Part I (Prima Pars) Part 11 (2/2)

Reply Obj. 2: Number, since it is an accident, does not, of itself, exist in place, but accidentally; neither is the whole but only part of it in each of the things numbered; hence it does not follow that it is primarily and absolutely everywhere.

Reply Obj. 3: The whole body of the universe is everywhere, but not primarily; forasmuch as it is not wholly in each place, but according to its parts; nor again is it everywhere absolutely, because, supposing that other places existed besides itself, it would not be in them.

Reply Obj. 4: If an infinite body existed, it would be everywhere; but according to its parts.

Reply Obj. 5: Were there one animal only, its soul would be everywhere primarily indeed, but only accidentally.

Reply Obj. 6: When it is said that the soul sees anywhere, this can be taken in two senses. In one sense the adverb ”anywhere”

determines the act of seeing on the part of the object; and in this sense it is true that while it sees the heavens, it sees in the heavens; and in the same way it feels in the heavens; but it does not follow that it lives or exists in the heavens, because to live and to exist do not import an act pa.s.sing to an exterior object. In another sense it can be understood according as the adverb determines the act of the seer, as proceeding from the seer; and thus it is true that where the soul feels and sees, there it is, and there it lives according to this mode of speaking; and thus it does not follow that it is everywhere.

_______________________

QUESTION 9

THE IMMUTABILITY OF G.o.d (In Two Articles)

We next consider G.o.d's immutability, and His eternity following on His immutability. On the immutability of G.o.d there are two points of inquiry:

(1) Whether G.o.d is altogether immutable?

(2) Whether to be immutable belongs to G.o.d alone?

_______________________

FIRST ARTICLE [I, Q. 9, Art. 1]

Whether G.o.d is altogether immutable?

Objection 1: It seems that G.o.d is not altogether immutable. For whatever moves itself is in some way mutable. But, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit, viii, 20), ”The Creator Spirit moves Himself neither by time, nor by place.” Therefore G.o.d is in some way mutable.

Obj. 2: Further, it is said of Wisdom, that ”it is more mobile than all things active [Vulg. 'mobilior']” (Wis. 7:24). But G.o.d is wisdom itself; therefore G.o.d is movable.

Obj. 3: Further, to approach and to recede signify movement. But these are said of G.o.d in Scripture, ”Draw nigh to G.o.d and He will draw nigh to you” (James 4:8). Therefore G.o.d is mutable.

_On the contrary,_ It is written, ”I am the Lord, and I change not”

(Malachi 3:6).

_I answer that,_ From what precedes, it is shown that G.o.d is altogether immutable. First, because it was shown above that there is some first being, whom we call G.o.d; and that this first being must be pure act, without the admixture of any potentiality, for the reason that, absolutely, potentiality is posterior to act. Now everything which is in any way changed, is in some way in potentiality. Hence it is evident that it is impossible for G.o.d to be in any way changeable.

Secondly, because everything which is moved, remains as it was in part, and pa.s.ses away in part; as what is moved from whiteness to blackness, remains the same as to substance; thus in everything which is moved, there is some kind of composition to be found. But it has been shown above (Q. 3, A. 7) that in G.o.d there is no composition, for He is altogether simple. Hence it is manifest that G.o.d cannot be moved. Thirdly, because everything which is moved acquires something by its movement, and attains to what it had not attained previously.

But since G.o.d is infinite, comprehending in Himself all the plenitude of perfection of all being, He cannot acquire anything new, nor extend Himself to anything whereto He was not extended previously. Hence movement in no way belongs to Him. So, some of the ancients, constrained, as it were, by the truth, decided that the first principle was immovable.

Reply Obj. 1: Augustine there speaks in a similar way to Plato, who said that the first mover moves Himself; calling every operation a movement, even as the acts of understanding, and willing, and loving, are called movements. Therefore because G.o.d understands and loves Himself, in that respect they said that G.o.d moves Himself, not, however, as movement and change belong to a thing existing in potentiality, as we now speak of change and movement.

Reply Obj. 2: Wisdom is called mobile by way of similitude, according as it diffuses its likeness even to the outermost of things; for nothing can exist which does not proceed from the divine wisdom by way of some kind of imitation, as from the first effective and formal principle; as also works of art proceed from the wisdom of the artist.

And so in the same way, inasmuch as the similitude of the divine wisdom proceeds in degrees from the highest things, which partic.i.p.ate more fully of its likeness, to the lowest things which partic.i.p.ate of it in a lesser degree, there is said to be a kind of procession and movement of the divine wisdom to things; as when we say that the sun proceeds to the earth, inasmuch as the ray of light touches the earth.

In this way Dionysius (Coel. Hier. i) expounds the matter, that every procession of the divine manifestation comes to us from the movement of the Father of light.

Reply Obj. 3: These things are said of G.o.d in Scripture metaphorically. For as the sun is said to enter a house, or to go out, according as its rays reach the house, so G.o.d is said to approach to us, or to recede from us, when we receive the influx of His goodness, or decline from Him.

<script>