Summa Theologica Part I (Prima Pars) Part 17

Therefore if the essence of G.o.d 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 G.o.d; which is impossible. Therefore it is not necessary that every creature should require a superadded light in order to see the essence of G.o.d.

_On the contrary,_ It is written: "In Thy light we shall see light" (Ps.

35:10).

_I answer that,_ 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 G.o.d, the essence of G.o.d 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 G.o.d, 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 (Apoc. 21:23): "The glory of G.o.d hath enlightened it"--viz. the society of the blessed who see G.o.d. By this light the blessed are made "deiform"--i.e. like to G.o.d, according to the saying: "When He shall appear we shall be like to Him, and [Vulg.: 'because'] we shall see Him as He is" (1 John 2:2).

Reply Obj. 1: The created light is necessary to see the essence of G.o.d, not in order to make the essence of G.o.d 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.

Reply Obj. 2: This light is required to see the divine essence, not as a similitude in which G.o.d is seen, but as a perfection of the intellect, strengthening it to see G.o.d. Therefore it may be said that this light is to be described not as a medium in which G.o.d is seen, but as one by which He is seen; and such a medium does not take away the immediate vision of G.o.d.

Reply Obj. 3: 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.

_______________________

SIXTH ARTICLE [I. Q. 12, Art. 6]

Whether of Those Who See the Essence of G.o.d, One Sees More Perfectly Than Another?

Objection 1: It seems that of those who see the essence of G.o.d, one does not see more perfectly than another. For it is written (1 John 3:2): "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.

Obj. 2: Further, Augustine says (Octog. Tri. Quaest. qu. x.x.xii): "One person cannot see one and the same thing more perfectly than another." But all who see the essence of G.o.d, understand the Divine essence, for G.o.d 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.

Obj. 3: 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 G.o.d 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 beat.i.tude.

_On the contrary,_ Eternal life consists in the vision of G.o.d, according to John 17:3: "This is eternal life, that they may know Thee the only true G.o.d," etc. Therefore if all saw the essence of G.o.d equally in eternal life, all would be equal; the contrary to which is declared by the Apostle: "Star differs from star in glory" (1 Cor. 15:41).

_I answer that,_ Of those who see the essence of G.o.d, one sees Him more perfectly than another. This, indeed, does not take place as if one had a more perfect similitude of G.o.d 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 G.o.d than another. The faculty of seeing G.o.d, 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.

Hence the intellect which has more of the light of glory will see G.o.d the more perfectly; and he will have a fuller partic.i.p.ation 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 G.o.d the more perfectly, and will be the more beatified.

Reply Obj. 1: 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 G.o.d will be as perfect as is the perfect mode of G.o.d's existence.

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.

Reply Obj. 3: 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 G.o.d; nor will it arise from the diverse partic.i.p.ation 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.

_______________________

SEVENTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 12, Art. 7]

Whether Those Who See the Essence of G.o.d Comprehend Him?

Objection 1: It seems that those who see the divine essence, comprehend G.o.d. For the Apostle says (Phil. 3:12): "But I follow after, if I may by any means comprehend [Douay: 'apprehend']." But the Apostle did not follow in vain; for he said (1 Cor. 9:26): "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."

Obj. 2: 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 G.o.d is seen in His essence, He is seen whole, and nothing of Him is hidden from the seer, since G.o.d is simple. Therefore whoever sees His essence, comprehends Him.

Obj. 3: 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 G.o.d, 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 G.o.d see Him wholly; therefore they comprehend Him.

_On the contrary,_ It is written: "O most mighty, great, and powerful, the Lord of hosts is Thy Name. Great in counsel, and incomprehensible in thought" (Jer. 32:18,19). Therefore He cannot be comprehended.

_I answer that,_ It is impossible for any created intellect to comprehend G.o.d; yet "for the mind to attain to G.o.d in some degree is great beat.i.tude," as Augustine says (De Verb. Dom., Serm. x.x.xviii).

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 G.o.d, whose being is infinite, as was shown above (Q. 7), is infinitely knowable. Now no created intellect can know G.o.d 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 G.o.d in an infinite degree. Hence it is impossible that it should comprehend G.o.d.

Reply Obj. 1: "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 G.o.d 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 G.o.d is comprehended by the blessed, according to the words, "I held him, and I will not let him go" (Cant. 3:4); 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 G.o.d; 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.

Reply Obj. 2: G.o.d 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.

Reply Obj. 3: 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 G.o.d'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.

_______________________

EIGHTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 12, Art. 8]

Whether Those Who See the Essence of G.o.d See All in G.o.d?

Objection 1: It seems that those who see the essence of G.o.d see all things in G.o.d. For Gregory says (Dialog. iv): "What do they not see, who see Him Who sees all things?" But G.o.d sees all things. Therefore those who see G.o.d see all things.

Obj. 2: Further, whoever sees a mirror, sees what is reflected in the mirror. But all actual or possible things shine forth in G.o.d as in a mirror; for He knows all things in Himself. Therefore whoever sees G.o.d, sees all actual things in Him, and also all possible things.

Obj. 3: Further, whoever understands the greater, can understand the least, as is said in _De Anima_ iii. But all that G.o.d does, or can do, are less than His essence. Therefore whoever understands G.o.d, can understand all that G.o.d does, or can do.

Obj. 4: Further, the rational creature naturally desires to know all things. Therefore if in seeing G.o.d it does not know all things, its natural desire will not rest satisfied; thus, in seeing G.o.d it will not be fully happy; which is incongruous. Therefore he who sees G.o.d knows all things.

_On the contrary,_ The angels see the essence of G.o.d; 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 G.o.d alone. Therefore whosoever sees the essence of G.o.d, does not know all things.

_I answer that,_ The created intellect, in seeing the divine essence, does not see in it all that G.o.d does or can do. For it is manifest that things are seen in G.o.d as they are in Him. But all other things are in G.o.d as effects are in the power of their cause. Therefore all things are seen in G.o.d 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 G.o.d wholly, as shown above (A. 7). Therefore no created intellect in seeing G.o.d can know all that G.o.d does or can do, for this would be to comprehend His power; but of what G.o.d does or can do any intellect can know the more, the more perfectly it sees G.o.d.

Reply Obj. 1: Gregory speaks as regards the object being sufficient, namely, G.o.d, who in Himself sufficiently contains and shows forth all things; but it does not follow that whoever sees G.o.d knows all things, for he does not perfectly comprehend Him.

Reply Obj. 2: It is not necessary that whoever sees a mirror should see all that is in the mirror, unless his glance comprehends the mirror itself.

Reply Obj. 3: Although it is more to see G.o.d 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 G.o.d according as He is seen more or less perfectly.

Reply Obj. 4: 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 G.o.d. 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 G.o.d can call into being. Yet if G.o.d 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."

_______________________

NINTH ARTICLE [I, Q. 12, Art. 9]

Whether What Is Seen in G.o.d by Those Who See the Divine Essence, Is Seen Through Any Similitude?

Objection 1: It seems that what is seen in G.o.d 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 a.s.similated 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 G.o.d, it must be informed by their similitudes.

Obj. 2: Further, what we have seen, we keep in memory. But Paul, seeing the essence of G.o.d 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" (2 Cor. 12:4). 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 G.o.d, he had certain similitudes or ideas of what he actually saw in it.