Quaestio 172 Question 172 De causa prophetiae The Cause of Prophecy Deinde considerandum est de causa prophetiae. Et circa hoc quaeruntur sex. We must now consider the cause of prophecy. Under this head there are six points of inquiry: Primo, utrum prophetia sit naturalis. (1) Whether prophecy is natural? Secundo, utrum sit a Deo mediantibus Angelis. (2) Whether it is from God by means of the angels? Tertio, utrum ad prophetiam requiratur dispositio naturalis. (3) Whether a natural disposition is requisite for prophecy? Quarto, utrum requiratur bonitas morum. (4) Whether a good life is requisite? Quinto, utrum sit aliqua prophetia a Daemonibus. (5) Whether any prophecy is from the demons? Sexto, utrum prophetae Daemonum aliquando dicant verum. (6) Whether prophets of the demons ever tell what is true? Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum prophetia possit esse naturalis Whether prophecy can be natural? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod prophetia possit esse naturalis. Dicit enim Gregorius in IV Dialog., quod ipsa aliquando animarum vis sua subtilitate aliquid praevidet. Et Augustinus dicit, in XII super Gen. ad Litt., quod animae humanae, secundum quod a sensibus corporis abstrahitur competit futura praevidere. Hoc autem pertinet ad prophetiam. Ergo anima naturaliter potest assequi prophetiam. Objection 1: It would seem that prophecy can be natural. For Gregory says (Dial. iv, 26) that sometimes the mere strength of the soul is sufficiently cunning to foresee certain things: and Augustine says (Gen ad lit. xii, 13) that the human soul, according as it is withdrawn from the sense of the body, is able to foresee the future. Now this pertains to prophecy. Therefore the soul can acquire prophecy naturally. Praeterea, cognitio animae humanae magis viget in vigilando quam in dormiendo. Sed in dormiendo quidam naturaliter praevident quaedam futura, ut patet per philosophum, in libro de somno et Vigil. Ergo multo magis potest homo naturaliter futura praecognoscere. Obj. 2: Further, the human soul’s knowledge is more alert while one wakes than while one sleeps. Now some, during sleep, naturally foresee the future, as the Philosopher asserts (De Somn. et Vigil. ). Much more therefore can a man naturally foreknow the future. Praeterea, homo secundum suam naturam est perfectior animalibus brutis. Sed quaedam animalia bruta habent praecognitionem futurorum ad se pertinentium, sicut formicae praecognoscunt pluvias futuras, quod patet ex hoc quod ante pluviam incipiunt grana in foramen reponere; et similiter etiam pisces praecognoscunt tempestates futuras, ut perpenditur ex eorum motu, dum loca tempestuosa declinant. Ergo multo magis homines naturaliter praecognoscere possunt futura ad se pertinentia, de quibus est prophetia. Est ergo prophetia a natura. Obj. 3: Further, man, by his nature, is more perfect than dumb animals. Yet some dumb animals have foreknowledge of future things that concern them. Thus ants foreknow the coming rains, which is evident from their gathering grain into their nest before the rain commences; and in like manner fish foreknow a coming storm, as may be gathered from their movements in avoiding places exposed to storm. Much more therefore can men foreknow the future that concerns themselves, and of such things is prophecy. Therefore prophecy comes from nature. Praeterea, Prov. XXIX dicitur, cum prophetia defecerit, dissipabitur populus, et sic patet quod prophetia necessaria est ad hominum conservationem. Sed natura non deficit in necessariis. Ergo videtur quod prophetia sit a natura. Obj. 4: Further, it is written (Prov 29:18): When prophecy shall fail, the people shall be scattered abroad; wherefore it is evident that prophecy is necessary for the stability of the human race. Now nature does not fail in necessaries. Therefore it seems that prophecy is from nature. Sed contra est quod dicitur II Pet. I, non enim voluntate humana allata est aliquando prophetia, sed spiritu sancto inspirante, locuti sunt sancti Dei homines. Ergo prophetia non est a natura, sed ex dono spiritus sancti. On the contrary, It is written (2 Pet 1:21): For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time, but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Spirit. Therefore prophecy comes not from nature, but through the gift of the Holy Spirit. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, prophetica praecognitio potest esse de futuris dupliciter, uno modo, secundum quod sunt in seipsis; alio modo, secundum quod sunt in suis causis. Praecognoscere autem futura secundum quod sunt in seipsis, est proprium divini intellectus, cuius aeternitati sunt omnia praesentia, ut in primo dictum est. Et ideo talis praecognitio futurorum non potest esse a natura, sed solum ex revelatione divina. Futura vero in suis causis possunt praecognosci naturali cognitione etiam ab homine, sicut medicus praecognoscit sanitatem vel mortem futuram in aliquibus causis, quarum ordinem ad tales effectus experimento praecognoverunt. Et talis praecognitio futurorum potest intelligi esse in homine a natura dupliciter. Uno modo, sic quod statim anima, ex eo quod in seipsa habet, possit futura praecognoscere. Et sic sicut Augustinus dicit, XII super Gen. ad Litt., quidam voluerunt animam humanam habere quandam vim divinationis in seipsa. Et hoc videtur esse secundum opinionem Platonis, qui posuit quod animae habent omnium rerum cognitionem per participationem idearum, sed ista cognitio obnubilatur in eis per coniunctionem corporis, in quibusdam tamen plus, in quibusdam vero minus, secundum corporis puritatem diversam. Et secundum hoc, posset dici quod homines habentes animas non multum obtenebratas ex corporum unione, possunt talia futura praecognoscere secundum propriam scientiam. Contra hoc autem obiicit Augustinus, cur non semper potest, scilicet vim divinationis habere anima, cum semper velit? I answer that, As stated above (Q. 171, A. 6, ad 2) prophetic foreknowledge may regard future things in two ways: in one way, as they are in themselves; in another way, as they are in their causes. Now, to foreknow future things, as they are in themselves, is proper to the Divine intellect, to Whose eternity all things are present, as stated in the First Part (Q. 14, A. 13). Wherefore such like foreknowledge of the future cannot come from nature, but from Divine revelation alone. On the other hand, future things can be foreknown in their causes with a natural knowledge even by man: thus a physician foreknows future health or death in certain causes, through previous experimental knowledge of the order of those causes to such effects. Such like knowledge of the future may be understood to be in a man by nature in two ways. In one way that the soul, from that which it holds, is able to foreknow the future, and thus Augustine says (Gen ad lit. xii, 13): Some have deemed the human soul to contain a certain power of divination. This seems to be in accord with the opinion of Plato, who held that our souls have knowledge of all things by participating in the ideas; but that this knowledge is obscured in them by union with the body; yet in some more, in others less, according to a difference in bodily purity. According to this it might be said that men, whose souls are not much obscured through union with the body, are able to foreknow such like future things by their own knowledge. Against this opinion Augustine says (Gen ad lit. xii, 13): How is it that the soul cannot always have this power of divination, since it always wishes to have it? Sed quia verius esse videtur quod anima ex sensibilibus cognitionem acquirat, secundum sententiam Aristotelis, ut in primo dictum est; ideo melius est dicendum alio modo, quod praecognitionem talium futurorum homines non habent sed, acquirere possunt per viam experimentalem; in qua iuvantur per naturalem dispositionem secundum quam in homine invenitur perfectio virtutis imaginativae et claritas intelligentiae. Since, however, it seems truer, according to the opinion of Aristotle, that the soul acquires knowledge from sensibles, as stated in the First Part (Q. 84, A. 6), it is better to have recourse to another explanation, and to hold that men have no such foreknowledge of the future, but that they can acquire it by means of experience, wherein they are helped by their natural disposition, which depends on the perfection of a man’s imaginative power, and the clarity of his understanding. Et tamen haec praecognitio futurorum differt a prima, quae habetur ex revelatione divina, dupliciter. Primo quidem, quia prima potest esse quorumcumque eventuum, et infallibiliter. Haec autem praecognitio quae naturaliter haberi potest, est circa quosdam effectus ad quos se potest extendere experientia humana. Secundo, quia prima prophetia est secundum immobilem veritatem, non autem secunda, sed potest ei subesse falsum. Prima autem praecognitio proprie pertinet ad prophetiam, non secunda, quia, sicut supra dictum est, prophetica cognitio est eorum quae excedunt universaliter humanam cognitionem. Et ideo dicendum est quod prophetia simpliciter dicta non potest esse a natura, sed solum ex revelatione divina. Nevertheless this latter foreknowledge of the future differs in two ways from the former, which comes through Divine revelation. First, because the former can be about any events whatever, and this infallibly; whereas the latter foreknowledge, which can be had naturally, is about certain effects, to which human experience may extend. Second, because the former prophecy is according to the unchangeable truth, while the latter is not, and can cover a falsehood. Now the former foreknowledge, and not the latter, properly belongs to prophecy, because, as stated above (Q. 171, A. 3), prophetic knowledge is of things which naturally surpass human knowledge. Consequently we must say that prophecy strictly so called cannot be from nature, but only from Divine revelation. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod anima, quando abstrahitur a corporalibus, aptior redditur ad percipiendum influxum spiritualium substantiarum, et etiam ad percipiendum subtiles motus qui ex impressionibus causarum naturalium in imaginatione humana relinquuntur, a quibus percipiendis anima impeditur cum fuerit circa sensibilia occupata. Et ideo Gregorius dicit quod anima quando appropinquat ad mortem, praecognoscit quaedam futura subtilitate suae naturae, prout scilicet percipit etiam modicas impressiones. Aut etiam cognoscit futura revelatione angelica. Non autem propria virtute. Quia, ut Augustinus dicit, XII super Gen. ad Litt., si hoc esset, tunc haberet quandocumque vellet, in sua potestate futura praecognoscere, quod patet esse falsum. Reply Obj. 1: When the soul is withdrawn from corporeal things, it becomes more adapted to receive the influence of spiritual substances, and also is more inclined to receive the subtle motions which take place in the human imagination through the impression of natural causes, whereas it is hindered from receiving them while occupied with sensible things. Hence Gregory says (Dial. iv, 26) that the soul, at the approach of death, foresees certain future things, by reason of the subtlety of its nature, inasmuch as it is receptive even of slight impressions. Or again, it knows future things by a revelation of the angels; but not by its own power, because according to Augustine (Gen ad lit. xii, 13), if this were so, it would be able to foreknow the future whenever it willed, which is clearly false. Ad secundum dicendum quod praecognitio futurorum quae fit in somnis, est aut ex revelatione substantiarum spiritualium, aut ex causa corporali, ut dictum est cum de divinationibus ageretur. Utrumque autem melius potest fieri in dormientibus quam in vigilantibus, quia anima vigilantis est occupata circa exteriora sensibilia, unde minus potest percipere subtiles impressiones vel spiritualium substantiarum vel etiam causarum naturalium. Quantum tamen ad perfectionem iudicii, plus viget ratio in vigilando quam in dormiendo. Reply Obj. 2: Knowledge of the future by means of dreams, comes either from the revelation of spiritual substances, or from a corporeal cause, as stated above (Q. 95, A. 6), when we were treating of divination. Now both these causes are more applicable to a person while asleep than while awake, because, while awake, the soul is occupied with external sensibles, so that it is less receptive of the subtle impressions either of spiritual substances, or even of natural causes; although as regards the perfection of judgment, the reason is more alert in waking than in sleeping. Ad tertium dicendum quod bruta etiam animalia non habent praecognitionem futurorum effectuum nisi secundum quod ex suis causis praecognoscuntur, ex quibus eorum phantasiae moventur. Et magis quam hominum, quia phantasiae hominum, maxime in vigilando, disponuntur magis secundum rationem quam secundum impressionem naturalium causarum. Ratio autem facit in homine multo abundantius id quod in brutis facit impressio causarum naturalium. Et adhuc magis adiuvat hominem divina gratia prophetas inspirans. Reply Obj. 3: Even dumb animals have no foreknowledge of future events, except as these are foreknown in their causes, whereby their imagination is moved more than man’s, because man’s imagination, especially in waking, is more disposed according to reason than according to the impression of natural causes. Yet reason effects much more amply in man, that which the impression of natural causes effects in dumb animals; and Divine grace by inspiring the prophecy assists man still more. Ad quartum dicendum quod lumen propheticum se extendit etiam ad directiones humanorum actuum. Et secundum hoc, prophetia necessaria est ad populi gubernationem. Et praecipue in ordine ad cultum divinum, ad quem natura non sufficit, sed requiritur gratia. Reply Obj. 4: The prophetic light extends even to the direction of human acts; and in this way prophecy is requisite for the government of a people, especially in relation to Divine worship; since for this nature is not sufficient, and grace is necessary. Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum prophetica revelatio non fiat per angelos Whether prophetic revelation comes through the angels? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod prophetica revelatio non fiat per Angelos. Dicitur enim Sap. VII, quod sapientia Dei in animas sanctas se transfert, et amicos Dei et prophetas constituit. Sed amicos Dei constituit immediate. Ergo etiam prophetas facit immediate, non mediantibus Angelis. Objection 1: It would seem that prophetic revelation does not come through the angels. For it is written (Wis 7:27) that Divine wisdom conveyeth herself into holy souls, and maketh the friends of God, and the prophets. Now wisdom makes the friends of God immediately. Therefore it also makes the prophets immediately, and not through the medium of the angels. Praeterea, prophetia ponitur inter gratias gratis datas. Sed gratiae gratis datae sunt a spiritu sancto, secundum illud, divisiones gratiarum sunt, idem autem spiritus. Non ergo prophetica revelatio fit Angelo mediante. Obj. 2: Further, prophecy is reckoned among the gratuitous graces. But the gratuitous graces are from the Holy Spirit, according to 1 Cor. 12:4, There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit. Therefore the prophetic revelation is not made by means of an angel. Praeterea, Cassiodorus dicit quod prophetia est divina revelatio. Si autem fieret per Angelos, diceretur angelica revelatio. Non ergo prophetia fit per Angelos. Obj. 3: Further, Cassiodorus says that prophecy is a Divine revelation: whereas if it were conveyed by the angels, it would be called an angelic revelation. Therefore prophecy is not bestowed by means of the angels. Sed contra est quod Dionysius dicit, IV cap. Cael. Hier., divinas visiones gloriosi patres nostri adepti sunt per medias caelestes virtutes. Loquitur autem ibi de visionibus propheticis. Ergo revelatio prophetica fit Angelis mediantibus. On the contrary, Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. iv): Our glorious fathers received Divine visions by means of the heavenly powers; and he is speaking there of prophetic visions. Therefore prophetic revelation is conveyed by means of the angels. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut apostolus dicit, Rom. XIII, quae a Deo sunt, ordinata sunt. Habet autem hoc divinitatis ordo, sicut Dionysius dicit, ut infima per media disponat. Angeli autem medii sunt inter Deum et homines, utpote plus participantes de perfectione divinae bonitatis quam homines. Et ideo illuminationes et revelationes divinae a Deo ad homines per Angelos deferuntur. Prophetica autem cognitio fit secundum illuminationem et revelationem divinam. Unde manifestum est quod fiat per Angelos. I answer that, As the Apostle says (Rom 13:1), Things that are of God are well ordered. Now the Divine ordering, according to Dionysius, is such that the lowest things are directed by middle things. Now the angels hold a middle position between God and men, in that they have a greater share in the perfection of the Divine goodness than men have. Wherefore the Divine enlightenments and revelations are conveyed from God to men by the angels. Now prophetic knowledge is bestowed by Divine enlightenment and revelation. Therefore it is evident that it is conveyed by the angels. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod caritas, secundum quam fit homo amicus Dei, est perfectio voluntatis, in quam solus Deus imprimere potest. Sed prophetia est perfectio intellectus, in quem etiam Angelus potest imprimere, ut in primo dictum est. Et ideo non est similis ratio de utroque. Reply Obj. 1: Charity which makes man a friend of God, is a perfection of the will, in which God alone can form an impression; whereas prophecy is a perfection of the intellect, in which an angel also can form an impression, as stated in the First Part (Q. 111, A. 1), wherefore the comparison fails between the two. Ad secundum dicendum quod gratiae gratis datae attribuuntur spiritui sancto sicut primo principio, qui tamen operatur huiusmodi gratias in hominibus mediante ministerio Angelorum. Reply Obj. 2: The gratuitous graces are ascribed to the Holy Spirit as their first principle: yet He works grace of this kind in men by means of the angels. Ad tertium dicendum quod operatio instrumenti attribuitur principali agenti, in cuius virtute instrumentum agit. Et quia minister est sicut instrumentum, idcirco prophetica revelatio, quae fit ministerio Angelorum, dicitur esse divina. Reply Obj. 3: The work of the instrument is ascribed to the principal agent by whose power the instrument acts. And since a minister is like an instrument, prophetic revelation, which is conveyed by the ministry of the angels, is said to be Divine. Articulus 3 Article 3 Utrum ad prophetiam requiratur dispositio naturalis Whether a natural disposition is requisite for prophecy? Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod ad prophetiam requiratur dispositio naturalis. Prophetia enim recipitur in propheta secundum dispositionem recipientis. Quia super illud Amos I, dominus de Sion rugiet, dicit Glossa Hieronymi, naturale est ut omnes qui volunt rem rei comparare, ex eis rebus sumant comparationes quas sunt experti et in quibus sunt nutriti, verbi gratia, nautae suos inimicos ventis, damnum naufragio comparant. Sic et Amos, qui fuit pastor pecorum timorem Dei rugitui leonis assimilat. Sed quod recipitur in aliquo secundum modum recipientis, requirit naturalem dispositionem. Ergo prophetia requirit naturalem dispositionem. Objection 1: It would seem that a natural disposition is requisite for prophecy. For prophecy is received by the prophet according to the disposition of the recipient, since a gloss of Jerome on Amos 1:2, The Lord will roar from Zion, says: Anyone who wishes to make a comparison naturally turns to those things of which he has experience, and among which his life is spent. For example, sailors compare their enemies to the winds, and their losses to a shipwreck. In like manner Amos, who was a shepherd, likens the fear of God to that which is inspired by the lion’s roar. Now that which is received by a thing according to the mode of the recipient requires a natural disposition. Therefore prophecy requires a natural disposition.