D. 43 - The resurrection of the body
After the Master has examined the sacraments that pertain to the Church’s present state, he begins in this part to consider those things that pertain to the Church’s final destination, namely, the final resurrection and final recompense.
Therefore this part is divided into two: in the first part, he considers those things that pertain to the resurrection of the body; in the second, those things that pertain to the reward that the resurrection is ordered to, in Distinction 45, at: moreover, it is to be known that, as Augustine says, “all souls, when they have left this world, have different receptions.” (Sententiae IV, 45.1 (259). 1.)
The first is in two parts: in the first, he examines the resurrection and its circumstances; in the second, the qualities of those who will rise again, in Distinction 44, at: a few people are accustomed . . . to ask whether all will rise again in the same age and size of body. (Sent. IV, 44.1 (251). 1.)
The first of these is in two parts: in the first, he proves that there is a future resurrection; in the second, he determines certain circumstances of the resurrection, at: for the cause of the resurrection of the dead shall be the sound of the trumpet. (Sent. IV, 43.2 (245). 1.)
And concerning this he does three things: first, he determines the cause of the resurrection; second, the time, at: he is said to be coming in the middle of the night; (Sent. IV, 43.3 (246). 1.) third, the terminus of the resurrection, at: “it is usual to ask whether those whom Christ shall find alive shall never die at all.” (Sent. IV, 43.6 (249). 1 citing Augustine, The City of God, Bk. 20, ch. 20, nn. 2–3.)
Concerning the second he does two things: first, he determines the time of the resurrection; second, he raises a certain doubt from what has been said, at: here it is asked whether at that time the memory of the evil deeds which have gone before is present in the elect. (Sent. IV, 43.5 (248). 1.)
The third part is also divided into two: in the first of these he determines the starting terminus of the resurrection, namely, death; second, the ending terminus, namely, wholeness of the body, at: and since from the above it can truly be believed that all will rise again, it is also to be believed that all shall rise uncorrupted, but they shall surely not be incapable of suffering. (Sent. IV, 43.7 (250). 2.)
Concerning the first he does two things: first, he inquires whether all men die so that they can rise from the dead; second, he explains something that could be doubtful about the things he has determined, at: to these matters we must add. (Sent. IV, 43.7 (250). 1.)
Question 1
The final resurrection
Here five questions arise:
first, about the resurrection itself;
- second, about its cause;
- third, about its time;
- fourth, about the starting terminus for the resurrection, since its ending terminus will be discussed later;
- fifth, about the memory and knowledge of those who rise.
- Article 1
About the resurrection itself
Quaestiuncula 1
Obj. 1: To the first question, we proceed thus. (Parallels: Super I Cor. 15, lec. 2; SCG IV, ch. 79; Comp. theo. 151.) It seems that there will be no resurrection of the body: man lies down and rises not again; till the heavens are no more he will not awake (Job 14:12). But heaven will never be no more, for the land, which seems to be less, stands forever, as is clear from Ecclesiastes 1:4. Therefore, a dead man will never rise again.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, the Lord proves the resurrection by this authority: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob: because he is not the God of the dead, but of the living (Matt 22:32). But it is clear that when those words were said, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were no longer living in the body, but only in the soul. Therefore, there will be no resurrection of bodies, but only of souls.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, in 1 Corinthians 15, the Apostle seems to prove the resurrection from the remuneration of the labors that the holy ones endure in this life, for if they trusted only in this life, they would be more miserable than anyone. But sufficient remuneration for all a man’s labors can only be in his soul, for no instrument needs to be remunerated along with its operator. But the body is the instrument of the soul; and therefore even in purgatory where souls are punished for what they did in the body, the soul is punished without the body. Therefore, it is not necessary to posit the resurrection of the body, but it is enough to posit the resurrection of the soul, which is when it passes from the death of guilt and misery into the life of grace and glory.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, the last end of a thing is the most perfect in the thing, for by that it attains its own end. But the most perfect state of the soul is that it be separated from the body; for in this state it is more like God and the angels, and more pure, as separated from every foreign nature. Therefore, separation from the body is its last state; and so from this state it does not return to the body, just as neither does one become a child from a man.
Obj. 5: Furthermore, physical death is inflicted as man’s punishment for the first transgression, as is clear from Genesis 2:17, just as also spiritual death, which is the soul’s separation from God, is inflicted on man for mortal sin. But no one ever returns to life from spiritual death after receiving the sentence of damnation. Therefore, neither will there be a return from physical death to life; and so there will be no resurrection.
On the contrary (1), it says in Job 19:25: I know that my Redeemer lives, and on the last day I shall rise out of the earth and shall be clothed again with my skin. Therefore, there will also be a resurrection of our bodies.
Furthermore (2), the gift of Christ is greater than the sin of Adam, as is clear from Romans 5:18. But death was brought in by sin, for if there had been no sin, there would be no death. Therefore, by the gift of Christ we will be renewed from death to life.
Furthermore (3), the members must be conformed to the body. But our head lives and will live eternally in body and soul: for Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again, as is clear from Romans 6:9. Therefore, men too, who are his members, live in body and the soul; and thus there must be a resurrection of the flesh.
Quaestiuncula 2
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the resurrection will not be for everyone generally. (Parallel: SCG IV, chs. 80–81.) For it says: the wicked will not rise in the judgment (Ps 1:5). But the resurrection of men will be only at the time of the universal judgment. Therefore, the wicked will not rise at all.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, it says, many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake (Dan 12:2). But this statement implies a certain division. Therefore, not all will rise.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, by the resurrection men are conformed to the risen Christ. This is why the Apostle concludes that if Christ rose, we too shall rise (1 Cor 15:20). But those only should be conformed to the risen Christ who bear his image, and that belongs only to the good. Therefore, they alone will rise.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, a punishment is not forgiven unless the fault is taken away. But physical death is the punishment for original sin. Therefore, since not all have been forgiven their original sin, not all will rise.
Obj. 5: Furthermore, as we are born again by the grace of Christ, so we shall rise by his grace. But those who die in their mother’s womb can never be born again. Therefore, neither could they rise; and thus not all will rise.
On the contrary (1), it says: all who are in the tombs will hear the voice of the Son of God; and whoever shall hear it, shall live (John 5:28). Therefore, all the dead will rise.
Furthermore (2), 1 Corinthians 15:51 says: we shall all indeed rise again.
Furthermore (3), the resurrection is necessary so that those who rise may receive punishment or reward for their merits. But punishment or reward is owed to all for their own merit, if they are adults, or for the merits of others, if they are children. Therefore, all will rise.
Quaestiuncula 3
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the resurrection is natural. (Parallels: In II Sent. d. 18, q. 1, a. 3, ad 3; Super I Cor. 15, lec. 5; SCG IV, ch. 81, ad 6; Super Rom. 11, lec. 3; Comp. theo. 154.) For as Damascene says in Book 3, what is commonly seen in all things characterizes nature in those things underlying it that are indivisible. (John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, Bk. 3, ch. 16, PG 94:1066.) But the resurrection is found in common among all things. Therefore, it is natural.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, Gregory says, whoever does not have faith in the resurrection out of obedience certainly should hold this by reason. For what does the world imitate every day in its elements but our resurrection? (Gregory the Great, Moralia in Iob (CCSL 143A), Bk. 14, par. 55.) And he gives the example of daylight, which is taken away from our eyes as though by dying, and recalled as though by rising again; and plants that lose their greenery and are revived as though rising again; and seeds, which die by decomposing, and rise again in a certain way by germinating; which is also the example the Apostle gives in 1 Corinthians 15:35–38. But nothing can be learned by reason from natural works except what is natural. Therefore, the resurrection will be natural.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, those things that are outside nature do not remain very long, for they are like violent things. But the life that is restored through resurrection will endure eternally. Therefore, the resurrection will be natural.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, that toward which all the expectation of nature looks seems to be more natural than anything. But this is what the resurrection and glorification of the saints is, as is clear from Romans 8:19. (”For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God” (Rom 8:19).) Therefore, the resurrection will be natural.
Obj. 5: Furthermore, resurrection is a certain movement toward the perpetual union of the soul and body. But the movement that terminates in natural rest is natural, as is seen in the Physics 5. (Aristotle, Physics, Bk. 5, ch. 6, 230b14–22; cf. On the Soul, Bk. 1, ch. 3, 406a22–26.) But the perpetual union of the body and soul will be natural, for since the soul is more properly the mover of the body, it is related to the body proportionally; and so the body is naturally able to live by it perpetually, just as the soul lives perpetually. Therefore, the resurrection will be natural.
On the contrary (1), there is no return from a privation in habit according to nature. But death is the privation of life. Therefore, the resurrection by which there is a return from death to life is not natural.
Furthermore (2), those things that are of one species have one determinate mode of origin; hence animals that are generated from decomposition and from seed are never of one species, as is clear from what the Commentator says about the Physics 8. (Averroes, Commentary on Physics, Bk. 8, comm. 46.) But the natural mode by which man arises is his generation from what is the same in species, which will not be the case in the resurrection, and therefore it is not natural.
Response to Quaestiuncula 1
I answer that, according to the different opinions about the final end of man, there are different opinions affirming or denying the resurrection. For the final end of man that all men naturally desire is beatitude or happiness, which some people have believed a man can possess in this life. Therefore, they were not forced to hold that another life existed after this one in which man would obtain his final perfection; and this is why they denied the resurrection. But this opinion is excluded plausibly enough by the different varieties of fortune and the infirmity of the human body, the imperfection of knowledge and virtue, and the instability that hampers the perfection of beatitude for everyone, as Augustine details in the end of the City of God. (See Augustine, The City of God, Bk. 22, especially chs. 21–23, 29–30.)
And therefore others have held that there is another life after this life, inasmuch as a man only lives according to his soul after death; and they held this life to be sufficient for fulfilling the natural desire for obtaining happiness. This is why Porphyry said that souls, in order that they might be blessed, must flee every kind of body, as Augustine states in his book on the City of God. (Ibid., ch. 26.) And this is why these people did not hold that there was a resurrection. But different people with these opinions had different false foundations. For certain heretics held that all corporeal things were from an evil principle, while spiritual things were from a good principle; and according to this it was necessary that the soul not be entirely perfect unless it was separated from the body, by which it is weighed down from its own principle, the participation in which makes it happy. And therefore all those of heretical sects who hold that corporeal things were created or formed by the devil deny the resurrection of the body.
Now the falsity of this fundamental principle was shown in the beginning of Book II. (See In II Sent., d. 1, q. 1, a. 1.) But some people held that the whole nature of man existed in the soul, so that the soul uses the body as an instrument or as a sailor uses a ship. Therefore, according to this opinion it follows that the beatified soul by itself would not be frustrated in a natural desire for beatitude; and so it is not necessary to hold that there is a resurrection. But the Philosopher sufficiently destroys this fundamental principle in On the Soul 2, (Aristotle, On the Soul, Bk. 2, chs. 1–2.) where he shows that the soul is united to the body as a form to matter. And so it is clear that if a person cannot be happy in this life, it is necessary to hold that there is a resurrection.
Reply Obj. 1: Heaven will never pass away as to its substance, but it will pass away as to the effect of its power, by which it effects the generation and corruption of lower things, which is the reason the Apostle says: the form of this world is passing away (1 Cor 7:31).
Reply Obj. 2: Abraham’s soul is not, properly speaking, Abraham himself, but a part of him; and it is the same with the others. Therefore, the life of Abraham’s soul would not suffice to make Abraham living or for the God of Abraham to be the God of the living, but life is required in the united whole, namely, the soul and the body. And although this life did not actually exist when those words were spoken, both of the parts were still ordered to resurrection. Therefore, the Lord proves the resurrection in a most subtle and effective way by these words.
Reply Obj. 3: The soul is compared to the body not only as a worker to the instrument it operates, but also as form to matter. And so the work belongs to the united whole, not only to the soul, as is clear from the Philosopher in On the Soul 1. (Aristotle, On the Soul, Bk. 1, ch. 1, 403a3–403b19; ch. 3, 407b14–25; ch. 4, 408b1–18.) And since the wages for the work is owed to the worker, the man himself, composed of body and soul, must receive the reward for his works. Now, just as venial sins are said to be sins as disposing one to sin, not because they have simply and perfectly the nature of sin, so also the punishment that is rendered in purgatory is not simply retribution but rather a kind of purification, which happens separately to the body by death and burning, and in the soul by the fire of purgatory.
Reply Obj. 4: All other things being equal, the state of the soul is more perfect in the body than out of the body, for it is a part of a complete composite, and every integral part is material with respect to the whole, even if the soul itself is more like God in a certain respect. For simply speaking something is most like God when it has whatever the condition of its nature requires, for then it imitates the divine perfection best. This is why an animal heart is more like the unmoving God when it is moved than when it is still, for the perfection of the heart is that it be moved, and its stillness is its destruction.
Reply Obj. 5: Physical death was brought on by Adam’s sin, which was wiped away by Christ’s death, and this is why that punishment does not remain in perpetuity. But mortal sin, which brings eternal death by non-repentance, will not be expiated later, and therefore that death will be eternal.
Response to Quaestiuncula 2
To the second question, it should be said that those things whose account is taken from the nature of the species must likewise be found in everything that belongs to the same species. But such is the resurrection, for, as is clear from what has been said, this is its account, that the soul, in the final perfection of the human species, cannot be separated from the body. Therefore, no soul will remain separated from the body in perpetuity, and so it is necessary that just as one will rise, all will rise.
Reply Obj. 1: The psalmist speaks of the spiritual resurrection by which the wicked will not rise in the judgment of the trial of conscience, as the Gloss expounds. (See the Glossa ordinaria, PL 113:845.) Or he speaks about the wicked who are entirely unbelievers, who will not rise and be judged, for they are already judged.
Reply Obj. 2: Augustine explains many as being all; and this manner of speaking is frequently found in Sacred Scripture. (Augustine, The City of God (CCSL 48), Bk. 20, ch. 23.) Or perdition could be understood as to condemned children, who, even if they rise, are not properly said to awaken, since they will have neither the sense of punishment nor of glory; for wakefulness is the freeing of the senses.
Reply Obj. 3: The good and the bad are both conformed to Christ by living in this life in those things that pertain to the nature of the species, but not in those things that regard grace. And therefore all will be conformed to him in the restoration of natural life; however, not all will be conformed to him in the likeness of glory, but only the good.
Reply Obj. 4: By their dying, those who die in original sin have paid that death which is the punishment of original sin. Therefore, they are able to rise from death without original guilt posing an obstacle. For the penalty for original sin is dying, rather than being detained in death.
Reply Obj. 5: We are reborn through the grace of Christ given to us, but we rise through the grace of Christ by which it happened that he took on our nature, for by this we are conformed to him in natural matters. Therefore, those who die in their mother’s womb, although they have not been reborn by receiving grace, still do rise because of the conformity of their nature to him, which they obtained by reaching the completeness of the human species.
Response to Quaestiuncula 3
To the third question, it should be said that any motion or action is related to a nature in three ways. For there are some motions or actions of which nature is neither the principle nor the terminus; and other motions are sometimes from a principle above their nature, as is seen in the glorification of the body, but sometimes from just any another principle, as is seen in the violent motion of a stone upward, which terminates in a violent stillness. There is also a certain kind of motion whose principle and terminus is nature, as is clear in the downward motion of a stone. There is also a kind of motion whose terminus is nature, but not its principle; but sometimes it is something above nature, as is seen in the illumination of the blind; for sight is natural, but the principle of illumination is above nature. Sometimes, though, it is something else, as is seen in the speeding up of flowers or crops by artificial means. But it cannot be that the principle is nature but the terminus is not, for natural principles are ordained to determinate effects, and beyond those they cannot extend.
Therefore, the activity or movement that relates to nature in the first way can in no way be called natural, but it is either miraculous, if it has its principle above nature, or violent, if it is from just any other principle. And an activity or movement related to nature in the second way, is simply natural. But the activity that is related to nature in the third way cannot be called natural simply, but only in a certain respect, namely, inasmuch as it leads to something that is according to nature; but it is either called miraculous, or artificial, or violent. For ‘natural’ is properly said of what is according to nature, but ‘according to nature’ is said of what has a nature and follows nature, as is clear from the Physics 2. (Aristotle, Physics, Bk. 2, ch. 1, 192b88–12, 192b33–193a1.) Therefore, simply speaking a motion cannot be called natural unless its principle is nature.
Now the principle of the resurrection cannot be nature, although the resurrection terminates in the life of nature. For nature is the principle of movement in what it exists in, whether an active principle, as is seen in the movement of heavy things and light things, and in the natural changes of animals; or a passive principle, as is seen in the generation of simple bodies. But the passive principle of natural generation is the passive natural potency, which always has some active potency corresponding to it in nature, as the Metaphysics 9 says. (Aristotle says this in many ways in Metaphysics, Bk. 9, chs. 7–8.) Nor does it make any difference as to this, whether the active principle corresponds to the passive principle in nature with regard to the last perfection or form, or with regard to the disposition that is necessary to the final form, as it is in the generation of a man according to the teaching of the faith; or even of all other things according to the opinion of Plato and Avicenna. But there is no active principle of resurrection in nature, either with regard to the union of soul to body, or with regard to the disposition that is necessary for this union, for such a disposition cannot be infused by nature except in a determinate manner by way of generation from seed. Therefore, even if a certain passive potency is posited on the part of the body, or even a certain inclination to union with the soul, it is not enough for the account of natural movement. Therefore, resurrection, simply speaking, is miraculous, not natural, except in a certain respect, as is clear from what has been said.
Reply Obj. 1: Damascene speaks about those things that are found in every individual thing from the created principles of nature. For if by divine working all men were made white, or were brought together in one place, as happened at the time of the flood, whiteness or being in such a place woulds still not be a natural property of men on this account.
Reply Obj. 2: If something is not demonstrated by natural reason, it is not known from natural things. But something above nature can be recognized by persuasive reasons, for those things that are in nature represent a certain likeness to things that are above nature, as the union of the body and soul represents the union of the spirit to God by the glory of fruition, as the Master said in Book II, Distinction 1. (See In II Sent., d. 1, q. 2, a. 4.) And in the same manner the examples that the Apostle and Gregory cite persuasively lend support to the faith in the resurrection.
Reply Obj. 3: That argument follows concerning the activity that is directed to what is not by nature, but contrary to nature. But this is not the case with the resurrection. And so it is not to the point.
Reply Obj. 4: The whole operation of nature is under the divine operation, as the operation of a lower art is under the operation of a higher one. Therefore, as every activity of a lower art aims at a certain end which it does not attain except by the activity of the higher art introducing a form, or using a skill, so the final end to which all of nature’s expectation tends cannot be attained by nature’s operation; and this is why its obtainment is not natural.
Reply Obj. 5: Although there could not be a natural movement that terminates in a violent rest, there can nevertheless be a non-natural motion that terminates in a natural rest, as is clear from what has been said.
Article 2
About the cause of the resurrection
Quaestiuncula 1
Obj. 1: To the second question, we proceed thus. (Parallels: ST III, q. 56, a. 1; In IV Sent. d. 48, expos. text.; Super I Cor. 15, lec. 2; Super I Thess. 4, lec. 2; SCG IV, ch. 79; Comp. theo. 239.) It seems that Christ’s resurrection is not the cause of our resurrection. For where a cause is established, the effect is established. But once Christ’s resurrection was established, the resurrection of the other dead did not follow right away. Therefore, his resurrection is not the cause of our resurrection.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, there cannot be an effect unless the cause has preceded. But the resurrection of the dead would happen even if Christ had not risen again, for there was another possible way for God to have liberated man. Therefore, Christ’s resurrection is not the cause of our resurrection.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, the same thing that causes something in one thing, causes it in the whole species. But resurrection will be common to all men. Therefore, since Christ’s resurrection is not the cause of itself, it will not be the cause of others’ resurrections.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, in an effect is left behind some likeness to the cause. But at least for some people, namely the wicked, resurrection is not at all similar to the resurrection of Christ. (The argument here is that Christ’s resurrection is all-glorious, in every way a reward and an elevation, but that the resurrection of the damned is inglorious and punitive.) Therefore, Christ’s resurrection will not be the cause of their resurrection.
On the contrary (1), what is first in any genus is the cause of those things that come after it, as is clear from the Metaphysics 2. (Aristotle, Metaphysics, Bk. 2, ch. 2, where the claim is defended with regard to each of the four kinds of causes.) But by reason of his bodily resurrection, Christ is said to be the first fruits of those fallen asleep (1 Cor 15:20) and the first-born of the dead (Rev 1:5). Therefore, his resurrection is the cause of the resurrection of others.
Furthermore (2), Christ’s resurrection has more in common with the bodily resurrection than with the spiritual resurrection, which is by justification. But Christ’s resurrection is the cause of our justification, as is clear from Romans 4:25: who was raised for our justification. Therefore, it is the cause of our bodily resurrection.
Quaestiuncula 2
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the sound of a trumpet is not the cause of our resurrection. (Parallel: Super I Cor. 15, lec. 8.) For John Damascene says: believe that the future resurrection will take place by the divine will, divine power, and divine nod. (John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, Bk. 4, ch. 27, PG 94:1226.) Therefore, since these are sufficient causes of the resurrection, it is not necessary to include the sound of a trumpet as a cause.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, a sound is emitted in vain for one who cannot hear. But the dead will have no hearing. Therefore, it is not appropriate that any sound be formed to raise them.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, if any sound were the cause of the resurrection, it would only be by a virtue divinely given to the sound. Hence, commenting on Psalm 68 (67):33, he will give to his voice the voice of power, the Gloss says, of resurrecting bodies. (See Glossa ordinaria, PL 113:945.) But even if power is given to something miraculously, nevertheless by the fact that a power is given, the act that follows from it is natural, as is clear in the case of the miraculously-healed blind, who see naturally. Therefore, if any sound were the cause of the resurrection, the resurrection would be natural, which is false.
On the contrary (1), it says in 1 Thessalonians 4:16: the Lord himself will descend from heaven . . . with the sound of the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
Furthermore (2), it says in John 5:25 and 28: the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. But this voice means the trumpet, as is clear in the text. Therefore, etc.
Quaestiuncula 3
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the angels have no part in causing the resurrection. (Parallels: ST I, q. 91, a. 2, ad 1; q. 110, a. 4, ad 1.) For the resurrection of the dead is demonstrative of greater power than the generation of a man. But when men are generated, the soul is not infused into the body by the mediation of the angels. Therefore, neither is the resurrection, the renewed union of body and soul, done by the ministry of the angels.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, if this ministry pertains to certain angels, it seems to pertain most to the virtues, to whom it belongs to work miracles. But it is not ascribed to them, but to the archangels, as is clear in the text. Therefore, the resurrection is not done by the ministry of angels.
On the contrary, it is said in 1 Thessalonians 4:16, that the Lord will descend from heaven with the voice of an archangel, and the dead will rise. Therefore, the resurrection of the dead will be completed by angelic ministry.
Response to Quaestiuncula 1
I answer that, Christ is called the mediator between man and God by reason of his human nature, as was said in Book III, Distinction 19, Question 1, Article 5, Quaestiuncula 2 and 3. This is why divine gifts reach men from God by means of Christ’s humanity. Therefore, just as we cannot be freed from spiritual death except by the gift of grace divinely given, so neither from bodily death except by the resurrection accomplished by divine power. And so just as Christ divinely received the first-fruits of grace, and his grace is the cause of our grace, for of his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace (John 1:16), so in him the resurrection was initiated, and his resurrection is the cause of our resurrection—in such a way that Christ, as God, is the first cause of our resurrection in the manner of an equivocal cause, but as the risen God-and-man, he is the proximate cause of our resurrection, and in the manner of a univocal cause.
However, a univocal agent cause produces an effect in the likeness of its own form, and so it is not only an efficient cause, but an exemplar cause of this effect. Now this happens in two ways. For sometimes the form itself, through which a likeness of agent to effect is found, is directly the principle of the action by which that effect is produced, like heat in a heating fire. But sometimes the very form wherein the likeness resides is not first and essentially the principle of that action by which the effect is produced, but the principles of that form are. If a white man generates a white man, the very whiteness of the one generating is not the principle of active generation; and yet the whiteness of the one generating is said to be the cause of whiteness in the one generated, for the principles of whiteness in the one generating are the generative principles causing whiteness in the one generated. And Christ’s resurrection is the cause of our resurrection in this way, for what causes Christ’s resurrection, which is the univocal efficient cause of our resurrection, acts for our resurrection, namely, the power of Christ’s very divinity, which is common to him and the Father. Therefore, it says, he who raised Jesus Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies (Rom 8:11).
But Christ’s resurrection itself, by the divine power joined to it, is like an instrumental cause of our resurrection; for divine operations were accomplished by means of Christ’s flesh as their tool, as it were, as Damascene in Book 3 (John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, Bk. 3, ch. 15, PG 94:1051.) cites the example of the physical touch by which he cleansed the leper (Matt 8:3).
Reply Obj. 1: A sufficient cause immediately produces its effect to which it is directly ordered, but not the effect to which it is ordered by means of another, no matter how sufficient it is; as heat, no matter how intense it is, does not cause heat in the first instant, but immediately begins to move toward heat, for heat is its effect by means of motion. Now Christ’s resurrection is called the cause of our resurrection, as was said, not because his resurrection itself brings about our resurrection, but this is said with its principle, namely, divine power, understood as a middle term. That power will cause our resurrection to the likeness of Christ’s resurrection. Now all power works by means of the will, which is the most proximate to the effect; therefore, it is not necessary that right away when Christ’s resurrection had happened, our resurrection should follow. But it will follow at the moment that the will of God has ordained.
Reply Obj. 2: Divine power is not tied to any secondary causes such that it could not produce their effects directly, or by other mediating causes, just as it could cause the generation of lower bodies even if the motion of the heavens did not exist. And yet according to the order that it established in things, the motion of the heavens is the cause of the generation of lower bodies. Similarly, too, according to the order that divine providence has foreordained in human affairs, Christ’s resurrection is the cause of our resurrection; nevertheless it could have fixed another order, and then there would be another cause of our resurrection, such as God would have ordained.
Reply Obj. 3: That argument proceeds when all those things that are in one species have the same order to the first cause of that effect that is introduced into the whole species. But this is not the case in the question at hand, for Christ’s humanity was closer to the divinity, whose power is the first cause of resurrection, than is the humanity of others. Therefore, Christ’s own resurrection is caused immediately by the divinity, but the resurrection of other people by means of Christ rising as a man.
Reply Obj. 4: The resurrection of all men will contain something of a likeness to Christ’s resurrection, which namely pertains to the life of nature, according to which all men were conformed to Christ. And this is why all rise in immortal life. But in the saints who were conformed to Christ by grace, there will be a conformity as to those things that belong to glory.
Response to Quaestiuncula 2
To the second question, it should be said that a cause must be joined to its effect in some way, for the mover and the moved, the doer and the thing done are together, as is proved in the Physics 7. (Aristotle, Physics, Bk. 7, ch. 2, esp. 243a21–23; cf. Bk. 3, ch. 3.) But Christ rising is the univocal cause of our resurrection, as was said above, which is why it is fitting that in the general resurrection of bodies the risen Christ works by a certain physical sign given, which sign indeed, as some people say, will literally be the voice of Christ commanding the resurrection, as he commanded the sea and the storm stopped (Matt 8:23–27).
But some say that this sign will be nothing other than the very appearance of the Son of God in the world, of which it is said, as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man (Matt 24:27). And they are supported by Gregory’s authority, who says that the trumpet sounding is nothing other than the revelation to the world of the Son as judge. (Something like this can be found in Gregory the Great, Pastoral Rule, Part 2, ch. 4.) And according to this the very appearance of the Son of God is called his voice, for all nature will obey him like one who commands when he appears for the restoration of human bodies; which is why he is said to come in command in 1 Thessalonians 4:16. And thus his appearance, inasmuch as it has the force of a certain command, is called his voice; and whatever may be this voice, sometimes it is called a noise like a herald summoning to the judgment; but sometimes it is called the sound of a trumpet, either because of its clarity, as it says in the text, or because of its resemblance to the use of the trumpet that was in the Old Testament; for the trumpet brought all together for the council, summoned to battle, and called to feasts. Now those who rise are brought together to the council of judgment, to the battle where creation will join with him to fight against the madmen (Wis 5:20), to the feast of eternal solemnity.
Reply Obj. 1: In those words about the material cause of the resurrection, Damascene touches upon three things, namely, the divine will that commands, the power that executes, and the ease of execution in that he added, his nod, to the likeness of those things that are in us; for what is extremely easy for us to do is what happens immediately at our word; but much greater ease appears if before a word is uttered, at the first sign of our will, which is called a nod, the execution of our will is carried out by ministers. And this is how our nod is a certain cause of what is executed, inasmuch as by it others are directed to fulfill our will. But a divine nod, by which the resurrection occurs, is nothing other than the sign for the resurrection of the dead given by the one whom all nature obeys. And this sign is the same as the voice of the trumpet, as is clear from what has been said.
Reply Obj. 2: As was said above, just as the forms of the sacraments have the power of sanctifying not by the fact that they are heard, but by the fact that they are uttered, so too, this voice, whatever it is, will have an instrumental efficacy for raising the dead, not by the fact that it is sensed, but by the fact that it is uttered. In the same way too a voice awakens a sleeping person by its very impact on the air striking the organ of sensing, not by the fact that he recognizes it, for the judgment about the voice reaching the ears follows waking, and is not the cause of it.
Reply Obj. 3: That argument would work if the power given to that voice were a complete being in nature, for then what proceeded from it would have a natural power already established as its principle. But it is not that kind of power, but such as was said to be in the forms of the sacraments.
Response to Quaestiuncula 3
To the third question, it should be said that Augustine says in On the Trinity 3 (Augustine, On the Trinity (CCSL 50), Bk. 3, ch. 4.) that just as coarser and inferior bodies are ruled by more subtle and powerful ones in a certain order, so bodies are entirely ruled by God through the rational spirit of life; and Gregory also touches on this in his Dialogues 4. (Gregory the Great, Dialogues (SChr 265), Bk. 4, ch. 6.) Therefore, in all things that are done by God physically, God uses the ministry of the angels. But in the resurrection there is something pertaining to the changing of bodies, namely, their assembly from the dust, and their preparation for the restoration of the human body; and so in the resurrection God uses the ministry of the angels for this. But just as the soul was created directly by God, so too it will be directly reunited to the body without any work of the angels. Likewise, he will also cause the glory of the body without the angels’ ministry, just as he also glorifies the soul directly. And this ministry of the angels is called the voice according to one exposition, which is referred to in the text.
The solution to the first objection is clear from what has been said.
Reply Obj. 2: That ministry will principally be of one archangel, namely, Michael, who is the leader of the Church, as he was the leader of the synagogue, as it says in Daniel 10:13 and 10:21. But he still acts by the influence of the virtues, and of the other higher orders of angels. Therefore, what he will do, the higher orders of angels will do in some way. Likewise, lower angels will cooperate with him in the resurrection of individuals, whose guardianship was committed to them; and so that voice can be called the voice of one angel and the voice of many angels.
Article 3
About its time
Quaestinucula 1
Obj. 1: To the third question, we proceed thus. (Parallels: ST III, q. 27, a. 1; q. 83, a. 5, ad 8; Super Iob 19, lec. 2; cf. In IV Sent. d. 12, q. 1, a. 3, qa. 3, sol. 3; De art. fidei, on the resurrection.) It seems that the time of the resurrection should not be deferred until the end of the world so that all men rise at the same time. For the head shares more with the members than the members with each other, as a cause shares more with its effect than effects with each other. But Christ, who is our head, did not defer his Resurrection until the end of the world so that he could rise together with all men. Therefore, neither is it necessary that the resurrection of the first saints be deferred until the end of the world, so that they could rise with the others.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, the resurrection of the head is the cause of the resurrection of the members. But the resurrection of some members, nobler because of their closeness to the head, was not deferred until the end of the world, but followed Christ’s Resurrection immediately, as is piously believed of the Blessed Virgin and John the Evangelist. (It is hard to know exactly what “pious belief” Aquinas is referring to. There is, of course, the puzzling passage in John 21:20–23, concerning the beloved disciple; v. 23 reads: “This saying therefore went abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die. And Jesus did not say to him: He should not die; but, So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee?” Perhaps as a result of these verses, the popular Golden Legend narrates that John, in his great old age, was called by Christ to come to him on a Sunday after Mass, and disappeared from the midst of the people in a blaze of light, so that some say he did not die.) Therefore, the resurrection of others will also be closer to the resurrection of Christ the more they were like him by grace and merit.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, the state of the New Testament is more perfect, and more expressly bears the image of Christ than the state of the Old Testament. But some of the patriarchs of the Old Testament rose when Christ did, as it says in Matthew 27:52, many of the bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. (On this passage, see John Saward, Sweet and Blessed Country (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 70–71.) Therefore, it seems that the resurrection of the saints of the New Testament should not be deferred until the end of the world either, so that the resurrection of all might be at the same time.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, after the end of the world there will not be any more years. But after the resurrection of the dead many years are still counted until the resurrection of others, as is clear from Revelation 20, for it says in verse 4: I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus, and for the word of God, and below, and they came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended (Rev 20:4–5). Therefore, the resurrection of all people will not be deferred until the end of the world, so that it may be all together.
On the contrary (1), Job 14:12 says: so man lies down and rises not again; till the heavens are no more he will not awaken or be roused out of his sleep, and he speaks of the sleep of death. Therefore, the resurrection will be deferred until the end of the world, when the heavens are no more.
Furthermore (2), the Letter to the Hebrews says, and all these, though well attested by their faith, did not receive what was promised, that is, the full beatitude of body and soul, since God had foreseen something better for us, that apart from us they should not be consummated, that is, perfected (Heb 11:39–40). The Gloss comments on this, so that the joy of each one might be made greater by the shared joy of all. But this resurrection will not take place before the glorification of the body, for he will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body (Phil 3:21); and the sons of the resurrection will be like the angels in heaven, as is clear from Matthew 22:30. Therefore, the resurrection will be deferred until the end of the world, when all will rise at the same time.
Quaestiuncula 2
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that that time is not secret. For when something’s beginning is determined and known, the end can also be known determinately, by the fact that all things are measured by a certain period, as it says in On Generation and Corruption 2. (See Aristotle, On Generation and Corruption, Bk. 2, ch. 10, 336b8–16.) But the beginning of the world is known determinately. Therefore, its end can also be known determinately, and then it will be the time of the resurrection and judgment. Therefore, that time is not secret.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, it says in Revelation 12:6 that the woman, by which the Church is signified, has a place prepared by God in which she is fed for 1,260 days. In Daniel 12:11, a determinate number of days is also set down, by which years seem to be signified, according to Ezekiel 4:6: I assign you a day for each year. Therefore, by Sacred Scripture a determinate end to the world can be known, and the time of the resurrection.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, the state of the New Testament was prefigured in the Old Testament. But we know the determinate time in which the Old Testament lasted. Therefore, a determinate time can also be known in which the New Testament will last. But the New Testament will last until the end of the world, which is why it says at the end of Matthew, lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age (Matt 28:20). Therefore, the end of the world can be known, and the time of the resurrection.
On the contrary (1), what is unknown by the angels is even more hidden from men, for what men can reach through natural reason, the angels know with much greater clarity and certainty by their natural understanding. Likewise, revelations to men are only made by the mediation of angels, as is clear from Dionysius, the Celestial Hierarchy, Chapter 4. (Pseudo-Dionysius, Celestial Hierarchy, ch. 4, PG 3:178.) But the angels do not know the determinate time, as is clear from Matt 24:36: of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven. Therefore, that time is hidden from men.
Furthermore (2), the apostles were much more aware of the secrets of God than any who followed them, as is said in Romans 8:23: we ourselves who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, about which the interlinear Gloss comments: earlier in time, and more abundantly than the rest. But it was said to those who were asking, it is not yours to know times and seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority (Acts 1:7).
Quaestiuncula 3
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the resurrection will not happen all at once, but successively. (Parallel: Super I Cor. 15, lec. 8.) For the resurrection of the dead is foretold in Ezekiel 37:7–8, where it says: the bones came together, bone to its bone; and as I looked, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them; but there was no breath in them. Therefore, the restoration of bodies precedes their union to their souls in time; and so the resurrection will not happen all at once.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, what requires several actions, one after another, cannot be done all at once. But several actions, successively following each other, are required for the resurrection: the collecting of the dust, the reforming of the body, and the infusion of the soul. Therefore, the resurrection will not happen all at once.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, every sound is measured by time. But the sound of the trumpet will be the cause of the resurrection, as was said. Therefore, the resurrection will happen in time, and not all at once.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, no local motion can be all at once, as it says in the book on Sense and the Sensible. (See Aristotle, Sense and Sensibilia, ch. 6, 446b30–447a8.) But a certain local motion is required in the resurrection for the collecting of dust. Therefore it will not all happen at once.
On the contrary (1), it is said: we shall rise . . . in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye (1 Cor 15:51–52). Therefore, the resurrection will happen all at once.
Furthermore (2), infinite power works all at once. But, as Damascene says, believe the resurrection will take place by divine power, (John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, Bk. 4, ch. 27, PG 94:1226.) which is clearly infinite. Therefore, the resurrection will happen all at once.
Quaestiuncula 4
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the resurrection will not happen at night-time. For the resurrection will not be until the heavens are no more, as it says in Job 14:12. But when the movement of the heavens ceases, which is what it means for them to be no more, there will not be time, neither day nor night. Therefore, the resurrection will not be at night.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, the end of any given thing should be its greatest perfection. But it will be the end of time at that moment, which is why in the Book of Revelation it says that time will be no more (Rev 10:6). Therefore, time should be in its best disposition; and so it should be day.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, the quality of the time should correspond to those things that are accomplished at that time. This is why John 13:30 mentions that it was night when Judas left the fellowship of light. But that moment will be the perfect manifestation of all those things that are now hidden, for when the Lord comes, he will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart, as it says in 1 Corinthians 4:5. Therefore, it should be during the day.
On the contrary (1), Christ’s resurrection is the exemplar of our own resurrection. But Christ’s resurrection was at night, as Gregory says in his Easter homily. (Gregory the Great, Homilies on the Gospels, Bk. 2, Hom. 22, par. 7 (CCSL 141:187).) Therefore, our resurrection will also be at night-time.
Furthermore (2), the coming of the Lord is compared to the coming of a thief into a house, as is seen in Luke 12:39. But a thief comes into a house at night. Therefore, he will come at night. But the resurrection will happen by his coming, as was said. Therefore, the resurrection will be at night.
Response to Quaestiuncula 1
I answer that, as Augustine says in On the Trinity 3, divine providence established that the more coarse and inferior bodies are governed by the more subtle and powerful ones in a certain order. (Augustine, On the Trinity (CCSL 50), Bk. 3, ch. 4.) And this is why all the matter of the inferior bodies is subject to change according to the movement of the heavenly bodies. Therefore, it would be against the order that divine providence has established in things if the matter of the lower bodies were brought to the state of incorruption while the motion of the higher ones remained. And since according to the position of the faith the resurrection into immortal life will be a conforming to Christ, who, having risen from the dead, no longer dies, as it says in Romans 6:9, therefore the resurrection of human bodies will be deferred until the end of the world, when the movement of the heavens will be stilled. And because of this even some philosophers who held that the movement of the heavens would never cease, held a return of human souls to mortal bodies such as we now have—whether they held that the souls returned to the same body in the end of a great year, like Empedocles, or to a different body, as Pythagoras held that any soul would enter any body, as it says in On the Soul 1. (Aristotle, On the Soul, Bk. 1, ch. 3, 407b14–26.)
Reply Obj. 1: Although the head has more in common with the members than they do with each other by a conformity of proportion, which is required for it to overflow into the members, nevertheless, the head has a certain causality over the members which the members lack. And in this the members differ from the head and resemble each other. Therefore, Christ’s resurrection is a kind of exemplar of our resurrection, and hope for our own resurrection springs from faith in it. But the resurrection of any single member of Christ is not a cause of the resurrection of the rest of the members. And so Christ’s resurrection had to precede the resurrection of the others, who must all rise together at the close of the ages.
Reply Obj. 2: Although among the members of Christ, some are nobler than the others, and some are more conformed to the head, nevertheless, they do not attain the nature of the head so that they may be a cause of the others. And thus by conformity to Christ it is not owed to them that their resurrection should precede the resurrection of others, as an exemplar precedes what it gives the example to, as was said about Christ’s resurrection. But the fact that it seems to have been granted to some that their resurrection was not delayed until the general resurrection is from a special privilege of grace, not earned by their conformity to Christ.
Reply Obj. 3: Jerome seems to wonder about that resurrection of the saints with Christ in his sermon on the Assumption, namely, whether once they had witnessed to the Resurrection they returned to the dead, so that it was more of a resuscitation, as was the case with Lazarus, rather than a true resurrection as it will be at the end of the world; or whether they were truly resurrected to immortal life, always to live in the body, ascending to heaven with Christ bodily, as the Gloss says on Matthew 27. (See Glossa ordinaria, PL 112:176.) And this seems more probable, for in order for them to provide true testimony to the true resurrection of Christ, it was fitting that they truly rise, as Jerome says elsewhere. (Jerome, On Matthew, Bk. 4, on 27:53, PL 26:213.) Nor was their resurrection hastened for their own sake, but in order to witness to the Resurrection of Christ for the sake of founding the faith of the New Testament. Therefore, it was done more appropriately by the patriarchs of the Old Testament than by those who would depart life once the New Testament was founded. Nevertheless, it should be known that even if mention were made in the Gospel of their resurrection before the resurrection of Christ, nevertheless, as is evident from the text, it should be understood as being said by way of anticipation, which frequently occurs with historians. For no one rose in a true resurrection before Christ, since he was the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep, as it says in 1 Corinthians 15:20; although some people were resuscitated before Christ’s resurrection, as is seen with Lazarus in John 11.
Reply Obj. 4: By the occasion of those words, as Augustine tells in the City of God, Book 20, (Augustine, The City of God, Bk. 20, ch. 7.) some heretics held that the first future resurrection would be of the dead, so that they would reign with Christ over the earth for a thousand years, which is why they are called Chiliasts or millenials. And in the same place Augustine shows that those words should be understood differently, namely, about a spiritual resurrection by which men rise from sin by the gift of grace. But the second resurrection is of the body. Moreover, the Church is called Christ’s reign, in which not only martyrs but also the other elect reign with him, so that the whole is understood from a part. Or all those in glory reign with Christ. And mention is especially made of the martyrs, because those dead particularly reign who strove according to the truth even to death. Now ‘a thousand’ does not signify any certain number, but it designates the whole time that must pass in which the saints rule with Christ, for the number thousand designates wholeness more than a hundred, by the fact that a hundred is ten squared, but a thousand is a cubed number arising from ten multiplied by itself twice, for ten times ten times ten is a thousand. And similarly it says in Psalm 105 (104):8: the word that he commanded for a thousand generations, that is, all generations.
Response to Quaestiuncula 2
To the second question, it should be said that as Augustine says in his book the Eighty-Three Questions, Question 58, (Augustine, Eighty-three Questions (CCSL 44A), q. 58.) it is uncertain how many generations are counted in the last age of the human race which begins from the coming of the Lord until the end of the world; just as old age, which is the last age of man, does not have a determinate time according to the measure of the others, since sometimes it alone takes as much time as all the rest of the ages together. Now the reason for this is that a determinate number of future time cannot be known unless either by revelation or by natural reason. But the time that will lapse before the resurrection cannot be counted by natural reason, for the resurrection will be simultaneous with the end of the movement of the heavens, as was said. But the number of all things that are foreseen by natural reason at a determinate time is taken from this movement. Now the end of the movement of the heavens cannot be known from itself, for since it is circular, it is according to its nature to be able to endure forever. Therefore, the time that there will be until the resurrection cannot be calculated by natural reason. Likewise, neither can it be had by revelation, so that everyone will always be ready and eager to meet Christ, and for this reason he answered even the apostles who asked about this, it is not yours to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority (Acts 1:7), in which, as Augustine says in the City of God, Book 18, (Augustine, The City of God, Bk. 18, ch. 53.) he puts an end to everyone’s calculations about this matter and commands them to be still, for what he did not wish to indicate to the apostles who asked, he will not reveal to others. Therefore, all those who have wanted to calculate the time discussed are found to be speaking falsely where this is concerned. For some people, as Augustine said in the same place, have said that four hundred years can be completed from the Lord’s ascension to the second coming; others, five hundred; others, a thousand; and that all of these claims are false is obvious. And it will be similarly obvious regarding the claims of all those who still do not cease to calculate.
Reply Obj. 1: Of those things whose end is known by knowing their beginning, it is necessary for us to know their measure; and therefore when the beginning of a certain thing is known, whose length is measured by the motion of the heavens, we can know its end, by the fact that the motion of the heavens is known to us. But the measure of the duration of the motion of the heavens is only the divine disposition, which is hidden from us. And therefore no matter how much we know its beginning, we cannot know its end.
Reply Obj. 2: The 1,260 days that are mentioned in Revelation 12:6 signify all the time that the Church will last, and not any determinate number of years. And this is because Christ’s preaching, upon which the Church is founded, lasted three and a half years, which period contains a number of days equal to that number. Likewise also the number of those days mentioned in Daniel is not to be referred to the number of years that will lapse before the end of the world, or before the preaching of the Antichrist; but it should be referred to the time through which the Antichrist will preach, and through which his persecution will last.
Reply Obj. 3: Although the state of the New Testament is prefigured in general by the state of the Old Testament, nevertheless it is not necessary that there be a one-to-one correspondence, particularly since in Christ all the figures of the Old Testament were fulfilled. And thus Augustine in the City of God, Book 18, (Augustine, The City of God (CCSL 48), Bk. 18, ch. 52.) answering certain people who wanted to take the number of persecutions that the Church suffered and will suffer according to the number of plagues of Egypt, says: I do not judge these persecutions to be prophetically signified by the events of Egypt, although by those who think this, each individual event seems to relate to these individual events ingeniously and in detail, not by a prophetic spirit, but by a conjecture of the human mind which sometimes attains the truth, but fails at other times. And it seems to be similar to the statements of the Abbot Joachim, who, by this kind of conjecture about the future, foretold certain true things and in others was deceived. (Aquinas refers here to Joachim of Fiore (c. 1135 – 30 March 1202), a theologian, mystic, and exegete whose opinions about the Trinity and the three ages of the Church—the third age, that of the Spirit, prophesied to have its beginning in the year 1260—were condemned by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, by Pope Alexander IV, and by the Synod of Arles.)
Response to Quaestiuncula 3
To the third question, it should be said that in the resurrection, something will be done by the ministry of the angels, and something by divine power directly, as was said. Therefore, what will happen by the ministry of the angels will not be in an instant if ‘instant’ means an indivisible moment of time; however, it will be in an instant if ‘instant’ is taken for an imperceptible time. Now whatever will be done by divine power directly will be all at once, namely, at the end of the time in which the angels’ work will be completed: for a superior power brings an inferior one to perfection.
Reply Obj. 1: Ezekiel was speaking to a rough people, just as Moses was. And even as Moses distinguished the works of the six days by days so that a rough people could grasp it, although all things were made at the same time according to Augustine, so Ezekiel expresses different things that will happen in the resurrection, although all these future things will exist together in an instant.
Reply Obj. 2: Although those activities are consequent upon each other by nature, they are nevertheless simultaneous in time, for either they exist in the same instant, or one exists in the instant that another terminates in.
Reply Obj. 3: It seems to be the same with that sound as with the forms of the sacraments: namely, that they have their effect in the last instant of being uttered.
Reply Obj. 4: Bringing together the dust, which cannot happen without local motion, will be by the ministry of the angels. And therefore it will be in time, but an imperceptible time, because of the ease with which angels naturally do their work.
Response to Quaestiuncula 4
To the fourth question, it should be said that the specific hour of time when the resurrection will happen cannot be known for certain, as is clear from the text. Nevertheless, it is said by some, with sufficient probability, that the resurrection will be in the twilight time when the sun hangs in the east and the moon in the west; for the sun and moon are believed to have been created in this disposition, and thus their full circuit would be thoroughly completed by their return to the same point. This is why it is said of Christ that he rose at this hour.
Reply Obj. 1: When the resurrection occurs it will not be time, but the end of time, for at the same instant in which the movement of the heavens ceases, the resurrection of the dead will occur. And yet the position of the stars will be according to the disposition by which they are arranged now in any specific hour; and accordingly the future resurrection is said to be at this or that hour.
Reply Obj. 2: The best disposition of time is said to be noon because of the brightness of the sun. But at that moment the city of God will not need either sun or moon, for the splendor of God will illuminate it, as it says in Revelation 21:23. And therefore as to this it does not matter whether the resurrection occurs in the day or at night.
Reply Obj. 3: Manifestation corresponds to that time as to the things that will be accomplished then, and concealment as to the determination of the time itself; and so either could be fitting, namely, that the resurrection could be during the day or at night.
Article 4
About the starting terminus for the resurrection
Quaestiuncula 1
Obj. 1: To the fourth question, we proceed thus. (Parallels: ST I-II, q. 81, a. 3, ad 1; In II Sent. d. 31, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2; De potentia, q. 4, a. 6, ad 1.) It seems that death will not be the starting terminus of the resurrection for everyone. For some people will not die, but will be clothed about with immortality; for it is said in the Creed, that he will come again to judge the living and the dead. However, this cannot be understood as to the time of the judgment, for then all will be alive. Therefore, it is necessary that this distinction be referred to the preceding time; and so not all will die before the judgment.
Obj. 2: Natural and common desire cannot be empty and vain without being fulfilled in certain things. But according to the Apostle in 2 Corinthians 5:4, this is the common desire, that we do not wish to be stripped, but clothed. Therefore, there will be certain people who will never be stripped of the body by death, but who will be clothed about with the glory of the resurrection.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, Augustine says in his Handbook on Faith, Hope, and Love (Augustine, Enchiridion (CCSL 46), ch. 30; in PL 40:285, it is given as ch. 115.) that the four last petitions of the Lord’s Prayer pertain to the present life, one of which is: forgive us our debts. Therefore, the Church prays in this life to have all her debts forgiven. But the Church’s prayer cannot be fruitless so that it is not heard: if you ask anything of the Father, he will give it to you in my name (John 16:23). Therefore, the Church will obtain the remission of all debts at some time in this life. But one of the debts by which we are bound for the sin of our first parents is that we are born in original sin. Therefore, at some time God will grant to the Church that men will be born without original sin. But death is the punishment for original sin. Therefore, at the end of the world there will be some men who will not die; and thus, the same as before.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, the shorter route is always the one to be chosen by the wise man. But for men who are found alive to be elevated into the impassibility of the resurrection is a shorter route than that they die first and afterward rise from death into immortality. Therefore, God, who is the wisest of all, chooses this route for those who will be found alive. And thus, the same as before.
On the contrary (1), what you sow does not come to life unless it dies (1 Cor 15:36). And he speaks under a similitude of the resurrection of the body. Therefore, bodies will rise from death.
Furthermore (2), as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive (1 Cor 15:22). But in Christ all shall be brought to life. Therefore, in Adam all will die, and thus for all people, the resurrection will be from death.
Quaestiuncula 2
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the resurrection will not be from ashes for everyone. For the resurrection of Christ is the exemplar for our resurrection. But his resurrection was not from ashes, for his flesh did not see corruption, as it says in Psalm 16 (15):10 and Acts 2:31. Therefore, neither will the resurrection be from ashes for everyone.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, the body of a man is not always burned. But something cannot be resolved into ashes except by burning. Therefore, not all will rise from ashes.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, the body of a dead person does not immediately decay into dust after death. But some people will rise immediately after death, as it says in the text, namely, those who are found alive on the last day. Therefore, not all will rise from ashes.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, the starting terminus corresponds to the ending terminus. But the ending terminus of the resurrection is not the same for the good as for the bad: for we shall all rise, but we shall not all be changed (1 Cor 15:51). Therefore neither is the starting terminus the same for all. And this is why, if the wicked rise from ashes, the good will not rise from ashes.
On the contrary (1), Haymo says in his commentary on Romans 5: this sentence binds all those born in original sin: you are earth, into the earth you will go. (There is something like this in Haymo of Halberstadt, Exposition on Romans, ch. 4, PL 117:773.) But all who will rise in the general resurrection were born in original sin, either at their birth from the womb, or at least at their beginning in the womb. Therefore, all will rise from ashes.
Furthermore (2), there are many things in the human body that do not belong to human nature in truth. But all those things will be taken away. Therefore, it is fitting that all bodies should be resolved into ashes.
Quaestiuncula 3
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that the dust from which the human body will be reconstituted has a certain natural inclination to the soul that is joined to it. (Parallel: Super I Cor. 15, lec. 5 & 6.) For if it had no inclination to that soul, it would be related to that soul like any other dust. Therefore, there would be no difference whether the body to be united with the soul was reformed out of this dust or other dust; which is false.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, the dependence of the body on the soul is greater than that of the soul on the body. But a soul separated from a body still has a certain dependency on a body, which is why its motion toward God is slowed because of the appetites of the body, as Dionysius says in On the Divine Names. (There does not appear to be anything quite like this in On the Divine Names, where, if anything, the author is at pains to defend the goodness of the body and the fittingness of the mutual dependency of soul and body on each other (e.g., ch. 4, n. 28).) Therefore, much more does a body separated from a soul still have a natural inclination to that soul.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, it says in Job 20:11: his bones are filled with the vices of his youth, and they shall sleep with him in the dust. But vices only exist in the soul. Therefore, in those ashes will still remain a certain natural inclination to the soul.
On the contrary (1), the human body can be resolved into the elements themselves, or even converted into the flesh of other animals. But elements are homogeneous, and likewise, the flesh of a lion or another animal. Therefore, since in other parts of the elements or of animals there is no natural inclination to that soul, neither in those parts into which the human body was converted will there be any inclination to the soul. This is clear from the authority of Augustine in the Handbook on Faith, Hope, and Love, (Augustine, Enchiridion (CCSL 46), ch. 23; given as ch. 88 in PL 40:273.) where he says: the human body may be changed into any substance of other bodies or into the elements themselves, it may become the food of any men or animals and be changed into flesh . . . at a point in time it will yield to that human soul which animated it before, so that it might become a man, and live and grow.
Furthermore (2), there is a natural agent corresponding to any natural inclination; otherwise nature would fail in necessary things. But the dust mentioned cannot be reunited with the same soul by any natural agent. Therefore, there is no natural inclination in it to this union.
Response to Quaestiuncula 1
I answer that, the saints have spoken about this question in various ways, as is clear from the text. Nevertheless, this is the more common and sure opinion, that all will die, and all will rise from death; and there are three reasons for this. First, because it agrees more with divine justice, which condemned human nature for the sin of our first parent, that all who draw their origin from him by an act of nature, should contract the infection of original sin, and as a result be under a debt of death. Second, because it agrees more with divine Scripture, which foretells that all will rise. But to rise properly belongs only to one who has fallen and dissolved, as Damascene says. (John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, Bk. 4, ch. 32, PG 94:1219.) Third, because it agrees more with the order of nature in which we find that what was corrupted and damaged is not returned to its newness except by means of corruption, as vinegar does not become wine except by the vinegar being corrupted, and passing into the fluid of the vines. Therefore, since human nature has arrived at the defect of the necessity of dying, there will be no return to immortality except by means of death. It also fits the order of nature for another reason: because, as is said in the Physics 8, (Aristotle, Physics, Bk. 8, ch. 1, 250b11–15.) the movement of the heavens is like a certain life in all things existing by nature, just as also the movement of the heart is like the life of the whole body. Therefore, just as when the motion of the heart stops, all the members die, so when the motion of the heaven stops, nothing can remain alive in that life that is conserved by the influence of that motion. However, the life that we now lead is like this; therefore, it is necessary that they should depart this life who will live after the stilling of the heavenly motion.
Reply Obj. 1: That distinction between the living and the dead is not to be referred to the very time of the judgment, nor to all past time; for all those to be judged were alive at one time, and dead at one time; but rather to that specific time that will immediately precede the judgment, namely, when the signs of the judgment will begin to appear.
Reply Obj. 2: The perfect desire of the saints cannot be in vain; but nothing prevents their conditional desire from being in vain, and that is the kind of desire by which we do not wish to be stripped but clothed about, namely, if that were possible. And this desire is called a willingness, ‘velleity’, by some.
Reply Obj. 3: It is erroneous to say that anyone may be conceived without original sin besides Christ; for that person who was conceived without original sin would not need the redemption that was worked by Christ, and thus Christ would not be the redeemer of all men. (We see in this clear statement of the youthful Aquinas what stands as his lifelong opinion, namely, that anyone lacking original sin would, for that very reason, be altogether lacking a need for redemption. See, for other expressions of the same position, Comp. theol. 224 and ST III, q. 14, a. 3, ad 1, and q. 27 in toto.) Nor can it be said that they did not need this redemption because it was granted to them that they be conceived without sin, for that grace was given to their parents so that the vice of nature might be healed in them, since they could not generate children without original sin while it remained; or it was granted to the nature that was healed. But it is necessary to hold that each person needs the redemption of Christ personally, not only by reason of nature. Now to be freed from evil or absolved from a debt can only happen to the one who incurred the debt or was thrown into the evil; and so not everyone could receive the fruit of the Lord’s redemption unless everyone were born a debtor and subject to evil. Therefore, the dismissal of debt and liberation from evil cannot be understood if anyone were born without the debt or immune from evil; but because a person born with the debt is freed afterward by the grace of Christ. Nor does it that, if it can be held without error that certain people will not die, therefore it can be held without error that some people are born without original sin; for out of his mercy God can lift the punishment someone is obligated to for past sin, as he sent away the adulterous woman without punishment in John 8:11. And likewise he could free from death those who had contracted the liability to death by being born with original sin. And so it does not follow that if they will not die, they were therefore born without original sin.
Reply Obj. 4: The shorter route is not always to be preferred, but only when it is more or equally conducive to the end to be obtained. And this is not the case here, as is clear from what has been said.
Response to Quaestiuncula 2
To the second question, it should be said that by the same arguments that showed that all would rise from death, it can also be shown that all will rise from ashes in the general resurrection, unless the contrary is granted to certain people by a privilege of special grace, as is the case with an earlier resurrection. Now as Scripture foretells the resurrection, so also does it foretell the reforming of bodies (cf. Phil 3:21). And therefore just as all must die in order for all to be able to rise truly, so too the bodies of all must be dissolved in order to be able to be reformed; for just as death was inflicted as man’s punishment by divine justice, so too was the dissolving of the body, as is clear from Genesis 3:19: you are dust, and to dust you shall return. (Thomas’s point would have been clearer had he quoted the Vulgate’s rendering of this verse: “quia pulvis es et in pulverem reverteris,” the words used in the ceremony of the imposition of ashes on Ash Wednesday.) Likewise also, the order of nature requires that not only the union of soul and body but also the commingling of the elements should be dissolved; just as also vinegar cannot be returned to the quality of wine except by its previous resolution into the preliminary matter. For the very mixture of elements is caused and preserved by the motion of the heavens, and all mixed things will be resolved into the pure elements when this stops.
Reply Obj. 1: The resurrection of Christ is the exemplar of our resurrection as to the ending terminus, but not as to the starting terminus.
Reply Obj. 2: By ashes are understood all the remains that are left of the human body once it is dissolved, for two reasons. First, because among the ancients it was customary to burn the bodies of the dead, and to keep the ashes, which is where this mode of speaking came from, that whatever the human body dissolves into is called ‘ashes’. Second, because of the cause of this dissolving, which is the fiery heat of the fomes by which the human body is infected in its root, and for this reason the human body must be reduced to its first components for the purification of this infection. Now what is consumed by fire is said to be dissolved into ashes; and so whatever the human body is dissolved into, is called ashes.
Reply Obj. 3: That fire that will purify the face of the earth could instantly reduce the bodies of those found alive into ashes, just as it will also reduce other mixtures into preliminary matter.
Reply Obj. 4: Motion does not receive its species from its starting terminus, but from its ending terminus. And therefore the resurrection of the saints, which will be glorious, must differ from the resurrection of the wicked, which will not be glorious as to its ending terminus, but not as to its starting terminus. For it often happens that two things with the same starting terminus do not have the same ending terminus, as something can be moved from blackness to whiteness or to grayness.
Response to Quaestiuncula 3
To the third question, it should be said that there are three opinions about this. For some people say that the human body is never resolved into its elements; and so some force added to the elements always remains in the ashes, which gives a natural inclination to the same soul. But this position is indirectly contrary to the authority of Augustine, and to the senses, and to reason: for it is possible for all things composed out of contraries to be resolved into what they were composed from. And therefore other people say that those parts of the elements into which the human body is resolved retain more light by the fact that they were once joined to a human soul, and from this they have a certain inclination to that soul. But this again seems silly: for the parts of the elements are of one nature, and they have equal participation in light and darkness. And therefore one must say otherwise, that in those ashes there is no natural inclination to the resurrection, but only by the order of divine providence, which established that those ashes would be joined again to this soul; and by this it is fitting that those parts of the elements are united again, and not others.
And thus the answer to the first objection is clear.
Reply Obj. 2: A soul separated from a body remains in the same nature that it had when it was joined to the body. But this does not happen to the body, and so the situation is not similar.
Reply Obj. 3: In that statement of Job it is not to be understood that vices actually remain in the dust of the dead, but according to the ordering of divine justice, by which that dust is designated for the reforming of a body, which will be eternally tormented for sins committed.
Article 5
About the memory and knowledge of those who rise
Quaestiuncula 1
Obj. 1: To the fifth question, we proceed thus. It seems that after the resurrection not everyone will recognize the sins he committed. For everything that we acknowledge either we newly receive through the senses, or it is drawn from the treasury of memory. But after the resurrection people will not be able to perceive their sins through the senses, for they will have already passed away, while the senses are only for present things. Many sins will have also been lost from the sinner’s memory, which could not be brought up from the treasury of memory. Therefore, those who rise will not have awareness of all the sins that they committed.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, as it says in the text, there are certain books of conscience in which the merits of individuals are read. But nothing can be read in books unless it is marked in the book. Now, as is clear from the Gloss on Romans 1, (It seems Aquinas has Romans 2:15 in mind; it is hard to see what verses in chapter 1 would fit his description.) certain marks of sins remain in the conscience, which do not seem to be anything other than the liability to punishment or the stain of sin. Therefore, since the stain and the debt of punishment are wiped away by grace in many people, it seems that not all the sins that someone committed could be read in his conscience, and thus, the same as before.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, when the cause increases, the effect increases. But the cause that makes us sorry for the sins we remember is charity. Therefore, since there is perfect charity in the risen saints, they will suffer the most from their sins, if they recall them to memory, which cannot be, since sorrow and grief will flee from them, as it says in Revelation 21:4. Therefore, they will not recall their own sins to memory.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, as the damned who rise will be related to the good things that they sometimes did, so the blessed who rise will be related to the sins that they sometimes committed. But the damned who rise, as it seems, will not be aware of the good things they sometimes did, for by this their pain would be greatly alleviated. Therefore, neither will the good have awareness of the sins they committed.
On the contrary (1), Augustine says in On the City of God, Book 20, (Augustine, The City of God, Bk. 20, ch. 14.) that a certain divine power will be present, by which all sins will be recalled to memory.
Furthermore (2), as human judgment is related to outward testimony, so is divine judgment to the testimony of conscience, as is evident from 1 Samuel 16:7: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart. But there can be no perfect human judgment about anything unless witnesses give testimony about everything to be judged. Therefore it is fitting, since divine judgment is the most perfect, that the conscience hold in awareness everything that must be judged. But all good and bad works will be judged: we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body (2 Cor 5:10). Therefore, the conscience of each person must retain all the works that he did, whether good or evil.
Quaestiuncula 2
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that everyone cannot read what is in the conscience of another. For there will not be clearer understanding in the resurrected than there is now in the angels, with whom the risen are promised equality (Matt 22:30). But angels cannot see in each other’s hearts those things that depend on free will, which is why they need speech in order to make them known to each other, as was said in Book II, Distinction 11, Question 1, Article 3. Therefore, neither will those who rise be able to look at what is contained in the consciences of others.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, everything that we understand is either understood in itself or in its cause or in its effect. But another person could not recognize the merits or demerits that are contained in someone’s conscience, for only God infiltrates the heart and searches its secrets. Likewise, neither could they be seen in their cause, for not all will see God, who alone can impress upon the affections, from which merits and demerits come. Likewise, neither in their effects, for there are many demerits from which no effect remains, for they have been entirely wiped away by penance. Therefore, every person will not be able to see all that is in the conscience of another.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, John Chrysostom says, as the text has at Distinction 16, but now if you remember your sins and frequently confess them in the sight of God and beg pardon for them, you will swiftly blot them out. But if you forget them, then you will remember them when you do not want to, when they are made public, and are brought forward in the sight of all your friends and enemies and the saints and angels. (John Chrysostom, On the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hom. 31.) From this it can be taken that that publicizing is a punishment for negligence, because a man omits confession. Therefore, those sins that a man has confessed will not be made public to others.
Obj. 4: Furthermore, it is a consolation to someone if he knows he has many companions in sin, and then he is less shamed by it. Therefore, if everyone knows the sin of others, the sinner’s embarrassment will be much diminished, which is not appropriate. Therefore, all people will not know the sins of all others.
On the contrary (1), commenting on 1 Corinthians 4:5: he will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness, the Gloss says, thoughts and deeds, good and evil, will then be made open and known to all.
Furthermore (2), the past sins of all the blessed were equally wiped away. But we shall know the sins of some of the saints, like Mary Magdalene and Peter and David. By the same reasoning, therefore, the sins of the other elect will be known, and much more, of the damned.
Quaestiuncula 3
Obj. 1: Moreover, it seems that not all of one’s own merits and demerits and those of others will be seen by people in one glance. For things that are considered individually are not seen in a single glance. But the damned will consider their sins individually and weep over them. This is why it is said in Wisdom 5:8, what has our arrogance profited us? (St. Thomas has, no doubt, the entire passage in mind: “’What has our arrogance profited us? And what good has our boasted wealth brought us? All those things have vanished like a shadow, and like a rumor that passes by; like a ship that sails through the billowy water, and when it has passed no trace can be found, nor track of its keel in the waves; or as, when a bird flies through the air, no evidence of its passage is found; the light air, lashed by the beat of its pinions and pierced by the force of its rushing flight, is traversed by the movement of its wings, and afterward no sign of its coming is found there; or as, when an arrow is shot at a target, the air, thus divided, comes together at once, so that no one knows its pathway. So we also, as soon as we were born, ceased to be, and we had no sign of virtue to show, but were consumed in our wickedness.’ Because the hope of the ungodly man is like chaff carried by the wind, and like a light hoarfrost driven away by a storm; it is dispersed like smoke before the wind, and it passes like the remembrance of a guest who stays but a day” (Wis 5:8–14).) Therefore, they will not see all things in one glance.
Obj. 2: Furthermore, the Philosopher says in the Topics 2, (Aristotle, Topics, Bk. 2, ch. 10, 114b33–35.) that it is not possible to understand many things at once. But the merits and demerits of oneself and others will only be seen with the intellect. Therefore, all things could not be seen at once.
Obj. 3: Furthermore, the intellect of damned persons wil not be raised higher after the resurrection than those of good men and angels now as to the natural understanding by which we understand a thing by its innate species. But with natural cognition like this, they do not see many things at the same time, as was said in Book II, Distinction 3. Therefore, neither will the damned be able to see all their own deeds at once at that time.
On the contrary (1), commenting on Job 8:22: those who hate you shall be clothed with shame, the Gloss says, when they have seen the judge, all their evils shall return before the eyes of their mind. (Glossa ordinaria, PL 113:780.) But they shall see the judge all at once. Therefore, they shall see the evils that they committed in the same way, and by the same argument, all other deeds.
Furthermore (2), Augustine in the City of God, Book 20, holds as unfitting that any material book in which the deeds of individuals are written be read in the judgment, because no one could gauge the size of such a book or how much time it would take to read it. (Augustine, The City of God (CCSL 48), Bk. 20, ch. 14: “Qui liber si carnaliter cogitetur, quis eius magnitudinem aut longitudinem ualeat aestimare? Aut quanto tempore legi poterit liber, in quo scriptae sunt uniuersae uitae uniuersorum?”) But similarly one could not guess at the amount of time it would take to set down for consideration by any man all one’s own merits and demerits, and those of others, if they saw different things successively. Therefore, one must hold that each person sees all things at the same time.
Response to Quaestiuncula 1
I answer that, as is said in Romans 2:14–16, on that day when the Lord will judge, testimony will be rendered for each person by his own conscience, and his thoughts will be accusers and defenders. And because it is necessary that the witnesses and accuser and defender in any trial have knowledge of the things that are being tried, but in the general judgment all the works of men will come under judgment, each person must have knowledge of all his own works. For this reason the consciences of individuals will be like a kind of ledger containing the things done, on the basis of which the judgment will be made, just as in a human court they use court reports. These are the books that Revelation 20:12 speaks about: books were opened. Also another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, by what they had done (Rev 20:12), so that by the books that are said to be opened in this way, as Augustine explains in the City of God, Book 20, (In the same passage cited above.) are signified the saints of the Old and New Testaments, in whom God shows which commands he has ordered to be done. Therefore, as Richard of St. Victor says, (Richard of St. Victor, De judiciaria potestate, PL 196:118.) their hearts were like a kind of canon of his decrees, but by the book of life, about which it is described below, the consciences of individuals are understood, which are individually called one book because it will happen by one divine power that the deeds of each one will be recalled to memory. And this power, inasmuch as it brings a man’s deeds back to his memory, is called the book of life. Or by the first books, consciences are understood, by the second, the sentence of the judge as prescribed in his providence.
Reply Obj. 1: Although many merits or demerits may fade from memory, nevertheless none of them will be such that it does not remain somehow in its effect, for merits that are not dead will remain in the reward that is rendered to them, while those that are dead will remain in the guilt of ingratitude, and are increased when a man sinned after having received grace. Likewise also demerits which are not erased by penance remain in the debt of punishment that is due them, while those that penance has effaced will remain in the very memory of that penance, which they will have together with other merits in their awareness. Therefore, in every person there will be something by which he can call to memory his works. And yet, as Augustine says, (In the same passage as above.) principally the divine power will bring this about.
Reply Obj. 2: It is already clear from what has been said that certain marks of the works they have done remain in the consciences of individuals. Nor is it necessary that these marks be only guilt, as is evident from what has been said.
Reply Obj. 3: Although charity is the cause of sorrow for sins now, nevertheless the saints in heaven will be so flooded with joy that sorrow will be unable to exist in them. And therefore they will not grieve over sins, but rather they will rejoice in the divine mercy by which their sins were forgiven, just as now the angels rejoice in divine justice by which it happens that those whom they guard tumble into sin when they are deprived of grace, yet they diligently pursue their salvation.
Reply Obj. 4: The wicked recognize all the good they did, and their sorrow is not diminished by this but but rather increased, for the greatest sorrow is to have lost many good things. This is why Boethius says, in On the Consolation of Philosophy, Book 2, (Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy (CCSL 94), Bk. 2, prose 4, l. 3.) that the greatest kind of misfortune is to have been happy.
Response to Quaestiuncula 2
To the second question, it should be said that in the last general judgment divine justice must appear plainly to all, which is now hidden in most things. Now a sentence that condemns or rewards cannot be just except according to the merits or demerits brought forth. And therefore just as a judge and a judge’s assessor must know the merits of the case in order to hand down a just sentence, so too in order for a just sentence to be given, the merits must be made known to all those who learn the sentence. Therefore, since just as each person’s reward or damnation will be known by him, so too it will be made known to all others, it is necessary that everyone bring to memory his own merits and demerits, and so too those of others will be exposed to his awareness. And this is the more probable and common opinion, although the Master says the contrary in the text, namely, that sins that are effaced through penance will not be made evident to others in the judgment. But from this it follows that neither will the penance completed for those sins be recognized, which would detract much from the glory of the saints and the praise of God, who so mercifully freed his saints.
Reply Obj. 1: All previous merits or demerits will cause a certain amount of glory or misery for a person who rises, as is clear from what has been said. And therefore all things could be seen in the conscience from what is seen outwardly; and especially by divine power working this, so that the sentence of the judge may appear just to all.
Reply Obj. 2: Merits or demerits could be shown to others in their effects, as is clear from what was said, or also in themselves through divine power, even though the power of the created intellect is not sufficient for this.
Reply Obj. 3: Making public one’s sins to the disgrace of the sinner is an effect of the negligence that is committed in the omission of confession. But the fact that the saints’ sins will be revealed could not be for their shame or embarrassment, just as neither does Mary Magdalene blush when her sins are recited publicly in the Church, for shame is the fear of losing glory, as Damascene says, (John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, Bk. 2, ch. 15, PG 94:931.) which could not exist in the blessed. But a making public like this will be to their greater glory because of the penance that they did, just as a confessor commends someone who bravely confesses great crimes. Sins are said to be effaced, however, because God does not see them to punish them.
Reply Obj. 4: From the fact that one sinner examines another’s sins, his own shame will not be diminished in the least, but rather it will be increased, weighing his own reproach against another’s reproach. For when a person’s shame is diminished for such a reason, this happens because his embarrassment arises from the estimation of men, which is made lighter by custom. But on that day his shame will arise from the estimation of God, which is according to the truth of any sin, whether it be the sin of one person or many.
Response to Quaestiuncula 3
To the third question, it should be said that there are two opinions about this. For some people say that a person will see all merits or demerits together, both his own and those of others, in an instant, which indeed can easily be believed of the blessed, for they shall see all things in one, and so it is not unfitting if they see many things together. But in the damned, whose intellect is not elevated so that it can see God and all other things in him, it is more difficult. And therefore others say that the wicked will see all their own sins together in their genus; and this suffices for that accusation or absolution that must occur in the judgment; but they will not see all things going down into particulars. But this also does not seem to agree with Augustine’s statements in the City of God, Book 20, (See Augustine, The City of God (CCSL 48), Bk. 20, ch. 14.) where he says that all things will be enumerated in a glimpse of the mind. But what is known in its genus is not enumerated. Therefore, a middle path can be chosen, that they will consider individual sins, not, however, in an instant, but in a very short time, with the help of divine power. And this is what Augustine says in the same place, that marvels will be enumerated with speed. Nor is this impossible, for in any small amount of time there are infinite instants in potency.
And by this the answer to either side is clear.
Exposition of the Text
“The Lord himself shall come down from heaven with command, and the voice of an archangel, and the trumpet of God.” (Sententiae IV, 43.1 (244). 2 citing 1 Thess. 4, 12.) The same thing can be signified by these three, so that the voice is called command as to power, for the bodies of the dead obey it; the voice of the archangel, that is, Christ, who is the prince of the angels, as to the dignity of the one uttering it; the trumpet as to its clarity. Or the command refers to the principal cause, namely, divine power, which all things obey; the voice of the archangel to the ministry of the angels; but the trumpet to the operation of the man Christ, for these three things will be at work in the resurrection.
And so it may not unreasonably be thought that those sins which have been concealed and blotted out here through penance will there be concealed from others. (Sent. IV, 43.5 (248). 4.) To support the Master it can be said that the sins of the just will not be made known as sins but as forgiven, for this is how they will be brought before everyone’s consideration. Therefore, there will be no shame from this, but glory. However, they are said to be concealed inasmuch as God does not see them to punish them, as the Gloss says about Psalm 32 (31):1: blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven.
But Jerome, writing to Marcella, seems to attest to the contrary. (Sent. IV, 43.6 (249). 5.) Some people say that Jerome did not say this as his own assertion, but only to report the opinion of a certain Greek.
Chapter 179 of 186