
508 would be in potentiality to the form of a corruptible body; and as it does not actually possess the latter, it has both form
|
|
|
509 and the privation of form; for want of a form in that which is in potentiality thereto is privation. But this condition implies
|
|
|
510 corruptibility. It is therefore impossible that bodies by nature corruptible, and those by nature incorruptible, should
|
|
|
511 possess the same matter.
|
|
|
512 </p>
|
|
|
513 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p9"> Neither can we say, as Averroes [*De Substantia Orbis ii.] imagines, that a heavenly body itself is the matter of the heaven---beings
|
|
|
514 in potentiality with regard to place, though not to being, and that its form is a separate substance united to it as its motive
|
|
|
515 force. For it is impossible to suppose any being in act, unless in its totality it be act and form, or be something which
|
|
|
516 has act or form. Setting aside, then, in thought, the separate substance stated to be endowed with
|
|
|
517 motive power, if the heavenly body is not something having form---that is, something composed of a form and the subject of
|
|
|
518 that form---it follows that in its totality it is form and act. But every such thing is something actually understood, which
|
|
|
519 the heavenly bodies are not, being sensible. It follows, then, that the matter of the heavenly bodies, considered in itself,
|
|
|
520 is in potentiality to that form alone which it actually possesses. Nor does it concern the point at issue to inquire whether
|
|
|
521 this is a soul or any other thing. Hence this form perfects this matter in such a way that there remains in it no potentiality
|
|
|
522 with respect to being, but only to place, as Aristotle [*De Coelo i, text. 20] says. So, then, the matter of the heavenly
|
|
|
523 bodies and of the elements is not the same, except by analogy, in so far as they agree in the character of potentiality.
|
|
|
524 </p>
|
|
|
525 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p10">
|
|
|
526 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Augustine follows in this the opinion of Plato, who does not admit a fifth essence. Or we may say that formless matter is
|
|
|
527 one with the unity of order, as all bodies are one in the order of corporeal creatures.
|
|
|
528 </p>
|
|
|
529 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p11">
|
|
|
530 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> If genus is taken in a physical sense, corruptible and incorruptible things are not in the same genus, on account of their
|
|
|
531 different modes of potentiality, as is said in Metaph. x, text. 26. Logically considered, however, there is but one genus
|
|
|
532 of all bodies, since they are all included in the one notion of corporeity.
|
|
|
533 </p>
|
|
|
534 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p12">
|
|
|
535 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The form of corporeity is not one and the same in all bodies, being no other than the various forms by which bodies are distinguished,
|
|
|
536 as stated above.
|
|
|
537 </p>
|
|
|
538 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p13">
|
|
|
539 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> As potentiality is directed towards act, potential beings are differentiated by their different acts, as sight is by color,
|
|
|
540 hearing by sound. Therefore for this reason the matter of the celestial bodies is different from that of the elemental, because
|
|
|
541 the matter of the celestial is not in potentiality to an elemental form.
|
|
|
542 </p>
|
|
|
543 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p14"></p>
|
|
|
544 <p id="FP_Q66_A2-p15"></p>
|
|
|
545 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
546 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
547 </div>
|
|
|
548 <div id="FP_Q66_A3" class="div4">
|
|
|
549 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
550 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
551 <h4 id="FP_Q66_A3-p0.1">Whether the empyrean heaven was created at the same time as formless matter?</h4>
|
|
|
552 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p1"></p>
|
|
|
553 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p2">
|
|
|
554 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the empyrean heaven was not created at the same time as formless matter. For the empyrean, if it is anything
|
|
|
555 at all, must be a sensible body. But all sensible bodies are movable, and the empyrean heaven is not movable. For if it were
|
|
|
556 so, its movement would be ascertained by the movement of some visible body, which is not the case. The empyrean heaven, then,
|
|
|
557 was not created contemporaneously with formless matter.
|
|
|
558 </p>
|
|
|
559 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p3">
|
|
|
560 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine says (De Trin. iii, 4) that "the lower bodies are governed by the higher in a certain order." If, therefore,
|
|
|
561 the empyrean heaven is the highest of bodies, it must necessarily exercise some influence on bodies below it. But this does
|
|
|
562 not seem to be the case, especially as it is presumed to be without movement; for one body cannot move another unless itself
|
|
|
563 also be moved. Therefore the empyrean heaven was not created together with formless
|
|
|
564 matter.
|
|
|
565 </p>
|
|
|
566 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p4">
|
|
|
567 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, if it is held that the empyrean heaven is the place of contemplation, and not ordained to natural effects; on the
|
|
|
568 contrary, Augustine says (De Trin. iv, 20): "In so far as we mentally apprehend eternal things, so far are we not of this
|
|
|
569 world"; from which it is clear that contemplation lifts the mind above the things of this world. Corporeal place, therefore,
|
|
|
570 cannot be the seat of contemplation.
|
|
|
571 </p>
|
|
|
572 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p5">
|
|
|
573 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, among the heavenly bodies exists a body, partly transparent and partly luminous, which we call the sidereal heaven.
|
|
|
574 There exists also a heaven wholly transparent, called by some the aqueous or crystalline heaven. If, then, there exists a
|
|
|
575 still higher heaven, it must be wholly luminous. But this cannot be, for then the air would be constantly illuminated, and
|
|
|
576 there would be no night. Therefore the empyrean heaven was not created together with formless
|
|
|
577 matter.
|
|
|
578 </p>
|
|
|
579 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p6">
|
|
|
580 <b>On the contrary,</b> Strabus says that in the passage, "In the beginning God created heaven and earth," heaven denotes not the visible firmament,
|
|
|
581 but the empyrean or fiery heaven.
|
|
|
582 </p>
|
|
|
583 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p7">
|
|
|
584 <b>I answer that,</b> The empyrean heaven rests only on the authority of Strabus and Bede, and also of Basil; all of whom agree in one respect,
|
|
|
585 namely, in holding it to be the place of the blessed. Strabus and Bede say that as soon as created it was filled with angels;
|
|
|
586 and Basil [*Hom. ii. in Hexaem.] says: "Just as the lost are driven into the lowest darkness, so the reward for worthy deeds
|
|
|
587 is laid up in the light beyond this world, where the just shall obtain the abode of
|
|
|
588 rest." But they differ in the reasons on which they base their statement. Strabus and Bede teach that there is an empyrean
|
|
|
589 heaven, because the firmament, which they take to mean the sidereal heaven, is said to have been made, not in the beginning,
|
|
|
590 but on the second day: whereas the reason given by Basil is that otherwise God would seem to have made darkness His first
|
|
|
591 work, as the Manicheans falsely assert, when they call the God of the Old Testament the God of darkness. These reasons, however,
|
|
|
592 are not very cogent. For the question of the firmament, said to have been made on the second day, is solved in one way by
|
|
|
593 Augustine, and in another by other holy writers. But the question of the darkness is explained according to Augustine [*Gen.
|
|
|
594 ad lit. i; vii.], by supposing that formlessness, signified by darkness, preceded form not by duration, but by origin. According
|
|
|
595 to others, however, since darkness is no creature, but a privation of light, it is a proof of Divine wisdom, that the
|
|
|
596 things it created from nothing it produced first of all in an imperfect state, and afterwards brought them to perfection.
|
|
|
597 But a better reason can be drawn from the state of glory itself. For in the reward to come a two-fold glory is looked for,
|
|
|
598 spiritual and corporeal, not only in the human body to be glorified, but in the whole world which is to be made new. Now the
|
|
|
599 spiritual glory began with the beginning of the world, in the blessedness of the angels, equality with whom is promised to
|
|
|
600 the
|
|
|
601 saints. It was fitting, then, that even from the beginning, there should be made some beginning of bodily glory in something
|
|
|
602 corporeal, free at the very outset from the servitude of corruption and change, and wholly luminous, even as the whole bodily
|
|
|
603 creation, after the Resurrection, is expected to be. So, then, that heaven is called the empyrean, i.e. fiery, not from its
|
|
|
604 heat, but from its brightness. It is to be noticed, however, that Augustine (De Civ. Dei x, 9,27) says that Porphyry sets
|
|
|
605 the demons apart from the angels by supposing that the former inhabit the air, the latter the ether, or empyrean. But Porphyry,
|
|
|
606 as a Platonist, held the heaven, known as sidereal, to be fiery, and therefore called it empyrean or ethereal, taking ethereal
|
|
|
607 to denote the burning of flame, and not as Aristotle understands it, swiftness of movement (De Coel. i, text. 22). This much
|
|
|
608 has been said to prevent anyone from supposing that Augustine maintained an empyrean heaven in the sense understood by
|
|
|
609 modern writers.
|
|
|
610 </p>
|
|
|
611 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p8">
|
|
|
612 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Sensible corporeal things are movable in the present state of the world, for by the movement of corporeal creatures is secured
|
|
|
613 by the multiplication of the elements. But when glory is finally consummated, the movement of bodies will cease. And such
|
|
|
614 must have been from the beginning the condition of the empyrean.
|
|
|
615 </p>
|
|
|
616 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p9">
|
|
|
617 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> It is sufficiently probable, as some assert, that the empyrean heaven, having the state of glory for its ordained end, does
|
|
|
618 not influence inferior bodies of another order---those, namely, that are directed only to natural ends. Yet it seems still
|
|
|
619 more probable that it does influence bodies that are moved, though itself motionless, just as angels of the highest rank,
|
|
|
620 who assist [*Infra,
|
|
|
621 <a id="FP_Q66_A3-p9.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q112_A3.html">Q[112], A[3]</a>], influence those of lower
|
|
|
622 degree who act as messengers, though they themselves are not sent, as Dionysius teaches (Coel. Hier. xii). For this reason
|
|
|
623 it may be said that the influence of the empyrean upon that which is called the first heaven, and is moved, produces therein
|
|
|
624 not something that comes and goes as a result of movement, but something of a fixed and stable nature, as the power of conservation
|
|
|
625 or causation, or something of the kind pertaining to dignity.
|
|
|
626 </p>
|
|
|
627 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p10">
|
|
|
628 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Corporeal place is assigned to contemplation, not as necessary, but as congruous, that the splendor without may correspond
|
|
|
629 to that which is within. Hence Basil (Hom. ii in Hexaem.) says: "The ministering spirit could not live in darkness, but made
|
|
|
630 his habitual dwelling in light and joy."
|
|
|
631 </p>
|
|
|
632 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p11">
|
|
|
633 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> As Basil says (Hom. ii in Hexaem.): "It is certain that the heaven was created spherical in shape, of dense body, and sufficiently
|
|
|
634 strong to separate what is outside it from what it encloses. On this account it darkens the region external to it, the light
|
|
|
635 by which itself is lit up being shut out from that region. "But since the body of the firmament, though solid, is transparent,
|
|
|
636 for that it does not exclude light (as is clear from the fact that we
|
|
|
637 can see the stars through the intervening heavens), we may also say that the empyrean has light, not condensed so as to emit
|
|
|
638 rays, as the sun does, but of a more subtle nature. Or it may have the brightness of glory which differs from mere natural
|
|
|
639 brightness.
|
|
|
640 </p>
|
|
|
641 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p12"></p>
|
|
|
642 <p id="FP_Q66_A3-p13"></p>
|
|
|
643 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
644 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
645 </div>
|
|
|
646 <div id="FP_Q66_A4" class="div4">
|
|
|
647 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
648 <a href="summa.FP_Q67.html"></a>
|
|
|
649 <h4 id="FP_Q66_A4-p0.1">Whether time was created simultaneously with formless matter?</h4>
|
|
|
650 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p1"></p>
|
|
|
651 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p2">
|
|
|
652 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that time was not created simultaneously with formless matter. For Augustine says (Confess. xii, 12): "I find
|
|
|
653 two things that Thou didst create before time was, the primary corporeal matter, and the angelic nature. "Therefore time was
|
|
|
654 not created with formless matter.
|
|
|
655 </p>
|
|
|
656 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p3">
|
|
|
657 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, time is divided by day and night. But in the beginning there was neither day nor night, for these began when "God
|
|
|
658 divided the light from the darkness. "Therefore in the beginning time was not.
|
|
|
659 </p>
|
|
|
660 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p4">
|
|
|
661 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, time is the measure of the firmament's movement; and the firmament is said to have been made on the second day.
|
|
|
662 Therefore in the beginning time was not.
|
|
|
663 </p>
|
|
|
664 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p5">
|
|
|
665 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, movement precedes time, and therefore should be reckoned among the first things created, rather than time.
|
|
|
666 </p>
|
|
|
667 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p6">
|
|
|
668 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, as time is the extrinsic measure of created things, so is place. Place, then, as truly as time, must be reckoned
|
|
|
669 among the things first created.
|
|
|
670 </p>
|
|
|
671 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p7">
|
|
|
672 <b>On the contrary,</b> Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. i, 3): "Both spiritual and corporeal creatures were created at the beginning of time."
|
|
|
673 </p>
|
|
|
674 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p8">
|
|
|
675 <b>I answer that,</b> It is commonly said that the first things created were these four---the angelic nature, the empyrean heaven, formless corporeal
|
|
|
676 matter, and time. It must be observed, however, that this is not the opinion of Augustine. For he (Confess. xii, 12) specifies
|
|
|
677 only two things as first created---the angelic nature and corporeal matter---making no mention of the empyrean heaven. But
|
|
|
678 these two, namely, the angelic nature and formless matter, precede the formation, by
|
|
|
679 nature only, and not by duration; and therefore, as they precede formation, so do they precede movement and time. Time, therefore,
|
|
|
680 cannot be included among them. But the enumeration above given is that of other holy writers, who hold that the formlessness
|
|
|
681 of matter preceded by duration its form, and this view postulates the existence of time as the measure of duration: for otherwise
|
|
|
682 there would be no such measure.
|
|
|
683 </p>
|
|
|
684 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p9">
|
|
|
685 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The teaching of Augustine rests on the opinion that the angelic nature and formless matter precede time by origin or nature.
|
|
|
686 </p>
|
|
|
687 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p10">
|
|
|
688 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> As in the opinion of some holy writers matter was in some measure formless before it received its full form, so time was
|
|
|
689 in a manner formless before it was fully formed and distinguished into day and night.
|
|
|
690 </p>
|
|
|
691 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p11">
|
|
|
692 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> If the movement of the firmament did not begin immediately from the beginning, then the time that preceded was the measure,
|
|
|
693 not of the firmament's movement, but of the first movement of whatsoever kind. For it is accidental to time to be the measure
|
|
|
694 of the firmament's movement, in so far as this is the first movement. But if the first movement was another than this, time
|
|
|
695 would have been its measure, for everything is measured by the first of its kind.
|
|
|
696 And it must be granted that forthwith from the beginning, there was movement of some kind, at least in the succession of concepts
|
|
|
697 and affections in the angelic mind: while movement without time cannot be conceived, since time is nothing else than "the
|
|
|
698 measure of priority and succession in movement."
|
|
|
699 </p>
|
|
|
700 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p12">
|
|
|
701 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Among the first created things are to be reckoned those which have a general relationship to things. And, therefore, among
|
|
|
702 these time must be included, as having the nature of a common measure; but not movement, which is related only to the movable
|
|
|
703 subject.
|
|
|
704 </p>
|
|
|
705 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p13">
|
|
|
706 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> Place is implied as existing in the empyrean heaven, this being the boundary of the universe. And since place has reference
|
|
|
707 to things permanent, it was created at once in its totality. But time, as not being permanent, was created in its beginning:
|
|
|
708 even as actually we cannot lay hold of any part of time save the "now."
|
|
|
709 </p>
|
|
|
710 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p14"></p>
|
|
|
711 <p id="FP_Q66_A4-p15"></p>
|
|
|
712 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
713 <a href="summa.FP_Q67.html"></a>
|
|
|
714 </div>
|
|
|
715 <a href="summa.FP_Q65_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
716 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
717 </div>
|
|
|
718 <div id="FP_Q67" class="div3">
|
|
|
719 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
720 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
721 <h3 id="FP_Q67-p0.1">ON THE WORK OF DISTINCTION IN ITSELF (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
722 <p id="FP_Q67-p1"></p>
|
|
|
723 <p id="FP_Q67-p2"> We must consider next the work of distinction in itself. First, the work of the first day; secondly, the work of the second
|
|
|
724 day; thirdly the work of the third day.
|
|
|
725 </p>
|
|
|
726 <p id="FP_Q67-p3"> Under the first head there are four points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
727 <p id="FP_Q67-p4"> (1) Whether the word light is used in its proper sense in speaking of spiritual things?</p>
|
|
|
728 <p id="FP_Q67-p5"> (2) Whether light, in corporeal things, is itself corporeal?</p>
|
|
|
729 <p id="FP_Q67-p6"> (3) Whether light is a quality?</p>
|
|
|
730 <p id="FP_Q67-p7"> (4) Whether light was fittingly made on the first day?</p>
|
|
|
731 <div id="FP_Q67_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
732 <a href="summa.FP_Q67.html"></a>
|
|
|
733 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
734 <h4 id="FP_Q67_A1-p0.1">Whether the word "light" is used in its proper sense in speaking of spiritual things?</h4>
|
|
|
735 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
736 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p2">
|
|
|
737 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that "light" is used in its proper sense in spiritual things. For Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. iv, 28) that
|
|
|
738 "in spiritual things light is better and surer: and that Christ is not called Light in the same sense as He is called the
|
|
|
739 Stone; the former is to be taken literally, and the latter metaphorically."
|
|
|
740 </p>
|
|
|
741 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p3">
|
|
|
742 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Dionysius (Div. Nom. iv) includes Light among the intellectual names of God. But such names are used in their proper
|
|
|
743 sense in spiritual things. Therefore light is used in its proper sense in spiritual matters.
|
|
|
744 </p>
|
|
|
745 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p4">
|
|
|
746 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the Apostle says (
|
|
|
747 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q67_A1-p4.1" href="./asv.html#Eph.5.13" target="asv">Eph. 5:13</a>): "All that is made manifest is light." But to be made manifest belongs more properly to spiritual things than to corporeal.
|
|
|
748 Therefore also does light.
|
|
|
749 </p>
|
|
|
750 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p5">
|
|
|
751 <b>On the contrary,</b> Ambrose says (De Fide ii) that "Splendor" is among those things which are said of God metaphorically.
|
|
|
752 </p>
|
|
|
753 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p6">
|
|
|
754 <b>I answer that,</b> Any word may be used in two ways---that is to say, either in its original application or in its more extended meaning. This
|
|
|
755 is clearly shown in the word "sight," originally applied to the act of the sense, and then, as sight is the noblest and most
|
|
|
756 trustworthy of the senses, extended in common speech to all knowledge obtained through the other senses. Thus we say, "Seeing
|
|
|
757 how it tastes," or "smells," or "burns. "Further, sight is applied to knowledge
|
|
|
758 obtained through the intellect, as in those words: "Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God" (
|
|
|
759 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q67_A1-p6.1" href="./asv.html#Matt.5.8" target="asv">Mat. 5:8</a>). And thus it is with the word light. In its primary meaning it signifies that which makes manifest to the sense of sight;
|
|
|
760 afterwards it was extended to that which makes manifest to cognition of any kind. If, then, the word is taken in its strict
|
|
|
761 and primary meaning, it is to be understood metaphorically when applied to spiritual things, as Ambrose says (De
|
|
|
762 Fide ii). But if taken in its common and extended use, as applied to manifestation of every kind, it may properly be applied
|
|
|
763 to spiritual things.
|
|
|
764 </p>
|
|
|
765 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p7"> The answer to the objections will sufficiently appear from what has been said.</p>
|
|
|
766 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p8"></p>
|
|
|
767 <p id="FP_Q67_A1-p9"></p>
|
|
|
768 <a href="summa.FP_Q67.html"></a>
|
|
|
769 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
770 </div>
|
|
|
771 <div id="FP_Q67_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
772 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
773 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
774 <h4 id="FP_Q67_A2-p0.1">Whether light is a body?</h4>
|
|
|
775 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
776 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p2">
|
|
|
777 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that light is a body. For Augustine says (De Lib. Arb. iii, 5) that "light takes the first place among bodies."Therefore
|
|
|
778 light is a body.
|
|
|
779 </p>
|
|
|
780 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p3">
|
|
|
781 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the Philosopher says (Topic. v, 2) that "light is a species of fire." But fire is a body, and therefore so is light.
|
|
|
782 </p>
|
|
|
783 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p4">
|
|
|
784 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the powers of movement, intersection, reflection, belong properly to bodies; and all these are attributes of light
|
|
|
785 and its rays. Moreover, different rays of light, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii) are united and separated, which seems impossible
|
|
|
786 unless they are bodies. Therefore light is a body.
|
|
|
787 </p>
|
|
|
788 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p5">
|
|
|
789 <b>On the contrary,</b> Two bodies cannot occupy the same place simultaneously. But this is the case with light and air. Therefore light is not a
|
|
|
790 body.
|
|
|
791 </p>
|
|
|
792 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p6">
|
|
|
793 <b>I answer that,</b> Light cannot be a body, for three evident reasons. First, on the part of place. For the place of any one body is different
|
|
|
794 from that of any other, nor is it possible, naturally speaking, for any two bodies of whatever nature, to exist simultaneously
|
|
|
795 in the same place; since contiguity requires distinction of place.
|
|
|
796 </p>
|
|
|
797 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p7"> The second reason is from movement. For if light were a body, its diffusion would be the local movement of a body. Now no
|
|
|
798 local movement of a body can be instantaneous, as everything that moves from one place to another must pass through the intervening
|
|
|
799 space before reaching the end: whereas the diffusion of light is instantaneous. Nor can it be argued that the time required
|
|
|
800 is too short to be perceived; for though this may be the case in short distances, it cannot be so in
|
|
|
801 distances so great as that which separates the East from the West. Yet as soon as the sun is at the horizon, the whole hemisphere
|
|
|
802 is illuminated from end to end. It must also be borne in mind on the part of movement that whereas all bodies have their natural
|
|
|
803 determinate movement, that of light is indifferent as regards direction, working equally in a circle as in a straight line.
|
|
|
804 Hence it appears that the diffusion of light is not the local movement of a body.
|
|
|
805 </p>
|
|
|
806 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p8"> The third reason is from generation and corruption. For if light were a body, it would follow that whenever the air is darkened
|
|
|
807 by the absence of the luminary, the body of light would be corrupted, and its matter would receive a new form. But unless
|
|
|
808 we are to say that darkness is a body, this does not appear to be the case. Neither does it appear from what matter a body
|
|
|
809 can be daily generated large enough to fill the intervening hemisphere. Also it would be absurd to say that a
|
|
|
810 body of so great a bulk is corrupted by the mere absence of the luminary. And should anyone reply that it is not corrupted,
|
|
|
811 but approaches and moves around with the sun, we may ask why it is that when a lighted candle is obscured by the intervening
|
|
|
812 object the whole room is darkened? It is not that the light is condensed round the candle when this is done, since it burns
|
|
|
813 no more brightly then than it burned before.
|
|
|
814 </p>
|
|
|
815 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p9"> Since, therefore, these things are repugnant, not only to reason, but to common sense, we must conclude that light cannot
|
|
|
816 be a body.
|
|
|
817 </p>
|
|
|
818 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p10">
|
|
|
819 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Augustine takes light to be a luminous body in act---in other words, to be fire, the noblest of the four elements.
|
|
|
820 </p>
|
|
|
821 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p11">
|
|
|
822 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Aristotle pronounces light to be fire existing in its own proper matter: just as fire in aerial matter is "flame," or in
|
|
|
823 earthly matter is "burning coal." Nor must too much attention be paid to the instances adduced by Aristotle in his works on
|
|
|
824 logic, as he merely mentions them as the more or less probable opinions of various writers.
|
|
|
825 </p>
|
|
|
826 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p12">
|
|
|
827 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> All these properties are assigned to light metaphorically, and might in the same way be attributed to heat. For because movement
|
|
|
828 from place to place is naturally first in the order of movement as is proved Phys. viii, text. 55, we use terms belonging
|
|
|
829 to local movement in speaking of alteration and movement of all kinds. For even the word distance is derived from the idea
|
|
|
830 of remoteness of place, to that of all contraries, as is said Metaph. x, text.
|
|
|
831 13.
|
|
|
832 </p>
|
|
|
833 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p13"></p>
|
|
|
834 <p id="FP_Q67_A2-p14"></p>
|
|
|
835 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
836 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
837 </div>
|
|
|
838 <div id="FP_Q67_A3" class="div4">
|
|
|
839 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
840 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
841 <h4 id="FP_Q67_A3-p0.1">Whether light is a quality?</h4>
|
|
|
842 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p1"></p>
|
|
|
843 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p2">
|
|
|
844 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that light is not a quality. For every quality remains in its subject, though the active cause of the quality
|
|
|
845 be removed, as heat remains in water removed from the fire. But light does not remain in the air when the source of light
|
|
|
846 is withdrawn. Therefore light is not a quality.
|
|
|
847 </p>
|
|
|
848 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p3">
|
|
|
849 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, every sensible quality has its opposite, as cold is opposed to heat, blackness to whiteness. But this is not the
|
|
|
850 case with light since darkness is merely a privation of light. Light therefore is not a sensible quality.
|
|
|
851 </p>
|
|
|
852 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p4">
|
|
|
853 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, a cause is more potent than its effect. But the light of the heavenly bodies is a cause of substantial forms of
|
|
|
854 earthly bodies, and also gives to colors their immaterial being, by making them actually visible. Light, then, is not a sensible
|
|
|
855 quality, but rather a substantial or spiritual form.
|
|
|
856 </p>
|
|
|
857 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p5">
|
|
|
858 <b>On the contrary,</b> Damascene (De Fide Orth. i) says that light is a species of quality.
|
|
|
859 </p>
|
|
|
860 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p6">
|
|
|
861 <b>I answer that,</b> Some writers have said that the light in the air has not a natural being such as the color on a wall has, but only an intentional
|
|
|
862 being, as a similitude of color in the air. But this cannot be the case for two reasons. First, because light gives a name
|
|
|
863 to the air, since by it the air becomes actually luminous. But color does not do this, for we do not speak of the air as colored.
|
|
|
864 Secondly, because light produces natural effects, for by the rays of the sun
|
|
|
865 bodies are warmed, and natural changes cannot be brought about by mere intentions. Others have said that light is the sun's
|
|
|
866 substantial form, but this also seems impossible for two reasons. First, because substantial forms are not of themselves objects
|
|
|
867 of the senses; for the object of the intellect is what a thing is, as is said De Anima iii, text. 26: whereas light is visible
|
|
|
868 of itself. In the second place, because it is impossible that what is the substantial form of one thing should be the
|
|
|
869 accidental form of another; since substantial forms of their very nature constitute species: wherefore the substantial form
|
|
|
870 always and everywhere accompanies the species. But light is not the substantial form of air, for if it were, the air would
|
|
|
871 be destroyed when light is withdrawn. Hence it cannot be the substantial form of the sun.
|
|
|
872 </p>
|
|
|
873 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p7"> We must say, then, that as heat is an active quality consequent on the substantial form of fire, so light is an active quality
|
|
|
874 consequent on the substantial form of the sun, or of another body that is of itself luminous, if there is any such body. A
|
|
|
875 proof of this is that the rays of different stars produce different effects according to the diverse natures of bodies.
|
|
|
876 </p>
|
|
|
877 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p8">
|
|
|
878 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Since quality is consequent upon substantial form, the mode in which the subject receives a quality differs as the mode differs
|
|
|
879 in which a subject receives a substantial form. For when matter receives its form perfectly, the qualities consequent upon
|
|
|
880 the form are firm and enduring; as when, for instance, water is converted into fire. When, however, substantial form is received
|
|
|
881 imperfectly, so as to be, as it were, in process of being received, rather
|
|
|
882 than fully impressed, the consequent quality lasts for a time but is not permanent; as may be seen when water which has been
|
|
|
883 heated returns in time to its natural state. But light is not produced by the transmutation of matter, as though matter were
|
|
|
884 in receipt of a substantial form, and light were a certain inception of substantial form. For this reason light disappears
|
|
|
885 on the disappearance of its active cause.
|
|
|
886 </p>
|
|
|
887 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p9">
|
|
|
888 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> It is accidental to light not to have a contrary, forasmuch as it is the natural quality of the first corporeal cause of
|
|
|
889 change, which is itself removed from contrariety.
|
|
|
890 </p>
|
|
|
891 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p10">
|
|
|
892 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> As heat acts towards perfecting the form of fire, as an instrumental cause, by virtue of the substantial form, so does light
|
|
|
893 act instrumentally, by virtue of the heavenly bodies, towards producing substantial forms; and towards rendering colors actually
|
|
|
894 visible, inasmuch as it is a quality of the first sensible body.
|
|
|
895 </p>
|
|
|
896 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p11"></p>
|
|
|
897 <p id="FP_Q67_A3-p12"></p>
|
|
|
898 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
899 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
900 </div>
|
|
|
901 <div id="FP_Q67_A4" class="div4">
|
|
|
902 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
903 <a href="summa.FP_Q68.html"></a>
|
|
|
904 <h4 id="FP_Q67_A4-p0.1">Whether the production of light is fittingly assigned to the first day?</h4>
|
|
|
905 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p1"></p>
|
|
|
906 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p2">
|
|
|
907 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the production of light is not fittingly assigned to the first day. For light, as stated above
|
|
|
908 <a id="FP_Q67_A4-p2.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q67_A3.html">(A[3])</a>, is a quality. But qualities are accidents, and as such should have, not the first, but a subordinate place. The production
|
|
|
909 of light, then, ought not to be assigned to the first day.
|
|
|
910 </p>
|
|
|
911 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p3">
|
|
|
912 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is light that distinguishes night from day, and this is effected by the sun, which is recorded as having been
|
|
|
913 made on the fourth day. Therefore the production of light could not have been on the first day.
|
|
|
914 </p>
|
|
|
915 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p4">
|
|
|
916 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, night and day are brought about by the circular movement of a luminous body. But movement of this kind is an attribute
|
|
|
917 of the firmament, and we read that the firmament was made on the second day. Therefore the production of light, dividing night
|
|
|
918 from day, ought not to be assigned to the first day.
|
|
|
919 </p>
|
|
|
920 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p5">
|
|
|
921 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, if it be said that spiritual light is here spoken of, it may be replied that the light made on the first day dispels
|
|
|
922 the darkness. But in the beginning spiritual darkness was not, for even the demons were in the beginning good, as has been
|
|
|
923 shown (
|
|
|
924 <a id="FP_Q67_A4-p5.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q63_A5.html">Q[63], A[5]</a>). Therefore the production of light ought not to be assigned to the first day.
|
|
|
925 </p>
|
|
|
926 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p6">
|
|
|
927 <b>On the contrary,</b> That without which there could not be day, must have been made on the first day. But there can be no day without light. Therefore
|
|
|
928 light must have been made on the first day.
|
|
|
929 </p>
|
|
|
930 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p7">
|
|
|
931 <b>I answer that,</b> There are two opinions as to the production of light. Augustine seems to say (De Civ. Dei xi, 9,33) that Moses could not
|
|
|
932 have fittingly passed over the production of the spiritual creature, and therefore when we read, "In the beginning God created
|
|
|
933 heaven and earth," a spiritual nature as yet formless is to be understood by the word "heaven," and formless matter of the
|
|
|
934 corporeal creature by the word "earth." And spiritual nature was formed first, as being of
|
|
|
935 higher dignity than corporeal. The forming, therefore, of this spiritual nature is signified by the production of light, that
|
|
|
936 is to say, of spiritual light. For a spiritual nature receives its form by the enlightenment whereby it is led to adhere to
|
|
|
937 the Word of God.
|
|
|
938 </p>
|
|
|
939 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p8"> Other writers think that the production of spiritual creatures was purposely omitted by Moses, and give various reasons.
|
|
|
940 Basil [*Hom. i in Hexaem.] says that Moses begins his narrative from the beginning of time which belongs to sensible things;
|
|
|
941 but that the spiritual or angelic creation is passed over, as created beforehand.
|
|
|
942 </p>
|
|
|
943 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p9"> Chrysostom [*Hom. ii in Genes.] gives as a reason for the omission that Moses was addressing an ignorant people, to whom
|
|
|
944 material things alone appealed, and whom he was endeavoring to withdraw from the service of idols. It would have been to them
|
|
|
945 a pretext for idolatry if he had spoken to them of natures spiritual in substance and nobler than all corporeal creatures;
|
|
|
946 for they would have paid them Divine worship, since they were prone to worship as gods even the sun, moon, and
|
|
|
947 stars, which was forbidden them (
|
|
|
948 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q67_A4-p9.1" href="./asv.html#Deut.4" target="asv">Dt. 4</a>).
|
|
|
949 </p>
|
|
|
950 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p10"> But mention is made of several kinds of formlessness, in regard to the corporeal creature. One is where we read that "the
|
|
|
951 earth was void and empty," and another where it is said that "darkness was upon the face of the deep." Now it seems to be
|
|
|
952 required, for two reasons, that the formlessness of darkness should be removed first of all by the production of light. In
|
|
|
953 the first place because light is a quality of the first body, as was stated
|
|
|
954 <a id="FP_Q67_A4-p10.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q67_A3.html">(A[3])</a>, and
|
|
|
955 thus by means of light it was fitting that the world should first receive its form. The second reason is because light is
|
|
|
956 a common quality. For light is common to terrestrial and celestial bodies. But as in knowledge we proceed from general principles,
|
|
|
957 so do we in work of every kind. For the living thing is generated before the animal, and the animal before the man, as is
|
|
|
958 shown in De Gener. Anim. ii, 3. It was fitting, then, as an evidence of the Divine wisdom, that among the works of
|
|
|
959 distinction the production of light should take first place, since light is a form of the primary body, and because it is
|
|
|
960 more common quality.
|
|
|
961 </p>
|
|
|
962 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p11"> Basil [*Hom. ii in Hexaem.], indeed, adds a third reason: that all other things are made manifest by light. And there is
|
|
|
963 yet a fourth, already touched upon in the objections; that day cannot be unless light exists, which was made therefore on
|
|
|
964 the first day.
|
|
|
965 </p>
|
|
|
966 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p12">
|
|
|
967 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> According to the opinion of those who hold that the formlessness of matter preceded its form in duration, matter must be
|
|
|
968 held to have been created at the beginning with substantial forms, afterwards receiving those that are accidental, among which
|
|
|
969 light holds the first place.
|
|
|
970 </p>
|
|
|
971 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p13">
|
|
|
972 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> In the opinion of some the light here spoken of was a kind of luminous nebula, and that on the making of the sun this returned
|
|
|
973 to the matter of which it had been formed. But this cannot well be maintained, as in the beginning of Genesis Holy Scripture
|
|
|
974 records the institution of that order of nature which henceforth is to endure. We cannot, then, say that what was made at
|
|
|
975 that time afterwards ceased to exist.
|
|
|
976 </p>
|
|
|
977 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p14"> Others, therefore, held that this luminous nebula continues in existence, but so closely attached to the sun as to be indistinguishable.
|
|
|
978 But this is as much as to say that it is superfluous, whereas none of God's works have been made in vain. On this account
|
|
|
979 it is held by some that the sun's body was made out of this nebula. This, too, is impossible to those at least who believe
|
|
|
980 that the sun is different in its nature from the four elements, and naturally incorruptible. For in
|
|
|
981 that case its matter cannot take on another form.
|
|
|
982 </p>
|
|
|
983 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p15"> I answer, then, with Dionysius (Div. Nom. iv), that the light was the sun's light, formless as yet, being already the solar
|
|
|
984 substance, and possessing illuminative power in a general way, to which was afterwards added the special and determinative
|
|
|
985 power required to produce determinate effects. Thus, then, in the production of this light a triple distinction was made between
|
|
|
986 light and darkness. First, as to the cause, forasmuch as in the substance of the sun we have the cause of
|
|
|
987 light, and in the opaque nature of the earth the cause of darkness. Secondly, as to place, for in one hemisphere there was
|
|
|
988 light, in the other darkness. Thirdly, as to time; because there was light for one and darkness for another in the same hemisphere;
|
|
|
989 and this is signified by the words, "He called the light day, and the darkness night."
|
|
|
990 </p>
|
|
|
991 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p16">
|
|
|
992 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Basil says (Hom. ii in Hexaem.) that day and night were then caused by expansion and contraction of light, rather than by
|
|
|
993 movement. But Augustine objects to this (Gen. ad lit. i), that there was no reason for this vicissitude of expansion and contraction
|
|
|
994 since there were neither men nor animals on the earth at that time, for whose service this was required. Nor does the nature
|
|
|
995 of a luminous body seem to admit of the withdrawal of light, so long as the
|
|
|
996 body is actually present; though this might be effected by a miracle. As to this, however, Augustine remarks (Gen. ad lit.
|
|
|
997 i) that in the first founding of the order of nature we must not look for miracles, but for what is in accordance with nature.
|
|
|
998 We hold, then, that the movement of the heavens is twofold. Of these movements, one is common to the entire heaven, and is
|
|
|
999 the cause of day and night. This, as it seems, had its beginning on the first day. The other varies in proportion as it
|
|
|
1000 affects various bodies, and by its variations is the cause of the succession of days, months, and years. Thus it is, that
|
|
|
1001 in the account of the first day the distinction between day and night alone is mentioned; this distinction being brought about
|
|
|
1002 by the common movement of the heavens. The further distinction into successive days, seasons, and years recorded as begun
|
|
|
1003 on the fourth day, in the words, "let them be for seasons, and for days, and years" is due to proper movements.
|
|
|
1004 </p>
|
|
|
1005 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p17">
|
|
|
1006 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> As Augustine teaches (Confess. xii; Gen. ad lit. 1,15), formlessness did not precede forms in duration; and so we must understand
|
|
|
1007 the production of light to signify the formation of spiritual creatures, not, indeed, with the perfection of glory, in which
|
|
|
1008 they were not created, but with the perfection of grace, which they possessed from their creation as said above (
|
|
|
1009 <a id="FP_Q67_A4-p17.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q62_A3.html">Q[62], A[3]</a>). Thus the division of light from darkness will
|
|
|
1010 denote the distinction of the spiritual creature from other created things as yet without form. But if all created things
|
|
|
1011 received their form at the same time, the darkness must be held to mean the spiritual darkness of the wicked, not as existing
|
|
|
1012 from the beginning but such as God foresaw would exist.
|
|
|
1013 </p>
|
|
|
1014 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p18"></p>
|
|
|
1015 <p id="FP_Q67_A4-p19"></p>
|
|
|
1016 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1017 <a href="summa.FP_Q68.html"></a>
|
|
|
1018 </div>
|
|
|
1019 <a href="summa.FP_Q66_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
1020 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1021 </div>
|
|
|
1022 <div id="FP_Q68" class="div3">
|
|
|
1023 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
1024 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1025 <h3 id="FP_Q68-p0.1">ON THE WORK OF THE SECOND DAY (FOUR ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
1026 <p id="FP_Q68-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1027 <p id="FP_Q68-p2"> We must next consider the work of the second day. Under this head there are four points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
1028 <p id="FP_Q68-p3"> (1) Whether the firmament was made on the second day?</p>
|
|
|
1029 <p id="FP_Q68-p4"> (2) Whether there are waters above the firmament?</p>
|
|
|
1030 <p id="FP_Q68-p5"> (3) Whether the firmament divides waters from waters?</p>
|
|
|
1031 <p id="FP_Q68-p6"> (4) Whether there is more than one heaven?</p>
|
|
|
1032 <div id="FP_Q68_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
1033 <a href="summa.FP_Q68.html"></a>
|
|
|
1034 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1035 <h4 id="FP_Q68_A1-p0.1">Whether the firmament was made on the second day?</h4>
|
|
|
1036 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1037 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p2">
|
|
|
1038 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the firmament was not made on the second day. For it is said (
|
|
|
1039 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A1-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.8" target="asv">Gn. 1:8</a>): "God called the firmament heaven." But the heaven existed before days, as is clear from the words, "In the beginning God
|
|
|
1040 created heaven and earth." Therefore the firmament was not made on the second day.
|
|
|
1041 </p>
|
|
|
1042 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p3">
|
|
|
1043 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the work of the six days is ordered conformably to the order of Divine wisdom. Now it would ill become the Divine
|
|
|
1044 wisdom to make afterwards that which is naturally first. But though the firmament naturally precedes the earth and the waters,
|
|
|
1045 these are mentioned before the formation of light, which was on the first day. Therefore the firmament was not made on the
|
|
|
1046 second day.
|
|
|
1047 </p>
|
|
|
1048 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p4">
|
|
|
1049 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, all that was made in the six days was formed out of matter created before days began. But the firmament cannot have
|
|
|
1050 been formed out of pre-existing matter, for if so it would be liable to generation and corruption. Therefore the firmament
|
|
|
1051 was not made on the second day.
|
|
|
1052 </p>
|
|
|
1053 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p5">
|
|
|
1054 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is written (
|
|
|
1055 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A1-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.6" target="asv">Gn. 1:6</a>): "God said: let there be a firmament," and further on (verse 8); "And the evening and morning were the second day."
|
|
|
1056 </p>
|
|
|
1057 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p6">
|
|
|
1058 <b>I answer that,</b> In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to observed, as Augustine teaches (Gen. ad lit. i, 18). The first is,
|
|
|
1059 to hold the truth of Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity
|
|
|
1060 of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation, only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it, if it be proved
|
|
|
1061 with certainty to be false; lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers,
|
|
|
1062 and obstacles be placed to their believing.
|
|
|
1063 </p>
|
|
|
1064 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p7"> We say, therefore, that the words which speak of the firmament as made on the second day can be understood in two senses.
|
|
|
1065 They may be understood, first, of the starry firmament, on which point it is necessary to set forth the different opinions
|
|
|
1066 of philosophers. Some of these believed it to be composed of the elements; and this was the opinion of Empedocles, who, however,
|
|
|
1067 held further that the body of the firmament was not susceptible of dissolution, because its parts are, so to
|
|
|
1068 say, not in disunion, but in harmony. Others held the firmament to be of the nature of the four elements, not, indeed, compounded
|
|
|
1069 of them, but being as it were a simple element. Such was the opinion of Plato, who held that element to be fire. Others, again,
|
|
|
1070 have held that the heaven is not of the nature of the four elements, but is itself a fifth body, existing over and above these.
|
|
|
1071 This is the opinion of Aristotle (De Coel. i, text. 6,32).
|
|
|
1072 </p>
|
|
|
1073 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p8"> According to the first opinion, it may, strictly speaking, be granted that the firmament was made, even as to substance,
|
|
|
1074 on the second day. For it is part of the work of creation to produce the substance of the elements, while it belongs to the
|
|
|
1075 work of distinction and adornment to give forms to the elements that pre-exist.
|
|
|
1076 </p>
|
|
|
1077 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p9"> But the belief that the firmament was made, as to its substance, on the second day is incompatible with the opinion of Plato,
|
|
|
1078 according to whom the making of the firmament implies the production of the element of fire. This production, however, belongs
|
|
|
1079 to the work of creation, at least, according to those who hold that formlessness of matter preceded in time its formation,
|
|
|
1080 since the first form received by matter is the elemental.
|
|
|
1081 </p>
|
|
|
1082 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p10"> Still less compatible with the belief that the substance of the firmament was produced on the second day is the opinion of
|
|
|
1083 Aristotle, seeing that the mention of days denotes succession of time, whereas the firmament, being naturally incorruptible,
|
|
|
1084 is of a matter not susceptible of change of form; wherefore it could not be made out of matter existing antecedently in time.
|
|
|
1085 </p>
|
|
|
1086 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p11"> Hence to produce the substance of the firmament belongs to the work of creation. But its formation, in some degree, belongs
|
|
|
1087 to the second day, according to both opinions: for as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv), the light of the sun was without form
|
|
|
1088 during the first three days, and afterwards, on the fourth day, received its form.
|
|
|
1089 </p>
|
|
|
1090 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p12"> If, however, we take these days to denote merely sequence in the natural order, as Augustine holds (Gen. ad lit. iv, 22,24),
|
|
|
1091 and not succession in time, there is then nothing to prevent our saying, whilst holding any one of the opinions given above,
|
|
|
1092 that the substantial formation of the firmament belongs to the second day.
|
|
|
1093 </p>
|
|
|
1094 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p13"> Another possible explanation is to understand by the firmament that was made on the second day, not that in which the stars
|
|
|
1095 are set, but the part of the atmosphere where the clouds are collected, and which has received the name firmament from the
|
|
|
1096 firmness and density of the air. "For a body is called firm," that is dense and solid, "thereby differing from a mathematical
|
|
|
1097 body" as is remarked by Basil (Hom. iii in Hexaem.). If, then, this explanation is adopted none of these
|
|
|
1098 opinions will be found repugnant to reason. Augustine, in fact (Gen. ad lit. ii, 4), recommends it thus: "I consider this
|
|
|
1099 view of the question worthy of all commendation, as neither contrary to faith nor difficult to be proved and believed."
|
|
|
1100 </p>
|
|
|
1101 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p14">
|
|
|
1102 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> According to Chrysostom (Hom. iii in Genes.), Moses prefaces his record by speaking of the works of God collectively, in
|
|
|
1103 the words, "In the beginning God created heaven and earth," and then proceeds to explain them part by part; in somewhat the
|
|
|
1104 same way as one might say: "This house was constructed by that builder," and then add: "First, he laid the foundations, then
|
|
|
1105 built the walls, and thirdly, put on the roof." In accepting this explanation we are,
|
|
|
1106 therefore, not bound to hold that a different heaven is spoken of in the words: "In the beginning God created heaven and earth,"
|
|
|
1107 and when we read that the firmament was made on the second day.
|
|
|
1108 </p>
|
|
|
1109 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p15"> We may also say that the heaven recorded as created in the beginning is not the same as that made on the second day; and
|
|
|
1110 there are several senses in which this may be understood. Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. i, 9) that the heaven recorded as made
|
|
|
1111 on the first day is the formless spiritual nature, and that the heaven of the second day is the corporeal heaven. According
|
|
|
1112 to Bede (Hexaem. i) and Strabus, the heaven made on the first day is the empyrean, and the firmament made on the
|
|
|
1113 second day, the starry heaven. According to Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii) that of the first day was spherical in form and without
|
|
|
1114 stars, the same, in fact, that the philosophers speak of, calling it the ninth sphere, and the primary movable body that moves
|
|
|
1115 with diurnal movement: while by the firmament made on the second day he understands the starry heaven. According to another
|
|
|
1116 theory, touched upon by Augustine [*Gen. ad lit. ii, 1] the heaven made on the first day was the starry heaven, and the
|
|
|
1117 firmament made on the second day was that region of the air where the clouds are collected, which is also called heaven, but
|
|
|
1118 equivocally. And to show that the word is here used in an equivocal sense, it is expressly said that "God called the firmament
|
|
|
1119 heaven"; just as in a preceding verse it said that "God called the light day" (since the word "day" is also used to denote
|
|
|
1120 a space of twenty-four hours). Other instances of a similar use occur, as pointed out by Rabbi Moses.
|
|
|
1121 </p>
|
|
|
1122 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p16"> The second and third objections are sufficiently answered by what has been already said.</p>
|
|
|
1123 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p17"></p>
|
|
|
1124 <p id="FP_Q68_A1-p18"></p>
|
|
|
1125 <a href="summa.FP_Q68.html"></a>
|
|
|
1126 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1127 </div>
|
|
|
1128 <div id="FP_Q68_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
1129 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1130 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1131 <h4 id="FP_Q68_A2-p0.1">Whether there are waters above the firmament?</h4>
|
|
|
1132 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1133 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p2">
|
|
|
1134 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that there are not waters above the firmament. For water is heavy by nature, and heavy things tend naturally
|
|
|
1135 downwards, not upwards. Therefore there are not waters above the firmament.
|
|
|
1136 </p>
|
|
|
1137 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p3">
|
|
|
1138 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, water is fluid by nature, and fluids cannot rest on a sphere, as experience shows. Therefore, since the firmament
|
|
|
1139 is a sphere, there cannot be water above it.
|
|
|
1140 </p>
|
|
|
1141 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p4">
|
|
|
1142 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, water is an element, and appointed to the generation of composite bodies, according to the relation in which imperfect
|
|
|
1143 things stand towards perfect. But bodies of composite nature have their place upon the earth, and not above the firmament,
|
|
|
1144 so that water would be useless there. But none of God's works are useless. Therefore there are not waters above the firmament.
|
|
|
1145 </p>
|
|
|
1146 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p5">
|
|
|
1147 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is written (
|
|
|
1148 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A2-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.7" target="asv">Gn. 1:7</a>): "(God) divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament."
|
|
|
1149 </p>
|
|
|
1150 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p6"> I answer with Augustine (Gen. ad lit. ii, 5) that, "These words of Scripture have more authority than the most exalted human
|
|
|
1151 intellect. Hence, whatever these waters are, and whatever their mode of existence, we cannot for a moment doubt that they
|
|
|
1152 are there." As to the nature of these waters, all are not agreed. Origen says (Hom. i in Gen.) that the waters that are above
|
|
|
1153 the firmament are "spiritual substances." Wherefore it is written (
|
|
|
1154 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A2-p6.1" href="./asv.html#Ps.148.4" target="asv">Ps. 148:4</a>): "Let the
|
|
|
1155 waters that are above the heavens praise the name of the Lord," and (
|
|
|
1156 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A2-p6.2" href="./asv.html#Dan.3.60" target="asv">Dan. 3:60</a>): "Ye waters that are above the heavens, bless the Lord."To this Basil answers (Hom. iii in Hexaem.) that these words do
|
|
|
1157 not mean that these waters are rational creatures, but that "the thoughtful contemplation of them by those who understand
|
|
|
1158 fulfils the glory of the Creator." Hence in the same context, fire, hail, and other like creatures, are invoked in the same
|
|
|
1159 way, though no one would
|
|
|
1160 attribute reason to these.
|
|
|
1161 </p>
|
|
|
1162 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p7"> We must hold, then, these waters to be material, but their exact nature will be differently defined according as opinions
|
|
|
1163 on the firmament differ. For if by the firmament we understand the starry heaven, and as being of the nature of the four elements,
|
|
|
1164 for the same reason it may be believed that the waters above the heaven are of the same nature as the elemental waters. But
|
|
|
1165 if by the firmament we understand the starry heaven, not, however, as being of the nature of the four
|
|
|
1166 elements then the waters above the firmament will not be of the same nature as the elemental waters, but just as, according
|
|
|
1167 to Strabus, one heaven is called empyrean, that is, fiery, solely on account of its splendor: so this other heaven will be
|
|
|
1168 called aqueous solely on account of its transparence; and this heaven is above the starry heaven. Again, if the firmament
|
|
|
1169 is held to be of other nature than the elements, it may still be said to divide the waters, if we understand by water not
|
|
|
1170 the
|
|
|
1171 element but formless matter. Augustine, in fact, says (Super Gen. cont. Manich. i, 5,7) that whatever divides bodies from
|
|
|
1172 bodies can be said to divide waters from waters.
|
|
|
1173 </p>
|
|
|
1174 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p8"> If, however, we understand by the firmament that part of the air in which the clouds are collected, then the waters above
|
|
|
1175 the firmament must rather be the vapors resolved from the waters which are raised above a part of the atmosphere, and from
|
|
|
1176 which the rain falls. But to say, as some writers alluded to by Augustine (Gen. ad lit. ii, 4), that waters resolved into
|
|
|
1177 vapor may be lifted above the starry heaven, is a mere absurdity. The solid nature of the firmament, the intervening
|
|
|
1178 region of fire, wherein all vapor must be consumed, the tendency in light and rarefied bodies to drift to one spot beneath
|
|
|
1179 the vault of the moon, as well as the fact that vapors are perceived not to rise even to the tops of the higher mountains,
|
|
|
1180 all to go to show the impossibility of this. Nor is it less absurd to say, in support of this opinion, that bodies may be
|
|
|
1181 rarefied infinitely, since natural bodies cannot be infinitely rarefied or divided, but up to a certain point only.
|
|
|
1182 </p>
|
|
|
1183 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p9">
|
|
|
1184 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Some have attempted to solve this difficulty by supposing that in spite of the natural gravity of water, it is kept in its
|
|
|
1185 place above the firmament by the Divine power. Augustine (Gen. ad lit. ii, 1), however will not admit this solution, but says
|
|
|
1186 "It is our business here to inquire how God has constituted the natures of His creatures, not how far it may have pleased
|
|
|
1187 Him to work on them by way of miracle." We leave this view, then, and answer that
|
|
|
1188 according to the last two opinions on the firmament and the waters the solution appears from what has been said. According
|
|
|
1189 to the first opinion, an order of the elements must be supposed different from that given by Aristotle, that is to say, that
|
|
|
1190 the waters surrounding the earth are of a dense consistency, and those around the firmament of a rarer consistency, in proportion
|
|
|
1191 to the respective density of the earth and of the heaven.
|
|
|
1192 </p>
|
|
|
1193 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p10"> Or by the water, as stated, we may understand the matter of bodies to be signified.</p>
|
|
|
1194 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p11">
|
|
|
1195 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The solution is clear from what has been said, according to the last two opinions. But according to the first opinion, Basil
|
|
|
1196 gives two replies (Hom. iii in Hexaem.). He answers first, that a body seen as concave beneath need not necessarily be rounded,
|
|
|
1197 or convex, above. Secondly, that the waters above the firmament are not fluid, but exist outside it in a solid state, as a
|
|
|
1198 mass of ice, and that this is the crystalline heaven of some writers.
|
|
|
1199 </p>
|
|
|
1200 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p12">
|
|
|
1201 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> According to the third opinion given, the waters above the firmament have been raised in the form of vapors, and serve to
|
|
|
1202 give rain to the earth. But according to the second opinion, they are above the heaven that is wholly transparent and starless.
|
|
|
1203 This, according to some, is the primary mobile, the cause of the daily revolution of the entire heaven, whereby the continuance
|
|
|
1204 of generation is secured. In the same way the starry heaven, by the zodiacal
|
|
|
1205 movement, is the cause whereby different bodies are generated or corrupted, through the rising and setting of the stars, and
|
|
|
1206 their various influences. But according to the first opinion these waters are set there to temper the heat of the celestial
|
|
|
1207 bodies, as Basil supposes (Hom. iii in Hexaem.). And Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. ii, 5) that some have considered this to
|
|
|
1208 be proved by the extreme cold of Saturn owing to its nearness to the waters that are above the firmament.
|
|
|
1209 </p>
|
|
|
1210 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p13"></p>
|
|
|
1211 <p id="FP_Q68_A2-p14"></p>
|
|
|
1212 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1213 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1214 </div>
|
|
|
1215 <div id="FP_Q68_A3" class="div4">
|
|
|
1216 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1217 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
1218 <h4 id="FP_Q68_A3-p0.1">Whether the firmament divides waters from waters?</h4>
|
|
|
1219 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1220 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p2">
|
|
|
1221 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the firmament does not divide waters from waters. For bodies that are of one and the same species have
|
|
|
1222 naturally one and the same place. But the Philosopher says (Topic. i, 6): "All water is the same species." Water therefore
|
|
|
1223 cannot be distinct from water by place.
|
|
|
1224 </p>
|
|
|
1225 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p3">
|
|
|
1226 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, should it be said that the waters above the firmament differ in species from those under the firmament, it may be
|
|
|
1227 argued, on the contrary, that things distinct in species need nothing else to distinguish them. If then, these waters differ
|
|
|
1228 in species, it is not the firmament that distinguishes them.
|
|
|
1229 </p>
|
|
|
1230 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p4">
|
|
|
1231 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, it would appear that what distinguishes waters from waters must be something which is in contact with them on either
|
|
|
1232 side, as a wall standing in the midst of a river. But it is evident that the waters below do not reach up to the firmament.
|
|
|
1233 Therefore the firmament does not divide the waters from the waters.
|
|
|
1234 </p>
|
|
|
1235 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p5">
|
|
|
1236 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is written (
|
|
|
1237 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A3-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.6" target="asv">Gn. 1:6</a>): "Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters; and let it divide the waters from the waters."
|
|
|
1238 </p>
|
|
|
1239 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p6">
|
|
|
1240 <b>I answer that,</b> The text of Genesis, considered superficially, might lead to the adoption of a theory similar to that held by certain philosophers
|
|
|
1241 of antiquity, who taught that water was a body infinite in dimension, and the primary element of all bodies. Thus in the words,
|
|
|
1242 "Darkness was upon the face of the deep," the word "deep" might be taken to mean the infinite mass of water, understood as
|
|
|
1243 the principle of all other bodies. These philosophers also taught that not all
|
|
|
1244 corporeal things are confined beneath the heaven perceived by our senses, but that a body of water, infinite in extent, exists
|
|
|
1245 above that heaven. On this view the firmament of heaven might be said to divide the waters without from those within---that
|
|
|
1246 is to say, from all bodies under the heaven, since they took water to be the principle of them all.
|
|
|
1247 </p>
|
|
|
1248 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p7"> As, however, this theory can be shown to be false by solid reasons, it cannot be held to be the sense of Holy Scripture.
|
|
|
1249 It should rather be considered that Moses was speaking to ignorant people, and that out of condescension to their weakness
|
|
|
1250 he put before them only such things as are apparent to sense. Now even the most uneducated can perceive by their senses that
|
|
|
1251 earth and water are corporeal, whereas it is not evident to all that air also is corporeal, for there have even
|
|
|
1252 been philosophers who said that air is nothing, and called a space filled with air a vacuum.
|
|
|
1253 </p>
|
|
|
1254 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p8"> Moses, then, while he expressly mentions water and earth, makes no express mention of air by name, to avoid setting before
|
|
|
1255 ignorant persons something beyond their knowledge. In order, however, to express the truth to those capable of understanding
|
|
|
1256 it, he implies in the words: "Darkness was upon the face of the deep," the existence of air as attendant, so to say, upon
|
|
|
1257 the water. For it may be understood from these words that over the face of the water a transparent body was
|
|
|
1258 extended, the subject of light and darkness, which, in fact, is the air.
|
|
|
1259 </p>
|
|
|
1260 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p9"> Whether, then, we understand by the firmament the starry heaven, or the cloudy region of the air, it is true to say that
|
|
|
1261 it divides the waters from the waters, according as we take water to denote formless matter, or any kind of transparent body,
|
|
|
1262 as fittingly designated under the name of waters. For the starry heaven divides the lower transparent bodies from the higher,
|
|
|
1263 and the cloudy region divides that higher part of the air, where the rain and similar things are generated,
|
|
|
1264 from the lower part, which is connected with the water and included under that name.
|
|
|
1265 </p>
|
|
|
1266 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p10">
|
|
|
1267 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> If by the firmament is understood the starry heaven, the waters above are not of the same species as those beneath. But if
|
|
|
1268 by the firmament is understood the cloudy region of the air, both these waters are of the same species, and two places are
|
|
|
1269 assigned to them, though not for the same purpose, the higher being the place of their begetting, the lower, the place of
|
|
|
1270 their repose.
|
|
|
1271 </p>
|
|
|
1272 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p11">
|
|
|
1273 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> If the waters are held to differ in species, the firmament cannot be said to divide the waters, as the cause of their destruction,
|
|
|
1274 but only as the boundary of each.
|
|
|
1275 </p>
|
|
|
1276 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p12">
|
|
|
1277 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> On account of the air and other similar bodies being invisible, Moses includes all such bodies under the name of water, and
|
|
|
1278 thus it is evident that waters are found on each side of the firmament, whatever be the sense in which the word is used.
|
|
|
1279 </p>
|
|
|
1280 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p13"></p>
|
|
|
1281 <p id="FP_Q68_A3-p14"></p>
|
|
|
1282 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1283 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
1284 </div>
|
|
|
1285 <div id="FP_Q68_A4" class="div4">
|
|
|
1286 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1287 <a href="summa.FP_Q69.html"></a>
|
|
|
1288 <h4 id="FP_Q68_A4-p0.1">Whether there is only one heaven?</h4>
|
|
|
1289 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1290 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p2">
|
|
|
1291 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that there is only one heaven. For the heaven is contrasted with the earth, in the words, "In the beginning
|
|
|
1292 God created heaven and earth."But there is only one earth. Therefore there is only one heaven.
|
|
|
1293 </p>
|
|
|
1294 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p3">
|
|
|
1295 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, that which consists of the entire sum of its own matter, must be one; and such is the heaven, as the Philosopher
|
|
|
1296 proves (De Coel. i, text. 95). Therefore there is but one heaven.
|
|
|
1297 </p>
|
|
|
1298 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p4">
|
|
|
1299 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, whatever is predicated of many things univocally is predicated of them according to some common notion. But if there
|
|
|
1300 are more heavens than one, they are so called univocally, for if equivocally only, they could not properly be called many.
|
|
|
1301 If, then, they are many, there must be some common notion by reason of which each is called heaven, but this common notion
|
|
|
1302 cannot be assigned. Therefore there cannot be more than one heaven.
|
|
|
1303 </p>
|
|
|
1304 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p5">
|
|
|
1305 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is said (
|
|
|
1306 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A4-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Ps.148.4" target="asv">Ps. 148:4</a>): "Praise Him, ye heavens of heavens."
|
|
|
1307 </p>
|
|
|
1308 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p6">
|
|
|
1309 <b>I answer that,</b> On this point there seems to be a diversity of opinion between Basil and Chrysostom. The latter says that there is only one
|
|
|
1310 heaven (Hom. iv in Gen.), and that the words 'heavens of heavens' are merely the translation of the Hebrew idiom according
|
|
|
1311 to which the word is always used in the plural, just as in Latin there are many nouns that are wanting in the singular. On
|
|
|
1312 the other hand, Basil (Hom. iii in Hexaem.), whom Damascene follows (De Fide Orth. ii), says
|
|
|
1313 that there are many heavens. The difference, however, is more nominal than real. For Chrysostom means by the one heaven the
|
|
|
1314 whole body that is above the earth and the water, for which reason the birds that fly in the air are called birds of heaven
|
|
|
1315 [*
|
|
|
1316 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A4-p6.1" href="./asv.html#Ps.8.9" target="asv">Ps. 8:9</a>]. But since in this body there are many distinct parts, Basil said that there are more heavens than one.
|
|
|
1317 </p>
|
|
|
1318 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p7"> In order, then, to understand the distinction of heavens, it must be borne in mind that Scripture speaks of heaven in a threefold
|
|
|
1319 sense. Sometimes it uses the word in its proper and natural meaning, when it denotes that body on high which is luminous actually
|
|
|
1320 or potentially, and incorruptible by nature. In this body there are three heavens; the first is the empyrean, which is wholly
|
|
|
1321 luminous; the second is the aqueous or crystalline, wholly transparent; and the third is called
|
|
|
1322 the starry heaven, in part transparent, and in part actually luminous, and divided into eight spheres. One of these is the
|
|
|
1323 sphere of the fixed stars; the other seven, which may be called the seven heavens, are the spheres of the planets.
|
|
|
1324 </p>
|
|
|
1325 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p8"> In the second place, the name heaven is applied to a body that participates in any property of the heavenly body, as sublimity
|
|
|
1326 and luminosity, actual or potential. Thus Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii) holds as one heaven all the space between the waters
|
|
|
1327 and the moon's orb, calling it the aerial. According to him, then, there are three heavens, the aerial, the starry, and one
|
|
|
1328 higher than both these, of which the Apostle is understood to speak when he says of himself that he was
|
|
|
1329 "rapt to the third heaven."
|
|
|
1330 </p>
|
|
|
1331 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p9"> But since this space contains two elements, namely, fire and air, and in each of these there is what is called a higher and
|
|
|
1332 a lower region Rabanus subdivides this space into four distinct heavens. The higher region of fire he calls the fiery heaven;
|
|
|
1333 the lower, the Olympian heaven from a lofty mountain of that name: the higher region of air he calls, from its brightness,
|
|
|
1334 the ethereal heaven; the lower, the aerial. When, therefore, these four heavens are added to the three
|
|
|
1335 enumerated above, there are seven corporeal heavens in all, in the opinion of Rabanus.
|
|
|
1336 </p>
|
|
|
1337 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p10"> Thirdly, there are metaphorical uses of the word heaven, as when this name is applied to the Blessed Trinity, Who is the
|
|
|
1338 Light and the Most High Spirit. It is explained by some, as thus applied, in the words, "I will ascend into heaven"; whereby
|
|
|
1339 the evil spirit is represented as seeking to make himself equal with God. Sometimes also spiritual blessings, the recompense
|
|
|
1340 of the Saints, from being the highest of all good gifts, are signified by the word heaven, and, in fact, are so
|
|
|
1341 signified, according to Augustine (De Serm. Dom. in Monte), in the words, "Your reward is very great in heaven" (
|
|
|
1342 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q68_A4-p10.1" href="./asv.html#Matt.5.12" target="asv">Mat. 5:12</a>).
|
|
|
1343 </p>
|
|
|
1344 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p11"> Again, three kinds of supernatural visions, bodily, imaginative, and intellectual, are called sometimes so many heavens,
|
|
|
1345 in reference to which Augustine (Gen. ad lit. xii) expounds Paul's rapture "to the third heaven."
|
|
|
1346 </p>
|
|
|
1347 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p12">
|
|
|
1348 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The earth stands in relation to the heaven as the centre of a circle to its circumference. But as one center may have many
|
|
|
1349 circumferences, so, though there is but one earth, there may be many heavens.
|
|
|
1350 </p>
|
|
|
1351 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p13">
|
|
|
1352 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The argument holds good as to the heaven, in so far as it denotes the entire sum of corporeal creation, for in that sense
|
|
|
1353 it is one.
|
|
|
1354 </p>
|
|
|
1355 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p14">
|
|
|
1356 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> All the heavens have in common sublimity and some degree of luminosity, as appears from what has been said.
|
|
|
1357 </p>
|
|
|
1358 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p15"></p>
|
|
|
1359 <p id="FP_Q68_A4-p16"></p>
|
|
|
1360 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1361 <a href="summa.FP_Q69.html"></a>
|
|
|
1362 </div>
|
|
|
1363 <a href="summa.FP_Q67_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
1364 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1365 </div>
|
|
|
1366 <div id="FP_Q69" class="div3">
|
|
|
1367 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
1368 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1369 <h3 id="FP_Q69-p0.1">ON THE WORK OF THE THIRD DAY (TWO ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
1370 <p id="FP_Q69-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1371 <p id="FP_Q69-p2"> We next consider the work of the third day. Under this head there are two points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
1372 <p id="FP_Q69-p3"> (1) About the gathering together of the waters;</p>
|
|
|
1373 <p id="FP_Q69-p4"> (2) About the production of plants.</p>
|
|
|
1374 <div id="FP_Q69_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
1375 <a href="summa.FP_Q69.html"></a>
|
|
|
1376 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1377 <h4 id="FP_Q69_A1-p0.1">Whether it was fitting that the gathering together of the waters should take place, as recorded, on the third day?</h4>
|
|
|
1378 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1379 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p2">
|
|
|
1380 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that it was not fitting that the gathering together of the waters should take place on the third day. For what
|
|
|
1381 was made on the first and second days is expressly said to have been "made" in the words, "God said: Be light made," and "Let
|
|
|
1382 there be a firmament made."But the third day is contradistinguished from the first and the second days. Therefore the work
|
|
|
1383 of the third day should have been described as a making not as a gathering together.
|
|
|
1384 </p>
|
|
|
1385 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p3">
|
|
|
1386 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the earth hitherto had been completely covered by the waters, wherefore it was described as "invisible" [*
|
|
|
1387 <a id="FP_Q69_A1-p3.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q66_A1.html">Q[66], A[1]</a>, OBJ[1]]. There was then no place on the earth to which the waters could be gathered together.
|
|
|
1388 </p>
|
|
|
1389 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p4">
|
|
|
1390 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, things which are not in continuous contact cannot occupy one place. But not all the waters are in continuous contact,
|
|
|
1391 and therefore all were not gathered together into one place.
|
|
|
1392 </p>
|
|
|
1393 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p5">
|
|
|
1394 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, a gathering together is a mode of local movement. But the waters flow naturally, and take their course towards the
|
|
|
1395 sea. In their case, therefore, a Divine precept of this kind was unnecessary.
|
|
|
1396 </p>
|
|
|
1397 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p6">
|
|
|
1398 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, the earth is given its name at its first creation by the words, "In the beginning God created heaven and earth."
|
|
|
1399 Therefore the imposition of its name on the third day seems to be recorded without necessity.
|
|
|
1400 </p>
|
|
|
1401 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p7">
|
|
|
1402 <b>On the contrary,</b> The authority of Scripture suffices.
|
|
|
1403 </p>
|
|
|
1404 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p8">
|
|
|
1405 <b>I answer that,</b> It is necessary to reply differently to this question according to the different interpretations given by Augustine and other
|
|
|
1406 holy writers. In all these works, according to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. i, 15; iv, 22,34; De Gen. Contr. Manich. i, 5, 7),
|
|
|
1407 there is no order of duration, but only of origin and nature. He says that the formless spiritual and formless corporeal natures
|
|
|
1408 were created first of all, and that the latter are at first indicated by the words
|
|
|
1409 "earth" and "water." Not that this formlessness preceded formation, in time, but only in origin; nor yet that one formation
|
|
|
1410 preceded another in duration, but merely in the order of nature. Agreeably, then, to this order, the formation of the highest
|
|
|
1411 or spiritual nature is recorded in the first place, where it is said that light was made on the first day. For as the spiritual
|
|
|
1412 nature is higher than the corporeal, so the higher bodies are nobler than the lower. Hence the formation of the higher
|
|
|
1413 bodies is indicated in the second place, by the words, "Let there be made a firmament," by which is to be understood the impression
|
|
|
1414 of celestial forms on formless matter, that preceded with priority not of time, but of origin only. But in the third place
|
|
|
1415 the impression of elemental forms on formless matter is recorded, also with a priority of origin only. Therefore the words,
|
|
|
1416 "Let the waters be gathered together, and the dry land appear," mean that corporeal matter was impressed with the
|
|
|
1417 substantial form of water, so as to have such movement, and with the substantial form of earth, so as to have such an appearance.
|
|
|
1418 </p>
|
|
|
1419 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p9"> According, however, to other holy writers [*
|
|
|
1420 <a id="FP_Q69_A1-p9.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q66_A1.html">Q[66], A[1]</a>] an order of duration in the works is to be understood, by which is meant that the formlessness of matter precedes its formation,
|
|
|
1421 and one form another, in order of time. Nevertheless, they do not hold that the formlessness of matter implies the total absence
|
|
|
1422 of form, since heaven, earth, and water already existed, since these three are named as already clearly perceptible to the
|
|
|
1423 senses; rather they
|
|
|
1424 understand by formlessness the want of due distinction and of perfect beauty, and in respect of these three Scripture mentions
|
|
|
1425 three kinds of formlessness. Heaven, the highest of them, was without form so long as "darkness" filled it, because it was
|
|
|
1426 the source of light. The formlessness of water, which holds the middle place, is called the "deep," because, as Augustine
|
|
|
1427 says (Contr. Faust. xxii, 11), this word signifies the mass of waters without order. Thirdly, the formless state of the earth
|
|
|
1428 is touched upon when the earth is said to be "void" or "invisible," because it was covered by the waters. Thus, then, the
|
|
|
1429 formation of the highest body took place on the first day. And since time results from the movement of the heaven, and is
|
|
|
1430 the numerical measure of the movement of the highest body, from this formation, resulted the distinction of time, namely,
|
|
|
1431 that of night and day. On the second day the intermediate body, water, was formed, receiving from the firmament a sort of
|
|
|
1432 distinction
|
|
|
1433 and order (so that water be understood as including certain other things, as explained above (
|
|
|
1434 <a id="FP_Q69_A1-p9.2" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q68_A3.html">Q[68], A[3]</a>)). On the third day the earth, the lowest body, received its form by the withdrawal of the waters, and there resulted the
|
|
|
1435 distinction in the lowest body, namely, of land and sea. Hence Scripture, having clearly expresses the manner in which it
|
|
|
1436 received its form by the equally suitable words, "Let the dry land appear."
|
|
|
1437 </p>
|
|
|
1438 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p10">
|
|
|
1439 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> According to Augustine [*Gen. ad lit. ii, 7,8; iii, 20], Scripture does not say of the work of the third day, that it was
|
|
|
1440 made, as it says of those that precede, in order to show that higher and spiritual forms, such as the angels and the heavenly
|
|
|
1441 bodies, are perfect and stable in being, whereas inferior forms are imperfect and mutable. Hence the impression of such forms
|
|
|
1442 is signified by the gathering of the waters, and the appearing of the land. For
|
|
|
1443 "water," to use Augustine's words, "glides and flows away, the earth abides" (Gen. ad lit. ii, 11). Others, again, hold that
|
|
|
1444 the work of the third day was perfected on that day only as regards movement from place to place, and that for this reason
|
|
|
1445 Scripture had no reason to speak of it as made.
|
|
|
1446 </p>
|
|
|
1447 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p11">
|
|
|
1448 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> This argument is easily solved, according to Augustine's opinion (De Gen. Contr. Manich. i), because we need not suppose
|
|
|
1449 that the earth was first covered by the waters, and that these were afterwards gathered together, but that they were produced
|
|
|
1450 in this very gathering together. But according to the other writers there are three solutions, which Augustine gives (Gen.
|
|
|
1451 ad lit. i, 12). The first supposes that the waters are heaped up to a greater height
|
|
|
1452 at the place where they were gathered together, for it has been proved in regard to the Red Sea, that the sea is higher than
|
|
|
1453 the land, as Basil remarks (Hom. iv in Hexaem.). The second explains the water that covered the earth as being rarefied or
|
|
|
1454 nebulous, which was afterwards condensed when the waters were gathered together. The third suggests the existence of hollows
|
|
|
1455 in the earth, to receive the confluence of waters. Of the above the first seems the most probable.
|
|
|
1456 </p>
|
|
|
1457 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p12">
|
|
|
1458 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> All the waters have the sea as their goal, into which they flow by channels hidden or apparent, and this may be the reason
|
|
|
1459 why they are said to be gathered together into one place. Or, "one place" is to be understood not simply, but as contrasted
|
|
|
1460 with the place of the dry land, so that the sense would be, "Let the waters be gathered together in one place," that is, apart
|
|
|
1461 from the dry land. That the waters occupied more places than one seems to be
|
|
|
1462 implied by the words that follow, "The gathering together of the waters He called Seas."
|
|
|
1463 </p>
|
|
|
1464 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p13">
|
|
|
1465 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> The Divine command gives bodies their natural movement and by these natural movements they are said to "fulfill His word."
|
|
|
1466 Or we may say that it was according to the nature of water completely to cover the earth, just as the air completely surrounds
|
|
|
1467 both water and earth; but as a necessary means towards an end, namely, that plants and animals might be on the earth, it was
|
|
|
1468 necessary for the waters to be withdrawn from a portion of the earth. Some
|
|
|
1469 philosophers attribute this uncovering of the earth's surface to the action of the sun lifting up the vapors and thus drying
|
|
|
1470 the land. Scripture, however, attributes it to the Divine power, not only in the Book of Genesis, but also
|
|
|
1471 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q69_A1-p13.1" href="./asv.html#Job.38.10" target="asv"> Job 38:10 </a>where in the person of the Lord it is said, "I set My bounds around the sea," and
|
|
|
1472 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q69_A1-p13.2" href="./asv.html#Jer.5.22" target="asv"> Jer. 5:22, </a> where it is written: "Will you not then fear Me, saith the Lord, who have set the sand a bound for the sea?"
|
|
|
1473 </p>
|
|
|
1474 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p14">
|
|
|
1475 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> According to Augustine (De Gen. Contr. Manich. i), primary matter is meant by the word earth, where first mentioned, but
|
|
|
1476 in the present passage it is to be taken for the element itself. Again it may be said with Basil (Hom. iv in Hexaem.), that
|
|
|
1477 the earth is mentioned in the first passage in respect of its nature, but here in respect of its principal property, namely,
|
|
|
1478 dryness. Wherefore it is written: "He called the dry land, Earth." It may also be
|
|
|
1479 said with Rabbi Moses, that the expression, "He called," denotes throughout an equivocal use of the name imposed. Thus we
|
|
|
1480 find it said at first that "He called the light Day": for the reason that later on a period of twenty-four hours is also called
|
|
|
1481 day, where it is said that "there was evening and morning, one day." In like manner it is said that "the firmament," that
|
|
|
1482 is, the air, "He called heaven": for that which was first created was also called "heaven." And here, again, it is said that
|
|
|
1483 "the dry land," that is, the part from which the waters had withdrawn, "He called, Earth," as distinct from the sea; although
|
|
|
1484 the name earth is equally applied to that which is covered with waters or not. So by the expression "He called" we are to
|
|
|
1485 understand throughout that the nature or property He bestowed corresponded to the name He gave.
|
|
|
1486 </p>
|
|
|
1487 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p15"></p>
|
|
|
1488 <p id="FP_Q69_A1-p16"></p>
|
|
|
1489 <a href="summa.FP_Q69.html"></a>
|
|
|
1490 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1491 </div>
|
|
|
1492 <div id="FP_Q69_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
1493 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1494 <a href="summa.FP_Q70.html"></a>
|
|
|
1495 <h4 id="FP_Q69_A2-p0.1">Whether it was fitting that the production of plants should take place on the third day?</h4>
|
|
|
1496 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1497 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p2">
|
|
|
1498 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that it was not fitting that the production of plants should take place on the third day. For plants have life,
|
|
|
1499 as animals have. But the production of animals belongs to the work, not of distinction, but of adornment. Therefore the production
|
|
|
1500 of plants, as also belonging to the work of adornment, ought not to be recorded as taking place on the third day, which is
|
|
|
1501 devoted to the work of distinction.
|
|
|
1502 </p>
|
|
|
1503 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p3">
|
|
|
1504 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, a work by which the earth is accursed should have been recorded apart from the work by which it receives its form.
|
|
|
1505 But the words of
|
|
|
1506 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q69_A2-p3.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.3.17" target="asv"> Gn. 3:17, </a> "Cursed is the earth in thy work, thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee," show that by the production of certain
|
|
|
1507 plants the earth was accursed. Therefore the production of plants in general should not have been recorded on the third day,
|
|
|
1508 which is concerned with the work of
|
|
|
1509 formation.
|
|
|
1510 </p>
|
|
|
1511 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p4">
|
|
|
1512 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, as plants are firmly fixed to the earth, so are stones and metals, which are, nevertheless, not mentioned in the
|
|
|
1513 work of formation. Plants, therefore, ought not to have been made on the third day.
|
|
|
1514 </p>
|
|
|
1515 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p5">
|
|
|
1516 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is said (
|
|
|
1517 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q69_A2-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.12" target="asv">Gn. 1:12</a>): "The earth brought forth the green herb," after which there follows, "The evening and the morning were the third day."
|
|
|
1518 </p>
|
|
|
1519 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p6">
|
|
|
1520 <b>I answer that,</b> On the third day, as said
|
|
|
1521 <a id="FP_Q69_A2-p6.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html">(A[1])</a>, the formless state of the earth comes to an end. But this state is described as twofold. On the one hand, the earth was
|
|
|
1522 "invisible" or "void," being covered by the waters; on the other hand, it was "shapeless" or "empty," that is, without that
|
|
|
1523 comeliness which it owes to the plants that clothe it, as it were, with a garment. Thus, therefore, in either respect this
|
|
|
1524 formless state ends on the third
|
|
|
1525 day: first, when "the waters were gathered together into one place and the dry land appeared"; secondly, when "the earth brought
|
|
|
1526 forth the green herb." But concerning the production of plants, Augustine's opinion differs from that of others. For other
|
|
|
1527 commentators, in accordance with the surface meaning of the text, consider that the plants were produced in act in their various
|
|
|
1528 species on this third day; whereas Augustine (Gen. ad lit. v, 5; viii, 3) says that the earth is said to have then
|
|
|
1529 produced plants and trees in their causes, that is, it received then the power to produce them. He supports this view by the
|
|
|
1530 authority of Scripture, for it is said (
|
|
|
1531 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q69_A2-p6.2" href="./asv.html#Gen.2.4" target="asv">Gn. 2:4,5</a>): "These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that . . . God made the heaven
|
|
|
1532 and the earth, and every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth, and every herb of the ground before it grew."
|
|
|
1533 Therefore, the production of plants in their causes,
|
|
|
1534 within the earth, took place before they sprang up from the earth's surface. And this is confirmed by reason, as follows.
|
|
|
1535 In these first days God created all things in their origin or causes, and from this work He subsequently rested. Yet afterwards,
|
|
|
1536 by governing His creatures, in the work of propagation, "He worketh until now."Now the production of plants from out the earth
|
|
|
1537 is a work of propagation, and therefore they were not produced in act on the third day, but in their causes only.
|
|
|
1538 However, in accordance with other writers, it may be said that the first constitution of species belongs to the work of the
|
|
|
1539 six days, but the reproduction among them of like from like, to the government of the universe. And Scripture indicates this
|
|
|
1540 in the words, "before it sprung up in the earth," and "before it grew," that is, before like was produced from like; just
|
|
|
1541 as now happens in the natural course by the production of seed. Wherefore Scripture says pointedly (
|
|
|
1542 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q69_A2-p6.3" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.11" target="asv">Gn.
|
|
|
1543 1:11
|
|
|
1544 </a>): "Let the earth bring forth the green herb, and such as may seed," as indicating the production of perfection of perfect
|
|
|
1545 species, from which the seed of others should arise. Nor does the question where the seminal power may reside, whether in
|
|
|
1546 root, stem, or fruit, affect the argument.
|
|
|
1547 </p>
|
|
|
1548 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p7">
|
|
|
1549 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Life in plants is hidden, since they lack sense and local movement, by which the animate and the inanimate are chiefly discernible.
|
|
|
1550 And therefore, since they are firmly fixed in the earth, their production is treated as a part of the earth's formation.
|
|
|
1551 </p>
|
|
|
1552 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p8">
|
|
|
1553 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Even before the earth was accursed, thorns and thistles had been produced, either virtually or actually. But they were not
|
|
|
1554 produced in punishment of man; as though the earth, which he tilled to gain his food, produced unfruitful and noxious plants.
|
|
|
1555 Hence it is said: "Shall it bring forth TO THEE."
|
|
|
1556 </p>
|
|
|
1557 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p9">
|
|
|
1558 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Moses put before the people such things only as were manifest to their senses, as we have said (
|
|
|
1559 <a id="FP_Q69_A2-p9.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q67_A4.html">Q[67], A[4]</a>;
|
|
|
1560 <a id="FP_Q69_A2-p9.2" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q68_A3.html">Q[68], A[3]</a>). But minerals are generated in hidden ways within the bowels of the earth. Moreover they seem hardly specifically distinct
|
|
|
1561 from earth, and would seem to be species thereof. For this reason, therefore, he makes no mention of them.
|
|
|
1562 </p>
|
|
|
1563 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p10"></p>
|
|
|
1564 <p id="FP_Q69_A2-p11"></p>
|
|
|
1565 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1566 <a href="summa.FP_Q70.html"></a>
|
|
|
1567 </div>
|
|
|
1568 <a href="summa.FP_Q68_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
1569 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1570 </div>
|
|
|
1571 <div id="FP_Q70" class="div3">
|
|
|
1572 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1573 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1574 <h3 id="FP_Q70-p0.1">OF THE WORK OF ADORNMENT, AS REGARDS THE FOURTH DAY (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
1575 <p id="FP_Q70-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1576 <p id="FP_Q70-p2"> We must next consider the work of adornment, first as to each day by itself, secondly as to all seven days in general.</p>
|
|
|
1577 <p id="FP_Q70-p3"> In the first place, then, we consider the work of the fourth day, secondly, that of the fifth day, thirdly, that of the sixth
|
|
|
1578 day, and fourthly, such matters as belong to the seventh day.
|
|
|
1579 </p>
|
|
|
1580 <p id="FP_Q70-p4"> Under the first head there are three points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
1581 <p id="FP_Q70-p5"> (1) As to the production of the lights;</p>
|
|
|
1582 <p id="FP_Q70-p6"> (2) As to the end of their production;</p>
|
|
|
1583 <p id="FP_Q70-p7"> (3) Whether they are living beings?</p>
|
|
|
1584 <div id="FP_Q70_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
1585 <a href="summa.FP_Q70.html"></a>
|
|
|
1586 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1587 <h4 id="FP_Q70_A1-p0.1">Whether the lights ought to have been produced on the fourth day?</h4>
|
|
|
1588 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1589 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p2">
|
|
|
1590 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the lights ought not to have been produced on the fourth day. For the heavenly luminaries are by nature
|
|
|
1591 incorruptible bodies: wherefore their matter cannot exist without their form. But as their matter was produced in the work
|
|
|
1592 of creation, before there was any day, so therefore were their forms. It follows, then, that the lights were not produced
|
|
|
1593 on the fourth day.
|
|
|
1594 </p>
|
|
|
1595 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p3">
|
|
|
1596 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the luminaries are, as it were, vessels of light. But light was made on the first day. The luminaries, therefore,
|
|
|
1597 should have been made on the first day, not on the fourth.
|
|
|
1598 </p>
|
|
|
1599 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p4">
|
|
|
1600 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the lights are fixed in the firmament, as plants are fixed in the earth. For, the Scripture says: "He set them in
|
|
|
1601 the firmament." But plants are described as produced when the earth, to which they are attached, received its form. The lights,
|
|
|
1602 therefore, should have been produced at the same time as the firmament, that is to say, on the second day.
|
|
|
1603 </p>
|
|
|
1604 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p5">
|
|
|
1605 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, plants are an effect of the sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies. Now, cause precedes effect in the order of nature.
|
|
|
1606 The lights, therefore, ought not to have been produced on the fourth day, but on the third day.
|
|
|
1607 </p>
|
|
|
1608 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p6">
|
|
|
1609 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, as astronomers say, there are many stars larger than the moon. Therefore the sun and the moon alone are not correctly
|
|
|
1610 described as the "two great lights."
|
|
|
1611 </p>
|
|
|
1612 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p7">
|
|
|
1613 <b>On the contrary,</b> Suffices the authority of Scripture.
|
|
|
1614 </p>
|
|
|
1615 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p8">
|
|
|
1616 <b>I answer that,</b> In recapitulating the Divine works, Scripture says (
|
|
|
1617 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q70_A1-p8.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.2.1" target="asv">Gn. 2:1</a>): "So the heavens and the earth were finished and all the furniture of them," thereby indicating that the work was threefold.
|
|
|
1618 In the first work, that of "creation," the heaven and the earth were produced, but as yet without form. In the second, or
|
|
|
1619 work of "distinction," the heaven and the earth were perfected, either by adding substantial form to formless matter, as Augustine
|
|
|
1620 holds (Gen. ad lit. ii,
|
|
|
1621 11), or by giving them the order and beauty due to them, as other holy writers suppose. To these two works is added the work
|
|
|
1622 of adornment, which is distinct from perfect. For the perfection of the heaven and the earth regards, seemingly, those things
|
|
|
1623 that belong to them intrinsically, but the adornment, those that are extrinsic, just as the perfection of a man lies in his
|
|
|
1624 proper parts and forms, and his adornment, in clothing or such like. Now just as distinction of certain things is made most
|
|
|
1625 evident by their local movement, as separating one from another; so the work of adornment is set forth by the production of
|
|
|
1626 things having movement in the heavens, and upon the earth. But it has been stated above (
|
|
|
1627 <a id="FP_Q70_A1-p8.2" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html">Q[69], A[1]</a>), that three things are recorded as created, namely, the heaven, the water, and the earth; and these three received their
|
|
|
1628 form from the three days' work of distinction, so that heaven was formed on the first day; on the second day the waters were
|
|
|
1629 separated; and on the third day, the earth was divided into sea and dry land. So also is it in the work of adornment; on the
|
|
|
1630 first day of this work, which is the fourth of creation, are produced the lights, to adorn the heaven by their movements;
|
|
|
1631 on the second day, which is the fifth, birds and fishes are called into being, to make beautiful the intermediate element,
|
|
|
1632 for they move in air and water, which are here taken as one; while on the third day, which is the sixth, animals are brought
|
|
|
1633 forth, to move upon the earth and adorn it. It must also here be noted that Augustine's opinion (Gen. ad lit. v, 5) on the
|
|
|
1634 production of lights is not at variance with that of other holy writers, since he says that they were made actually, and not
|
|
|
1635 merely virtually, for the firmament has not the power of producing lights, as the earth has of producing plants. Wherefore
|
|
|
1636 Scripture does not say: "Let the firmament produce lights," though it says: "Let the earth bring forth the green herb."
|
|
|
1637 </p>
|
|
|
1638 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p9">
|
|
|
1639 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> In Augustine's opinion there is no difficulty here; for he does not hold a succession of time in these works, and so there
|
|
|
1640 was no need for the matter of the lights to exist under another form. Nor is there any difficulty in the opinion of those
|
|
|
1641 who hold the heavenly bodies to be of the nature of the four elements, for it may be said that they were formed out of matter
|
|
|
1642 already existing, as animals and plants were formed. For those, however, who hold
|
|
|
1643 the heavenly bodies to be of another nature from the elements, and naturally incorruptible, the answer must be that the lights
|
|
|
1644 were substantially created at the beginning, but that their substance, at first formless, is formed on this day, by receiving
|
|
|
1645 not its substantial form, but a determination of power. As to the fact that the lights are not mentioned as existing from
|
|
|
1646 the beginning, but only as made on the fourth day, Chrysostom (Hom. vi in Gen.) explains this by the need of guarding the
|
|
|
1647 people from the danger of idolatry: since the lights are proved not to be gods, by the fact that they were not from the beginning.
|
|
|
1648 </p>
|
|
|
1649 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p10">
|
|
|
1650 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> No difficulty exists if we follow Augustine in holding the light made on the first day to be spiritual, and that made on
|
|
|
1651 this day to be corporeal. If, however, the light made on the first day is understood to be itself corporeal, then it must
|
|
|
1652 be held to have been produced on that day merely as light in general; and that on the fourth day the lights received a definite
|
|
|
1653 power to produce determinate effects. Thus we observe that the rays of the sun have
|
|
|
1654 one effect, those of the moon another, and so forth. Hence, speaking of such a determination of power, Dionysius (Div. Nom.
|
|
|
1655 iv) says that the sun's light which previously was without form, was formed on the fourth day.
|
|
|
1656 </p>
|
|
|
1657 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p11">
|
|
|
1658 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> According to Ptolemy the heavenly luminaries are not fixed in the spheres, but have their own movement distinct from the
|
|
|
1659 movement of the spheres. Wherefore Chrysostom says (Hom. vi in Gen.) that He is said to have set them in the firmament, not
|
|
|
1660 because He fixed them there immovably, but because He bade them to be there, even as He placed man in Paradise, to be there.
|
|
|
1661 In the opinion of Aristotle, however, the stars are fixed in their orbits, and in
|
|
|
1662 reality have no other movement but that of the spheres; and yet our senses perceive the movement of the luminaries and not
|
|
|
1663 that of the spheres (De Coel. ii, text. 43). But Moses describes what is obvious to sense, out of condescension to popular
|
|
|
1664 ignorance, as we have already said (
|
|
|
1665 <a id="FP_Q70_A1-p11.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q67_A4.html">Q[67], A[4]</a>;
|
|
|
1666 <a id="FP_Q70_A1-p11.2" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q68_A3.html">Q[68], A[3]</a>). The objection, however, falls to the ground if we regard the firmament made on the second day as having a natural distinction
|
|
|
1667 from that in
|
|
|
1668 which the stars are placed, even though the distinction is not apparent to the senses, the testimony of which Moses follows,
|
|
|
1669 as stated above (De Coel. ii, text. 43). For although to the senses there appears but one firmament; if we admit a higher
|
|
|
1670 and a lower firmament, the lower will be that which was made on the second day, and on the fourth the stars were fixed in
|
|
|
1671 the higher firmament.
|
|
|
1672 </p>
|
|
|
1673 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p12">
|
|
|
1674 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> In the words of Basil (Hom. v in Hexaem.), plants were recorded as produced before the sun and moon, to prevent idolatry,
|
|
|
1675 since those who believe the heavenly bodies to be gods, hold that plants originate primarily from these bodies. Although as
|
|
|
1676 Chrysostom remarks (Hom. vi in Gen.), the sun, moon, and stars cooperate in the work of production by their movements, as
|
|
|
1677 the husbandman cooperates by his labor.
|
|
|
1678 </p>
|
|
|
1679 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p13">
|
|
|
1680 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> As Chrysostom says, the two lights are called great, not so much with regard to their dimensions as to their influence and
|
|
|
1681 power. For though the stars be of greater bulk than the moon, yet the influence of the moon is more perceptible to the senses
|
|
|
1682 in this lower world. Moreover, as far as the senses are concerned, its apparent size is greater.
|
|
|
1683 </p>
|
|
|
1684 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p14"></p>
|
|
|
1685 <p id="FP_Q70_A1-p15"></p>
|
|
|
1686 <a href="summa.FP_Q70.html"></a>
|
|
|
1687 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1688 </div>
|
|
|
1689 <div id="FP_Q70_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
1690 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1691 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1692 <h4 id="FP_Q70_A2-p0.1">Whether the cause assigned for the production of the lights is reasonable?</h4>
|
|
|
1693 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1694 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p2">
|
|
|
1695 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the cause assigned for the production of the lights is not reasonable. For it is said (
|
|
|
1696 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q70_A2-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Jer.10.2" target="asv">Jer. 10:2</a>): "Be not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fear." Therefore the heavenly lights were not made to be signs.
|
|
|
1697 </p>
|
|
|
1698 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p3">
|
|
|
1699 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, sign is contradistinguished from cause. But the lights are the cause of what takes place upon the earth. Therefore
|
|
|
1700 they are not signs.
|
|
|
1701 </p>
|
|
|
1702 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p4">
|
|
|
1703 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the distinction of seasons and days began from the first day. Therefore the lights were not made "for seasons, and
|
|
|
1704 days, and years," that is, in order to distinguish them.
|
|
|
1705 </p>
|
|
|
1706 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p5">
|
|
|
1707 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, nothing is made for the sake of that which is inferior to itself, "since the end is better than the means" (Topic.
|
|
|
1708 iii). But the lights are nobler than the earth. Therefore they were not made "to enlighten it."
|
|
|
1709 </p>
|
|
|
1710 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p6">
|
|
|
1711 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, the new moon cannot be said "to rule the night." But such it probably did when first made; for men begin to count
|
|
|
1712 from the new moon. The moon, therefore, was not made "to rule the night."
|
|
|
1713 </p>
|
|
|
1714 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p7">
|
|
|
1715 <b>On the contrary,</b> Suffices the authority of Scripture.
|
|
|
1716 </p>
|
|
|
1717 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p8">
|
|
|
1718 <b>I answer that,</b> As we have said above (
|
|
|
1719 <a id="FP_Q70_A2-p8.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q65_A2.html">Q[65], A[2]</a>), a corporeal creature can be considered as made either for the sake of its proper act, or for other creatures, or for the
|
|
|
1720 whole universe, or for the glory of God. Of these reasons only that which points out the usefulness of these things to man,
|
|
|
1721 is touched upon by Moses, in order to withdraw his people from idolatry. Hence it is written (
|
|
|
1722 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q70_A2-p8.2" href="./asv.html#Deut.4.19" target="asv">Dt. 4:19</a>): "Lest perhaps lifting up thy
|
|
|
1723 eyes to heaven, thou see the sun and the moon and all the stars of heaven, and being deceived by error thou adore and serve
|
|
|
1724 them, which the Lord thy God created for the service of all nations." Now, he explains this service at the beginning of Genesis
|
|
|
1725 as threefold. First, the lights are of service to man, in regard to sight, which directs him in his works, and is most useful
|
|
|
1726 for perceiving objects. In reference to this he says: "Let them shine in the firmament and give life to the earth."
|
|
|
1727 Secondly, as regards the changes of the seasons, which prevent weariness, preserve health, and provide for the necessities
|
|
|
1728 of food; all of which things could not be secured if it were always summer or winter. In reference to this he says: "Let them
|
|
|
1729 be for seasons, and for days, and years." Thirdly, as regards the convenience of business and work, in so far as the lights
|
|
|
1730 are set in the heavens to indicate fair or foul weather, as favorable to various occupations. And in this respect he says:
|
|
|
1731 "Let them be for signs."
|
|
|
1732 </p>
|
|
|
1733 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p9">
|
|
|
1734 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The lights in the heaven are set for signs of changes effected in corporeal creatures, but not of those changes which depend
|
|
|
1735 upon the free-will.
|
|
|
1736 </p>
|
|
|
1737 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p10">
|
|
|
1738 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> We are sometimes brought to the knowledge of hidden effects through their sensible causes, and conversely. Hence nothing
|
|
|
1739 prevents a sensible cause from being a sign. But he says "signs," rather than "causes," to guard against idolatry.
|
|
|
1740 </p>
|
|
|
1741 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p11">
|
|
|
1742 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The general division of time into day and night took place on the first day, as regards the diurnal movement, which is common
|
|
|
1743 to the whole heaven and may be understood to have begun on that first day. But the particular distinctions of days and seasons
|
|
|
1744 and years, according as one day is hotter than another, one season than another, and one year than another, are due to certain
|
|
|
1745 particular movements of the stars: which movements may have had their
|
|
|
1746 beginning on the fourth day.
|
|
|
1747 </p>
|
|
|
1748 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p12">
|
|
|
1749 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Light was given to the earth for the service of man, who, by reason of his soul, is nobler than the heavenly bodies. Nor
|
|
|
1750 is it untrue to say that a higher creature may be made for the sake of a lower, considered not in itself, but as ordained
|
|
|
1751 to the good of the universe.
|
|
|
1752 </p>
|
|
|
1753 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p13">
|
|
|
1754 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> When the moon is at its perfection it rises in the evening and sets in the morning, and thus it rules the night, and it was
|
|
|
1755 probably made in its full perfection as were plants yielding seed, as also were animals and man himself. For although the
|
|
|
1756 perfect is developed from the imperfect by natural processes, yet the perfect must exist simply before the imperfect. Augustine,
|
|
|
1757 however (Gen. ad lit. ii), does not say this, for he says that it is not
|
|
|
1758 unfitting that God made things imperfect, which He afterwards perfected.
|
|
|
1759 </p>
|
|
|
1760 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p14"></p>
|
|
|
1761 <p id="FP_Q70_A2-p15"></p>
|
|
|
1762 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1763 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1764 </div>
|
|
|
1765 <div id="FP_Q70_A3" class="div4">
|
|
|
1766 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1767 <a href="summa.FP_Q71.html"></a>
|
|
|
1768 <h4 id="FP_Q70_A3-p0.1">Whether the lights of heaven are living beings?</h4>
|
|
|
1769 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1770 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p2">
|
|
|
1771 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the lights of heaven are living beings. For the nobler a body is, the more nobly it should be adorned.
|
|
|
1772 But a body less noble than the heaven, is adorned with living beings, with fish, birds, and the beasts of the field. Therefore
|
|
|
1773 the lights of heaven, as pertaining to its adornment, should be living beings also.
|
|
|
1774 </p>
|
|
|
1775 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p3">
|
|
|
1776 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the nobler a body is, the nobler must be its form. But the sun, moon, and stars are nobler bodies than plants or
|
|
|
1777 animals, and must therefore have nobler forms. Now the noblest of all forms is the soul, as being the first principle of life.
|
|
|
1778 Hence Augustine (De Vera Relig. xxix) says: "Every living substance stands higher in the order of nature than one that has
|
|
|
1779 not life." The lights of heaven, therefore, are living beings.
|
|
|
1780 </p>
|
|
|
1781 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p4">
|
|
|
1782 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, a cause is nobler than its effect. But the sun, moon, and stars are a cause of life, as is especially evidenced
|
|
|
1783 in the case of animals generated from putrefaction, which receive life from the power of the sun and stars. Much more, therefore,
|
|
|
1784 have the heavenly bodies a living soul.
|
|
|
1785 </p>
|
|
|
1786 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p5">
|
|
|
1787 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, the movement of the heaven and the heavenly bodies are natural (De Coel. i, text. 7,8): and natural movement is
|
|
|
1788 from an intrinsic principle. Now the principle of movement in the heavenly bodies is a substance capable of apprehension,
|
|
|
1789 and is moved as the desirer is moved by the object desired (Metaph. xii, text. 36). Therefore, seemingly, the apprehending
|
|
|
1790 principle is intrinsic to the heavenly bodies: and consequently they are living beings.
|
|
|
1791 </p>
|
|
|
1792 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p6">
|
|
|
1793 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, the first of movables is the heaven. Now, of all things that are endowed with movement the first moves itself, as
|
|
|
1794 is proved in Phys. viii, text. 34, because, what is such of itself precedes that which is by another. But only beings that
|
|
|
1795 are living move themselves, as is shown in the same book (text. 27). Therefore the heavenly bodies are living beings.
|
|
|
1796 </p>
|
|
|
1797 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p7">
|
|
|
1798 <b>On the contrary,</b> Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii), "Let no one esteem the heavens or the heavenly bodies to be living things, for they have
|
|
|
1799 neither life nor sense."
|
|
|
1800 </p>
|
|
|
1801 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p8">
|
|
|
1802 <b>I answer that,</b> Philosophers have differed on this question. Anaxagoras, for instance, as Augustine mentions (De Civ. Dei xviii, 41), "was
|
|
|
1803 condemned by the Athenians for teaching that the sun was a fiery mass of stone, and neither a god nor even a living being."
|
|
|
1804 On the other hand, the Platonists held that the heavenly bodies have life. Nor was there less diversity of opinion among the
|
|
|
1805 Doctors of the Church. It was the belief of Origen (Peri Archon i) and Jerome that these
|
|
|
1806 bodies were alive, and the latter seems to explain in that sense the words (
|
|
|
1807 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q70_A3-p8.1" href="./asv.html#Eccl.1.6" target="asv">Eccles. 1:6</a>), "The spirit goeth forward, surveying all places round about." But Basil (Hom. iii, vi in Hexaem.) and Damascene (De Fide
|
|
|
1808 Orth. ii) maintain that the heavenly bodies are inanimate. Augustine leaves the matter in doubt, without committing himself
|
|
|
1809 to either theory, though he goes so far as to say that if the heavenly bodies are really living beings, their souls must be
|
|
|
1810 akin to the angelic
|
|
|
1811 nature (Gen. ad lit. ii, 18; Enchiridion lviii).
|
|
|
1812 </p>
|
|
|
1813 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p9"> In examining the truth of this question, where such diversity of opinion exists, we shall do well to bear in mind that the
|
|
|
1814 union of soul and body exists for the sake of the soul and not of the body; for the form does not exist for the matter, but
|
|
|
1815 the matter for the form. Now the nature and power of the soul are apprehended through its operation, which is to a certain
|
|
|
1816 extent its end. Yet for some of these operations, as sensation and nutrition, our body is a necessary instrument.
|
|
|
1817 Hence it is clear that the sensitive and nutritive souls must be united to a body in order to exercise their functions. There
|
|
|
1818 are, however, operations of the soul, which are not exercised through the medium of the body, though the body ministers, as
|
|
|
1819 it were, to their production. The intellect, for example, makes use of the phantasms derived from the bodily senses, and thus
|
|
|
1820 far is dependent on the body, although capable of existing apart from it. It is not, however, possible that the functions
|
|
|
1821 of nutrition, growth, and generation, through which the nutritive soul operates, can be exercised by the heavenly bodies,
|
|
|
1822 for such operations are incompatible with a body naturally incorruptible. Equally impossible is it that the functions of the
|
|
|
1823 sensitive soul can appertain to the heavenly body, since all the senses depend on the sense of touch, which perceives elemental
|
|
|
1824 qualities, and all the organs of the senses require a certain proportion in the admixture of elements, whereas the nature
|
|
|
1825 of
|
|
|
1826 the heavenly bodies is not elemental. It follows, then, that of the operations of the soul the only ones left to be attributed
|
|
|
1827 to the heavenly bodies are those of understanding and moving; for appetite follows both sensitive and intellectual perception,
|
|
|
1828 and is in proportion thereto. But the operations of the intellect, which does not act through the body, do not need a body
|
|
|
1829 as their instrument, except to supply phantasms through the senses. Moreover, the operations of the sensitive soul, as we
|
|
|
1830 have seen, cannot be attributed to the heavenly bodies. Accordingly, the union of a soul to a heavenly body cannot be for
|
|
|
1831 the purpose of the operations of the intellect. It remains, then, only to consider whether the movement of the heavenly bodies
|
|
|
1832 demands a soul as the motive power, not that the soul, in order to move the heavenly body, need be united to the latter as
|
|
|
1833 its form; but by contact of power, as a mover is united to that which he moves. Wherefore Aristotle (Phys. viii, text. 42,43),
|
|
|
1834 after showing that the first mover is made up of two parts, the moving and the moved, goes on to show the nature of the union
|
|
|
1835 between these two parts. This, he says, is effected by contact which is mutual if both are bodies; on the part of one only,
|
|
|
1836 if one is a body and the other not. The Platonists explain the union of soul and body in the same way, as a contact of a moving
|
|
|
1837 power with the object moved, and since Plato holds the heavenly bodies to be living beings, this means nothing else but
|
|
|
1838 that substances of spiritual nature are united to them, and act as their moving power. A proof that the heavenly bodies are
|
|
|
1839 moved by the direct influence and contact of some spiritual substance, and not, like bodies of specific gravity, by nature,
|
|
|
1840 lies in the fact that whereas nature moves to one fixed end which having attained, it rests; this does not appear in the movement
|
|
|
1841 of heavenly bodies. Hence it follows that they are moved by some intellectual substances. Augustine appears to be of the
|
|
|
1842 same opinion when he expresses his belief that all corporeal things are ruled by God through the spirit of life (De Trin.
|
|
|
1843 iii, 4).
|
|
|
1844 </p>
|
|
|
1845 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p10"> From what has been said, then, it is clear that the heavenly bodies are not living beings in the same sense as plants and
|
|
|
1846 animals, and that if they are called so, it can only be equivocally. It will also be seen that the difference of opinion between
|
|
|
1847 those who affirm, and those who deny, that these bodies have life, is not a difference of things but of words.
|
|
|
1848 </p>
|
|
|
1849 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p11">
|
|
|
1850 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Certain things belong to the adornment of the universe by reason of their proper movement; and in this way the heavenly luminaries
|
|
|
1851 agree with others that conduce to that adornment, for they are moved by a living substance.
|
|
|
1852 </p>
|
|
|
1853 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p12">
|
|
|
1854 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> One being may be nobler than another absolutely, but not in a particular respect. While, then, it is not conceded that the
|
|
|
1855 souls of heavenly bodies are nobler than the souls of animals absolutely it must be conceded that they are superior to them
|
|
|
1856 with regard to their respective forms, since their form perfects their matter entirely, which is not in potentiality to other
|
|
|
1857 forms; whereas a soul does not do this. Also as regards movement the power that
|
|
|
1858 moves the heavenly bodies is of a nobler kind.
|
|
|
1859 </p>
|
|
|
1860 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p13">
|
|
|
1861 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Since the heavenly body is a mover moved, it is of the nature of an instrument, which acts in virtue of the agent: and therefore
|
|
|
1862 since this agent is a living substance the heavenly body can impart life in virtue of that agent.
|
|
|
1863 </p>
|
|
|
1864 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p14">
|
|
|
1865 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> The movements of the heavenly bodies are natural, not on account of their active principle, but on account of their passive
|
|
|
1866 principle; that is to say, from a certain natural aptitude for being moved by an intelligent power.
|
|
|
1867 </p>
|
|
|
1868 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p15">
|
|
|
1869 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> The heaven is said to move itself in as far as it is compounded of mover and moved; not by the union of the mover, as the
|
|
|
1870 form, with the moved, as the matter, but by contact with the motive power, as we have said. So far, then, the principle that
|
|
|
1871 moves it may be called intrinsic, and consequently its movement natural with respect to that active principle; just as we
|
|
|
1872 say that voluntary movement is natural to the animal as animal (Phys. viii, text.
|
|
|
1873 27).
|
|
|
1874 </p>
|
|
|
1875 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p16"></p>
|
|
|
1876 <p id="FP_Q70_A3-p17"></p>
|
|
|
1877 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1878 <a href="summa.FP_Q71.html"></a>
|
|
|
1879 </div>
|
|
|
1880 <a href="summa.FP_Q69_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
1881 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
1882 </div>
|
|
|
1883 <div id="FP_Q71" class="div3">
|
|
|
1884 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1885 <a href="summa.FP_Q72.html"></a>
|
|
|
1886 <h3 id="FP_Q71-p0.1">ON THE WORK OF THE FIFTH DAY (ONE ARTICLE)</h3>
|
|
|
1887 <p id="FP_Q71-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1888 <p id="FP_Q71-p2"> We must next consider the work of the fifth day.</p>
|
|
|
1889 <p id="FP_Q71-p3">
|
|
|
1890 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that this work is not fittingly described. For the waters produce that which the power of water suffices to
|
|
|
1891 produce. But the power of water does not suffice for the production of every kind of fishes and birds since we find that many
|
|
|
1892 of them are generated from seed. Therefore the words, "Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having life, and the
|
|
|
1893 fowl that may fly over the earth," do not fittingly describe this work.
|
|
|
1894 </p>
|
|
|
1895 <p id="FP_Q71-p4">
|
|
|
1896 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, fishes and birds are not produced from water only, but earth seems to predominate over water in their composition,
|
|
|
1897 as is shown by the fact that their bodies tend naturally to the earth and rest upon it. It is not, then, fittingly that fishes
|
|
|
1898 and birds are produced from water.
|
|
|
1899 </p>
|
|
|
1900 <p id="FP_Q71-p5">
|
|
|
1901 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, fishes move in the waters, and birds in the air. If, then, fishes are produced from the waters, birds ought to be
|
|
|
1902 produced from the air, and not from the waters.
|
|
|
1903 </p>
|
|
|
1904 <p id="FP_Q71-p6">
|
|
|
1905 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, not all fishes creep through the waters, for some, as seals, have feet and walk on land. Therefore the production
|
|
|
1906 of fishes is not sufficiently described by the words, "Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having life."
|
|
|
1907 </p>
|
|
|
1908 <p id="FP_Q71-p7">
|
|
|
1909 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, land animals are more perfect than birds and fishes which appears from the fact that they have more distinct limbs,
|
|
|
1910 and generation of a higher order. For they bring forth living beings, whereas birds and fishes bring forth eggs. But the more
|
|
|
1911 perfect has precedence in the order of nature. Therefore fishes and birds ought not to have been produced on the fifth day,
|
|
|
1912 before land animals.
|
|
|
1913 </p>
|
|
|
1914 <p id="FP_Q71-p8">
|
|
|
1915 <b>On the contrary,</b> Suffices the authority of Scripture.
|
|
|
1916 </p>
|
|
|
1917 <p id="FP_Q71-p9">
|
|
|
1918 <b>I answer that,</b> As said above, (
|
|
|
1919 <a id="FP_Q71-p9.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q70_A1.html">Q[70], A[1]</a>), the order of the work of adornment corresponds to the order of the work of distinction. Hence, as among the three days
|
|
|
1920 assigned to the work of distinction, the middle, or second, day is devoted to the work of distinction of water, which is the
|
|
|
1921 intermediate body, so in the three days of the work of adornment, the middle day, which is the fifth, is assigned to the adornment
|
|
|
1922 of the intermediate body, by the
|
|
|
1923 production of birds and fishes. As, then, Moses makes mention of the lights and the light on the fourth day, to show that
|
|
|
1924 the fourth day corresponds to the first day on which he had said that the light was made, so on this fifth day he mentions
|
|
|
1925 the waters and the firmament of heaven to show that the fifth day corresponds to the second. It must, however, be observed
|
|
|
1926 that Augustine differs from other writers in his opinion about the production of fishes and birds, as he differs about the
|
|
|
1927 production of plants. For while others say that fishes and birds were produced on the fifth day actually, he holds that the
|
|
|
1928 nature of the waters produced them on that day potentially.
|
|
|
1929 </p>
|
|
|
1930 <p id="FP_Q71-p10">
|
|
|
1931 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> It was laid down by Avicenna that animals of all kinds can be generated by various minglings of the elements, and naturally,
|
|
|
1932 without any kind of seed. This, however, seems repugnant to the fact that nature produces its effects by determinate means,
|
|
|
1933 and consequently, those things that are naturally generated from seed cannot be generated naturally in any other way. It ought,
|
|
|
1934 then, rather to be said that in the natural generation of all animals that are
|
|
|
1935 generated from seed, the active principle lies in the formative power of the seed, but that in the case of animals generated
|
|
|
1936 from putrefaction, the formative power of is the influence of the heavenly bodies. The material principle, however, in the
|
|
|
1937 generation of either kind of animals, is either some element, or something compounded of the elements. But at the first beginning
|
|
|
1938 of the world the active principle was the Word of God, which produced animals from material elements, either in act, as
|
|
|
1939 some holy writers say, or virtually, as Augustine teaches. Not as though the power possessed by water or earth of producing
|
|
|
1940 all animals resides in the earth and the water themselves, as Avicenna held, but in the power originally given to the elements
|
|
|
1941 of producing them from elemental matter by the power of seed or the influence of the stars.
|
|
|
1942 </p>
|
|
|
1943 <p id="FP_Q71-p11">
|
|
|
1944 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The bodies of birds and fishes may be considered from two points of view. If considered in themselves, it will be evident
|
|
|
1945 that the earthly element must predominate, since the element that is least active, namely, the earth, must be the most abundant
|
|
|
1946 in quantity in order that the mingling may be duly tempered in the body of the animal. But if considered as by nature constituted
|
|
|
1947 to move with certain specific motions, thus they have some special affinity
|
|
|
1948 with the bodies in which they move; and hence the words in which their generation is described.
|
|
|
1949 </p>
|
|
|
1950 <p id="FP_Q71-p12">
|
|
|
1951 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The air, as not being so apparent to the senses, is not enumerated by itself, but with other things: partly with the water,
|
|
|
1952 because the lower region of the air is thickened by watery exhalations; partly with the heaven as to the higher region. But
|
|
|
1953 birds move in the lower part of the air, and so are said to fly "beneath the firmament," even if the firmament be taken to
|
|
|
1954 mean the region of clouds. Hence the production of birds is ascribed to the water.
|
|
|
1955 </p>
|
|
|
1956 <p id="FP_Q71-p13">
|
|
|
1957 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Nature passes from one extreme to another through the medium; and therefore there are creatures of intermediate type between
|
|
|
1958 the animals of the air and those of the water, having something in common with both; and they are reckoned as belonging to
|
|
|
1959 that class to which they are most allied, through the characters possessed in common with that class, rather than with the
|
|
|
1960 other. But in order to include among fishes all such intermediate forms as have
|
|
|
1961 special characters like to theirs, the words, "Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having life," are followed
|
|
|
1962 by these: "God created great whales," etc.
|
|
|
1963 </p>
|
|
|
1964 <p id="FP_Q71-p14">
|
|
|
1965 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> The order in which the production of these animals is given has reference to the order of those bodies which they are set
|
|
|
1966 to adorn, rather than to the superiority of the animals themselves. Moreover, in generation also the more perfect is reached
|
|
|
1967 through the less perfect.
|
|
|
1968 </p>
|
|
|
1969 <p id="FP_Q71-p15"></p>
|
|
|
1970 <p id="FP_Q71-p16"></p>
|
|
|
1971 <a href="summa.FP_Q70_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
1972 <a href="summa.FP_Q72.html"></a>
|
|
|
1973 </div>
|
|
|
1974 <div id="FP_Q72" class="div3">
|
|
|
1975 <a href="summa.FP_Q71.html"></a>
|
|
|
1976 <a href="summa.FP_Q73.html"></a>
|
|
|
1977 <h3 id="FP_Q72-p0.1">ON THE WORK OF THE SIXTH DAY (ONE ARTICLE)</h3>
|
|
|
1978 <p id="FP_Q72-p1"></p>
|
|
|
1979 <p id="FP_Q72-p2"> We must now consider the work of the sixth day.</p>
|
|
|
1980 <p id="FP_Q72-p3">
|
|
|
1981 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that this work is not fittingly described. For as birds and fishes have a living soul, so also have land animals.
|
|
|
1982 But these animals are not themselves living souls. Therefore the words, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature," should
|
|
|
1983 rather have been, "Let the earth bring forth the living four-footed creatures."
|
|
|
1984 </p>
|
|
|
1985 <p id="FP_Q72-p4">
|
|
|
1986 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, a genus ought not to be opposed to its species. But beasts and cattle are quadrupeds. Therefore quadrupeds ought
|
|
|
1987 not to be enumerated as a class with beasts and cattle.
|
|
|
1988 </p>
|
|
|
1989 <p id="FP_Q72-p5">
|
|
|
1990 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, as animals belong to a determinate genus and species, so also does man. But in the making of man nothing is said
|
|
|
1991 of his genus and species, and therefore nothing ought to have been said about them in the production of other animals, whereas
|
|
|
1992 it is said "according to its genus" and "in its species."
|
|
|
1993 </p>
|
|
|
1994 <p id="FP_Q72-p6">
|
|
|
1995 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, land animals are more like man, whom God is recorded to have blessed, than are birds and fishes. But as birds and
|
|
|
1996 fishes are said to be blessed, this should have been said, with much more reason, of the other animals as well.
|
|
|
1997 </p>
|
|
|
1998 <p id="FP_Q72-p7">
|
|
|
1999 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, certain animals are generated from putrefaction, which is a kind of corruption. But corruption is repugnant to the
|
|
|
2000 first founding of the world. Therefore such animals should not have been produced at that time.
|
|
|
2001 </p>
|
|
|
2002 <p id="FP_Q72-p8">
|
|
|
2003 <b>Objection 6:</b> Further, certain animals are poisonous, and injurious to man. But there ought to have been nothing injurious to man before
|
|
|
2004 man sinned. Therefore such animals ought not to have been made by God at all, since He is the Author of good; or at least
|
|
|
2005 not until man had sinned.
|
|
|
2006 </p>
|
|
|
2007 <p id="FP_Q72-p9">
|
|
|
2008 <b>On the contrary,</b> Suffices the authority of Scripture.
|
|
|
2009 </p>
|
|
|
2010 <p id="FP_Q72-p10">
|
|
|
2011 <b>I answer that,</b> As on the fifth day the intermediate body, namely, the water, is adorned, and thus that day corresponds to the second day;
|
|
|
2012 so the sixth day, on which the lowest body, or the earth, is adorned by the production of land animals, corresponds to the
|
|
|
2013 third day. Hence the earth is mentioned in both places. And here again Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. v) that the production
|
|
|
2014 was potential, and other holy writers that it was actual.
|
|
|
2015 </p>
|
|
|
2016 <p id="FP_Q72-p11">
|
|
|
2017 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The different grades of life which are found in different living creatures can be discovered from the various ways in which
|
|
|
2018 Scripture speaks of them, as Basil says (Hom. viii in Hexaem.). The life of plants, for instance, is very imperfect and difficult
|
|
|
2019 to discern, and hence, in speaking of their production, nothing is said of their life, but only their generation is mentioned,
|
|
|
2020 since only in generation is a vital act observed in them. For the powers of
|
|
|
2021 nutrition and growth are subordinate to the generative life, as will be shown later on (
|
|
|
2022 <a id="FP_Q72-p11.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q78_A2.html">Q[78], A[2]</a>). But amongst animals, those that live on land are, generally speaking, more perfect than birds and fishes, not because the
|
|
|
2023 fish is devoid of memory, as Basil upholds (Hom. viii in Hexaem.) and Augustine rejects (Gen. ad lit. iii), but because their
|
|
|
2024 limbs are more distinct and their generation of a higher order, (yet some imperfect animals, such as bees and ants, are more
|
|
|
2025 intelligent in certain ways). Scripture, therefore, does not call fishes "living creatures," but "creeping creatures having
|
|
|
2026 life"; whereas it does call land animals "living creatures" on account of their more perfect life, and seems to imply that
|
|
|
2027 fishes are merely bodies having in them something of a soul, whilst land animals, from the higher perfection of their life,
|
|
|
2028 are, as it were, living souls with bodies subject to them. But the life of man, as being the most perfect grade, is not said
|
|
|
2029 to
|
|
|
2030 be produced, like the life of other animals, by earth or water, but immediately by God.
|
|
|
2031 </p>
|
|
|
2032 <p id="FP_Q72-p12">
|
|
|
2033 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> By "cattle," domestic animals are signified, which in any way are of service to man: but by "beasts," wild animals such as
|
|
|
2034 bears and lions are designated. By "creeping things" those animals are meant which either have no feet and cannot rise from
|
|
|
2035 the earth, as serpents, or those whose feet are too short to life them far from the ground, as the lizard and tortoise. But
|
|
|
2036 since certain animals, as deer and goats, seem to fall under none of these classes,
|
|
|
2037 the word "quadrupeds" is added. Or perhaps the word "quadruped" is used first as being the genus, to which the others are
|
|
|
2038 added as species, for even some reptiles, such as lizards and tortoises, are four-footed.
|
|
|
2039 </p>
|
|
|
2040 <p id="FP_Q72-p13">
|
|
|
2041 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> In other animals, and in plants, mention is made of genus and species, to denote the generation of like from like. But it
|
|
|
2042 was unnecessary to do so in the case of man, as what had already been said of other creatures might be understood of him.
|
|
|
2043 Again, animals and plants may be said to be produced according to their kinds, to signify their remoteness from the Divine
|
|
|
2044 image and likeness, whereas man is said to be made "to the image and likeness of God."
|
|
|
2045 </p>
|
|
|
2046 <p id="FP_Q72-p14">
|
|
|
2047 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> The blessing of God gives power to multiply by generation, and, having been mentioned in the preceding account of the making
|
|
|
2048 of birds and fishes, could be understood of the beasts of the earth, without requiring to be repeated. The blessing, however,
|
|
|
2049 is repeated in the case of man, since in him generation of children has a special relation to the number of the elect [*Cf.
|
|
|
2050 Augustine, Gen. ad lit. iii, 12], and to prevent anyone from saying that there was
|
|
|
2051 any sin whatever in the act of begetting children. As to plants, since they experience neither desire of propagation, nor
|
|
|
2052 sensation in generating, they are deemed unworthy of a formal blessing.
|
|
|
2053 </p>
|
|
|
2054 <p id="FP_Q72-p15">
|
|
|
2055 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> Since the generation of one thing is the corruption of another, it was not incompatible with the first formation of things,
|
|
|
2056 that from the corruption of the less perfect the more perfect should be generated. Hence animals generated from the corruption
|
|
|
2057 of inanimate things, or of plants, may have been generated then. But those generated from corruption of animals could not
|
|
|
2058 have been produced then otherwise than potentially.
|
|
|
2059 </p>
|
|
|
2060 <p id="FP_Q72-p16">
|
|
|
2061 <b>Reply to Objection 6:</b> In the words of Augustine (Super. Gen. contr. Manich. i): "If an unskilled person enters the workshop of an artificer he
|
|
|
2062 sees in it many appliances of which he does not understand the use, and which, if he is a foolish fellow, he considers unnecessary.
|
|
|
2063 Moreover, should he carelessly fall into the fire, or wound himself with a sharp-edged tool, he is under the impression that
|
|
|
2064 many of the things there are hurtful; whereas the craftsman, knowing their use,
|
|
|
2065 laughs at his folly. And thus some people presume to find fault with many things in this world, through not seeing the reasons
|
|
|
2066 for their existence. For though not required for the furnishing of our house, these things are necessary for the perfection
|
|
|
2067 of the universe." And, since man before he sinned would have used the things of this world conformably to the order designed,
|
|
|
2068 poisonous animals would not have injured him.
|
|
|
2069 </p>
|
|
|
2070 <p id="FP_Q72-p17"></p>
|
|
|
2071 <p id="FP_Q72-p18"></p>
|
|
|
2072 <a href="summa.FP_Q71.html"></a>
|
|
|
2073 <a href="summa.FP_Q73.html"></a>
|
|
|
2074 </div>
|
|
|
2075 <div id="FP_Q73" class="div3">
|
|
|
2076 <a href="summa.FP_Q72.html"></a>
|
|
|
2077 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2078 <h3 id="FP_Q73-p0.1">ON THE THINGS THAT BELONG TO THE SEVENTH DAY (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
2079 <p id="FP_Q73-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2080 <p id="FP_Q73-p2"> We must next consider the things that belong to the seventh day. Under this head there are three points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
2081 <p id="FP_Q73-p3"> (1) About the completion of the works;</p>
|
|
|
2082 <p id="FP_Q73-p4"> (2) About the resting of God;</p>
|
|
|
2083 <p id="FP_Q73-p5"> (3) About the blessing and sanctifying of this day.</p>
|
|
|
2084 <div id="FP_Q73_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
2085 <a href="summa.FP_Q73.html"></a>
|
|
|
2086 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2087 <h4 id="FP_Q73_A1-p0.1">Whether the completion of the Divine works ought to be ascribed to the seventh day?</h4>
|
|
|
2088 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2089 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p2">
|
|
|
2090 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that the completion of the Divine works ought not to be ascribed to the seventh day. For all things that are
|
|
|
2091 done in this world belong to the Divine works. But the consummation of the world will be at the end of the world (
|
|
|
2092 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Matt.13.39" target="asv">Mat. 13:39,40</a>). Moreover, the time of Christ's Incarnation is a time of completion, wherefore it is called "the time of fulness [*Vulg.:
|
|
|
2093 'the fulness of time']" (
|
|
|
2094 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p2.2" href="./asv.html#Gal.4.4" target="asv">Gal. 4:4</a>). And Christ
|
|
|
2095 Himself, at the moment of His death, cried out, "It is consummated" (
|
|
|
2096 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p2.3" href="./asv.html#John.19.30" target="asv">Jn. 19:30</a>). Hence the completion of the Divine works does not belong to the seventh day.
|
|
|
2097 </p>
|
|
|
2098 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p3">
|
|
|
2099 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the completion of a work is an act in itself. But we do not read that God acted at all on the seventh day, but rather
|
|
|
2100 that He rested from all His work. Therefore the completion of the works does not belong to the seventh day.
|
|
|
2101 </p>
|
|
|
2102 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p4">
|
|
|
2103 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, nothing is said to be complete to which many things are added, unless they are merely superfluous, for a thing is
|
|
|
2104 called perfect to which nothing is wanting that it ought to possess. But many things were made after the seventh day, as the
|
|
|
2105 production of many individual beings, and even of certain new species that are frequently appearing, especially in the case
|
|
|
2106 of animals generated from putrefaction. Also, God creates daily new souls. Again, the work
|
|
|
2107 of the Incarnation was a new work, of which it is said (
|
|
|
2108 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p4.1" href="./asv.html#Jer.31.22" target="asv">Jer. 31:22</a>): "The Lord hath created a new thing upon the earth." Miracles also are new works, of which it is said (
|
|
|
2109 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p4.2" href="./asv.html#Eccl.36.6" target="asv">Eccles. 36:6</a>): "Renew thy signs, and work new miracles." Moreover, all things will be made new when the Saints are glorified, according
|
|
|
2110 to
|
|
|
2111 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p4.3" href="./asv.html#Rev.21.5" target="asv"> Apoc. 21:5</a>: "And He that sat on the throne said: Behold I make all things new." Therefore the completion of the Divine works
|
|
|
2112 ought not to be attributed to the seventh day.
|
|
|
2113 </p>
|
|
|
2114 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p5">
|
|
|
2115 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is said (
|
|
|
2116 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.2.2" target="asv">Gn. 2:2</a>): "On the seventh day God ended His work which He had made."
|
|
|
2117 </p>
|
|
|
2118 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p6">
|
|
|
2119 <b>I answer that,</b> The perfection of a thing is twofold, the first perfection and the second perfection. The 'first' perfection is that according
|
|
|
2120 to which a thing is substantially perfect, and this perfection is the form of the whole; which form results from the whole
|
|
|
2121 having its parts complete. But the 'second' perfection is the end, which is either an operation, as the end of the harpist
|
|
|
2122 is to play the harp; or something that is attained by an operation, as the end of the
|
|
|
2123 builder is the house that he makes by building. But the first perfection is the cause of the second, because the form is the
|
|
|
2124 principle of operation. Now the final perfection, which is the end of the whole universe, is the perfect beatitude of the
|
|
|
2125 Saints at the consummation of the world; and the first perfection is the completeness of the universe at its first founding,
|
|
|
2126 and this is what is ascribed to the seventh day.
|
|
|
2127 </p>
|
|
|
2128 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p7">
|
|
|
2129 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The first perfection is the cause of the second, as above said. Now for the attaining of beatitude two things are required,
|
|
|
2130 nature and grace. Therefore, as said above, the perfection of beatitude will be at the end of the world. But this consummation
|
|
|
2131 existed previously in its causes, as to nature, at the first founding of the world, as to grace, in the Incarnation of Christ.
|
|
|
2132 For, "Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" (
|
|
|
2133 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p7.1" href="./asv.html#John.1.17" target="asv">Jn. 1:17</a>).
|
|
|
2134 So, then, on the seventh day was the consummation of nature, in Christ's Incarnation the consummation of grace, and at the
|
|
|
2135 end of the world will be the consummation of glory.
|
|
|
2136 </p>
|
|
|
2137 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p8">
|
|
|
2138 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> God did act on the seventh day, not by creating new creatures, but by directing and moving His creatures to the work proper
|
|
|
2139 to them, and thus He made some beginning of the "second" perfection. So that, according to our version of the Scripture, the
|
|
|
2140 completion of the works is attributed to the seventh day, though according to another it is assigned to the sixth. Either
|
|
|
2141 version, however, may stand, since the completion of the universe as to the
|
|
|
2142 completeness of its parts belongs to the sixth day, but its completion as regards their operation, to the seventh. It may
|
|
|
2143 also be added that in continuous movement, so long as any movement further is possible, movement cannot be called completed
|
|
|
2144 till it comes to rest, for rest denotes consummation of movement. Now God might have made many other creatures besides those
|
|
|
2145 which He made in the six days, and hence, by the fact that He ceased making them on the seventh day, He is said on that day
|
|
|
2146 to
|
|
|
2147 have consummated His work.
|
|
|
2148 </p>
|
|
|
2149 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p9">
|
|
|
2150 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Nothing entirely new was afterwards made by God, but all things subsequently made had in a sense been made before in the
|
|
|
2151 work of the six days. Some things, indeed, had a previous experience materially, as the rib from the side of Adam out of which
|
|
|
2152 God formed Eve; whilst others existed not only in matter but also in their causes, as those individual creatures that are
|
|
|
2153 now generated existed in the first of their kind. Species, also, that are new, if any
|
|
|
2154 such appear, existed beforehand in various active powers; so that animals, and perhaps even new species of animals, are produced
|
|
|
2155 by putrefaction by the power which the stars and elements received at the beginning. Again, animals of new kinds arise occasionally
|
|
|
2156 from the connection of individuals belonging to different species, as the mule is the offspring of an ass and a mare; but
|
|
|
2157 even these existed previously in their causes, in the works of the six days. Some also existed beforehand by way of
|
|
|
2158 similitude, as the souls now created. And the work of the Incarnation itself was thus foreshadowed, for as we read (
|
|
|
2159 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p9.1" href="./asv.html#Phil.2.7" target="asv">Phil. 2:7</a>), The Son of God "was made in the likeness of men." And again, the glory that is spiritual was anticipated in the angels
|
|
|
2160 by way of similitude; and that of the body in the heaven, especially the empyrean. Hence it is written (
|
|
|
2161 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A1-p9.2" href="./asv.html#Eccl.1.10" target="asv">Eccles. 1:10</a>), "Nothing under the sun is new, for it hath already gone before, in the ages that were
|
|
|
2162 before us."
|
|
|
2163 </p>
|
|
|
2164 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p10"></p>
|
|
|
2165 <p id="FP_Q73_A1-p11"></p>
|
|
|
2166 <a href="summa.FP_Q73.html"></a>
|
|
|
2167 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2168 </div>
|
|
|
2169 <div id="FP_Q73_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
2170 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2171 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
2172 <h4 id="FP_Q73_A2-p0.1">Whether God rested on the seventh day from all His work?</h4>
|
|
|
2173 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2174 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p2">
|
|
|
2175 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that God did not rest on the seventh day from all His work. For it is said (
|
|
|
2176 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A2-p2.1" href="./asv.html#John.5.17" target="asv">Jn. 5:17</a>), "My Father worketh until now, and I work." God, then, did not rest on the seventh day from all His work.
|
|
|
2177 </p>
|
|
|
2178 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p3">
|
|
|
2179 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, rest is opposed to movement, or to labor, which movement causes. But, as God produced His work without movement
|
|
|
2180 and without labor, He cannot be said to have rested on the seventh day from His work.
|
|
|
2181 </p>
|
|
|
2182 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p4">
|
|
|
2183 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, should it be said that God rested on the seventh day by causing man to rest; against this it may be argued that
|
|
|
2184 rest is set down in contradistinction to His work; now the words "God created" or "made" this thing or the other cannot be
|
|
|
2185 explained to mean that He made man create or make these things. Therefore the resting of God cannot be explained as His making
|
|
|
2186 man to rest.
|
|
|
2187 </p>
|
|
|
2188 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p5">
|
|
|
2189 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is said (
|
|
|
2190 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A2-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.2.2" target="asv">Gn. 2:2</a>): "God rested on the seventh day from all the work which He had done."
|
|
|
2191 </p>
|
|
|
2192 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p6">
|
|
|
2193 <b>I answer that,</b> Rest is, properly speaking, opposed to movement, and consequently to the labor that arises from movement. But although movement,
|
|
|
2194 strictly speaking, is a quality of bodies, yet the word is applied also to spiritual things, and in a twofold sense. On the
|
|
|
2195 one hand, every operation may be called a movement, and thus the Divine goodness is said to move and go forth to its object,
|
|
|
2196 in communicating itself to that object, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii). On the
|
|
|
2197 other hand, the desire that tends to an object outside itself, is said to move towards it. Hence rest is taken in two senses,
|
|
|
2198 in one sense meaning a cessation from work, in the other, the satisfying of desire. Now, in either sense God is said to have
|
|
|
2199 rested on the seventh day. First, because He ceased from creating new creatures on that day, for, as said above (A[1], ad
|
|
|
2200 3), He made nothing afterwards that had not existed previously, in some degree, in the first works; secondly, because He
|
|
|
2201 Himself had no need of the things that He had made, but was happy in the fruition of Himself. Hence, when all things were
|
|
|
2202 made He is not said to have rested "in" His works, as though needing them for His own happiness, but to have rested "from"
|
|
|
2203 them, as in fact resting in Himself, as He suffices for Himself and fulfils His own desire. And even though from all eternity
|
|
|
2204 He rested in Himself, yet the rest in Himself, which He took after He had finished His works, is that rest which belongs to
|
|
|
2205 the
|
|
|
2206 seventh day. And this, says Augustine, is the meaning of God's resting from His works on that day (Gen. ad lit. iv).
|
|
|
2207 </p>
|
|
|
2208 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p7">
|
|
|
2209 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> God indeed "worketh until now" by preserving and providing for the creatures He has made, but not by the making of new ones.
|
|
|
2210 </p>
|
|
|
2211 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p8">
|
|
|
2212 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Rest is here not opposed to labor or to movement, but to the production of new creatures, and to the desire tending to an
|
|
|
2213 external object.
|
|
|
2214 </p>
|
|
|
2215 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p9">
|
|
|
2216 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Even as God rests in Himself alone and is happy in the enjoyment of Himself, so our own sole happiness lies in the enjoyment
|
|
|
2217 of God. Thus, also, He makes us find rest in Himself, both from His works and our own. It is not, then, unreasonable to say
|
|
|
2218 that God rested in giving rest to us. Still, this explanation must not be set down as the only one, and the other is the first
|
|
|
2219 and principal explanation.
|
|
|
2220 </p>
|
|
|
2221 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p10"></p>
|
|
|
2222 <p id="FP_Q73_A2-p11"></p>
|
|
|
2223 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2224 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
2225 </div>
|
|
|
2226 <div id="FP_Q73_A3" class="div4">
|
|
|
2227 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2228 <a href="summa.FP_Q74.html"></a>
|
|
|
2229 <h4 id="FP_Q73_A3-p0.1">Whether blessing and sanctifying are due to the seventh day?</h4>
|
|
|
2230 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2231 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p2">
|
|
|
2232 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that blessing and sanctifying are not due to the seventh day. For it is usual to call a time blessed or holy
|
|
|
2233 for that some good thing has happened in it, or some evil been avoided. But whether God works or ceases from work nothing
|
|
|
2234 accrues to Him or is lost to Him. Therefore no special blessing or sanctifying are due to the seventh day.
|
|
|
2235 </p>
|
|
|
2236 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p3">
|
|
|
2237 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the Latin "benedictio" [blessing] is derived from "bonitas" [goodness]. But it is the nature of good to spread and
|
|
|
2238 communicate itself, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv). The days, therefore, in which God produced creatures deserved a blessing
|
|
|
2239 rather than the day on which He ceased producing them.
|
|
|
2240 </p>
|
|
|
2241 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p4">
|
|
|
2242 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, over each creature a blessing was pronounced, as upon each work it was said, "God saw that it was good." Therefore
|
|
|
2243 it was not necessary that after all had been produced, the seventh day should be blessed.
|
|
|
2244 </p>
|
|
|
2245 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p5">
|
|
|
2246 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is written (
|
|
|
2247 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q73_A3-p5.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.2.3" target="asv">Gn. 2:3</a>), "God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He had rested from all His work."
|
|
|
2248 </p>
|
|
|
2249 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p6">
|
|
|
2250 <b>I answer that,</b> As said above
|
|
|
2251 <a id="FP_Q73_A3-p6.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q73_A2.html">(A[2])</a>, God's rest on the seventh day is understood in two ways. First, in that He ceased from producing new works, though He still
|
|
|
2252 preserves and provides for the creatures He has made. Secondly, in that after all His works He rested in Himself. According
|
|
|
2253 to the first meaning, then, a blessing befits the seventh day, since, as we explained (Q[72], ad 4), the blessing referred
|
|
|
2254 to the increase by multiplication; for which
|
|
|
2255 reason God said to the creatures which He blessed: "Increase and multiply." Now, this increase is effected through God's Providence
|
|
|
2256 over His creatures, securing the generation of like from like. And according to the second meaning, it is right that the seventh
|
|
|
2257 day should have been sanctified, since the special sanctification of every creature consists in resting in God. For this reason
|
|
|
2258 things dedicated to God are said to be sanctified.
|
|
|
2259 </p>
|
|
|
2260 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p7">
|
|
|
2261 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The seventh day is said to be sanctified not because anything can accrue to God, or be taken from Him, but because something
|
|
|
2262 is added to creatures by their multiplying, and by their resting in God.
|
|
|
2263 </p>
|
|
|
2264 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p8">
|
|
|
2265 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> In the first six days creatures were produced in their first causes, but after being thus produced, they are multiplied and
|
|
|
2266 preserved, and this work also belongs to the Divine goodness. And the perfection of this goodness is made most clear by the
|
|
|
2267 knowledge that in it alone God finds His own rest, and we may find ours in its fruition.
|
|
|
2268 </p>
|
|
|
2269 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p9">
|
|
|
2270 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The good mentioned in the works of each day belongs to the first institution of nature; but the blessing attached to the
|
|
|
2271 seventh day, to its propagation.
|
|
|
2272 </p>
|
|
|
2273 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p10"></p>
|
|
|
2274 <p id="FP_Q73_A3-p11"></p>
|
|
|
2275 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2276 <a href="summa.FP_Q74.html"></a>
|
|
|
2277 </div>
|
|
|
2278 <a href="summa.FP_Q72.html"></a>
|
|
|
2279 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2280 </div>
|
|
|
2281 <div id="FP_Q74" class="div3">
|
|
|
2282 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
2283 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2284 <h3 id="FP_Q74-p0.1">ON ALL THE SEVEN DAYS IN COMMON (THREE ARTICLES)</h3>
|
|
|
2285 <p id="FP_Q74-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2286 <p id="FP_Q74-p2"> We next consider all the seven days in common: and there are three points of inquiry:</p>
|
|
|
2287 <p id="FP_Q74-p3"> (1) As to the sufficiency of these days;</p>
|
|
|
2288 <p id="FP_Q74-p4"> (2) Whether they are all one day, or more than one?</p>
|
|
|
2289 <p id="FP_Q74-p5"> (3) As to certain modes of speaking which Scripture uses in narrating the works of the six days.</p>
|
|
|
2290 <div id="FP_Q74_A1" class="div4">
|
|
|
2291 <a href="summa.FP_Q74.html"></a>
|
|
|
2292 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2293 <h4 id="FP_Q74_A1-p0.1">Whether these days are sufficiently enumerated?</h4>
|
|
|
2294 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2295 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p2">
|
|
|
2296 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that these days are not sufficiently enumerated. For the work of creation is no less distinct from the works
|
|
|
2297 of distinction and adornment than these two works are from one another. But separate days are assigned to distinction and
|
|
|
2298 to adornment, and therefore separate days should be assigned to creation.
|
|
|
2299 </p>
|
|
|
2300 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p3">
|
|
|
2301 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, air and fire are nobler elements than earth and water. But one day is assigned to the distinction of water, and
|
|
|
2302 another to the distinction of the land. Therefore, other days ought to be devoted to the distinction of fire and air.
|
|
|
2303 </p>
|
|
|
2304 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p4">
|
|
|
2305 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, fish differ from birds as much as birds differ from the beasts of the earth, whereas man differs more from other
|
|
|
2306 animals than all animals whatsoever differ from each other. But one day is devoted to the production of fishes, and another
|
|
|
2307 to that of the beast of the earth. Another day, then, ought to be assigned to the production of birds and another to that
|
|
|
2308 of man.
|
|
|
2309 </p>
|
|
|
2310 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p5">
|
|
|
2311 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, it would seem, on the other hand, that some of these days are superfluous. Light, for instance, stands to the luminaries
|
|
|
2312 in the relation of accident to subject. But the subject is produced at the same time as the accident proper to it. The light
|
|
|
2313 and the luminaries, therefore, ought not to have been produced on different days.
|
|
|
2314 </p>
|
|
|
2315 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p6">
|
|
|
2316 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, these days are devoted to the first instituting of the world. But as on the seventh day nothing was instituted,
|
|
|
2317 that day ought not to be enumerated with the others.
|
|
|
2318 </p>
|
|
|
2319 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p7">
|
|
|
2320 <b>I answer that,</b> The reason of the distinction of these days is made clear by what has been said above (
|
|
|
2321 <a id="FP_Q74_A1-p7.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q70_A1.html">Q[70], A[1]</a>), namely, that the parts of the world had first to be distinguished, and then each part adorned and filled, as it were, by
|
|
|
2322 the beings that inhabit it. Now the parts into which the corporeal creation is divided are three, according to some holy writers,
|
|
|
2323 these parts being the heaven, or highest part, the water, or middle part, and the
|
|
|
2324 earth, or the lowest part. Thus the Pythagoreans teach that perfection consists in three things, the beginning, the middle,
|
|
|
2325 and the end. The first part, then, is distinguished on the first day, and adorned on the fourth, the middle part distinguished
|
|
|
2326 on the middle day, and adorned on the fifth, and the third part distinguished on the third day, and adorned on the sixth.
|
|
|
2327 But Augustine, while agreeing with the above writers as to the last three days, differs as to the first three, for, according
|
|
|
2328 to him, spiritual creatures are formed on the first day, and corporeal on the two others, the higher bodies being formed on
|
|
|
2329 the first these two days, and the lower on the second. Thus, then, the perfection of the Divine works corresponds to the perfection
|
|
|
2330 of the number six, which is the sum of its aliquot parts, one, two, three; since one day is assigned to the forming of spiritual
|
|
|
2331 creatures, two to that of corporeal creatures, and three to the work of adornment.
|
|
|
2332 </p>
|
|
|
2333 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p8">
|
|
|
2334 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> According to Augustine, the work of creation belongs to the production of formless matter, and of the formless spiritual
|
|
|
2335 nature, both of which are outside of time, as he himself says (Confess. xii, 12). Thus, then, the creation of either is set
|
|
|
2336 down before there was any day. But it may also be said, following other holy writers, that the works of distinction and adornment
|
|
|
2337 imply certain changes in the creature which are measurable by time; whereas the
|
|
|
2338 work of creation lies only in the Divine act producing the substance of beings instantaneously. For this reason, therefore,
|
|
|
2339 every work of distinction and adornment is said to take place "in a day," but creation "in the beginning" which denotes something
|
|
|
2340 indivisible.
|
|
|
2341 </p>
|
|
|
2342 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p9">
|
|
|
2343 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Fire and air, as not distinctly known by the unlettered, are not expressly named by Moses among the parts of the world, but
|
|
|
2344 reckoned with the intermediate part, or water, especially as regards the lowest part of the air; or with the heaven, to which
|
|
|
2345 the higher region of air approaches, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. ii, 13).
|
|
|
2346 </p>
|
|
|
2347 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p10">
|
|
|
2348 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The production of animals is recorded with reference to their adorning the various parts of the world, and therefore the
|
|
|
2349 days of their production are separated or united according as the animals adorn the same parts of the world, or different
|
|
|
2350 parts.
|
|
|
2351 </p>
|
|
|
2352 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p11">
|
|
|
2353 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> The nature of light, as existing in a subject, was made on the first day; and the making of the luminaries on the fourth
|
|
|
2354 day does not mean that their substance was produced anew, but that they then received a form that they had not before, as
|
|
|
2355 said above (
|
|
|
2356 <a id="FP_Q74_A1-p11.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q70_A1.html">Q[70], A[1]</a> ad 2).
|
|
|
2357 </p>
|
|
|
2358 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p12">
|
|
|
2359 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. iv, 15), after all that has been recorded that is assigned to the six days, something
|
|
|
2360 distinct is attributed to the seventh---namely, that on it God rested in Himself from His works: and for this reason it was
|
|
|
2361 right that the seventh day should be mentioned after the six. It may also be said, with the other writers, that the world
|
|
|
2362 entered on the seventh day upon a new state, in that nothing new was to be added to
|
|
|
2363 it, and that therefore the seventh day is mentioned after the six, from its being devoted to cessation from work.
|
|
|
2364 </p>
|
|
|
2365 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p13"></p>
|
|
|
2366 <p id="FP_Q74_A1-p14"></p>
|
|
|
2367 <a href="summa.FP_Q74.html"></a>
|
|
|
2368 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2369 </div>
|
|
|
2370 <div id="FP_Q74_A2" class="div4">
|
|
|
2371 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2372 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
2373 <h4 id="FP_Q74_A2-p0.1">Whether all these days are one day?</h4>
|
|
|
2374 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2375 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p2">
|
|
|
2376 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem that all these days are one day. For it is written (
|
|
|
2377 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q74_A2-p2.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.2.4" target="asv">Gn. 2:4,5</a>): "These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord . . . made the
|
|
|
2378 heaven and the earth, and every plant of the field, before it sprung up in the earth." Therefore the day in which God made
|
|
|
2379 "the heaven and the earth, and every plant of the field," is one and the same day. But He made the heaven and the earth on
|
|
|
2380 the first day, or rather before there was any day, but the plant of the field He made on the third day. Therefore the first
|
|
|
2381 and third days are but one day, and for a like reason all the rest.
|
|
|
2382 </p>
|
|
|
2383 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p3">
|
|
|
2384 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, it is said (
|
|
|
2385 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q74_A2-p3.1" href="./asv.html#Sir.18.1" target="asv">Ecclus. 18:1</a>): "He that liveth for ever, created all things together." But this would not be the case if the days of these works were
|
|
|
2386 more than one. Therefore they are not many but one only.
|
|
|
2387 </p>
|
|
|
2388 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p4">
|
|
|
2389 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, on the seventh day God ceased from all new works. If, then, the seventh day is distinct from the other days, it
|
|
|
2390 follows that He did not make that day; which is not admissible.
|
|
|
2391 </p>
|
|
|
2392 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p5">
|
|
|
2393 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, the entire work ascribed to one day God perfected in an instant, for with each work are the words (God) "said .
|
|
|
2394 . . . and it was . . . done." If, then, He had kept back His next work to another day, it would follow that for the remainder
|
|
|
2395 of a day He would have ceased from working and left it vacant, which would be superfluous. The day, therefore, of the preceding
|
|
|
2396 work is one with the day of the work that follows.
|
|
|
2397 </p>
|
|
|
2398 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p6">
|
|
|
2399 <b>On the contrary,</b> It is written (
|
|
|
2400 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q74_A2-p6.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1" target="asv">Gn. 1</a>), "The evening and the morning were the second day . . . the third day," and so on. But where there is a second and third
|
|
|
2401 there are more than one. There was not, therefore, only one day.
|
|
|
2402 </p>
|
|
|
2403 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p7">
|
|
|
2404 <b>I answer that,</b> On this question Augustine differs from other expositors. His opinion is that all the days that are called seven, are one
|
|
|
2405 day represented in a sevenfold aspect (Gen. ad lit. iv, 22; De Civ. Dei xi, 9; Ad Orosium xxvi); while others consider there
|
|
|
2406 were seven distinct days, not one only. Now, these two opinions, taken as explaining the literal text of Genesis, are certainly
|
|
|
2407 widely different. For Augustine understands by the word "day," the knowledge in the
|
|
|
2408 mind of the angels, and hence, according to him, the first day denotes their knowledge of the first of the Divine works, the
|
|
|
2409 second day their knowledge of the second work, and similarly with the rest. Thus, then, each work is said to have been wrought
|
|
|
2410 in some one of these days, inasmuch as God wrought in some one of these days, inasmuch as God wrought nothing in the universe
|
|
|
2411 without impressing the knowledge thereof on the angelic mind; which can know many things at the same time, especially in
|
|
|
2412 the Word, in Whom all angelic knowledge is perfected and terminated. So the distinction of days denotes the natural order
|
|
|
2413 of the things known, and not a succession in the knowledge acquired, or in the things produced. Moreover, angelic knowledge
|
|
|
2414 is appropriately called "day," since light, the cause of day, is to be found in spiritual things, as Augustine observes (Gen.
|
|
|
2415 ad lit. iv, 28). In the opinion of the others, however, the days signify a succession both in time, and in the things
|
|
|
2416 produced.
|
|
|
2417 </p>
|
|
|
2418 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p8"> If, however, these two explanations are looked at as referring to the mode of production, they will be found not greatly
|
|
|
2419 to differ, if the diversity of opinion existing on two points, as already shown (
|
|
|
2420 <a id="FP_Q74_A2-p8.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q67_A1.html">Q[67], A[1]</a>;
|
|
|
2421 <a id="FP_Q74_A2-p8.2" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html">Q[69], A[1]</a>), between Augustine and other writers is taken into account. First, because Augustine takes the earth and the water as first
|
|
|
2422 created, to signify matter totally without form; but the making of the firmament,
|
|
|
2423 the gathering of the waters, and the appearing of dry land, to denote the impression of forms upon corporeal matter. But other
|
|
|
2424 holy writers take the earth and the water, as first created, to signify the elements of the universe themselves existing under
|
|
|
2425 the proper forms, and the works that follow to mean some sort of distinction in bodies previously existing, as also has been
|
|
|
2426 shown (
|
|
|
2427 <a id="FP_Q74_A2-p8.3" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q67_A1.html">Q[67], AA[1]</a>,4;
|
|
|
2428 <a id="FP_Q74_A2-p8.4" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q69_A1.html">Q[69], A[1]</a> ). Secondly, some writers hold that
|
|
|
2429 plants and animals were produced actually in the work of the six days; Augustine, that they were produced potentially. Now
|
|
|
2430 the opinion of Augustine, that the works of the six days were simultaneous, is consistent with either view of the mode of
|
|
|
2431 production. For the other writers agree with him that in the first production of things matter existed under the substantial
|
|
|
2432 form of the elements, and agree with him also that in the first instituting of the world animals and plants did not exist
|
|
|
2433 actually. There remains, however, a difference as to four points; since, according to the latter, there was a time, after
|
|
|
2434 the production of creatures, in which light did not exist, the firmament had not been formed, and the earth was still covered
|
|
|
2435 by the waters, nor had the heavenly bodies been formed, which is the fourth difference; which are not consistent with Augustine's
|
|
|
2436 explanation. In order, therefore, to be impartial, we must meet the arguments of either side.
|
|
|
2437 </p>
|
|
|
2438 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p9">
|
|
|
2439 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> On the day on which God created the heaven and the earth, He created also every plant of the field, not, indeed, actually,
|
|
|
2440 but "before it sprung up in the earth," that is, potentially. And this work Augustine ascribes to the third day, but other
|
|
|
2441 writers to the first instituting of the world.
|
|
|
2442 </p>
|
|
|
2443 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p10">
|
|
|
2444 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> God created all things together so far as regards their substance in some measure formless. But He did not create all things
|
|
|
2445 together, so far as regards that formation of things which lies in distinction and adornment. Hence the word "creation" is
|
|
|
2446 significant.
|
|
|
2447 </p>
|
|
|
2448 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p11">
|
|
|
2449 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> On the seventh day God ceased from making new things, but not from providing for their increase, and to this latter work
|
|
|
2450 it belongs that the first day is succeeded by other days.
|
|
|
2451 </p>
|
|
|
2452 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p12">
|
|
|
2453 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> All things were not distinguished and adorned together, not from a want of power on God's part, as requiring time in which
|
|
|
2454 to work, but that due order might be observed in the instituting of the world. Hence it was fitting that different days should
|
|
|
2455 be assigned to the different states of the world, as each succeeding work added to the world a fresh state of perfection.
|
|
|
2456 </p>
|
|
|
2457 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p13">
|
|
|
2458 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> According to Augustine, the order of days refers to the natural order of the works attributed to the days.
|
|
|
2459 </p>
|
|
|
2460 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p14"></p>
|
|
|
2461 <p id="FP_Q74_A2-p15"></p>
|
|
|
2462 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2463 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
2464 </div>
|
|
|
2465 <div id="FP_Q74_A3" class="div4">
|
|
|
2466 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2467 <a href="summa.FP.ix.html"></a>
|
|
|
2468 <h4 id="FP_Q74_A3-p0.1">Whether Scripture uses suitable words to express the work of the six days?</h4>
|
|
|
2469 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p1"></p>
|
|
|
2470 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p2">
|
|
|
2471 <b>Objection 1:</b> It would seem the Scripture does not use suitable words to express the works of the six days. For as light, the firmament,
|
|
|
2472 and other similar works were made by the Word of God, so were the heaven and the earth. For "all things were made by Him"
|
|
|
2473 (
|
|
|
2474 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q74_A3-p2.1" href="./asv.html#John.1.3" target="asv">Jn. 1:3</a>). Therefore in the creation of heaven and earth, as in the other works, mention should have been made of the Word of God.
|
|
|
2475 </p>
|
|
|
2476 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p3">
|
|
|
2477 <b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the water was created by God, yet its creation is not mentioned. Therefore the creation of the world is not sufficiently
|
|
|
2478 described.
|
|
|
2479 </p>
|
|
|
2480 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p4">
|
|
|
2481 <b>Objection 3:</b> Further, it is said (
|
|
|
2482 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q74_A3-p4.1" href="./asv.html#Gen.1.31" target="asv">Gn. 1:31</a>): "God saw all the things that He had made, and they were very good." It ought, then, to have been said of each work, "God
|
|
|
2483 saw that it was good." The omission, therefore, of these words in the work of creation and in that of the second day, is not
|
|
|
2484 fitting.
|
|
|
2485 </p>
|
|
|
2486 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p5">
|
|
|
2487 <b>Objection 4:</b> Further, the Spirit of God is God Himself. But it does not befit God to move and to occupy place. Therefore the words, "The
|
|
|
2488 Spirit of God moved over the waters," are unbecoming.
|
|
|
2489 </p>
|
|
|
2490 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p6">
|
|
|
2491 <b>Objection 5:</b> Further, what is already made is not made over again. Therefore to the words, "God said: Let the firmament be made . . .
|
|
|
2492 and it was so," it is superfluous to add, "God made the firmament." And the like is to be said of other works.
|
|
|
2493 </p>
|
|
|
2494 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p7">
|
|
|
2495 <b>Objection 6:</b> Further, evening and morning do not sufficiently divide the day, since the day has many parts. Therefore the words, "The
|
|
|
2496 evening and morning were the second day" or, "the third day," are not suitable.
|
|
|
2497 </p>
|
|
|
2498 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p8">
|
|
|
2499 <b>Objection 7:</b> Further, "first," not "one," corresponds to "second" and "third." It should therefore have been said that, "The evening and
|
|
|
2500 the morning were the first day," rather than "one day."
|
|
|
2501 </p>
|
|
|
2502 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p9">
|
|
|
2503 <b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. i, 4), the person of the Son is mentioned both in the first creation of the world, and
|
|
|
2504 in its distinction and adornment, but differently in either place. For distinction and adornment belong to the work by which
|
|
|
2505 the world receives its form. But as the giving form to a work of art is by means of the form of the art in the mind of the
|
|
|
2506 artist, which may be called his intelligible word, so the giving form to every
|
|
|
2507 creature is by the word of God; and for this reason in the works of distinction and adornment the Word is mentioned. But in
|
|
|
2508 creation the Son is mentioned as the beginning, by the words, "In the beginning God created," since by creation is understood
|
|
|
2509 the production of formless matter. But according to those who hold that the elements were created from the first under their
|
|
|
2510 proper forms, another explanation must be given; and therefore Basil says (Hom. ii, iii in Hexaem.) that the words, "God
|
|
|
2511 said," signify a Divine command. Such a command, however, could not have been given before creatures had been produced that
|
|
|
2512 could obey it.
|
|
|
2513 </p>
|
|
|
2514 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p10">
|
|
|
2515 <b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> According to Augustine (De Civ. Dei ix, 33), by the heaven is understood the formless spiritual nature, and by the earth,
|
|
|
2516 the formless matter of all corporeal things, and thus no creature is omitted. But, according to Basil (Hom. i in Hexaem.),
|
|
|
2517 the heaven and the earth, as the two extremes, are alone mentioned, the intervening things being left to be understood, since
|
|
|
2518 all these move heavenwards, if light, or earthwards, if heavy. And others say that
|
|
|
2519 under the word, "earth," Scripture is accustomed to include all the four elements as (
|
|
|
2520 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q74_A3-p10.1" href="./asv.html#Ps.148.7" target="asv">Ps. 148:7,8</a>) after the words, "Praise the Lord from the earth," is added, "fire, hail, snow, and ice."
|
|
|
2521 </p>
|
|
|
2522 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p11">
|
|
|
2523 <b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> In the account of the creation there is found something to correspond to the words, "God saw that it was good," used in the
|
|
|
2524 work of distinction and adornment, and this appears from the consideration that the Holy Spirit is Love. Now, "there are two
|
|
|
2525 things," says Augustine (Gen. ad lit. i, 8) which came from God's love of His creatures, their existence and their permanence.
|
|
|
2526 That they might then exist, and exist permanently, "the Spirit of God," it is
|
|
|
2527 said, "moved over the waters"---that is to say, over that formless matter, signified by water, even as the love of the artist
|
|
|
2528 moves over the materials of his art, that out of them he may form his work. And the words, "God saw that it was good," signify
|
|
|
2529 that the things that He had made were to endure, since they express a certain satisfaction taken by God in His works, as of
|
|
|
2530 an artist in his art: not as though He knew the creature otherwise, or that the creature was pleasing to Him otherwise,
|
|
|
2531 than before He made it. Thus in either work, of creation and of formation, the Trinity of Persons is implied. In creation
|
|
|
2532 the Person of the Father is indicated by God the Creator, the Person of the Son by the beginning, in which He created, and
|
|
|
2533 the Person of the Holy Ghost by the Spirit that moved over the waters. But in the formation, the Person of the Father is indicated
|
|
|
2534 by God that speaks, and the Person of the Son by the Word in which He speaks, and the Person of the Holy Spirit by the
|
|
|
2535 satisfaction with which God saw that what was made was good. And if the words, "God saw that it was good," are not said of
|
|
|
2536 the work of the second day, this is because the work of distinguishing the waters was only begun on that day, but perfected
|
|
|
2537 on the third. Hence these words, that are said of the third day, refer also to the second. Or it may be that Scripture does
|
|
|
2538 not use these words of approval of the second days' work, because this is concerned with the distinction of things not evident
|
|
|
2539 to the senses of mankind. Or, again, because by the firmament is simply understood the cloudy region of the air, which is
|
|
|
2540 not one of the permanent parts of the universe, nor of the principal divisions of the world. The above three reasons are given
|
|
|
2541 by Rabbi Moses [*Perplex. ii.], and to these may be added a mystical one derived from numbers and assigned by some writers,
|
|
|
2542 according to whom the work of the second day is not marked with approval because the second number is an imperfect number,
|
|
|
2543 as
|
|
|
2544 receding from the perfection of unity.
|
|
|
2545 </p>
|
|
|
2546 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p12">
|
|
|
2547 <b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Rabbi Moses (Perplex. ii) understands by the "Spirit of the Lord," the air or the wind, as Plato also did, and says that
|
|
|
2548 it is so called according to the custom of Scripture, in which these things are throughout attributed to God. But according
|
|
|
2549 to the holy writers, the Spirit of the Lord signifies the Holy Ghost, Who is said to "move over the water"---that is to say,
|
|
|
2550 over what Augustine holds to mean formless matter, lest it should be supposed that
|
|
|
2551 God loved of necessity the works He was to produce, as though He stood in need of them. For love of that kind is subject to,
|
|
|
2552 not superior to, the object of love. Moreover, it is fittingly implied that the Spirit moved over that which was incomplete
|
|
|
2553 and unfinished, since that movement is not one of place, but of pre-eminent power, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. i, 7).
|
|
|
2554 It is the opinion, however, of Basil (Hom. ii in Hexaem.) that the Spirit moved over the element of water, "fostering and
|
|
|
2555 quickening its nature and impressing vital power, as the hen broods over her chickens." For water has especially a life-giving
|
|
|
2556 power, since many animals are generated in water, and the seed of all animals is liquid. Also the life of the soul is given
|
|
|
2557 by the water of baptism, according to
|
|
|
2558 <a class="scripRef" id="FP_Q74_A3-p12.1" href="./asv.html#John.3.5" target="asv"> Jn. 3:5</a>: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
|
|
|
2559 </p>
|
|
|
2560 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p13">
|
|
|
2561 <b>Reply to Objection 5:</b> According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. i, 8), these three phrases denote the threefold being of creatures; first, their being
|
|
|
2562 in the Word, denoted by the command "Let . . . be made"; secondly, their being in the angelic mind, signified by the words,
|
|
|
2563 "It was . . . done"; thirdly, their being in their proper nature, by the words, "He made." And because the formation of the
|
|
|
2564 angels is recorded on the first day, it was not necessary there to add, "He made."
|
|
|
2565 It may also be said, following other writers, that the words, "He said," and "Let . . . be made," denote God's command, and
|
|
|
2566 the words, "It was done," the fulfilment of that command. But as it was necessary, for the sake of those especially who have
|
|
|
2567 asserted that all visible things were made by the angels, to mention how things were made, it is added, in order to remove
|
|
|
2568 that error, that God Himself made them. Hence, in each work, after the words, "It was done," some act of God is expressed
|
|
|
2569 by
|
|
|
2570 some such words as, "He made," or, "He divided," or, "He called."
|
|
|
2571 </p>
|
|
|
2572 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p14">
|
|
|
2573 <b>Reply to Objection 6:</b> According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. iv, 22,30), by the "evening" and the "morning" are understood the evening and the morning
|
|
|
2574 knowledge of the angels, which has been explained (
|
|
|
2575 <a id="FP_Q74_A3-p14.1" shape="rect" href="summa.FP_Q58_A6.html">Q[58], A[6]</a>,7). But, according to Basil (Hom. ii in Hexaem.), the entire period takes its name, as is customary, from its more important
|
|
|
2576 part, the day. And instance of this is found in the words of Jacob, "The days of my pilgrimage," where night is not
|
|
|
2577 mentioned at all. But the evening and the morning are mentioned as being the ends of the day, since day begins with morning
|
|
|
2578 and ends with evening, or because evening denotes the beginning of night, and morning the beginning of day. It seems fitting,
|
|
|
2579 also, that where the first distinction of creatures is described, divisions of time should be denoted only by what marks their
|
|
|
2580 beginning. And the reason for mentioning the evening first is that as the evening ends the day, which begins with the
|
|
|
2581 light, the termination of the light at evening precedes the termination of the darkness, which ends with the morning. But
|
|
|
2582 Chrysostom's explanation is that thereby it is intended to show that the natural day does not end with the evening, but with
|
|
|
2583 the morning (Hom. v in Gen.).
|
|
|
2584 </p>
|
|
|
2585 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p15">
|
|
|
2586 <b>Reply to Objection 7:</b> The words "one day" are used when day is first instituted, to denote that one day is made up of twenty-four hours. Hence,
|
|
|
2587 by mentioning "one," the measure of a natural day is fixed. Another reason may be to signify that a day is completed by the
|
|
|
2588 return of the sun to the point from which it commenced its course. And yet another, because at the completion of a week of
|
|
|
2589 seven days, the first day returns which is one with the eighth day. The three reasons
|
|
|
2590 assigned above are those given by Basil (Hom. ii in Hexaem.).
|
|
|
2591 </p>
|
|
|
2592 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p16"></p>
|
|
|
2593 <p id="FP_Q74_A3-p17"></p>
|
|
|
2594 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A2.html"></a>
|
|
|
2595 <a href="summa.FP.ix.html"></a>
|
|
|
2596 </div>
|
|
|
2597 <a href="summa.FP_Q73_A3.html"></a>
|
|
|
2598 <a href="summa.FP_Q74_A1.html"></a>
|
|
|
2599 </div>
|
|
|
2600 <a href="summa.FP_Q64_A4.html"></a>
|
|
|
2601 <a href="summa.FP_Q65.html"></a>
|
|
|
2602 `
|
|
|
2603 </div> |
