Sermon

Among all religions and sects the Christian faith rejoices in this privilege that it contains very much that surpasses the natural and the rational, that is, what is beyond reason, more than other religions. The reason for this is that in this faith some most excellent things have been promised which exceed not only our understanding, but even the very desire of a rational creature. (Cf. ST I-II.114.2, resp.) Hence the Apostle says that eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, neither did it come up in the heart of a man, what God has prepared for those who love him (1 Cor 2:9). (Cf. ST I-II.5.5 (happiness) and I-II.62.3 (theological virtues of faith, hope, and love), I-II.114.2 (eternal life).)

And therefore, in accordance with the fitness of what has been promised, the excellence of the things to be believed is in the Christian faith. Whereas in the Old Law earthly and carnal things are promised, as we read in Isaiah 1:19: if you are willing and listen to me, you will eat the goods of the earth. (Cf. ST I-II.99.6, s.c.; resp.) And because of this it was not necessary that in the Old Law the revelation of things that exceed the reason be revealed explicitly, although implicitly and in a certain hidden way many things that exceed the reason were handed down in it. (Even the Incarnation; cf. ST I.73.1, obj. 3.)

And this is what the Lord says in today’s Gospel: when I spoke to you about earthly things, you have not believed me, how then would you believe me if I spoke to you about heavenly things? (John 3:12).

Hence, if they do not believe Christ when he spoke to them about earthly things through the prophets—because he himself is the Word by which every word spoken to the prophets is said (Cf. Psalm 68:11. The triune God speaks his Word through the prophets: ST I.43.3 and 5; I-II.102.2.)—how can they believe him if he spoke of heavenly things? Yet we cannot know those things that are above the reason, but we are to believe them, for knowing is proper to reason, whereas believing is proper to the will. (Cf. ST I-II.62.2 (citing Augustine); I-II.110.3, ad 1; II-II.2.1, ad 3; On Truth, q. 14, a. 1, resp.)

And so it was becoming that the authority of the ones who reveal and of the things that are revealed would be above all others, and in particular about the things that belong to the Holy Trinity. (Seraphim are characterized by an excellent love: ST I.108.5, obj. 5. Love is, just like the other theological virtues of faith and hope, connected with the will (see previous notes). We can know about the Trinity only through our faith: ST II-II.2.8; II-II.171.3. Prophets excel through the grace they received: ST I-II.111.4; cf. II-II.171.4 and 6 and Isaiah in particular because he had a vision; cf. ST II-II.174.2.)

1. Now, the prophet makes the authority of those revealing the mystery of the Holy Trinity known for our day and age based on three things: (1.1) the task, (1.2) the dignity, and (1.3) the unanimity.

1.1. So, based on the task, because he says seraphim, that is, those who glow and set on fire, (ST I.108.5, obj. 5: Thomas explains the name “seraph” etymologically as fire/glow/heat (ardor) setting on fire (incendo), for instance, the lips of the prophet Isaiah: Isaiah 6:7; cf. ST I.112.2, obj. 2; Jerome, Book of Interpretations of Hebrew Names, Isaiah (PL 23:830; CCSL 72:121–22); Isidore of Seville, The Etymologies, bk. 7, ch. 5, para. 24 (PL 82:273–74).) by whom the order of the apostles is implied. For, just as seraphs (Seraphim is Hebrew plural and used as such by Thomas; seraphin is Latin plural and therefore translated as “seraphs.”) excel among all the orders of the heavenly spirits, so also the apostles are exalted above all the other saints in grace as well as in glory. (ST I.43.7, ad 6; I-II.106.4; III.72.2, obj. 1.) 2 Thessalonians 2:13 reads: God has chosen us as the first fruits for salvation, for the sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth. (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on 2 Thessalonians, at 2:13, ch. 2, lect. 3, n. 57.) For they are the ones who have the first fruits of the Holy Spirit, as the Apostle says to the Romans (Rom 8:23). (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on Romans, at 8:23, ch. 8, lect. 5, n. 676.) Thus the apostles, set on fire by the fire of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:3), were the right and suitable (They received the graces of the Holy Spirit, so that they could do the work of the Holy Spirit: ST III.42.1, ad 2.) ones to hand down the mystery of the Holy Trinity. (Which the prophets before them could not do; cf. ST I.57.5, ad 3; I-II.106.4.2; II-II.176.1, obj. 1.)

Well, since it is becoming that something that comes from something else makes known the thing from which it comes, the Son, who comes from the Father, makes the Father known. Thus we read in John 17:6: Father, I have made your name known. [Likewise,] the Holy Spirit, who comes from the Father and the Son makes known the Father and the Son, as it is said in John 16:14: he will proclaim me, for he will receive from what is mine and announce it to you. (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on John, at 16:14, ch. 16, lect. 4, n. 2107.)

Therefore, it was becoming that the mystery of the Trinity was revealed to us by seraphim, that is, through the apostles, who were taught by the Son and set on fire by the Holy Spirit. (ST II-II.2.8, obj. 2.) The Apostle says: yet to us God has revealed it by means of his Spirit, for his Spirit fathoms all things, even the profundities of God (1 Cor 2:10). And it is for this reason that after the feast of the Holy Spirit the feast of the Trinity is celebrated.

1.2. Based on the dignity, for they were above it, meaning: above the temple. (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on Isaiah, at 6:2, ch. 6, lect. 1, n. 214.) By this their primacy and the source of their authority are made known. The psalmist says: you will appoint them as princes (Ps 45:17). (Therefore, only bishops and priests can administer the sacraments; cf. ST III.67.2, ad 2; Commentary on Psalms, 44:17, ch. 44, n. 461.)

But concerning this we must notice that it is said of the seraphim that with two wings they covered their head, and with two wings they covered their feet, and they flew with two wings. By this their authority obtained from God is expressed, for it is granted to them to reveal some things and to keep other things hidden for the people. Just as the Apostle says that he has heard secret things that no people ought to speak of (2 Cor 12:4), as he also says somewhere else: as with little children in Christ, I gave you milk as food, not solid food (1 Cor 3:1–2); for he is the debtor to the wise and to the ignorant (Rom 1:14).

Thus they flew by teaching, but by hiding they covered the head, since the first principle of all things itself cannot be examined; and since the very principle is also the end, as it is said in Revelation 1:8 and 22:13, they covered their feet as well. The things in the middle were indeed not covered, because the things that are from the beginning to the end, namely, the divine effects, are manifest to us. (Cf. Romans 1:20; ST I.2.2; Commentary on Isaiah, at 6:2, ch. 6, lect. 1, n. 217.)

And therefore it is said in the Gospel: the Spirit blows where it wills, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it is coming from or where it is going to (John 3:8). So we only hear its sound, that is, the effects of the Spirit of the Lord, but they are known insofar as it is possible to know them; but we do not know where it is coming from, and this is the meaning of them covering their head, or where it is going to, to which the covering of the feet refers. (Cf. ST I.1.6, obj. 2: we receive knowledge through natural things (ST I.14.8, ad 3, 16.2); therefore, we cannot know by our own effort our principle and our end itself, that is, the triune God, who is of the highest dignity (ST I.42.4, ad 2).)

1.3. Third, the source of the authority of the apostles is called to mind on the ground of their unanimity, since all, and not one or two or three, have handed down unanimously, explicitly, and clearly the mystery of the Trinity. The Apostle says: whether I or they, that is not the point; this is what we preach and this is what you have believed (1 Cor 15:11). (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, at 15:11, ch. 15, lect. 1, n. 910.) And therefore it is said about the seraphim that they cried to one another. Thus the source of the authority of the ones who reveal the mystery of the Trinity is clear.

2. Now it remains to look at what they revealed when they said: holy, holy, holy, et cetera. In these words they make known three things to us:

(2.1) first, the mystery of the sacred Trinity;

(2.2) second, the image of the Trinity itself impressed upon rational creatures;

(2.3) third, a trace of the same Trinity that is reflected in all other creatures. (Cf. ST III.83.4 and Rigans montes, Thomas’s inaugural lecture, where he explains these words, used in the Eucharistic prayer, as referring to the divinity of Christ. He interprets “blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” as referring to Christ’s humanity.)

2.1. So they make the mystery of the Trinity manifest to us, when they say: holy, holy, holy. (This manifestation is a prophetic act: ST II-II.171.3.) Concerning this we must know that, as Dionysius says, no way is as successful for getting to know God as the way of removal. (Dionysius, The Divine Names, ch. 1, para. 5 (PG 3:593); Aquinas, Commentary on Dionysius’s On the Divine Names, ch. 1, lect. 3, n. 83. The passage here refers to the via remotionis—which is a part of the via negativa—that is, saying what God is not, rather than what he is; cf. ST I.13.2: the things that do not belong to God are removed, like a body, imperfection, change, ignorance, powerlessness, and all things incompatible with divinity (cf. ST I.3–11). This method is applied by Thomas in this section of the sermon, 2.1.) For then God is perfectly known, when we know that he is above every thing that can be thought of. Hence we read about Moses, who was very familiar with God according to what is granted to a human being in this life, that he approached God in a cloud and a thick mist, (Exodus 19:9; 20:21; 24:15–16; cf. SCG III.49.) meaning: by getting to know what God is not, he arrived at knowledge of God. (ST I.12.11; I-II.98.3, obj. 2. In II-II.174.5, ad 1, however, Thomas says that Moses did see the divine essence, although posthaste and by way of a passion, not remaining and by way of happiness.) Well, this way of removal is understood by the term “holiness,” for, in general, according to all teachers, “holy” is the same as what is pure, and “pure” is what is separated from other things. (Cf. ST II-II.81.8: in people, holiness is also being directed towards the Holy One, and so, in humans, holiness is a synonym for religiosity.)

For the evidence of this we must know that we find in creatures three most excellent things: (2.1.1) essence, (2.1.2) knowledge, and (2.1.3) affection. (These three correspond with respectively the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.) But still they differ a lot; yes, they can in no way touch upon purity in the way that these are in God.

2.1.1. Now, in the essences of created things we find a threefold defect that keeps them completely remote from God. (God and God alone is essentially perfect: ST I.4. God’s perfections are perfect as such, whereas they are in us as created; cf. Thomas on analogy in ST I.13.5–6.)

(a) The first defect is the weakness of corruption, and this is found in all corruptible creatures. (Hence God is not corruptible (ST I.9.2). Also angels and the human soul cannot be corrupted: ST I.50.5 and I.76.6. Yet the human body is corruptible: ST I.102.2.) Isaiah 24:4 reads: the earth has slid down and is weakened.

(b) The second defect is the defect of composition. This defect is in heavenly bodies, which, although they are free from corruption and from transitoriness, (The matter in celestial bodies is without potentia passiva. The only change in them is of place: ST I.66.2.) nevertheless still do not come near the purity of the divine essence at all, because they are composite. (Composition does not refer to different material parts made one (physical level), but to the ten categories of Aristotle: on a meta-physical level, all creatures are composed of substance (e.g., man) and quality (e.g., black), relations (e.g., taller than someone else) and quantity (e.g., weight), time (e.g., now) and place (e.g., here), position (e.g., standing), state (e.g., dressed, drunk), potentia (e.g., being touched, moved) and actus (e.g., to touch, to move). Only God is not composed; his being is his essence, etc.; cf. ST I.3.2–8.) It is said in Job 15:15: behold, among his saints no one is immutable, and even the heavens are not clean before him. (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on Job, at 15:5, ch. 15, lect. 2, n. 252.)

(c) The third defect is mutability. This defect is in the angels, who, although they are free from corruption (ST I.50.2; I.50.5.) and free of composition, (ST I.50.2.) are still found changeable, as we read in Job 4:18: behold, the ones who serve him are not steadfast. (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on Job, at 4:18, ch. 4, lect. 3, n. 88.) And the reason for this is that in his angels he has found badness (ibid.). (ST I.63.) And if some are found immutable, this is not because of their nature, but because of the grace of God. (Angels do not have bliss (beatitudo) from the beginning: ST I.62.1. When God grants angels this ultimate happiness, they cannot sin any more: ST I.62.8; cf. Aquinas, Commentary on Job, at 15:15, ch. 15, lect. 2, n. 252: ecce inter sanctos eius, idest angelos.)

Hence the first principle is above this: incorruptible, simple, and immovable. (Respectively, ST I.4, 3 and 9.) And this holiness is the holiness of God the Father, who is the principle of the whole Divinity. (ST I.27.1; I.42.3.) The psalmist says: let them acknowledge your great name for it is terrifying and holy (Ps 99:3).

And therefore, three names are attributed to the Father, in order to exclude the defects mentioned: (ad a) power, in order to exclude the weakness of corruption; the psalmist says: Lord, you are powerful (Ps 89:9); (ST I.25; I.32.1, obj. 1; cf. I.39.8, obj. 3 (with a reference to Augustine) and resp.: the name “powerful” signifies God as cause; In I Sent., 34.2, resp.; Peter Lombard, Sentences, bk. 1, d. 34, cc. 3–4, pp. 251–53 (PL 192:611).) (ad b) unity, a name given by Augustine, to exclude composition; (ST I.11; Augustine, On Christian Doctrine 1.5 (CSEL 80:11; PL 34:21); Peter Lombard, Sentences, bk. 1, d. 31, ch. 2, n. 9, p. 226 (PL 192:604); cf. Aquinas, In I Sent. 31.1.2, ad 1; ST I.39.8, obj. 2: this name signifies God as for his unity. In I Sent. 31.3.1, resp.: unity . . . However, insofar as its account consists in a negation . . .) (ad c) eternity, a name given by Hilary, in order to exclude mutability; (Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity 2.1 (CCSL 62:38; PL 10:51A); Peter Lombard, Sentences, bk. 1, d. 31, ch. 2, n. 1, p. 226 (PL 192:604); cf. Aquinas, In I Sent. 31.2.1, resp.) the psalmist says: you yourself, however, are the same and your years do not decrease (Ps 102:28). (ST I.10; cf. I.39.8, obj. 1: this name signifies God as such.)

2.1.2. Also, in knowledge we find a threefold defect, according to which the knowledge of creatures falls short in three ways.

(a) The first defect is of the knowledge of material and singular things. This is the knowledge through touching and being touched. In the senseless creatures this is the only knowledge. (Someone knows in accordance with his/her nature; cf. ST I.12.11.)

(b) The second defect of knowledge is the one that we have through appearances. For, although we have knowledge of general things, it is still obscure, because now we see in a mirror, enigmatically (1 Cor 13:12)—and we know insofar as sensible things appear to us. (ST I.1.9, 12.12. This defect is in all human beings.)

(c) The third defect of knowledge is insofar as it is diminished. This defect is in the angels; although they have a clear knowledge since they do not receive knowledge through senses—and as a sign of this they appeared before prophets with sparkling eyes (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on Job, at 40:10, ch. 40, lect. 2, n. 535: angels . . . have a certain excellence above the dignity of men, and so they appear to men in a very brilliant light.) (cf. Dan 12:3)—still their knowledge is diminished, because on the basis of their natural powers they cannot see God in his essence, for no created intellect can see the essence of God unless through grace. (ST I.56.3; I.12.4, s.c.: therefore to see the essence of God is possible to the created intellect by grace, and not by nature.) The Apostle says: God’s grace is eternal life (Rom 6:23). (Cf. ST I.18.1–3.) What’s more, it is diminished because, although they see the essence of God through grace, they do not understand it, nevertheless. (ST I.62.2; I.56.3, obj. 1.) Therefore, it is said that, when the voice sounded in the firmament, the angels lowered their wings (Ezek 1:25). Chrysostom says about this that even these heavenly essences could never see God’s essence as it is. (John Chrysostom, Homilies on John, homily 15 (PG 59:97–98); cf. Aquinas, In IV Sent. 49.2.1.)

So above the knowledge of these [three] is the knowledge of the Word of God; it contains all things, knows all things (Wis 1:7). And so the Arians, who separated the Word from God, were foolish, because, if they had been right, God would not have known himself. (ST I.14.2; I.34.2 (“Word” signifies an efflux of the intellect).) And therefore is this holiness the holiness of God’s Word. The psalmist says: yet you dwell in the Holy One, Praise of Israel (Ps 22:4), (“You,” “the Praise of Israel,” is identified as the eternal Word of God: a Christological reading of the Psalms.) for this is the praise of the ones who see God, that they may dwell in the Holy One, meaning: participate in the knowledge of God’s Word. And since the Word of God is clear of these defects, three things are attributed to him: (ad a) wisdom, to exclude singular knowledge; (In ST I.39.8, obj. 3 (with reference to Augustine): this name signifies God as cause. “Wisdom” includes all knowledge, knowledge as such; it is not about knowledge of this and that.) (ad b) Hilary attributes beauty to him, namely, splendor, (ST I.39.8, obj. 1: this name signifies God as such.) to exclude obscure knowledge; (ad c) Augustine attributes equality to him, in order to exclude diminishment. (ST I.39.8, obj. 2; I.47.2, obj. 2; III.58.2, obj. 3. This name signifies God as for his unity. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine 1.5 (CSEL 80:11; PL 34:21).)

2.1.3. In the affection we find in a similar way a threefold defect of holiness.

(a) The first defect is when our affection is deprived. For, a nature degenerates when it makes itself equal to an inferior nature. Well, other creatures, those without reason, have an affection aimed at one single good: the preservation of themselves. And thus, when someone has a deprived affection, he falls away from his honor. The Apostle says: all who seek their own interest do not belong to Christ Jesus (Phil 2:21). (Someone who becomes like an inferior, irrational creature by becoming self-centered is not a disciple and/or a friend of Jesus Christ. Self-preservation is not the highest good; Thomas even considers it illicit to kill someone who attacks you in order to defend yourself; cf. ST II-II.64.7.)

(b) The second defect is when our affection is held back and closed. This is caused by the first defect. For it is for this reason that people do not share their goods: because they love (For Thomas’s terminology, see Sermon 1, He Who Is Desired, note in section 3.3.) themselves. These people are rebuked by St. John: someone who sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him—how can the love of God remain in him? (1 John 3:17). (Sharing and giving away what you have are good acts (ST I.5.4, obj. 2; I.106.4; III.1.1), acts of love: ST II-II.32.1 and 10.)

(c) The third defect is when our affection is disquieted, and this occurs when the affection is not at peace in view of the ultimate end. (Cf. Psalm 42:6 (perturbatus); Matthew 2:3, 16 (Herod, turbatus, and so much that he had all boys killed who could have been the rival king). On the other hand, Mary, turbata (Luke 1:29), found peace again as soon as she heard of the final end (Luke 1:32–33, 37 and 38).) Augustine says [in Confessions]: disquieted is our heart until it finds peace in you. (Augustine, Confessions 1.1 (CCSL 27:1; PL 32:661).)

So holy affection is above these affections; it is the divine love that is not deprived since it loves all things that are, as it is said in Wisdom 11:25, and you hate nothing of the things you made. (Cf. ST I.20.2, s.c.) It is not closed, because when you open your hand everything will be filled with goodness, as the psalmist says (Ps 104:28). It is not disquieted, since it is the love of the ultimate end which loves itself and all things because of itself; and thus it is everlasting: in everlasting love (Jer 31:3). (The love of the Eternal One is not selfish love, as also the second part of this verse shows: “I have loved you and therefore I drew you towards me in my mercy”; cf. ST I.20.1, obj. 3: “love is a unifying force.”)

And therefore three things are attributed to him: (That is, the Holy Spirit.) (ad a) union, (Connexio. ST I.39.8, obj. 2 (with reference to Augustine): unanimity (concordia) or the connection/bond between the equal Father and the equal Son; cf. also I.37.2. The name Unio signifies God as for his unity. See note on God’s unity in section 2.1.2 above.) so that it may be clear that he is not lacking anything, for deprived love causes discord. (ST II-II.37.1.) But the Holy Spirit is proper to the highest good, and therefore it is the one who binds together; (ad b) goodness, so that it may be clear that [the Holy Spirit] is not closed, for a good spreads itself; (ST I.5.4; I.39.8.3 (with reference to Augustine). This name signifies God as cause (causa finalis); cf. William of Auxerre (Altissiodorensis), Summa aurea, 7 vols., ed. J. Ribaillier (Paris: Edition du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1980–1987), bk. 2, tract. 8, ch. 2, q. 9, aa. 2–3, pp. 215, 221.) Wisdom 12:1 (Vg) says: O, how good is the Spirit; (ad c) use, so that it may be clear that he is peaceful and that he concerns the end. (ST I.39.8, obj. 1 (with reference to Hilary). This name signifies God as such.) Also, Augustine points out that he is use, that is, enjoyment, since God enjoys himself with divine love and loves the Son with the love of enjoyment. (Augustine, On the Trinity 6.11 (CCSL 50:242; PL 42:932); cf. Peter Lombard, Sentences, bk. 1, d. 31, ch. 2, p. 226 (PL 192:604); ST I.37.2. Thus Thomas explains the paradox of Hilary’s Usus as a name of God and Augustine’s distinction between uti (towards things) and frui (towards God only); ST I-II.11; I-II.12.2, ad 3; I-II.34.4.)

But are these three holinesses? No. For in us, being, willing, and understanding are three different things; thus the holiness of being is different from the holiness of will and of understanding. But in God, being, understanding, and willing are the same; (But we must distinguish them according to our understanding: ST I.13.4.) and so the holiness of these three is the same. (ST I.42.2–6.) But it is repeated thrice [in Is 6:3], not in order to show a triple holiness, but the holiness of three.

2.2. He shows that the image of the Holy Trinity is impressed upon rational creatures, when he says: Lord, God of the hosts.

Regarding this we must know that the resemblance to him is the more explicit in things the nearer they are to God and the closer they are to him. (Cf. ST I.4.3.) Well, such are the rational creatures, and hence the resemblance to the Trinity is reflected more in them. This resemblance is shown in three respects:

2.2.1. First, in respect of a special providence that God has for the rational creature, by punishing, by instructing, and by rewarding him. (Respectively, Proverbs 3:11–12 (cf. ST III.59.1); Hebrews 12:5–7; Genesis 1:28–30 (cf. ST I.96.2; I.22.2, ad 5); Psalm 8:6 (cf. ST I.20.4, ad 2); Luke 6:35; Hebrews 10:35–38, 11:6, 26.) And therefore it says: Lord.

2.2.2. Second, because in a special way he is the end and the reward of a rational creature, while, in general, he is the end of the whole of creation. (Cf. also Romans 11:36, 1 Corinthians 8:6, and Hebrews 2:10. These texts underlie the exitus-reditus scheme of the ST, although Thomas never refers to these texts explicitly. ST I-II.1.8, resp.) Therefore, it says: God. In Hebrews 11:16 it says: he is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has built a city for them; and in Genesis 15:1: I am your protector, and your reward will be very big.

2.2.3. Third, in respect of freedom. For the other creatures lead their lives, yet they do not lead themselves to their actions and thus they are like slaves, in particular because they exist for the sake of other things. (Cf. ST I.22.2, ad 4; Commentary on John, at 1:4, ch. 1, lect. 3, n. 99.) A rational creature, however, leads himself, because he is free and lord over his own actions. (Cf. ST I.83 (free will); I-II.6.8 and 76 (ignorance) and 80 (the devil).) And therefore they are soldiers, (Cf. Aquinas, Commentary on Job, at 25:3, ch. 25, lect. 1, n. 357.) whence it says: of the hosts, meaning: of the angels—about which Job 25:3 says: is there a number of his soldiers?—and of the people, as Job 14:14 reads: all the days that I have served now as a soldier. (Only, however, if he is obedient will he win the battle; cf. ST III.47.2 (citing Prov 21:28), aiming at Christ, especially in the Passion.) In this host the image of the Trinity is reflected: in the angel, namely, because he is the seal of resemblance (Ezek 28:12); (Curiously enough, these words in Ezekiel 28:12 refer to a human being (filius hominis, namely, the prophet Ezekiel), not to angels.) in mankind through memory, intellect, and will. (As Augustine says. Memoria refers to the Father, since it retains what it knows (the Word, the Son) as well as love (the Holy Spirit); cf. ST I.93.7, obj. 3. Intellect and will obviously refer respectively to the Son and the Spirit.)

2.3. Furthermore, he makes known a trace that is reflected (ST I.45.7; I.93.2.) within other creatures, when he says: full is the (The text leaves out omnis, “the whole,” from Isaiah 6:3, which would strengthen Thomas’s interpretation.) earth, et cetera. And this is clear in the first establishment of the things.

For, there [that is, in the first establishment of things] we find the power of the God who creates, so that the Father would be recognized: in the beginning God has created heaven and earth (Gen 1:1), et cetera. And when we read that the earth was waste and empty (Gen 1:2), we understand this [as waste and empty] if it is considered in itself, because its fulfillment comes from the glory of God. (ST I.65.2; I-II.114.1, ad 2: God’s glory is the manifestation of his goodness, as in Psalm 19:2; cf. ST I.44.1–2; I.45.1: and God saw it was good.)

There we find the art of the God who forms all the things, (ST I.44.3.) so that the Son would be recognized. For just as an artist by means of his art renders form to the matter, so God has given to all things their proper form by means of his Word, who is the full art of living rational beings. (Augustine, On the Trinity 6.11 (CCSL 50:241; PL 42:931); cf. Aquinas, In II Sent. 11.2.2, obj. 3; 13.1.5, s.c. 2; ST I.45.6, resp.; Commentary on John, ch. 1, lect. 2, 4.) Hence it is said: and God said: ‘let there be light’ (Gen 1:3), meaning: he brought forth the Word, in whom was [the power] to bring them into being. (Augustine, On the Literal Interpretation of Genesis 2.6 (CSEL 28.1:41; PL 34:268).)

There we find the pleasure of the God who approves, so that the Holy Spirit would be recognized. Thus it is said: God saw all the things that he had made and that they were very good (Gen 1:31), meaning: he approved of them. (ST I.47.2; I.65.1, obj. 2; I.74.3, obj. 3.)

There we also find a trace insofar as the property [of each of the three Persons] is concerned. For every creature whatsoever remains through the power of the Father, has an appearance because it is formed by the Word of God, and is ordered through the love of the Holy Spirit towards [its] end.