--- a/summa/bilingual/FP_ii.xml	Sat Dec 06 16:02:48 2008 +0000
+++ b/summa/bilingual/FP_ii.xml	Sat Dec 06 16:33:07 2008 +0000
@@ -7352,7 +7352,6 @@
 
 			 </div4>
 		  </div3>
-<!-- merged down to here -->
 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q12" next="FP_Q12_A1" prev="FP_Q11_A4" progress="1.53%" n="xi" title="Question. 12 - HOW GOD IS KNOWN BY US (THIRTEEN ARTICLES)">
 			 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p0.1">Question 12. HOW GOD IS KNOWN BY US (THIRTEEN ARTICLES)</h3>
 
@@ -7360,113 +7359,236 @@
 
 			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p2"> As hitherto we have considered God as He is in Himself, we now go on to consider in what manner He is in the knowledge of creatures; concerning which there are thirteen points of inquiry:</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
+<div xml:lang="en">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p3"> (1) Whether any created intellect can see the essence of God?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p4"> (2) Whether the essence of God is seen by the intellect through any created image?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p5"> (3) Whether the essence of God can be seen by the corporeal eye?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p6"> (4) Whether any created intellectual substance is sufficient by its own natural powers to see the essence of God?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p7"> (5) Whether the created intellect needs any created light in order to see the essence of God?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p8"> (6) Whether of those who see God, one sees Him more perfectly than another?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p9"> (7) Whether any created intellect can comprehend the essence of God?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p10"> (8) Whether the created intellect seeing the essence of God, knows all things in it?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p11"> (9) Whether what is there known is known by any similitudes?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p12"> (10) Whether the created intellect knows at once what it sees in God?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p13"> (11) Whether in the state of this life any man can see the essence of God?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p14"> (12) Whether by natural reason we can know God in this life?</p>
-</div>
-
-			 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12-p15"> (13) Whether there is in this life any knowledge of God through grace above the knowledge of natural reason?</p>
 </div>
-
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 pr."><a name="28681"><span class="ref">[28681]
+I&ordf; q. 12 pr.</span></a> Quia in superioribus consideravimus
+qualiter Deus sit secundum seipsum, restat considerandum qualiter
+sit in cognitione nostra, idest quomodo cognoscatur a creaturis. Et
+circa hoc quaeruntur tredecim. Primo, utrum aliquis intellectus
+creatus possit videre essentiam Dei. Secundo, utrum Dei essentia
+videatur ab intellectu per aliquam speciem creatam. Tertio, utrum
+oculo corporeo Dei essentia possit videri. Quarto, utrum aliqua
+substantia intellectualis creata ex suis naturalibus sufficiens sit
+videre Dei essentiam. Quinto, utrum intellectus creatus ad videndam
+Dei essentiam indigeat aliquo lumine creato. Sexto, utrum videntium
+essentiam Dei unus alio perfectius videat. Septimo, utrum aliquis
+intellectus creatus possit comprehendere Dei essentiam. Octavo,
+utrum intellectus creatus videns Dei essentiam, omnia in ipsa
+cognoscat. Nono, utrum ea quae ibi cognoscit, per aliquas
+similitudines cognoscat. Decimo, utrum simul cognoscat omnia quae
+in Deo videt. Undecimo, utrum in statu huius vitae possit aliquis
+homo essentiam Dei videre. Duodecimo, utrum per rationem naturalem
+Deum in hac vita possimus cognoscere. Tertiodecimo, utrum, supra
+cognitionem naturalis rationis, sit in praesenti vita aliqua
+cognitio Dei per gratiam.</p>
+</div>
 <div4 id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1" next="FP_Q12_A2" prev="FP_Q12" progress="1.54%" n="i" title="Article. 1 - Whether any created intellect can see the essence of God?">
 <h4 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p0.1">Whether any created intellect can see the essence of God?</h4>
 
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that no created intellect can see the essence of God. For Chrysostom (Hom. xiv. in Joan.) commenting on<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.1.18" parsed="vul|John|1|18|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p2.1" passage=" Jn. 1:18, "> Jn. 1:18, </scripRef> "No man hath seen God at any time," says: "Not prophets only, but neither angels nor archangels have seen God. For how can a creature see what is increatable?" Dionysius also says (Div. Nom. i), speaking of God: "Neither is there sense, nor image, nor opinion, nor reason, nor knowledge of Him."</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, everything infinite, as such, is unknown. But God is infinite, as was shown above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p3.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q7.FP_Q7_A1">Q[7], A[1]</a>). Therefore in Himself He is unknown.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the created intellect knows only existing things. For what falls first under the apprehension of the intellect is being. Now God is not something existing; but He is rather super-existence, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv). Therefore God is not intelligible; but above all intellect.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, there must be some proportion between the knower and the known, since the known is the perfection of the knower. But no proportion exists between the created intellect and God; for there is an infinite distance between them. Therefore the created intellect cannot see the essence of God.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p6"><b>On the contrary,</b> It is written: "We shall see Him as He is" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.2.2" parsed="vul|1John|2|2|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p6.1" passage="1 Jn. 2:2">1 Jn. 2:2</scripRef>).</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> Since everything is knowable according as it is actual, God, Who is pure act without any admixture of potentiality, is in Himself supremely knowable. But what is supremely knowable in itself, may not be knowable to a particular intellect, on account of the excess of the intelligible object above the intellect; as, for example, the sun, which is supremely visible, cannot be seen by the bat by reason of its excess of light.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that no
+created intellect can see the essence of God. For Chrysostom
+(Hom. xiv. in Joan.) commenting on<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:John.1.18" parsed="vul|John|1|18|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p2.1" passage=" Jn. 1:18, "> Jn. 1:18,
+</scripRef> "No man hath seen God at any time," says: "Not prophets
+only, but neither angels nor archangels have seen God. For how can a
+creature see what is increatable?" Dionysius also says (Div. Nom. i),
+speaking of God: "Neither is there sense, nor image, nor opinion, nor
+reason, nor knowledge of Him."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 arg. 1"><a name="28682"><span class=
+"ref">[28682] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 arg. 1</span></a> Ad primum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod nullus intellectus creatus possit Deum per
+essentiam videre. Chrysostomus enim, super Ioannem, exponens illud
+quod dicitur Ioan. I, <i>Deum nemo vidit unquam</i>, sic dicit,
+<i>ipsum quod est Deus, non solum prophetae, sed nec Angeli
+viderunt nec Archangeli, quod enim creabilis est naturae, qualiter
+videre poterit quod increabile est?</i> Dionysius etiam, I cap. de
+Div. Nom., loquens de Deo, dicit, <i>neque sensus est eius, neque
+phantasia, neque opinio, nec ratio, nec scientia</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, everything
+infinite, as such, is unknown. But God is infinite, as was shown above
+(<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p3.1"
+href="#FP.ii.FP_Q7.FP_Q7_A1">Q[7], A[1]</a>). Therefore in Himself He
+is unknown.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 arg. 2"><a name="28683"><span class=
+"ref">[28683] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, omne
+infinitum, inquantum huiusmodi, est ignotum. Sed Deus est
+infinitus, ut supra ostensum est. Ergo secundum se est ignotus.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the
+created intellect knows only existing things. For what falls first
+under the apprehension of the intellect is being. Now God is not
+something existing; but He is rather super-existence, as Dionysius
+says (Div. Nom. iv). Therefore God is not intelligible; but above all
+intellect.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 arg. 3"><a name="28684"><span class=
+"ref">[28684] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
+intellectus creatus non est cognoscitivus nisi existentium, primum
+enim quod cadit in apprehensione intellectus, est ens. Sed Deus non
+est existens, sed supra existentia. Ut dicit Dionysius. Ergo non
+est intelligibilis; sed est supra omnem intellectum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, there must
+be some proportion between the knower and the known, since the known
+is the perfection of the knower. But no proportion exists between the
+created intellect and God; for there is an infinite distance between
+them. Therefore the created intellect cannot see the essence of
+God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 arg. 4"><a name="28685"><span class=
+"ref">[28685] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea,
+cognoscentis ad cognitum oportet esse aliquam proportionem, cum
+cognitum sit perfectio cognoscentis. Sed nulla est proportio
+intellectus creati ad Deum, quia in infinitum distant. Ergo
+intellectus creatus non potest videre essentiam Dei.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p6"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> It is written: "We shall see Him as He is"
+(<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.2.2" parsed="vul|1John|2|2|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p6.1" passage="1 Jn. 2:2">1
+Jn. 2:2</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 s. c."><a name="28686"><span class=
+"ref">[28686] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicitur I Ioan. III, <i>videbimus eum sicuti est</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<div xml:lang="en">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p7"><b>I
+answer that,</b> Since everything is knowable according as it is
+actual, God, Who is pure act without any admixture of potentiality, is
+in Himself supremely knowable. But what is supremely knowable in
+itself, may not be knowable to a particular intellect, on account of
+the excess of the intelligible object above the intellect; as, for
+example, the sun, which is supremely visible, cannot be seen by the
+bat by reason of its excess of light.</p>
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p8"> Therefore some who considered this, held that no created intellect can see the essence of God. This opinion, however, is not tenable. For as the ultimate beatitude of man consists in the use of his highest function, which is the operation of his intellect; if we suppose that the created intellect could never see God, it would either never attain to beatitude, or its beatitude would consist in something else beside God; which is opposed to faith. For the ultimate perfection of
   the rational creature is to be found in that which is the principle of its being; since a thing is perfect so far as it attains to its principle. Further the same opinion is also against reason. For there resides in every man a natural desire to know the cause of any effect which he sees; and thence arises wonder in men. But if the intellect of the rational creature could not reach so far as to the first cause of things, the natural desire would remain void.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p9"> Hence it must be absolutely granted that the blessed see the essence of God.</p>
 </div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Both of these authorities speak of the vision of comprehension. Hence Dionysius premises immediately before the words cited, "He is universally to all incomprehensible," etc. Chrysostom likewise after the words quoted says: "He says this of the most certain vision of the Father, which is such a perfect consideration and comprehension as the Father has of the Son."</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The infinity of matter not made perfect by form, is unknown in itself, because all knowledge comes by the form; whereas the infinity of the form not limited by matter, is in itself supremely known. God is Infinite in this way, and not in the first way: as appears from what was said above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p11.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q7.FP_Q7_A1">Q[7], A[1]</a>).</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> God is not said to be not existing as if He did not exist at all, but because He exists above all that exists; inasmuch as He is His own existence. Hence it does not follow that He cannot be known at all, but that He exceeds every kind of knowledge; which means that He is not comprehended.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 co."><a name="28687"><span class=
+"ref">[28687] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod, cum unumquodque sit cognoscibile secundum quod est in actu,
+Deus, qui est actus purus absque omni permixtione potentiae,
+quantum in se est, maxime cognoscibilis est. Sed quod est maxime
+cognoscibile in se, alicui intellectui cognoscibile non est,
+propter excessum intelligibilis supra intellectum, sicut sol, qui
+est maxime visibilis, videri non potest a vespertilione, propter
+excessum luminis. Hoc igitur attendentes, quidam posuerunt quod
+nullus intellectus creatus essentiam Dei videre potest. Sed hoc
+inconvenienter dicitur. Cum enim ultima hominis beatitudo in
+altissima eius operatione consistat, quae est operatio intellectus,
+si nunquam essentiam Dei videre potest intellectus creatus, vel
+nunquam beatitudinem obtinebit, vel in alio eius beatitudo
+consistet quam in Deo. Quod est alienum a fide. In ipso enim est
+ultima perfectio rationalis creaturae, quia est ei principium
+essendi, intantum enim unumquodque perfectum est, inquantum ad suum
+principium attingit. Similiter etiam est praeter rationem. Inest
+enim homini naturale desiderium cognoscendi causam, cum intuetur
+effectum; et ex hoc admiratio in hominibus consurgit. Si igitur
+intellectus rationalis creaturae pertingere non possit ad primam
+causam rerum, remanebit inane desiderium naturae. Unde simpliciter
+concedendum est quod beati Dei essentiam videant.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Both of
+these authorities speak of the vision of comprehension. Hence
+Dionysius premises immediately before the words cited, "He is
+universally to all incomprehensible," etc. Chrysostom likewise after
+the words quoted says: "He says this of the most certain vision of the
+Father, which is such a perfect consideration and comprehension as the
+Father has of the Son."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 ad 1"><a name="28688"><span class=
+"ref">[28688] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod utraque auctoritas loquitur de visione
+comprehensionis. Unde praemittit Dionysius immediate ante verba
+proposita, dicens, <i>omnibus ipse est universaliter
+incomprehensibilis, et nec sensus est</i>, et cetera. Et
+Chrysostomus parum post verba praedicta subdit, <i>visionem hic
+dicit certissimam patris considerationem et comprehensionem, tantam
+quantam pater habet de filio</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The
+infinity of matter not made perfect by form, is unknown in itself,
+because all knowledge comes by the form; whereas the infinity of the
+form not limited by matter, is in itself supremely known. God is
+Infinite in this way, and not in the first way: as appears from what
+was said above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p11.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q7.FP_Q7_A1">Q[7],
+A[1]</a>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 ad 2"><a name="28689"><span class=
+"ref">[28689] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod infinitum quod se tenet ex parte materiae non
+perfectae per formam, ignotum est secundum se, quia omnis cognitio
+est per formam. Sed infinitum quod se tenet ex parte formae non
+limitatae per materiam, est secundum se maxime notum. Sic autem
+Deus est infinitus, et non primo modo, ut ex superioribus
+patet.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p12"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> God is
+not said to be not existing as if He did not exist at all, but because
+He exists above all that exists; inasmuch as He is His own
+existence. Hence it does not follow that He cannot be known at all,
+but that He exceeds every kind of knowledge; which means that He is
+not comprehended.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 ad 3"><a name="28690"><span class=
+"ref">[28690] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod Deus non sic dicitur non existens, quasi nullo modo
+sit existens, sed quia est supra omne existens, inquantum est suum
+esse. Unde ex hoc non sequitur quod nullo modo possit cognosci, sed
+quod omnem cognitionem excedat, quod est ipsum non comprehendi.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1-p13"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Proportion is twofold. In one sense it means a certain relation of one quantity to another, according as double, treble and equal are species of proportion. In another sense every relation of one thing to another is called proportion. And in this sense there can be a proportion of the creature to God, inasmuch as it is related to Him as the effect of its cause, and as potentiality to its act; and in this way the created intellect can be proportioned
   to know God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 1 ad 4"><a name="28691"><span class=
+"ref">[28691] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 1 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum
+dicendum quod proportio dicitur dupliciter. Uno modo, certa
+habitudo unius quantitatis ad alteram; secundum quod duplum,
+triplum et aequale sunt species proportionis. Alio modo, quaelibet
+habitudo unius ad alterum proportio dicitur. Et sic potest esse
+proportio creaturae ad Deum, inquantum se habet ad ipsum ut
+effectus ad causam, et ut potentia ad actum. Et secundum hoc,
+intellectus creatus proportionatus esse potest ad cognoscendum
+Deum.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7480,47 +7602,168 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the essence of God is seen through an image by the created intellect. For it is written: "We know that when He shall appear, we shall be like to Him, and [Vulg.: 'because'] we shall see Him as He is" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.3.2" parsed="vul|1John|3|2|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p2.1" passage="1 Jn. 3:2">1 Jn. 3:2</scripRef>).</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine says (De Trin. v): "When we know God, some likeness of God is made in us."</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the intellect in act is the actual intelligible; as sense in act is the actual sensible. But this comes about inasmuch as sense is informed with the likeness of the sensible object, and the intellect with the likeness of the thing understood. Therefore, if God is seen by the created intellect in act, it must be that He is seen by some similitude.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. xv) that when the Apostle says, "We see through a glass and in an enigma [*Douay: 'in a dark manner']," "by the terms 'glass' and 'enigma' certain similitudes are signified by him, which are accommodated to the vision of God." But to see the essence of God is not an enigmatic nor a speculative vision, but is, on the contrary, of an opposite kind. Therefore the divine essence is not seen through a similitude.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
+essence of God is seen through an image by the created intellect. For
+it is written: "We know that when He shall appear, we shall be like to
+Him, and [Vulg.: 'because'] we shall see Him as He is" (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.3.2" parsed="vul|1John|3|2|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p2.1" passage="1 Jn. 3:2">1
+Jn. 3:2</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 arg. 1"><a name="28692"><span class=
+"ref">[28692] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 arg. 1</span></a> Ad secundum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod essentia Dei ab intellectu creato per
+aliquam similitudinem videatur. Dicitur enim I Ioan. III, <i>scimus
+quoniam, cum apparuerit, similes ei erimus, et videbimus eum sicuti
+est</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine
+says (De Trin. v): "When we know God, some likeness of God is made in
+us."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 arg. 2"><a name="28693"><span class=
+"ref">[28693] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
+Augustinus dicit, IX de Trin., <i>cum Deum novimus, fit aliqua Dei
+similitudo in nobis</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the
+intellect in act is the actual intelligible; as sense in act is the
+actual sensible. But this comes about inasmuch as sense is informed
+with the likeness of the sensible object, and the intellect with the
+likeness of the thing understood. Therefore, if God is seen by the
+created intellect in act, it must be that He is seen by some
+similitude.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 arg. 3"><a name="28694"><span class=
+"ref">[28694] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
+intellectus in actu est intelligibile in actu, sicut sensus in actu
+est sensibile in actu. Hoc autem non est nisi inquantum informatur
+sensus similitudine rei sensibilis, et intellectus similitudine rei
+intellectae. Ergo, si Deus ab intellectu creato videtur in actu,
+oportet quod per aliquam similitudinem videatur.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. xv) that when the Apostle
+says, "We see through a glass and in an enigma [*Douay: 'in a dark
+manner']," "by the terms 'glass' and 'enigma' certain similitudes are
+signified by him, which are accommodated to the vision of God." But to
+see the essence of God is not an enigmatic nor a speculative vision,
+but is, on the contrary, of an opposite kind. Therefore the divine
+essence is not seen through a similitude.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 s. c."><a name="28695"><span class=
+"ref">[28695] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicit Augustinus, XV de Trin., quod cum apostolus dicit
+<i>videmus nunc per speculum et in aenigmate, speculi et aenigmatis
+nomine, quaecumque similitudines ab ipso significatae intelligi
+possunt, quae accommodatae sunt ad intelligendum Deum</i>. Sed
+videre Deum per essentiam non est visio aenigmatica vel specularis,
+sed contra eam dividitur. Ergo divina essentia non videtur per
+similitudines.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<div xml:lang="en"
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Two things are required both for sensible and for intellectual vision---viz. power of sight, and union of the thing seen with the sight. For vision is made actual only when the thing seen is in a certain way in the seer. Now in corporeal things it is clear that the thing seen cannot be by its essence in the seer, but only by its likeness; as the similitude of a stone is in the eye, whereby the vision is made actual; whereas the substance of the stone is not
-  there. But if the principle of the visual power and the thing seen were one and the same thing, it would necessarily follow that the seer would receive both the visual power and the form whereby it sees, from that one same thing.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
+  there. But if the principle of the visual power and the thing seen
+were one and the same thing, it would necessarily follow that the seer
+would receive both the visual power and the form whereby it sees, from
+that one same thing.</p>
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p7"> Now it is manifest both that God is the author of the intellect power, and that He can be seen by the intellect. And since the intellective power of the creature is not the essence of God, it follows that it is some kind of participated likeness of Him who is the first intellect. Hence also the intellectual power of the creature is called an intelligible light, as it were, derived from the first light, whether this be understood of the natural power, or of some perfection
   superadded of grace or of glory. Therefore, in order to see God, there must be some similitude of God on the part of the visual faculty, whereby the intellect is made capable of seeing God. But on the part of the object seen, which must necessarily be united to the seer, the essence of God cannot be seen by any created similitude. First, because as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. i), "by the similitudes of the inferior order of things, the superior can in no way be known;" as by the likeness of a
   body the essence of an incorporeal thing cannot be known. Much less therefore can the essence of God be seen by any created likeness whatever. Secondly, because the essence of God is His own very existence, as was shown above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A4">Q[3], A[4]</a>), which cannot be said of any created form; and so no created form can be the similitude representing the essence of God to the seer. Thirdly, because the divine essence is uncircumscribed, and contains in itself super-eminently whatever
   can be signified or understood by the created intellect. Now this cannot in any way be represented by any created likeness; for every created form is determined according to some aspect of wisdom, or of power, or of being itself, or of some like thing. Hence to say that God is seen by some similitude, is to say that the divine essence is not seen at all; which is false.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p8"> Therefore it must be said that to see the essence of God, there is required some similitude in the visual faculty, namely, the light of glory strengthening the intellect to see God, which is spoken of in the <scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.35.10" parsed="vul|Ps|35|10|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p8.1" passage=" Ps. 35:10, "> Ps. 35:10, </scripRef> "In Thy light we shall see light." The essence of God, however, cannot be seen by any created similitude representing the divine essence itself as it really is.</p>
 </div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> That authority speaks of the similitude which is caused by participation of the light of glory.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Augustine speaks of the knowledge of God here on earth.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The divine essence is existence itself. Hence as other intelligible forms which are not their own existence are united to the intellect by means of some entity, whereby the intellect itself is informed, and made in act; so the divine essence is united to the created intellect, as the object actually understood, making the intellect in act by and of itself.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 co."><a name="28696"><span class=
+"ref">[28696] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod ad visionem, tam sensibilem quam intellectualem, duo
+requiruntur, scilicet virtus visiva, et unio rei visae cum visu,
+non enim fit visio in actu, nisi per hoc quod res visa quodammodo
+est in vidente. Et in rebus quidem corporalibus, apparet quod res
+visa non potest esse in vidente per suam essentiam, sed solum per
+suam similitudinem, sicut similitudo lapidis est in oculo, per quam
+fit visio in actu, non autem ipsa substantia lapidis. Si autem
+esset una et eadem res, quae esset principium visivae virtutis, et
+quae esset res visa, oporteret videntem ab illa re et virtutem
+visivam habere, et formam per quam videret. Manifestum est autem
+quod Deus et est auctor intellectivae virtutis, et ab intellectu
+videri potest. Et cum ipsa intellectiva virtus creaturae non sit
+Dei essentia, relinquitur quod sit aliqua participata similitudo
+ipsius, qui est primus intellectus. Unde et virtus intellectualis
+creaturae lumen quoddam intelligibile dicitur, quasi a prima luce
+derivatum, sive hoc intelligatur de virtute naturali, sive de
+aliqua perfectione superaddita gratiae vel gloriae. Requiritur ergo
+ad videndum Deum aliqua Dei similitudo ex parte visivae potentiae,
+qua scilicet intellectus sit efficax ad videndum Deum. Sed ex parte
+visae rei, quam necesse est aliquo modo uniri videnti per nullam
+similitudinem creatam Dei essentia videri potest. Primo quidem,
+quia, sicut dicit Dionysius, I cap. de Div. Nom., per similitudines
+inferioris ordinis rerum nullo modo superiora possunt cognosci,
+sicut per speciem corporis non potest cognosci essentia rei
+incorporeae. Multo igitur minus per speciem creatam quamcumque
+potest essentia Dei videri. Secundo, quia essentia Dei est ipsum
+esse eius, ut supra ostensum est, quod nulli formae creatae
+competere potest. Non potest igitur aliqua forma creata esse
+similitudo repraesentans videnti Dei essentiam. Tertio, quia divina
+essentia est aliquod incircumscriptum, continens in se
+supereminenter quidquid potest significari vel intelligi ab
+intellectu creato. Et hoc nullo modo per aliquam speciem creatam
+repraesentari potest, quia omnis forma creata est determinata
+secundum aliquam rationem vel sapientiae, vel virtutis, vel ipsius
+esse, vel alicuius huiusmodi. Unde dicere Deum per similitudinem
+videri, est dicere divinam essentiam non videri, quod est erroneum.
+Dicendum ergo quod ad videndum Dei essentiam requiritur aliqua
+similitudo ex parte visivae potentiae, scilicet lumen gloriae,
+confortans intellectum ad videndum Deum, de quo dicitur in Psalmo,
+<i>in lumine tuo videbimus lumen</i>. Non autem per aliquam
+similitudinem creatam Dei essentia videri potest, quae ipsam
+divinam essentiam repraesentet ut in se est.</p>
+</div>
+
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> That
+authority speaks of the similitude which is caused by participation of
+the light of glory.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 ad 1"><a name="28697"><span class=
+"ref">[28697] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod auctoritas illa loquitur de similitudine quae est per
+participationem luminis gloriae.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Augustine
+speaks of the knowledge of God here on earth.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 ad 2"><a name="28698"><span class=
+"ref">[28698] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod Augustinus ibi loquitur de cognitione Dei quae
+habetur in via.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The
+divine essence is existence itself. Hence as other intelligible forms
+which are not their own existence are united to the intellect by means
+of some entity, whereby the intellect itself is informed, and made in
+act; so the divine essence is united to the created intellect, as the
+object actually understood, making the intellect in act by and of
+itself.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 2 ad 3"><a name="28699"><span class=
+"ref">[28699] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 2 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod divina essentia est ipsum esse. Unde, sicut aliae
+formae intelligibiles quae non sunt suum esse, uniuntur intellectui
+secundum aliquod esse quo informant ipsum intellectum et faciunt
+ipsum in actu; ita divina essentia unitur intellectui creato ut
+intellectum in actu, per seipsam faciens intellectum in actu.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7534,40 +7777,143 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the essence of God can be seen by the corporeal eye. For it is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.19.26" parsed="vul|Job|19|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p2.1" passage="Job 19:26">Job 19:26</scripRef>): "In my flesh I shall see . . . God," and (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.42.5" parsed="vul|Job|42|5|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p2.2" passage="Job 42:5">Job 42:5</scripRef>), "With the hearing of the ear I have heard Thee, but now my eye seeth Thee."</p>
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
+essence of God can be seen by the corporeal eye. For it is written
+(<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.19.26" parsed="vul|Job|19|26|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p2.1" passage="Job 19:26">Job
+19:26</scripRef>): "In my flesh I shall see . . . God," and (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:Job.42.5" parsed="vul|Job|42|5|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p2.2" passage="Job 42:5">Job
+42:5</scripRef>), "With the hearing of the ear I have heard Thee, but
+now my eye seeth Thee."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 arg. 1"><a name="28700"><span class=
+"ref">[28700] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 arg. 1</span></a> Ad tertium sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod essentia Dei videri possit oculo
+corporali. Dicitur enim Iob XIX, <i>in carne mea videbo Deum,</i>
+etc.; et XLII, <i>auditu auris audivi te, nunc autem oculus meus
+videt te</i>.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xxix, 29): "Those eyes" (namely the glorified) "will therefore have a greater power of sight, not so much to see more keenly, as some report of the sight of serpents or of eagles (for whatever acuteness of vision is possessed by these creatures, they can see only corporeal things) but to see even incorporeal things." Now whoever can see incorporeal things, can be raised up to see God. Therefore the glorified eye can see
   God.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, God can be seen by man through a vision of the imagination. For it is written: "I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne," etc. (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.6.1" parsed="vul|Isa|6|1|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p4.1" passage="Is. 6:1">Is. 6:1</scripRef>). But an imaginary vision originates from sense; for the imagination is moved by sense to act. Therefore God can be seen by a vision of sense.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Vid. Deum, Ep. cxlvii): "No one has ever seen God either in this life, as He is, nor in the angelic life, as visible things are seen by corporeal vision."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 arg. 2"><a name="28701"><span class=
+"ref">[28701] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
+Augustinus dicit, ultimo de civitate Dei, cap. XXIX, <i>vis itaque
+praepollentior oculorum erit illorum</i> (scilicet glorificatorum),
+<i>non ut acutius videant quam quidam perhibentur videre serpentes
+vel aquilae (quantalibet enim acrimonia cernendi eadem animalia
+vigeant, nihil aliud possunt videre quam corpora), sed ut videant
+et incorporalia</i>. Quicumque autem potest videre incorporalia,
+potest elevari ad videndum Deum. Ergo oculus glorificatus potest
+videre Deum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, God can be
+seen by man through a vision of the imagination. For it is written: "I
+saw the Lord sitting upon a throne," etc. (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:Isa.6.1" parsed="vul|Isa|6|1|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p4.1"
+passage="Is. 6:1">Is. 6:1</scripRef>). But an imaginary vision
+originates from sense; for the imagination is moved by sense to
+act. Therefore God can be seen by a vision of sense.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 arg. 3"><a name="28702"><span class=
+"ref">[28702] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, Deus
+potest videri ab homine visione imaginaria, dicitur enim Isaiae VI,
+<i>vidi dominum sedentem super solium,</i> et cetera. Sed visio
+imaginaria a sensu originem habet, <i>phantasia enim est motus
+factus a sensu secundum actum</i>, ut dicitur in III de anima. Ergo
+Deus sensibili visione videri potest.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Vid. Deum, Ep. cxlvii): "No one
+has ever seen God either in this life, as He is, nor in the angelic
+life, as visible things are seen by corporeal vision."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 s. c."><a name="28703"><span class=
+"ref">[28703] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicit Augustinus, in libro de videndo Deum ad Paulinam,
+<i>Deum nemo vidit unquam, vel in hac vita, sicut ipse est; vel in
+Angelorum vita, sicut visibilia ista quae corporali visione
+cernuntur</i>.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> It is impossible for God to be seen by the sense of sight, or by any other sense, or faculty of the sensitive power. For every such kind of power is the act of a corporeal organ, as will be shown later <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p6.1" href="#FP.ix.FP_Q78">(Q[78])</a>. Now act is proportional to the nature which possesses it. Hence no power of that kind can go beyond corporeal things. For God is incorporeal, as was shown above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p6.2" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A1">Q[3], A[1]</a>). Hence He cannot be seen by the
   sense or the imagination, but only by the intellect.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 co."><a name="28704"><span class=
+"ref">[28704] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod impossibile est Deum videri sensu visus, vel quocumque alio
+sensu aut potentia sensitivae partis. Omnis enim potentia huiusmodi
+est actus corporalis organi, ut infra dicetur. Actus autem
+proportionatur ei cuius est actus. Unde nulla huiusmodi potentia
+potest se extendere ultra corporalia. Deus autem incorporeus est,
+ut supra ostensum est. Unde nec sensu nec imaginatione videri
+potest, sed solo intellectu.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The words, "In my flesh I shall see God my Saviour," do not mean that God will be seen with the eye of the flesh, but that man existing in the flesh after the resurrection will see God. Likewise the words, "Now my eye seeth Thee," are to be understood of the mind's eye, as the Apostle says: "May He give unto you the spirit of wisdom . . . in the knowledge of Him, that the eyes of your heart" may be "enlightened" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Eph.1.17-Eph.1.18" parsed="vul|Eph|1|17|1|18" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p7.1" passage="Eph. 1:17,18">Eph.
   1:17,18</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 ad 1"><a name="28705"><span class=
+"ref">[28705] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod, cum dicitur <i>in carne mea videbo Deum, salvatorem
+meum</i>, non intelligitur quod oculo carnis sit Deum visurus, sed
+quod in carne existens, post resurrectionem, visurus sit Deum.
+Similiter quod dicitur, <i>nunc oculus meus videt te</i>,
+intelligitur de oculo mentis, sicut Ephes. I dicit apostolus,
+<i>det vobis spiritum sapientiae in agnitione eius, illuminatos
+oculos cordis vestri</i>.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Augustine speaks as one inquiring, and conditionally. This appears from what he says previously: "Therefore they will have an altogether different power (viz. the glorified eyes), if they shall see that incorporeal nature;" and afterwards he explains this, saying: "It is very credible, that we shall so see the mundane bodies of the new heaven and the new earth, as to see most clearly God everywhere present, governing all corporeal things, not as we
   now see the invisible things of God as understood by what is made; but as when we see men among whom we live, living and exercising the functions of human life, we do not believe they live, but see it." Hence it is evident how the glorified eyes will see God, as now our eyes see the life of another. But life is not seen with the corporeal eye, as a thing in itself visible, but as the indirect object of the sense; which indeed is not known by sense, but at once, together with sense, by some
-  other cognitive power. But that the divine presence is known by the intellect immediately on the sight of, and through, corporeal things, happens from two causes---viz. from the perspicuity of the intellect, and from the refulgence of the divine glory infused into the body after its renovation.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The essence of God is not seen in a vision of the imagination; but the imagination receives some form representing God according to some mode of similitude; as in the divine Scripture divine things are metaphorically described by means of sensible things.</p>
+  other cognitive power. But that the divine presence is known by the
+intellect immediately on the sight of, and through, corporeal things,
+happens from two causes---viz. from the perspicuity of the intellect,
+and from the refulgence of the divine glory infused into the body
+after its renovation.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 ad 2"><a name="28706"><span class=
+"ref">[28706] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod Augustinus loquitur inquirendo in verbis illis, et
+sub conditione. Quod patet ex hoc quod praemittitur, longe itaque
+potentiae alterius erunt (scilicet oculi glorificati), si per eos
+videbitur incorporea illa natura. Sed postmodum hoc determinat,
+dicens, <i>valde credibile est sic nos visuros mundana tunc corpora
+caeli novi et terrae novae, ut Deum ubique praesentem, et universa
+etiam corporalia gubernantem, clarissima perspicuitate videamus;
+non sicut nunc invisibilia Dei per ea quae facta sunt intellecta
+conspiciuntur; sed sicut homines, inter quos viventes motusque
+vitales exerentes vivimus, mox ut aspicimus, non credimus vivere,
+sed videmus</i>. Ex quo patet quod hoc modo intelligit oculos
+glorificatos Deum visuros, sicut nunc oculi nostri vident alicuius
+vitam. Vita autem non videtur oculo corporali, sicut per se
+visibile, sed sicut sensibile per accidens, quod quidem a sensu non
+cognoscitur, sed statim cum sensu ab aliqua alia virtute
+cognoscitiva. Quod autem statim, visis corporibus, divina
+praesentia ex eis cognoscatur per intellectum, ex duobus contingit,
+scilicet ex perspicacitate intellectus; et ex refulgentia divinae
+claritatis in corporibus innovatis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A3-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The
+essence of God is not seen in a vision of the imagination; but the
+imagination receives some form representing God according to some mode
+of similitude; as in the divine Scripture divine things are
+metaphorically described by means of sensible things.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 3 ad 3"><a name="28707"><span class=
+"ref">[28707] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 3 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod in visione imaginaria non videtur Dei essentia, sed
+aliqua forma in imaginatione formatur, repraesentans Deum secundum
+aliquem modum similitudinis, prout in Scripturis divinis divina per
+res sensibiles metaphorice describuntur.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7581,19 +7927,87 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that a created intellect can see the Divine essence by its own natural power. For Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv): "An angel is a pure mirror, most clear, receiving, if it is right to say so, the whole beauty of God." But if a reflection is seen, the original thing is seen. Therefore since an angel by his natural power understands himself, it seems that by his own natural power he understands the Divine essence.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, what is supremely visible, is made less visible to us by reason of our defective corporeal or intellectual sight. But the angelic intellect has no such defect. Therefore, since God is supremely intelligible in Himself, it seems that in like manner He is supremely so to an angel. Therefore, if he can understand other intelligible things by his own natural power, much more can he understand God.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, corporeal sense cannot be raised up to understand incorporeal substance, which is above its nature. Therefore if to see the essence of God is above the nature of every created intellect, it follows that no created intellect can reach up to see the essence of God at all. But this is false, as appears from what is said above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p4.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1">(A[1])</a>. Therefore it seems that it is natural for a created intellect to see the Divine essence.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> It is written: "The grace of God is life everlasting" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.6.23" parsed="vul|Rom|6|23|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p5.1" passage="Rom. 6:23">Rom. 6:23</scripRef>). But life everlasting consists in the vision of the Divine essence, according to the words: "This is eternal life, that they may know Thee the only true God," etc. (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.17.3" parsed="vul|John|17|3|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p5.2" passage="Jn. 17:3">Jn. 17:3</scripRef>). Therefore to see the essence of God is possible to the created intellect by grace, and not by nature.</p>
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that a
+created intellect can see the Divine essence by its own natural
+power. For Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv): "An angel is a pure mirror,
+most clear, receiving, if it is right to say so, the whole beauty of
+God." But if a reflection is seen, the original thing is
+seen. Therefore since an angel by his natural power understands
+himself, it seems that by his own natural power he understands the
+Divine essence.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 arg. 1"><a name="28708"><span class=
+"ref">[28708] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quartum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod aliquis intellectus creatus per sua
+naturalia divinam essentiam videre possit. Dicit enim Dionysius,
+cap. IV de Div. Nom., quod Angelus est speculum purum, clarissimum,
+<i>suscipiens totam, si fas est dicere, pulchritudinem Dei</i>. Sed
+unumquodque videtur dum videtur eius speculum. Cum igitur Angelus
+per sua naturalia intelligat seipsum, videtur quod etiam per sua
+naturalia intelligat divinam essentiam.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, what is
+supremely visible, is made less visible to us by reason of our
+defective corporeal or intellectual sight. But the angelic intellect
+has no such defect. Therefore, since God is supremely intelligible in
+Himself, it seems that in like manner He is supremely so to an
+angel. Therefore, if he can understand other intelligible things by
+his own natural power, much more can he understand God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 arg. 2"><a name="28709"><span class=
+"ref">[28709] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, illud
+quod est maxime visibile, fit minus visibile nobis propter defectum
+nostri visus, vel corporalis vel intellectualis. Sed intellectus
+Angeli non patitur aliquem defectum. Cum ergo Deus secundum se sit
+maxime intelligibilis, videtur quod ab Angelo sit maxime
+intelligibilis. Si igitur alia intelligibilia per sua naturalia
+intelligere potest, multo magis Deum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, corporeal
+sense cannot be raised up to understand incorporeal substance, which
+is above its nature. Therefore if to see the essence of God is above
+the nature of every created intellect, it follows that no created
+intellect can reach up to see the essence of God at all. But this is
+false, as appears from what is said above <a xml:link="simple"
+shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p4.1"
+href="#FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A1">(A[1])</a>. Therefore it seems that it
+is natural for a created intellect to see the Divine essence.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 arg. 3"><a name="28710"><span class=
+"ref">[28710] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
+sensus corporeus non potest elevari ad intelligendam substantiam
+incorpoream, quia est supra eius naturam. Si igitur videre Deum per
+essentiam sit supra naturam cuiuslibet intellectus creati, videtur
+quod nullus intellectus creatus ad videndum Dei essentiam
+pertingere possit, quod est erroneum, ut ex supradictis patet.
+Videtur ergo quod intellectui creato sit naturale divinam essentiam
+videre.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> It is written: "The grace of God is life
+everlasting" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.6.23"
+parsed="vul|Rom|6|23|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p5.1"
+passage="Rom. 6:23">Rom. 6:23</scripRef>). But life everlasting
+consists in the vision of the Divine essence, according to the words:
+"This is eternal life, that they may know Thee the only true God,"
+etc. (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.17.3"
+parsed="vul|John|17|3|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p5.2"
+passage="Jn. 17:3">Jn. 17:3</scripRef>). Therefore to see the essence
+of God is possible to the created intellect by grace, and not by
+nature.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 s. c."><a name="28711"><span class=
+"ref">[28711] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicitur Rom. VI, <i>gratia Dei vita aeterna</i>. Sed vita
+aeterna consistit in visione divinae essentiae, secundum illud
+Ioan. XVII, <i>haec est vita aeterna, ut cognoscant te solum verum
+Deum,</i> et cetera. Ergo videre Dei essentiam convenit intellectui
+creato per gratiam, et non per naturam.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
@@ -7601,21 +8015,115 @@
   the knower. Now the mode of being of things is manifold. For some things have being only in this one individual matter; as all bodies. But others are subsisting natures, not residing in matter at all, which, however, are not their own existence, but receive it; and these are the incorporeal beings, called angels. But to God alone does it belong to be His own subsistent being. Therefore what exists only in individual matter we know naturally, forasmuch as our soul, whereby we know, is the form
   of certain matter. Now our soul possesses two cognitive powers; one is the act of a corporeal organ, which naturally knows things existing in individual matter; hence sense knows only the singular. But there is another kind of cognitive power in the soul, called the intellect; and this is not the act of any corporeal organ. Wherefore the intellect naturally knows natures which exist only in individual matter; not as they are in such individual matter, but according as they are abstracted
   therefrom by the considering act of the intellect; hence it follows that through the intellect we can understand these objects as universal; and this is beyond the power of the sense. Now the angelic intellect naturally knows natures that are not in matter; but this is beyond the power of the intellect of our soul in the state of its present life, united as it is to the body. It follows therefore that to know self-subsistent being is natural to the divine intellect alone; and this is beyond the
-  natural power of any created intellect; for no creature is its own existence, forasmuch as its existence is participated. Therefore the created intellect cannot see the essence of God, unless God by His grace unites Himself to the created intellect, as an object made intelligible to it.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> This mode of knowing God is natural to an angel---namely, to know Him by His own likeness refulgent in the angel himself. But to know God by any created similitude is not to know the essence of God, as was shown above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2">(A[2])</a>. Hence it does not follow that an angel can know the essence of God by his own power.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The angelic intellect is not defective, if defect be taken to mean privation, as if it were without anything which it ought to have. But if the defect be taken negatively, in that sense every creature is defective, when compared with God; forasmuch as it does not possess the excellence which is in God.</p>
+  natural power of any created intellect; for no creature is its own
+existence, forasmuch as its existence is participated. Therefore the
+created intellect cannot see the essence of God, unless God by His
+grace unites Himself to the created intellect, as an object made
+intelligible to it.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 co."><a name="28712"><span class=
+"ref">[28712] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod impossibile est quod aliquis intellectus creatus per sua
+naturalia essentiam Dei videat. Cognitio enim contingit secundum
+quod cognitum est in cognoscente. Cognitum autem est in cognoscente
+secundum modum cognoscentis. Unde cuiuslibet cognoscentis cognitio
+est secundum modum suae naturae. Si igitur modus essendi alicuius
+rei cognitae excedat modum naturae cognoscentis, oportet quod
+cognitio illius rei sit supra naturam illius cognoscentis. Est
+autem multiplex modus essendi rerum. Quaedam enim sunt, quorum
+natura non habet esse nisi in hac materia individuali, et huiusmodi
+sunt omnia corporalia. Quaedam vero sunt, quorum naturae sunt per
+se subsistentes, non in materia aliqua, quae tamen non sunt suum
+esse, sed sunt esse habentes, et huiusmodi sunt substantiae
+incorporeae, quas Angelos dicimus. Solius autem Dei proprius modus
+essendi est, ut sit suum esse subsistens. Ea igitur quae non habent
+esse nisi in materia individuali, cognoscere est nobis connaturale,
+eo quod anima nostra, per quam cognoscimus, est forma alicuius
+materiae. Quae tamen habet duas virtutes cognoscitivas. Unam, quae
+est actus alicuius corporei organi. Et huic connaturale est
+cognoscere res secundum quod sunt in materia individuali, unde
+sensus non cognoscit nisi singularia. Alia vero virtus cognoscitiva
+eius est intellectus, qui non est actus alicuius organi corporalis.
+Unde per intellectum connaturale est nobis cognoscere naturas, quae
+quidem non habent esse nisi in materia individuali; non tamen
+secundum quod sunt in materia individuali, sed secundum quod
+abstrahuntur ab ea per considerationem intellectus. Unde secundum
+intellectum possumus cognoscere huiusmodi res in universali, quod
+est supra facultatem sensus. Intellectui autem angelico connaturale
+est cognoscere naturas non in materia existentes. Quod est supra
+naturalem facultatem intellectus animae humanae, secundum statum
+praesentis vitae, quo corpori unitur. Relinquitur ergo quod
+cognoscere ipsum esse subsistens, sit connaturale soli intellectui
+divino, et quod sit supra facultatem naturalem cuiuslibet
+intellectus creati, quia nulla creatura est suum esse, sed habet
+esse participatum. Non igitur potest intellectus creatus Deum per
+essentiam videre, nisi inquantum Deus per suam gratiam se
+intellectui creato coniungit, ut intelligibile ab ipso.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> This mode
+of knowing God is natural to an angel---namely, to know Him by His own
+likeness refulgent in the angel himself. But to know God by any
+created similitude is not to know the essence of God, as was shown
+above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p7.1"
+href="#FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2">(A[2])</a>. Hence it does not follow
+that an angel can know the essence of God by his own power.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 ad 1"><a name="28713"><span class=
+"ref">[28713] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod iste modus cognoscendi Deum, est Angelo connaturalis,
+ut scilicet cognoscat eum per similitudinem eius in ipso Angelo
+refulgentem. Sed cognoscere Deum per aliquam similitudinem creatam,
+non est cognoscere essentiam Dei, ut supra ostensum est. Unde non
+sequitur quod Angelus per sua naturalia possit cognoscere essentiam
+Dei.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> The
+angelic intellect is not defective, if defect be taken to mean
+privation, as if it were without anything which it ought to have. But
+if the defect be taken negatively, in that sense every creature is
+defective, when compared with God; forasmuch as it does not possess
+the excellence which is in God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 ad 2"><a name="28714"><span class=
+"ref">[28714] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod intellectus Angeli non habet defectum, si defectus
+accipiatur privative, ut scilicet careat eo quod habere debet. Si
+vero accipiatur negative, sic quaelibet creatura invenitur
+deficiens, Deo comparata, dum non habet illam excellentiam quae
+invenitur in Deo.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The sense of sight, as being altogether material, cannot be raised up to immateriality. But our intellect, or the angelic intellect, inasmuch as it is elevated above matter in its own nature, can be raised up above its own nature to a higher level by grace. The proof is, that sight cannot in any way know abstractedly what it knows concretely; for in no way can it perceive a nature except as this one particular nature; whereas our intellect is able to
   consider abstractedly what it knows concretely. Now although it knows things which have a form residing in matter, still it resolves the composite into both of these elements; and it considers the form separately by itself. Likewise, also, the intellect of an angel, although it naturally knows the concrete in any nature, still it is able to separate that existence by its intellect; since it knows that the thing itself is one thing, and its existence is another. Since therefore the created
-  intellect is naturally capable of apprehending the concrete form, and the concrete being abstractedly, by way of a kind of resolution of parts; it can by grace be raised up to know separate subsisting substance, and separate subsisting existence.</p>
+  intellect is naturally capable of apprehending the concrete form,
+and the concrete being abstractedly, by way of a kind of resolution of
+parts; it can by grace be raised up to know separate subsisting
+substance, and separate subsisting existence.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 4 ad 3"><a name="28715"><span class=
+"ref">[28715] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 4 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod sensus visus, quia omnino materialis est, nullo modo
+elevari potest ad aliquid immateriale. Sed intellectus noster vel
+angelicus, quia secundum naturam a materia aliqualiter elevatus
+est, potest ultra suam naturam per gratiam ad aliquid altius
+elevari. Et huius signum est, quia visus nullo modo potest in
+abstractione cognoscere id quod in concretione cognoscit, nullo
+enim modo potest percipere naturam, nisi ut hanc. Sed intellectus
+noster potest in abstractione considerare quod in concretione
+cognoscit. Etsi enim cognoscat res habentes formam in materia,
+tamen resolvit compositum in utrumque, et considerat ipsam formam
+per se. Et similiter intellectus Angeli, licet connaturale sit ei
+cognoscere esse concretum in aliqua natura, tamen potest ipsum esse
+secernere per intellectum, dum cognoscit quod aliud est ipse, et
+aliud est suum esse. Et ideo, cum intellectus creatus per suam
+naturam natus sit apprehendere formam concretam et esse concretum
+in abstractione, per modum resolutionis cuiusdam, potest per
+gratiam elevari ut cognoscat substantiam separatam subsistentem, et
+esse separatum subsistens.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7629,37 +8137,151 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the created intellect does not need any created light in order to see the essence of God. For what is of itself lucid in sensible things does not require any other light in order to be seen. Therefore the same applies to intelligible things. Now God is intelligible light. Therefore He is not seen by means of any created light.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, if God is seen through a medium, He is not seen in His essence. But if seen by any created light, He is seen through a medium. Therefore He is not seen in His essence.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, what is created can be natural to some creature. Therefore if the essence of God is seen through any created light, such a light can be made natural to some other creature; and thus, that creature would not need any other light to see God; which is impossible. Therefore it is not necessary that every creature should require a superadded light in order to see the essence of God.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> It is written: "In Thy light we shall see light" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.35.10" parsed="vul|Ps|35|10|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p5.1" passage="Ps. 35:10">Ps. 35:10</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that the
+created intellect does not need any created light in order to see the
+essence of God. For what is of itself lucid in sensible things does
+not require any other light in order to be seen. Therefore the same
+applies to intelligible things. Now God is intelligible
+light. Therefore He is not seen by means of any created light.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 arg. 1"><a name="28716"><span class=
+"ref">[28716] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 arg. 1</span></a> Ad quintum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod intellectus creatus ad videndum essentiam
+Dei aliquo lumine creato non indigeat. Illud enim quod est per se
+lucidum in rebus sensibilibus, alio lumine non indiget ut videatur,
+ergo nec in intelligibilibus. Sed Deus est lux intelligibilis. Ergo
+non videtur per aliquod lumen creatum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, if God is
+seen through a medium, He is not seen in His essence. But if seen by
+any created light, He is seen through a medium. Therefore He is not
+seen in His essence.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 arg. 2"><a name="28717"><span class=
+"ref">[28717] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, cum
+Deus videtur per medium, non videtur per suam essentiam. Sed cum
+videtur per aliquod lumen creatum, videtur per medium. Ergo non
+videtur per suam essentiam.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, what is
+created can be natural to some creature. Therefore if the essence of
+God is seen through any created light, such a light can be made
+natural to some other creature; and thus, that creature would not need
+any other light to see God; which is impossible. Therefore it is not
+necessary that every creature should require a superadded light in
+order to see the essence of God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 arg. 3"><a name="28718"><span class=
+"ref">[28718] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, illud
+quod est creatum, nihil prohibet alicui creaturae esse naturale. Si
+ergo per aliquod lumen creatum Dei essentia videtur, poterit illud
+lumen esse naturale alicui creaturae. Et ita illa creatura non
+indigebit aliquo alio lumine ad videndum Deum, quod est
+impossibile. Non est ergo necessarium quod omnis creatura ad
+videndum Dei essentiam lumen superadditum requirat.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> It is written: "In Thy light we shall see light"
+(<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Ps.35.10" parsed="vul|Ps|35|10|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p5.1"
+passage="Ps. 35:10">Ps. 35:10</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 s. c."><a name="28719"><span class=
+"ref">[28719] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicitur in Psalmo, <i>in lumine tuo videbimus lumen</i>.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Everything which is raised up to what exceeds its nature, must be prepared by some disposition above its nature; as, for example, if air is to receive the form of fire, it must be prepared by some disposition for such a form. But when any created intellect sees the essence of God, the essence of God itself becomes the intelligible form of the intellect. Hence it is necessary that some supernatural disposition should be added to the intellect in order that it
   may be raised up to such a great and sublime height. Now since the natural power of the created intellect does not avail to enable it to see the essence of God, as was shown in the preceding article, it is necessary that the power of understanding should be added by divine grace. Now this increase of the intellectual powers is called the illumination of the intellect, as we also call the intelligible object itself by the name of light of illumination. And this is the light spoken of in the
-  Apocalypse (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Rev.21.23" parsed="vul|Rev|21|23|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p6.1" passage="Apoc. 21:23">Apoc. 21:23</scripRef>): "The glory of God hath enlightened it"---viz. the society of the blessed who see God. By this light the blessed are made "deiform"---i.e. like to God, according to the saying: "When He shall appear we shall be like to Him, and [Vulg.: 'because'] we shall see Him as He is" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.2.2" parsed="vul|1John|2|2|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p6.2" passage="1 Jn. 2:2">1 Jn. 2:2</scripRef>).</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The created light is necessary to see the essence of God, not in order to make the essence of God intelligible, which is of itself intelligible, but in order to enable the intellect to understand in the same way as a habit makes a power abler to act. Even so corporeal light is necessary as regards external sight, inasmuch as it makes the medium actually transparent, and susceptible of color.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> This light is required to see the divine essence, not as a similitude in which God is seen, but as a perfection of the intellect, strengthening it to see God. Therefore it may be said that this light is to be described not as a medium in which God is seen, but as one by which He is seen; and such a medium does not take away the immediate vision of God.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The disposition to the form of fire can be natural only to the subject of that form. Hence the light of glory cannot be natural to a creature unless the creature has a divine nature; which is impossible. But by this light the rational creature is made deiform, as is said in this article.</p>
+  Apocalypse (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Rev.21.23"
+parsed="vul|Rev|21|23|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p6.1"
+passage="Apoc. 21:23">Apoc. 21:23</scripRef>): "The glory of God hath
+enlightened it"---viz. the society of the blessed who see God. By this
+light the blessed are made "deiform"---i.e. like to God, according to
+the saying: "When He shall appear we shall be like to Him, and [Vulg.:
+'because'] we shall see Him as He is" (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.2.2" parsed="vul|1John|2|2|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p6.2" passage="1 Jn. 2:2">1
+Jn. 2:2</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 co."><a name="28720"><span class=
+"ref">[28720] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod omne quod elevatur ad aliquid quod excedit suam naturam,
+oportet quod disponatur aliqua dispositione quae sit supra suam
+naturam, sicut, si aer debeat accipere formam ignis, oportet quod
+disponatur aliqua dispositione ad talem formam. Cum autem aliquis
+intellectus creatus videt Deum per essentiam, ipsa essentia Dei fit
+forma intelligibilis intellectus. Unde oportet quod aliqua
+dispositio supernaturalis ei superaddatur, ad hoc quod elevetur in
+tantam sublimitatem. Cum igitur virtus naturalis intellectus creati
+non sufficiat ad Dei essentiam videndam, ut ostensum est, oportet
+quod ex divina gratia superaccrescat ei virtus intelligendi. Et hoc
+augmentum virtutis intellectivae illuminationem intellectus
+vocamus; sicut et ipsum intelligibile vocatur lumen vel lux. Et
+istud est lumen de quo dicitur Apoc. XXI, <i>quod claritas Dei
+illuminabit eam</i>, scilicet societatem beatorum Deum videntium.
+Et secundum hoc lumen efficiuntur deiformes, idest Deo similes;
+secundum illud I Ioan. III, <i>cum apparuerit, similes ei erimus,
+et videbimus eum sicuti est</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The
+created light is necessary to see the essence of God, not in order to
+make the essence of God intelligible, which is of itself intelligible,
+but in order to enable the intellect to understand in the same way as
+a habit makes a power abler to act. Even so corporeal light is
+necessary as regards external sight, inasmuch as it makes the medium
+actually transparent, and susceptible of color.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 ad 1"><a name="28721"><span class=
+"ref">[28721] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod lumen creatum est necessarium ad videndum Dei
+essentiam, non quod per hoc lumen Dei essentia intelligibilis fiat,
+quae secundum se intelligibilis est, sed ad hoc quod intellectus
+fiat potens ad intelligendum, per modum quo potentia fit potentior
+ad operandum per habitum, sicut etiam et lumen corporale
+necessarium est in visu exteriori, inquantum facit medium
+transparens in actu, ut possit moveri a colore.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> This light
+is required to see the divine essence, not as a similitude in which
+God is seen, but as a perfection of the intellect, strengthening it to
+see God. Therefore it may be said that this light is to be described
+not as a medium in which God is seen, but as one by which He is seen;
+and such a medium does not take away the immediate vision of God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 ad 2"><a name="28722"><span class=
+"ref">[28722] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod lumen istud non requiritur ad videndum Dei essentiam
+quasi similitudo in qua Deus videatur, sed quasi perfectio quaedam
+intellectus, confortans ipsum ad videndum Deum. Et ideo potest dici
+quod non est medium in quo Deus videatur, sed sub quo videtur. Et
+hoc non tollit immediatam visionem Dei.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A5-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The
+disposition to the form of fire can be natural only to the subject of
+that form. Hence the light of glory cannot be natural to a creature
+unless the creature has a divine nature; which is impossible. But by
+this light the rational creature is made deiform, as is said in this
+article.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 5 ad 3"><a name="28723"><span class=
+"ref">[28723] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 5 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod dispositio ad formam ignis non potest esse naturalis
+nisi habenti formam ignis. Unde lumen gloriae non potest esse
+naturale creaturae, nisi creatura esset naturae divinae, quod est
+impossibile. Per hoc enim lumen fit creatura rationalis deiformis,
+ut dictum est.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7673,41 +8295,165 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that of those who see the essence of God, one does not see more perfectly than another. For it is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.3.2" parsed="vul|1John|3|2|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p2.1" passage="1 Jn. 3:2">1 Jn. 3:2</scripRef>): "We shall see Him as He is." But He is only in one way. Therefore He will be seen by all in one way only; and therefore He will not be seen more perfectly by one and less perfectly by another.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine says (Octog. Tri. Quaest. qu. xxxii): "One person cannot see one and the same thing more perfectly than another." But all who see the essence of God, understand the Divine essence, for God is seen by the intellect and not by sense, as was shown above (A[3] ). Therefore of those who see the divine essence, one does not see more clearly than another.</p>
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that of
+those who see the essence of God, one does not see more perfectly than
+another. For it is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1John.3.2"
+parsed="vul|1John|3|2|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p2.1" passage="1
+Jn. 3:2">1 Jn. 3:2</scripRef>): "We shall see Him as He is." But He is
+only in one way. Therefore He will be seen by all in one way only; and
+therefore He will not be seen more perfectly by one and less perfectly
+by another.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 arg. 1"><a name="28724"><span class=
+"ref">[28724] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 arg. 1</span></a> Ad sextum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod videntium essentiam Dei unus alio
+perfectius non videat. Dicitur enim I Ioan. III, <i>videbimus eum
+sicuti est</i>. Sed ipse uno modo est. Ergo uno modo videbitur ab
+omnibus. Non ergo perfectius et minus perfecte.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine
+says (Octog. Tri. Quaest. qu. xxxii): "One person cannot see one and
+the same thing more perfectly than another." But all who see the
+essence of God, understand the Divine essence, for God is seen by the
+intellect and not by sense, as was shown above (A[3] ). Therefore of
+those who see the divine essence, one does not see more clearly than
+another.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 arg. 2"><a name="28725"><span class=
+"ref">[28725] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
+Augustinus dicit, in libro octoginta trium qq., quod unam rem non
+potest unus alio plus intelligere. Sed omnes videntes Deum per
+essentiam, intelligunt Dei essentiam, intellectu enim videtur Deus,
+non sensu, ut supra habitum est. Ergo videntium divinam essentiam
+unus alio non clarius videt.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, That anything be seen more perfectly than another can happen in two ways: either on the part of the visible object, or on the part of the visual power of the seer. On the part of the object, it may so happen because the object is received more perfectly in the seer, that is, according to the greater perfection of the similitude; but this does not apply to the present question, for God is present to the intellect seeing Him not by way of similitude,
-  but by His essence. It follows then that if one sees Him more perfectly than another, this happens according to the difference of the intellectual power; thus it follows too that the one whose intellectual power is higher, will see Him the more clearly; and this is incongruous; since equality with angels is promised to men as their beatitude.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> Eternal life consists in the vision of God, according to<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.17.3" parsed="vul|John|17|3|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p5.1" passage=" Jn. 17:3"> Jn. 17:3</scripRef>: "This is eternal life, that they may know Thee the only true God," etc. Therefore if all saw the essence of God equally in eternal life, all would be equal; the contrary to which is declared by the Apostle: "Star differs from star in glory" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.15.41" parsed="vul|1Cor|15|41|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p5.2" passage="1 Cor. 15:41">1 Cor. 15:41</scripRef>).</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
+  but by His essence. It follows then that if one sees Him more
+perfectly than another, this happens according to the difference of
+the intellectual power; thus it follows too that the one whose
+intellectual power is higher, will see Him the more clearly; and this
+is incongruous; since equality with angels is promised to men as their
+beatitude.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 arg. 3"><a name="28726"><span class=
+"ref">[28726] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, quod
+aliquid altero perfectius videatur, ex duobus contingere potest,
+vel ex parte obiecti visibilis; vel ex parte potentiae visivae
+videntis. Ex parte autem obiecti, per hoc quod obiectum perfectius
+in vidente recipitur, scilicet secundum perfectiorem similitudinem.
+Quod in proposito locum non habet, Deus enim non per aliquam
+similitudinem, sed per eius essentiam praesens est intellectui
+essentiam eius videnti. Relinquitur ergo quod, si unus alio
+perfectius eum videat, quod hoc sit secundum differentiam potentiae
+intellectivae. Et ita sequitur quod cuius potentia intellectiva
+naturaliter est sublimior, clarius eum videat. Quod est
+inconveniens, cum hominibus promittatur in beatitudine aequalitas
+Angelorum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> Eternal life consists in the vision of God,
+according to<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:John.17.3"
+parsed="vul|John|17|3|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p5.1" passage="
+Jn. 17:3"> Jn. 17:3</scripRef>: "This is eternal life, that they may
+know Thee the only true God," etc. Therefore if all saw the essence of
+God equally in eternal life, all would be equal; the contrary to which
+is declared by the Apostle: "Star differs from star in glory"
+(<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.15.41" parsed="vul|1Cor|15|41|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p5.2" passage="1 Cor. 15:41">1
+Cor. 15:41</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 s. c."><a name="28727"><span class=
+"ref">[28727] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod vita aeterna in visione Dei consistit, secundum illud Ioan.
+XVII, <i>haec est vita aeterna,</i> et cetera. Ergo, si omnes
+aequaliter Dei essentiam vident, in vita aeterna omnes erunt
+aequales. Cuius contrarium dicit apostolus, I Cor. XV, <i>stella
+differt a stella in claritate</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<div xml:lang="en"
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Of those who see the essence of God, one sees Him more perfectly than another. This, indeed, does not take place as if one had a more perfect similitude of God than another, since that vision will not spring from any similitude; but it will take place because one intellect will have a greater power or faculty to see God than another. The faculty of seeing God, however, does not belong to the created intellect naturally, but is given to it by the light of
   glory, which establishes the intellect in a kind of "deiformity," as appears from what is said above, in the preceding article.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p7"> Hence the intellect which has more of the light of glory will see God the more perfectly; and he will have a fuller participation of the light of glory who has more charity; because where there is the greater charity, there is the more desire; and desire in a certain degree makes the one desiring apt and prepared to receive the object desired. Hence he who possesses the more charity, will see God the more perfectly, and will be the more beatified.</p>
 </div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> In the words,"We shall see Him as He is," the conjunction "as" determines the mode of vision on the part of the object seen, so that the meaning is, we shall see Him to be as He is, because we shall see His existence, which is His essence. But it does not determine the mode of vision on the part of the one seeing; as if the meaning was that the mode of seeing God will be as perfect as is the perfect mode of God's existence.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p9"> Thus appears the answer to the Second Objection. For when it is said that one intellect does not understand one and the same thing better than another, this would be true if referred to the mode of the thing understood, for whoever understands it otherwise than it really is, does not truly understand it, but not if referred to the mode of understanding, for the understanding of one is more perfect than the understanding of another.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The diversity of seeing will not arise on the part of the object seen, for the same object will be presented to all---viz. the essence of God; nor will it arise from the diverse participation of the object seen by different similitudes; but it will arise on the part of the diverse faculty of the intellect, not, indeed, the natural faculty, but the glorified faculty.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 co."><a name="28728"><span class=
+"ref">[28728] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod videntium Deum per essentiam unus alio perfectius eum videbit.
+Quod quidem non erit per aliquam Dei similitudinem perfectiorem in
+uno quam in alio, cum illa visio non sit futura per aliquam
+similitudinem, ut ostensum est. Sed hoc erit per hoc, quod
+intellectus unius habebit maiorem virtutem seu facultatem ad
+videndum Deum, quam alterius. Facultas autem videndi Deum non
+competit intellectui creato secundum suam naturam, sed per lumen
+gloriae, quod intellectum in quadam deiformitate constituit, ut ex
+superioribus patet. Unde intellectus plus participans de lumine
+gloriae, perfectius Deum videbit. Plus autem participabit de lumine
+gloriae, qui plus habet de caritate, quia ubi est maior caritas,
+ibi est maius desiderium; et desiderium quodammodo facit
+desiderantem aptum et paratum ad susceptionem desiderati. Unde qui
+plus habebit de caritate, perfectius Deum videbit, et beatior
+erit.</p></div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> In the
+words,"We shall see Him as He is," the conjunction "as" determines the
+mode of vision on the part of the object seen, so that the meaning is,
+we shall see Him to be as He is, because we shall see His existence,
+which is His essence. But it does not determine the mode of vision on
+the part of the one seeing; as if the meaning was that the mode of
+seeing God will be as perfect as is the perfect mode of God's
+existence.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 ad 1"><a name="28729"><span class=
+"ref">[28729] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod, cum dicitur videbimus eum sicuti est, hoc adverbium
+sicuti determinat modum visionis ex parte rei visae ut sit sensus,
+videbimus eum ita esse sicuti est, quia ipsum esse eius videbimus,
+quod est eius essentia. Non autem determinat modum visionis ex
+parte videntis, ut sit sensus, quod ita erit perfectus modus
+videndi, sicut est in Deo perfectus modus essendi.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p9"> Thus
+appears the answer to the Second Objection. For when it is said that
+one intellect does not understand one and the same thing better than
+another, this would be true if referred to the mode of the thing
+understood, for whoever understands it otherwise than it really is,
+does not truly understand it, but not if referred to the mode of
+understanding, for the understanding of one is more perfect than the
+understanding of another.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 ad 2"><a name="28730"><span class=
+"ref">[28730] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 ad 2</span></a> Et per hoc etiam
+patet solutio ad secundum. Cum enim dicitur quod rem unam unus alio
+melius non intelligit, hoc habet veritatem si referatur ad modum
+rei intellectae, quia quicumque intelligit rem esse aliter quam
+sit, non vere intelligit. Non autem si referatur ad modum
+intelligendi, quia intelligere unius est perfectius quam
+intelligere alterius.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A6-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The
+diversity of seeing will not arise on the part of the object seen, for
+the same object will be presented to all---viz. the essence of God;
+nor will it arise from the diverse participation of the object seen by
+different similitudes; but it will arise on the part of the diverse
+faculty of the intellect, not, indeed, the natural faculty, but the
+glorified faculty.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 6 ad 3"><a name="28731"><span class=
+"ref">[28731] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 6 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod diversitas videndi non erit ex parte obiecti, quia
+idem obiectum omnibus praesentabitur, scilicet Dei essentia, nec ex
+diversa participatione obiecti per differentes similitudines, sed
+erit per diversam facultatem intellectus, non quidem naturalem, sed
+gloriosam, ut dictum est.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7723,46 +8469,166 @@
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that those who see the divine essence, comprehend God. For the Apostle says (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Phil.3.12" parsed="vul|Phil|3|12|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p2.1" passage="Phil. 3:12">Phil. 3:12</scripRef>): "But I follow after, if I may by any means comprehend [Douay: 'apprehend']." But the Apostle did not follow in vain; for he said (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.9.26" parsed="vul|1Cor|9|26|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p2.2" passage="1 Cor. 9:26">1 Cor. 9:26</scripRef>): "I . . . so run, not as at an uncertainty." Therefore he comprehended; and in the same way, others also, whom he invites to do the same, saying: "So run that you may
   comprehend."</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine says (De Vid. Deum, Ep. cxlvii): "That is comprehended which is so seen as a whole, that nothing of it is hidden from the seer." But if God is seen in His essence, He is seen whole, and nothing of Him is hidden from the seer, since God is simple. Therefore whoever sees His essence, comprehends Him.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 arg. 1"><a name="28732"><span class=
+"ref">[28732] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 arg. 1</span></a> Ad septimum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod videntes Deum per essentiam ipsum
+comprehendant. Dicit enim apostolus, Philipp. III, <i>sequor autem
+si quo modo comprehendam</i>. Non autem frustra sequebatur, dicit
+enim ipse, I Cor. IX, <i>sic curro, non quasi in incertum</i>. Ergo
+ipse comprehendit, et eadem ratione alii, quos ad hoc invitat,
+dicens, <i>sic currite, ut comprehendatis</i>.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine
+says (De Vid. Deum, Ep. cxlvii): "That is comprehended which is so
+seen as a whole, that nothing of it is hidden from the seer." But if
+God is seen in His essence, He is seen whole, and nothing of Him is
+hidden from the seer, since God is simple. Therefore whoever sees His
+essence, comprehends Him.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 arg. 2"><a name="28733"><span class=
+"ref">[28733] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, ut
+dicit Augustinus in libro de videndo Deum ad Paulinam, <i>illud
+comprehenditur, quod ita totum videtur, ut nihil eius lateat
+videntem</i>. Sed si Deus per essentiam videtur, totus videtur, et
+nihil eius latet videntem; cum Deus sit simplex. Ergo a quocumque
+videtur per essentiam, comprehenditur.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, if we say that He is seen as a "whole," but not "wholly," it may be contrarily urged that "wholly" refers either to the mode of the seer, or to the mode of the thing seen. But he who sees the essence of God, sees Him wholly, if the mode of the thing seen is considered; forasmuch as he sees Him as He is; also, likewise, he sees Him wholly if the mode of the seer is meant, forasmuch as the intellect will with its full power see the Divine essence.
-  Therefore all who see the essence of God see Him wholly; therefore they comprehend Him.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> It is written: "O most mighty, great, and powerful, the Lord of hosts is Thy Name. Great in counsel, and incomprehensible in thought" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Jer.32.18-Jer.32.19" parsed="vul|Jer|32|18|32|19" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p5.1" passage="Jer. 32:18,19">Jer. 32:18,19</scripRef>). Therefore He cannot be comprehended.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
+  Therefore all who see the essence of God see Him wholly; therefore
+they comprehend Him.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 arg. 3"><a name="28734"><span class=
+"ref">[28734] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 arg. 3</span></a> Si dicatur quod
+videtur totus, sed non totaliter, contra, totaliter vel dicit modum
+videntis, vel modum rei visae. Sed ille qui videt Deum per
+essentiam, videt eum totaliter, si significetur modus rei visae,
+quia videt eum sicuti est, ut dictum est. Similiter videt eum
+totaliter, si significetur modus videntis, quia tota virtute sua
+intellectus Dei essentiam videbit. Quilibet ergo videns Deum per
+essentiam, totaliter eum videbit. Ergo eum comprehendet.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> It is written: "O most mighty, great, and powerful,
+the Lord of hosts is Thy Name. Great in counsel, and incomprehensible
+in thought" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Jer.32.18-Jer.32.19"
+parsed="vul|Jer|32|18|32|19" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p5.1"
+passage="Jer. 32:18,19">Jer. 32:18,19</scripRef>). Therefore He cannot
+be comprehended.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 s. c."><a name="28735"><span class=
+"ref">[28735] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicitur Ierem. XXXII, <i>fortissime, magne, potens, dominus
+exercituum nomen tibi; magnus consilio, et incomprehensibilis
+cogitatu</i>. Ergo comprehendi non potest.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<div xml:lang="en">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> It is impossible for any created intellect to comprehend God; yet "for the mind to attain to God in some degree is great beatitude," as Augustine says (De Verb. Dim., Serm. xxxvii).</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p7"> In proof of this we must consider that what is comprehended is perfectly known; and that is perfectly known which is known so far as it can be known. Thus, if anything which is capable of scientific demonstration is held only by an opinion resting on a probably proof, it is not comprehended; as, for instance, if anyone knows by scientific demonstration that a triangle has three angles equal to two right angles, he comprehends that truth; whereas if anyone accepts it as a
   probable opinion because wise men or most men teach it, he cannot be said to comprehend the thing itself, because he does not attain to that perfect mode of knowledge of which it is intrinsically capable. But no created intellect can attain to that perfect mode of the knowledge of the Divine intellect whereof it is intrinsically capable. Which thus appears---Everything is knowable according to its actuality. But God, whose being is infinite, as was shown above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q7">(Q[7])</a> is
   infinitely knowable. Now no created intellect can know God infinitely. For the created intellect knows the Divine essence more or less perfectly in proportion as it receives a greater or lesser light of glory. Since therefore the created light of glory received into any created intellect cannot be infinite, it is clearly impossible for any created intellect to know God in an infinite degree. Hence it is impossible that it should comprehend God.</p>
 </div>
-
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 co."><a name="28736"><span class=
+"ref">[28736] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod comprehendere Deum impossibile est cuicumque intellectui
+creato, <i>attingere vero mente Deum qualitercumque, magna est
+beatitudo</i>, ut dicit Augustinus. Ad cuius evidentiam, sciendum
+est quod illud comprehenditur, quod perfecte cognoscitur. Perfecte
+autem cognoscitur, quod tantum cognoscitur, quantum est
+cognoscibile. Unde si id quod est cognoscibile per scientiam
+demonstrativam, opinione teneatur ex aliqua ratione probabili
+concepta, non comprehenditur. Puta, si hoc quod est triangulum
+habere tres angulos aequales duobus rectis, aliquis sciat per
+demonstrationem, comprehendit illud, si vero aliquis eius opinionem
+accipiat probabiliter, per hoc quod a sapientibus vel pluribus ita
+dicitur, non comprehendet ipsum, quia non pertingit ad illum
+perfectum modum cognitionis, quo cognoscibilis est. Nullus autem
+intellectus creatus pertingere potest ad illum perfectum modum
+cognitionis divinae essentiae, quo cognoscibilis est. Quod sic
+patet. Unumquodque enim sic cognoscibile est, secundum quod est ens
+actu. Deus igitur, cuius esse est infinitum, ut supra ostensum est,
+infinite cognoscibilis est. Nullus autem intellectus creatus potest
+Deum infinite cognoscere. Intantum enim intellectus creatus divinam
+essentiam perfectius vel minus perfecte cognoscit, inquantum maiori
+vel minori lumine gloriae perfunditur. Cum igitur lumen gloriae
+creatum, in quocumque intellectu creato receptum, non possit esse
+infinitum, impossibile est quod aliquis intellectus creatus Deum
+infinite cognoscat. Unde impossibile est quod Deum
+comprehendat.</p>
+</div>
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> "Comprehension" is twofold: in one sense it is taken strictly and properly, according as something is included in the one comprehending; and thus in no way is God comprehended either by intellect, or in any other way; forasmuch as He is infinite and cannot be included in any finite being; so that no finite being can contain Him infinitely, in the degree of His own infinity. In this sense we now take comprehension. But in another sense "comprehension"
   is taken more largely as opposed to "non-attainment"; for he who attains to anyone is said to comprehend him when he attains to him. And in this sense God is comprehended by the blessed, according to the words, "I held him, and I will not let him go" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Song.3.4" parsed="vul|Song|3|4|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p8.1" passage="Cant 3:4">Cant 3:4</scripRef>); in this sense also are to be understood the words quoted from the Apostle concerning comprehension. And in this way "comprehension" is one of the three prerogatives of the soul, responding to hope, as vision
   responds to faith, and fruition responds to charity. For even among ourselves not everything seen is held or possessed, forasmuch as things either appear sometimes afar off, or they are not in our power of attainment. Neither, again, do we always enjoy what we possess; either because we find no pleasure in them, or because such things are not the ultimate end of our desire, so as to satisfy and quell it. But the blessed possess these three things in God; because they see Him, and in seeing Him,
-  possess Him as present, having the power to see Him always; and possessing Him, they enjoy Him as the ultimate fulfilment of desire.</p>
+  possess Him as present, having the power to see Him always; and
+possessing Him, they enjoy Him as the ultimate fulfilment of
+desire.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 ad 1"><a name="28737"><span class=
+"ref">[28737] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod comprehensio dicitur dupliciter. Uno modo, stricte et
+proprie, secundum quod aliquid includitur in comprehendente. Et sic
+nullo modo Deus comprehenditur, nec intellectu nec aliquo alio,
+quia, cum sit infinitus, nullo finito includi potest, ut aliquid
+finitum eum infinite capiat, sicut ipse infinite est. Et sic de
+comprehensione nunc quaeritur. Alio modo comprehensio largius
+sumitur, secundum quod comprehensio insecutioni opponitur. Qui enim
+attingit aliquem, quando iam tenet ipsum, comprehendere eum
+dicitur. Et sic Deus comprehenditur a beatis, secundum illud Cant.
+III, <i>tenui eum, nec dimittam</i>. Et sic intelliguntur
+auctoritates apostoli de comprehensione. Et hoc modo comprehensio
+est una de tribus dotibus animae, quae respondet spei; sicut visio
+fidei, et fruitio caritati. Non enim, apud nos, omne quod videtur,
+iam tenetur vel habetur, quia videntur interdum distantia, vel quae
+non sunt in potestate nostra. Neque iterum omnibus quae habemus,
+fruimur, vel quia non delectamur in eis; vel quia non sunt ultimus
+finis desiderii nostri, ut desiderium nostrum impleant et quietent.
+Sed haec tria habent beati in Deo, quia et vident ipsum; et
+videndo, tenent sibi praesentem, in potestate habentes semper eum
+videre; et tenentes, fruuntur sicut ultimo fine desiderium
+implente.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> God is called incomprehensible not because anything of Him is not seen; but because He is not seen as perfectly as He is capable of being seen; thus when any demonstrable proposition is known by probable reason only, it does not follow that any part of it is unknown, either the subject, or the predicate, or the composition; but that it is not as perfectly known as it is capable of being known. Hence Augustine, in his definition of comprehension, says
-  the whole is comprehended when it is seen in such a way that nothing of it is hidden from the seer, or when its boundaries can be completely viewed or traced; for the boundaries of a thing are said to be completely surveyed when the end of the knowledge of it is attained.</p>
+  the whole is comprehended when it is seen in such a way that nothing
+of it is hidden from the seer, or when its boundaries can be
+completely viewed or traced; for the boundaries of a thing are said to
+be completely surveyed when the end of the knowledge of it is
+attained.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 ad 2"><a name="28738"><span class=
+"ref">[28738] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod non propter hoc Deus incomprehensibilis dicitur,
+quasi aliquid eius sit quod non videatur, sed quia non ita perfecte
+videtur, sicut visibilis est. Sicut cum aliqua demonstrabilis
+propositio per aliquam probabilem rationem cognoscitur, non est
+aliquid eius quod non cognoscatur, nec subiectum, nec praedicatum,
+nec compositio, sed tota non ita perfecte cognoscitur, sicut
+cognoscibilis est. Unde Augustinus, definiendo comprehensionem,
+dicit quod <i>totum comprehenditur videndo, quod ita videtur, ut
+nihil eius lateat videntem; aut cuius fines circumspici
+possunt</i>, tunc enim fines alicuius circumspiciuntur, quando ad
+finem in modo cognoscendi illam rem pervenitur.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> The word "wholly" denotes a mode of the object; not that the whole object does not come under knowledge, but that the mode of the object is not the mode of the one who knows. Therefore he who sees God's essence, sees in Him that He exists infinitely, and is infinitely knowable; nevertheless, this infinite mode does not extend to enable the knower to know infinitely; thus, for instance, a person can have a probable opinion that a proposition is
-  demonstrable, although he himself does not know it as demonstrated.</p>
+  demonstrable, although he himself does not know it as
+demonstrated.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 7 ad 3"><a name="28739"><span class=
+"ref">[28739] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 7 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod totaliter dicit modum obiecti, non quidem ita quod
+totus modus obiecti non cadat sub cognitione; sed quia modus
+obiecti non est modus cognoscentis. Qui igitur videt Deum per
+essentiam, videt hoc in eo, quod infinite existit, et infinite
+cognoscibilis est, sed hic infinitus modus non competit ei, ut
+scilicet ipse infinite cognoscat, sicut aliquis probabiliter scire
+potest aliquam propositionem esse demonstrabilem, licet ipse eam
+demonstrative non cognoscat.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7776,47 +8642,176 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that those who see the essence of God see all things in God. For Gregory says (Dialog. iv): "What do they not see, who see Him Who sees all things?" But God sees all things. Therefore those who see God see all things.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, whoever sees a mirror, sees what is reflected in the mirror. But all actual or possible things shine forth in God as in a mirror; for He knows all things in Himself. Therefore whoever sees God, sees all actual things in Him, and also all possible things.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, whoever understands the greater, can understand the least, as is said in De Anima iii. But all that God does, or can do, are less than His essence. Therefore whoever understands God, can understand all that God does, or can do.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, the rational creature naturally desires to know all things. Therefore if in seeing God it does not know all things, its natural desire will not rest satisfied; thus, in seeing God it will not be fully happy; which is incongruous. Therefore he who sees God knows all things.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p6"><b>On the contrary,</b> The angels see the essence of God; and yet do not know all things. For as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii), "the inferior angels are cleansed from ignorance by the superior angels." Also they are ignorant of future contingent things, and of secret thoughts; for this knowledge belongs to God alone. Therefore whosoever sees the essence of God, does not know all things.</p>
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that those
+who see the essence of God see all things in God. For Gregory says
+(Dialog. iv): "What do they not see, who see Him Who sees all things?"
+But God sees all things. Therefore those who see God see all
+things.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 arg. 1"><a name="28740"><span class=
+"ref">[28740] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 arg. 1</span></a> Ad octavum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod videntes Deum per essentiam omnia in Deo
+videant. Dicit enim Gregorius, in IV Dialog. <i>quid est quod non
+videant, qui videntem omnia vident?</i> Sed Deus est videns omnia.
+Ergo qui vident Deum, omnia vident.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, whoever
+sees a mirror, sees what is reflected in the mirror. But all actual or
+possible things shine forth in God as in a mirror; for He knows all
+things in Himself. Therefore whoever sees God, sees all actual things
+in Him, and also all possible things.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 arg. 2"><a name="28741"><span class=
+"ref">[28741] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 arg. 2</span></a> Item, quicumque
+videt speculum, videt ea quae in speculo resplendent. Sed omnia
+quaecumque fiunt vel fieri possunt, in Deo resplendent sicut in
+quodam speculo, ipse enim omnia in seipso cognoscit. Ergo quicumque
+videt Deum, videt omnia quae sunt et quae fieri possunt.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, whoever
+understands the greater, can understand the least, as is said in De
+Anima iii. But all that God does, or can do, are less than His
+essence. Therefore whoever understands God, can understand all that
+God does, or can do.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 arg. 3"><a name="28742"><span class=
+"ref">[28742] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea, qui
+intelligit id quod est maius, potest intelligere minima, ut dicitur
+III de anima. Sed omnia quae Deus facit vel facere potest, sunt
+minus quam eius essentia. Ergo quicumque intelligit Deum, potest
+intelligere omnia quae Deus facit vel facere potest.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, the
+rational creature naturally desires to know all things. Therefore if
+in seeing God it does not know all things, its natural desire will not
+rest satisfied; thus, in seeing God it will not be fully happy; which
+is incongruous. Therefore he who sees God knows all things.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 arg. 4"><a name="28743"><span class=
+"ref">[28743] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea,
+rationalis creatura omnia naturaliter scire desiderat. Si igitur
+videndo Deum non omnia sciat, non quietatur eius naturale
+desiderium, et ita, videndo Deum non erit beata. Quod est
+inconveniens. Videndo igitur Deum, omnia scit.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p6"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> The angels see the essence of God; and yet do not
+know all things. For as Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. vii), "the
+inferior angels are cleansed from ignorance by the superior angels."
+Also they are ignorant of future contingent things, and of secret
+thoughts; for this knowledge belongs to God alone. Therefore whosoever
+sees the essence of God, does not know all things.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 s. c."><a name="28744"><span class=
+"ref">[28744] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod Angeli vident Deum per essentiam, et tamen non omnia sciunt.
+Inferiores enim Angeli purgantur a superioribus a nescientia, ut
+dicit Dionysius, VII cap. Cael. Hier. Ipsi etiam nesciunt futura
+contingentia et cogitationes cordium, hoc enim solius Dei est. Non
+ergo quicumque vident Dei essentiam, vident omnia.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> The created intellect, in seeing the divine essence, does not see in it all that God does or can do. For it is manifest that things are seen in God as they are in Him. But all other things are in God as effects are in the power of their cause. Therefore all things are seen in God as an effect is seen in its cause. Now it is clear that the more perfectly a cause is seen, the more of its effects can be seen in it. For whoever has a lofty understanding, as soon
   as one demonstrative principle is put before him can gather the knowledge of many conclusions; but this is beyond one of a weaker intellect, for he needs things to be explained to him separately. And so an intellect can know all the effects of a cause and the reasons for those effects in the cause itself, if it comprehends the cause wholly. Now no created intellect can comprehend God wholly, as shown above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A7">(A[7])</a>. Therefore no created intellect in seeing God can know
-  all that God does or can do, for this would be to comprehend His power; but of what God does or can do any intellect can know the more, the more perfectly it sees God.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Gregory speaks as regards the object being sufficient, namely, God, who in Himself sufficiently contains and shows forth all things; but it does not follow that whoever sees God knows all things, for he does not perfectly comprehend Him.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> It is not necessary that whoever sees a mirror should see all that is in the mirror, unless his glance comprehends the mirror itself.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Although it is more to see God than to see all things else, still it is a greater thing to see Him so that all things are known in Him, than to see Him in such a way that not all things, but the fewer or the more, are known in Him. For it has been shown in this article that the more things are known in God according as He is seen more or less perfectly.</p>
+  all that God does or can do, for this would be to comprehend His
+power; but of what God does or can do any intellect can know the more,
+the more perfectly it sees God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 co."><a name="28745"><span class=
+"ref">[28745] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod intellectus creatus, videndo divinam essentiam, non videt in
+ipsa omnia quae facit Deus vel facere potest. Manifestum est enim
+quod sic aliqua videntur in Deo, secundum quod sunt in ipso. Omnia
+autem alia sunt in Deo, sicut effectus sunt virtute in sua causa.
+Sic igitur videntur alia in Deo, sicut effectus in sua causa. Sed
+manifestum est quod quanto aliqua causa perfectius videtur, tanto
+plures eius effectus in ipsa videri possunt. Qui enim habet
+intellectum elevatum, statim uno principio demonstrativo proposito,
+ex ipso multarum conclusionum cognitionem accipit, quod non
+convenit ei qui debilioris intellectus est, sed oportet quod ei
+singula explanentur. Ille igitur intellectus potest in causa
+cognoscere omnes causae effectus, et omnes rationes effectuum, qui
+causam totaliter comprehendit. Nullus autem intellectus creatus
+totaliter Deum comprehendere potest, ut ostensum est. Nullus igitur
+intellectus creatus, videndo Deum, potest cognoscere omnia quae
+Deus facit vel potest facere, hoc enim esset comprehendere eius
+virtutem. Sed horum quae Deus facit vel facere potest, tanto
+aliquis intellectus plura cognoscit, quanto perfectius Deum
+videt.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Gregory
+speaks as regards the object being sufficient, namely, God, who in
+Himself sufficiently contains and shows forth all things; but it does
+not follow that whoever sees God knows all things, for he does not
+perfectly comprehend Him.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 ad 1"><a name="28746"><span class=
+"ref">[28746] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod Gregorius loquitur quantum ad sufficientiam obiecti,
+scilicet Dei, quod, quantum in se est, sufficienter continet omnia
+et demonstrat. Non tamen sequitur quod unusquisque videns Deum
+omnia cognoscat, quia non perfecte comprehendit ipsum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> It is not
+necessary that whoever sees a mirror should see all that is in the
+mirror, unless his glance comprehends the mirror itself.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 ad 2"><a name="28747"><span class=
+"ref">[28747] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod videns speculum, non est necessarium quod omnia in
+speculo videat, nisi speculum visu suo comprehendat.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Although
+it is more to see God than to see all things else, still it is a
+greater thing to see Him so that all things are known in Him, than to
+see Him in such a way that not all things, but the fewer or the more,
+are known in Him. For it has been shown in this article that the more
+things are known in God according as He is seen more or less
+perfectly.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 ad 3"><a name="28748"><span class=
+"ref">[28748] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod, licet maius sit videre Deum quam omnia alia, tamen
+maius est videre sic Deum quod omnia in eo cognoscantur, quam
+videre sic ipsum quod non omnia, sed pauciora vel plura
+cognoscantur in eo. Iam enim ostensum est quod multitudo cognitorum
+in Deo, consequitur modum videndi ipsum vel magis perfectum vel
+minus perfectum.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A8-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> The natural desire of the rational creature is to know everything that belongs to the perfection of the intellect, namely, the species and the genera of things and their types, and these everyone who sees the Divine essence will see in God. But to know other singulars, their thoughts and their deeds does not belong to the perfection of the created intellect nor does its natural desire go out to these things; neither, again, does it desire to know
   things that exist not as yet, but which God can call into being. Yet if God alone were seen, Who is the fount and principle of all being and of all truth, He would so fill the natural desire of knowledge that nothing else would be desired, and the seer would be completely beatified. Hence Augustine says (Confess. v): "Unhappy the man who knoweth all these" (i.e. all creatures) "and knoweth not Thee! but happy whoso knoweth Thee although he know not these. And whoso knoweth both Thee and them is
   not the happier for them, but for Thee alone."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 8 ad 4"><a name="28749"><span class=
+"ref">[28749] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 8 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum
+dicendum quod naturale desiderium rationalis creaturae est ad
+sciendum omnia illa quae pertinent ad perfectionem intellectus; et
+haec sunt species et genera rerum, et rationes earum, quae in Deo
+videbit quilibet videns essentiam divinam. Cognoscere autem alia
+singularia, et cogitata et facta eorum, non est de perfectione
+intellectus creati, nec ad hoc eius naturale desiderium tendit, nec
+iterum cognoscere illa quae nondum sunt, sed fieri a Deo possunt.
+Si tamen solus Deus videretur, qui est fons et principium totius
+esse et veritatis, ita repleret naturale desiderium sciendi, quod
+nihil aliud quaereretur, et beatus esset. Unde dicit Augustinus, V
+Confess., infelix homo qui scit omnia illa (scilicet creaturas),
+<i>te autem nescit, beatus autem qui te scit, etiam si illa
+nesciat. Qui vero te et illa novit, non propter illa beatior est,
+sed propter te solum beatus</i>.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7831,31 +8826,120 @@
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that what is seen in God by those who see the Divine essence, is seen by means of some similitude. For every kind of knowledge comes about by the knower being assimilated to the object known. For thus the intellect in act becomes the actual intelligible, and the sense in act becomes the actual sensible, inasmuch as it is informed by a similitude of the object, as the eye by the similitude of color. Therefore if the intellect of one who sees the Divine
-  essence understands any creatures in God, it must be informed by their similitudes.</p>
+  essence understands any creatures in God, it must be informed by
+their similitudes.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 9 arg. 1"><a name="28750"><span class=
+"ref">[28750] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 9 arg. 1</span></a> Ad nonum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod ea quae videntur in Deo, a videntibus
+divinam essentiam per aliquas similitudines videantur. Omnis enim
+cognitio est per assimilationem cognoscentis ad cognitum, sic enim
+intellectus in actu fit intellectum in actu, et sensus in actu
+sensibile in actu, inquantum eius similitudine informatur, ut
+pupilla similitudine coloris. Si igitur intellectus videntis Deum
+per essentiam intelligat in Deo aliquas creaturas, oportet quod
+earum similitudinibus informetur.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, what we have seen, we keep in memory. But Paul, seeing the essence of God whilst in ecstasy, when he had ceased to see the Divine essence, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. ii, 28,34), remembered many of the things he had seen in the rapture; hence he said: "I have heard secret words which it is not granted to man to utter" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:2Cor.12.4" parsed="vul|2Cor|12|4|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p3.1" passage="2 Cor. 12:4">2 Cor. 12:4</scripRef>). Therefore it must be said that certain similitudes of what he remembered, remained in his mind; and in the same way,
-  when he actually saw the essence of God, he had certain similitudes or ideas of what he actually saw in it.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p4"><b>On the contrary,</b> A mirror and what is in it are seen by means of one likeness. But all things are seen in God as in an intelligible mirror. Therefore if God Himself is not seen by any similitude but by His own essence, neither are the things seen in Him seen by any similitudes or ideas.</p>
+  when he actually saw the essence of God, he had certain similitudes
+or ideas of what he actually saw in it.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 9 arg. 2"><a name="28751"><span class=
+"ref">[28751] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 9 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, ea
+quae prius vidimus, memoriter tenemus. Sed Paulus, videns in raptu
+essentiam Dei, ut dicit Augustinus XII super Gen. ad litteram,
+postquam desiit essentiam Dei videre, recordatus est multorum quae
+in illo raptu viderat, unde ipse dicit quod <i>audivit arcana
+verba, quae non licet homini loqui</i>, II Cor. XII. Ergo oportet
+dicere quod aliquae similitudines eorum quae recordatus est, in
+eius intellectu remanserint. Et eadem ratione, quando
+praesentialiter videbat Dei essentiam, eorum quae in ipsa videbat,
+aliquas similitudines vel species habebat.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p4"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> A mirror and what is in it are seen by means of one
+likeness. But all things are seen in God as in an intelligible
+mirror. Therefore if God Himself is not seen by any similitude but by
+His own essence, neither are the things seen in Him seen by any
+similitudes or ideas.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 9 s. c."><a name="28752"><span class=
+"ref">[28752] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 9 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod per unam speciem videtur speculum, et ea quae in speculo
+apparent. Sed omnia sic videntur in Deo sicut in quodam speculo
+intelligibili. Ergo, si ipse Deus non videtur per aliquam
+similitudinem, sed per suam essentiam; nec ea quae in ipso
+videntur, per aliquas similitudines sive species videntur.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> Those who see the divine essence see what they see in God not by any likeness, but by the divine essence itself united to their intellect. For each thing is known in so far as its likeness is in the one who knows. Now this takes place in two ways. For as things which are like one and the same thing are like to each other, the cognitive faculty can be assimilated to any knowable object in two ways. In one way it is assimilated by the object itself, when it is
   directly informed by a similitude, and then the object is known in itself. In another way when informed by a similitude which resembles the object; and in this way, the knowledge is not of the thing in itself, but of the thing in its likeness. For the knowledge of a man in himself differs from the knowledge of him in his image. Hence to know things thus by their likeness in the one who knows, is to know them in themselves or in their own nature; whereas to know them by their similitudes
-  pre-existing in God, is to see them in God. Now there is a difference between these two kinds of knowledge. Hence, according to the knowledge whereby things are known by those who see the essence of God, they are seen in God Himself not by any other similitudes but by the Divine essence alone present to the intellect; by which also God Himself is seen.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The created intellect of one who sees God is assimilated to what is seen in God, inasmuch as it is united to the Divine essence, in which the similitudes of all things pre-exist.</p>
+  pre-existing in God, is to see them in God. Now there is a
+difference between these two kinds of knowledge. Hence, according to
+the knowledge whereby things are known by those who see the essence of
+God, they are seen in God Himself not by any other similitudes but by
+the Divine essence alone present to the intellect; by which also God
+Himself is seen.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 9 co."><a name="28753"><span class=
+"ref">[28753] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 9 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod videntes Deum per essentiam, ea quae in ipsa essentia Dei
+vident, non vident per aliquas species, sed per ipsam essentiam
+divinam intellectui eorum unitam. Sic enim cognoscitur unumquodque,
+secundum quod similitudo eius est in cognoscente. Sed hoc contingit
+dupliciter. Cum enim quaecumque uni et eidem sunt similia, sibi
+invicem sint similia, virtus cognoscitiva dupliciter assimilari
+potest alicui cognoscibili. Uno modo, secundum se, quando directe
+eius similitudine informatur, et tunc cognoscitur illud secundum
+se. Alio modo, secundum quod informatur specie alicuius quod est ei
+simile, et tunc non dicitur res cognosci in seipsa, sed in suo
+simili. Alia enim est cognitio qua cognoscitur aliquis homo in
+seipso, et alia qua cognoscitur in sua imagine. Sic ergo,
+cognoscere res per earum similitudines in cognoscente existentes,
+est cognoscere eas in seipsis, seu in propriis naturis, sed
+cognoscere eas prout earum similitudines praeexistunt in Deo, est
+videre eas in Deo. Et hae duae cognitiones differunt. Unde secundum
+illam cognitionem qua res cognoscuntur a videntibus Deum per
+essentiam in ipso Deo, non videntur per aliquas similitudines
+alias; sed per solam essentiam divinam intellectui praesentem, per
+quam et Deus videtur.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> The
+created intellect of one who sees God is assimilated to what is seen
+in God, inasmuch as it is united to the Divine essence, in which the
+similitudes of all things pre-exist.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 9 ad 1"><a name="28754"><span class=
+"ref">[28754] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 9 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod intellectus videntis Deum assimilatur rebus quae
+videntur in Deo, inquantum unitur essentiae divinae, in qua rerum
+omnium similitudines praeexistunt.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A9-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> Some of the cognitive faculties form other images from those first conceived; thus the imagination from the preconceived images of a mountain and of gold can form the likeness of a golden mountain; and the intellect, from the preconceived ideas of genus and difference, forms the idea of species; in like manner from the similitude of an image we can form in our minds the similitude of the original of the image. Thus Paul, or any other person who sees
-  God, by the very vision of the divine essence, can form in himself the similitudes of what is seen in the divine essence, which remained in Paul even when he had ceased to see the essence of God. Still this kind of vision whereby things are seen by this likeness thus conceived, is not the same as that whereby things are seen in God.</p>
+  God, by the very vision of the divine essence, can form in himself
+the similitudes of what is seen in the divine essence, which remained
+in Paul even when he had ceased to see the essence of God. Still this
+kind of vision whereby things are seen by this likeness thus
+conceived, is not the same as that whereby things are seen in God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 9 ad 2"><a name="28755"><span class=
+"ref">[28755] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 9 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod aliquae potentiae cognoscitivae sunt, quae ex
+speciebus primo conceptis alias formare possunt. Sicut imaginatio
+ex praeconceptis speciebus montis et auri, format speciem montis
+aurei, et intellectus ex praeconceptis speciebus generis et
+differentiae, format rationem speciei. Et similiter ex similitudine
+imaginis formare possumus in nobis similitudinem eius cuius est
+imago. Et sic Paulus, vel quicumque alius videns Deum, ex ipsa
+visione essentiae divinae potest formare in se similitudines rerum
+quae in essentia divina videntur, quae remanserunt in Paulo etiam
+postquam desiit Dei essentiam videre. Ista tamen visio, qua
+videntur res per huiusmodi species sic conceptas, est alia a
+visione qua videntur res in Deo.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7869,28 +8953,107 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that those who see the essence of God do not see all they see in Him at one and the same time. For according to the Philosopher (Topic. ii): "It may happen that many things are known, but only one is understood." But what is seen in God, is understood; for God is seen by the intellect. Therefore those who see God do not see all in Him at the same time.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. viii, 22,23), "God moves the spiritual creature according to time"---i.e. by intelligence and affection. But the spiritual creature is the angel who sees God. Therefore those who see God understand and are affected successively; for time means succession.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p4"><b>On the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. xvi): "Our thoughts will not be unstable, going to and fro from one thing to another; but we shall see all we know at one glance."</p>
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that
+those who see the essence of God do not see all they see in Him at one
+and the same time. For according to the Philosopher (Topic. ii): "It
+may happen that many things are known, but only one is understood."
+But what is seen in God, is understood; for God is seen by the
+intellect. Therefore those who see God do not see all in Him at the
+same time.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 10 arg. 1"><a name="28756"><span class=
+"ref">[28756] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 10 arg. 1</span></a> Ad decimum sic
+proceditur. Videtur quod videntes Deum per essentiam non simul
+videant omnia quae in ipso vident. Quia, secundum philosophum,
+contingit multa scire, intelligere vero unum. Sed ea quae videntur
+in Deo, intelliguntur, intellectu enim videtur Deus. Ergo non
+contingit a videntibus Deum simul multa videri in Deo.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, Augustine
+says (Gen. ad lit. viii, 22,23), "God moves the spiritual creature
+according to time"---i.e. by intelligence and affection. But the
+spiritual creature is the angel who sees God. Therefore those who see
+God understand and are affected successively; for time means
+succession.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 10 arg. 2"><a name="28757"><span class=
+"ref">[28757] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 10 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
+Augustinus dicit, VIII super Gen. ad litteram, quod <i>Deus movet
+creaturam spiritualem per tempus</i>, hoc est per intelligentiam et
+affectionem. Sed creatura spiritualis est Angelus, qui Deum videt.
+Ergo videntes Deum, successive intelligunt et afficiuntur, tempus
+enim successionem importat.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p4"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> Augustine says (De Trin. xvi): "Our thoughts will
+not be unstable, going to and fro from one thing to another; but we
+shall see all we know at one glance."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 10 s. c."><a name="28758"><span class=
+"ref">[28758] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 10 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod Augustinus dicit, ultimo de Trin., <i>non erunt volubiles
+nostrae cogitationes, ab aliis in alia euntes atque redeuntes; sed
+omnem scientiam nostram uno simul conspectu videbimus</i>.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p5"><b>I answer that,</b> What is seen in the Word is seen not successively, but at the same time. In proof whereof, we ourselves cannot know many things all at once, forasmuch as understand many things by means of many ideas. But our intellect cannot be actually informed by many diverse ideas at the same time, so as to understand by them; as one body cannot bear different shapes simultaneously. Hence, when many things can be understood by one idea, they are understood at the same
-  time; as the parts of a whole are understood successively, and not all at the same time, if each one is understood by its own idea; whereas if all are understood under the one idea of the whole, they are understood simultaneously. Now it was shown above that things seen in God, are not seen singly by their own similitude; but all are seen by the one essence of God. Hence they are seen simultaneously, and not successively.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> We understand one thing only when we understand by one idea; but many things understood by one idea are understood simultaneously, as in the idea of a man we understand "animal" and "rational"; and in the idea of a house we understand the wall and the roof.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> As regards their natural knowledge, whereby they know things by diverse ideas given them, the angels do not know all things simultaneously, and thus they are moved in the act of understanding according to time; but as regards what they see in God, they see all at the same time.</p>
+  time; as the parts of a whole are understood successively, and not
+all at the same time, if each one is understood by its own idea;
+whereas if all are understood under the one idea of the whole, they
+are understood simultaneously. Now it was shown above that things seen
+in God, are not seen singly by their own similitude; but all are seen
+by the one essence of God. Hence they are seen simultaneously, and not
+successively.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 10 co."><a name="28759"><span class=
+"ref">[28759] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 10 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod ea quae videntur in verbo, non successive, sed simul videntur.
+Ad cuius evidentiam considerandum est, quod ideo nos simul non
+possumus multa intelligere, quia multa per diversas species
+intelligimus; diversis autem speciebus non potest intellectus unus
+simul actu informari ad intelligendum per eas, sicut nec unum
+corpus potest simul diversis figuris figurari. Unde contingit quod,
+quando aliqua multa una specie intelligi possunt, simul
+intelliguntur, sicut diversae partes alicuius totius, si singulae
+propriis speciebus intelligantur, successive intelliguntur, et non
+simul; si autem omnes intelligantur una specie totius, simul
+intelliguntur. Ostensum est autem quod ea quae videntur in Deo, non
+videntur singula per suas similitudines, sed omnia per unam
+essentiam Dei. Unde simul, et non successive videntur.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p6"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> We
+understand one thing only when we understand by one idea; but many
+things understood by one idea are understood simultaneously, as in the
+idea of a man we understand "animal" and "rational"; and in the idea
+of a house we understand the wall and the roof.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 10 ad 1"><a name="28760"><span class=
+"ref">[28760] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 10 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod sic unum tantum intelligimus, inquantum una specie
+intelligimus. Sed multa una specie intellecta simul intelliguntur,
+sicut in specie hominis intelligimus animal et rationale, et in
+specie domus parietem et tectum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A10-p7"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> As
+regards their natural knowledge, whereby they know things by diverse
+ideas given them, the angels do not know all things simultaneously,
+and thus they are moved in the act of understanding according to time;
+but as regards what they see in God, they see all at the same
+time.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 10 ad 2"><a name="28761"><span class=
+"ref">[28761] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 10 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod Angeli, quantum ad cognitionem naturalem qua
+cognoscunt res per species diversas eis inditas, non simul omnia
+cognoscunt, et sic moventur, secundum intelligentiam, per tempus.
+Sed secundum quod vident res in Deo, simul eas vident.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7906,48 +9069,210 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that one can in this life see the Divine essence. For Jacob said: "I have seen God face to face" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.32.30" parsed="vul|Gen|32|30|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p2.1" passage="Gn. 32:30">Gn. 32:30</scripRef>). But to see Him face to face is to see His essence, as appears from the words: "We see now in a glass and in a dark manner, but then face to face" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.13.12" parsed="vul|1Cor|13|12|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p2.2" passage="1 Cor. 13:12">1 Cor. 13:12</scripRef>).</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the Lord said to Moses: "I speak to him mouth to mouth, and plainly, and not by riddles and figures doth he see the Lord" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Num.12.8" parsed="vul|Num|12|8|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p3.1" passage="Num. 12:8">Num. 12:8</scripRef>); but this is to see God in His essence. Therefore it is possible to see the essence of God in this life.</p>
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that one
+can in this life see the Divine essence. For Jacob said: "I have seen
+God face to face" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Gen.32.30"
+parsed="vul|Gen|32|30|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p2.1"
+passage="Gn. 32:30">Gn. 32:30</scripRef>). But to see Him face to face
+is to see His essence, as appears from the words: "We see now in a
+glass and in a dark manner, but then face to face" (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.13.12" parsed="vul|1Cor|13|12|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p2.2" passage="1 Cor. 13:12">1
+Cor. 13:12</scripRef>).</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 arg. 1"><a name="28762"><span class=
+"ref">[28762] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 arg. 1</span></a> Ad undecimum
+sic proceditur. Videtur quod aliquis in hac vita possit Deum per
+essentiam videre. Dicit enim Iacob, Gen. XXXII, <i>vidi Deum facie
+ad faciem</i>. Sed videre facie ad faciem, est videre per
+essentiam, ut patet per illud quod dicitur I Cor. XIII, <i>videmus
+nunc per speculum et in aenigmate, tunc autem facie ad faciem</i>.
+Ergo Deus in hac vita per essentiam videri potest.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the Lord
+said to Moses: "I speak to him mouth to mouth, and plainly, and not by
+riddles and figures doth he see the Lord" (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:Num.12.8" parsed="vul|Num|12|8|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p3.1"
+passage="Num. 12:8">Num. 12:8</scripRef>); but this is to see God in
+His essence. Therefore it is possible to see the essence of God in
+this life.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 arg. 2"><a name="28763"><span class=
+"ref">[28763] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, Num.
+XII dicit dominus de Moyse, <i>ore ad os loquor ei, et palam, et
+non per aenigmata et figuras, videt Deum</i>. Sed hoc est videre
+Deum per essentiam. Ergo aliquis in statu huius vitae potest Deum
+per essentiam videre.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, that wherein we know all other things, and whereby we judge of other things, is known in itself to us. But even now we know all things in God; for Augustine says (Confess. viii): "If we both see that what you say is true, and we both see that what I say is true; where, I ask, do we see this? neither I in thee, nor thou in me; but both of us in the very incommutable truth itself above our minds." He also says (De Vera Relig. xxx) that, "We judge of all
-  things according to the divine truth"; and (De Trin. xii) that, "it is the duty of reason to judge of these corporeal things according to the incorporeal and eternal ideas; which unless they were above the mind could not be incommutable." Therefore even in this life we see God Himself.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, according to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. xii, 24, 25), those things that are in the soul by their essence are seen by intellectual vision. But intellectual vision is of intelligible things, not by similitudes, but by their very essences, as he also says (Gen. ad lit. xiii, 24,25). Therefore since God is in our soul by His essence, it follows that He is seen by us in His essence.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p6"><b>On the contrary,</b> It is written, "Man shall not see Me, and live" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Exod.32.20" parsed="vul|Exod|32|20|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p6.1" passage="Ex. 32:20">Ex. 32:20</scripRef>), and a gloss upon this says, "In this mortal life God can be seen by certain images, but not by the likeness itself of His own nature."</p>
+  things according to the divine truth"; and (De Trin. xii) that, "it
+is the duty of reason to judge of these corporeal things according to
+the incorporeal and eternal ideas; which unless they were above the
+mind could not be incommutable." Therefore even in this life we see
+God Himself.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 arg. 3"><a name="28764"><span class=
+"ref">[28764] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
+illud in quo alia omnia cognoscimus, et per quod de aliis
+iudicamus, est nobis secundum se notum. Sed omnia etiam nunc in Deo
+cognoscimus. Dicit enim Augustinus, XII Conf., <i>si ambo videmus
+verum esse quod dicis, et ambo videmus verum esse quod dico, ubi
+quaeso illud videmus? Nec ego in te, nec tu in me, sed ambo in ipsa
+quae supra mentes nostras est, incommutabili veritate</i>. Idem
+etiam, in libro de vera religione, dicit quod secundum veritatem
+divinam de omnibus iudicamus. Et XII de Trin. dicit quod
+<i>rationis est iudicare de istis corporalibus secundum rationes
+incorporales et sempiternas, quae nisi supra mentem essent,
+incommutabiles profecto non essent</i>. Ergo et in hac vita ipsum
+Deum videmus.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p5"><b>Objection 4:</b> Further, according
+to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. xii, 24, 25), those things that are in the
+soul by their essence are seen by intellectual vision. But
+intellectual vision is of intelligible things, not by similitudes, but
+by their very essences, as he also says (Gen. ad lit. xiii,
+24,25). Therefore since God is in our soul by His essence, it follows
+that He is seen by us in His essence.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 arg. 4"><a name="28765"><span class=
+"ref">[28765] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 arg. 4</span></a> Praeterea,
+secundum Augustinum, XII super Gen. ad Litt., visione intellectuali
+videntur ea quae sunt in anima per suam essentiam. Sed visio
+intellectualis est de rebus intelligibilibus, non per aliquas
+similitudines, sed per suas essentias, ut ipse ibidem dicit. Ergo,
+cum Deus sit per essentiam suam in anima nostra, per essentiam suam
+videtur a nobis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p6"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> It is written, "Man shall not see Me, and live"
+(<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Exod.32.20" parsed="vul|Exod|32|20|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p6.1"
+passage="Ex. 32:20">Ex. 32:20</scripRef>), and a gloss upon this says,
+"In this mortal life God can be seen by certain images, but not by the
+likeness itself of His own nature."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 s. c."><a name="28766"><span class=
+"ref">[28766] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicitur Exod. XXXIII, <i>non videbit me homo et vivet</i>.
+Glossa, <i>quandiu hic mortaliter vivitur, videri per quasdam
+imagines Deus potest; sed per ipsam naturae suae speciem non
+potest</i>.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p7"><b>I answer that,</b> God cannot be seen in His essence by a mere human being, except he be separated from this mortal life. The reason is because, as was said above <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p7.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A4">(A[4])</a>, the mode of knowledge follows the mode of the nature of the knower. But our soul, as long as we live in this life, has its being in corporeal matter; hence naturally it knows only what has a form in matter, or what can be known by such a form. Now it is evident that the Divine essence
   cannot be known through the nature of material things. For it was shown above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p7.2" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A2">AA[2]</a>,9) that the knowledge of God by means of any created similitude is not the vision of His essence. Hence it is impossible for the soul of man in this life to see the essence of God. This can be seen in the fact that the more our soul is abstracted from corporeal things, the more it is capable of receiving abstract intelligible things. Hence in dreams and alienations of the bodily senses
-  divine revelations and foresight of future events are perceived the more clearly. It is not possible, therefore, that the soul in this mortal life should be raised up to the supreme of intelligible objects, i.e. to the divine essence.</p>
+  divine revelations and foresight of future events are perceived the
+more clearly. It is not possible, therefore, that the soul in this
+mortal life should be raised up to the supreme of intelligible
+objects, i.e. to the divine essence.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 co."><a name="28767"><span class=
+"ref">[28767] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod ab homine puro Deus videri per essentiam non potest, nisi ab
+hac vita mortali separetur. Cuius ratio est quia, sicut supra
+dictum est, modus cognitionis sequitur modum naturae rei
+cognoscentis. Anima autem nostra, quandiu in hac vita vivimus,
+habet esse in materia corporali, unde naturaliter non cognoscit
+aliqua nisi quae habent formam in materia, vel quae per huiusmodi
+cognosci possunt. Manifestum est autem quod per naturas rerum
+materialium divina essentia cognosci non potest. Ostensum est enim
+supra quod cognitio Dei per quamcumque similitudinem creatam, non
+est visio essentiae ipsius. Unde impossibile est animae hominis
+secundum hanc vitam viventis, essentiam Dei videre. Et huius signum
+est, quod anima nostra, quanto magis a corporalibus abstrahitur,
+tanto intelligibilium abstractorum fit capacior. Unde in somniis et
+alienationibus a sensibus corporis, magis divinae revelationes
+percipiuntur, et praevisiones futurorum. Quod ergo anima elevetur
+usque ad supremum intelligibilium, quod est essentia divina, esse
+non potest quandiu hac mortali vita utitur.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> According to Dionysius (Coel. Hier. iv) a man is said in the Scriptures to see God in the sense that certain figures are formed in the senses or imagination, according to some similitude representing in part the divinity. So when Jacob says, "I have seen God face to face," this does not mean the Divine essence, but some figure representing God. And this is to be referred to some high mode of prophecy, so that God seems to speak, though in an imaginary
-  vision; as will later be explained (SS, <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p8.1" href="#FP_Q174">Q[174])</a> in treating of the degrees of prophecy. We may also say that Jacob spoke thus to designate some exalted intellectual contemplation, above the ordinary state.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> As God works miracles in corporeal things, so also He does supernatural wonders above the common order, raising the minds of some living in the flesh beyond the use of sense, even up to the vision of His own essence; as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 26,27,28) of Moses, the teacher of the Jews; and of Paul, the teacher of the Gentiles. This will be treated more fully in the question of rapture (SS, <a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p9.1" href="#FP_Q175">Q[175])</a>.</p>
+  vision; as will later be explained (SS, <a xml:link="simple"
+shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p8.1"
+href="#FP_Q174">Q[174])</a> in treating of the degrees of prophecy. We
+may also say that Jacob spoke thus to designate some exalted
+intellectual contemplation, above the ordinary state.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 ad 1"><a name="28768"><span class=
+"ref">[28768] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod, secundum Dionysium, IV cap. Cael. Hier., sic in
+Scripturis dicitur aliquis Deum vidisse, inquantum formatae sunt
+aliquae figurae, vel sensibiles vel imaginariae, secundum aliquam
+similitudinem aliquod divinum repraesentantes. Quod ergo dicit
+Iacob, vidi Deum facie ad faciem, referendum est, non ad ipsam
+divinam essentiam, sed ad figuram in qua repraesentabatur Deus. Et
+hoc ipsum ad quandam prophetiae eminentiam pertinet, ut videatur
+persona Dei loquentis, licet imaginaria visione, ut infra patebit,
+cum de gradibus prophetiae loquemur. Vel hoc dicit Iacob ad
+designandam quandam eminentiam intelligibilis contemplationis,
+supra communem statum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> As God
+works miracles in corporeal things, so also He does supernatural
+wonders above the common order, raising the minds of some living in
+the flesh beyond the use of sense, even up to the vision of His own
+essence; as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 26,27,28) of Moses, the
+teacher of the Jews; and of Paul, the teacher of the Gentiles. This
+will be treated more fully in the question of rapture (SS, <a
+xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p9.1"
+href="#FP_Q175">Q[175])</a>.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 ad 2"><a name="28769"><span class=
+"ref">[28769] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod, sicut Deus miraculose aliquid supernaturaliter in
+rebus corporeis operatur, ita etiam et supernaturaliter, et praeter
+communem ordinem, mentes aliquorum in hac carne viventium, sed non
+sensibus carnis utentium, usque ad visionem suae essentiae
+elevavit; ut dicit Augustinus, XII super Genes. ad Litt., et in
+libro de videndo Deum de Moyse, qui fuit magister Iudaeorum, et
+Paulo, qui fuit magister gentium. Et de hoc plenius tractabitur,
+cum de raptu agemus.</p>
 </div>
 
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> All things are said to be seen in God and all things are judged in Him, because by the participation of His light, we know and judge all things; for the light of natural reason itself is a participation of the divine light; as likewise we are said to see and judge of sensible things in the sun, i.e., by the sun's light. Hence Augustine says (Soliloq. i, 8), "The lessons of instruction can only be seen as it were by their own sun," namely God. As
-  therefore in order to see a sensible object, it is not necessary to see the substance of the sun, so in like manner to see any intelligible object, it is not necessary to see the essence of God.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b> Intellectual vision is of the things which are in the soul by their essence, as intelligible things are in the intellect. And thus God is in the souls of the blessed; not thus is He in our soul, but by presence, essence and power.</p>
+  therefore in order to see a sensible object, it is not necessary to
+see the substance of the sun, so in like manner to see any
+intelligible object, it is not necessary to see the essence of
+God.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 ad 3"><a name="28770"><span class=
+"ref">[28770] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod omnia dicimur in Deo videre, et secundum ipsum de
+omnibus iudicare, inquantum per participationem sui luminis omnia
+cognoscimus et diiudicamus, nam et ipsum lumen naturale rationis
+participatio quaedam est divini luminis; sicut etiam omnia
+sensibilia dicimus videre et iudicare in sole, idest per lumen
+solis. Unde dicit Augustinus, I Soliloquiorum, <i>disciplinarum
+spectamina videri non possunt, nisi aliquo velut suo sole
+illustrentur, videlicet Deo</i>. Sicut ergo ad videndum aliquid
+sensibiliter, non est necesse quod videatur substantia solis, ita
+ad videndum aliquid intelligibiliter, non est necessarium quod
+videatur essentia Dei.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A11-p11"><b>Reply to Objection 4:</b>
+Intellectual vision is of the things which are in the soul by their
+essence, as intelligible things are in the intellect. And thus God is
+in the souls of the blessed; not thus is He in our soul, but by
+presence, essence and power.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 11 ad 4"><a name="28771"><span class=
+"ref">[28771] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 11 ad 4</span></a> Ad quartum
+dicendum quod visio intellectualis est eorum quae sunt in anima per
+suam essentiam sicut intelligibilia in intellectu. Sic autem Deus
+est in anima beatorum, non autem in anima nostra; sed per
+praesentiam, essentiam, et potentiam.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -7961,40 +9286,136 @@
 
 
 <div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that by natural reason we cannot know God in this life. For Boethius says (De Consol. v) that "reason does not grasp simple form." But God is a supremely simple form, as was shown above (<a xml:link="simple" shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p2.1" href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7">Q[3], A[7]</a> ). Therefore natural reason cannot attain to know Him.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the soul understands nothing by natural reason without the use of the imagination. But we cannot have an imagination of God, Who is incorporeal. Therefore we cannot know God by natural knowledge.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the knowledge of natural reason belongs to both good and evil, inasmuch as they have a common nature. But the knowledge of God belongs only to the good; for Augustine says (De Trin. i): "The weak eye of the human mind is not fixed on that excellent light unless purified by the justice of faith." Therefore God cannot be known by natural reason.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.19" parsed="vul|Rom|1|19|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p5.1" passage="Rom. 1:19">Rom. 1:19</scripRef>), "That which is known of God," namely, what can be known of God by natural reason, "is manifest in them."</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that by
+natural reason we cannot know God in this life. For Boethius says (De
+Consol. v) that "reason does not grasp simple form." But God is a
+supremely simple form, as was shown above (<a xml:link="simple"
+shape="rect" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p2.1"
+href="#FP.ii.FP_Q3.FP_Q3_A7">Q[3], A[7]</a> ). Therefore natural
+reason cannot attain to know Him.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 arg. 1"><a name="28772"><span class=
+"ref">[28772] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 arg. 1</span></a> Ad duodecimum
+sic proceditur. Videtur quod per naturalem rationem Deum in hac
+vita cognoscere non possimus. Dicit enim Boetius, in libro de
+Consol., quod <i>ratio non capit simplicem formam</i>. Deus autem
+maxime est simplex forma, ut supra ostensum est. Ergo ad eius
+cognitionem ratio naturalis pervenire non potest.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, the soul
+understands nothing by natural reason without the use of the
+imagination. But we cannot have an imagination of God, Who is
+incorporeal. Therefore we cannot know God by natural knowledge.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 arg. 2"><a name="28773"><span class=
+"ref">[28773] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea,
+ratione naturali sine phantasmate nihil intelligit anima, ut
+dicitur in III de anima. Sed Dei, cum sit incorporeus, phantasma in
+nobis esse non potest. Ergo cognosci non potest a nobis cognitione
+naturali.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, the
+knowledge of natural reason belongs to both good and evil, inasmuch as
+they have a common nature. But the knowledge of God belongs only to
+the good; for Augustine says (De Trin. i): "The weak eye of the human
+mind is not fixed on that excellent light unless purified by the
+justice of faith." Therefore God cannot be known by natural
+reason.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 arg. 3"><a name="28774"><span class=
+"ref">[28774] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
+cognitio quae est per rationem naturalem, communis est bonis et
+malis, sicut natura eis communis est. Sed cognitio Dei competit
+tantum bonis, dicit enim Augustinus, I de Trin., quod <i>mentis
+humanae acies in tam excellenti luce non figitur, nisi per
+iustitiam fidei emundetur</i>. Ergo Deus per rationem naturalem
+cognosci non potest.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> It is written (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:Rom.1.19" parsed="vul|Rom|1|19|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p5.1"
+passage="Rom. 1:19">Rom. 1:19</scripRef>), "That which is known of
+God," namely, what can be known of God by natural reason, "is manifest
+in them."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 s. c."><a name="28775"><span class=
+"ref">[28775] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicitur Rom. I, <i>quod notum est Dei, manifestum est in
+illis</i>, idest, quod cognoscibile est de Deo per rationem
+naturalem.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<div xml:lang="en">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> Our natural knowledge begins from sense. Hence our natural knowledge can go as far as it can be led by sensible things. But our mind cannot be led by sense so far as to see the essence of God; because the sensible effects of God do not equal the power of God as their cause. Hence from the knowledge of sensible things the whole power of God cannot be known; nor therefore can His essence be seen. But because they are His effects and depend on their cause, we
   can be led from them so far as to know of God "whether He exists," and to know of Him what must necessarily belong to Him, as the first cause of all things, exceeding all things caused by Him.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p7"> Hence we know that His relationship with creatures so far as to be the cause of them all; also that creatures differ from Him, inasmuch as He is not in any way part of what is caused by Him; and that creatures are not removed from Him by reason of any defect on His part, but because He superexceeds them all.</p>
 </div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Reason cannot reach up to simple form, so as to know "what it is"; but it can know "whether it is."</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> God is known by natural knowledge through the images of His effects.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> As the knowledge of God's essence is by grace, it belongs only to the good; but the knowledge of Him by natural reason can belong to both good and bad; and hence Augustine says (Retract. i), retracting what he had said before: "I do not approve what I said in prayer, 'God who willest that only the pure should know truth.' For it can be answered that many who are not pure can know many truths," i.e. by natural reason.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 co."><a name="28776"><span class=
+"ref">[28776] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod naturalis nostra cognitio a sensu principium sumit, unde
+tantum se nostra naturalis cognitio extendere potest, inquantum
+manuduci potest per sensibilia. Ex sensibilibus autem non potest
+usque ad hoc intellectus noster pertingere, quod divinam essentiam
+videat, quia creaturae sensibiles sunt effectus Dei virtutem causae
+non adaequantes. Unde ex sensibilium cognitione non potest tota Dei
+virtus cognosci, et per consequens nec eius essentia videri. Sed
+quia sunt eius effectus a causa dependentes, ex eis in hoc perduci
+possumus, ut cognoscamus de Deo an est; et ut cognoscamus de ipso
+ea quae necesse est ei convenire secundum quod est prima omnium
+causa, excedens omnia sua causata. Unde cognoscimus de ipso
+habitudinem ipsius ad creaturas, quod scilicet omnium est causa; et
+differentiam creaturarum ab ipso, quod scilicet ipse non est
+aliquid eorum quae ab eo causantur; et quod haec non removentur ab
+eo propter eius defectum, sed quia superexcedit.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Reason
+cannot reach up to simple form, so as to know "what it is"; but it can
+know "whether it is."</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 ad 1"><a name="28777"><span class=
+"ref">[28777] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod ratio ad formam simplicem pertingere non potest, ut
+sciat de ea quid est, potest tamen de ea cognoscere, ut sciat an
+est.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> God is
+known by natural knowledge through the images of His effects.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 ad 2"><a name="28778"><span class=
+"ref">[28778] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod Deus naturali cognitione cognoscitur per phantasmata
+effectus sui.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A12-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> As the
+knowledge of God's essence is by grace, it belongs only to the good;
+but the knowledge of Him by natural reason can belong to both good and
+bad; and hence Augustine says (Retract. i), retracting what he had
+said before: "I do not approve what I said in prayer, 'God who willest
+that only the pure should know truth.' For it can be answered that
+many who are not pure can know many truths," i.e. by natural
+reason.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 12 ad 3"><a name="28779"><span class=
+"ref">[28779] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 12 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod cognitio Dei per essentiam, cum sit per gratiam, non
+competit nisi bonis, sed cognitio eius quae est per rationem
+naturalem, potest competere bonis et malis. Unde dicit Augustinus,
+in libro Retractationum, <i>non approbo quod in oratione dixi,
+Deus, qui non nisi mundos verum scire voluisti, responderi enim
+potest, multos etiam non mundos multa scire vera</i>, scilicet per
+rationem naturalem.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -8010,39 +9431,147 @@
 <div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p2"><b>Objection 1:</b> It seems that by grace a higher knowledge of God is not obtained than by natural reason. For Dionysius says (De Mystica Theol. i) that whoever is the more united to God in this life, is united to Him as to one entirely unknown. He says the same of Moses, who nevertheless obtained a certain excellence by the knowledge conferred by grace. But to be united to God while ignoring of Him "what He is," comes about also by natural reason. Therefore God is not more
   known to us by grace than by natural reason.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, we can acquire the knowledge of divine things by natural reason only through the imagination; and the same applies to the knowledge given by grace. For Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. i) that "it is impossible for the divine ray to shine upon us except as screened round about by the many colored sacred veils." Therefore we cannot know God more fully by grace than by natural reason.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, our intellect adheres to God by grace of faith. But faith does not seem to be knowledge; for Gregory says (Hom. xxvi in Ev.) that "things not seen are the objects of faith, and not of knowledge." Therefore there is not given to us a more excellent knowledge of God by grace.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p5"><b>On the contrary,</b> The Apostle says that "God hath revealed to us His spirit," what "none of the princes of this world knew" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.2.10" parsed="vul|1Cor|2|10|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p5.1" passage="1 Cor. 2:10">1 Cor. 2:10</scripRef>), namely, the philosophers, as the gloss expounds.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 arg. 1"><a name="28780"><span class=
+"ref">[28780] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 arg. 1</span></a> Ad
+decimumtertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod per gratiam non
+habeatur altior cognitio Dei, quam ea quae habetur per naturalem
+rationem. Dicit enim Dionysius, in libro de mystica theologia, quod
+ille qui melius unitur Deo in hac vita, unitur ei sicut omnino
+ignoto, quod etiam de Moyse dicit, qui tamen excellentiam quandam
+obtinuit in gratiae cognitione. Sed coniungi Deo ignorando de eo
+quid est, hoc contingit etiam per rationem naturalem. Ergo per
+gratiam non plenius cognoscitur a nobis Deus, quam per rationem
+naturalem.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p3"><b>Objection 2:</b> Further, we can
+acquire the knowledge of divine things by natural reason only through
+the imagination; and the same applies to the knowledge given by
+grace. For Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. i) that "it is impossible for
+the divine ray to shine upon us except as screened round about by the
+many colored sacred veils." Therefore we cannot know God more fully by
+grace than by natural reason.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 arg. 2"><a name="28781"><span class=
+"ref">[28781] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 arg. 2</span></a> Praeterea, per
+rationem naturalem in cognitionem divinorum pervenire non possumus,
+nisi per phantasmata, sic etiam nec secundum cognitionem gratiae.
+Dicit enim Dionysius, I cap. de Cael. Hier., quod <i>impossibile
+est nobis aliter lucere divinum radium, nisi varietate sacrorum
+velaminum circumvelatum</i>. Ergo per gratiam non plenius
+cognoscimus Deum, quam per rationem naturalem.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p4"><b>Objection 3:</b> Further, our
+intellect adheres to God by grace of faith. But faith does not seem to
+be knowledge; for Gregory says (Hom. xxvi in Ev.) that "things not
+seen are the objects of faith, and not of knowledge." Therefore there
+is not given to us a more excellent knowledge of God by grace.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 arg. 3"><a name="28782"><span class=
+"ref">[28782] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 arg. 3</span></a> Praeterea,
+intellectus noster per gratiam fidei Deo adhaeret. Fides autem non
+videtur esse cognitio, dicit enim Gregorius, in Homil., quod ea
+quae non videntur fidem habent, et non agnitionem. Ergo per gratiam
+non additur nobis aliqua excellentior cognitio de Deo.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p5"><b>On
+the contrary,</b> The Apostle says that "God hath revealed to us His
+spirit," what "none of the princes of this world knew" (<scripRef
+osisRef="Bible.vul:1Cor.2.10" parsed="vul|1Cor|2|10|0|0"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p5.1" passage="1 Cor. 2:10">1
+Cor. 2:10</scripRef>), namely, the philosophers, as the gloss
+expounds.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 s. c."><a name="28783"><span class=
+"ref">[28783] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 s. c.</span></a> Sed contra est
+quod dicit apostolus, I Cor. II, <i>nobis revelavit Deus per
+spiritum suum</i>, illa scilicet quae nemo principum huius saeculi
+novit, idest philosophorum, ut exponit Glossa.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<div xml:lang="en>
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p6"><b>I answer that,</b> We have a more perfect knowledge of God by grace than by natural reason. Which is proved thus. The knowledge which we have by natural reason contains two things: images derived from the sensible objects; and the natural intelligible light, enabling us to abstract from them intelligible conceptions.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
 <p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p7"> Now in both of these, human knowledge is assisted by the revelation of grace. For the intellect's natural light is strengthened by the infusion of gratuitous light; and sometimes also the images in the human imagination are divinely formed, so as to express divine things better than those do which we receive from sensible objects, as appears in prophetic visions; while sometimes sensible things, or even voices, are divinely formed to express some divine meaning; as in the
   Baptism, the Holy Ghost was seen in the shape of a dove, and the voice of the Father was heard, "This is My beloved Son" (<scripRef osisRef="Bible.vul:Matt.3.17" parsed="vul|Matt|3|17|0|0" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p7.1" passage="Mat. 3:17">Mat. 3:17</scripRef>).</p>
 </div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Although by the revelation of grace in this life we cannot know of God "what He is," and thus are united to Him as to one unknown; still we know Him more fully according as many and more excellent of His effects are demonstrated to us, and according as we attribute to Him some things known by divine revelation, to which natural reason cannot reach, as, for instance, that God is Three and One.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> From the images either received from sense in the natural order, or divinely formed in the imagination, we have so much the more excellent intellectual knowledge, the stronger the intelligible light is in man; and thus through the revelation given by the images a fuller knowledge is received by the infusion of the divine light.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="bilingual">
-<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no" id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Faith is a kind of knowledge, inasmuch as the intellect is determined by faith to some knowable object. But this determination to one object does not proceed from the vision of the believer, but from the vision of Him who is believed. Thus as far as faith falls short of vision, it falls short of the knowledge which belongs to science, for science determines the intellect to one object by the vision and understanding of first principles.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 co."><a name="28784"><span class=
+"ref">[28784] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 co.</span></a> Respondeo dicendum
+quod per gratiam perfectior cognitio de Deo habetur a nobis, quam
+per rationem naturalem. Quod sic patet. Cognitio enim quam per
+naturalem rationem habemus, duo requirit, scilicet, phantasmata ex
+sensibilibus accepta, et lumen naturale intelligibile, cuius
+virtute intelligibiles conceptiones ab eis abstrahimus. Et quantum
+ad utrumque, iuvatur humana cognitio per revelationem gratiae. Nam
+et lumen naturale intellectus confortatur per infusionem luminis
+gratuiti. Et interdum etiam phantasmata in imaginatione hominis
+formantur divinitus, magis exprimentia res divinas, quam ea quae
+naturaliter a sensibilibus accipimus; sicut apparet in visionibus
+prophetalibus. Et interdum etiam aliquae res sensibiles formantur
+divinitus, aut etiam voces, ad aliquid divinum exprimendum; sicut
+in Baptismo visus est spiritus sanctus in specie columbae, et vox
+patris audita est, <i>hic est filius meus dilectus</i>.</p>
+</div>
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p8"><b>Reply to Objection 1:</b> Although
+by the revelation of grace in this life we cannot know of God "what He
+is," and thus are united to Him as to one unknown; still we know Him
+more fully according as many and more excellent of His effects are
+demonstrated to us, and according as we attribute to Him some things
+known by divine revelation, to which natural reason cannot reach, as,
+for instance, that God is Three and One.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 ad 1"><a name="28785"><span class=
+"ref">[28785] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 ad 1</span></a> Ad primum ergo
+dicendum quod, licet per revelationem gratiae in hac vita non
+cognoscamus de Deo quid est, et sic ei quasi ignoto coniungamur;
+tamen plenius ipsum cognoscimus, inquantum plures et excellentiores
+effectus eius nobis demonstrantur; et inquantum ei aliqua
+attribuimus ex revelatione divina, ad quae ratio naturalis non
+pertingit, ut Deum esse trinum et unum.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p9"><b>Reply to Objection 2:</b> From the
+images either received from sense in the natural order, or divinely
+formed in the imagination, we have so much the more excellent
+intellectual knowledge, the stronger the intelligible light is in man;
+and thus through the revelation given by the images a fuller knowledge
+is received by the infusion of the divine light.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 ad 2"><a name="28786"><span class=
+"ref">[28786] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 ad 2</span></a> Ad secundum
+dicendum quod ex phantasmatibus, vel a sensu acceptis secundum
+naturalem ordinem, vel divinitus in imaginatione formatis, tanto
+excellentior cognitio intellectualis habetur, quanto lumen
+intelligibile in homine fortius fuerit. Et sic per revelationem ex
+phantasmatibus plenior cognitio accipitur, ex infusione divini
+luminis.</p>
+</div>
+
+<div class="bilingual">
+<p xml:lang="en" shownumber="no"
+id="FP.ii.FP_Q12.FP_Q12_A13-p10"><b>Reply to Objection 3:</b> Faith is
+a kind of knowledge, inasmuch as the intellect is determined by faith
+to some knowable object. But this determination to one object does not
+proceed from the vision of the believer, but from the vision of Him
+who is believed. Thus as far as faith falls short of vision, it falls
+short of the knowledge which belongs to science, for science
+determines the intellect to one object by the vision and understanding
+of first principles.</p>
+<p xml:lang="la" title="I q. 12 a. 13 ad 3"><a name="28787"><span class=
+"ref">[28787] I&ordf; q. 12 a. 13 ad 3</span></a> Ad tertium
+dicendum quod fides cognitio quaedam est, inquantum intellectus
+determinatur per fidem ad aliquod cognoscibile. Sed haec
+determinatio ad unum non procedit ex visione credentis, sed a
+visione eius cui creditur. Et sic, inquantum deest visio, deficit a
+ratione cognitionis quae est in scientia, nam scientia determinat
+intellectum ad unum per visionem et intellectum primorum
+principiorum.</p>
 </div>
 
 
@@ -8050,7 +9579,7 @@
 
 			 </div4>
 		  </div3>
-
+<!-- merged down to here -->
 <div3 id="FP.ii.FP_Q13" next="FP_Q13_A1" prev="FP_Q12_A13" progress="1.92%" n="xii" title="Question. 13 - THE NAMES OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)">
 			 <h3 xml:lang="en" id="FP.ii.FP_Q13-p0.1">Question 13. THE NAMES OF GOD (TWELVE ARTICLES)</h3>