Dist. 9, Art. 1, Q. 8
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/9/q/bon-sent-II-d9-a1-q8
----------------------------------------
### Question VIII. *Whether in the same order of Angels there is a perfect equality, or a certain gradation.*

Eighthly it is asked concerning the orders of the Angels in comparison to their opposite; and the question is whether in the Angels an order is compatible with equality. And that it is so, [thus] it seems:

1. *Through Dionysius.* For Dionysius says that those who are in one hierarchy are equal in power; but those who are equal in power are equal: therefore in the same hierarchy the Angels are equal: therefore much more strongly in the same order.

2. Likewise, through Augustine, *On True Religion*: «In all acts a fittingness pleases, by which, when it alone is preserved, all things also are beautiful; and this fittingness itself seeks unity and equality»: therefore if in the angelic orders there is a perfect beauty, then [there is] also fittingness and equality; but there is no equality among the Angels of diverse orders: therefore [there is equality] among the Angels of the same order.

3. Likewise, those whose gift and reward is one have equality; but the gift and reward of the Angels of the same order is one, and [their] state one: therefore it seems that they have equality.

4. Likewise, the angelic hierarchy is most of all representative of the supreme hierarchy; but in that [supreme hierarchy] order does not exclude equality: therefore it seems that in the angelic hierarchy there ought to be order with equality. But there is no equality among the Angels of diverse orders: therefore [there is] among the Angels of the same order.

**On the contrary:**
1. The Master says in the text: «Just as among the Apostles some are worthier than others, so among the orders of the Angels it is rightly believed to be».

2. Likewise, the account of order is participated in a more perfect manner where there is order in all things, than where there is order in some things only; but the Angels among the other creatures participate in order in the most perfect manner: therefore not only among the Angels of diverse orders, but also among the Angels of the same order it is possible to assign an order.

3. Likewise, «it belongs to the wise man to order», and to one more wise [it belongs] to order more, therefore also to the most wise [it belongs], in his noblest effect, to produce things most highly ordered: therefore it seems that there is order there not only among the Angels of diverse orders, but also among the Angels of the same order.

4. Likewise, Lucifer is said to have been the greatest among all the Angels; and it is established that he was of some order: therefore the Angels of that order were not equal to one another; by a like reasoning it seems that in the other orders some are superior, others inferior.

### Conclusion

> It is probable that among the Angels of the same order a certain gradation is found, although among them there is not so great an excess as there is among the Angels of diverse orders.

**I respond:** It must be said that, just as in the *supreme* hierarchy, on account of its highest perfection, beauty is found from the most perfect *equality and likeness of equals*, so in the angelic hierarchy beauty perfect in the genus of creature is found from a certain *gradation of unequals*. For in these two modes consist beauty and fittingness, as Augustine says in *On True Religion*. But in the supreme hierarchy, from likeness and equality alone there can be the most perfect beauty, because in any of equal persons there is total and supreme perfection. But in the angelic hierarchy, because those spirits which are co-ordered do not have, taken singly, the supreme perfection, it is necessary that from a certain fitting diversity, in a certain proportional gradation, there arise a certain ordered fittingness and a beauty perfect in the genus of creature.

And therefore, just as among the Saints we understand that one is the order of the Apostles, another of the Martyrs, another of the Confessors, and so of the others; and yet in these orders there is a certain gradation, nor can a total equality be found, since of any Saint it can be said: *There was not found one like to him, who kept the law of the Most High*; so, in its own manner, it must be understood in the angelic spirits. Therefore in the same order too there must be posited a certain gradation and a certain order, although there is not so great an excess as is found among the Angels of diverse orders. — Hence the arguments proving this are to be conceded, although they are not very compelling. For this seems to be the view both of the Master in the text and of Dionysius in the book *On the Angelic Hierarchy*.

*Solution of the opposing [arguments].* 1. To that which is objected — that they are equal in power — it must be said that the equality of that power is regarded or taken according to the conformity of [their] conversion, according to which is regarded the distinction of one hierarchy from the others; just as the first hierarchy and the orders which are in it are taken with respect to the act of conversion to God, not because they are converted altogether equally, but because to this all are ordered indifferently and from this act principally all are denominated.

2. To that which is objected — that fittingness makes beauty — it must be said that, as Augustine says in the same place, fittingness arises not only from equality, but also from a congruent gradation of unequals; and so it must be understood to be in the Angels.

3. To that which is objected — that they have the same gift and reward — it must be said that, if it is understood of the common and uncreated reward, which is God, it is true. But if it is understood of created beatitude, or of the gratuitous gifts as to state and dignity and some prerogative; thus it does not hold true. For thus each one, in respect of another, has some prerogative according to more and less.

4. To that which is objected — that this hierarchy represents the supreme one — it must be said that it does represent [it], in so far as it can; and since in that supreme hierarchy there is order and perfect beauty in the highest unity and equality, and these cannot coexist together in a created hierarchy on account of the limitation of the creature: therefore it is [right] there to posit order and beauty with diversity and a certain disparity, so that what could not here be brought about from unity might at least be fulfilled from the diversity of many. — And this is the reason why God, although He has one Son, did not nevertheless produce one Angel only, but many, because the Son perfectly fills and imitates the Father, as Augustine says, but an Angel does not perfectly express the Creator; therefore it was fitting to create them in a great multitude or in a multiform order.