|
Objection 1: It would seem that an angel is not entirely
incorporeal. For what is incorporeal only as regards ourselves, and
not in relation to God, is not absolutely incorporeal. But
Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii) that "an angel is said to be
incorporeal and immaterial as regards us; but compared to God it is
corporeal and material. Therefore he is not simply incorporeal."
Objection 2: Further, nothing is moved except a body, as the
Philosopher says (Phys. vi, text 32). But Damascene says
(De Fide Orth. ii) that "an angel is an ever movable intellectual
substance." Therefore an angel is a corporeal substance.
Objection 3: Further, Ambrose says (De Spir. Sanct. i,
7): "Every creature is limited within its own nature." But to be
limited belongs to bodies. Therefore, every creature is corporeal.
Now angels are God's creatures, as appears from Ps. 148:2:
"Praise ye" the Lord, "all His angels"; and, farther on
(verse 4), "For He spoke, and they were made; He commanded,
and they were created." Therefore angels are corporeal.
On the contrary, It is said (Ps. 103:4): "Who makes His
angels spirits."
I answer that, There must be some incorporeal creatures. For what
is principally intended by God in creatures is good, and this consists
in assimilation to God Himself. And the perfect assimilation of an
effect to a cause is accomplished when the effect imitates the cause
according to that whereby the cause produces the effect; as heat makes
heat. Now, God produces the creature by His intellect and will
(Question 14, Article 8; Question 19, Article 4). Hence
the perfection of the universe requires that there should be
intellectual creatures. Now intelligence cannot be the action of a
body, nor of any corporeal faculty; for every body is limited to
"here" and "now." Hence the perfection of the universe requires
the existence of an incorporeal creature.
The ancients, however, not properly realizing the force of
intelligence, and failing to make a proper distinction between sense
and intellect, thought that nothing existed in the world but what could
be apprehended by sense and imagination. And because bodies alone fall
under imagination, they supposed that no being existed except bodies,
as the Philosopher observes (Phys. iv, text 52,57). Thence
came the error of the Sadducees, who said there was no spirit (Acts
23:8).
But the very fact that intellect is above sense is a reasonable proof
that there are some incorporeal things comprehensible by the intellect
alone.
Reply to Objection 1: Incorporeal substances rank between God and
corporeal creatures. Now the medium compared to one extreme appears to
be the other extreme, as what is tepid compared to heat seems to be
cold; and thus it is said that angels, compared to God, are material
and corporeal, not, however, as if anything corporeal existed in
them.
Reply to Objection 2: Movement is there taken in the sense in which
it is applied to intelligence and will. Therefore an angel is called
an ever mobile substance, because he is ever actually intelligent, and
not as if he were sometimes actually and sometimes potentially, as we
are. Hence it is clear that the objection rests on an equivocation.
Reply to Objection 3: To be circumscribed by local limits belongs
to bodies only; whereas to be circumscribed by essential limits belongs
to all creatures, both corporeal and spiritual. Hence Ambrose says
(De Spir. Sanct. i, 7) that "although some things are not
contained in corporeal place, still they are none the less
circumscribed by their substance."
|
|