THIRD ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 173, Art. 3]

Whether the Prophetic Vision Is Always Accompanied by Abstraction

from the Senses?

Objection 1: It would seem that the prophetic vision is always

accompanied by abstraction from the senses. For it is written (Num.

12:6): "If there be among you a prophet of the Lord, I will appear to

him in a vision, or I will speak to him in a dream." Now a gloss says

at the beginning of the Psalter, "a vision that takes place by dreams

and apparitions consists of things which seem to be said or done."

But when things seem to be said or done, which are neither said nor

done, there is abstraction from the senses. Therefore prophecy is

always accompanied by abstraction from the senses.

Obj. 2: Further, when one power is very intent on its own operation,

other powers are drawn away from theirs; thus men who are very intent

on hearing something fail to see what takes place before them. Now in

the prophetic vision the intellect is very much uplifted, and intent

on its act. Therefore it seems that the prophetic vision is always

accompanied by abstraction from the senses.

Obj. 3: Further, the same thing cannot, at the same time, tend in

opposite directions. Now in the prophetic vision the mind tends to

the acceptance of things from above, and consequently it cannot at

the same time tend to sensible objects. Therefore it would seem

necessary for prophetic revelation to be always accompanied by

abstraction from the senses.

Obj. 4: _On the contrary,_ It is written (1 Cor. 14:32): "The spirits

of the prophets are subject to the prophets." Now this were

impossible if the prophet were not in possession of his faculties,

but abstracted from his senses. Therefore it would seem that

prophetic vision is not accompanied by abstraction from the senses.

_I answer that,_ As stated in the foregoing Article, the prophetic

revelation takes place in four ways: namely, by the infusion of an

intelligible light, by the infusion of intelligible species, by

impression or coordination of pictures in the imagination, and by the

outward presentation of sensible images. Now it is evident that there

is no abstraction from the senses, when something is presented to the

prophet's mind by means of sensible species--whether these be

divinely formed for this special purpose, as the bush shown to Moses

(Ex. 3:2), and the writing shown to Daniel (Dan. 5:)--or whether they

be produced by other causes; yet so that they are ordained by Divine

providence to be prophetically significant of something, as, for

instance, the Church was signified by the ark of Noah.

Again, abstraction from the external senses is not rendered necessary

when the prophet's mind is enlightened by an intellectual light, or

impressed with intelligible species, since in us the perfect judgment

of the intellect is effected by its turning to sensible objects,

which are the first principles of our knowledge, as stated in the

First Part (Q. 84, A. 6).

When, however, prophetic revelation is conveyed by images in the

imagination, abstraction from the senses is necessary lest the things

thus seen in imagination be taken for objects of external sensation.

Yet this abstraction from the senses is sometimes complete, so that a

man perceives nothing with his senses; and sometimes it is

incomplete, so that he perceives something with his senses, yet does

not fully discern the things he perceives outwardly from those he

sees in imagination. Hence Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 12):

"Those images of bodies which are formed in the soul are seen just as

bodily things themselves are seen by the body, so that we see with

our eyes one who is present, and at the same time we see with the

soul one who is absent, as though we saw him with our eyes."

Yet this abstraction from the senses takes place in the prophets

without subverting the order of nature, as is the case with those who

are possessed or out of their senses; but is due to some well-ordered

cause. This cause may be natural--for instance, sleep--or

spiritual--for instance, the intenseness of the prophets'

contemplation; thus we read of Peter (Acts 10:9) that while he was

praying in the supper-room [*Vulg.: 'the house-top' or

'upper-chamber'] "he fell into an ecstasy"--or he may be carried away

by the Divine power, according to the saying of Ezechiel 1:3: "The

hand of the Lord was upon him."

Reply Obj. 1: The passage quoted refers to prophets in whom imaginary

pictures were formed or coordinated, either while asleep, which is

denoted by the word "dream," or while awake, which is signified by

the word "vision."

Reply Obj. 2: When the mind is intent, in its act, upon distant

things which are far removed from the senses, the intensity of its

application leads to abstraction from the senses; but when it is

intent, in its act, upon the coordination of or judgment concerning

objects of sense, there is no need for abstraction from the senses.

Reply Obj. 3: The movement of the prophetic mind results not from its

own power, but from a power acting on it from above. Hence there is

no abstraction from the senses when the prophet's mind is led to

judge or coordinate matters relating to objects of sense, but only

when the mind is raised to the contemplation of certain more lofty

things.

Reply Obj. 4: The spirit of the prophets is said to be subject to the

prophets as regards the prophetic utterances to which the Apostle

refers in the words quoted; because, to wit, the prophets in

declaring what they have seen speak their own mind, and are not

thrown off their mental balance, like persons who are possessed, as

Priscilla and Montanus maintained. But as regards the prophetic

revelation itself, it would be more correct to say that the prophets

are subject to the spirit of prophecy, i.e. to the prophetic gift.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 1021 / 1128 题