Mercurial > hg > Aquinas
comparison summa/english/FP_viii.html @ 64:11682db9b870
from auto-split
| author | ht |
|---|---|
| date | Sun, 03 Jan 2010 14:43:02 +0000 |
| parents | |
| children |
comparison
equal
deleted
inserted
replaced
| 63:4665e252e26e | 64:11682db9b870 |
|---|---|
| 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> |