Bibliotheca Catholicaa library of libraries
Support
Summa Theologiae · Suppl., q. 96, a. 9

Whether an aureole is due to the angels?

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Supplement, question 96, Of the Aureoles, article 9. About 2 min.

Read in the reading room → This article at New Advent

From the Supplement, compiled after Aquinas’s death from his Commentary on the Sentences and transcribed here from the 1917 to 1922 printings. About the Supplement.

Text: Summa Theologiae, Supplement to the Third Part (Supplementum Tertiae Partis), transcribed from Internet Archive scans, translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. The Supplement, compiled after Aquinas’s death from his earlier Commentary on the Sentences, in the same English Dominican translation as the Gutenberg Parts. Transcribed by Bibliotheca Catholica from the OCR of four Internet Archive scans of the pre-1931 printings (Questions 1 to 33 from the 1917 Washbourne and Benziger volume, 34 to 68 from the 1922 volume, 69 to 86 from the 1921 volume, and 87 to 99 from the 1922 Benziger volume), with OCR errors corrected and doubtful passages marked, not rewritten. 99 questions and 446 articles. The two appendices printed after Question 99 are not included. Sources, SHA-256 of each OCR file, and the method are in the source record. Rights: Public domain (US)

The Supplement is not a Project Gutenberg text. It is Bibliotheca Catholica’s transcription of public-domain scans at the Internet Archive; obvious OCR errors were corrected, and passages marked “OCR uncertain” could not be confidently corrected, so check them against the linked scan page.

One passage on this page is marked “OCR uncertain”; check it against the scan.

Objection 1: It would seem that an aureole is due to the angels. For Jerome (Serm. de Assump.)* speaking of virginity says: To live without the flesh while living in the flesh is to live as an angel rather than as a man and a gloss on 1 Cor. vii. 26, For the present necessity, says that virginity is the portion of the angels. Since then an aureole corresponds to virginity, it would seem due to the angels.

Obj. 2: Further, Incorruption of the spirit is more excellent than incorruption of the flesh. Now there is incorruption of spirit in the angels, since they never sinned. Therefore an aureole is due to them rather than to men incorrupt in the flesh and who have sinned at some time.

Obj. 3: Further, An aureole is due to teaching. Now angels teach us by cleansing, enlightening, and perfecting us, as Dionysius says (Hier. Eccles. vi.). Therefore at least the aureole of doctors is due to them.

[*Ep. ad Paul. et Eustoch. x. ¢ Cf. P. 1, Q. CXl., A. 1.]

On the contrary, It is written (2 Tim. ii. 5): He... shall not be (Vulg.,--is not) crowned,-except he strive lawfully. But there is no conflict in the angels. Therefore an aureole is not due to them.

Further, An aureole is not due to an act that is not performed through the body: wherefore it is not due to lovers of virginity, martyrdom, or teaching, if they do not practise them outwardly. But angels are incorporealspirits. Therefore they have no aureole. [OCR uncertain: incorporealspirits. Check the scan, image 169.]

I answer that, An aureole is not due to the angels. The reason of this is that an aureole, properly speaking, corresponds to some perfection of surpassing merit. Now those things which make for perfect merit in man are connatural to angels, or belong to their state in general, or to their essential reward. Wherefore the angels have not an aureole in the same sense as an aureole is due to men.

Reply Obj. 1: Virginity is said to be an angelic life, in so far as virgins imitate by grace what angels have by nature. For it is not owing to a virtue that angels abstain altogether from pleasures of the flesh, since they are incapable of such pleasures.

Reply Obj. 2: Perpetual incorruption of the spirit in the angels merits their essential reward: because it is necessary for their salvation, since in them recovery is impossible after they have fallen.*

Reply Obj. 3: The acts whereby the angels teach us belong to their glory and their common state: wherefore they do not merit an aureole thereby.

_______________________

Also online, linked only: the same translation at New Advent and the Latin text at Corpus Thomisticum. Neither is copied here.

Source: Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologica, Supplement to the Third Part. Internet Archive scans: Third Part, Fourth Number (QQ. LXXXIV to Suppl. XXXIII), 1917, Third Part (Supplement), QQ. XXXIV to LXVIII, 1922, Third Part (Supplement), QQ. LXIX to LXXXVI, 1921, and Third Part (Supplement), QQ. LXXXVII to XCIX and Appendices, 1922; two curled pages of the 1921 volume are read from another scan of the same printing. Public domain in the USA. Printed in 1917, 1921, and 1922, before 1931. Outside the U.S., check local copyright rules. Transcription, OCR file checksums, and method: source record.