Pro iustis etiam est orandum, triplici ratione. Primo quidem, quia multorum preces facilius exaudiuntur. Unde Rom. XV, super illud, adiuvetis me in orationibus vestris, dicit Glossa, bene rogat apostolus minores pro se orare. Multi enim minimi, dum congregantur unanimes, fiunt magni, et multorum preces impossibile est quod non impetrent, illud scilicet quod est impetrabile. Secundo, ut ex multis gratia agatur Deo de beneficiis quae confert iustis, quae etiam in utilitatem multorum vergunt, ut patet per apostolum, II ad Cor. I. Tertio, ut maiores non superbiant, dum considerant se minorum suffragiis indigere. We ought also to pray for the just for three reasons: First, because the prayers of a multitude are more easily heard, wherefore a gloss on Rom. 15:30, Help me in your prayers, says: The Apostle rightly tells the lesser brethren to pray for him, for many lesser ones, if they be united together in one mind, become great, and it is impossible for the prayers of a multitude not to obtain that which is possible to be obtained by prayer. Second, that many may thank God for the graces conferred on the just, which graces conduce to the profit of many, according to the Apostle (2 Cor 1:11). Third, that the more perfect may not wax proud, seeing that they find that they need the prayers of the less perfect. Articulus 8 Article 8 Utrum debeamus pro inimicis orare Whether we ought to pray for our enemies? Ad octavum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non debeamus pro inimicis orare. Quia, ut dicitur Rom. XV, quaecumque scripta sunt, ad nostram doctrinam scripta sunt. Sed in sacra Scriptura inducuntur multae imprecationes contra inimicos, dicitur enim in Psalm., erubescant et conturbentur omnes inimici mei, erubescant et conturbentur valde velociter. Ergo et nos debemus orare contra inimicos, magis quam pro eis. Objection 1: It would seem that we ought not to pray for our enemies. According to Rom. 15:4, what things soever were written, were written for our learning. Now Holy Writ contains many imprecations against enemies; thus it is written (Ps 6:11): Let all my enemies be ashamed and be . . . troubled, let them be ashamed and be troubled very speedily. Therefore we too should pray against rather than for our enemies. Praeterea, vindicari de inimicis in malum inimicorum cedit. Sed sancti vindictam de inimicis petunt, secundum illud Apoc. VI, usquequo non vindicas sanguinem nostrum de his qui habitant in terra? Unde et de vindicta impiorum laetantur, secundum illud Psalm., laetabitur iustus cum viderit vindictam. Ergo non est orandum pro inimicis, sed magis contra eos. Obj. 2: Further, to be revenged on one’s enemies is harmful to them. But holy men seek vengeance of their enemies according to Apoc. 6:10, How long . . . dost Thou not . . . revenge our blood on them that dwell on earth? Wherefore they rejoice in being revenged on their enemies, according to Ps. 57:11, The just shall rejoice when he shall see the revenge. Therefore we should not pray for our enemies, but against them. Praeterea, operatio hominis et eius oratio non debent esse contraria. Sed homines quandoque licite impugnant inimicos, alioquin omnia bella essent illicita, quod est contra supradicta. Ergo non debemus orare pro inimicis. Obj. 3: Further, man’s deed should not be contrary to his prayer. Now sometimes men lawfully attack their enemies, else all wars would be unlawful, which is opposed to what we have said above (Q. 40, A. 1). Therefore we should not pray for our enemies. Sed contra est quod dicitur Matth. V, orate pro persequentibus et calumniantibus vos. On the contrary, It is written (Matt 5:44): Pray for them that persecute and calumniate you. Respondeo dicendum quod orare pro alio caritatis est, sicut dictum est. Unde eodem modo quo tenemur diligere inimicos, tenemur pro inimicis orare. Qualiter autem teneamur inimicos diligere supra habitum est, in tractatu de caritate, ut scilicet in eis diligamus naturam, non culpam; et quod diligere inimicos in generali est in praecepto, in speciali autem non est in praecepto nisi secundum praeparationem animi, ut scilicet homo esset paratus etiam specialiter inimicum diligere et eum iuvare in necessitatis articulo, vel si veniam peteret; sed in speciali absolute inimicos diligere et eos iuvare perfectionis est. I answer that, To pray for another is an act of charity, as stated above (A. 7). Wherefore we are bound to pray for our enemies in the same manner as we are bound to love them. Now it was explained above in the treatise on charity (Q. 25, AA. 8, 9), how we are bound to love our enemies, namely, that we must love in them their nature, not their sin, and that to love our enemies in general is a matter of precept, while to love them in the individual is not a matter of precept, except in the preparedness of the mind, so that a man must be prepared to love his enemy even in the individual and to help him in a case of necessity, or if his enemy should beg his forgiveness. But to love one’s enemies absolutely in the individual, and to assist them, is an act of perfection. Et similiter necessitatis est ut in communibus nostris orationibus quas pro aliis facimus, inimicos non excludamus. Quod autem pro eis specialiter oremus, perfectionis est, non necessitatis, nisi in aliquo casu speciali. In like manner it is a matter of obligation that we should not exclude our enemies from the general prayers which we offer up for others: but it is a matter of perfection, and not of obligation, to pray for them individually, except in certain special cases. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod imprecationes quae in sacra Scriptura ponuntur quadrupliciter possunt intelligi. Uno modo, secundum quod prophetae solent figura imprecantis futura praedicere, ut Augustinus dicit, in libro de Serm. Dom. in monte. Secundo, prout quaedam temporalia mala peccatoribus quandoque a Deo ad correctionem immittuntur. Tertio, quia intelliguntur petere non contra ipsos homines, sed contra regnum peccati, ut scilicet correctione hominum peccatum destruatur. Quarto, conformando voluntatem suam divinae iustitiae circa damnationem perseverantium in peccato. Reply Obj. 1: The imprecations contained in Holy Writ may be understood in four ways. First, according to the custom of the prophets to foretell the future under the veil of an imprecation, as Augustine states. Second, in the sense that certain temporal evils are sometimes inflicted by God on the wicked for their correction. Third, because they are understood to be pronounced, not against the men themselves, but against the kingdom of sin, with the purpose, to wit, of destroying sin by the correction of men. Fourth, by way of conformity of our will to the Divine justice with regard to the damnation of those who are obstinate in sin. Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut in eodem libro Augustinus dicit, vindicta martyrum est ut evertatur regnum peccati, quo regnante tanta perpessi sunt. Vel, sicut dicitur in libro de quaest. Vet. et novi Test., postulant se vindicari non voce, sed ratione, sicut sanguis Abel clamavit de terra. Laetantur autem de vindicta non propter eam, sed propter divinam iustitiam. Reply Obj. 2: As Augustine states in the same book (De Serm. Dom. in Monte i, 22), the martyrs’ vengeance is the overthrow of the kingdom of sin, because they suffered so much while it reigned: or as he says again (QQ. Vet. et Nov. Test. lxviii), their prayer for vengeance is expressed not in words but in their minds, even as the blood of Abel cried from the earth. They rejoice in vengeance not for its own sake, but for the sake of Divine justice. Ad tertium dicendum quod licitum est impugnare inimicos ut compescantur a peccatis, quod cedit in bonum eorum et aliorum. Et sic etiam licet orando petere aliqua temporalia mala inimicorum ut corrigantur. Et sic oratio et operatio non erunt contraria. Reply Obj. 3: It is lawful to attack one’s enemies, that they may be restrained from sin: and this is for their own good and for the good of others. Consequently it is even lawful in praying to ask that temporal evils be inflicted on our enemies in order that they may mend their ways. Thus prayer and deed will not be contrary to one another. Articulus 9 Article 9 Utrum convenienter septem petitiones Orationis Dominicae assignentur Whether the seven petitions of the Lord’s Prayer are fittingly assigned? Ad nonum sic proceditur. Videtur quod inconvenienter septem petitiones orationis dominicae assignentur. Vanum enim est petere illud quod semper est. Sed nomen Dei semper est sanctum, secundum illud Luc. I, sanctum nomen eius. Regnum etiam eius est sempiternum, secundum illud Psalmo, regnum tuum, domine, regnum omnium saeculorum. Voluntas etiam Dei semper impletur, secundum illud Isaiae XLVI, omnis voluntas mea fiet. Vanum ergo est petere quod nomen Dei sanctificetur, quod regnum eius adveniat, et quod eius voluntas fiat. Objection 1: It would seem that the seven petitions of the Lord’s Prayer are not fittingly assigned. It is useless to ask for that to be hallowed which is always holy. But the name of God is always holy, according to Luke 1:49, Holy is His name. Again, His kingdom is everlasting, according to Ps. 144:13, Thy kingdom is a kingdom of all ages. Again, God’s will is always fulfilled, according to Isa 46:10, All My will shall be done. Therefore it is useless to ask for the name of God to be hallowed, for His kingdom to come, and for His will to be done. Praeterea, prius est recedere a malo quam consequi bonum. Inconvenienter igitur videntur praeordinari petitiones quae pertinent ad consequendum bonum, petitionibus quae pertinent ad amotionem mali. Obj. 2: Further, one must withdraw from evil before attaining good. Therefore it seems unfitting for the petitions relating to the attainment of good to be set forth before those relating to the removal of evil. Praeterea, ad hoc aliquid petitur ut donetur. Sed praecipuum donum Dei est Spiritus Sanctus, et ea quae nobis per ipsum dantur. Ergo videntur inconvenienter proponi petitiones, cum non respondeant donis spiritus sancti. Obj. 3: Further, one asks for a thing that it may be given to one. Now the chief gift of God is the Holy Spirit, and those gifts that we receive through Him. Therefore the petitions seem to be unfittingly assigned, since they do not correspond to the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Praeterea, secundum Lucam in oratione dominica ponuntur solum quinque petitiones, ut patet Luc. XI. Superfluum igitur fuit quod secundum Matthaeum septem petitiones ponuntur. Obj. 4: Further, according to Luke, only five petitions are mentioned in the Lord’s Prayer, as appears from the eleventh chapter. Therefore it was superfluous for Matthew to mention seven. Praeterea, in vanum videtur captare benevolentiam eius qui benevolentia sua nos praevenit. Sed Deus nos sua benevolentia praevenit, quia ipse prior dilexit nos, ut dicitur I Ioan. IV. Superflue ergo praemittitur petitionibus, pater noster, qui es in caelis, quod videtur ad benevolentiam captandam pertinere. Obj. 5: Further, it seems useless to seek to win the benevolence of one who forestalls us by his benevolence. Now God forestalls us by His benevolence, since He first hath loved us (1 John 4:19). Therefore it is useless to preface the petitions with the words our Father Who art in heaven, which seem to indicate a desire to win God’s benevolence. Sed in contrarium sufficit auctoritas Christi orationem instituentis. On the contrary, The authority of Christ, who composed this prayer, suffices. Respondeo dicendum quod oratio dominica perfectissima est, quia, sicut Augustinus dicit, ad Probam, si recte et congruenter oramus, nihil aliud dicere possumus quam quod in ista oratione dominica positum est. Quia enim oratio est quodammodo desiderii nostri interpres apud Deum, illa solum recte orando petimus quae recte desiderare valemus. In oratione autem dominica non solum petuntur omnia quae recte desiderare possumus, sed etiam eo ordine quo desideranda sunt, ut sic haec oratio non solum instruat postulare, sed etiam sit informativa totius nostri affectus. Manifestum est autem quod primo cadit in desiderio finis; deinde ea quae sunt ad finem. Finis autem noster Deus est. In quem noster affectus tendit dupliciter, uno quidem modo, prout volumus gloriam Dei; alio modo, secundum quod volumus frui gloria eius. Quorum primum pertinet ad dilectionem qua Deum in seipso diligimus, secundum vero pertinet ad dilectionem qua diligimus nos in Deo. Et ideo prima petitio ponitur, sanctificetur nomen tuum, per quam petimus gloriam Dei. Secunda vero ponitur, adveniat regnum tuum, per quam petimus ad gloriam regni eius pervenire. I answer that, The Lord’s Prayer is most perfect, because, as Augustine says (ad Probam Ep. cxxx, 12), if we pray rightly and fittingly, we can say nothing else but what is contained in this prayer of our Lord. For since prayer interprets our desires, as it were, before God, then alone is it right to ask for something in our prayers when it is right that we should desire it. Now in the Lord’s Prayer not only do we ask for all that we may rightly desire, but also in the order wherein we ought to desire them, so that this prayer not only teaches us to ask, but also directs all our affections. Thus it is evident that the first thing to be the object of our desire is the end, and afterwards whatever is directed to the end. Now our end is God towards Whom our affections tend in two ways: first, by our willing the glory of God, second, by willing to enjoy His glory. The first belongs to the love whereby we love God in Himself, while the second belongs to the love whereby we love ourselves in God. Wherefore the first petition is expressed thus: Hallowed be Thy name, and the second thus: Thy kingdom come, by which we ask to come to the glory of His kingdom. Ad finem autem praedictum ordinat nos aliquid dupliciter, uno modo, per se; alio modo, per accidens. Per se quidem, bonum quod est utile in finem. Est autem aliquid utile in finem beatitudinis dupliciter. Uno modo, directe et principaliter, secundum meritum quo beatitudinem meremur Deo obediendo. Et quantum ad hoc ponitur, fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo, et in terra. Alio modo, instrumentaliter, et quasi coadiuvans nos ad merendum. Et ad hoc pertinet quod dicitur, panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, sive hoc intelligatur de pane sacramentali, cuius quotidianus usus proficit homini, in quo etiam intelliguntur omnia alia sacramenta; sive etiam intelligatur de pane corporali, ut per panem intelligatur omnis sufficientia victus, sicut dicit Augustinus, ad Probam; quia et Eucharistia est praecipuum sacramentum, et panis est praecipuus cibus, unde et in Evangelio Matthaei scriptum est, supersubstantialem, idest praecipuum, ut Hieronymus exponit. To this same end a thing directs us in two ways: in one way, by its very nature, in another way, accidentally. Of its very nature the good which is useful for an end directs us to that end. Now a thing is useful in two ways to that end which is beatitude: in one way, directly and principally, according to the merit whereby we merit beatitude by obeying God, and in this respect we ask: Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven; in another way instrumentally, and as it were helping us to merit, and in this respect we say: Give us this day our daily bread, whether we understand this of the sacramental Bread, the daily use of which is profitable to man, and in which all the other sacraments are contained, or of the bread of the body, so that it denotes all sufficiency of food, as Augustine says (ad Probam, Ep. cxxx, 11), since the Eucharist is the chief sacrament, and bread is the chief food: thus in the Gospel of Matthew we read, supersubstantial, i.e., principal, as Jerome expounds it. Per accidens autem ordinamur in beatitudinem per remotionem prohibentis. Tria autem sunt quae nos a beatitudine prohibent. Primo quidem, peccatum, quod directe excludit a regno, secundum illud I ad Cor. VI, neque fornicarii, neque idolis servientes, etc., regnum Dei possidebunt. Et ad hoc pertinet quod dicitur, dimitte nobis debita nostra. Secundo, tentatio, quae nos impedit ab observantia divinae voluntatis. Et ad hoc pertinet quod dicitur, et ne nos inducas in tentationem, per quod non petimus ut non tentemur, sed ut a tentatione non vincamur, quod est in tentationem induci. Tertio, poenalitas praesens, quae impedit sufficientiam vitae. Et quantum ad hoc dicitur, libera nos a malo. We are directed to beatitude accidentally by the removal of obstacles. Now there are three obstacles to our attainment of beatitude. First, there is sin, which directly excludes a man from the kingdom, according to 1 Cor. 6:9, 10, Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, etc., shall possess the kingdom of God; and to this refer the words, Forgive us our trespasses. Second, there is temptation which hinders us from keeping God’s will, and to this we refer when we say: And lead us not into temptation, whereby we do not ask not to be tempted, but not to be conquered by temptation, which is to be led into temptation. Third, there is the present penal state which is a kind of obstacle to a sufficiency of life, and to this we refer in the words, Deliver us from evil. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, in libro de Serm. Dom. in monte, cum dicimus, sanctificetur nomen tuum, non hoc petitur quasi non sit sanctum Dei nomen, sed ut sanctum ab hominibus habeatur; quod pertinet ad Dei gloriam in hominibus propagandam. Quod autem dicitur, adveniat regnum tuum, non ita dictum est quasi Deus nunc non regnet, sed, sicut Augustinus dicit, ad Probam, desiderium nostrum ad illud regnum excitamus, ut nobis veniat, atque in eo regnemus. Quod autem dicitur, fiat voluntas tua, recte intelligitur, obediatur praeceptis tuis. Sicut in caelo et in terra, idest, sicut ab Angelis, ita ab hominibus. Unde hae tres petitiones perfecte complebuntur in vita futura, aliae vero quatuor pertinent ad necessitatem vitae praesentis, sicut Augustinus dicit, in Enchiridio. Reply Obj. 1: As Augustine says (De Serm. Dom. in Monte ii, 5), when we say, Hallowed be Thy name, we do not mean that God’s name is not holy, but we ask that men may treat it as a holy thing, and this pertains to the diffusion of God’s glory among men. When we say, Thy kingdom come, we do not imply that God is not reigning now, but we excite in ourselves the desire for that kingdom, that it may come to us, and that we may reign therein, as Augustine says (ad Probam, Ep. cxxx, 11). The words, Thy will be done rightly signify, ‘May Thy commandments be obeyed’ on earth as in heaven, i.e., by men as well as by angels (De Serm. Dom. in Monte ii, 6). Hence these three petitions will be perfectly fulfilled in the life to come; while the other four, according to Augustine (Enchiridion cxv), belong to the needs of the present life. Ad secundum dicendum quod, cum oratio sit interpres desiderii, ordo petitionum non respondet ordini executionis, sed ordini desiderii sive intentionis, in quo prius est finis quam ea quae sunt ad finem, et consecutio boni quam remotio mali. Reply Obj. 2: Since prayer is the interpreter of desire, the order of the petitions corresponds with the order, not of execution, but of desire or intention, where the end precedes the things that are directed to the end, and attainment of good precedes removal of evil. Ad tertium dicendum quod Augustinus, in libro de Serm. Dom. in monte, adaptat septem petitiones donis et beatitudinibus, dicens, si timor Dei est quo beati sunt pauperes spiritu, petamus ut sanctificetur in hominibus nomen Dei timore casto. Si pietas est qua beati sunt mites, petamus ut veniat regnum eius, ut mitescamus, nec ei resistamus. Si scientia est qua beati sunt qui lugent, oremus ut fiat voluntas eius, quia sic non lugebimus. Si fortitudo est qua beati sunt qui esuriunt, oremus ut panis noster quotidianus detur nobis. Si consilium est quo beati sunt misericordes, debita dimittamus, ut nobis nostra dimittantur. Si intellectus est quo beati sunt mundo corde, oremus ne habeamus duplex cor, temporalia sectando, de quibus tentationes fiunt in nobis. Si sapientia est qua beati sunt pacifici quoniam filii Dei vocabuntur, oremus ut liberemur a malo, ipsa enim liberatio liberos nos faciet filios Dei. Reply Obj. 3: Augustine (De Serm. Dom. in Monte ii, 11) adapts the seven petitions to the gifts and beatitudes. He says: If it is fear of God whereby blessed are the poor in spirit, let us ask that God’s name be hallowed among men with a chaste fear. If it is piety whereby blessed are the meek, let us ask that His kingdom may come, so that we become meek and no longer resist Him. If it is knowledge whereby blessed are they that mourn, let us pray that His will be done, for thus we shall mourn no more. If it is fortitude whereby blessed are they that hunger, let us pray that our daily bread be given to us. If it is counsel whereby blessed are the merciful, let us forgive the trespasses of others that our own may be forgiven. If it is understanding whereby blessed are the pure in heart, let us pray lest we have a double heart by seeking after worldly things which ere the occasion of our temptations. If it is wisdom whereby blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God, let us pray to be delivered from evil: for if we be delivered we shall by that very fact become the free children of God. Ad quartum dicendum quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, in Enchirid., Lucas in oratione dominica petitiones non septem, sed quinque complexus est. Ostendens enim tertiam petitionem duarum praemissarum esse quodammodo repetitionem, praetermittendo eam facit intelligi, quia scilicet ad hoc praecipue voluntas Dei tendit ut eius sanctitatem cognoscamus, et cum ipso regnemus. Quod etiam Matthaeus in ultimo posuit, libera nos a malo, Lucas non posuit, ut sciat unusquisque in eo se liberari a malo quod non infertur in tentationem. Reply Obj. 4: According to Augustine (Enchiridion cxvi), Luke included not seven but five petitions in the Lord’s Prayer, for by omitting it, he shows that the third petition is a kind of repetition of the two that precede, and thus helps us to understand it; because, to wit, the will of God tends chiefly to this—that we come to the knowledge of His holiness and to reign together with Him. Again the last petition mentioned by Matthew, Deliver us from evil, is omitted by Luke, so that each one may know himself to be delivered from evil if he be not led into temptation. Ad quintum dicendum quod oratio non porrigitur Deo ut ipsum flectamus, sed ut in nobis ipsis fiduciam excitemus postulandi. Quae quidem praecipue excitatur in nobis considerando eius caritatem ad nos, qua bonum nostrum vult, et ideo dicimus, pater noster; et eius excellentiam, qua potest, et ideo dicimus, qui es in caelis. Reply Obj. 5: Prayer is offered up to God, not that we may bend Him, but that we may excite in ourselves the confidence to ask: which confidence is excited in us chiefly by the consideration of His charity in our regard, whereby he wills our good—wherefore we say: Our Father; and of His excellence, whereby He is able to fulfill it—wherefore we say: Who art in heaven. Articulus 10 Article 10 Utrum orare sit proprium rationalis creaturae Whether prayer is proper to the rational creature? Ad decimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod orare non sit proprium rationalis creaturae. Eiusdem enim videtur esse petere et accipere. Sed accipere convenit etiam personis increatis, scilicet filio et spiritui sancto. Ergo etiam eis convenit orare, nam et filius dicit, Ioan. XIV, ego rogabo patrem; et de spiritu sancto dicit apostolus, spiritus postulat pro nobis. Objection 1: It would seem that prayer is not proper to the rational creature. Asking and receiving apparently belong to the same subject. But receiving is becoming also to uncreated Persons, viz. the Son and Holy Spirit. Therefore it is competent to them to pray: for the Son said (John 14:16): I will ask My Father, and the Apostle says of the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:26): The Spirit . . . asketh for us. Praeterea, Angeli sunt supra rationales creaturas, cum sint intellectuales substantiae. Sed ad Angelos pertinet orare, unde in Psalm. dicitur, adorate eum, omnes Angeli eius. Ergo orare non est proprium rationalis creaturae. Obj. 2: Angels are above rational creatures, since they are intellectual substances. Now prayer is becoming to the angels, wherefore we read in the Ps. 96:7: Adore Him, all you His angels. Therefore prayer is not proper to the rational creature. Praeterea, eiusdem est orare cuius est invocare Deum, quod praecipue fit orando. Sed brutis animalibus convenit invocare Deum secundum illud Psalm., qui dat iumentis escam ipsorum, et pullis corvorum invocantibus eum. Ergo orare non est proprium rationalis creaturae. Obj. 3: Further, the same subject is fitted to pray as is fitted to call upon God, since this consists chiefly in prayer. But dumb animals are fitted to call upon God, according to Ps. 146:9, Who giveth to beasts their food and to the young ravens that call upon Him. Therefore prayer is not proper to the rational creatures. Sed contra, oratio est actus rationis, ut supra habitum est. Sed rationalis creatura a ratione dicitur. Ergo orare est proprium rationalis creaturae. On the contrary, Prayer is an act of reason, as stated above (A. 1). But the rational creature is so called from his reason. Therefore prayer is proper to the rational creature. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut ex supradictis patet, oratio est actus rationis per quem aliquis superiorem deprecatur, sicut imperium est actus rationis quo inferior ad aliquid ordinatur. Illi ergo proprie competit orare cui convenit rationem habere, et superiorem quem deprecari possit. Divinis autem personis nihil est superius, bruta autem animalia non habent rationem. Unde neque divinis personis neque brutis animalibus convenit orare, sed proprium est rationalis creaturae. I answer that, As stated above (A. 1) prayer is an act of reason, and consists in beseeching a superior; just as command is an act of reason, whereby an inferior is directed to something. Accordingly prayer is properly competent to one to whom it is competent to have reason, and a superior whom he may beseech. Now nothing is above the Divine Persons; and dumb animals are devoid of reason. Therefore prayer is unbecoming both the Divine Persons and dumb animals, and it is proper to the rational creature. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod divinis personis convenit accipere per naturam, orare autem est accipientis per gratiam. Dicitur autem filius rogare, vel orare, secundum naturam assumptam, scilicet humanam, non secundum divinam. Spiritus autem sanctus dicitur postulare, quia postulantes nos facit. Reply Obj. 1: Receiving belongs to the Divine Persons in respect of their nature, whereas prayer belongs to one who receives through grace. The Son is said to ask or pray in respect of His assumed, i.e., His human, nature and not in respect of His Godhead: and the Holy Spirit is said to ask, because He makes us ask.