Dist. 7, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 2
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/2/d/7/q/bon-sent-II-d7-p2-a1-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *Whether forgetfulness falls upon the demons.*

In the second place it is asked whether forgetfulness falls upon the demons concerning things past. And that it does, seems thus:

**For the opposite side:**

1. No one becomes a fool from being wise unless he forgets something; but the demons have been made fools out of having been wise, most of all Lucifer, of whom Ezekiel chapter twenty-eight says: *Thou wast full of wisdom* etc., and of whom Ecclesiastes chapter four says: *Better is a wise child than an old and foolish king* — the Gloss expounds this of Lucifer or the devil: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, *grace* repairs and reforms the whole image, therefore *sin* deforms it; but deformation and corruption of the memory is by way of forgetfulness: therefore it seems that sin induces forgetfulness in the memorative power in the Angels.

3. Likewise, the understanding and remembering of the demons themselves takes place with variation, and therefore in time; but everything that is measured by time grows old and tends to corruption, since « *time makes that which is depart from what it was* », as the Philosopher says, whence it is per se a principle of corruption: therefore since the only corruption regarding the memorative power is by forgetfulness, the point is plain.

4. Likewise, as the *intellect* stands to error, so the *memory* stands to forgetfulness; but in the Angel's intellect there falls deception, and in the will obliquity: therefore in memory there falls forgetfulness.

5. Likewise, « *opposites are by nature apt to occur about the same thing* »; but the Angel's memory can advance by learning more: therefore by parity of reason it can decline by forgetting, since that state is more apt to defect than to progress.

6. Likewise, « only God is higher than the human mind », as Augustine holds; but it happens that forgetfulness falls upon our mind: therefore if the angelic mind is on a par with ours, much more so will it fall upon the mind of the demons. And that forgetfulness falls upon our mind as regards its superior part is plain, because Augustine says that the cognition of those things that pertain to the divinity belongs to the superior part; but we frequently forget such things: therefore etc.

**On the contrary:**

**Fundamenta:**

1. What is *natural* is indelible; but the species existing in the angelic memory are innate and concreate to it: therefore they are indelible. If therefore forgetfulness comes about by deletion of species, the point is plain etc.

2. Likewise, « everything that is received in something is there after the manner of the receiver »: therefore the species which is in the angelic memory is there after the manner of the receiver; but the angelic memory is incorruptible and does not depend on anything corruptible, neither as to *substance* nor as to *operation*, neither per se nor *per accidens*: therefore the species which is received there is simply incorruptible.

3. Likewise, this is shown *from the lesser case*. The will is more changeable than any of the interior powers; but the fault that adheres to the will adheres unchangeably: therefore much more so the species which is in the memory is there indelibly: if then forgetfulness is on account of the deletion of species, the point is plain etc.

4. Likewise, « everything that is corrupted is corrupted either because it has a contrary, or because it is from contraries, or because it is in something which has a contrary, or is from contraries » — this is written by the Philosopher in the book *On Life and Death* — but

the species existing in the demon's memory is not corruptible in any of the aforesaid modes: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, the Philosopher says that the sensitive power does not grow old of itself, but only by reason of the organ. Whence in book one *On the Soul* he says: « If an old man were to receive the eye of a boy, he would certainly see as the boy sees »: therefore since the memorative power of the demon does not depend on an organ, it does not grow old or weary in operating: therefore neither in receiving species, and so, as it seems, it forgets nothing.

### Conclusion

> *In so far as memory denotes a habit, there is no forgetfulness in the demons; but in so far as it denotes the act of remembering, and indeed with respect to God's benefits and to salvation, there can be forgetfulness.*

**I respond:** It must be said that the act of memory may be taken after the manner of a *habit*; and this is *to retain a species*, and is said to be after the manner of a habit because it continuously holds and denotes a state or conservation rather than an action. There is another act of memory, which is *to remember* or *to recall*. The first is indeed a natural act and is not subject to the will, nor is merit or demerit reckoned in regard to it. The second act, however, can be ordered to the good and to its opposite, namely to evil. — According to this twofold mode a distinction must be made in forgetfulness.

For if forgetfulness be spoken of by opposition to the *retention of a species*, in that sense it is the deletion of the species from the memory; if however it be spoken of by opposition to *recollection*, in that sense it denotes a disabling as regards that act which is *to remember*. And this can be good, namely when we forget evils inflicted upon us, and evil, when we forget the benefits conferred upon us by God, or forget the things which would be expedient to us for salvation; against which it is said in Deuteronomy chapter four: *Beware lest thou ever forget the Lord thy God* etc.

If therefore we speak of forgetfulness in the first mode, in that sense I say that it does not fall upon the demons; for there is no deletion of species in them. If in the second mode, in that sense I say that it does fall — nay, that there fell upon them a great forgetfulness, because they have forgotten their own salvation, forgotten God's benefits; since, when they turned to evils, they became unfit for recalling good things; in this mode I freely concede that they have forgotten.

**To the arguments:**

*To 1, 2.* And so the first two reasons proceed: the first, which was taken from foolishness; the second, which was taken from the deformed image; for they proceed in this way.

*To 3, 4.* To the objection that *understanding* falls in time, it must be said that it does fall in time, with the name of time taken broadly, not as it is the measure of the motion of the first mobile, because neither the *being* nor the *understanding* of the demons depends on that. — Yet it can be put another way: that although the act qua « act » falls under time or in time, nevertheless not the act qua habit, because it has the mode of substance, in which there is no variation; and therefore, just as the substance of the demons is not corrupted nor grows old in time, nor is the habit, so neither is the act qua habit; and such is the *retention of species*. — And by this is plain the other point: that the case is not similar with *understanding* and *forgetting*; because *understanding* is not so much a natural act as also one conformed to the will, and likewise *erring*; but to hold or to lose a species is from natural power or impotence. Moreover, that reason does not hold, since memory has a *mirror-like* nature or that of a mirror, the intellect a *luminous* nature or that of light; and the Angel has more of the nature of a mirror and of receptive power than of the nature of light; for that nature is most fully in God alone, or in those who are *deiform* by glory: therefore the parity does not hold, nor is the case similar. For the Angel can do more in holding a species than in judging rightly; some things indeed are above the judgment of the Angel, but it is not so with the retention of species.

*To 5.* To the objection that *opposites are by nature apt to occur about the same thing*, it is true unless one of them is naturally present; and the nature of the Angel *is in potency* to reception by nature, but by no means to deletion.

*To 6.* To the objection that only God is greater than the human mind, it must be said that this is true as regards the manner of *perfecting*; nevertheless, because the human mind, by reason of its conjunction with an earthly body, contracts certain properties and *depressing* defects, in this respect it is inferior to the angelic mind; and therefore, just as the human mind is impeded from actual consideration on account of the depression of the body, so it is also compelled to forget. The angelic intellect, however, is always in the act of understanding; and therefore it is no wonder if the memory is always in the act of conserving. **And so the objections are plain**.

---