title: Expositio in Hierarchiam Coelestem S. Dionysii

author: Hugh of Saint Victor

source_edition: Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 175, coll. 923B–1154C

source_text:
## LIBER PRIMUS.

- CAP. I. *De differentia mundanae theologiae atque divinae, et de demonstrationibus earumdem.*
- CAP. II. *Quae sit materia hierarchiarum, et dispositio earum.*
- CAP. III. *De tribus hierarchiis.*
- CAP. IV. *Quare theologiam assumpsit tractandam Dionysius Areopagites, postquam susceperat fidem catholicam.*
- CAP. V. *Quid sit hierarchia, et dispositio illius et exordium*

## CAPITULUM PRIMUM *De differentia mundanae theologiae atque divinae et de demonstrationibus earumdem.*

[0923B] *Judaei signa quaerunt, et Graeci sapientiam [n: (I Cor. I)]*. Fuit enim quaedam sapientia, quem sapientia videbatur iis, qui veram sapientiam non noverant. Et invenit mundus sapientiam illam, et inflari coepit, et tumuit, magnum se existimans in ea. Et praesumpsit, et dixit ut ultra pergeret ad sapientiam summam confidens in sapientia sua, quasi via esse potuisset ad illam. Et ascendit, et elevatus est ut ad alta corde perveniret. Et fecit sibi scalam, speciem creaturae, nitens ad invisibilia Creatoris. Tunc quae [0924B] manifesta erant Dei, ad illuminationem processerunt; et nota facta sunt ut probarentur corde non puro. Nam illa, quae videbantur, nota erant, et erant alia quae nota non erant, et per ea quae manifesta sunt, putaverunt ire in illa, quae abscondita fuerunt, et corruerunt mente ultra possibilem veritatem in mendacia figmentorum suorum, ubi non est inventum amplius, quod apprehenderent. Ideo stultam facit Deus sapientiam hujus mundi, quia in illa non potuit inveniri sapientia Dei; et monstravit sapientiam [0925A] aliam, quae stultitia videbatur, et non erat, ut vera sapientia inverniretur per eam. Praedicatus est Christus crucifixus, ut humilitate veritas quaereretur. Sed mundus medicum [modicum] despexit, et non potuit verum agnoscere. Voluit enim contemplari opera Dei quae miranda fecerat, et quae proposuerat imitanda noluit venerari. Neque enim morbum suum attendit, ut pia devotione medicinam quaereret; sed de falsa sanitate praesumens, dedit se ut vana curiositate aliena investigaret. Et videbatur extra se proficere, sed defecit in se et eum, qui erat supra se, non invenit. Et proposuit existimationes de illo, quas corde superbo conceperat, ne verum ignorare videretur: et secutus est in via erroris, alia et alia, contra verum plurima, et novissime indecora [0925B] Deitati, et excellenti majestati deformia, ut error fieret manifestus. Prius enim verum erat, et magnum videbatur et novissime successit falsitas, cum veritas consummari debuisset. Et demonstratum est quasi lumen quoddam in parte una, ut ibi videretur aliquid, et erant contra densae tenebrae, et caligo profunda ignorationis, ubi erroris laqueus ponebatur in captionem superborum. Et viderunt ubi lumen erat, et ubi tenebrae erant videre non potuerunt; et ibi laqueo capti sunt propter audaciam praesumptionis suae, qua se praecipitaverunt ire in illud: manifesta sunt haec. Quanto enim illi excellentis ingenii monumenta reliquerunt: ubi tam multa investigatione secreta naturae, et abdita rerum conditarum prosecuti sunt, ut ipsam illorum efficaciam [0925C] omni studio praeferendam existimemus. Legimus artes, et studia, et disciplinas et rationum praecepta plurima, quae illi sensu et ingenio suo dato in hoc ipsum scrutati sunt, et invenerunt; et scripserunt inventa, et legenda posteris tradiderunt, logicam, et ethicam, et mathematicam, et physicam, de forma ratiocinationum, et vitae, et morum pro instituto naturae decentium, de dispositione et ordine, et causis, et proventibus rerum omnium. Et invaluerunt in parte hac, ut verum apprehenderent; quoniam et haec veritas per eos ministranda erat, quae non erat ad vitam qui filii vitae non erant. Ideo datum est illis propter nos, quibus consummatio servabatur et inchoatio parabatur, ut invenirent veritatem [0925D] illam, quam oportuit suscipere filios vitae ad obsequium summae veritatis. Cujus labor ipsis appositus est, iis fructus servatus. Et in omnibus iis lumen intelligentiae, et acumen ingenii, sensusque virtutem ad documenta praevia perceperunt; in quibus creaturarum vim, et modum naturae inferioris secundum formam rationis insitae subtiliter discusserunt. Novissime autem theologiam pro ratione divinorum, et scrutatione invisibilium quasi consummaturi sapientiam addixerunt, ut ipsi putaverunt, consummaturi; sed vere amissuri, et veram non inventuri. Nam, ibi corruere coeperunt in mendacia figmentorum, et assumpserunt species visibiles simulacra divinorum, ut invisibilia viderent per ea, quae videbantur et erat ibi simile aliquid, sed de [0926A] longe ostendens, quod quaerebatur, neque lucem ingerens oculis caligantibus. Natura enim ad servitutem condita Creatorem suum demonstravit; sed erat similitudo peregrina ad excellentem, et dominantem majestatem. Neque potuit evidentem declarationem invenire in iis omnibus illa, quae docenda fuerat natura, quoniam, et ipsa sana non erat, ut multum claresceret in contemplationem. Non enim habuit quae per gratiam exemplaria formabantur ad sanitatem visionis internae; neque arcam sapientiae noverat, et conditorum thesaurorum, carnem Verbi aeterni in Jesu humanitate; sed naturali solo documento utens lippienti acie lumen nubilum, et ambiguum adducens speculanti in rerum creatarum specie contemplabatur. Propterea erraverunt, et evanuerunt, [0926B] cum transire vellent mente ea quae sola nosse acceperant et palpantes aestimationibus ad ea quae videri non poterant, caeci inventi sunt qui se videre putaverunt. Haec sunt simulacra errorum, quae theologia (sic enim ipsi vocaverunt studium, quo divina scrutari crediderunt) vanitatis eorum, et deceptionis praedicat veneranda; in quibus tam multa tam praeter verum, et rectum, et naturae bonae consentaneum mentiuntur, ut ipsi quoque erubescere compellantur in eis. Dignum quippe erat ut confunderentur in summis qui de infimorum cognitione superbi erant, et qui humilitatem fidei in morte Salvatoris despiciunt, celsitudinem ejus admirentur in agnitione Creatoris. Duo enim simulacra erant proposita homini, in quibus invisibilia videre potuis [0926C] set: unum naturae, et unum gratiae. Simulacrum naturae erat species hujus mundi. Simulacrum autem gratiae erat humanitas Verbi. Et in utroque Deus monstrabatur, sed non in utroque intelligebatur; quoniam natura quidem specie sua artificem demonstravit, sed contemplantis oculos illuminare non potuit. Humanitas vero Salvatoris et medicina fuit, ut caeci lumen reciperent, et doctrina pariter ut videntes agnoscerent veritatem. Lutum fecit ex sputo: et linivit oculos caeci, et lavit et vidit [n: (Joan. IX)]. Et quid postea? Deinde videnti et nondum cognoscenti ait: Ego sum, et qui loquitur tecum, ipse est Filius Dei [n: (ibid.)]. Prius ergo illuminavit, postea demonstravit. Natura enim demonstrare potuit, illuminare [0926D] non potuit. Et mundus Creatorem suum specie praedicavit, sed intelligentiam veritatis cordibus hominum non infudit. Per simulacra igitur naturae, Creator tantum significabatur; in simulacris vero gratiae praesens Deus ostendebatur, quia illa operatus est ut intelligeretur esse; in istis vero operatus est ut agnosceretur praesens esse. Haec est distantia theologiae hujus mundi ab illa, quae divina nominatur theologia. Impossibile enim est invisibilia, nisi per visibilia demonstrari: et propterea omnis theologia necesse habet visibilibus demonstrationibus uti in invisibilium declaratione. Sed mundana, ut diximus, theologia opera conditionis assumpsit, et elementa hujus mundi secundum speciem creata, ut demonstrationem suam faceret in [0927A] illis. Theologia vero divina opera restaurationis elegit secundum humanitatem Jesu, et sacramenta ejus quae ab initio sunt, naturalibus quoque pro modo subjunctis, ut in illis eruditionem conformaret. Major autem, ut diximus, declaratio divinitatis in sacramentis gratiae, et carne Verbi, et mystica operatione ipsius ostenditur, quam naturali rerum specie praedicetur. Et idcirco mundana theologia parum evidenti demonstratione utens, non valuit incomprehensibilem veritatem sine contagione erroris educere, cum divina noscitur theologia simplici, ac pura assertione praedicare.

Nunc dicendum est quid sit theologia, altius quidem incipienti ad evidentiam rerum dicendarum. Philosophia omnis in tres principales partes secatur: [0927B] Logicam, ethicam, theoricam. Quartam enim, quam in suo loco adjecimus, hic ex superabundanti enumerare est. Philosophia itaque tres continet partes: Primam, id est logicam, quae vim modumque ratiocinationum, veri ac falsi judicium assumpsit; secundam autem, id est ethicam, quae modum vivendi rectum, et disciplinae formam secundum virtutum instituta disponit; tertiam vero, id est theoricam, quae sola verum in omni, quod est, et non est scrutari elegit. Hujus, id est, theoricae tres partes sunt: Prima, mathematica; secunda, physica; tertia, theologia, in quibus contemplatio veritatis, quasi quibusdam contemplationum gradibus ad summum conscendit. Prima enim, id est mathematica, speculatur visibiles rerum visibilium formas. [0928A] Secunda autem, id est physica, scrutatur invisibiles rerum visibilium causas. Tertia vero sola, id est theologia, contemplatur invisibiles substantias, et invisibilium substantiarum invisibiles naturas. Et est in his quasi progressio quaedam, et profectus mentis ad cognoscendum verum conscendentis. Per visibiles enim visibilium formas pervenitur ad invisibiles visibilium causas; et per invisibiles visibilium causas ascenditur ad invisibiles substantias, et earum cognoscendas naturas. Hic autem summa philosophiae est, et veritatis perfectio, qua nihil altius esse potest animo contemplanti. In hac sapientes hujus mundi propterea, sicut jam diximus, stulti facti sunt; quia solo naturali documento secundum elementa et speciem mundi incedentes, exemplaria [0928B] gratiae non habuerunt: in quibus etsi species erat humilis, sed manifestior praestabatur demonstratio veritatis. Hic ergo stultam fecit Deus sapientiam hujus [n: (I Cor. I)]; quoniam veritatem agnoscere non potuit; quoniam in sua eruditione formam humilitatis tenere contempsit. Haec nunc de theologia dixisse sufficiat propter hierarchiam Dionysii, in quam explanationis gratia aliqua dicenda suscepimus. Omnis enim hierarchia theologiae supponitur; et necesse erat introducendis ad lectionem hierarchiae aliqua de theologia praemittere, ad definiendam materiam ejus, quae tota in invisibilibus consistit substantiis, et earum naturis similiter invisibilibus visibili documento utens ad demonstrationem sui.

## CAPITULUM II. *Quae sit materia hierarchiarum, et dispositio earum.*

[0927]

[0927C]Dionysius Areopagites ex philosopho Christianus effectus theologus, et hierarchiarum descriptor, divinae dispositionis ordinem in rerum omnium gubernatione demonstrat; quomodo rationalem creaturam participem fecit Deus potestatis suae, constituens magistratus, et potestates, et principatus sacros in coelo in angelis, et in terra in hominibus, ut dominentur creaturae ejus. Dignum siquidem fuerat, ut illa pars operis sui particeps fieret potestatis ejus in dispositione sua: quae in sui conditione similitudinis participationem acceperat, ut quae sola ad similitudinem Conditoris sui facta fuerat, sola in sui ordinationem imaginem illius retineret. Ipse igitur rerum omnium conditor Deus, cujus ineffabilis majestas, et indeficiens virtus, potens erat sola gubernare [0927D] quod creaverat sola, voluit in rerum a se factarum gubernatione participes habere et cooperatores, non ut illorum ipse ministerio juvaretur, sed ut ipsi potestatis ejus consortio sublimes efficerentur. Dominus ergo solus et princeps omnium, dominationes et principatus sub se, et secundum se esse instituit in ministerio perficiendo: quod universitatis ordo deposcebat, ut opera ejus complerentur per ordines et dispositiones a summo in universa praecepto decurrente. Majestas ergo et imperium, [0928C] quod in Domino et gubernatore omnium universaliter, et omnipotentissime, et superexcellenter, et ineffabiliter adoratur: in eos qui participes gratiae et gloriae consortes et socii majestatis facti sunt, per partes, et divisiones, et gradus, et ordines distributum est, ab eo descendens et respiciens ad eum, et sub eo ordinatum qui fons et causa est omnium, et principium primum: « Unum opus, et artifex unus? unum imperium, et unus rector, unus princeps, et una respublica: unus Dominus, et Pater, a quo omnis paternitas in coelo, et in terra [n: (Ephes. III)]: unus in omnibus omnia: et omnia unum in uno. » Summum namque bonum participatione gratiarum et donorum distributione, per cunctos participes largitionis unum in se manens [0928D] dividitur, et omnes uno participantes ad ipsius unitatis formam, simplicitatemque veram colliguntur. Neque enim participes potestatis esse potuissent, nisi prius per gratiam consortes fierent virtutis. Neque cum illo possent, quod ipse potest, nisi prius ex illo esse mererentur, quod ipse est. Omnipotens autem Conditor non extranea usurpatione, neque perfunctoria appellatione gubernator a se factorum omnium nominatur; sed insita sibi virtute, et bonitate inolita cuncta fovens et nutriens, [0929A] regens, et disponens universa, eamdem sub se dominantibus bonitatem, et virtutem secundum mensuram participationis et ministerii rationem per ordines et gradus multifariam dispensavit excellentioribus quidem, et supra positis imperio majora et superexcellentia dona impertiens; inferioribus autem, et suppositis gradibus minora charismata, et libere famulantia ad subjecta quoque sine oppressione praelata concedens. Istae sunt distributiones luminum, descendentes in omnia, quibus ipsa participare datum est a Patre luminum et sole justitiae, clara speculamina effecta, ut luceant et illuminent. Subjecta quidem in eo quod lucent, et in eo quod illuminant praelata. Et una lux est, et bonum unum est; et plurima sunt lucentia, et participantia bonum [0929B] unum, et lucem unam; et in eo quod participant unum sunt in uno collecta, et reducta ad unum, et uni conformata. Hae sunt hierarchiae, id est sacri principatus, quos summa hierarchia secundum se formavit, et sub se constituit dominari, et praeesse in operibus suis secundum ordines consignatos [0930A] sub uno principio et potestate una, a qua omnis potestas, et omnis virtus, et omnis lux spiritualiter lucens et illuminans spiritualiter lucentia omnia. Haec est creaturae rationalis celsitudo, et sublimitas, et dignitas admiranda, quo dominari meruit in operibus factoris sui, accepta virtute ab ipso, et tenens potestatem cum ipso. Quae virtus, quoniam secundum mensuram largitionis et participationis varie multipliciterque ad decorem ac pulchritudinem eorum, quae sapientia ornavit operum, ab una virtute et potestate una distribuitur, multae virtutes et potestates multae efficiuntur. Sed, ne rursum multitudo schisma generet, ac divisionem et adversum se pugnet orbis dominatione contraria, unum principium est, et moderator unus omnium, [0930B] a quo habent quod sunt, et sub quo moderantur quod possunt, et referunt ad ipsum omne quod efficiunt, ut unitas maneat in omnibus, et pax perseveret in regno cuncta creantis et regentis omnia Dei.

## CAPITULUM III. *De tribus hierarchiis*

[0929]

[0929C]Tres sunt hierarchiae, in quarum descriptione theologus et narrator hierarchiarum et potestatum sacrarum, quae in coelo et in terris sunt, Dionysius, opus consummatum explicuit. Prima principalis omnium, et forma, et exemplar reliquarum summa, et ineffabilis potestas est Trinitatis, simplex, et una, et uniformis sine gradu et differentia, et comparatione, summa, et aeterna, et perfecta, et vera in omnia opera sua condenda et regenda propria virtute Omnipotens, nihil externum suscipiens, nihil suum amittens. Secunda hierarchia in angelica natura formata est, adoptione, et participatione, et dignatione, a prima, et sub prima, et ad primam secunda, similitudine sublimis, gradum habens, et differentiam suscipiens, et comparationem admittens, post summam Trinitatem secunda aemulatione, [0930C] trina divisione distincta. Tertia, et ultima hierarchia in humana natura ordinata est secundam primo, et primam secundo loco imitans, et imaginem summam, et super excellentem similitudinem per mediam participantia suscipiens, et referens per idipsum, ut ab uno totum sit, et ad unum totum, et totum unum. Theologia autem angelicam hierarchiam primam suscepit quasi exemplar humanae hierarchiae, ad cujus similitudinem ea quae in hominibus est hierarchia omnis facta est, et formata, explicandam; et post eam, quae secundum ejus similitudinem constat, humanam: tertio loco summam, et ineffabilem, et super excelsam constituens hierarchiam, ut ex praecedentium illuminatione humanis mentibus propinquiore, quae valde intelligibilis est et obscura, clarescat.

## CAPITULUM IV. *Quare theologiam assumpsit tractandam Dionysius Areopagites postquam susceperat fidem catholicam.*

[0929]

[0929D]Theologus Dionysius sapientiam mundi contra humilitatem fidei Christianae inflatam cernens, et crucem Christi, et quae opera humanitatis Verbi in carne remedium facta sunt quasi indigna Deo, et majestati summae incongrua, et impossibilia veritati contemni, et stultum existimari praedicationis Verbum in redemptionem generis humani, et ex naturae documento secundum mundi hujus elementa incedentes falsa judicare, quae de salute hominis perfecta sunt in morte Redemptoris, opponit se ut gloriam ejus evacuet, quae est secundum sensum hujus saeculi sapientiae. Et ostendit sapientiam Christianae fidei in morte quidem Redemptoris humilem, sed [0930D] in agnitione Creatoris esse sublimem, et sacramenta redemptionis, quae despecta videbantur secundum speciem hujus mundi, et eorum qui mundanam tantum noverant aestimationem, excelsa esse, et veneranda, et supra mundi hujus sapientiam, et rationem, et doctrina efficacia ad demonstrandam summam veritatem. Propterea theologiam divinam, quae his exemplaribus usa est in demonstratione invisibilium, digna Deo, et consentanea veritati praedicare, theologiam vero mundi, quae ratione carnis elementa conditionis secuta est, non potuisse veritatem Dei apprehendere. Et ita quidem, ut in aenigmate dicatur, Golias in capite suo a despecto et [0931A] modico percussus prosternitur; quia mundi hujus sapientia tumens in altum ab humilitate Christianae veritatis in summo suo manifesti erroris comprobatur. Et monstratur Deus ab humilibus inventus, et humilibus revelatus, et crucem Christi credentibus contulisse: quod superbientibus, et de se praesumentibus conferre non potuit sapientia mundi. Propterea opponimus theologiam nostram, et excelsorum, et sublimium, et invisibilium cognitionem, subsannantibus, et arguentibus fidem humilem, ut glorientur si possint ipsi, qui haec despiciunt de similibus. Et si talia invenerunt, et similia cognoverunt sapientia sua, et ratione sua, et sensu suo, quam fidei nostrae praeferre non timent, ut inspiciant theologiam suam, et quae de Deo dixerunt erubescenda, [0932A] et ridicula, et incongrua, et falsa, ut fidem agnoscant et suscipiant veritatem. Propter hoc enim Deus in natura hominis conversari voluit, ut conversatio hominis in coelo esse posset, et ob hoc ille humana sustinuit, ut divina iste cognoscere mereretur. Hoc est sacramentum humilitatis Dei, et sacramentum fidei, et sacramentum veritatis: quod non cognoverunt superbi corde, inflati sensu suo, et sapientia sua, quae de carne erat, et non potuit Dei sapientiam invenire, ut inveniretur stultitia esse quae sapientia putabatur, et non erat. In hoc sublimes facti sumus ad eos; quia sapientia Dei quae in carne a nobis creditur, ab illis despicitur; in gloria et majestate a nobis agnoscitur, ab illis ignoratur.

## CAPITULUM V. *Quid sit hierarchia et dispositio illius et exordium.*

[0931]

[0931B]Quae oportuit in theologiam Dionysii pro descriptione hierarchiarum ad intelligentiam dicendorum praemittere, superioribus capitulis quantum pro tempore animo suggestum est, explevi. Nunc superest, ut quae de his a theologo dicta sunt, inspiciamus. Et quia ipsa lectionis superficies magna verborum profunditate tecta est, et quodam alto sermonis superferentis se et extollentis, et involuti secundum magnitudinem et excellentiam rerum secretissimarum ambiguo celata necesse est, ut primum moderata, et communi, facilique ad intelligentiam explanatione reseretur. Et haec erit fortassis commodior explanatio introducendis ad magnum principium, quoniam non oportet in tantarum tamque sublimium rerum meditatione exercendos [0931C] animos sermonum involucris occupari. Quae licet apposita sint secretis venerandis digna velamina ingredientibus, tamen revelata facie ad contemplationem eorum, quae intrinsecus sunt in libertate spiritus e medio sunt tollenda, ad pandenda mysteria. Hoc nunc ergo suscipimus, et hoc satis nobis est in iis, quae dicemus. Nam ex reliquo, si quid adjectum fuerit, ex superabundanti sit dono. Hierarchia ex Graeco interpretata *sacer* dicitur *principatus:* et sunt hierarchiae, id est principatus sacri tres: quas dicemus, ut supra commemoravimus. Prima et summa hierarchia est potestas divinitatis. Secunda et media est potestas angelica ad similitudinem primae potestatis facta, et sub prima potestate constituta. Tertia, et ultima hierarchia est [0931D] potestas humana ad similitudinem angelicae facta, et sub ea constituta, et per mediam eam sub prima et summa. His hierarchiis, id est principatibus sacris totus regitur mundus: in quibus summa potestas est, quae imperat tantum et infima, cui tantum imperatur; et media quae imperat inferiori, et cui a superiori imperatur. Summa ergo potestas, et prima secundam, et tertiam potestatem post se constituit in angelis, et hominibus, ut ei et conformes participatione virtutis, et cooperatrices consortio [0932B] potestatis sint. Et divisit dona virtutum, et secundum divisiones donorum distribuit officia potestatum; et dedit dona plurima, et multas potestates constituit, et omnia dona de uno, et omnis potestas sub uno; et unum in omnibus, et omnia ad unum, et in uno. Angelicam vero hierarchiam primo demonstrat theologus. Secundo tractat de humana. Tertio quasi in fine, et consummatione, de divina, et summa. Ipsam autem angelicam in tres subdividit hierarchias, et unamquamque trium per tres ordines distinguit, ut novem angelicorum ordinum numerus compleatur. Et omnem hierarchiam unius potestatis et unius officii, et unius dignitatis, et in unaquaque hierarchia et primos constituit, et medios, et ultimos ordines. Et primos quidem [0932C] illuminare; ultimos vero illuminari; medios autem et illuminari a primis, et ultimos illuminare. Post haec de ultima hierarchia similiter divisiones donorum, et distributiones potestatum et dignitatum, et officia, et ordines, et operationes ad similitudinem angelicae hierarchiae ordinata prosequitur. Novissime ad divinam, et simplicem, et superexcellentem hierarchiam (quantum possibile est in humanis contemplanti) conscendens, et in ipsa consummans, consummata haec summa est. Exordium autem (quoniam summum bonum), cum sit unum, mirifice multiplicatur, et variatur ad decorem et pulchritudinem divisionis et profusionis in omnes, qui ejus participatione digni sunt, ut in illo unum sint omnes; quoniam dona ejus lumina sunt, et lumina faciunt [0932D] lucentia, et illuminata lucentia, et illuminantia ipsa, et fiunt lux lucentia, et illuminantia lumina. Lux sunt, et una lux ubique, et unum lucentia in luce una, et multiplicatur in multis una, et multa in una uniuntur. Ex hoc ergo theologia incipit, quia lumina lucentia et illuminantia speculamina sunt divina: et videtur in eis lux lucens et illuminans, quae incomprehensibilis et inaccessibilis in se manet. Et propter hoc, ut videri possit, exit in ipsa, et infundit se illis, ut apprehendant eam, et [0933A] capiant, et videant in seipsis lucentia ex ipsa. Non enim possunt videre vel apprehendere illam, quae non lucent ex illa, quia sine luce neque ipsa videri lux potest. Et sunt quidem ista speciosa simulacra lucis ad invisibilem profusionem, ut per visibilia invisibilia videantur. Non enim bonum illud, et lux ipsa ista lux est; et tamen secundum aliquid lux est, et vere lux dici potest: et cum dicitur lux, verum dicitur quia lux est, et lux illius imago est. Et quod in hac luce est, in illo bono est; quoniam ipsa lux ab illo bonum est, et totum in illo est, quia ab illo totum est: non enim cum ab illo esse coepit, in [0934A] illo esse desinit; sed processit ab illo, et permansit in illo. Propterea servit imago, et monstrat creatura opificem, quoniam ad hoc facta est ut videatur in illa. Propterea dona lumina sunt illuminantia, et participantia lumina illuminata, et ipsa illuminantia, et illuminanti lumini similia. In eo quod illuminantur, fiunt gratiae participes. In eo vero quod illuminant, efficiuntur potestatis consortes. Et constat his duobus omnis hierarchia; et perficitur gratia, et officio, virtute et ministerio: quae omnia similitudinibus, et figuris, et aenigmatibus variis a visibilibus sumptis theologice demonstrantur.

## LIBER SECUNDUS. Sequuntur tituli XV capitulorum coelestis sive angelicae hierarchiae divi Dionysii Areopagitae ad Timotheum; post quos singulorum capitulorum apponetur secundum Joannem Scotum littera; et post litteram, Hugonis nostri expositio.

[0933]

- CAP. I. *Quod divina illuminatio secundum bonitatem varie impraevisa proveniens, manet simpla: et non hoc solum, sed et unificat illuminata.*
- CAP. II. *Quam pulchre divina et coelestia per dissimilia symbola manifestantur.*
- CAP. III. *Quid est hierarchia, et quae per hierarchiam intelligantur.*
- CAP. IV. *Quid significat angelorum cognominatio.*
- CAP. V. *Quare omnes coelestes essentiae communiter angeli dicuntur.*
- CAP. VI. *Quae prima coelestium essentiarum dispositio, quae media, quae ultima.*
- CAP. VII. *De seraphin, et cherubin, et de thronis et de prima eorum hierarchia.*
- CAP. VIII. *De dominationibus, et virtutibus, et potestatibus et de media eorum hierarchia.*
- CAP. IX. *De principibus, et archangelis, et angelis, et de ultima eorum hierarchia.*
- CAP. X. *Repetitio et congregatio angelicae ordinationis.*
- CAP. XI. *Quare omnes coelestes essentiae communiter virtutes coelestes vocantur.*
- CAP. XII. *Quare secundum homines summi sacerdotes angeli vocantur,*
- CAP. XIII. *Quare a Seraphin dicitur purgatus fuisse propheta Isaias.*
- CAP. XIV. *Quid significat traditus angelicus numerus.*
- CAP. XV. *Quae formativae angelicarum virtutum imagines, et quae deinde.*

## TITULUS CAPITULI I. *Quod divina illuminatio secundum bonitatem varie impraevisa proveniens, manet simpla; et non hoc solum sed et unificat illuminata.*

## LITTERA.

[0933B]

« *Omne datum optimum, et omne donum perfectum desursum est descendens a Patre luminum [n: (Jac. I)]*. » *Sed et omnis, Patre moto, manifestationis luminum processio in nos optime ac large proveniens: iterum ut unifica virtus restituens nos replet, ac convertit ad congregantis Patris unitatem, et deificam simplicitatem. Etenim ex ipso omnia, et in ipsum [n: (Rom. XI)]*, *ut divinum ait verbum. Ergo Jesum invocantes paternum lumen, quod est quod verum quod « illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum [n: (Joan. I)]* » *per quem ad principale lumen Patrem accessum habuimus [n: (Ephes. II)]*: *in sanctissimorum eloquiorum Patre traditas illuminationes, quantum possibile est, respiciemus. Et ab ipsis symbolice nobis, et anagogice [0933C] manifestatas coelestium animorum hierarchias, quantum potentes sumus, considerabimus. Et principalem, [0934B] et super principalem divini Patris claritatem, quae angelorum nobis in figuratis symbolis manifestat beatissimas hierarchias immaterialibus, et non trementibus mentis oculis respicientes: iterum ex ipsa in simplum illius restituimur radium. Etenim neque ipse usquam, neque unquam radius a propria singulari unitate deseritur. Ad anagogicam vero, et unificam eorum, quae provisa sunt contemperantiam optime et pulchre multiplicatur, et provenit: manetque intra se munite in incommutabili similitudine uniformiter fixus: et in se, quantum fas est, respicientes proportionaliter eis extendit; et unificat secundum simplicem sui unitatem. Etenim neque possibile est aliter nobis lucere divinum radium, nisi varietate sacrorum velaminum anagogice circumvelatum, et iis, quae secundum [0934C] nos sunt, providentia paterna connaturaliter, et proprie praeparatum. Propter quoae et sanctissimam [0935A] nostram hierarchiam perfectissima sacrorum dispositio coelestium hierarchiarum super mundana imitatione dignam judicans, et dictas immateriales hierarchias materialibus figuris, et formalibus compositionibus varificans tradidit, ut proportionaliter nobis ipsis a sacratissimis formationibus in simplas, et non figuratas ascendamus altitudines et similitudines. Quoniam neque possibile est nostro animo ad non materialem illam ascendere coelestium hierarchiarum, et imitationem, et contemplationem, nisi ea, quae secundum ipsum est, materiali manuductione utatur. Visibiles quidem formas invisibilis pulchritudinis imaginationes arbitrans, et sensibiles suavitates figuras invisibilis distributionis, et immaterialis luculentiae imaginem materialia lumina, et secundum intellectum contemplativae plenitudinis [0935B] discursas sacras disciplinas, et adunati ad divina, et ordinati habitus earum, quae hic sunt, dispositionum, ordines, et Jesu participationis ipsam divinissimae eucharistiae assumptionem, et quaecunque alia coelestibus quidem essentiis super mundane, nobis vero symbolice tradita sunt. Propter hanc ergo nostram corrationalem theosin misericors perfectionis principium, et coelestes hierarchias nobis manifestans, et comministram earum perficiens nostram hierarchiam ad virtutem, nostramque similitudinem deiformis earum sanctificationis sensibilibus imaginibus super coelestes descripsit intellectus, in sacris eloquiorum compositionibus, ut nos reduceret per sensibilia ad intellectualia, et ex sacre figuratis symbolis in simplas coelestium hierarchiarum summitates.*

## EXPOSITIO.

[0935C]

Primus liber Dionysii theologi Areopagitae, qui de coelesti hierarchia, id est coelesti principatu inscribitur, quindecim capitulis contextus est: in quibus coelestium spirituum dona, et officia, virtutes, et operationes per singulos ordines, et gradus, et distributiones, et differentias diligenter enumerat. Titulus autem primi capituli est: Quoniam omnis divina illuminatio secundum bonitatem varie impraevisa proveniens manet simpla, et non hoc solum sed etiam unificat illuminata. Ipsa enim gratia divina illuminatio est, et ipsa dona gratiae lumina sunt illuminantia eos qui se participant; et omnia gratia [0935D] ab uno fonte descendit, et omnis illuminatio ab uno lumine; et multi sunt radii, et unum lumen: et spargit se unum lumen, ut multos illuminet; et lucent illuminati multi, et non videtur nisi unum lumen, et fiunt lumen unum in lumine uno. Tali similitudine monstrat theologia quomodo unum bonum multis se participandum praebet, ut unum sint in illo; qui unam trahunt similitudinem ex illo. Deinde prosequitur theologus, et ostendit, quod invisibiles gratiae operationes, et donorum invisibilium distributiones, non nisi visibilibus signis et similitudinibus possunt demonstrari aut intelligi; et quod omnis visibiles species, et sensibilis natura aliquam similitudinem teneat ad invisibilium demonstrationem. Quoniam sicut omne bonum a [0936A] summo bono est, ita in omni bono secundum aemulationem participationis summum bonum contemplari potest. Ideoque theologiam convenienter ex omni specie, et forma, et qualitate sensibili invisibilium significatione conformare. Et hic sensus est primi capituli. « Omne datum optimum, et omne donum perfectum desursum est descendens a Patre luminum » Auctoritate apostolica, et divinae theologiae primum probat omne bonum esse a summo bono; deinde ex sua subjungit sententia omne bonum respicere, et refundi ad summum bonum; quia, sicut in multis participatione dividitur, ita multa in una similitudine et imitatione uniuntur. Data optima dona naturae sunt: dona perfecta dona gratiae: Pater luminum auctor et largitor donorum.

[0936B] « Omne ergo datum optimum, et omne donum perfectum desursum est descendens a Patre luminum, » quoniam bona omnia sive quae natura primum bene condita accepit, sive quae postea per gratiam glorificata obtinere meruit; ab uno auctore naturae et largitore, gratiae data sunt. Quibus quasi descendere fuit, a fonte plenitudinis summae ad participationem inferiorum venire. Omnis enim creatura excellentiae Creatoris natura inferior est; et idcirco omne bonum, quod dono Creatoris creaturae infunditur, merito quasi ad inferiora descendere perhibetur. Descendit enim, quia subditae naturae et inferiori dignitate se infundit, Descendit etiam, quia a perfecta et consummata plenitudine in eam, quae ex parte est, participationem [0936C] se dividit. Ita tamen, quod nec descendens serviat, nec divisum decrescat; sed manens in se quod est, et in eo, a quo venit, quantum est eis, ad quos venit se praebet, et hoc quod esse accipiunt, et quantum esse in eo quod sunt, meruerunt. Ita ab uno bono omnia bona sunt; et in uno bono omnia bona sunt; et ipsum bonum, a quo sunt omnia bona, bonum est, et lumen est; et eorum, quae ab ipso sunt, auctor bonorum et Pater luminum; et bona ipsa lumina sunt, et illuminantia ea, quae lucere possunt, et lumina fieri lucentia ex illuminante lumine. Hoc enim bonum nihil a se conditum alienum relinquit a se; nec tamen illuminat nisi ea tantum quae creavit ad se et formavit secundum se. Illa [0936D] enim sola lumen capiunt, quae lucere possunt ex lumine, quae lumen veniens, sibi non dissimilia invenit; et infusum ad majorem sui similitudinem et imaginem exteriorem perfectiorem extollit. Ista ergo sola data optima, et dona perfecta accipiunt; quia omnis creatura (praeter eam, quae imaginem conditoris habet, et similitudinis capax est) si in suo genere bonum est, quod a Creatore esse accepit, nec optimum erat cum datum est, nec perfectum consummatum. Rationalis vero creatura, quae sola ad imaginem conditoris facta est, data et dona accepit. Optima quidem dum conderetur ad infima; et perfecta dum sublimaretur ad summa. Neque enim melius aliquid alteri naturae datum est ab eo quod primum accepit, neque perfectius eo quod postmodum [0937A] esse meruit, quoniam et primum prae caeteris omnibus bona condita est, et postmodum ad ejus, a quo facta est, imaginem et similitudinem perfecta. Ergo data optima, et dona perfecta a Patre luminum descendentia rationalis tantum creaturae celsitudinem contingunt, quae sola sublimis facta est. Primum dum concederetur optima; et postea dum glorificaretur, perfecta est, quodammodo consimilis, et coaequalis ad summa. Nam ipsa data optima, et dona perfecta lumina sunt, quae a Patre luminum descendunt; et ipse lumen est, a quo descendunt Patre luminum, et in quos descendunt ipsi lumina fiunt; quia nec Pater luminis alium gignere potuit quam ipse est, nec susceptor luminis aliud quam lumen fieri potest. Si ergo lumen est qui lumen [0937B] genuit; et lumen est, qui lumen suscepit, jam quodammodo invenitur esse idem et qui genuit, et qui suscepit. Ita tamen ut ille hoc esse credatur per naturam: iste vero hoc esse agnoscatur per gratiam. Propter hoc ergo unum lumen in multa se lumina participatione profudit, ut multos illuminatos ad unum lumen reformaret, ut dum illud participando multi acciperent, in illius forma omnes unum apparerent. Propterea theologus cum ex divina monstrasset auctoritate, quoniam omne bonum a summo bono, ex sua statim subjungit sententia. Quoniam omne bonum ad summum bonum, et quod ab illo quidem divisione participationis profunditur, et ad illud similitudine conformationis unitur.

[0937C] « Omne datum optimum, et omne donum perfectum desursum est descendens a Patre luminum. » In hoc ergo probat, quod omne bonum a summo bono est. Post hoc subjungit, quod omne bonum ad summum bonum conversionem habet, et reductionem, et finem. « Sed et omnis Patre moto, manifestationis luminum processio in nos optime, et large proveniens, iterum ut unifica virtus restituens nos replet, et convertit ad congregantis Patris unitatem, et deificam simplicitatem. » Motus Patris, affectus est paternae benignitatis; sola enim benignitate et pietate sola Pater movetur, ut lumina sua effundat super nos. Movetur non conturbatione sui, sed miseratione nostri. Movetur non se concutiens, sed nos colligens; non se evacuans, sed nos replens. [0937D] Movetur ergo, ut ad nos veniat, et non movetur, ut a se recedat. Movetur, ut nobis esse incipiat, quod non erat, et non movetur, ut sibi desinat esse, quod erat. Sic ergo Pater luminum movetur super nos, et moto Patre lumina ejus descendunt in nos, et per procedentia in nos manifestantur per nos. Primum nobis, post hoc aliis ex nobis, et omnis ista processio manifestationis luminum, id est per quam lumina manifestantur (non enim manifestarentur, nisi procederent) exiens a Patre moto. Omnis scilicet ista processio manifestationis luminum in nos proveniens hoc operatur, videlicet quod replet nos, non utique alio quam seipsa ex eo quod replet, iterum restituens reparando, sicut poenis constituit creando, restituit scilicet utpote unifica [0938A] virtus, quae dispersa colligit; diversa componit, et ex multis unum facit, et ita restituens, et reformans convertit nos, qui prius dissimilitudine fuimus aversi, multitudine diversi, pravitate perversi. Convertit dico ad congregantis Patris unitatem, et deificam simplicitatem. Lux enim Patris invisibilis in se, procedens in nos, et exiens ad manifestationem vacuos invenit, et inanes a vero bono; et infundens se nobis replet nos secundum uniuscujusque nostrum virtutem et capacitatem; et cum repleverit, convertit nos, ut non dissideamus a Patre, sed in eadem similitudine et imagine respiciamus ad ipsum, qua non discordamus ab ipso. Replet quidem illuminando; et convertit lumina faciendo. Replemur enim in eo quod lumen accipimus; convertimur [0938B] autem in eo quod ex accepto lumine, et ipsi lumina sumus. Nam in eo cum lumine unus sumus, et in lumine unum sumus, quod lumen sumus, et est unitas in una similitudine, in uno lumine, in una claritate, et unum illuminans, et lucens lumen. Quia igitur omne bonum a summo bono est, et omne bonum ad summum bonum est; ab illo enim accipimus, quod cum illo unum sumus; nec esset in nobis, quo respiceremus ad illum, nisi prius quod suum est, nostrum fieret per illum. « Etenim ex ipso omnia, et in ipsum, ut divinum ait verbum. » Id est, ut divini verbi auctoritas testatur, ex ipso procedentia, in ipsum conversa; ex ipso principio in ipsum finem. Possumus autem adhuc et motum Patris non inconvenienter accipere principium nostrae [0938C] contemplationis. Mens etenim tenebris suis assueta, quando internam claritatem contemplari nititur, quasi trementibus, et palpantibus luminibus vim insoliti fulgoris non sustinens, ipsis primis aspectus radiis reverberatur; et apparet illi quasi tremulum lumen; et moveri videtur ipsum lumen, cum potius illius tenebrae solae moveantur, et fugiant praesentiam luminis coruscantis. Et videtur motus luminis hic esse, cum sit tenebrarum fugientium lumen; et post motum ipsum funduntur lumina, et procedunt ad manifestationem, quae stantibus tenebris videri non potuerunt, et replent nos lumine, ut luceamus, et lumina simus, sicut lumen est ipsum, quod nos illuminat, ut ex ipso sint omnia, [0938D] et in ipsum; quae principium subsistendi accipiunt ab ipso, et finem consummationis in ipso, sicut divinum verbum per Paulum apostolum, testatur: « Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia: ipsi gloria in saecula. Amen [n: (Rom. XI)]. »

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

« Ergo Jesum invocantes paternum lumen, quod est, verum, quod illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum [n: (Joan. I)]; per quem ad principale lumen Patrem accessum habuimus; in sacratissimorum eloquiorum Patre traditas illuminationes quantum possibile respiciemus, et ab ipsis symbolice nobis, et anagogice manifestatas coelestium animorum hierarchias, quantum potentes sumus, considerabimus. » Superiori capitulo sequentis operis summam breviter complexus est, quoniam [0939A] omne bonum a summo bono, et omne bonum ad summum bonum. Nunc priusquam textum materiae suae ingrediatur, invocationem facit ad Jesum, qui est paternum lumen, quo mediante omnes spirituales illuminationes, et dona gratiarum illuminandis tribuuntur, ut ipso illuminante, et juvante secundum divinorum eloquiorum traditiones, quae et ipsa ad luminanda corda hominum a Patre tradita sunt, possit et veraciter agnoscere, et digne narrare coelestium spirituum invisibiles illuminationes, et dispositiones sacras. « Ergo Jesum invocantes; » ac si diceret: Omnis quidem illuminatio a Patre est, sed sine Jesu mediatore nulla illuminatio haberi potest. « Ergo » nos, qui illuminari poscimus, « Jesum invocantes, » ut scilicet illuminari [0939B] mereamur. Deinde sequitur de ipso Jesu Christo, quod est, « paternum lumen; » pro eo quod dicere debuerat, qui est paternum lumen, ad sequentem dictionem relatio facta est, quod est paternum lumen. Vel « Jesum invocantes paternum lumen, » quod scilicet lumen est; hoc est, verum et aeternum, et incommutabile esse habet, et lumen est, ex eo quod est. Nam sicut illuminata lumina, quae lumina sunt non ex eo quod sunt, sed ex eo quod acceperunt. Quod etiam lumen verum subauditur est lumen; quoniam ex eo quod est, lucet, et non solum sibi lucet, sed etiam alios illuminat. Quod « illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum. » Non quia omnes illuminantur; sed quia ex omnibus [0939C] nemo est, qui ex se habeat, cur potius quam alter illuminari mereatur. Gratiae enim illuminatio ista est, non naturae; donum, non debitum; beneficium largientis, non praemium accipientis. Sive enim omnem hominem in hunc mundum venientem hoc lumen illuminat quantum omnes natura rationis capaces facti sunt, et lumen intelligentiae perceperunt. Vel omnem hominem venientem in mundum lumen istud illuminat; non quia omnes, sicut dictum est, illuminantur; sed quia aliunde illuminari non habent omnes, qui vel illuminantur, vel non illuminantur. Illuminare enim non est, nisi luminis; sicut illuminari non est, nisi lumen accipientis. Quapropter sicut omnium est lumen accipere, ita solius luminis est omnes illuminare.

[0939D]Sequitur: « Per quem ad principale lumen Patrem accessum habuimus. » Per lumen Jesum accessum habuimus ad lumen Patrem. Jesus enim lumen est, et Pater Jesu lumen; et genitus est a lumine Patre Filius lumen, et unum lumen Pater et Filius. Et dicitur Pater principale lumen, non quia majus lumen vel melius lumen, quia idem lumen; sed quia non de lumine lumen, ideo principale lumen. Filius lumen de lumine, Pater lumen non de lumine: et tamen unum lumen Pater et Filius, sicut unus Deus Pater et Filius. Et ideo Pater principale lumen, quia de lumine Patre Filius lumen. Potest adhuc et aliter intelligi, quod Pater principale lumen dictus est. Video enim et ipsum Filium secundum aliquid lumen esse, in quo non potest Patri [0940A] aequalis esse. Pater quippe Jesu Deus est, et solum, Deus; Filius autem Deus est, nec solum, sed etiam homo et Deus; et est lumen Jesus in eo quod est Deus; et idem lumen, quod est Pater Deus. In eo vero, quod homo est, lumen est, quoniam et ipsa Jesu humanitas lumen fuit in eo quod veritatem demonstravit, et principale lumen Patrem revelavit. Sed lumen humanitatis Jesu minus fuit lumine deitatis, et in lumine quidem humanitatis Jesus inferior fuit Patre, in lumine vero divinitatis idem cum Patre. Et venimus per ipsum ad ipsum lumen humanitatis, in quo erat solus Filius, ad lumen divinitatis, in quo erat Pater, et Filius. Idcirco accessum habuimus per Filium ad Patrem; nec ad solum Patrem, sed et ad Filium et ad Patrem. Video et alium accessum [0940B] per Jesum ad principale lumen Patrem. Jesus enim sapientia Patris est, et ipsa sapientia Patrem revelavit, et exivit sapientia Patris, Patre permanente in abscondito: et mansit Pater invisibilis, et sapientia ejus visibilis facta est, ut ad invisibilem Patrem perduceret, et cum facta est visibilis, non desiit invisibilis esse, quia venit eo ubi non erat: inde, ubi erat, non recessit. Et exivit primum per creaturam mundi, et manifestavit se in operibus suis: et coepit visibiliter videri invisibilis in eo quod erat visibile, et monstratum est quoddam lumen, ut duceret ad majus lumen: et erat primum lumen sapientiae, et secundum lumen sapientia. Et factus est nobis Jesus via ad Patrem; ex inferiori lumine ad lumen principale. Deinde venit secundo [0940C] sapientia, et exivit, ut dictum est, per carnem, et facta est lumen in testa, ut illuminaret nos, et assuefaceret ad majus lumen, et perduceret ad principale lumen. Sed et ita accessum habuimus per Jesum ad principale lumen Patrem. « Ergo Jesum invocantes paternum lumen, quod est, quod verum, quod illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum: per quem ad principale lumen Patrem accessum habuimus. » Hucusque pendet sententia donec sequentibus compleatur; et est sensus. Nos invocantes Jesum, respiciemus, quantum possibile est nobis, in illuminationes sacratissimorum eloquiorum, hoc est in sacratissima eloquia, quae illuminant nos doctrina veritatis et intelligentia secretorum, [0940D] a Patre traditas. Traditae sunt enim a Patre illuminationes divinorum eloquiorum, ut nos ex ipsis illuminemur, quousque capaces efficiamur contemplationis luminis principalis, et ipsis illuminantibus nunc agnoscimus secreta coelestia, quae nondum sensu comprehendere valemus. Illuminationes quoque sacratissimorum eloquiorum accipere possumus descriptiones sacri eloquii, et configurationes ex formis visibilibus sumptas, in quibus nobis statum invisibilium rerum, et coelestium secretorum rationem modumque ex proposita similitudine demonstrat. Ipsis enim signis visibilibus humana mens commodius instruitur, et illuminatur ad invisibilium cognitionem. Propterea pene ubique in sacro eloquio rerum visibilium species pro significatione adhibentur, [0941A] quando humana mens de iis eruditur, quae abscondita sunt ab intelligentia humana, ut per ea, quae novit, capere possit et intelligere quae non novit. Istas illuminationes foris ad eruditionem nobis propositas, Jesum invocantes, qui intus corda illuminet, inspicere debemus, et secundum ipsarum demonstrationem secreta coelestia addiscere.

Hoc est, quod sequitur: « Et ab ipsis symbolice nobis, et anagogice manifestata coelestium animorum hierarchias quantum potentes sumus considerabimus. » Est itaque ordo, ut primum sanctarum Scripturarum illuminationes cum invocatione Jesu, per quem interna illuminatio datur et sine quo exterior inanis est, inspiciamus: ac deinde, illuminante Jesu, ex ipsis sacrae Scripturae illuminationibus et demonstrationibus [0941B] coelestium animorum, id est spirituum coelestium principatus sacros et potestates (qui nobis, nisi per Scripturae sacrae traditiones manifestarentur, invisibiles omnino essent et incogniti), consideremus. Hoc est enim, quod ait: « Considerabimus quantum potentes » sive quantum possumus. Parvum est enim nostrum posse, et exiguum ad tantarum rerum magnitudinem. « Considerabimus hierarchias, » id est sacros principatus coelestium animorum, id est angelicorum spirituum. Hierarchias dico manifestatas nobis, hoc est demonstratas, vel revelatas ab ipsis, scilicet illuminationibus, id est demonstrationibus sacri eloquii symbolice et anagogice. Symbolum est collatio formarum visibilium ad invisibilium demonstrationem. Anagoge autem [0941C] ascensio, sive elevatio mentis est ad superna contemplanda. Notat autem hic duplicem modum revelationis divinae, quae theologorum et prophetarum mentibus infusa est per visiones et demonstrationes, quas Graeci theophanias appellant, id est divinas apparitiones. Quoniam aliquando per signa sensibilibus similia invisibilia demonstrata sunt, aliquando per solam anagogen, id est mentis ascensum, in superna pure contemplata. Ex his vero duobus generibus visionum, duo quoque descriptionum genera in sacro eloquio sunt formata. Unum, quo formis, et figuris, et similitudinibus rerum occultarum veritas adumbratur. Alterum, quo nude et pure sicut est absque integumento exprimitur. Cum itaque [0941D] formis, et signis, et similitudinibus manifestatur, quod occultum est, vel quod manifestum est, describitur, symbolica demonstratio est. Cum vero puro pura et nuda revelatione ostenditur, vel plana et aperta narratione docetur, anagogica.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Et principalem, et super principalem divini Patris claritatem, quae angelorum nobis in figuratis symbolis manifestat beatissimas hierarchias, immaterialibus, et non trementibus mentis oculis respicientes, iterum ex ipsa in simplum illius restituimur radium. » Hic manifeste edocet quibus gradibus divinae illuminationis processio fiat usque ad nos; et rursum quibus progressionibus mens nostra reducatur ad summae claritatis contemplationem. Divinum enim lumen primum in angelicam naturam [0942A] descendit, et ab ipsa revelationibus, et demonstrationibus divinis, et mystica sacri eloquii narratione ad nostram usque intelligentiam, participationemque se transfundit. Mens vero humana eisdem rursum gradibus ad superna conscendens, sacra divini eloquii inspectione coelestia secreta, et eam, quae in angelis est, divinae claritatis illuminationem perpendit: ex qua paulatim in invisibilium agnitionem succrescens ad ipsum tandem summi luminis splendorem contemplandum convalescit; et fit, quod in principio dictum est, quia unum lumen et ad multa illuminanda se dividit, ut illuminata omnia ad unius claritatis aspectum similitudinemque reformet. Propterea cognita ex sacris divini eloquii traditionibus coelestium spirituum claritate, qualiter hanc cognitionem [0942B] summi luminis contemplatio subsequatur, ostendit, dicens: « Et principalem, et superprincipalem divini Patris claritatem, quae angelorum nobis in figuratis symbolis manifestat beatissimas hierarchias, immaterialibus, et non trementibus mentis oculis respicientes, iterum ex ipsa in simplum illius restituimur radium. » Ordo verborum est: Nos respicientes claritatem divini Patris principalem, et superprincipalem oculis mentis immaterialibus et non trementibus: quae claritas manifestat nobis beatissimas hierarchias angelorum in symbolis figuratis. iterum ex ipsa in simplum illius restituimur radium. Respicientes enim claritatem Patris restituimur, id est reformamur iterum, hoc est reductive conversi ad illud, unde venimus, in simplum ejus radium, [0942C] ut in uno lumine unum simus, qui lucemus ex lumine uno, et non sit discrepantia lucentium, sicut diversitas luminum non est ulla. Claritas autem Patris principalis et superprincipalis dicitur, quia non solum dignitate vel causa lucentibus omnibus superior est, sed etiam excelsior natura. Et haec claritas, quia non corporalis, sed spiritualis est, et spiritualiter lucet: idcirco nonnisi immaterialibus tantum, id est incorporalibus oculis videri potest. Quos oculos etiam non trementes, id est sanos, et perspicaces, et irreverberatos esse necesse est, ne lippienti acie tantum lumen intuentes, tenebras sibi ex ipsa claritate inducant. Merito autem post claritatem angelorum per sacra eloquia contemplatam, [0942D] ad divini Patris claritatem illuminamur; quia et ipsa nobis angelorum claritas a claritate Patris per eos in nos descendente ex sacri eloquii revelatione manifestatur. Hoc est, quod ait: « *Quae angelorum nobis in figuratis symbolis,* » id est signis et conformationibus secundum species visibiles figuratis, manifestat beatissimas hierarchias, id est principatus, dignitates et potestates. Angelorum ordines, et potestates, et divinae eorum operationes omnino invisibiles sunt: et nisi visibilibus signis, et similitudinibus ex visibilibus sumptis demonstrentur, intelligi ab iis qui visibilia tantum noverunt nequaquam possunt. Propterea Patris claritas ad principale lumen suum nos reparare volens, primum illuminationibus sacri eloquii ad contemplandam angelorum [0943A] claritatem nos excitat, et ex ea claritate illuminatos tandem ad suae claritatis agnitionem lumenque reformat, ut unum simus in illa, qui unum accepimus ab illa. Haec vero claritas Patris unius simplicis radii emissione et illuminatione per cuncta se diffundit, et penetrat cuncta, quoniam unam sapientiam Pater genuit, per quam cuncta opera sua fecit. Verbum quippe Patris lumen de lumine est; unum Verbum, et radius unus, et ipsum Verbum sapientia est, et ipsa sapientia lumen est procedens, a quo nota est: una de uno, et propterea radius unus a claritate una, a quo illuminantur, qui ad ipsum reformantur, ut luceant ex ipso, et lux sint cum ipso, sicut ille lux est. Et cum sint multa lumina illuminata, et varie dissimiliterque lucentia, unum tamen [0943B] lumen est illuminans in omnibus illuminatis.

Hoc est, quod sequitur: « Etenim neque ipse usquam, neque unquam radius a propria singulari unitate deseritur. » Sapientia enim Dei quamvis se varie dissimiliterque mentibus spiritualiter illuminandis secundum suscipientium capacitatem ac possibilitatem infundat, in se tamen una permanet et simplex. Nec major sibi in iis qui abundant ex ipsa, nec minor in iis qui secundum inferiorem participationis gratiam uniri accipiunt in ipsa; sed tota in toto, et in singulis tota, summa transcendens, et infimis condescendens, numerose se participandam praebens, et in se una permanens. Propterea sese in plura participantia dividit, sed ex sui participatione plura participantia ad unitatem restituit. Nos enim [0943C] colligi possumus in ipsa; sed ipsa dividi non potest in nobis. Etenim ipse radius, id est ipsa sapientia illuminans a principali lumine Patre exiens, et usque ad illuminanda omnia procedens, a sua unitate propria non deseritur unquam, quoniam semper cum illo est; neque usquam, quoniam ubique in illo est. Nam et cum per diversa tempora mentibus illuminandis dissimiliter se praebet, eadem ac indissimilis est. Et cum diversis locis, diversisque participationis consortibus simul praesentem se exhibet, multiplex non est.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Ad anagogicam vero, et unificam eorum, quae provisa sunt, contemperantiam optime et pulchre multiplicatur et provenit: manetque intra [0943D] se munite in incommutabili naturae similitudine uniformiter fixus: et in se, quantum fas est, respicientes proportionaliter eis extendit, et unificat secundum simplicem sui unitatem. » Ac si diceret: Divinae claritatis radius, qui spiritualiter lucentes illuminat, quamvis in se unus permaneat, participatione tamen et distributione donorum varie multiplicatur, quoniam multis diversisque modis distribuitur et multiplicatur. Haec vero multiplicatio et variatio universorum est pulchritudo; quoniam, nisi dissimiliter pulchra essent singula, summe pulchra non essent simul universa. Non enim unum aliquod ex universis diversis capere potuit, quod erat pulchritudinis totum: et idcirco summa pulchritudo varia participatione distributa est in singulis, ut [0944A] perfecta esse posset simul in universis. Ipsa vero distributio multiplicatur optime et pulchre: optime in universis, et pulchre in singulis, vel, optime secundum participantium dispositionem. Optime enim multiplicatur, ut majus sit bonum, quod a multis percipitur; et pulchre multiplicatur, ut major sit decor universitatis, quod participantibus singulis varie diversisque modis infunditur, ut ex multitudine numerosa in participantibus boni fiat consummatio, ex distributione dissimili participantium pulchritudo. Sive simplicis radii, quo nos illuminamur multiplicatio convenienter intelligi potest secundum multas ac diversas divinorum eloquiorum figuras ac similitudines: quibus secundum nos sumptis divina [0944B] sapientia, quae in sua puritate, ac simplicitate omnino incomprehensibilis est, mentibus humanis varie multipliciterque, cum ipsa una eademque semper sit, declaratur. Multiplicatur ergo, quoniam multis modis declaratur: optime quidem quantum ad se, et pulchre quantum ad nos. Optime multiplicatur, quoniam ex ipsa multiplicatione declarationum perfectius agnoscitur; pulchre declaratur, quoniam pulchra ac decenti se declarantium formarum specie ac dissimilitudine manifestatur. Et ipsa multiplicatio fit ad contemperantiam eorum, quae provisa sunt, hoc est electorum et provisorum ad vitam, ut contemperentur et participationis concordia uniantur quasi multa membra in uno corpore, ut ipsa diversitas donorum unitatis et pacis [0944C] societatem ad invicem confirmet: quatenus unumquodque membrum se a totius corporis compage dividere non praesumat, cum boni plenitudinem, quam in se minus habet, in aliorum societate possideat. Quia enim unumquodque habet, quod aliud non habet: propterea unumquodque in alio habet quod in se non habet, vel in alio plus habet quod in se minus habet. Et idcirco singula invicem tendunt ad se et concordiam ac pacem servant inter se: et ipsa concordia et pax contemperantia est, qua sibi consentiunt, ut stent in unum et reformentur ad unum. Propter hoc ergo ipsam contemperantia provisorum anagogicam dicit et unificam. Unificam quidem, ut stent in unum; anagogicam, ut reformentur [0944D] ad unum. Unificam, quia dispersos in unum colligit; anagogicam, quia dejectos ad superiora reducit. Unificam, per dilectionem proximi; anagogicam, per dilectionem Dei. Propterea pulchra est in congregatione, optima in elevatione. Ipse ergo radius divinae illustrationis multiplicatus sive per distributionem donorum spiritualium, qua intrinsecus participatur; sive per varietatem mysticarum demonstrationum, qua extrinsecus in sacro eloquio declaratur, provenit, hoc est procedit in corda illuminanda, sive ab intus per aspirationem ea replens, sive a foris per sacri verbi eruditionem se ipsis infundens: et tamen manet intra se munite, ut cum se mentibus illuminandis varie ac multipliciter participandum praestat, extra suae tamen simplicitatem [0945A] unitatis non effluat. Ipsa enim ejus unitas propterea semper intra se manet, quoniam illam munit atque custodit coessentialis incommutabilitas, ut licet ad illius communicationem accedat participantium pluralitas, ad divisionem tamen illius non praevaleat participationis diversitas. Manet ergo intra se munite, ut semper idem sit, neque exeat ab eo quod est, in id quod non est: sed incommutabili similitudine sua uniformiter fixus, ut videlicet a seipso non discrepet, quasi sibi dissimilis effectus. Neque solum ipse unus manet, sed etiam respicientes in se, et conversos ad se, quantum fas est, hoc est licitum et possibile illis, extendit se eis, hoc est porrigit ut ad eos etiam veniat qui longe sunt, et a se tamen non recedat. Extendit videlicet proportionaliter, [0945B] hoc est ut alii plus, alii miuus accipiant secundum dispensationem distributionis munerum, vel possibilitatem capacitatis participantium. Qui enim proximi sunt, abundantius ex illo accipiunt: et sic deinde singuli quo magis accedunt, magis accipiunt; et quo magis recedunt, minus recipiunt. Omnes tamen accipiunt; unusquisque pro parte sua. Hoc est, quod ait: « Proportionaliter se extendit, quia tamen ad omnes se extendit, et omnibus se infundit, omnes illuminat, et lumina esse facit ex lumine suo, ac per hoc unum esse facit, sicut ipse unus est. Et hoc est, quod dicit: « Unificat eos secundum simplicem sui unitatem. » Una enim illuminatio omnium, una est similitudo, et una forma, in qua unum sunt omnes ex illa, qui [0945C] illuminantur ab illa, et unum cum illa, quoniam illuminati lumina sunt, sicut ipsa est lumen. Illi tamen, qui ex ipsa unum sunt, unificatione unum sunt non unitate, quia quod unum sunt ex multis, unum sunt in uno. Ipsi enim multi sunt, et propterea unum non sunt in eo quod sunt; sed, quia multi in uno sunt, ex uno multi unum sunt, et unificatione unum sunt, non unitate. Ipse vero non unificatione, sed unitate unus est, quia unus est ex eo quod est, quod unum est. Et propterea simplicem dixit unitatem, quia ex uno unus est, et idem unum a quo est, ipse est. Idcirco unitas in uno simplex est; unificatio vero multiplex in uno, quia illi ex uno unum, et unum in uno: hic autem [0945D] ex multis unum, quia multi in uno, et unum in multis. Deinde subjungit causam quare divinus radius, id est, sapientia divina, quae a Patre una est, et apud Patrem simplex est, varie multiplicatur per similitudines et formas demonstrationum in sacro eloquio, quoniam videlicet aliter nobis innotescere non potuit invisibilis Dei sapientia, nisi se iis quae novimus visibilium rerum formis ad similitudinem conformaret, et per eas nobis sua invisibilia quae non novimus significando exprimeret. Propterea divinus radius, qui in se unus est, et simplex, ad nos veniens, significationum et demonstrationum varietate multiplicatur, quia eum in sua puritate ac simplicitate capere non valet

[0946A] « Etenim neque possibile est aliter nobis lucere divinum radium, nisi varietate sacrorum vel animum anagogice circumvelatum, et iis, quae secundum nos sunt, providentia paterna connaturaliter, et proprie praeparatum. » Sacra velamina, in quibus nobis radius divinus lucet, sunt mysticae in sacro eloquio descriptiones, quae visibiles adducunt formas et similitudines invisibilium ad declarationem. Quibus videlicet velaminibus ipse radius divinus anagogice circumvelatur. Anagoge enim, sicut dictum est, ascensio mentis, sive elevatio vocatur in contemplationem supernorum. Anagogice igitur circumvelatur, quia ad hoc velatur ut amplius clarescat; ob hoc tegitur ut magis appareat. Ejus igitur obumbratio nostri est illuminatio; et ejus circumvelatio; [0946B] nostri elevatio. Quemadmodum infirmi oculi solem nube tectum libere conspiciunt, qui coruscum ejus lumen intueri non possunt: sic et divinum radium lippientibus mentis oculis lucere impossibile est, nisi varietate sacrorum velaminum circumvelatum et praeparatum providentia paterna connaturaliter et proprie iis, quae secundum nos sunt. Nisi enim providentia paterna nobis ineffabili bonitate in hoc providisset, oculis nostris lumen ipsius omnino lucere non posset: et idcirco paterne et pie providit nobis, ut ipsum lumen praepararet nobis et coaptaret iis, quae secundum nos sunt, rebus, et similitudinibus, et formis: et sic connaturaliter et proprie, hoc est secundum naturam nostram, et proprietatem eorum, quae naturae nostrae sunt, praeparatum [0946C] et coaptatum ostenderet nobis. Conformat se nostris, ut per nostra innotescat nobis, ut ea, quae connaturalia sunt et propria nobis, in demonstrationem proposita facilius intelligantur a nobis.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Propter quod et sanctissimam nostram hierarchiam perfectissima sacrorum dispositio coelestium hierarchiarum supermundana imitatione dignam judicans, et dictas immateriales hierarchias materialibus figuris, et formalibus compositionibus varificans tradidit. » Ac si diceret: Quia per visibilia convenienter invisibilia demonstrantur, idcirco divina Sapientia, quae omnia disponit ad similitudinem angelicae hierarchiae, quae invisibiliter [0946D] ordinata erat in coelis, humanam hierarchiam visibiliter formavit in terris, ut essent in hominibus quoque sicut in angelis potestates et principatus sacri, quibus humana conversatio temporaliter incedens gubernetur, ut ex visibili dispositione hominum, invisibilis innotescat dispositio angelorum. Hoc est enim quod ait: Propter quod perfectissima sacrorum, hoc est summa hierarchia ipsa ineffabilis Trinitas, a qua, et secundum quam sacra omnia, id est sacrae ordinationes omnes disponuntur, judicans sanctissimam nostram hierarchiam, id est humanam, dignam supermundana, id est spirituali vel intellectuali imitatione coelestium hierarchiarum, ut eas spiritualiter imitetur, et secundum illas disponatur. Et idcirco varificans id est varie ac multipliciter [0947A] declarans ipsas scilicet jam dictas immateriales, id est spirituales et angelicas hierarchias materialibus, id est corporalibus et visibilibus, vel secundum visibilia sumptis figuris et compositionibus formalibus, hoc est aptis et competenter secundum rationem formationum expressis, tradit, hoc est instituit ipsam videlicet sanctissimam nostram hierarchiam, ut in hoc quoque ratio servaretur visibilium demonstrationum ad invisibilem veritatem, ut nos ascendamus ab ipsis sacratissimis formationibus, quae foris ad demonstrationem proponuntur, ad altitudines et similitudines non figuratas, hoc est simplices et spirituales. Ascendamus dico proportionaliter nobis ipsis, hoc est, secundum proportionem et mensuram spiritualium donorum illuminati [0947B] per ea, quae foris sunt, in invisibilium agnitionem, et ad sublimem, et simplicem, et eamdem semper consistentem veritatem. Altitudines enim, et similitudines ipsae sunt invisibiles potestates. Altitudines quidem dignitate, similitudines incommutabilitate, non figuratae simplicitate. Ad quarum cognitionem secundum differentiam progressionum, et incrementa illuminationum proportionaliter nobis ipsis ascendimus per gradus spiritualium profectuum in nobis, per differentiam donorum inter nos. Secundum namque illam proportionem, qua nunc dona gratiarum differenter percipimus, merito postea vel hic per mentis contemplationem, vel illic per retributionem in numerum angelorum transimus. Sic enim proportionaliter nobis ipsis ascendimus, quando secundum [0947C] hoc, quod in praesenti per dona gratiarum, et gradus dignitatum differenter disponimur, ad invisibilis veritatis participationem secreta et invisibili promotione sublevamur. Ipsa autem veritas in nobis quidem per officia spiritualium dignitatum, et gradus, et distributiones ordinum figuraliter et materialiter figuratur, atque formatur secundum habitus, et actiones, et signa visibilia, quae in nostra sicut hierarchia ad declarationem opposita, quae omnia coelesti atque angelica hierarchia secundum simplicem veritatem sublimi, et nostrae naturae superexcellenti modo absque signis et figuris pure et uniformiter constant: secundum quam excellentiam ipsos angelicos ordines altitudines theologia vocat [0947D] et similitudines, vel quia per nullam mutabilitatem a semetipsis discrepant, vel quia ea in ipsis secundum simplicem veritatem sunt, quasi quaedam similitudines et exemplaria esse videntur eorum, quae per figuras et imagines consistunt. Nisi enim inter haec et illa aliqua similitudo esset, per haec ad illa nulla declaratio esset. Nunc autem, quoniam haec, quae visibilia sunt ad invisibilium aemulationem divina sapientia in prima conditione formavit, in secunda dispositione ex eisdem quoque rationali animo ad invisibilium agnitionem conscendenti signa et exempla demonstrationum constituit.

Hoc est enim, quod sequitur: « Quoniam neque possibile est nostro animo ad non materialem illam ascendere coelestium hierarchiarum imitationem, et [0948A] contemplationem, nisi ea, » quae secundum ipsum est materiali manuductione utatur. Non materialem spiritualem imitationem, vel contemplationem dicit et incorporalem; quoniam omne, quod corporale est, ex materia est. Spiritualis autem natura merito immaterialis dicitur, quoniam, neque ex materia est, ut sit de alio, neque materia esse potest, ut de ipsa sit aliud. Materialem autem manuductionem corporalia signa intelligit, quorum quasi manuductione mens humana utitur, ut ex visibilibus ad invisibilium imitationem et contemplationem dirigatur. Ad imitationem quidem per exercitium virtutis; ad contemplationem vero per cognitionem veritatis. Nota autem novam compositionem et similitudinem novam in eo quod ait manuductio. Mens [0948B] etenim hominis tenebris ignorantiae suae obvoluta ad lumen veritatis exire non potest, nisi dirigatur, et quasi caecus manuductione utens, quo non videt, incedat. Ipsae autem manuductiones et directiones, quibus mens ad invisibilia tendens utitur, a visibilibus sumuntur signis, et demonstrationibus secundum visibilia formatis. Et hoc totum disposuit, et ordinavit perfectissima sacrorum dispositio, quae Graece hierothesia vocatur, hoc est sacrorum positio, summa videlicet Trinitas, a qua et secundum quam omnia sacra disponuntur et ordinantur in coelo, et in terra, et alio nomine teletarche, id est principium purgationis dicitur, quoniam ab ipsa omnis emundatio est et principium purgationis non solum ut bona fiant, quae mala sunt; sed et illustrationis [0948C] et deificationis, ut meliora efficiantur, quae bona fuerunt. Ipsum ergo summum sacerdotium, vel summa paternitas omnia emundans, et sanctificans, et illustrans, hoc instituit et ordinavit, ut primo loco secundum ipsam angelica natura invisibiliter formetur, et secundo loco humana natura ad eamdem imaginem per visibilia excitata reformetur; quia non potest humanus animus ad invisibilium cognitionem vel imitationem reduci, nisi per visibiles demonstrationes eruditus, quoniam et ipsa visibilia a Deo sic facta sunt, ut secundum illam similitudinem et aemulationem, quam ad ipsa invisibilia acceperunt, eadem convenienter declarare possunt, ut noster animus horum ductione utens ad illa dirigatur [0948D] secundum ista, pro similitudine demonstrationis illa aestimans et perpendens.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Quemadmodum sequitur: « Visibiles quidem formas invisibilis pulchritudinis imaginationes, sive imagines arbitrans, » videlicet ipse noster animus; « et sensibiles suavitates figuras invisibilis distributionis, » subauditur, arbitrans ipse noster animus; « et immaterialis luculentiae imaginem materialia lumina, » ut iterum subaudiatur, arbitrans ipse noster animus; « secundum intellectum contemplativae plenitudinis discursas sacras disciplinas, » hic plus subaudiendum est, arbitrans noster animus imagines esse; « et adunati ad divina, et ordinati habitus earum, quae hic sunt, dispositionum ordines, » iterum subaudi, arbitrans noster animus imagines [0949A] esse; « Jesu participationis ipsam divinissimae Eucharistiae assumptionem, » iterum subintellige, arbitrans noster animus imaginem esse. Summa igitur totius capituli haec est: Quoniam non potest noster animus ad invisibilium imitationem et contemplationem ascendere, nisi per visibilia dirigatur, ita videlicet, ut ex ipsis visibilibus invisibilia arbitrari, et aestimare sciat, secundum quod ipsa ad illa similitudinem habent, et significationem faciunt. Quas vero visibilium similitudines ad invisibilia ipse noster animus arbitrari debeat et existimare, quaedam distincta subjiciens exempla ostendit, ac si diceret: Ideo per visibilia invisibilium veritas demonstrata est; quia non potest noster animus ad invisibilium ipsorum veritatem ascendere, nisi per [0949B] visibilium considerationem eruditus, ita videlicet, ut arbitretur visibiles formas esse imaginationes invisibilis pulchritudinis. Quia enim in formis rerum visibilium pulchritudo earumdem consistit, congrue ex formis visibilibus invisibilem pulchritudinem demonstrari dicit, quoniam visibilis pulchritudo invisibilis pulchritudinis imago est. Quia tamen in rebus visibilibus aliud est forma, et aliud est essentia, idcirco quaecunque visibilia sunt mutabiliter pulchra sunt, quoniam quaecunque numero diversa sunt, et natura mutabilia inseparabiliter simul non consistunt. Invisibilia autem quibus aliud non est forma, et aliud essentia, quia omne quod est, unum est et simplex, et idem esse: pulchra sunt ex eo quod sunt, et non est pulchritudo illorum compacta ex [0949C] multis concurrentibus in unum, sicut visibilis natura videtur, cujus forma secundum spatia locorum explicatur, et per figuras ex multis coaptatas disponitur. Idcirco alia est pulchritudo visibilis, et alia invisibilis naturae, quoniam illa simplex, et uniformis est; ista autem multiplex et varia proportione conducta. Est tamen aliqua similitudo visibilis pulchritudinis ad invisibilem pulchritudinem, secundum aemulationem, quam invisibilis artifex ad utramque constituit, in qua quasi speculamina quaedam diverversorum proportionum unam imaginem effingunt. Secundum hoc ergo a pulchritudine visibili ad invisibilem pulchritudinem mens humana convenienter excitata ascendit; quasi de simili ad similia conducta [0949D] facile in semetipsa invisibiliter intelligens quae sit eorum, quae foris visibiliter comprehendit, ad invisibilia cognatio. Nam secundum invisibilem lucem insitam sibi noster animus ad invisibilia respiciens, facile arbitratur visibiles formas invisibilis pulchritudinis imagines esse, illi, quod invisibile intus ipse habet, amica quadam similitudine respondentes, eas secundum approbationem et affectum inveniens. Quod enim in animo est, invisibile est, sicut ipse animus invisibilis est; et concipit tamen ipse, qui invisibilis est ex iis quae visibilia sunt, gaudium, et amorem, et affectum; et diligit ex his quaedam quasi similia, et amica, et cognata et praestat se illis voluntarie, et exsultat in ipsis. Alia autem aspernatur, et odit, et refugit, et longe [0950A] se facit ab illis, amore, et dilectione; et judicat peregrina a se, et disconvenientia, et nullam secum habentia similitudinem. Atque in hunc modum noster animus ex propria natura docetur quod visibilia ad invisibilia cognationem habent et similitudinem: et quod ipsa visibilia imagines sunt et simulacra eorum, quae visibiliter videri non possunt, quoniam ex his intelliguntur ea, quae non videntur; et quia secundum aliquid totum illic in incommutabili natura invisibiliter consistit, quod hic visibiliter et sensibiliter natura mutabilis accepit, ut ad invisibilia conducat. Est enim hic species et forma, quae delectat visum; est et melodiae jucunditas, quae demulcet auditum; est suavitas odoris, quae reficit olfactum; est dulcedo saporis, quae infundit [0950B] gustum; et lenitas corporum, quae fovet et blande excipit tactum. Illic autem species est virtus, et forma justitia, dulcedo amor, et odor desiderium; cantus vero gaudium et exsultatio; contactus autem amati, et desiderati, et quaesiti boni inventio. Haec enim omnia ibi sunt, et vera ibi sunt, et habent ad haec, quae non vera sunt, aliquod simile secundum quod intelliguntur a nobis. Ex his enim noster animus ad illorum cognitionem et imitationem ascendit, arbitrans visibiles formas, quas vel natura secundum primam conditionem inditas ostendit, vel sacrum eloquium dispensatorie ad declarationem faciendam in significationem proponit, invisibilis pulchritudinis imagines esse et sensibiles suavitates, id est dulcedines sensibiles, figuras esse et similitudines [0950C] invisibilis distributionis, hoc est dulcedinis, quae invisibiliter distribuitur, id est diversis modis tribuitur: ut videlicet alius plus, alius minus accipiat secundum mensuram, et dona gratiae largitoris. Et similiter immaterialis luculentiae, hoc est spiritualis lucis imaginem esse materialia, id est corporalia lumina; et rursum sacras disciplinas, id est investigatas et perscrutatas ingenio, imagines esse contemplativae plenitudinis, id est plenae ac perfectae contemplationis, quae secundum intellectum, id est intellectualiter solum et invisibiliter et percipitur, et ministratur. Omnis enim illa cognitio, quam modo per sacrum eloquium studio lectionis vel meditationis discimus, quasi imago tantum est illius plenae [0950D] ac perfectae cognitionis, quam postmodum ex praesenti contemplatione hauriemus. Unde et Apostolus ait: « Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate; tunc autem facie ad faciem [n: (I Cor. XIII)]. » Quid ergo mirum est, si ea, quae foris apparent sensibilia, invisibilium imagines esse dicuntur, cum ipsa nostra scientia, quae ad horum comparationem spiritualis et invisibilis creditur, imaginis et similitudinis loca ad illa existimetur?

Sequitur: « Et adunati ad divina, et ordinati habitus earum, quae hic sunt, dispositionum ordines. » Iterum subaudi, arbitrans noster animus ordines dispositionum: « quae dispositiones hic, » hoc est exterius sunt, esse imagines habitus adunati ad divina. Est enim quidam habitus mentis bonae adunatae [0951A] ad divina, et quasi collectae in unum a variis desideriorum scissuris, et ordinatae, ut recte incedat. Adunatae videlicet per dilectionem, et ordinatae per discretionem. Adunatae ad unum, et ordinatae in uno. Cujus videlicet habitus invisibiliter ordinati, et subsistentis imagines sunt ordines dispositionum, quae extrinsecus in gradibus, et officiis, et ministeriis in Ecclesia sancta dispensantur. Sicut enim in una Ecclesia diversi ordines, et dispositiones unam in universitate pacem et concordiam subministrando, et cooperando efficiunt, sic in una anima multae virtutes cooperando, et subministrando sibi unam perfectionis formam componunt. Sed et in unoquoque nostrum exterioris hominis dispositio, et ordo vivendi, atque agendi modus interioris hominis formam [0951B] habitumque demonstrat.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Et Jesu participationis ipsam divinissimae eucharistiae assumptionem. » Rursum subintellige, quod supra, arbitrans noster animus ipsam assumptionem divinissimae eucharistiae imaginem esse participationis Jesu. Ipsa enim assumptio divinissimae Eucharistiae, id est sanctissimae perceptionis corporis et sanguinis Jesu Christi, quam nunc sacramentaliter et visibiliter in altari tractamus, imago est et forma illius participationis Jesu, qua vel nunc ei in spiritu per dilectionem conjungimur, vel postmodum in eadem forma gloriae apparentes plena similitudine uniemur. Sane hic notandum quod quidam ex hoc loco munimentum erroris sui dicere putaverunt, dicentes in sacramento altaris veritatem [0951C] corporis et sanguinis Christi non esse, sed imaginem illius tantum et figuram: propterea quia Scriptura dicit, id quod in eucharistia altaris sumitur, imaginem esse illius quod in participatione Jesu percipietur. Qui profecto in hunc erroris laqueum non inciderent, si vel sacramenta Dei recta, et humili fide susciperent, vel Scripturas sacras convenienti intelligentia tractarent. Nunc autem, quia in sacramentis Dei sensum suum fidei praeferunt, et in Scripturis sacris sanam interpretationis formam tenere contemnunt, fit ut ipse sermo veritatis amplius eos caligare faciat, dum non recte intellectus errorem pro veritate ministrat. Quod tamen Scripturae vitium non est, sed legentium et non intelligentium [0951D] caecitas; neque sacramentorum Dei confusio, sed praesumentium pravitas. Hic autem periculose erraverunt tot manifestis sententiis et assertionibus non dubiis unum ambiguum praeferentes, et in ipso magis mendacium, quam veritatem eligentes, non quia hoc ibi magis dicebatur, sed quia hoc ab illis magis credebatur. Quid enim? nunquid ideo sacramentum altaris veritas non est, quia figura est? Ergo nec mors Christi veritas est, quia figura est; et resurrectio Christi veritas non est, quia figura est. Nam et mortem Christi, et resurrectionem figuram esse, et imaginem esse, et similitudinem, et sacramentum, et exemplum Apostolus manifeste declarat, dicens: « Christus mortuus est pro delictis nostris, et resurrexit propter justificationem [0952A] nostram: ut peccatis mortui justitiae vivamus [n: (I Cor. XV)]. » Et apostolus Petrus dixit: « Christus est passus pro nobis; vobis relinquens exemplum, ut sequamini vestigia ejus [n: (I Petr. II)]. » Ergo mors Christi exemplum fuit ut peccato moriamur, et resurrectio ejus exemplum fuit ut justitiae vivamus. Nunquid ideo veritas non fuit? ergo Christus vere mortuus non est, et vere non surrexit, si mors ejus, vel resurrectio vera non fuit. Absit! Nam de ipso scriptum est: « Vere languores nostros ipse tulit, et dolores nostros ipse portavit » [n: (Isa. LIII)]. Ergo mors Christi vera fuit, et tamen exemplum fuit; et resurrectio Christi vera fuit, et tamen exemplum fuit. Quare ergo sacramentum altaris similitudo esse non potest, et veritas? In alio quidem [0952B] similitudo, et in alio veritas. Nam, cum unum sit sacramentum, tria ibi discreta proponuntur, species scilicet visibilis, et veritas corporis, et virtus gratiae spiritualis. Aliud est enim visibilis species, quae visibiliter cernitur. Aliud est veritas corporis et sanguinis, quae sub visibili specie invisibiliter creditur. Atque aliud gratia spiritualis, quae cum corpore et sanguine invisibiliter et spiritualiter percipitur. Quod enim videmus, species est panis et vini; quod autem sub specie illa credimus, verum corpus est, et verus sanguis Christi Jesu, quod pependit in cruce, et qui fluxit de latere. Nec per panem et vinum corpus et sanguinem tantum significari; sed sub specie panis et vini verum corpus et verum sanguinem consecrari. Et speciem quidem [0952C] visibilem sacramentum esse veri corporis et veri: sanguinis; corpus autem et sanguinem sacramentum esse gratiae spiritualis. Et sicut species illic cernitur, cujus res vel substantia ibi esse non creditur, sic res ibi esse veraciter et substantialiter praesens creditur, cujus species non cernitur. Videtur enim species panis et vini, et substantia panis et vini non creditur. Creditur autem substantia corporis et sanguinis Christi, et tamen illius species non cernitur.

Quod ergo videtur secundum speciem sacramentum est, et imago illius quod creditur secundum corporis veritatem, et quod creditur secundum corporis veritatem, sacramentum est illius, quod percipitur secundum gratiam spiritualem. Sacramentum ergo [0952D] altaris et eucharistia divina in vero corpore et sanguine Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et imago est secundum speciem panis et vini, in qua cernitur, et res est secundum substantiae suae veritatem, in qua creditur illic atque percipitur. Et rursum, quod nunc visibiliter secundum speciem sacramenti, et corporaliter secundum carnis et sanguinis veritatem, Christum in altari sumimus, sacramentum est et imago, quod ipsum eumdem invisibiliter et spiritualiter secundum gratiae infusionem, et spiritus sui participationem in corde sumere debemus. Ergo divinissima eucharistia, quae in altari et secundum speciem panis et vini, et secundum corporis et sanguinis Christi veritatem visibiliter et corporaliter tractatur, sacramentum est, et signum, et imago [0953A] invisibilis, et spiritualis participationis Jesu, quae intus in corde per fidem et dilectionem perficitur. Voluit enim sapientia Dei, quae se per visibile manifestat, ostendere, quod ipsa animorum cibus et refectio est, et propterea carnem assumptam in edulium proposuit, ut per cibum carnis ad gustum invitaret Divinitatis. Sed, ne rursum humana infirmitas contactum carnis in assumptione horreret, consueti et principalis edulii specie illam velavit, et sic sumendam proposuit, ut sensus in uno foveretur, et fides in altero aedificaretur. Sensus enim fovetur in uno, dum solita tantum et consueta percipit; aedificatur autem fides in altero, dum in eo quod videt, quale sit illud quod non videt agnoscit. Proponitur igitur species panis et vini, ut doceatur [0953B] plena et perfecta refectio esse in sumptione corporis et sanguinis Christi ex divinitate Christi. Plena autem refectio cibus et potus est; cibi autem et potus, panis et vinum principalis substantia est. Et proponitur species ex principali substantia refectionis, ut in ea sumatur, et per eum significetur veritas corporis et sanguinis, sicut ipse testatur, dicens: « Caro mea vere est cibus, et sanguis meus vere est potus [n: (Joan. VI)]. » Quae tamen corporis et sanguinis sumptio, quod sola sine spirituali effectu salutem non conferat, ipse idem Salvator manifesstat, dicens: « Caro nihil prodest; spiritus est, qui vivificat [n: (ibid.)]. » Virtus ergo et plenitudo spiritualis refectionis, quae in corpore et sanguine Christi est, per speciem quidem panis et vini significatur; [0953C] in perceptione autem gratiae, et infusione internae et aeternae refectionis perficitur. Et sic quidem, cum tria in uno ibi sint, in primo quidem signum invenitur secundi; in secundo autem causa tertii; in tertio vero virtus secundi, et veritas primi. Et haec tria in uno sunt, et unum sacramentum. Claret itaque quod divinissimae eucharistiae assumptio sacramentum est, et imago participationis Jesu; quia hoc, quod ejus sacramentum visibiliter percipimus signum est, quod ei spiritualiter et invisibiliter uniri debemus. Ipsa autem eucharistia, id est bona gratia, ipsa scilicet hostia sacra divinissima vocatur, quoniam divinos facit et participes Divinitatis eos qui se participant. Et quia ipsa signum est, et [0953D] veritas in qua vera caro Christi sub specie panis sumitur, et in carne ejus digne sumpta ipsius etiam Divinitatis susceptio, et participatio, et consortium condonatur. Propterea dignissima est, et sanctissima, et sanctificans sanctificantia omnia, et sancta.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Et quaecunque alia coelestibus quidem essentiis supermundane, nobis vero symbolice tradita sunt. » Postquam quaedam, exempli gratia, ad ostendendam visibilium ad invisibilia similitudinem proposuit, nunc generaliter de toto concludit, dicens: « Et quaecunque alia coelestibus quidem essentiis supermundane, nobis vero symbolice tradita sunt, » ac si diceret: Haec quae superius memorata sunt, visibilia, arbitrari debet noster animus [0954A] secundum exempla proposita ad invisibilia similitudinem habere: et non sola haec, sed quaecunque alia, quae nobis symbolice tradita sunt, vel quae coelestibus essentiis supermundane. Non enim sola haec, quae posita sunt, visibilia, id est formae suavitates, lumina disciplinae, ordines, eucharistia sacra, invisibilium habent, etsi multitudinem, et demonstrationem; sed et alia omnia visibilia quaecunque nobis, visibiliter erudiendis symbolice, id est figurative tradita, sunt proposita ad invisibilium significationem et declarationem. Et non sola haec visibilia, quae nobis symbolice tradita sunt, invisibilium demonstrationem habent; sed illa quoque, quae coelestibus essentiis, id est angelicis spiritibus, supermundane, id est invisibiliter et spiritualiter, et non [0954B] secundum hujus mundi species tradita sunt, signa sunt invisibilium, et imagines eorum, quae in excellenti et incomprehensibili Divinitatis natura supra omnem intelligentiam subsistunt, et sensum. Hoc est enim, quod dicit, quod non sola ea invisibilium signa sunt, quae nobis tradita sunt symbolice; sed illa quoque, quae caelestibus essentiis tradita sunt supermundane. Habent namque et ipsi angelici spiritus signa sua, et demonstrationes, per quas de invisibilibus Dei, et valde occultis, et secretis absconditis intus immaterialiter, et invisibiliter, et simpliciter erudiuntur. Quae quidem signa quantum ad nos, et ea quae apud nos sunt visibilia, invisibilia omnino existimantur; quantum vero ad illam multum invisibilem, et inaccessibilem lucem, et incomprehensibilem [0954C] Deitatis, quasi foris sunt et procedunt abintus in demonstrationem. Propter quod et ipsa signa, quae superveniunt mentibus, sive animis divinitus illuminatis, theophaniae, id est divinae apparitiones vocantur; quia in eis ad manifestationem venientibus id, quod omnino occultum Dei est demonstratur. Haec ergo sunt, quae coelestibus supermundane traduntur, non secundum eam, quae apud nos est, demonstrationem; sed invisibiliter et simpliciter aspirata. Multa quidem hic dicenda fuerant de hoc contemplationis genere, quo theophaniae, id est divinae apparitiones divinitus aspiratae mentibus illuminandis superveniunt, et eas de occultis et invisibilibus Dei miro, et abscondito, et secreto, et [0954D] singulari modo erudiendo sapientes efficiunt: praecipue quoniam et hic quoque quidam in cogitationibus suis evanuisse inveniuntur, Deum rationali animo omnino incomprehensibilem et inaccessibilem, praedicantes, praeterquam quod theophaniis quibusdam, id est divinis apparitionibus, vel similitudinibus divinis in contemplationem propositis, de ipso eruditur. Ipsa autem quasi quaedam simulacra absconditae Divinitatis inter rationales animos ac Deum media ponunt, altiora quidem mente, inferiora autem Divinitate. Et hoc quidem solum de Deo videri, et in hoc solo Deum videri, utpote qui in ipso a nulla mente vel animo videri possit. Haec vero simulacra sunt eorum, et phantasmata vanitatis: in quibus dum solum Divinitatis lucem visibilem et perceptibilem [0955A] conantur asserere, veram Deitatis cognitionem et visionem mentibus sanctis probantur auferre. Quid est enim in illis solum Deum videri, et extra illa non videri, nisi nunquam vere videri, et verum nunquam videri? Si enim imago sola semper videtur, et veritas nunquam videtur, quoniam imago veritas non est, etiam cum de veritate est. Tollant ergo phantasias suas, quibus lumen mentium nostrarum obumbrare nituntur; neque nobis Deum nostrum simulacris autumationum suarum intersepiant; quia nos sicut satiare non potest aliquid praeter ipsum, ita nec sistere usque ad ipsum. Ipsas igitur theophanias alio modo, et veritati consentaneo existimemus. Sicut enim duo sunt, lumen et quod suscipit lumen corpus: et ex his duobus unum efficitur [0955B] lucens, et ipsum lucens imago quodammodo est, et similitudo luminis, in eo quod lucet sicut ipsum lumen; ita et Deus noster lumen est, et verum lumen est, et ipsum lumen rationales animi mundi et puri concipiunt: et ex eo lucentes fiunt, et non sunt ipsi imago luminis in eo quod sunt; sed in eo quod lucent ex lumine, sicut ipsum lumen lucet; et sunt ipsa lucentia theophaniae luminis, in quibus lumen videtur, quoniam a nullo lumen videretur, si nullus a lumine illuminaretur. Nam et qui in se lumen videt, lucentem se videt; qui profecto non videret, si non luceret, et se lucentem non videret. Sic ergo non constituimus alium inter Deum nostrum et nos, sed immediate viam facimus, et nobis ad ipsum, et ipsi usque ad nos, ut simus in ipso, et [0955C] ipse in nobis: ut non sit aliud extra ipsum, in quo beatificemur, sicut aliud esse non potuit praeter ipsum, a quo crearemur. Propter hoc ergo supradictam sententiam theologiae ad commodiorem intelligentiam interpretemur. Quia enim dixerat invisibilia quaedam per eas quae determinatae sunt visibiles imagines, demonstrari, nunc generalem de ipsis invisibilibus sententiam subjungit, dicens: « Et quaecunque alia, etc. » Ac si diceret: Non solum illa invisibilia, quorum haec signa proposita sunt, in manifestationem venerunt; sed etiam quaecunque alia invisibilia, quae nobis quidem, scilicet hominibus symbolice, id est figurative et per sensibiles demonstrationes sunt tradita, id est proposita et manifesta; [0956A] coelestibus autem essentiis, id est angelicis spiritibus supermundane et spiritualiter per nudam et simplicem veritatem impressam revelata.

Sequitur: « Propter hanc ergo nostram corrationalem theosin, » id est divinitatem, quae nobis est corrationalis, id est congrua vel apta. Congruum enim est ut per ea, quae nota sunt nobis, divinorum participes efficiamur, « Propter hanc ergo, etc., » quasi diceret: Quia humanus animus non potest de invisibilibus erudiri, nisi per visibilia et cognita, ac cognata sibi, igitur « misericors principium perfectionis, » id est Deus, a quo omnis perfectio initium habet, sicut in ipso consummationem capit, et finem sola gratia et misericordia, ut nos ad suam cognitionem revocaret, et similitudinem reformaret; [0956B] « manifestans nobis coelestes hierarchias, » id est angelicas potestates; « et perficiens etiam nostram hierarchiam comministram earum, » scilicet coelestium hierarchiarum, ut sit illis et in dignitate conformis, et in ministerio divino consimilis, servata in nobis similitudine deiformis earum sanctificationis, ut simus similes sanctificationi earum quae Deo conformes sunt, « ad virtutem nostram, » id est secundum possibilitatem nostram, hoc est quantum similes esse possumus, qui homines, et mortales, et peccato adhuc obnoxii sumus; « descripsit supercoelestes intellectus, » invisibiles spiritus, qui nobis incogniti erant, sensibilibus imaginibus, ut per nota incognita disceremus. Et hanc descriptionem fecit [0956C] « in sacris eloquiorum compositionibus, » id est in sacri eloquii descriptionibus: quae compositiones, et figuras, et similitudines proponunt nobis ad invisibilium demonstrationem. Et hoc ideo fecit, « ut nos reduceret per sensibilia ad intellectualia, » hoc est per visibilia ad invisibilia. Et ut nos etiam reduceret et « ex sacre figuratis symbolis, » id est de figuris sacris et sacrarum rerum figuris; « in simplas summitates, » id est in simplices et spiritales excellentias cognoscendas « coelestium hierarchiarum, » id est angelicarum potestatum. Propterea enim illas visibilibus signis nobis descripsit, ut eas nobis intelligibiles faceret, et ad earum nos imitationem conformaret.

## LIBER TERTIUS.

[0955]

## TITULUS CAPITULI II: *Quod pulchre divina et coelestia etiam per dissimilia symbola manifestantur.*

## LITTERA.

[0955C]

*Oportet ergo, ut existimo, primum exponere quam quidem esse speculationem omnis hierarchiae existimamus, et quid ipsius unaquaeque divinis profuit laudatoribus. Deinde coelestes hierarchias laudare secundum ipsarum in eloquiis manifestationem consequentibusque his dicere, qualibus divinis formationibus coelestes figurant ordines eloquiorum sacrae [0956C] descriptiones, et ad qualem oportet ascendere per formas veritatem. Ut non et nos eodem modo multis immunde existimemus coelestes, et deiformes animos, multipedes esse quosdam, et multorum vultuum, et ad boum et pecudalitatem [pecuinitatem], aut ad leonum bestialem imaginationem formatos, aut ad aquilarum curvo rostro speciem, aut ad volatilium tripertitam alarum commotionem effiguratos: et rotas quasdam [0957A] igneas super coelum imaginemur, et thronos materiales Divinitati ad recubitum necessarios; et equos quosdam multicolores, et armiferos archistrategos; et quaecunque alia ex eloquiis nobis sacrae, et formabiliter in varietate manifestativorum symbolorum tradita sunt [n: (Ezech. I; Apoc. IV; Isa. VI; Dan. VII; Zach. I; Apoc. VI; Ezech. XXIII; Job. XVI; Sap. V; Josue V; II Machab. III)]*. *Etenim valde artificialiter theologia poeticis sacris formationibus in non figuratis intellectibus usa est: nostrum, ut dictum est, animum revelans, et ipsi propria, et connaturali reductione providens, et ad ipsam reformans anagogicas sanctas Scripturas, si cui autem videtur sacras quidem recipi debere compositiones tanquam simplicium in seipsis ignotorumque nobis, et incontemplabilium [0957B] subsistentium: inconvenientes vero existimat sanctorum intellectuum in eloquiis sacris descriptiones, et omne sic dicere durum, hoc angelicorum nominum theatrum; et debuisse, ait, theologos ad corpoream facturam universaliter in corporalium venientes propriis ea, et quantum possibile cognatis et formare, et manifestare figurationibus ex apud nos pretiosissimis, et immaterialibus quoquo modo, et supereminentibus essentiis, et non coelestibus, et deiformibus simplicitatibus terrenas novissimas circumpositas multiformitates. Hoc quidem et nostrum sublimius futurum esset, et supermundanas manifestationes non deduceret in inconvenientes dissimilitudines. Hoc etiam in divinas simul injuste non injuriam faceret virtutes, et aeque nostrum non seduceret [0957C] animum in immundas se inserentem compositiones. Et fortassis etiam existimabuntur supercoelestia leoninis quibusdam, et equinis multitudinibus repleri; et mugitiva laudum oratione, et volatili angelorum praecipitatu, et animalibus aliis, et materiis ignobilioribus tanquam ad inconsequens, et ignobile, et passibile reclusa, dum describuntur per omnia deiformes clarae manifestativorum eloquiorum similitudines. Sed veritatis, ut existimo, inquisitio ostendit eloquiorum sacratissimam sapientiam [n: (Ezech. XXVIII; Job. XXXVIII)] in animorum coelestium formationibus utrumque valde providisse: ita ut neque in divinas (sic forsitan diceret quis) injuriam faceret virtutes; neque vos in viles passibiliter infigeret imaginum humilitates. Quia quidem enim pulchre procuratae [0957D] sunt informium formae, et figurae carentium figuris, non unam causam diceret quis esse nostram analogiam non valentem immediate in invisibiles extendi contemplationes, et desiderantem proprias, et connaturales reductiones: quae passibiles nobis formationes praetendunt informium supernaturaliumque speculationum. Sed quia et hoc mysticis eloquiis est decentissimum, per incomprehensibilia divina aenigmat occultare, et inviam multis ponere sacram, abditamque supermundanorum intellectuum veritatem. Est enim non omnis sacer, neque omnium, ut eloquia aiunt, scientia [n: (Matth. VII; I Cor. II)]*. *Si autem deformes imaginum descriptionis causas existimaverit quis inhonestum, dicens, referri sic turpes [0958A] formationes deiformibus, et sanctissimis dispositionibus, sufficit ad eum dicere: Quomodo duplex est sanctae manifestationis modus? Unus quidem quasi consequens propter similes provenientium sacrarum figurarum imagines; alter vero propter dissimiles formarum facturas in omnino inconsequens, et indecorum conformatus. Itaque colendam super essentiam divinitatis beatitudinem manifestativorum eloquiorum mysticae traditiones, aliquando quidem ut rationem, et intellectum, et essentiam laudant; divinam rationalitatem, et sapientiam ejus declarantes, et vere existentem substantiam, et eorum, quae sunt substantiae, causam veram; et quasi lumen eam formant, et vitam vocant tantis mirabilibus formationibus castioribus manentibus, et materiales formationes [0958B] excellere quoquomodo probatis deficientibus; et sic divina ad veritatem similitudine. Est enim super omnem essentiam et vitam, nullo quidem ipsam lumine characterizante, omnique ratione, et intellectu similitudine ipsius incomparabiliter derelictis. Aliquando vero dissimilibus manifestationibus ab ipsis eloquiis [n: (Rom. XI; I Tim. VI; Psalm. CXL)] supermundane laudatur, eam invisibilem, et infinitam, et incomprehensam vocantibus: et quae, ex quibus non quid est, sed quid non est, significatur. Hoc enim, ut existimo, potentius est in ipsa. Quoniam quidem, ut occulta, et sacerdotalis traditio subintroduxit, hoc quidem non esse secundum quid eorum, quae sunt, eam vere dicimus. Ignoramus autem superessentialem ipsius, et invisibilem, et ineffabilem infinalitatem. [0958C] Si igitur negationes in divinis verae sunt affirmationes vero incompactae, obscuritati arcanorum magis apta per dissimiles formationes manifestatio. Et nunc itaque non turpes replent coelestes ornatus eloquiorum sacrae descriptiones dissimilibus eos formarum facturis manifestantes, et per has ostendentes materialibus simul omnibus supermundalium excellentias. Quin vero et nostrum animum reducant magis dissimiles similitudines: non existimo quemquam bene sapientum contradicere. Per quidem enim pretiosiores sacras formationes consequens est seduci, auriformes quasdam existimantes esse coelestes essentias, et quosdam viros fulgoreos decora indutos vestimenta, candidum, et igneum innocue respergentes, et quibuscunque aliis similibus imaginalis formis theologia [0958D] coelestes figuravit intellectus. Quod quidem ne paterentur, qui nihil visibilibus bonis altius intelligunt, sanctorum theologorum restitutiva sapientia ad indecoras dissimilitudines mirabiliter descendit: non concedens materiale nostrum in turpibus imaginibus remanens quiescere; purgans vero sursumque ferens, et animae suggerens deformitate compositionum, tanquam neque justo neque vero probante, esse nequaquam valde materialibus, quia sic turpibus, similia secundum veritatem supercoelestia, et divina spectacula. Sed itaque et hoc intelligere oportet: Nihil eorum, quae sunt, esse universaliter boni participatione privatum: siquidem, ut eloquiorum Veritas ait: « Omnia bona valde [n: (Gen. I)]*. » *Est ergo ex omnibus intelligere bonas [0959A] speculationes, et invisibilibus, et intellectualibus, ex materialibusque formare dictas dissimiles similitudines: altero modo intellectualibus habentibus, quae sensibilibus aliter distributa sunt. Etenim furor in irrationalibus quidem ex passibili motu est: et omnis irrationabilitatis repletus est furibundus eorum motus; sed intellectualibus altero modo oportet irascibile intelligere, declarans, ut existimo, eorum virilem rationabilitatem, et immanem [immanentem] quietem in divinis, et immutabilibus fundamentis. Eodem modo concupiscentiam quidem esse dicimus in irrationabilibus inconsultam quamdam, et materialem ex naturali motu, aut consuetudine in mutabilibus incontinenter ingenitam impassibilitatem, et irrationabilem corporalis voluptatis continuitatem; simul omne animal [0959B] compellentis secundum sensum inconcupiscibile. Cum vero dissimiles similitudines intellectualibus circumponentes concupiscentiam eis circumformamus amorem divinum, ipsum intelligere oportet super rationem, et intellectum immaterialitatis, et inflexibile, et non indigens desiderium superessentialiter castae, et impassibilis contemplationis et illam puram, et sublimissimam claritatem, et invisibilem, et formificam pulchritudinem aeternae, verae et invisibilis societatis. Et veluti potentiam excipit quidem in sufficentia, et in conversibilitate; et a nulla affligitur virtute, per inconfusum, et immutabilem divinae pulchritudinis amorem, et universalem revocationem in id quod vere est appetendum. Sed et ipsam irrationabilitatem et insensualitatem [0959C] in quidem irrationabilibus animalibus, aut in animatis materiis, defectum rationis, et sensus proprie vocamus; in autem immaterialibus et intellectualibus essentiis sanctae, et decenter supereminentias earum, ut super mundalium confitemur, nostram transitoriam, et corporalem rationem, et materialem, et alienatum incorporalibus animi sensum excellentes. Est itaque non dissonas formare coelestibus formas, et ex vilibus materiae partibus. Quoniam et ipsa ex vere bono subsistentiam possidens per omnem sui materialem dispositionem imagines quasdam intellectualis pulchritudinis habet; et possibile est per eas reduci ad immateriales primas formas dissimiliter, ut dictum est, similitudinibus acceptis, et eisdem non similiter: compacte autem, et pulchre intellectualibusque [0959D] et sensibilibus proprietatibus definitis. Haec mysticos theologos inveniemus non solum coelestium dispositionum declarationibus mirabiliter conformantes, sed ipsis aliquando divinis manifestationibus. Et aliquando quidem ipsam ex luminibus pretiosis laudant, ut solem justitiae, ut stellam matutinam in animum sancte orientem, et ut lumen incircumvolute, et invisibiliter resplendens [n: (Malach. I; Apoc. II)]*. *Aliquando vero ex mediis, ut ignem innocue resplendentem, ut aquam vitalis plenitudinis datricem, et, ut symbolice dicendum, in ventrem subeuntem, fluminaque redundantem immensurabiliter refluentia. Aliquando autem ex novissimis, ut unguentum suave, ut lapidem angularem [n: (Exod. III; Joan. I)]*. » *Sed et bestialem ipsi formam circumponunt; et leonis ei, et pantherae [0960A] specialitatem coaptant, et pardalineam vestiunt, et ur sam saevientem [n: (Cant. II; Isa, XXVIII; Osee V)]*. *Ad dam vero, et quod omnium vilius esse, et magis significare visum est; quia et vermis specie ipsam seipsam circumformantem divina sapientes [divinam sapientiam] tradiderunt [n: (Psal. XXI)]*. *Sic et omnes theosophi, et occulta inspiratione prophetae a sanctis incontaminatis distinguunt Sancta sanctorum, et dissimilem sanctam figurationem honorant, ut neque divina immundis recte accepta sint, neque mirabilium imaginum studiosi contemplationis tanquam veris remanent figuris. Divina itaque honorificant veris negationibus, et ad novissima compactarum imaginationum diversis similitudinibus. Nihil ergo inconsequens est, si et coelestes essentias ex inconvenientibus dissimilibus similitudinibus [0960B] formant secundum dictas causas. Non enim fortassis utique, non nos in quaestionem quidem ex indigentia in anagogen per diligentem divinorum scrutationem veniremus, nisi deformitas nos extorqueret manifestatoriae angelorum deformationis: non sinens nostrum animum remanere in dissimilibus formarum facturis, sed reluctantem negare materiales passibilitates, et assuescentem pure extendere per visibilia in supermundanas altitudines. Tanta quidem a nobis dicta sunt propter materiales et inconvenientes divinorum eloquiorum angelicas imaginum descriptiones. Deinde autem segregare oportet quid ipsam quidem esse hierarchiam existimamus, quidque ab ipsa hierarchia prosunt hierarchiam sortientes. Dux vero sit Christus (siquidem mihi fas dicere) meus, totius [0960C] hierarchicae manifestationis inspiratio. Tu vero, o puer, secundum sanctam nostrae sacerdotalis traditionis legislationem, ipse sancte, et decenter ausculta, mirabiliter dictorum divinus divina in doctrina factus, secreto animi quae sancta sunt circumtegens, ex immunda multitudine tanquam uniformia custodi. Non enim fas, ut eloquia aiunt in porcos projicere invisibilium margaritarum inconfusum, et luciformem, beneficumque ornatum [n: (Matth. VII)]*.

## EXPOSITIO.

Primum dixi, et dico nunc, ne vos expectatione detineam, quod in hierarchiam Dionysii petitionem vestram suscepi, non ut profunda rerum scrutari persequar, sed ut detegam solum, et in lucem exponam [0960D] tecta verborum. Hoc enim introducendis primum magis conveniens est: praecipue quia illa, quae disserenda censuimus, magna nimis, et supra nostram possibilitatem agnoscimus. Titulus secundi capituli hic est. « Quod pulchre divina, et coelestia etiam per dissimilia symbola manifestantur. » Supra jam diximus quid sit symbolum, collatio videlicet, id est coaptatio visibilium formarum ad demonstrationem rei invisibilis propositarum. Verbi gratia, cum spirituum coelestium naturas exprimere visibiliter volumus humanos quidem vultus, sed alas avis in unam compositionis speciem coaptamus, ut pro vultu hominis, qui solus ex visibilibus ratione utitur, ipsi quoque invisibiles spiritus rationales et sapientes esse intelligantur per alas autem agilitas [0961A] naturae illorum, et velox ad omnia motus exprimatur. Quia ergo in primo capitulo generaliter de omni hierarchia disseruit, quasi summam sequentis operis breviter ad doctrinam faciendam praelibans; primum, quia omne bonum a summo bono participatione multiplicatur, et omne bonum ad summum bonum similitudine et conversione unitur; deinde, quia convenienter Scriptura ad declarationem invisibilium visibilia signa assumpsit: nunc sequenti capitulo ostendit, sicut titulus ipse praeloquitur, quod videlicet pulchre, id est apte et convenienter manifestantur, hoc est repraesentantur et significantur, ut manifesta fiant, divina scilicet ea quae in summa sunt hierarchia, et coelestia quae in angelica sunt hierarchia. Utraque haec convenienter manifestantur, [0961B] non solum per similia symbola, id est non solum per pulchras et decentes, atque eorum majestati et puritati congruas, sive consimiles figuras et formas; sed etiam per dissimilia symbola, id est per tales formas et descriptiones, quae ab eorum excellentia alienae et puritate indignae videantur. Quod quidem aliquibus minus conveniens videatur esse. Sed bene considerantibus ratione magna, et dispensatione necessaria ordinatum invenitur. Ratione quidem, ut dum haec aliena in demonstrationem assumpta cernimus, illa quoque, quae propria esse videbantur secundum aliquid, aliena esse, et dissimilia a summa veritate agnoscamus. Dispensatione vero, ut dum illa, quae mens pia in divinis collocari secundum proprietatem non sustinet, significatione [0961C] illorum cernit attribui: alia quoque quae digna videbantur, ac per hoc vera et propria credi poterant, figurativa esse, et per similitudinem veritati adducta nullatenus possit dubitari Ergo symbola similia in demonstrationem ad hoc proposita sunt, ut invisibilium veritatem specie consimili ostenderent; dissimilia autem, ut significando a figura ad veritatem exeundum, et non remanendum in iis, quae vera esse non poterant, demonstrarent. Ergo quantum similia symbola praecellunt specie, tamen dissimilia symbola transcendunt significatione; quoniam, etsi illa habent speciem pulchriorem, tamen ista significationem tenent manifestiorem. Illa veritatem ostendunt; ista a falsitate exire compellunt. Illa sic veritatem significant, ut facile [0961D] possit rudis animus in eis detineri; ista sic erudiunt, ut non sinat in sui veneratione animos considerantium falli. Illa, cum sint signa veritatis tamen, aliquando fortassis se pro veritate propter excellentem speciem recipi facerent, nisi ista signa essent, in quibus veritas non creditur, etiamsi per ipsa veritas significetur. Aliud enim est veritas, atque aliud signum veritatis; quia signum veritas non est, etiam eum veritatis signum est, et verum est. Illa igitur signa evidentiorem demonstrationem habent, quae et per similitudinem, qua appropinquant veritati, ipsam veritatem manifestant; et per dissimilitudinem, qua elongant a veritate, se non esse veritatem, sed signa tamen, et imaginem veritatis demonstrant. [0962A] Hoc est ergo, quod in isto capitulo demonstrare intendit, sicut per titulum ipsius exprimitur: quod divina, et coelestia pulchre, et decenter non solum per similes, sed etiam per dissimiles formas, et figurationes demonstratur. Et quod nulla, sicut quidam existimaverunt, ipsis divinis et coelestibus injuria fiat, si aliquando in Scripturis sacris per humiles formationes, et quasi ab eorum excellentia remotas, et indignas figurentur, quemadmodum in Scriptura Deus plaustro, et angeli bobus comparantur: et caetera in hunc modum.

« Oportet ergo, ut existimo, primum exponere quam quidem esse speculationem omnis hierarchiae existimamus, etc. » Pudice temperat assertionem suam, ut prudentem decet; nec in rebus excellentibus, [0962B] et a sensu humano remotis ultra hominis possibilitatem praesumere videtu, dicens: « Ut existimo. » Noverat enim hoc ipse, quod dicebat, quoniam ab eo doctus erat qui viderat, et sciebat. Sed servavit modestiam dictionis, ut haec humilitate, non elatione quaerenda et invenienda ostenderet. Oportet ergo, ut existimo, primum exponere quam quidem esse speculationem « omnis hierarchiae existimamus. » Quinque hic primum generaliter consideranda modo introductionis legentibus proponit: quae per sequentia capitula singillatim exponet. Primum, generalem omnis hierarchiae definitionem. Secundum, uniuscujusque hierarchiae utilitatem. Tertium, coelestium hierarchiarum secundum visibiles formationes, quae in eloquio sacro reperiuntur, [0962C] laudationem. Quartum, ipsarum formationum et descriptionum, quibus coelestes virtutes significantur, qualitatem. Quintum, qualem ex ipsis, quae visibiliter ad invisibilium declarationem et laudationem proponuntur, mens humana in ipsis invisibilibus concipere debeat, veritatem. Hoc est, considerare primum, quid sit hierarchia. Secundo, quid prosit, id est quae in unaquaque utilitas consistat. Tertio, quomodo excellentia invisibilium hierarchiarum per visibilia signa ostenditur. Quarto qualitatem signorum, et demonstrationum mysticarum cognoscere. Quinto, signatum a signo, veritatem a figura separare. Oportet primum exponere quam speculationem, id est quam definitionem existimamus esse omnis hierarchiae, hoc est quomodo generaliter [0962D] vel universaliter definienda est hierarchia. Definitionem autem idcirco speculationem vocat; quoniam definitio rei quasi speculum est, in qua ipsius rei natura cernitur, sicut in speculo natura corporis appositi imago videtur. Generalis definitio est, quae definitio universaliter convenit, et in toto invenitur. Qui enim dicit principatus angelicos hierarchiam esse, verum dicit; sed universaliter non definit, quoniam in hominibus quoque hierarchia invenitur. Item, qui dicit hierarchiam esse ordinem, verum dicit; quoniam ubi potestas est, ordo est. Sed non totum dicit; quoniam non omnis ordo hierarchia est, quia non omnis ordo potestas est. Itaque generalis. definitio est, quae omni convenit et continet totum. [0963A] Hanc itaque generalem definitionem hierarchiae speculationem omnis hierarchiae auctor nominavit: quae et omni convenit, et continet totum. Hanc autem quia in subsequentibus ipse positurus est et expositurus, nos in praesenti praeoccupare non oportet. Deinde subjungit aliud ex iis; quae exquirere vel exponere oportet, videlicet quod profuit unaquaeque hierarchia divinis laudatoribus ipsius, hoc est, quid vel quantum profuit unaquaeque hierarchia, id est sacra potestas, divinis laudatoribus suis, id est illis qui in ea constituti et ordinati Deum laudant, sive laudes divinas celebrant, et frequentant. Omnes enim hierarchiae ad laudem divinam ordinatae sunt et institutae, sivae superiores, sive inferiores, ut ab omnibus laudetur Deus: a quo et per quem sunt omnes et [0963B] in omnibus omnia [n: (I Cor. XV)]. Et qui excellentiores sunt, amplius laudant; et qui amplius laudant, sublimius remunerantur. Itaque omnis hierarchia tamen suis divinis laudatoribus prodest, quantum accepit secundum gratiae distributionem et dona largitionis, ut sit vel in cognitione sublimior, vel in amore ferventior. Secundum gratiam enim sunt dona, et secundum dona sunt merita, et secundum diversitatem meritorum, praemiorum diversitas constat. Omnis ergo hierarchia Dei laudatoribus suis tamen in praemio profuit quantum contulit in dono; quia omnis dignitas et potestas secundum ministerii et officii gratiam, qua Dei laudem, et honorem, et gloriam praedicare et amplificare potuit, in fructu retributionis excrescit. Sed et ipsae coelestes virtutes, [0963C] quibus hoc ipsum praemium est Deum laudare, tantum singulae secundum ordines suos et dignitates in principatibus, et hierarchiis suis utilitatis accipiunt, quanto plus vel minus in laudem Creatoris per donum gratiae cooperantis assurgunt. Deinde, ait, « oportet, » id est post expositam divinam definitionem omnis hierarchiae et utilitatem, oportet laudare coelestes hierarchias, hoc est, angelicos principatus, id est laudes eorum describere et demonstrare secundum ipsarum, videlicet hierarchiarum, in eloquiis manifestationem, id est secundum hoc quod laudes earum in eloquiis, hoc est divinis Scripturis manifestantur. Proponuntur enim in sacro eloquio figurae et demonstrationes, quibus virtutes et laudes [0963D] angelicarum potestatum declarantur: quas auctor inspiciendas, et considerandas dicit, ad angelicae hierarchiae manifestationem.

Sequitur; « Consequentibusque iis, » hoc est consequenter post ista supradicta, vel in consequentibus iis, qui sequuntur: Oportet « dicere qualibus divinis formationibus figurant sacrae descriptiones eloquiorum scilicet divinorum, coelestes ordines. » Ac si diceret: Primum oportet considerare quomodo divina eloquia coelestes virtutes per descriptionum formationes laudabiles praedicant. Deinde quales etiam sint ipsae descriptiones et formationes, quas divina quadam oratione in earum scilicet coelestium virtutum declarationem figurant. Novissime autem oportet considerare ad qualem oportet ascendere per [0964A] formas veritatem. Non enim sufficit hoc solum, quod visibile est attendere, nisi etiam sciamus qualem oporteat ex eo quod visibiliter demonstratur, invisibiliter veritatem cogitare. Si enim putamus hoc solum esse quod visibiliter in demonstrationem cernitur, nunquam veritatis participes efficimur. Discernamus ergo signum a veritate, et sciamus aliud esse, quod foris sensui erudiendo apponitur; aliud autem, quod intus animo beatificando reservatur. Idcirco autem dicere oportet ad qualem veritatem ascendere debeamus, ab his figurationum visibilium formis, ne nos etiam, sicut multi, existimemus haec omnia, quae pro signis coelestium in Scripturis figurate proponuntur, ita esse illic quemadmodum hic mystice figurantur in similitudinibus et formis [0964B] et figuris ad corporalia tamen, et sensibilia pertinentibus: quae in divina, et spiritualia omnino non cadunt.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Hoc est enim, quod sequitur: « Ut non et nos eodem modo multis immunde existimemus coelestes, et deiformes animos, multipedes esse quosdam, et multorum vultuum: et ad boum pecudalitatem, aut ad leonum bestialem imaginationem formatos: et ad aquilarum curvo rostro speciem, aut ad volatilium tripertitam alarum commotionem effiguratos. Et rotas quasdam igneas super coelum imaginemur; et thronos materiales Divinitati ad recubitum necessarios, et equos quosdam multicolores, et armiferos archistrategos; et quaecunque alia ex eloquiis nobis sacre et formabiliter in varietate manifestativorum [0964C] symbolorum tradita sunt. » Ut ergo non existimemus etiam nos eodem modo multis, id est quemadmodum multi existimant, coelestes et deiformes animos, id est spiritus invisibiles, incorporeos, et Dei non corporum similitudinem ac formam habentes, multipedes esse; quemadmodum videlicet figurative in eloquio sacro sub figuris et formis animalium describuntur, ut in Ezechiele, in Isaia, et Zacharia, et Michea, et aliis prophetis, angelici spiritus per animalia figurantur quadrupedia, et volatilia, et caetera ad hunc modum. Et ne existimemus etiam quosdam illorum spirituum multorum vultuum esse, id est multos vultus sive facies habere, ut in Ezechiele scriptum est de animalibus sanctis: « Quatuor [0964D] facies uni erant [n: (Ezech. I)]: » quod licet ad sanctos evangelistas, vel apostolos, vel quoslibet justos congrue referatur, tamen etiam de sanctis angelis, incarnationem Verbi, et passionem, et resurrectionem, et ascensionem annuntiantibus, et in his omnibus Verbum incarnatum ministerii famulatu prosequentibus, non inconvenienter accipitur.

Sequitur: « Et ad boum pecudalitatem, » subaudiendum est, et ne existimemus quosdam formatos ad boum pecudalitatem, hoc est ad similitudinem, formamque boum, quae pecudalis est, non angelica, sicut in Ezechiele forma bovis, vel vituli in animalium figuratione exprimitur. Aut etiam, ne existimemus eosdem spiritus formatos ad leonum bestialem. imaginationem hoc est ad imaginationem sive [0965A] imaginem leonum, quae bestialis est, et spirituali ac rationali natura indigna, sicut in Ezechiele facies hominis, et facies leonis in figuratione animalium memoratur. Et ad aquilarum curvo rostro speciem, iterum subauditur, formatos non existimemus. Quod autem ait « curvo rostro, » expresse dignam movet irrisionem, sicut in caeteris, adversum eos qui haec putant spirituali naturae secundum proprietatem assignata. Notum est autem quod in discretione Ezechielis etiam facies aquilae memoratur.

Sequitur: « Aut volatilium tripertitam alarum commotionem effiguratos, » subauditur ne existimemus. Sicut enim in Isaia scriptum est de solio sedentis et templo: « Seraphim stabat super illud: [0965B] sex alae uni, et sex alae alteri. Duabus velabant caput, duabus velabant pedes; et duabus volabant alter ad alterum [n: (Isa. VI)]. » Et alibi: « Quoniam duabus tegebant corpora sua [n: (Ezech. I)]. » Ubi quidem in sex alarum per binas et binas distinctiones terna vel tripertita commotio invenitur. Sex enim binae et binae junctae simul tria paria alarum conficiunt.

Sequitur: « Et rota quasdam igneas super coelum imaginemur. » Subauditur negativa particula a superiori, videlicet ne imaginemur rotas quasdam igneas super coelum, et ne imaginemur etiam thronos materiales quasi necessarios Divinitati ad recubitum, cum divina natura, quae sola omnia portat, fulcimento non egeat. De rotis autem igneis et thronis [0965C] in libro Danielis testimonium habemus [n: (Dan. VII)], et in Isaia [n: (Isa. VI)], et Michea de solio excelso et sublimi sedentis.

Sequitur: « Et equos quosdam multicolores » (sicut in Zacharia leguntur equi albi, et nigri, et nigri, et varii [n: (Zach. VI)]; et in Apocalypsi similiter [n: (Apoc. VI)] subauditur ne imaginemur. « Et armiferos archistrategos, » similiter ne imaginemur, id est principes, et duces militiae arma ferentes, sive armis indutos sicut in Zacharia legimus, et in Michea. Item Dominum sedentem super solium excelsum, et exercitum coeli a dextris ejus, et sinistris; et in libro Regum currus, et equos, et equites in montibus igneos demonstratos Eliseo, et puero ejus in auxilium venientes [n: (IV Reg. VI)], Archistrategi dicti sunt [0965D] quasi duces, vel ductores principum exercitus. Compositum nomen ab eo quod est ἀρχός archos, id est princeps, et στρατηγος strategos, quod est dux et imperator exercitus, Archistrategi itaque duces intelliguntur principum exercitus: qui ipsis etiam princibus principantur, sive ducatum praebent superiores. Haec igitur omnia ab iis, quae secundum nos sunt per similitudinem sumpta, atque illis spiritibus coelestibus ad ea, quae ipsis invisibilia sunt, significanda attributa, sic a nobis accipienda sunt, ut haec ita in ipsis esse non existimemus, sed per haec alia, quae in ipsis, nobis sunt invisibilia, visibiliter proposita perpendere studeamus. Non enim species corruptibilis ad illorum munditiam attingit et propterea quodammodo [0966A] immunda existimatio est, quae sine discretione, tam humilia et indigna illi excellenti naturae per proprietatem attribuit. Sive igitur haec, sive quaecunque alia ex eloquiis, id est Scripturis, nobis sacre et formabiliter, hoc est sacra sive sacrae rei formatione vel figuratione, tradita sunt, in varietate manifestativorum symbolorum, id est figurarum et descriptionum sacrarum, quibus manifestantur secreta et abscondita: omnia sic accipiamus, ut secundum similitudinem et significationem eorum illa, de quibus facta sunt, omnia vera esse credamus: et tamen nihil horum in illis per proprietatem esse cogitemus.

Sequitur: « Etenim valde artificialiter theologia poeticis sacris formationibus in non figuratis intellectibus [0966B] usa est: nostrum, ut dictum est, animum revelans, et ipsi propria, et connaturali reductione providens: et ad ipsum reformans anagogicas sanctas Scripturas. » Ad hoc respondet, quod supradixerat, considerandum esse qualibus formationibus sacra Scriptura coelestes ordines figuraret. Ac si diceret: Propterea ipsae formationes coelestium ordinum in sacro eloquio diligenter inspiciendae sunt; quoniam idcirco factae sunt, ut nostrum animum ad invisibilium cognitionem per haec visibilia et nota revelarent, id est illuminarent. Etenim valde artificialiter vel prudenter, sive considerare usa est theologia, id est divina Scriptura, poeticis sacris formationibus, id est descriptionibus formarum vel figurarum ad sacra vel sancta repraesentanda propositarum, [0966C] formationibus poeticis, id est excogitatis, vel adinventis ratione et expositis per similitudinem mysticae traditionis in non figuratis intellectibus, id est spiritibus sine figura et corporali forma in sua simplicitate consistentibus significandis. « Nostrum, ut dictum est, » videlicet in superiori capitulo « animum revelans » ab alto ignorantiae velamine, ut nuda et aperta facie coelestia contempletur: « et ipsi scilicet animo propria et connaturali reductione providens, » ut videlicet reducatur ad invisibilia cognoscenda instructus per ea quae connaturalia et propria illi sunt; et ad ipsum videlicet animum reformans vel coaptans, sive contemperans sanctas Scripturas anagogicas, ut prius nostra nobis conformata ad nos descenderent, et postea ad superiora [0966D] reducendo illuminatos sublevarent. Hoc ergo theologia valde artificialiter fecit, ut nobis loquens nostra susciperet, et per nostra admonitos et eruditos ad sua sublevaret. Sed si cui fortassis hoc probandum videatur, inquantum ipsa theologia ad significationem visibilium pulchras et decentes ab iis quae nostra sunt, formationes assumpsit; reprehensibile autem et incongruum illud, quod indecoras etiam et indignas tantae puritati et majestati similitudines apposuit: illi respondendum, propterea theologiam non solum similes, sed etiam dissimiles in demonstrationem divinorum formas assumpsisse, ut per illud quod dissimile et quasi alienum manifeste de ipsis per figuram dicitur etiam id, quod [0967A] proprium videri poterat, figuratum et alienum ad proprietatem agnoscatur:

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Hoc est, quod sequitur: « Si cui autem videtur sacras quidem recipi debere compositiones, tanquam simplicium in seipsis, ignotorumque nobis, et incontemplabilium subsistentium. » Hoc est, dignum esse ut recipiantur sacrae compositiones, id est figurationes vel formationes sacrae, quae de ipsis divinis et invisibilibus factae sunt, utpote de iis quae simplicia et incomposita sine figuratione corporali, et forma, ac per hoc nobis, qui corporalia tantum contemplari et cogitare novimus, ignota et incontemplabilia subsistunt, et nisi per visibilia signa et demonstrationes visibiles ostendi, ac percipi ab humano corde non possunt. Si cui ergo dignum [0967B] videtur, et necessarium propter ejusmodi causas sacras compositiones recipiendas esse, ita duntaxat si pulchre et decenter, tantaeque puritati convenientes formarentur, nunc autem indecentes esse, « et inconvenientes existimat, » ille videlicet quaecunque, « sanctorum intellectuum, » id est spirituum descriptiones, quae « in eloquiis sacris » factae sunt; et existimat ille etiam inconveniens esse, omne hoc angelicorum nominum, ut theatrale sibi videtur figmentum, ut videlicet angeli, boves, et leones, et aquilae, et equi, et rotae, et currus, et throni, et caetera hujusmodi introducantur et nominentur: quod secundum ipsius existimationem theatrale videtur, et theatrali recitatione et irrisione dignum. [0967C] Nobis autem pie sentientibus, et recte credentibus sic dicere durum, vel omne sic dicere durum, id est omnes sic durae et inconvenientes dictiones, et descriptiones, quod est quasi quoddam angelicorum nominum theatrum; vel si existimat ille sic dicere, id est sic dicendum esse hoc, quod in Scriptura fingitur, quasi durum, id est inconsonum et inconveniens angelicorum nominum theatrum esse: et si ille etiam ait debuisse theologos venientes vel descendentes ad corpoream facturam, id est materialem figurationem, universaliter, id est omnino incorporalium, coelestium videlicet et invisibilium, formare ea, scilicet invisibilia, et manifestare, quantum possibile eis esset propriis et cognatis figurationibus, id est inconvenientibus et similibus figurationibus [0967D] sumptis apud nos, id est inter visibilia ista ex pretiosissimis, vel sumptis ex pretiosissimis apud nos, hoc est ex eis, quae pretiosissima sunt apud nos; et ex immaterialibus quoquomodo, id est ex eis, quae quoquo, id est aliquo modo immaterialia esse videntur et incorporalia, sicut videlicet lux, et ignis, et splendor, et calor, et caetera hujusmodi: quae, cum materialia sint, corporalia, multum tamen spirituali naturae subtilitate et puritate appropinquant. Si ergo dicat ille ex iis pretiosissimis, et aliquo modo immaterialibus et supereminentibus essentiis debere theologos sumpsisse figuras eorum, quae omnino incorporalia sunt, ut per ea, quae fere immaterialia et incorporalia sunt, vere incorporalia significarentur. Etsi adhuc dicat non debere circumpositas [0968A] esse terrenas et novissimas, id est ultimas vel infimas, sive abjectas multiformitates, id est ex multis formis et variis compositas figuras, deiformibus simplicitatibus, id est spiritualibus naturis: quae quia deiformes sunt in gloria, terrenae et novissimae, et quia simplices in essentia, multiformitates ei omnino attribui non debuerunt. Et si dicat adhuc: Hoc quidem, id est si ex pretiosis et supereminentibus essentiis figurae invisibilium sumerentur, et terrenae, et novissimae formitates deiformibus simplicitatibus non circumponerentur, vel aptarentur: hoc quidem et nostrum sublimius futurum esset, hoc est, sublimius nos ad cognitionem spiritualium proveheret. Vel hoc quidem et nostrum esset, quia corporale esset, et materiale; et sublimius futurum [0968B] esset, id est divinis et spiritualibus vicinius, ut ex utraque parte rationabile fieret: ut per hoc, quod nostrum esset, id est familiare et cognitum nobis, erudire non posset; et per hoc, quod sublimius et dignius esset, spiritualium excellentiae et dignitati congrueret. Et supermundanas etiam, id est coelestes et spirituales manifestationes non deduceret in inconvenientes dissimilitudines quemadmodum istae descriptiones faciunt; quia ex terrenis et novissimis essentiis similitudines inconvenientes et dissimiles rebus spiritualibus adducunt. Hoc etiam, id est si ex pulchris et decentibus formis tantum spiritualium figurae formarentur, non faceret injuriam in divinas virtutes non convenientes formas eis attribuendo: [0968C] quod facere est injustum. Et aeque, id est, similiter non seduceret animum nostrum, sicut ista turpis et indecens formatio seducit, ut aliena de illis virtutibus et indigna cogitet, dum se in istas immundas inserit, vel ingerit compositiones: quae de ipsis indecenter factae sunt. Et fortassis adhuc aliud de his turpibus compositionibus malum proveniat, quod existimabuntur supercoelestia repleri, vel repleta esse leoninis quibusdam, et equinis multitudinibus, id est equorum et leonum, et mugitiva laudum oratione, et volatili angelorum praecipitatu; quia figurae leonum, et equorum, et boum, et avium, quorum rugire, et hinnire, et volare est, et qui Deum laudare non possunt nisi mugiendo, vel rugiendo, angelis tribuuntur. Et existimabuntur ipsa coelestia [0968D] non solum his, sed etiam aliis animalibus et materiis ignobilioribus, ut vermibus, et carbonibus, et aliis hujusmodi, quae per figuram de spiritualibus dicta inveniuntur repleta, tanquam reclusa, id est patefacta, et aperta sint ipsa coelestia, ad inconsequens, id est inconveniens et ignobile, et possibile supra sit, ut ejusmodi admittantur in ea, vel et passibile, id est corruptibile. Et haec quidem omnia existimabuntur, dum describuntur, similitudines manifestativorum eloquiorum: quas ad manifestationem eloquia proponunt clare, id est manifeste, deformes. Si cui ergo hoc totum videatur (ut huc usque pendeat sententia, et demum ita inferatur) ei quidem ita videri, solas scilicet pulchras et excellentes species spiritualium, et divinorum significationi [0969A] apponendas. Sed tamen si quis veritatem diligenter inquirat, eum agnoscere, quod sapientia divinorum eloquiorum utrasque convenienter apposuit.

Hoc est, quod sequitur: « Sed veritatis, ut existimo, inquisitio ostendit eloquiorum sacratissimam sapientiam in animorum, sive spirituum coelestium formationem utrumque valde providisse, ita ut neque in divinas (sic forsitan diceret quis) injuriam faceret virtutes, » id est ut neque per ipsas humiles figurationes injuriam faceret divinis virtutibus, id est spiritibus, qui divini sunt et sacri et incorporei: quod tamen fortassis aliquis injuriam diceret, et dicendam putaret, cum tamen injuria non sit, « neque nos » per easdem figurationes « infigeret passibiliter [0969B] in viles humilitates imaginum, » id est in vilitatem humilium, sive in humilitatem vilium imaginum. Utrumque enim sapientia divini eloquii providit et cavit, ut per istas humiles figurationes, neque divinis injuriam faceret, neque nostrum animum ad viles cogitationes vel existimationes falsas informaret. Et quidem primum quare divinis et invisibilibus manifestandis corporales et visibiles figurae et formae appositae sunt, necessaria et conveniens causa demonstratur, quam fortassis aliquis non unam diceret esse, sed duplicem, id est non solum ideo quia illa nisi per ista animo nostro manifestari non poterant, sed etiam ideo, quia in figuris et aenigmatibus mysticarum descriptionum ab impuris mentibus, et a malevolis divina secreta tegenda fuerant, et celanda. [0969C] Ita, inquit, mysticarum descriptionum causam aliquis dicet: quod cum et ipse indubitanter et veraciter dicere potuisset, modeste alteri attribuit, ne forte suam auctoritatem commendare videretur.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Hoc est ergo, quod ait: « Quia quidem enim pulchre procuratae sunt informium formae, et figurae carentium figuris: non unam causam diceret quis esse nostram analogiam. Quia quidem enim. » Contra usum latinitatis secundum idioma linguae Graecae conjunctiones glomeravit, sive quia pro quod legatur, ut sit hic sensus: Quod quidem quis, id est aliquis, diceret non unam esse causam, hanc scilicet nostram analogiam, id est non solum nostram [0969D] analogiam causam esse hujus rei, quod procuratae sunt pulchre, id est convenienter a sacro eloquio formae informium et figurae carentium figuris, id est quod in sacro eloquio attributae sunt formae et figurae illis coelestibus spiritibus, qui in sua natura nec formas corporales habent, nec figuras. Hujus, inquam, rei diceret quis non solum esse causam analogiam, id est conditionem nostram aliter non valentem ad invisibilium cognitionem pertingere, neque valentem immediate, id est sine medio aliquo extendit per intellectum in invisibiles contemplationes, id est in contemplationes invisibilium. Nostram analogiam dico etiam desiderantem proprias, et connaturales reductiones, hoc est, reduci ad invisibilum cognitionem, et contemplationem [0970A] per ea, quae propria illi sunt et connaturalia, id est visibilia et corporalia quae videlicet corporalia praetendunt, id est proponunt formationes informium, id est spiritualium speculationum et supernaturalium, id est nostram naturam excedentium speculationum et omnino incomprehensibilium nobis, nisi per istas formationes passibiles demonstrarentur, et insinuarentur nobis. Analogiam conditionem dicit humanam; quoniam analogia est juxta rationem et convenientiam plurium similium in uno proprietas, quemadmodum et grammatici analogias verborum assignare solent secundum similitudinem plurium sub una proprietate cadentium. Analogia igitur humanae naturae, id est conditio vel proprietas, sive [0970B] convenientia, est ea posse et nosse quae ad hominem pertinent, et quae homo esse et posse accepit. Supra analogiam autem nostram, id est supra convenientiam et aequalitatem nostram est coelestia scrutari, nisi per ea quae apud nos sunt visibilia et nota nobis erudiamur. Haec ergo analogia, id est conditio humana, causa fuit quare sacrum eloquium mentibus humanis erudiendis de invisibilibus visibilia signa proposuit. Et non sola haec causa fuit, sed etiam « quia et hoc decentissimum est mysticis eloquiis, » occultare scilicet, « et inviam multis ponere sacram, et abditam, » id est occultam veritatem « supermundanorum intellectuum, » id est invisibilium spirituum « per incomprehensibilia divina aenigmata. » [0970C] Propterea enim aenigmata, et parabolae, et figurae in mystico eloquio Scripturarum apponuntur, ne veritas spiritualium rerum carnalibus et immundis spiritibus patescat, et ut simul studiosos et devotos ipsa sua profunditate exerceat. Quam tamen causam hic auctor ex superabundanti commemorare judicat. Ideo igitur tecta sunt ne omnibus pateant divina sacramenta, quia non omnes digni sunt agnitione veritatis. « Est enim non omnis sacer, neque omnium, ut eloquia aiunt, scientia. » Propterea enim quia non omnis homo sacer est idcirco veritas omnibus manifestanda non est; quoniam, si cunctis manifestaretur, multi illam per malitiam contradicendo roderent, vel immunde vivendo inquinarent. Unde dictum est: « Nolite Sanctum [0970D] dare canibus [n: (Matth. VII)], » iis videlicet, qui dente malitiae veritatem propositam rodunt; « neque margaritas projicere ante porcos [n: (ibid.)], » ante eos scilicet qui oblatam, quantum in se est, male vivendo polluunt. Hi sunt namque non sacri, id est non digni sacris, quorum non est scientia, « ut eloquia dicunt, » Scripturae sacrae. Apostolus enim dicit, quod « fides omnium non est [n: (II Thess. III)], » quoniam illa veritatis cognitio, qua Deus a sanctis, et justis pie creditur, a perversis quibusque vel non recipitur, vel non digne tenetur.

« Si autem deformes imaginum descriptionis causas existimaverit quis inhonestum, dicens referri sic turpes formationes deiformibus et sanctissimis dispositionibus, sufficit ad eum dicere: Quomodo [0971A] duplex est sanctae manifestationis modus? » Nunc tandem ad quaestionem superius objectam respondet, in qua continebatur sacris et divinis non convenienter in sacro eloquio viles et abjectas formationes apponi, dicens: « Si quis existimaverit causas descriptionis imaginum deformes, » id est si quis existimaverit deformes, id est inconvenientes esse causas describendi imagines, dicens, inhonestum esse referri, id est aptari sic turpes formationes deiformibus et sanctissimis dispositionibus, id est ordinibus. Si quis, inquam, ita existimaverit, et ita dixerit: « Ad eum sufficit dicere quomodo duplex est sanctae manifestationis modus: » id est existimationi et oppositioni ejusmodi sufficienter respondetur in eo, quod sanctae manifestationis, quae fit [0971B] per Scripturas, duplex modus esse ostenditur. « Unus quidem quasi consequens, » id est conveniens et decens, in quo signa signatam veritatem per consimilem proprietatem sequantur: propter similes imagines sacrarum figurarum convenientium, id est procedentium ad faciendam manifestationem, vel provenientium id est aptarum et concordantium cum eo, quod significant. « Alter vero modus est conformatus in omnino inconsequens, » id est discrepans, et inconveniens, et indecorum, propterea quod ipsae figurae et ipsa signa manifestantia veritatem non dicere videantur. Hoc est, quod ait: « Propter dissimiles formarum facturas. »

Sequitur: « Itaque colendam superessentialis [0971C] divinitatis beatitudinem manifestativorum eloquiorum mysticae traditiones, aliquando quidem ut rationem, et intellectum, et essentiam laudant, divinam rationalitatem, et sapientiam ejus declarantes, et vere existentem subsistentiam, et eorum, quae sunt subsistentiae, causam veram. » Ac si diceret: Quia duplex est modus manifestationis in sacro eloquio: alter videlicet per similia signa, alter per dissimilia signa formatus. Itaque etiam divinae naturae majestatem ipsa sacra eloquia aliquando per similes, aliquando per dissimiles formationes repraesentant. Per similes quidem aliquando a corporalibus sumptas, aliquando ab incorporalibus. A corporalibus, sicut cum eam rationem et intellectum; a corporalibus, quemadmodum cum eam lumen et [0971D] splendorem nominant, et caetera quae fiunt ad hunc modum. Aliquando autem per dissimiles formationes similiter ab incorporalibus, vel a corporalibus sumptas divinam naturam manifestant. Ab incorporalibus quidem, ut cum ei iram, zelum, poenitentiam attribuunt; a corporalibus vero, quando illi formas, vel figuras bestiarum, vel aliarum quarumlibet rerum corporalium in significatione apponunt. Hoc est ergo, quod dicit: « Itaque mysticae traditiones manifestativorum eloquiorum laudant colendam beatitudinem superessentialis divinitatis; aliquando quidem ut rationem, et intellectum, et essentiam, declarantes divinam subsistentiam ejus vere existentem, et veram causam subsistentiae omnium eorum, quae sunt; » quoniam et in se vere subsistit, [0972A] et subsistentia omnia subsistere facit, in eo quod illam essentiam appellant cum ipsa tamen supra omnem rationem, et intellectum, et essentiam in sua majestate nec intelligibilis, nec comprehensibilis supra omnia subsistentia subsistat.

Sequitur: « Et quasi lumen eum formant, et vitam vocant. » Colendam scilicet beatitudinem mysticae traditiones, cum tamen ipsa super omne lumen sit lumen et super omnem vitam vita subsistat. Tot ergo, ac tantis modis sacra eloquia divinam majestatem in figuratione formant. « Ipsis tantis mirabilibus formationibus castioribus manentibus, quam caeterae, quae incongruae videntur, et indignae, et ipsis tantis mirabilibus formationibus probatis quoquo modo excellere caeteras materiales formationes. » Ac si diceret: [0972B] Quamvis ad illam excellentiam omnis formatio, vel repraesentatio inferior inveniatur, ad comparationem tamen aliarum formationum tam pulchrae, et tam decorae formationes excellere probantur. Cum scilicet divinitatis natura, ratio, et intellectus, et essentia, et lumen, et vita nominatur, quamvis et in his quoque formationibus ad ineffabilem veritatem exprimendam similitudo in manifestatione deficiat. Unde ait: « Deficientibus, et sic divina ad veritatem similitudine. » Ipsis videlicet excellentioribus similitudinibus etiam sic deficientibus, id est etiam in tanta excellentia deficientibus a divina similitudine, deficientibus scilicet ad veritatem, subauditur exprimendam. Omne enim, quod hic in signo est, minus est quam quod illic in veritate est. « Est [0972C] enim, « scilicet divina natura, » super omnes essentiam, et vitam nullo quidem lumine characterizante, id est figurante, vel exprimente: et est excellens omni ratione, et intellectu incomparabiliter derelictis retrorsum, sive inferius a similitudine ipsius. Unde apparet si ejus similitudo ratione et intellectu tanto superior est, quod ad ejus similitudinem aequandam nec ratio, nec intellectus incedere potest.

Sequitur: « Aliquando vero dissimilibus manifestationibus ab ipsis eloquiis super mundane laudatur, eam invisibilem, et infinitam, et incomprehensibilem vocantibus, et quae, ex quibus non quid est sed qui non est, significatur. » Ac si dicat: Non solum similibus et excellentibus manifestationibus, [0972D] atque ad ejus imaginem accedentibus manifestatur: sed aliquando etiam manifestationibus dissimilibus, et ab ipsius natura peregrinis, ab eloquiis « supermundane, » id est mystice et spiritualiter, et super hujus mundi speciem laudatur. Quando enim per pulchras formas laudatur, secundum speciem hujus mundi laudatur, id est dicitur secundum aliquid, quod est ipsum per quod laudatur. Quando vero per dissimiles et a se alienas formationes laudatur, supermundane laudatur; quoniam, nec idem esse dicitur, nec secundum id, sed supra id totum aliud, per quod laudatur. Propterea ergo supermundane laudatur ab ipsis eloquiis formationibus dissimilibus. Eloquiis dico sive ipsis formationibus vocantibus eam, divinam scilicet naturam, invisibilem, et [0973A] infinitam, et incomprehensam: primum infinitam in se; deinde invisibilem nobis; post incomprehensam a nobis; et alia quoque multa ipsis eloquiis vocantibus divinam naturam, quae talia sunt, ex quibus non quid est, sed quid non est, significatur. Cum enim invisibilis, et infinitus, et incomprehensus dicitur Deus: non quid est dicitur, sed quid non est enim visibilis, quia videri non potest, neque finitur, quia loco non clauditur, nec tempore terminatur; nec comprehensibilis est, quia etsi quod est creditur, quantum est non capitur. Qui ergo invisibilem dicit, non esse dicit quod est, sed non esse quod non est. Similiter et qui infinitum dicit, et incomprehensum, non dicit esse quod est, quia nihil esse affirmat. Sed non esse dicit quod non est, [0973B] quia aliquid esse negat; quoniam et quod non affirmat, est quod dici non potest; et quod negat, est quod potest intelligi.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Hoc enim, ut existimo, potentius est in ipsa. » Hoc videlicet, ex quo non quid est, sed quid non est significatur, potentius est, id est efficacius, et magis proprium, et expressum in ipsa; quoniam, qui dicit quod non est, dicit quod aliquo modo potest intelligi; qui autem dicit quod est, dicit quod nullo modo potest comprehendi. Sed potentius est et excellentius quantum ad veritatis expressionem, dicere, quod non est Deus, quam quod est. « Quoniam quidem ut occulta, et sacerdotalis traditio subintroduxit: hoc quidem non esse secundum quid eorum, quae sunt, eam vere dicimus: ignoramus [0973C] autem superessentialem ipsius, et invisibilem, et ineffabilem infinalitatem » Ac si diceret: Sicut testatur auctoritas sacrae Scripturae, subintroducta ex occulto ad manifestationem, et tradita ad correctionem et informationem. Sicut ergo ipsa traditio, id est ipsa auctoritas tradita, occulta quantum ad mysteria sacramentorum occultorum, et sacerdotalis quantum ad ipsorum divinorum scriptorum dignitatem et sanctitatem, et sui sanctificationem, quia et a divinis sacerdotibus, et propheticis tradita est, et propter sanctificandos per eam divinitus sanctificata. Sicut ergo ipsa occulta et sacerdotalis traditio subintroduxit, didicimus eorum, quae sunt, omnium non esse hoc, id est tale quid secundum [0973D] quod vere dicimus esse eam, id est divinam naturam, quia nulla rerum creatarum species ita ejus similitudini approximat, ut id, quod vere in ipsa est, expresse et secundum proprietatem ostendat. Vel ita didicimus non esse eam vere quod dicimus eam esse secundum quid, hoc est secundum aliquid eorum quae sunt: quod enim vere est secundum aliquid eorum, quae sunt, totum dici non potest: et ideo cum eam secundum illa, quae sunt, aliquid esse dicimus, nondum quod vere est per expressionem manifestamus. Ignoramus autem superessentialem ipsius, et invisibilem, et ineffabilem infinalitatem. Quod enim infinitum est ab humana scientia existimari non potest: quod, quia ineffabile est, non dicitur; et quia invisibile est, non cognoscitur; et [0974A] quia superessentiale est, non comprehenditur. De ipso igitur mens humana aliquid capere potest, ipsum non potest; et lingua humana de ipso aliquid dicere potest, ipsum non potest, nec idcirco tamen falsum existimandum est quod de ipso dicitur; quoniam de ipso tantum est, et non ipse hoc, quod dicitur; neque vanum, quod de ipso cogitatur, quoniam de ipso tantum est, et non ipse hoc, quod cogitatur; quoniam verum dicitur, et veritas cogitatur: quae sic ducit ad ipsum, quamvis sublimius et excelsius consistat in ipso.

Sequitur: « Si igitur negationes in divinis verae, affirmationes vero incompactae; obscuritati arcanorum magis apta est per dissimiles formationes manifestatio. » Ac si dicat: Quia expressius et magis [0974B] proprie Deum non esse quidquam esse dicimus, cum et esse aliquid, et non esse veraciter dicamus, manifestum est in divinis, id est iis quae de Deo dicuntur, et Deo attribuuntur, negationes veras esse, id est proprias; affirmationes vero incompactas, id est improprias et non cohaerentes, quoniam dissimilia jungere et coaptare conantur secundum illum modum dicendi, quo de Deo formari non potest aliter humana locutio. Si autem negationes in divinis verae sunt, id est propriae, et affirmationes incompactae, id est impropriae, manifestum est quoniam obscuritati arcanorum revelandorum magis apta est manifestatio facta per dissimiles formationes, quam per similes; quoniam illa removendo quasi per negationem quid non sit Deus demonstrare [0974C] nititur; ista vero ponendo, quasi per affirmationem quid sit ostendere conatur. « Et nunc itaque non turpes replent coelestes ornatus eloquiorum sacrae descriptiones dissimilibus eos formarum facturis manifestantes; et per has ostendentes materialibus simul omnibus super mundalium excellentias. Et nunc itaque » quandoquidem dissimiles figurationes in divinis magis proprie constant secundum eum modum, quo de Deo ex omnibus, quae sunt, nihil proprie nominatur; secundum hunc itaque modum non replent, id est repletos asserunt, coelestes ornatus, id est coelestes ordines vel dispositiones, ipsae turpes, id est deformes, quae in sacro eloquio proponuntur formationes; manifestantes [0974D] eos scilicet ornatus, dissimilibus facturis, id est compositionibus formarum dissimilibus, et alienis ab eorum excellentia; et per has facturas ostendentes supermundalium, id est coelestium et invisibilium excellentias simul omnibus materialibus; hoc est excellentias ad omnia materialia; id est ostendentes, quod ipsa supermundalia, et spiritualia omnibus materialibus excellunt. In hoc enim, quod eis dissimiles figuras attribuunt, ostendunt quod et illa quoque, quae et secundum similitudinem de ipsis dici videntur, ad proprietatem illorum non assurgunt.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Quin vero et nostrum animum reducant magis dissimiles similitudines, non existimo quemquam bene sapientum contradicere. » Ac si dicat: Non solum ideo dissimiles figurationes probabiles [0975A] sunt, quod supermundalium excellentias ostendunt; sed ideo etiam quod nostrum animum magis quam similes figurationes a materialibus et corporalibus reducunt, neque in se quiescere sinunt. Audi magnum sacramentum. Quod Deus est, super omne est; et cum quaeritur quid est, hoc dici non potest, quia cogitari non potest. Quod enim cogitari potest, ascendit in cor hominis, et capitur a corde hominis, vel in his quae videntur secundum speciem, vel secundum ea quae per imaginationem, vel in iis quae sentiuntur intus per experientiam et veritatem; et non capit cor hominis, nisi quae novit, vel secundum ea quae novit. Novit autem ea, quae foris per sensum concipit, et ea quae intus per experientiam sentit; et omne quod capit, vel in istis capit, vel secundum [0975B] ista conjicit. Quod autem nec in istis, nec secundum ista est, cor humanum capere non potest. Quod autem Deus est, nec horum aliquid est, quia creatura non est; nec secundum ista est, quia Creator est. Quod ergo Deus est, nec in istis inveniri potest, nec secundum ista intelligi quale est. Si enim intelligeretur secundum ista, in eadem similitudine deduceretur ad ista, et esset hoc in istis, quod in illo est. Quaecunque autem in creaturis sunt, magis sibi vicina sunt et cognata, quia facta sunt; quam opus artifici, et factura plasmatori. Omne enim tempus ad aeternitatem comparatum, et omne spatium ad immensitatem compositum, minus invenitur habens, quam quaelibet prolixitas temporis ad momentum collata, vel quantitatis extensio [0975C] quantumvis excrescens, ad atomi proportionem relata. Sic quod Deus est, ad creaturam comparatum amplius excellens invenitur, quam quod summum est conditum ad ea, quae sunt ima, vel extrema facta, comparatum. Non ergo secundum ista potest cogitari Deus quod est; quoniam aliud est, et aliter est, et longe, et remote, et dissimiliter; et quid est dici non potest. Si enim aliquod horum dicitur, aliud est. Si secundum aliquid horum dicitur, aliter est. Quid ergo dicendum est quod Deus est? Si coelum dicitur, aliud est. Si terra dicitur, aliud est; et quidquid in coelo est, et in terra est, non est hoc quod Deus est. Ergo aliud est hoc quod Deus est. Et hoc quid est? Solum hoc dici potest, quod aliud [0975D] est, et quid est, dici non potest. Habemus ergo quod dicamus, non est hoc Deus; sed non habemus quod dicamus, hoc est Deus; quia omne quod habemus, hoc non est Deus, et non habemus in his omnibus, neque invenimus quod est Deus. Omne enim hoc aliud est a Deo; quia non est Deus omne quod factum est a Deo, et non videt oculus, neque mens capit, nisi hoc, vel secundum hoc quod non est Deus, sed a Deo. Homo enim sensum hominis habet, et sentit secundum sensum hominis, vel quod extra est secundum carnem, vel quod intus est secundum mentem, et non habet amplius homo. Oculus carnis quae ad carnem, oculus mentis quae ad mentem. Amplius quid? « Nemo hominum scit quae sunt hominis, nisi spiritus hominis, qui est in homine. » [0976A] [n: (I Cor. II)]. » Sic quae Dei sunt, nemo scit, nisi spiritus Dei; et qui habet spiritum Dei, sit per spiritum Dei quae sunt Dei. Est autem oculus triplex: oculus carnis, oculus rationis, oculus contemplationis. Oculus carnis apertus est, oculus rationis lippus, oculus contemplationis clausus et caecus. Oculo carnis videtur mundus, et ea quae sunt in mundo. Oculo rationis animus, et ea quae sunt in animo. Oculo contemplationis Deus, et ea quae sunt in Deo. Oculo carnis videt homo quae sunt extra se; oculo rationis quae sunt in se; oculo contemplationis quae sunt intra se et supra se. Ergo Deus, quod est, incogitabilis est, sed hominum, et humanae rationi: quae non percipit, nisi quod novit, vel secundum id quod novit, quod est in se vel extra se. Qui autem [0976B] spiritum Dei in se habent, et Deum habent: hi Deum vident, quia oculum illuminatum habent quo Deus videri potest, et sentiunt non in alio, vel secundum aliud quod ipse non est, sed ipsum et in ipso quod est, quod praesens est. Nec tamen id dici potest, quia ineffabile est, quia incogitabile est; et sentitur, et non exprimitur. Ergo, omne quod dicitur de Deo quia est, secundum id dicitur, quod dici et cogitari potest, quoniam aliter dici non potest; et omne quod dici et cogitari potest, minus est et infra est quam quod Deus est. Ipsum hoc, quod dicitur, minus dicitur, et ipsum hoc non dicitur quod est Deus, quia qui aliquid dicit secundum aliquid dicit, et cogitat quod dicit, et secundum quod dicit. Nominas [0976C] Deum, et duas syllabas formas; et totum dixisse putas quod est. Quid cogitasti? Quod enim cogitasti, hoc dixisti. Cogitavi, inquis, quod supra omnia est: hoc quid est? Si cogitare potes quid est, hoc dicere potes. Si autem cogitare non potes, dicere non potes; quia, quod non potest cogitari, non potest dici. Dixisti Deus: et quid est Deus? Quid cogitas, aut quale cogitas cum dicis Deus? Quod enim sonat, hoc est inspiciens vel currens, sive timor, vel quodlibet aliud existimaveris ut potes de ipso. Ergo cum dicis Deus, inspicientem dicis et contemplantem, et considerantem omnia. Et quid est hoc? Quomodo inspicit Deus, et quomodo videt? Quid est videre ejus, nisi esse ejus? Et hoc quale est? Si autem currentem intelligis, quia penetrat [0976D] omnia, et apprehendit, et continet omne quod est, currere illi hoc stare est. Et hoc quis capiat? Si vero timorem interpretaris; et ipsum sub hoc nomine cogitandum asseris cum dicitur Deus: quis explicare possit quomodo timor sit Deus? Quod si idcirco timorem dici putes quoniam timetur, quomodo timetur quod non videtur? quomodo videri potest quod non potest cogitari? et quomodo timeri potest quod non potest sciri? Vide ergo quid dicas, cum dicis Deus; aut quid cogites, cum dicis Deus. Creatorem, inquis, omnium cogito, cum dico Deus, qui omnia fecit, et ipse factus non est. Ergo cum dicis Deus, cogitas quod fecit omnia. Cogitas quod fecit, et non cogitas quod est ipse qui fecit. Nondum adhuc attigisti quod spoponderas, ut cogites, et intelligas [0977A] quid est Deus. Minus est totum hoc quod dicis; et non est hoc totum ipse de quo dicis; et tamen de ipso hoc dicis, non ut accedas ad ipsum, sed ut ipsi appropinques. Magnum est enim homini nunc ad ipsum ire, etsi non detur pervenire. Dabitur autem postea, cum venerit quod perfectum est; et coeperit videre homo sicut videtur, non per speculum imaginem, sed facie ad faciem veritatem. Nunc autem interim totum imago est, et ipsa imago longe a veritate est; et tamen facit quod potest quasi imago; et convertit animum, sed non perducit. Hoc enim solum potest in nobis et nos in illa hoc solum, quia nec ipsa amplius ostendere potest, neque nos aliud comprehendere, et est tamen imago quaedam sublimior, et magis appropinquans veritati, [0977B] ita ut magis nobis appellari veritas possit, quia aliud nihil est super illam, quo expressius veritas demonstrari possit. Dicitur namque quod Deus ignis est; et manifesta est figura; quoniam Deus ad proprietatem, ignis non est; quoniam ignis corpus est, Deus corpus non est. Dicitur etiam, quod Deus lumen est; et apparet hic similiter imago veritatis, aliud a veritate, quoniam Deus lumen non est secundum proprietatem, quod secundum figuram nominatur. Omnia enim haec visibilia sunt, et longe a Deo sunt per proprietatem naturae, etiamsi secundum similitudinem solam, quae et ipsa ad excellentiam majestatis exigua est, coaptantur. Est autem alia natura incorporea magis vicina Deo, inter quam ac Deum nulla alia media est natura; et haec ad similitudinem [0977C] magis accedit, quamvis et ipsa a veritate longe sit. Secundum hanc itaque a nobis altissimam naturam ad Deum nobis sublimis similitudo formatur, cum dicitur Deus spiritus, et sapientia, et ratio, et amor; quia anima spiritus est, et angelus spiritus est, et in ipso spiritu ratio, sapientia et amor est. Et novimus quid sit spiritus, quantum animam novimus, et angelum novimus; et per animam angelum novimus, quantum nosmetipsos novimus; quamvis et hoc modicum, et vix dici possit cognitio. Cum ergo audimus quod Deus spiritus est, cogitamus animam, et angelum, et existimamus similitudinem, quoniam tale aliquid Deus est qualis anima est, et angelus, quia anima et angelus [0977D] spiritus est. Et nescimus quam longe hoc est a veritate incomprehensibilis excellentiae. Qui enim diceret corpus spiritum, falsum diceret, quoniam corpus spiritus non est nec spiritus corpus. Qui ergo hoc diceret, jure reprehenderetur; et veritati contrarius judicaretur, et tamen qui dicit Deum esse spiritum, verum dixisse existimatur. Nemo illum falsitatis arguit, cum tamen magis vicina sunt natura, et conditione corpus et spiritus, quam spiritus et Deus. Hic enim utrumque creatura est, et utrumque comprehensibile est, et mutabile utrumque, et finitum. Illic autem unum quidem aeternum est, alterum temporale; unum immensum, alterum comprehensibile; unum semper idem manens, alterum mutabile; unum sub scientiam cadens, alterum [0978A] incogitabile. Et tamen, quia aliud dici non potest, hoc dicitur; ne nihil dicatur, ubi aliud dicendum est, et dici non potest quod est; vel si dici potest, intelligi non potest. Hoc ergo dicitur, et tolerat hoc veritas de se, et commendat hoc nobis pro veritate, qui ipsam adhuc veritatem capere non possumus, donec transeat figura, et veritas manifestetur, super omne hoc, et extra omne hoc, nude et aperte ut est ipsa. Nunc ergo usque adhuc manent figurae, et ex ipsis quaedam longe sunt, et apparent quod sunt similitudo tantum; quaedam vero propriae sunt, et accipiuntur quasi pro veritate, cum sint tantum signa veritatis et non veritas, in quibus quidem si nihil altius fuerit ad ipsam, concedit haec veritas nobis, et non reputat impossibilitatem. Si autem propinquae [0978B] fuerint et consimiles, proximae tamen non fuerint, et appareat aliud sublimius ad veritatem manifestandam; non patitur veritas ad ipsas deduci secundum proprietatem, quoniam in altero perfectius se demonstrat, in quo probat se hic esse tantum per similitudinem. In illo vero supremo, quo altius nihil est, ad ipsam non apparet alterum, quo figura probetur; et idcirco ipsum sic accipere oportet ut est, quoniam aliud non datur, donec veniat quod perfectum est. Omnis ergo figura tanto evidentius veritatem demonstrat, quanto apertius per dissimilem similitudinem figuram se esse, et non veritatem probat; atque in hoc nostrum animum dissimiles similitudines magis ad veritatem reducunt, quo ipsum in sola similitudine manere [0978C] non permittunt.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Quapropter, inquit, « non existimo quemquam bene sapientum contradicere » contra hoc quod dissimiles similitudines nostrum animum ad veritatem reducunt. Siquidem « consequens est, per pretiosio res sacras formationes seduci, » id est consequi, vel provenire, vel contingere potest facile, ut per illas sacrarum rerum formationes, quae pretiosiores repraesentantur in sacro eloquio, seducantur cogitationes hominum « existimantes quasdam coelestes essentias esse auriformes, » sicut in quibusdam locis Scripturarum per similitudinem repraesentantur; et existimantes etiam in coelo esse quosdam fulgureos viros decora indutos vestimenta, quemadmodum [0978D] angeli apparuisse leguntur splendidis vestibus et vultibus fulgoreis, « candidum, et igneum innocue respergentes, » id est emittentes, vel fundentes claritatem, et lumen; candidum quidem quantum ad vestimenta, et igneum quantum ad vultus flammeos et ardentes; innocue, id est sine laesione, constante in hoc ipso divino miraculo, quia in divinis et coelestibus naturis, quae hic demonstrantur per speciem, aliter illic sunt secundum veritatem, in quibus naturae visibilis species cernitur, effectus non invenitur.

Sequitur: « Et quibuscunque aliis similibus imaginatis formis, » id est secundum imaginabilia expressis, « Theologia coelestes figuravit intellectus, » id est spirituales naturas repraesentavit, ut a superioribus [0979A] (subauditur) hic consequens est seduci existimantes coelestes essentias in sua natura tales existere. « Quod quidem ne paterentur, qui nihil visibilibus bonis altius intelligunt, » id est hoc existimarent ii qui alia bona esse non putant altiora, vel meliora his visibilibus bonis; ideo « sanctorum theologorum sapientia restitutiva mirabiliter descendit ad indecoras similitudines, » id est ideo sancti theologi, qui per sapientiam suam restituentem, et reformantem nos ad cognitionem veritatis divina nobis eloquia tradiderunt, mirabili consideratione descenderunt ad indecoras similitudines assumendas, ut eas divinis et coelestibus naturis aptarent; et per ipsas alia quoque quae de illis magnifice, et decore dici videntur, ad similitudinem, et non ad [0979B] proprietatem referenda ostenderent. Hoc ergo fecit sapientia sanctorum theologorum « non concedens materiale nostrum in turpibus imaginibus remanens quiescere; purgans vero, sursum ferens animae, et suggerens deformitate compositionum tanquam neque justo, neque vero probante esse; et quod neque valde materialibus sic turpibus similia secundum veritatem sint super coelestia, et divina spectacula. » Ac si diceret: Sapientia theologorum ad indecoras similitudines descendens, in hoc ipso mirabiliter nostrae restitutioni providit, non concedens materiale nostrum, id est carnalem sensum nostrum, et materialibus inhaerentem, quiescere materiale dico remanens in turpibus imaginibus, id est quantum in se est remanere volens, ut haec sola cogitet, [0979C] et sola haec quasi vera accipiat, si in eis quiescere permitteretur, et non ipsarum turpitudine imaginum ad alia pulchra, et vera quaerenda exire compelleretur; vel non concedens materiale nostrum quiescere remanens in turpibus imaginibus, id est non concedens, ut vel quiescat, vel remaneat per ipsarum turpitudinem imaginum illud expellens, et ad superiora promovens; purgans vero sursum ferens scilicet virtutem animae, id est intellectualem vim animae, quae sursum fert, et ad superiora intendit; purgans ab imaginum admistione, ut spiritualia, et invisibilia pure, et simpliciter contemplari assuescat; et suggerens, id est admonens et persuadens animae ex ipsa deformitate compositionum, [0979D] quod super coelestia, et divina spectacula non valde similia sunt, secundum veritatem materialibus, praecipue sic turpibus, tanquam neque justo, neque vero probante esse, videlicet his illa similia; vel suggerens deformitate compositionum tanquam neque justo, neque vero probante esse; subauditur eo modo in proprietate spiritualium, et invisibilium naturarum, quemadmodum in specie, et imagine visibilium demonstratur; et suggerens etiam, quod neque valde, id est non multum similia sunt secundum veritatem suam supercoelestia, et divina spectacula materialibus sic turpibus.

Sequitur: « Sed itaque et hoc intelligere oportet, nihil eorum, quae sunt, esse universaliter boni participatione privatum. Siquidem, ut eloquiorum veritas [0980A] ait, omnia bona valde. » Superius demonstravit dissimiles repraesentationes propterea ad divinorum manifestationem convenienter adduci, ut ex eis, quae evidenter dissimilia apparent, illa quoque, quae similia videbantur, extra proprietatem esse agnoscantur. Nunc vero demonstrat, quod propter hoc etiam non inconvenienter dissimilitudines assumuntur; quoniam et illa quoque, quae dissimilia a divinorum, et spiritualium veritate esse videntur, aliquid habent cum ipsis, in quo similia dici possunt, quoniam nihil in universitate est, quod a summo bono participationem non trahat; ac per hoc eo quod cum illo participat, convenienter imaginem illius, ac similitudinem repraesentat. Itaque non solum superiorem causam considerare oportet, sed [0980B] et hoc etiam intelligere oportet, nihil eorum, quae sunt universaliter, esse boni participatione privatum. Quia « sicut eloquiorum veritas ait, » id est vera eloquia aiunt, « omnia bona valde. » Sic enim scriptum est in Genesi: « Vidit Deus cuncta, quae fecerat, et erant valde bona [n: (Gen. I)]. » Si ergo omnia bona erant, in omnibus bonum erat, et omnia bona participabant, et ex bono omnia habebant aliquid simile cum bono; ex quo bonum ipsum intelligi possit, et cognosci in ipsis. Unde sequitur: « Est ergo, » id est contingit, « ex omnibus » scilicet rebus « intelligere bonas speculationes; et invisibilibus, et intellectualibus formare, » sive aptare « similitudines dictas dissimiles; » quas scilicet superius diximus dissimiles: « formare » dico « ex ipsis [0980C] materialibus, » id est corporalibus et visibilibus. Sic tamen ut ea, quae secundum similitudinem visibilium invisibilibus tribuuntur, aliter in ipsis visibilibus, aliter in invisibilibus subsistere agnoscantur. Hoc enim quidem ait: « Altero modo intellectualibus habentibus, » ea scilicet, quae sensibilibus aliter distributa sunt.

Sequitur: « Etenim furor irrationabilibus quidem ex passibili motu inest; et omnis irrationabilitatis est repletus furibundus eorum motus. » Modo quibusdam exemplis propositis probat quod ea, quae de visibilium natura ad invisibilia referuntur aliter hic atque aliter ibi subsistunt; quemadmodum furor, et concupiscentia, et caetera, quae de visibilibus ad invisibilia [0980D] per similitudinem referuntur; ac si diceret: Ea, quae visibilibus ad invisibilia aptantur, aliter se in ipsis visibilibus, atque aliter in invisibilibus habere credenda sunt; sicut in iis, quae subsequuntur, aperte potest intelligi. « Furor » enim « in irrationabilibus, » id est irrationabiliter incedentibus et agentibus, sive ea rationem non habeant, sive rationem habentia secundum rationem non incedant. His quidem furor inest ex passibili motu, id est impetuoso, et ferventi, et secundum passionem dominantem nato; et omnis irrationabilitatis repletus est furibundus eorum motus. Ille namque motus furor nominatur, qui omnino extra rationem fervens solo impetu fertur passionis. « Sed in intellectualibus altero modo oportet irascibile intelligere; » [0981A] hoc modo videlicet, ut ipsum irascibile in illis intelligatur, declarans eorum virilem rationabilitatem, et immanem quietem in divinis, et immutabilibus fundamentis. Cum enim furor in spiritali, coelestique natura nominatur, non impetus, vel motus nominatur, sed quies, et immutabilitas intelligitur. Hac ratione inter dissimilia, et contraria considerata, quod sicut in his furor impetu, et vehementia supervenientem molestiam propellere nititur; ita illic quies immobilis persistens nulla concussione superveniente turbatur, propter hoc ipsam quietem immanem vocat, id est fortem, et robustum, et imperturbabilem; omnem motum sine motu repellentem, et omnem violentiam sine concussione, et conturbatione sui comprimentem; quae tamen [0981B] quies non ex ipsis est, sed ex divinis et immutabilibus fundamentis, quibus inhaerent, id est amore et contemplatione divina, quibus ad aeternitatem firmantur, ne ullatenus amodo commoveri possint. Haec autem quies, quoniam non necessitatis est, ut inviti teneantur, sed voluntatis, ut infatigabiliter amantes non deserantur; idcirco quieti rationabilitatem virilem adjunxit, ostendens quod per rationem illuminantem, mala quae discernunt, viriliter respuunt, et per amorem afficientem in bonis, quae sentiunt, quieti sunt, ut quies per rationem muniatur, ne affectum malorum suscipiat; et ratio per quietem custodiatur, ne in odio mali se opponens tranquillitatis terminos transcendat. Hanc ergo virilem rationem, et immanem quietem, liberam et [0981C] absolutam, nullamque perturbationem suscipientem furor divinis aptatus significat; quia, sicut diximus, quemadmodum hic furor ingruentem molestiam per insaniam repellit, ita illic rationabilis, et voluntaria quies per immutabilitatem concussionem non recipit.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Eodem modo concupiscentiam esse dicimus in irrationabilibus inconsultam quamdam, et materialem ex naturali motu, aut consuetudine in mutabilibus incontinenter ingenitam, passibilitatem, et irrationabilem corporalis voluptatis continuitatem; simul omne animal compellentis in secundum sensum concupiscibile. » Postquam demonstravit quid significet furor sensibilibus et materialibus [0981D] attributus, quid item immaterialibus et invisibilibus naturis coaptatus; nunc consequenter differentiam concupiscentiae ostendit, sive quando de corporalibus dicitur, sive quando in spiritualibus, et divinis nominatur. Corporalium quidem concupiscentium definiens esse passibilitatem quamdam, sive passionem, id est dominantem affectionem, inconsultam quidem, quia ratione non fertur, sed trahitur temerario appetitu in ea, quorum delectatione afficitur; et materialem, id est ex carne et ex sensu carnali surgentem, et carnalia, et sensibilia apparentem, passibilitatem dico ingenitam aut ex naturali motu, quando scilicet secundum naturam est appetitus ejus; aut ex consuetudine in ipsis mutabilibus incontinenter habita, quando extra naturam, [0982A] vel contra fertur desiderium illius: et irrationabilem corporalis voluptatis continuitatem; subauditur dicimus esse ipsam concupiscentiam, irrationabilem continuitatem, id est productionem, vel intentionem, vel effusionem corporalis voluptatis, hoc est de corpore surgentis, et ad corporalia tendentis, et compellentis etiam omne animal scilicet per appetitus sui violentiam, in id quod concupiscibile est secundum sensum. Et talem quidem concupiscentiam corporalium esse intelligimus. « Cum vero dissimiles similitudines non intellectualibus, et spiritualibus circumponentes, » vel vestientes: « circumformatus, » id est adaptamus « eis concupiscentiam; » tunc ipsam concupiscentiam, non qualem prius, sed amorem potius divinum intelligere [0982B] oportet, et desiderium immaterialitatis, sive incorporalitatis, et divinitatis super rationem, et intellectum existens; quoniam plus amari potest quam investigari vel intelligi; et inflexibile, quoniam ad unum semper est; et non indigens, quoniam quod amatur praesens est. Desiderium dico contemplationis superessentialiter castae et impassibilis, hoc est ejus rei, quam contemplantur superessentialiter, omnem scilicet essentiam, et naturam animo transeuntes, cujus rei amor et castus est, quoniam corruptionem amanti non ingerit, et impassibilis quoniam suaviter reficiens desiderantem non affligit. « Et oportet etiam intelligere ipsam concupiscentiam desiderium esse, tendens ad illam puram, et sublimissimam claritatem; et ad invisibilem, [0982C] et formificam pulchritudinem aeternae, verae, et invisibilis societatis, » quae videlicet pulchritudo formifica dicitur, quoniam sibi conformat conversos ad se, ut pulchri fiant, amantes pulchritudinem veram, non sicut in carne, et secundum carnem, ubi amator pulchritudinis turpi esse potest; et pulchritudinis possessor non bonus inveniri; illic autem qui amat, possidet, et esse incipit qui habere diligit. Talem ergo amorem, et tale desiderium inconcupiscentia spiritualium ac divinorum intelligere oportet.

Sequitur: « Et veluti potentiam suscipit quidem in sufficientia, et in conversibilitate; et a nulla affligitur; virtute per inconfusum, et immutabilem divinae [0982D] pulchritudinis amorem, et universalem revocationem in id quod vere est appetendum. » Ac si diceret: Ipsa concupiscentia, sive desiderium castum aeternorum, et invisibilium bonorum, quia inflexibile est, sicut dictum est, et non indigens, idcirco excepit, sive accipit in sua sufficientia, et conversibilitate ad Deum, et ad divina, quasi potentia quamdam sive excellentiam et firmitatem, ut affligi omnino non possit ab aliqua contraria virtute, vel violentia, vel fortitudine. Nullus enim laedi potest, vel affligi, nisi in eo quod diligit; et propterea qui illud solum diligit quod auferri non potest, laedi omnino non potest, quia nec extra illud aliud appetit, in illo sufficientiam habens, nec de illius amissione sollicitatur, illud immutabiliter obtinens. Quia ergo [0983A] sufficiens est, non patitur indigentiam; et quia inflexibile est, sustinere non potest violentiam. Et hoc quidem ei confertur per inconfusum, et immutabilem divinae pulchritudinis amorem et universalem revocationem in id quod vere est appetendum. Quia enim in illis amor Dei inconfusus est, vel, ut aliter dicatur, impermistus et purus; idcirco desiderium eorum ad diversa non scinditur. Et quia immutabilis est, ab eodem non flectitur. Et quia universaliter revocantur, et colliguntur in id quod vere est appetendum, nulla exteriori violentia turbatur. Si enim toto desiderio ad veritatem amandam non revocarentur, nec colligerentur, procul dubio laedi et affligi possent, ubi mutabilibus, et transitoriis mente inhaererent. Nunc autem, quia toti illic sunt, ubi omnia [0983B] immutabiliter consistunt; fit ut ipsi quoque per cohaesionem dilectionis, afflictionis mutabilitatem sentire non possint.

Sequitur: « Sed et ipsam irrationabilitatem, et insensualitatem in quidem irrationabilibus animalibus, aut in animatis materiis, defectum rationis et sensus proprie vocamus; in autem immaterialibus, et intellectualibus essentiis sancte, et decenter supereminentias earum ut supermundalium confitemur, nostram transitoriam, et corporalem rationem et materialem, et alienatum incorporalibus animi sensum excellentes. » Aliis exemplis propositis ostendit ea quae de visibilibus et invisibilibus eadem dicuntur, non similiter dici, neque eodem modo. Ac si diceret: Non solum furor, et concupiscentia aliter [0983C] hic atque aliter illic intelligere oportet. Irrationabilitas enim, quae significat excelsum rationis; et insensualitas, quae excessum sensibilitatis demonstrat, quando hic nominantur, id est in irrationabilibus et sensum non habentibus, defectum ostendit rationis et sensibilitatis; quando vero illic, hoc est, in divinis et intellectualibus naturis dicitur, supra rationem et sensum aliquid non per defectum, sed per profectum significatur. Excessus enim rationis et sensibilitatis vel sursum fit, vel deorsum, cum videlicet a ratione, et sensu vel deficiens corruit, ut hoc non habeat, vel supra proficiens transcendit, ut amplius habeat. Unde et in sacra Scriptura sanctos viros Spiritu Dei afflatos exstasim, id est mentis excessum [0983D] aliquoties passos invenimus; quoniam supra rationem et sensum humanum ducti in hoc a ratione et sensu excesserunt, quo ad id, quod altius ratione erat, pertingentes in ipso vivificari et ab ipso illuminari coeperunt. Illis ergo excessus fuit in eo quod amplius acceperunt, sicut istis excessus factus est in eo, quod id ipsum perdiderunt. Propterea ergo irrationabilitatem et insensualitatem in irrationabilibus quidem animalibus et in materiis inanimatis defectum rationis, et sensus proprie vocamus; in immaterialibus autem, et intellectualibus essentiis quoties irrationabilitatem, et insensualitatem nominamus, confitemur non defectum earum; sed potius supereminentias earum, utpote supermundalium. Confitemur, dico, sancte, et decenter, [0984A] id est nihil irreverenter vel indecenter eis attribuentes; sed, sicut decet supereminentias vel excellentias supermundalium, id est spiritualium essentiarum, quae excellunt nostram transitoriam et corporalem rationem, id est rationem quae neque supra transitoria ascendere, neque extra corporalia omnino comprehendere aliquid potest; et excellentes sensum animi nostri materialem et alienatum in corporalibus hoc est, ad materialia tantum vigentem; et per materialia et corporalia ab immaterialibus, et incorporalibus alienatum, eadem percipere non valentem. Quia ergo supra talem rationem, supra talem sensum per excellentiam contemplationis constitutae sunt, merito a tali ratione, et sensu alienae perhibentur, ut haec ipsa eorum insensibilitas et irrationabilitas, [0984B] non intelligatur stupor sive ignorantia, sed alia esse et viri cognitio, et boni perceptio; et qualis apud nos est, vel secundum nos, non esse.

Sequitur: « Est itaque non dissonas formare coelestibus formas, et ex vilibus materiae partibus; quoniam et ipsa ex vere bono subsistentiam possidens, per omnem sui materialem dispositionem imagines quasdam intellectualis pulchritudinis habet; et possibile est per eas reduci ad immateriales primas formas, dissimiliter, ut dictum est, similitudinibus acceptis, et eisdem non similiter; compacte autem, et pulchre intellectualibusque, et sensibilibus proprietatibus definitis. » Subjungit aliam causam priori, pro qua convenienter ex visibilibus ad invisibilia [0984C] similitudines trahuntur, secundum ea etiam, quae contraria videntur; non solum videlicet quia ea, quae dicuntur aliter hic, et aliter ibi subsistere intelliguntur, sed ideo etiam, quia quaecunque hic sunt secundum aliud similitudinem habent ad ea quae ibi subsistunt, quoniam et haec, et illa ab uno bono sunt, quod sunt; et secundum imaginem, quam ad illud possident ista, illorum quoque figuram et similitudinem praetendunt. Hoc est quod dicit: « Est, » id est contingit, « formare coelestibus, » videlicet essentiis formas non dissonas, etiam « ex vilibus partibus materiae, » id est corporalis substantiae, quoniam et ipsa scilicet materia possidens subsistentiam ex vere bono habet quasdam [0984D] imagines intellectualis pulchritudinis per omnem sui materialem dispositionem: et per eas scilicet imagines possibile est reduci animum ad illas primas immateriales formas, id est ad formas immaterialium et spiritualium essentiarum, quae primae sunt ad ista quia secundum illa ista, et ad illa ista, et propter illa ista. Possibile est dico reduci de istis, ad illa tamen, similitudinibus ipsis dissimiliter acceptis, ut videlicet, quae hic sunt, et de illis dicuntur, aliter ibi esse, et subsistere intelligantur. Et proprietatibus eisdem non similiter definitis. Sed tamen compacte, id est convenienter, et apte, et pulchre, id est decenter subauditur definitis eisdem proprietatibus, utrobique videlicet et intellectualibus et insensibilibus. Similitudinem dicit, [0985A] quando per extrinsecas formas vel figuras, vel qualitates descriptiones invisibilium a visibilibus sumuntur; proprietatem autem, quando ab interiori natura similitudo conducitur. Sive ergo similitudines ex rebus visibilibus ad invisibilium naturam, extrinsecus transferendae proponantur, sive proprietates ab eisdem visibilibus, et materialibus rebus ad demonstrationem invisibilium intrinsecus assumantur, sic utrinque comparatio, et coaptatio temperanda est, ut et ipsae similitudines, quae similiter utrinque proponi videntur, dissimiliter tamen accipiantur; et aliter hic, aliter illic esse intelligantur; et ipsae proprietates quae utrisque eadem attribui videntur, aliter in istis, atque aliter in illis definiantur, et aliae esse intelligantur, ita ut unicuique, quod [0985B] sibi conveniens est et aptum secundum naturam attribuatur.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Haec mysticos theologos inveniemus non solum coelestium dispositionum declarationibus mirabiliter conformantes, sed et ipsis aliquando divinis manifestationibus. » Idem superius commemoravit, quoniam scilicet mystici theologi, id est theologi, qui mystica et secreta narrant, haec, id est has similitudines et proprietates sumptas a visibilibus, conformant, et coaptant non solum declarationibus coelestium dispositionum, id est coelestium ordinum angelicorum scilicet spirituum, id est non solum ad declarandas vel demonstrandas coelestes dispositiones, et angelicas ordinationes has similitudines, et proprietates rerum visibilium proponunt; [0985C] sed etiam ipsis aliquando divinis manifestationibus, hoc est, ad ipsam divinitatem manifestandam, et indicandam adducunt. « Et aliquando quidem ipsam » scilicet divinitatem, « ex luminibus pretiosis laudant, » eam luminibus pretiosis comparando, et laudem ejus per illius rei, quae inter caeteras res visibiles pretiosa est, et decora demonstrando, ut verbi gratia cum eam solem vocant, non hunc visibilem, qui oculos corporales etiam ad iniquitatem perpetrandam illuminat; sed solem justitiae, qui spirituales oculos ad veritatem, et virtutem cognoscendam illustrat. Et sicut cum eam vocant « stellam matutinam, » cujus ortus tenebras fugat, non in hunc mundum visibiliter illustrandum ascendentem, [0985D] sed in animum rationalem, qui solus hoc lumen capere potest, sancte, id est ad sanctificationem faciendam orientem. Et sicut etiam cum eam vocant « lumen incircumvolute, et invisibiliter resplendens; » non quemadmodum hoc visibile lumen, quod et tenebris obscurari, et circumvolvi, et loco concludi, et termino coarctari potest. Si ergo per species et formas summarum et pretiosarum rerum divinae majestatis excellentiam laudat mystica theologia. « Aliquando vero ex mediis, » subauditur rebus, quae in ordine conditionis nec summa sunt, nec infima, laudas ipsa theologia divinam majestatem, ut videlicet ignem eam vocando; non qualis iste est corporalis ignis, qui licet prosit illuminando, nocet urendo, et consumendo; sed « ignem innocue splendentem; » [0986A] illuminantem scilicet, ex non comburentem; accendentem, et non consumentem. Et quemadmodum cum eam vocat « aquam vitalis plenitudinis datricem; » quae dat videlicet plenitudinem vitae, et vita implet haurientes et portantes eam; et aquam etiam, « ut symbolice, » id est figurative, sic dicatur, « in ventrem subeuntem; fluminaque redundantem immensurabiliter refluentia. » Haec enim omnia non in proprietate, sed in figura sola de ipsa dicuntur. In omnibus his divinitatis majestatem et bonitatem laudat mystica theologia. « Aliquando autem etiam ex novissimis » ut ex inferioribus et terrenis ipsam laudat, et laudem ipsius figurative manifestat, ut cum eam nominat « unguentum suave » et similiter cum vocat eam « lapidem [0986B] angularem. » Et in tantum rerum infirmarum species per similitudinem ei coaptat, ut aliquando etiam ad inconvenientes, et contrarias formas in ejus descriptione descendere videatur. Quod tamen secundum causam superius memoratam congrua, necessariaque dispensatione peragitur. « Sed et bestialem ipsi formam circumponunt. » Ac si diceret: Non solum in declaratione divinitatis theologi ex rebus inferioribus similitudines assumunt, sed (quod mirum videtur!) etiam ad contrarias ac dissimiles, et quae si secundum proprietatem intelligerentur, indignae omnino ejus majestate essent, formationes descendunt. « Nam et bestialem ipsi formam circumponunt; et leonis ei, et pantherae specialitatem, » id est speciem, vel formam, vel figuram « coaptant; [0986C] et vestiunt eam, » scilicet divinitatem: « pardalineam, » subauditur formam, id est formam pardi. « Et vestiunt eam, » subauditur iterum divinitatem; ursam saevientem, hoc est specie ursae saevientis, vel « ursam saevientem » eam dicunt, ut in utroque disconvenientia appareat, cum etiam deformitatem pulchro, et miti crudelitatem attribuant.

Sequitur: « Addam vero et quod omnium vilibus esse, et magis significare visum est. » Ac si diceret: Liceret in praecedentibus, quae commemorata sunt, et caeteris ejusmodi, magna indignitas videatur tamen in hoc quod subjungo, multo major apparet injuria. « Addam vero, » praesumam quidem, et audacter [0986D] loqui videbor, qui et hoc divinis significationibus adjiciam, « quod omnium vilissimum esse visum est; » ac per hoc secundum rationem supradictam, qua dissimilia symbola magis declarationem faciunt, amplius caeteris significare probatur. Quod tamen fortassis homo divinae majestati aptare non auderet si non ipsa sibi haec sapientia Dei spontanea dignatione assumeret. « Quia et vermis specie tradiderunt ipsam divina sapientes seipsam circumformantem. » Sicut scriptum est: « Ego sum vermis, et non homo; opprobrium hominum, et abjectio plebis [n: (Psal. XXI)]. » Nisi enim ipsa prius de se hoc dixisset, quis de ipsa hoc dicere auderet? Cum enim nihil verme vilius et humilius esse videatur, quis summam majestatem in hanc adjectionem [0987A] deducere praesumeret, nisi ipsa se prius propria dispensatione tali specie significando circumformaretur. Propterea ipsa hoc prius de se dignata est dicere, quod sciebat humanam conscientiam per se in Creatorem suum non audere. « Sic omnes theosophi, et occulta inspiratione prophetae a sanctis incontaminatis distinguunt Sancta sanctorum. » Theosophi, id est divina sapientes et qui occulta inspiratione prophetae facti sunt. Ii omnes cum per visibiles species et visibilium rerum proprietates invisibilia designare volunt, distinguunt ita ut superius demonstravimus, « a sanctis incontaminatis Sancta sanctorum. » Sancta incontaminata sunt symbola divinorum ex pulchris et decentibus formis assumpta; Sancta sanctorum sunt ipsa, quae [0987B] per haec figurantur, divina. Theosophi ergo per hoc quod dissimiles figuras divinis attribuunt, etiam similes formationes, et eas quae dignae videbantur, ab illorum excellentia et majestate secernunt. Quia enim et illa coaptant significationi eorum, quae non dubitantur esse aliena; ostendunt et alia quoque, quae vera videri poterant, secundum proprietatem non esse similia. Sic ergo in una eademque re, et in similibus figuram a veritate separant, et in dissimilibus veritatis societate figuram veritatis honorant, quoniam et illa cum alia ostenduntur, discernuntur, et ista, cum ad similitudinem coaptantur, honorantur. Sic enim conveniens erat, ut id quod factum est, omne ad Creatoris excellentiam comparatum, et in sublimibus demonstraretur non [0987C] esse aequales et in infimis non esse dissimile. Quia enim factum est, non potest ad aequalitatem esse comparabile, et quia ab eo factum est, non potest illi, a quo factum est, omnino esse dissimile.

Sequitur: « Ut neque divina immundis recte sint accepta, neque mirabilium imaginum studiosi contemplationis tanquam veris remaneant figuris. » Hoc ergo agitur per dissimiles figurationes, ut in earum consideratione immundi corde, et indigni cognitione veritatis amplius excaecentur; et ii qui studiosi sunt, in contemplatione mirabilium imaginum, hoc est sacrarum repraesentationum mirabiliter factarum amplius exerceantur. Sic enim utrobique [0987D] justum institutum perficitur, ut dum veritas in manifestatione quasi vili indumento se contegit, et indignos ad contemptum sui provocet, et dignos, et illam speciem suam, quae latet, concupiscendam, et quaerendam invitet, ut non sint contenti eo quod foris aspiciunt, sed ipse deformitate exterioris demonstrationis repulsi in figuris non remaneant tanquam veris, quoniam signum veritas esse non potest, etiam cum veritatis est signum.

Sequitur: « Divina itaque honorificant veris negationibus, et ad novissima compactarum imaginationum diversis similitudinibus. » Ac si diceret: Quandoquidem negationes in divinis factae expressius veritatem eorum significant, et dissimiles formationes imaginum evidentius puritatem eorum demonstrant, [0988A] ergo nullam injuriam faciunt ipsis divinis theologi sancti, et veras negationes de ipsis faciendo, et dissimiles formationes, ipsis attribuendo, sed honorificant potius ipsa divina veris negationibus, quibus ostendunt illorum excellentiam tantam esse, ut quid sint, nullo modo possit exprimi, etiamsi aliquo modo quid non sint possit dici; et honorificant etiam ea similitudinibus ab eorum sublimitate per humilem formationem diversis; et similitudinibus imaginationum compactarum ad novissima, hoc est compositarum, et conjunctarum ex novissimis, id est infimis et vilibus rerum corruptibilium speciebus.

Sequitur: « Nihil ergo inconsequens est, si et coelestes essentias ex inconvenientibus dissimilibus [0988B] similitudinibus formam secundum dictas causas. » Ac si dicat: Quandoquidem veris negationibus, et formationibus diversis divina honorificantur; nihil inconsequens est, hoc est inconveniens, si formant theologi, id est repraesentant coelestes essentias ex similitudinibus dissimilibus, et inconvenientibus; hoc est per repraesentationes figurarum ab earum natura dissimilium, et quodammodo inconvenientium. Non est inconsequens dico secundum superius dictas causas.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Non enim fortassis utique, non nos in quaestionem quidem ex indigentia in anagogen per diligentem divinorum scrutationem veniremus, nisi deformitas nos extorqueret manifestatoriae angelorum formationis. » Quasi diceret: Ex indigentia [0988C] nostra in quaestionem hanc, hoc est ad ista quaerenda quantum ad imaginum visibilium compositionem, vel in anagogen quantum ad invisibilis veritatis investigationem; ex nostra inquam indigentia, qui veritatem scientes iis quaestionibus non indigemus; in hanc, inquam, quaestionem non veniremus, nisi (propter alios qui inde scandalizari possent, si non erudirentur) deformitas nos extorqueret. Primum negationis geminationem nota, qua expressio facta est: vel in hoc manifestum est formationes deformes in divinis utiles esse, quia et nos divinorum veritatem ita diligenter non scrutaremur, nisi deformitas manifestationum nos extorqueret, id est compelleret. Hoc est quod dicit: « Non utique fortassis [0988D] veniremus in quaestionem ducentes in anagogen, » hoc est supernorum contemplationem; ex indigentia scilicet intelligentiae veritatis: non veniremus, dico, per diligentem divinorum scrutationem, « nisi nos extorqueret, » hoc est compelleret « venire in quaestionem ex indigentia, et per quaestionem in anagogen, » ipsa deformitas manifestatoriae deformationis, angelorum, id est nisi deformitas formationis, per quam in Scriptura sacra manifestantur, angeli, compelleret; dico: « Non sinens nostrum animum remanere in dissimilibus formarum facturis, » id est in deformibus repraesentationum compositionibus, quae a veritate spiritualium dissimiles sunt. Nisi ergo ipsa deformitas repraesentationum nostrum animum a visibilibus figuris ad [0989A] quaerendam veritatem compelleret; ipse noster animus in iis, quae foris proposita sunt, solis credendis et venerandis remaneret, nec indigentiam suam agnosceret, ut alia extra haec concupiscenda sibi et quaerenda putaret. Nunc autem ipsa deformitas interveniens compellit animum egredi a figura ad veritatem; animum dico non valentem remanere in iis quae per se indigna sunt, et incongrua divinorum veritati. « Sed luctantem negare » ab ipsius divinis istas « materiales possibilitates, » quae foris in signis proponuntur; ac per hoc quod ita sanctae abominatur « assuescentem pure extendere se per visibilia » excitatum « in supermundanas altitudines » : id est excellentias angelicas, quae mundanis omnibus supereminent et excellunt. Nisi enim ab istis excitatus [0989B] per contemplationis provectum eadem ipsa omnino relinqueret, illa ad quae contemplanda nititur, pure intueri non valeret.

Sequitur: « Tanta quidem a nobis dicta sunt » etc. Continuat ipse praecedentia ad sequentem narrationem. « Tanta quidem, » quanta hactenus diximus, « dicta sunt a nobis propter descriptiones imaginum angelicas, » id est propter descriptiones angelorum, quae factae sunt per imagines, et formas visibiles, et a visibilibus sumptas, quae descriptiones sunt « divinorum eloquiorum, » id est per divina eloquia factae, et in divinis eloquiis praepositae, quae etiam descriptiones materiales sunt, id est secundum materialium et corporalium naturam, et similitudinem formatae; et sunt etiam inconvenientes [0989C] propter incongruas et turpes figurationes eorum, quibus attributae sunt excellentiae. Propter ejusmodi enim quaestio, quae hactenus ventilata est, proposita fuit. « Deinde autem segregare oportet, quid ipsam quidem esse hierarchiam existimamus; quidque ab ipsa hierarchia prosunt hierarchiam sortientes. Oportet, inquit, deinde, » hoc est, post supradicta, segregare, hoc est distinguere quid existimanus esse ipsam hierarchiam generaliter acceptam definitione ejus proposita. « Deinde » etiam « oportet segregare, quid prosunt, » hoc est quid utilitatis accipiunt sortientes hierarchiam ab ipsa scilicet hierarchia, quam singuli sortiuntur. Atque in hoc dicendo precor, inquit, ut sit « dux » sermonis [0989D] mei « Christus meus; » ita tamen si mihi fas est, hoc est licet dicere « meus. » Magnum enim est hoc, et quasi praesumptioni proximum esse videtur, ut peccator praemium justi accipiat, et abjectus de altissimi familiaritate confidat. Propterea dico [0990A] « Christus » (et si amplius audeo, dico « meus » ) dux sit sermonis mei. Sine quo nec sermo potest esse rectus, quia verbum est; nec intelligentia vera, quia sapientia est. Nam omnes qui verum sapiunt, per ipsum sapiunt; et ipse est inspiratio « totius hierarchicae manifestationis, » quoniam ipse sapientia mentibus sanctorum theologorum inspiratus omnem hierarchicae dispositionis rationem sive quae in coelo est, sive quae in terra est iis, quibus ipse vult, modis manifestat. « Tu vero, o puer, » etc. Ad Timotheum loquitur Pauli discipulum, ad quem haec scripisse fertur, quem et puerum vocat propterea vel quia aetate antecedebat ipsum, vel quia doctoris, et magistri loco et dignitate fungebatur ad ipsum. « Tu vero, o puer, ausculta. » Ac si dicat: [0990B] Quia ea quae dicenda sunt, magna sunt, idcirco tu sancte ac decenter ausculta, sicut ipsa sancta quae dicenda sunt, decet. « Ausculta » dico; secundum sanctam nostrae sacerdotalis traditionis legislationem quae non contendere jubet, nec resistere in doctrina, sed reverenter, et humiliter auscultare. Sive ausculta haec, quae dicta sunt « secundum sanctam legislationem nostrae sacerdotalis traditionis, » id est quae dicta sunt secundum sanctam legem; id est sanctam Scripturam, quae allata est nobis a Deo per traditionem sacerdotalem, id est per traditionem sanctorum et sanctificatorum. Sic ergo « ausculta mirabiliter dictorum » hoc est ea quae mirabiliter dicta sunt: « tu » dico, qui factus es divinus in divina doctrina, quae audientes et facientes divinos [0990C] facit; vel in divina doctrina mirabiliter dictorum divinus factus ausculta quae dicenda propono. Et non solum ausculta, ut dicta reverenter suscipias, sed etiam « secreto animi quae sancta sunt circumtegens ex immunda multitudine, » id est ab iis qui et conversatione immundi et desideriis divisi sunt: « tanqam uniformia, » id est indivisa et intacta « custodi, » ne imprudenter lanianda et polluenda exponas. « Non enim fas est, ut eloquia aiunt, in porcos projicere invisibilium margaritarum inconfusum, et luciformem, beneficumque ornatum. » Ipsi enim sunt immunda illa multitudo qui per porcos in sacra Scriptura significantur, qui Verbum Dei male vivendo polluunt, et invisibiles margaritas, id [0990D] est spirituales intelligentias, quae ornant moribus intelligentias, lucent per puram veritatem, inconfusae sunt per affluentiam gratiae, beneficae sunt in eos, qui ipsas cum reverentia et honore contingunt.

## LIBER QUARTUS.

[0989]

## TITULUS CAPITULI III. *Quid est hierarchia et quae per hierarchiam utilitas.*

## LITTERA.

[0989D]

*Est quidem hierarchia, secundum me, ordo divinus, et scientia, et actio deiforme quantum possibile similans, [0990D] et ad inditas ei divinitus illuminationes proportionaliter in Dei similitudinem ascendens. Divina pulchritudo ut simpla, et optima ut consummativa. Pura [0991A] quidem est universaliter omnium dissimilitudine, distributiva vero secundum dignitatem uniuscujusque proprii luminis: et perfectiva in sacrificio divinissimo secundum ad ipsam perfectorum compacte immutabilem formationem. Interpretatio igitur hierarchiae est ad Deum, quantum possibile est similitudo, et unitas, ipsum habens omnis sanctae actionis, et scientiae ducem; et ad suum divinissimum decorem immutabiliter quidem definiens: quantum vero possibile reformat, et suos laudatores agalmata divina perficit specula clarissima, et munda receptiva principalis luminis, et divini radii, et inditae quidem claritatis sacrae repleta: eamque iterum copiose in ea, quae sequuntur declarantia divinas leges. Non enim fas est sanctorum perfectoribus ac sancte perfectis; operari quod omnino [0991B] praeter hostiarum + mysteria, aut sacras ordinationes; sed neque subsistere aliter si divinam ipsius claritatem appetunt; et ad ipsam sacre et decenter respiciunt, et reformantur, secundum uniuscujusque sanctorum intellectuum anagogiam. Nonne ergo hierarchiam qui dicit, sacram quamdam universaliter declarat dispositionem, imaginem divinae speciositatis in ordinibus, et scientiis hierarchicis propriae illuminationis sacrificantem mysteria, et ad proprium principium, ut licet, assimilatam? Est enim unicuique hierarchiam sortientium perfectio; hoc est secundum propriam analogiam in Dei imitationem ascendere, et omnium divinius, ut eloquia aiunt, Dei cooperatorem fieri [n: (I Cor. III; III Joan. I; Matth. V)]*, *et ostendere divinam in seipso actionem, secundum [0991C] quod possibile est, relucentem. Utpote quoniam ordo hierarchiae est quosdam quidem purgari, quosdam vero purgare; et quosdam quidem illuminari quosdam vero illuminare; et quosdam quidem perfici, quosdam vero perficere; unicuique deiforme adunationi qualicunque modo. Divina beatitudo, quantum in hominibus dicendum, pura quidem est sine omni dissimilitudine, plena vero luminis aeterni, perfecta et non indigens, simul omnis perfectionis; purgans, et illuminans, et perficiens; magna autem purgatio, sancta et illuminatio, et perfectio, super purgationem, super lumen, ante perfecta; per seipsam perfecta perfectionis principium; et omnis quidem hierarchiae causa, omnisque sacri secundum supereminentem celsitudinem. [0991D] Oportet itaque, ut existimo, purgandos quidem puro perfici omnino, et omni liberari dissimilitudinis confusione. Illuminandos vero repleri divino lumine ad contemplativam habitudinem et virtutem in castissimis mentis oculis reducendos. Ex imperfecto restaurando participes fieri exploratorum sacrorum perfectivae scientiae. Purgatores vero magnitudine purgationis aliis tradere ex propria castitate. Illuminatores autem luculentiores animos, et ad participationem luminis, et distributionem proprie habentes, et ditissime sanctae repleti charitatis, omnino suum superexcellens lumen in eos qui digni sunt lumine, supervehere. Perfectores vero tanquam praeceptores perfectivae traditionis perficiendos sacratissima doctrina per inspectorum sacrorum scientiam. Nonne ergo [0992A] unusquisque hierarchia dispositionis ordo secundum propriam analogiam reducitur ad divinam cooperationem, illa perficiens gratia, et Deo data virtute, quae divinitati naturaliter, et supernaturaliter insunt, et ab ea superessentialiter acta, et ad possibilem Deum diligentium animorum imitationem hierarchiae manifestata.*

## EXPOSITIO.

Hactenus quae universaliter dicenda erant introducendis in hierarchiarum cognitionem pro ratione demonstrationum visibilium in significationem visibilium propositarum theologus disseruit. Deinde nunc principalem narrationem ingrediens primum definit quid sit hierarchia; non universaliter tamen, sed secundum eam tantum, quae in angelis et [0992B] hominibus constat hierarchiam, significatione restricta. « Est quidem, » inquit, « hierarchia, secundum me, ordo divinus, et scientia, et actio, deiforme, quantum possibile similans; et ad inditas ei divinitus illuminationes proportionaliter in Dei similitudinem ascendens. » Quod ait, « secundum me, » ita accipiendum, ac si dixisset, secundum existimationem meam. Pudice enim temperat assertionem suam, ne de sua existimatione plus justo praesumere videatur. Deinde tria in definitione hierarchiae principalia proponit, quae perficiunt ipsam hierarchiae definitionem. Sunt autem haec: ordo, scientia et actio. Horum trium si defuerit omnium aliquod, non constat hierarchia. Primum est ordo divinus; quia non est potestas, si ordinata non est [0992C] a Deo; propter hoc ait, ordo divinus. « Omnis » enim « potestas a Deo est; et quae a Deo sunt, omnia bona et ordinata sunt; propterea qui potestati resistit a Deo ordinatae, Deo resistit [n: (Rom. XIII)]. » Propter hoc ergo hierarchia est ordo divinus, id est potestas a Deo ordinata, et secundum Deum disposita. A Deo quippe est per ordinationem; et secundum Deum est per imitationem; et propterea ordo divinus, quia a Deo est, ut sit; et secundum Deum est, ut qualis et quantus sit. Deinde quia omnis potestas, quae a Deo ordinata est, ad aliquid perficiendum, atque complendum ordinata est; sequitur in definitione post ordinem « scientia et actio. » Scientia quidem, qua quid faciendum sit intelligant; [0992D] actio vero, qua quod intellexerint agendum, perficiant. In ordine officium; in scientia discretio; in actione ministerium. Sine ordine praesumptio est actio, sine actione negligentia est ordo, sine scientia vero et actio reprehensibilis et ordo inutilis. Propter haec ergo hierarchia est ordo divinus, et scientia, et actio. Hierarchia dico tam in ordine quam scientia et actione, similans deiforme, hoc est conformitatem Dei imitans quantum possibile scilicet illi est; et ascendens in Dei similitudinem proportionaliter ad illuminationes, id est secundum illuminationes divinitus ei inditas: unaquaeque scilicet secundum modum et mensuram gratiae divinitus ei infusae in ordine suo perficiens, et ascendens ad imitationem Dei, ut recte discernendo et bene operando [0993A] ipsum imitetur. In utroque enim divinam similitudinem aemulatur omnis hierarchia, sive in eo videlicet quod ab ipso disponitur sive in eo quod secundum ipsum operatur. Haec autem definitio, sicut diximus, angelicam tantum et humanam hierarchiam complectitur, quae ad similitudinem summae et aeternae factae sunt hierarchiae: et ipsam imitantur secundum ipsam dispositae.

Sequitur: « Divina pulchritudo ut simpla, et optima ut consummativa; pura quidem est universaliter omni dissimilitudine; distributiva vero secundum dignitatem uniuscujusque proprii luminis; et perfectiva in sacrificio divinissimo secundum ad ipsam perfectorum compacte immutabilem formationem. » Sensus hic est. Quod divina pulchritudo, [0993B] quam summam nominamus hierarchiam, secundum quam caeterae factae sunt hierarchiae, pura est universaliter, id est omnino, utpote quae semper simpla quidem est unitate, optima bonitate, consummativa perfectione. Ubi enim unitas est, diversitas non est; et ubi diversitas non est, dissimilitudo nulla esse potest. Item ubi perfectio est, ibi gradus non est; ubi gradus non est, differentia non est; ubi differentia non est, dissimilitudo nulla est. Ergo divina pulchritudo, quae forma et exemplar est bene, et pulchre dispositorum omnium; quia una est, pluralitatem non recipit; et quia optima est, et consummata, nec solum consummata, sed etiam consummandorum omnium consummativa, et consummationis causa, diversitatem non admittit, ac per [0993C] hoc omnino dissimilitudinem nescit; quae et una est simplicitate et eadem perfectione. Et cum in semetipsa talis sit, ut nec dividatur pluralitate, nec inferior sit diversitate; in ipsis tamen qui participes fiunt gratiae, distributiva est proprii luminis, proprium lumen diversis modis tribuens; secundum dignitatem, videlicet uniuscujusque participantium; altioribus quidem majora, inferioribus autem minora largiendo dona gratiarum, ut in ipsis pulchre multiplicetur, quae in se vere una consistit. Perfectiva est et ipsa divina pulchritudo, quoniam perficit, et consummatos facit participes luminum suorum; perfectiva dico in sacrificio divinissimo, quo perficit perficiendos secundum immutabilem formationem compacte perfectorum ad ipsam. Divinissimum [0993D] sacrificium vocat ipsam illuminationem divinam, et gratiam, et propitiationem; quo purgantur, et emundantur purgandi omnes, et salvandi, non solum a corruptione mali, ut boni fiant; sed a defectu quoque boni purgantur, ut meliores assistant. Ipsa ergo oblatio summa, et teletargis, id est principalis purgationis hostia; ipsa videlicet gratia divina quae nobis offertur et pro nobis offertur. Offertur nobis ad purgationem, offertur pro nobis ad propitiationem. Offertur nobis, ut eam habeamus; offertur pro nobis, ut per eam placeamus. Offertur nobis per infusionem, offertur pro nobis per emundationem. Offertur nobis dum incipimus esse quod non fuimus; offertur a nobis, dum exhibemus et praesentamus [0994A] quod sumus. Ipsa ergo teletargis, id est principalis purgationis hostia, et sacrificium divinissimum, sine quo omnes hostiae et sacrificia omnia nec affectum habere possunt, nec prodesse; ipsum est, quo divina pulchritudo perficit, et perfectos facit eos, qui perfecti sunt, ad ipsam, id est ad similitudinem ipsius reformati, id est concorditer, ut ab ea videlicet non discrepent secundum immutabilem formationem ipsorum scilicet perfectorum, ad ipsam, id est secundum similitudinem ejus, quam semel acceptam immutabiliter servant, ut non defluant ab ipsa. Divina enim pulchritudo quae in se una est, et perfecta perficiendos ad se per principalis purgationis hostiam id est infusionem gratiae suae, quam a sua plenitudine propter purgandos, et [0994B] perficiendos in participatione diffudit, purgat et perficit, secundum uniuscujusque modum, et mensuram, et capacitatem, quam dono ejusdem gratiae perceperunt secundum immutabilem formationem illorum ad ipsam; quae videlicet formatio vel ideo immutabilis, sicut diximus, vocatur, quod ipsos, quod formantur et reformantur ad immutabilitatem convertat; vel quia immutabilis consistit in eo, a quo est, etiam si mutetur iis quibus est et in quibus est.

Sequitur: « Interpretatio [ *intentio* ] igitur hierarchiae est ad Deum, quantum possibile, similitudo et unitas. » Quod in Graeco dicitur σκοπός *scopos,* et quod translator interpretationem vocat, magis proprie *intentio* vel *directio* nominatur. Est enim intentio [0994C] sive directio, quae scopos dicitur, certa destinatio in aliquem finem. Omnis enim actio in aliquem finem tendit et per aliquam directionem tendit. Scopas autem, id est directio vel destinatio, est qua tendit. Omnis ergo hierarchia scopon habet, id est directionem secundum quam incedat in ministerio suo explendo; imitationem scilicet, et similitudinem divinam, ut quemadmodum ab ipso ordinata est in officio et dignitate, ita secundum ipsum incedat in ministerio et operatione, ut praeter modum, et mensuram ab ipso assignatam et ordini suo debitam, nihil agere praesumat. Est ergo interpretatio, id est definitio, sive potius directio et contemplatio hierarchiae, qua intendere debet et dirigit omnis hierarchia: similitudo, et unitas, hoc est [0994D] imitatio et identitas ad Deum, ut in nullo deviet vel declinet ab ipsius similitudine, in qua posita est; sed eum quantum possibile est aemuletur per omnia. Similitudo ad Deum est ipsum imitari; unitas vero solum sequi. Et hic est scopus, id est directio, vel destinatio omnis hierarchiae, ut secundum ipsum ad ipsum incedat, ipsum habens omnis sanctae et scientiae, et actionis ducem, ipsum sequens judicio, et actione illuminata ab ipso ad cognitionem veritatis, et adjuta ad exsecutionem boni operis. « Ipsum habens ducem » intus praesidentem in demonstratione veritatis, et foris praecedentem in exemplo bonae actionis. « Et ad suum divinissimum decorem immutabiliter quidem definiens; [0995A] quantum vero possibile, reformat, et suos laudatores agalmata divina perficit. » Ipsa quidem scilicet hierarchia immutabiliter definiens, hoc est invariabiliter sive inflexibiliter conversa, vel intendens per suum scopum ad divinissimum decorem ipsius Dei, imitando, et sequendo ipsum, ut pulchritudini ipsius et decori divinissimo conformetur, secundum quem omnis hierarchia pulchre et decenter in suo ordine et gradu disposita est: quantum possibile est reformat suos laudatores, hoc est eos qui in ipsa Deum laudant, et ad laudem Dei dispositi sunt et ordinati: reformat, dico, in eo ipso quod imitatores Dei facit, et ad similitudinem ipsius in suo ministerio convertit, et convertendo, ac reformando agalmata divina perficit, ut sint ipsi divina [0995B] agalmata, id est sancta simulacra et receptacula divinitatis, et specula clarissima; ut sint ipsi agalmata quidem divina, divinum lumen perficiendo, specula autem clarissima lucenda ex suscepto lumine. Perficit etiam ipsos laudatores suos, « munda receptiva, » sive receptacula « principalis luminis, et divini radii » hoc est luminis immediate illuminantis, et ad ipsa prima illuminanda descendentis, ut post susceptum quidem lumen repleta sint claritatis sacrae, inditae sibi, hoc est, infusae: et ut sint etiam declarantia eam, videlicet claritatem, « iterum, » hoc est secundo loco, « in ea, quae sequuntur, declarantia » copiose secundum « divinas leges. » Sensus hic est: Quoniam hierarchia secundum illam dispositionem, qua divinam pulchritudinem [0995C] imitatur, laudatores suos universaliter quidem, id est sive superiores, sive inferiores, tales facit ut digni sint, et lumen divinum percipere et lucere ex lumine: specialiter autem quosdam ita mundos perficit ut sint capaces principalis luminis, et immediate illuminentur a Deo, ac deinde ad eos, qui sequuntur post se et dignitate constituti sunt sub se, lumen suum transfundant: copiose quidem ex abundantia perceptionis primae secundam participationem ministrantes, servata duntaxat lege divina, in qua unicuique perscriptum est quid, vel quantum, aut cui ex dono gratiae sibi concesso debeat impertiri. Nam quod non sine divina lege, id est ea dispensatione divina, qua dona gratiae in participes largitionis secundum [0995D] certam mensuram, et proportionem tribuuntur: et assignantur officia, ut sciat unusquisque quantum sibi liceat secundum ministerium assignatum vel fieri liceat, manifestat cum subdit:

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

« Non enim fas est sanctorum perfectoribus, ac sancte perfectis operari quid omnino praeter propria mysteria hostiarum, ac sacras ordinationes. » Ac si dicat: Propterea ii qui in ordine hierarchiarum superiores sunt secundum divinas leges, lumina sua ad inferiores transfundunt; quia fas non est, hoc est, licitum omnino aliquid operari, aut sanctorum perfectoribus, id est iis qui alios in sanctitate perficiunt, aut sancte perfectis, id est iis qui ab aliis in sanctitate perficiuntur, praeter propria hostiarum mysteria, id est propria gratiarum dona, et proprias [0996A] sacras ordinationes, id est sacros ordines unicuique proprios assignatos. Nam sine gratia operari, vanum est; praeter ordinem operari aut contra, perversum. Habent namque singuli propria dona, secundum quae valeant operari; et ordines proprios secundum quos debeant operationem suam moderari. Propterea necesse est ut studeat unusquisque gratiam, quam accepit, agnoscere, ne incipiat praesumere in eo quod non potest; et officium proprium, ordinemque attendere, ne audeat transgredi in eo quod non debet. Hunc namque ordinem divinae dispositionis diligenter servandum esse Petrus apostolus admonet, dicens: « Unusquisque sicut accepit gratiam, in alterutrum administrantes » [n: (I Petr. IV)]. Et Paulus apostolus eos qui hanc divinam ordinationem, [0996B] et dispensationem tenere noluerunt, reprehendit, dicens: « Nunquid omnes apostoli? Nunquid omnes prophetae? Nunquid omnes doctores? Nunquid omnes virtutes? Nunquid omnes gratiam curationum habent? Nunquid omnes linguis loquuntur? Nunquid omnes interpretantur? Aemulamini charismata meliora. » [n: (I Cor. XII.)] Propterea igitur fas non est iis, qui divinae gratiae participes facti sunt, sive immediate a Deo, sive per hominem eam acceperint, aliquid operari praeter propria dona, et officia, ut divina pulchritudo in omnibus conservetur, et ordo dispensationis summae perseveret. Sanctorum perfectores vocat eos, qui tantam a Deo gratiam perceperunt, ut alios etiam illuminando, et erudiendo ad sanctitatem perficiant. Sancte perfecti sunt, qui [0996C] ab ipsis superioribus illuminati, et eruditi in sanctitate perficiuntur. Mysteria hostiarum, sive dona gratiarum intelligi vult: quae propterea mysteria dicuntur, quia occulte inspirantur; hostiae autem, quia ad emundationem et expiationem percipientium tribuuntur. Sive ministeria hostiarum exhibitiones sanctorum operum dicit, et administrationes divinorum sacramentorum: quae et hostiae sunt, quia offeruntur per exhibitionem actionis, et mysteria per sacramenta significationis; quia per id, quod foris visibiliter in sacramento agitur, invisibilis virtus veritatis significatur. Ita ergo praeter propria hostiarum mysteria, id est dona, vel ministeria propria, fas non est operari aliquid, vel sanctorum perfectoribus, id est iis qui gratiam acceptam aliis perficiendis [0996D] administrant, vel ipsis perfectis, id est qui per acceptam gratiam, in sanctitatis perfectionem perficiuntur. Neque fas est etiam sive his, sive illis aliquid operari, praeter sacras ordinationes suas, hoc est, praeter id quod ad sacras ordinationes suas spectat, ut videlicet id solum unusquisque operari praesumat, quod ad ordinem, et officium sibi assignatum spectare probatur.

Sequitur: « Sed neque subsistere aliter, si divinam ipsius claritatem appetunt, et ad ipsam sacre, et decenter respiciunt, et reformantur, secundum uniuscujusque sanctorum intellectuum analogiam. » Quasi dicat: Non solum debitum illis est ut sacra mysteria et ordinationes sacras custodiant, sed necessarium [0997A] quoque, quoniam aliter subsistere non possunt, in eo videlicet statu, quo divinam pulchritudinem imitantur, nisi ordines suos servando secundum leges divinas incedant. Si ergo appetunt divinam ipsius Creatoris sui claritatem, et ad ipsam percipiendam respiciunt imitando, et desiderando sacre per affectum, decenter per habitum, et reformamur ad ipsius similitudinem imitando ipsam, et sequendo: unusquisque videlicet sanctorum intellectuum, id est angelorum, « secundum uniuscujusque analogiam, » id est secundum modum et mensuram possibilitatis suae, quam habet secundum ordinem, et gradum, et proprietatem suam unusquisque; aliter nullatenus subsistere possunt in eo bono, quod appetunt, nisi secundum leges divinas incedant, [0997B] ordinationes suas servando, et ministeria propria exsequendo.

Sequitur: « Nonne ergo hierarchiam qui dicit, sacram quamdam universaliter declarat dispositionem, imaginem divinae speciositatis in ordinibus, et scientiis hierarchicis propriae illuminationis sacrificantem mysteria, et ad proprium principium, ut licet, assimilatam? » Quando, inquit, necesse est ut omnis hierarchia divinam appetat similitudinem, neque aliter subsistere potest, nisi in ejus imitatione perseveret. Ergo qui dicit hierarchiam, declarat sacram dispositionem quamdam, quae imago est divinae speciositatis, id est pulchritudinis. Dispositionem, dico sacrificantem mysteria, id est exercentem sive exhibentem mystica opera, vel divina ministeria [0997C] propriae illuminationis, hoc est secundum propriam illuminationem in ordinibus et scientiis hierarchicis, quantum videlicet unicuique datum est operi secundum ordinem, et gradum suum, et donum gratiae illuminantis; et operando assimilatam, ut licet, id est quantum possibile est creaturae secundum modum et dignitatem suam ad proprium principium suum a quo et facta est ut aliquid sit, et secundum quod disposita est ut talis sit. « Nonne ergo qui hierarchiam dicit declarat dispositionem quamdam sacram universaliter, » id est in omni ordine et gradu suo sic se habentem; quoniam, videlicet disposita est et ordinata ad imaginem divinae pulchritudinis in ordinibus, et scientiis hierarchicis, et sacrificat [0997D] mysteria propriae illuminationis, ut in omni dispositione sua, et ordine dignitatis, et scientia discretionis, et imitatione operis, principium suum aemuletur. Mysteria propriae illuminationis sacrificat, qui ex occulto aspirationis dono bonum opus repraesentat; mysteria etiam propriae illuminationis sacrificat, qui perceptam gratiam ad alios transfundens talentum commissum multiplicat; mysteria etiam propriae illuminationis sacrificat, qui ea solum quae suo ordini et officio conveniunt administrat. « Est enim unicuique hierarchiam sortientium perfectio, hoc est, secundum propriam analogiam in Dei imitationem ascendere, et omnium divinius [divinissime], ut eloquia aiunt, Dei cooperato em fieri, et ostendere divinam in seipso actionem, secundum quod possibile est [0998A] relucentem. » Propterea ait: Qui dicit: hierarchiam generalem quamdam dispositionem significat, pulchritudinem divinam in sua ordinatione imitantem, quia haec est perfectio unicuique ordini scilicet sive personae omnium hierarchiam sortientium ascendere, videlicet secundum propriam analogiam, id est modum et mensuram in Dei imitationem, et fieri cooperatorem Dei, ut eloquia aiunt, divinius omnium, id est quo nihil divinius aiunt eloquia, vel omnium divinius fieri cooperatorem Dei, id est, quo nihil magis divinos facit quam scilicet Dei cooperatorem fieri, et ostendere in seipso divinam actionem relucentem: ut scilicet ad alios relucendo transfundat per exemplum operis, quod primum percipere meruit per donum occultae aspirationis. Sic ergo [0998B] perfectio constat hierarchiae, ut qui purgantur purgent, et qui illuminantur illuminent, et qui perficiuntur perficiant. « Utpote quoniam ita scilicet est ordo hierarchiae: Quosdam quidem purgari, quosdam vero purgare; et quosdam quidem illuminari, quosdam vero illuminare; et quosdam quidem perfici, quosdam vero perficere: unicuique deiforme adunationi qualicunque modo. » Primum purgantur, postea illuminantur, deinde perficiuntur. Nisi enim praecederet purgatio, non sequeretur illuminatio; et nisi esset illuminatio, non veniret consummatio. Sicut enim illuminari non potest qui non est purgatus, sic consummari non potest qui non est illuminatus; quia cognitio veritatis nonnisi mundos illuminat, et perfectio virtutis nonnisi illuminatis [0998C] veritate appropinquat. Sed sunt superiores et sublimes, et ipsi appropinquantes divinitati immediate ab ipsa accipientes et purgationem ut sint mundi, et illuminationem ut sint clari, et perfectionem ut sint sancti. Et ab illis rursum secundum ordinem divinae dispositionis, iis qui sequuntur, et in ordine subjecti sunt, et purgantur, et illuminantur, et perficiuntur. Et sic secundum hunc modum unicuique adunationi, id est ordini et distributioni qualicunque modo deiforme, id est deiformitas sive similitudo, ipsum videlicet purgari, illuminari et perfici, ut in hoc suo modo, et mensura singuli deiformitatem, et Dei similitudinem habeant: qui sunt purgatione mundi, veritate illuminati, bonitate perfecti.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

[0998D]Sequitur: « Divina beatitudo (quantum in hominibus dicendum) pura quidem est simul omni dissimilitudine; plena vero luminis aeterni: perfecta et non indigens simul omnis perfectionis; purgans, et illuminans, et perficiens. » Nunc demonstrare vult, quod bonum, quod in creatura sive purgata, sive illuminata, sive perfecta constat per gratiam, in ipso Creatore, a quo est, subsistit per naturam: cujus divina beatitudo, et munda est sine purgatione, et lucens sine illuminatione, et perfecta sine susceptione. Non enim ut munda sit, purgatur; neque ut luceat, illuminatur; neque accipit, ut perficiatur. Sed habens in se totum alieno non indiget; et suum ministrans, ea, quae per se indigentia sunt, replet. Pura quidem, inquit, est ab omni pariter dissimilitudine, [0999A] hoc est ergo, propter quod munda jure nominatur, et dissimilitudinem non habet ullam. Ubi enim puritas est, dissimilitudo non est; quia id ipsum est totum, et concordans unum. Corruptio enim dissimilitudinem inducit, et alterum facit quod a suo esse recedit, et deficit ut si alterum quam fuit. Quod ergo semper idem est, dissimilitudinem non capit; et quod immutabile perseverat, corruptionem non admittit. Propterea divina beatitudo munda est, et incorrupta, et ab omni dissimilitudine aliena, consistens in eo, quod est, et incorruptum servans quod habet. Est quoque plena luminis aeterni, non tamen quasi illuminata, quoniam ipsa lumen est; nec lucere incipiens, quoniam aeterna est; nec crescens in lumine, quoniam plena [0999B] est. Perfecta quoque est, et non indigens simul omnis perfectionis, hoc est nullo indigens, quod ad perfectionem pertineat; quia totum habet et possidet, et est totum ipsa, quod possidet: et idcirco nec major esse potest, quia totum habet; nec minor, quoniam immutabiliter et aeternaliter habet. Et cum in se talis sit, ut nec purgari egeat, pura; nec illuminari, lumine plena; nec perfici, consummata: purgat tamen, et illuminat et perficit omnes, qui purgari, et illuminari, et perfici merentur, sive primo loco immediate gratiam accipientes, sive mediate per eos, qui primum accipere meruerunt, participantes. Hoc vero totum, videlicet quod divina beatitudo plena, et lumine plena, et perfecta vocatur: dicendum est quantum in hominibus, id est [0999C] secundum eum modum, quo id, quod ineffabile est, ab hominibus dici potest. Nam quantum ad ipsam ineffabilem summae veritatis puritatem, magis dicenda est ipsa divina natura purgatio sancta, et illuminatio, et perfectio, ut parum id esse intelligatur, quod pura dicitur, sed magis ipsa purgatio; quod illuminata, sed magis ipsa illuminatio; quod perfecta, sed magis ipsa perfectio: quod et ipsum tamen minus adhuc invenitur, nisi cogitetur purgatio super omnem purgationem, illuminatio super omnem illuminationem, perfectio super omnem perfectionem. Propterea ait: « Purgatio, illuminatio, perfectio, super purgationem, super lumen ante perfecta, » sive plusquam perfecta, id est supra perfectionem; quia omne hoc, quod dicitur, secundum [0999D] aliquid dicitur, a quo longe est qui summe est, et propterea supra omne hoc est, quod est. Idcirco purgatio est, quoniam in se coinquinatum non recipit, coinquinationem vel corruptionem recipientibus et patientibus corruptionem tollit: et tamen supra purgationem, quoniam corruptionem non contingit. Et est illuminatio, quoniam in se lucet, et a se tenebrosa clarescere facit, et supra illuminationem, quoniam omnia irradians, et penetrans a se non exit; et est perfectio, quoniam nihil minus habet in se, et minus habentibus quod deest largitur, et praestat ex se; et tamen ante perfecta, sive plusquam perfecta, quoniam in singularitate boni constat tota, et in participatione indivisa, ut nec minus ejus [1000A] bonum sit, quia unum est, nec multiplex, quia participatum. Propter hoc, « per seipsam perfecta est, » quia quod habet, aliunde non accepit; et « per seipsam perfectionis principium, » quia perficiendis quod habet largiendo ipsa non amittit. Et est « causa omnis hierarchiae, et omnis sacri secundum supereminentem celsitudinem. » Principium est, quoniam ab ipsa; et causa, quoniam per ipsam, et propter ipsam; et forma, quoniam secundum ipsam omnis hierarchia in ordine dignitatis, et omne sacrum in ministerio actionis dispensatur. Ab ipsa, praedestinatione; per ipsam, creatione; propter ipsam, glorificatione; ad ipsam, conversione, ut ipsam imitetur et in ipsa beatificetur.

Sequitur: « Oportet itaque, ut existimo, etc. » [1000B] Postquam demonstravit divinam beatitudinem formam esse, et causam omnis sacrae potestatis et dispositionis; ipsamque et mundam esse, et lucentem, et perfectam: mundam quidem ac puram in eo quod omni dissimilitudine, et confusione careat; lucentem autem in eo quod aeterni luminis plenitudinem in se contineat; perfectam vero in eo quod omnia habens nullo indigeat. Modo infert, probans eos quoque, qui ad ipsius similitudinem et imitationem in sacris dispositionibus ordinati sunt, similiter mundos esse debere ab omni contagione, et confusione, et lucentes veritate, et perfectos bonitate, ut et ipsi quoque alios emundare possint, et illuminare, et perficere doctrina, et exemplo, ut in utroque ad imaginem et similitudinem Creatoris sui assurgant, [1000C] sive in eo videlicet quod ipsi mundi, et clari, et perfecti sunt, sive in eo quod alios mundant, et illuminant, et perficiunt. « Oportet, » inquit, « ut existimo purgandos quidem, » sive eos videlicet, qui primo loco, sive eos, qui mediantibus aliis purgationem accipiunt; « puros perfici omnino, et liberari ab omni dissimilitudinis confusione, » quam vel ignorantia veri, vel concupiscentia mali induxit. « Illuminandos vero oportet repleri divino lumine, » utpote reducendos in castissimis mentis oculis « ad contemplativam habitudinem, et virtutem, id est ut mentis oculis castis, et mundis ex praecedenti purgatione peccati, et erroris existentibus « contemplativam habeant habitudinem, et virtutem. » Habitudinem videlicet per mentis puritatem; virtutem autem per [1000D] contemplationis stabilitatem, ut possint contemplari divina, quae et veraciter apprehendunt, et retinent perseveranter. « Ex imperfecto » autem « restaurandos oportet participes fieri exploratorum sacrorum perfectivae scientiae, » ut videlicet vera bona, et sacra illa, quae per scientiam perfectam explorant, dilectione sequendo, et sanctitate participando apprehendant; ut sicut per scientiam perfectam perfecti sunt in cognitione, ita per bonitatem perfectam perfecti sint in participatione. « Purgatores vero magnitudine purgationis aliis tradere ex propria castitate, » id est ipsos purgatores, quorum scilicet ministerium est, ut per eos alii purgentur ab errore et culpa: oportet tales esse, ut magnitudine [1001A] purgationis suae, id est munditiae suae, quam in se habent, aliis tradant purgationem propria castitate, non alieno, sed proprio exemplo purgandorum vitam castificantes. « Illuminatores autem oportet suum superexcellens lumen in eos, qui digni sunt lumine, supervehere, » utpote habentes luculentiores animos ad participationem luminis, qua lumen ipsi percipiunt, et ad distributionem luminis, qua perceptum lumen ad alios illuminandos transfundunt: « habentes » dico « proprie, » id est singulariter et excellenter, quia qui alios illuminare debent, plus aliis lucere debent: « et ditissime, » id est abundanter repleti esse debent sanctae claritatis, ut ex abundantia perceptionis singulis tribuere possint quod opus est. Nam qui omnes docere debet, omnium [1001B] scientiam habere debet; quia non potest unicuique quod expedit, ministrare, qui causas omnium non novit, et utilitates. Supervehere autem debent lumen suum, ut quod verbo docent, per excellentiam vitae commendent, quasi in sublimi lucentes, et lumina fundentes ad eos, qui conversatione inferius manent. Perfectores vero oportet perficiendos sacratissima doctrina per inspectorum sacrorum scientiam, tanquam praeceptores perfectivae scientiae. Sacra veraciter inspicit, qui habitum per experientiam cognoscit; sacra veraciter inspicit, qui interna bona gustando percepit. Sacratissimam ergo doctrinam habet, qui docet quod sapit; qui instruit quod sentit; qui docet non solum cognoscere verum, sed apprehendere bonum [1001C] et amare justum. Quae traditio idcirco perfectiva vocatur, quia hoc solum hominem ad perfectum ducit, quando bona, quae per intelligentiam cognoscere non potuit, per studium boni operis apprehendit. Tali ergo doctrina ipsi perfectores perficiendos perficere debent, ut sint sancti et perfecti bonitate, imitantes illum, ad cujus formam et similitudinem reformantur, et superiores tribuendo, et inferiores percipiendo gratiae divinae participationem.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Unde sequitur: « Nonne ergo unusquisque hierarchiae dispositionis ordo secundum propriam analogiam, id est, » modum, et mensuram, et ordinem, « reducitur ad divinam cooperationem: illa agens et perficiens per gratiam et virtutem a Deo datam, [1001D] quae divinitati naturaliter, et supernaturaliter insunt, et ab ipsa » scilicet divinitate « superessentialiter acta, postea manifestata sunt hierarchiae ad possibilem imitationem animorum, id est, » spirituum « Deum diligentium? » Nisi enim illa bona, quae in Deo sunt per naturam, ad istos descenderent per gratiam, non essent illi similes; et nisi ipsi agendo obtinerent, quae ipse non agendo sed habendo possidet, non essent illius imitatores. Postremo, nisi ab ejus secreto invisibili, bona illa ad manifestationem deducta essent, nequaquam possibilitati creaturae imitabilia fuissent; nec dignitas secundum ipsum esset, nisi gratia ab ipso exisset. Ecce quid charitas facit. Solis animis diligentibus Deum, abscondita [1002A] divina manifesta facta dicuntur, et ad imitandum possibilia. Interna namque, et aeterna bona rationales animi per solam charitatem percipiunt: illa per dilectionem et gustando ut intelligant, et sequendo ut apprehendant. Nisi enim diligerent non intelligerent, quia non intelliguntur nisi cum diliguntur; et rursum nisi amarent non quaererent, et nisi quaererent non invenirent, quia non inveniuntur, si non quaeruntur. Hinc enim scriptum est: « Jam non dicam vos servos, quia servus nescit quid faciat Dominus ejus. Vos autem dixi amicos, quia omnia quaecunque audivi a Patre meo, nota feci vobis [n: (Joan. XV)]. » Et iterum: « Pater, gratias ago tibi, quia abscondisti haec a sapientibus et prudentibus, et revelasti ea parvulis [n: (Luc. X)]. » Ecce [1002B] ergo quomodo sola charitas revelat ea quae abscondita sunt Dei, similiter quoque et ipsa ad possibilitatem deducit, quae sunt ineffabilia, et superessentialia, et supernaturalia omni creaturae, secundum incomprehensibilem sublimitatem Dei. « Si quis, inquit, diligit me, sermonem meum servabit; et Pater meus diliget eum, et ad eum veniemus, et mansionem apud eum faciemus [n: (Joan. XIV)]. » Sic ergo omnis ordo dispositionis hierarchiae gratia, et virtute accepta a Deo per solam charitatem perficitur, agendo, et imitando Deum, ut illi actione et imitatione inesse incipiant, quae divinitati naturaliter insunt, quoniam ex ipsa sunt; et supernaturaliter, quoniam idem cum ipsa sunt: naturaliter, quoniam coaeterna; supernaturaliter, quoniam [1002C] coessentialia: quod enim semper inest, naturale est; quod autem idem est, supernaturale est, quoniam natura ipsa est, et ipsum natura est.

Sequitur: « Et ab ea superessentialiter acta; et ad possibilem Deum diligentium animorum imitationem hierarchiae manifestata. » Quae sunt ea, quae divinitati supernaturaliter insunt, et ab ea superessentialiter acta sunt, postremo ad possibilem imitationem animorum Deum diligentium hierarchiae manifestata. Bona quaedam intelligi vult invisibilia, et ineffabilia, quae apud Deum fuerunt, et in Deo fuerunt, et non venerant adhuc in cognitionem per participationem, ut cognoscerentur et haberentur nisi ab eo solo cujus erant, in quo erant: et postea ab ipso facta sunt, quando factum est, ut fierent in [1002D] nobis; et superessentialiter facta sunt, quoniam primum ab ipso facta sunt, nobis, ut postmodum per ipsum fierent in nobis. Facta nobis praedestinatione, ut fierent in nobis perceptione; facta nobis cum tribuuntur, ut fierent in nobis cum percipiuntur. Facta supra nos, cum incipiunt venire ad nos; facta in nobis, cum incipiunt haberi a nobis. Facta in nos, cum descendunt ab ipso; facta in nobis, cum tribuuntur per ipsum. Haec ergo sunt, quae divinitati ante nos supernaturaliter insunt, et ab ea ad nos superessentialiter facta sunt: postremo in nobis per eam manifestata. « Manifestatae, inquit, sunt hierarchiae, » id est sacrae dispositioni, quae secundum Deum ordinata est, et incedit: et hoc factum [1003A] est « ad possibilem imitationem animorum Deum diligentium, » id est, ut animi Deum diligentes eum imitari possint; quia, nisi manifestata fuissent, imitabilia non essent. Nisi enim cognoscerentur non quaererentur, et nisi quaererentur non cognoscerentur. Hoc autem diligenter attendendum est, quod non singulis quibusque, sed hierarchiae, id est universitati, bona illa manifestata dicuntur. ita tamen ut a singulis [1004A] in universitate imitationis studio exerceantur, quia gratia ad universos effunditur et in singulis operatur. Extra unitatem nullus illam accipere potest, et in unitate alteri data nulli sufficere potest. Propterea hierarchiae manifestantur ad possibilem imitationem Deum diligentium animorum deducendam.

## LIBER QUINTUS.

[1003]

## TITULUS CAPITULI IV. *Quid significat angelorum cognominatio.*

## LITTERA.

[1003B]

*Igitur hierarchia quid est, ut existimo, bene a nobis definita angelica hierarchia, deinde laudanda, mirabilesque ejus in eloquiis formarum facturae supermundanis oculis intuendae, ut ascendamus in deiformissimam eorum simplicitatem per mysticas formationes. Et simul omnis hierarchiae scientiae principium laudabimus in divina religiositate, et perfectissimis gratiarum actionibus: primum simul omnium illud dicere verum, ut bonitate universali, superessentialis divinitas eorum quae, sunt essentias ad esse substituens adduxit. Est enim hoc omnium causae, et super omnia bonitatis, proprium, ad communionem suam ea, quae sunt, vocare, ut unicuique eorum, quae sunt, ex propria definitur analogia. Omnia igitur [1003C] quae sunt participant providentiam ex superessentiali, et causalissima divinitate manantem. Non enim fortassis essent nisi eorum, quae sunt, essentiae principii assumptione. Existentia igitur omnia ejus esse participant. Esse enim omnium est superesse divinitatis: viventia autem eamdem super omnem vitam vivificam virtutem. Rationabilia, et intellectualia eamdem super omnem, et rationem, et intellectum per se perfectam, et ante perfectam sapientiam. Clarumque quod circa eam illae essentiarum sunt, quaecunque innumerabiliter ab ea acceperunt. Sanctae ergo coelestium essentiarum dispositiones super ea, quae tantum sunt et irrationabiliter viventia (secundum quae nos rationalia) in hierarchiae traditionis participatione facta sunt. Invisibiliter enim in divinam similitudinem supermundane [1003D] aspicientes, et formare appetentes intellectualem suam speciem copiosiores pulchre habent ad eam communiones. Attendentes enim sunt omnem vitum. Ipsae ergo sunt primo, et multipliciter, et semper ad summum, quantum fas est, in conformatione divini, et inflexibilis amoris intentae, et principales illuminationes immaterialiter, et pure recipientes, et ad ipsas ordinatae, et intellectualem habentes omnem vitam. Ipsae ergo sunt primo, et multipliciter in participatione Dei factae: et primo, et multipliciter manifestatrices divinae occultationis. Propterea et ultra [1004B] omnia cognominatione angelica et selectim dignae factae sunt: eo quod primo in seipsas edunt divinam illuminationem, et per se in nos deferunt, quae supra nos sunt, manifestationes. Sic quidem, ut theologia ait, per angelos nobis donatae sunt. Et gloriosos quoque ante legem, et post legem nostros patres angeli ad divinum reducebant: quod agendum introducentes, et ad rectam veritatis viam ex errore, et vita immunda reducentes, aut ordines sacros mysteriorum supermundalium, aut occultas visiones, aut divinas quasdam ante praedicationes [praedictiones] prophetice revelantes [n: (Gen. XIX, XXII, XXXI; Judith. VI; Dan. VII; Matth. II; Act. X; Apoc. IV)]*. *Si autem quis dixerit et inde immediate fuisse quibusdam sanctorum theophanias, discat et hoc sapienter ex sacratissimis [1004C] eloquiis, quomodo hoc quidem quid est, Dei occultum nemo videt, neque videbit [n: (Num. XII; I Tim. VI)]*. *Theophaniae autem sanctis factae sunt, [sed] secundum decentes Deum, perque quasdam sacras videntibus proportionalium visionum manifestationes. Ipsa igitur sapientissima theologia visionem illam, quae in ipsa est descripta, revelavit divinam, quasi in forma informium similitudinem ex videntium in divinum reductione pulchre vocari theophaniam, quasi per ipsam videntibus divina facta illuminatione, et quidem divinis ipsis sancte perficientibus. Has autem divinas visiones gloriosi patres nostri perfecerunt per medias coelestes virtutes. An non et sacram legislationem eloquiorum traditio velut per se quidem dicit ex Deo Moysi donatam, ut etiam nos [1004D] vere doceat, divinos eam esse, et sacros characteres? [n: (Deut. IX.)] Docet autem et sapienter theologia per angelos eam in nos pervenire, tanquam divino legali ordine illud legaliter ponente, hoc est, per prima secunda in divinum reduci. Etenim non solum in superpositis, et subjectis animis sed et aeque potentibus ipsa lex definitur ex superessentiali omnium ordinationis principio. Hoc est per unam quamque hierarchiam primas, et medias, ultimas esse, et ordinationes, et virtutes, et minimorum esse diviniores doctores, et manuductores in divinam adductionem, et illuminationem, [1005A] et communicationem. Video autem quod et divinum humanitatis Christi mysterium angeli primum docuere deinde per ipsos in nos scientiae gratia descendit [n: (Matth. I; Luc. I, II)]*. *Sic ergo divinissimus Gabriel Zachariam quidem summum sacerdotem mysteria edocuit [n: (Luc. I)]*, *hoc est, prophetam fore ex ipso contra spem, gratia divina nasciturum puerum divinitus, et salutariter mundo manifestandae virilis Jesu divinae operationis. Mariam quoque quomodo in ipsa foret divinum ineffabilis divinae formationis mysterium [n: (ibid.)]*. *Ast alius angelorum Joseph erudiebat, quomodo vere implerentur divinitus promissa progenitori David [n: (Matth. I; Luc. II)]*. *Alius vero pastores tanquam multorum reditu, et silentio purgatos evangelizavit, et cum eo multitudo exercitus coelestis [1005B] illam valde laudabilem tradebant iis, qui in terra sunt, doxologiam. Respiciamque et ad excellentissimas eloquiorum luminis apparitiones. Video enim quoniam et ipse Jesus supercoelestium essentiarum superessentialis essentia, ad id, quod secundum nos est, immutabiliter veniens, non resilit a se ordinata, et assumpta humana ordinatione, sed obediens subditur Patris, et Dei per angelos dispositionibus. Et per medios ipsos annuntiatur Joseph a Patre disposita Filii ad Aegyptum recessio, et iterum ad Judaeam ex Aegypto traductio [n: (Matth. II)]*. *Et per angelos ipsum videmus sub paternis legislationibus ordinatum [n: (Luc. XXII)]*. *Insto enim dicere (ut scienti nostris sacerdotalibus traditionibus expressa) et de angelo ipsum Vesum confortante; aut quia et ipse Jesus per nostram [1005C] salutarem, beneficam, et manifestatoriam veniens ordinationem Angelus magni consilii appellatur. Etenim, ut ipse angelus dixit, quaecunque audivit a Patre, annuntiavit nobis [n: (Joan. XV; Isai. IX)]*.

## EXPOSITIO.

Postquam demonstravit, data et exposita generali definitione, quomodo intelligenda sit hierarchia secundum angelicam et humanam ordinationem (divina enim, quae infinita est, definiri non potest), nunc de angelica hierarchia specialiter tractare incipit, primum ostendens quomodo nomina angelorum, quae ab hominibus, et secundum homines data sunt, in illa spirituali, coelestique natura intelligenda sunt. Continuat praecedentia ad narrationem subsequentem dicens: « Igitur hierarchia quid est, ut [1005D] existimo, bene a nobis definita angelica hierarchia, deinde laudanda: mirabilesque ejus in eloquiis formarum facturae supermundanis oculis intuendae. » Ac si diceret: Postquam secundum nostram existimationem bene ostendimus quid sit hierarchia ex definitione ejus proposita; nunc consequens est, ut laudemus angelicam hierarchiam, id est ut ostendamus quantum laudata sit in Scripturis sacris, sive quantum ex iis, quae de ipsa dicta sunt, laudabilis appareat, demonstremus. Et ad hoc demonstrandum conveniens est ut intueamur supermundanis oculis, id est spiritualibus, et spiritualiter videntibus oculis mirabiles facturas, id est compositiones vel adaptiones formarum, quae in eloquiis sacris illi [1006A] attribuuntur, ad invisibilem ejus naturam demonstrandam. Ideo enim spiritualibus oculis ea, quae visibiliter proponuntur, intuenda sunt, ne hoc solum esse putetur quod videtur, ne mens in illo remaneat quod foris conspicit. Sed per illud quod exterius in demonstrationem proponitur, ad illud verius et sublimius contemplandum invitatur.

Ideo sequitur: « Ut ascendamus in deiformissimam eorum » scilicet angelorum, « simplicitatem per mysticas formationes. » Ideo, inquit, « super mundanis oculis intuendae sunt mirabiles formarum facturae, ut per ipsas mysticas formationes » extrinsecus consideratas excitati, intrinsecus « ascendamus ad deiformissimam » ipsorum angelorum « simplicitatem. » Quasi enim multiplicitas quaedam angelis [1006B] est ipsa, per quam exterius demonstratur mysticarum formationum veritas. Simpliciter autem illorum spiritualis et invariabilis naturae suae unitas est. In multiplicitate ergo sua deiformitatem non habent, sed in simplicitate: quia in ea parte, qua per visibiles formas demonstrantur, corporeae naturae similitudinem assumunt. In ea autem parte, qua spirituales ipsi et incorporea natura intelliguntur, ad imaginem, et similitudinem Dei respiciunt. Quae similitudo non solum deiformis, sed etiam deiformissima appellatur; quia cum eadem ipsa in hominibus quoque inveniatur, in angelis tamen excellentior creditur.

Sequitur: « Et simul omnis hierarchiae scientiae principium laudabimus in divina religiositate, et [1006C] perfectissimis gratiarum actionibus. » In eo, inquit, quod angelicam hierarchiam laudabimus, simul etiam laudabimus divinam, et summam hierarchiam, quae principium est omnis scientiae hierarchiae, id est quam habet omnis hierarchia, et per quam disposita est omnis hierarchia, quia omnis hierarchia et per eam disponitur et ab ea illuminatur. « Laudabimus, inquam, principium omnis hierarchiae, » scientiae, non tamen definitione et demonstratione sicut angelicam, nec definitione et comprehensione sicut humanam, quarum altera invisibilis per visibilia demonstratur; altera visibilis in seipsa cognoscitur. Sed laudabimus divina religiositate, et perfectissimis gratiarum actionibus. [1006D] Neque enim demonstratione laudatur, quod incogitabile est, neque comprehensione laudatur, quod est incomprehensibile. Sola ergo religione et gratiarum actione Deus laudari potest, qui investigari et comprehendi non potest. Si ergo dicendo non potes, lauda vivendo. Quod lingua non explicat vita bona commendat; bona voluntate contingitur, qui per scientiam non investigatur. Si ergo non comprehendis ipsum, vivendo secundum ipsum, tende ad ipsum; hoc est laudare divina religione. Rursum si dicere non potes ipsum, dicere potes quae data sunt ab ipso; dona ejus optima commendare, ipsum ineffabiliter bonum praedicare; hoc est laudare perfectissima gratiarum actione, sic ergo laudabimus principium nostrum divina religiositate, [1007A] et perfectissimis gratiarum actionibus. In ipsa autem laudatione principii nostri primo omnium hoc commemorandum est, qualiter divina bonitas, quae ad omnia diffunditur, primum creanda ad esse adduxit; postea gubernanda sub se constituit et nutrienda ad se reformavit. Hoc est, quod dicit: « Primum simul omnium, » id est primum ante omnia, oportet « illud dicere verum, » id est illam veritatem dicere, « ut, » hoc est qualiter, scilicet superessentialis divinitas « universali bonitate sua adduxit ad esse essentias eorum, quae sunt; substituens, » post creationem, videlicet disponens et ordinans, vel statuens sub se, et ordinans secundum se. « Est enim, » etc. Ac si diceret: Propter hoc divina bonitas ea, quae creavit, [1007B] ad se revocat et reformat, quia proprium illi est ex insita benignitate illa, quae esse acceperunt ab ea, ut beate esse possint, ad suam communionem vocare; quantum scilicet unumquodque secundum ordinem conditionis suae, et modum capax esse potest participationis illius. « Est enim, inquit, hoc proprium causae omnium, et bonitatis super omnia, » id est bonitatis, quae causa est omnium, quia per eam facta sunt omnia, et super omnia est, quia trahit ad se facta a se; hoc scilicet proprium illi est, vocare ea, quae sunt, ad communionem suam, ut hoc est, sicut unicuique eorum quae sunt, definitur vel dispensatur ex propria analogia, id est mensura, et modo, et ordine. Nam in hoc ipso pulchritudo [1007C] universitatis perficitur, quod non uno et eodem modo omnia, sed singula quaeque secundum ordinem et gradum suum varie, ac multifariam ad communionem divinae bonitatis revocantur, ut in eo quod non deseruntur, compleatur opus bonitatis; in eo vero, quod varie disponuntur ad decorem et pulchritudinem omnium opus sapientiae perficiatur. « Omnia igitur, quae sunt, participant providentiam ex superessentiali, et causalissima divinitate manantem. » Quandoquidem, inquit, hoc proprium est divinae bonitatis, ut omnia revocet ad sui participationem, ut conversa ad eam subsistant, quae ab ea processerunt, ut esse acciperent. Ergo « omnia quae sunt, participant providentiam, » id est provisum bonum, et provisam gratiam manantem ex [1007D] ipsa divinitate, quasi de fonte, et primo principio omnis bonitatis, quae superessentialis est, quia in suae naturae excellentia omnibus essentiis, et subsistentibus naturis supereminet; et causalissima est, id est causarum omnium causa, et prima causa, quoniam ab ejus bonitate procedit bonum omne quod rebus a se conditis omnibus, ut subsistant, participandum praebet. « Non enim fortassis essent nisi eorum, quae sunt, essentiae, et principii assumptione. » Ex hoc, inquit, probari potest, omnia quae sunt, divinam providentiam participare, quia aliter subsistere non possent, nisi ipsius divinae bonitatis, a qua omnia esse acceperunt, et in qua omnia subsistunt, participatione subsisterent. Omnia enim, quae sunt, nisi a divina bonitate principium accepissent, [1008A] non incoepissent; et nisi in illa essentiam haberent, in eo quod sunt, non permanerent. Propterea ipsa principium omnium est, quam assumendo, et participando incipiunt; et essentia omnium est, quam assumendo, et participando subsistunt.

Unde sequitur: « Existentia igitur omnia ejus esse participant. » Ac si diceret: Quia sine ea nihil subsistere potest, manifestum est, quod esse ejus participant omnia, quae subsistunt. Ipsa ergo una et eadem existens in se divina natura quantum ad effectum, et virtutem, et operationem, omnibus subsistentibus, et a se creatis essentiis, et naturis, et principium est, a quo esse accipiunt, et essentia omnium est, in qua subsistunt; et vita est non [1008B] omnium quidem (quia non omnia vivunt) sed viventium omnium vita est, ex qua, et per quam vivificantur, et vivunt; et sapientia est non omnium existentium, aut viventium, quia non omnia existentia, aut viventia sapiunt, sed sapientium omnium sapientia est; et intellectus, et ratio, a qua et per quam illuminantur, et sapiunt, et intelligunt, et discernunt.

Hoc est quod dicit: « Esse enim omnium est superesse divinitatis, » quia per esse divinitatis, quod super omne esse est, esse habet et subsistit quidquid est. « Viventia autem, » quae jam non solum esse sed et vivere ab ea accipiunt, participando eamdem vitam, quae est super omnem vitam, et [1008C] eamdem vivificam virtutem participando, vivificantur, et vivunt. « Rationalia autem, et intellectualia, » participando « eamdem » ipsam sapientiam existentem « super omnem et rationem, et intellectum, per se perfectam, et ante perfectam, » id est supra omnia perfectam sapientiam participando, ratiocinantur, et intelligunt, et sapiunt. Ratiocinantur quidem investigando, intelligunt cognoscendo, sapiunt participando, ut una et eadem divina bonitas et subsistentibus essentia sit, et viventibus vita, et sapientibus sapientia. Ex quo claret, quod illa creata creatrici naturae similitudine, et veritate magis propinqua sunt, quae ab illa magis in dono perceperunt.

[1008D]Hoc est quod sequitur: « Clarumque quod circa eam illae essentiarum sunt, quae innumerabiliter ab ea acceperunt. » Circa eam videlicet divinam naturam, id est propinquae et vicinae illi sunt, et immediate conjunctae, illae essentiarum, hoc est illae essentiae, sive naturae, quaecunque post ipsum esse datum innumerabiliter, vel multipliciter ab ea dona virtutum acceperunt. In quibus primo loco censentur coelestes illae et spirituales naturae angelorum, quae non solum per subtilitatem sapientiae rationabilia sunt, quia intellectu discernunt; sed per subtilitatem quoque spiritualis naturae intellectualia, quia solo intellectu in sua natura percipiuntur, et sensum corporis non contingunt; ac per hoc super omnia, quae sunt, factae sunt, quia vivunt; et super [1009A] omnia, quae irrationabiliter vivunt, quia discernunt.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Hoc est, quod ait: « Sanctae ergo coelestium essentiarum dispositiones, » id est sancti coelestium spirituum ordines, « factae sunt participatione traditionis hierarchiae, » id est participatione gratiae, quae traditur hierarchiae secundum Deum ordinatae, « super ea, quae tantum sunt, » quia vivunt: « et super ea, » quae « irrationabiliter viventia sunt, » quia discernunt; secundum quae irrationabiliter viventia nos homines rationalia animalia vocamur et sumus. Nec mirum, inquit, est, si spiritus angelici non solum super existentia et non viventia et super viventia et non discernentia, sed etiam super rationalia et corporalia dignitate facti sunt, quia rationalia [1009B] corporalia, id est homines, licet ad divinam similitudinem reformentur, non nisi corporalibus tamen mediantibus eruditi et excitati ad illam respiciunt. Angelica autem sublimitas super corporalia omnia constituta invisibiliter, et immediate nulla alia creatura inter ipsam, et Deum constituta, ad divinam similitudinem conformatur copiosius, et multiplicius ab illa gratiam hauriendo, et vicinius illam, ut proximam contemplando. « Invisibiliter, » ait, hoc est sine materialibus et corporalibus instrumentis et signis visibilibus in divinam imitationem seipsas conformantes; ipsae scilicet coelestium essentiarum dispositiones. « Et ad divinam similitudinem, » per imitationem et conformationem « supermundane, » id est spiritualiter « aspicientes copiosiores pulchre [1009C] habent ad eam communiones, » id est multipliciores ab ea videlicet divina similitudine sumunt donorum spiritualium perceptiones, in quibus communionem cum ipsa habent, quia bonum ejus in ipsis spiritualibus donis percipiendo et communicando, in ipsa et cum ipsa possident. Pulchre quidem, et pure, et sine corporali contagione, et materiali attactu; simpliciter in illud assumpto. « Attendentes » quidem « sunt omnem vitam, » id est summam vitam, in qua est omnis vita; et quae tota est vita, nec aliunde vivens, sed vita; ac per hoc percipientes ex summa vita omnem vitam, ut in ea ipso quod immediate plenitudinem vitae accipiunt in ipsis, vita nunquam deficiat.

[1009D]Sequitur: « Ipsae ergo sunt primo, et multipliciter; et semper ad summum, quantum fas est, in conformatione divini, et inflexibilis amoris intentae; et principales illuminationes immaterialiter, et pure recipientes, et ad ipsas ordinatae, et intellectualem, habentes omnem vitam. » Ipsae, inquit, sunt intentae, ad summum videlicet bonum, primo quia immediate, et multipliciter quia perfecte, et semper quia sine intermissione intentae, « videlicet quantum fas est, » id est licitum, vel possibile creaturae positae, « in conformatione divini et inflexibilis amoris, » id est creaturae inflexibiliter vel immutabiliter Deum amanti; et per inflexibilem et divinum amorem ad Deum se convertenti, et reformanti. « Sunt etiam ipsae, » scilicet coelestes virtutes « recipientes principales [1010A] illuminationes, » hoc est primo, et principaliter datas, immaterialiter sine corpore, et pure sine contagione. Immaterialiter sine visibili significatione, et pure sine erroris contagione. « Sunt etiam ordinatae ad ipsas, » videlicet illuminationes percipiendas, ut secundum differentiam ordinis differentia sit perceptionis; vel ordinatae ad illas per justitiam sunt subjicientes se, et coaptantes divinae voluntati per omnia, ut in eo ipso gratiae illuminationem sine impedimento percipiant, quo ab ejus veritate per desiderium iniquitatis non discordant. « Sunt » etiam « habentes intellectualem omnem vitam, » quia ipsum quod sunt, vita sunt, et eorum spirituales substantiae hoc ipsum vivere habent quod esse. Quia ergo in eis aliud non est, quod vivificat; [1010B] et aliud quod vivificatur, sed unum ipsum totum; omnem vitam habere dicuntur, vel omnis vita esse, quia totum quod sunt, vita sunt, sicut et ipsa summa vita, in qua sunt, et in qua vivunt, omnis vita est; quia ex se vivit, et vita est, et totum quod est ipsum, vita est.

Sequitur: « Ipsae ergo sunt primo, et multipliciter in participatione Dei factae, et primo, et multipliciter manifestatrices divinae occultationis. » Ipsae, inquit, coelestes dispositiones « factae sunt in participatione Dei, » id est ut Deum et gratiam divinam participent; primo, quia nulla creatura ante ipsas: « et multipliciter, » quia nulla creatura supra ipsas. « Primo, » quia ante omnia: « et multipliciter, » quia plus omnia. Et sunt « manifestatrices divinae occultationis, » [1010C] id est divinae gratiae invisibiliter et occulte sibi aspiratae, dum id quod ipsae intus ex occulta inspiratione percipiunt ad alios postmodum manifestando transfundunt. Vel « divinae occultationis, » id est divinitatis occultae et invisibilis manifestatrices sunt; quia in eis, et per eas invisibilia Dei ad manifestationem exeunt, cum claritas divina et in eis primum lucet, et per eas postea illuminat subjectos ordines provisorum. Propterea, ait, « dignae factae sunt selectim, » id est specialiter vel singulariter, « ultra omnia cognominatione angelica, eo quod primo in seipsas edunt divinam illuminationem, et per se in nos deferunt, quae supra nos sunt, manifestationes. » Propterea quia divinum lumen in [1010D] ipsas primo loco se effundit, et per ipsas ad nos illuminandos postea descendit, dignae factae sunt ultra omnia, cognominatione angelica. Angelus quippe *nuntius* interpretatur. Qui ergo acceptam gratiam aliis ministrando deferunt, quid aliud quam auctoris et largitoris gratiae ejusdem nuntii sunt? Sed sunt nuntii, alii priores, alii posteriores. Angeli enim, qui primo loco gratiam divinam percipientes illam postmodum ad hominum cognitionem deferunt, quasi ejusdem gratiae primi nuntii sunt. Ipsi vero homines cum gratiam perceptam aliis praedicando, et annuntiando deferunt, nuntii quidem nominantur, sed primi nuntii non sunt, quia ab aliis primo illuminatis, et prius nuntiantibus, quod nuntiant, perceperunt. Propterea coelestes illi, et invisibiles [1011A] spiritus et singulari dignitate, et propria cognominatione angeli nominantur; quia eis primum per occultam aspirationem manifestatur, quod de invisibili divinitatis luce in semetipsis aspiciant, et per eos primo loco ad nos transfunditur, quod per se ipsi ad nostram cognitionem manifestandum portant. Primo namque loco quasi ex occulto conceptionis divinae parturiendo, in seipsos divinam illuminationem edunt, non extrinsecus hauriendo, sed ab intus concipiendo lucem claritatis aeternae, ut abintus prodeat ad se, quod videant in se, et ad nos transfundant per se. Sic enim primo in semetipsis illuminationes divinas percipiendo per se, postea deferunt ad nos manifestationes ipsarum illuminationum, quae sunt supra nos. Nam « sic quidem donatae [1011B] sunt nobis per angelos manifestationes, » scilicet divinae, « sicut theologia, » id est, sacra Scriptura « testatur. Et gloriosos quoque ante legem, et post legem nostros patres angeli ad divinum reducebant, quod agendum introducentes, et ad rectam veritatis viam ex errore, et vita immunda reducentes, aut ordines sacros mysteriorum supermundalium, aut occultas visiones, aut divinas quasdam ante praedicationes prophetice revelantes. » Ita, ait, sicut theologia, id est sacra Scriptura, testatur, manifestatur, manifestationes divinae nobis per angelos donatae sunt; quia et ante legem, scilicet datam, et post legem datam, id est sub lege et gratia, gloriosos patres nostros, id est electos et justos, quorum vitam imitando filii sumus, angeli ad divinum, id est [1011C] ad divinam cognitionem reducebant: quod agendum scilicet erat introducentes, id est juste et pie ducentes vivere, et ad rectam veritatis viam ex errore, et vita immunda reducentes, hoc est, docentes recte credere, ut et fides illorum esset recta, et vita munda. Aut etiam revelantes ordines sacros mysteriorum supermundalium, id est secretorum coelestium de vita scilicet beata, et coelestis patriae gaudiis, et invisibili beatorum spirituum ordinatione, qualiter omnes in uno bono felices sunt, non tamen coaequales; et quod superiores sine superbia praelati sunt, inferiores sine miseria subjecti; aut ordines sacros mysteriorum supermundalium, id est secretorum divinorum revelantes, qualiter scilicet visibiliter [1011D] et temporaliter ab hominibus impleri oportet, quod Deus invisibili, et secreta dispensatione agendum disposuit; aut etiam revelantes occultas aliquas visiones de praeteritis, sive praesentibus, sive futuris aliquid significantes; aut revelantes divinas quasdam ante praedicationes prophetice factas, id est praedicationes divinas, in quibus aliquid antequam fieret prophetice praedicabatur, revelantes, ut iis videlicet, quae dixerunt cognitionem futurorum, vel iis qui audierunt intelligentiam dictorum ministrantes, et in his omnibus sanctos viros sive ad rectam fidem, sive ad bonam operationem instruendo, ad divinam cognitionem et participationem reducentes.

Sequitur: « Si autem quis dixerit, et inde immediate [1012A] fuisse quibusdam theophanias, discat et hoc sapienter ex sacratissimis eloquiis: quomodo hoc quidem quid est: Dei occultum nemo vidit, neque videbit. » Si quis, inquit, contra hoc, quod dixi, revelationes divinas per angelos ad hominum cognitionem venire dixerit, etiam angelis non mediantibus nonnunquam quosdam sanctorum Patrum ab ipsa divinitate revelationes accepisse, discat ex sacratissimis eloquiis hoc, quod, ipsum Dei occultum nemo vidit, aut videbit. Si ergo quis, hoc est aliquis dixerit inde, id est, a secreto divino fuisse scilicet factas quibusdam sanctorum theophanias, id est divinas apparitiones immediate, hoc est, primo loco in ipsos descendentes nulla alia creatura mediante; si quis, inquam, hoc dixerit, discat ille [1012B] etiam hoc sapienter intelligere ex sacratissimis eloquiis, quomodo « nemo » unquam « vidit, neque videbit occultum Dei, » hoc est divinam naturam, quae occulta est et ab omni sensu remota. Vidit, dico, quid scilicet est hoc ipsum occultum; hoc est: Et si vidit in figura, non vidit in essentia; non vidit in specie, etsi vidit in significatione. Cumque hoc ex sacratissimis eloquiis cognoverit, intelligat quod humana mens ad inaccessibilis lucis contemplationem per semetipsam immediate accedere non potest, nisi theophaniis, id est apparitionibus divinis excitata sublevetur. « Theophaniae autem sanctis factae sunt [sed] secundum decentes Deum: perque quasdam sacras videntibus proportionalium visionum manifestationes. » Theophaniae inquit, id [1012C] est divinae revelationes vel divinitatis revelationes sanctis factae sunt, non hoc quidem modo, ut mens humana in carne mortali posita, et intra sensum humanum constituta ad incomprehensibilem naturam contingendam immediate accederet; sed factae sunt secundum quasdam sacras manifestationes, sive visibilium formarum extrinsecus sensui adhibitas, sive imaginationum secundum visibilia intrinsecus animo ingestas, sive alio qualicunque modo altiori et excellentiori spiritaliter humanae rationi impressas, tali convenientia coaptatas, ut et ipsum Deum, de quo factae erant, decerent, et ipsis, quibus fiebant videntibus secundum proportionem uniuscujusque, et capacitatem congruerent.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

[1012D]Hoc est, quod dicit: Sanctis factae sunt theophaniae secundum quasdam sacras manifestationes decentes Deum, et per manifestationes visionum proportionalium videntibus. Quae scilicet ita proportionaliter contemperatae erant possibilitati videntium, ut imperfectiores quidem inferiori et imperfectiori genere visionis coelestium veritatem perciperent; excellentiores autem sublimiori modo secreta divina cognoscerent. Et tamen sive in istis, sive in illis quidquid de Deo ad humanam cognitionem venire potuit, minus ipso, et quodammodo infra ipsum fuit. Hinc enim scriptum est: « Ea, quae sub ipso erant, replebant templum [n: (Isai. VI)]: » quia omne quod mens humana in hac vita de cognitione [1013A] illius capere potest, ineffabili majestati ejus aequari non potest. Tamen divina Scriptura manifestationes illas, quibus Deus mentibus humanis se revelat, theopbanias, id est divinas apparitiones vocare consuevit; quoniam, etsi natura Deus non est, quod cernitur, secundum demonstrationem est, quia tamen per ipsum, et in ipso Deus manifestatur.

Hoc est, quod sequitur: « Ipsa igitur sapientissima theologia visionem illam, quae in ipsa est descripta, revelavit divinam, quasi in forma informium similitudinem ex videntium in divinum reductione pulchre vocari theophaniam. » « Ipsa, inquit, sapientissima theologia, » id est, divina Scriptura, quae secreta divina sapienter ad humanam cognitionem educit, « revelavit pulchre, » id est, convenienter vocari [1013B] theophaniam visionem illam, quae in ipsa descripta est, utpote « divinam similitudinem informium, » id est spiritualium, et corporalem formam non habentium naturarum, in forma visibili vel secundum visibilia sumpta expressam. Revelavit, dico, pulchre vocari theophaniam ex reductione videntium in divina, id est, quia per eam videntes in divina cognoscenda reducuntur, quasi per ipsam videntibus divina facta illuminatione et quidem divinis ipsis sancte perficientibus, id est, non solum ideo quia divina videntibus manifestavit, sed quia ipsos etiam videntes divinos effecit.

Sequitur: « Has autem divinas visiones gloriosi patres nostri perfecerunt, per medias coelestes virtutes, » [1013C] id est mediantibus coelestibus virtutibus, per quas ad hominum cognitionem deductae sunt: adepti sunt, et consecuti, et perfecte comprehenderunt visiones istas gloriosi patres nostri.

Sequitur: « An non et sacram legislationem eloquiorum traditio velut per se quidem dicit ex Deo Moysi donatam, ut etiam nos vere doceat divinos eam esse, et sacros characteres? » Nonne, inquit, « traditio eloquiorum, » id est, auctoritas Scripturarum, « dicit sacram legislationem, » id est, lationem sacrae legis, « donatam esse Moysi ex Deo per se, » nullum videlicet mediatorem commemorans in latione legis inter Deum et Moysen. Sed ipsum per se Deum Moysi locutum fuisse contestans: ut etiam doceat nos eam, videlicet legem, sacros esse, et divinos [1013D] characteres, hoc est sacrorum et divinorum signa, ut per ea, quae visibiliter in legislatione gesta sunt, alia quaedam invisibilia significata et demonstrata ostendat, sicut scriptum est: « Facies ergo tabernaculum juxta exemplar, quod tibi monstratum est in monte [n: (Exod. XXVI)]. » Secundum hunc ergo modum et ipsa visibilis manifestatio ac materialis allocutio, qua invisibilis Dei hominibus se demonstrare voluit, Deus esse vel Dei esse dicitur, quia in ea invisibilis Deus ad manifestationem prodiit, et quae occulta erant sua ad cognitionem eduxit. In qua tamen visibili manifestatione ministerio angelorum mediante cuncta operatus est, ut id quidem quod visibile factum est, et Dei dici possit per primam [1014A] auctoritatem, et angelorum per subjectam operationem.

Hinc est enim quod sequitur: « Docet autem et hoc sapienter theologia, per angelos eam in nos pervenire. » Non solum, inquit, testatur theologia legislationem donatam Moysi ex Deo immediate, sed docet etiam eam, scilicet legem, pervenire in nos, hoc est ad nostram cognitionem expositam per angelos, ut aperte demonstretur quod illa legislatio et Dei erat, ex cujus auctoritate processit; et angelorum erat, quorum etiam ministerium exhibuit. « Tanquam, inquit, divino legali ordine illud legaliter ponente, hoc est, per prima secunda in divinum reduci. » Ita, inquit, Scriptura legislationem Deo per angelos in hominibus ordinatam ostendit, tanquam [1014B] ipso legali ordine divinitus facto illud legaliter ponente, id est instituente, vel sanciente, hoc est, secunda reduci in divinum per prima. Cum enim divina lex primum a Deo in angelos, ac deinde per angelos in homines processisse perhibetur, manifeste ostenditur quod per prima et superiora, secunda et inferiora ad divinam cognitionem reducuntur: et hoc non solum inter Deum et angelos, vel inter angelos et homines, sed in ipsis quoque angelis intelligi oportet, quoniam superiores inferiores ad divinam reducunt cognitionem. Quoniam et in ipsis angelis ordines sunt, alii superiores, alii inferiores: et qui superiores sunt, copiosius lumen divinitatis hauriunt, et ad eos qui sequuntur post se, illuminandos transfundunt. Et in ipsis quoque ordinibus, [1014C] in quibus secundum parem dispositionem multi aequales sunt, haec legis definitio servatur, ut sint in divinae gratiae perceptionem alii primi, alii secundi, alii ultimi; et ii etiam, qui ordine pares sunt, non sint in gratiae perceptione aequales. Hoc est, quod dicit: « Etenim non solum et in super positis, et in subjectis animis, id est spiritibus; sed et in aeque potentibus ipsa lex definitur ex superessentiali principio ordinationis omnium, hoc est, » id scilicet, « per unamquamque hierarchiam, » id est sacram ordinationem, « esse et primas, et medias, et ultimas, et ordinationes, et virtutes: » et in ipsis ordinationibus, et virtutibus diviniores semper esse doctores, « et manuductores » divinorum, [1014D] ut eos doceant, et adducant « in divinam adductionem, et illuminationem, et communicationem. In adductionem » per conversionem, « in illuminationem » per cognitionem; « in communicationem » per perceptionem.

Sequitur: « Video autem quod et divinum Christi humanitatis mysterium angeli primum docuere. Deinde per ipsos in nos scientiae gratia descendit. » Ex hoc, inquit, patet quod quae a Deo mandantur hominibus per angelos nuntiantur, quoniam et ipsum divinum mysterium humanitatis Christi angeli docuerunt, tam eos qui praedixerunt et crediderunt, quam eos qui viderunt et susceperunt. Et deinde, hoc est, consequenter per ipsos angelos in nos hujus scientiae gratia descendit. Sic ergo, sicut videlicet [1015A] Christi nativitas per angelos nuntiata est: nativitas quoque praecursoris ejus per Gabrielem angelum legitur nuntiata. « Sic, inquit, divinissimus Gabriel Zachariam quidem summum sacerdotem docuit mysteria, hoc est, puerum nasciturum ex ipso contra spem, » quia ex sterili matre et sene patre: gratia divina « Prophetam fore manifestandae virilis divinae operationis Jesu mundo divinitus et salutariter. » Ac si diceret: Divinissimus Gabriel docuit Zachariam summum sacerdotem, quod puer nasciturus ex ipso propheta foret operationis Jesu virilis; quia in natura humanitatis, qua sexum carnis assumpsit, exhibita est; et divinae, quia per potentiam divinitatis, in qua etiam carnem suam condidit, est perfecta. Operationis, dico, manifestandae mundo per eum [1015B] divinitus, et salutariter, hoc est ad salutem mundi divinitus proventuram. Docuit enim idem divinissimus Gabriel « Mariam quomodo, » scilicet « in ipsa foret complendum divinum mysterium ineffabilis divinae formationis. » Quod scilicet divina operatio ineffabiliter super usum, et legem naturae de carne ipsius virginis sine virilis seminis admistione carnem sumeret, et eam indumentum Verbi aeterni mirabiliter formaret. « Ast alius angelorum Joseph erudiebat, quomodo vere implerentur divinitus promissa progenitori David. » Id est, quomodo implerentur ea, quae promissa erant divinitus, hoc est, a Deo progenitori ejus David.

« Alius vero pastores tanquam multorum reditu, et silentio purgatos evangelizavit: et cum eo multitudo [1015C] exercitus coelestis illam valde laudabilem tradebant iis, qui in terra sunt, doxologiam. Alius, inquit, rursum angelus evangelizavit pastores, tanquam purgatos, et puros effectos multorum reditu, » id est separatione vel segregatione multitudinis, et tumultus, et strepitus; et purgatos etiam silentio, id est quiete mentis et pace interna, ut in hoc ipso digni Evangelio, et Evangelico fierent alloquio, quod seorsum a multitudine ad semetipsos redeuntes in silentio, et quiete mentis constituti spiritalis annuntiationis capaces exstiterant. Unde paulatim crescente gratia post unius evangelizationem coelestis exercitus multitudo auditur, qui illam valde laudabilem doxologiam, id est hymnum gloriae, tradebant iis qui in terra sunt hominibus scilicet bonae voluntatis.

[1015D]Sequitur: « Respiciamque et ad excellentissimas eloquiorum luminis apparitiones. » Ac si diceret: Non solum in iis, quae de Verbi incarnatione hominibus per angelos nuntiata sunt, apparet, quod divinorum cognitio ipsis angelis mediantibus et ministrantibus ad homines descendit; sed in ipsa quoque persona Verbi incarnati idem videri potest: quae licet divinitatis majestate angelis imperaret, ea tamen, quae circa ejus humanitatem temporaliter facienda fuerant, per angelos voluit dispensari: in hoc ipso conditionem humanitatis dignanter suscipiens, quod omni necessitate carens sola dispensatione ad exemplum humanitatis, et documentum veritatis [1016A] dispositionibus angelicis se inclinavit. « Respiciam, inquit, etiam ad excellentissimas apparitiones eloquiorum luminis, » id est apparitiones ipsius Jesu Christi, quando videlicet ipse Jesus, qui lumen est verum, in carne assumpta visibilis apparuit. Quae apparitiones luminis excellentissimae existunt, prae caeteris omnibus apparitionibus eloquiorom, id est prae caeteris omnibus apparitionibus quae in eloquiis sacris referuntur; quia nunquam prius ita excellenter Deus mundo se manifestavit, sicut quando in carne assumpta ipse visibilis apparuit. Ad has igitur, inquit, apparitiones luminis excelsissimas prae omnibus apparitionibus eloquiorum respiciam, ut in eis etiam hoc probem, quod divina arcana in homines per angelos dispensantur. Si enim circa illum [1016B] hominem, qui super homines est angelica dispensatio non est repudiata, quanto magis in eis, qui peccato obnoxii sunt, et in tenebris ignorantiae constituti probatur esse necessaria. In illo ergo homine, qui caput est hominum, agnoscere possumus quid de aliis hominibus, membris ejus sentire debeamus.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

« Video enim, inquit, quoniam et ipse Jesus supercoelestium essentiarum in superessentialis essentia ad id, quod secundum nos est, immutabiliter veniens, non resilit a se ordinata et assumpta humana ordinatione. » Ipse, inquit, Jesus, qui secundum divinitatem suam, qua universa subsistunt supercoelestium quoque essentiarum, id est angelicorum spirituum, qui non solum terrena puritate, sed et [1016C] coelestia quoque subtilitate transcendunt, essentia est; nec solum essentia, quia in eo subsistunt; sed superessentialis essentia, quia ad ejus aequalitatem non pertingunt. Ipse Jesus cujus ineffabilis majestas et divinitatis potentia ipsos quoque angelos et portat per gratiam, et transcendit per naturam, veniens ad id quod secundum nos est, hoc est, ad susceptionem carnis, quae nostrae naturae erat, et nobis similis erat; et immutabiliter veniens, hoc est, sine diminutione, vel mutatione suae divinitatis, non resilit ab humana ordinatione, hoc est, ab ordinatione sive lege humanitati debita. Ordinatione, dico, primum ab eo ordinata, quando prius hominem instruxit: postea ab eo assumpta quando humanitatis formam et naturam suscepit. Si autem humanam [1016D] naturam assumpsisset, et humanam conditionem respueret, ab humana ordinatione resiliret. Quasi enim resilire illi esset, id, quod per naturam assumpserat, per conditionem nolle tolerare. Nunc autem veniens ad humanam naturam per assumptionem carnis, ab humana ordinatione non resilit per custodiam humilitatis. « Sed obediens subditur dispositionibus Dei Patris per angelos, » circa ejus humanitatem administratis: « et per medios ipsos » angelos, id est mediantibus ipsis angelis « annuntiatur Joseph, » utpote paedagogo infantiae ejus, « recessio » ipsius « filii » Dei « ad Aegyptum » a Patre Deo disposita, « et iterum ad Judaeam ex Aegypto traductio, » sive reductio. « Sed et ipsum, inquit, [1017A] videmus per angelos sub paternis legislationibus ordinatum. » Ipsum videmus ordinatum per angelos, hoc est, dispositum, « sub paternis legislationibus, » id est sub mandatis legalibus, quae mandata ii, quos secundum carnem patres habuit et antecessores, acceperant observanda. Sub his itaque mandatis legalibus ordinatus est per angelos, quando secundum legis paternae praecepta et circumcisus est die octava, et quadragesima die in templo cum muneribus, et hostiis praesentatus, legem per angelos datam observans Dominus angelorum.

Sequitur: « Insto enim dicere, ut scienti nostris sacerdotalibus traditionibus expressa, et de angelo ipsum Jesum confortante. » Parum est, inquit, quod dico, quod Jesus in humanitate ab angelis sub paternis [1017B] legibus ordinatus est: qui in eadem humanitate ab angelo passioni propinquans etiam est confortatus. Insto dicere, quod fortasse si prius dictum non esset, credibile omnino non esset. Insto dicere et de angelo ipsum Jesum confortante. Insto dicere, quod et ipse ego sine admiratione proferre non possum, quod credo certe, et studeo: quod si inscienti dicturus essem, dicere omnino non praesumerem. Insto dicere, quod tam magnum est, ut a parvis scientia comprehendi non possit; tam mirabile, ut a parvis fide non possit credi, de angelo ipsum confortante. Insto dicere, quod si a me dictum putaretur, non crederetur. Tibi autem scienti quae expressa sunt, id est manifeste prolata a nostris traditionibus sacerdotalibus, id est a Scripturis, [1017C] quae nobis traditae sunt a sacerdotalibus, et sacra ministrantibus ac sanctificatis viris, tibi audacter insto dicere veritatem, nihil haesitans de tua fide, quae firma est, et scandalum non recipit, habens discretionem quid factum, quid dictum sit. Tibi ergo, o Timothee fili, ut scienti nostris sacerdotalibus traditionibus expressa, tibi fiducialiter « insto dicere et de angelo Jesum confortante, » ut in hoc sine dubitatione patescat, quantum humanitas [1018A] secundum divinam ordinationem angelicae dispensationi subjecta sit quae in homine de tempore passionis ab angelo confortari voluit; non tamen quaerens auxilium, sed formans exemplum; non habens necessitatem, et tamen monstrans conditionem. Propterea ergo « insto » tibi « dicere, et de angelo ipsum Jesum confortante. » Aut etiam hoc « insto » tibi « dicere, quod ipse Jesus per nostram salutarem beneficam, et manifestatoriam veniens ordinationem, angelus magni consilii appellatur. » Hoc est quod ipse Jesus appellatur « magni consilii angelus, veniens, » hoc est, in eo quod venit ad nos, per nostram ordinationem, id est secundum quod ordinaverat, vel ordinatum erat venire in nostra natura: quae ordinatio salutaris erat, et benefica, et manifestatoria. [1018B] Salutaris in redemptione, benefica in gratiae largitione, manifestatoria in glorificatione. Salutaris, quia a morte redemit; benefica, quia redemptis ad justificationem dona gratiarum contulit; manifestatoria, quia primum justificandis Deum in humanitate visibiliter videndum proposuit, et postea justificatos per visionem humanitatis ad contemplationem divinitatis perducit. Secundum hanc ergo « manifestatoriam ordinationem veniens Jesus angelus magni consilii appellatur. » Quia, « ut ipse angelus dicit, quaecunque audivit a Patre, annuntiavit nobis. » Si ergo angelus nuntius dicitur, merito et ipse Salvator nuntius vocatur. Qui voluntatem Dei Patris nobis annuntiat, et interna bona per Spiritum suum nostris mentibus aspirando revelat. In [1018C] quo etiam dignitas angelica manifeste ostenditur, quod et ipse Salvator ad nos mandata Patris deferens angelus cognominatur. Nam, cum summa nostrae salutis per redemptionem non sine angelica cognominatione perficitur, patet quod et caetera quoque, quae ad eamdem salutem pertinent, angelica, administratione dispensantur. Et haec quidem de angelica cognominatione dicta sunt.

## TITULUS CAPITULI V *Quare omnes coelestes essentiae communiter angeli dicuntur, et specialiter proprias, praeterquam primi et ecundi ordinum habent agnominationes.*

## LITTERA.

[1017D]

*Haec quidem est, quantum ad nos, causa angelicae in eloquiis cognominationis. Scrutari autem, ut existimo, oportet, ob quam causam theologi omnes quidem simul coelestes essentias angelos vocant: ad manifestationem autem venientes supermundalium ipsarum dispositionum ordinem angelicum specialiter nominant, completive terminantem divinas, et coelestes res: ante ipsum vero superpositae archangelicos ordinant ornatus, principesque, et potestates, et virtutes, et quascunque his superfirmatas essentias eloquiorum cognoscunt manifestatoriae traditiones. Dicimus autem, quod per omnem sanctam dispositionem excellentes quidem ordines habent inferiorum dispositionum, et illuminationes, et virtutes, non autem participantes [1018D] excellentium se, sunt ultimi. Ergo sanctissimos excellentissimarum essentiarum ordines angelos vocant theologi; etenim sunt manifestatores et ipsi divinae illuminationis [n: (Hebr. I)]*. *Ordinem vero extremum animorum coelestium non habent rationem archas, aut thronos, aut seraphim nominandi. Neque enim est in participatione excelsissimarum virtutum. Sed sicut ipse, nostros divinos summos sacerdotes reducit ad cognitos ei divinitatis fulgores, sic et ipsum ante se essentiarum [adhuc immundae] omnino sacrae virtutes reducunt, et ad divinum sunt consummanti angelicas hierarchias dispositioni. Nisi quidem quis et hoc dixerit, communes esse omnes angelicas nominationes secundum omnium coelestium virtutum in deiforme, et ex Deo datum lumen subjectionem, et supereminentem [1019A] communicationem. Sed ut magis a nobis ratio dijudicata sit, considerabimus sacrae in eloquiis expressas sanctas, et decoras proprietates uniuscujusque coelestis dispositionis.*

## EXPOSITIO.

« Haec quidem est, » etc. Hoc quinto capite disquiritur quare omnes coelestes essentiae angeli cognominantur. Haec autem quaestio ex eo orta videtur, quod in sacro eloquio coelestium spirituum quidam Deo sempe assistere, faciemque ejus semper videre perhibentur; quidam vero foras ad exteriora ministeria complenda mitti dicuntur. Hinc namque consequens esse videtur quod ii, qui semper vultui divino assistunt, ad exteriora nuntianda non exeant; ii autem, [1019B] qui foras mittuntur, divino conspectui immobiliter, sive immutabiliter non assistant. Scriptum quippe est in libro Danielis prophetae: « Millia millium ministrabant ei, et decies millies centena millia assistebant ei [n: (Dan. VII)]. » In qua distinctione per assistentes quidem ii significati esse videntur, qui ad exteriora non exeunt; per ministrantes vero ii qui ad exteriora exeundo non semper assistunt. Propter quod quia inferiores simul, et postremi ordines ad exteriora exeunt, superiores tantum, et excellentiores divinae contemplationi sine intermissione assistunt; pauciores assistentes, plures vero ministrantes esse perhibentur. Nam cum novem sint ordines angelorum, duo tantum, id est angeli et archangeli pro eo quod specialiter ex officii sui distributione [1019C] mitti habent, ex re ipsa cognominationem susceperunt. Angeli videlicet nuntii, archangeli vero principales nuntii dicti; quoniam et illi minora, isti vero majora quasi ex ministerii dignitate annuntiant. Sed quia rursum in Scriptura sacra quosdam de superioribus ordinibus missos legimus, sicut in Isaia unus de seraphim volasse ad prophetam, atque labia ejus carbone, quem forcipe de altari tulerat, tetigisse memoratur [n: (Isa. VI)]; et in Epistola ad Hebraeos Apostolus omnes administratorios spiritus, et in ministerium missos testatur, propter eos, qui haereditatem capiunt salutis [n: (Hebr. I)]: magna nobis ambiguitatis difficultas oboritur, et quid potius hinc asserendum sit non facile invenitur. Auctor hanc quaestionem in hunc modum solvit. Nomen angelorum [1019D] inferioribus tantum ordinibus, et qui ex officio proprie exteriora nuntiare habent, convenire testatur. Sed quia divina secreta, quae ab ipsis inferioribus exterius ad hominum cognitionem deferuntur, eisdem a superioribus nuntiantur: nomen quoque angelorum superioribus esse communicabile: qui licet ad exteriora nuntianda non exeant, ea tamen, quae exterius nuntianda sunt, desuper ipsi accipiendo secundum legem divinae ordinationis ad inferiores, et post se subsequentes ordines nuntiando transportans, omnemque virtutem, et gratiam, et proprietatem inferiorum superiores participare: proptereaque etiam cognominationes inferiorum ad superiores transire; virtutem autem, et gratiam, et [1020A] proprietatem superiorum non omnem inferioribus esse communicabilem, et idcirco cognominationes quoque ipsorum simili ratione ad inferiores universaliter non posse deduci. Aliquando tamen inferiores quando superiorum proprietatem ex officii qualitate suscipiunt, nomen quoque ipsorum in ejusdem officii exsecutione assumunt. Hinc esse illud, quod superius commemoravimus, quod angelus, qui prophetae labia accendere, et purgare venerat, seraphim dicitur, quia in hujus operis qualitate accendentis sive inflammantis proprietatem exsequebatur. Illud vero quod Apostolus dicit, omnes esse administratorios spiritus, et in ministerium missos, hoc modo intelligendum putant, quod sicut superius diximus, illi quoque non inconvenienter missi dicuntur; [1020B] quia, licet ad exteriora non exeant, ea tamen quae exterius nuntianda sunt, inferioribus et subsequentibus ordinibus nuntiando apportant. Alii putant omnes coelestes ordines tam superiores, quam inferiores pro tempore, et loco, et causa ad exteriora dirigi; eos tamen, qui hoc ex officio proprium habent, specialiter angelos sive archangelos cognominari. Nam, quod omnes aliquando mittantur, apostolus, in eo quod superius commemoravimus, testimonio asserere videtur, dicens: « Nonne omnes sunt administratorii spiritus in ministerium missi, propter eos, qui haereditatem capiunt salutis? » Quod autem etiam superiores quidam aliquando non ex officio, sed ex causa accidentali ad exteriora dirigantur, Psalmista asserere videtur, cum dicit: « Qui [1020C] facit angelos suos spiritus, et ministros suos ignem urentem [n: (Psal. CIII)]. Sic ergo et alii sunt, qui ex officio assistunt; atque alii, qui ad exteriora complenda exeunt, et tamen assistentes aliquando in ministerium missi, dum proprietatem inferiorum suscipiunt, nomen quoque ipsorum in significatione assumunt. Qui tamen cum ad exteriora exeunt, ab interiori contemplatione non recedunt, quia illum aspiciunt, qui praesens ipsis est, quocunque vadunt. Et hoc modo quidem priusquam verba libri discuteremus, ad evidentiam dicendorum hujusmodi quaestionis mentionem breviter faciendam esse putavimus, nihil temere definientes, sed secretum venerantes, quod fortassis nescisse, venialis est infirmitas, [1020D] asserere autem praesumptuose, damnabilis temeritas. Hoc tamen sciendum est quod auctor illi potius parti assensum praebere videtur, quosdam solummodo, non omnes coelestes ordines ad exteriora mitti; et tamen propter ejusdem proprietatis participationem, qua superiores inferiorum gratiam et virtutem communicant, nomina quoque inferiorum a superioribus assumi. Sicut etiam aliquando inferiores, quando superiorum proprietatem ex officii qualitate suscipiunt nomen quoque illorum in significatione assumunt. Nunc ad litteram: « Haec quidem est, quantum ad nos, causa angelicae in eloquiis cognominationis. » « Haec, inquit, est, » quam superius diximus, « causa angelicae cognominationis; » quia videlicet secreta divina per eos nobis [1021A] nuntiantur, et idcirco quia ad nos divina praecepta nuntiando deferunt, quantum ad nos, id est quantum ad id, sive propter id quod erga nos operantur, angelorum nomen assumunt. Sed quia hoc, id est interni praeceptoris nuntia foras ad hominum cognitionem efferte, utrum omnibus conveniat nondum manifesta ratione, vel auctoritate probatur, quaerendum nunc est, inquit, quare angelorum nomen in sacro eloquio omnibus communiter coelestibus virtutibus attribuit.

Hoc est, quod ait: « Scrutari, ut existimo, oportet, ob quam causam theologi omnes quidem simul coelestes essentias angelos vocant; ad manifestationem autem unientes supermundalium ipsarum dispositionum ordinem angelicum specialiter nominant, [1021B] completive terminantem divinas et coelestes res; » ac si diceret: Hoc nunc quaerendum restat quare theologi omnes illas coelestes naturas universaliter angelos nominant, cum tamen specialiter unum ordinem illorum videlicet spirituum, qui veniunt ad nos ad manifestandas ipsas supermundales dispositiones, id est spirituales, et divinas, et invisibiles ordinationes, ordinem angelicum nominant; « completive terminantem divinas, et coelestes res, » id est usque ad completionem, et terminum perducentem res divinitus in coelesti, secretaque ordinatione dispositas. Praeceptum namque divinum a summo deorsum currens, per superiores ordines ad inferiores defertur, donec tandem ad hominum cognitionem veniens opere compleatur: propter quod [1021C] et ille ordo coelestis, ad quem novissime per superpositas virtutes mandatum divinitatis descendit; ac deinde per ipsum foras nuntiatur, completive sive ad completionem illud terminare dicitur, quia per ejus illuc, ubi novissimae visibili operatione complendum est, annuntiationem defertur. Hoc ergo quaerendum est quare scilicet, cum novissimus iste ordo specialiter angelica cognominatione signetur, omnes coelestium essentiarum ordines angeli nominantur. « Ante ipsum vero superpositae archangelicos ordinant ornatus principesque et potestates, et virtutes, et quascunque his superfirmatas essentias eloquiorum cognoscunt manifestatoriae traditiones. » Ac si diceret: Ipsum quidem angelicum ordinem [1021D] ultimum et novissimum, rebusque humanis proximum, divinasque visiones postremo annuntiatione efferentem, et determinantem theologi constituunt; ante ipsum autem ordinant superposite, id est in ordine superpositos describunt. « Archangelicos ornatus. » id est choros archangelorum ordinatos, et pulchre dispositos, qui in ordine ipsis angelis et superiores sunt dignitate, et priores annuntiatione. Deinde etiam constituunt ipsi theologi non solum scilicet super angelos, sed etiam super archangelos: principes, id est principatus, et potestates, et virtutes, et alias essentias, id est « spirituales naturas quascunque cognoscunt, » id est ad cognitionem proponunt manifestatoriae traditiones eloquiorum sacrorum. Essentias, dico, superfirmatas his videlicet [1022A] angelis, vel quascunque alias his supradictis omnibus superfirmatas, ut sint non solum dignitate sublimiores, sed etiam perfectionis firmitate fortiores, et magis ad aeternitatem et immutabilitatem stabiles.

Sequitur: « Dicimus autem quod per omnem sanctam dispositionem excellentes quidem ordines habent inferiorum dispositionum et illuminationes et virtutes; non autem participantes excellentium se sunt ultimi. » Ac si diceret: Cum in illa coelestium spirituum dispositione alii superiores sint, alii inferiores, superiores quidem omnem illuminationem, et virtutem inferiorum habent; sed inferiores superiorum ordinum illuminationes, et virtutes non omnes habent. Proptereaque inferiorum nomina [1022B] aliquando ad superiores ordines transferuntur, utpote qui ipsis in eisdem nominum proprietatibus participant. Nomina vero superiorum non ita ab inferioribus assumi possunt, quoniam ad eos proprietates nominum universaliter non transeunt: hoc est quod ait: « Dicimus autem, quod per omnem sanctam dispositionem » coelestium videlicet spirituum, « excellentes quidem » sive superiores « ordines habent » omnes illuminationes, et virtutes « inferiorum dispositionum, » hoc est subjectorum ordinum. Sed ultimi, id est inferiores, et in ordine sequentes non sunt participantes, omnes subauditur illuminationes et virtutes excellentium se, id est eorum qui ipsis sunt excellentiores. Illuminationes intelligimus [1022C] in cognitione veritatis; virtutes autem in amore bonitatis et perfectione operis.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Ergo sanctissimos excellentissimarum essentiarum ordines angelos vocant theologi. Etenim sunt manifestatores et ipsi divinae illuminationis. » Quia ait superiores ordines omnes proprietates habent inferiorum: ergo theologi sanctissimos ordines excellentissimarum essentiarum, id est excellentissimorum spirituum, vocant angelos; quoniam ipsi angelicam proprietatem participant, in eo quod, licet ad exteriora nuntianda non exeant, tamen eis, qui post se sequuntur ordinibus divinam illuminationem, quam de se accipiunt transfundendo, et quasi nuntiando manifestant. « Ordinem vero extremum animorum coelestium non habent [1022D] rationem archas, aut thronos, aut seraphim nominandi. » -- « Non habent, inquit, rationem » ipsi theologi « nominandi extremum ordinem animorum coelestium, » id est ultimum ordinem spirituum coelestium, angelos videlicet: « archas, » id est principes, aut thronos, aut seraphim, quia ipse scilicet extremus ordo angelorum non est in participatione excelsissimarum virtutum. Propterea enim non possunt angeli principes, aut throni, aut seraphim nominari, sicut principes, et throni, et seraphim angeli nominantur; quia superiores angelicam proprietatem universaliter participant, angeli vero superiorum illuminationes, et virtutes non universaliter participant: et eas praecipue, pro quibus speciales cognominationes acceperunt, sed ex parte [1023A] possident; dignitatem tamen, ac proprietatem cognominationis ejus non habent. Neque enim omnis, qui aliquam virtutem aut proprietatem participando habet, secundum illam statim proprietatem cognominari debet, nisi illam vel inter caeteros singulariter, vel prae caeteris excellenter obtineat. Non enim omnis; qui aliquid sapit, statim sapiens nominatur; nec qui rectum quidpiam fecerit, continuo justus dicitur. Sed hic solus qui sapientiam et justitiam vel singulariter, vel excellenter obtinet, sapiens et justus propria et expressa cognominatione appellari debet. Sic itaque coelestes illi ordines spirituum sanctorum proprias cognominationes habent, in quibus designatur, non quod singulariter acceperint, sed quid possideant excellenter. Seraphim [1023B] namque, quia ex amore Creatoris sui tanquam vicini et proximi, et in se ardentes sunt et ex se alios accendunt, *ardentes* sive *incendentes* interpretantur, non quod soli hoc inter caeteros habeant singulariter, sed cum caeteris, et prae caeteris excellenter. Omnes enim amore Dei ardent, et tamen ipsi specialiter ardentes vocari debuerunt, qui ipsius amoris ignem et primi concipiunt, et fortius ardentes ad caeteros quoque accendendos flammam dilectionis emittunt. Sic et cherubim (quod nomen *plenitudo scientiae* interpretatur) quia majorem caeteris cognitionem Dei habent, ex eo soli nomen accipiunt quod cum caeteris possidentes prae caeteris omnibus excellentius percipere meruerunt. Throni quoque dicti sunt, non quod in eis solis Deus sedeat, et judicia [1023C] sua discernat; sed quia hoc excellentius caeteris in munere acceperunt, propter hoc ex ipso specialiter cognominationem trahunt. Et ad hunc modum quidem de caeteris etiam ordinibus intelligendum est, ut videlicet inde credantur singuli proprias cognominationes accipere, quod excellentius probantur ex dono gratiae possidere.

Sed oritur non contemnenda quaestio, et quae magnam animo confusionem inducat, si ratione adhibita discussa non fuerit. Si enim, ut dictum est, in illa coelesti dispositione singuli quique ordines ex ea proprietate singulares cognominationes trahunt, in qua caeteris excellentiores esse comprobantur, cum subjectorum ordinum omnes illuminationes et [1023D] virtutes superiores universaliter et excellenter possideant, nihil suppositis consequentibusque ordinibus singulare relinquitur, ex quo propriam discretamque inter caeteros cognominationem sortiantur. Unde oportet diligentius considerare quemadmodum utrumque simul verum sit: quod videlicet subjectorum ordinum superiores universaliter et excellenter illuminationes et dona possident, et tamen singuli quique aliquid proprium ac speciale retinent unde propria discretaque appellatione signari valent. Seraphim namque ex nomine singularem dilectionem exprimunt. Cherubim autem excellentiorem cognitionem innuunt. Throni vero majorem vim discretionis ostendunt. Constat tamen, quod qui ardentius diligunt, profundius prospiciunt, et subtilius discernunt. [1024A] Qui enim magis e vicino respiciunt, procul dubio evidentius agnoscunt. Quomodo ergo ordo cherubim ex singularis gratiae privilegio cognominatus, dicitur, si hoc alter in munere excellentius retinet, unde ipse appellationem sortitur? Haec vero quaestio hac fortassis ratione non inconvenienter solvitur: ita tamen, si secretum veritatis nulla praejudicii temeritate violetur. Fieri namque potest ut, licet omnia virtutum dona superiores ordines excellentius possideant, ab iis tamen quae inter ipsa dona virtutum sublimiora sunt, solum cognominationem trahant; atque alia quae ordine dignitatis sequuntur, post se sequentibus ad denominationem relinquant, ut primus a prima, secundus a secunda, tertius a tertia vocabulum sortiatur. Scimus scilicet, [1024B] teste Scriptura, quod inter omnia virtutum dona charitas excellit propter quod consequens erat, ut ille ordo, qui omnium eminentissimus est, a charitate sola singularem sumeret in sui discretione appellationem, quamvis et alia quoque dona virtutum excellentius possideret, a quibus appellationem et vocabulum sumere potuisset. Quia autem cognitio veritatis, post amorem virtutis proxima dignitate cognoscitur: idcirco ab ipsa dignitate qui secundi sunt, post primos angelici spiritus merito cognominantur. Judicium autem discernendae veritatis quia sententiam adhuc quasi dubiam habere videtur, et suspensam quodammodo minus perfecta cognitione apparet: et idcirco quia ipsum post plenam contemplationem, in qua veritas non quaeritur, sed [1024C] habetur, ad eamden veritatis summae cognitionem respicit, tertio post duos priores ordini nomen dedit: hoc tamen secundum hominem propter quem nomina spiritibus ipsis data sunt, intelligi oportet. Nam illic judicium non est ambiguitatis definitio, sed veritatis discretio; neque ibi ubi manifesta sunt omnia, aliquid, quod latet, discutitur, sed quod certum est, pro merito existimatur. Quocirca in hoc quoque judicio scientiam veritatis anteponendam existimamus, quoniam sapientia simplicitatem et unitatem judicat; judicium autem per vim discretionis ad diversa se, contrariaque respicere probat. Unde excellentior cognominatio ab ipsa sapientia sumenda erat, per quam ordo excellentior designandus [1024D] erat: qui licet et sapientiam, et judicium utpote sublimior et perfectior plenius possideret, a sola tamen sapientia vocabulum sumens, sequentis post se ordinis judicium cognominationis relinqueret. Secundum hanc itaque considerationem quisquis angelorum cognominationes interpretari voluerit, nihil fortassis inconvenientiae erit, si omnia virtutum dona superiores ordines perfectius possident, et tamen inferiores ordines ex quibusdam specialiter donis proprias cognominationes habent. De ipsis autem ordinibus angelorum in primis quidem, et ultimis eadem omnium sententia constat. Nam seraphim, loco supremo positos, et post illos cherubim, ac deinde thronos nulli, qui sanctarum Scripturarum testimonia novit, ignotum esse potest. [1025A] Inferioribus quoque ab imo sursum ascendentibus primum angelos atque archangelos collocari manifestum est. Sequentes quatuor ordines quidam hoc modo disponunt, ut a thronis deorsum primum dominationes, deinde principatus, deinde potestates, deinde virtutes constituant, ut in hunc modum novem ordines tribus ternariis distinguantur: quorum primus, et supremus seraphim, cherubim, thronos continet; secundus et medius dominationes, principatus, et potestates complectitur; tertius, et infimus virtutes, archangelos et angelos simul disponit. Sicque ab imo sursum primum angeli numerantur; deinde archangeli, deinde virtutes, deinde potestates, deinde principatus, deinde dominationes, deinde throni, deinde cherubim, deinde seraphim. Theologus [1025B] autem primum angelos ponit, deinde archangelos, deinde principatus, et hos primo ternario deputat. In secundo autem primum potestates, deinde virtutes, deinde dominationes constituit. In tertio vero primum thronos, postea cherubim, postea seraphim ab inferiori ad superiora progressione facta collocandos censet. Sed in hac terna triplici distinctione hoc maxime considerare oportet quod supremi quidem tres ordines, id est seraphim, et cherubim, et throni ex virtute singularis excellentiae, et vi denominationis suae ad interiora tantummodo respicere videntur. Amare enim et cognoscere, et judicare intus praesidentium, et conversionem ad interiora habentium proprium est. Ultimi vero tres, et extremi ordines ex proprietate cognominationis [1025C] suae ad exteriora solum secundum officium ministerii sui dispositi esse probantur; sive angeli et archangeli pro eo quod, agenda quaeque et manifestanda hominibus, exterius nuntiant; sive principatus pro eo quod, quae circa homines administranda sunt et disponenda, invisibili potestate dispensant. Medii autem ordines sicut dispositione, ita officio quoque inter invisibilia et visibilia ferri videntur; et quae a superioribus ad inferiores deferenda sunt secundum dignitatem, et officium suum administrare. In his autem dominationes primae sunt, quae singulari excellentia invisibilem annuntiationem in virtutibus solo imperio formant; virtutes autem secundae, quae praeceptum imperium exsequendo in [1025D] potestatibus edunt. Potestates vero tertiae, quae conceptum mandatum in principatibus, archangelis et angelis sibi ad operationem subjectis perficiunt. Qui autem post angelos et archangelos constituit virtutes, illos nimirum spiritus intelligi volunt, per quos frequentius signa et miracula fiunt. In hoc quoque postremae dispositionis proprietas servetur, cujus ministerium ad exteriora sola dispensanda ordinatum esse putamus. Potestates vero dicunt illos spiritus vocari, qui adversas virtutes subjectas habent, et eas secundum datam potestatem libere comprimunt, ne tantum nocere valeant, quantum volunt. Principatus autem appellatos putant eos nimirum spiritus, qui ipsis etiam bonis angelorum spiritibus praelati sunt: quibus dum agenda quaeque imperant, [1026A] subjectis ad explenda divina ministeria principantur, et superiores existunt. Dominationes autem dictos, qui etiam principatus excellentiori potestate transcendunt, ut ipsos quoque subjectos habeant, qui aliis ad ministerium implendum imperare meruerunt. Haec breviter de ordinibus angelorum, et nominibus ad futuram narrationem necessaria praelibanda esse putavimus, ut semel dicta lector ad singula quaeque, prout ratio poposcerit, et causa, in sequentibus commemoranda, super his, et fortassis sine his obscura dicenda assumat. Nunc ad ipsius textus seriem explanandam revertamur. Superius dixit, quod non habent rationem theologi nominandi angelicum ordinem archas, aut thronos, aut seraphim; quia ipse videlicet angelicus ordo [1026B] non est in participatione illarum excelsissimarum virtutum, ut ipsis participet in nomine, quibus non participat in nominis proprietate. Nunc idipsum sequentibus probat verbis, quod videlicet angelicus ordo excelsissimis virtutibus non participat. Non, inquit, participat cum ipsis; sed quod participat, participat ex ipsis. Aliud quippe est in plenitudine participare, atque aliud ex plenitudine participationem accipere. Sic itaque angelicus ordo excelsissimis virtutibus subjectus est, ut non participet cum ipsis, sed ex ipsis; quia, sicut ipse eos, qui in hominibus ad divinam cognitionem reducuntur, illuminando, et erudiendo reducit; sic et ab iis, qui ante ipsum sunt, virtutibus divinam ipse illuminationem percipit.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

[1026C]Hoc est, quod ait: « Sicut ipse, » videlicet angelicus ordo, « nostros divinos summos sacerdotes, » id est sanctos viros, qui sacra divina ab angelis immediate perceperunt, et nobis tradiderunt, « reducit ad cognitos ei divinitatis fulgores, » id est divinam cognitionem quam ipse percepit, et perceptam tribuit, « sic ipsum etiam reducunt virtutes essentiarum quae sunt ante se, » id est ante ipsum, vel super ipsum, « virtutes dico mundae, » id est valde sacrae, vel omnino sacrae, ut possint per excellentiam sanctitatis forma perfectionis esse subjectis. Et sunt etiam ipsae « virtutes sacrae ad divinum, » scilicet conferendum; id est divinitatis cognitionem dandam, « dispositioni consummanti, angelicas hierarchias, » [1026D] id est dispositioni, quae perficit, vel perfectas continet sive terminat angelicas hierarchias; hoc est, videlicet ultima dispositio, in qua et ordo angelicus in eo quod perfecta est, consummatur, et in eo quod ultima est, omnium spirituum hierarchiae terminantur. Sane hic exsecrabilis interpretis error cavendus est, qui coelestes virtutes immundas dici existimavit. Nam Graecum πανιερὸν panieron, quod *valde sacrum,* vel *omnino sacrum,* vel *universaliter sacrum* interpretatur, hic ἀνιερὸν anieron, id est *insacrum,* vel *non sacrum,* vel *sine sacro* intelligendum putavit.

Sequitur: « Nisi quidem quis et hoc dixerit communes esse omnes angelicas nominationes secundum omnium coelestium virtutum in deiforme, et [1027A] ex Deo datum lumen subjectionem, et supereminentem communicationem. » Non possunt, inquit, inferiores ordines superiorum nomina assumere, quia in eadem excellentia virtutum cum eis non participant, nisi quis dicere velit, propterea nominationes angelorum omnes communes esse debere, quod omnes pariter unum lumen a Deo datum subjecti percipiunt, et ex ipso lumine percepto omnes Deo conformes fiunt, et unius supereminentis communicationis in uno lumine participes existunt. Nisi, ait, quis etiam hoc dixerit, omnes angelicas cognominationes communes esse, secundum omnium coelestium virtutum subjectionem in lumen, sive ad lumen deiforme, et ex Deo datum percipiendum, et secundum communicationem supereminentem gratiae spiritualis vel specialis: ut quemadmodum una [1028A] gratia ad omnium participationem se diffundit, sic una omnibus cognominatio rationabiliter tribui possit. « Sed ut magis a nobis ratio dijudicata sit, considerabimus sacrae in eloquiis expressas sanctas, et decoras proprietates uniuscujusque coelestis dispositionis. » Ut magis possimus, inquit, judicare hanc rationem, utrum videlicet cognominationes angelicae communes esse debeant an non, considerabimus sanctas et decoras proprietates uniuscujusque coelestis dispositionis sacrae expressas in eloquiis. Ex proprietatibus enim uniuscujusque diligenter consideratis fortassis poterit agnosci, utrum communicatio nominationis eadem esse possit: quibus et si gratia una infunditur, una tamen mensura, ac proportione non datur.

## TITULUS CAPITULI VI. *Quae sit prima coelestium essentiarum dispositio: quae media, et quae ultima.*

## LITTERA.

[1027B]

*Quanti quidem sunt et quales supercoelestium essentiarum ornatus, et quomodo secundum eos Hierarchiae perficiuntur, solam diligenter scire dico contemplativam eorum perfectionis principem; adhuc et eos ignorare proprias virtutes et illuminationes, et suam sacram, et superornatam ordinationem. Impossibile enim est nos scire supercoelestium animorum ministeria, et sanctissimas eorum perfectiones, nisi sibi dixerit quis, quaecunque per eos nos tanquam propria bene scientes divinitas mysteria docuit. Non ergo nos quidem quidquam proprio motu dicimus. Quaecunque autem angelicarum speculationum a sanctis theologis contemplata sunt, haec docentes nos, quantum potentes sumus, exponemus. Omnes theologia [1027C] coelestes essentias novem vocavit manifestativis cognominationibus [n: (Colos. I)]*. *Has divinus noster sanctus perfector in tres segregat ternas dispositiones. Et primam quidem esse dicit circa Deum existentem semper, et attente ipsi et ante alias immediate uniri traditam. Sanctissimos enim thronos, et oculosos, et pennosos ordines cherubim Hebraeorum voce, et seraphim nominatos, secundum omnibus superpositam propinquitatem, circa Deum immediate collocari, ait, tradere divinorum eloquiorum manifestationem. Trinum ergo hunc ornatum, quasi unam, et aeque ordinatam, et vere primam hierarchiam communis noster magister ait: qua [n: (Ephes. III; Coloss. I)] non est alia deiformior, et per se praeoperantibus divinitatis illuminationibus immediate intentior. [1027D] Secundam vero esse ait, ex potestatibus, et dominationibus, et virtutibus completam. Et ternarum novissime coelestium hierarchiarum, angelorum et archangelorum, et principatuum [n: (I Thess. IV)] dispositionem.*

## EXPOSITIO

Sexti capitis titulus est: « Quae sit prima coelestium essentiarum dispositio, quae media, et quae [1028B] ultima. » Agit enim in hoc capite de trina dispositione novem ordinum: quarum prima, quae et summa, tres ordines continet, seraphim, cherubim et thronos; secunda quae et media, similiter tres, dominationes, virtutes, et potestates; tertia, quae et ultima, tres similiter, principatus, archangelos et angelos: in quibus novem ordinum dispositio consummatur. Tractaturus autem de rebus tam sublimibus, et ab humano sensu remotis, primum ignorantiam suam pudice confitetur, ostendens secreta illa coelestia non solum hominibus ignota esse, sed ab ipsis quoque angelicis spiritibus perfecte, ut sunt, omnino comprehendi non posse, solamque ipsam, a qua sunt, divinam virtutem perfecte scire quod sunt.

[1028C]Hoc est, quod dicit: « Quanti quidem sunt, et quales, super coelestium essentiarum ornatus et quomodo secundum eos hierarchiae perficiuntur: solam diligenter scire dico contemplativam eorum perfectionis principem, » id est solam divinam sapientiam, quam et principium habent ut sint, et ad ipsam per contemplationem respiciunt ut perfecti sint. Ipsam ergo, inquit, divinam sapientiam solam scire dico, quanti et quales sunt ornatus supercoelestium essentiarum, id est invisibilium naturarum: quia nimirum quales a Deo conditi sunt, nec ipsi perfecte comprehendere possunt. Propterea, inquit, dico adhuc et eos ignorare proprias virtutes, et illuminationes, et suam sacram, et superornatam ordinationem. [1028D] Sola ergo ipsa, quae fecit, divina sapientia perfecta comprehendit, et quales eos fecit et qualiter disposuit, ut in hoc aperte demonstretur quantum Creatoris immensitas omnem creaturae possibilitatem transcendat, cum ad semetipsam etiam comprehendendam nequaquam ipsa creatura sufficiat.

Sequitur: « Impossibile enim est nos scire supercoelestium animorum ministeria, et sanctissimas [1029A] eorum perfectiones. » Neque enim valde mirandum est, si nos de ipsis hoc non possumus scire, quod ipsi etiam de se non valent comprehendere qui idipsum etiam quod de illis scimus, nonnisi per illos a Deo datum, et ministratum scire possumus. Propterea impossibile est nos scire de ipsis aliquid, nisi quod divinitas per ipsos nos docuit. « Nisi, inquit, ibi dixerit quis, quaecunque per eos tanquam propria bene scientes divinitas mysteria docuit. » Impossibile est nos scire, nisi quis dixerit ibi, nos tantummodo scire ubi per eos edocti sumus quaecunque mysteria, id est secreta, divinitas nos docuit per eos, tanquam bene scientes propria ministeria. Bene ergo sciunt propria ministeria, quantum sufficit ad nostram eruditionem; et bene nesciunt, [1029B] quantum sufficit ad plenam, et perfectam comprehensionem.

Sequitur: « Non ergo nos quidem quidquam proprio motu dicimus: quaecunque autem angelicarum speculationum a sanctis theologis contemplata sunt haec docentes nos quantum potentes sumus, exponemus. » Quandoquidem, inquit, nos per nos de ipsis, nihil scire possumus, quod ad ipsis non didicerimus: ergo in iis, quae de ipsis dicere volumus, non dicimus nos, id est ex proprio motu, vel sensu, sive cogitatione nihil dicimus. Sed quaecunque sancti theologi per contemplationem de ipsis angelis speculati sunt, nos eorum auctoritatem quantum possumus sequendo, hoc docemus. « Omnes theologia coelestes essentias novem vocavit [1029C] manifestativis cognominationibus. » Omnes, inquit, coelestes essentias, id est spiritus, vocavit theologia novem manifestativis cognominationibus, id est, discrevit per novem manifestas, et evidentes cognominationes, scilicet angelos, archangelos, principatus, potestates, virtutes, dominationes, thronos, cherubim et seraphim propriis vocabulis distinguens. « Has, inquit, divinus noster sanctus perfector in tres segregat ternas dispositiones. » Divinum, sanctumque perfectorem, sive doctorem suum neminem hic melius significasse creditur, quam apostolum Paulum, a quo baptizatus, et in fide catholica eruditus fuerat; qui usque ad tertium coelum in paradisum Dei raptus, ibique secreta, quae non licet homini loqui, audiens; quantum [1029D] de his huic vitae mortali cognoscere vel utile, vel possibile fuit, tam huic viro sancto quam aliis, qui per Spiritum Dei humanam intelligentiam excesserant, ad memoriam posteritatis transmittendo per eos potius revelasse putatur. Hujus ergo auctoritate fretus, sanctarumque Scripturarum testimoniis fultus, coelestium cognitionem in terram deduxit. Has, inquit, scilicet essentias, id est, hos novem ordines, « divinus noster sanctus perfector segregat, » id est, distinguit « in tres ternas, » id est ternarias « dispositiones. Et primam quidem esse dicit circa Deum existentem, semper, et attente ipsi, et ante alias immediate uniri traditam. » Primam quidem dispositionem dicit circa Deum esse semper [1030A] existentem, neque ad exteriora aliquando exeuntem; et traditam, id est ordinatam, et dispositam uniri ipsi scilicet Deo, id est, ut ipsi uniatur attente, semper scilicet in ipsum intendens; et ut ipsi uniatur ante alias coelestes virtutes, quae sunt post ipsam, et immediate uniatur, ut nullae sint ante ipsam. « Sanctissimos enim thrones et oculosos et pennosos ordines cherubim Hebraeorum voce, et seraphim nominatos, secundum omnibus superpositam propinquitatem circa Deum immediate collocari, ait, tradere divinorum eloquiorum manifestationem. » Ait ergo ipse perfector et doctor noster divinorum eloquiorum manifestationem sive auctoritatem tradere, aut perhibere sanctissimos thronos, et oculosos, et pennosos ordines Hebraeorum [1030B] voce nominatos cherubim et seraphim oculosos scilicet cherubim propter contemplationem, pennosos scilicet seraphim propter dilectionem. Hos inquam, ordines, id est thronos, cherubim et seraphim, ait ipse, collocari circa Deum immediate secundum propinquitatem, quam habent ad Deum superpositam, et excellentiorum omnibus aliis ordinibus. « Trinum ergo hunc ornatum, quasi unam, et aeque ordinatam, et vere primam hierarchiam communis noster magister ait. » Hos ergo tres ordines ait unam constituere hierarchiam primam ad alias, aeque ordinatam in se. In qua scilicet hierarchia licet aliis excelsiores sint in singulari gratia, pares tamen quodammodo omnes sunt in dispositione una: et ex eo secundum aliquid [1030C] aequales existunt, quod omnes immediate Deum respiciunt: primi in dilectione, secundi in cognitione, tertii in discretione. « Qua » scilicet hierarchia: « non est alia aliqua deiformior, et per se praeoperantibus divinitatis illuminationibus immediate intentior. » Nulla, inquit, alia hierarchia deiformior est quam ista, neque similitudini Dei magis appropinquans, neque magis intendens illuminationibus divinitatis in ipsa sola praeoperantibus, quia ante alias; et per se operantibus quia non per alias. Divinae enim illuminationes in ista sola hierarchia ante alias operantur, quia omnes post hanc hierarchiam ab ipsis divinis illuminationibus illuminantur; et per se in ista sola divinae illuminationes operantur, quia per istam omnes aliae hierarchiae [1030D] a divinis illuminationibus consequenter illuminantur. « Secundam vero esse, ait, » scilicet hierarchiam « ex potestatibus, et dominationibus, et virtutibus completam: » ordine tamen commutato, ut dominationes primae, et secundae virtutes, tertiae potestates intelligantur. « Et ternarum novissime coelestium hierarchiarum, angelorum, archangelorum, et principatuum dispositionem. » Subaudiendum est a superiori, ait ipse magister noster, ternarum coelestium hierarchiarum novisse collocaram dispositionem, angelorum, archangelorum et principatuum. Ubi si quaeratur quare Paulus in Epistolis suis cum angelorum dispositionem distinguendo enumeraret, hunc ordinem non servaverit, cum [1031A] talem esse ordinem in eis, aliis astruxerit. Potest dici illic eum non tantum ordinem dispositionum coelestium quantum numerum explicare voluisse, maxime cum in uno loco quosdam tantum enumeret; in alio autem eos, quos illic tacuerat, sine alienorum [1032A] repetitione explanet. In quo manifestum est quia, si ordinem et numerum attenderet, simul omnes in una narrationis serie explicare studuisset. Et si qua alia ratio est, quae ad hanc objectionem convenienter responderi possit.

## LIBER SEXTUS.

[1031]

## TITULUS CAPITULI VII. *De seraphim et thronis, hoc est de prima angelorum hierarchia.*

## LITTERA.

[1031B]

*Hunc nos recepturi sanctarum hierarchiarum ordinem, dicimus, quod omnes coelestium intellectuum cognominationes declarationem habent uniuscujusque deiformis proprietatis. Et quidem sanctam seraphim nominationem, quae Hebraeorum sunt, scientes, aut intendentes manifestare, aut calefacientes; eam vero cherubim, multitudinem scientiae, aut fusionem sapientiae. Pulchre igitur prima coelestium hierarchiarum ab excellentissimis essentiis sanctificatur, ordinem habens omnibus altiorem, hoc est, circa Deum immediate collocatur; et primo operantes theophaniae, et perfectiones in eam tanquam proximam principalius deferuntur. Calefacientes ergo nominantur et throni, et fusio sapientiae manifestativo deiformium [1031C] suarum habitudinum nomine. Mobile enim semper eorum circa divina, et incessabile, et calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum intentae, et forsan intimae, et inflexibilis semper motionis, et suppositorum reductivae, et activae exemplativum tanquam recalificans illa, et resuscitans in similem caliditatem, et igneum coelitus, et holocauste purgativum, et incircumvelatum, et inexstinguibile, habentemque sic semper luciformem et illuminativam proprietatem, omnis tenebrosae obscurificationis persecutricem, et manifestatricem, seraphim manifestatio, aut cognominatio docet. Ipsa vero cherubim cognoscibile eorum, et denudum, et altissimae luminum dationis acceptivum et contemplativum, in prima operatrice virtute divinae pulchritudinis, et sapientificae traditionis repletum, et communicativum [1031D] copiose ad secunda fusioni donatae sapientiae. Ipsa autem altissimarum et compactarum sedium omni diligenter exaltari ignominia subjectionis, et ad summum supermundane sursum ferens, et omni extremitate ineffabiliter in sublimissimum, et circa vere excelsum totis virtutibus incommutabiliter et stabiliter collocatum, et divini superadventus in omni impassibilitate et immaterialitate acceptivum, et deiferum, et famulanter in divinas susceptiones apertum. Haec quidem nominum ipsorum, quantum ad nos, declaratio. Dicendum vero, quam hierarchiam eorum existimamus. Omnis quidem enim hierarchiae speculationem Deum imitanti deiformitate dependentem ineffabiliter esse, et dividi omnem hierarchicam actionem in participationem sacram, et traditionem [1032B] purgationis purae, et divini luminis, et perfectivae scientiae, sufficienter jam a nobis dictum esse arbitror. Nunc autem dicere digne prosequamur excellentissimos intellectus, quomodo jam secundum eos hierarchia ab eloquiis manifestatur. In primis essentiis, quae post substantificam earum divinitatem collocatae, et veluti in vestibulis ipsius ordinatae, omnem sunt visibilem et invisibilem superexcellentes factam virtutem, propriam existimandum est esse, et omnino aequiformem hierarchiam. Puras igitur eas esse existimandum, non ut immundis maculis et inquinationibus liberatas: neque ut materialium receptivas phantasiarum, sed ut omni diminutione mundas, et altiores, et omni superfirmato templo secundum excelsissimam castitatem omnibus deiformissimis virtutibus [1032C] supercollocatas, et proprio per se motu secundum diligentis Deum inconversibile ordinis, ineffabiliter receptas, et in subjectis contumeliam omnino nescientes, sed incasualem, ut et intransmutabilem habentes propriae deiformis specialitatis purissiman collocationem. Contemplativasque iterum sensibilium symbolorum, aut intellectualium speculativas, neque ut varietate sacrae scribentis theoriae in divinum reductas, sed ut omnis immaterialis scientiae altiori lumine repletas, et formificae, et principalis pulchritudinis, et superessentialis, et terlucentis contemplatione, quantum fas, refertas, communionem autem Jesu similiter digne factas. Non in imaginibus sacre fictis, formative figurant deificam similitudinem, sed ut vere ipsi approximantes in prima participatione [1032D] scientiae deificum ejus luminum, et quia Deo simile ipsis substantialiter donatum est. Communicat autem hujusmodi, ut possibile, in praeoperatrice virtute deificis ipsius, et humanis virtutibus. Perfectas autem similiter, non ut sacra varietate analecticam [analyticum] scientiam illuminatas, sed ut prima, et supereminenti deificatione repletas, secundum excellentissimam, quantum in angelis, divinorum operum scientiam. Non enim per alias sanctas essentias, sed ab ipsa divinitate sanctificatae, in ipsam immediate extenduntur omnibus supereminenti virtute et ordine, et ad castissimam omnino fortitudinem collocantur, et ad immaterialem et invisibilem pulchritudinem, quantum fas, in contemplationem adducuntur, et ad divinorum operum scibiles rationes, ut primae, et circa [1033A] Deum essentiae flectuntur, et ab ipso perfectionis principe excellentissime [excelsissime] sanctificatae sunt. Hoc ergo et theologi aperte declarant, suppositas quidem coelestium essentiarum dispositiones superfirmatis ornate erudiri deificas scientias: omnium vero altiores ab ipsa divinitate, quantum fas, doctrinam illuminari. Quasdam enim earum introducunt a prioribus sacre eruditas, Dominum esse coelestium virtutum, et Regem gloriae in coelos humanitus receptum [n: (Psal. XXIII)]*. *Quasdam vero apud ipsum Jesum quaerentes, et pro nobis suae divinae actionis scientiam discentes, et eas ipsum Jesum immediate docentem, et praelargiens eis manifestantem suam humanam benignitatem. Ego enim, inquit, disputo justitiam, et judicium salutaris [n: (Isa. LXIII)]*. *Miror autem quod et [1033B] coelestium essentiarum primae, et tantum simul omnes supereminentes divinis illuminationibus, ut mediatae quaestiones reverenter appetunt. Etenim non inde interrogant: Quare tua [tibi] rubra vestimenta? Apud seipsas vero deliberant ante interrogare, ostendentes quidem, quod discunt, et deificam scientiam appetunt, non autem praesilientes per divinam processionem inditam illuminationem. Num ergo prima coelestium intellectuum hierarchia, ab ipsa perfectionis principe sanctificata, quo in eam immediate extenditur sanctissima purgatione, multo lumine, ante perfecta consummatione, proportionaliter eam implens purgatur, et illuminatur, et perficitur; omni quidem minoratione pura, primi vero luminis plena, et primo data cognitione, et scientia [1033C] participans perfecta. Comprehendens autem (et hoc dixerim fortassis non immerito), quod et purgatio est, et illuminatio, et perfectio divinae scientiae assumptio. Ignorantiam quidem utpote purgans secundum ordinem indita scientia perfectarum doctrinarum, illuminans autem ipsa divina cognitione per quam et purgat non prius contemplantem, quam manifestat per altiorem illuminationem, et perficiens iterum ipso lumine secundum habitum scientia lucidissimarum doctrinarum. Ipsa ergo est, quantum ad nostram scientiam, prima coelestium essentiarum dispositio, in circuitu Dei, et circa Deum immediate stans, et simpliciter, et incessanter circuiens aeternam ejus scientiam, secundum excellentissimam, quantum in angelis, semper mobilem collocationem. Multas [1033D] quidem, et beatas videns pure contemplationes, simplosque, et immediate fulgores illuminata, et divino alimento repleta; multa quidem primo data fusione, solaque domestica, et unifica divinae refectionis unitate, multaque communione Dei, et cooperatione digna effecta ad eam, ut possibile, similitudine bonarum habitudinum et actionum: multaque divinorum superposite cognoscens, et divinae scientiae, et cognitionis in participatione, secundum quod fas est, facta. Propterea et laudes ipsius theologia iis, qui in terra sunt, tradidit; in quibus mirabiliter manifestatur excellentissimae ipsius illuminationis eminentia. Alii enim quidam ejus sensibiliter dicendo tanquam vox aquarum reboant: Benedicta gloria Domini ex loco suo. [1034A] Alii vero et illam valde laudabilem et piissimam reclamant theologiam: Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth; plena omnis terra gloria ipsius [n: (Ezech. I; Ezech. III; Isa. VI; Apoc. IV)]*. *Has autem excelsissimas coelestium animorum hymnologias, jam quidem in iis, quae sunt de divinis laudibus, quantum possibile, aperuimus, et dictum est de iis in illis, quantum ad nos, sufficienter. Ex quibus in recordationem sufficit dicere tantum secundum praesens tempus, quod theologicam seientiam ipsa prima dispositio, quantum fas, illuminata est a divina bonitate, per quam, tanquam deiformem hierarchiam et aliis seipsam deinde tradidit, illud per brevitatem dicendo subintroducens, ipsam piissimam, et summe benedictam, et omnino benedictam divinitatem fas est benedictam [1034B] esse ex Deum recipientibus quantum possibile cognosci, et laudari intellectibus. Ipsi enim sunt tanquam deiformes divini loci, divinae, ut eloquia aiunt [n: (Psal. IX, XLVI, LXXIX; Isa. LXVI)]*, *quietis. Et quia monas est et unitas tres substantialiter, et supercoelestibus essentiis usque novissima terrae extendens bonitatem suam in omnia quae sunt, providentiam, tanquam omnis essentiae super principale principium, et causa, et omnium super essentialiter immensurabili continentia circumligans.*

## EXPOSITIO.

Septimi capitis titulus est: De interpretatione seraphim, et cherubim, et thronorum; et de prima, quae eorum est, hierarchia. Postquam enim enumeravit [1034C] ordines coelestium hierarchiarum, nunc de interpretatione, et significatione cognominationum tractare incipit. Et primum de iis, qui in prima sunt hierarchia computati, id est de seraphim, et cherubim, et thronis secundum proprietatem appellationis virtutem eorum demonstrans.

« Hunc nos recepturi sanctarum hierarchiarum ordinem. » Hunc, inquit, ordinem sanctarum hierarchiarum, quem superius diximus, nos recepturi et approbaturi: « Dicimus » consequenter, « quod omnes coelestium intellectuum cognominationes declarationem habent uniuscujusque deiformis proprietatis. » Omnes enim cognominationes sanctorum intellectuum, id est spirituum, declarationem habent [1034D] deiformis proprietatis uniuscujusque ordinis. Cognominatio declarat quod proprium illi est, et singulare, per excellentiam doni in deiformitate collatum. Omnis enim gratia ad Dei similitudinem animum reformat; et tamen quod in ipsa una forma singulis collatum est proprium, sicut discretum est in munere, sic discernendum erat in appellatione.

Sequitur: « Et quidem sanctam seraphim nominationem, quae Hebraeorum sunt, scientes, aut incendentes manifestare, aut calefacientes; eam vero cherubim, multitudinem scientiae, aut fusionem sapientiae. Dicimus, inquit, quod omnes coelestium intellectuum cognominationes declarationem habent [1035A] uniuscujusque deiformis proprietatis. » Nos, dico, scientes nominationem seraphim: quae seraphim Hebraeorum sunt, id est, Hebraice sic appellantur, manifestare aut incendentes, aut calefacientes; eam vero subaudi nominationem, quae est cherubim, scientes manifestare multitudinem scientiae, aut fusionem sapientiae, ut in ipsa expressione nominum spiritualium declaretur gratia donorum, quae etsi singula non sint, excellentia tamen constant. « Pulchre igitur prima coelestium hierarchiarum ab excellentissimis essentiis sanctificatur, ordinem habens omnibus altiorem, hoc est circa Deum immediate collocatur: et primo operantes theophaniae, et perfectiones in eam tanquam proximam principalius deferuntur. » Hoc, inquit, pulchrum [1035B] et conveniens est, ut prima hierarchia spiritus habeat excellentiores, quoniam et ipsa ordine caeteris omnibus altior est hierarchiis, et Deo vicinior circa ipsum immediate, id est nulla alia inter ipsam et Deum consistente, collocata. Et propterea quia proxima Deo est, idcirco theophaniae, id est divinae apparitiones, vel manifestationes, sive illuminationes primo operantes, a creatore scilicet in creaturam, non per creaturam (illae enim primae sunt operationes divinae illuminationis in creaturam sive creatura, secundae per creaturam in creaturam): et perfectiones etiam donorum spiritualium in ipsam primam hierarchiam principalius deferuntur, quam in caeteras consequentes, et subjectas: quippe quae omnem participationem spiritualis gratiae [1035C] nonnisi ipsa mediante concipiunt. « Calefacientes ergo nominantur, et throni, et fusio sapientiae manifestativo deiformium suarum habitudinum nomine. » Quandoquidem divinae illuminationes et perfectiones in ipsam principalius deferuntur, idcirco qui in ea sunt ordines constituti, alii ignem amoris concipiendo et praebendo calefacientes nominantur, sicut seraphim; alii judicio veritatis potentes, throni; alii cognitione scientiae lucentes et illuminantes, fusio sapientiae, sicut cherubim, appellantur manifestativo nomine deiformium suarum habitudinum. Ex ipso quippe nomine appellationis manifestatur virtus deiformis habitudinis, ut ipso noscantur divina similitudine praediti, quo discreta, [1035D] ac singulari appellatione noscuntur signati. Nam quod in unoquoque ordine discretio nominis singularem quamdam, ac propriam notat habitudinem divinae participationis, ex subjecta sententia probat, dicens:

« Mobile enim semper eorum circa divina, et incessabile, et calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum, intentae, et forsan intimae, et inflexibilis semper, motionis et suppositorum reductivae, et activae exemplativum tanquam recalificans illa, et resuscitans in similem caliditatem, et igneum coelitus, et holocauste purgativum, et incircumvelatum, et inexstinguibile habentemque sic semper luciformem, et illuminativam proprietatem omnis tenebrosae obscurificationis persecutricem, et manifestatricem, seraphim nominatio, [1036A] aut manifestatio docet. » Si ego quod sentio dicam, primum hoc fateor, quod verba audivi aut non homini dicta, aut non dicta ab homine. Nam et per hominem ea dici tam magnum mihi videtur, ut nihil amplius homini dari possit. Et forte, quia verba ista ab illis nata sunt, quae audiri potuerunt, dici non debuerunt. Nam ille quidem, qui haec suggerebat, vel docebat, usque ad tertium coelum pervenerat, et intraverat in paradisum, Dei ibique verba quaedam de verbo audierat secreta omnino, et proxima silentio, usque ad quae auris humana non contingeret: quae nemo audiret, donec sciret. Intus enim audiebantur ubi dicebantur, et non poterant exire foras ubi erat homo. Propterea ab eo qui intus erat, et valde intus, intus et introrsum audiri [1036B] potuerunt; sed iis, qui foris erant, dic non debuerunt. Ne tamen vel illi, qui foris erant, derelinquerentur, si ab eo, qui intus erat, non vocarentur: nata sunt de verbis verba, sicut verba de verbo nata fuerunt: de verbis, quae intus servari debuerunt, verba quae foras proferri potuerunt; de immensis magna, de occultis obscura, de impenetrabilibus profunda, quae a nobis audita sunt utrum intellecta, nescio. Haec sunt verba ipsa, quae magistri discipulus, et discipulorum magister nobis scrutanda, vel potius miranda proposuit. Primus enim discipulus Verbi verba audivit a Verbo, et ille verbis aliis doctor factus discipulum habuit, et doctorem fecit. Quo tandem ad nostrum auditum descendente quasi de coelo vox in terram personuit, et ipsa aures [1036C] nostras jam stupore implevit; nondum tamen corda manifesta veritate illuminavit. Propterea qui homines fuerunt, et nondum divina capere potuerunt, dixerunt, quod tonitruum factum fuerat, quia solum consternabantur, et non erudiebantur. Alii ad modicum illuminati, nondum consummati, angelum putaverunt, Deum non intellexerunt. Itaque et nos supernae vocis tonitruum audivimus, et coepimus mirari, nondum illuminari. Si tamen fuerit nostra admiratio excitatio, ipsa admiratione convertemur, ut conversione illuminemur. Et erunt tunc verba ipsa dulcia non solum miranda, sed amanda, cum coeperint audiri et sciri, si tamen ad ipsa gratiosi fuerimus. [1036D] Si enim non diliguntur, non intelliguntur; neque amantur, si non gustantur. Quid ergo? Quare audivimus, si non intelligimus; aut quomodo intelligimus, si non diligimus? Ego pro mea parte respondeo: Si non praesumo de dilectione, non discedo ab admiratione. Forsitan ipsa admiratione evigilabo ad cognitionem: et si minus excitor ad cognitionem, incitabor ad dilectionem. Et erit interim dilectio ipsa refectio, donec ex ea oriatur contemplatio, per quam fiat illuminatio.

Quid est illud angelorum « mobile semper circa divina, et incessabile, et calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum motionis semper intenta, et forsan intimae, et inflexibilis semper? » Si dixerimus quod dilectio hoc est, fortassis parum dixisse videamur, [1037A] nescientibus quid sit dilectio. Nunquam enim parum dicit, qui dilectionem dicit, nisi forte parvam dicat dilectionem. Non autem iste parvam dilectionem dicere voluit, qui tam multa de dilectione dixit. « Mobile, inquit, et incessabile, et calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum. » Mobile, quia vita; incessabile, quia perpetua; calidum, quia amor; acutum, quia sapientia. Nunquid satis est hoc? vitam dixit, perpetuam nominavit, amorem posuit, et sapientiam adjunxit. Et totum hoc in una dilectione est, et una dilectio est. Vis scire, quod dilectio vita est? Audi dilectum illum, et dilectorem dilectionem commendantem. « Qui non diligit, inquit, manet in morte [n: (Joan. I)]. » Ergo dilectio vita est; et qualis vita? « Charitas nunquam excidit [n: (I Cor. XIII)]. » Si [1037B] autem charitas nunquam excidit, vita perpetua est dilectio. Et quid amor? Ubi calidum illud, et fervidum ostendere poterimus in dilectionem? Ubi fervorem, et calorem amor habuit; vel potius, ubi amor sine calore, et fervore fuit? Ambulantes et amantes, incendentes et ferventes, quid dixerunt de Jesu, quem audierunt, et non cognoverunt in via? Ambulabant enim et movebantur, impatientia dilectionis acti, quia si starent non amarent. Mobile enim amoris est sicut et calidum, ut non torpescat dilectio vera. Ambulabant ergo in mobili amoris, et ardebant in calido, et dicebant: « Nonne cor nostrum ardens erat in nobis de Jesu, dum loqueretur nobis in via? [n: (Luc. XXIV.)] » Quia enim ambulabant, mobile habebant; et calidum, quia ardebant; acutum [1037C] autem non habebant, quia non cognoscebant. Propterea enim quia acutum non habuerunt, audierunt: « Stulti, et tardi ad credendum in omnibus quae locuti sunt prophetae [n: (ibid.)]. » Ergo hebetes fuerunt, et tardi ad cognoscendum; sed non tepidi, aut pigri ad diligendum. Quia tamen prius dilexerunt postea cognoverunt, ut acutum in dilectione esset sicut et calidum. Prius calidum, postea acutum. Propterea non dilexit acutum et calidum, sed calidum et acutum: quemadmodum prius mobile, postea incessabile, ut mobile ad inquisitionem excitet, incessabile, ad perseverantiam confirmet; calidum, ut sensum vivificet; acutum autem, ut penetret ad comprehensionem. Significat enim acutum impetum quemdam amoris, et vehementiam desiderii ardentis, ferentis [1037D] se in amatum, et intrantis, et penetrantis, ut ibi sit, ubi est ipsum, quod amatur, cum ipso, et in ipso, ut non solum ab ipso calidum sit, sed transeat acutum in ipsum. Poterat enim calidum esse, et quasi de longe calefieri: cui hoc satis esset amare ita absentem, et praesentem non videre, vel praesentissimam possidere. Sed non erat amor hierarchiae perfectus, neque amabilis multum, nisi acutum faceret sibi, et transiret omnia, et penetraret, donec ad dilectum perveniret, imo potius in dilectum iret. Si enim in dilectum non vadis, adhuc foris amas, neque acutum habes dilectionis. Sed habes, et torpens divisus manes, et extra illum, ut unum non efficiaris. Amor autem unum te facere vult cum [1038A] ipso: et idcirço penetrat omnia, et appropinquat quantum potest, ad unum ipsum.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Considera modo quomodo acutum habebant amoris de quibus dictum est: « Ubi erat impetus spiritus, illuc gradiebantur [n: (Ezech. I)]. » Impetus namque ipse acutum fuit, sicut et liquidum in alio quodam loco acutum nominatur dilectionis. Et puto quod sponsa erat ipsa, quae loquebatur; et non oportebat durum aliquid aut asperum paventi et timidae adduci. Idcirco liquidum nominatum est pro acuto in blandimento dilectionis. Nam et ipsum liquidum penetrat sicut acutum, et non cessat donec ad interiora pervenerit. Idcirco ait: « Anima mea liquefacta est, ut dilectus locutus est; quaesivi illum [n: (Cant. III)]. » Propterea enim quaesivit illum, quia [1038B] liquefacta est ad illum. Nisi enim liquefieret ad illum, non curreret post illum; sed dura staret, et non intraret. Nunc autem liquefacta est, et currere coepit; sed nondum statim invenit, donec pervenit. Idcirco et hic quoque incessabile necessarium erat, ut intraret, et penetraret, et diceret: « Tenui illum, nec dimittam, donec introducam, inquit, eum in domum matris meae, et in cubibulum genitricis meae [n: (Cant. V)]. Introducam, inquit, eum in domum matris meae, in cubiculum genitricis meae. » Ergo ipse ad te intrabit, ut tu ingrediaris ad ipsum. Tunc enim tu intras ad ipsum, quando ipse ad te ingreditur. Quando amor illius cor tuum intrat, et penetrat, et ad intimum cordis tui dilectio illius pertingit; tunc intrat in te ipse, et tu quoque intras [1038C] teipsum, ut ingrediaris ad ipsum. Igitur tu ipsum ad te introducito; nec quolibet modo ad te introducito, ut maneat scilicet vel subsitat extra apud te, vel in portis tuis, vel in atriis tuis; sive ante ostium domus tuae, aut etiam solummodo in domo tua, quia non multum est, neque magnum hoc dilectioni magnae, nisi usque ad thalamum perveniat, et cubiculum ingrediatur, et usque ad interiora penetret, et in intimis tuis requiescat. Adhuc amplius dicam, quia, et cubiculum genitoris forte non amat nisi in cubiculum genitricis introducatur, ubi dilectio magis tenera est et blandimenta dulciora, ut nihil apud te durum aut rigidum inveniat virilis truculentiae. Sed totum liquefiat, et mollescat igne dilectionis. Tunc enim nihil duritiae obsistet, ut ad [1038D] intima charitas perveniat, et acutum habeat omnia penetrare dilectio; hoc nobis dicendum erat, pro acuto dilectionis, et liquido ut intelligas vim amoris et dilectionis quanta est. Si tamen hoc intelligi potest, quoniam dilectio supereminet scientiae, et major est intelligentia. Plus enim diligitur, quam intelligitur, et intrat dilectio, et appropinquat, ubi scientia foris est. Nec mirum: quia dilectio semper amplius praesumit, et confidit semper; ingerit se sine cunctatione amor. Propterea acutum habet, et liquidum penetrans omnia, et impetum sequens ardentis desiderii sui, non dissimulare valens donec ad amatum perveniat; et eo ipso amplius adhuc sitiens intrare in ipsum, et esse cum ipso, et tam prope, ut [1039A] si fieri possit, hoc idem ipsum sit quod ipse. Nunquid non acutum valde est, haec omnia penetrare, et ad intima intrare, ut nec repelli possit aliqua virtute, donec perveniat ubi amat? « Quis, inquit Apostolus, separabit nos a charitate Christi? Persecutio, an fames, an gladius? [n: (Rom. VIII)] » et caetera multa, quae impedimento esse potuissent, si dilectio illis non obstitisset. Dilectio autem, quia acutum habuit, teneri non potuit; sed pertransivit, et penetravit, evadens libere, et currens ad desiderium suum. Si ergo tale est calidum et acutum dilectionis, quale putas est quod sequitur, « superfervidum? » Nam illud oportet aliquid amplius habere, quod ad incrementum adjectum est praecedentium virtutum. Sed et ipsa res admonet in eo majus quiddam [1039B] cogitare, quod superfervidum est, quam quod calidum et acutum.

Nostis enim quomodo id, quod fervet quadam caloris et incendii sui violentia jactatur extra se, et tollitur supra se, et facit motionem magnam ex subjecta et invisibili aestuatione concepti fervoris. Et non videtur, qui intus est et movet, calor incendii latentis; sed quod movetur, videtur eo: et ex eo quod videtur, concipimus et intelligimus vim magnam, et virtutem robustam, et violentiam fortem ejus, qui latet, et non videtur. Quis poterit digne visibilium aemulationem ad invisibilium majestatem conducere? Spectacula proposita sunt, et ostenditur nobis fervor ex calore, et humore, sive potius in humore ex calore: et videmus quemadmodum calor [1039C] sine tumultuatione sensim ad humorem ingreditur, ut ingressus illum potenter et violenter ejiciat. Suggerit se invisibiliter, ut illum manifeste attollat, quasi eum illic esse nolit, quem tam vehementi velut impetus cujusdam indignatione ejicere festinat. Movetur ergo calidum ad acutum, deinde promovetur acutum ad superfervidum. Quod enim prius acutum fuit, et liquidum in dilectione obsistentia alia penetrare valens, superfervidum fit jam, et bulliens in seipso stare non valens. Acutum enim est amoris, cum omnia transeundo despicit; superfervidum autem, cum etiam semetipsum contemnendo relinquit. Nam qui hoc solum appetit, quod amat in illius comparatione etiam, semetipsum despicit. Neque enim vere illud solum appeteret, si vel [1039D] semetipsum cum illo amaret. Non autem hoc facere potest nisi magna et singularis dilectio, ut prae amore illius, quod solum diligitur, ille etiam, qui amat, quemadmodum a semetipso, despiciatur. Fit ergo miro quodammodo, ut dum per dilectionis ignem in illum sustollitur, qui est supra se, per vim amoris expelli incipiat, et exire etiam a se. Quomodo ergo fervet, et quomodo bullit corde, qui per conceptum superni amoris ignem, dum in illum solum, qui sursum est, appetendum fertur cogitatione et desiderio extra semetipsum projicitur, et supra se elevatur, nec se cogitat, dum illum solum amat? Sic intelligimus mobile, et incessabile, et calidum, et acutum et superfervidum dilectionis.

[1040A]Sed quomodo haec assignare poterimus in illis supercoelestibus naturis, quibus idem est vita quod essentia, quia non aliam habent essentiam quam vitam? Quis est ille incessabilis earum motus circa divina, et calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum? Quae sunt illa divina, circa quae incessabiliter moventur, et calescunt, et acuuntur, et superfervent? Nam qui in circuitu est, nondum intrat; quia vel tepet a calido, vel torpet ab acuto. Si ergo acutum habent, quomodo in circuitu sunt? Forte quia divina illa, de quibus Scriptura locuta est, intus sunt omni creaturae, et ita prorsus secreta et latentia, ut si etiam contingi possunt, penetrari non possint. Alia vero divina quaedam sunt, quae in manifestationem veniunt, et se quodammodo ad cognitionem [1040B] exponunt, vel dum prodeunt intro ad animum, vel dum procedunt foras usque ad sensum. Nam quaedam divina prorsus intus esse, et abscondita, et latentia, quaedam vero foras exisse, et manifestata esse Apostolus insinuat, dicens: « Quod notum Dei est, manifestum est in illis [n: (Rom. I)]. » Cum enim dicit; « Quod notum Dei est, » id est noscibile de Deo, ostendit, plane ex iis quae Dei sunt, et in Deo sunt aliquid esse manifestum, aliquid occultum. Et id quidem quod manifestum est, per scientiam posse contingi; id vero, quod prorsus absconditum est, nulla ratione posse penetrari. Sunt ergo divina quaedam, et Dei quaedam ad manifestationem proposita, quae secundum aliquid penetrari possunt, et comprehendi; quaedam vero tam profunda, et occulta, [1040C] et intima valde, et impenetrabilia omnino, ut scrutari non possit illa omnis intellectus, neque ulla sapientia investigare: de quibus magnum hoc est, cum datur ad illa contingere, etiamsi non detur illa penetrare; et cum ad illa penetrando pervenitur, illa tamen non penetrantur, sed manent impenetrabilia et incomprehensibilia, in quibus hoc solum, quod foris est, pervenienti intelligentiae ad cognitionem ostenditur, et id, quod semper intus est, ad comprehensionem non aperitur.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Considera modo et vide, si non te erudiant de invisibilibus Dei ea, quae visibilia facta sunt a Deo. Nam quae sola ratione aliquando minus investigantur, nonnunquam luce exemplorum cognoscibilia efficiuntur. Vide ergo, quid possit sensus carnis in [1040D] mundo, ut ex eo intelligas sicut intelligi potest, quid possit sensus mentis in Deo. Quando mundum justum visibilem oculo carnis contingimus: ea, quae foris ipsi sunt, percipimus; et ad ea, quae intus latent, sensu eodem penetrare non valemus. Et si aperiuntur aliquando quaedam, quae latuerunt, latent adhuc alia multa quae comprehendi non possunt, vel immensitate quia sensum excedunt; vel subtilitate, quia sensum effugiunt; vel obscuritate, quia sensum ad se non admittunt. Ita cogita quod sensus mentis rationalis, ille, quo divina percipimus, si quando ad Deum contingendum admittatur, ea solum, quae quasi sunt foris illi, percipit; et illa quae intus occulta et abscondita latent non comprehendit. [1041A] Idcirco autem dixit, quod illi foris est, et non nobis; quoniam omne, quod in Deo est, ad omnem creaturam intus est: sed tamen ad comparationem eorum, quae omnino comprehendi non possunt, illi quodammodo, sive in illo foris dicitur, id quod de illo secretissimae etiam et subtilissimae intelligentiae manifestatur. Per acutum igitur amoris penetrant ad ipsum: et tamen per incomprehensibilem majestatem, ipsius permanent circa ipsum, ut non ad totum ingrediantur, etiamsi penetrant usque ad aliquid. Sed et hoc ipsum considerare oportet, quod circa ipsum esse dicuntur, et non in una parte aliqua. Ambiunt enim desiderio, quod intellectu non penetrant, ut non reliquant quidquam inconsideratum ex omnibus, quae possunt agnosci, [1041B] semper videntes, et semper videre sitientes. Stabiles, ne recedant; mobiles, ut incessanter appetant. In circuitu, quia ad totum quod est, non intrant. In circuitu, quia immediate appropinquant. In circuitu, quia omne, quod in illo noscibile est, per contemplationem et dilectionem lustrant. Sic ergo mobile eorum circa divina, et incessabile, et ipsius motionis incessabilis, et intentae, et forsan intimae, et inflexibilis calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum possunt convenienter intelligi. Hoc tamen praeterire non oportet, quod motionem invisibilium naturarum incessabilem, et intentam, et forsan intimam, et inflexibilem nominavit, in uno solo dubitantis voce usus, cum ait forsitan, quasi caetera sine haesitatione assereret, hoc solum nisi cum determinatione [1041C] dubitationis astruere non auderet. Motio igitur illorum spirituum summae divinitati approximantium incessabilis dicitur, et intima, et inflexibilis; quia a se per amoris desiderium in Deum tendens, et mobilis semper est, ut nunquam in se subsistat; et intenta ut in illum pergat; et intima, ut ad exteriora non effluat; et inflexibilis, ut ad alia extra seipsum et praeter ipsum non divertat. Quare ergo non dicit absolute intimae; sed quasi dubitans, et an ita esset, sive ita dicendum esset, nesciret, forsan addidit? Fortassis, quia vere intimum hoc solum intelligendum et dicendum putavit, quo interius nihil est. Intima ergo motio non est, nisi quae vel ab intimo est, vel usque ad intimum est. Quia ergo divina natura [1041D] sola omni naturae intus est, sola ipsa ad omnem naturam intima est; cujus motus sine motu ad creaturam solus in re intimus dicitur, quia ab eo est, quo nihil magis intimum invenitur. Motus autem creaturae ad Creatorem quamlibet secretus, et penetrans intimus tamen proprie dici non potest; quia ab eo est, quod in foris est, ad quem est: et cum ad ipsum, qui intimus est contingendum ducitur, via illi usque ad ipsius intima non aperitur. Quia ergo secundum aliquid et foris venit a creatura exiens, et foris subsistit usque ad intima Creatoris penetranda non pertingens, intimus omnino nominari non debuit, licet tamen pro eo, quod ab interiori natura ad intimam est, convenienter intimus dici possit: propter hoc bene ait, forsan intimae, ut innueret [1042A] quod secundum aliquid intimum dici poterat, quod secundum omnem modum intimum non erat. Potest namque intima dici proprietate, non comparatione. Intima illi, a quo est; sed non illi, ad quem est.

Sequitur: « Et suppositorum reductivae, et activae exemplativum. » In superiori enumeratione expressit virtutem dilectionis verae in Deum, si quantum est, nescio; sed puto quantum dici potest. Nunc subsequenter ostendit ejusdem dilectionis vim, effectumque ad proximum. Illic motum ejus et conversionem ad superiora demonstravit, qua Creatorem suum sitiunt: hic vero exponit motum ejus, et conversionem ad inferiora, et proxima, qua ab invicem non recedunt. Motio igitur dilectionis, quae illic ad superiora [1042B] intenta, et intima, et inflexibilis dicitur, hic ad supposita et inferiora reductivae et activae exemplativum nominatur. Motus enim ille, qui in superiori est contemplatio, in inferiori est operatio. Ad superiora tendit, ut in eis quiescat; ad inferiora tendit, ut ea ad se reducat. Sursum ergo charitas movetur, ut illic maneat; deorsum, ut redeat. Propterea motio charitatis in superioribus quidem ad inferiores reductiva, et activa dicitur. Reductiva in eo, quod illos ad Creatorem suum eodem igne charitatis succendens convertit. Activa in eo, quod illos accepta claritate illustrans ad ipsius voluntatem componit. Reductiva est ergo subjectorum, quia illos ad superiora trahit. Activa, quia illos in inferioribus disponit. Reductiva, ut ad Deum tendant. [1042C] Activa, ut secundum Deum incedant. Hujusmodi ergo motionis reductivae, et activae subjectorum, id est quae subjecta reducit ad ea, quae sunt supra se, et ad agendum instituit in se, exemplativum est forma illa dilectionis, in qua exemplo superiorum subjectis ostenditur, quanto affectu charitatis, et secundum Deum incedere, et ad ipsum debeant inhiare. Sive ut ita legatur, exemplativum subjectorum, id est quod subjectis in exemplum proponitur: reductive et active adverbialiter pronuntiatis, eodem sensu manente. Videte ergo quomodo se expandit charitas, omnia complecti desiderans in illis spiritibus beatis, et Deo proximis, quasi e vicino ardentibus, et ferventibus amplius. Ignis dilectionis [1042D] ad superiora quidem reducitur, dum per dilectionem Dei bonum suum sitiens, movetur et ad inferiora et subjecta, participes boni sui, et consortes secum colligere volens. Diligentes ergo diligendi formam subjectis tribuunt, et ardentes in se alios quoque flamma dilectionis succendunt. Propter hoc itaque dilectio illorum exemplum facta est subjectorum ad superiora tendendi, et secundum superiora incedendi, tanquam recalificans illa, videlicet subjecta et resuscitans in similem caliditatem, ut similiter ardeant, etsi non aequaliter. Quod autem ait « recalificans, et resuscitans, » non ita intelligendum est, quasi prius exstincti, et mortui, iterum accendantur et vivificentur; sed quod per dilectionem desuper venientem ad eadem rursus, quae sursum [1043A] sunt, amanda et expetenda excitentur. Per ignem ergo dilectionis quasi recalefiunt et resuscitantur, in quibus accensa dilectionis flamma ad illa rursum amanda reducitur, a quibus prius et principalius amantibus in subsequentes, et subjectos amatores oriebatur. Omnia ergo haec docet cognominatio seraphim, sive manifestatio. In eo namque quod Seraphim, id est incendentes, aut calefacientes cognominantur, et cognominatio ipsis est, et nobis manifestatio, quia et ipsis in voce cognominatio exprimitur, et nobis in vocis interpretatione proprietas cognominationis manifestatur, quia non manifestarentur nisi cognominarentur. Qui enim sibi noti sunt contemplatione, nobis innotescunt cognominatione: et idcirco ipsis quantum ad vocem cognominatio [1043B] dicitur, nobis quantum ad vocis interpretationem manifestatio appellatur. Ipsa ergo cognominatio, sive manifestatio seraphim omnia haec docet, id est videlicet mobile eorum circa divina, et incessabile, et docet etiam calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum motionis eorum intentae, et intimae, et inflexibilis, et docet etiam exemplativum subjectorum, reductive et active, quod in ipsis est, et ab ipsis ad reductionem, et actionem subjectis praebetur, ut recalefiant et resuscitentur in caliditatem similem caliditati superiorum et fervorem. Docet etiam ipsa cognominatio seraphim « igneum coelitus, et holocauste purgativum, et incircumvelatum, et inexstinguibile. » Quod in ipsis est primum coelitus, sive divinitus descendens in ipsos: deinde ab ipsis, [1043C] ut ardeant et succendant, purgentur et purgent, revelentur et revelent.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Et docet etiam ipsa cognominatio seraphim luciformem, et illuminativam proprietatem eorum habentem se semper sic: sic, id est uno eodemque modo, ac sine varietate, et mutabilitate permanentem, et persecutricem omnis tenebrosae obscurificationis, ut ad ipsam non accedat; et manifestatricem, ut extra ipsam non lateat: haec ergo omnia seraphim cognominatio, aut manifestatio docet. Et haec omnia, sicut diximus, in una dilectione sunt, et una dilectio sunt: quae ipsis desuper datur, et per ipsos ad subjectos derivatur. Cujus dilectionis triplicem vim in illis summis spiritibus, hac enumeratione auctor distinguit: supra ipsos, in ipsis, et sub [1043D] ipsis. Supra ipsos mobilem, in ipsis vitalem, sub ipsis operantem. Supra ipsos per desiderium, in ipsis per sensum, sub ipsis per affectum. Supra ipsos quaerentem, in ipsis sentientem, sub ipsis colligentem. Supra ipsos, in eo quod appetunt; in ipsis, in eo quod sentiunt, sub ipsis, pro iis, quos ad id quod sentiunt in se, et ad in quod appetunt supra se, secum trahunt. Propter hujusmodi mirabiles operationes dilectionis tam multa de ipsa dixit: in quibus fortassis totum dixisset, si totum dici potuisset. Nos vero utrumque pertimescimus, [1044A] si vel negligentes, vel fastidiosi fuerimus. Durum nobis est in re tam dulci aliquid negare, quod accepimus: et rursum temerarium nobis videtur adjicere quidquam, quod non debemus. Quid est, putatis, dilectio? Quando totum dicetur? Ecce diximus « mobile » illud ipsis, « et incessabile, et calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum, et intentum, et intimum, et inflexibile, et exemplativum, et reductivum, et activum, et recalificans, et resuscitans: » et videbatur hoc multum esse, et forsitan satis: nisi adhuc sequerentur alia mira, nescio utrum mirabiliora. « Igneum, » inquit, « coelitus, et holocauste purgativum. » Duo notanda sunt, quia igneum nominavit, et idipsum coelitus. Nam et igneum aliud est a terra, sed non est simile illi, quod [1044B] igneum coelitus est. Urit enim, et consumit, et vastat, et destruit; nec societas illi esse potest cum alio. Qui enim illi approximant, laeduntur; et si omnino ad illud contingunt, jam consumi incipiunt. Quod vero igneum coelitus est, suaviter ardet; et accendit quidem, sed non consumit; et si quid consumit, non tamen ad laesionem, sed ad purgationem: hoc enim consumit, quod laederet, si consumptum non esset. Propterea post « igneum coelitus, » sequitur « purgativum holocauste; » quia ipsum igneum purgat, et totum purgat, et ex toto purgat, non solum a corruptione mali, sed etiam a defectu boni. Quaedam enim fuerunt, quae corruptionem mali contraxerant; quaedam fuerunt, quae perfectionem boni nondum perceperant: et erant [1044C] utraque purganda; altera a corruptione, altera ab imperfectione. Quae in terra erant, purganda erant a corruptione; quae autem in coelo, purganda erant ab imperfectione. Illa, quia in prima conditione non erant perfecta; ista, quia post primam conditionem erant corrupta. Illa purgata sunt ab imperfectione, quando in glorificatione sunt consummata; ista purgata sunt a corruptione, quando a peccato sunt liberata. Illorum ergo purgatio non erat mali emendatio, quod non habebant; sed boni consummatio, quod minus habebant. Istorum autem purgatio prius erat emendatio; postea consummatio. Talem ergo purgationem in illa spiritali coelestique natura intelligimus. Sed et si quis in illis purgationem intelligat, [1044D] non quae inerat corruptionis, quia semper mundi erant, sed perfectae munditiae, cui nihil corruptionis inesse poterat, et hoc convenienter intelliget. Illud ergo « igneum coelitus, » quo inflammantur, ut ardeant et purgantur vel ab imperfectione ad consummationem, vel ad plenam munditiam contra omnem corruptionem: « holocauste purgativum » est, id est universaliter purgativum, vel in toto purgativum, quia totum purgat et in toto purgat; vel ne aliqua insit corruptio, vel aliqua desit perfectio. Holocaustum enim est, quod totum incenditur, et totum crematur.

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.*

[1045]

[1045A]Otia longa novum exordium poscunt. Paulo superius ingressi fuimus sermonem de cognominatione angelorum, ubi auctor demonstrat quare singulis ordinibus angelorum tales sunt cognominationes, sive appellationes attributae. Et de primo quidem, atque supremo ordine, qui seraphim cognominatur, ejusdem appellationis rationem, quae a theologia data est, secundum capacitatem nostram prosecuti sumus. Nunc superest ut eam quoque, quam de sequentis ordinis cognominatione rationem reddit, consideremus. Prius dixerat, quod cognominatio, sive manifestatio seraphim docet « mobile illorum, et incessabile, et calidum, et acutum, et superfervidum, » quae post haec adjuncta sunt: nunc vero infert et dicit, quod ipsa cognominatio, [1045B] sive manifestatio cherubim docet « cognoscibile eorum, et deividum, » etc. Ait enim: « Ipsa vera cherubim. » Duo a superiori repetenda sunt, cognominatio et docet. Ac si diceret: Ipsa cognominatio cherubim docet, id est in eo quod cherubim, quod interpretatur *plenitudo scientiae,* cognominantur, docetur et significatur « cognoscibile eorum, » id est cognitio sive notitia et scientia, quam habent; et significatur etiam hoc nomine « deividum eorum, » id est visio Dei, quae est in eis, quia per lumen sapientiae inditum sibi majestatem Creatoris sui clare contemplantur. Significatur etiam « acceptivum altissimae donationis luminum: » hoc est, significatur, quod lumina divinitus data altissime [1045C] et perfectissime acceperunt. In eo enim quod plenitudinem scientiae ex ipsa sua cognominatione habere significantur, profecto ejusdem sapientiae lumen aliunde accepisse docentur; quia secundum Apostoli dictum: « Si non accepissent, omnino habere non potuissent [n: (I Cor. IV)]. » In eo vero, quod habent, notatur acceptio; in eo, quod plenitudinem habent, notatur profectio. Est autem ordo, quod primum lumen sapientiae divinitus datum accipiunt, et postea eodem lumine illustrati auctorem luminis Deum vident et cognoscunt. Bene ergo illuminantur, qui sic illuminantur, ut eum videant et cognoscant, a quo illuminantur. Multi illuminantur ut caetera videant, et ipsum, per quem vident, non videant. Sed non est magnum, opus videre, si artificem [1045D] ignores. Species facta beatificare non potest, si ad operatricem pulchritudinem non pertingas. Propterea ergo cherubim cognominatio docet « cognoscibile eorum, et deividum, et altissima luminundationis acceptivum. » Nota inusitatas compositiones in eo, quod ait deividum, et luminundationis. Docet [1046A] etiam cognominatio cherubim contemplativum scilicet eorum in prima operatrice virtute divinae pulchritudinis, et sapientifice traditionis repletum, et communicativum copiosae ad secunda fusioni donatae sapientiae. Sic distingue: Cherubim cognominatio docet contemplativum divinae pulchritudinis in prima operatrice virtute. In eo namque quod cherubim, id est pleni scientia dicuntur, ostenditur quod per lumen datae sapientiae divinam pulchritudinem contemplantur; quoniam profecto quidquid scirent, pleni sapientia non essent, si divinam pulchritudinem, a qua, et in qua pulchre, et rationabiliter ordinata sunt omnia, non cognoscerent. Quia ergo pleni sunt sapientia, divinam utique pulchritudinem contemplantur. Nec quolibet modo contemplantur. [1046B] sed in prima operatrice virtute ut primum scilicet et principaliter illuminati a Deo caeteros post se illuminent. Divina enim virtus primum, et principaliter, et per se operatur in eos, qui proximi sunt; deinde autem per illos in alios, qui subsequuntur. Hoc ergo docet cognominatio cherubim, contemplationem scilicet pulchritudinis divinae in illis esse per primam operatricem virtutem; quia primum Deus operatur in eis, ut postea per eos operetur. Docet etiam repletum sapientificae traditionis, hoc est docet repletos eos esse gratia divina: quae sapientifica traditione Creatoris aliis plus, et aliis minus in participatione distribuitur. Mira igitur excellentia illorum ostenditur, quia illius boni, quod sapientia [1046C] Creatoris ad pulchritudinem universorum dissimiliter traditum est, non partem sed plenitudinem habere praedicantur. Potest et aliter distingui, ut dicatur quod cherubim cognominatio docet contemplativum illorum repletum, id est contemplationem illorum repletam divinae pulchritudinis, et sapientificae traditionis in prima operatrice virtute. Potest autem non inconvenienter per divinam pulchritudinem et sapientificam traditionem hoc intelligi, quod divina sapientia ex eo ipso majorem in operibus suis pulchritudinem efficit, quod dona sua non uno et eodem modo omnibus participanda consedit. Cujus nimirum pulchritudinis, et traditionis summi isti spiritus idcirco repleti sunt; quia dona, quae inferioribus, et subjectis ex parte datae sunt, secundum [1046D] plenitudinem possidere meruerunt.

Sequitur: « Et communicativum copiose ad secunda fusioni donatae sapientiae. » Iterum repetendum est a superiori. Docet cognominatio cherubim communicativum eorum, id est communicationem, vel participationem copiose fusioni donatae sapientiae, [1047A] hoc est quod communicantes participant non modice, sed copiose fusioni donatae eis sapientiae. Quae videlicet fusio primum in eis copiose facta est, ut per eos deinde fiat ad secunda: quatenus lumen sapientiae, quod ipsis primum desuper copiose infunditur, per ipsos postmodum ad secundos, id est sequentes ordines illuminandos transfundatur. Hanc ergo plenitudinem, et dignitatem, et excellentiam in dono sapientiae, et lumine veritatis cherubim cognominatio docet.

Sequitur: « Ipsa autem altissimarum et compactarum sedium omni diligenter exaltari ignominia subjectionis, et ad summum supermundane sursum ferens, et omni extremitate ineffabiliter in sublimissimum, et circa vere excelsum totis virtutibus incommutabiliter [1047B] et stabiliter collocatum: et divini superadventus in omni impassibilitate et immaterialitate acceptivum, et deiferum, et famulanter in divinas susceptiones apertum. » Post cognominationem seraphim, et cherubim, ad cognominationem thronorum transit explanandam. Ac si dicat: Sicut seraphim cognominatio ardorem dilectionis, et cognominatio cherubim claritatem cognitionis, ita quoque cognominatio thronorum celsitudinem significat dignitatis, pro eo quod invisibilis Conditor in ipsis sedens, per eos subjecta omnia judicando disponit. Propter hanc enim dignitatem et excellentiam judicii divini, quod per eos exercetur, ipsos thronos altissimas et compactas sedes nominavit; altissimas, [1047C] propter dignitatem; compactas, propter veritatem. Thronos namque regnantium et judicantium sedes esse manifestum est. Et ad regnantem quidem sublimitas, ad judicantem vero veritas pertinet. Et idcirco ipsos thronos merito altissimas sedes nominavit, quia in eis regnans superiorem non habet; et compactas, quia in eis judicans a veritate non desidet. Quid est compactum? Apte et convenienter conjunctum. Videte juncturam sedium Dei. Junctura sedium Dei convenientia est judiciorum. Omne judicium ex alio aliud infert. Ex culpa poenam, ex justitia gloriam, ex merito praemium, ex qualitate operis qualitatem retributionis. Invenit culpam, adjudicat poenam. Invenit justitiam, adjudicat gloriam. Bene jungitur, compacta est sedes ista. Bene convenit et [1047D] apte cohaeret. Poena culpae, gloria justitiae. Si gloria culpae jungeretur, et poena justitiae, non convenirent ad invicem, neque compactam sedem haberet judicium. Compactio ergo sedium veritas est judiciorum. Sciendum vero est quod omne inferius judicium cum in quaestionem venerit aut contradictionem a superiori, aut testimonium, aut firmamentum sumere solet. Summum autem judicium, quia supra se aliud non habet, a quo confirmetur; jure sedes Dei non solum compactae per veritatem, sed altissimae nominantur per dignitatem. Si autem non compactas, sed sublevatas legerimus, quod ex ambiguo Graecae dictionis similiter intelligi potest: hoc significatur, quod coelestes illi spiritus, quibus ad judicandum praesidet Deus, quod singulariter alti sunt [1048A] in gloria non per celsitudinem naturae, sed per sublevationem gratiae meruerunt. Dicat ergo: « Ipsa autem altissimarum et compactarum sedium, » id est thronorum (iterum a superiori subaudiendum est cognominatio) docet hoc, scilicet eosdem thronos exaltari, sive exaltatos esse diligenter, id est perfecte ab omni ignominia subjectionis, hoc est ab omni ignominiosa subjectione. Nam quanto perfectius praesidenti Deo subjecti sunt tanto verius per ipsum, et in ipso supra caetera omnia sublimari meruerunt. Quia ergo throni non subjectionem, sed dominationem significant, dum coelestes illos spiritus sermo Dei thronos nominat, in eo ipso perfecte dominantes, et ab omni subjectione liberos esse demonstrat. Sic ergo cognominatio thronorum docet eos ab omni [1048B] ignominia subjectionis exaltatos, docet etiam sursum ferens illorum, id est sublevationem illorum usque ad summum: et hoc supermundane, id est spiritualiter sive invisibiliter, exaltatione videlicet spiritali et invisibili, atque omnem mundanam et visibilem celsitudinem transcendenti. Cognominatio ergo thronorum non solum docet eos per dominationem inferioribus esse praelatos; sed per sublimationem quoque usque ad summum exaltatos, ut videlicet inter ipsos, et eum qui summus est, medium non sit aliquid.

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Sequitur: « Et omni extremitate ineffabiliter in sublimissimum: et circa vere excelsum totis virtutibus incommutabiliter, et stabiliter collocatum. [1048C] Ipsa scilicet thronorum cognominatio docet collocatum, id est collocationem illorum, sive stabilimentum incommutabiliter, et stabiliter factum, totis virtutibus, id est omnimoda virtute, et inconcussa fortitudine. Factum dico ineffabiliter longe ab omni extremitate, hoc est ultra omnem finem, in sublimissimum, et circa vere excelsum. Ubi enim esset sedes Dei, nisi ubi Deus sedet? Ubi habitat Deus, ubi regnat, ubi sedet, ubi quiescit, ubi throni ejus sunt, et sedes ejus. Videte quam longe sunt a nobis. Quam longe est ab omni subjectione summa majestas, ab omni corruptione aeterna incommutabilitas. Ubi majestas est, thronus est; ubi incommutabilitas est, sedes est. Thronus significat incommutabilitatem. Ergo in ipsa aeternitate, in ipsa incommutabilitate sedes Dei [1048D] collocatae sunt. Et quam longe hoc sit ab omni extremitate, quis dicere potest? Quid est extremitas? Finis: ubi finis est, extremitas est. Finis in summo, finis in imo. In utroque creatura finem habet. Finis in imo est, ubi cessat defectus, ne in nihilum eat, quod aliquid est. Finis in summo, ubi se sistit profectus, ne extra mensuram se extendat, quod magnum est. Quantum ergo infima superant, qui ineffabiliter summa transcendunt? Possumus adhuc alio modo non inconvenienter extremitates istas interpretari. Extrema quippe sunt; quippe sunt visibilia omnia; quia sicut ab infimis sursum ascendenti supremum est, quo nihil est altius, ita ab intimis foras prodeunti extremum est, quo nihil est exterius. Subsellia ergo divina, sicut in eo quod throni dicuntur, [1049A] a subjectione infimorum ostenduntur per dignitatem in summo excellenter sublevata, ita quoque, in eo quod sedes dicuntur, demonstrantur ab omni fluctuatione extremorum per stabilitatem in intimo incommutabiliter collocata. Et tamen neque sursum sublevata ineffabili celsitudini aequari possunt, sub qua sunt; neque ad interiora collecta simplici unitati comparari, circa quam sunt. Propter hoc ergo sedes dicuntur, quia et subtus sunt per ineffabilem majestatem superius praesidenti, et in circuitu sunt per incommutabilem unitatem interius quiescenti. Hoc ergo cognominatio thronorum docet: et non solum hoc, sed docet etiam « acceptivum divini superadventus, » hoc est, quod divinitatem desuper eis advenientem accipiunt in omni impassibilitate et [1049B] immaterialitate, hoc est incorrupte et pure. Quia enim illam accipiunt in puritate, immaterialiter illam accipiunt; et rursum quia illam sine labore, et fatigatione suaviter influentem accipiunt, impassibiliter illam accipiunt. Qui ad occultae divinitatis notitiam per studium et laborem proficiunt, isti divinum superadventum passibiliter accipiunt. Rursum quibus occulta divinitas per signa exteriora, et figuras corporales cognoscendam se ingerit, ad ipsos quodammodo quasi materialiter venit. Quia ergo summi illi spiritus ad percipiendam divinitatis notitiam nec studio proficiunt, nec materialibus figuris erudiuntur: recte, divinum superadventum et impassibiliter et immaterialiter accipere perhibentur.

[1049C]Sequitur: « Et deiferum, et famulariter in divinas susceptiones apertum. » A superiori iterum subaudiendum est, cognominatio thronorum docet, scilicet deiferum illorum, hoc est quod Deum sibi praesidentem ferunt; et famulariter apertum in divinas susceptiones, hoc est, quod famulariter, id est obedienter se aperiunt et voluntarie coaptant, ut ipsum Deum advenientem in se suscipiant, quatenus divinae operationi voluntas subjecta respondeat, et ministerium sacrum non necessitudinis, sed dilectionis esse comprobetur. Rectus ordo. Primum subsellia Dei sublevantur per dignitatem; deinde collocantur proter stabilitatem; postea Deum advenientem in se suscipiunt, et ferunt. Postremo, quia rationalia sunt vehicula, ut opus felicitatis sit, ministerio desiderium, [1049D] et voluntatem adjungunt.

Sequitur: « Haec quidem nominum ipsorum quantum ad nos declaratio. » Continuat seipsum ad sequentia. Dictis enim cognominationibus trium ordinum, nunc ad eorumdem hierarchiam, id est, sacram potestatem definiendam, et exponendam transit. « Haec quidem, » scilicet haec, quam supra diximus, « est declaratio nominum ipsorum, » videlicet trium ordinum. Est dico quantum ad nos, id est quantum nobis videtur, vel quantum ad nos est declaratio nominum ipsorum, id est propter nos, ut nobis per nomina declarentur, non propter ipsos, qui sibi, et sine nominibus noti esse possunt.

Sequitur: « Dicendum vero, quam hierarchiam [1050A] eorum existimamus. » Ac si diceret: Hactenus de cognominatione illorum diximus; nunc vero de sacra potestate eorum, qualem eam existimamus esse, dicere debemus. « Omnis quidem enim hierarchiae speculationem Deum imitanti deiformitate dependentem ineffabiliter esse, et dividi omnem hierarchicam actionem in participationem sacram, et traditionem purgationis purae, et divini luminis, et perfectivae scientiae: sufficienter jam a nobis dictum esse arbitror. » Sensus hic est: Arbitror sufficienter dictum esse jam a nobis, omnis hierarchiae speculationem, id est, generalem hierarchiae definitionem, ineffabiliter dependentem esse ex deiformitate, hoc est ex similitudine Dei: similitudine, dico, imitanti Deum, hoc est ex similitudine imitationis Dei. Satis, inquit, [1050B] jam dictum arbitror quid sit hierarchia generaliter definita, scilicet deiformitas, id est conformatio vel similitudo ad Deum, quae in est imitantibus Deum. Superius namque in tertio capitulo universaliter hierarchiam ita definit. Hierarchia est ad Deum, quantum possibile est, similitudo et unitas. Propter hoc ergo arbitror sufficienter jam dictum esse quid sit hierarchia, quantum scilicet pertinet ad generalem definitionem. Similiter arbitror satis jam dictum esse, omnem hierarchicam actionem dividi, id est, quod omnis hierarchica actio dividitur in participationem sacram et traditionem purgationis purae, et divini luminis, et perfectivae scientiae. Omnis enim sacrae potestatis actio vel in eo [1050C] constat, quod participant a superiori; vel in eo, quod tradunt inferioribus purgationem, et illuminationem, et perfectionem. Triplex est gratia, quam duobus modis exercent, accipiendo, et impertiendo: primum est purgatio ad puritatem; deinde illuminatio ad veritatem; deinde perfectio ad bonitatem. Haec est enim perfectiva scientia, quae perficit, et perfectos facit, quando ex habitu virtutis veritas percipitur. « Nunc autem dicere digne prosequamur excellentissimos intellectus, quomodo jam secundum eos hierarchia ab eloquiis manifestatur. » Ac si diceret: Quoniam superius universaliter hierarchiae et definitio, et divisio sufficienter a nobis data est; nunc prosequamur digne dicere excellentissimos intellectus, id est, supremos spiritus [1050D] seraphim; scilicet cherubim, et thronos, in quibus prima angelica hierarchia ordinata est. Prosequamur, dico, dicere quomodo hierarchia secundum eos, id est, quomodo eorum hierarchia ab eloquiis sacris manifestatur. Hoc enim ordo rationis expostulat ut post generalem definitionem et divisionem hierarchiae, ad specialem tractationem ejus sermo descendat. In primis quidem de prima hierarchia, quae in tribus illis summis ordinibus consistit, quaerendum est qualem eam esse sacra eloquia manifestant. Et ne forte quis putaret eorum sacram potestatem idcirco diversam esse, quia ordines eorum differentes inveniuntur, dicit in omnibus tribus unam esse omnino, et consimilem hierarchiam, [1051A] inquantum videlicet omnes summae et principali hierarchiae primo loco uniuntur, et ab illa suae sacrae potestatis dignitatem immediate sortiuntur.

Hoc est enim, quod subjungit, dicens: « In primis essentiis, quae post substantificam earum divinitatem collocatae, et velut in vestibulis ipsius ordinatae, omnem sunt invisibilem, et visibilem super excellentes factam virtutem, propriam existimandum est esse et omnino aequiformem hierarchiam. » Primae essentiae supremi illi sunt, et principales tres ordines angelorum quae inter omnes creaturas primae sunt, et post divinitatem substantificam earum, id est, quae eas subsistere facit, primo constitutae, et veluti in vestibulis ipsius ordinatae, id est [1051B] ita prope, ut quidquid ultra sit, nonnisi in ipsa, et ipsa sit divinitas. In illis ergo primis essentiis, quae ita collocatae, et ordinatae, proximae divinitati superexcellentes sunt, et transgredientes omnem factam virtutem invisibilem, et visibilem, id est, omnis facturae, sive creaturae virtutem invisibilis et visibilis; in illis, inquam, essentiis existimandum est esse hierarchiam, id est sacram potestatem; propriam, id est discretam, et differentem ab aliis in se, et omnino aequiformem, id est consimilem et aequalem inter se. In illa enim sacra potestate, quam habent, sicut sunt aliis omnibus excellentiores, ita adinvicem omnino aequales existunt, ita ut singuli in eo quod a summa divinitate immediate accipiunt, alios superiores non habeant; et in eo quod inferioribus [1051C] ex divina participatione largiuntur, omnes similiter primi dispensatores existant. In hoc ergo una est, et consimilis hierarchia in tribus.

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Sequitur: « Puras igitur eas esse existimandum: non ut immundis maculis et inquinationibus liberatas, neque ut materialium receptivas phantasiarum, sed ut omni diminutione mundas, et altiores: et omni superfirmato templo secundum excelsissimam castitatem omnibus deiformissimis virtutibus supercollocatas: et proprio per se motu, et eodem motu secundum diligentis Deum inconversibile ordinis, ineffabiliter receptas: et in subjectis contumeliam omnino nescientes, sed incasualem ut et intransmutabilem habentes propriae deiformis specialitatis [1051D] purissimam collocationem. » Superius dixit in tribus illis excellentissimis ordinibus angelorum unam esse, et consimilem omnino hierarchiam, id est sacram potestatem: nunc consequenter adjungit ea, quae ad hierarchicam actionem, id est, sacrae potestatis operationem pertinent, perfecte illis inesse, hoc est, purgationem, illuminationem, perfectionem. Quae tria omnis sacra potestas sub summa potestate ordinata duobus modis exercet, scilicet a superiori accipiendo, et inferioribus impertiendo. Dicit ergo, quod istae primae essentiae in quibus est prima hierarchia ordinata, purgationem habent, quam et a superiori divinitate accipiunt, ut purgentur, et inferioribus conferunt, ut purgent. Accipiunt autem purgationem non quasi ab aliqua [1052A] immunditia, vel corruptione liberandae, sed ab omni imperfectione, et diminutione perficiendae, hoc est, quod dicit: Existimandum est puras eas esse, videlicet primas illas essentias: puras dico, non tamen ita quasi liberatas ab aliquibus immundis maculis, et inquinationibus; quia nunquam immunditiam aliquam, aut inquinationem habuerunt; neque ita puras quasi receptivas materialium phantasiarum, quia omnino materiales phantasias non recipiunt, et propterea purgari ab eis non indigent, quia omnino eas non habent; sed potius ita puras, quasi mundas, et alienas ab omni diminutione et imperfectione. Sane per immundas maculas, et materiales phantasias duo genera spiritualis inquinationis expressit: unum, quod est in desideriis pravis; alterum, [1052B] quod est in cogitationibus vanis. Desideria enim prava munditiam cordis quasi lutum inquinant, vanae autem cogitationes quasi pulvis quidam superaspersus claritatem ejus obnubilant. Quia igitur purissimae illae essentiae summorum spirituum, neque in pravis desideriis, nec in cogitationibus vanis corruptionem ullam suscipiunt, idcirco neque ab immundis maculis, neque a materialibus phantasiis mundari exposcunt. Purae igitur intelligendae sunt, non quasi purificatae a corruptione, sed quasi mundae ab imperfectione; nec solum ab imperfectione alienae, sed etiam per excellentiam perfectionis caeteris omnibus perfectis altiores, et supercollocatae.

[1052C]Hoc est enim, quod sequitur: « Et altiores, » subauditur existimandum est, esse primas illas essentias, « et supercollocatas omnium superfirmato templo, » id est, omni rationali creaturae, in qua Deus habitat, et quae per inhabitantem ipsum ad summum bonum est confirmata. Omnibus his primae illae essentiae supercollocatae sunt secundum excellentissimam castitatem suam, id est, excellentiorem castitate reliquorum omnium: castitatem, dico, existentem in omnibus virtutibus, hoc est omnimodis virtutibus, illarum, deiformissimis, hoc est, ad conformitatem Dei magis accedentibus, quam virtutes aliorum accedunt. Sic ergo existimandum est primas illas essentias, et puras esse, et per excellentiam puritatis caeteris altiores, et supercollocatas [1052D] esse. Et existimandum est etiam ad ipsam puritatem in Deo participandam ineffabiliter receptas esse proprio motu per se, hoc est, sine mediatore; et eodem motu, hoc est, sine deviatione semper in idipsum intendente; secundum inconversibile, hoc est, inconversibilitatem ordinis Deum diligentis. Qui enim nunquam tepescunt a dilectione, nunquam flectuntur aut convertuntur ab intentione.

Sequitur: « Et in subjectis contumeliam omnino nescientes, subauditur existimandum est. Sicut enim puritatem Dei desuper participant sine diminutione, ita inferius participandam praebent sine elatione: in hoc ipso Deum imitantes, « qui dat omnibus affluenter, et non improperat [n: (Jac. I)]. » [1053A] Propterea, inquit, « existimandum est nescientes esse contumeliam in subjectis; sed potius habentes collocationem propriae deiformis specialitatis incasualem, ut et intransmutabilem. » Propriam deiformem specialitatem intelligit, excellentem, et singularem conformationis divinae pulchritudinem: quae in illis summis essentiis est; in qua ita purissimae et perfectissimae collocatae sunt, et fundatae, ut collocationem habeant incasualem; cui casus dominari non potest; et merito incasualem, utpote intransmutabilem, vel incommutabilem. Summa ergo hujus capituli haec est, quod primae et principales illae essentiae purgationem, sive puritatem suam sine diminutione participant, sine elatione participandam praebent, sine mutabilitate incorruptam [1053B] possident. Et haec quidem de purgatione illorum dicta sunt.

Postea de illuminatione jungit dicens: « Contemplativasque iterum sensibilium symbolorum, aut intellectualium speculativas, neque ut varietate sacrescribentis theoriae in divinum reductas; sed, ut omnis immaterialis scientiae altiori lumine repletas, et formificae et principalis pulchritudinis, et superessentialis, et terlucentis contemplatione, quantum fas, refertas, communione autem Jesu similiter dignefactas: non in imaginibus sacrefictis formative figurant deificam similitudinem; sed ut vere ipsi approximantes in prima participatione scientiae deificum ejus luminum: et quia a Deo simile ipsis substantialiter donatum est. Communicant [1053C] autem hujusmodi, ut possibile, in praeoperatrice virtute deificis ipsius, et humanis virtutibus. » Hoc totum de illuminatione dictum est. Ac si diceret: Non solum existimandum est primas illas essentias purgationem habere et puras esse; sed iterum, hoc est, adhuc existimandum est, illuminationem habere, et contemplativas esse sensibilium symbolorum, et speculativas intellectualium. Sensibilia symbola materialia sunt signa, sive in creaturis, sive in Scripturis, sive in sacramentis divinis, ad demonstrationem invisibilium proposita: quorum mysticam significationem, et invisibilem veritatem summi illi angelici spiritus per divinam illuminationem contemplando agnoscunt. Speculantur etiam per eamdem illuminationem intellectualia, [1053D] subaudi symbola, id est spirituales theophanias, id est divinas manifestationes, per quas eis intus occultae, et invisibilis divinitatis natura manifestatur. Vel sic legi potest. Existimandum est eas, scilicet essentias contemplativas esse sensibilium symbolorum, et speculativas intellectualium, et non (subaudi) symbolorum. Foris enim in sensibilibus ubi materialia signa sunt, symbola sunt: intus autem in intellectualibus, ubi signa non sunt, sed veritas, symbola non sunt. Propterea in sensibilibus sacris symbolis signa veritatis contemplantur, intus autem in intellectualibus absque signis nudam veritatem speculantur. Propterea existimandum est, contemplativas esse sensibilium symbolorum, et similiter [1054A] speculativas intellectualium; non tamen quasi reductas in divinum, hoc est in divinam cognitionem, varietate, id est multiplici doctrina theoriae, id est divinae Scripturae; theoriae dico sacrescribentis; quia scilicet de divinis et sacris rebus scribit et loquitur. Per divinae enim contemplationis simplicem illuminationem, non per variam et multiplicem Scripturarum doctrinam eruditae, omnes sacras figurationes, et sensibilia signa, quae vel in Veteri, vel in Novo Testamento, utpote tabernaculum foederis, et arcam testamenti, et caetera hujusmodi, quae ad demonstrationem invisibilium Scriptura proponit: visibiles etiam species creaturarum, per quas invisibilia demonstrantur; mysticas quoque revelationes per sensibiles formationes factas, omnia scilicet haec [1054B] sacra symbola contemplantur. Et non solum haec, quae foris sunt, sed intellectualia quoque, quae per puram et nudam veritatem intus lucent, speculantur. Ad horum autem omnium speculationem, et divinam cognitionem non existimandum est eas reductas esse varietate sacrescribentis theoriae, hoc est, multiplici doctrina divinarum Scripturarum, quae ad hoc solum necessaria est, ut mentes hominum abalienatae a Deo ad cognitionem veritatis reducantur, et per varia dispersa colligantur in unum. Non ergo existimandum, summas illas essentias horum omnium cognitionem habere quasi per doctrinam Scripturarum eruditas, sed potius ut repletas altiori lumine, id est excellentiori cognitione omnis immaterialis, hoc est spiritualis scientiae. Altius quippe et [1054C] dignius est lumen cognitionis, quod intus per invisibilem aspirationem infunditur, quam quod extrinsecus per doctrinae eruditionem possidetur. Ipsas itaque summas, scilicet essentias existimandum est visibilium et invisibilium cognitionem habere, utpote repletas tali lumine; et ut etiam refertas contemplatione pulchritudinis formificae principalis, et superessentialis, et terlucentis. Refertas dico, quantum fas est, id est possibilitati creaturae concessum. Significat autem divinam pulchritudinem: quae formifica est, quia secundum se formavit a se facta omnia, et principalis est, quia, cum sit forma omnium, ipsa tamen ab alio formam non accepit; et superessentialis est, quia non solum praecedit per [1054D] formam in eo, quod exemplar est omnium, sed transcendit quoque per essentiam in eo quod est creatrix universorum.

Sequitur: « Et terlucentis, » scilicet pulchritudinis « contemplatione refertas existimandum est. » Terlucentem pulchritudinem eamdem divinam pulchritudinem significat: quae in tribus lucet, cum ipsa tamen triplex non sit, sed una, Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus tres personae sunt; sed Deus unus, Deitas una, natura una, essentia una, pulchritudo una. Vides Patrem, pulchritudinem illam lucentem vides in Patre; vides Filium, pulchritudinem illam lucentem vides in Filio; vides Spiritum sanctum, pulchritudinem illam lucentem vides in Spiritu sancto. Quasi ergo terlucet, quia in tribus lucet, [1055A] cum tamen ipsa triplex non sit; sed una, quae lucet. Alius est Pater in persona, ibi lucet. Alius est Filius in persona, ibi lucet. Alius est Spiritus sanctus in persona, ibi lucet. Et tamen Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus sancti, sicut Deitas una, et natura una, ita pulchritudo una. Propterea, inquit, « existimandum est terlucentis pulchritudinis contemplatione refertas. » Quid ergo mirum est, si summae illae essentiae opera divina visibilia et invisibilia perfecte cognoscunt, quae ipsius Creatoris contemplatione quantum scilicet creaturae possibile est, plenae sunt.

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Sequitur: « Communione autem Jesu similiter digne factas, » subauditur existimandum est. Nota [1055B] ibi esse compositionem « dignefactas, » id est dignas factas. Non solum, inquit, divinitatis contemplationem et cognitionem percipere meruerunt, sed illius etiam salvationis, quae in humanitate Jesu perfecta est, communione, et cognoscendo, et participando dignefactae sunt. Communicaverunt enim Jesu: mysterium incarnationis ejus, et antequam fieret praedicendo, et cum fieret administrando et posquam perfectum est, homini ad aeternitatem reparato in eadem beatitudinis societate congaudendo. Postea subjungit, ostendens quod divinam contemplationem sine aliquibus figuris immediate ab ipsa divinitate illuminatae percipiunt. Sicut enim superius demonstravit quod cognitionem omnium visibilium et invisibilium non per exteriorem doctrinam, [1055C] sed per internam in ipsa Dei sapientia legunt et hauriunt; ita nunc demonstrat quod eamdem contemplationem divinam non per aliquas formas, vel imagines mediantes, sed ab ipsa divinitate primo loco immediate, nude et pure percipiunt. « Non, inquit, figurant deificam similitudinem formative in imaginibus sacrefictis; sed potius figurant eam, ut vere approximantes ipsi, » scilicet deificae similitudini, vel divinitati, « approximantes, » dico in prima participatione scientiae « deificum ejus luminum, » id est, deificantium ejus illuminationum. Deifica similitudo ipsa contemplatio divina; quia, dum per eam illuminati lucentes sunt, quodammodo ipsius lucis illuminantis similitudinem accipiunt. In hac [1055D] autem deifica similitudine non se figurant, neque illam sibi acquirunt per aliquas sacras imagines formatas et fictas, id est compositas ad demonstrationem spiritualium; sicut homines, qui per visibiles et materiales demonstrationes in sacro eloquio erudiuntur ad invisibilium cognitionem. Non ergo mediantibus ejusmodi illae summae essentiae illuminantur contemplatione divina. Sed, ut vere approximantes ipsi, id est non per aliud, sed per ipsam veritatem approximantes ipsi veritati, quia inter ipsas, et veritatem nihil est medium: et idcirco approximantes sunt in prima participatione scientiae; quia primo loco participant scientiam deificum ejus luminum; quia immediate contemplantur, et sciunt, et cognoscunt lumina ejus deifica, id est deificantia; [1056A] quia illuminatos a se per divinam similitudinem, quodammodo deos efficiunt.

Sequitur: « Et quia Deo simile ipsis substantialiter donatum est. » Ideo etiam, inquit, vere, et in prima participatione approximantes sunt ipsi Divinitati; quia Deo simile donatum est ipsis, id est quia similitudo Dei donata est ipsis substantialiter. Quod enim Deo similes sunt non ex alio, aut per alium habent; sed quia ipsam divinitatem substantialiter nude et pure percipiunt. Vel simile Deo donatum est eis subjectissime, quia proximo loco subjecti sunt, ut ipsam similitudinem Dei prima participatione suscipiant.

Sequitur: « Communicant hujusmodi, ut possibile est, in praeoperatrice virtute deificis ipsius, et [1056B] humanis virtutibus. » Concludit supradicta. Quia enim refertae sunt hujusmodi, id est istae summae essentiae contemplatione principalis pulchritudinis, idcirco communicant deificis virtutibus; et quia dignefactae communione Jesu idcirco communicant humanis virtutibus; et quia primo, et proximo loco participant, idcirco communicant in praeoperatrice virtute Dei: quae scilicet primum in eis operatur, et postea operetur per eos. Vel humanas virtutes Jesu vocat virtutes ejus ex humanitate, id est ex clementia sive benignitate exhibitas: ut sit sensus: Quoniam, sicut ejus virtutibus communicant in contemplatione majestatis, ita etiam communicant in cooperatione benignitatis. Communicant ipsi per contemplationem in sua majestate; communicant [1056C] ipsi per ministerium cooperationis in nostra redemptione. Sic ergo communicant deificis et humanis virtutibus ipsius: et hoc est quantum possibile est eis secundum datae gratiae mensuram. Hactenus de illuminatione illarum dictum est. Nunc tertio loco subjungit de perfectione.

Sequitur: « Perfectas autem similiter non ut sacra varietate analyticam scientiam illuminatas, sed ut prima; et supereminenti deificatione repletas, secundum excellentissimam, quantum in angelis, divinorum operum scientiam. » Ac si dicat: Non solum puras et illuminatas eas esse existimandum est; sed etiam perfectas in scientia ex habitu virtutis percepta, non tamen quasi illuminatas, sive eruditas [1056D] scientiam, vel disciplinam analyticam, id est resolutoriam; sacra varietate, id est multiplici doctrina sacra Scripturae. Non enim sicut homines foris multiplicitate sermonis erudiuntur, ut eis per disputationes et discretiones ea, quae occulta sunt et perplexa, in scientia ac disciplina resolvantur, sed per simplicem intus contemplationem illuminari accipiunt, ut ab eorum cognitione nihil eorum, quae sciri possunt, abscondatur. Sic igitur eas existimandum est esse perfectas, non quasi illuminatas ad resolutivam et explicabilem scientiam per varietatem sacri eloquii; sed quasi repletas prima, et supereminenti deificatione, hoc est divina illuminatione, qua ante alias omnes coelestes essentias illuminantur secundum scientiam divinorum operum, [1057A] excellentissima, quantum in angelis scilicet excellens esse potest. « Non enim per alias sanctas essentias, sed ab ipsa Divinitate sanctificatae, in ipsam immediate extenduntur: omnibus supereminenti virtute et ordine et ad castissimam omnino fortitudinem collocantur, et ad immaterialem et invisibilem pulchritudinem, quantum fas in contemplationem adducuntur: et ad divinorum operum scibiles rationes ut primae et circa Deum essentiae, flectuntur, et ab ipso perfectionis principe excelsissime sanctificatae sunt. » Probat summa istas essentias ante omnes alias, et supra omnes alias coelestes essentias illuminationem divinam percipere; quia non per alias sanctas essentias, sed ab ipsa Divinitate sanctificatae, in ipsam immediate per dilectionem et [1057B] sublimationem extenduntur, secundum virtutem et ordinem, hoc est, gratiam et dignitatem, quam habent omnibus supereminentem. Sic itaque Divinitati immediate conjunctae ab ipsa sola accipiunt et purgationem, et illuminationem, et perfectionem, hoc est quod dicit, collocantur, id est stabiliuntur ad castissimam omnino fortitudinem, sive inflexibilitatem, hoc est, fortem et inflexibilem, et incorruptibilem castitatem. Adducuntur etiam per illuminationem, quantum fas, id est licitum vel concessum est, in contemplationem ad immaterialem et invisibilem pulchritudinem Creatoris contemplandam. Flectuntur etiam sicut in molli cera, vel informantur vel erudiuntur, sive etiam perficiuntur ad scibiles rationes divinorum operum, ut primae essentiae [1057C] et circa Deum proximo loco consistentes, et quae ab ipsa perfectionis principe scilicet Divinitate excelsissimae sanctificatae sunt.

Sequitur: « Hoc ergo et theologi aperte declarant, suppositas quidem coelestium essentiarum dispositiones a superfirmatis ornate erudiri deificas scientias: omnium vero altiores ab ipsa Divinitate, quantum fas, ad doctrinam illuminari. » Auctoritate probat, quod dixerat, supremos scilicet angelorum ordines a sola Divinitate illuminari; inferiores autem a superioribus erudiri. Hoc enim theologi, id est prophetae, et qui sancti de coelestibus et divinis locuti sunt, aperte declarant: suppositas quidem dispositiones, id est inferiores ordines coelestium essentiarum, [1057D] ordinate, id est pulchre et convenienter erudiri ad deificas scientias, a superfirmatis, id est superpositis ordinibus; eas vero, quae altiores sunt omnium, ab ipsa Divinitate, quantum fas est, id est possibile illis, ad doctrinam illuminari.

Sequitur: « Quasdam enim earum introducunt a prioribus sacre eruditas, Dominum esse coelestium virtutum, et Regem gloriae in coelos humanitus receptum. » Exemplum ponit, ubi coelestes essentiae inferiores a superioribus eruditae sunt: ubi scilicet theologi introducunt quasdam earum a prioribus sive a superioribus eruditas, ut scirent Deum Dominum coelestium virtutum, et regem gloriae secundum humanitatem suam in coelos esse receptum. Sic [1058A] enim scriptum est, quod Salvatore secundum carnem acceptam, ascendente in coelum, quibusdam angelorum humanitatis ejus exaltationem adhuc ignorantibus, atque ideo admirantibus, et dicentibus: « Quis est iste rex gloriae? » ab aliis amplius illuminatis dictum est Dominus virtutum, ipse est rex gloriae. » [n: (Psal. XXIII.)] In quo probatur aliquando alios ab aliis erudiri.

Sequitur: « Quasdam vero apud ipsum Jesum quaerentes, et pro nobis suae divinae actionis scientiam discentes; et eas ipsum Jesum immediate docentem, et praelargiens eis manifestantem suam humanam benignitatem. Ego enim, inquit, disputo justitiam, et judicium salutaris. » Hoc exemplum de Isaia sumptum est ad probandum, quod supremi ordines [1058B] angelorum a solo Deo ad scientiam veritatis illuminantur. Quasdam vero solas coelestes essentias introducunt ipsi theologi, quaerentes, id est quaestionem facientes apud ipsum Jesum; et discentes, non ab alio, sed ab ipso, qui Deus est, scientiam suae actionis divinae pro nobis exhibitae. Actionem divinam ipsius Jesu vocat passionem et mortem quam pro nobis sustinuit. Quae actio idcirco divina dicitur; quia soli Deo possibile fuit ut per mortem mortis destrueret potestatem. Hujus ergo actionis scientiam coelestes essentias ab ipso Jesu quaerentes introducunt, ubi indumentum carnis assumptae sanguine passionis cruentatum cernentes dicunt: « Quis est, qui venit de Edom tinctis vestibus de Bosra? [n: (Isai. LXIII.)] » Et deinceps: « Quare [1058C] ergo rubrum est vestimentum tuum, et indumentum tuum sicut calcantium in torculari? [n: (ibid.)] » Ita ergo quaerentes, et discere appetentes introducunt. Introducunt etiam ipsum Jesum eas immediate, et per semetipsum docentem, et manifestantem eis suam humanam, id est clementem benignitatem, quam nobis exhibuit. Quam manifestationem eis confert, praelargiens, id est ante omnes alios largiens scientiam operationis suae. « Ego, » inquit, « disputo justitiam, et judicium salutaris [n: (ibid.)]. » Justitia, et judicium salutaris, id est salvatoris sive salvationis, redemptionem significat generis humani. In qua et justitia fuit, inquantum scilicet factor creaturam suam ab aliena dominatione revocavit; [1058D] et judicium, inquantum diabolum invasorem alieni juris ab eo, quem possidebat, homine, potenter ejecit. Hanc autem justitiam, et judicium idcirco disputare se dicit, quia eam, quae ad dolores carnis assumptae pertinuit, cum labore, et quasi quadam concertatione adimplevit.

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Sequitur: « Miror autem, quod et coelestium essentiarum primae, et tantum simul omnes supereminentes divinis illuminationibus, ut mediatae quaestiones reverenter appetunt. » Ad hoc respicit quod dicitur summas essentias immediate a Deo illuminari, et erudiri, quia contrarium videtur, quod in hoc loco non solum a superiori suo, sed ab invicem quoque quaerentes, et quasi discere volentes inveniuntur. Sed sciendum est quod haec quaestio non [1059A] doctrinae inquisitio est, sed ignorantiae professio. Quaerunt enim, ostendentes quod nesciunt, et quod doceri opus habent. Ubi autem omnes quaerunt, profecto aliunde se doceri debere ostendunt. Quaerunt ergo inter se, docendi supra se. Quia tam mutua quaestio doctrinae, et scientiae ab invicem inquisitio esse videtur, cum eas a solo superiori erudiri constet, idcirco ait. Miror quod primae illae, et principales coelestium essentiarum, id est inter coelestes essentias, et tantum supereminentes divinis illuminationibus, omnes simul alias coelestes essentias; miror, dico, quod appetunt quaestiones, id est faciunt quaestiones appetentes scientiam, reverenter, id est humiliter sicut humiles et inferiores, et quasi excellentiam illuminationis suae non attendentes; et [1059B] hoc est quod ait, « ut mediatae, » id est velut illae quae medium habent inter se et Deum, et ab aliis erudiri indigent; vel ut mediatae, quia non vere mediatae, quia ad alias quaestionem non faciunt; nec tamen vere immediatae, quia non ad ipsum principium suum, sed adinvicem quaestionem referunt.

Sequitur: « Etenim non inde interrogant: quare tua rubra vestimenta? » Probat quod vere ut mediatae quaestionem faciunt, quia non ad ipsum Jesum prius, sed ad invicem verba dirigunt, dicentes: « Quis est iste, qui venit de Edom tinctis vestibus de Bosra? » Non enim, inquit, inde interrogant, hoc est ab illo interrogationem incipiunt, quare tua rubra vestimenta? ubi immediate ad ipsum Jesum [1059C] sermonem dirigunt; sed prius inter se quasi mediate: « Quis est iste, » et caetera. Unde mirum est, quod illae supremae essentiae, cum primae sint, et proximae Divinitati, quasi mediatae faciunt quaestiones.

Sequitur: « Apud seipsas vero deliberant ante interrogare, ostendentes quod discunt, et deificam scientiam appetunt. » Solvit modo quaestionem, quare scilicet summae illae essentiae, cum sint proximae Deo, inter se quaestionem faciunt; quia scilicet apud semetipsas deliberant interrogare, ne forte nimis festiva interrogatione praesiliant, sive praeveniant illuminationem illam, quae in ipsis fit per divinam processionem; hoc est, per divinam gratiam [1059D] in ipsas illuminandas procedentem; ostendentes etiam per ipsam deliberationem interrogationis suae, quod appetunt deificam scientiam. In eo quippe, quod interrogant, significant se scientiam appetere; in eo autem quod prius inter se conferunt quaestionantes et deliberant, demonstrant quod divinam in se processionem non audent praevenire.

Hoc est enim quod sequitur: « Non autem praesilientes per divinam processionem inditam illuminationem. » Appetunt enim scientiam; et ideo interrogant, sed non praesilientes illuminationem divinam, donec ipsa seipsam offerat sponte procedens in ipsas, ideo deliberant apud se, prius non audent Jesum interrogare quousque se ipse offert, dicens: « Ego sum, qui loquor justitiam. » Tunc demum [1060A] assumpta fiducia ad ipsum quaestionem dirigunt. « Quare rubrum est indumentum tuum, et vestimentum tuum sicut calcantium in torculari. »

Sequitur: « Num ergo prima coelestium intellectuum hierarchia ab ipsa perfectionis principe sanctificata in eo quod in eam immediate extenditur sanctissima purgatione, multo lumine, anteperfecta consummatione proportionaliter eam implens, purgatur, et illuminatur, et perficitur? » Sensus hic est. Num pro nonne ergo prima hierarchia coelestium intellectuum purgatur, et illuminatur, et perficitur. Sanctificata ab ipsa principe perfectionis, hoc est ab ipsa divinitate, quae princeps est, et principium omnis sanctificationis. Sanctificata, dico, in eo quod ipsa divinitas immediate in eam [1060B] extenditur, illustrans, sive irradians, vel replens eam proportionaliter, id est differenti participatione ab illuminatione reliquorum, cum sanctissima purgatione, et cum multo lumine, et cum anteperfecta, id est superexcellenti consummatione vel perfectione. « Purgatur, » dico, et « illuminatur, et perficitur, ut sit pura ab omni minoratione vel imperfectione, et ut plena primi luminis, » hoc est, in eam primum ante alias lucentis; et ut sit « perfecta participans perfecta scientia, et cognitione primo sibi data. » Quod autem ait, « sanctificata, » vel ut commodius fortassis quamvis inusitatius transfertur, pontificata ab ipsa principe purgationis; ipsam, ut diximus, divinitatem significat, quae Graece teletarchia, id est princeps purgationis, sive [1060C] sanctificationis vocatur.

Sequitur: « Comprehendens autem et hoc dixerim fortassis non immerito. » Tanquam si quaeretur, quae sit ista purgatio, respondet, quod assumptio divinae scientiae in animo rationali, et purgatio est, et illuminatio, et perfectio. Purgatio, quia ignorantiam purgat; illuminatio, quia divina cognitione illuminat; perfectio, quia illuminando scientia perfectarum doctrinarum, sive disciplinarum secundum habitum illuminatum consummat, hoc est quod dicit: « Comprehendens, » hoc est, breviter in unum supra dicta colligens; etiam hoc non immerito fortassis dixerim, quod et purgatio est, et illuminatio, et perfectio divinae scientiae assumptio. [1060D] Et reddit causam, quare purgatio, et illuminatio, et perfectio dicitur. « Ignorantiam quidem utpote purgans secundum ordinem indita scientia perfectarum doctrinarum. » Ideo purgatio dicitur, utpote purgans ignorantiam indita scientia, hoc est per inditam scientiam perfectarum doctrinarum. Indita, dico, secundum ordinem; hoc est, secundum quod dignitas, et excellentia uniuscujusque ordinis exposcit. « Illuminans autem ipsa divina cognitione, per quem et purgat non prius contemplantem. » Ideo illuminatio dicitur, quia illuminat unamquamque hierarchiam divina cognitione, per quam scilicet divinam cognitionem etiam purgat ipsam hierarchiam. Hierarchiam, dico, non prius contemplantem, quam purgetur, sicut scriptum est: [1061A] « Beati mundo corde, quoniam ipsi Deum videbunt [n: (Matth. V)]. »

Sequitur: « Quam manifestat per altiorem illuminationem, et perficiens iterum ipso lumine secundum habitum scientia lucidissimarum doctrinarum. » Quam scilicet hierarchiam ipsa divinae scientiae assumptio manifestat per altiorem illuminationem. In hoc enim eam altiorem caeteris omnibus esse declarat, quod eam altiori, et excellentiori lumine divinae cognitionis illustrat.

Sequitur: « Et perficiens iterum ipso lumine secundum habitum scientia lucidissimarum doctrinarum. » Non satis manifeste distinguit illuminationem et perfectionem, pro eo quod utrumque in cognitione et scientia assignare videtur. Hoc tamen [1061B] interest, quod illuminatio proprie ad illam cognitionem pertinet, quae scientiam aedificat; perfectio autem ad illam cognitionem, quae bonorum morum formam, et habitum virtutum demonstrat. Sunt enim quaedam, quae tantum investigantur ad cognitionem intelligendi; quaedam vero specialiter pertinent ad intelligentiam faciendi. Ad illa necessaria est illuminatio; ad ista perfectio. Non enim perfectum facit cognitio veritatis, nisi habitus virtutis subsequatur. Idcirco lucidissimam doctrinam vocat, quae in habitu virtutis constat, quia magistra intelligendi experientia est; et ille optime virtutem novit, qui eam non audiendo solum, sed et gustando et faciendo didicit. In experientia et habitu virtutis, cognitio veritatis perficitur, quae in sola intelligendi [1061C] illuminatione inchoatur. Quod totum quia per divinae scientiae assumptionem acquiritur, idcirco ipsa et purgatio, et illuminatio, et perfectio convenienter appellatur.

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Sequitur: « Ipsa ergo est, quantum ad nostram scientiam, prima coelestium essentiarum dispositio, in circuitu Dei, et circa Deum immediate stans, et simpliciter, et incessanter circuiens aeternam ejus scientiam, secundum excellentissimam, quantum in angelis, semper mobilem collocationem. » Infert e supradictis. Ac si diceret: Quandoquidem illa summorum spirituum hierarchia primum, et principaliter ab ipsa Divinitate et purgatur, et illuminatur et perficitur; ergo ipsa est prima et principalis [1061D] dispositio, sive principalis ordo coelestium essentiarum, stans immediate; et in circuitu, et circa Deum. Stat enim per incommutabilitatem contemplationis; circuit autem per vivificum et incessabile desiderium aeternae dilectionis. Ideo incessanter, quia non deficit a dilectione; ideo simpliciter, quia circuiens non recedit ab unitate. Ipsa unitas in medio est simplicitas Divinitatis; cui in circuitu, et circa sunt, inquantum immediate illi appropinquant. In circuitu etiam, quia ineffabili ejus occultaeque incomprehensibilitati quodammodo foris et ipsae sunt, ad quem omnino non penetrant. Tamen ambiunt et desiderant; et ad interiora nituntur; et cognitione, et dilectione accedentes proximae fiunt secundum excellentissimam collocationem, quam [1062A] habent juxta Deum; excellentissimam, dico, quantum in angelis, id est quantum ad comparationem illius, quae in caeteris omnibus angelis invenitur. Et collocationem dico semper mobilem, quia et contemplatione non recedunt, et desiderio semper accedunt. Propter haec ergo omnia principalis est ista dispositio inter omnes alias coelestes essentias, principalis, dico, quantum ad nostram scientiam scilicet quantum per nostram scientiam comprehendi potest. Subjungit adhuc in laudem hujus hierarchiae, alia post alia; multa excelsa, et sublimia, et divina admiratione digna accumulans, et profunda quaedam, et non nisi puris nota. Talis, inquit, est dispositio illa, sive ordo, primae hierarchiae collocatione proxima, desiderio et intentione ardentissima; [1062B] quae, licet ad totum quod Dei est incomprehensibile penetrare non valeat, aeterna tamen dilectione quantum capi potest et comprehendi a creatura ambire non cessat. Sed ne forte laboris, non felicitatis studium videretur, si semper ambiret, et nunquam attingeret, semper quaereret, et nunquam perciperet; semper desideraret, et nunquam gustaret, adjungit fructum inquisitionis et desiderii effectum, dicens: « Multas quidem, et beatas videns pure contemplationes, simplosque et immediatos fulgores, illuminata, et divino alimento repleta. Multa quidem primo data fusione, solaque domestica, et unifica divinae refectionis unitate multaque communione Dei, et cooperatione digna effecta ad eam, ut possibile, similitudine bonarum habitudinum [1062C] et actionum; multaque divinorum superposite cognoscens, et divinae scientiae, et cognitionis in participatione, secundum quod fas est, facta. » Dixit quomodo dicere potuit: Tres trinitatem circumstant, seraphim dilectione, cherubim cognitione, throni dominatione. Tota hic trinitas est. Dominatio in Patre, sapientia in Filio, dilectio in Spiritu sancto. Videbatur seraphim superposuisse, quia charitas supereminet; sed et ecce videmus quia thronus Patris est, et junguntur throni cum Patre, et dilectio Spiritui sancto datur. Si thronos subjectos putas, quia post seraphin et cherubim nominantur; puta etiam praelatos, quia ad Patrem pertinent, qui ante Filium et Spiritum sanctum dicitur. Sed in [1062D] Trinitate gradus non est. Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus unus est Deus. Non potest unitas inferior esse seipsa. Propterea hierarchia illa summorum spirituum, quae a summa et supereminenti Divinitatis dominatione primo, et principaliter formatur quantum ad excellentissimam similitudinem, qua simplicem unitatem imitatur, gradum in dominatione non habet, quamvis tamen secundum eam (qua creatura Creatori aequari non potest) mensuram participationis, et distributionem gratiae, differentiam habeat. Propterea una est trium dominatio, qua universaliter subjectis omnibus post supremam et supereminentem Deitatis dominationem praeferuntur, adinvicem non subjiciuntur. Propterea omnes simul primum locum habent, et circumstant [1063A] proxima collocatione singuli, ut alium alius nec interveniat positione, nec praeveniat participatione, nec transcendat dominatione. Ita est dispositio ista prima in circuitu Dei, et circa Deum immediate stans ita proprie. Et quis est fructus hujus tantae familiaritatis?

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Audi quod sequitur: « Multas quidem et beatas videns pure contemplationes simplosque et immediate fulgores illuminata, et divino alimento repleta. » Ne ergo mireris si sic ambiunt, et elongari non patiuntur. Aliquid ibi est quod trahit; et quid hoc est? Exspectas, ut dicatur quid sit illud quod in tantum desiderantium affectum incitat et provocat dilectionem. Sed quomodo putas a nobis dicetur, quod ab illis non penetratur? Illi adhuc non intraverunt, sed [1063B] in circuitu stant; et magnum illis est accedere ad illud, ut videant, et contrectent, et gustent, et experiantur qualis sit dulcedo boni sine obstaculo dilectoribus expositi; nec intrant tamen nec penetrant ut comprehendant, et usque ad totum capiant, quanta sit immensitas occulti. Quomodo ergo tu foris exponere putas, cui et illi qui intus sunt foris manent? Non ergo dici potest a nobis bonum illud, quod illos beatos animos per gaudium aeternae contemplationis juxta se immobiles tenet, ut ad caduca non effluant; et rursum per desiderium movens ad se trahit, ut ipsum incessabili dilectione appetant. Sed ne omnino taceatur, quod prorsus dici non potest, audi quid sit, quod illos et tenet juxta se, et trahit ad se. Bonum quoddam, et magnum supra [1063C] bona ista omnia, quae nosti, aliud prorsus non solum differentia, sed supereminentia, ut tamen secundum haec, quae nosti, bona tibi insinuetur, et notum fiat, sicut potest esse, dicamus: lumen est et dulcedo bonum illud. Quare lumen? quia oculos clarescere facit. Quare dulcedo? quia reficit. Duo sunt ista apud nos magna bona, et non inveniuntur alia majora his, neque ad gaudium vel ad felicitatem nostram magis operantia: lumen et dulcedo. Alterum est ad illuminationem, alterum ad refectionem. Si illuminaris et non satiaris, magnum bonum est sed non plenum. Si satiaris et non illuminaris; magnum item bonum est sed non perfectum. Refectio jucundum facit, quod intus est; illuminatio [1063D] jucundum exhibet, quod foris est, utrumque ad gaudium plenum exigitur. Si enim in altero reficeris, et in altero afficeris, non est laetitia perfecta, cui tristitia mista est. Quaere ergo refectionem, ut jucundum tibi sit quod in te est, quaere et illuminationem, ut jucundum tibi sit, quod extra te est. Videtur quidem refectio magis necessaria esset, quemadmodum magis proprium est tibi bonum, quod in te est, quam quod extra te est bonum. Verumtamen illuminatio contemplationis quantum jucunditatis apponit? Dulce lumen, et delectabile oculis videre solem. Aspice mundum istum, qui multa spectacula jucunditatis praebet? Et omnia haec per sapientia Dei facta sunt. Totum quod vides, inde exivit, ubi ratio, et causa est omnium. Si ergo tam pulchrum [1064A] est videre dispositionem et formam operis; quam jucundum esse putas et delectabile sapientiam artificis contemplari? Noli autem cogitare, quia una sapientia nominatur quasi solitariam quamdam et fastidiosam contemplationem videntium illam, una est, sed non ita una. Quomodo enim putas esse unam sapientiam Dei? Forte, quemadmodum dicis essentiam unam, speciem unam et formam unam, locum unum et tempus unum: haec omnia numero unum sunt. Quid est numero? discretione. Quid est numero? parvitate. Quid est numero? imperfectione. Sic enim numeras hoc et illud. Cum enim numeras, dicis hoc et non illud. Quod ergo unitate numeratur, unitate separatur; et eadem unitate probatur ab omnibus esse diminutum, a quibus ostenditur [1064B] ipsa unitate discretum. Nunquid sapientiam Dei ita unam esse putas? Ergo ipsam numeras, et dicis, recte hoc, et non illud. Si ergo ipsa est, et non illud; ergo non totum est ipsa; et aliquid est extra ipsam, quod non est in ipsa. Si totum in ipsa est, totum ipsa est; quomodo tu dicis hoc et non illud ipsa est? Noli ergo numerare. Scriptura tibi dicit: « Sapientia ejus non est numerus. Omnia, quae ex ipsa sunt, in numero facta sunt et pondere, et mensura. Ipsa autem sub numero non est; » in qua vera unitas est sine parvitate, et universitas sine multiplicitate; nec sub pondere est, inaestimabilis; nec sub mensura, incomprehensibilis. Quid ergo putas esse videre sapientiam Dei? Quando mundum istum vides, quanta in ipsos vides? Et totum [1064C] hoc inde venit; et ibi est totum, ubi est sapientia Dei. Et quid dico totum hoc? Parum enim est hoc, ut in sapientia Dei non aliud sit. Si intelligit opus suum Deus, et seipsum non intelligit, quae est sapientia ista? Plus enim est quod est Deus quam quod est factum a Deo. Si ergo novit quod fecit, et non novit quod est ipse qui fecit; quod majus est ignorat, et non est sapientia perfecta in eo. Si cor tuum capere potest, et comprehendere ea quae facis et quae explicas opere, universa ratione intus dictante disponis, et quae facturus es omnia prius in ratione concipis; et cum ad opus exeunt, a ratione non recedunt: quomodo in aeterna ratione Conditoris non esse potest omne [1064D] quod factum est? Rursum si parum est animo rationali videre et comprehendere quae foris sunt, nisi ea quae intus sunt, multo majora et mirabiliora contempletur, et majus agnoscit esse quod ipse est, quam omne quo extra ipsum est: non potest aeternus artifex in ea sapientia, qua videt omne quod ipse fecit, ignorare quod majus omnibus est; quod est ipse qui fecit. Attende ergo quae sit sapientia ista, in qua sunt omnia quae facta sunt, et praeter omnia, et super omnia, quod majus omnibus est ille, a quo omnia facta sunt. Qualis putas est species ista, in qua tanta pulchritudo est? Cum ergo audis sapientiam Dei nominari, hoc totum cogita, hoc totum in ipsa est; et ipsam videre, totum hoc videre est. In ipsa videntur omnia quae facta sunt; [1065A] et in ipsa videtur a quo omnia facta sunt. Propterea summi illi spiritus, qui per excellentiam supereminentis gratiae immediate appropinquant, ab ipsa illuminantur ad contemplandam ipsam, et in ejus contemplatione vident, et quod factum est per ipsam, et quod est in ipsa, et eum qui per ipsam fecit in quo est ipsa. Istae ergo sunt contemplationes, quas pure videt prima hierarchia, ad simplos fulgores immediate illuminata, quae contemplationes et multae sunt, in quantum illic omnia videntur; et beatae sunt, quia cum omnibus ille etiam qui fecit omnia videtur. Non enim praeter ipsum videtur quod in ipso videtur, quia et unum est quod videtur, quod ipse est; et in ipso uno omnia videntur, in quo omnia unum et unum omnia est. Vide quam [1065B] multae sunt contemplationes, ubi nihil omnium absconditur, quam beatae contemplationes, ubi in summo bono cuncta videntur; ubi videre et habere; amare et gustare bonum idem est; ubi non videtur, nisi veritas; non amatur, nisi bonitas. Duo sunt enim, cognitio et amor. Alterum ad illuminationem pertinet; alterum ad refectionem. Cognitio illuminat, dilectio satiat. Cognitio veritatis, amor bonitatis: in his beatitudo constat cognoscere et amare bonum. « Gustate, inquit Scriptura, et videte, quoniam suavis est Dominus [n: (Psal. XXXIII)]. » In « gustate » dilectio; in « videte » cognitio est. Duo ista distincte commendat, scilicet cognitionem et dilectionem. « Multas quidem, et beatas videns pure contemplationes simplosque, et immediate fulgores [1065C] illuminata. » Hoc de illuminatione et cognitione dictum est.

Sequitur: « Divino alimento repleta. Multa quidem primo data fusione, solaque domestica, et unifica divinae refectionis unitate. » Hoc dictum est de dilectione et refectione. Utramque multis modis commendat. Primo cognitionem in contemplationibus multis et beatis pure visis per illuminationem fulgorum simplicium. Qui sunt simplices fulgores? purae illuminationes. Per puras illuminationes venitur ad puras contemplationes. Pura illuminatio est quando veritas per semetipsam concipitur; pura contemplatio est quando veritas in semetipsa videtur. Quando per subjectam imaginem vel figuram [1065D] veritas addiscitur, non est pura illuminatio; quando in subjecta imagine vel figura veritas cognoscitur, non est pura contemplatio. Neque enim simplicitas esse potest, nisi ubi solum est; neque puritas, nisi ubi verum est. Simplicitas in solo; puritas in vero. Propterea qui immediate contemplantur, et per semetipsos ad veritatem accedunt, soli simplices illuminationes habent et puras contemplationes.

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Sequitur: « Divino alimento repleta. » Quod est divinum alimentum? divina refectio. Et ipsa refectio quae est, nisi Dei dilectio? Propterea cum dixisset, « Supereminentem illam dispositionem angelicam repletam divino alimento, » adjunxit etiam, dicens: « repletam unitate divinae refectionis. » Quid autem est divina refectio, nisi divinum alimentum? [1066A] Unitas ergo refectionis, et unitas alimenti una est refectio, et unum alimentum. Ergo in mensa Dei non nisi unum ferculum apponitur. Sed noli contemnere. Satietas multa est. « Satiabor, » inquit Psalmista, « cum apparuerit gloria tua [n: (Psal. XVI)]. » Multa in hoc mundo sunt, et haec omnia cor hominis satiare non possunt. Unum autem bonum est apud Deum, et hoc solum cum percipitur, satietas invenitur. Ergo non in multitudine, sed in unitate satietas est. Quando satietas? quando satis est satietas. Pone modo, ut ex his multis, quae in mundo sunt, quaedam aliqua habeas, quae diligis et videbis, quod non sufficit. Veniant plura: adhuc non dices, sufficit. Apponantur universa; et invenies te egentem adhuc, et nondum satis habentem. In omnibus ergo his satietas [1066B] esse non potest, ubi satis esse non potest. Veniet autem unum illud bonum; et satietas erit, quia satis erit. Non mireris. Omnia haec multa sunt, sed multum non sunt. Illud unum est, et multum est. Propterea peccatrix illa quia multa dimittenda habuit, non multa sed multum dilexit. Multa dimisit, et multum elegit. Sapiens erat; non attendit acervum, sed pretium pensavit. In multis parum; in uno multum. Propterea non atttendas ad numerum, sed fructum inquire. Unum est bonum, quod tibi praeparavit Deus. Noli timere cum audis unum; unum bonum est, sed in illo bono omne bonum est. Unam refectionem, unum cibum, unum ferculum, unum panem praeparavit, sed ne despicias. Audi quod scriptum est: « Habentem omnem saporem, et [1066C] omne oblectamentum suavitatis [n: (Sap. XV)]. » Hoc divinum alimentum, et multa fusio, vel abundans effusio, qua videlicet fusione beata illa societas primo loco sibi data repletur. Est etiam unitas divinae refectionis, qua scilicet unitate sola, hoc est singulari et domestica, et unifica specialiter digna effecta est. Ipsa vero una, et simplex divina refectio, idcirco singularis dicitur, quia cum aliena delectatione et dulcedine extranea non percipitur; domestica, quia amicis tantum et familiaribus praeparatur. Unifica, quia unum secum efficit omnes, quibus se sumendam et participandam concedit.

Sequitur: « Multaque communione Dei et cooperatione: » subauditur repleta est dispositio, vel hierarchia [1066D] prima coelestium essentiarum. Ipsa dico, digna effecta ad eam, scilicet communionem et cooperationem Dei, ut possibile sibi est; similitudine bonarum habitudinum, id est virtutum et actionum. Per bonas enim habitudines, digna effecta est communione; per bonas actiones, digna cooperatione. Et rectus est ordo. Primum per claritatem cognitionis illuminatur; postea per dulcedinem dilectionis reficitur, ut sic Deo et communicet in virtute, et cooperetur in actione, sicut scriptum est: « Si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit; et Pater meus diliget eum, et ad eum veniemus, et mansionem apud eum faciemus [n: (Joan. XIV)]. »

Sequitur: « Multaque divinorum superposite cognoscens, et divinae scientiae et cognitionis in participatione, [1067A] secundum quod fas est, facta. » Hoc est, ipsa hierarchia cognoscens est multa divinorum, id est multa de divinis, sive de Deo superposite, id est excellenter super alias hierarchias « et facta est in participatione, » hoc est, particeps facta est divinae scientiae et cognitionis divinae, secundum quod fas est illi, id est concessum.

Sequitur: « Propterea et laudes ipsius theologia iis qui in terra sunt, tradidit in quibus mirabiliter manifestatur excelsissimae ipsius illuminationis eminentia. » Ac si diceret: Quia tanta est excellentia hierarchiae primarum essentiarum, propterea theologia, id est divina Scriptura tradidit iis, qui in terra sunt, hoc est, hominibus, laudes sive laudationes ipsius. In quibus scilicet laudationibus [1067B] mirabiliter manifestatur eminentiam excelsissimae illuminationis ipsius. Ac si diceret: Quia tanta est sublimitas ejus, propterea theologia hominibus laudationes ejus, quibus ipsa Deum laudat, manifestavit, ut per excellentiam laudationis manifestaretur eminentia illuminationis.

Sequitur: « Alii enim quidam ejus sensibiliter dicendo tanquam vox aquarum reboant. Benedicta gloria Domini ex loco suo. » Ac si diceret: Vere excellentes sunt laudationes hujus hierarchiae, quae a Scriptura divina manifestantur, quia alii ejus, id est quidam ex ea sensibiliter sonando reboant, vel resonant, sive clamant tanquam vox aquarum: Benedicta gloria Domini ex loco suo. Vel sic legi potest. Theologia tradidit laudes ipsius sensibiliter, id est [1067C] per similitudinem sensibilium, et corporalium de spiritalibus dicendo, quod « alii ejus. » Hoc est, de numero ipsius « reboant tanquam vox aquarum. Benedicta gloria Domini ex loco suo. » Hoc testimonium de Ezechiele sumptum est, ubi propheta vocem commotionis magnae post se factam commemorat. Quae vox, quamvis ibi prolata non dicitur, tamen iste a summis eam coelestium ordinum spiritibus sine ambiguitate factam esse testatur.

Sequitur: « Alii vero illam valde laudabilem et piissimam reclamant theologiam: Sanctus, sanctus sanctus: Dominus Deus Sabaoth. Plena omnis terra gloria ipsius [n: (Isa. VI)]. » Hoc testimonium de Isaia sumptum est, ubi duo seraphim volantes alter ad [1067D] alterum, hanc theologiam, id est divinam allocutionem, sive laudationem ad invicem proclamasse commemorantur.

Sequitur: « Has autem excelsissimas coelestium animorum hymnologias, jam quidem in iis, quae sunt de divinis laudibus, quantum possibile, aperuimus. Et dictum est de his in illis quantum ad nos, sufficienter. » Has supradictas hymnologias, id est divinas laudationes coelestium animorum, hoc est, coelestium spirituum; dicit se aperuisse, vel exposuisse, quantum sibi possibile fuit, in aliis Scripturis, quae sunt ab ipso factae de divinis laudibus; et de his scilicet hymnologiis, in illis (subauditur) Scripturis sufficienter dictum esse testatur, quantum ad eum, hoc est ad ejus possibilitatem pertinuit. Haec [1068A] autem Scriptura, quam se de divinis laudibus fecisse asserit, inter haec ejus scripta, quae apud nos sunt, minime reperitur. Ex hac tamen sententia possumus cognoscere de divinis laudibus ipsum scripsisse, quoniam in libro de divinis nominibus ex amatoriis hymnis sancti Hierothei quaedam introduxit, in quibus de supradictis laudibus nonnihil tractatur.

Sequitur: « Ex quibus in recordationem sufficit dicere tantum secundum praesens tempus, quod theologicam scientiam ipsa prima dispositio, quantum fas, illuminata est a divina bonitate, per quam tanquam deiformem hierarchiam et aliis seipsam deinde tradidit. » Ac si diceret: Ex quibus, scilicet laudibus divinis in supra memorato libro sufficienter [1068B] expositis, nunc secundum praesens tempus in recordationem, vel admonitionem tantum sufficit dicere hoc, scilicet quod ipsa prima dispositio, hoc est, prima hierarchia angelorum illuminata est theologicam, id est divinam scientiam ab ipsa divina bonitate. Nota constructionem in eo quod ait, illuminata scientiam. Sic enim dicitur: Erudior autem, doceor disciplinam. Dicit ergo, quod prima dispositio a sola divina bonitate illuminata est ad scientiam; per quam videlicet scientiam ipsa dispositio tradidit seipsam; deinde, hoc est, consequenter aliis hierarchiis post se sequentibus. « Tradidit, » dico, « seipsam tanquam deiformem hierarchiam, » hoc est, Dei conformitatem et similitudinem habentem, et Deum imitantem in eo quod ab ipso illuminata [1068C] alios illuminat, et seipsis quasi formam, et exemplar proponit divinae conformitatis. Hoc ergo nunc sufficit dicere de supradictis laudibus, quod in eis prima dispositio angelorum Creatorem suum laudans, formam laudandi aliis post sequentibus hierarchiis semetipsam tradidit, « subintroducens, » hoc est, suggerens eis, vel insinuans « illud per brevitatem dicendo. » Subintroduxit enim, vel suggessit quasi occultum quiddam, et paucis manifestum. Suggessit autem per brevitatem dicendo aliud quod suggessit. Et recte nonnisi occulte suggerebatur, quod erat invisibile, et nonnisi breviter dicebatur, quod erat ineffabile. Quantumcunque enim exponeretur ad cognitionem, ocultum esset, quod erat impenetrabile; [1068D] et quantumcunque extenderetur per sermonem, breve esset ad ipsum, quod erat interminabile. Suggessit tamen, et insinuavit, et exposuit, ut per eam ad aliorum cognitionem veniret, quod ipsa nullo mediante perceperat. Quid suggessit?

## LIBER SEPTIMUS. *Expositio in reliquam partem capitis septimi divi Dionysii Areopagitae de coelesti hierarchia, cujus littera praemissa est.* (cont.)

Audi: « Ipsam piissimam, et summe benedictam, et omnino benedictam divinitatem, fas est benedictam esse ex Deum recipientibus quantum possibile est eam cognosci, et laudari intellectibus. Ipsi enim sunt tanquam deiformes divini loci, divinae, ut eloquia aiunt, quietis. » Exponit supra memoratum testimonium de Ezechiele sumptum. « Benedicta gloria Domini ex loco suo. » Ipsa, inquit, prima hierarchia clamans, « benedicta gloria Domini ex loco [1069A] suo, » docet, quod fas est, hoc est justum, vel debitum, vel dignum, ipsam piissimam et summe benedictam, et omnino benedictam divinitatem, benedictam esse ex intellectibus Deum recipientibus et in tantum benedictam, quantum possibile est eam cognosci et laudari. Justum est, inquit, ut ipsa divinitas, quae in se semper piissima est, parata scilicet largiri, et non indigens accipere: et quae summe benedicta est, et omnino, vel fortissime benedicta, hoc est, cujus gloria in semetipsa tanta est, ut nec alieno beneficio augeri, nec aliena laude amplius commendari possit. Fas, inquit, est, ut quamvis in se ita perfecta sit, ut benedici, vel laudari non egeat: tamen ut intellectus, id est, corda rationalia, eam benedicant et laudent, quantum scilicet eam cognoscere, [1069B] et secundum cognitionem perceptam laudare possunt. Quamvis enim gloria ejus ex semetipsa perfecta sit, nos tamen a benedictione et laude ejus cessare non debemus: qui et si benedicendo et laudando illi non perficimus, perficimur tamen ex illa. Vel aliter intelligi potest, quod dicit, justum esse, ut divinitas, quae in se summe benedicta est, ex intellectibus Deum recipientibus benedicatur. Ac si diceret: Quamvis laus Dei in semetipsa summe perfecta sit, hoc tamen laudi ejus jure addicitur, quod per gratiam corda a se facta inhabitare dignatur. Sic ergo justum est divinitatem in semetipsa summe benedictam pro eo etiam benedici, et benedictam esse, quod se mentibus beatificandis recipiendam praebet, et eas tanquam locum proprium [1069C] inhabitare dignatur. Non enim ita in eis habitat quasi stabilimentum quaerens, et velut ruitura, si fulcimentum non habeat. Non enim locum quaerit Deus sibi, quasi esse non posset, nisi contineretur; sed quasi receptaculum quaerit cui se infundendum praestet: quod utique beatum esse non posset, nisi ab ipso repleretur. Adjicitur ergo super omnem laudem ejus, quod summe benedictus in se alios benedictos facit ex se. Benedicatur ab illis, benedicatur et pro illis. Ab illis benedicatur quantum illis cognoscendus et laudandus revelatur; pro illis benedicatur, quantum in illis manifestatur.

Sequitur: « Ipsi enim sunt tanquam deiformes divini loci, divinae, ut eloquia aiunt, quietis. » Reddit causam, quare ex eo, quod dictum est, « benedicta [1069D] gloria Domini ex loco suo: » signatum intelligat, gloriam benedictam esse debere ex intellectibus Deum recipientibus, quia, inquit, ipsi intellectus Deum recipientes, ipsi sunt loci divini. Theodocos enim Graece dicitur, hoc est, Dei receptor. Quo nomine omnis purus animus sive humanus, sive angelicus potest significari. In ipsis enim duobus Deus habitat, et quiescit. Ipsi ergo tanquam deiformes divini loci sunt. Quasi rationem reddit, quare divini loci dicuntur. Eadem enim causa est, quare loci sunt, et quare deiformes sunt. Ex eo quippe, quod lumen capiunt, locus luminis fiunt. Et rursum ex eo ipso, quod lumen capiunt, lucentes fiunt, et conformes lumini existunt. Sunt ergo divini loci, utpote [1070A] deiformes, et ex inhabitante Deo Dei similitudinem habentes. Rursum quia loci divini sunt, constat quod divinae quietis loci sunt, quia divini loci omnino esse non possent, nisi quietis et pacis loci essent, sicut eloquia aiunt: « In pace factus est locus ejus [n: (Psal. LXXV)]. »

Sequitur: « Et quod monas est, et unitas tres substantialiter: et super coelestibus essentiis usque ad novissima terrae extendens bonitatem suam in omnia, quae sunt, providentiam tanquam omnis essentiae super principale principium, et causa, et omnium superessentialiter immensurabili continentia circumligans. » Hoc de sequentis expositione, quod de Isaia sumptum fuerat, adjungit. Ac si diceret: Sicut prima illa coelestis hierarchia clamans, [1070B] « benedicta gloria Domini de loco suo, » Deum non solum in se, sed in sanctis etiam suis benedicendum et glorificandum esse docuit, ita quoque ter sanctum proclamando, et non dominos, sed Dominum Sabaoth subjungendo, tres personas in una Deitate, non tres deos, sed unum Deum esse significavit. Hoc est, quod dicit. Et quia monas est, et unitas tres substantialiter, quasi diceret: Non solum hoc, quod supradictum est de gloria Domini ex loco suo benedicenda ipsa prima hierarchia coelestis sequentibus se hierarchiis subintroduxit; sed etiam hoc, quod monas, et unitas, hoc est divinitas, quae vere una est, et simplex natura, tres personae est substantialiter, hoc est, quod tres personae una essentia vel substantia, et una essentia tres personae; [1070C] quia Deus in essentia unus est, et trinus in personis. Sane quod monas et unitas cum idem esse videatur, geminate positum est, pro Graeco factum est: in quo duo nomina sunt monas, et henas: quae quamvis unam habeant apud nos interpretationem (utrumque enim sonat unitas) haec tamen differentia esse videtur, quod monas illam magis unitatem significat, quae secundum discretionem dicitur henas vero illam, quae secundum simplicitatem notatur. Omne enim, quod simplex est, unum est. Non autem omne, quod unum est, simplex est; quoniam et unum collectione dicitur et unum compositione, et unum similitudine. Quae omnia, quia non totum, quod sunt unum sunt vere unum non sunt, et unitatis nomen similitudine tantum mutuantur, non proprietate. [1070D] Divinae autem naturae, cui unum est et simplex esse, totum quod est, vere unum esse est et ideo recte non solum monas, sed henas quoque appellari debuit; quia unitas ejus in vera ejusdem atque indivisae substantiae semper simplicitate subsistit. Dicat ergo, quia in vera Deitate monas et unitas substantialiter sunt; quia, sicut trinitas personarum in Deo essentiae unitatem non dividit, ita unitas naturae trinitatem personarum non confundit. Sed tres unum substantialiter sunt, quibus tribus substantia est una.

Sequitur: « Et super coelestibus essentiis usque ad novissima terrae extendens bonitatem suam in omnia, quae sunt providentiam. » Et hoc, inquit, [1071A] prima hierarchia sequentibus post se insinuavit: quod vera unitas, et summa trinitas extendit, vel penetrare facit bonitatem suam a super coelestibus essentiis, usque ad novissima terrae, id est, a summis usque ad ima; bonitatem, dico existentem providentiam in omnia, quia omnibus providet et nihil a se alienum relinquit, ut pote quae est super principale, vel super essentiale principium omnis essentiae, et causa omnium; quia ab ipsa, et ad ipsam facta sunt omnia: et quae est omnium [1072A] circumligans, id est circumligatio, quia circumligat omnia, et complectitur, et continet superessentialiter cum immensurabili continentia, quae totum comprehendit, et in ipsa incomprehensibilis manet. Quia ergo principium est, a quo facta sunt omnia, et causa per quam facta sunt omnia, et circumligans continentia, in qua subsistunt universa, Idcirco plena est omnis terra gloria ejus, quoniam ab ipsa bonitate replentur, et nutriuntur omnia, ut subsistant in ipsa, quae facta sunt per ipsam.

## LIBER OCTAVUS.

[1071]

## TITULUS CAPITULI VIII: *De dominationibus, et potestatibus, et de media eorum hierarchia.*

## LITTERA.

[1071B]

*Transeundum autem nunc nobis in mediam coelestium intellectuum dispositionem, dominationes illas supermundanis oculis, quantum possibile est, explorantibus, et vere potentia speculamina divinarum potestatum, et virtutum. Etenim unaquaeque supra nos essentiarum cognominatio Dei imitatorias earum significat deiformes proprietates. Igitur sanctarum dominationum manifestativam nominationem existimo declarare absolutam quamdam, et omni pedestri minoratione liberam anagogen, nullaque tyrannicarum dissimilitudinum ullo modo universaliter eam inclinatam, liberaliter severam dominationem, omni minutivae servituti superpositam, superiorem subjectioni omni, et remotam [1071C] ab universa dissimilitudine, et dominationis incessanter appetentem, et ad illius ipsius naturaliter subsistentis virtutis similitudinem, quantum possibile est, et seipsam, et quae post eam sunt, optime, et speciose conformantem, ad nullum una videntium, sed ad proprie* ὄν *universale conversam, et Dominicae semper deiformitatis in participatione, secundum quod possibile est, ipsi factam. Ipsam vero sanctarum virtutum fortem quamdam, et incommutabilem virilitatem in omnes secundum earum deiformitatem operationes, ad nullam susceptionem inditarum ei divinarum illuminationum imbecilliter infirmatam, potenter in imitationem Dei reductam, non relinquentem suimet imbecillitate deiformem motum, sed firmiter ferentem in superessentialem, [1071D] et potentificam virtutem, et ipsius imaginem virtuti similem, juxta quod licet, factam, et ad ipsam quidem ut principalem virtutem potenter conversam: ad secunda vero virtutem dando [dans et] deiformiter provenientem. Ipsam autem sanctarum potestatem aequipotentem divinarum dominationum, et virtutum bene ornatam, et inconfusam circa divinas susceptiones ordinationem, et ordinatum supermundanae et intellectualis potestatis, non tyrannice [1072B] in ea, quae inferiora sunt, potestativis virtutibus praecipitatae, sed potenter in divina post bene ordinatas reductae, et quae post eam deiformiter reducentis, et ad potentificam causalem potentiam, quantum fas est, assimilatae, et eam, ut possibile, angelis revelantis in bene ornatis per ipsam ordinibus potestativa virtute. Has habens deiformes proprietates media coelestium animorum dispositio purgatur quidem, et illuminatur, et perficitur, quemadmodum dictum est, a divinis illuminationibus inditis sibi secundo per primam hierarchiam dispositionem, et per mediam illam secunda manifestatione delatis. Itaque per alium dictum venientem in alium angelum auditum, symbolum faciemus a longe super perfectae, et per processionem [1072C] occultae in sequentia perfectionis. Nam sapientes circa sacras nostras immolationes aiunt, per seipsas lucentes divinorum plenitudines per alias contemplativarum participationum esse perfectiores. Sic existimo et angelicorum ordinum immediatam participationem primo in Deum extentorum perfectorem esse per medietatem perfectorum. Propter quod et a nostra sacerdotali traditione perfectivae, lucificae, et purgativae virtutes primi intellectus nominantur inferiorum, tanquam per eos in omnium superessentiale principium reductorum, et mysticarum purgationum, et illuminationum et perfectionum in participatione, secundum quod eis fas, factorum. Poc enim est omnino divina ordinatione divinitus promulgatum, per prima secunda divinis participare [1072D] illuminationibus. Invenies autem hoc et multoties a theologis expressum. Quando enim divina, et paterna humanitas Israel nutritive pro sacra ejus salute corripiens, et ulciscentibus, et immanibus nationibus in correptionem tradens, omnigena provisorum in melius traductione, et captivitatem dimisit, et ad priorem clementer reduxit beneficentiam, vidit theologorum unus Zacharias unum primorum, ut existimo, et circa Deum angelorum (communis [1073A] enim, ut dixi, est omnibus haec angelica cognominatio) ab ipso Deo discentem de hoc consolatoria, ut dictum est, verba. Alterum vero subjectorum angelorum in occursum primi provenientem, tanquam ad illuminationis susceptionem et perceptionem, deinde ab ipso divinum consilium tanquam a summo sacerdote eruditum, et hoc docere theologum conversum, quoniam fructuose habitabitur Hierusalem a multitudine hominum [n: (Zach. I)]*. *Alter autem theologorum Ezechiel [n: (Ezech. VIII)]*, *et ab ipsa, inquit, hoc sacratissime promulgatum esse cherubim superfirmata gloriosissima divinitate. Ipsum enim Israel, ut dictum est, dux exercitus humanitas per disciplinas in melius traducens justitia divina corrigentibus respondetur, correctos justificavit. Hoc [1073B] docetur, primus post cherubim lumbos sapphiro praecinctus, qui podera juxta symbolum hierarchicum induebatur. Reliquos autem angelos, qui secures habebant, divina ordinatio imperat a priori doceri de hoc divinum judicium [n: (Ezech. X)]*. *Ei quidem enim dixit mediam pertransire Hierusalem, et dare signum in frontes correctorum virorum; aliis: Exite in civitatem post eum, et percutite, et nolite parcere oculis vestris; ad omnes autem, super quos est signum, ne appropinquetis [n: (Ezech. IX)]*. *Quid fortassis quis dixerit de dicente angelo ad Danielem: Exiit sermo; aut de ipso primo ignem ex medio cherubim recipiente [n: (Dan. IX)]*. *Aut illud ejusdem quod abundantius in ordinis angelici ostensionem, quoniam [1073C] et cherubin immittit ignem in manus sanctam stolam induti [n: (Ezech. X)]*; *aut de vocante divinissimum Gabrielem, et dicente ei: « Fac illum intelligere visionem [n: (Zach. I)]*; » *aut quaecunque alia a sacris theologis dicta sunt de coelestium hierarchiarum deiformi ornatu. Ad quem nostrae hierarchiae ordinatio, secundum quod possibile est, assimilata, angelicam pulchritudinem, quantum in characteribus habebit formata per eum, et reducta ad superessentialem simul omnis hierachiae.*

## EXPOSITIO.

Octavum caput est de dominationibus, et virtutibus, et potestatibus, et de media, quae eorum est hierachia. In praecedenti siquidem capite tractavit [1073D] de tribus primis ordinibus, seraphim, et cherubim, et thronis, et de hierarchia, id est sacra potestate eorum, quae in coelesti dispositione prima est et principalis, et post Deum immediate ordinata. Nunc ergo consequenter ingreditur tractare de tribus sequentibus ordinibus, id est dominationibus, virtutibus et potestatibus; et de hierarchia, id est sacra potestate eorum, quae in coelesti dispositione secunda, vel media est constituta, id est, post primam, et ante ultimam. De hac ergo hierarchia, eodem, quo et de superiori ordine tractat, primum ostendendo causam vel rationem cognominationis, quae ipsis ordinibus hujus hierarchiae attributa est, deinde virtutem ipsius sacrae potestatis latius exponendo.

[1074A] « Transeundum, inquit, nunc nobis est in mediam coelestium intellectuum dispositionem: dominationes, illas super mundanis oculis, quantum possibile est, explorantibus, et vere potentia speculamina divinarum potestatum, et virtutum. » Continua: seipsum ad sequentem dictionem, ac si diceret. Post expositionem supremae hierarchiae, ordo expostulat ut transeamus ad mediam, id est ad expositionem mediae hierarchiae coelestium intellectuum, id est angelicorum spirituum. Postea exponit nominatim qui sunt illi ordines angelorum, in quibus media illa potestas sacra constat: ad cujus expositionem se transire debere dicit, addens: « Dominationes: illas supermundanis oculis, quantum possibile est, explorantibus, et vere potentia [1074B] speculamina divinarum potestatum et virtutum. Transeundum, inquit, est nobis, » dicit, « explorantibus in illa, » scilicet hierarchia dominationes, « et vere potentia speculamina potestatum et virtutum, » id est et potestates, et virtutes. Isti enim sunt tres ordines secundae hierarchiae, quorum virtutem et officia diligenter explorare oportet eum, qui eorum sacram potestatem exponere desiderat. Ideo, inquit, « supermundanis oculis, » id est spiritualibus explorandum. Non enim ista corporalibus oculis videntur. « Explorantibus » itaque « nobis illas, » scilicet dominationes coelestes, et « explorantibus speculamina, » id est speculationes, vel contemplationes « potestatum, et virtutum. » Quod dicit exploraturum se speculationes vel contemplationes [1074C] potestatum et virtutum; vel ita intelligendum est, ac si diceret, per speculationem vel contemplationem de illis habitam se illorum dignitatem exploraturum, vel ipsam eorum contemplationem, qua Deum contemplantur, et divina percipiunt exploraturum, et investigaturum se testatur. Vere potentia speculamina, vel potentes speculationes vocat propterea, quod ipsos vere potentes explorant. Potentem enim speculationem potentium speculationem intelligit. Vere potentes idcirco nominat, quia in bonitate potentes et in veritate. Malum siquidem posse, vere posse non est, sed non posse, sicut scriptum est: « Quid gloriaris in malitia, qui potens es in iniquitate [n: (Psal. LI)]: » Quapropter et ipsas [1074D] potestates divinas vocat, quia ex Deo et in Deo possunt omne quod possunt.

Sequitur: « Etenim unaquaeque supra nos essentiarum cognominatio Dei imitatorias earum significat deiformes proprietates. Ac si diceret: Recte potestates, et virtutes divinas nominavi, quia et hoc ipsa earum cognominatio docet. Sicut unaquaeque cognominatio essentiarum, quae supra nos sunt, id est coelestium, significat deiformes proprietates earum: et ideo deiformes, quia Dei imitatorias. Quod enim formitatem habent coelestes illae essentiae, non ex qualitate habent, sed ex imitatione, quia similitudinem Dei illis non natura confert, sed gratia.

Sequitur: « Igitur sanctarum dominationum manifestativam nominationem existimo declarare, absolutam [1075A] quamdam, et omni pedestri minoratione liberam anagogem; nullaque tyrannicarum dissimilitudinum ullo modo eam inclinatam universaliter, liberaliter severam dominationem, omni minutivae servituti superpositam: superiorem subjectione, omni et remotam ab universa dissimulatione, et dominationis incessanter appetentem; et ad illius ipsius naturaliter subsistentis virtutis similitudinem, quantum possibile, et seipsam, et quae post eam sunt, optime, et speciose conformantem; ad nullum vana videntium, sed ad proprie ὄν on universale conversam, et Dominicae semper deiformitatis in participatione, secundum quod possibile est ipsi factam. » Haec omnia nominatio dominationum docet; in eo enim, quod dominationes appellantur, haec [1075B] omnia, quae de seipsis dicta sunt, habere et facere significantur. Hoc est quod dicit: « Existimo manifestativam nominationem sanctarum dominationum, » id est nominationem, qua manifestatur et declaratur earum virtus, et excellentia, et dignitas: existimo, inquit, illam nominationem declarare haec omnia. Quae omnia? Audi. « Multa enim sunt. » Ideo dixi haec omnia: quia multa sunt ad nos, sed pauca ad ipsas. « Existimo, inquit, sanctarum dominationum nominationem declarare absolutam quamdam, » id est liberam, et ab omni depressione alienam « anagogem, » id est excellentiam, sive sublimitatem, vel sursum ductionem earum, qua ad summum elevantur, ut nulli infra summum subjiciantur. Et existimo ipsam nominationem etiam [1075C] declarare, eam scilicet anagogen, sive excellentiam ipsarum non esse inclinatam universaliter ullo modo, id est nullo modo omnino esse inclinatam ulla tyrannicarum dissimilitudinem, id est per ullam, sive secundum ullam tyrannicam dissimilitudinem, id est secundum aliquam tyrannidem, quae omnino ab earum dominatione dissimilis est. Ac si diceret: Sicut per excellentiam universalem supra omnem subjectionem elevantur, ita ad oppressionem subjectorum per nullam tyrannidem inclinantur.

Sequitur: « Liberaliter severam dominationem; omni minutivae servituti superpositam. » A superioribus (subaudiendum est) existimo declarare nominationem dominationum, dominationem earum liberaliter severam, id est benigne severam. Severitatem [1075D] habentem in potestate, liberalitatem in benignitate. Severam, quia a superiori potestas exercetur, inferiori libertas non tollitur. Ideo liberaliter severam dominationem, omni minutivae servituti superpositam, id est non subjectam alicui ad servitutem, quae libertatem imminuat, sed superiorem omni subjectione, et remotam ab universa dissimilitudine, id est ab omni minoritate, sive imperfectione, quae eam dissimilem Creatori suo efficiat, et incessanter appetentem dominationis, id est per similitudinem dominationis, et conformitatem Creatoris respicientem, sive tendentem, vel inhaerentem, et conformantem se, et ea, quae post eam sunt, ut singula, quantum sibi possibile est. divinam virtutem [1076A] optime et speciose imitentur. Propterea inquit, « existimo declarare nominationem earum dominationem conformantem se, et ea quae post eam sunt, divinae virtuti; et ad nullum vana videntium, sed ad proprie on universale conversam. » Videntium ponit pro eo, quod dicere debuerat visorum, usitatissimo Graecorum more; quoniam a verbo δοκοῦμαι, hoc est, video vel videor, quoniam commune est, derivatur: ut sit sensus: Existimo declarare conversam non ad aliquid eorum quae vana videntur, id est quae per se considerata ima apparent, et transitoria. Sed conversam potius ad proprie on universale, id est conversam ad id, quod est proprie, et universale; ad Deum, scilicet cui et proprium esse est, quia per se subsistit, et universale, [1076B] quia omnibus esse tribuit. Sciendum vero quod ὄν on apud Graecos quando per ὄντῶν μικρὸν per omicron, id est o breve seu parvum scribitur, neutrale est, et interpretatur *quod est.* Quando vero ὤν per ω τὸν μέγα, id est ω longum vel magnum scribitur, masculinum est, et interpretatur *qui est.* On ergo, ipse est Creator omnium, et principium, qui est, et quod est proprie in se, et universale ad omnia: ad quod principium dominationem hanc conversam dicit, et factam in participatione, id est participem effectam Dominicae deiformitatis, id est divinae similitudinis, quam semper, id est incommutaibiliter retinet: factam dico, secundum quod possibile est ipsi. Hactenus demonstravit quid significet nominatio dominationum; nunc transit ut demonstret quid significet [1076C] nominatio virtutum.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Ipsam vero sanctarum virtutum fortem quamdam et incommutabilem virilitatem in omnes, secundum earum deiformitatem, operationes, ad nullam susceptionem inditarum eis divinarum illuminationem imbecilliter infirmatam, potenter in imitationem Dei reductam: non relinquentem suimet imbecillitate deiformem motum, sed firmiter ferentem in superessentialem, et potentificam virtutem, et ipsius imaginem virtuti similem, juxta quod licet, factam, et ad ipsam quidem ut principalem virtutem potenter conversam. Ad secundam vero virtutem dans et deiformiter provenientem. » Ipsam, inquit, sanctarum virtutum (subauditur [1076D] cognominationem) existimo declarare quamdam virilitatem fortem et incommutabilem in omnes operationes: virilitatem dico, inditam eis secundum deiformitatem earum, quia in hoc similes, vel conformes Deo sunt, quod ad omnia agenda fortem et incommutabilem virilitatem, sive virtutem accipere meruerunt. Divina siquidem virtus et fortis est agendum ut non frangatur in difficultate alicujus operis, et incommutabilis est ad perseverandum ut non langueat, aut infirmetur spatio diuturnitatis. In hoc ergo virtutes deiformes sunt, et ideo consimiles sunt quod ad omnia agenda robur forte habent; et incommutabile. Nec solum virilitatem habent fortem, et incommutabilem ad omnia agenda sub se, sed habent etiam virilitatem sive virtutem non infirmatam [1077A] imbecilliter, ad illam susceptionem inditarum ei divinarum illuminationum. Fortes enim sunt in exsecutione operum, fortes etiam sunt in perceptione donorum, quia virtutes eorum, et si infirmetur ad divinam virtutem comparata, non tamen infirmatur ad divinam conformata. Infirmatur conditione ad capiendum totum, quod Creatori proprium est; sed non infirmatur corruptione ad percipiendum totum, quod creaturae debitum est. Non ergo imbecilliter infirmatur: quae etsi virtutem non habeat Creatori aequalem, habet tamen fortitudinem creaturae sufficientem. Propterea virilitatem habet fortem, et incommutabilem ad exsecutionem faciendorum, et non infirmatam ad perceptionem munerum; et reductam potenter, hoc est, conversam sive [1077B] reformatam in imitatione Dei, hoc est, ut Deum imitetur; reductam quidem per illuminationes, in imitationem per operationes. Et habent virilitatem non relinquentem deiformem motum aliqua imbecillitate suimet. Deiformem motum vocat, quod ipsae virtutes coelestes incessabiliter moventur, ut Deum imitentur; vel desuper scilicet appetendo accipere, quod ille habet, ut idem sint cum ipso; aut deorsum, faciendo quod facit, ut non recedant ab ipso. Sic itaque habent virilitatem non relinquentem deiformem motum; sed per illum deiformem motum firmiter ferentem se, vel extollentem in superessentialem, et potentificam virtutem Creatoris: ac per hoc factam imaginem similem virtuti ipsius Creatoris, juxta quod licet, hoc est, secundum quod [1077C] concessum est ipsis, vel possibile. In hoc enim quod virilitas illorum per deiformem motum in superessentialem, et potentificam virtutem Creatoris sustollitur, ejusdem divinae virtutis imago et similitudo fieri comprobatur. Propterea, inquit, existimo virilitatem illorum imaginem effectam similem divinae virtuti, et conversam ad illam divinam virtutem, utpote ad principalem virtutem; ad secunda vero virtutem dans, et deiformiter provenientem. Sic, inquit, cognominatio virtutum docet virilitatem eorum conversam ad superiorem virtutem Dei, ut ab illa quasi a prima deiformitatem accipiat; et docet etiam eam provenientem vel procedentem ad secunda, id est, ad subsequentes ordines, ut illis deiformiter proveniat, dans eis virtutem, et in ipsa virtute [1077D] Dei conformitatem, ut ipsam deiformitatem, et a superiori accipiat, et inferioribus tribuat: accipiat per donum, tribuat per exemplum.

Sequitur: « Ipsam autem sanctarum potestatum aequipotentem divinarum dominationum, et virtutum bene ornatam, et inconfusam circa divinas susceptiones ordinatione, et ordinatum supermundanae, et intellectualis potestatis, non tyrannice in ea, quae inferiora sunt, potestativis virtutibus praecipitatae, sed potenter in divina post bene ordinatas reductae: et post eam deiformiter reducentis, et ad potentificam causalem potentiam, quantum fas est, assimilatae: et eam, ut possibile, angelis revelantis in bene ornatis per ipsam ordinibus potestativa [1078A] virtute. » Post cognominationem virtutum transit ad cognominationem potestatum. Ipsam autem sanctarum potestatum (subauditur nominationem) existimo declarare ordinationem quamdam illarum, aequipotentem divinarum dominationum, et virtutum, id est aequalis potentiae cum dominationibus et virtutibus ordinationem, dico, bene ornatam et inconfusam circa divinas susceptiones, id est circa dona divina suscipienda, quia dona Dei, quae ad ornatum pulchritudinis spiritualis suscipit, in suo gradu, et ordine humiliter persistens sine confusione custodit. Existimo etiam ipsam nominationem potestatum declarare ordinatum, id est ordinationem potestatis supermundanae, et intellectualis: potestatis, dico, non praecipitatae tyrannice in ea, [1078B] quae inferiora sunt, cum potestativis virtutibus, id est violenta fortitudine. Sed potius reductae, sive conversae potenter in divina post bene ordinatis, id est post virtutes, quae ante eam ordinatae sunt: et potestatis, dico, reducentis deiformiter, id est secundum similitudinem divinam, quae post eam sunt, id est, illos ordines angelorum, qui post eam subsequuntur. Sicut enim ipsa meditantibus superioribus ad similitudinem Dei convertitur, ita mediante ipsa quae inferiora sunt ad eamdem Dei similitudinem revocantur. Adhuc sequitur: Potestates assimilatae, quantum fas est, id est, vel licitum, vel concessum ad potentificam, causalem potentiam; quia omnia potest, et causa est omnium. Et potestatis, dico, revelantis, eam scilicet divinam [1078C] potentiam, quantum possibile est, angelis eam revelare. Quomodo revelantis? potestativa virtute. Ubi revelantis? In ordinibus per ipsam bene ornatis, hoc est, in subsequentibus ordinibus, quos ornat, divinam eis potentiam exemplo sui revelando.

Sequitur: « Has habens deiformes proprietates media coelestium animorum dispositio, purgatur quidem, et illuminatur, et perficitur, quemadmodum dictum est, a divinis illuminationibus inditis sibi secundo per primam hierarchiam dispositionem, et per mediam illam secunda manifestatione delatis. » Media, inquit, dispositio coelestium animorum, de qua scilicet hactenus tractatum est quae constat dominationibus et virtutibus, et potestatibus: ipsa habens deiformes proprietates, has [1078D] scilicet quas supra diximus, purgatur et illuminatur, et perficitur, quemadmodum superius dictum est de prima hierarchia; purgatur dico, a divinis illuminationibus inditis sibi secundo (subauditur loco) per primam hierarchicam dispositionem. Prima hierarchica dispositio in tribus primis ordinibus constat, id est seraphim, cherubim, et thronis: quae primo loco ab ipsa divinitate divinas suscipit illuminationes: quibus illuminationibus postea secunda manifestatione per mediam illam ad secundam hierarchiam delatis, ipsa secunda hierarchia per easdem divinas illuminationes secundo loco purgatur, et illuminatur, et perficitur.

Sequitur: « Itaque per alium dictum venientem [1079A] in alium angelum auditum, symbolum faciemus a longe super perfectae, et per processionem occultae in sequentia perfectionis. » Exemplo et auctoritate probat quod dixerat, scilicet mediam dispositionem angelorum illuminari a prima, sive per primam, hoc est, quod dicit: Symbolum faciemus, hoc est exemplum, sive demonstrationem perfectionis, scilicet divinae a longe super omnia perfectae: et occultae per processionem in sequentia; quia, cum in se occulta sit et invisibilis, per processionem tamen exit, et manifestatur in sequentia, id est, in eos qui post ipsam primo loco sunt immediate, sive in eos qui post illos sequuntur. Hujusmodi, inquam, perfectionis divinae in se perfectae et occultae, et tamen per largitionem gratiae in sequentia procedentis [1079B] symbolum faciemus, dictum, id est dictionem, sive sermonem per alium angelum prolatum et postea venientem in alium angelum, et ab eo auditum. In eo enim quod alius angelus dixit, alius audivit, alius doctrinam protulit, alius suscepit: symbolum factum est, hoc est demonstratio, sive argumentum, quod divina perfectio per priores et superiores ad sequentes et inferiores participanda procedit. « Nam sapientes circa nostras sacras immolationes aiunt per seipsas lucentes divinorum plenitudines, per alias contemplativarum participationum esse perfectiores. » Ac si diceret: Non est mirum, si in angelis, alius docuit, alius docebatur, quando alius alio doctior est. Nam qui sapientes sunt circa sacras nostras immolationes, [1079C] id est circa nostra sacrificia sive sacramenta, ipsi aiunt divinorum plenitudines, id est illos angelos, qui pleni sunt divinis donis, sive illuminationibus et per seipsos lucent, perfectiores esse participationum contemplativarum per alios, hoc est, participationibus contemplativis per alios. Genitivum enim posuit pro ablativo. Qui, inquit, sapientes sunt, vel periti in nostris sacramentis, testantur, quod illi angelici spiritus qui per semetipsos divinam immediate contemplationem suscipiunt, perfectiores sunt quam caeteri, qui mediantibus superioribus eamdem participant contemplationem.

Sequitur: « Sic existimo et angelicorum ordinum immediatam participationem primo in Deum [1079D] extentorum perfectiorem esse per medietatem perfectorum. » Quia, inquit, sapientes hoc testantur, propterea et ego existimo immediatam participationem angelicorum ordinum, primo in Deum extentorum, hoc est, illos angelicos ordines, qui primo loco, et principaliter in Deum extenti immediate ipsum participant, perfectiorem esse, id est, perfectiores participatione esse perfectorum per medietatem, hoc est, perfectis participantibus per medietatem, hoc est, perfectiores esse quam iis, qui perfecti sunt aliis mediantibus.

Sequitur: « Propter quod a nostra sacerdotali traditione perfectivae, lucificae, et purgativae virtutes primi intellectus nominantur inferiorum; tanquam per se in omnium superessentiale principium [1080A] reductorum; et mysticarum purgationum, et illuminationum, et perfectionum in participatione, secundum quod eis fas factorum. » Ac si diceret: Quia superiores spiritus perfectiores sunt inferioribus et consequentibus, propterea a nostra sacerdotali traditione primi intellectus, id est, supremi ordines angelorum vocantur perfectivae, et lucificae, et purgativae virtutes inferiorum, quia per eos inferiores perficiuntur et purgantur, et illuminantur: virtutes nominantur inferiorum, utpote reductorum per se, hoc est, per seipsos in superessentiale principium omnium, id est Deum, et inferiorum, dico, factorum in participatione, quia participes facti sunt, quantum eis fas est, mysticarum purgationum, et illuminationum, et perfectionum. [1080B] Per ipsos itaque superiores, per quos purgantur, et illuminantur, et perficiuntur.

Sequitur: « Hoc enim est omnino divina ordinatione divinitus promulgatum: per prima secunda divinis participare illuminationibus: hoc, inquit, est divinitus promulgatum, » vel manifestatum « omnino, » id est, universaliter de divina ordinatione, quod secunda ubique per prima participant divinis illuminationibus.

Sequitur: « Invenies autem hoc et multoties a theologis expressum: » hoc, inquit, quod dico secunda per prima participare divinis illuminationibus, invenies tu expressum, id est, manifeste magnificatum, et notatum in Scripturis scilicet sacris: a theologis, id est, iis qui de divinis ratiocinati [1080C] sunt, et scripserunt.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Quando enim divina et paterna humanitas Israel nutritive pro sacra ejus salute corripiens et ulciscentibus, et immanibus nationibus in correptionem tradens omnigena provisorum in melius traductione: et captivitatem dimisit, et ad priorem clementer reduxit beneficentiam: Vidit theologorum unus Zacharias unum primorum, ut existimo, et circa Deum angelorum (communis enim, ut dixi, est omnibus haec angelica cognominatio) ab ipso Deo discentem de hoc consolatoria, ut dictum est, verba. Alterum vero subjectorum angelorum in occursum primi provenientem, tanquam ad illuminationis susceptionem, et perceptionem; [1080D] deinde ab ipso divinum consilium tanquam a summo sacerdote eruditum: Et hoc docere theologum conversum, quoniam fructuose habitatur Hierusalem a multitudine hominum. » Probat exemplum, quod dixerat. In Zacharia propheta legitur angelum mandato accepto a Deo exisse, et angelo alteri sibi occurrenti mandatum dedisse ut curreret, et prophetae nuntiaret, quod adhuc absque muris habitaretur Hierusalem. Hoc est enim quod dicit: « Quando divina, et paterna humanitas, » id est pietas Dei paterna, « nutritive corripiens, » id est, more nutritii qui parvulum filium ad hoc flagellat, ut castiget, corripiens Israel flagello Babylonicae captivitatis pro sacra ejus salute, ut scilicet dum corporaliter eum ad tempus exterius disperderet, interius [1081A] ad sanctitatem reparando salvaret. Sic itaque pietas Dei paterne corripiens Israel et tradens eum in correptionem, ad hoc scilicet ut corrigeretur tradens eum nationibus, Chaldaeis videlicet: nationibus dico, et ulciscentibus, et immanibus; quia et injuriam Dei ultae sunt, et tamen hoc non zelo justitiae sed crudelitatis furore fecerunt. Tradens dico traductione; ut scilicet traducerentur de patria in exsilium, de terra sua in terram alienam, de Hierusalem in Babylonem, de visione pacis in captivitatem confusionis: traductione dico omnigena, id est universali, sive generali omnium provisorum in melius, hoc est, ad salutem praedestinatorum. Per hanc siquidem captivitatem et reductionem, quae in uno populo corporaliter facta est [1081B] omnium electorum, et a captivitate peccati liberandorum forma demonstrata est. Quando igitur divina pietas paterne tradens Israel tali traductione; postea et captivitatem dimisit, et ipsum Israel ad priorem beneficentiam clementer reduxit. Tunc « vidit unus theologorum Zacharias scilicet, unum primorum angelorum, » id est, unum de primis angelis, hoc est unum de excellentibus et superioribus, et circa Deum positis angelis. Dicit, « unum de primis, ut ego existimo: » nam theologia hoc non dicit, quod ille unus de primis fuerit. Sed ego existimo, quod ille unus de primis fuit, quia praeceptum ab alio priore non accepit, sed mandatum ad secundum dedit. Ideo, inquit, « existimo ego, » quod ille unus fuit primorum angelorum. Quomodo [1081C] primorum angelorum, cum angeli primi non sint, quoniam qui ultimi sunt et infimi tantum angeli nominantur? Non inquit, sic angelum dico. Sed secundum hoc, quod communis est aliquando omnibus, sicut supra dictum est, haec angelica cognominatio nunc supremos ordines angelos voco. Sic itaque unus theologorum Zacharias vidit unum primorum angelorum ab ipso Deo discentem consolatoria verba, de hoc scilicet negotio captivitatis, et reductionis Israel, ut dictum est in prophetia, scilicet ipsius Zachariae. Vidit etiam alterum subjectorum angelorum in occursum primi angeli provenientem id est exeuntum, vel praevenientem, id est, praecurrentem antequam vocetur, tanquam paratum, et [1081D] devotum per se ad susceptionem, et perceptionem illuminationis suae, quam accepturus erat ab illo. Deinde vidit ipse Zacharias illum secundum angelum eruditum consilium ab ipso primo angelo tanquam a summo sacerdote, utpote scilicet a superiori, et sacra dante: et vidit etiam eumdem secundum angelum postea conversum, hoc docere theologum, hoc est conversum a primo angelo, cui intendebat; ad theologum, hoc est ad ipsum Zachariam, ut eum doceret, hoc scilicet consilium divinum, quod ipse didicerat a primo angelo: primus autem angelus a Deo, hoc est autem consilium, quod ipse annuntiavit « quoniam fructuose, » id est, copiose « habitabitur » Hierusalem a multitudine hominum. Alia translatio dicit: « Absque muris [1082A] habitabitur Hierusalem. » Sub eodem utique sensu, pro eo quod post interniciem captivitatis divina gratia populus ille in tantum multiplicandus foret, ut ambitu murorum Hierusalem habitantium multitudo includi non posset.

Sequitur: « Alter autem theologorum Ezechiel: et ab ipsa, inquit, hoc sacratissime promulgatum esse cherubim superfirmata gloriosissima divinitate. » Alterius theologi testimonio probat, quod dixit, scilicet quod divina consilia a primis angelis immediate suscepta; deinde per inferiores angelos usque ad theologorum animos deferuntur, hoc est, quod ait: « Alter theologorum Ezechiel, » scilicet hoc consilium divinum etiam ab ipsa gloriosissima divinitate, et superfirmata sacratissime promulgatum [1082B] esse cherubim: hoc, inquit. Ezechiel dicit, quod divinitas ipsa gloriosissima in majestate superfirmata in aeternitate, consilium suum cherubim sacratissime promulgavit vel revelavit, a quibus postea consequentibus est ordinibus manifestatum amplius? « Ipsum enim Israel, ut dictum est, dux exercitus humanitas, per disciplinas in melius traducens, Justitia divina corrigentibus respondetur, correctos justificavit. » Humanitas, inquit, id est, pietas, dux exercitus sive magistra exercitationis, traducens ipsum Israel in melius per disciplinas, noxios condemnavit, correctos justificavit, et hoc, scilicet judicium ex divina justitia respondetur corrigentibus angelis, qui missi erant ad puniendum: quod idcirco divina pietas flagella induceret, ut [1082C] reprobos condemnaret, correctos justificaret. Vel ipsa divina justitia respondetur corrigentibus quod justum est, ut reprobi condemnentur, correcti justificentur. Vel corrigentibus Chaldaeis, id est, persequentibus per quos Deus populum suum flagellavit et correxit, ex divina justitia respondetur, ut recipiant sicut meruerunt; Israelitas autem correctos divina pietas justificavit. « Hoc docetur primus post cherubim lumbos sapphiro praecinctus, qui podere juxta symbolum hierarchicum induebatur: » hoc, inquit, divinum consilium condemnationis et justificationis « docetur, primus post cherubim constitutus qui induebatur podere juxta symbolum hierarchicum. » Quod enim post cherubim quidam [1082D] apparuit lumbos sapphiro praecinctus, et podere indutus, symbolum erat hierarchicum, id est figura hierarchica, quia hierarchia visibilibus figuris utitur ad invisibilium demonstrationem. Et non solum ille, qui post cherubim primus erat, docetur divinum consilium, sed etiam reliqui, qui sequuntur. Hoc est enim quod subjungit: Reliquos autem angelos, qui secures habebant, divina ordinatio imperat a priori doceri de hoc divinum judicium. De hoc scilicet consilio, sive de hoc opere divina ordinatio imperat ipsi cherubim « reliquos angelos doceri ab eo, » qui primus erat post cherubim, ut eo ordine praeceptum divinum primum in cherubim descenderet, deinde per cherubim ad eum qui proximus erat podere indutus, per quem tandem ad consequentes [1083A] angelos, qui cum securibus parati erant veniret.

Sequitur: « Ei quidem enim dixit mediam pertransire Hierusalem, et dare signum in frontes correctorum virorum: » vel ei, hoc est, cherubim dixit divina ordinatio, ut ille praeciperet sequentem se pertransire mediam Hierusalem, etc. Vel ei, hoc est, sequenti post cherubim, per ipsum cherubim « dixit mediam pertransire Hierusalem, » etc. Et non solum illi per cherubim praeceptum dedit, sed aliis etiam post ipsum sequentibus hoc est, quod subdiditur: « Aliis exite in civitatem post eum, et percutite; et nolite parcere oculis vestris. Ad omnes autem super quos est signum, ne appropinquetis. » Haec autem omnia, quae de visionibus propheticis [1083B] assumpta sunt, ad hoc valent, ut ostendatur, quod primi et summi angeli ab ipso Deo erudiuntur, secundi a primis, tertii a secundis.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Quid fortassis quis dixerit de dicente angelo ad Danielem: Exiit sermo; aut de ipso primo ignem ex medio cherubim recipiente? aut illud ejusdem, quod abundantius in ordinis angelici ostensionem; quoniam et cherubim immittit ignem in manus sanctam stolam induti; aut de vocante divinissimum Gabrielem, et dicente ei: Fac illum intelligere visionem. Aut quaecunque alia a sacris theologis dicta sunt de coelestium hierarchiarum deiformi ornatu, ad quem nostrae hierarchiae ordinatio, secundum quod possibile est, assimilata, angelicam pulchritudinem, quantum in characteribus [1083C] habebit formata per eum et reducta ad superessentialem simul omnis hierarchiae. » In his testimoniis propheticis, sicut supra diximus, hoc solum probare intendit, quod in angelis alii alios docent, et inferiores a superioribus praeceptum, et doctrinam suscipiunt; sive etiam cum homines ab angelis erudiuntur, et inferiores a superioribus cognitionem accipiunt. Quid enim dixerit quis, hoc est, aliquis, de angelo dicente ad Danielem, nisi, quod inferior a superiore eruditur, et doctrinam suscipit? Aut etiam quid dixerit aliquis de illo primo superius post cherubim commemorato podere induto, et ignem, ex medio cherubim recipiente, nisi hoc similiter, quod alius ab alio accipere ostenditur, quod [1083D] per se habere non potest? Aut quid aliud est etiam illud ejusdem, scilicet visionis, sive exempli, quod abundantius est sive copiosius in ostensionem angelici ordinis, id est ad ostendendum, quod in angelis aliis alii superiores ordines ordinati sunt, sicut dico, quod cherubim immittit ignem in manus sanctam stolam induti, nisi manifeste dispensatio per [1084A] alium in alium fieri demonstratur? Illud quidem in visione Ezechielis, de qua hoc sumptum est, testimonium conjicitur magis, quam exponit; quoniam ex eo quod primus ille post cherubim sanctam stolam, sive podere indutus de medio cherubim ignem accipere jubetur, eumdem ignem ab ipso cherubim non inconvenienter accepisse creditur. De hoc itaque quid dicere poterit aliquis, nisi quod manifeste ostenditur divinam largitionem per alios ad alios transire? Aut etiam de angelo vocante divinissimum Gabrielem, et dicente ei: Fac illum intelligere sermonem [visionem]: quid dicere poterit aliquis, nisi quod secundum ejusdem dispositionis ordinationem divinum praeceptum per alios ad alios descendit; et qui superiores sunt, inferioribus [1084B] imperant facienda, quemadmodum cognoscenda insinuant? De his itaque aut etiam de aliis omnibus, quaecunque alia a sacris theologis dicta sunt de coelestium hierarchiarum deiformi ornatu, quid aliquis dicere poterit, nisi quod supradictum est? Ad quem scilicet ornatum coelestium hierarchiarum nostrae, id est humanae, sive Ecclesiasticae hierarchiae ordinatio assimilata, quantum ei possibile (scilicet assimilari) ex ipsa similitudine habebit angelicam pulchritudinem quantum in characteribus, hoc est, figuris, et similitudinibus. Quantum enim modo habet in figura similitudinis, tantum postmodum habebit in celsitudine glorificationis. Modo quidem characterem et signum habet in figura; tunc rem et veritatem habitura in gloria. Quidam characteres [1084C] istos extranee interpretari conati sunt; in illa futura gloria beatitudinis supernae phantasias quasdam et imagines errorum pro Deo in contemplatione speculantibus opponentes, Deum in sua substantia nulli unquam visibilem asserentes. Sed nos beatitudinem non exspectamus in contemplatione figurarum, quibus veritas ipsa promissa est. Nostrae igitur hierarchiae dispositio ad angelicum ornatum formata, quantum modo in characteribus et figura habet similitudinis, tantum postmodum habebit in gloria pulchritudinis. Modo quidem formata per eum: hoc est, et secundum eum angelicum scilicet ornatum, et mediante eodem ornatu angelico, reducta ad superessentialem simul omnis hierarchiae, hoc est, [1084D] reparata ad similitudinem Dei, qui est superessentialis omnis hierarchiae; quia ab eo omnis hierarchia non solum formam, sed etiam substantiam habet; quia omnem hierarchiam ipse non solum instituit, sed etiam creavit, ut post ipsum esset similitudine, sub ipso conditione.

## LIBER NONUS.

[1083]

## TITULUS CAPITULI IX: *De principatibus, archangelis et angelis, et de ultima eorum hierarchia.*

## LITTERA.

[1083D]

*Reliquus nobis in contemplationem ornatus angelicas [1084D] concludens hierarchias a deiformibus principibus, archangelis, et angelis dispositas. Et primo quidem [1085A] dicere necessarium existimo, secundum quod mihi impossibile, sacrarum earum cognominationum manifestationes. Manifestat enim ipsa quidem coelestium principum illud deiformiter principale eductivum cum ordine sacro, et principalibus decentissimis virtutibus, et ad superprincipale principium eas universaliter converti, et alias hierarchice ducere, et ad illud ipsum, quantum possibile, formari princificum principium, manifestareque superessentialem ejus ordinationem ornatumque principalium virtutum. Ipsa autem sanctorum archangelorum aequipotens quidem est coelestibus principatibus. Est enim, et eorum, et angelorum, ut dixi, hierarchia una, et dispositio. Verumtamen quoniam quidem non est hierarchia non et primas, et medias, et ultimas virtutes habens, archangelorum [1085B] sanctus ordo communicativae hierarchicae medietati extremorum recipitur. Etenim sacratissimis principatibus communicat, et sanctis angelis. Ipsis quidem quoniam ad superessentiale principium principaliter convertitur, et ad ipsum, ut possibile, reformatur, et angelos unificat secundum bene ornatos ejus, et ordinatos, et invisibiles ducatus. Istis vero, quod et eis prophetico est ordini, divinas illuminationes hierarchice per primas virtutes suscipiens, et angelis eas deformiter annuntians, et per angelos nobis manifestans secundum sacram uniuscujusque divinitus illuminatorum analogiam. Ipsi enim angeli, sicut praediximus, completive consummant omnes coelestium animorum dispositiones, secundum quod consummandum est: quippe in coelestibus essentiis [1085C] habentes angelicam proprietatem et magis apud nos angeli, quam priores aptius nominati, quantum circa id, quod manifestius est, ipsis est hierarchia, et magis circumornatus. Excellentissimam quidem enim, ut dictum est, dispositionem tanquam ipsi occulto primitus ordinate proximantem, clam, formans [formantem] existimandum ordinare secundam. Secundam vero, quae completur a sanctis dominationibus, et virtutibus, et potestatibus, ei, quae est principibus, et archangelis, et angelis, hierarchiae praeesse. Primam quidem hierarchiam manifestius; eam vero, quae est post eam, occultius. Principatuum autem, archangelorum, et angelorum manifestativam dispositionem, humanis hierarchiis per consequentia praecipere, ut si per ordinem ad Deum ascensus, et conversio, [1085D] et communicatio, et unitas. Et quidem necnon a Deo omnibus hierarchicis optime indita, et communicative superveniens, et cum ornatu sacratissimo processio. Inde theologia nostram hierarchiam angelis distribuit, principem Judaeorum populi Michaelem nominans [n: (Dan. X)]*, *et alios gentium diversos. Statuit enim Excelsus terminos gentium, secundum numerum angelorum Dei [n: (Deut. XXXII)]*. *Si autem quis dixerit, et quomodo Hebraeorum populus reductus est solus in divinas illuminationes, respondendum quod non angelorum rectas dominationes accusari oportet aliarum gentium in non existentes deos errore, sed illos ipsos propriis inflexionibus ex ea quae est in divinum recta reductione recidentes amore proprio, et superbia [1086A] ipsis visorum divinitus, et corrationaliter cultui. Hoc perhibetur et ipse Hebraeorum populus perpessus esse. Cognitionem enim Dei repulisti, ait, et post cor tuum existi [n: (Ose. IV; Jer. II)]*. *Neque enim coactam habemus vitam; neque per providentium propriam potestatem, divina lumina providae illuminationis revelantur, sed intellectualium visionum dissimilitudo superplena paterna bonitate lucis donationem, aut omnino non participatam facit, ad earum reformationem non distributam, aut participationes facit differentes, parvas aut magnas, obscuras aut claras, unius et simplicis, et semper eodem se modo habentis, et superexpensi fontalis radii. Deinde quia et aliis gentibus, ex quibus et nos respeximus in illud, omnibus paratum in traditionem et apertum divini luminis, et magnum, [1086B] et copiosum pelagus, non alienigenae quidam imperabant dii: unum autem omnium principium, et ad ipsum reduxerunt sequentes, secundum unamquamque gentem sacerdotio fungentes angeli. Melchisedech intelligendum summum sacerdotem existentem Domino amicissimum existentium, non existentium, sed vere existentis excelsi Dei. Etenim sic simpliciter Melchisedech ipsi theosophi non amicum Dei tantum, sed et sacerdotem vocaverunt [n: (Gen. XIV)]*. *An ut sapientibus aperte significarent, quod non solum ex eis in ipsum, qui vere est, Deum convertit. Adhuc autem et aliis ut summus sacerdos educet ea, quae est ad veram, et solam divinitatem reductione. Et hoc autem tuam summe sacerdotalem intelligentiam admonebimus, quod et Pharaoni apud ipsos Aegyptios imperante [1086C] angelo [n: (Gen. XLI)]*, *et Babyloniorum principi praeside proprio, omni providentia, et dominationis providum, et potestativum secundum divisiones distributum, et gentibus illis veri Dei ministri duces statuti sunt formationum ab angelis visionis manifestatione, angelis continuo sacris viris Joseph, et Danieli ex Deo per angelos revelatae [n: (Dan. II)]*. *Unum enim est omnium principium, et providentia. Et nullo modo existimandum Judaeos quidem pleniter dixisse divinitatem; angelos autem specialiter, aut aeque honorabiliter, aut oppositis, aut Deos quosdam altero imperare aliis gentibus. Sed et eloquium illud secundum ipsam sacram intelligentiam accipiendum non ut patiente Deo cum alteris diis, aut angelis nostrum ducatum, in Israel principatum, et gentis ducatum Israel contento. [1086D] Sed ut ipsa quidem una simul, et excelsa providentia omnes homines salutariter propriorum angelorum restitutoriis manuductionibus distribuente, solo fere ultra omnes Israel in viri Dei illuminationem, et cognitionem converso. Unde theologia quidem ipsum possedisse Israel in veri Dei famulatum significans, facta est portio Domini, ait [n: (Psal. CXXXIV; Deut. XXXII; Isa. XIX)]*. *Ostendens autem et eum viritim caeteris gentibus distribuisse cuidam sanctorum angelorum in cognoscendum per eum unum omnium principium Michaelem, dixit Judaicum duxisse populum [n: (Dan. X)]*. *aperte nos edocens unam esse omnium providentiam, simul omnibus invisibilibus et visibilibus virtutibus superessentialiter supercollocatam. Omnes [1087A] autem per singulas gentes imperantes angelos in ipsum, ut proprium principium sequentes, voluntate essentiali quasque virtutes extendere*

## EXPOSITIO.

« Reliquus nobis in contemplationem ornatus, angelicas concludens hierarchias a deiformibus principibus archangelis, et angelis dispositas. » Plana sunt verba. Ornatus, inquit, concludens angelicas hierarchias, dispositas a deiformibus principibus archangelis, et angelis, est nobis reliquus, id est reliquum nobis est nunc hoc, ut contemplemur sive consideremus ornatum, id est pulchram dispositionem angelicae hierarchiae, quae quasi conclusio est duarum praecedentium, et finis, in qua dispositi sunt tres ordines, id est principatus, angeli et archangeli.

[1087B]Sequitur: « Et primo quidem dicere necessarium existimo secundum quod mihi possibile, sanctarum earum cognominationum manifestationes. » Ego, inquit, existimo necessarium esse, ut primum dicam manifestationes cognominationum earum, ut per interpretationem cognominationum manifestentur proprietates earum. Hoc igitur primum existimat exponendum, quare in hac ultima hierarchia alii principes, alii archangeli, alii angeli nominantur, quia ex ipsa discreta cognominatione proprietates singulorum manifestantur. Hoc est, quod subdit: « Manifestat enim ipsa quidem coelestium principum illud deiformiter principale eductivum cum ordine sacro et principalibus decentissimis virtutibus [1087C] et ad super principale principium eas universaliter converti, et alias hierarchice ducere; et ad illud ipsum, quantum possibile formari princificum principium, manifestareque superessentialem ejus ordinationem, ornatumque principalium virtutum. » Exponit quid singulares cognominationes in hac hierarchia ultima significent: et primum de cognominatione principatuum tractat, ostendens quod ipsa scilicet cognominatio manifestat illud principale eductivum, hoc est, illum principalem ducatum, quem habent, deiformiter, hoc est similitudinem Dei; quia sicut Deus unus, et summus princeps est omnium, ita ipsi principes, et duces sunt subjectorum angelorum et hominum. Hunc [1087D] itaque ducatum ipsa cognominatio manifestat cum ordine sacro, et principalibus decentissimis virtutibus, quia ipsum ducatum et ex ordine sacro, habent, et ex principalibus virtutibus. Quia quod duces et principes aliorum sunt, et ex eo habent, quod ad hoc ex officio ordinati sunt, et ex hoc, quod principalibus virtutibus caeteris excellentiores existunt.

Sequitur: « Et ad super principale principium eas universaliter converti; » hoc, inquit, etiam manifestat cognominatio principum, eas scilicet virtutes, quas ipsi habent: universaliter converti ad superprincipale principium, hoc est, Deum. Et significat etiam ipsa eorum cognominatio, alias scilicet virtutes, vel aliorum virtutes ducere ad illud ipsum [1088A] princificum principium, quantum possibile est, eas scilicet virtutes formari ad illud, vel conformari illi: ducere, dico, hierarchice, id est secundum modum et mensuram praelationis suae. Suae enim virtutes ad principium suum ducunt, universaliter convertendo; aliorum virtutes ad principium suum ducunt hierarchice praecedendo; quia in tantum ducere habent, in quantum praecedere, vel praeesse debent. Ideo hierarchice ducunt, quia in eo, in quo praelati non sunt, recte duces esse non possunt. Hoc itaque manifestat eorum cognominatio, quod scilicet principatum habent ad similitudinem Dei ex officio, et virtute: et quod ad principium suum et suas virtutes convertunt, et aliorum virtutes ducunt. Manifestat etiam eorum cognominatio ornatum [1088B] ipsarum principalium virtutum, hoc est ipsorum principatuum dispositionem, manifestare superessentialem ordinationem ejus principii primi. Ex ipsa quippe cognominatione principatuum innuitur, quod in eorum praelatione primus principatus manifestatur, quia ipsum principando et imitantur, et manifestant.

Sequitur: « Ipsa autem sanctorum archangelorum aequipotens quidem est coelestibus principatibus. Est enim et eorum, et angelorum, ut dixi, hierarchia una et dispositio. » Ipsa (subauditur) cognominatio « sanctorum archangelorum, aequipotens est, » id est aequam potentiam, vel aequalem potentiam, significat, « coelestibus principatibus; » quia una hierarchia est, et una dispositio trium ordinum, [1088C] hoc est, et angelorum, et eorum scilicet archangelorum, et principatuum. Et licet ex eo, quod una est hierarchia, una est et aequalis potestas trium: tamen quia nulla hierarchia est, quae non habeat et primos, et medios, et ultimos ordines, ideo archangeli inter principatus, qui primi sunt, et angelos qui ultimi sunt, medio loco constituti, utrorumque participant proprietatem. Hoc est, quod dicit: « Verumtamen quoniam quidem non est hierarchia, non et primas, et medias et ultimas virtutes habens, archangelorum sanctus ordo communicative hierarchiae medietati extremorum recipitur. » Quoniam, inquit, non est hierarchia aliqua quae non habeat et primas, et medias, et ultimas virtutes: [1088D] ideo « sanctus ordo archangelorum recipitur communicative medietati hierarchiae extremorum: » hoc est, recipitur ut in medietate sit extremorum communicans hierarchiae, id est sacrae potestati illorum, vel hierarchicae medietati recipitur, hoc est ad possidendam hierarchicam medietatem, quae communicativa est extremorum, hoc est, quod sequitur: « Et enim sacratissimis principatibus communicat, et sanctis angelis. » In quo autem utriusque communicet, subsequenter ostendit, dicens: « Ipsis quidem, quia ad superessentiale principium principaliter convertitur, et ad ipsum, ut possibile, reformatur; et angelos unificat secundum bene ornatos, ejus, et ordinatos, et invisibiles ducatus. » In hoc, inquit, participat archangelorum ordo cum [1089A] principatibus in eadem virtute, quia « convertitur ad superessentiale principium suum, et reformatur ad ipsum, » quantum possibile est sibi: et quia etiam unificat, hoc est, ad unitatem ejusdem principii colligit, angelos post se ducendo secundum ducatus invisibiles, et ordinatos, quibus illos subjectos et sequentes ducere habet. In hoc ergo archangelorum ordo virtuti principatuum communicat, quod ad similitudinem, sive imitationem illorum ad primum principium suum et se convertit, et sequentes se colligit. Et non solum principatibus supra positis, sed etiam angelis infra constitutis communicat ipse ordo archangelorum. Hoc est, quod subdit: « Istis vero, quod et eis prophetico est ordini divinas illuminationes hierarchice per primas [1089B] virtutes suscipiens: et eas angelis deiformiter annuntians: et per angelos nobis manifestans secundum sacram uniuscujusque divinitus illuminatorum analogiam. » Illis, inquit, id est principatibus communicat, sicut supra diximus, ordo archangelorum. Istis vero, id est, angelis in hoc communicat, quod eis et prophetico est ordini, id est, ordo propheticus, et ad prophetandum ordinatus, prophetans eis utpote inferioribus divina secreta, divinas quidem illuminationes suscipiens per primas virtutes, hoc est, per principatus, qui priores, et superiores sunt: ipse suscipiens, dico, « hierarchice, » hoc est, secundum quod ordo, et dispositio hierarchica exposcit, ut scilicet inferiores a superioribus suas illuminationes suscipiant. « Suscipiens, » [1089C] dico, « et annuntians eas, » scilicet illuminationes, quas a superioribus suscipit, angelis inferioribus: annuntians autem deiformiter, ut in hoc, quod a superioribus suscipit, hierarchicam dispositionem custodiat; in hoc vero, quod inferioribus tribuit, a Dei conformitate non recedat, qui summus omnium universis subjectis sua dona participanda largitur. Illuminationem quippe a superiori suscipere hierarchicum est, inferiori autem dare divinum. Ac per hoc ordo archangelicus medio constitutus secundum dispositionem hierarchiae et superioribus et inferioribus participat, divinas illuminationes a superioribus suscipiens principatibus, et angelis inferioribus eas annuntians: et per angelos [1089D] nobis quasi postremis et infimis easdem divinas illuminationes annuntians secundum sacram uniuscujusque divinitus illuminatorum analogiam, hoc est secundum modum et mensuram capacitatis uniuscujusque nostrum ad eamdem divinam illuminationem percipiendam; vel annuntians nobis per angelos secundum sacram analogiam uniuscujusque illorum, scilicet angelorum, divinitus illuminatorum, id est in tantum per unumquemque divinam illuminationem annuntiant, in quantum unusquisque aptus est ad eam capiendam in se, et annuntiandam aliis per se.

Sequitur: « Ipsi enim angeli, sicut praediximus, completive consummant omnes coelestium animorum dispositiones, secundum quod consummandum [1090A] est. » Ac si diceret: Congrue nobis ordo archangelicus per angelos divinas illuminationes annuntiat, quia ipsi angeli in coelesti dispositione ultimi sunt, et hominibus proximi, et in eis complentur, sive terminantur et consummantur omnes dispositiones sive ordines coelestium animorum, hoc est, angelorum. Ita ergo angeli omnes coelestes ordines consummant, secundum quod consummandum est, ut subaudiatur de eis; vel, ut expressius dicatur, secundum quod consummandi sunt ipsi scilicet ordines angelorum. Quomodo autem perficiant, aut consumment ipsi angeli coelestes ordines, subjungit, dicens: « Quippe in coelestibus essentiis habentes angelicam proprietatem, et magis apud nos angeli quam priores aptius nominati, quantum [1090B] circa id quod manifestius est ipsis est hierarchia, et magis circumornatus. » Non, inquit, mirum est si in eis coelestes ordines terminantur, quia inter omnes coelestes essentias eorum proprium est nobis divina secreta nuntiare; et in hoc habent angelicam proprietatem, quod eorum proprium est nuntios esse nobis; et idcirco apud non aptius angeli nominati sunt magis quam priores sive superiores, in quantum videlicet ipsis est hierarchia, id est potestas, vel officium circa id quod manifestius est nobis, et in quantum etiam ipsorum ornatus, sive dispositio, vel ordo magis circum, id est, circumscriptibilis est, et intelligibilis nobis propter ministerium visibilibus appropinquans. Ideo eis magis est circumornatus, hoc est, cognoscibilis vel comprehensibilis [1090C] ordo, quia nobis proximus.

Sequitur: « Excellentissimam quidem enim, ut dictum est, dispositionem tanquam ipsi occulto primitus ordinare proximantem clam formans [forma] existimandum ordinare secundam. Secundam vero, quae completur a sanctis dominationibus, et virtutibus, et potestatibus, ei quae est principibus et archangelis, et angelis, hierarchiae praeesse. Primam quidam hierarchiam manifestius, eam vero quae post eam, occultius. Principatuum autem, et archangelorum, et angelorum manifestativam dispositionem, humanis hierarchiis, per consequentia praecipere, ut sit per ordinem ad Deum ascensus, et conversio, et communicatio, et unitas. » Existimandum [1090D] est, inquit, excellentissimam dispositionem, hoc est, supremam hierarchiam tanquam primitus, id est, principaliter approximantem ipsi occulto, id est Deo, ordinare secundam, clam, id est, occulte, vel incomprehensibiliter formans eam. Secundam vero hierarchiam, quae completur a sanctis dominationibus, et virtutibus, et potestatibus, existimandum est praeesse ei, scilicet hierarchiae, quae ex principatibus, et archangelis, et angelis, et existimandum est primam quidem hierarchiam, hoc est, supremam, percipere manifestius divinas illuminationes, vel manifestius praeesse tertiae; eam vero, quae post eam est, hoc est, secundam, occultius scilicet praeesse. Dispositionem autem, id est, hierarchiam principatuum, et archangelorum, et angelorum, [1091A] manifestativam, id est, notam, et notificantem existimandum est praecipere humanis hierarchiis per consequentia, hoc est, consequenter postquam ei a superioribus praeceptum fuerit: ut sic sit per ordinem ad Deum ascensus, et conversio, et communicatio, et unitas, id est, ut humanae mentes per inferiorem hierarchiam ad mediam, et de media ad supremam conversae, ascendant ad illum unum communicandum quod Deus est.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Et quidem necnon a Deo omnibus hierarchicis optime indita, et communicative superveniens, et cum ornatu sacratissimo processio. » Tali, inquit, ordine unum bonum ab omnibus communicatur, a Deo procedens in omnes hierarchicos ordines, ut eos ornet superveniens eis et inditum [1091B] per communicationem. Hoc est, quod ait: *Et quidem necnon,* id est, etiam, processio fit a Deo illius summi videlicet boni, omnibus hierarchicis, subauditur, ordinibus, optime indita: eis « superveniens communicative, » hoc est, ad communicandum, et cum ornatu sacratissimo. In hoc enim magnum est ornatus divinae dispositionis, quod cum unum bonum omnes participent, non uno tamen modo communicandum provenit, sed per alios alii illud percipiunt, et rursum aliis post se communicandum praebent. Quemadmodum in illis spiritibus prima hierarchia secundae, secunda tertiae, tertia nostrae, id est, humanae, divinas illuminationes communicandas praebet. Hoc est, quod subsequenter adjungit, dicens: « Inde theologia nostram hierarchiam [1091C] angelis distribuit, principem populi Judaeorum Michaelem nominans, et alios gentium diversos. » Inde, ait, hoc est, propterea, quia inferiores a superioribus reguntur, theologia, id est, divina Scriptura, distribuit nostram hierarchiam angelis regendam, nominans Michaelem principem populi Judaeorum, et alios angelos diversos principes gentium scilicet nominans: sicut in Daniele principem Persarum, et principem Graecorum nominatum legimus. Et non solum in illis testimoniis probatur angelos principari hominibus, sed etiam alibi testatur Scriptura, dicens: « Statuit excelsus terminos gentium secundum numerum angelorum Dei [n: (Dan. X)]. » Terminos, hoc est, divisiones, sive distributiones gentium statuit Altissimus juxta numerum [1091D] angelorum Dei: quia numero angelorum numerum gentium aptavit, ut singulis gentibus singuli angeli praeessent; quamvis quia secundum aliam translationem ibi non angeli, sed filii Dei, nominantur, aliud aliquid significatum videatur.

Sequitur: « Si autem quis dixerit: Et quomodo Hebraeorum populus reductus est solus in divinas illuminationes? Respondendum quod non angelorum rectas dominationes accusari oportet, aliarum gentium in non existentes deos errore, sed illos ipsos propriis inflexionibus ex ea quae est in divinum recta reductione recidentes amore proprio, et superbia, ipsis visorum divinitus et corrationabiliter cultui. » Ac si diceret Mirum quidem videtur. Si [1092A] quis, ait, miratur cur boni angeli illas gentes quibus praefuerunt a cognitione veri Dei recidere passi sunt, respondendum hoc culpa angelorum factum non esse, et quod non oportet accusari rectas dominationes angelorum pro errore gentium aliarum, quae non fuerunt ex Israel, in deos non existentes, id est, quia errando illos coluerunt qui non erant dii; sed illos ipsos propriis inflectionibus, id est, propria voluntate, recidentes a recta reductione, id est, cognitione, per quam homo reducitur in divinum, ut crederent deos, qui non erant dii; illos, inquam, ipsos accusandos, qui propria voluntate, in quantum liberi arbitrii erant, a veritate in errorem lapsi sunt, et hoc ex amore proprio, quia seipsos amaverunt plusquam Deum, et suam gloriam [1092B] quaerebant, et ideo superbi erant; et ex superbia visorum ipsis divinitus, id est, eorum quae ipsis revelata sunt divinitus, et quae revelata sunt eis etiam corrationabiliter cultui scilicet divino, id est, ex quibus rationabiliter vel probabiliter intellexisse potuissent quemadmodum Deum colere deberent. Quia sicut dicit Apostolus: « Cum cognovissent Deum, non sicut Deum glorificaverunt; sed evanuerunt in cogitationibus suis. Dicentes enim se esse sapientes [ecce superbia] stulti facti sunt, et obscuratum est insipiens cor eorum [ecce error in non existentes deos], quia servierunt potius creaturae quam Creatori, qui est benedictus in saecula [n: (Rom. I)]. » Vel divinitus et corrationabiliter retribuente, subauditur eis, Deo: hoc est, sapienter et condigne [1092C] cultui; hoc est, sicut decebat cultores falsorum, scilicet deorum, visorum ipsis, hoc est, qui ipsis videbantur dii, et non erant. In hoc enim sapienter et rationabiliter retribuit eis Deus, quod, sicut dicit Apostolus, quia Deum non probaverunt habere in notitia, tradidit eos Deus in reprobum sensum, ut faciant quae non oportet in semetipsis. In semetipsis enim puniendi fuerant, qui in semetipsis peccaverant.

Sequitur: « Hoc perhibetur et ipse Hebraeorum populus perpessus esse, hoc scilicet, quod a cultu Dei recessit, sicut et aliae nationes recesserant in culturam idolorum; vel hoc, id est, vindictam divinam consimilem, quia similiter a cultu Dei recessit, et cognitionem Dei abjecit. Ait enim divina vox ipsi [1092D] Israel. « Cognitionem Dei repulisti: et post cor tuum existi. » Relicto scilicet Deo, qui intus pura mente colitur. Existi foras per amorem visibilium, quo te cor tuum, id est, desiderium et voluntas prava distrahebat. In quibus omnibus liberi arbitrii potestas apparet, quia sine coactione homo, sive ad bonum adjutus, sive ad malum permissus, propria voluntate inclinatur. Hoc est quod sequitur: « Neque enim coactam habemus vitam. » Voluntas enim rationali creaturae dari potest libera, sed cogi omnino non potest. Et sicut in nostra potestate non est ut divinae illuminationis donum nobis offeratur, ita nonnisi in nostra potestate est ut oblatum suscipiatur. Nam aliquando et cum nolumus offertur. [1093A] sed nunquam suscipitur, nisi cum volumus. Et cum volumus, quidem a Deo volumus, quia donum Dei est voluntas bona. Cum autem nolumus, a nobis nolumus, quia nolle nihil aliud est quam non velle: quod desertio boni est ad non esse, et nihil, quod sine ipso factum est. Itaque « divina lumina providae illuminationis, » quia per ea Deus provide illuminat, illa quidem non « revelantur per propriam potestatem providentiam: » id est, eorum qui ex eis acceptis providentes fiunt; vel provisorum, id est, eorum qui provisi sunt, vel praedestinati a Deo ad illa accipienda. Notandum, quod ubi nos *revelantur* habemus, alia littera habet *obcaecantur;* quae licet diversa sint, ad eamdem tamen veritatem astruendam pertinent: ut scilicet ostendatur [1093B] quod utrum divina lumina revelentur, id est, manifestentur, an obcaecentur, id est, abscondantur et occultentur, non in potestate accipientium, sed in arbitrio dantis constat. Sed tamen quamvis ipsa manifestatio vel occultatio in eorum potestate non sit, susceptio tamen nunquam fit, nisi cum eorum voluntate, quia rationale bonum est quod non potest nisi a cognoscente et volente percipi. Igitur aut prava voluntate fit ut omnino repellantur, aut differentia bonae voluntatis, ut dissimiliter participentur. Hoc est quod dicit: « Sed intellectualium visionum, » hoc est, spiritualium oculorum, rationalium scilicet mentium, « dissimilitudo facit donationem lucis, » venientem scilicet « de superplena, » hoc est, de valde plena et excellenter plena paterna [1093C] bonitate; illam, inquam, donationem facit ipsa dissimilitudo, aut omnino non participantem, et non distributam ad earum scilicet visionum reformationem: « aut facit participationes differentes, hoc est, parvas aut magnas, obscuras aut claras, unius fontalis radii, et simplicis, et semper eodem modo se habentis, et superexpansi. » Radius enim divinae illuminationis a fonte boni descendens in se unus et simplex, et semper eodem modo se habens, cunctis rationalibus mentibus superexpanditur, et ab eis non secundum suam simplicitatem, sed secundum illarum diversitatem differenter participatur. Aut enim pravae sunt, et omnino illam repellunt, et faciunt ut nullo modo participetur, neque [1093D] distribuatur ad earum reformationem; aut dissimiliter bonae sunt, et differenter eum suscipiunt.

Sequitur: « Deinde quia et aliis gentibus, ex quibus et nos respeximus in illud, omnibus paratum in traditionem et apertum divini luminis, et magnum, et copiosum pelagus; non alienigenae quidem imperabant dii, unum autem omnium principium; et ad ipsum reduxerunt sequentes secundum unamquamque gentem sacerdotio fungentes angeli. » Ac si diceret: Quod gentibus boni angeli praelati fuerint, non solum ex eo probari potest, quod Altissimus terminos populorum constituisse dicitur juxta numerum angelorum Dei, sed ex eo etiam, quod ipsis gentibus non alienigenae dii ab initio imperabant, sed unus Deus. Probabile enim est omnino [1094A] quod bonus Dominus in republica sua bonos sub se ministros constituerit: quorum ministerio et hoc postea factum est, quod nos, qui ex gentibus credidimus, respeximus per fidem ad Deum, et ad plenitudinem illuminationis ejus, reducti per eos: quod utique non fecissent, si boni non fuissent. Hoc est quod dicit. Deinde etiam ex hoc probari potest, quod boni angeli praelati fuerunt gentibus, quia scilicet ipsis aliis gentibus, quae non fuerunt ex Israel, ex quibus gentibus et nos, qui postea credimus, respeximus, conversi per fidem in id magnum et copiosum pelagus divini luminis, quod paratum est et apertum omnibus in traditionem, sive largitionem, quia largitur se et tradit omnibus volentibus et desiderantibus illud accipere. Illis videlicet gentibus [1094B] non imperabant alienigenae quidam dii, quamvis hoc videri posset, quia idola coluerunt, et falsos deos adoraverunt. Sed unus Deus illis imperabat, et dominabatur, quia sicut est unum principium omnium, a quo sunt omnia, ita est unus Dominus, et rector, sub cujus potestate constituta sunt universa. Qui sicut in seipso bonus est, ita ministros bonos sub se rectores et duces angelos constituit, et illi angeli reduxerunt nos sequentes per fidem ad ipsum principium nostrum. Reduxerunt, dico, secundum quod erant sacerdotio, id est sacra praelatione, fungentes secundum unamquamque gentem, hoc est, unusquisque ex ea gente in qua sacerdotio, id est sacra potestate, fungebatur, ad fidem convertit eos, qui crediderunt, et ad principium suum respexerunt.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

[1094C]Sequitur: « Melchisedech, intelligendum, summum sacerdotem existentem Domino amicissimum existentium, non existentium, sed vere existentis excelsi Dei. » De angelorum ministerio et officio tractans, subito de Melchisedech narrationem inducit: non quia, ut quidam putaverunt, angelum ipsum fuisse, aut per hoc ejus sacerdotium inter ministeria angelorum commemorandum existimet, sed ut ostendat quod non solum angelorum, sed etiam sanctorum et Deo placentium hominum, aliisque hominibus in iis quae divina fuerunt praepositorum, opere et ministerio factum sit quod increduli ex gentibus ad fidem et cultum veri Dei conversi sunt. Secundum [1094D] hunc itaque modum, quo angeli ex officio praelationis suae sacerdotio functi sunt in gentibus, ad fidem veri Dei convertentes, intelligendum est Melchisedech summum sacerdotem fuisse existentem Domino amicissimum omnium existentium, imo potius non existentium, sed vere existentis excelsi Dei. Littera perplexa est. Sensus autem hic est. Quia dixerat Melchisedech Domino fuisse amicissimum omnium existentium, quasi corrigens dictum suum, quia eos qui vere non sunt existentes dixerat, subjungit, non existentium, secundum quod scriptum est: « Omnes gentes quasi non sint, sic sunt coram eo [n: (Isa. XL)]. » Et quasi quaereretur quis ergo existat, subjungit: « Solus excelsus Deus, qui veram habet existentiam. » Quod autem non ait vere existens excelsus [1095A] Deus, « sed vere existentis excelsi Dei, propter similitudinem praecedentis vocis factum est, ut per eumdem casum responderet non existentium, « si vere existentis excelsi Dei. » Vel sic legi potest. Melchisedech existentem Domino amicissimum omnium existentium intelligendum est fuisse sacerdotem non quorumlibet existentium, sed excelsi Dei vere existentis, sicut scriptum est: « Erat enim sacerdos Dei altissimi [n: (Gen. XIV)]. »

Et sequitur: « Etenim sic simpliciter Melchisedech ipsi theosophi non amicum Dei, sed et sacerdotem vocaverunt. » Bene, inquit, dixi Melchisedech sacerdotem intelligendum quia theosophi, id est divina scribentes non sic simpliciter amicum tantummodo Dei. sed etiam sacerdotem vocaverunt. Et quare [1095B] sacerdotem vocaverunt subjungit, dicens: « An ut sapientibus significarent aperte quod non solum ex eis in ipsum qui vere est Deum convertit? Adhuc autem et aliis ut summus sacerdos educet ea quae est ad veram et solam divinitatem reductione. » Quod, inquit, Melchisedech, qui de Judaeis non erat, non solum amicum Dei, sed etiam sacerdotem Dei vocaverunt; an ideo hoc fecerunt? utique sic ideo hoc fecerunt, ut sapientibus aperte significarent quod non solum ex eis, id est ex Israel, qui soli tunc ad cognitionem divinam reducti et conversi videbantur, convertit in ipsum Deum, hoc est, ad fidem et cognitionem ipsius Dei, qui vere est, sed etiam ex aliis gentibus multos educet de tenebris ignorantiae, videlicet ea reductione quae est ad veram [1095C] et solam divinitatem, hoc est, ad cognitionem Dei. Non quod ipse Melchisedech aliquos ex Israel convertisse legatur, qui necdum populus erat: nisi forte Israel in patribus superioribus accipiamus, ex quibus aliqui fortassis per ipsum Melchisedech tempore ipsius ad notitiam Dei ducti sunt. Vel ut sic legatur, quod scilicet idcirco non solum amicus Dei, sed et sacerdos vocatus sit, quia convertit, subauditur, ignaros et nescios, ad ipsum Deum, cui vere est credendum. Et quasi aliquis objiceret, quod ipse Melchisedech, qui de Israel non erat, sed alienigena, nullum ad fidem Dei convertit, quia solus Israel Deum cognovit, respondet quod non solum ex Israel ad fidem Dei conversi sunt, sed etiam ex aliis gentibus: quae scilicet conversio aliorum per ipsum Melchisedech facta est. Qui tunc quidem, id est quando Abraham benedixit, sacerdos Dei altissimi vocatus est, cum non esset ex Israel, ut ostenderetur quod educturus esset ad Deum multos, et quod Deus non solum in Israel, sed etiam in gentibus et sacerdotem haberet et populum. Propterea non ait eduxit, sed « educet, » inquid. Ad illud quidem tempus, quando haec dicta sunt, futurum significans, quando vel ipse Melchisedech postea per se ex gentibus ad Deum convertit: vel Christus, cujus ille typus erat, non solum ex Israel. sed etiam ex omnibus gentibus per fidem multos ad Ecclesiam suam de tenebris infidelitatis eduxit.

Sequitur: « Et hoc autem, tuam, summe sacerdotalem [1096A] intelligentiam admonebimus quod et Pharaoni apud ipsos Aegyptios imperante angelo et Babyloniorum principi praeside proprio, omni providentia, et dominationis providum, et potestativum secundum divisiones distributum: et gentibus illis veri Dei ministri duces statuti sunt formationum ab angelis visionis manifestatione, angelis continuo sacris viris Joseph et Danieli ex Deo per angelos revelatae. » Adhuc aliam subjungit auctoritatem, ex qua probare vult gentibus bonis angelos a Deo praelatos, quod videlicet apud Aegyptios Pharaoni angelus visionem demonstrat, et per eam illi de futura sterilitate cautelam imperat: manifestata deinde eadem visione per Joseph, et similiter Babyloniorum principi, scilicet Nabuchodonosor, proprius praeses, id est proprius [1096B] praepositus suus, videlicet proprius angelus visionem format, eademque postea per Danielem reserando manifestat. In quibus omnibus apparet quod Deus omnium rerum et providentiam habet, et dominationem, et potestatem, secundum quod per illas visiones discretum, vel distinctum, vel distributum est: quae visiones primum angelis revelatae sunt a Deo, et deinde continuo per angelos sacris viris Joseph et Danieli, hoc est quod dicit: O Timothee, non solum superiora, sed etiam hoc admonebimus tuam, summe, sacerdotalem intelligentiam, id est intelligentiam tuam, qui summus sacerdos es, admonebimus hoc, quod angelo imperante Pharaoni apud Aegyptios, et Babyloniorum principi imperante praeside proprio, id est, angelo, qui ei praelatus [1096C] erat; per hoc, inquam, quod angeli illis imperasse leguntur, distributum est providum et potestativum divinae providentiae et dominationis secundum illas, scilicet visiones, id est ostensum est quod Deus providentiam suam et potestatem singulis gentibus gubernandis distribuit; et ostensum est etiam quod gentibus illis veri Dei ministri duces statuti sunt; et quomodo ostensum sit, hoc subjungit: manifestatione, scilicet visionis formationum ab angelis, hoc est, visionis in qua demonstratae sunt formationes, sive figurae ab angelis factae in mentibus prophetarum, ad significanda futura, quales fuerunt vaccae, et spicae, quas vidit Pharao [n: (Gen. XLI)], et arbor, et statua, quam vidit Nabuchodonosor [n: (Dan. II)]. Talis itaque visionis manifestatione demonstrata est divina providentia et potestas, per angelos gentes disponens; visionis, dico, primum revelatae angelis a Deo, et deinde continuo per angelos revelatae sacris viris, Joseph scilicet et Danieli ex Deo.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Unum enim est omnium principium et providentia: et nullo modo existimandum Judaeos quidem pleniter duxisse divinitatem: angelos autem specialiter, aut aeque honorabiliter, aut oppositis, aut deos quosdam alteros imperare aliis gentibus. » Repetitio probat, quod supra dixit, quod unum est principium et providentia omnium, id est, unus Deus, a quo sunt omnia, et per quem reguntur universa; et idcirco nullo modo [1097A] existimandum est divinitatem duxisse Judaeos, hoc est, ducatum praebuisse Judaeis pleniter, vel absolute, hoc est, per semetipsam, scilicet sine mediante angelorum ministerio: aliis autem gentibus imperare angelos specialiter, hoc est, particulariter, sive minus excellenti potestate, aut aeque honorabiliter, hoc est potestate aequali et consimili divinae dominationi, aut oppositis (subauditur imperiis), quemadmodum apostata angelus dixisse legitur sedem se ad aquilonem positurum et Altissimo potestate futurum consimilem [n: (Isa. XIV)]. Aut etiam non est existimandum alteros quosdam deos imperare aliis gentibus, quasi unius et veri Dei potestati et dominationi omnia subjecta non sint. Non est, inquit, ita existimandum quasi in solis Judaeis verus Deus [1097B] potestatem habeat, et aliis gentibus sive angeli, sive alteri quidam dii, sive aequali, sive inaequali, contraria tamen et extranea divinae dominationi imperent potestate. Vel sic legatur: Nullo modo existimandum Divinitatem per se ipsam sine interposita subjecta potestate angelica, Judaeis ducatum praebuisse: angelos autem aliis gentibus imperasse specialiter, hoc est, particulariter, scilicet in gentibus potestate et dignitate inferioribus quam ipsi Judaei fuerunt; aut aeque honorabiliter, hoc est, in gentibus scilicet aeque potentibus et honorabilibus: aut etiam in oppositis gentibus, quae ipsis scilicet Judaeis oppositae et contrariae fuerunt, oppugnantes et opprimentes eos. Non est, inquit, ita existimandum, quod scilicet Deus idcirco Judaeos per semetipsum [1097C] duxerit, quasi ipsi caeteris gentibus omnibus honorabiliores fuerint, alias autem gentes quasi inferiores et viliores dominationi angelicae reliquerit, cum in aliis nationibus plures non solum aeque honorabiles, sed etiam fortiores et potentiores, ipsosque Judaeos, sua potentia et fortitudine opprimentes fuisse non dubitentur. Nam quod dictum est: « Quando dividebat Altissimus gentes, statuit terminos populorum juxta numerum angelorum Dei: pars autem Domini populus ejus, Jacob funiculus haereditatis ejus; » non ita intelligendum est, quasi caeteras gentes angelis regendas dederit, solo Israel sibi, hoc est, suae providentiae et gubernationi retento: ut videlicet vel ipse Israel sine angelis vel angeli reliquas gentes [1097D] sine ipso disponerent, quia et Israel Michael praelatus legitur, et Deus omnes gentes in sacro eloquio possidere et gubernare memoratur. Non itaque sic intelligendum est quod scriptum est: « Sed eloquium illud, » in quod videlicet hoc dicitur accipiendum: « est secundum ipsam sacram intelligentiam, » hoc est, secundum talem intelligentiam, quae a sacro, hoc est a veritate, non discordet. Haec autem est sacra intelligentia, ut intelligamus hoc dictum non ita ut, hoc est, quasi, partiente Deo ducatum nostrum, id est humani generis cum alteris quibusdam diis aut angelis: partiente, dico, in principatum Israel, et in ducatum gentis, contento scilicet Deo Israel, id est, principatu in Israel, aut retento sibi, ita ut [1098A] illi soli princeps et dux esset. Non, inquam, ita intelligendum est. Sed ita ut, hoc est, quasi, ipsa quidem excelsa, vel Excelsi providentia, quae est una simul omnium, quia omnibus providet; illa, inquam, providentia salutariter distribuente omnes homines restitutoriis manuductionibus propriorum angelorum, id est ducatibus, quibus quasi caeci in tenebris ignorantiae manuducerentur, et ad lumen veritatis restituerentur, et solo Israel converso in illuminationem et cognitionem veri Dei fere ultra omnes gentes. Propterea enim solus Israel a Deo in portionem aceeptus, et ductus legitur; quia solus tunc ex omnibus gentibus ad cognitionem Dei revocatus est, et ad cultum divinum institutus. « Unde, inquit, theologia significans [1098B] ipsum, » hoc est Deum, « possedisse Israel in veri Dei famulatum, » ait: « Facta est portio Domini, » ipse scilicet Israel. Sic itaque portio ejus fuit Israel, qui sic ab ipso possidebatur, ut ipsum possideret et haberet.

Sequitur: « Ostendens autem et eum viritim caeteris gentibus distribuisse, cuidam sanctorum angelorum in cognoscendum per eum unum omnium principium Michaelem dixit Judaicum duxisse populum. » In hoc, inquit, quod sacra Scriptura dixit Michaelem duxisse Judaicum populum, ostendit plane eum, id est Deum distribuisse etiam in caeteris gentibus scilicet ducatum viritim, hoc est sigillatim, cuidam, hoc est, alicui sanctorum angelorum, vel, ut expressius dicatur, unam uni, vel unamquamque [1098C] unicuique vel singula singulis: distribuisse, dico, in cognoscendum per eum scilicet angelum, hoc est, ut unaquaeque gens per suum angelum cognosceret unum omnium principium, a quo sunt omnia, et sub quo reguntur universi, ut hoc, inquit, ostenderet sacra Scriptura, dixit Michaelem ducem Judaici populi, quem specialiter Deus sua sub providentia, et gubernatione tuendum susceperat. Nam, hoc dicens, aperte nos edocuit unam esse providentiam, quae omnibus gubernando praesidet. sub qua per singulas gentes imperantes angeli easdem gentes sequentes ipsos voluntate essentiali, hoc est, libero arbitrio naturaliter insito, extendunt vel promovent [1098D] in ipsum proprium principium, scilicet suggerendo et adjuvando, Scriptura, inquit, dixit Michaelem Judaicum duxisse populum, cujus ducem ipsum Dei alibi commemoraverat. In hoc « aperte nos edocens unam esse omnium providentiam superessentialiter supercollocatam, » hoc est, non solum potentialiter, sed etiam naturaliter praesidentem simul omnibus invisibilibus et visibilibus virtutibus, angelorum scilicet et hominum. Hoc est enim, quod in utrisque bonum constat. Ostendens etiam « omnes angelos sub illa providentia per singulas gentes imperantes extendere quasque, » sive singulas virtutes illarum videlicet gentium in ipsum subauditur Deum, « ut in proprium principium: » virtutes, dico, « sequentes [1099A] voluntate essentiali, » hoc est arbitrio libero naturali. Angeli enim humanas mentes ad Deum amandum [1100A] virtutes suggerendo excitant, non coactas necessitate, sed « sequentes voluntate. »

## TITULUS CAPITULI X. *Synagogae angelicae ordinationis repetitio.*

## LITTERA.

[1099A]

*Connexa est itaque sic ipsa quidem honorabilissima circa Deum animorum dispositio ex perfectiva illuminatione ordinata, in eam immediate ascendendo occultior: et manifestior divinitatis illuminatione purgatur, et illuminatur, et perficitur. Occultior quidem [1099B] tanquam invisibilior, et magis simplificata et unificata. Manifestior vero ut ante data, et primo lucet, et universalior, et magis in eam, ut oportet, forma effusa. Ab ipsa autem iterum proportionaliter secunda, et a secunda tertia, et ex tertia secundum nos hierarchia, secundum ipsam bene ornantis ordinationis legem in harmonia divina, et analogia ad simul omnis boni ornatus super principale principium et consummationem hierarchiae reducitur. Manifestatores autem omnes sunt et angeli eorum, qui ante ipsos sunt. Ipsi quidem honorabilissimi Dei moventis, proportionaliter autem caeteri ex Deo motorum. Tantum enim omnium superessentialis harmonia unicuique rationalium, et intellectualium sacro ornatu, [1099C] et ordinata ductione praevidit, quantum ipse hierarchiarum unusquisque ordo sacre, et decenter positus est. Et omnem hierarchiam videmus in primas, et medias, et ultimas virtutes divisam. Sed et ipsam, per singulas specialiter dicendum, dispositionem ipsis divinis harmoniis discrevit. Propter quod et ipsos divinissimos seraphim theologi aiunt alterum ad alterum clamare [n: (Isai. IV)]*, *aperte hoc, ut existimo, declarantes, quod theologicas sententias ipsi primi secundis tradunt. Addiderim autem fortassis, et hoc non incongrue, quod et secundum seipsum unusquisque et coelestis, et humanus animus speciales habet et primas, et medias, et ultimas ordinationes, et virtutes, ad jam dictas per unumquemque hierarchicarum illuminationum proprias anagogas proportionaliter manifestatas: [1099D] per quas unumquodque in participatione fit, sicut idipsum et fas est, et possibile, superincognitissimae purgationis plenissimi luminis, anteperfectae perfectionis. Etenim nihil per se perfectum indigens universalis perfectionis, nisi vere perfectissimum et ante perfectum.*

## EXPOSITIO.

Decimi capitis titulus est: Synagogae angelicae ordinationis repetitio. Hic enim breviter repetitur, quod supra dictum est, scilicet, ordinata Synagoga, id est congregatio, vel multitudo angelica in omnibus suis primis, et secundis, et tertiis. Caput autem sic incipit:

« Connexa est itaque sic ipsa quidem honorabilissima circa Deum animorum dispositio, ex perfectiva illuminatione ordinata, in eam immediate ascendendo, [1100A] occultior et manifestior divinitatis illuminatione purgatur, et illuminatur, et perficitur. » De prima hierarchia dicit, quae in tribus constat ordinibus, seraphim, cherubim et thronis. Haec itaque dispositio, sive ordinatio animorum, hoc est spirituum honorabilissima vel excellentissima omnium: [1100B] connexa est circa Deum, hoc est, et inter se concorditer juncta, et Deo immediate sociata; sic ordinata ex perfectiva illuminatione, id est divina, quae sola perfecte lucet et illuminat. Quicunque enim ab ipsa illuminantur, lucendo quidem ei assimilantur, et illuminando alios eam imitantur. Sed tamen nec in eo quod lucent, ei coaequantur, nec in eo quod illuminant, comparantur. Propterea hierarchia ista, quae sola ab ipsa illuminatur immediate, singulariter ex perfectiva illuminatione ordinatur. Alii quippe, qui inferiores illuminationes mediate suscipiunt, convenienter etiam inferius dispositi et ordinati sunt. Ista vero hierarchia, quae ex perfectiva, sive teletarchica, et divina illuminatione, quae princeps [1100C] est sanctificationis, id est prima, et maxima, ac singularis causa sanctificationis ordinatur, vel, ut expressius dicatur, pontificatur, hoc est in pontificalem ordinem, sive dignitatem sublimatur: convenienter cunctis dignitate superponitur, in eam videlicet illuminationem immediate ascendendo, occultior existens, et manifestior ex eadem divinitatis illuminatione purgatur, et illuminatur, et perficitur. Quomodo autem prima hierarchia, ex eo quod divinam illuminationem immediate suscipit, et occultior, et manifestior sit, verbis subsequentibus exponit, dicens: « Occultior quidem tanquam invisibilior, et magis simplificata et vivificata. Manifestior vero ut quae ante data lucet, et primo lucet, et universalior est, et magis in eam ut oportet, forma [1100D] effusa. » Occultior, inquit, est in eo quod invisibilior est, et magis simplificata, et unificata. In eo occultior est quod magis invisibilis est, et propinquior simplicitati, et unitati Deitatis. Manifestior autem est, utpote quae lucens ex luce data sibi ante, id est priusquam aliis: ideo primo lucet, et excellentius. Manifestior est etiam, quia universalior est, in qua una similitudo in pluribus constat, quia magis notum est quod magis commune est, et pluribus convenit. Unde autem universalior sit et magis consimilis, adinvicem consequenter ostendit, quia scilicet forma, id est divina illuminatio, ex qua formatur ut luceat, magis, id est expressius, vel abundantius effusa est in eam, quam in alias hierarchias subditas. Sensus autem hic est: Quia scilicet divina illuminatio in istam hierarchiam primo effunditur, idcirco [1101A] ipsa perfectius illuminatur. Quanto autem perfectius ii, qui in ea sunt, spiritus unam illuminationem suscipiunt, tanto perfectius et clarius lucentes in ipsa una forma unius luminis unum fiunt: et quod in ipsis diversum ex natura multipliciter distinguitur, una claritatis forma superveniente cunctis dissimile non videtur. Ita ergo ista hierarchia, quia prius lucet, perfectius lucet; et quia perfectius lucet, universalius, vel similius, vel expressius lucet, quia expressius lucet, manifestius lucet. Quae ergo essentialiter occultior est, formaliter est manifestior; et quae subtilior est ex natura, clarior est ex gratia.

Sequitur: « Ab ipsa autem iterum proportionaliter secunda, et a secunda tertia, et ex tertia secundum [1101B] nos hierarchia, secundum ipsam bene ornantis ordinationis legem in harmonia divina, et analogia ad simul omnis boni ornatus super principale principium et consummationem hierarchice reducitur. » Ab ipsa, inquit, hierarchia prima reducitur vel convertitur a secunda et a secunda tertia convertitur, et a tertia convertitur illa scilicet hierarchia, quae est secundum nos. Prima enim hierarchia angelica convertit secundam, secunda tertiam, tertia angelica convertit humanam. Quomodo autem convertat ostendit, dicens: Ad super principale principium, et consummationem simul omnis bonus ornatus, id est ad Deum, qui principium est et perfectio omnis bonae et pulchrae dispositionis. Reducit autem hierarchice, hoc est secundum officium, vel [1101C] ordinationem, sive legem hierarchiarum in quibus ordinatum est, ut superiores secundum modum et virtutem suam inferiores illuminando et suggerendo ad principium suum convertant. Convertunt autem secundum ipsam legem bene ornantis ordinationis, id est divinae ordinationis, quae ornat omnia: cujus lex est et institutio, ut alii ab aliis illuminentur, et convertantur in harmonia et analogia divina, hoc est, in concordia et proportione a Deo universitati collata. In eo enim quod boni participatio per alios aliis proportionaliter transfunditur, concordia in universitate perficitur et consummatur. Quod autem ait, iterum reducitur, sic intelligendum est quasi secunda reductione. Prima enim reductio est, quando [1101D] primi ab ipso Deo illuminati in ipsum Deum convertuntur. Secunda quando a primis secundi, vel a secundis tertii. « Manifestatores autem sunt omnes, et angeli eorum, qui ante ipsos sunt. » Omnes, inquit, spiritus coelestes manifestatores sunt, et angeli, hoc est, nuntii eorum qui sunt ante ipsos. Quod enim a praecedentibus accipiunt sequentibus post se nuntiant et manifestant.

Sequitur: « Ipsi quidem honorabilissimi Dei moventis, proportionaliter autem caeteri ex Deo motorum. » Dixerat omnes nuntios esse praecedentium ad sequentes: nunc subdistinguit, quod ipsi quidem honorabilissimi, id est, excellentissimi spiritus, qui solum Deum ante se habent, nuntii sunt ipsius Dei moventis eos per inspirationem, ut per eos secreta [1102A] sua sequentibus revelet. Caeteri eidem, qui post ipsos sequuntur, nuntii sunt ipsorum motorum ex Deo. Nuntii, inquam, sunt proportionaliter, id est, secundi primorum, et Dei per primos; tertii secundorum, et primorum per secundos; Dei autem per secundos et primos; atque in hunc modum caeteri post hoc sequentes. Quomodo autem proportionaliter singuli divina secreta revelent, subsequentibus verbis exponit, ostendens quod unicuique tantum posse datum est, quantum competit ordini et loco in quo positus est. Hoc est, quod dicit: « Tantum enim omnium superessentialis harmonia unicuique rationalium et intellectualium sacro ornatu et ordinata ductione praevidit, quantum ipse hierarchiarum unusquisque ordo sacre et decenter positus est. » [1102B] Superessentialis, inquit, harmonia, id est, divina providentia, quae omnia concorditer disposuit tantum praevidit, scilicet virtutis vel potentiae, unicuique rationalium vel intellectualium, cum sacro ornatu, et ordinata ductione, scilicet sacre ornans, et ordinate ducens; tantum, inquam, praevidit, quantum est sacre et decenter positus unusquisque ordo hierarchiarum, hoc, quantum decet sanctitatem et decentiam ordinis uniuscujusque. De quo ordine in unaquaque hierarchia distinctiones subjungit, dicens: « Et omnem hierarchiam videmus in primas, et medias, et ultimas virtutes sive ordines divisam. » Et non solum unamquamque hierarchiam, sed etiam unumquemque ordinem per singulas hierarchias. Hoc est, quod sequitur: « Sed et ipsam, per singulas [1102C] specialiter dicendum, dispositionem ipsis divinis harmoniis discrevit. » Ipsa, inquit, divina providentia discrevit, vel distinxit, ipsam scilicet unamquamque dispositionem, hoc est ordinem, divinis harmoniis, ut scilicet distinctio esset, et discrepantia non esset. Et hoc dicendum est specialiter per singulas hierarchias: singuli ordines speciales habent discretiones.

Sequitur: « Propter quod et ipsos divinissimos seraphim ipsi theologi aiunt alterum ad alterum clamare: aperte, ut aperte existimo, declarantes quod theologicas sententias ipsi primi secundis tradunt. » Propter quod, quia scilicet singuli ordines in semet discreti sunt, idcirco ipsi theologi aiunt ipsos seraphim, [1102D] qui divinissimi sunt, id est, divinitatis propinquissimi, clamare alterum ad alterum, sicut in Isaia legitur [n: (Isai. VI)]. In hoc scilicet quod alterum ad alterum clamare dicunt, aperte declarantes quod theologicas, id est divinas sententias, ipsi qui primi sunt in illo ordine tradunt iis qui secundi in eodem ordine constituti sunt. In quo claret unum eumdemque ordinem primos et secundos habere. Quod si de primo et de supremo ordine veraciter accipitur, de sequentibus nullo modo dubitari potest.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Addiderim autem fortassis et hoc non incongrue, quod et secundum seipsum unusquisque et coelestis et humanus animus speciales habet et primas, et medias, et ultimas ordinationes et virtutes, addictas per unumquemque hierarchicarum [1103A] illuminationum proprias anagogas proportionaliter manifestatas: per quas unumquodque in participatione fit, sicut idipsum et fas est, et possibile, superincognitissimae purgationis, et plenissimi luminis, et ante perfectae perfectionis. » Sensus hic est: quod non solum universalis hierarchia in primam, et mediam, et ultimam hierarchiam, et singulae hierarchiae in primos, et medios, et ultimos ordines, et singuli ordines in primos, et medios, et ultimos spiritus dividuntur; sed etiam ipsi singuli spiritus angelici, si humani in semetipsis virtualiter discreti sunt; primas, et medias, et ultimas virtutes continentes: per quas propriis anagogis, id est, sursum ductionibus, sive ascensionibus, ab infimis ad medias, et a mediis ad supremas, secundum hierarchicas [1103B] illuminationes proportionaliter ascendentes, participes fiunt, quantum eis possibile, divinae purgationis, quae est incognitissima, vel occultissima, quia intime purgat, et divini luminis, quod est plenissimum, quia omnes tenebras fugat, et divinae perfectionis, quae est anteperfecta, quia cunctis et prior est aeternitate, et superior dignitate, et plenior veritate. Hierarchicas autem illuminationes idcirco proportionales dicit, quia in sacris potestatibus, ubi alii superiores, alii inferiores constituti sunt, divinas illuminationes non omnes uno modo percipiunt. Superioribus enim et capacioribus in donis gratiae amplius tribuitur, inferioribus secundum modum capacitatis suae minus participandum praebetur. Secundum hunc itaque modum, quo vel in singulis [1103C] hierarchiis diversis ordinibus et diversis animis differenter divinae illuminationes tribuuntur, unusquisque etiam animus in semetipso in eisdem illuminationibus rationabili differentia a minoribus ad majora excrescens provehitur. Hoc est quod dicit: « Addiderim autem et hoc non incongrue, » ac si diceret: Non solum de singulis hierarchiis sive ordinibus congrue dicere possum quod habeant et primos, et medios, et ultimos ordines, vel spiritus; sed etiam hoc fortassis non incongrue supradictis addere possum, quod unusquisque et coelestis et humanus animus secundum seipsum, vel in seipso, habet speciales, hoc est, proprias et primas, et medias, et ultimas ordinationes et virtutes, hoc est, virtutes in ipso primo, et medio, et ultimo loco ordinatas. Ad [1103D] quid autem virtutes habeat differentes, subjungit, [1104A] scilicet ad proprias anagogas, ut habeat videlicet ascensiones suas unusquisque proprias, et promotiones in melius, sicut scriptum est: « Ascensiones in corde suo disposuit [n: (Psal. LXXXIII)]; » et iterum: « Ascendunt de virtute in virtutem: et videbitur Deus deorum in Sion. » Ad has autem anagogas, id est ascensiones, dispositae sunt virtutes aliae inferiores, aliae superiores, ut ab inferioribus ad superiora ascendendo participes tandem fiant summi boni, quod est Deus deorum in Sion. Habet, inquit, unusquisque spiritus proprias virtutes, primas, et medias, et ultimas, ad proprias anagogas, id est, ascensiones faciendas. Anagogas dico, dictas jam, id est, quas supra jam diximus, per unumquemque scilicet ordinem hierarchicarum illuminationum: [1104B] quia cum ostendimus qualiter in distributione hierarchiarum distincti ordines differentes illuminationes percipiunt, demonstravimus etiam quemadmodum in eis inferiores proportionaliter, id est, rationabili differentia promotionis per superiores ad suprema ascendunt. Propterea dixit anagogas hierarchicarum illuminationum proportionaliter manifestatas, sive in proportionibus manifestatas, sive ex praecedenti tractatione, in qua hoc demonstratum est quod ascensiones istae proportionaliter fiunt vel in hoc proportionaliter manifestatas, quia quanto magis crescit ascensio, tanto magis crescit cognitio. Propter has igitur ascensiones gradus virtutum dispositi sunt, per quas videlicet ascensiones unumquodque, id est, unusquisque animus ascendens [1104C] per eas fit in participatione, id est, fit particeps superincognitissimae purgationis, et plenissimi luminis, et anteperfectae perfectionis. Particeps, dico, fit sicut idipsum, id est ut particeps fiat, fas est et possibile: fas, quantum ad participandi boni dignitatem; possibile, quantum ad suam capacitatem.

Sequitur: « Etenim nihil per se perfectum indigens universalis perfectionis, nisi vere perfectissimum, et ante perfectum. » Bene, inquit, dixi divinam perfectionem anteperfectam; quia omnia, quae perfecta sunt, ex ipsa perfecta sunt; quia nihil est per se perfectum, et nihil quod non sit per se imperfectum, et quod non sit indigens per se invisibilis, vel omnis perfectionis, nisi illud bonum summum: [1104D] quod est et vere perfectissimum quia nihil ei deest; et anteperfectum, quia ejus plenitudo aeterna est.

## TITULUS CAPITULI XI. *Quare omnes coelestes essentiae communiter virtutes coelestes nominantur.*

## LITTERA.

[1103D]

*His autem definitis, illud dignum intelligere oportet, ob quam causam omnes similiter angelicas essentias, virtutes coelestes vocare consuevimus. Non enim est dicendum ut in angelis, quod omnium novissima est dispositio ipsa sanctarum virtutum. Et quidem novissimarum sanctam, et decoram illuminationem superpositarum essentiarum dispositiones participant; [1104D] ultimae vero primarum nullo modo. Et cujus gratia coelestes quidem virtutes omnes divini intellectus nominantur; seraphim autem, et throni, et dominationes nullo modo. Participatae enim extremae ab excellentissimis sunt universalibus proprietatibus. Ipsi namque angeli, et ante angelos archangeli, et principatus, et potestates post virtutes ab ipsa theologia ordinati communiter saepe a nobis similiter cum aliis [1105A] sanctis essentiis coelestes virtutes vocantur. Dicimus autem quod communiter in omnibus utentes coelestium nominatione virtutum, non confusionem quamdam uniuscujusque dispositionis proprietatum introducimus; sed, quia in tria dividuntur secundum se supermundana ratione omnes divini intellectus, in essentiam, et virtutem, et operationem, cum simul omnes, aut eorum quosdam inobservate coelestes essentias, aut coelestes vocamus virtutes, periphrasticos, de quibus sermo est, significare nos existimandum, ex ea, quae per singulos eorum est, essentia vel virtute. Neque enim superpositam proprietatem facile est jam a nobis discretarum sanctarum virtutum minoribus omnino annectere essentiis in conversione inconfusae angelicorum ornatuum ordinationis. Juxta enim saepe a [1105B] nobis recte redditam rationem ipsae quidem superfirmatae dispositiones abundanter habent minorum etiam sacras proprietates; ultimae vero majorum superpositas universitates non habent, particulariter in eas primo apparentibus illuminationibus per primas proportionaliter eis distributis.*

## EXPOSITIO.

Undecimi capitis titulus est: Quare omnes coelestes essentiae communiter virtutes vocantur. Haec est quaestio: Cum unus tantum ordo in coelestibus spiritibus virtutes vocetur, quare hoc vocabulum omnibus communiter tribuatur. Dicit autem:

« His autem definitis, illud dignum intelligere oportet, ob quam causam omnes similiter angelicas essentias virtutes coelestes vocare consuevimus. » [1105C] Hoc quippe dignum inquisitione est; quia non eam causam hic esse constat, quam reddimus, quando omnes coelestes essentias angelos vocamus: quod scilicet ordo angelorum ultimus est: et ideo nomen ejus ad superiores ordines assumitur, quia ab eis proprietas ejus participatur; quoniam omnes superiores sicut omnes proprietates inferiorum participant, ita etiam convenienter aliquando nomen eorum assumunt. Sed hic similiter dicere non possumus, quando omnes coelestes spiritus virtutes nominamus; quia, cum quidam ordines inferiores sint ipsis virtutibus, illi sicut non participant in proprietate superiorum, ita etiam videtur, quod in vocabulo participare non debeant. Hoc est, quod dicit: « Non [1105D] enim est dicendum ut in angelis, scilicet quod ipsa sanctarum virtutum dispositio novissima sit omnium. » Hoc enim si verum esset, non esset mirum, si nomen earum omnes alii ordines participarent, quia proprietatem ipsarum utpote superiores participarent. Hoc est, quod sequitur: « Et quidem novissimarum essentiarum, » id est, ultimorum spirituum « sanctam, et decoram illuminationem participant dispositiones superpositarum essentiarum; ultimae vero, » subauditur dispositiones, « nullo modo, » scilicet participant illuminationem primarum essentiarum.

Sequitur: « Et cujus gratia coelestes quidem virtutes omnes divini intellectus nominantur; seraphim autem, et throni, et dominationes nullo modo. » [1106A] Dignum, inquit, est intelligere cujus, subauditur rei, gratia omnes divini intellectus coelestes virtutes nominantur, cum nullo modo nominentur seraphim, et throni, et dominationes. Nam, quod angeli nominantur, mirum non est quia angeli ultimi sunt, et eorum proprietas a superioribus participatur universaliter. Hoc est, quod dicit: « Extremae enim, » subauditur essentiae, ut sunt angeli, « participatae sunt ab excelsissimis virtutibus » in omnibus proprietatibus suis; sed non enim diverso, superiorum proprietates ad inferiorum participationem universaliter veniunt. Propterea mirum est quomodo angeli, et qui ante angelos sunt, archangeli, et principatus, et potestates nomen virtutum assumant, cum non participent proprietatem; quia « post virtutes [1106B] ab ipsa theologia ordinati sunt, » id est a divina Scriptura post virtutes ordinati referuntur. Et tamen « similiter cum aliis sanctis essentiis vocantur a nobis coelestes virtutes. »

Sequitur: « Dicimus autem, quod communiter in omnibus utentes coelestium nominatione virtutum, non confusionem quamdam uniuscujusque dispositionis proprietatum introducimus. » Modo solvit quaestionem quare nomen virtutum inferioribus ordinibus tribuatur. « Dicimus, inquit, quia nos utentes nominatione coelestium virtutum, communiter etiam omnibus, non inducimus, confusionem aliquam proprietatum uniuscujusque dispositionis, » id est per hoc quod nomen commune facimus, discretionis proprietatem non confundimus. Sed potius quando [1106C] inferiores ordines virtutes nominamus, non illius ordinis proprietatem, sed communem cunctis virtutem significamus. Omnes enim divini intellectus in tria dividuntur, non inter se, alius scilicet ad alium, sed unusquisque secundum se, sive in se, « supermundana ratione, » id est spirituali. Quod enim dividuntur non fit ex consideratione partium, ubi non simplicitas essentiae, sed spiritualis est discretio, ubi non totum in partes, sed natura discernitur in proprietates. Postea subjungit, in quae tria unusquisque spiritus in se dividatur, scilicet « in essentiam, et virtutem, et operationem. » In omni enim spiritu haec tria sunt. Primum essentia, in qua subsistit; deinde virtus, secundum quam valet; deinde operatio [1106D] per quam efficit. « Cum igitur omnes simul » scilicet spiritus, « aut quosdam eorum, inobservate, » id est indiscrete sive communiter, « vocamus aut coelestes essentias, aut coelestes virtutes, existimandum est nos eos, de quibus sermo est, significare periphrasticos, » id est, per circumlocutionem, « ex ea essentia, vel virtute quae per singulos eorum est, » id est quae communis est omnibus, non ex ea, quae proprie singularis, cujus ordinis dignitatem discernit. Quare autem singularem proprietatem unius ordinis aliis subjectis ordinibus attribuere nolit, ostendit, dicens: « Neque enim, inquit, facile nobis est superpositam proprietatem sanctarum virtutum jam a nobis discretam, » id est proprie et singulariter eis attributam, « minoribus essentiis annectere, » sive tribuere, [1107A] « in conversione ordinationis inconfusae angelicorum ornatuum; » quia si hoc facerem, converterem sive perverterem ordinationem angelicorum ornatuum, quae inconfusa est. Quomodo autem inconfusa sit ordinatio angelicorum ornatuum, id est angelicorum ordinum pulchre sive ornate dispositorum ostendit, quia scilicet servant discretionem suam, nec se commiscent superioribus, quorum proprietatibus participare non habent. « Ipsae quidem superfirmatae dispositiones, » id est superiores ordines « abundanter » sive plene « habent etiam minorum sacras proprietates; ultimae vero majorum superpositas universitates non habent. » Superius aliquantulum jam diximus, quomodo illic, ubi Deus est omnia in omnibus, aliquid proprium esse possit alicui, quod [1107B] omnibus commune non sit. Hic quoque non omnino tacuit auctor, quomodo id intelligendum sit in eo, quod ait: « Abundanter habent. » In hoc ergo proprietas intelligenda est, quae superioribus convenit, [1108A] inferioribus non convenit; quod superiores abundanter habent, quidquid inferiores habent; inferiores vero abundanter non habent quidquid superiores habent. Quid enim tam magnum potest esse ibi, quod in communionem universorum non transeat, ibi charitas communis est, quae major omnibus est? Ergo omnia sunt omnium. Sed hoc solum proprium ibi est, quod abundanter alicui est quod omnibus non est, quia superiores quidem virtutes inferiorum universaliter et abundanter habent; inferiores autem non aeque virtutes superiorum habent universaliter, id est, secundum omnem plenitudinem illuminationibus divinis « tantummodo particulariter primo in eas apparentibus. » Non in eas primo apparentibus, sed primo particulariter in eas. Nam in alias, id est, [1108B] in superiores prius apparent universaliter, et deinde postea per ipsas primas proportionaliter, hoc est, secundum proportionem, non secundum omnem plenitudinem ejus distribuuntur.

## TITULUS CAPITULI XII. *Quare secundum homines hierarchiae angeli vocantur.*

## LITTERA.

[1107B]

*Quaeritur autem et hoc intelligibilium eloquiorum studiose intuentibus. Si enim participantia excelsiorum virtutum universitatum non sunt ultima, ob quam causam secundum nos, summus sacerdos, angelus Dei omnipotentis, ab eloquiis nominatur? [n: (Malach. II; Apoc. II.)] Est autem non contraria ratio, ut existimo, ante definitis. Dicimus enim, quod [1107C] ab universali, et superposita majorum ornatuum virtute relinquuntur ultimi. Mediam enim et proportionalem participant juxta unam simul cunctorum conjunctivam societatem: quale est, quod sanctorum cherubim ordo participat sapientiam et scientiam altiorem. Sub ipsis autem essentiarum dispositiones participant quidem et ipsae sapientiam, et scientiam, particularem tamen ad illos et subjectam. Et quidem omnino in participatione sapientiae esse et scientiae, commune est omnibus deiformibus intellectibus. Attente autem, et primo, aut secundo, aut infra, nequaquam commune; sed sicut unicuique ante propria definitur analogia. Hoc autem et de omnibus divinis mentibus non fortassis quis errans definiet. Etenim sicut primi abundantius habent minorum sanctas, pulchrasque [1107D] proprietates, sic habent ultimi eas priorum; non tamen similiter, sed infra. Nihil ergo, ut existimo, inordinatum, si et secundum nos summum sacerdotem angelum theologia vocat, juxta virtutem propriam angelorum participantem prophetica proprietate, et ad manifestativam eorum similitudinem, quantum possibile hominibus, extentum. Invenies autem, quod et deos theologia vocat, et coelestes supra nos essentias, et apud nos amicissimos Dei, et mirabiles viros. Et quidem divinum secretum superessentialiter simul omnibus et remotum, et supercollocatum, et nullum ei eorum, quae ab eo sunt, simile nominari proprie, et omnino valet. Verumtamen quaecunque et intellectualium [1108B] et rationalium ad unitatem ejus, et qualiscunque virtus, universaliter convertitur, et ad divinas ipsius, illuminationes, quantum possibile, incessabiliter extenditur secundum virtutem, si justum dicere, divina imitatione, et divina univocatione digna facta est.*

## EXPOSITIO.

Duodecimi capitis titulus est: Quare secundum homines hierarchiae angeli vocantur. Cujus sensus est: [1108C] Quare illi, qui sunt hierarchiae, id est sacri principes secundum homines sive inter homines, sicut sunt summi pontifices, vel quilibet sacerdotes et alii ministri verbi Dei, quare illi scilicet angeli vocantur, cum dictum sit superius quod inferiores sicut superiorum proprietates non participant, ita etiam nomina assumere non debent. Si enim ordo angelorum quia inferior virtutibus est, nomen ipsarum secundum proprietatem earum participare non potest; nec homines (quia indubitanter angelis inferiores sunt) nomen ipsorum secundum proprietatem eorum usurpare possunt. Sed haec quaestio in eo solvitur, quod supra diximus, quia dona gratiae spiritualis, quae in communionem omnium transeunt, [1108D] appellationem quoque in participationem universorum deducunt: et quamvis eo quod singulariter per excellentiam a quibusdam possidentur, discretam appellationem faciunt; eo tamen quod secundum aliquem modum communia sunt, nomina quoque aliquando secundum exigentiam causarum ad communem appellationem deducunt.

« Quaeritur autem et hoc intelligibilium eloquiorum studiose intuentibus. » A studiose intuentibus, hoc est, a studiosis inspectatoribus intelligibilium eloquiorum, id est divinorum eloquiorum: quae sunt intelligibilia, id est spiritualia et profunda de rebus intelligibilibus facta: quaeritur, dico, hoc scilicet quare homines praelati aliis, angeli vocantur. [1109A] Quare autem hoc quaeratur rationem subjungit: « Si enim ultima, id est inferiores ordines non sunt participantia virtutum universitatum excelsiorum, » id est proprietatum, quae sunt in excelsioribus universaliter, vel, ut expressius dicatur universe, id est plene et perfecte: « Ob quam causam ergo sacerdos, qui secundum nos » sive inter nos scilicet homines « summus est, nominatur ab eloquiis angelus Dei omnipotentis? » Si enim singularitatem proprietatis non habet, quare expressionem appellationis assumit? Contrarium videtur, ut nomen discretionis ad communionem deducatur. Sed tamen inquit, « non est contraria ratio ista, » sive assertio, « ut existimo, ante definitis, » hoc est, iis quae ante definita sunt, scilicet de discretione singulorum. In [1109B] hoc enim, quod talem communionem appellationis concedimus plurium, discretionem non tollimus singulorum. « Nos quippe dicimus vere, quod ultimi » sive infimi scilicet ordines « relinquuntur ab universali, et superposita virtute majorum ornatuum, » id est excellentiorum ordinum, ut scilicet non participent virtutes superiorum secundum illam universitatem, sive totalitatem, vel plenitudinem, qua illi participant. Et tamen possunt aliquando convenienter nomen illorum participare; quia, quamvis non participent virtutem illorum secundum aequalem plenitudinem, participant tamen secundum consimilem imitationem.

« Mediam enim. inquit, et proportionalem participant, » subauditur virtutem, hoc est, participant [1109C] virtutem illorum, etsi non secundum summam participationem, in qua sint aequales, participant tamen secundum mediam, vel mediocrem et inferiorem quamdam participationem, in qua possint esse consimiles: haec autem participatio fit non secundum singularem uniuscujusque perfectionem sed « juxta unam simul cunctorum et conjunctivam societatem, » hoc est, non juxta id quod unicuique singulare est, sed juxta id quod omnibus est commune. Quod quia unum, id est commune cunctis est, in eo simul omnes conjuncti sunt et sociati. Secundum itaque quod commune cunctis est, singularia nomina ad communem significationem trahuntur; quia, sicut diximus, illud etiam, quod per excellentiam [1109D] aliquibus proprium est, per participationem cunctis commune est. « Quale est, quod sanctorum cherubim ordo participat sapientiam, et scientiam altiorem, » etc. Exemplo subjecto probat, quod dixit: Quod id, quod quidam tantum excellenter possident, secundum inferiorem communionem in participationem cunctorum venit: quale est hoc, quod ordo sanctorum cherubim participat sapientiam, et scientiam altiorem. « Dispositiones autem essentiarum, » id est ordines spirituum, qui sunt sub ipsis cherubim, « participant et ipsae quidem sapientiam, et scientiam; sed tamen particularem, et subjectam ad illos, » id est non ita perfecte, neque ita excellenter ut illi. Et vere non soli cherubim sapientiam et scientiam participant, sed etiam alii inferiores; [1110A] quia « in participatione sapientiae et scientiae esse omnino, » id est universaliter, « commune est omnibus deiformibus intellectibus, » id est omnibus spiritibus per insitam rationem Deo conformibus et similibus. Participare quidem sapientiam aliquo modo omnibus commune est. Sed « attente et primo, » hoc est, expresse et principaliter « eam participare, aut secundo, aut etiam infra eam participare, nequaquam omnibus commune est. » Qui enim primo non participant, participant secundo, aut infra, hoc est, inferius et imperfectius participant; sed non participant et primo; quia, quicunque perfectionem habent, habent et inchoationem; sed non quicunque inchoationem habent, statim perfectionem habere possunt. « Sed » habent tantummodo unumquodque [1110B] « sicut unicuique definitur, » vel dispensatur, vel determinatim unum aliquid tribuitur « ante propria analogia, » id est secundum regulam, vel modum, vel mensuram propriam, quae ei ante omnia in aeterna Dei providentia praedestinata et praevisa fuit. « Hoc autem, » scilicet quod superiorum virtutes inferiores non secundum plenitudinem, tamen aliquo modo participent fortassis « de omnibus divinis mentibus, » hoc est rationalibus spiritibus « aliquis definiet, » vel affirmabit, « non errans » in hoc, quia verum est. « Etenim sicut primi, » et superiores ordines « abundantius habet sanctas, et pulchras proprietates minorum; sic ipsi ultimi, et minores habent eas proprietates, quae sunt priorum: non tamen similiter, sed infra, » hoc est, imperfectius quam illi. Propterea, [1110C] inquit, « ut ego existimo, nihil inordinatum, » subauditur, fuit vel fit, « si theologia angelum vocat summum sacerdotem secundum nos, » id est eum, qui secundum nos homines summo sacerdotio fungitur, vel angelum vocat secundum nos, quia nobis videlicet annuntiat verbum Dei: et ideo angelum, quia « participantem juxta virtutem propriam, » hoc est, secundum gratiam ex proprio officio sibi datam: « participantem » dico « prophetica proprietate » angelorum, quia ei competit prophetizare, et annuntiare verbum Dei sicut angeli annuntiant. Et illum, dico, etiam « extentum, » vel provectum, sive sublimatum ad manifestativam similitudinem eorum scilicet angelorum, quia in hoc similis est angelis quod secreta Dei ad eruditionem subjectorum manifestat [1110D] vel revelat. Nec mirum si homines angeli vocantur, cum angeli, et homines pariter dii vocati sunt.

Hoc est, quod dicit: « Invenies autem, quod et deos theologia vocat ipsas coelestes, et superiores essentias, » hoc est angelos, et non solum illos, sed « etiam quosdam » apud nos, id est nostri generis viros, scilicet « mirabiles, et amicissimos Dei. » Quare autem homines angeli, vel homines dii vocentur, causam subjungit: Quia videlicet divinitas, cum sit secreta et remota secundum excellentiam naturae suae ab omni creatura, tamen a rationabilibus mentibus, quae se per virtutem ad unitatem illius et illuminationem convertunt, quodammodo concipitur, et participatur: et ideo inquantum divinitatis [1111A] participes sunt, secundum aliquem modum non inconvenienter dii vocari possunt.

Hoc est, quod dicit: « Et quidem divinum secretum, » id est divinitatis secretum, « et remotum est, et supercollocatum est superessentialiter simul omnibus rebus; et nullum eorum, quae ab eo sunt, » subauditur condita, « valet omnino, et proprie nominari simile ei; » quia Creator et creatura expresse similia esse non possunt. « Verumtamen quaecunque virtus intellectualium, et rationalium, » hoc est angelorum « et, » ut universaliter dicatur, « qualiscunque [1112A] virtus, » sive angelorum, sive hominum « convertitur ad unitatem ejus, » scilicet divinitatis; et qualiscunque virtus extenditur incessabiliter ad divinas ipsius Deitatis illuminationes capiendas, illa virtus digna facta est divina imitatione per similitudinem, et divina univocatione per appellationem: digna dico facta est virtus illa secundum virtutem, id est intantum digna inquantum virtus est. Ita tamen si hoc justum est dicere, ut aliqua virtus quantumvis magna digna esse possit « divina imitatione, et divina univocatione. »

## TITULUS CAPITULI XIII. *Quare a seraphim dicitur purgatus fuisse propheta Isaias.*

## LITTERA.

[1111B]

*Age et hoc secundum virtutem inspiciamus ut quid a theologis seraphim missus fuisse dicitur [n: (Isai. VI)]*. *Etenim responderit quisquam, quod non suppositorum quis angelorum, sed unus quisdam de maximis essentiis, et intimis purgat sacerdotem. Quidam ergo aiunt, quod juxta jam ante redditam cunctorum intellectuum societatis definitionem non unam circa Deum primarum mentium nominat eloquium in theologi purgationem venisse; quemdam vero praestantium nobis angelorum sacrificantem prophetae purgationem, seraphim aequivocatione vocatum fuisse, propter igneam et coelestem dictorum ablutionem peccatorum, et purgati in divinam obedientiam resuscitationem. Et eloquium unum ex seraphim simpliciter dixisse aiunt, [1111C] non unam circa Deum collocatarum, sed nobis praestantium purgativarum virtutum. Aliter autem non nimis inconvenientem quamdam praestitit mihi apologiam super hujusmodi statu. Ait enim, quia propriam purgativam sacrificationem magnus ille, qui tunc erat, visionem formans angelus, in docendum divina theologum, in Deum, et post Deum in praeoperatricem reposuit hierarchiam. Et nonne igitur haec ratio verax est? Ait enim qui hoc dixit: Quomodo divina virtus in omnia veniens implet, et per omnia immensurabiliter pervenit, et omnibus iterum est invisibilis non solum, quasi ab omnibus superessentialiter remota, sed et quasi occulte in omnia permittens providas suas operationes. Sed tamen et in omnibus intellectualibus proportionaliter superlucet, et propriam [1111D] illuminationem ingerens pretiosissimis essentiis, per eas quasi primas in alias sub illis munitas se bene ordinate distribuit secundum uniuscujusque dispositionis contemplativam commensurationem. Quam, ut apertius dicam, et per propria exempla etsi deficientia Deo omnibus remoto, verumtamen nobis manifestiora. Solaris radii distributiones in primam materiam bene distributae implent omnium lucidiorem, et per eam manifestius proprios declarat splendores. Accedens vero crassioribus materiis obscuriorem habet distributivam superapparitionem ex illuminandarum materiarum ad illuminationis distributivum habitum in opportunitate, et paulo post ex hoc ad perfecte fere indistributum coarctatur. Iterum ignis caliditas magis seipsam distribuit in capaciora, et ad [1112B] similitudinem suam bene convenientia et facilia. Ad vero reformationibus contrarias essentias, ipsa nullum absconsum primitivae operationis vestigium manifestat. Et hoc eo amplius, quia iis, quae non sunt cognata per opportuna sibi habentia admittitur, primum utpote ignita faciens ab igneis facile mobilia, et per haec aut aquam, aut alterum quid, non facile ignescentium proportionaliter calificans. Juxta hanc igitur naturalis ordinationis rationem, supernaturalis ipsa omnis boni ornatus visibilis, et invisibilis, ordinatio, congrue dilucidationi claritatem primo apparentem ut in copiosissimis effusionibus, excelsissimis manifestat essentiis: et per eas quae post sunt essentiae divinum participant radium. Hae enim primae cognoscentes Deum, et divinam supereminenter desiderantes [1112C] virtutem, et praeoperatrices fieri, quantum possibile, Deo simili virtute, et actione dignae effectae sunt, et post se essentias ipsae ad similem virtutem, ut virtus, deiformiter extendunt, copiose ipsis tradentes ex superveniente in eas claritate, et illae iterum subjectis: et per singulas prima ei, quae est post eam, tradit. Ipsa aqua nonne et in omnes proportionaliter pervenit? Est ergo simul cunctis illuminatis principium illuminandi Deus quidem natura, et vere et proprie, ut luminis essentia, et ipsius esse, et videre causalis. Tum deiformiter, et Deo similiter permanens superpositum, post se unicuique divina lumina per se in illud transvehendo. Ergo excellentissimam coelestium animorum dispositionem simul omnium reliquarum [1112D] essentiae, secundum quod consequens est, post Deum principium mirantur, omnis sacrae et divinae scientiae, et divinae imitationis, tanquam per illos in omnes, et nos divina illuminatione distributa. Propter quod et omnem sacram, et Deo similem operationem in Deum quidem quasi causalem referunt; deinde in primos deiformes intellectus tanquam primos operatores divinorum, et magistros. Num ergo prima sanctorum angelorum dispositio magis simul omnibus habet igneam proprietatem, et effusam divinae sapientiae traditionem, et mysticum excelsissimae divinarum illuminationum scientiae, et sessivam proprietatem gestantem, divinam susceptionem significantem. Ipse vero suppositarum dispositiones essentiarum, igneam, sapientem atque scientem Dei susceptoriam virtutem participant quidem infra, et ad primas [1113A] aspicientes, et per eas ut imitatione divina praeoperatrices dignefactas in deiformitatis possibile reductae. Dictas ergo sanctas proprietates, quarum participatio per primas post eas subsistentes fiunt, in ipsis illis post Deum tanquam in hierarchiis reponunt. Ait ergo haec, dicens [n: (ibid.)]*: *Visionem ab illa descendentem, ab ipso susceptam fuisse theologo, per unum imperantium nobis sanctorum et beatorum angelorum, et ante illuminativam ipsius manuductionem in illam sanctam contemplationem reposuisse. Et supersedere vidit excelsissimas essentias, quantum in symbolis dicendum, post Deum, et circa Deum collocatas et cum Deo; omnibus etiam ipsis superarcane sublimiorem superprincipalem summitatem in medio superfirmatarum virtutum supercollocatam. Didicit ergo visionibus [1113B] ipse theologus, quod juxta omnem superessentialem superexcellentiam incomparabiliter supercollocatum est divinum omnium invisibili visibilique virtuti. Atque quod ab omnibus est remotum ut universale, neque primis eorum, quae sunt, essentiis simile. Adhuc et omnium ipsum principium, et causam substantificam esse, et eorum quae sunt, secreta singularitate immutabile fundamentum, ex quo esse, et bene esse etiam ipsis summe munitis est virtutibus. Deinde easdem sanctissimorum seraphim edoctus est deiformes virtutes; sacra quidem ipsorum cognominatione, quod est ignitum de quo paulo post nos dicemus, quantum nobis possibile, subintroducere in deiforme ignitae virtutis anagogas. Alarum vero expansa sacra formatione in divinum in primis, et in mediis, [1113C] et in ultimis intellectibus absolutam, et altissimam extensionem. Sed et eorum multificum, et multiforme videns intellectualis theologus, et alis distingui eam subtus pedes, et eam subtus facies visionem, et eum in mediis alis semper motum, ad invisibilem eorum, quae visa sunt, reductus est scientiam, manifestata ei altissimorum intellectuum multivia, et multivida virtute: et eorum sacra formidine, quam habent supermundane in altiorum, et inferiorum superbam, et audacem, et impossibilem scrutationem: et in commensuratione Deum imitantium actionum incessabile, et altivolum semper motionis. Sed et illam divinam, et multum pretiosam hymnodiam eruditus est, formante visionem angelo secundum virtutem ipsi theologo, et [1113D] tradente propriam sacram scientiam. Docuit ergo eum et hoc, quia purgatio est quantumcunque purgatis ipsa divinae claritatis incognitae, quantum possibile, participatio. Haec autem ex ipsis divinitatis remotis causis, qua omnes sacros intellectus superessentiali occultatione perficit, altissimis circa se virtutibus manifestior quomodo est, et magis semetipsam manifestat, et distribuit. Deinde secundis, aut novissimis, aut nostris intellectualibus virtutibus, quantum ab ipsa unaquaeque secundum deiforme exstitit, sic manifestam suam illuminationem conducit ad propriae occultationis laudandum ignotum. Lucet autem per singula, secundis per prima. Et si oportet breviter dicere, primo ex occulto ad manifestum ducitur per primas virtutes. Hoc ergo theologus didicit ex lucem [1114A] ducente angelo, hoc est purgationem, et omnes divinas operationes per primas essentias relucentes, et in omnes reliquas distribui, secundum uniuscujusque ad deificas participationes analogiam. Propter quod et ignite purgativam proprietatem ipsis seraphim consequenter post Deum reposuit. Nihil ergo inordinatum, si purgare theologum dicitur seraphim. Sic enim Deus purgat omnes, quorum totius purgationis est causa. Magis autem proxime utemur exemplo: sicut qui secundum nos est summus sacerdos per suos ministros aut sacerdotes purgans, aut illuminans ipse dicitur purgare, et illuminare per ipsum purgatis ordinibus per se in ipsum reponentibus proprias sacras operationes; sic et propriam purgativam scientiam, et virtutem, ipse purgationem theologi perficiens angelus [1114B] in Deum quidem veluti causalem deinde in ipsum seraphim tanquam primo agentem summum sacerdotem reponit: veluti fortassis quis cum angelica reverentia, purgatum edocens, dixerit quod in te perficiendae purgationis ante me principium quidem est excelsum, et essentia, et creator, et causalis, primasque essentias adesse adducens, et circa se collocatione continens: et observans inconversibiles, et casu carentes: et seipsum movens in primas propriarum providarum operationum participationes; hoc enim haec me docens ait ipsius seraphim manifestare missionem. Summus autem sacerdos, et post Deum dux ipse, praestantium essentiarum ornatus, a quo ego purgare deiformiter eruditus sum, ipse igitur est per me te purgans, per quem proprias providas actiones ex [1114C] occulto etiam in nos produxit ipsa totius causa, et opifex purgationis. Haec ille quidem docuit me: tibi autem ego trado, tuae autem concesserim intellectuali, et discretivae scientiae, aut alteram partem dictarum causarum absolvi dubitatione; et eamdem honorari ante alteram, tanquam consequens, et rationabile, et aeque verum habentem, aut a teipso, quod vere veri vicinius sit, invenire, aut ab altero discere, Deo videlicet dante, et prius recipientibus angelis, et angelorum amicis nobis revelare, per ejus magis amabilem contemplationem.*

## EXPOSITIO.

« Age et hoc secundum virtutem inspiciamus. » Eia, inquit, o Timothee, post caetera, quae dicta sunt, [1114D] etiam hoc consideremus secundum virtutem et possibilitatem nostram, « utquid scilicet a theologis dicitur unus de seraphim missus fuisse » in Isaia videlicet, quando forcipe carbone sublato de altari, prophetae labia purgavit [n: (Isa. VII)]. Et necesse est ut hanc quaestionem inspiciamus, et discutiamus, quia dubium fieri potest utrum per seraphim hic unus aliquis de superiori ordine intelligendus sit, propter proprietatem nominis; an de inferioribus, propter proprietatem administrationis, quia infirmorum et extremorum proprium est nostram hierarchiam administrare. Ideo inspicienda est quaestio, ut ambiguitas existimationis tollatur. Fortassis enim « quisquam responderit, quod non suppositorum quis, » hoc est aliquis Angelorum, « purgat sacerdotem, » [1115A] Isaiam scilicet; « sed unus quidem de intimis et maximis essentiis, » hoc est, supremis spiritibus. Sed hoc rursum alicui dubium esse potest, propterea quod supremi ordines ad exteriora dispensanda, sive administranda non mittuntur.

Propterea « quidam aiunt quod juxta definitionem societatis cunctorum intellectuum jam ante redditam » a nobis, id est secundum hoc quod superius definivimus, omnes spiritus societatem quamdam habere inter se proprietatum et nominum dicunt, quod eloquium « non nominat, » id est, « non » dicit « venisse in purgationem theologi unam aliquam primarum mentium, » id est primorum spirituum circa Deum, subauditur, constitutorum. Sed dicunt « quemdam potius praestantium nobis, » qui [1115B] nobis tantum hominibus praelati sunt « sacrificantem purgationem prophetae, » id est facientem sanctam, et Deo quasi gratum sacrificium offerentem, « vocatum fuisse seraphim, aequivocatione, » id est nominis, non excellentia proprietatis. Qua similitudine autem angelus extremi ordinis seraphim vocatus sit, subjungit: « Propter igneam et coelestem ablutionem, » sive mundationem « dictorum » jam superius « peccatorum » ipsius prophetae, et propter « resuscitationem » etiam, vel vivificationem ipsius « purgati in divinam obedientiam; » quia sicut ignis est rubiginem cremando purgare, et mortua atque exstincta calefaciendo vivificare; sic isto divino igne et a peccatis purgatus est, et ad amorem Dei [1115C] inflammatus. Quod quia ministerio angeli factum est, « aiunt » quidam « eloquium » sacrum « unum ex seraphim simpliciter dixisse non unam » aliquam virtutum « collocatarum circa Deum, » sed unam potius « purgativarum virtutum nobis praestantium, » id est unum angelorum, nobis, hoc est, hominibus, praelatorum propter similitudinem actionis tamen ipsum seraphim appellatum.

Sequitur: « Alter autem non nimis inconvenientem quamdam praestitit mihi apologiam super hujusmodi statu. » Quidam, inquit, ducunt angelum qui prophetam purgavit de supremis fuisse spiritibus, propter hoc quod seraphim appellatus est. Alii autem dicunt eum de inferioribus fuisse, et propter similitudinem actionis tantum seraphim appellatum: [1115D] ita singuli pro sua opinione verisimiliter definientes. Sed « alter » quidam neque cum illis neque cum istis omnino consentiens, « praestitit mihi quamdam apologiam, » id est excusationem, vel satisfactionem, sive defensionem « non nimis inconvenientem, » super hujusmodi statu, id est definitione, per quam status rei describitur: vel super hujusmodi instantia, id est quaestione, quae quodammodo instat, et importuna est donec solvatur. Quam autem satisfactionem vel defensionem ipse praestiterit circa quaestionem hanc subjungit: « Ait enim (subauditur ille apologiam praestans) quia magnus ille angelus, qui tunc erat formans visionem in theologum docendum divina, » hoc est, in mente theologi, quem per illam visionem divina docere debuit [1116A] ille scilicet angelus propriam purgativam sacrificationem, hoc est operationem, qua ipse tunc proprie et singulariter prophetae labia purgavit, et sacra fecit, illam suam operationem reposuit « in Deum, » hoc est attribuit Deo, « et post Deum reposuit in praeoperatricem hierarchiam, » id est in hierarchiam in qua et per quam Deus primo, id est ante omnes alias operatur. Ideo autem suam actionem illi hierarchiae attribuit, a qua ut hoc ageret post Deum principaliter accepit. Et haec est ratio quare seraphim summus dicitur, scilicet quia qui hoc fecit angelus sicut illud post Deum principaliter a seraphim accepit, ita etiam post Deum ipsi seraphim attribuit. Hanc ergo rationem reddidit ille circa quaestionem hujusmodi. « Et nonne igitur haec ratio [1116B] verax est? » Verba sunt auctoris, qui videtur suam existimationem huic sententiae accommodare. Verax videtur esse ratio haec quia ille talis, « qui hoc dixit, » ait ostendens « quomodo divina virtus in omnia veniens implet omnia » et non solum venit, sed etiam pervenit, et penetrat per omnia immensurabiliter transiens ea, « et est invisibilis omnibus. » Et iterum haec est ita invisibilis transcendens omnia sine termino, sicut invisibilis est omnibus subsistens ante omnia sine principio. Vel « iterum invisibilis est » per immensitatem, sicut invisibilis est per aeternitatem, quia sicut aeternitatem non capit intelligentia temporalis, sic immensitatem non comprehendit natura circumscriptibilis. Vel iterum « invisibilis est, » id est non solum in se secundum [1116C] quod est essentialiter et ineffabiliter ab omnibus remota, sed etiam nobis, secundum quod est incomprehensibiliter omnibus occulta. In se igitur est invisibilis, et in nobis est invisibilis, et in utroque modo manet incomprehensibilis. Hoc est quod ait ille: « Quia non solum invisibilis est in se, quasi ab omnibus superessentialiter remota, sed » etiam in nobis est invisibilis, « quasi occulte permittens, » vel penetrare faciens « in omnia providas suas operationes. » Ita ergo divina virtus et in seipsa invisibilis est quasi remota, et in nobis invisibilis est quasi occulta, per operationem, quia secundum providentiam suam operatur in nobis. « Sed tamen » quamvis ita invisibilis sit, superlucet effundens se [1116D] ad manifestationem « omnibus intellectualibus, » hoc est rationalibus mentibus. « Superlucet » dico, « proportionaliter, » id est aliis plus, aliis minus, secundum uniuscujusque mensuram scilicet et capacitatem. Et cum omnibus communiter superluceat, excellenter tamen « propriam illuminationem ingerens pretiosissimis essentiis, » id est subtilissimis et excellentissimis spiritibus: « per eas » videlicet essentias « quasi primas » postea distribuit se bene ornate « in alias » scilicet essentias « sub illis » primis « munitas, » id est firmatas, vel collocatas, vel dispositas. « Distribuit » dico, « secundum contemplativam commensurationem uniuscujusque dispositionis, » id est secundum hoc quod unaquaeque dispositio, sive ordo secundum propriam [1117A] mensuram capax est contemplationis illius: « quam, » subauditur, distributionem divinae illuminationis ita differenter secundum mensuram accipientium pervenientem, « ut apertius dicam et per propria exempla; » propria, inquam, « et si » hoc est, quamvis, tamen « deficientia, Deo omnibus remoto; » hoc est ad comparationem Dei deficientia, qui ab omnibus rebus remotus est, et nulla similitudine proprie demonstrari potest. Ergo deficientia, et non propria. « Verumtamen » propria, quia « nobis manifestiora. » Non propria ad divinam majestatem, propria ad humanam possibilitatem; non propria, sicut in illo est, propria sicut nobis ostendi potest. Ut ergo per exempla Deo non propria nobis propria divinae illuminationis dispensari distributionem [1117B] ostendam, hanc similitudinem propono. « Solaris radii distributiones in primam materiam bene distributae implent omnium lucidiorem, et per eam manifestius proprios declarat splendores. » Distributiones, inquit, sive effusiones solaris radii bene distributae in primam materiam, hoc est in illam materiam venientes quae est prima, hoc est optima et purissima, et ad illuminationem aptissima; ad talem, inquam, materiam venientes implent eam, nullum in aliqua parte obstaculum lumini invenientes, et implendo faciunt eam lucidiorem, prolucidissimam omnium; et sic per eam ipse radius manifestius declarat proprios splendores, quia quanto perfectius radiat, tanto perfectius illuminabitur; et quanto perfectius illi infunditur, tanto clarius [1117C] refunditur ex illa. « Accedens vero crassioribus materiis, » hoc est, ad crassiores materias, et quae minus illuminationi sunt aptae, illic « obscuriorem habet distributivam super apparitionem. » Sicut enim cum se infundit in illis capitur imperfecte, ita et cum se effundit per illas super hoc extrinsecus apparet obscure: quod provenit ex « inopportunitate illuminandarum materiarum: » inopportunitas nocet, et impedimento est ad « distributivum habitum illuminationis, » id est ad hoc ut illuminatio ipsa vel distribuatur, vel habeatur. Ita ergo in puris et levigatis corporibus perfectius lucet, in crassioribus et grossioribus minoratur; et paulo post ad alia adhuc minus apta descendens ex hoc defectu, [1117D] id est, post hunc defectum, coarctatur fere ad perfecte indistributum, hoc est ad hoc ut nullo modo distribuatur. A subtilissimis enim materiis, a quibus perfecte comprehenditur, ad minus aptas descendens, a quibus imperfecte capitur, tandem ad alia tam faeculenta, et grossa, et obtusa pervenit, quae fere omnino lumen repellunt, et nihil illuminationis capere possunt. Ad hunc modum spiritualis lux ad mentes rationales veniens, eas quas puras invenit, et defaecatas perfecte illuminat, eas vero quas minus aptas reperit minori claritate, et, ut ita dicam, luce obscuriori illustrat. Quas vero omnino contrarias et faeculentas offendit, sua prorsus participatione et communione immunes relinquit. Ita per similitudinem visibilium, invisibilium veritas demonstratur. [1118A] Non solum in lumine, sed etiam in calore materiali invisibilis veritatis imago est. Nam ipse calor ea corpora quae magis apta susceptioni suae invenit, magis accendit: alia autem minus, donec tandem in contraria omnino et dissimilia offendens, nullum in eis suae operationis effectum ostendit.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Hoc est quod dicit: « Iterum ignis caliditas, » ac si diceret: Non solum in splendore luminis, sed etiam in caliditate ignis supradicta similitudo videri potest. « Nam ignis caliditas magis seipsam distribuit in capaciora » subauditur corpora, et in ea quae sunt bene convenientia ad suam similitudinem, ut scilicet ex calore calefiant, quia inter calidum et calorem similitudo constat, sicut inter album et albedinem, et bonum et bonitatem, et omnino omnis [1118B] proprietatis ad affectum suum. Veniens vero ipsa, scilicet caliditas, « ad essentias contrarias reformationibus » suis, quia scilicet calefactioni, per quam ad similitudinem caloris reformari debuerunt, contraria qualitate repugnant, in eis ipsa caliditas « nullum manifestat vestigium, » vel saltem « absconsum, » sive obscurum « primitivae operationis; » hoc est, nullum effectum ibi ostendit, in quo vel tenuiter possit agnosci quod saltem principium ibi aliquod habeat operationis. In hunc modum rationales substantiae coelestis amoris ignem aut suscipiunt, si aptae fuerint, et praeparata habitacula convenientia susceptioni illius, aut omnino repellunt, si discrepant qualitate contraria, aut accendi non [1118C] possunt. Ego opto, ut anima mea nulla faeculentia sordium terrenarum lumen claritatis internae repellat, nullo malitiae frigore sanctae devotionis calorem excludat, sed clarescat et calescat coelitus in divinam similitudinem reformata. O qualis essentia super essentiali bono conjuncta, beata natura supernaturali bono plena! Feliciter facta est, quae sic refici meretur. Si mihi hoc concessum fuerit, non habeo ultra queri de his omnibus quae priora transierunt. Monstrat creatura artificem, et mirabilium operum forma speciem commendat auctoris. Unum est bonum et una est pulchritudo, et ipsum bonum ipsa est pulchritudo. Summum bonum et summa pulchritudo, et in summo bono omne bonum, unum bonum, et in summa pulchritudine omnis pulchritudo, [1118D] una pulchritudo. Non poterat autem visibilis natura in eo uno omnia continere; et Deo multa bona facta sunt, ut unum bonum summum ostenderent, et similiter pulchra multa, ut unius pulchritudinis summae imaginem demonstrarent. Sed et vitae multae constitutae sunt in iis quorum conditio amplius aliquid habere meruit, iis quae bona quidem et pulchra facta sunt, et tamen hoc bonum quod vita est capere non possunt. Et hae vitae omnes unam vitam summam aemulantur: unaquaeque in genere suo, in eo quod est, et quantum est ab ea, et secundum eam quae sola vera est. Omnis autem vitae corporeae principia duo sunt, calor et humor: unum, scilicet humor, nutrimentum vitae praestat; alterum, id est calor, vitam sensificat. Sine calore [1119A] non vivit subsistens; sine humore vivens non subsistit. Propterea haec rationabili contemperantia cunctis se vivificandis infundunt, ut ex eis unaquaeque vita mensuram capacitatis suae, quantum oportet, accipiat, quatenus inferiores vitae per gradus incrementorum suorum ad imaginem summae vitae proficiant. Primus enim gradus corporeae vitae est sensificatio; secundus per sensum ingrediens, imaginatio; tertius per imaginationem conceptorum, memoria; quartus secundum passibilem applicationem, sensus, quaedam sine intelligentiae discretione providentia. In qua quidem quasi rationis imago est, sed ratio nulla est. Secundum hanc et bruta quaedam animalia aliis sui generis callidiora videntur, et quadam quasi sensus facilitate rationalis mentis providentiam [1119B] imitantia. Quod tamen magis sensus passio quam intelligentiae operatio esse probatur. In his autem omnibus vita corporea vitam spiritualem imitatur. Primum videlicet in eo quod sentit; secundo in eo quod sensum concipit; tertio in eo quod concepta retinet; quarto in eo quod sive in imaginatis sive in sensis per sensus passionem secundum quamdam rationis similitudinem vel ad appetendum vel ad fugiendum se inflectit. In his itaque omnibus vitae corporeae spiritualium vitarum imaginem tenent, et per medias eas summam vitam, quantum possunt, aemulantur. Nam et ipsae spiritales vitae omnes a summa vita accipiunt quod vitae sunt, participantes inde descendentem spiritualem calorem, et humorem, quo nutriantur et vivificentur ut vivant. [1119C] Duo ista spiritualiter concepta spiritualem vitam perficiunt: spiritalis humor nutriens per gaudium; et non constat vita ulla quae calorem et humorem suum non habeat nutrientem et sensificantem, ut in eo quod vita est subsistere possit; et quae magis haec habet, merito magis vita nominatur. Ut multae sunt vitae, sicut participationes sunt multae, et omnis participatio ab uno, et omnis vita ab uno; sic itaque summum bonum in omnia se diffundens, omnem vitam constituit, et ad summam vitam omnem vitam formando reducit.

Sequitur: « Et hoc eo amplius. » Ac si diceret: Non solum hoc quod lucem corpoream et calorem materialem quaedam corpora suscipiunt, quaedam [1119D] omnino repellunt, argumentum est invisibilis veritatis, sed hoc etiam, quod per ea quae magis calent alia minus calida accenduntur: hoc, inquit, adhuc amplius argumentum est. Amplius post prima, non amplius supra prima: hoc argumentum est invisibilis veritatis. Quia ipsa caliditas materialis ignis admittitur, et infunditur iis scilicet corporibus « quae non sunt cognata » sibi, id est, apta ad suscipiendam ipsam: infunditur, dico, illis « per alia habentia opportuna, » id est, quae se habent opportune ad illam. « Primum, » illam suscipiunt, « utpote ignita faciens ab igneis facile mobilia. » Ipsa quippe caliditas ab igneis, quae magis calent ignita, facit alia, quae secundario et minus calefiunt, quae tamen et ipsa ideo ignita fiunt ab igneis, quia facile mobilia [1120A] sunt, et apta ad susceptionem caloris. Sic itaque ab igneis primum et principaliter calentibus facit ignita, et per haec ignita, scilicet postea, calificat adhuc frigidiora et remotiora, id est, aut aquam, aut alterum quid, hoc est, « aliquid aliud non facile ignescentium, » id est eorum quae non facile ignescunt. « Calificat, » dico, « proportionaliter, » hoc est, unumquodque secundum modum, et mensuram suam, et capacitatem suam ad calorem suscipiendum.

Sequitur: « Juxta hanc igitur, » etc. Adaptat similitudinem. « Secundum hanc, inquit, rationem, » id est similitudinem « naturalis ordinationis, » id est ordinationis naturalium rerum et visibilium, « etiam ipsa supernatur alis ordinatio, » id est divinae gratiae [1120B] distributio, quae est « ordinatio omnis boni ornatus, » id est omnis ordinis bene et ornate dispositi, sive « visibilis » ut in hominibus, sive « invisibilis » ut in angelis; illa, inquam, supernaturalis ordinatio congrue manifestat primo « claritatem delucidationis, » id est manifestationis, vel revelationis, « excelsissimis essentiis, » id est supremis spiritibus: « claritatem » illam, dico, « primo apparentem » in eis, utpote « in copiosissimis effusionibus, » hoc est, sicut eam decet apparere quando se copiose effundit, vel iis quibus se copiosissime effudit. « Et per eas » scilicet excelsissimas essentias, illae essentiae, « quae post » ipsas « sunt, participant divinum radium, » id est claritatem divinam. « Hae enim, » [1120C] scilicet excelsissimae essentiae, « primae sunt cognoscentes Deum, et desiderantes supereminenter divinam virtutem. » Et quia principaliter cognoscunt et diligunt, dignae effectae sunt « fieri praeoperatrices, quantum possibile est, virtute et actione simili Deo; » id est, ut ante omnes alias primo post Deum in subjecta omnia operentur, divinam virtutem largiendo; et in eo ipso similes Deo fiant, quia virtutem quam desuper accipiunt subjectis impendunt. Ipsae enim essentias quae post se sunt, sive subjectae sibi, « extendunt ad virtutem similem, » scilicet suae virtuti, utpote virtus deiformiter se habens, quia in eo quod hoc faciunt, virtute sua Deum imitantur, « copiose tradentes ipsis, » scilicet subjectis essentiis, « ex claritate superveniente in eas. Et illae » [1120D] scilicet subjectae essentiae, « iterum » tradunt « subjectis » sibi; « et » ita « per singulas » effusione divini muneris currente, « prima tradit ei quae est post eam, » et sic deinceps usque in finem.

Sequitur: « Ipsa aqua, » etc. Post similitudinem quam de igne secundum claritatem et calorem proposuit, aliam iterum similitudinem de aqua proponit. « Ipsa, inquit, aqua nonne in omnes proportionaliter pervenit? » Ipse humor aquae, qui se per omnes partes terrenorum corporum diffundit, proportionaliter cuncta replet, alia plus alia minus humectans, secundum hoc, scilicet, quod unumquodque plus vel minus capax est humectationis. In hoc ergo exemplo similiter divinae gratiae distributio non pari [1121A] modo cunctis proveniens convenienter demonstratur.

Sequitur: « Est ergo, » etc. Quandoquidem, inquit, sicut unum visibile lumen multa illuminat, et ab illo lumine multa lucentia lucent, ita invisibilis lux cuncta invisibiliter lucentia illustrat. « Ergo Deus principium est illuminandi, » sive illuminationis « simul cunctis illuminatis. » Nec mirum: quoniam et ipse lumen est, et non quolibet modo lumen, sed natura, id est naturaliter, et vere, et proprie. Naturaliter, quia ex se; et vere, quia in se; et proprie, quia per se. Naturaliter, quia ex ipso quod est lumen est; et vere, quia ipsum quod est lumen est; et proprie, quia per ipsum quod est lumen est. Naturale siquidem est quod aliunde non assumitur, [1121B] vere est quod essentialiter possidetur, proprie est quod per alium non confertur. Sic itaque Deus lumen est: et parum dico, cum dico eum esse lumen, utpote qui essentia est ipsius luminis. Caeteri enim qui lucent essentia luminis non sunt, sed effectus. Illi ergo, quod lumina sunt, ex lumine sunt; ille vero lumen est ex eo quod est. « Et est etiam causalis esse et videre, id est essentiae et visionis ipsius luminis; » quasi sic diceretur: Deus essentia luminis est, et ipsius essentiae etiam causa est, quia quod lumen est, essentialiter est; et quod essentialiter est, ex se est. Sic ergo causa est essentiae luminis: et non solummodo essentiae luminis, sed etiam ipsius visionis, sive manifestationis luminis, quia non solum ex se habet quod essentialiter lumen est [1121C] lucens per naturam, sed hoc etiam quod temporaliter lucet illuminans per gratiam.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Tum deiformiter et Deo similiter permanens superpositum, » etc. In Deo, inquit, lumen ipsum aliud non est quam essentia ipsa illi, cui idem est esse et lumen esse, qui ex semetipso principium est illuminandi, quia eos qui primi lucent ex semetipso illuminat. Tum autem, id est, deinde post ipsum, scilicet Deum, unumquodque « super positum permanens deiformiter et Deo similiter, » hoc est, secundum conformationem et similitudinem Dei, subauditur, principium fit illuminandi post se, « per se transvehendo divina lumina in illud » scilicet post se constitutum. Sensus hic est: Quod Deus, qui omnibus superpositus est, eos qui proximi sunt [1121D] per se illuminat: et sic fit principium illuminationis primos lucentes illuminans; deinde ipsorum primum lucentium unusquisque caeteris omnibus subjectis secundum conformitatem et similitudinem Dei superpositum fit principium illuminationis unicuique subjectorum, divina lumina per se transvehendo in illud scilicet subjectum. Quod autem neutraliter posuit superpositum, pro eo quod dixisse debuisset superpositus, scilicet ordo, vel angelus, more Scripturae factum est, maxime cum de ignotis et mirabilibus agitur, cum dicitur illud, ac si diceretur, quodcunque illud est. Quod vero subjunxit unicuique post se, sic videtur dictum quasi illud superpositum, quodcunque est, unum existens, singulis [1122A] subjectis principium illuminationis existat, ut non quasi multa multis, sed unum multis lumen praebeat. Sed in eo quod post hoc iterum adjecit, « in illud divina lumina transvehendo, » non unum multis, sed unum uni illuminationem ministrare videtur. Unde patet quod secundum morem Scripturae vicissim, sive pro numero numerus, sive pro genere genus ponatur, ejusdem intelligentiae veritas non mutatur.

Sequitur: « Ergo excelsissimam coelestium animorum dispositionem. » Infert e supradictis, ac si diceret: Quandoquidem dispositio prima divina suscepit, et subjectis omnibus illuminationem praebet; « ergo omnium reliquarum dispositionem essentiae mirantur, » id est reliquorum ordinum omnium spiritus [1122B] admirando et stupendo contemplantur « ipsam excelsissimam coelestium animorum dispositionem, principium post Deus, secundum quod consequens est. » Ita enim consequens est, ut Deum primum principium cognoscant; deinde et ipsos qui primi sunt post Deum suo modo principium ad sequentia venerentur, per quos gratia divina ad eos qui subjecti sunt descendit. Et hoc est quod sequitur: « Mirantur eos principium esse omnis sacrae et divinae scientiae et divinae imitationis: » quae scilicet ad subjecta per ipsos manant tanquam divina illuminatione distributa per illos in omnes alias coelestes virtutes, et non solum in eas, sed etiam in nos; videlicet homines, qui divinas illuminationes illis mediantibus accipimus. Et quia omnes reliquae essentiae [1122C] coelestes primis mediantibus illuminantur, idcirco quidquid sacrum operari possunt, et Deo simile, hoc quidem primum Deo attribuunt, qui causa est omnium; deinde ipsis primis spiritibus, quibus operantibus et mediantibus gratiam divinam percipiunt. Hoc est, quod dicit: « Propter quod, » scilicet, quia per illos a Deo illuminatos reliqui illuminantur, ideo ipsi reliqui « omnem sacram et Deo similem operationem suam in Deum quidem quasi causalem referunt » quia ipse est prima causa omnium; « deinde referunt in primos intellectus. » id est, supremos spiritus, qui deiformes sunt, vel Deo, conformes, in hoc quod dona spiritalia tribuunt: non tamen ut Deus, qui prima causa est a quo sunt, sed [1122D] tanquam primi effectus, per quos sunt. Ideo ad eos referunt bonum suum, per quos est « tanquam per primos operatores, et magistros divinorum, » scilicet donorum. Operatores quidem in eo quod movent efficiendo, magistri vero in eo quod praesident dirigendo.

Sequitur: « Num ergo prima, » etc. Num pro nonne. « Nonne ergo, inquit, prima dispositio sanctorum angelorum, » quae tantopere caeteris omnibus sublimior est, « magis omnibus habet, » summam et « igneam proprietatem, » hoc est, charitatem, sicut in seraphim; « et effusam, » id est, abundantem « traditionem divinae sapientiae, et mysticum excelsissimae divinarum illuminationum scientiae, » id est mysticam, vel occultam sive profundam excelsissimam [1123A] scientiam, quam ex divinis illuminationibus percipit, sicut in cherubim, et sessivam proprietatem, sicut in thronis, gestantem, Deum scilicet, et « significantem divinam susceptionem: » quia in eo, quod throni dicti sunt, aperte significatur quod Deum in se sedentem et quiescentem suscipiunt. Sensus est: Nonne prima hierarchia excellentius et abundantius caeteris omnibus habet et ignem charitatis, et lumen cognitionis, et judicium discretionis? Habet utique haec omnia amplius caeteris omnibus. « Ipsae vero » dispositiones « suppositarum essentiarum, » id est, subjectorum ordinum, participant quidem et ipsae « igneam virtutem, » id est charitatem, sicut seraphim, sapientem, atque scientem « virtutem, » id est, cognitionem, sicut [1123B] cherubim, et virtutem susceptoriam Dei, sicut throni: « participant, » dico; sed « infra, » id est, imperfectius quam primae: « et aspicientes ad primas, » id est, imitantes primas, « et per eas, » scilicet primas, reductae in id deiformitatis quod possibile ipsis est, hoc est, reductae ad tantam deiformitatem quantam eis possibile est; per eas scilicet primas, dico, « digne factas » hoc est, dignas factas, « divina imitatione, » id est, ut Deum imitentur « praeoperatrices, » id est, prius et excellentius omnibus aliis ab ipso et secundum ipsum operantes.

Sequitur: « Dictas ergo sanctas proprietates, » etc. Quandoquidem, inquit, per primas subsequentes dona gratiarum accipiunt, ergo sanctas proprietates jam superius dictas, quale fuit prophetae labia carbone [1123C] incendere, quod proprium videtur esse seraphim, et scientiam docere, quod proprium videtur cherubim. Ejusmodi ergo proprietates, « quarum participatio fit per primas essentias, » aliae essentiae « subsistentes post eas, » has, inquam, proprietates, « reponunt in ipsis, » id est, attribuunt ipsis illis primis, scilicet per quas eas participant: « tanquam in hierarchis, » id est in principibus, et superioribus, ut eas ad illos referant, a quibus acceperunt. « Reponunt » dico « in illis post Deum: » quia primo eas Deo attribuunt, deinde illis qui proximi sunt post Deum. Quod autem ait, quod subsequentes essentiae participatio fiunt proprietatum primarum, modus loquendi talis est ac si diceret: Participes [1123D] fiunt proprietatum primarum, quia quod primi possident per proprietatem, secundi communicant per participationem.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Ait ergo haec, dicens, » etc. Ille, inquit, de quo superius dixi, qui mihi non inconvenientem praestitit apologiam. Ille dicens haec, quae hactenus dicta sunt de divina illuminatione per alios ad alios descendente, ait visionem supradictam, de qua quaestio orta est de purificatione labiorum prophetae « susceptam fuisse ab ipso theologo, » Isaia scilicet, « per unum sanctorum, et beatorum, » angelorum « imperantium nobis, » hominibus, « descendentem ab illa, » subauditur, prima hierarchia. Hoc enim ait ille, quod visio illa, quam vidit Isaias prima hierarchia descendit, et allata est ipsi prophetae [1124A] per unum angelum de novissimo ordine eorum, qui in angelis extremi sunt et nobis tantum praesunt: et ideo ait illum angelum « ante illuminativam ipsius manuductionem, » id est revelationem illam, qua ipse manuduxit, et erudivit prophetam, et qua ipse ante illuminatus erat a prima hierarchia: « reposuisse in, » id est, retulisse ad « illam sanctam contemplationem, » hoc est, in ipsam primam hierarchiam, a qua contemplabatur se habuisse quod habuit, et fecisse quod fecit. « Videt etiam » ipse Isaias « supersedere, » id est in alto et sublimi sedere, « excelsissimas essentias, collocatas post Deum, et circa Deum, et cum Deo, quantum in symbolis, » id est, figuris et similitudinibus est « dicendum. » Hoc enim totum symbolicum est et figurativum, [1124B] quod Deus secundum corporalem similitudinem in solio excelso sedere dicitur; et seraphim circa eum et juxta stare perhibentur. Et videt etiam ipse Isaias summitatem sublimiorem « omnibus ipsis, » scilicet excelsissimis spirituum beatorum essentiis; « etiam superarcane, » id est, excellentissimo modo: « summitatem, » dico, « super principalem, » id est Deum, qui summus et principalis omnium est, supercollocatam « in medio superfirmatarum virtutum. » In medio enim virtutum, id est sanctorum spirituum, qui firmati sunt et stabiliti aeterna collocatione circa Deum super omnia, ipse Deus summus, et principalis sedens videtur in solio excelso et elevato. « In his ergo visionibus didicit ipse theologus, » Isaias hoc scilicet, « quod divinum, » id est divinitas, [1124C] « supercollocata est incomparabiliter supra omnem superessentialem superexcellentiam omni invisibili, et visibili virtuti, » hoc est, quod divinitas incomparabiliter, transcendit secundum omnem excellendi modum, omnem virtutem, visibilem et invisibilem. Et non mirum, si transcendit omnia ipsum divinum: « atqui, » id est certe, « quia ab omnibus est remotum, » per excellentiam scilicet, utpote illud, quod universale est ab iis, quae ex parte sunt omnia, et intantum remotum et excellens, ut « nec primis essentiis eorum, » quae sunt, « simile sit, » sed longe distans et transcendens. Quod autem ait « primis essentiis eorum, quae sunt, » tale est ac si diceret, essentiis eorum qui sunt primi, vel essentiis quae [1124D] sunt primae, id est, supremis spiritibus angelorum. Nec solum didicit divinum ab omnibus remotum, et nulli simile esse. « Sed adhuc, » sive insuper etiam hoc didicit ipsum « esse omnium principium, » quia ab eo sunt omnia; et causam sanctificam, quia per eum subsistunt universa; et immutabile fundamentum eorum, quae sunt, secreta singularitate, quia in eo subsistentia perseverant universa: qui secreta et occulta divinitate sua omnia continens unitas universitatem colligit, et singularitas multiplicitatem constringit. Ex quo et esse, et bene esse est etiam ipsis summe munitis virtutibus, id est illis spiritibus, qui in summa virtute et felicitate firmati sunt et stabiliti: qui ab illo habent non solum ut sint, sed etiam ut beati sint. Hoc ergo totum didicit in [1125A] visione illa de divinitatis excellentia. « Deinde, » etiam didicit, et « edoctus est, easdem sanctissimorum seraphim, » vel, ut expressius dicatur, eorumdem sanctissimorum seraphim, « deiformes virtutes, » vel easdem virtutes, quas in Deo esse didicerat, didicit etiam esse in seraphim ex conformitate Dei; quia, quod Deus habet per naturam, ipsi habent per gratiam, conformati Deo. Quas autem, et quales virtutes, sive etiam ex quo didicerit virtutes esse in seraphim subjungit, dicens: « Ex sacra quidem cognominatione ipsorum, quod, » id est, quae cognominatio, « est ignitum. » Quia seraphim *ardens,* vel *succedens* interpretatur, et significat ignitum: « de quo » ignito, inquit, nos « paulo post dicemus, quantum possibile nobis erit, subintroducere anagogas, » [1125B] id est, sursum ductiones « virtutis ignitae, » scilicet charitatis ipsorum seraphim, « in deiforme: » hoc est, in rem tam dignam et Deo consimilem. Vel sic: Ex hac, inquam sacra cognominatione, didicit ipse propheta: anagogas, id est, sursum ductiones, sive ascensus, vel provectus ignitae virtutis, id est, charitatis ipsorum seraphim. « In expansa autem sacra formatione alarum, » id est in sacra formatione expansarum alarum, didicit ipse propheta « absolutam, et altissimam in divinum extensionem, » quae est « in primis, et in mediis, et in ultimis intellectibus. » Per cognominationem igitur, quae ignitum sonat, didicit igneam virtutem; id est, charitatem desiderio ad alta ascendentem; per expansionem vero alarum, didicit cognitionem subtilitate [1125C] in longinqua se porrigentem, et usque in divina capienda se extendentem, in primis, et mediis, et ultimis intellectibus, id est, spiritibus in illo ordine primis, et mediis, et ultimis: vel primis intellectibus quibus divina capiunt supra se, mediis quibus divina capiunt in se, ultimis quibus divina capiunt sub se. Extensio vero ipsa, sive porrectio cognitionis et absoluta est, quia nulla ignorantiae caligine ad immensitatem se diffundens circumvolvitur; et altissima, quia ad summa pergens nulla infirmitate praegravatur. Et non solum ex iis, quae dicta sunt, virtutem dilectionis et cognitionis ipsorum cognovit, « sed etiam multificum, et multiforme eorum videns ipse intellectualis theologus » [1125D] Isaias, « et videns etiam eam visionem distingui alis subtus pedes, et distingui eam alis subtus facies: et videns etiam eum semper motum, » id est, qui semper est, in mediis alis: per haec omnia « reductus est, » et eruditus « ad invisibilem scientiam eorum, quae visa sunt. » Per hoc enim, quod distinctionem vidit alarum, quae subtus pedes deorsum; et alarum, quae subtus facies sedentis sursum porrigebantur; et alarum, quae in medio semper movebantur: per hoc scilicet vidit ipse multiplicem virtutem illorum, quae et multificata est in opere, signata per motionem, et multiformis in cognitione et dilectione, significata per porrectionem. Et in his omnibus reductus est ille et admonitus, ut invisibiliter cognosceret, quod secundum speciem visibilium [1126A] vidit: « manifestata ei per haec omnia multivia, et multivida virtute istorum altissimorum intellectuum. » Quae scilicet, virtus et multivia est, inquantum multipliciter movetur appetendo; et multivida, inquantum multipliciter beatificatur possidendo. Multivia in eo, qua pergit scrutando; multivida in eo, quod invenit penetrando. Multae sunt viae, quibus itur ad bonum unum: ideo recte multivia. Sed quare multivida, cum unum sit, quod videtur, nisi quia in uno cuncta videntur? Sic ergo reductus est propheta ad scientiam veritatis, monstrata, ei per sacras imagines multivia, et multivida virtute altissimorum intellectuum. Monstrata etiam « ei sacra formidine eorum, » sive reverentia, « quam habent supermundane, » id est, impassibiliter et [1126B] pure, « in superbam et audacem et inpossibilem scrutationem altiorum et inferiorum, » id est, ne superbe, et audacter, et impossibiliter scrutentur, ultra mensuram possibilitatis suae secreta Dei, quae altiora ipsis sunt per majestatem, et inferiora per profunditatem. Ideo quippe velant caput, ut altiora tecta sibi profiteantur: ideo velant pedes, ut inferiora et profundiora impenetrabilia esse testentur. Propter ea superbi, et audaces esse formidant ad id, quod impossibile est scrutandum. Superbi ad alta, audaces ad profunda; superbi ne nimis eleventur, audaces, ne praecipitentur. In hoc ergo sacram formidinem habent, quia sacrum est timere, quod praesumptum noceret, et supermundane habent, quia sine passione et afflictione formidant. Timent enim, [1126C] et non afficiuntur; contremiscunt, et non concutiuntur. Pavent securi, et sine ulla molestia, vel corruptione suae quietis verentur ad incomprehensibilem majestatem mensuram transire suae possibilitatis. Ad horum omnium scientiam reductus est propheta, supradicta videns, in extensione alarum. Et videns etiam incessabile, et altivolum semper, scilicet perseverantis motionis in commotione alarum: quae commotio in commensuratione constat actionum Deum imitantium, id est in actionibus ipsorum, quibus imitantur Deum, commensurantes se possibilitati suae, ut nihil praeter rationem et mensuram agere praesumant.

Sequitur: « Sed et illam divinam, et multum [1126D] pretiosam hymnodiam eruditus est. » Ac si diceret: Non solum in habitu seraphim virtutem eorum cognovit; sed etiam in voce eorum hymnodiam, id est laudem divinam, didicit « formante angelo visionem ipsi theologo secundum virtutem » capacitatis ipsius, « et tradente propriam sacram scientiam: » quia quod ipse angelus scivit, per hanc sacram visionem theologum scire fecit. « Docuit ergo » ipse angelus « eum, » scilicet theologum, in hoc quod labia ejus, qui jam justus videbatur, purgavit carbone sumpto de altari, « quia ipsa participatio incognitae divinae claritatis accepta, quantum possibile est, purgatio est quantumcunque perfectis. » Quia quantumcunque quis purgatus sit, purgatior fit illa percepta.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

[1127A]Sequitur: « Haec autem, » etc. Dixit, quod perceptio claritatis divinae purgatio est: nunc consequenter ostendit quod haec claritas, ex occulto summae divinitatis procedens, ad perficiendos et illuminandos omnes sacros intellectus, primum se manifestat altissimis virtutibus apertius circa se positis: et ostendit quomodo est in proprio, et vero esse suo; deinde post primas ostendit se secundis; et postea novissimis; ad postremum etiam, nostris humanis intellectibus, et ita descendens conducit illuminationem suam ad unamquamque virtutem, secundum quod unaquaeque deiformis facta est ab ea, hoc est, quod ait: « Haec, » scilicet « claritas procedens ex remotis causis divinitatis, a qua divinitate exiens, perficit omnes sacros intellectus, » id [1127B] est rationales mentes, illustrando eos « superessentiali occultatione, » id est valde occulta et secreta aspiratione: ex illis, inquam, remotis causis procedens ad manifestationem, primum manifestior fit quomodo est, id est secundum verum esse suum, altissimis virtutibus circa se positis: et manifestat, « et distribuit semetipsam illis magis, » quam aliis; « et deinde » post illas « manifestat secundis » se, « deinde novissimis, » postremo etiam « nostris intellectualibus virtutibus, » id est rationalibus mentibus; « et sic » a primis usque ad ultima descendens, « conducit illuminationem suam per singulas virtutes: sic » hoc est, intantum manifestam in singulis, quantum unaquaeque virtus existit ab ipsa scilicet claritate secundum deiforme, hoc est secundum [1127C] conformitatem Dei. Tanto magis enim unamquamque virtutem illuminat, quanto magis eam ad deiformitatem coaptat. Quare autem claritas ista procedat ad manifestationem subjungit: « Ad propriae occultationis laudandum ignotum. » Idcirco enim aliquid de ipsa percipimus, ut in illo, et per illud quod occultum, et ignotum, et incomprehensibile omnino in ipsa est, laudemus.

Sequitur: « Lucet autem per singula secundis per prima. » Ubique enim secundis lucet per prima, sive per primos, « Et si oportet breviter dicere, » hoc in summa dici potest, quod « primum ex occulto ad manifestum ducitur per primas virtutes. » Quod enim in seipsa est omnino occulta est; et tunc [1127D] primum incipit videri quando primum incipit haberi. Neque enim ab aliquo unquam videtur, nisi a quo habetur. « Hoc ergo theologus didicit ex lucem ducente angelo. » Ex ductore claritatis angelo didicit hoc. Nova compositio, lucem ducente, ac si diceret luciductore. Ab illo igitur didicit hoc theologus. Quid hoc? hoc est scilicet quod didicit: « Purgationem, et omnes divinas operationes relucentes per primas essentias per eas in omnes reliquas distribui, secundum uniuscujusque reliquorum analogiam, » id est modum et mensuram, « ad deificas participationes. Propter quod et ignite purgativam proprietatem reposuit » ille angelus, id est attribuit, « ipsis seraphim consequenter post Deum: » et ideo « nihil inordinatum » dicitur « si seraphim dicitur purgare [1128A] theologum. Sic enim et Deus purgat omnes, quorum totius purgationis, » vel quorum omnium purgationis « est causa; » et non solum Deus, sed magis in hoc exemplo videri potest quomodo facere aliquid dicitur, non per quem fit solum, sed etiam a quo fit. Quia « magis proxime utemur exemplo. » Sic seraphim dicitur purgare illum, quem purgat inferior angelus, accepta virtute et mandato a seraphim: « Sicut secundum nos summus sacerdos per suos ministros, aut sacerdotes purgans, aut illuminans, ipse dicitur purgare, et illuminare ordinibus per ipsum purgatis, proprias suas sacras operationes reponentibus in ipsum, » id est attribuentibus ei per se. Quod enim per illas operatur, per illas ei attribuitur. « Sic et propriam purgativam scientiam, [1128B] et virtutem, ipse purgationem theologi perficiens, angelus, in Deum quidem veluti causalem, deinde in ipsum seraphim tanquam primo agentem summum sacerdotem reponit. » Ita ergo angelus quod fecit, primum Deo, deinde seraphim attribuit, per quos fecit. « Veluti fortassis quis dixerit, » id est ut verbi gratia: « Si quis cum angelica reverentia, » id est sub persona angeli, quae est reverenda: « edocens, » prophetam « purgatum » esse a se, « diceret » ei: O Isaia, « purgationis perficiendae in te, » scilicet per me, « non ego sum principium, sed ante me principium est excelsum quidem, » id est Deus, qui est et « essentia, et Creator, et causalis » omnium et adducens adesse primas essentias; « et continens eas circa se collocatione, » id [1128C] est stabili firmitate; « et conservans eas inconversibiles, et casu carentes, » id est ne simul a se vertantur, et cadant; « et seipsum movens in primas participationis propriarum providarum operationum, » id est operationum, quas secundum providentiam facit; quia omne quod temporaliter facit, in aeterna providentia disposuit. Propria operatio Dei est, quando per semetipsum operatur sine mediante creatura, ex qua nimirum prima participatio venit; quia illi eum sine medio suscipiunt, qui ejus operationis primi effectus fiunt. Prima siquidem Dei operatio est, quando se movet a se; prima participatio, quando sese praebet per se. Et illa quidem altissima creatura est, ad quam est prima operatio, [1128D] et in qua est prima participatio per illam, deinde ad subsequentia descendens. Ad hunc modum subjectus angelus hoc quod fecit, superiori seraphim attribuit, a quo, ut hoc facere posset, accepit. « Hoc enim, » quod ab alio illud facere acceperit, ait « docens me haec manifestare, » vel significare « missionem ipsius seraphim. » Ille inquit, qui supradicta haec omnia apologiam praestans me docuit, ipse ait missionem seraphim significare hoc, quod scilicet illud, quod fecit ab illo utique facere acceperat, a quo venit. Idcirco convenienter ipse angelus prophetae dicere potest. « Ego purgationis, quam in te facio, principium non sum. Sed excelsum, et primum principium ante me est » Deus, qui est Creator et causa omnium. Deinde autem ipse « ornatus [1129A] praestantium essentiarum, » id est ordo summorum spirituum, qui est « post Deum sacerdos, et dux » divina tribuens, et ad Deum reducens: « a quo » ordine et « ego eruditus sum deiformiter purgare, » quemadmodum nunc in te facio. « Ipse » scilicet ordo « est purgans te per me, » propter hoc quia me purgare docuit: « per quem, » scilicet ordinem, ipsa causa et opifex totius purgationis (subauditur divinitas) « providas suas actiones producit ex occulto etiam in nos » extremos, scilicet angelos. Haec et his similia verba si angelus purgationem faciens ad prophetam diceret, inconveniens non esset: unde patet quod cum seraphim ad prophetam volare dicitur, et prophetam purgare dicitur, non inconvenienter intelligi potest quod haec operatio [1129B] per subjectum quidem angelum administrata est, sed superiori, a quo erat, attributa.

Sequitur: « Haec ille quidem docuit me: » verba sunt auctoris ad propositum redeuntis. Ille, inquit, qui apologiam mihi praestitit, docuit me haec supradicta omnia. « Ego autem, » o Timothee! « tibi trado » omnia a me sive dicta, sive approbata, sed ad utramque partem habentia. « Tuae autem intellectuali et discretivae scientiae, » id est discretioni: « concesserim alteram partem dictarum causarum absolvi » scilicet per te « dubitatione, » id est pro rata et indubitata haberi: « et eamdem honorari ante alteram tanquam habentem consequens, et rationabile, et aeque verum. » Hoc et tuae voluntati concedo, et discretioni, et scientiae, ut alteram partem sententiarum istarum, remota dubitatione, eligas, [1130A] et honores plusquam alteram tanquam veram et rationabilem. « Aut » si hoc non placet, concedo tibi « a teipso invenire, quod vere vero vicinius sit. Aut, » si adhuc illud non placet, concedo tibi « ab altero discere, Deo videlicet dante, » sive hoc, sive ullo alio modo agnoscas: « prius » tamen ipsam scientiam veritatis « recipientibus angelis » a Deo, et postea per angelos angelorum amicis sanctis viris nobis revelare, id est ad hoc recipientibus, ut nobis eam revelent. Aut sic. Et concedo tibi revelare nobis « per ejus magis amabilem contemplationem, » angelis, et angelorum amicis recipientibus prius scilicet ipsam scientiam veritatis. Verbum mirabile. Angeli a Deo accipiunt, et homines ab angelis; et ipsi rursum homines ab [1130B] angelis docti alios homines docent; et venit doctrina veritatis per alios in alios, et videntur multi esse magistri et doctores veritatis; et nemo tamen docetur, quia ab ejus contemplatione non illuminatur. Alii magistri adhibent ministerium; unus magister est, qui solus praestat sensum. Ille sine aliis docere potest; alii sine ipso non possunt. Tu mihi das verbum. Quid autem est verbum sine intelligentia? Per verbum quidem intelligentia venit. Sed ille intelligentiam in corde ponit, qui intus illuminat, non qui foris sonat. Unctio ejus docet nos de omnibus. Tu foris loqueris; sed intus non ungis. Propterea amabilis mihi quidem est tua eruditio. Sed magis amabilis est ejus contemplatio; quia et hoc, quod in tua eruditione amabile est, nonnisi ex ejus contemplatione est.

## TITULUS CAPITULI XIV. *Quid significat traditus angelicus numerus.*

## LITTERA.

[1129C]

*Quid significat angelicus numerus traditus. Et hoc autem dignum, ut existimo, intellectuali cognitione, quia eloquiorum de angelis traditio, « millies millia » esse ait, et « decem millia decies millies [n: (Dan. VII)]*, *secundum nos sublimissimos numerorum in seipsam revolvens, et multiplicans, et per hoc aperte significans innumerabiles coelestium essentiarum ordinationes. Multae enim sunt beatae militiae supermundalium intellectuum, infirmam et coarctatam superantes materialium secundum nos numerorum commensurationem, et a sola gnostica definitae supermundana, et coelesti intelligentia, et scientia, secundum ipsam ditissime eis donatam sanitatem divinae multae scientiae sapientifica omnium simul quae sunt superessentialiter [1129D] subsistentis principii, et causae substantificae, et continentis virtutis, et ambientis consummationis.*

## EXPOSITIO.

« Quid significat angelicus numerus traditus, » id est datus, vel definitus a Scripturis sanctis? Non solum, inquit, supradicta; sed et « hoc intellectuali cognitione dignum est, » quare scilicet certus et definitus numerus angelicis spiritibus attribuatur: [1130C] « quia traditio » divinorum « eloquiorum de angelis ait esse millies millia, et decies millies decem millia » angelorum, « revolvens sublimissimos numerorum secundum nos, » id est numeros qui secundum nos sublimissimi sunt. Revolvens dico in seipsam, hoc est, in pronuntiatione verborum, quae in ipsa continentur verba, revolvens in verba, et alia per alia multiplicans, sicut millia in millies et decem millia in decies millies per multiplicationem revolvuntur. Quod apertius dixisset revolvens numeros in seipsos, quamvis tamen hoc expressius dictum sit, quia non numeri, sed nomina numerorum per multiplicationem in se collocata revolvuntur. Si itaque traditio eloquiorum multitudinem coelestium spirituum signans, ait millies millia, et decies [1130D] millies decem millia esse angelorum, sublimissimos secundum nos numeros in se revolvens, vel inter se conferens, et alios per alios multiplicans. « Et per hoc aperte significans innumerabiles esse ordinationes coelestium essentiarum. » In eo enim quod maximos numeros posuit, patenter innuit, quod adhuc dicere debuisset, si amplius dicere potuisset. Sane sciendum quod hoc, quod ait millies millia, et decies millies decem millia, nostra translatio hoc modo [1131A] non continet; sed millia millium, et decies millies centena millia, quod tamen ad eamdem veritatem spectat. Ideo ergo infinitos significare volens, maximos numeros finitos posuit, quia « multae sunt beatae militiae, » id est beatae multitudines Deo militantes, « supermundalium intellectuum, superantes infirmam et coarctatam commensurationem materialium numerorum secundum nos, et definitae a sola gnostica, id est cognitiva scientia; vel cognitione scilicet divina, quae omnia cognoscit, et sola novit numerum illarum supernarum virtutum, et sola discernit eas, et plene cognoscit secundum ipsam sanitatem, id est puritatem, vel integritatem simplicis et incorruptibilis naturae earum, donatam eis ditissime et abundantissime supermundana, et [1131B] coelesti sapientifica intelligentia et scientia divinae, et multae scientiae principii omnium quae sunt superessentialiter et existentis, et causae substantificae omnium et virtutis continentis omnia, et consummationis ambientis omnia. » Sensus talis est, quia sola Dei sapientia, quae est gnostica, id est cognitiva omnium, definite et perfecte cognoscit numerum [1132A] illarum essentiarum coelestium in illa puritate et integritate, in qua eas creavit et formavit. Quae scilicet scientia et coelestis est, et divina, et multa. Coelestis, per puritatem; divina, per veritatem; multa, per incomprehensibilitatem. Et cum talis sit in se, sapientifica etiam est in opere suo, sapienter faciens omnia, nihilque reprehensione dignum constituens. Et ista talis sapientia, per quam omnia creata sunt, et omnia cognoscuntur, ipsa est illius, qui est principium omnium, quae sunt (quia ab ipso sunt omnia) superessentialiter subsistens per se, videlicet perfectus, et nullo indigens; et qui est causa substantifica omnium, quia omnia subsistere facit, ut sint; et est virtus continens omnia, ut maneant in eo quod sunt; et est consummatio [1132B] ambiens omnia ne diffluant, aut decidant ab eo, quod sic sint. Non ergo mirum est, si illi spiritus quorum numerus nobis incomprehensibilis est, per tantam et tanti scientiam discerni possunt: per quam omnia, quando non erant, creata sunt; et nunc ne ad nihilum facta revertantur, in ipsa subsistunt.

## LIBER DECIMUS.

## TITULUS CAPITULI XV. *Quae sunt formativae angelicarum virtutum imagines, et quae deinde, id est et reliqua?*

## LITTERA.

[1131C]

## LITTERA. (cont.)

*Fer, age, quod restat dicamus, remittentes nostrum, si videtur, intellectualem oculum circa sublimes contemplationes angelico vigore intentum, ad dividuam et multipertitam latitudinem multiformis angelicarum specificationum varietatis, descendentes iterum ipsis, tanquam inconsequentibus in simplicitatem coelestium animorum analytice reflexis. Unum autem sit tibi praecognitum, quomodo sacrae formatarum imaginum discretiones, easdem aliquando coelestium essentiarum dispositiones ordinantes significant, et iterum ordinatas, et novissimas ordinantes, ordinatasque primas, et easdem, ut dictum est, primas, et medias, et ultimas habentes virtutes, nulla inordinata ratione introducta, secundum hujusmodi reserationum modum. [1131D] Siquidem enim ordinari quasdam a prioribus diceremus, deinde earumdem ordinantes priores, et iterum ordinantes ultimarum, ordinari ab ipsis illis ordinatis, vere inordinatione et confusione multa commista esset res interposita. Si vero easdem et ordinare, et ordinari dicimus, non autem earumdem, aut ab eisdem, sed eas singulas ordinari quidem a prioribus, ordinari autem novissimas: non inconsequenter fortassis quis dixerit in eloquiis sacrefactas formas, easdem aliquando posse primis, et mediis, et ultimis virtutibus pulchre et vere circumdari. Et sursum igitur conversibiliter extendi, et erga semetipsas firmiter convolvi propriarum existentes custoditivae virtutum, [1132C] et erga venientia sociabili processione provide eas in participatione virtutis esse, omnibus non falso coadunabit coelestibus essentiis, etsi aliis quidem superposite et universaliter, ut saepe dictum est, aliis vero particulariter et subjecte. Inchoandum autem ratione, et quaerendum in prima formarum discretione, ob quam causam theologia fere ultra omnes invenitur honorans ignitam sacram descriptionem. Invenies ergo eam non solum rotas igneas conformantem, sed et animalia ignita, et viros quasi ignem fulgurantes, et circa eas coelestes essentias cumulos carbonum ignis circumponentem, et flumina immensurabili sonitu igne flagrantia [n: (Ezech. I; Dan. VII; IV Reg. II)]*. *Sed et thronos ait igneos esse, et ipsos excelsissimos seraphim coelitus ardentes ex cognominatione significare: et [1132D] ignis proprietatem et operationem ipsis distribuit, et omnino sursum, deorsumque ignitam honorat selectim formarum facturam. Ergo igneum significare censeo coelestium animorum deiformissimum. Ipsi enim sancti theologi [n: (Hebr. X)] superessentialem et informem essentiam in igne saepe describunt, tanquam habente multas divinae, si fas est dicere, proprietatis, quantum in invisibilibus imagines. Ignis enim sensibilis est sic quidem dicendum, in omnibus et per omnia clare venit, et removetur ab omnibus; lucidus simul, et quasi occultus; incognitus ipse per ipsum non accumbente materia, in qua propriam manifestat actionem, immensurabilisque et invisibilis, per seipsum [1133A] potens simul omnium, et quaecunque in eis fiunt ad actionem propriam mobilis, tradens seipsum omnibus quoquo modo approximantibus, renovativus, naturae custodia, illuminativus circumvelatis splendoribus, incomprehensibilis, clarus, discretus, resiliens, sursum ferens, acute means, excelsus, non recepturus contumeliam minorationis, semper motus per seipsum motus, movens alterum, comprehendens, incomprehensus, non indigens alterius, latenter crescens a seipso, et ad susceptas materias manifestans suimet magnitudinem, activus, potens, simul omnibus praesens invisibiliter, neglectus non esse putatur, attritur autem, sicut quadam vindicta, connaturaliter et proprie subito relucet, et iterum incomprehensibiliter impalpabilis, non minutus, in omnibus ditissimis suimet [1133B] traditionibus. Et alias multas fortassis quis inveniet ignis proprietates pulchras, ut insensibilibus imaginibus, divinae operationis. Hoc ergo scientes theosophi, coelestes essentias ex igne conformant, significantes earum deiforme et, quantum possibile, Dei imitabile. Sed et humaniformes ipsas describunt propter intellectuale, et sursum habendo intuitivas virtutes, et figurae rectum et luculentum, et secundum naturam principale et regale, et secundum sensum minimum quidem quantum ad reliquas irrationabilium animalium virtutes. Omnium vero potens, secundum intellectus magnitudinem virtute, et secundum rationabilem scientiam continuitate, et secundum naturam animae liberum et potentissimum. Est autem et per singula, ut existimo, corporalis nostrae multiplicis [1133C] partitionis invenire coelestes virtutes, dicentes conspectivas quidem significare virtutes, ipsum ad divina luminaria clarissimum respectum, et iterum teneram et liquidam et non repercussam, sed acute mobilem, et puram, et plenam impassibiliter divinarum susceptionem illuminationum. Olfactuum vero discretivas virtutes illud super intellectum suave olentis distributionis, quantum possibile receptivum, et eorum, quae sic non sunt, per scientiam discretivum, et omnino refugitivum. Aurium vero virtutes, illud particeps et gnosticum divinae inspirationis susceptivum. Gustativas autem invisibilium escarum plenitudinem, et divinarum, et alentium promotuum susceptivum. Tactivas vero convenientis, aut nocentis per scientiam discretivum. Palpebras deinde, [1133D] et supercilia divinarum visionum, et intelligentiae custoditivum. Juvenilem vero et adultam aetatem, illud innovantis semper vitalis virtutis. Dentes autem divisivum inditae nutrientis perfectionis. Unaquaeque enim essentia intellectualis, donatam sibi a diviniore uniformem intelligentiam provida virtute dividit, et multiplicat ad inferioris ductricem analogiam. Humeros autem, et brachia, et item manus, factivum, et operativum, et activum. Cor vero symbolum esse deiformis vitae propriam vitalem virtutem deiformiter in ea, quae praeintellecta sunt seminantis. Pectora iterum significare durum et custoditivum, ut a supposito corde vivificae distributionis; dorsa vero continuum simul cunctarum fertilium virtutum. Pedes autem [1134A] mobile, et velox, et cursile in divina semper euntis motionis, propter quod et pennatos theologia sanctorum intellectuum figuravit pedes [n: (Ezech. I)]*. *Pennatum namque significat anagogicam velocitatem, et coeleste sursum versus itineris activum et ab omni humili per sursum ferens remotum. Ipsa vero pennarum levitas nihil terrenum, sed totum munde, et sine gravitate in excelsum ascendens. Nudum quoque, et discalceatum [n: (Gen. XVIII, XIX)]*, *et absolutum, et demissum, et immensurabile, et purum, ad eorum, quae extra sunt, appositione, et ad simplicitatem divinam quantum possibile, assimilativum. Sed quoniam iterum simpla, et multum varia sophia, et nudos vestit, et vasa quaedam dat ipsis circumferre age animorum coelestium sacros amictus, et organa, secundum quod [1134B] nobis possibile, aperiamus. Claram quidem enim vestem igneamque [n: (Apoc. I)]*, *significare existimo deiforme, juxta ignis imaginem et luculentum, propter in coelo quietes, ubi lumen est omnino invisibile dicendum, aut intellectualiter illuminans, aut intellectualiter illuminatum. Sacerdotalem vero vestem ad divina et mystica speculamina ductivum, et totius vitae votum. Zonas quoque fecundarum ipsarum custoditivum virtutum, et congregantem eas habitum in seipsum unite converti, et circulariter cum facilitate casu carente a naturae similitudine circa seipsum circumferri. Virgas etiam regale ac principale, rectaque omnia definiens. Tela vero, et secures dissimilitudinum separativum, et discernentium virtutum acumen et efficax et actuosum. Geometrica et tectonica vasa, [1134C] fundativum, et aedificativum, et perfectivum, et quaecunque alia reducentis et convertentis sunt secundorum providentiae. Est autem quando et in nos divinorum judiciorum sunt symbola, illa quae acta sunt a sanctis angelis, organa; aliis quidem declarantibus corrigentem disciplinam, aut punientem justitiam; aliis vero de angustia libertatem, aut disciplinae finem, aut prioris beneficentiae resumptionem, aut appositionem aliorum bonorum, parvorum aut magnorum, sensibilium aut invisibilium [n: (Ezech. X; Judic. VI; II Machab. V; Ezech. XXXI; Apoc. III; Zach. VIII)]*. *Et omnino forsan non dubitaret perspicax animus pulchre invisibilibus adunare visibilia. Ipsos etiam ventos nominari, velocitatem eorum significat, et in omnes fere absque mora pervenientem effectum, [1134D] et desursum in ea, quae deorsum ad sursumque ea, quae deorsum sunt, transvectivum motum, erigentemque secunda ad superiorem celsitudinem, moventemque prima ad communicativam, et providam minorum processionem [n: (Gen. XXVIII; Joan. I)]*. *Dicet autem fortassis quis, aerei spiritus ventosam cognominationem, et deiforme coelestium significare: habet enim et hoc operationis divinae imaginem et formam, ut in symbolica theologia per tetrasticam dijudicationem per plura demonstratur, secundum naturae motivam, et gignentem, et velocem, et potentem capacitatem, et ignotum nobis, et invisibile latibulum moventium principiorum et consummationum. « Nescis enim, inquit, unde venit, et quo vadit (Joan. III [1135A] Isai. V)*. » *Sed et nubis ipsis speciem theologia circumformat, significans per hoc sacros intellectus occulti quidem luminis supermundane superrepletos, primam manifestationem pompose accipientes, et ipsam copiose in ea, quae sunt secunda, lucide et proportionaliter distribuentes: et quia genitale eis, et vivificum, et activum, et perfectivum subsistit juxta intellectualem imbrium conceptionem, excipientem sinum humidis pluviis in vitales partus evocantem. Ipsa etiam aeris, et electri, et lapidum multicolorum speciem theologia coelestibus essentiis circumponit [n: (Isai. XXXV; Apoc. I; Dan. II)]*. *Electrum quidem quasi auriforme, simul et argenteum significat, imputribilem ut in auro, et largum, et non minutum, et incontaminatum splendorem, et apertam, ut in argento, [1135B] et luciformem et coelestem claritatem. In aere autem secundum traditas rationes aut igneum aut auriforme attribuendum. Lapidum vero multicolores species significare existimandum aut quasi albas, luciforme, aut quasi rubeas, auriforme, aut quasi pallidas, juvenile et novum; et per singulas species invenies anagogicam typicarum imaginum dijudicationem. Sed quoniam quidem haec secundum virtutem nostram a nobis sufficienter dicta esse arbitror, transeundum in sanctam reserationem coelestium animorum sacrefiguratae bestialis formationis. Leonem enim significare censendum, principale, et robustum, et indomitum. et abditum ineffabilis divinitatis, ut virtus, assimilativum intellectualium vestigiorum circumvelamine et mystice fortassis pomposo amictu, secundum divinam [1135C] illuminationem in semet restituto itinere. Ipsam vero bovis, firmum et novum, et intellectuales sulcos revocans [renovans] in susceptionem coelestium, et gignentium imbrium, et custoditivum, et fortissimum. Ipsam dehinc aquilae, regale, et altiferum, et citivolum, et ad potentificum alimentum acutum, et sobrium, et agile, et bene machinatum, et ad copiosum et multolucentem radium divini solis desiderio in speculativarum virtutum sanis obtutibus immediate, recte et inflexibiliter contemplativum. Illam vero equorum, obediens, et frenabile; et album quidem, vere lucidum, et quasi maxime divini luminis cognatissimum. Eorum autem, qui nigri sunt, abditum; rubrum vero igneum, et activum; commistorum quoque ex albo et nigro, cum perfectiva virtute extremorum [1135D] conjunctivum, et prima secundis, et secunda primis conversibiliter ac provide connectens. Sed si non sermonis terminaremus commensurationem, et per partes dictorum animalium proprietates, et omnes corporales eorum conformationes adunassemus fortassis non incongrue coelestibus virtutibus secundum dissimile similitudines. Furibundum quidem in ipsorum intellectualem fortitudinem, cujus novissima furor est imago; ipsam vero iterum concupiscentiam in amorem divinum: et, ut summatim dicendum, simul omnes irrationabilium animalium, et sensus, et multiplices partes in immateriales coelestium essentiae intelligentias, et uniformes virtutes reducentes. Sufficiunt autem sapientibus non solum haec ipsa, sed unius significativae [1136A] imaginis dijudicatio in proximarum simili modo declarationem. Inspiciendumque et hoc, fluvios dictos fuisse et rotas et currus connexos coelestibus essentiis [n: (Dan. VII; Ezech. I, X)]*. *Igneam enim quidem flumina significant divinos promotus copiosam ipsis, et non deficientem affluentiam donantes, et vivifica nutrientes fecunditate. Currus autem conjunctivam similitudinum societatem [n: (IV Reg. I; Ezech. I)]*, *Rotae autem pennatae quidem cum sint, in ea, quae ante conspectum sunt, inconversibiliter euntes per rectam, et justam viam exeuntis operationis earum virtutem in eamdem sine flexu, et recte sectam viam simul omnium earum intellectuali rotatu supermundane directo. Est autem et per aliam anagogen dijudicare intellectualium rotarum imaginariam descriptionem. Vocitatum est enim [1136B] eis, ut ait theologus, gel, gel, gel [n: (Ezech. X)]*. *Significat autem hoc, juxta Hebraicam vocem, revolutiones et revelationes. Igneae siquidem et deiformes rotae, revolutiones quidem habent circa idipsum optimum semper mobili motu; revelationes vero secretorum manifestatione, et subjectorum circumreductione, et altarum illuminationum, in ea, quae subjecta sunt, deductiva perfectione. Reliquus vero nobis in explanationem de gaudio coelestium dispositionum sermo. Etenim acceptrices omnino non sunt ejus, quae secundum nos est, passibilis delectationis. Congaudere autem Deo [n: (Luc. XVI)] dicuntur perditorum inventione juxta deiformem epulationem et in providentia, et in salute in Deum redeuntium deiformitatem, et incorruptionis laetitiam, et illam beneficentiam ineffabilem, [1136C] in cujus participatione saepe facti sunt et viri sancti per deificos divinarum illuminationum desuper adventus. Tanta a me de sanctis formationibus dicta sunt, diligenti quidem earum manifestatione deficientia; perfecta autem, ut existimo, ad non humiliter nos remanendum in figurativis phantasiis. Si autem et hoc dixeris, quomodo non omnium deinde angelicarum in eloquiis virtutum, aut operationum, aut imaginum fecerimus mentionem, respondemus verum quod, quarum quidem supermundanam scientiam ignoravimus, in ipsis nos alterum luciductorem docentem desideramus [n: (Job XII)]*. *Quaedam autem tanquam dictis aeque potentia praetermisimus, commensurationi sermonis providentes, et supra nos secretum silentio honorificantes.*

## EXPOSITIO.

[1136D]

Decimi quinti et ultimi capitis titulus est: Quae sunt formativae angelicarum virtutum imagines, et quae deinde, id est et reliqua? Hactenus enim tractavit de invisibilibus proprietatibus angelorum: quae sunt scilicet dona illa virtutum, invisibiles operationes in eis. Nunc consequenter de visibilibus formationibus tractare incipit: quas sacrum eloquium ipsis secundum corporalium rerum imagines et similitudines mystica significatione attribuit. Fer, age, dic, eia, vox hortantis est vel seipsum, vel etiam Timotheum, ad quem loquitur: « Eia dicamus, quod restat. » Quid est quod restat? Hoc scilicet ut nos, « si ita videtur, » tibi remittamus, vel relaxemus [1137A] « nostrum intellectualem oculum, » hactenus « circa sublimes contemplationes de angelico vigore » inspiciendo habitas « intentum; » et reflexo oculo descendamus « ad dividuam, et multipertitam latitudinem multiformis varietatis angelicarum specificationum, » hoc est, ad multiformem varietatem, vel multarum formarum varietatem, quae est in specificationibus, vel formationibus angelicis: in qua varietate, quia ampla multitudo est, vel multa amplitudo, pro simplicitate dividuum, et pro unitate invenitur multipertitum. Sic ergo dicamus, quod restat, remittentes oculum nostrum ab invisibilibus, et descendentes ad visibilia. « Iterum in ipsis, » scilicet descendentes, et considerationem figentes, et tamen « reflexit » iterum, sive reductis ipsis imaginibus [1137B] « analytice, » id est resolutorie, « in simplicitatem animorum coelestium: tanquam » per se « in consequentibus, » id est inconvenientibus. Et est sensus: nos descendentes per contemplationem de invisibilibus, ad visibilia et in ipsis scilicet visibilibus considerationem figentes, iterum ipsa ad simplicitatem invisibilium reflectamus, resolvendo et exponendo, sive ostendendo quomodo per id quod visibile cernitur, id, quod videri non potest, significetur. Alioquin visibilis formatio inconsequens, et inconveniens esset, si in illa simplici natura hoc per veritatem essentiae esse crederetur, quod ei secundum varias rerum corporalium species in significatione multiplex attribuitur. Sicut ergo descendimus [1137C] simplices naturas visibilibus repraesentando, sic ascendimus, et quasi resolutorie ad divinam considerationem nos reflectimus, quando easdem formas spiritaliter exponendo mystice intelligendas praedicamus. Descendimus, quando simplicitati coelestium naturarum multiplicitatem corporalium formationum per significationem aptamus: ascendimus, quando eamdem multiplicitatem visibilium figurationum ad intelligentiam simplicis veritatis exponendo resolvimus.

Sequitur: « Unum autem, etc. » O Timothee, priusquam de visibilibus formationibus angelorum tractemus, unum sit tibi praecognitum, ut primum illud cognoscas. Quid est illud? hoc scilicet ut cognoscas. « Quomodo sacrae discretiones formatarum [1137D] imaginum, » id est quomodo sacrae Scripturae discretae in imaginibus, quas formant de ipsis, angelis, « significant, et repraesentant easdem dispositiones, » id est ordines « coelestium essentiarum. » Aliquando inferiores ut « ordinantes, et iterum » easdem ut « ordinatas » a superioribus: in quo significant quodammodo eas medias esse, et inferiores habere quos ordinent, et superiores a quibus ordinentur. « Et rursum aliquando significant etiam novissimas dispositiones ut ordinantes, et primas ut ordinatas: » quod tamen mirum videtur, cum nec illae inferiores habeant quos ordinent, nec istae superiores a quibus ordinentur. In quo tamen datur intelligi, quod supremae etsi alios supra se non habent angelos, a quibus ordinentur, habent tamen Deum, a quo ordinantur [1138A] et sanctificantur. Et novissimae iterum, etsi non habent angelos sub se quos ordinent, habent tamen homines, qui ordinantur, et disponuntur, et sanctificantur ab ipsis. Vel certe in hoc, quod supremi ordinati, et novissimi ordinantes introducuntur, significatur, quod in ipsis alii ab aliis differunt: et sunt in superioribus quidam inferiores, qui ab aliis tamen in eodem ordine constitutis ad aliquid ordinentur et inferioribus quidam superiores, qui alios in eodem ordine collocatos ad aliquid ordinent. Et hoc est quod sequitur: Quia ipsa eloquia significant easdem scilicet dispositiones, primas, et medias, et ultimas habentes virtutes. Sicut jam superius dictum est, unamquamque dispositionem habere in personis, et unamquamque personam in [1138B] proprietatibus, ita, inquit, discretiones formationum sacrarum repraesentant primos, et medios, et ultimos spiritus in eodem ordine, et primas, et medias, et ultimas virtutes in eadem persona; « nulla » tamen « in hoc inordinata ratione introducta, secundum modum hujusmodi reserationum, » id est expositionum. Si enim hoc modo intelligitur sicut nos superius exposuimus, nihil inconvenientis est in hac repraesentatione. Et bene dico in hac repraesentatione, qua iidem et ordinantes et ordinati introducuntur, nullam inconvenientiam esse, quia confusio, sive transpositio nulla rectae dispositionis est ibi, cum ab aliis ordinati, et alios ordinantes introducantur. Si vero respectu eorumdem ordinantes et [1138C] ordinati dicerentur, inconveniens esset, hoc est, quod dicit: « Si quidem diceremus quasdam, » subaudi dispositiones, utpote medias, « ordinari a prioribus; » et deinde ipsas « priores ordinantes » sive ordinatrices « earumdem » scilicet mediarum, « et iterum » per eas medias « ordinantes » sive ordinatrices « ultimarum: » si, inquit, illas priores ordinatrices mediarum, et ultimarum converso ordine « ordinari diceremus ab ipsis illis ordinatis: vere res interposita esset commista inordinatione, et confusione multa; » quia ordinatum non esset aliquos ordinari ab iis, quos ordinant. « Si vero easdem, » diverso respectu, « ordinare et ordinari dicimus; non tamen earumdem » ordinatrices, a quibus ordinantur, « aut ab eisdem ordinari, » quas [1138D] ordinant; « sed eas singulas, » id est discretas sine confusione reciprocationis permanentes « ordinari quidem a prioribus, ordinare autem novissimas, » nullum inconveniens est. Et secundum hoc fortassis « non inconsequenter, » id est non inconvenienter « aliquis dixerit sacrefactas formas, quae sunt in eloquiis, aliquando posse et pulchre, et vere, » id est convenienter et veraciter « circumdari, » id est aptari « easdem et primis, et mediis, et ultimis virtutibus. »

Sequitur: « Et sursum igitur, etc. » Ac si diceret: Quandoquidem aliquis veraciter dicere potest easdem formas convenienter aptari primis, et mediis, et ultimis virtutibus. Igitur ipse ille, qui hoc dixerit, non falso coadunabit, id est communiter [1139A] attribuet omnibus coelestibus essentiis: et sursum extendi per dilectionem Dei, et in seipsis firmari per custodiam sui et sub se progredi per dilectionem proximi, hoc est, quod dicit: « Sursum conversibiliter [ *convertibiliter* ] extendi, » scilicet per dilectionem Dei, « et erga seipsas firmiter convolvi, » id est constringi et ambiri: constringi, ne bonum effluat; ambiri, ne malum influat. In quo scilicet quia convolvuntur erga seipsas, « custoditivae existunt propriarum virtutum, » id est proprias virtutes custodiunt. Hoc itaque, id est sursum extendi, et in se convolvi, « et esse eas in participatione virtutis, » subaudit paratas, « provide, » hoc est, intente sive devote « erga venientia consociabili processione. » Haec ergo tria communiter aliquis attribuet vere [1139B] omnibus « essentiis coelestibus, » scilicet quod sursum extenduntur per dilectionem Dei, et quod erga se convolvuntur per custodiam sui, et quod paratae sunt provide, et intente, et devote ad participandam virtutem suam erga venientia ad se per amorem socialem procedentes, et ultro se offerentes ad dilectionem socialem. Haec igitur omnia communiter omnibus attribui possunt: « Etsi, » id est quamvis, « aliis quidem superposite et universaliter, » id est excellenter et plene conveniant, ut « saepe jam dictum est; aliis vero particulariter et subjecte. »

Sequitur: « Inchoandum autem ratione, » etc. Ac si diceret: Quandoquidem de formationibus angelicis tractandum est, ergo in primis inchoandum [1139C] est ratione, id est rationabiliter « et quaerendum in prima, » ipsarum « formarum discretione, » quare « theologia invenitur honorans ignitam sacram descriptionem, » id est, formationem, in qua ignis species ad significationem proponitur, « fere ultra omnes alias descriptiones. » Raro enim invenitur aliqua species visibilis (si tamen invenitur) excellentiorem habens ad invisibilia demonstrationem. « Invenies ergo eam, » scilicet theologiam « non solum rotas igneas formantem » ipsorum invisibilium significationi, « sed et animalia ignita, et viros quasi ignem fulgurantes; » et invenies etiam ipsam theologiam « circumponentem cumulos carbonum ignis circa eas coelestes essentias, » et describentem etiam « flumina igne flagrantia cum immensurabili [1139D] sonitu. » Et non solum hoc: « Sed etiam thronos igneos ait, » scilicet ipsa theologia, in coelo esse; et ait etiam « ipsos excelsissimos seraphim ex cognominatione significare coelitus ardentes, et distribuit » etiam « ipsis » seraphim « ignis proprietatem et operationem. Et, » ut breviter dicam, « omnino sursum, et deorsum, ubique honorat selectim, » id est specialiter ignitam facturam formarum.

Sequitur: « Ergo igneum, » etc. Ac si diceret: Quandoquidem theologia in tantum veneratur igneam formationem: « Ergo, » judico ego « igneum significare deiformissimum coelestium animorum, » id est illam virtutem, quae est in illis deiformissima. Et merito, quia « ipsi theologi saepe describunt in [1140A] igne, » id est in ignis specie, et figura etiam ipsam « superessentialem, et informem essentiam » divinitatis: quae et superessentialis est per majestatem, et informis per incomprehensibilitatem. Describunt dico in igne « tanquam habente multas imagines divinae proprietatis, quantum in » rebus « visibilibus » haberi potest imago divinae proprietatis. Ita tamen dico « si fas est dicere, » quod divina proprietas aliquam similitudinem habeat, quae valde incomprehensibilis est et invisibilis.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Ignis enim, » etc. Nunc ingreditur proprietates ignis describere, in quibus ejus naturam, et qualitatem, et potentiam mirabilem ostendit, atque significationem excellentem demonstrat. « Ignis enim, » inquit, « sensibilis est. Sic quidem [1140B] dicendum est, » scilicet quod sit sensibilis. Hoc adjungit idcirco: Quia aliquibus fortassis videri poterat, propterea quod natura ignis nonnisi in subjecta materia sensu percipitur, ignem omnino corpus non esse. Dicit ergo, quod ignis vere sensibilis est, et corpus quamvis longe excellentius et subtilius omnibus aliis rebus corporalibus, et naturae spirituali proximum, ac per hoc longe dissimilius cunctis aliis effectum suum demonstrans. « Ignis enim in omnibus, et per omnia clare venit, et » tamen « removetur ab omnibus. » Prope est per praesentiam; longe est per excellentiam. In omnibus est quia visibilem se praestat per illuminationem, et longe est ab omnibus; quia perceptibilem se non praebet per discretam substantiae suae perceptionem. [1140C] Hoc est, quod sequitur: Et « lucidus simul est, et quasi occultus. » Lucidus enim est, quia in subjecta materia percipitur; occultus, quia in sua essentia corporaliter non videtur. « Incognitus » est « ipse per seipsum, non accumbente materia; » quia sine subjecta materia, ut dictum est, percipi non potest: « in qua » videlicet materia « propriam manifestat actionem. » Ex quo quodammodo magis incorporeus esse videtur; quia praeter subjectam materiam ad sensum non venit. Unde videtur ignis quodammodo medius esse inter invisibilia et visibilia? inquantum illis approximat incorporeus, et corporeus inquantum his appropinquat. Est etiam immensurabilis, quia in infinitum [1140D] excrescit, et quantum materia subjecta sufficit, ipse non deficit, et est invisibilis, quia in sua pura substantia extra subjectam materiam non videtur. Est etiam « per seipsum potens simul omnium, » scilicet rerum, « et potens » etiam « omnium, quaecunque in eis » videlicet rebus « fiunt ad actionem propriam. In igne siquidem primus motus corporeus est, qui omnia alia movet, et ipse ab alio non movetur. Propterea quidquid in omnibus agitur, non ipsorum proprium est, in quibus fit, sed ipsius potius, per quem fit.

Sequitur: « Mobilis tradens seipsum omnibus quoquo modo proximantibus. » Quia enim per se movetur proprio motu, diffundit se in omnia, unumquodque movens secundum quod ei approximat, [1141A] id est secundum quod plus vel minus mobile invenitur. Est etiam « renovativus » omnium, quia renovat veterascentia, ne omnino deficiant, et in nihilum eant. Videmus enim per singulos annos quomodo ignis naturam innovat, quando ea quae hiemali algore senuerant, verno calore calefacta reviviscunt. In hoc ergo ipse ignis « custodia » est « naturae; » quia naturam custodit; ne omnino esse desinat, si semper defectum pateretur, et nunquam repararetur. Est etiam « illuminativus, » quia illuminat omnia, « circumvelatis splendoribus. » Splendores siquidem ejus ad illuminationem foris emicant, sed circumvelantur quando rursum se ad secretum naturae suae reducti occultant. Propterea ergo est « incomprehensibilis, » quia foris quidem [1141B] effusus sensus percipitur, sed introrsum subductus non comprehenditur. Est etiam « clarus, » manifeste apparens, et « discretus » diversa distinguens. Et est « resiliens, » quia deorsum pascitur, et sursum movetur. Inferiora ardore apprehendens, sed ab ipsius levitate propria ad alta resiliens.

Propterea sequitur: « Sursum ferens, » quia pondere carons summa petit, « et acute means, » quia propria virtutis motu cuncta penetrat, « et excelsus » quia supereminet universis; quia quidquid corporeum praeter ipsum est, natura sub ipso est: « Non recepturus contumeliam minorationis; » quia, sicut cum effunditur non augetur, si cum recipitur non minoratur, neque, in eo [1141C] quod augmentum accipere videtur capiens gloriam, neque, in eo quod minorari putatur passus contumeliam, quia quod est in se semper totus est. Est etiam « semper motus, » id est habens motum, et est « per seipsum motus, » quia motus, quem habet, ab alio non est; et in eo quod se movet, alia omnia motum habentia movet; et ideo est « movens alterum » et est « comprehendens » ipse « incomprehensus. » Omnem enim materiam virtute propria commutans utendo, et consumendo in se trahit, et a nullo corpore tenetur, cum consumpto eo, quod exurit, in semetipsum revertitur. Est igitur « non indigens alterius, » quia per subjectam materiam, in qua ardet, non tam tenetur, ut sit, quam tenetur, ut ibi sit; et si crescere videatur ex [1141D] ipsa, non accipit ex ipsa incrementi substantiam, quamvis ex ipsa crescendi in ipsa causam sumat, quia non fit major in se, sed in ipsa magis. Idcirco ait, quod est « latenter crescens a seipso, » quia quantum ad manifestum ab ipsa subjecta materia crescere videtur; sed rei veritate a seipso crescit, non ut in se major sit, sed ut in ipsa materia magis sit: propterea incrementum quidem a seipso accipit, cum crescere videtur in res subjectas « manifestans tantummodo suimet magnitudinem ad illas materias, » in quibus est, hoc est, ita crescit in materia, quam suscipit, id est apprehendit, ut in ea quidem major appareat, sed tamen in semetipso major non sit. Non enim magnitudinem ibi [1142A] accipit, sed ostendit, manifestans ibi aliquando, quod in se habet semper. Est etiam « activus, » et « potens, » quia potenter agit, atque movetur, cuncta obstantia destruens; et est « simul omnibus praesens invisibiliter. » In quibusdam enim rebus videtur tantummodo, sed omnibus invisibiliter praesens habetur: quod apparet ex eo quod aliquando offensione et concursu corporum sine attritione inde etiam excutitur ubi non esse videbatur. « Neglectus » quidem, et non motus, sive quietus permanens, « non esse putatur; attritu autem » sive attritione, provocatus, et commotus « quasi quadam vindicta subito relucet » exsiliens, et in ea quae corripuerit desaeviens: quod tamen « connaturaliter et proprie, » id est ex propria virtute et potentia facit. [1142B] « Et iterum incomprehensibiliter impalpabilis, » cum relabitur, a sensu incomprehensibilis manet: « non minutus » exstinctione, sicut nec auctus accensione. Quod totum facit « in omnibus » rebus, « ditissimis suimet traditionibus; » quia quidquid ex se rebus subjectis ad aliquam virtutem tradit, in se minus non habet, semper plenus persistens. Istas igitur ignis proprietates enumeravi, et fortassis « multas alias inveniet quis ignis proprietates, pulchras » scilicet similitudines « divinae operationis: ut, » hoc est, sicut « in sensibilibus imaginibus, » scilicet similitudo illius esse potest. Et ideo « theosophi, hoc scientes, » id est tantam excellentiam ignis « conformant, » vel figurant « coelestes essentias ex igne: significantes » per hoc « deiforme earum, [1142C] et Dei imitabile, » quod in eis est « quantum possibile » est haberi. Et non solum ex igne conformant eas, « sed etiam describunt eas humaniformes, » id est in humana forma, « propter intellectuale, » vel rationale eorum, id est rationalitatem eorum, sicut homo solus inter omnia visibilia rationalis invenitur. Similiter in humana forma describunt eas, propter « intuitivas, » id est contemplativas « virtutes » eorum, quas habent sursum habendo sese, sicut homo solus inter omnia animantia erectum habet vultum in superna: « et » describunt etiam eas in humana forma propter ipsius « figurae » humanae « rectum, » id est rectitudinem, quia erecta est statura humana, non prona sicut aliorum [1142D] animantium; « et » propter « luculentum, » id est clarum et evidens, sine insigne ipsius figurae humanae; quia ex ipsa erectione sua magis evidentem praestat, et venustiorem aspectum; « et » propter « principale, et regale, » quod ipsi homini datum est « secundum naturam, » ut principetur et dominetur caeteris creaturis; et propter « minimum secundum sensum quantum ad reliquas virtutes irrationalium animalium, » id est quia homo minus in sensu corporali viget, quam caetera animantia: quae in vi sentiendi majorem ipso virtutem acceperunt. Propter minimum quidem in sensu: et propter Omnipotens in virtute, vel propter « potens » omni virtute « secundum intellectus magnitudinem et secundum rationalem scientiam continuitate » permanentem, [1143A] « et propter liberum, et potentissimum » quod in eo est « secundum naturam animae. » Propter hoc enim in forma humana angelus describitur; quia homo quanto minus sensu viget, ubi a bestiis superatur, tanto potentior est ratione, et intelligentia, et libertate naturalis arbitrii, ubi angelis assimilatur.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

« Est autem, » etc. Ac si diceret: Non solum propter haec, quae dixi, convenienter humana forma angelis per significationem aptatur, sed etiam « est, » hoc est, contingit « invenire coelestes virtutes per singula nostrae corporalis multiplicis partitionis. » In singulis enim partibus humani corporis per mysticam significationem inveniri possunt spirituales virtutes; quia omnia, quae visibiliter facta sunt, aliquam [1143B] ad invisibilia habent significationem. Ita possunt recte considerantes ex visibilibus invisibilia perpendere. Unde contingit id invenire, « dicentes, » id est eos qui dicunt « ipsum clarissimum respectum, » qui homini datus est « ad divina luminaria, » utpote solem, et lunam, et stellas « significare conspectivas virtutes, » id est contemplativas, quae sunt in rationabilibus. Similiter dicentes adhuc ipsum respectum exterioris intuitus significare « susceptionem » quamdam « divinarum illuminationum, teneram, » id est facile sentientem et liquidam, id est clare perspicientem, « et non repercussam, » id est efficaciter comprehendentem, « sed acute mobilem, » quia non repercussam; « puram, » quia liquidam; « plenam impassibiliter, » quia teneram. [1143C] Ita quidem de visu corporali dicentes: « Olfactum vero, » corporalium « discretivas virtutes, » dicentes significare « illud receptivum distributionis, » sive donationis, sive effusionis gratiae spiritualis « suave olentis super intellectum. » Receptivum dico, quantum possibile est esse receptivum; « et eorum quae sic non sunt, » id est eorum quae non suaviter olent; « discretivum per scientiam, et omnino refugitivum. » Hoc est, olfactum dicunt significare specialiter vim illam sive virtutem animae, quae spiritualiter discernit inter ea, quae spiritualiter bene olent, et quae non; et bene olentia appetit, male vero olentia refugit. « Aurium vero virtutes » dicunt significare « illud, » quod in anima est « particeps; [1143D] et gnosticum, » id est cognitivum et susceptivum divinae inspirationis. « Gustativas, » etc. Idem dicit, hoc est, gustativas virtutes dicunt significare « plenitudinem invisibilium, et divinarum escarum, » quibus coelestes essentiae reficiuntur; significare etiam « susceptivum promotuum alentium, id est illud quod eis suscipit alentes promotus, hoc est, nutrientia incrementa. Tactivas vero virtutes, » dicunt significare illud, quod in anima est, « discretivum per scientiam convenientis, aut nocentis. Palpebras deinde, et supercilia » dicunt significare « custoditivum intelligentiae divinarum visionum; juvenilem vero, et adultam aetatem » dicunt significare « illud, » quod in anima est « vitalis virtutis semper innovantis » eam. « Dentes autem, » [1144A] quibus cibus dividitur, et comminuitur, et in corpus nutriendum trajicitur, dicunt significare « divisivum nutrientis perfectionis inditae, » vel insitae ipsi rationali spiritui. « Unaquaeque enim essentia intellectualis uniformem intelligentiam donatam sibi a diviniore essentia » quasi cibum integrum « provida virtute dividit et multiplicat: » comminuens, et adaptans « ad ductricem analogiam inferioris, » hoc est, ad mensuram, per quam traduci possit ad participationem inferioris scientiae. Nisi enim illud, quod magnum accipit ad mensuram comminueret, nequaquam ad inferioris intelligentiae participationem transire valeret. « Humeros autem, et brachia, et item manus » dicunt significare « factivum, et operativum, et activum. Cor [1144B] vero » dicunt « symbolum esse, » id est figuram, « deiformis vitae, » seminantis, vel spargentis, sive diffundentis « propriam vitalem virtutem in ea, quae praeintellecta sunt: » sicut cor motum diffundit vitalem ad membra caetera. Propterea dicunt cor esse in Deo, sive in rationali spiritu illam virtutem, a qua diffunditur gratia vitalis in alios, qui praevisi sunt a Deo, ut illam accipiant. Illis enim tantum datur, qui ad illam accipiendam praevisi sunt, et praedestinati ad vitam. « Pectora iterum » dicunt « significare durum, et firmum: et custoditivum » illius « vivificae distributionis a corde » procedentis, utpote « a supposito » ipsi pectori, quia cor pectori suppositum est, ut ipso muniatur et custodiatur. « Dorsa vero, » dicunt significare « continuum » [1144C] id est continuationem « cunctarum fertilium virtutum; » quia, sicut in dorso spina spinae copulata est, ita in virtutibus una alteri cohaeret. « Pedes autem » dicunt significare « mobile, et velox, et cursile motionis semper euntis in divina. Propter quod » quia velocem motum habent, « theologia pedes sanctorum intellectuum pennatos figuravit. » Et merito, quia « pennatum significant anagogicam, » id est, sursum ducentem « velocitatem: » et significat etiam « coeleste activum, » id est coelestem actionem, vel impulsionem, sive promotionem itineris, quod est sursum versus: et significat etiam « remotum, » id est remotionem, « ab omni humili, » id est humilitate, vel abjectione, sive depressione: [1144D] quod « remotum » in eis est « per sursum ferens, » quia in eo quod sursum feruntur ab omnibus, quae in imo sunt, removentur. Ipsa vero pennarum levitas significat nihil terrenum aut ponderosum in eis esse, « sed totum ascendens in excelsum munde, et sine gravitate. Nudum quoque, et discalceatum, » quod eis attribuitur, significat « demissum » eorum, « et absolutum, et inmensurabile, et purum ab » omni « appositione eorum, quae extra sunt, » hoc est, quod nudi, et discalceati describuntur angeli, significat quod « ab » omni « appositione, » sive conjunctione « eorum, quae extra sunt, » id est visibilium, demissi sunt, id est laxati, et absoluti, et puri, ac per hoc immensurabiles. Quo enim minus corporea commistione, vel appositione [1145A] coarctantur, eo amplius per puritatem intelligentiae immensurabiliter dilatantur. Significat etiam « nudum, et discalceatum assimilativum eorum ad divinam simplicitatem, quantum possibile est, » quod a corporea admistione puri ex duplici substantia non subsistunt. Qua sententia feriuntur, qui angelos corpora habere dicunt. Auctor quippe ab omni appositione eorum, quae extra sunt puros esse testatur et per nudam ac puram essentiam suam, in qua subsistunt, divinam simplicitatem imitari.

Sequitur: « Sed quoniam iterum, » etc. Ac si diceret: Dixi, quod divina Scriptura in eo quod angelos nudos describit, puritatem ac simplicitatem eorum significat. Sed quoniam iterum ipsa sophia, quae et simpla est per veritatem, et multum varia [1145B] per diversitatem formationum, « quoniam, » inquam, ipsa talis « sophia iterum et nudos vestit, et vasa quaedam » id est instrumenta « dat ipsis circumferre: age, » id est eia, « aperiamus, secundum quod nobis possibile est, sacros amictus coelestium animorum et organa, » id est instrumenta; quia, sicut dictum est, et vestitu describuntur, et vasa quaedam, sive organa eis in ipsa mystica descriptione circumferenda tribuuntur. Et bene dico aperiamus quid haec significent, quia significativa sunt omnia. In primis ergo « claram quidem vestem et igneam, » quae eis attribuitur, « existimo significare deiforme, » quod in eis est, « juxta ignis imaginem, » quae similitudo est deiformitatis, « et luculentum, id est clarum existimo eis attribui, propter quietes, » quae sunt [1145C] « in coelo, ubi lumen est, » sed non quodlibet lumen, sed « omnino invisibile. » (Ita enim dicendum est, quod omnino sit invisibile lumen illud quod ibi est) « aut intellectualiter illuminans, » sicut in Deo, « aut intellectualiter illuminatum, » sicut in angelis. « Sacerdotalem vero vestem, » existimo significare « ductivum, » vel ducatum, sive directionem « ad divina et mystica speculamina, » et significare « votum totius vitae. » In sacerdotali namque veste significatur, quod duces sunt ad divina, mystica speculamina, id est ad contemplationes divinas et mysticas, subjectos erudientes ad cognitionem, et quod illorum vitam Deo dedicant exhortantes, et confirmantes boni operis devotionem. « Zonas quoque » dicunt significare « custoditivum ipsarum fecundarum virtutum: » [1145D] et significare « habitum congregantem eas » scilicet virtutes, « converti unite in seipsum, et circumferri circulariter circa seipsum, cum facultate carente casu a similitudine naturae. » Sensus est: Quod zona quae lumbos et umbilicum, in quibus est seminativum propagationis, ambit et constringit, significat custodiam fecundarum virtutum: quae custodia ipsas virtutes ambit, et custodit, vel constringit, ne in sua multiplicatione extra metas justitiae relaxentur, aut diffluant. Significatur etiam in ipsa zona, in eo quod corpus ambiendo more circuli in seipsum convertitur, et unitur: quod habitus virtutum ipsas virtutes in unum congregans, ne diffluant sive ab unitate concordiae recedant; [1146A] quod ille, inquam, habitus circa seipsum circulariter circumflectitur per cohaerentiam universorum et per mutuam ipsarum virtutum considerationem: circumflectitur dico cum facilitate, quia facilis propter similitudinem et concordiam de virtute in virtutem progressio fit: quae facilitas casu caret a similitudine naturae. Virtutum enim progressio, non corruptio, sed reparatio est naturae. « Virgas etiam, » sive sceptra dicunt significare, « regale et principale, et omnia recta definiens; » sicut virga recta est, et gestamen regium. « Tela vero, et secures, » quibus incidi, vel dividi, vel secari solent integra, dicunt significare « separativum dissimilitudinum, » hoc est illam vim, quae dissimilitudines separat, et inter bona ac mala discernit; [1146B] « et » dicunt significare ipsum « discernentium acumen virtutum, » id est subtilitatem scilicet inspiciendo; « et efficax, et actuosum, » id est efficaciam agendi perficiendo: « Geometrica » autem « et tectonica vasa, » id est instrumenta mensurandi et aedificandi, dicunt significare « fundativum, et aedificativum, et perfectivum, et quaecunque sunt alia providentiae reducentis, et convertentis secundorum. » Providentia enim primorum, et superiorum, quae secunda, et inferiora in melius convertit, et reducit, spiritale in eis aedificium fundat, et aedificat, et perficit. Cujus operis signa sunt vasa geometrica, et tectonica secundum corporalem speciem in visione formata.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Est autem, etc. » Ac si diceret: Ea [1146C] quae secundum visibilium formam angelis attribuuntur, non solum signa sunt invisibilis virtutis eorum, sed significant etiam aliquando ea quae in nobis et circa nos aguntur. Hoc est quod dicit: « Est, » hoc est, contingit, « quando illa organa, » id est instrumenta, « quae acta sunt, » hoc est exhibita vel praesentia « a sanctis angelis, symbola sunt, » id est signa et demonstrationes « divinorum judiciorum, » quae in nos vel erga nos exercentur. « Aliis quidem » scilicet organis per significationem « declarantibus corrigentem disciplinam, » scilicet Dei, sicut virga, quae verberans videtur, « aut » declarantibus « punientem justitiam, » sicut secures et gladii. « Aliis vero » organis declarantibus « libertatem, » vel liberationem de angustia, « aut finem disciplinae, » id est [1146D] correptionis, et poenae « aut resumptionem, » id est recuperationem « prioris beneficentiae, aut appositionem aliorum donorum » post priora data, « parvorum aut magnorum, sensibilium » sicut in corporalibus bonis, « aut invisibilium » sicut in spiritualibus. « Et, ut » universaliter dicam, « forsitan perspicax animus non dubitaret omnino, id est per omnia, pulchre adunare, » id est adaptare per significationem, « visibilia invisibilibus, » ut nihil scilicet ex omnibus visibilibus relinqueret, quod non aliquam ad invisibilia significationem habere demonstraret. Et merito: quia etiam « ipsos » scilicet angelos « ventos, nominari, » hoc est, illud etiam, quod ipsi angeli venti nominantur, « significat eorum [1147A] velocitatem, et effectum eorum pervenientem in omnes res fere absque mora. » Et significat etiam motum eorum transvectivum « desursum in ea quae deorsum sunt, et » rursum ab iis, « quae deorsum sunt ad ea quae sursum sunt. » Quid autem motus ille hinc inde transvehat consequenter adjungit. « Motum » dico « erigentem secunda, » id est inferiora ad superiorem celsitudinem, « et moventem prima, » id est superiora « ad communicativam, et providam minorum processionem, » id est ut procedant ad minora, id est inferiora, providere eis, et communicare eis virtutem suam.

Sequitur: « Dicet autem fortassis quis, » etc. Dixerat superius angelos ventos nominari propter velocitatem suam; nunc subjungit, quod fortassis [1147B] aliquis dicere poterit, quod venti nominantur propter divinam similitudinem; quia et ventus secundum aliquid divinae operationis formam, et imaginem habet, sicut in alia theologia de quaternaria dijudicatione, id est de quatuor elementorum significatione per plura exempla, aut argumenta se demonstrasse testatur: quod opus apud nos non habetur. « Dicet, inquit, fortassis quis, id est aliquis, ventosam cognominationem aerii spiritus, significare » non solum velocitatem, sed etiam « deiforme, » id est deiformitatem coelestium spirituum. « Habet enim etiam hoc » (subauditur elementum) in se « et imaginem, et formam divinae operationis, » ut, hoc est, sicut per plura videlicet exempla demonstratur « in symbolica theologia, » id est in theologia, [1147C] quae de symbolis, id est de figuris et similitudinibus visibilibus demonstratur: dico « per tetrasticam, » id est quaternariam « dijudicationem, » ubi per singula quatuor elementa ostenditur, qualiter visibilia invisibilium, et similitudines sunt et signa. Secundum illam igitur dijudicationem demonstratum est, quomodo hoc elementum, id est ventus divinae operationis et imaginem et formam habet. In quo autem habeat hanc imaginem et formam, subjungit: « Secundum capacitatem naturae suae motivam, et gignentem, et velocem, et potentem, » quia motus aer motum et incrementum rebus subjicit, et velociter currens extrinsecus potenter, sive violenter impellit « et secundum ignotum nobis, [1147D] et invisibile latibulum moventium principiorum et consummationum. » Ventus enim motus foras ad sensum venit; sed principium et finem motus ejus sensus non deprehendit. Unde scriptum est: « Qui producit ventos de thesauris suis [n: (Psal. CXXXIV)]. » Ventos siquidem de thesauris producere, est et de occultis et latentibus causis spiramina ventorum per manifestam agitationem ad sensum proferre. Secundum hanc similitudinem etiam Creator spiritus, universis occulte praesidens et invisibilis permanens, cuncta movet et promovet sua virtute; et videntur quae moventur, at qui movet non videtur; potens in faciendo, velox in perficiendo; cujus opera quidem foris cernuntur, sed ignotum et invisibile latibulum primarum causarum et [1148A] principiorum moventium opera ipsa ad effectum, non penetratur. Similiter et consummationum ignotum latibulum non penetratur; quia, cum quid ad effectum movetur, illud quidem, quod fit, cernimus; sed unde sic fiat, vel ad quid fiat, non videmus. Hoc est quod in visione seraphim, caput et pedes contegunt in solio sedentis, quia divinae operationis media, quae in tempore aguntur, cernimus; quae autem ante tempora fuerunt prima, et quae post tempora ultima futura sunt, investigare non possumus, quia latibulum moventium principiorum, et consummationum, invisibilis nobis est et ignorum. Similiter et quando spiritus ad cor venit, sentitur quidem in eo quod percipitur. « Unde » autem « veniat, aut quo vadat, » non investigatur. Unde [1148B] venit, principium est; quo vadit, consummatio et finis. « Sed nescis, » inquit, « unde venit, aut quo vadit, » quia et principii, et finis simul latibulum ignotum et invisibile est. Propterea nescis unde veniat, quia meritum in te non invenis, pro quo te gratiam dicas. Nescis quo vadit, quia ex percepto dono ad quem fidem pervenias, non intelligis. Secundum haec itaque omnis ventus divinae operationis imaginem habet et formam.

Sequitur « Sed et nubis, » etc. Non solum, inquit, theologia angelos ventos nominat, « sed etiam speciem nubis circumformat, vel aptas ipsis: nubes eos vocando, significans per hoc sacros intellectus super repletos supermundane, » id est spiritualiter, « occulti luminis, » id est invisibilis charitatis: illos [1148C] dico « accipientes pompose, » id est excellenter « primam manifestationem » ipsius luminis in prima apparitione ipsius, quia primum eis monstratur, et excellenter ab eis percipitur: ideo sunt ipsi « accipientes primam manifestationem ejus pompose, » et gloriose, et sunt etiam distribuentes ipsam scilicet manifestationem « in ea, quae secunda post eos; distribuentes eis illam lucide, » id est clare « et proportionaliter, » id est secundum uniuscujusque mensuram. Sic et nubes primum lumen solis suscipiunt, deinde illud ex ipsis resplendens in subjecta diffundunt. Et ideo etiam angeli nubes dicuntur, quia « in eis subsistit generale, et vivificum, et activum, et perfectivum, juxta intellectualem conceptionem [1148D] imbrium » spiritualium. Sicut nubes, quae per effusionem imbrium terram fecundantes rebus ex ea nascentibus tribuunt vim gignendi, et vivificationis, et augmenti perfectionis. Sic ergo nubes dicuntur, propter hujusmodi imbrium conceptionem, dico « evocantem, » sive provocantem, vel elicientem « in vitales partus » excipientem sinum, id est terram, quae imbres sinu suo excipit: « evocantem » dico, « humidis pluviis, » id est per pluvias humidas. « Per pluvias enim terram provocat nutriendo ad vitales partus procreandos.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Ipsa etiam, » etc. Ac si diceret: Non solum in specie nubis ipsa theologia angelos describit, « sed etiam speciem aeris, et electri, et multicolorum lapidum circumponit ipsa per » significationem [1149A] « coelestibus essentiis. » Et recte. Nam « electrum » quidem utpote « auriforme, simul et argenteum significat, » utpote in auro, splendorem « imputribilem, et simul largum, et non minutum, et incontaminatum, » sicut aurum non aeruginat aliquando, sed « splendorem » purum habet, atque perpetuum. « Et » significat etiam utpote « in argento, claritatem apertam, et luciformem, et coelestem, » sicut argentum nitidum est et lucens. Sic ergo electrum secundum utramque speciem, auri scilicet et argenti significat nitidum et fulgidum, id est clarum et igneum, quia superna sapientia, quae in illis spiritibus lucet, et clara est per cognitionem, et ignea per dilectionem. Hoc ergo per electri speciem in supernis spiritibus significatur « In aere autem attribuendum » [1149B] est eis « aut igneum aut auriforme, secundum rationes » jam « traditas, » in expositione scilicet electri, ubi secundum aliquid similis species invenitur. « Lapidum vero multicolores species existimandum est significare aut luciforme quasi albas, » id est sicut albae scilicet species significant, « aut auriforme, quasi rubras, aut juvenile et novum, quasi pallidas. » Et, ut breviter dicam, « per singulas species invenies anagogicam, id est spiritualem dijudicationem typicarum, » id est figurativarum imaginum. « Sed quoniam quidem haec secundum virtutem nostram a nobis dicta esse sufficienter arbitror, ideo transeundum » est nunc « in sanctam reserationem, » id est expositionem « sacrefiguratae bestialis formationis coelestium animorum, [1149C] ut scilicet exponamus bestiales formas, quae sacrefiguratae sunt coelestibus animis ad significandos ipsos. Leonem enim censendum est significare principale, et robustum, et indomitum, » quod in illis spiritualiter consistit, et significare etiam « assimilativum intellectualium vestigiorum » pergentium « ad abditum, » id est secretum « ineffabilis divinitatis. » Quae vestigia, ut, id est sicut virtus, id est res spiritualis potest, imitantur vestigia leonis, quia sicut leo vestigia sua cauda delet et quodammodo planum, quod pede impresserat, reformat et restituit, ut occultus sit incessus ejus, ita invisibilis gressus coelestium spirituum quodammodo formatur, « itinere suo in semet restituto, » id est ad [1149D] priorem statum reducto, et in planum reducto, deletis vestigiorum signis « circumvelamine, id est per circumvelamen; et, ut ita fortassis potius mystice dicatur, restituit in itinere pomposo amictu, » id est insigni, vel excellenti, sive splendido et glorioso amictu proveniente eis « secundum divinam illuminationem. » Pergentibus enim introrsum ad secretum divinitatis lumen contemplandum ex superveniente splendore vestigia delentur; quia omne quod prius per cognitionem inhaerebat, a memoria tergitur, cum concupiscentibus animis desiderata claritas manifestatur. Hinc est quod Paulus dicit: « Unum, quae quidem retro sunt obliviscens, in ea, quae anteriora sunt, me extendo. » Quasi ergo deletis vestigiis incedere est, deleta ab animo omnium [1150A] imagitionum cogitatione in incircumpscritum lumen contemplandum mente proficisci. Illic quippe intellectus, dum supervenientis claritatis splendore circumdatur, quasi quodam amictu tectus, quidquid praeter illud lumen in semetipso est, etiam ipse videre non potest. Haec ergo omnia leonis formam significare existimandum est. « Ipsam vero bovis » (subauditur formam) existimandum est significare « firmum et novum, » et revocans vel renovans, « et reparans intellectuales sulcos in susceptionem coelestium, et gignentium imbrium; et » significare etiam « custoditivum et fortissimum. » Quia enim bos firmiter pedem figit, firmitatem et stabilitatem immutabilitatis significat. In hoc autem, quod terram sulcans revocat eam, et renovat ad susceptionem [1150B] coelestium imbrium quibus ad gignendum fecundatur, significat interiorem novitatem, qua mens temperatur et adaptatur ad susceptionem coelestis gratiae, quae fecundata, germina virtutum profert. In hoc ergo, quod bos fortitudine cervicis eminet, et jugum portans custodit, significatur custodia mentis, qua in omni actu in sui custodia sine defectu perseverat. « Ipsam dehinc aquilae » (subaudi formam) existimandum est significare « regale, » quia caeteris avibus praeeminet; « et altiferum, » quia volatu in altum se fert; « et citivolum, » quia cito volat; « et ad potentificum alimentum, acutum et sobrium, » quia in sublimi volans alimentum suum acute prospicit, sobrie appetit, potenter rapit. [1150C] Significat etiam forma aquilae, « agile, » quia ad se movendum expedita est; « et » significat « bene machinatum, » quia in motu suo convenienter se coaptat; « et » significat etiam contemplativum « ad radium divini solis copiosum, et multolucentem, » id est multum lucentem, una dictio. « Contemplativum » dico, « desiderio, » id est per desiderium « virtutum inspeculativarum, » id est intus vel interiora speculantium: et contemplationem dico « sanis obtutibus et immediate, et recte, et inflexibiliter, » sicut aquila irreverberatis oculis radium solis intuetur. Haec igitur omnia in contemplativis spiritibus formam aquilae existimandum est significare. « Illam vero equorum, » subaudi formam existimandum est significare « obediens, et frenabile, [1150D] et album quidem, » id est albam formam existimandum est significare « obediens, et frenabile, et album quidem, » id est albam formam existimandum est significare « vere lucidum, et quasi maxime cognatissimum divini luminis. Eorum autem, » scilicet equorum, « qui nigri sunt, » formam existimandum est significare « abditum, » id est occultum incomprehensibilitatis scilicet divinae, sicut niger color tenebrosus est, et visum repellit. « Rubrum vero » colorem existimandum est significare « igneum et activum, » quia fervorem innuit bonae voluntatis, quae in opere exercetur. « Commistorum quoque » (subaudi equorum) « ex albo et nigro » colore, existimandum est significare « conjunctivum extremorum cum perfectiva virtute: » quae sociat per [1151A] charitatem « prima secundis, et secunda primis convertibiliter, ac proinde connectens, » ut scilicet adinvicem per amorem mutuum et providentiam connectantur. Hoc itaque in supradictis formationibus intelligi potest. Et fortassis, « si non terminaremus sermonis commensurationem, » id est nisi hoc esset quod terminare volumus tali mensura sermonem, et amplius per singula exponenda non ire: et nisi etiam terminaremus omnes proprietates, « et omnes corporales conformationes » supradictorum animalium « per partes eorum » jam dictas, id est nisi per hoc quod ex parte jam de eis diximus, quidquid universaliter de ipsis dici potest, sive in interioribus proprietatibus, sive in exterioribus conformationibus una similitudine significare volumus: [1151B] nisi hoc, inquam, esse quod per singula exponendo ire nolumus, « fortassis non incongrue adunassemus coelestibus virtutibus, » etiam furibundum, « secundum similitudines dissimiles, » sicut superius dictum est, quasdam dissimilitudines similes, quasdam vero dissimiles esse. Secundum hunc itaque modum non incongrue aptassemus « furibundum » coelestibus virtutibus « in ipsorum intellectualem fortitudinem » significandam: « cujus » scilicet fortitudinis « furor novissima imago est » quia videlicet per contrarium et de longe significat. « Ipsam vero concupiscentiam » irrationabilium, non incongrue aptassemus « in amorem divinum » significandum. « Et, ut universaliter dicamus » sicut summatim dicendum est, convenienter aptassemus « simul [1151C] et omnes sensus, et omnes multiplices partes irrationabilium animalium, » ipsis scilicet spiritualibus per significationem sensus et partes dico « reducentes » nos significando « in immateriales, » id est spirituales « intelligentias, et uniformes virtutes essentiae coelestium; » quia per ea quae corporaliter et materialiter in sensibus et membris irrationalium animalium describuntur ad immaterialem, id est spiritualem intelligentiam earum virtutum quae uniformiter et pure in essentia sunt spiritualium excitamur. Possent multa alia dici, « sed sufficiunt sapientibus non solum haec ipsa » quae dicta sunt; « sed » etiam « unius significativae imaginis dijudicatio in declarationem proximarum, » id est similium imaginum « simili modo » faciendam. Et ideo [1151D] « inspiciendum est etiam hoc » ipsos scilicet angelos « fluvios dictos fuisse, et rotas et currus connexos, » id est adaptatos per significationem « coelestibus essentiis, » vel inspiciendum est in coelestibus essentiis, dictos, id est nominatos fuisse fluvios, et rotas et currus connexos, id est copulatos et conjunctos ad invicem. Nam « ignea quidem flumina significant divinos promotus, » id est promotiones sive effusiones divinae gratiae « donantes » ipsis coelestibus essentiis « copiosam, » id est « non deficientem affluentiam, et nutrientes eas » vivifica fecunditate. Currus autem, » in quibus multa copulata pariter volvuntur, significant « conjunctivam societatem similitudinum, » quae sunt in ipsis, per [1152A] quas concorditer uno assensu moventur ad omnia. « Rotae autem » cum sint quidem « pennatae, id est agiles; et cum sint euntes inconversibiliter, » id est sine retrogradatione, et inflexibiliter, id est sine deviatione, « in ea quae sunt ante conspectum, » id est anteriora, significant « virtutem operationis, earum » scilicet essentiarum: operationis dico exeuntis « per rectam et justam viam, » omnium simul earum essentiarum intellectuali rotatu, « supermundane, » id est spiritualiter « directo » in eamdem rectam viam, ut simul et concorditer propositum iter incedant, sine flexu, id est sine deviatione, « et recte, » id est sine retrogradatione. Hoc itaque rotae significant. Et non solum hoc, sed « est etiam, » id est contingit, vel convenit « per aliam [1152B] anagogen, » id est spiritualem interpretationem, « dijudicare imaginariam descriptionem intellectualium rotarum. Vocitatum enim est eis, » scilicet angeli, « ut ait theologus, » id est propheta: « Gel, gel, gel. » Dicit enim Ezechiel quod apparentibus et currentibus rotis audiente ipso angelus eas volubiles appellavit. In hoc ergo vocitatum est et clamatum gel, sive eis, sive ab eis. « Significat autem hoc, » id est gel, « juxta Hebraicam vocem, revolutiones et revelationes. » Utriusque interpretationis causam subjungit: « Igneae siquidem et Deiformes rotae, revolutiones quidem habent circa idipsum optimum, motu semper mobili, » id est per motum semper mobilem. Quemadmodum circulus propterea in semetipsum revolvitur, quia circum unum et [1152C] idem ipsum, id est centrum, semper movetur; sic spirituales rotae quasi in semetipsas revolvuntur, dum circa idipsum quod est optimum, id est Deum, quasi circa centrum suum contemplatione semper ipsum ambiendo moventur. Et ideo semper mobili motu moventur, quia et desiderium est inexstinguibile, et quod desideratur incomprehensibile. Propter haec omnia spirituales rotae revolutiones habent. « Revelationes vero » habent in manifestatione « secretorum, et in circumreductione subjectorum, » quia ad subjectos quidem descendunt, eos illuminando: sed iterum redeunt, ipsos per contemplationem ad superiora reducendo; et sic revelationes habent in « deductiva perfectione altarum illuminationum in ea quae subjecta sunt; » quia illuminationes [1152D] quas ab alto suscipiunt ad perfectionem subjectorum deducunt, per quas eadem subjecta rursum ad superiora reducunt.

## EXPOSITIO. (cont.)

Sequitur: « Reliquus vero nobis, » etc. Post explanationem figurarum et descriptionum materialium, rursum ad interiora convertitur, gaudia angelorum novissimo contemplaturus. Et bene sermo de coelestibus gaudio terminatur, quia coelestium omnium gaudium finis est. « Reliquus nobis » est « in explanationem sermo de gaudio coelestium dispositionum, » quia hoc solum nunc restat ut de gaudio coelestium aliquem explanationis gratia sermonem faciamus. Et bene non simpliciter de gaudio, sed de gaudio coelestium [1153A] sermonem restare dixit quia coelestes dispositiones « non sunt omnino acceptrices ejus passibilis delectationis quae secundum nos est, » sed « congaudere Deo dicuntur, » id est, gaudio divino simili gaudio gaudere, de « perditorum inventione, » sicut quando perdita ove reducta, et drachma inventa ad gratulandum invitantur. Et « juxta deiformem exsulationem » illam quae prodigo filio revertente in vitulo saginato figurata est et perfecta. Vel sic legi potest: Congaudere Deo dicuntur de perditorum inventione, non aliqua temporali et subito passibiliter exorta laetitia affecti, sed « juxta deiformem epulationem, » id est, delectationem et jucunditatem qua impassibiliter perfruuntur, aeternum Dei gaudium imitantes. Et [1153B] « congaudere Deo dicuntur » secundum deiformitatem, « in providentia et salute redeuntium in Deum, » quia ad similitudinem Dei saluti provident redeuntium ad Deum. Dicuntur etiam congaudere Deo secundum « incorruptionis laetitiam, » id est, incorruptam, sive plene et perfecte dulcem laetitiam, cui nulla amaritudo mista est; et secundum illam « ineffabilem beneficentiam » divinae gratiae, per quam interna dulcedine effusa corda sancta reficit, « in cujus participatione, » id est, cujus scilicet dulcedinis vel beneficentiae participes « facti sunt; » et, id est etiam « sancti viri, per deificos adventus divinarum illuminationum, » desuper scilicet advenientium. « Tanta a me, » etc. [1153C] Clausulam format in qua brevi recapitulatione finem narrationis constituit. « Tanta, » inquit, « a me dicta sunt de sanctis formationibus: » dicta dico « deficientia diligenti manifestatione, » hoc est, a diligenti manifestatione « earum, » scilicet formationum; quia ea quae a me dicta sunt minus sufficientia esse confiteor ad diligentem et perfectam manifestationem sanctarum formationum. Sed tamen quamvis ad hoc perfecta non sint, « perfecta » tamen sunt, « ut existimo, » ad aliud, scilicet « ad non remanendum nos humiliter in figurativis [1154A] phantasiis, » id est, ad hoc ut erudiant nos, qualiter (omnino saltem) non remaneamus « humiliter, » id est, abjecte, « in figurativis phantasiis, » nihil aliud esse credentes quam quod secundum visibilium formationem scriptum invenimus. Sed eruditi potius a figurativis, ad eorum quae vera sunt cognitionem ascendamus. « Si autem et hoc dixeris, » tu aliquis, vel tu, Timothee, « quomodo » nos « non fecerimus » memoriam vel « mentionem omnium angelicarum virtutum » et « operationum » et « imaginum » quae « in eloquiis » inveniuntur: deinde, id est post illa quae diximus, « respondemus verum, » id est, « quod » verum est; et quod in ipsis quidem, scilcet virtutibus, aut operationibus, aut imaginibus, « quarum supermundanam, » [1154B] id est, nimis altam « scientiam ignoravimus, alterum lucis ductorem desideramus docentem » nos, id est, ut doceat nos, et ducat ad lucem cognitionis. « Quaedam autem tanquam aequepotentia dictis, » id est aequalia et non majora: iis quae diximus, « praetermisimus; » tamen « commensurationi sermonis providentes, » id est providentes ne sermo noster mensuram suam transiret, et nimis diceremus, si vel hoc totum diceremus, quod dicere possemus. Similiter etiam « honorificantes secretum » quod « super nos, » est « silentio, » id est, silendo aut per silentium. Silentium enim secretum honorat, quia illi quod tacetur aliquando major reverentia exhibetur. Et [1154C] tegenda sunt nonnunquam aliqua quae dici possent, ut semper supersit quod intus requiratur, et ne vilescat si totum exponatur.

Haec quidem in hierarchiam B. Dionysii secundum sensus nostri possibilitatem praesumpsi. Sed timeo ne nostra illius adjiciens, marmoreum parietem luto superduxisse convincar. Propterea vertatur praesumptio, imploret devotio. Mihi autem solatium affert, quod illius quem exponendum suscepit, in quo sapientia transcendit sanctitas condescendit.

english:
## BOOK ONE.

- CHAP. I. *On the difference between worldly and divine theology, and on the demonstrations of each.*
- CHAP. II. *What is the subject-matter of the hierarchies, and their arrangement.*
- CHAP. III. *On the three hierarchies.*
- CHAP. IV. *Why Dionysius the Areopagite undertook to treat of theology, after he had received the catholic faith.*
- CHAP. V. *What a hierarchy is, and its arrangement and origin*

## CHAPTER ONE *On the difference between worldly and divine theology, and on the demonstrations of each.*

[0923B] *The Jews seek signs, and the Greeks wisdom [n: (I Cor. I)]*. For there was a certain wisdom, which seemed wisdom to those who did not know the true wisdom. And the world found that wisdom, and began to be puffed up, and swelled, esteeming itself great in it. And it presumed, and resolved to press on further to the highest wisdom, trusting in its own wisdom, as though this could have been a way to that. And it climbed, and was lifted up, that it might reach the heights in heart. And it made itself a ladder, the outward form of the creature, striving toward the invisible things of the Creator. Then those things of God which [0924B] were manifest came forth to give light; and they were made known so as to be tested by a heart that was not pure. For the things that were seen were known, and there were others that were not known; and through the things that are manifest they thought to pass into those that were hidden, and they fell in mind beyond the truth that was possible into the lies of their own fabrications, where there was found nothing further that they might grasp. Therefore God makes foolish the wisdom of this world, because in it the wisdom of God could not be found; and he showed [0925A] another wisdom, which seemed foolishness and was not, that the true wisdom might be found through it. Christ crucified was preached, that truth might be sought through humility. But the world despised the physician [modicum], and could not recognize the truth. For it wished to contemplate the works of God which he had made to be wondered at, yet the things he had set forth to be imitated it would not venerate. For it did not attend to its own disease, so as to seek the medicine with devout devotion; but presuming upon a false health, it gave itself over to investigating things not its own with empty curiosity. And it seemed to make progress outside itself, but it failed within itself, and did not find him who was above it. And it set forth opinions about him which it had conceived with a proud heart, lest it should seem to be ignorant of the truth; and it followed, in the way of error, one thing after another, very many against the truth, and at the last things unseemly [0925B] to the Godhead and misshapen to his surpassing majesty, so that the error became manifest. For at first it was true, and seemed great, and at the last falsehood followed, when the truth ought to have been brought to completion. And there was shown, as it were, a certain light in one part, so that there something might be seen; and over against it were dense shadows and the deep gloom of ignorance, where the snare of error was set for the taking of the proud. And they saw where the light was, and where the shadows were they could not see; and there they were caught in the snare because of the boldness of their presumption, by which they cast themselves headlong to go into it: these things are manifest. For how great are the monuments of surpassing genius that they left, wherein with so much investigation they pursued the secrets of nature and the hidden things of created things, so that we judge their very efficacy [0925C] to be preferred to every study. We read of the arts, and the studies, and the disciplines, and very many precepts of the reasonings, which they, by the sense and genius given to them, searched out for this very purpose, and found; and they wrote down what they had found, and handed it down to posterity to be read — logic, and ethics, and mathematics, and physics — concerning the form of reasonings, and of life, and of morals befitting the ordinance of nature, concerning the disposition and order, and the causes, and the outcomes of all things. And they grew strong in this part, so as to grasp the truth; since this truth too was to be dispensed through them — a truth that was not unto life, since they were not the sons of life. Therefore it was given to them for our sake — for whom the consummation was being reserved and the beginning prepared — that they might find that truth [0925D] which the sons of life had to take up for the service of the highest truth. The labor of it was laid upon them, the fruit reserved for these others. And in all these things they received the light of understanding, and the keenness of genius, and the power of sense for the foregoing lessons; in which they subtly examined the force of creatures and the measure of the lower nature according to the form of the reason implanted in them. But at the last they devoted themselves to theology, as the account of divine things and the searching out of the invisible, as though to bring wisdom to completion — as they themselves supposed, about to bring it to completion; but in truth about to lose it, and not to find the true wisdom. For there they began to fall into the lies of fabrications, and they took visible forms as the images of divine things, so as to see the invisible through the things that were seen; and there was there something similar, but showing from [0926A] afar what was sought, and not bringing light to eyes that were darkened. For nature, established for service, showed forth its Creator; but it was a likeness foreign to his surpassing and sovereign majesty. Nor could that nature, which had to be taught, find an evident declaration in all these things, since it too was not sound, so as to grow much clear unto contemplation. For it did not have those exemplars which through grace were being formed for the health of the inner vision; nor did it know the ark of wisdom and of the treasures laid up — the flesh of the eternal Word in the humanity of Jesus; but using the natural lesson alone, with bleary sight, it contemplated a clouded and ambiguous light, bringing it to the beholder in the outward form of created things. Therefore they went astray and became vain, [0926B] when they wished to pass in mind beyond the things which alone they had received to know; and groping with their estimations toward the things that could not be seen, they were found blind who thought that they saw. These are the images of errors, which their theology (for so they themselves called the study by which they believed they were searching out divine things) proclaims as things to be venerated — images of their vanity and deception; in which they lie in so many things so far from the true, and the right, and what accords with good nature, that they too are compelled to blush over them. For it was fitting that those who were proud over the knowledge of the lowest things should be confounded in the highest, and that those who despise the humility of faith in the death of the Savior should marvel at his loftiness in the knowledge of the Creator. For two images were set before man, in which he might have been able to see the invisible: [0926C] one of nature, and one of grace. The image of nature was the outward form of this world. But the image of grace was the humanity of the Word. And in each God was shown, but not in each was he understood; for nature indeed by its outward form showed forth the Maker, but could not illumine the eyes of the beholder. But the humanity of the Savior was both a medicine, that the blind might receive light, and likewise a teaching, that those who see might recognize the truth. He made clay from spittle, and smeared the eyes of the blind man, and he washed and saw [n: (Joan. IX)]. And what afterward? Then to the man who saw and did not yet know, he says: I am he; and he who speaks with thee, he it is, the Son of God [n: (ibid.)]. First, therefore, he gave light; afterward he showed. For nature could show, but could not [0926D] give light. And the world proclaimed its Creator by outward form, but did not pour the understanding of truth into the hearts of men. Through the images of nature, therefore, the Creator was only signified; but in the images of grace God was shown present, because those things he wrought that he might be understood to be; but these he wrought that he might be acknowledged to be present. This is the difference of the theology of this world from that which is called divine theology. For it is impossible that the invisible be shown except through the visible; and therefore every theology must needs use visible demonstrations in the declaration of the invisible. But worldly theology, as we have said, took up the works of creation, and the elements of this world created according to their outward form, that it might make its demonstration in [0927A] them. But divine theology chose the works of restoration according to the humanity of Jesus, and his sacraments which are from the beginning — with natural things too subjoined in due measure — that in them it might shape its instruction. But a greater declaration of the divinity, as we have said, is shown in the sacraments of grace, and in the flesh of the Word, and in his mystical working, than is proclaimed by the natural outward form of things. And therefore worldly theology, using a demonstration of little evidence, had not the power to draw forth the incomprehensible truth without the contagion of error, whereas divine theology is known to proclaim it with a simple and pure assertion.

Now it must be said what theology is — beginning indeed somewhat higher, for the clarity of the things to be said. All philosophy is divided into three principal parts: [0927B] logic, ethics, and the theoretical. For the fourth, which we have added in its own place, to enumerate here would be superfluous. Philosophy, then, contains three parts: the first, that is, logic, which takes up the force and manner of reasonings, the judgment of the true and the false; the second, that is, ethics, which orders the right manner of living and the form of discipline according to the ordinances of the virtues; the third, that is, the theoretical, which alone has chosen to search out the true in all that is and is not. Of this, that is, of the theoretical, there are three parts: the first, mathematics; the second, physics; the third, theology — in which the contemplation of truth ascends to the summit as though by certain steps of contemplation. For the first, that is, mathematics, beholds the visible forms of visible things. [0928A] But the second, that is, physics, searches out the invisible causes of visible things. But the third alone, that is, theology, contemplates invisible substances, and the invisible natures of invisible substances. And there is in these, as it were, a certain progression, and an advance of the mind ascending to know the truth. For through the visible forms of visible things one comes to the invisible causes of visible things; and through the invisible causes of visible things one ascends to invisible substances, and to the knowing of their natures. And here is the summit of philosophy, and the perfection of truth, than which nothing can be higher for the contemplating mind. In this the wise men of this world were therefore, as we have already said, made foolish; because, walking by the natural lesson alone according to the elements and the outward form of the world, they did not have the exemplars [0928B] of grace, in which, although the outward form was humble, yet a more manifest demonstration of truth was afforded. Here, therefore, God made foolish the wisdom of this world [n: (I Cor. I)]; because it could not recognize the truth; because in its own learning it scorned to hold the form of humility. Let it now suffice to have said these things about theology, for the sake of the hierarchy of Dionysius, upon which, for the sake of explanation, we have undertaken to say some things. For every hierarchy is subordinated to theology; and it was necessary, for those being introduced to the reading of the hierarchy, to set down beforehand some things about theology, in order to define its subject-matter, which consists wholly in invisible substances, and in their natures likewise invisible — using a visible lesson for the demonstration of itself.

## CHAPTER II. *What is the subject-matter of the hierarchies, and their arrangement.*

[0927]

[0927C] Dionysius the Areopagite, from a philosopher made a Christian theologian and describer of the hierarchies, shows the order of the divine arrangement in the governance of all things: how God made the rational creature a partaker of his power, appointing sacred magistracies, and powers, and principalities in heaven among the angels, and on earth among men, that they might have dominion over his creation. For it had been fitting that that part of his work should become a partaker of his power in its own arrangement — the part which in its own creation had received a participation of the likeness, so that, being the only one made to the likeness of its Maker, it alone should retain his image in its own ordering. God himself, therefore, the Maker of all things, whose ineffable majesty and unfailing power was able alone to govern [0927D] what it alone had created, willed to have partakers and fellow-workers in the governance of the things made by him — not that he himself might be helped by their ministry, but that they themselves might be made exalted by fellowship in his power. The Lord, therefore, alone and prince of all, established dominions and principalities beneath him and after him, for the accomplishing of the ministry which the order of the universe demanded, so that his works might be fulfilled through orders and arrangements, by a command running down from the highest into all things. The majesty, therefore, and the dominion, [0928C] which in the Lord and governor of all is adored universally, and most omnipotently, and super-excellently, and ineffably, has been distributed among those who have been made partakers of grace and glory, consorts and companions of the majesty, through parts, and divisions, and degrees, and orders — descending from him and looking back to him, and ordered beneath him who is the fount and cause of all things, and the first beginning: « One work, and one maker? one dominion, and one ruler, one prince, and one commonwealth: one Lord, and Father, from whom is all fatherhood in heaven and on earth [n: (Ephes. III)]: one in all, all things: and all things one in one. » For the highest good, by the participation of graces and the distribution of gifts, remaining one in itself, [0928D] is divided among all the partakers of its bounty, and all who partake of the one are gathered together into the form of its unity and its true simplicity. For they could not have been partakers of the power, unless first through grace they became consorts of the virtue. Nor could they, together with him, do what he himself can do, unless first they deserved to be, from him, what he himself is. But the omnipotent Maker is named governor of all things made by him, not by a foreign usurpation, nor by a perfunctory title; but by a power innate in him, and by an ingrown goodness cherishing and nourishing all things, [0929A] ruling and disposing all things, he has dispensed that same goodness and power, in manifold ways, to those who rule beneath him, according to the measure of participation and the reckoning of ministry, through orders and degrees — to the more excellent indeed, and those set above in dominion, imparting greater and super-excellent gifts; but to the lower, and to the subordinate degrees, granting lesser graces, and things freely serving, set over their subjects too without oppression. These are the distributions of lights, descending into all things, to which it has been given to partake of them from the Father of lights and the Sun of justice — made bright mirrors, that they may shine and give light. Subordinate indeed in that they shine, and set above in that they give light. And there is one light, and there is one good; and there are very many things that shine, and that partake of the one [0929B] good and the one light; and in that they partake, they are one, gathered together into the one, and led back to the one, and conformed to the one. These are the hierarchies, that is, the sacred principalities, which the highest hierarchy formed after its own likeness, and appointed beneath itself to have dominion and to preside over its works according to the orders marked out, [0930A] under one beginning and one power, from which is all power, and all virtue, and all light spiritually shining and spiritually giving light to all things that shine. This is the loftiness of the rational creature, and its sublimity, and its dignity to be marveled at, whereby it deserved to have dominion in the works of its Maker, having received virtue from him, and holding power together with him. Which virtue, since according to the measure of the bounty and the participation it is distributed variously and manifoldly, for the comeliness and beauty of those works which wisdom has adorned, from one virtue and one power, becomes many virtues and many powers. But, lest again the multitude beget schism and division, and the world war against itself with contrary rule, there is one beginning, and one moderator of all, [0930B] from whom they have what they are, and under whom they moderate what they can do, and they refer to him everything that they accomplish, so that unity may remain in all things, and peace endure in the kingdom of God, who creates all things and governs all.

## CHAPTER III. *On the three hierarchies*

[0929]

[0929C] There are three hierarchies, in the description of which Dionysius — theologian and narrator of the hierarchies and of the sacred powers that are in heaven and on earth — set forth a finished work. The first, chief of all, and the form and exemplar of the rest, is the highest and ineffable power of the Trinity — simple, and one, and uniform, without degree and difference and comparison, highest, and eternal, and perfect, and true, Omnipotent by its own virtue in creating and ruling all its works, receiving nothing external, losing nothing of its own. The second hierarchy is formed in the angelic nature, by adoption, and participation, and deigning — from the first, and beneath the first, and toward the first, second, sublime by likeness, having degree, and admitting difference, and allowing comparison, second after the highest Trinity in emulation, [0930C] distinguished by a threefold division. The third and last hierarchy is ordained in human nature, imitating the second in the first place and the first in the second, and receiving, through the middle one, the highest image and the super-excellent likeness in the things that partake, and referring it through that very thing, so that the whole may be from the one, and the whole toward the one, and the whole one. But theology took up the angelic hierarchy first, as the exemplar of the human hierarchy — to whose likeness the whole hierarchy that is among men has been made and formed — to be explained; and after it, the human, which stands according to its likeness; in the third place setting the highest, and ineffable, and super-exalted hierarchy, so that, from the illumination of the preceding ones — nearer to human minds — that which is exceedingly intelligible and obscure might grow clear.

## CHAPTER IV. *Why Dionysius the Areopagite undertook to treat of theology, after he had received the catholic faith.*

[0929]

[0929D] The theologian Dionysius, seeing the wisdom of the world puffed up against the humility of the Christian faith — and seeing the cross of Christ, and the works of the humanity of the Word which in the flesh were wrought as a remedy, despised as though unworthy of God, and incongruous with the highest majesty, and impossible to the truth; and the Word of preaching, unto the redemption of the human race, esteemed foolish; and those walking according to the elements of this world, out of the lesson of nature, judging false the things that were accomplished for the salvation of man in the death of the Redeemer — sets himself against it, to empty out the glory which is according to the sense of the wisdom of this age. And he shows that the wisdom of the Christian faith, humble indeed in the death of the Redeemer, is yet [0930D] sublime in the knowledge of the Creator; and that the sacraments of redemption, which seemed despised according to the outward form of this world and the estimation of those who had known only what is worldly, are exalted and to be venerated, and above the wisdom of this world, and above reason, and efficacious in doctrine for demonstrating the highest truth. Therefore he shows that divine theology, which used these exemplars in the demonstration of the invisible, proclaims things worthy of God and consonant with the truth; but that the theology of the world, which by the reasoning of the flesh followed the elements of creation, could not grasp the truth of God. And so indeed, that it may be said as in a riddle, Goliath is struck upon his own head by one despised and [0931A] small, and laid low; because the wisdom of this world, swelling on high, is convicted at its very summit of manifest error by the humility of Christian truth. And it is shown that God is found by the humble, and revealed to the humble, and has bestowed the cross of Christ upon believers — which the wisdom of the world could not bestow upon the proud, and upon those who presume of themselves. Therefore we set our theology, and the knowledge of things exalted, and sublime, and invisible, against those who deride and reprove the humble faith — that they themselves may glory, if they can, over things like these which they despise. And if they have found such things, and known the like, by their own wisdom, and their own reason, and their own sense — which they do not fear to prefer to our faith — let them look upon their own theology, and the things they have said about God, things to be blushed at, [0932A] and ridiculous, and incongruous, and false, that they may acknowledge the faith and take up the truth. For on this account God willed to dwell in the nature of man, that the dwelling of man might be in heaven; and for this that One endured human things, that this one might deserve to know divine things. This is the mystery of the humility of God, and the mystery of faith, and the mystery of truth — which the proud in heart did not know, puffed up by their own sense, and by their own wisdom, which was of the flesh, and could not find the wisdom of God, so that it was found to be foolishness which was thought to be wisdom, and was not. In this we have been made sublime beyond them; because the wisdom of God, which by us is believed in the flesh, is despised by them; in glory and majesty it is acknowledged by us, and unknown by them.

## CHAPTER V. *What a hierarchy is, and its arrangement and origin.*

[0931]

[0931B] The things that it behooved me to set down beforehand, in the theology of Dionysius, for the description of the hierarchies and for the understanding of what is to be said, I have set forth in the foregoing chapters, as far as for the time was suggested to my mind. Now it remains that we examine what has been said about these things by the theologian. And because the very surface of the reading is covered with a great depth of words, and hidden by a certain lofty ambiguity of speech that carries and lifts itself up, and is folded up according to the greatness and excellence of the most secret matters, it is necessary that it first be unlocked by a measured, and common, and easy explanation for the understanding. And this will perhaps be the more suitable explanation for those being introduced to the great beginning, since it is not fitting that minds, to be exercised in the meditation of matters so great and so sublime, be [0931C] occupied with the wrappings of words. Which wrappings, although they are set as veils worthy of the venerable secrets for those entering in, nevertheless, when the face is unveiled for the contemplation of the things that are within in the liberty of the spirit, are to be taken out of the way, for the disclosing of the mysteries. This, then, we now undertake, and this is enough for us in the things that we shall say. For as to the rest, if anything be added, let it be from a superabundant gift. Hierarchy, interpreted from the Greek, is called a *sacred* *principality:* and there are three hierarchies, that is, sacred principalities, which we shall name, as we have recalled above. The first and highest hierarchy is the power of the Godhead. The second and middle is the angelic power, made to the likeness of the first power, and established beneath the first power. The third and last hierarchy is [0931D] the human power, made to the likeness of the angelic, and established beneath it, and through that middle one beneath the first and highest. By these hierarchies, that is, sacred principalities, the whole world is governed: among which there is the highest power, which only commands, and the lowest, which is only commanded; and the middle, which commands the lower, and is commanded by the higher. The highest, therefore, and first power established the second and third power after itself, in the angels and in men, that they might be both conformed to it by participation in virtue, and fellow-workers by fellowship [0932B] in power. And he divided the gifts of the virtues, and according to the divisions of the gifts distributed the offices of the powers; and he gave very many gifts, and established many powers, and all the gifts from one, and all power under one; and one in all, and all things toward one, and in one. But the angelic hierarchy the theologian shows first. Second, he treats of the human. Third, as at the end and consummation, of the divine and highest. But the angelic itself he subdivides into three hierarchies, and each of the three he distinguishes by three orders, so that the number of the nine angelic orders may be completed. And every hierarchy is of one power and one office and one dignity, and in each hierarchy he establishes both first, and middle, and last orders. And the first indeed [0932C] give light; the last are given light; but the middle both are given light by the first, and give light to the last. After these things he pursues, concerning the last hierarchy likewise, the divisions of gifts, and the distributions of powers and dignities, and the offices, and the orders, and the operations, ordered after the likeness of the angelic hierarchy. At the last, ascending to the divine, and simple, and super-excellent hierarchy (so far as is possible for one contemplating amid human things), and bringing them to consummation in it, this consummated whole is the summit. But the beginning (since it is the highest good), being one, is wondrously multiplied and varied for the comeliness and beauty of division and outpouring into all who are worthy of participation in it, so that in it all may be one; since its gifts are lights, and the lights make [0932D] shining things, and the things illumined are shining, and themselves illuminating, and they become light — shining things, and illuminating lights. They are light, and one light everywhere, and the shining things are one in the one light; and the one is multiplied in the many, and the many are united in the one. From this, therefore, theology begins, because the shining and illuminating lights are divine mirrors; and in them is seen the light shining and illuminating, which remains incomprehensible and inaccessible in itself. And for this reason, that it may be seen, it goes out into them, and pours itself into them, that they may grasp it, and [0933A] receive it, and see in themselves, shining from it. For those that do not shine from it cannot see or grasp it, because without light not even the light itself can be seen. And these are indeed beautiful images of the light unto the invisible outpouring, so that through visible things the invisible may be seen. For that good, and the light itself, is not this light; and yet according to something it is light, and can truly be called light; and when it is called light, the truth is spoken, because it is light, and it is the image of that light. And what is in this light is in that good; since the light itself is good from that good, and is wholly in it, because it is wholly from it: for it does not, when it began to be from it, cease [0934A] to be in it; but it proceeded from it, and remained in it. Therefore the image serves, and the creature shows the Maker, since it was made for this, that he might be seen in it. Therefore the gifts are illuminating lights, and the lights that partake are illumined, and themselves illuminating, and like to the illuminating light. In that they are illumined, they become partakers of grace. But in that they give light, they are made consorts of power. And every hierarchy consists of these two, and is perfected by grace and by office, by virtue and by ministry — all of which are shown theologically by likenesses, and figures, and various riddles taken from visible things.

## BOOK TWO. There follow the titles of the fifteen chapters of the celestial or angelic hierarchy of the blessed Dionysius the Areopagite, to Timothy; after which the text of each several chapter will be set down according to John Scotus; and after the text, the exposition of our Hugh.

[0933]

- CHAP. I. *That the divine illumination, coming forth variously unforeseen according to goodness, remains simple; and not this only, but it also unifies the things illumined.*
- CHAP. II. *How beautifully the divine and heavenly things are manifested through dissimilar symbols.*
- CHAP. III. *What a hierarchy is, and what things are understood through a hierarchy.*
- CHAP. IV. *What the appellation of angels signifies.*
- CHAP. V. *Why all the heavenly essences are commonly called angels.*
- CHAP. VI. *Which is the first arrangement of the heavenly essences, which the middle, which the last.*
- CHAP. VII. *On the seraphim, and cherubim, and on the thrones, and on their first hierarchy.*
- CHAP. VIII. *On the dominions, and virtues, and powers, and on their middle hierarchy.*
- CHAP. IX. *On the princes, and archangels, and angels, and on their last hierarchy.*
- CHAP. X. *A recapitulation and gathering of the angelic ordering.*
- CHAP. XI. *Why all the heavenly essences are commonly called heavenly virtues.*
- CHAP. XII. *Why, in respect of men, the high priests are called angels,*
- CHAP. XIII. *Why the prophet Isaiah is said to have been purged by a Seraph.*
- CHAP. XIV. *What the angelic number that has been handed down signifies.*
- CHAP. XV. *What are the formative images of the angelic virtues, and what follows.*

## TITLE OF CHAPTER I. *That the divine illumination, coming forth variously unforeseen according to goodness, remains simple; and not this only, but it also unifies the things illumined.*

## THE TEXT.

[0933B]

« *Every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights [n: (Jac. I)]*. » *But also every procession of the manifestation of lights, the Father being moved, coming forth into us most excellently and abundantly: again, as a unifying power restoring us, fills us anew, and turns us back to the unity of the gathering Father, and to the deifying simplicity. For from him are all things, and unto him [n: (Rom. XI)]*, *as the divine word says. Therefore, calling upon Jesus, the paternal light, that which is, that which is true, that which « illumines every man coming into this world [n: (Joan. I)]* » *through whom we have had access to the principal light, the Father [n: (Ephes. II)]*: *upon the illuminations handed down in the Father of the most holy oracles, we shall look, as far as is possible. And the hierarchies of the heavenly minds, manifested to us from them symbolically and anagogically, [0933C] we shall consider, as far as we are able. And beholding [0934B] the principal, and super-principal brightness of the divine Father — which manifests to us in figured symbols the most blessed hierarchies of the angels — with immaterial and untrembling eyes of the mind, we are again restored from it into the single ray of that light. For neither is the ray itself anywhere, nor is it ever, forsaken by its own singular unity. But toward the anagogic and unifying tempering of the things that have been provided, it is most excellently and beautifully multiplied, and comes forth; and it remains within itself, securely, uniformly fixed in an unchangeable likeness; and toward those who look upon it, as far as is lawful, it extends itself proportionally to them, and unifies them according to the simple unity of itself. For neither is it possible for the divine ray to shine upon us otherwise than anagogically wrapped about with a variety of sacred veils, and connaturally and properly prepared, by the paternal providence, for those things that are according to [0934C] us. On account of which [sic: *quoae*], judging our most holy hierarchy [0935A] worthy of the celestial hierarchies by a supra-mundane imitation, the most perfect arrangement of sacred things both handed down the said immaterial hierarchies, varying them by material figures and formal compositions, so that we might proportionally ascend, for our very selves, from the most sacred formations into the simple and unfigured heights and likenesses. For neither is it possible for our mind to ascend to that immaterial imitation and contemplation of the celestial hierarchies, unless it use the material hand-leading that is according to itself. Deeming, indeed, the visible forms to be imaginations of the invisible beauty, and the sensible sweetnesses to be figures of the invisible distribution, and the material lights to be an image of the immaterial refulgence, and the sacred disciplines run through according to the intellect to be an image of the contemplative fullness, [0935B] and the ordered habits of the dispositions of the things that are here to be an image of things united and ordered toward the divine, and the very reception of the most divine eucharist to be an image of the participation of Jesus — and whatever other things are handed down to the heavenly essences in a supra-mundane way, but to us symbolically. On account, therefore, of this our co-rational deification, the merciful beginning of perfection, both manifesting to us the heavenly hierarchies, and making our hierarchy their fellow-minister unto virtue and unto our likeness, described the deiform sanctification of those super-celestial intellects in sensible images, in the sacred compositions of the oracles, that he might lead us back through sensible things to intelligible things, and from sacredly figured symbols to the simple summits of the celestial hierarchies.*

## EXPOSITION.

[0935C]

The first book of Dionysius the Areopagite the theologian, which is entitled On the Celestial Hierarchy, that is, on the celestial principate, is woven together of fifteen chapters: in which he carefully enumerates the gifts of the celestial spirits, and their offices, powers, and operations, through their several orders and grades and distributions and differences. And the title of the first chapter is: That every divine illumination, coming forth in various unforeseen ways according to goodness, remains simple, and not this alone, but also unifies the things illuminated. For grace itself is a divine illumination, and the gifts of grace themselves are lights illuminating those who partake of them; and all grace [0935D] descends from one fount, and every illumination from one light; and there are many rays, and one light: and the one light scatters itself, that it may illuminate many; and the many illuminated shine, and nothing is seen but one light, and they become one light in one light. By such a likeness theology shows how the one good offers itself to be partaken by many, that they may be one in it — they who draw one likeness from it. Then the theologian goes on, and shows that the invisible operations of grace, and the distributions of the invisible gifts, cannot be demonstrated or understood except by visible signs and likenesses; and that every visible appearance and sensible nature holds some likeness for the demonstration of invisible things. For as every good is from the [0936A] highest good, so in every good, according to the emulation of participation, the highest good can be contemplated. And therefore it is fitting for theology to conform, out of every appearance and form and sensible quality, to the signification of invisible things. And this is the sense of the first chapter. « Every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, descending from the Father of lights. » By apostolic authority, and that of divine theology, he first proves that every good is from the highest good; then from his own opinion he adds that every good looks toward and is poured back to the highest good; because, as it is divided among many by participation, so the many are united in one likeness and imitation. The best gifts are the gifts of nature; the perfect gifts are the gifts of grace; the Father of lights is the author and bestower of the gifts.

[0936B] « Every best gift, therefore, and every perfect gift, is from above, descending from the Father of lights, » since all goods — whether those which nature, first well established, received, or those which afterward, glorified through grace, it merited to obtain — are given by one author of nature and bestower of grace. For which to descend, as it were, was to come from the fount of highest fullness to the participation of lower things. For every creature is by nature inferior to the excellence of the Creator; and therefore every good which by the Creator's gift is poured into the creature is rightly said, as it were, to descend to lower things. For it descends, because it pours itself into a nature subject and inferior in dignity. It descends also, because from a perfect and consummate fullness it divides itself into that participation [0936C] which is in part. Yet in such a way that neither in descending is it enslaved, nor in being divided does it decrease; but, remaining in itself what it is, and in that from which it came, it offers itself, so far as it may, to those to whom it comes; and what being they receive, and how much being in that which they are, they have merited. Thus from one good all goods are; and in one good all goods are; and the good itself, from which all goods are, is good, and is light; and of the things which are from it, it is the author of goods and Father of lights; and the goods themselves are lights, and illuminating those things which are able to shine, and to become shining lights from the illuminating light. For this good leaves nothing established by it estranged from it; and yet it illuminates only those things which it created toward itself and formed according to itself. For those [0936D] alone receive light which can shine from the light — which the coming light finds not unlike itself; and, poured in, it raises them to a greater likeness of itself and a more perfect outward image. These alone, therefore, receive the best gifts and the perfect gifts; because every creature (except that one which has the image of its founder and is capable of likeness), if in its own kind it is a good — which it received from the Creator to be — was neither best when it was given, nor perfect and consummate. But the rational creature, which alone was made to the image of its founder, has received both the given things and the gifts. The best, indeed, while it was being established toward the lowest; and the perfect, while it was being lifted toward the highest. For nothing better was given to any other nature than what it first received, nor anything more perfect than what it afterward [0937A] merited to be, since it was both first established good before all the rest, and afterward perfected to the image and likeness of him by whom it was made. Therefore the best gifts and the perfect gifts, descending from the Father of lights, reach only the loftiness of the rational creature, which alone was made sublime. First, while it was being granted them, the best; and afterward, while it was being glorified, it is made perfect, in a certain manner conformed and coequal to the highest. For the best gifts themselves and the perfect gifts are lights, which descend from the Father of lights; and he from whom they descend, the Father of lights, is himself light, and those into whom they descend themselves become lights; because neither could the Father of light beget another than he himself is, nor can the receiver of light become other than light. If therefore he who begot light is light [0937B], and he who received light is light, now in a certain manner both he who begot and he who received are found to be the same. Yet in such a way that the one is believed to be this by nature, but the other is acknowledged to be this by grace. For this reason, therefore, the one light poured itself out into many lights by participation, that it might reform the many illuminated toward the one light, so that, while many received it by partaking of it, all might appear one in its form. Therefore the theologian, when he had shown from divine authority that every good is from the highest good, at once adds from his own opinion: That every good is toward the highest good, and that it is both poured forth from it by the division of participation, and united to it by the likeness of conformation.

[0937C] « Every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, descending from the Father of lights. » In this, therefore, he proves that every good is from the highest good. After this he adds that every good has its conversion, and its leading-back, and its end toward the highest good. « But also, the Father being moved, every procession of the manifestation of lights, coming forth into us most excellently and largely, again, as a unifying power, restoring us, fills us, and converts us to the unity of the gathering Father, and to the deifying simplicity. » The movement of the Father is the affection of fatherly kindness; for by kindness alone and by mercy alone the Father is moved to pour out his lights upon us. He is moved not by any disturbance of himself, but by compassion for us. He is moved, not shaking himself, but gathering us; not emptying himself, but filling us. [0937D] He is moved, therefore, that he may come to us, and he is not moved so as to depart from himself. He is moved, that he may begin to be to us what he was not, and he is not moved so as to cease being to himself what he was. Thus, therefore, the Father of lights is moved upon us, and, the Father being moved, his lights descend into us, and by the things proceeding into us they are manifested through us. First to us, after this to others from us; and all this procession of the manifestation of lights — that is, through which the lights are manifested (for they would not be manifested unless they proceeded) — goes forth from the Father when he is moved. That is, all this procession of the manifestation of lights, coming forth into us, works this: namely, that it fills us — by nothing other, indeed, than itself, out of that with which it fills us — again restoring us by repairing, as it established us by punishments in creating. It restores us, namely, inasmuch as it is a unifying [0938A] power, which gathers what is scattered, composes what is diverse, and out of many makes one; and thus, restoring and reforming, it converts us, who before had been turned away by unlikeness, made diverse by multitude, made perverse by depravity. It converts us, I say, to the unity of the gathering Father, and to the deifying simplicity. For the light of the Father, invisible in itself, proceeding into us and going forth to manifestation, finds us empty and void of the true good; and, pouring itself into us, fills us according to the power and capacity of each one of us; and when it has filled us, it converts us, that we may not be at variance with the Father, but in the same likeness and image may look toward him, by which we are not in discord with him. It fills, indeed, by illuminating; and it converts by making us lights. For we are filled in that we receive light; but we are converted [0938B] in that, from the light received, we too are lights. For in this we are one with the light, and in the light we are one, that we are light; and there is unity in one likeness, in one light, in one brightness, and one illuminating and shining light. Since, therefore, every good is from the highest good, and every good is toward the highest good; for from it we receive that we are one with it; nor would there be in us anything by which we might look toward it, unless first what is its own became ours through it. « For from him are all things, and unto him, as the divine word says. » That is, as the authority of the divine word testifies, all things proceeding from him, converted unto him; from him as beginning unto him as end. But we can also, moreover, not unfittingly take the movement of the Father as the beginning of our [0938C] contemplation. For the mind, accustomed to its own darkness, when it strives to contemplate the inner brightness, as though with trembling and groping eyes not enduring the force of the unwonted radiance, is beaten back by the very first rays of the sight; and the light appears to it as though quivering; and the light itself seems to be moved, when rather its own darkness alone is moved and flees the presence of the flashing light. And this seems to be the movement of the light, when it is the light of the fleeing darkness; and after this movement the lights are poured out, and proceed to manifestation — lights which, while the darkness stood, could not be seen — and they fill us with light, that we may shine, and be lights, just as the light itself is which illuminates us, so that from it are all things [0938D] and unto it; things which receive the beginning of their subsistence from it, and the end of their consummation in it, as the divine word through Paul the apostle testifies: « For from him, and through him, and in him are all things: to him be glory forever. Amen [n: (Rom. XI)]. »

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

« Therefore, invoking Jesus, the paternal light, which is, [and] true, which illuminates every man coming into this world [n: (Joan. I)]; through whom we have had access to the principal light, the Father; we shall look, as far as is possible, upon the illuminations handed down by the Father in the most sacred oracles, and we shall consider, as far as we are able, the hierarchies of the celestial spirits made manifest by them to us symbolically and anagogically. » In the preceding chapter he has briefly comprised the sum of the following work, namely [0939A] that every good is from the highest good, and every good is toward the highest good. Now, before he enters upon the text of his subject-matter, he makes an invocation to Jesus, who is the paternal light, by whose mediation all spiritual illuminations and gifts of graces are bestowed on those to be illuminated, so that, with him illuminating and helping, according to the traditions of the divine oracles — which themselves too were handed down by the Father for the illuminating of the hearts of men — he may be able both truly to recognize and worthily to narrate the invisible illuminations and sacred dispositions of the celestial spirits. « Therefore, invoking Jesus; » as if he said: Every illumination indeed is from the Father, but without Jesus the mediator no illumination can be had. « Therefore » we, who ask to be illuminated, « invoking Jesus, » namely that we may merit to be illuminated [0939B]. Then there follows, concerning Jesus Christ himself, that it is « the paternal light; » instead of what he ought to have said, "who is the paternal light," the reference has been made to the following expression, "which is the paternal light." Or, « invoking Jesus, the paternal light, » which, namely, is light; that is, it has true and eternal and unchangeable being, and is light from that which it is. For it is as with the illuminated lights, which are lights not from that which they are, but from that which they have received. For which phrase "true light" — the word "light" too is understood — because from that which it is, it shines, and it shines not only for itself, but also illuminates others. Which « illuminates every man coming into this world. » Not because all are illuminated; but because of all men [0939C] there is none who has of himself why he should merit to be illuminated rather than another. For this illumination is of grace, not of nature; a gift, not a debt; the benefit of the giver, not the reward of the receiver. For either this light illuminates every man coming into this world inasmuch as all were made by nature capable of reason, and received the light of understanding. Or this light illuminates every man coming into the world; not because all, as has been said, are illuminated; but because all who are either illuminated or not illuminated have no means of being illuminated from elsewhere. For to illuminate belongs to none but the light; as to be illuminated belongs to none but the one receiving the light. Wherefore, as it belongs to all to receive light, so it belongs to the light alone to illuminate all.

[0939D] There follows: « Through whom we have had access to the principal light, the Father. » Through the light Jesus we have had access to the light the Father. For Jesus is light, and the Father of Jesus is light; and the Son, light, was begotten of the Father, light; and the Father and the Son are one light. And the Father is called the principal light, not because he is a greater light or a better light, since he is the same light; but because he is light not from light, therefore the principal light. The Son is light from light, the Father is light not from light; and yet the Father and Son are one light, as the Father and Son are one God. And therefore the Father is the principal light, because from the Father, light, the Son, light. It can, moreover, be understood also in another way, that the Father is called the principal light. For I see that the Son himself too is light in a certain respect, in which he cannot be equal [0940A] to the Father. For the Father of Jesus is God, and God only; but the Son is God, and not only God, but also man and God; and Jesus is light in that he is God; and the same light which the Father, God, is. But in that he is man, he is light, since the very humanity of Jesus too was light in that it demonstrated the truth, and revealed the principal light, the Father. But the light of the humanity of Jesus was less than the light of the deity; and in the light of humanity indeed Jesus was inferior to the Father, but in the light of divinity the same as the Father. And we come through him — through the light of his humanity, in which was the Son alone — to the light of the divinity, in which was the Father and the Son. Therefore we have had access through the Son to the Father; and not to the Father alone, but both to the Son and to the Father. I see also another access [0940B] through Jesus to the principal light, the Father. For Jesus is the wisdom of the Father, and this wisdom revealed the Father, and the wisdom of the Father went forth, the Father remaining in the hidden place: and the Father remained invisible, and his wisdom was made visible, that it might lead through to the invisible Father; and when it was made visible, it did not cease to be invisible, because it came thither where it was not: thence, where it was, it did not withdraw. And it went forth first through the creature of the world, and manifested itself in its works: and, invisible, it began to be seen visibly in that which was visible, and a certain light was shown, that it might lead to a greater light: and the first light was of wisdom, and the second light was wisdom. And Jesus was made for us the way to the Father; from the inferior light to the principal light. Then wisdom came a second time [0940C], and went forth, as has been said, through the flesh, and became light in an earthen vessel, that it might illuminate us, and accustom us to the greater light, and lead us through to the principal light. But thus also we have had access through Jesus to the principal light, the Father. « Therefore, invoking Jesus, the paternal light, which is, which is true, which illuminates every man coming into this world: through whom we have had access to the principal light, the Father. » Up to this point the sentence hangs, until it is completed by what follows; and the sense is this. We, invoking Jesus, shall look, as far as is possible for us, upon the illuminations of the most sacred oracles — that is, upon the most sacred oracles, which illuminate us by the teaching of truth and the understanding of secrets — handed down [0940D] by the Father. For the illuminations of the divine oracles were handed down by the Father, that we might be illuminated by them, until we are made capable of the contemplation of the principal light; and, with them illuminating us, we now recognize the celestial secrets which we are not yet able to comprehend by sense. We can also take the "illuminations of the most sacred oracles" to mean the descriptions of the sacred oracle, and the configurations drawn from visible forms, in which it demonstrates to us, from the proposed likeness, the state of invisible things and the reason and manner of the celestial secrets. For by these very visible signs the human mind is more conveniently instructed and illuminated to the knowledge of invisible things. Therefore almost everywhere in the sacred oracle the appearances of visible things are employed for signification, [0941A] when the human mind is instructed concerning those things which are hidden from human understanding, so that through the things it knows it may be able to grasp and understand the things it does not know. These illuminations, set before us outwardly for instruction, we ought — invoking Jesus, who inwardly illuminates hearts — to examine, and according to their demonstration to learn the celestial secrets.

This is what follows: « And we shall consider, as far as we are able, the hierarchies of the celestial spirits made manifest by them to us symbolically and anagogically. » The order, then, is this: that first we examine the illuminations of the Holy Scriptures with the invocation of Jesus, through whom the inward illumination is given and without whom the outward is empty; and then, with Jesus illuminating, from these illuminations and demonstrations of Holy Scripture [0941B] we consider the sacred principates and powers of the celestial spirits, that is, of the celestial spirits (which, unless they were made manifest to us through the traditions of Holy Scripture, would be altogether invisible and unknown to us). For this is what he says: « We shall consider, as far as we are able, » or as far as we can. For our ability is small and scanty for the magnitude of such great things. « We shall consider the hierarchies, » that is, the sacred principates of the celestial spirits, that is, of the angelic spirits. The hierarchies, I say, made manifest to us, that is, demonstrated, or revealed by them, namely by the illuminations, that is, by the demonstrations of the sacred oracle, symbolically and anagogically. A symbol is the bringing-together of visible forms for the demonstration of invisible things. But anagogy [0941C] is the ascent, or elevation, of the mind for contemplating the things above. Here he notes a twofold mode of divine revelation, which was poured into the minds of the theologians and prophets through visions and demonstrations, which the Greeks call theophanies, that is, divine apparitions. Since sometimes invisible things were demonstrated through signs like to sensible things, sometimes through anagogy alone, that is, the ascent of the mind, purely contemplated in the things above. From these two kinds of visions, two kinds of descriptions also were formed in the sacred oracle. One, by which the truth of hidden things is shadowed forth by forms and figures and likenesses. The other, by which it is expressed nakedly and purely, as it is, without covering. When, therefore, [0941D] that which is hidden is manifested by forms and signs and likenesses, or that which is manifest is described, it is a symbolic demonstration. But when it is shown [d: by pure] by pure and naked revelation, or taught by plain and open narration, it is anagogic.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « And, looking with immaterial and untrembling eyes of the mind upon the principal and super-principal brightness of the divine Father, which manifests to us in figured symbols the most blessed hierarchies of the angels, again from it we are restored into the single ray of it. » Here he plainly teaches by what grades the procession of the divine illumination takes place down to us; and again by what advances our mind is led back to the contemplation of the highest brightness. For the divine light first descends into the angelic nature [0942A], and from it, by revelations and divine demonstrations and the mystical narration of the sacred oracle, transfuses itself even to our understanding and participation. But the human mind, again ascending by the same grades to the things above, by the sacred inspection of the divine oracle weighs the celestial secrets and that illumination of the divine brightness which is in the angels: from which, gradually growing up into the recognition of invisible things, it at last becomes strong enough to contemplate the very splendor of the highest light; and there comes about what was said at the beginning, that the one light both divides itself for the illuminating of many, so that it may reform all the illuminated to the sight and likeness of one brightness. Therefore, the brightness of the celestial spirits being known from the sacred traditions of the divine oracle, he shows how the contemplation [0942B] of the highest light follows upon this knowledge, saying: « And, looking with immaterial and untrembling eyes of the mind upon the principal and super-principal brightness of the divine Father, which manifests to us in figured symbols the most blessed hierarchies of the angels, again from it we are restored into the single ray of it. » The order of the words is: We, looking upon the principal and super-principal brightness of the divine Father with immaterial and untrembling eyes of the mind — which brightness manifests to us the most blessed hierarchies of the angels in figured symbols — again from it we are restored into its single ray. For, looking upon the brightness of the Father, we are restored, that is, reformed again — that is, being turned back reductively to that whence we came — into his single ray, [0942C] that in one light we may be one, we who shine from one light, and that there may be no discrepancy of the shining ones, just as there is no diversity of the lights. But the brightness of the Father is called principal and super-principal, because it is superior to all shining things not only in dignity or in being their cause, but also loftier in nature. And this brightness, because it is not corporeal but spiritual, and shines spiritually: therefore it can be seen only by immaterial, that is, incorporeal, eyes. Which eyes must also be untrembling, that is, sound and clear-sighted and unbeaten-back, lest, gazing upon so great a light with bleary keenness, they bring darkness upon themselves out of the very brightness. And rightly, after the brightness of the angels has been contemplated through the sacred oracles, [0942D] we are illuminated to the brightness of the divine Father; because the brightness of the angels itself too is made manifest to us, from the revelation of the sacred oracle, by the brightness of the Father descending through them into us. This is what he says: « *Which, in figured symbols,* » that is, in signs and conformations figured according to visible appearances, manifests to us the most blessed hierarchies of the angels, that is, the principates, dignities, and powers. The orders of the angels, and their powers, and their divine operations are altogether invisible: and unless they are demonstrated by visible signs and by likenesses drawn from visible things, they can in no way be understood by those who have known only visible things. Therefore the brightness of the Father, wishing to restore us to his principal light, first arouses us by the illuminations of the sacred oracle to contemplate the brightness of the angels [0943A], and, illuminated from that brightness, at last reforms us to the recognition of his own brightness and light, that we may be one in it, we who have received one thing from it. But this brightness of the Father, by the emission and illumination of one simple ray, diffuses itself through all things, and penetrates all things, since the Father begot one wisdom, through which he made all his works. For the Word of the Father is light from light; one Word, and one ray, and the Word itself is wisdom, and this wisdom is a proceeding light, by which it is known: one from one, and therefore one ray from one brightness, by which they are illuminated who are reformed toward it, that they may shine from it, and be light with it, just as he is light. And although there are many illuminated lights, shining variously and dissimilarly, yet there is one [0943B] light illuminating in all the illuminated.

This is what follows: « For neither anywhere, nor ever, is the ray itself forsaken by its own singular unity. » For the wisdom of God, although it pours itself variously and dissimilarly into the minds to be spiritually illuminated according to the capacity and possibility of those receiving it, yet in itself remains one and simple. Neither greater in itself in those who abound from it, nor less in those who, according to a lower grace of participation, receive to be united in it; but whole in the whole, and whole in each, transcending the highest and condescending to the lowest, offering itself to be partaken manifoldly, and remaining one in itself. Therefore it divides itself among many partakers, but by the participation of itself it restores the many partakers to unity. For we [0943C] can be gathered in it; but it cannot be divided in us. For the ray itself, that is, the illuminating wisdom itself, going forth from the principal light, the Father, and proceeding even to all things to be illuminated, is never forsaken by its own proper unity, since it is always with it; nor anywhere forsaken, since it is everywhere in it. For even when, through diverse times, it offers itself dissimilarly to the minds to be illuminated, it is the same and undissimilar. And when it shows itself present at once in diverse places and to diverse partners of participation, it is not manifold.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « But for the anagogic and unifying tempering-together of the things that have been provided, it is multiplied and comes forth most excellently and beautifully: and it remains within [0943D] itself securely, uniformly fixed in the unchangeable likeness of its nature: and, to those looking upon it, as far as is right, it extends itself proportionally to them, and unifies them according to the simple unity of itself. » As if he said: The ray of divine brightness, which illuminates those who shine spiritually, although it remains one in itself, is nevertheless variously multiplied by the participation and distribution of gifts, since it is distributed and multiplied in many and diverse ways. But this multiplication and variation is the beauty of all things; since, unless the several things were beautiful dissimilarly, all things together would not be supremely beautiful. For no one thing out of all the diverse things could contain what was the whole of beauty: and therefore the highest beauty was distributed by varied participation among the several things, that [0944A] it might be able to be perfect in all things together. But this distribution itself is multiplied most excellently and beautifully: most excellently in all things, and beautifully in the several, or, most excellently according to the disposition of the partakers. For it is multiplied most excellently, that the good which is perceived by many may be greater; and it is multiplied beautifully, that the comeliness of the whole may be greater — in that it is poured into the several partakers in varied and diverse ways, so that from the numerous multitude in the partakers there may come about the consummation of good, and from the dissimilar distribution the beauty of the partakers. Or the multiplication of the simple ray, by which we are illuminated, can suitably be understood according to the many and diverse figures and likenesses of the divine oracles: by which, taken according to the measure of us, the divine [0944B] wisdom — which in its purity and simplicity is altogether incomprehensible — is declared to human minds variously and manifoldly, although it is itself always one and the same. It is multiplied, therefore, because it is declared in many ways: most excellently indeed as regards itself, and beautifully as regards us. It is multiplied most excellently, because from the very multiplication of declarations it is more perfectly recognized; it is declared beautifully, because it is manifested by the beautiful and seemly appearance and dissimilarity of the forms that declare it. And this multiplication takes place for the tempering-together of those things that have been provided — that is, of the elect and of those provided for life — that they may be tempered together and united by the concord of participation, like many members in one body, so that the very diversity of gifts may confirm among them the fellowship [0944C] of unity and peace: so that each single member may not presume to divide itself from the framework of the whole body, since the fullness of good, which it has less in itself, it possesses in the fellowship of the others. For because each one has what another does not have, therefore each one has in the other what it does not have in itself, or has more in the other what it has less in itself. And therefore the several members tend toward one another and keep concord and peace among themselves: and this concord and peace is the tempering-together by which they agree with one another, that they may stand as one and be reformed to one. For this reason, therefore, he calls the tempering-together of those provided-for anagogic and unifying. Unifying indeed, that they may stand as one; anagogic, that they may be reformed [0944D] to one. Unifying, because it gathers the dispersed into one; anagogic, because it leads back the cast-down to higher things. Unifying, through the love of neighbor; anagogic, through the love of God. Therefore it is beautiful in congregation, best in elevation. Therefore the ray of divine illustration itself, multiplied whether through the distribution of spiritual gifts, by which it is partaken inwardly, or through the variety of mystical demonstrations, by which it is declared outwardly in the sacred oracle, comes forth — that is, proceeds into the hearts to be illuminated — whether from within filling them by inspiration, or from without pouring itself into them by the instruction of the sacred word: and yet it remains within itself securely, so that, while it offers itself to be partaken variously and manifoldly by the minds to be illuminated, it nevertheless does not flow out beyond the simplicity of its [0945A] unity. For its unity itself therefore always remains within itself, because a coessential unchangeableness guards and keeps it, so that, although a plurality of partakers approaches to the communication of it, yet the diversity of participation does not prevail to the division of it. It remains, therefore, within itself securely, that it may always be the same, and may not go out from that which it is into that which it is not: but remaining uniformly fixed in its unchangeable likeness, so that, namely, it may not differ from itself, as though made unlike itself. Nor does it alone remain one, but also to those looking upon it and turned toward it — as far as is right, that is, permitted and possible for them — it extends itself to them, that is, it reaches out so that it may come even to those who are far off, and yet does not withdraw from itself. It extends itself, namely, proportionally, [0945B] that is, so that some receive more, others less [sic: *miuus*], according to the dispensation of the distribution of gifts, or the possibility of the capacity of the partakers. For those who are nearest receive more abundantly from it: and so then each one, the more they approach, the more they receive; and the more they withdraw, the less they receive. Yet all receive; each one according to his part. This is what he says: « It extends itself proportionally, because nevertheless it extends itself to all, and pours itself into all, illuminates all, and makes them to be lights from its own light, and through this makes them to be one, just as it itself is one. And this is what he says: « It unifies them according to the simple unity of itself. » For the one illumination of all is one likeness and one form, in which all are one from it — they who [0945C] are illuminated by it — and one with it, since the illuminated are lights, just as it itself is light. Yet those who are one from it are one by unification, not by unity, because what they are, one out of many, they are one in one. For they themselves are many, and therefore they are not one in that which they are; but, because they are many in one, from one the many are one, and they are one by unification, not by unity. But it itself is one not by unification but by unity, because it is one from that which it is, which is one. And therefore he said "simple unity," because it is one from one, and the same one from which it is, it itself is. Therefore unity in one is simple; but unification is manifold in one, because those are one from one, and one in one: but here [0945D] one out of many, because they are many in one, and one in many. Then he adds the reason why the divine ray, that is, the divine wisdom, which is one from the Father and simple with the Father, is variously multiplied through the likenesses and forms of demonstrations in the sacred oracle: namely, because the invisible wisdom of God could not otherwise become known to us, unless it conformed itself unto likeness to those forms of visible things which we know, and through them expressed to us, by signifying, its invisible things which we do not know. Therefore the divine ray, which in itself is one and simple, coming to us, is multiplied by the variety of significations and demonstrations, because the human mind is not able to grasp it in its purity and simplicity.

[0946A] « For neither is it possible for the divine ray to shine upon us otherwise, unless, by the variety of sacred things, or the mind, [it be] anagogically veiled about, and prepared, connaturally and properly, by the fatherly providence, for those things which are according to us. » The sacred veils, in which the divine ray shines for us, are the mystical descriptions in the sacred oracle, which bring forward visible forms and likenesses of invisible things for their declaration. By which veils, namely, the divine ray itself is anagogically veiled about. For anagogy, as has been said, is called the ascent of the mind, or elevation, into the contemplation of the things above. It is therefore anagogically veiled about, because it is veiled for this end, that it may grow more fully bright; it is covered for this, that it may appear the more. Its overshadowing, therefore, is our illumination; and its veiling-about [0946B] is our elevation. Just as weak eyes freely behold the sun covered by a cloud, which cannot gaze upon its flashing light: so too it is impossible for the divine ray to shine upon the bleary eyes of the mind, unless it be veiled about by the variety of sacred veils and prepared, connaturally and properly, by fatherly providence, for those things which are according to us. For unless fatherly providence had provided for us in this with ineffable goodness, the light of it could not shine at all to our eyes: and therefore it provided for us fatherly and devoutly, that it might prepare that light for us and fit it to those things which are according to us — to things and likenesses and forms: and so, connaturally and properly, that is, according to our nature and the property of those things which belong to our nature, it might show it to us prepared [0946C] and fitted. It conforms itself to our things, that through our things it may become known to us, so that those things which are connatural and proper to us, set forth in demonstration, may more easily be understood by us.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « For which reason also the most perfect disposition of sacred things, judging our most holy hierarchy worthy of the supermundane imitation of the celestial hierarchies, handed down the said immaterial hierarchies too, varying them by material figures and formal compositions. » As if he said: Because invisible things are suitably demonstrated through visible things, therefore the divine Wisdom, which disposes all things to the likeness of the angelic hierarchy, which had been invisibly [0946D] ordered in the heavens, formed the human hierarchy visibly on earth, so that in men too, as in the angels, there might be sacred powers and principates, by which human conduct, proceeding in time, might be governed, so that from the visible disposition of men the invisible disposition of the angels might become known. For this is what he says: For which reason the most perfect disposition of sacred things — that is, the highest hierarchy, the ineffable Trinity itself, from which, and according to which, all sacred things, that is, all sacred ordinations, are disposed — judging our most holy hierarchy, that is, the human, worthy of the supermundane, that is, spiritual or intellectual, imitation of the celestial hierarchies, so that it might imitate them spiritually and be disposed according to them. And therefore "varying," that is, variously and manifoldly [0947A] declaring those same already-mentioned immaterial, that is, spiritual and angelic hierarchies by material, that is, corporeal and visible, or figures taken according to visible things, and by formal compositions, that is, fittingly and competently expressed according to the plan of the formations, "he hands down," that is, institutes, namely our most holy hierarchy itself, so that in this too the reason of visible demonstrations to the invisible truth might be preserved, that we may ascend from these most sacred formations, which are set forth outwardly for demonstration, to the unfigured heights and likenesses, that is, the simple and spiritual ones. Let us ascend, I say, proportionally to our very selves, that is, according to the proportion and measure of spiritual gifts, illuminated [0947B] through the things that are outward, into the recognition of invisible things, and to the sublime and simple truth that ever remains the same. For the heights and likenesses themselves are the invisible powers. Heights indeed by dignity, likenesses by unchangeableness, unfigured by simplicity. To the knowledge of which we ascend proportionally to our very selves, according to the difference of progressions and the increments of illuminations, by the grades of spiritual advancements in us, by the difference of gifts among us. For according to that proportion by which we now perceive the gifts of graces differently, we deservedly afterward pass over into the number of the angels — either here through the contemplation of the mind, or there through retribution. For thus we ascend proportionally to our very selves, when, according to [0947C] the fact that in the present we are disposed differently through the gifts of graces and the grades of dignities, we are lifted up to the participation of invisible truth by a secret and invisible promotion. But the truth itself, in us indeed, is figured figuratively and materially through the offices of spiritual dignities and the grades and distributions of the orders, and is formed according to habits and actions and visible signs, which are set forth in our hierarchy, as it were, for declaration — all which things, in the celestial and angelic hierarchy, according to the simple truth, in a manner sublime and superexcelling our nature, subsist purely and uniformly without signs and figures: according to which excellence theology calls the angelic orders themselves "heights" [0947D] and "likenesses," either because through no mutability do they differ from themselves, or because those things which are in them according to the simple truth seem to be, as it were, certain likenesses and exemplars of the things which subsist through figures and images. For unless there were some likeness between these and those, through these there would be no declaration of those. But now, since the divine wisdom formed these visible things, for the emulation of invisible things, in the first creation, in the second disposition it also established from these same things, for the rational soul ascending to the recognition of invisible things, signs and examples of demonstrations.

For this is what follows: « Since it is not possible for our soul to ascend to that non-material imitation and [0948A] contemplation of the celestial hierarchies, unless by that, » which is according to it, it make use of material hand-leading. By "non-material" he means the spiritual imitation, or contemplation, and the incorporeal; since everything that is corporeal is from matter. But the spiritual nature is rightly called immaterial, since it neither is from matter, so as to be from another, nor can be matter, so that something else be from it. But by "material hand-leading" he understands corporeal signs, by whose hand-leading, as it were, the human mind makes use, so that from visible things it may be directed to the imitation and contemplation of invisible things. To imitation indeed through the exercise of virtue; but to contemplation through the knowledge of truth. But note a new composition and a new likeness in the fact that he says "hand-leading." For the mind [0948B] of man, wrapped about by the darkness of its own ignorance, cannot go out to the light of truth unless it be directed and, like a blind man using a hand to lead him, walk on where he does not see. But these hand-leadings and directions, which the mind uses in tending toward invisible things, are taken from visible signs and from demonstrations formed according to visible things. And all this was disposed and ordered by the most perfect disposition of sacred things, which in Greek is called hierothesia, that is, the placing of sacred things — namely the highest Trinity, from which and according to which all sacred things are disposed and ordered in heaven and on earth — and by another name is called teletarche, that is, the beginning of purgation, since from it is every cleansing and beginning of purgation — not only that the things which are evil may be made good; but also of illustration [0948C] and deification, that the things which were good may be made better. Therefore this highest priesthood, or highest fatherhood, cleansing and sanctifying and illustrating all things, instituted and ordained this: that in the first place, according to it, the angelic nature might be invisibly formed, and in the second place the human nature, aroused through visible things, might be reformed to the same image; because the human soul cannot be led back to the knowledge or imitation of invisible things unless instructed through visible demonstrations, since the visible things themselves too were so made by God that, according to that likeness and emulation which they received toward those invisible things, they can suitably declare the same, so that our soul, using the leading of these, may be directed to those [0948D] according to these, estimating and weighing those things by the likeness of the demonstration.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

As it follows: « judging the visible forms to be imaginations, or images, of invisible beauty, » namely our own mind; « and the sensible sweetnesses figures of the invisible distribution, » — understand, our own mind judging; « and the material lights an image of the immaterial brightness, » so that again it is understood, our own mind judging; « the sacred disciplines run through according to the understanding of contemplative fullness, » here more is to be understood, our mind judging them to be images; « and the ordered dispositions, gathered unto divine things and set in order, of those things which are here, the orders of dispositions, » again understand, our mind judging [0949A] them to be images; « the very reception of the Eucharist of the participation of Jesus, that most divine reception, » again understand it, our mind judging it to be an image. The sum, then, of the whole chapter is this: Since our mind cannot ascend to the imitation and contemplation of invisible things unless it be directed through visible things — in such a way, namely, that from the visible things themselves it may know how to judge and estimate the invisible, according as they bear a likeness to those and effect a signification. But which likenesses of visible things unto invisible things our own mind ought to judge and estimate, he shows by subjoining certain distinct examples, as if he were saying: For this reason the truth of invisible things has been demonstrated through visible things: because our mind cannot ascend to the truth of those invisible things themselves unless it be instructed through the [0949B] consideration of visible things — in such a way, namely, that it may judge the visible forms to be imaginations of invisible beauty. For since in the forms of visible things their beauty consists, he fittingly says that invisible beauty is demonstrated from visible forms, since visible beauty is an image of invisible beauty. Yet because in visible things form is one thing and essence another, therefore whatever things are visible are mutably beautiful, since whatever things are diverse in number and by nature mutable do not inseparably subsist together. But invisible things, in which form is not one thing and essence another — since everything that is, is one and simple, and the same being — are beautiful from the very fact that they are; and their beauty is not compacted out of [0949C] many things running together into one, as the visible nature is seen to be, whose form is unfolded according to the spaces of places and is arranged through figures fitted together out of many. Therefore the beauty of the visible nature is one thing, and that of the invisible nature another, since the latter is simple and uniform, but the former manifold and led together by a varied proportion. There is nevertheless some likeness of visible beauty to invisible beauty, according to the emulation which the invisible Artificer established between the two, in which, as it were, certain reflections of diverse proportions fashion one image. According to this, then, the human mind, fittingly roused, ascends from visible beauty to invisible beauty; as though led [0949D] from like to like, easily understanding within itself, invisibly, what kinship there is to invisible things in the things which it comprehends outwardly and visibly. For according to the invisible light implanted in it, our mind, looking to invisible things, easily judges the visible forms to be images of invisible beauty, corresponding by a certain friendly likeness to that which it itself has invisibly within, finding them according to its approval and affection. For what is in the mind is invisible, just as the mind itself is invisible; and yet it, which is invisible, conceives from those things which are visible joy, and love, and affection; and it loves out of these certain things as though like, and friendly, and akin, and yields itself to them willingly, and exults in them. But others it spurns, and hates, and shuns, and puts itself far [0950A] from them, in love and delight; and it judges them foreign to itself, and discordant, and having no likeness with itself. And in this manner our mind is taught, from its own nature, that visible things have kinship and likeness to invisible things; and that the visible things themselves are images and likenesses of those things which cannot be seen visibly, since from these are understood those things which are not seen; and because, according to something, the whole of that which the mutable nature has here received visibly and sensibly subsists there invisibly in the immutable nature, so that it may lead to invisible things. For here there is a shape and form which delights the sight; there is also the pleasantness of melody, which soothes the hearing; there is the sweetness of odor, which restores the smell; there is the sweetness of savor, which pours into [0950B] the taste; and the softness of bodies, which cherishes and gently receives the touch. But there the shape is virtue, and the form justice, the sweetness love, and the odor desire; the song indeed joy and exultation; and the touch the finding of the loved, and desired, and sought good. For all these things are there, and are true there, and have with these things, which are not true, some likeness according to which they are understood by us. For from these our mind ascends to the knowledge and imitation of those things, judging the visible forms — which either nature shows implanted according to the first condition, or the sacred word sets forth dispensatively as a signification, to make a declaration — to be images of invisible beauty; and the sensible sweetnesses, that is, the sensible delights, to be figures and likenesses [0950C] of the invisible distribution, that is, of the sweetness which is distributed invisibly, that is, bestowed in diverse ways: namely, that one may receive more, another less, according to measure, and the gifts of the bounteous Giver. And likewise, that the material, that is, corporeal lights are an image of the immaterial brightness, that is, of spiritual light; and again, that the sacred disciplines, that is, the things investigated and searched out by the intellect, are images of contemplative fullness, that is, of full and perfect contemplation, which is both perceived and ministered according to the understanding, that is, intellectually only and invisibly. For all that knowledge which we now learn through the sacred word by the study of reading or meditation is, as it were, only an image of that full [0950D] and perfect knowledge which we shall afterward draw from the contemplation that is to come. Whence the Apostle also says: « We see now through a glass, in a riddle; but then face to face [n: (I Cor. XIII)]. » What wonder is it, then, if those sensible things which appear outwardly are said to be images of invisible things, when our very knowledge, which in comparison with these is believed to be spiritual and invisible, is reckoned to hold the place of an image and likeness in relation to those things?

There follows: « and the ordered dispositions, gathered unto divine things, of those things which are here, the orders of dispositions. » Again understand, our mind judging the orders of dispositions: « which dispositions are here, » that is, exteriorly, to be images of a state gathered unto divine things. For there is a certain state of the good mind gathered [0951A] unto divine things, and, as it were, collected into one out of the various rents of desires, and set in order, so that it may go forward rightly. Gathered, namely, through love, and set in order through discretion. Gathered unto one, and ordered in one. Of which state, invisibly ordered and subsisting, the orders of dispositions are images, which are dispensed outwardly in the grades, and offices, and ministries in the holy Church. For just as in one Church diverse orders and dispositions effect one peace and concord in the whole, by ministering and cooperating, so in one soul many virtues, by cooperating and ministering to one another, compose one form of perfection. But also, in each one of us, the disposition of the outer man, and the order of living, and the manner of acting, demonstrate the form [0951B] and state of the inner man.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « and the very reception of the most divine Eucharist of the participation of Jesus. » Again understand, as above, our mind judging the reception itself of the most divine Eucharist to be an image of the participation of Jesus. For the very reception of the most divine Eucharist, that is, of the most holy partaking of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, which we now handle sacramentally and visibly upon the altar, is an image and form of that participation of Jesus by which either now we are joined to him in spirit through love, or afterward, appearing in the same form of glory, we shall be united to him in full likeness. Now here it is to be noted that certain men have thought to allege from this passage a bulwark for their error, saying that in the sacrament of the altar there is not the truth [0951C] of the body and blood of Christ, but only an image and figure of it: for this reason, because the Scripture says that what is taken in the Eucharist of the altar is an image of that which will be received in the participation of Jesus. Who assuredly would not fall into this snare of error, if they either received the sacraments of God with a right and humble faith, or handled the sacred Scriptures with a fitting understanding. But now, because in the sacraments of God they prefer their own sense to faith, and in the sacred Scriptures scorn to hold the sound form of interpretation, it comes about that the very word of truth makes them grow yet more blind, while, not rightly understood, it ministers error in place of truth. Which, however, is not the fault of Scripture, but the blindness of those who read and do not understand; [0951D] nor a confusion of the sacraments of God, but the depravity of the presumptuous. Here, however, they have erred perilously, preferring one ambiguous thing to so many manifest sentences and undoubted assertions, and choosing in it the lie rather than the truth — not because this was more said there, but because this was more believed by them. For what? Is the sacrament of the altar therefore not truth, because it is a figure? Then neither is the death of Christ truth, because it is a figure; and the resurrection of Christ is not truth, because it is a figure. For that both the death of Christ and the resurrection are a figure, and are an image, and a likeness, and a sacrament, and an example, the Apostle plainly declares, saying: « Christ died for our sins, and rose again for our justification [0952A]: that, dead to sins, we might live to justice [n: (I Cor. XV)]. » And the apostle Peter said: « Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example, that you should follow his steps [n: (I Petr. II)]. » Therefore the death of Christ was an example, that we might die to sin, and his resurrection was an example, that we might live to justice. Was it therefore not truth? Then Christ did not truly die, and did not truly rise again, if his death, or resurrection, was not true. God forbid! For of him it is written: « Surely he himself hath borne our infirmities, and himself carried our sorrows » [n: (Isa. LIII)]. Therefore the death of Christ was true, and yet was an example; and the resurrection of Christ was true, and yet was an example. Why then can the sacrament of the altar not be both a likeness and a truth? In one thing indeed [0952B] a likeness, and in another a truth. For, since the sacrament is one, three distinct things are there set forth, namely: the visible appearance, and the truth of the body, and the virtue of spiritual grace. For the visible appearance, which is visibly discerned, is one thing. The truth of the body and blood, which under the visible appearance is invisibly believed, is another. And the spiritual grace, which is invisibly and spiritually received together with the body and blood, is yet another. For what we see is the appearance of bread and wine; but what we believe under that appearance is the true body and true blood of Christ Jesus, which hung upon the cross, and which flowed from his side. Nor is only the body and blood signified through the bread and wine; but under the appearance of bread and wine the true body and true blood is consecrated. And indeed the visible appearance [0952C] is a sacrament of the true body and true blood; but the body and blood is a sacrament of spiritual grace. And just as there the appearance is discerned, whose reality or substance is not believed to be there, so there the reality is believed to be truly and substantially present, whose appearance is not discerned. For the appearance of bread and wine is seen, and the substance of bread and wine is not believed. But the substance of the body and blood of Christ is believed, and yet its appearance is not discerned.

What, then, is seen according to the appearance is a sacrament, and an image of that which is believed according to the truth of the body; and what is believed according to the truth of the body is a sacrament of that which is received according to spiritual grace. The sacrament, then, [0952D] of the altar and the divine Eucharist is, in the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, both an image according to the appearance of bread and wine, in which it is discerned, and a reality according to the truth of its own substance, in which it is there believed and received. And again, that we now visibly, according to the appearance of the sacrament, and corporeally, according to the truth of flesh and blood, take Christ upon the altar, is a sacrament and image of the fact that we ought to take that same one invisibly and spiritually, according to the infusion of grace and the participation of his Spirit, in the heart. Therefore the most divine Eucharist, which upon the altar is handled visibly and corporeally both according to the appearance of bread and wine and according to the truth of the body and blood of Christ, is a sacrament, and a sign, and an image [0953A] of the invisible and spiritual participation of Jesus, which is accomplished within, in the heart, through faith and love. For the Wisdom of God, which manifests itself through the visible, willed to show that it is itself the food and refreshment of minds; and therefore it set forth the assumed flesh as food, that through the food of the flesh it might invite to the taste of the Godhead. But, lest again human weakness should shrink from the touch of flesh in the receiving, it veiled it with the appearance of the accustomed and principal food, and thus set it forth to be taken, so that the sense might be cherished in the one, and faith built up in the other. For the sense is cherished in the one, while it perceives only the usual and accustomed; but faith is built up in the other, while in that which it sees it recognizes what manner of thing that is which it does not see. The appearance of bread and wine is therefore set forth, that it may be taught [0953B] that there is full and perfect refreshment in the taking of the body and blood of Christ from the Godhead of Christ. Now full refreshment is food and drink; but of food and drink, bread and wine is the principal substance. And the appearance is set forth from the principal substance of refreshment, that in it may be taken, and through it may be signified, the truth of the body and blood, as he himself testifies, saying: « My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed [n: (Joan. VI)]. » Yet that this taking of the body and blood, alone and without a spiritual effect, does not confer salvation, the same Savior himself manifests, saying: « The flesh profiteth nothing; it is the spirit that quickeneth [n: (ibid.)]. » Therefore the virtue and fullness of the spiritual refreshment which is in the body and blood of Christ is signified indeed through the appearance of bread and wine; [0953C] but it is accomplished in the receiving of grace, and in the infusion of the inward and eternal refreshment. And thus indeed, since three things are there in one, in the first is found a sign of the second; in the second the cause of the third; but in the third the virtue of the second, and the truth of the first. And these three are in one, and are one sacrament. It is clear, therefore, that the reception of the most divine Eucharist is a sacrament, and an image of the participation of Jesus; because this, that we visibly receive the sacrament of it, is a sign that we ought to be united to him spiritually and invisibly. But the Eucharist itself, that is, the good grace, that very sacred host, is called most divine, [0953D] since it makes divine, and partakers of the Godhead, those who partake of it. And because it is a sign, and a truth in which the true flesh of Christ is taken under the appearance of bread, and in his flesh, worthily taken, the reception too, and participation, and fellowship of his very Godhead is granted. Therefore it is most worthy, and most holy, and sanctifying all things that sanctify, and holy.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « And whatever other things have been handed down to the heavenly essences in a supramundane manner, but to us symbolically. » After he had set forth certain things, by way of example, to show the likeness of visible things to invisible, now he concludes generally about the whole, saying: « And whatever other things have been handed down to the heavenly essences in a supramundane manner, but to us symbolically, » as if he were saying: These things above mentioned, the visible things, our mind ought to judge [0954A] to have a likeness to invisible things according to the examples set forth; and not these alone, but whatever other things have been handed down to us symbolically, or to the heavenly essences supramundanely. For not only these visible things which have been set down — that is, the forms, the sweetnesses, the lights, the disciplines, the orders, the sacred Eucharist — have the manifestation and demonstration of invisible things, even if a multitude of them; but also all other visible things whatsoever, which have been handed down to us — who are to be instructed visibly — symbolically, that is, figuratively, have been set forth for the signification and declaration of invisible things. And not only these visible things which have been handed down to us symbolically have a demonstration of invisible things; but those too which have been handed down to the heavenly essences, that is, to the angelic spirits, supramundanely, that is, invisibly and spiritually, and not [0954B] according to the appearances of this world, are signs of invisible things, and images of those things which, in the excellent and incomprehensible nature of the Godhead, subsist above all understanding and sense. For this is what he says: that not only those things which have been handed down to us symbolically are signs of invisible things; but those too which have been handed down to the heavenly essences supramundanely. For the angelic spirits themselves also have their signs, and demonstrations, through which they are instructed concerning the invisible things of God, and things exceedingly hidden, and secrets concealed within, immaterially, and invisibly, and simply. Which signs indeed, as far as concerns us and those things which are visible among us, are reckoned altogether invisible; but as far as concerns that light, much invisible, and inaccessible, and incomprehensible, [0954C] of the Deity, they are as it were outside, and proceed from within into demonstration. On which account those very signs, which come upon minds, or upon souls divinely illuminated, are called theophanies, that is, divine apparitions; because in them, coming to manifestation, that which is altogether hidden of God is demonstrated. These, then, are the things which are handed down to the heavenly ones supramundanely, not according to that demonstration which is among us, but breathed in invisibly and simply. Many things indeed were here to be said about this kind of contemplation, by which theophanies, that is, divine apparitions divinely breathed in, come upon minds to be illuminated, and, by instructing them concerning the hidden and invisible things of God in a wondrous, and concealed, and secret, and [0954D] singular manner, make them wise: especially since here too certain men are found to have become vain in their thoughts, proclaiming God to be altogether incomprehensible and inaccessible to the rational mind, except that it is instructed concerning him by certain theophanies, that is, divine apparitions, or divine likenesses set forth for contemplation. But these they place, as it were, certain images of the hidden Godhead, as means between rational souls and God, higher indeed than the mind, but lower than the Godhead. And this alone, they say, is seen of God, and in this alone is God seen — inasmuch as he in himself can be seen by no mind or soul. But these are likenesses of them, and phantasms of vanity: in which, while they try to assert that only the light of the Godhead is visible and perceptible, [0955A] they are proved to take away from holy minds the true knowledge and vision of the Deity. For what is it, that God is seen in those things alone, and outside them is not seen, save that he is never truly seen, and the truth is never seen? For if the image alone is always seen, and the truth is never seen, since the image is not the truth, even when it is of the truth. Let them therefore take away their phantasies, by which they strive to overshadow the light of our minds; nor let them fence off from us our God by the likenesses of their own conjectures; because, just as nothing besides himself can satisfy us, so neither can anything come to a stand short of himself. Let us therefore reckon these theophanies in another manner, and one consonant with truth. For just as there are two things, the light and the body that receives the light — and out of these two is made one thing that [0955B] shines, and that shining thing is in a manner an image and likeness of the light, in that it shines as the light itself does — so also our God is light, and is true light, and rational souls, clean and pure, conceive that very light: and from it they become shining, and they themselves are not an image of the light in that they are; but in that they shine from the light, as the light itself shines; and those shining things are theophanies of the light, in which the light is seen, since by none would the light be seen, if none were illuminated by the light. For he too who sees the light in himself sees himself shining; who assuredly would not see, if he did not shine, and would not see himself shining. Thus, then, we set no other between our God and us, but make a way immediately, both for us to him, and for him even to us, that we may be in him, and [0955C] he in us: so that there be nothing outside himself in which we may be beatified, just as there could be nothing besides himself by which we might be created. On account of this, therefore, let us interpret the aforesaid sentence of theology to a more convenient understanding. For because he had said that certain invisible things are demonstrated through those visible images which are determinate, now he subjoins a general sentence concerning the invisible things themselves, saying: « And whatever other things, etc. » As if he were saying: Not only those invisible things, of which these signs have been set forth, came into manifestation; but also whatever other invisible things which have been handed down to us — namely to men — symbolically, that is, figuratively and through sensible demonstrations, that is, set forth and made manifest; [0956A] but to the heavenly essences, that is, to the angelic spirits, supramundanely and spiritually, revealed through a bare and simple truth impressed.

There follows: « On account of this, then, our co-rational theosis, » that is, divinity, which is to us co-rational, that is, congruous or apt. For it is congruous that through those things which are known to us we should be made partakers of divine things: « On account of this, then, etc., » as if he were saying: Because the human mind cannot be instructed concerning invisible things save through visible things, and things known and akin to it, therefore « the merciful Principle of perfection, » that is, God, from whom all perfection has its beginning, as in him it takes its consummation and end — by grace and mercy alone, that he might call us back to his own knowledge, and reform his likeness; [0956B] « manifesting to us the heavenly hierarchies, » that is, the angelic powers; « and perfecting also our hierarchy as fellow-minister of them, » namely of the heavenly hierarchies, that it might be both conformable to them in dignity, and like them in divine ministry, the deiform likeness of their sanctification being preserved in us, that we may be like the sanctification of them who are conformed to God, « according to our virtue, » that is, according to our possibility, that is, as far as we are able to be like — we who are men, and mortal, and still liable to sin; « he described the supercelestial intellects, » the invisible spirits, who were unknown to us, by sensible images, that through the known we might learn the unknown. And this description he made [0956C] « in the sacred compositions of the words, » that is, in the descriptions of the sacred word: which compositions set forth to us both figures and likenesses for the demonstration of invisible things. And this he did for this reason, « that he might lead us back through sensible things to intellectual things, » that is, through visible things to invisible things. And that he might also lead us back and « from sacredly figured symbols, » that is, from sacred figures and the figures of sacred things; « into the simple heights, » that is, into the simple and spiritual excellences to be known « of the heavenly hierarchies, » that is, of the angelic powers. For this reason he described them to us by visible signs, that he might make them intelligible to us, and conform us to their imitation.

## THIRD BOOK.

[0955]

## TITLE OF CHAPTER II: *That divine and heavenly things are beautifully manifested even through dissimilar symbols.*

## THE TEXT.

[0955C]

*It behooves us, then, as I judge, first to set forth what indeed we reckon the speculation of every hierarchy to be, and what each of them has profited the divine praisers of it. Then to praise the heavenly hierarchies according to their manifestation in the words, and, in what follows these, to say by what divine formations the sacred [0956C] descriptions of the words figure the heavenly orders, and to what truth one ought to ascend through the forms. That we too may not, in the same manner as the many, uncleanly reckon the heavenly and deiform minds to be certain many-footed things, and of many faces, and formed to oxen and to a cattle-like beastliness [pecuinitatem], or to the bestial imagination of lions, or figured to the appearance of eagles with curved beak, or to the tripartite motion of the wings of flying things: and imagine certain fiery [0957A] wheels above the heaven, and material thrones necessary for the Divinity to recline upon; and certain many-colored horses, and arms-bearing chief-commanders; and whatever other things have been handed down to us from the sacred words, and formatively, in the variety of manifesting symbols [n: (Ezech. I; Apoc. IV; Isa. VI; Dan. VII; Zach. I; Apoc. VI; Ezech. XXIII; Job. XVI; Sap. V; Josue V; II Machab. III)]*. *For indeed most artfully has theology used poetic sacred formations in un-figured intellects: revealing, as has been said, our mind, and providing for it by a proper and connatural reduction, and reforming unto itself the anagogical holy Scriptures. But if to anyone it seems that the sacred compositions ought indeed to be received as of things simple in themselves and unknown to us, and of things incontemplable [0957B] in their subsisting: but he reckons unfitting the descriptions of the holy intellects in the sacred words, and all such speaking hard — this theater of angelic names; and that the theologians ought, he says, coming universally to a corporeal fashioning among corporeal things, to form and manifest these by their proper figurations, and, as far as possible, akin, from the most precious things among us, and in any way immaterial, and supereminent essences — and not to set the earthly, most base, manifold forms round about the heavenly and deiform simplicities. This indeed would be both more sublime for us, and would not lead down the supramundane manifestations into unfitting dissimilitudes. This too would at once not unjustly do injury to the divine virtues, and likewise would not seduce our [0957C] mind, thrusting itself into unclean compositions. And perhaps also the supercelestial things will be reckoned to be filled with certain leonine and equine multitudes; and with a bellowing utterance of praises, and with the flying headlong rush of angels, and with other animals, and with more ignoble matters, as though shut up unto the inconsequent, and ignoble, and passible, while there are described throughout as deiform the clear likenesses of the manifesting words. But the inquiry of truth, as I judge, shows that the most sacred wisdom of the words [n: (Ezech. XXVIII; Job. XXXVIII)] has in the formations of the heavenly minds provided exceedingly for both: so that neither would it (so perhaps someone might say) do injury to the divine virtues; nor would it fix you, in a passible manner, into the vile lownesses of images. For because indeed there have been beautifully procured [0957D] forms of the formless, and figures of things lacking figures, one might say that it is not one single cause — that our analogy, not being able to be extended immediately into invisible contemplations, and desiring its proper and connatural reductions: which hold out to us the passible formations of formless and supernatural speculations. But because this too is most seemly for mystical words, to conceal by incomprehensible divine [sic: *aenigmat*], and to set trackless to the many the sacred and hidden truth of the supramundane intellects. For not every one is holy, nor is knowledge, as the words say, of all [n: (Matth. VII; I Cor. II)]*. *But if anyone should reckon the deformed causes of the description of images dishonorable, saying that base [0958A] formations are thus referred to deiform and most holy dispositions, it suffices to say to him: How is the mode of holy manifestation twofold? One indeed as it were consequent, on account of the like images of the sacred figures that come forth; but the other, on account of the dissimilar makings of forms, conformed to what is altogether inconsequent and unseemly. And so the mystical traditions of the manifesting words sometimes praise the blessedness of the Godhead, which is to be venerated above essence, as reason, and intellect, and essence; declaring the divine rationality and its wisdom, and the truly existing substance, and the true cause of those things which are substance; and they form it as though light, and call it life, so many wondrous, more chaste formations abiding, and the material formations [0958B] being proved in some way to fall short of excelling; and thus by a likeness of the divine unto truth. For it is above all essence and life, no light indeed characterizing it, all reason and intellect being incomparably left behind by any likeness of it. But sometimes it is praised supramundanely by dissimilar manifestations from the very words [n: (Rom. XI; I Tim. VI; Psalm. CXL)], which call it invisible, and infinite, and incomprehensible: and by which is signified not what it is, but what it is not. For this, as I judge, is more powerful in its case. Since indeed, as the hidden and priestly tradition has introduced, we truly say that it is not according to anything of those things which are. But we do not know its superessential, and invisible, and ineffable infinitude. [0958C] If, therefore, negations in divine matters are true, but affirmations incompact, the manifestation through dissimilar formations is more apt to the obscurity of the arcane things. And so now the sacred descriptions of the words do not fill up the heavenly ornaments with base things, manifesting them by dissimilar makings of forms, and through these showing, together with all material things, the excellences of the supramundane things. Nay rather, that dissimilar likenesses lead our mind back more — I do not think any of the well-wise contradict. For through the more precious sacred formations it is consequent to be seduced, reckoning the heavenly essences to be certain gold-formed things, and certain resplendent men clothed in comely garments, sprinkling harmlessly a white and fiery brightness, and by whatever other like imaginal forms theology has [0958D] figured the heavenly intellects. And lest they who understand nothing higher than visible goods should suffer this, the restorative wisdom of the holy theologians has wondrously descended to unseemly dissimilitudes: not granting our material part, remaining in base images, to rest; but purging, and bearing upward, and suggesting to the soul by the deformity of the compositions — as neither the just nor the true approving — that the supercelestial and divine spectacles are by no means, according to truth, like to things very material, because thus base. But so this too it behooves to understand: That nothing of those things which are, is universally deprived of the participation of the good: since indeed, as the Truth of the words says: « All things very good [n: (Gen. I)]*. » *It is possible, then, from all things to understand good [0959A] speculations, and, of both invisible and intellectual things, to form from material things the said dissimilar likenesses: the intellectual things having in another way those things which are otherwise distributed to sensible things. For fury indeed in irrational things is from a passible motion: and the furious motion of them is filled with all irrationality; but in intellectual things one must understand the irascible in another way, declaring, as I judge, their manly reasonableness, and their immense [immanentem] rest in divine and immutable foundations. In the same way we say that concupiscence indeed is in irrational things a certain inconsiderate and material thing, from a natural motion, or from custom incontinently engendered in mutable things — an impassibility, and an irrational continuity of bodily pleasure; at once compelling every animal [0959B] according to sense to what is unfit to be desired. But when, setting dissimilar likenesses about intellectual things, we form concupiscence about them, we must understand it to be divine love — above reason, and above the intellect of immateriality, and the inflexible and needless desire of a superessentially chaste and impassible contemplation, and that pure and most sublime brightness, and the invisible and form-making beauty of eternal, true, and invisible fellowship. And as it were it receives power in sufficiency and in convertibility; and it is afflicted by no virtue, through the unconfused and immutable love of the divine beauty, and the universal recalling into that which is truly to be sought. But that very irrationality and insensibility [0959C], in irrational animals indeed, or in animate matters, we properly call a defect of reason and sense; but in immaterial and intellectual essences we confess it, holily and fittingly, to be their supereminences, as of supramundane things, excelling our transitory and corporeal reason, and the material sense of the mind, alienated from incorporeal things. And so it is possible to form for the heavenly things forms not dissonant, even from vile parts of matter. Since it too, possessing subsistence from the truly good, has through all its material disposition certain images of intellectual beauty; and it is possible through them to be led back to the immaterial first forms — the likenesses being received dissimilarly, as has been said, and not in like manner with them: but compactly and beautifully, the intellectual [0959D] and sensible properties being defined. These mystical theologians we shall find wondrously conforming not only to the declarations of the heavenly dispositions, but sometimes to the divine manifestations themselves. And sometimes indeed they praise it from precious lights, as the Sun of justice, as the morning star holily rising in the mind, and as a light shining unenveloped and invisibly [n: (Malach. I; Apoc. II)]*. *But sometimes from middle things, as fire shining harmlessly, as water the giver of vital fullness, and, as it must be said symbolically, entering into the belly, and pouring back rivers that flow again immeasurably. But sometimes from the lowest things, as a sweet ointment, as a corner-stone [n: (Exod. III; Joan. I)]*. » *But they set about it also a bestial form; and fit to it the special property of a lion and of a panther [0960A], and clothe it with a leopard's skin, and a raging she-bear [sic: ur sam] [n: (Cant. II; Isa, XXVIII; Osee V)]*. *I will add [sic: Ad dam] indeed that which seemed to be the vilest of all, and to signify more; since the divinely wise [divine wisdom] handed it down as forming itself even into the appearance of a worm [n: (Psal. XXI)]*. *So too all the theosophers, and the prophets by hidden inspiration, distinguish the Holy of Holies from the undefiled saints, and honor the dissimilar holy figuration, so that neither may divine things be rightly received by the unclean, nor may the students of wondrous images remain in the figures of contemplation as though in true things. And so they honor divine things by true negations, and by diverse likenesses of images compacted unto the lowest things. Nothing, therefore, is inconsequent, if they form the heavenly essences too from unfitting, dissimilar likenesses [0960B] according to the said causes. For perhaps we would not indeed come to the question, out of need, unto the anagogy, through the diligent scrutiny of divine things, unless the deformity of the manifesting deformation of the angels forced us out: not suffering our mind to remain in the dissimilar makings of forms, but making it struggle to refuse the material passibilities, and accustoming it to extend itself purely through visible things into the supramundane heights. So much, then, has been said by us on account of the material and unfitting angelic descriptions of the images of the divine words. But then it behooves to set apart what indeed we reckon the hierarchy itself to be, and what those who obtain a hierarchy profit from the hierarchy itself. But let Christ be my leader (if indeed it is lawful for me to say), the [0960C] inspiration of the whole hierarchical manifestation. But thou, O boy, according to the holy legislation of our priestly tradition, do thou holily and fittingly hearken, made divine in the divine doctrine of the things wondrously said, covering round in the secret of the mind the things that are holy, and, from the unclean multitude, guard them as uniform. For it is not lawful, as the words say, to cast to swine the unconfused, and light-formed, and beneficent ornament of the invisible pearls [n: (Matth. VII)]*.

## EXPOSITION.

First I said, and I say now — that I may not detain you in expectation — that I undertook your petition upon the Hierarchy of Dionysius, not that I should pursue the searching-out of the deep things of the matters, but that I should only uncover, and bring into the light [0960D], the coverings of the words. For this is more fitting, first, for those who are to be introduced: especially because those things which we judged were to be discussed we recognize to be exceedingly great, and above our possibility. The title of the second chapter is this: « That divine and heavenly things are beautifully manifested even through dissimilar symbols. » Above we have already said what a symbol is: namely a collation, that is, a fitting-together of visible forms set forth for the demonstration of an invisible thing. For example, when we wish to express visibly the natures of the heavenly spirits, we fit human faces indeed, but the wings of a bird, into one appearance of composition, so that, by the face of a man — who alone among visible things uses reason — the invisible spirits themselves too may be understood to be rational and wise; but by the wings the agility [0961A] of their nature, and their swift motion toward all things, may be expressed. Since, then, in the first chapter he discussed generally concerning every hierarchy, as though briefly foretasting the sum of the following work in order to make instruction — first, that every good is multiplied from the highest good by participation, and every good is united to the highest good by likeness and conversion; then, that Scripture fittingly took up visible signs for the declaration of invisible things: now in the following chapter he shows, as the title itself declares beforehand, that beautifully — that is, aptly and fittingly — are manifested, that is, represented and signified, that they may be made manifest: divine things, namely those which are in the highest hierarchy, and heavenly things, which are in the angelic hierarchy. Both these are fittingly manifested, [0961B] not only through like symbols, that is, not only through beautiful and comely figures and forms, congruous or like to their majesty and purity; but also through dissimilar symbols, that is, through such forms and descriptions as seem foreign to their excellence and unworthy of their purity. Which indeed may seem to some to be less fitting. But to those who consider well, it is found to be ordered by a great reason and a necessary dispensation. By reason indeed, so that while we discern these foreign things taken up for demonstration, we may recognize that those things too, which seemed to be proper according to something, are foreign and dissimilar from the highest truth. But by dispensation, so that while the pious mind sees those things, which it does not endure to be placed among divine things according to their propriety, attributed by the signification [0961C] of them, it may in no way be able to doubt that other things too, which seemed worthy, and through this could be believed to be true and proper, are figurative and led to truth by likeness. Therefore the like symbols are set forth for demonstration to this end, that they might show the truth of invisible things by a like appearance; but the dissimilar ones, that by signifying they might demonstrate that one must go out from the figure to the truth, and not remain in those things which could not be true. Therefore, as much as the like symbols excel in appearance, yet the dissimilar symbols transcend in signification; since, even if the former have a more beautiful appearance, yet the latter hold a more manifest signification. The former show the truth; the latter compel us to go out from falsity. The former so signify the truth that [0961D] the untrained mind can easily be detained in them; the latter so instruct that they do not suffer the minds of those who consider to be deceived in their veneration. The former, though they are signs of the truth, would yet perhaps sometimes cause themselves to be received in place of the truth on account of their excellent appearance, unless these were signs in which the truth is not believed, even though through them the truth is signified. For the truth is one thing, and the sign of the truth another; because the sign is not the truth, even when it is a sign of the truth, and is true. Those signs, therefore, have a more evident demonstration, which both, through the likeness by which they approach the truth, manifest the truth itself; and, through the dissimilitude by which they are far removed from the truth, demonstrate that they are not the truth, but signs nevertheless, and an image of the truth. [0962A] This, then, is what he intends to demonstrate in this chapter, as is expressed through its title: that divine and heavenly things are beautifully and fittingly demonstrated not only through like, but also through dissimilar forms and figurations. And that no injury, as some have reckoned, is done to those divine and heavenly things, if they are sometimes figured in the sacred Scriptures through humble formations, and, as it were, removed from their excellence, and unworthy — as in Scripture God is compared to a wagon, and the angels to oxen: and the rest in this manner.

« It behooves us, then, as I judge, first to set forth what indeed we reckon the speculation of every hierarchy to be, etc. » Modestly he tempers his assertion, as befits a prudent man; nor in excellent matters, [0962B] and remote from the human sense, does he seem to presume beyond man's possibility, saying: « As I judge. » For he himself knew this which he said, since he had been taught by him who had seen and knew. But he kept the modesty of speech, that he might show that these things are to be sought and found by humility, not by elation. It behooves us, then, as I judge, first to set forth what indeed we reckon the speculation « of every hierarchy to be. » Five things here he first sets forth, generally, by way of introduction to the readers: which through the following chapters he will set forth one by one. First, the general definition of every hierarchy. Second, the utility of each hierarchy. Third, the praise of the heavenly hierarchies according to the visible formations which are found in the sacred word. [0962C] Fourth, the quality of those very formations and descriptions by which the heavenly virtues are signified. Fifth, what truth the human mind ought to conceive, in those very invisible things, from those things which are visibly set forth for the declaration and praise of invisible things. That is: to consider, first, what a hierarchy is. Secondly, what it profits, that is, what utility consists in each one. Thirdly, how the excellence of the invisible hierarchies is shown through visible signs. Fourthly, to know the quality of the mystical signs and demonstrations. Fifthly, to separate the thing signified from the sign, the truth from the figure. It behooves us first to set forth what speculation, that is, what definition we reckon to be of every hierarchy, that is, how generally [0962D] or universally a hierarchy is to be defined. But he calls the definition a speculation for this reason; since the definition of a thing is as it were a mirror, in which the nature of the thing itself is discerned, just as in a mirror the image of the nature of the body placed before it is seen. A general definition is that which fits universally, and is found in the whole. For he who says that the angelic principalities are a hierarchy, says truly; but he does not define universally, since a hierarchy is found among men also. Again, he who says that a hierarchy is an order, says truly; since where there is power, there is order. But he does not say the whole; since not every order is a hierarchy, because not every order is a power. And so a general definition is that which fits every one and contains the whole. [0963A] This general definition of a hierarchy, therefore, the author named the speculation of every hierarchy: which both fits every one, and contains the whole. But because he himself is about to place and set forth this in what follows, we ought not to anticipate it at present. Then he subjoins another of those things which one ought to search out or set forth, namely, what each hierarchy has profited its divine praisers, that is, what or how much each hierarchy, that is, each sacred power, has profited its divine praisers, that is, those who, established and ordained in it, praise God, or celebrate and frequent the divine praises. For all the hierarchies are ordained and instituted unto the divine praise, whether the higher or the lower, so that by all God may be praised: by whom and through whom are all things, and [0963B] in all things all things [n: (I Cor. XV)]. And those who are more excellent praise more; and those who praise more are more sublimely rewarded. And so every hierarchy profits its own divine praisers, in proportion to what it has received according to the distribution of grace and the gifts of bounty, so that it may be either more sublime in knowledge, or more fervent in love. For according to grace are the gifts, and according to the gifts are the merits, and according to the diversity of the merits the diversity of the rewards is established. Every hierarchy, therefore, has profited its praisers of God, in reward, in proportion to what it conferred in gift; because every dignity and power, according to the grace of ministry and office by which it was able to proclaim and amplify the praise, and honor, and glory of God, grows greater in the fruit of retribution. But the heavenly virtues themselves also, [0963C] to which this very thing is a reward — to praise God — receive, each according to their orders and dignities in their principalities and hierarchies, so much of utility as they rise up, more or less, in the praise of the Creator through the gift of cooperating grace. Then, he says, « it behooves, » that is, after the divine definition of every hierarchy and its utility has been set forth, it behooves to praise the heavenly hierarchies, that is, the angelic principalities, that is, to describe and demonstrate their praises according to the manifestation of them, namely of the hierarchies, in the words, that is, according to this, that their praises are manifested in the words, that is, in the divine Scriptures. For there are set forth in the sacred word figures and demonstrations by which the virtues and praises [0963D] of the angelic powers are declared: which the author says are to be inspected and considered, unto the manifestation of the angelic hierarchy.

There follows: « And in what follows these, » that is, consequently after those things aforesaid, or in those things which follow: It behooves « to say by what divine formations the sacred descriptions of the words, namely the divine words, figure the heavenly orders. » As if he were saying: First it behooves to consider how the divine words proclaim the heavenly virtues as praiseworthy through the formations of the descriptions. Then, of what quality these very descriptions and formations are, which by a certain divine speech they figure for the declaration of those heavenly virtues. But last of all it behooves to consider to what truth one ought to ascend through [0964A] the forms. For it is not enough to attend to this alone, that it is visible, unless we also know of what quality we ought, from that which is visibly demonstrated, invisibly to think the truth. For if we think that this alone is what is visibly discerned in the demonstration, we are never made partakers of the truth. Let us therefore discern the sign from the truth, and let us know that one thing is that which is set outwardly for the instructing of the sense; but another that which is reserved within for the beatifying of the mind. Therefore it behooves to say to what truth we ought to ascend from these forms of the visible figurations, lest we too, like many, should reckon all these things, which are set forth figuratively in the Scriptures as signs of the heavenly ones, to be there just as here they are mystically figured in likenesses and forms [0964B] and figures pertaining nevertheless to corporeal and sensible things: which by no means fall into the divine and spiritual things.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

For this is what follows: « So that neither may we too, in the same fashion as the many, impurely suppose the heavenly and deiform minds to be certain many-footed and many-faced things, and formed after the herd-nature of oxen, or after the bestial imagination of lions, and shaped after the appearance of eagles with a curved beak, or after the threefold beating of the wings of flying things. And that we should imagine certain fiery wheels above the heaven; and material thrones necessary to the Divinity for its reclining, and certain horses of many colors, and arms-bearing supreme commanders; and whatever other things have been handed down to us out of the sacred words, sacredly and in a form-giving way, in the variety of manifesting [0964C] symbols. » So that neither may we too, then, in the same fashion as the many — that is, in the way that the many suppose — suppose the heavenly and deiform minds, that is, the invisible, incorporeal spirits, which have the likeness and form of God, not of bodies, to be many-footed; namely, in the way in which they are figuratively described in the sacred word under the figures and forms of animals, as in Ezekiel, in Isaiah, and Zechariah, and Micah, and other prophets, the angelic spirits are figured by four-footed animals, and flying things, and the rest in this manner. And lest we also suppose certain of those spirits to be many-faced, that is, to have many countenances or faces, as it is written in Ezekiel concerning the holy living creatures: « Four [0964D] faces had one of them [n: (Ezech. I)]: » which, although it may be fittingly referred to the holy evangelists, or the apostles, or any of the just, is nevertheless also not inconveniently taken of the holy angels, who announce the incarnation of the Word, and the passion, and the resurrection, and the ascension, and in all these things attend upon the incarnate Word in the service of ministry.

There follows: « And after the herd-nature of oxen, » — it is to be understood, and lest we suppose certain of them formed after the herd-nature of oxen, that is, after the likeness and form of oxen, which is that of the herd, not angelic, as in Ezekiel the form of an ox, or of a calf, is expressed in the figuration of the living creatures. Or again, lest we suppose the same spirits formed after the bestial imagination of lions, that is, after the imagination or [0965A] image of lions, which is bestial, and unworthy of a spiritual and rational nature, as in Ezekiel the face of a man and the face of a lion is mentioned in the figuration of the living creatures. And after the appearance of eagles with a curved beak, again it is understood, let us not suppose them formed. But in that he says « with a curved beak, » he plainly stirs a fitting derision, as in the rest, against those who think these things assigned to a spiritual nature according to property. It is known, moreover, that in Ezekiel's distinction the face of an eagle also is mentioned.

There follows: « Or shaped after the threefold beating of the wings of flying things, » — it is understood, let us not suppose. For as it is written in Isaiah of the throne of the one sitting and of the temple: « The seraphim stood above it: [0965B] six wings to the one, and six wings to the other. With two they veiled the head, with two they veiled the feet; and with two they flew, the one to the other [n: (Isa. VI)]. » And elsewhere: « For with two they covered their bodies [n: (Ezech. I)]. » Where indeed, in the six wings, by twos and twos in their distinctions, a threefold or tripartite beating is found. For six, joined two and two together, make three pairs of wings.

There follows: « And let us imagine certain fiery wheels above the heaven. » The negative particle is supplied from above, namely, let us not imagine certain fiery wheels above the heaven, and let us not imagine also material thrones as though necessary to the Divinity for its reclining, since the divine nature, which alone bears all things, has no need of a support. But of the fiery wheels and thrones [0965C] we have testimony in the book of Daniel [n: (Dan. VII)], and in Isaiah [n: (Isa. VI)], and Micah, concerning the one sitting upon a lofty and high throne.

There follows: « And certain horses of many colors » (as in Zechariah there are read white horses, and black, and black, and dappled [n: (Zach. VI)]; and in the Apocalypse likewise [n: (Apoc. VI)]) — it is understood, let us not imagine. « And arms-bearing supreme commanders, » likewise let us not imagine, that is, princes and leaders of the army bearing arms, or clad in arms, as we read in Zechariah, and in Micah. Likewise the Lord sitting upon a lofty throne, and the host of heaven at his right hand and his left; and in the book of Kings the chariots, and horses, and horsemen of fire shown upon the mountains to Elisha, and coming to the aid of his servant [n: (IV Reg. VI)]. They are called supreme commanders [0965D] as it were leaders, or conductors of the princes of the army. It is a compound name, from that which is ἀρχός *archos*, that is, prince, and στρατηγος *strategos*, which is leader and commander of an army; and so supreme commanders are understood as the leaders of the princes of the army, who rule over the princes themselves, or, being superior, afford them their leadership. All these things, therefore, taken by likeness from those things which are according to us, and attributed to those heavenly spirits for the signifying of those things which are invisible to themselves, are so to be received by us that we do not suppose these things to be in them in this way, but that through these things we may study to weigh other things, which are in them and are invisible to us, visibly set forth. For no corruptible appearance attains to their purity; and therefore in a certain manner [0966A] it is an impure supposition which, without discretion, attributes things so lowly and unworthy to that excellent nature according to property. Whether therefore these things, or whatever other things out of the words, that is, the Scriptures, have been handed down to us sacredly and in a form-giving way — that is, by a sacred fashioning or figuring, or the figuring of a sacred thing — in the variety of manifesting symbols, that is, of sacred figures and descriptions, by which secret and hidden things are made manifest: let us so receive them all that, according to their likeness and signification, we believe all those things of which they are made to be true; and yet let us think none of these things to be in them according to property.

There follows: « For very artfully theology has used poetic sacred formations in unfigured intellects [0966B] — revealing, as has been said, our mind, and providing for it its own and connatural leading-back, and reforming unto it the anagogical holy Scriptures. » To this he responds to what he had said above, that it is to be considered with what sort of formations sacred Scripture would figure the heavenly orders. As if he said: For this reason the very formations of the heavenly orders in the sacred word are diligently to be inspected; because they were made for this end, that they might reveal, that is, illuminate, our mind unto the knowledge of invisible things through these visible and known things. For very artfully, or prudently, or with consideration, theology, that is, the divine Scripture, has used poetic sacred formations, that is, descriptions of forms or figures set forth for the representing of sacred or holy things — [0966C] poetic formations, that is, ones devised, or invented by reason and set forth through the likeness of mystical tradition — for the signifying of unfigured intellects, that is, of spirits subsisting without figure and corporeal form in their own simplicity. « Revealing, as has been said, » namely in the foregoing chapter, « our mind » from the deep veil of ignorance, so that with bared and open face it may contemplate heavenly things: « and providing for it, namely for the mind, its own and connatural leading-back, » so that, instructed, it may be led back to the knowing of invisible things through those things which are connatural and its own; and reforming, namely, or adapting, or tempering unto the mind itself the anagogical holy Scriptures, so that first, being conformed to us, they might descend to us, and afterward, by leading back to higher things, [0966D] might lift up the illumined. This, then, theology did very artfully, that, speaking to us, it might take up our things, and, through our things, might lift up those admonished and instructed unto its own. But if perchance it seem to anyone that this is to be approved insofar as theology itself, for the signifying of visible things, took beautiful and seemly formations from those things which are ours; but that it is reprehensible and unfitting that it also appended likenesses unseemly and unworthy of so great a purity and majesty: to him it is to be answered that theology took up not only like, but also unlike, forms for the demonstration of divine things for this reason — that through that which is unlike and, as it were, alien, said manifestly of them by figure, even that which [0967A] could seem proper might be recognized as figured and alien to property:

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

This is what follows: « But if to anyone it seems that the sacred compositions ought indeed to be received, as of things simple in themselves, and unknown to us, and uncontemplable in their subsistence. » This is, that it is worthy that the sacred compositions be received, that is, the sacred figurations or formations which are made concerning the divine and invisible things themselves, inasmuch as they are of those things which are simple and uncompounded, without corporeal figuration and form, and thereby, to us who know only how to contemplate and think corporeal things, subsist unknown and uncontemplable, and cannot be shown, nor perceived by the human heart, save through visible signs and visible demonstrations. If, then, it seems to anyone worthy [0967B] and necessary, on account of causes of this sort, that the sacred compositions be received — provided only that they be formed beautifully and seemly, and befitting so great a purity — but now judges them to be unseemly « and unfitting, » namely whatever, « of the holy intellects, » that is, the descriptions of spirits, that are made « in the sacred words »; and he judges it also to be unfitting, all this figment of angelic names, as it seems to him theatrical — namely, that angels, oxen, and lions, and eagles, and horses, and wheels, and chariots, and thrones, and the rest of this sort should be introduced and named: which according to his supposition seems theatrical, and worthy of theatrical recitation and derision. [0967C] But to us, thinking piously and believing rightly, to speak thus is hard, or, every such speaking is hard, that is, all such hard and unfitting sayings and descriptions, which is as it were a certain theater of angelic names; or, if he supposes that to speak thus, that is, that it must so be spoken, that which is feigned in Scripture, is as it were hard, that is, an inconsonant and unfitting theater of angelic names to be: and if he also says that the theologians, coming or descending to a corporeal fashioning, that is, a material figuration, of things universally, that is, altogether incorporeal — namely the heavenly and invisible — ought to have formed them, namely the invisible things, and to have made them manifest, as far as was possible for them, by proper and cognate figurations, that is, by unfitting and like figurations [0967D] taken from among us, that is, from among these visible things, out of the most precious ones — or taken out of the most precious things among us, that is, out of those things which are most precious among us; and out of things in some way immaterial, that is, out of those things which in any, that is, in some, way seem to be immaterial and incorporeal, such namely as light, and fire, and splendor, and heat, and the rest of this sort: which, though they be material and corporeal, nevertheless approach closely to a spiritual nature by their subtlety and purity. If then he say that out of these most precious things, and in some way immaterial and supereminent essences, the theologians ought to have taken the figures of those things which are altogether incorporeal, so that through those things which are almost immaterial and incorporeal, truly incorporeal things might be signified. And if he say further that there ought not to be set round about [0968A] earthly and lowest, that is, last or least, or abject multiformities, that is, figures composed of many and various forms, upon the deiform simplicities, that is, the spiritual natures: which, because they are deiform in glory, earthly and lowest things, and because they are simple in essence, multiformities ought by no means to have been attributed to them. And if he say further: This indeed — that is, if out of precious and supereminent essences the figures of the invisible things were taken, and earthly and lowest formednesses were not set round about, or fitted to, the deiform simplicities — this indeed both would be our own more sublimely, that is, would advance us more sublimely to the knowledge of spiritual things. Or, this indeed both would be ours, because it would be corporeal and material; and would be more sublime, [0968B] that is, nearer to divine and spiritual things, so that on either part it would become reasonable: so that through that which was ours, that is, familiar and known to us, it could instruct; and through that which was more sublime and more worthy, it would befit the excellence and dignity of spiritual things. And it would also not lead the supermundane, that is, the heavenly and spiritual manifestations into unfitting unlikenesses, as these descriptions do; because out of earthly and lowest essences they bring likenesses unfitting and unlike to spiritual things. This also — that is, if only out of beautiful and seemly forms the figures of spiritual things were formed — would do no injury to the divine powers by attributing to them unfitting forms: [0968C] which to do is unjust. And equally, that is, likewise, it would not seduce our mind, as this base and unseemly formation seduces it, into thinking things alien and unworthy of those powers, while it inserts, or intrudes, itself into these impure compositions: which have been made unseemly concerning them. And perhaps yet another evil may come from these base compositions, namely, that the supercelestial things will be supposed to be filled, or to have been filled, with certain leonine and equine multitudes, that is, of horses and lions, and with a lowing utterance of praises, and with a flying headlong of angels; because the figures of lions, and horses, and oxen, and birds, whose office is to roar, and to neigh, and to fly, and which cannot praise God save by lowing, or roaring, are ascribed to the angels. And the heavenly things themselves will be supposed [0968D] to be filled not only with these, but also with other animals and baser materials, such as worms, and coals, and other things of this sort, which are found said by figure of spiritual things — as though the heavenly things themselves were laid open, that is, disclosed and opened, unto that which is inconsequent, that is, unfitting and ignoble, and it be possible above that things of this sort be admitted into them, or even passible, that is, corruptible. And all these things indeed will be supposed, while they are described, likenesses of the manifesting words: which the words set forth for manifestation clearly, that is, manifestly, as deformed. If then to anyone this whole thing seem so (so that up to this point the sentence hangs, and at last it is thus inferred) — to him indeed it so seems, namely that only beautiful and excellent appearances are to be set to the signification of spiritual [0969A] and divine things. But nevertheless, if anyone diligently inquire into the truth, he recognizes that the wisdom of the divine words has fittingly set forth both.

This is what follows: « But the inquiry of truth, as I suppose, shows that the most sacred wisdom of the words, in the formation of the minds, or spirits, of the heavenly ones, has provided for both exceedingly, so that neither (as perhaps someone would say) should it do injury to the divine powers, » that is, so that neither through those lowly figurations should it do injury to the divine powers, that is, to the spirits, who are divine and sacred and incorporeal: which nevertheless perhaps someone would call injury, and would think ought to be called so, when yet it is no injury, « neither should it fix us » through the same figurations « passibly [0969B] in the vile lownesses of images, » that is, in the vileness of lowly, or in the lowness of vile, images. For the wisdom of the divine word provided and took care of both: that through these lowly figurations it should neither do injury to the divine things, nor inform our mind to vile thoughts or false suppositions. And first, indeed, why corporeal and visible figures and forms have been set to the manifesting of divine and invisible things, a necessary and fitting cause is demonstrated — which perhaps someone would say is not one, but twofold, that is, not only because those things could not otherwise be made manifest to our mind save through these, but also because in the figures and enigmas of mystical descriptions the divine secrets were to be covered and concealed from impure minds and from the malevolent. [0969C] Thus, he says, someone will state the cause of the mystical descriptions: which, though he himself could have said it indubitably and truly, he modestly attributes to another, lest perchance he should seem to commend his own authority.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

This, then, is what he says: « For because indeed the forms of the formless, and the figures of things lacking figures, have been beautifully provided: one would not say the cause thereof to be one, our analogy. For because indeed. » Contrary to the usage of Latinity, according to the idiom of the Greek tongue, he has heaped up conjunctions, or *quia* is to be read for *quod*, so that this is the sense: That indeed one, that is, someone, would say the cause not to be one — namely this our analogy, that is, that not only our [0969D] analogy is the cause of this thing, namely that the forms of the formless and the figures of things lacking figures have been beautifully, that is, fittingly, provided by the sacred word — that is, that in the sacred word forms and figures have been attributed to those heavenly spirits, which in their own nature have neither corporeal forms nor figures. Of this thing, I say, one would say the cause to be not only the analogy, that is, our condition, otherwise unable to attain to the knowledge of invisible things, nor able immediately, that is, without some intermediary, to extend itself through the intellect into the invisible contemplations, that is, into the contemplations of invisible things. Our analogy, I say, which also desires its own and connatural leadings-back, this is, to be led back to the knowledge and contemplation of invisible things [0970A] through those things which are its own and connatural, that is, visible and corporeal — which corporeal things, namely, put forth, that is, set forth, the formations of the formless, that is, of spiritual speculations, and the supernatural, that is, of speculations exceeding our nature, and altogether incomprehensible to us, unless through these passible formations they were demonstrated and insinuated to us. He calls analogy the human condition; because analogy is a property, according to reason and the agreement of several like things in one, just as grammarians too are wont to assign analogies of words according to the likeness of several falling under one property. The analogy, then, of human nature, that is, the condition or property, or [0970B] agreement, is this: to be able and to know those things which pertain to man, and which man received to be and to be able. But above our analogy, that is, above our agreement and equality, is it to scrutinize heavenly things, unless we be instructed through those things which are with us visible and known to us. This analogy, then, that is, the human condition, was the cause why the sacred word, for the instructing of human minds, set forth visible signs of invisible things. And not this cause only, but also « because this also is most seemly for the mystical words, » namely to hide, « and to set as trackless to the many the sacred and hidden, » that is, the concealed truth « of the supermundane intellects, » that is, of the invisible spirits, « through incomprehensible divine enigmas. » [0970C] For enigmas, and parables, and figures are set to the mystical word of the Scriptures for this reason: that the truth of spiritual things be not laid open to carnal and impure spirits, and that at once it may exercise the studious and devout by its very profundity. Which cause, however, the author here judges to mention out of superabundance. Therefore, then, the divine sacraments are covered lest they lie open to all, because not all are worthy of the recognition of truth. « For not everyone is holy, neither is knowledge of all, as the words say. » For because not every man is holy, therefore the truth is not to be made manifest to all; since, if it were made manifest to all, many would gnaw at it by contradicting through malice, or would defile it by living impurely. Whence it is said: « Give not the holy thing [0970D] to dogs [n: (Matth. VII)], » namely to those who gnaw the truth set forth with the tooth of malice; « neither cast pearls before swine [n: (ibid.)], » namely before those who, as far as in them lies, pollute what is offered by living wickedly. For these are the unholy, that is, unworthy of holy things, whose knowledge it is not, « as the words say, » of the sacred Scripture. For the Apostle says that « faith is not of all [n: (II Thess. III)], » since that knowledge of truth, by which God is piously believed by the holy and just, is either not received by any of the perverse, or not worthily held.

« But if anyone should suppose the causes of the deformed descriptions of images to be dishonorable, saying that such base formations are thus referred to the deiform and most holy dispositions, it suffices to say to him: How [0971A] is the mode of holy manifestation twofold? » Now at length he responds to the question objected above, in which it was contained that vile and abject formations are unfittingly set to sacred and divine things in the sacred word, saying: « If anyone should suppose the causes of the description of images to be deformed, » that is, if anyone should suppose the causes of describing images to be deformed, that is, unfitting, saying it to be dishonorable that such base formations be referred, that is, fitted, to the deiform and most holy dispositions, that is, orders. If anyone, I say, should so suppose, and so say: « It suffices to say to him how the mode of holy manifestation is twofold: » that is, to a supposition and objection of this sort it is sufficiently answered in this, that the holy manifestation which is made [0971B] through the Scriptures is shown to have a twofold mode. « One indeed as it were consequent, » that is, fitting and seemly, in which the signs follow the signified truth by a like property: on account of like images of sacred figures agreeing, that is, proceeding to make the manifestation, or coming forth, that is, apt and concordant with that which they signify. « But the other mode is conformed unto the altogether inconsequent, » that is, discrepant, and unfitting, and unseemly, for the reason that the very figures and the very signs manifesting the truth seem not to say it. This is what he says: « On account of unlike fashionings of forms. »

There follows: « And so the mystical traditions of the manifesting words praise the venerable [0971C] beatitude of the superessential divinity — sometimes indeed as reason, and intellect, and essence, declaring the divine rationality and its wisdom, and the truly existing subsistence, and the true cause of those things which are subsistences. » As if he said: Since the mode of manifestation in the sacred word is twofold — one, namely, formed through like signs, the other through unlike signs — and so the sacred words themselves also sometimes represent the majesty of the divine nature through like, sometimes through unlike formations. Through like ones, sometimes indeed taken from corporeal things, sometimes from incorporeal. From incorporeal things, as when they name it reason and intellect; from corporeal, as when they name it light and [0971D] splendor, and the rest that are done in this manner. But sometimes through unlike formations, likewise taken from incorporeal, or from corporeal things, they manifest the divine nature. From incorporeal indeed, as when they attribute to it anger, zeal, repentance; but from corporeal, when they set to it, in signification, the forms or figures of beasts, or of any other corporeal things whatsoever. This, then, is what he says: « And so the mystical traditions of the manifesting words praise the venerable beatitude of the superessential divinity; sometimes indeed as reason, and intellect, and essence, declaring its divine subsistence truly existing, and the true cause of the subsistence of all those things which are; » since it both truly subsists in itself, [0972A] and makes all subsistences to subsist, in that they call it essence — although it itself nevertheless, above all reason, and intellect, and essence, subsists in its majesty, neither intelligible nor comprehensible, above all subsistences.

There follows: « And they form it as light, and call it life. » Namely, the venerable beatitude the mystical traditions form, although it itself is light above all light and subsists as life above all life. By so many, then, and so great modes do the sacred words form the divine majesty in figuration. « These so great and wondrous formations remaining chaster than the rest, which seem incongruous, and unworthy, and these so great and wondrous formations being approved in some way to excel the other material formations. » As if he said: [0972B] Although unto that excellence every formation, or representation, is found inferior, yet in comparison with the other formations such beautiful and such seemly formations are proved to excel. When, namely, the nature of the divinity is named reason, and intellect, and essence, and light, and life — although even in these formations too the likeness fails in manifestation for the expressing of the ineffable truth. Whence he says: « These divine things also thus failing of likeness unto the truth. » Namely, even these more excellent likenesses thus failing, that is, even in so great excellence failing of the divine likeness — failing, namely, unto the truth, it is understood, to be expressed. For everything that here is in the sign is less than that which there is in the truth. « For it is, [0972C] « namely the divine nature, » above all essence and life, no light indeed characterizing, that is, figuring, or expressing, it: and it is excellent, all reason and intellect being incomparably left behind, or beneath the likeness of itself. Whence it appears that if its likeness is so far superior to reason and intellect, that neither reason nor intellect can advance to equal its likeness.

There follows: « But sometimes it is praised supermundanely by the words themselves through unlike manifestations, they calling it invisible, and infinite, and incomprehensible, and by those things from which is signified not what it is, but what it is not. » As if he said: Not only is it manifested by like and excellent manifestations, [0972D] and by those approaching to its image: but sometimes also by unlike manifestations, and ones foreign to its nature, it is praised by the words « supermundanely, » that is, mystically and spiritually, and above the appearance of this world. For when it is praised through beautiful forms, it is praised according to the appearance of this world, that is, it is said according to something which is the very thing through which it is praised. But when it is praised through unlike formations, and ones alien from itself, it is praised supermundanely; since it is neither said to be the same, nor according to that, but above that, wholly other, through which it is praised. Therefore, then, it is praised supermundanely by the words themselves through unlike formations. The words, I say, or the formations themselves, calling it, namely the divine nature, invisible, and [0973A] infinite, and incomprehended: first, infinite in itself; then, invisible to us; after, incomprehended by us; and many other things also the words themselves calling the divine nature, which are such that from them is signified not what it is, but what it is not. For when God is said to be invisible, and infinite, and incomprehended: it is not said what he is, but what he is not — for he is not visible, because he cannot be seen, nor is he bounded, because he is not enclosed by place, nor terminated by time; nor is he comprehensible, because, even if it is believed what he is, how great he is is not grasped. Whoever, then, says him invisible, does not say to be that which is, but not to be that which is not. Likewise also whoever says him infinite, and incomprehended, does not say to be that which is, because he affirms nothing to be. But he says not to be that which is not, [0973B] because he denies something to be; since both what he does not affirm is that which cannot be said, and what he denies is that which can be understood.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « For this, as I suppose, is more powerful in it. » This, namely, from which is signified not what it is, but what it is not, is more powerful, that is, more efficacious, and more proper, and more expressive in it; since he who says what it is not, says that which in some manner can be understood; but he who says what it is, says that which in no manner can be comprehended. But it is more powerful and more excellent, as regards the expression of truth, to say what God is not, than what he is. « Since indeed, as the hidden and priestly tradition has introduced, we truly say this to be it — not according to any of those things which are; but we are ignorant [0973C] of its superessential, and invisible, and ineffable infinitude. » As if he said: As the authority of sacred Scripture testifies, introduced from the hidden unto manifestation, and handed down for correction and information. As, then, that tradition, that is, that authority which is handed down, hidden as regards the mysteries of hidden sacraments, and priestly as regards the dignity and holiness of the divine writings themselves, and its own sanctification, because it was both handed down by divine priests and prophets, and divinely sanctified for the sake of those to be sanctified through it. As, then, that hidden and priestly tradition introduced, we learned that this, that is, such a thing according to which [0973D] we truly say it, that is, the divine nature, to be, is not of all those things which are; because no species of created things so approaches to its likeness as to show expressly and according to property that which truly is in it. Or thus we learned that it is not truly what we say it to be according to something, that is, according to any of those things which are: for that which truly is according to any of those things which are, cannot be said to be the whole; and therefore when we say it to be something according to those things which are, we do not yet manifest by expression that which it truly is. But we are ignorant of its superessential, and invisible, and ineffable infinitude. For that which is infinite cannot be estimated by human knowledge: which, because it is ineffable, is not said; and because it is invisible, is not known; and [0974A] because it is superessential, is not comprehended. Of it, then, the human mind can grasp something, itself it cannot; and the human tongue can say something of it, itself it cannot; nor for that reason, however, is what is said of it to be supposed false; since it is only of it, and it itself is not this which is said; nor is what is thought of it vain, since it is only of it, and it itself is not this which is thought; since what is said is true, and what is thought is truth: which so leads unto it, although it subsists more sublimely and loftily in itself.

There follows: « If, then, the negations in divine things are true, but the affirmations incompact: the manifestation through unlike formations is more apt to the obscurity of hidden things. » As if he said: Since more expressly and more [0974B] properly we say God to be nothing that is, when we say both to be something, and not to be, truly, it is manifest that in divine things, that is, in those things which are said of God and attributed to God, the negations are true, that is, proper; but the affirmations incompact, that is, improper and not cohering, since they try to join and fit together unlike things, according to that mode of speaking by which human speech cannot otherwise be formed concerning God. But if the negations in divine things are true, that is, proper, and the affirmations incompact, that is, improper, it is manifest that the manifestation made through unlike formations is more apt to the obscurity of the hidden things to be revealed than that made through like ones; since the former strives to demonstrate, as it were by negation, by removing, what God is not, [0974C] but the latter tries to show, as it were by affirmation, by positing, what he is. « And now, therefore, the sacred descriptions of the words do not, as base, fill up the heavenly adornments, manifesting them by unlike fashionings of forms; and through these showing the excellences of the supermundane things above all material things together. And now therefore, » — since unlike figurations stand more properly in divine things, according to that mode by which, out of all things which are, nothing is properly named of God; according to this mode, therefore, they do not fill up, that is, assert to be filled up, the heavenly adornments, that is, the heavenly orders or dispositions, the base, that is, deformed, formations themselves which are set forth in the sacred word; manifesting [0974D] them, namely the adornments, by unlike fashionings, that is, by compositions of forms unlike and alien from their excellence; and through these fashionings showing the excellences of the supermundane, that is, of the heavenly and invisible things, above all material things together; this is, their excellences in relation to all material things; that is, showing that the supermundane and spiritual things themselves excel all material things. For in this, that they attribute unlike figures to them, they show that even those things too, which seem to be said of them according to likeness, do not rise up to their property.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « But that unlike likenesses lead our mind back more, I do not suppose that any of those who are well-wise contradicts. » As if he said: Not only for this reason are the unlike figurations approvable, [0975A] that they show the excellences of the supermundane things; but also for this reason, that they lead our mind back from material and corporeal things more than like figurations do, nor suffer it to rest in itself. Hear a great mystery. That which God is, is above all; and when it is asked what he is, this cannot be said, because it cannot be thought. For that which can be thought ascends into the heart of man, and is grasped by the heart of man, either in those things which are seen according to appearance, or according to those things which are through imagination, or in those things which are perceived within by experience and truth; and the heart of man grasps only what it knows, or according to those things which it knows. But it knows those things which it conceives without by sense, and those things which it feels within by experience; and everything that it grasps, it either grasps in these, or conjectures according to [0975B] these. But that which is neither in these, nor according to these, the human heart cannot grasp. But that which God is, is neither any of these, because he is not a creature; nor is it according to these, because he is the Creator. That which God is, then, can neither be found in these, nor understood according to these what sort it is. For if it were understood according to these, it would be led down into the same likeness unto these, and there would be this in these which is in him. But whatever things are in creatures are more near and akin to one another, because they are made; than the work is to the artificer, and the thing fashioned to the fashioner. For all time compared to eternity, and all space composed to immensity, is found to have less, than any length of time set beside a moment, or an extension of quantity [0975C] however much increasing, referred to the proportion of an atom. So that which God is, compared to a creature, is found to excel more amply, than that which is highest among created things, compared to those things which are lowest, or made most extreme. God, then, cannot be thought according to these things, what he is; since he is other, and is otherwise, and far, and remotely, and unlikely; and what he is cannot be said. For if any of these things is said, he is other. If according to any of these things it is said, he is otherwise. What then is to be said, which God is? If he is called heaven, he is other. If he is called earth, he is other; and whatever is in heaven, and is on earth, is not this which God is. Therefore this which God is, is other. And what is this? Only this can be said, that he is other, [0975D] and what he is cannot be said. We have, then, what we may say, God is not this; but we have not what we may say, this is God; because everything that we have, this is not God, and we have not in all these things, nor do we find, what God is. For all this is other than God; because God is not everything that is made by God, and the eye does not see, nor does the mind grasp, save this, or according to this, which is not God, but from God. For man has the sense of man, and feels according to the sense of man, either that which is without according to the flesh, or that which is within according to the mind, and man has no more. The eye of flesh those things which are unto the flesh, the eye of the mind those things which are unto the mind. What more? « No man knows the things which are of a man, save the spirit of a man, which is in the man. » [0976A] [n: (I Cor. II)]. » So the things which are of God no one knows, save the Spirit of God; and he who has the Spirit of God knows through the Spirit of God the things which are of God. But the eye is threefold: the eye of flesh, the eye of reason, the eye of contemplation. The eye of flesh is open, the eye of reason bleary, the eye of contemplation closed and blind. By the eye of flesh is seen the world, and the things which are in the world. By the eye of reason the mind, and the things which are in the mind. By the eye of contemplation God, and the things which are in God. By the eye of flesh man sees those things which are outside himself; by the eye of reason those things which are in himself; by the eye of contemplation those things which are within himself and above himself. Therefore God, that which he is, is unthinkable, but to men, and to human reason: which perceives nothing save what it knows, or according to that which it knows, which is in itself or outside itself. But those who [0976B] have the Spirit of God in themselves, have God also: these see God, because they have an illumined eye by which God can be seen, and they feel him not in another, or according to another which he himself is not, but himself and in himself that which he is, which is present. Nor yet can it be said, because it is ineffable, because it is unthinkable; and it is felt, and not expressed. Therefore, everything that is said of God, that he is, is said according to that which can be said and thought, since it cannot be said otherwise; and everything that can be said and thought is less and is below than that which God is. This very thing which is said, is said as less, and this very thing is not said which God is, because he who says something says according to something, and thinks that which he says, and according to that which he says. You name [0976C] God, and you form two syllables; and you think you have said the whole of that which he is. What have you thought? For that which you have thought, this you have said. I have thought, you say, that which is above all things: what is this? If you can think what it is, this you can say. But if you cannot think it, you cannot say it; because that which cannot be thought, cannot be said. You have said God: and what is God? What do you think, or of what sort do you think, when you say God? For that which sounds is this, either one beholding or running, or fear, or whatever else you shall have supposed of him as you are able. Therefore when you say God, you say one beholding and contemplating, and considering all things. And what is this? How does God behold, and how does he see? What is his seeing, save his being? And of what sort is this? But if you understand one running, because he penetrates [0976D] all things, and apprehends, and contains everything that is, for him to run is this: to stand. And who may grasp this? But if you interpret it fear; and you assert that this itself is to be thought under this name when it is said God: who could explain how fear is God? But if for this reason you suppose fear to be said, because he is feared, how is that feared which is not seen? how can that be seen which cannot be thought? and how can that be feared which cannot be known? See therefore what you say, when you say God; or what you think, when you say God. The Creator, you say, of all things I think, when I say God, who made all things, and himself was not made. Therefore when you say God, you think that which made all things. You think that which he made, and you do not think that which he himself is who made. Not yet have you attained that which you had promised, that you should think, and understand [0977A] what God is. Less is this whole which you say; and this whole is not himself of whom you say it; and yet of him you say this, not that you may reach unto him, but that you may draw near to him. For it is a great thing for man now to go unto him, even if it be not granted to arrive. But it will be granted afterward, when that which is perfect shall have come; and man shall have begun to see as he is seen, not the image through a glass, but the truth face to face. But now meanwhile the whole is image, and the image itself is far from the truth; and yet it does what it can as an image; and it turns the mind, but does not lead it through. For this alone it can do in us, and we in it this alone, because neither can it show more, nor we grasp another, and yet there is a certain image more sublime, and more approaching to the truth, [0977B] so that it can be more called truth by us, because there is nothing else above it, by which truth could be more expressly demonstrated. For it is said that God is fire; and the figure is manifest; since God, according to property, is not fire; since fire is a body, God is not a body. It is said also that God is light; and here likewise appears an image of the truth, other than the truth, since God is not light according to property, which is named according to figure. For all these things are visible, and are far from God by the property of nature, even if they are fitted to him according to likeness alone, which itself too is scanty in relation to the excellence of his majesty. But there is another incorporeal nature more near to God, between which and God there is no other intermediary nature; and this approaches more to likeness, [0977C] although it too is far from the truth. According to this, then, the highest nature to us, a sublime likeness to God is formed for us, when God is called spirit, and wisdom, and reason, and love; because the soul is spirit, and the angel is spirit, and in the spirit itself is reason, wisdom, and love. And we know what spirit is, as far as we know the soul, and know the angel; and through the soul we know the angel, as far as we know our own selves; although even this is little, and can scarcely be called knowledge. When therefore we hear that God is spirit, we think the soul, and the angel, and we suppose a likeness, since God is some such thing as the soul is, and the angel, because the soul and the angel [0977D] are spirit. And we know not how far this is from the truth of the incomprehensible excellence. For whoever should call a body spirit, would say a falsehood, since a body is not spirit nor spirit a body. Whoever, then, should say this, would rightly be reprehended; and would be judged contrary to the truth; and yet whoever says God to be spirit is supposed to have said a truth. No one accuses him of falsity, although yet a body and a spirit are more near in nature and condition, than a spirit and God. For here each is a creature, and each is comprehensible, and each mutable, and finite. But there the one indeed is eternal, the other temporal; the one immense, the other comprehensible; the one always remaining the same, the other mutable; the one falling under knowledge, the other [0978A] unthinkable. And yet, because another cannot be said, this is said; lest nothing be said, where another is to be said, and what is cannot be said; or if it can be said, it cannot be understood. This, then, is said, and the truth tolerates this of itself, and commends this to us for truth — to us who cannot yet grasp the truth itself, until the figure pass away, and the truth be manifested, above all this, and outside all this, nakedly and openly as it itself is. Now therefore up to this point the figures remain, and of these some are far, and appear to be likeness only; but some indeed are proper, and are received as it were for truth, though they be only signs of the truth and not the truth, in which indeed, if nothing higher shall have been unto it, the truth concedes these to us, and does not reckon the impossibility. But if [0978B] they shall have been near and closely alike, yet shall not have been nearest, and something more sublime appear for the manifesting of the truth; the truth does not suffer itself to be led down to them according to property, since in the other it demonstrates itself more perfectly, in which it proves itself here to be only through likeness. But in that supreme thing, than which nothing is higher, no other appears unto it by which the figure may be proved; and therefore it behooves to receive it so as it is, since no other is given, until that which is perfect shall come. Every figure, then, the more evidently demonstrates the truth, the more openly it proves itself, through an unlike likeness, to be a figure, and not the truth; and in this the unlike likenesses lead our mind back more unto the truth, in that they do not permit it to remain in likeness alone. [0978C]

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

Wherefore, he says, « I do not think that any of the well-wise would contradict » this — that dissimilar likenesses lead our mind back to the truth. For indeed « it follows, that men are led astray by the more precious sacred formations, » that is, it can follow, or come about, or easily happen, that through those formations of sacred things which are represented as more precious in the sacred discourse, the thoughts of men are led astray, « thinking certain celestial essences to be gold-formed, » just as in certain places of the Scriptures they are represented by likeness; and thinking also that there are in heaven certain flashing men clothed in comely garments, just as [0978D] angels are read to have appeared in splendid garments and with flashing countenances, « sprinkling forth, harmlessly, what is white and fiery, » that is, emitting, or pouring out, brightness and light; the white indeed as to the garments, and the fiery as to the flaming and burning countenances; harmlessly, that is, without injury — this itself holding firm in the very divine miracle, because in the divine and celestial natures, which are here shown by appearance, they are otherwise there according to truth: in which the appearance of visible nature is discerned, but the effect is not found.

There follows: « And by whatever other similar imagined forms, » that is, expressed according to imaginable things, « Theology has figured the celestial intellects, » that is, has represented the spiritual natures — so that from the things above [0979A] (understand) here it follows that men are led astray, thinking the celestial essences to exist in their own nature such as these. « Now that they might not suffer this — those who understand nothing higher than visible goods, » that is, that those might not think this who do not suppose there to be other goods higher, or better, than these visible goods; therefore « the restorative wisdom of the holy theologians wondrously descended to unseemly likenesses, » that is, therefore the holy theologians, who by their wisdom — which restores and reforms us unto the knowledge of truth — handed down to us the divine discourses, by a wondrous consideration descended to the taking up of unseemly likenesses, that they might fit them to the divine and celestial natures; and through these they might show that the other things too, which seem to be said of them magnificently and becomingly, are to be referred to likeness, and not to [0979B] property. This, then, the wisdom of the holy theologians did, « not granting that our material part, remaining in base images, should rest; but purging, bearing upward the powers of the soul, and suggesting by the deformity of the compositions that these are approved by neither the just nor the true; and that the super-celestial and divine spectacles are not, according to truth, so very like to things material and thus base. » As if he were saying: The wisdom of the theologians, descending to unseemly likenesses, in this very thing wondrously provided for our restoration, not granting that our material part — that is, our carnal sense, which cleaves to material things — should rest; the material part, I say, which remains in base images, that is, which so far as in it lies wills to remain, so that it may think only these things, [0979C] and accept only these as though true, if it were permitted to rest in them, and were not compelled by the very baseness of the images to go out to seek other things beautiful and true; or, not granting that our material part should rest, remaining in base images — that is, not granting that it either rest or remain, but by the very baseness of the images expelling it, and advancing it to higher things; but purging, bearing upward, namely, the power of the soul, that is, the intellectual force of the soul, which bears it upward and strains toward higher things; purging it from the admixture of images, that it may grow accustomed to contemplate spiritual and invisible things purely and simply; and suggesting, that is, admonishing and persuading the soul from the very deformity of the compositions, [0979D] that the super-celestial and divine spectacles are not, according to truth, very like to material things — especially to things so base — as neither the just nor the true approves, namely that those are like to these; or, suggesting by the deformity of the compositions that it is approved by neither the just nor the true — understand, in that manner, in the property of spiritual and invisible natures, as it is shown in the appearance and image of visible things; and suggesting also, that the super-celestial and divine spectacles are not very — that is, not much — like, according to their own truth, to material things thus base.

There follows: « But so too this must be understood: that none of the things which are is universally deprived of the participation of the good. For indeed, as the truth of the discourses [0980A] says, all things are very good. » Above he demonstrated that dissimilar representations are for this reason fittingly brought forward for the manifestation of divine things: that from those which evidently appear dissimilar, those too which seemed similar may be recognized to be outside the property of the thing. But now he demonstrates that for this reason also dissimilarities are not unfittingly taken up; because those too which seem to be dissimilar from the truth of divine and spiritual things have something in common with them, in which they can be called similar, since there is nothing in the universe which does not draw participation from the highest good; and through this — in that it participates with it — it fittingly represents its image and likeness. And so it behooves us not only to consider the former cause, but [0980B] also to understand this: that none of the things which universally are is deprived of the participation of the good. For « as the truth of the discourses says, » that is, the true discourses say, « all things are very good. » For thus it is written in Genesis: « God saw all the things that he had made, and they were very good [n: (Gen. I)]. » If therefore all things were good, in all things there was the good, and all things participated in the good, and from the good all things had something similar to the good; from which the good itself may be understood and known in them. Whence there follows: « It is possible, then, » that is, it happens, « from all » namely things « to understand good speculations; and to form, » or fit, « to invisible and intellectual things the likenesses called dissimilar; » namely those which above we called dissimilar: « to form, » I say, « from these very [0980C] material things, » that is, corporeal and visible ones. Yet in such a way that those things which, according to the likeness of visible things, are attributed to invisible things, be recognized to subsist otherwise in the visible things themselves, and otherwise in the invisible. For this indeed he says: « the intellectual things having them in another manner, » namely those things which are distributed otherwise to sensible things.

There follows: « For indeed anger is present in irrational beings from a passible motion; and their raging motion is full of all irrationality. » Now, certain examples having been set forth, he proves that those things which are referred from the nature of visible things to invisible things subsist otherwise here and otherwise there; as anger, and concupiscence, and the rest, which are referred from visible things to invisible things [0980D] by likeness; as if he were saying: Those things which are fitted from visible things to invisible things must be believed to be otherwise in the visible things themselves, and otherwise in the invisible; as can be plainly understood in the things which follow. For « anger » « in irrational beings, » that is, in those proceeding and acting irrationally — whether they have no reason, or, having reason, do not proceed according to reason. In these, indeed, anger is present from a passible motion, that is, one impetuous and fervent, and born according to a dominating passion; and their raging motion is full of all irrationality. For that motion is named anger which, seething wholly outside reason, is borne by the impulse of passion alone. « But in intellectual beings the irascible must be understood in another manner; » [0981A] in this manner, namely, that the irascible itself be understood in them as declaring their manly rationality, and their vast quiet in the divine and immutable foundations. For when anger is named in the spiritual and celestial nature, it is not an impulse or a motion that is named, but quiet and immutability that is understood. By this reasoning — these things being considered among the dissimilar and contrary: that just as in these beings anger strives by impulse and vehemence to drive off a supervening annoyance, so there an immovable quiet, persisting, is disturbed by no supervening shock — for this reason he calls that quiet itself "vast," that is, strong, and robust, and imperturbable; repelling every motion without motion, and suppressing every violence without shock and disturbance of itself; which quiet, however, [0981B] is not from themselves, but from the divine and immutable foundations to which they cleave, that is, from divine love and contemplation, by which they are made firm unto eternity, that they can in no way henceforth be moved. But this quiet, since it is not of necessity — as though they were held unwilling — but of will — as though, loving indefatigably, they are not forsaken — therefore he joined manly rationality to the quiet, showing that through illuminating reason they manfully reject the evils which they discern, and through affecting love they are at rest in the goods which they perceive, so that the quiet may be fortified by reason, lest it take on an affection for evils; and reason may be guarded by the quiet, lest, setting itself in opposition in hatred of evil, it overstep the bounds of tranquillity. This manly reason, then, and vast quiet, free and [0981C] absolute, and receiving no perturbation, is what anger — when fitted to divine things — signifies; because, as we have said, just as here anger repels an assailing annoyance through madness, so there a rational and voluntary quiet receives no shock, through its immutability.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « In the same manner we say that concupiscence in irrational beings is a certain ill-considered and material passibility, engendered incontinently from a natural motion or from custom in mutable things, and an irrational continuity of bodily pleasure; at once compelling every animal toward the concupiscible according to sense. » After he demonstrated what anger signifies when attributed to sensible and material [0981D] things, and likewise what it signifies when fitted to immaterial and invisible natures, now he consequently shows the difference of concupiscence — whether when it is said of corporeal things, or when it is named in spiritual and divine things. Defining the concupiscence of corporeal beings, indeed, to be a certain passibility, or passion, that is, a dominating affection — ill-considered indeed, because it is not borne by reason, but is drawn by rash appetite into those things by whose delight it is affected; and material, that is, rising from the flesh and from the carnal sense, and showing forth things carnal and sensible — a passibility, I say, engendered either from a natural motion, namely when its appetite is according to nature; or from custom incontinently held in those mutable things, when its desire is borne outside nature, [0982A] or against it: and an irrational continuity of bodily pleasure; understand, we say that concupiscence itself is an irrational continuity, that is, a prolongation, or straining, or effusion of bodily pleasure — that is, of pleasure rising from the body, and tending toward corporeal things, and even compelling every animal, namely by the violence of its appetite, toward that which is concupiscible according to sense. And such indeed we understand the concupiscence of corporeal things to be. « But when, placing dissimilar likenesses about the intellectual and spiritual things, » or clothing them: « being formed about them, » that is, we adapt « to them concupiscence; » then we must understand that concupiscence itself not such as before, but rather divine love, [0982B] and a desire of immateriality, or incorporeality, and of divinity, existing above reason and intellect; since it can be loved more than investigated or understood; and inflexible, since it is always toward the one; and not needy, since what is loved is present. A desire, I say, of contemplation superessentially chaste and impassible — that is, of that thing which they contemplate superessentially, passing over in mind, namely, every essence and nature — the love of which thing is both chaste, since it brings no corruption upon the lover, and impassible, since, sweetly refreshing the one who desires, it does not afflict him. « And it must also be understood that concupiscence itself is a desire, tending toward that pure and most sublime brightness; and toward the invisible [0982C] and form-making beauty of the eternal, true, and invisible fellowship » — which beauty, namely, is called form-making, because it conforms to itself those turned toward it, that they may become beautiful, loving the true beauty, not as in the flesh and according to the flesh, where a lover of beauty can be base, and a possessor of beauty be found not good; but there he who loves, possesses; and he who loves to have, begins to be it. Such a love, then, and such a desire, we must understand in the concupiscence of spiritual and divine things.

There follows: « And it receives, as it were, a power in its sufficiency and in its convertibility; and is afflicted by none; by virtue, through the unconfused and immutable love of divine [0982D] beauty, and the universal recalling unto that which is truly to be desired. » As if he were saying: Concupiscence itself, or the chaste desire of eternal and invisible goods, because it is inflexible, as was said, and not needy, therefore has received, or receives, in its sufficiency and its convertibility toward God and toward divine things, as it were a certain power, or excellence and firmness, so that it cannot at all be afflicted by any contrary power, or violence, or strength. For no one can be hurt or afflicted, except in that which he loves; and therefore he who loves that alone which cannot be taken away can in no way be hurt, because he neither desires anything else outside it, having his sufficiency in it, nor is he anxious about its loss, holding it immutably. Because, then, [0983A] it is sufficient, it suffers no need; and because it is inflexible, it can undergo no violence. And this indeed is conferred on it through the unconfused and immutable love of divine beauty, and the universal recalling unto that which is truly to be desired. For because in them the love of God is unconfused, or, to say it otherwise, unmingled and pure, therefore their desire is not split toward diverse things. And because it is immutable, it is not bent away from the same object. And because they are universally recalled and gathered together unto that which is truly to be desired, it is disturbed by no exterior violence. For if with their whole desire they were not recalled to loving the truth, nor gathered together, without doubt they could be hurt and afflicted, wherever they cleaved in mind to mutable and transitory things. But now, because they are wholly there where all things [0983B] immutably stand fast, it comes about that they too, through the cohesion of love, cannot feel the mutability of affliction.

There follows: « But irrationality itself too, and insensibility, in irrational animals or in animated matters, we properly call a defect of reason and sense; but in immaterial and intellectual essences we confess, holily and becomingly, their supereminences as of super-mundane beings, surpassing our transitory and corporeal and material reason, and the mind's sense that is estranged from incorporeal things. » Other examples being set forth, he shows that the same things which are said of visible and invisible things are not said similarly, nor in the same manner. As if he were saying: Not only anger and concupiscence must be understood otherwise [0983C] here and otherwise there. For irrationality, which signifies the loftiness of reason; and insensibility, which demonstrates the excess of sensibility, when they are named here, that is, in irrational things and things not having sense, show a defect of reason and sensibility; but when they are said there, that is, in divine and intellectual natures, something above reason and sense is signified — not by defect, but by advance. For an excess of reason and sensibility happens either upward or downward: namely when something, either falling short of reason and sense, sinks down, so that it has not this; or, advancing beyond, transcends it, so that it has more. Whence also in Holy Scripture we find that holy men, breathed upon by the Spirit of God, at times suffered ecstasy, that is, an excess of mind [0983D]; since, led above human reason and sense, they went beyond reason and sense in this: that, reaching to that which was higher than reason, they began to be vivified in it and illumined by it. For them, then, the excess was in that they received more, just as for these others the excess came about in that they lost that very thing. Therefore, then, irrationality and insensibility in irrational animals and in inanimate matters we properly call a defect of reason and sense; but in immaterial and intellectual essences, as often as we name irrationality and insensibility, we confess not a defect of them, but rather their supereminences, inasmuch as they are super-mundane. We confess, I say, holily and becomingly, [0984A] that is, attributing nothing to them irreverently or unbecomingly; but, as befits the supereminences or excellences of super-mundane beings, that is, of spiritual essences, which surpass our transitory and corporeal reason — that is, a reason which can neither ascend above transitory things, nor comprehend anything at all outside corporeal things; and surpassing the material sense of our mind, estranged among corporeal things — that is, a sense flourishing only toward material things, and, through material and corporeal things, estranged from immaterial and incorporeal things, unable to perceive the same. Because, then, they are established above such reason, above such sense, through the excellence of contemplation, they are rightly reported to be estranged from such reason and sense — so that this very insensibility and irrationality of theirs [0984B] be understood not as stupor or ignorance, but to be something other — both a manly knowledge and a perception of the good; and not to be such as it is with us, or according to us.

There follows: « It is possible, therefore, to form for celestial things forms not discordant, even from the base parts of matter; since matter itself too, possessing its subsistence from the truly good, has, throughout its every material disposition, certain images of intellectual beauty; and it is possible through them to be led back to the immaterial first forms — the likenesses being taken, as was said, dissimilarly, and not similarly for the same things; yet compactly and beautifully, the intellectual and sensible properties being defined. » He subjoins another cause to the former, for which likenesses are fittingly drawn from visible things to invisible ones [0984C], even according to those things which seem contrary; namely not only because the things which are said are understood to subsist otherwise here and otherwise there, but for this reason too: because whatever things are here have, according to something, a likeness to those which subsist there, since both these and those are, whatever they are, from the one good; and according to the image which these possess toward that good, they also put forth the figure and likeness of those there. This is what he says: « It is possible, » that is, it happens, « to form for celestial things, » namely for the essences, forms not discordant, even « from the base parts of matter, » that is, of corporeal substance, since matter itself too, namely, possessing its subsistence from the truly good, has certain [0984D] images of intellectual beauty throughout its every material disposition: and through them, namely the images, it is possible for the mind to be led back to those first immaterial forms, that is, to the forms of immaterial and spiritual essences, which are prior to these — because these exist according to those, and these tend toward those, and these exist on account of those. It is possible, I say, to be led back from these — yet to those — the likenesses themselves being taken dissimilarly, so that, namely, the things which are here, and are said of those, be understood to be and subsist otherwise there. And the same properties being not similarly defined. But yet compactly, that is, fittingly, and aptly, and beautifully, that is, becomingly — understand, the same properties being defined, on both sides namely, both intellectual and insensible. He speaks of likeness [0985A] when, through extrinsic forms or figures or qualities, descriptions of invisible things are taken from visible ones; but of property, when the likeness is drawn from the inner nature. Whether, then, likenesses from visible things be set forth to be transferred extrinsically to the nature of invisible things, or properties be taken up intrinsically from those same visible and material things for the demonstration of invisible ones, the comparison and adaptation on both sides must be so tempered, that the likenesses themselves, which seem to be set forth similarly on both sides, be nevertheless taken dissimilarly, and be understood to be otherwise here, otherwise there; and the properties themselves, which seem to be attributed the same to both, be defined otherwise in these, and otherwise in those, and be understood to be different — so that to each may be attributed what is [0985B] fitting and apt to it according to its nature.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « We shall find the mystical theologians wondrously conforming these things not only to the declarations of the celestial dispositions, but sometimes also to the very divine manifestations. » He recalled the same thing above: namely that the mystical theologians — that is, theologians who narrate mystical and secret things — conform and fit these things, that is, these likenesses and properties taken from visible things, not only to the declarations of the celestial dispositions, that is, of the celestial orders, namely of the angelic spirits — that is, they set forth these likenesses and properties of visible things not only to declare or demonstrate the celestial dispositions and angelic orderings; [0985C] but they sometimes bring them also to the very divine manifestations, that is, to manifesting and indicating the divinity itself. « And sometimes indeed they praise it » namely the divinity, « from precious lights, » by comparing it to precious lights, and by demonstrating its praise through that thing which, among the other visible things, is precious and comely, as, for example, when they call it the sun — not this visible one, which illumines even the bodily eyes for perpetrating iniquity; but the sun of justice, which enlightens the spiritual eyes for knowing truth and virtue. And as when they call it the « morning star, » whose rising puts darkness to flight — not rising to illumine this world visibly, [0985D] but rising into the rational mind, which alone can receive this light, holily, that is, for making sanctification. And as also when they call it « light shining without being wrapped about, and invisibly; » not as this visible light, which can be both darkened by shadows, and wrapped about, and enclosed in place, and constrained by a bound. If, then, mystical theology praises the excellence of the divine majesty through the appearances and forms of the highest and most precious things. « But sometimes from the middle things, » understand, which in the order of creation are neither highest nor lowest, that theology praises the divine majesty, namely by calling it fire; not such as this corporeal fire is, which, though it profit by illumining, harms by burning and consuming; but « fire harmlessly shining; » [0986A] namely illumining, and not burning up; kindling, and not consuming. And as when it calls it « water, giver of vital fullness; » which gives, namely, the fullness of life, and fills with life those who draw and carry it; and water also, « that it be so said symbolically, » that is, figuratively, « entering into the belly; and overflowing with rivers immeasurably flowing back. » For all these things are said of it not in property, but in figure alone. In all these things mystical theology praises the majesty and goodness of the divinity. « But sometimes also from the lowest things » — as from the inferior and earthly ones — it praises it, and manifests its praise figuratively, as when it names it « sweet ointment, » and likewise when it calls it « corner [0986B] stone. » And to such a degree does it fit the appearances of lowly things to it by likeness, that sometimes it seems even to descend, in describing it, to unfitting and contrary forms. Which nevertheless, according to the cause mentioned above, is carried through by a fitting and necessary dispensation. « But they even set a bestial form about it. » As if he were saying: Not only in the declaration of the divinity do the theologians take up likenesses from inferior things, but (what seems marvelous!) they even descend to contrary and dissimilar formations — ones which, if they were understood according to property, would be wholly unworthy of its majesty. « For they even set a bestial form about it; and to it the particularity of a lion and of a panther, » that is, the appearance, or form, or figure, « they fit; [0986C] and they clothe it, » namely the divinity: « with a leopard-like form, » understand form, that is, the form of a leopard. « And they clothe it, » understand again the divinity; a raging she-bear, that is, with the appearance of a raging she-bear; or they call it « a raging she-bear, » so that in both the incongruity may appear, since they attribute even deformity to the beautiful, and cruelty to the mild.

There follows: « But I will add also that which has seemed to be, of all things, among the base, and to signify more. » As if he were saying: Although in the preceding things which have been mentioned, and in the rest of this kind, a great unworthiness may seem to appear, nevertheless in this which I subjoin a much greater affront appears. « But I will add, » I will indeed presume, and I shall seem to speak boldly, [0986D] I who add this too to the divine significations, « what has seemed to be the basest of all; » and through this, according to the aforesaid reasoning by which dissimilar symbols make the declaration greater, it is proved to signify more than the rest. Which nevertheless perhaps a man would not dare to fit to the divine majesty, if the wisdom of God itself did not take these things to itself by spontaneous condescension. « For those wise in divine things have handed it down as forming itself even under the appearance of a worm. » As it is written: « I am a worm, and no man; the reproach of men, and the outcast of the people [n: (Psal. XXI)]. » For unless it had first said this of itself, who would dare to say this of it? For since nothing seems to be baser and lowlier than a worm, who would presume to bring the highest majesty down to this abasement, [0987A] unless it had first, by its own dispensation, formed itself about with such an appearance, signifying itself thereby. Therefore it deigned first to say this of itself, because it knew that human conscience would not, of itself, dare this against its own Creator. « Thus all the theosophists, and the prophets by hidden inspiration, distinguish the Holy of Holies from the undefiled holy things. » Theosophists, that is, those wise in divine things and who have been made prophets by hidden inspiration. All these, when they wish to designate invisible things through visible appearances and the properties of visible things, distinguish, as we demonstrated above, « the Holy of Holies from the undefiled holy things. » The undefiled holy things are the symbols of divine things taken from beautiful and becoming forms; the Holy of Holies are the divine things themselves, which [0987B] are figured through these. The theosophists, then, by the fact that they attribute dissimilar figures to divine things, also separate the similar formations — even those which seemed worthy — from the excellence and majesty of those divine things. For because they fit even those figures which are not doubted to be foreign to the signification of them, they show that the others too, which could seem true, are not, according to property, similar. Thus, then, in one and the same thing, both in the similar figures they separate the figure from the truth, and in the dissimilar ones, by the fellowship of truth, they honor the figure of truth — since those figures, when they are shown to be foreign, are distinguished, and these, when they are fitted to likeness, are honored. For thus it was fitting that all that was made, compared to the excellence of the Creator, should be shown both in sublime things not [0987C] to be equal, and in the lowest things not to be dissimilar. For because it was made, it cannot be comparable unto equality; and because it was made by him, it cannot be wholly dissimilar to him by whom it was made.

There follows: « So that neither may divine things be rightly received by the unclean, nor may the zealous of the contemplation of marvelous images remain in the figures as though they were true. » This, then, is effected through dissimilar figurations: that in the consideration of them the unclean of heart, and those unworthy of the knowledge of truth, may be the more blinded; and those who are zealous, in the contemplation of marvelous images — that is, of sacred representations marvelously made — may be the more exercised. For thus on both sides [0987D] a just design is accomplished: that while the truth, in its manifestation, covers itself as with a base garment, it both provokes the unworthy to contempt of it, and invites the worthy to desire and to seek that appearance of its own which lies hidden, so that they be not content with what they look upon outwardly, but, repelled by the very deformity of the exterior demonstration, do not remain in the figures as though they were true — since a sign cannot be the truth, even when it is a sign of the truth.

There follows: « They therefore honor divine things by true negations, and by the diverse likenesses of imaginations compacted unto the lowest things. » As if he were saying: Since negations made concerning divine things signify their truth more expressly, and dissimilar formations of images demonstrate their purity more evidently, [0988A] therefore the holy theologians do no affront to the divine things themselves, both by making true negations concerning them, and by attributing dissimilar formations to them, but rather they honor the divine things themselves by true negations, by which they show their excellence to be so great that what they are can in no way be expressed, even if in some way what they are not can be said; and they honor them also by likenesses diverse from their sublimity through a humble formation; and by the likenesses of imaginations compacted unto the lowest things — that is, composed and joined together out of the lowest things, that is, out of the basest and vile appearances of corruptible things.

There follows: « Nothing therefore is inconsequent, if they also form the celestial essences from unfitting, dissimilar [0988B] likenesses, according to the causes stated. » As if he says: Since divine things are honored by true negations and by diverse formations, nothing is inconsequent — that is, unfitting — if the theologians form, that is, represent, the celestial essences from dissimilar and unfitting likenesses; that is, through representations of figures dissimilar from their nature, and in a certain way unfitting. It is not inconsequent, I say, according to the causes stated above.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « For perhaps indeed we would not, from need, come into inquiry, and into anagogy through a diligent scrutiny of divine things, unless the deformity of the manifesting formation of angels wrested us thereto. » As if he were saying: From our need [0988C] into this inquiry — that is, to seeking these things as regards the composition of visible images — or into anagogy as regards the investigation of invisible truth; from our need, I say — we who, knowing the truth, do not need these inquiries — into this inquiry, I say, we would not come, unless (on account of others who might be scandalized thereby, if they were not instructed) the deformity wrested us to it. First, note the doubling of the negation, by which the expression is made: or in this it is manifest that deformed formations are useful in divine things, because we too would not scrutinize the truth of divine things so diligently, unless the deformity of the manifestations wrested us, that is, compelled us. This is what he says: « Perhaps we would not indeed [0988D] come into an inquiry leading into anagogy, » that is, the contemplation of things above; from need, namely, of the understanding of truth: we would not come, I say, through a diligent scrutiny of divine things, « unless it wrested us, » that is, compelled us « to come into inquiry from need, and through inquiry into anagogy, » — the very deformity of the manifesting deformation of the angels, that is, unless the deformity of the formation through which the angels are manifested in Holy Scripture should compel us; I say: « Not allowing our mind to remain in the dissimilar makings of forms, » that is, in the deformed compositions of representations, which are dissimilar from the truth of spiritual things. Unless, then, the very deformity of the representations should compel our mind from the visible figures to [0989A] seek the truth, our mind itself would remain in those things which are set forth outwardly, as things only to be believed and venerated, and would not recognize its own need, so as to think that other things, beyond these, were to be desired and sought by it. But now the very deformity, intervening, compels the mind to go forth from the figure to the truth — the mind, I say, unable to remain in those things which are in themselves unworthy, and incongruous with the truth of divine things. « But the mind struggling to deny » of the divine things themselves those « material possibilities » which are set forth outwardly in signs; and through the fact that it thus holily abhors them, « growing accustomed purely to extend itself through visible things, » roused « into the super-mundane heights »: that is, the angelic excellences, which are supereminent over and excel all worldly things. For unless, roused from these [0989B] by the advancement of contemplation, it should wholly leave these very things behind, it would not be able purely to behold those things which it strives to contemplate.

There follows: « So many things indeed have been said by us, » etc. He himself connects the preceding matters to the following narration. « So many things indeed, » as many as we have said thus far, « have been said by us on account of the angelic descriptions of images, » that is, on account of the descriptions of angels, which are made through images and visible forms, and forms taken from visible things — which descriptions are « of the divine discourses, » that is, made through the divine discourses, and set forth in the divine discourses, which descriptions are also material, that is, formed according to the nature and likeness of material and corporeal things; and they are also unfitting [0989C] on account of the incongruous and base figurations of those things to which excellences have been attributed. For on account of such a thing the inquiry which has been ventilated thus far was set forth. « But next it behooves us to set apart what we consider the hierarchy itself to be, and what benefit those who obtain the hierarchy receive from the hierarchy itself. It behooves us, he says, next, » that is, after the aforesaid, to set apart, that is, to distinguish what we consider the hierarchy itself, taken generally, to be, its definition being set forth. « Next » also « it behooves us to set apart what benefit they receive, » that is, what of usefulness those who obtain the hierarchy receive from the hierarchy itself, namely, which each one obtains. And in saying this, he says, I pray that « my Christ » may be the « leader » of my discourse [0989D]; yet only if it is lawful for me, that is, permitted, to say « my. » For this is a great thing, and seems as it were close to presumption, that a sinner should receive the reward of the just, and one cast down should be confident of the familiarity of the Most High. Therefore I say [0990A] let « Christ » (and if I dare more, I say « my ») be the leader of my discourse. Without whom neither can discourse be right, because he is the Word; nor understanding be true, because he is Wisdom. For all who savor the true, savor through him; and he himself is the inspiration « of every hierarchical manifestation, » since he himself, being Wisdom breathed into the minds of the holy theologians, manifests the whole account of the hierarchical disposition — whether that which is in heaven, or that which is on earth — to those to whom he wills, in the ways he wills. « But you, O boy, » etc. He speaks to Timothy, the disciple of Paul, to whom he is said to have written these things — whom he also calls a boy for this reason: either because he preceded him in age, or because he held toward him the place and dignity of a teacher and master. « But you, O boy, hearken. » As if he says: [0990B] Because the things which are to be said are great, therefore hearken holily and becomingly, as befits the very holy things which are to be said. « Hearken, » I say; according to the holy legislation of our priestly tradition, which bids us not to contend, nor to resist in doctrine, but reverently and humbly to hearken. Or hearken to these things which have been said « according to the holy legislation of our priestly tradition, » that is, which have been said according to the holy law, that is, the Holy Scripture, which has been brought to us by God through the priestly tradition, that is, through the tradition of the holy and the sanctified. Thus, then, « hearken to the wondrously said things, » that is, those things which have been wondrously said: « you, » I say, who have been made divine in the divine doctrine, which makes those who hear and do it divine; [0990C] or, having been made divine in the divine doctrine of the wondrously said things, hearken to the things I propose to be said. And not only hearken, so as to receive the things said reverently, but also « in the secret of your mind covering about the things which are holy, keeping them from the unclean multitude, » that is, from those who are both unclean in conduct and divided in desires: « as uniform things, » that is, undivided and untouched, « guard them, » lest you imprudently expose them to be torn and defiled. « For it is not lawful, as the discourses say, to cast to swine the unconfused, and light-formed, and beneficent adornment of the invisible pearls. » For those are that unclean multitude who are signified by swine in Holy Scripture, who defile the Word of God by living wickedly, and defile the invisible pearls, that [0990D] is, the spiritual understandings — which adorn the understandings with morals, shine through pure truth, are unconfused through the affluence of grace, and are beneficent toward those who touch them with reverence and honor.

## BOOK FOUR.

[0989]

## TITLE OF CHAPTER III. *What the hierarchy is, and what the benefit is through the hierarchy.*

## THE TEXT.

[0989D]

*The hierarchy is, according to me, a divine order, and a knowledge, and an activity assimilating itself, as far as possible, to the deiform, [0990D] and, proportionally to the illuminations divinely implanted in it, ascending into the likeness of God. The divine beauty, as simple, and best, as consummative. It is pure [0991A] indeed, universally, from all dissimilarity; distributive according to the worth of each one's proper light; and perfective, in the most divine sacrifice, according to the compactly immutable formation of those perfected unto it. The interpretation, therefore, of the hierarchy is, unto God, as far as is possible, a likeness and unity, having Him as the leader of every holy action and knowledge; and unto its own most divine comeliness immutably defining them; but, as far as possible, it reforms, and perfects its own praisers as divine statues, mirrors most clear, and pure, receptive of the principal light and of the divine ray, and filled indeed with the implanted sacred brightness: and pouring it out again copiously into the things which follow, declaring the divine laws. For it is not lawful for the perfecters of the holy, and for the holily perfected, to do anything at all [0991B] apart from the + mysteries of the sacrificial victims, or the sacred ordinations; but neither to subsist otherwise, if they seek His divine brightness; and they look unto it holily and becomingly, and are reformed, according to the anagogy of each of the holy intellects. Does not, therefore, he who says "hierarchy" declare universally a certain sacred disposition, an image of the divine beauty, in the hierarchical orders and knowledges celebrating the mysteries of its own illumination, and assimilated to its own principle, as is permitted? For to each of those who obtain the hierarchy this is the perfection: to ascend, according to one's own analogy, into the imitation of God, and — most divine of all, as the discourses say — to become a fellow-worker of God [n: (I Cor. III; III Joan. I; Matth. V)]*, *and to show forth the divine action shining again in oneself, according [0991C] as is possible. Inasmuch as the order of the hierarchy is that some be purged, but some purge; and some be illumined, but some illumine; and some be perfected, but some perfect; for each in a deiform union, in whatever manner. The divine blessedness — as far as it is to be spoken of among men — is indeed pure, without any dissimilarity; full of eternal light; perfect and not needy, at once of all perfection; purging, and illumining, and perfecting; but a great purgation, and holy illumination, and perfection, above purgation, above light, perfect beforehand; through itself perfect, the principle of perfection; and the cause indeed of every hierarchy, and of everything sacred, according to its supereminent loftiness. [0991D] It behooves, therefore, as I consider, that those to be purged be wholly perfected by the pure, and be freed from all confusion of dissimilarity. But that those to be illumined be filled with divine light, and be led back unto a contemplative habit and power in the most chaste eyes of the mind. That from the imperfect, being restored, they become partakers of the perfective knowledge of the sacred things searched out. But that the purgers, by the greatness of purgation, impart to others out of their own chastity. But that the illuminators — having more luminous minds, and being properly suited both for the participation of light and for its distribution, and most richly filled with holy charity — convey their own super-excellent light entirely upon those who are worthy of light. But that the perfecters, as teachers of the perfective tradition, perfect those to be perfected by a most sacred doctrine, through the knowledge of the sacred things beheld. Is not, therefore, [0992A] each order of the hierarchy's disposition led back, according to its own analogy, to divine cooperation — accomplishing those things by grace and by the power given by God, which are present in the divinity naturally and supernaturally, and, by it superessentially enacted, are manifested unto the imitation of the hierarchy, as far as is possible, by minds loving God.*

## EXPOSITION.

Up to this point the theologian has discoursed on the things that had to be said in a general way for those being introduced into the knowledge of the hierarchies, in proportion to the visible demonstrations set forth for the signifying of visible things. Then now, entering upon the principal exposition, he first defines what a hierarchy is; not universally, however, but with a restricted meaning, only according to that hierarchy which consists in angels and [0992B] men. « A hierarchy, » he says, « is, in my view, a divine order, and knowledge, and activity, likening the deiform as far as is possible; and ascending, in proportion to the illuminations divinely implanted in it, into the likeness of God. » What he says, « in my view, » is to be taken as though he had said, according to my own estimation. For he modestly tempers his assertion, lest he seem to presume upon his own estimation more than is right. Then he sets forth three principal things in the definition of a hierarchy, which complete the very definition of a hierarchy. And these are: order, knowledge, and activity. If any one of all these three be lacking, there is no hierarchy. The first is a divine order; because there is no power, if it is not ordained [0992C] by God; for this reason he says, a divine order. For « all » « power is from God; and the things that are from God are all good and ordained; therefore he who resists the power ordained by God, resists God [n: (Rom. XIII)]. » For this reason, then, a hierarchy is a divine order, that is, a power ordained by God and disposed according to God. For it is from God by ordination; and according to God by imitation; and therefore a divine order, because it is from God, that it may be; and it is according to God, as to what kind and how great it is. Then, because every power that is ordained by God is ordained for the accomplishing and completing of something, there follows in the definition, after order, « knowledge and activity. » Knowledge, indeed, by which they may understand what is to be done; [0992D] but activity, by which they may accomplish what they have understood must be done. In order, duty; in knowledge, discernment; in activity, ministry. Without order, activity is presumption; without activity, order is negligence; but without knowledge, both activity is blameworthy and order is useless. For these reasons, then, a hierarchy is a divine order, and knowledge, and activity. A hierarchy, I say, both in order and in knowledge and in activity, likening the deiform, that is, imitating conformity to God as far as is possible for it; and ascending into the likeness of God in proportion to the illuminations, that is, according to the illuminations divinely implanted in it: each one, namely, according to the manner and measure of the grace divinely infused into it, accomplishing its task in its own order, and ascending to the imitation of God, so that by discerning rightly and working well [0993A] it may imitate him. For in both respects every hierarchy emulates the divine likeness: namely, both in that it is disposed by him, and in that it works according to him. But this definition, as we have said, embraces only the angelic and human hierarchy, which were made after the likeness of the supreme and eternal hierarchy; and, being disposed according to it, they imitate it.

There follows: « The divine beauty, as simple, and as best because consummative; it is pure, indeed, universally from all unlikeness; but distributive, according to the dignity of each, of its proper light; and perfective in the most divine sacrifice, according to the unchangeable formation of those made perfect, closely joined unto it. » The sense is this. That the divine beauty, [0993B] which we name the supreme hierarchy, according to which the other hierarchies were made, is universally pure, that is, wholly so, inasmuch as it is always simple in unity, best in goodness, consummative in perfection. For where there is unity, there is no diversity; and where there is no diversity, there can be no unlikeness. Likewise, where there is perfection, there is no degree; where there is no degree, there is no difference; where there is no difference, there is no unlikeness. Therefore the divine beauty, which is the form and exemplar of all things well and beautifully disposed — because it is one, it does not admit plurality; and because it is best, and consummate, and not only consummate but also consummative of all things to be consummated, and the cause of consummation, it does not admit diversity, and thereby [0993C] knows no unlikeness at all; it that is both one in simplicity and the same in perfection. And although in itself it is such that it is neither divided by plurality nor made lesser by diversity, yet in those who become partakers of grace it is distributive of its proper light, bestowing its proper light in diverse ways, according to the dignity, namely, of each of the participants — granting to the higher greater, but to the lower lesser, gifts of graces, so that it may be beautifully multiplied in them, it which in itself truly abides one. The divine beauty itself is also perfective, since it perfects and makes the partakers of its lights consummate; perfective, I say, in the most divine sacrifice, by which it perfects those to be perfected according to the unchangeable formation of those closely joined and made perfect unto it. By the most divine [0993D] sacrifice he means the divine illumination itself, and grace, and propitiation; by which all who are to be purged and to be saved are purged and cleansed, not only from the corruption of evil, that they may become good, but they are purged also from the defect of good, that they may stand present as better. It is therefore the supreme offering, and the *teletargis*, that is, the victim of the principal purgation; namely, the divine grace itself which is offered to us and offered for us. It is offered to us for purgation; it is offered for us for propitiation. It is offered to us, that we may have it; it is offered for us, that through it we may be pleasing. It is offered to us by infusion; it is offered for us by cleansing. It is offered to us while we begin to be what we were not; it is offered by us, while we exhibit and present [0994A] what we are. It is therefore the *teletargis* itself, that is, the victim of the principal purgation, and the most divine sacrifice, without which all victims and all sacrifices can have neither effect nor profit; it is that by which the divine beauty perfects, and makes perfect those who are perfect unto it — that is, reformed unto its likeness, that is, harmoniously, so that, namely, they may not diverge from it — according to the unchangeable formation of those very ones made perfect, unto it, that is, according to its likeness, which, once received, they keep unchangeably, so that they do not flow away from it. For the divine beauty, which in itself is one and perfect, purges and perfects those to be perfected unto itself through the victim of the principal purgation — that is, the infusion of its grace, which from its own fullness it poured out into participation for the sake of those to be purged and [0994B] perfected — according to the manner and measure and capacity of each, which they received by the gift of that same grace, according to the unchangeable formation of them unto it; which formation, namely, is called unchangeable, as we have said, either because it turns those who are formed and reformed toward unchangeability; or because it abides unchangeable in him from whom it is, even if it be changed for those for whom it is and in whom it is.

There follows: « The interpretation [ *intentio* ], therefore, of a hierarchy is likeness and unity with God, as far as is possible. » What in Greek is called σκοπός *scopos,* and what the translator calls interpretation, is more properly named *intentio* or *directio*. For the intention [0994C] or direction which is called *scopos* is a fixed aiming toward some end. For every action tends toward some end, and tends by some direction. But *scopas*, that is, the direction or aim, is that by which it tends. Every hierarchy, therefore, has a *scopon*, that is, a direction according to which it may proceed in fulfilling its ministry; namely, the imitation and divine likeness, so that, just as it has been ordained by him in office and dignity, so according to him it may proceed in ministry and operation, so that it presume to do nothing beyond the manner and measure assigned by him and owed to its own order. The interpretation, then — that is, the definition, or rather the direction and contemplation of a hierarchy, toward which every hierarchy ought to aim and does direct itself — is likeness and unity, that is, [0994D] imitation of and identity with God, so that in nothing it may deviate or decline from his likeness, in which it has been placed, but may emulate him in all things as far as is possible. Likeness to God is to imitate him; but unity is to follow him alone. And this is the *scopos*, that is, the direction or aim of every hierarchy: that according to him it may proceed toward him, having him as the leader of all holy knowledge and activity, following him in judgment and in action — illumined by him unto the knowledge of truth, and aided unto the carrying out of good work. « Having him as leader, » presiding within in the demonstration of truth, and going before without in the example of good action. « And unto its own most divine comeliness defining unchangeably indeed; [0995A] but, as far as is possible, it reforms, and perfects its own praisers as divine images. » The hierarchy itself, namely, defining unchangeably — that is, invariably or inflexibly turned, or aiming through its *scopos* toward the most divine comeliness of God himself, by imitating and following him, so that it may be conformed to his beauty and most divine comeliness, according to which every hierarchy is beautifully and becomingly disposed in its own order and rank: as far as is possible it reforms its own praisers, that is, those who in it praise God, and are disposed and ordained unto the praise of God: it reforms them, I say, in this very thing, that it makes them imitators of God, and turns them unto his likeness in their ministry; and by turning and reforming them it perfects them as divine *agalmata*, so that they themselves may be divine [0995B] *agalmata*, that is, holy images and receptacles of divinity, and most bright mirrors; so that they themselves may be divine *agalmata*, indeed, by perfecting the divine light, but most bright mirrors, to shine from the light received. He also perfects those praisers of his as « pure receptacles, » or vessels « of the principal light, and of the divine ray » — that is, of the light immediately illuminating, and descending to illuminate those first things — so that, after the light is received, they may be filled with the sacred brightness implanted in them, that is, infused; and so that they may also be things declaring it, namely the brightness — « again, » that is, in the second place, « in those things which follow, declaring it » abundantly, according to « the divine laws. » The sense is this: Since a hierarchy, according to that disposition by which it imitates the divine beauty, [0995C] makes its praisers universally — that is, whether the higher or the lower — such that they are worthy both to receive the divine light and to shine from the light: but in particular it makes certain ones so pure that they are capable of the principal light, and are immediately illumined by God, and then transfuse their light to those who follow after them and are set beneath them in dignity: administering, indeed, abundantly, out of the abundance of the first reception, the second participation — provided only that the divine law is observed, in which it is prescribed for each one what, or how much, or to whom he ought to impart out of the gift of grace granted to him. For that it is not without the divine law — that is, that divine dispensation by which the gifts of grace are bestowed upon the partakers of the largess according to [0995D] a fixed measure and proportion, and duties are assigned, so that each one may know how much is permitted to him according to the ministry assigned, or is permitted to be done — he makes clear when he adds:

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

« For it is not lawful for the perfecters of holy things, and for the holily perfected, to work anything at all beyond their proper mysteries of victims, and their sacred ordinations. » As if he should say: For this reason those who in the order of the hierarchies are superior transfuse their lights to the inferiors, according to the divine laws; because it is not lawful, that is, not at all permitted, to work anything either for the perfecters of holy things, that is, for those who perfect others in holiness, or for the holily perfected, that is, for those who are perfected by others in holiness, beyond the proper mysteries of victims, that is, the proper gifts of graces, and the proper [0996A] sacred ordinations, that is, the sacred orders proper and assigned to each one. For to work without grace is vain; to work beyond order, or against it, is perverse. For individuals have their proper gifts, according to which they are able to work; and their proper orders, according to which they ought to moderate their working. Therefore it is necessary that each one strive to recognize the grace which he has received, lest he begin to presume in that which he cannot do; and to attend to his proper office and order, lest he dare to transgress in that which he ought not. For that this order of the divine disposition must be diligently observed, the Apostle Peter admonishes, saying: « Each one, as he has received grace, ministering it one to another » [n: (I Petr. IV)]. And the Apostle Paul reproves those who were unwilling to hold this divine ordination [0996B] and dispensation, saying: « Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all doctors? Are all workers of powers? Have all the grace of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? Be zealous for the better charisms. » [n: (I Cor. XII.)] Therefore, then, it is not lawful for those who have been made partakers of divine grace, whether they have received it immediately from God, or through man, to work anything beyond their proper gifts and offices, so that the divine beauty may be conserved in all, and the order of the supreme dispensation may persevere. He calls perfecters of holy things those who have received so great a grace from God that, by illuminating and instructing, they perfect others also unto holiness. The holily perfected are those who, [0996C] illumined and instructed by those very superiors, are perfected in holiness. By mysteries of victims he wishes gifts of graces to be understood: which are for this reason called mysteries, because they are secretly inspired; but victims, because they are bestowed for the cleansing and expiation of those who receive them. Or by ministries of victims he means the exhibitions of holy works, and the administrations of the divine sacraments: which are both victims, because they are offered through the exhibition of action, and mysteries through the sacraments of signification; because through that which is done visibly without in the sacrament, the invisible power of truth is signified. So, then, beyond the proper mysteries of victims, that is, the proper gifts or ministries, it is not lawful to work anything, either for the perfecters of holy things, that is, for those who administer the grace they have received to others to be perfected, [0996D] or for the perfected themselves, that is, for those who, through the grace received, are perfected unto the perfection of holiness. Nor is it lawful either for these or for those to work anything beyond their sacred ordinations, that is, beyond that which pertains to their sacred ordinations, so that, namely, each one may presume to work that alone which is proved to pertain to the order and office assigned to him.

There follows: « But neither can they subsist otherwise, if they desire his divine brightness, and look toward it sacredly and becomingly, and are reformed, according to the analogy of each of the holy intellects. » As if he should say: Not only is it a debt for them to keep the sacred mysteries and the sacred ordinations, but it is also necessary, [0997A] since they cannot subsist otherwise, namely in that state in which they imitate the divine beauty, unless, by keeping their orders, they proceed according to the divine laws. If, therefore, they desire the divine brightness of their Creator himself, and look toward the receiving of it by imitating and desiring — sacredly by affection, becomingly by habit — and we are reformed unto his likeness by imitating and following it: each of the holy intellects, namely, that is, of the angels, « according to the analogy of each, » that is, according to the manner and measure of his possibility, which each has according to his order, and rank, and property; otherwise they can in no way subsist in that good which they desire, unless they proceed according to the divine laws, [0997B] keeping their ordinations, and executing their proper ministries.

There follows: « Does not, therefore, he who says a hierarchy universally declare a certain sacred disposition, an image of the divine beauty, in the hierarchical orders and knowledges sacrificing the mysteries of its proper illumination, and, as far as is allowed, assimilated unto its proper principle? » Since, he says, it is necessary that every hierarchy desire the divine likeness, nor can it subsist otherwise, unless it persevere in his imitation. Therefore he who says a hierarchy declares a certain sacred disposition, which is an image of the divine beauty, that is, comeliness. A disposition, I say, sacrificing the mysteries, that is, exercising or exhibiting the mystical works, or the divine ministries [0997C] of its proper illumination, that is, according to its proper illumination, in the hierarchical orders and knowledges — as far, namely, as is given to each for the work, according to his order, and rank, and the gift of illuminating grace; and, by working, assimilated, as far as is allowed, that is, as far as is possible for the creature according to its manner and dignity, unto its proper principle, from which also it was made that it might be something, and according to which it was disposed that it might be such. « Does not, therefore, he who says a hierarchy declare a certain sacred disposition universally, » that is, so holding itself in every order and rank of it; because, namely, it is disposed and ordained after the image of the divine beauty in the hierarchical orders and knowledges, and sacrifices [0997D] the mysteries of its proper illumination, so that in all its disposition, and order of dignity, and knowledge of discernment, and imitation of work, it may emulate its principle. He sacrifices the mysteries of his proper illumination who, out of the hidden gift of inspiration, represents good work; he also sacrifices the mysteries of his proper illumination who, transfusing the grace he has received to others, multiplies the talent committed to him; he also sacrifices the mysteries of his proper illumination who administers those things alone which befit his order and office. « For the perfection of each of those who are allotted a hierarchy is this: namely, according to his proper analogy, to ascend into the imitation of God, and to become, most divinely of all [divinissime], as the words say, a fellow-worker of God, and to show forth the divine action in himself, shining, as far as is possible, [0998A] relucent. » For this reason he says: He who says a hierarchy signifies a certain general disposition, imitating the divine beauty in its ordination, because this is the perfection of each order, namely, or person, of all who are allotted a hierarchy: to ascend, namely, according to his proper analogy, that is, manner and measure, into the imitation of God, and to become a fellow-worker of God, as the words say, most divinely of all, that is, than which the words say nothing more divine, or, most divinely of all, to become a fellow-worker of God, that is, than which nothing makes men more divine than, namely, to become a fellow-worker of God, and to show forth in himself the divine action relucent: so that, namely, by being relucent to others, he may transfuse through the example of work that which he first merited to receive through the gift of hidden inspiration. Thus, then, [0998B] the perfection of a hierarchy stands, that those who are purged may purge, and those who are illumined may illumine, and those who are perfected may perfect. « Inasmuch as the order of a hierarchy is thus, namely: that some indeed are purged, but some purge; and some indeed are illumined, but some illumine; and some indeed are perfected, but some perfect: for each one a deiform union in whatever mode. » First they are purged, afterward they are illumined, then they are perfected. For unless purgation preceded, illumination would not follow; and unless there were illumination, consummation would not come. For just as he cannot be illumined who is not purged, so he cannot be consummated who is not illumined; because the knowledge of truth illumines none but the pure, and the perfection of virtue [0998C] approaches none but those illumined by truth. But there are the superior and sublime, who themselves also, approaching the divinity, receive immediately from it both purgation, that they may be pure, and illumination, that they may be clear, and perfection, that they may be holy. And from those in turn, according to the order of the divine disposition, those who follow, and are subject in order, are both purged, and illumined, and perfected. And thus, according to this mode, for each union — that is, order and distribution — in whatever mode the deiform, that is, deiformity or likeness, is: namely, this very being purged, illumined, and perfected, so that in this their mode and measure the individuals may have deiformity and the likeness of God: they who are pure by purgation, illumined by truth, perfected by goodness.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

[0998D]There follows: « The divine beatitude (as far as it must be said among men) is indeed pure at once from all unlikeness; but full of eternal light: perfect, and at once not lacking any perfection; purging, and illuminating, and perfecting. » Now he wishes to demonstrate that the good which, in the creature — whether purged, or illumined, or perfected — stands by grace, in the Creator himself, from whom it is, subsists by nature: whose divine beatitude is both pure without purgation, and shining without illumination, and perfect without reception. For it is not purged in order that it may be pure; nor is it illumined in order that it may shine; nor does it receive in order that it may be perfected. But having the whole in itself, it does not lack what is another's; and, administering its own, it fills those things which of themselves are in need. It is indeed pure, he says, from all unlikeness equally; [0999A] this, then, is the reason for which it is rightly named pure, and has no unlikeness whatsoever. For where there is purity, there is no unlikeness; because it is the very same throughout, and a concordant one. For corruption introduces unlikeness, and makes other that which withdraws from its own being, and fails as though it were other than it was. That, therefore, which is always the same admits no unlikeness; and that which perseveres unchangeable admits no corruption. Therefore the divine beatitude is pure, and incorrupt, and foreign to all unlikeness, abiding in that which it is, and keeping incorrupt what it has. It is also full of eternal light, yet not as if illumined, since it is itself light; nor beginning to shine, since it is eternal; nor growing in light, since it is [0999B] full. It is also perfect, and at once not lacking any perfection, that is, lacking nothing that pertains to perfection; because it has and possesses the whole, and it is itself the whole which it possesses: and therefore it can be neither greater, because it has the whole; nor lesser, since it has it unchangeably and eternally. And although in itself it is such that it needs neither to be purged, being pure; nor to be illumined, being full of light; nor to be perfected, being consummate: yet it purges, and illumines, and perfects all who merit to be purged, and illumined, and perfected — whether receiving grace immediately in the first place, or partaking mediately through those who first merited to receive it. But this whole, namely that the divine beatitude is called full, and full of light, and perfect: is to be said as far as among men, that is, [0999C] according to that mode by which that which is ineffable can be said by men. For as regards that ineffable purity of the supreme truth, the divine nature itself is rather to be called holy purgation, and illumination, and perfection, so that it may be understood to be little that it is called pure, but rather purgation itself; that it is called illumined, but rather illumination itself; that it is called perfect, but rather perfection itself: which itself, however, is still found to be too little, unless there be thought purgation above all purgation, illumination above all illumination, perfection above all perfection. For this reason he says: « Purgation, illumination, perfection, above purgation, above light, before perfect, » or more than perfect, that is, above perfection; because all this that is said is said according to [0999D] something, from which he who supremely is is far removed, and therefore he is above all this, which is. Therefore it is purgation, since it receives nothing defiled into itself, and takes away defilement or corruption from those receiving and suffering corruption: and yet above purgation, since it touches no corruption. And it is illumination, since it shines in itself, and makes dark things grow bright from itself, and above illumination, since, irradiating and penetrating all things, it does not go out from itself; and it is perfection, since it has nothing less in itself, and to those having less it grants what is lacking, and supplies it out of itself; and yet before perfect, or more than perfect, since it stands wholly in the singularity of good, and undivided in participation, so that its good is neither less [1000A] because it is one, nor manifold because it is participated. For this reason, « it is perfect through itself, » because what it has it did not receive from elsewhere; and « through itself the principle of perfection, » because, by granting to those to be perfected that which it has, it itself does not lose it. And it is « the cause of every hierarchy, and of every holy thing, according to its supereminent loftiness. » It is a principle, since it is from it; and a cause, since it is through it, and on account of it; and a form, since according to it every hierarchy in the order of dignity, and every holy thing in the ministry of action, is dispensed. From it, by predestination; through it, by creation; on account of it, by glorification; unto it, by conversion, that it may imitate it and be beatified in it.

There follows: « It behooves, therefore, as I suppose, etc. » [1000B] After he has demonstrated that the divine beatitude is the form and cause of every sacred power and disposition; and that it is both pure, and shining, and perfect: pure indeed and clean in that it lacks all unlikeness and confusion; shining in that it contains in itself the fullness of eternal light; but perfect in that, having all things, it lacks nothing. Now he infers, proving that those too who are ordained unto its likeness and imitation in the sacred dispositions ought likewise to be pure from all contagion and confusion, and shining with truth, and perfect in goodness, so that they too may be able to cleanse, and illumine, and perfect others by doctrine and by example, so that in both respects they may rise up unto the image and likeness of their Creator, [1000C] namely, both in that they themselves are pure, and clear, and perfect, and in that they cleanse, and illumine, and perfect others. « It behooves, » he says, « as I suppose, that those to be purged indeed » — namely, whether those who in the first place, or those who, with others mediating, receive purgation — « be made altogether pure, and be freed from all confusion of unlikeness, » which either ignorance of the true, or concupiscence of evil, has introduced. « But those to be illumined it behooves to be filled with the divine light, » inasmuch as they are to be led back, in the most chaste eyes of the mind, « unto a contemplative habitude and power — that is, so that, the eyes of the mind being chaste and pure from the preceding purgation of sin and of error, they « may have a contemplative habitude and power. » A habitude, namely, through purity of mind; but a power through [1000D] the stability of contemplation, so that they may be able to contemplate divine things, which they both truly apprehend, and retain perseveringly. « But those to be restored from the imperfect it behooves to become partakers of the perfective knowledge of the explored holy things, » so that, namely, they may apprehend the true goods, and those holy things which they explore through perfect knowledge, by following them with love and partaking of them with holiness; so that, just as through perfect knowledge they are perfected in cognition, so through perfect goodness they may be perfected in participation. « But the purgers, by the greatness of purgation, to hand on to others out of their proper chastity, » that is, the purgers themselves, whose ministry it is, namely, that through them others be purged from error and fault: it behooves them to be such that, by the greatness [1001A] of their own purgation, that is, of their own cleanness which they have in themselves, they may hand on purgation to others by their proper chastity, chastening the life of those to be purged by their own, not another's, example. « But the illuminators it behooves to convey their supereminent light upon those who are worthy of light, » inasmuch as they have more luminous souls for the participation of light, by which they themselves receive light, and for the distribution of light, by which they transfuse the light received to others to be illumined: « having » I say « properly, » that is, singularly and excellently, because those who ought to illumine others ought to shine more than others: « and most richly, » that is, they ought to be abundantly filled with the sacred brightness, so that out of the abundance of reception they may be able to bestow upon individuals what is needful. For he who ought to teach all ought to have the knowledge of all; [1001B] because he cannot administer to each one what is expedient, who does not know the causes of all things, and their utilities. And they ought to convey their light aloft, so that what they teach by word they may commend by the excellence of life, as though shining on high, and pouring lights upon those who remain lower in their manner of life. But the perfecters it behooves to perfect those to be perfected by most sacred doctrine, through the knowledge of the holy things beheld, as teachers of the perfective knowledge. He truly beholds holy things who knows the habit through experience; he truly beholds holy things who has perceived the interior goods by tasting. He therefore has most sacred doctrine who teaches what he savors; who instructs in what he feels; who teaches not only to know the true, but to apprehend the good [1001C] and to love the just. Which handing-on is for this reason called perfective, because this alone leads a man to the perfect, when he apprehends, through the pursuit of good work, the goods which he could not know through the understanding. By such doctrine, therefore, the perfecters themselves ought to perfect those to be perfected, so that they may be holy and perfect in goodness, imitating him unto whose form and likeness they are reformed — the superiors by bestowing, and the inferiors by receiving, the participation of divine grace.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

Whence there follows: « Is not, therefore, every order of the hierarchic disposition, according to its proper analogy, that is, » manner, and measure, and order, « led back unto the divine cooperation: doing and perfecting those things through the grace and power given by God, [1001D] which are in the divinity naturally and supernaturally, and, having been » — namely by the divinity — « superessentially wrought by it, were afterward manifested to the hierarchy for the possible imitation of the souls, that is, » of the spirits « that love God? » For unless those goods which are in God by nature descended to these by grace, they would not be like him; and unless they themselves, by acting, obtained those things which he possesses not by acting but by having, they would not be his imitators. Finally, unless those goods had been led forth from his invisible secret unto manifestation, they would in no way have been imitable by the possibility of the creature; nor would there be dignity according to him, unless grace had gone forth from him. Behold what charity does. To those souls alone that love God are the hidden [1002A] divine things said to be made manifest, and possible to imitate. For rational souls perceive the interior and eternal goods through charity alone: those goods, through love, both by tasting that they may understand, and by following that they may apprehend. For unless they loved they would not understand, because they are not understood except when they are loved; and again, unless they loved they would not seek, and unless they sought they would not find, because they are not found if they are not sought. For hence it is written: « Now I will not call you servants, because the servant knows not what his Lord does. But I have called you friends, because all things whatsoever I have heard from my Father, I have made known to you [n: (Joan. XV)]. » And again: « Father, I give thee thanks, because thou hast hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones [n: (Luc. X)]. » Behold, [1002B] therefore, how charity alone reveals the things of God that are hidden, and likewise it too leads unto possibility the things that are ineffable, and superessential, and supernatural to every creature, according to the incomprehensible sublimity of God. « If anyone, he says, loves me, he will keep my word; and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him [n: (Joan. XIV)]. » Thus, therefore, every order of the disposition of the hierarchy, the grace and power having been received from God, is perfected through charity alone, by acting and imitating God, so that by action and imitation there may begin to be present in them those things which are in the divinity naturally, since they are from it; and supernaturally, since they are the same with it: naturally, since coeternal; supernaturally, since [1002C] coessential: for that which is always present is natural; but that which is the same is supernatural, since it is nature itself, and it itself is nature.

There follows: « And superessentially wrought by it; and manifested to the hierarchy for the possible imitation of the souls that love God. » What are those things which are supernaturally in the divinity, and were superessentially wrought by it, and finally were manifested to the hierarchy for the possible imitation of the souls that love God. He wishes certain goods to be understood, invisible and ineffable, which were with God, and were in God, and had not yet come into knowledge through participation, so as to be known and possessed except by him alone whose they were, in whom they were: and afterward they were made by him, when it was brought about that they should come to be in [1002D] us; and they were superessentially made, since first they were made by him, for us, so that afterward through him they might come to be in us. Made for us by predestination, that they might come to be in us by reception; made for us when they are bestowed, that they might come to be in us when they are received. Made above us, when they begin to come to us; made in us, when they begin to be had by us. Made unto us, when they descend from him; made in us, when they are bestowed through him. These, therefore, are the things which are supernaturally in the divinity before us, and were superessentially made from it unto us: finally manifested in us through it. « They were manifested, he says, to the hierarchy, » that is, to the sacred disposition which is ordained according to God, and proceeds: and this was done [1003A] « for the possible imitation of the souls that love God, » that is, so that the souls that love God might be able to imitate him; because, unless they had been manifested, they would not be imitable. For unless they were known they would not be sought, and unless they were sought they would not be known. But this is to be diligently attended to, that those goods are said to be manifested not to any single individuals, but to the hierarchy, that is, to the whole; yet in such a way that they are exercised by the individuals [1004A] within the whole by the zeal of imitation, because grace is poured out upon all and works in individuals. Outside unity none can receive it, and, given to another within unity, it can suffice for no one. For this reason they are manifested to the hierarchy, to bring forth the possible imitation of the souls that love God.

## BOOK FIVE.

[1003]

## TITLE OF CHAPTER IV. *What the appellation of the angels signifies.*

## THE TEXT.

[1003B]

*What a hierarchy is, therefore, having been, as I suppose, well defined by us — the angelic hierarchy — is then to be praised, and its wondrous makings of forms in the words are to be beheld with supermundane eyes, that we may ascend into their most deiform simplicity through the mystical formations. And at the same time we shall praise the principle of all hierarchic knowledge in divine religiosity, and in the most perfect givings of thanks: first of all, at once, to say this true thing — that by universal goodness the superessential divinity, setting up the essences of the things that are unto being, led them forth. For this is proper to the cause of all things, and to the goodness that is above all: to call unto its own communion the things that are, as for each one of the things that are it is defined out of its proper analogy. All things, therefore, [1003C] that are participate the providence flowing from the superessential and most causal divinity. For perhaps they would not be, save by the assumption of the principle of the essences of the things that are. All existing things, therefore, participate its being. For the being of all things is the superbeing of the divinity: but living things participate the same vivific power above all life. Rational and intellectual things participate the same wisdom, above all reason and intellect, perfect through itself, and before perfect. And it is clear that about it are those of the essences which have innumerably received from it. The holy dispositions, therefore, of the heavenly essences, above the things which merely are and live irrationally (according to which we are rational), have been made in the participation of the hierarchic tradition. For, invisibly looking supermundanely [1003D] into the divine likeness, and desiring to form their intellectual appearance, they beautifully have the more copious communions toward it. For they are attentive to all life. They, therefore, are first, and manifoldly, and ever to the utmost, as far as is lawful, intent upon the conformation of the divine and inflexible love, and receiving the principal illuminations immaterially and purely, and ordained unto them, and having all intellectual life. They, therefore, are first, and manifoldly made in the participation of God: and first, and manifoldly the makers-manifest of the divine hiddenness. For this reason also, beyond [1004B] all things, they have been made worthy of the angelic appellation, and by selection: in that they first bring forth into themselves the divine illumination, and through themselves convey to us the manifestations which are above us. Thus indeed, as theology says, they were given to us through angels. And our glorious fathers also, both before the law and after the law, the angels led back unto the divine: introducing what was to be done, and leading them back unto the right way of truth from error and from an unclean life; or revealing prophetically the sacred orders of the supermundane mysteries, or the hidden visions, or certain divine prior proclamations [praedictiones] [n: (Gen. XIX, XXII, XXXI; Judith. VI; Dan. VII; Matth. II; Act. X; Apoc. IV)]*. *But if anyone should say that from thence also there were, immediately, theophanies to certain of the holy ones, let him learn this too wisely from the most sacred [1004C] words: how this indeed is a certain thing — no one sees the hidden of God, nor will see [n: (Num. XII; I Tim. VI)]*. *But theophanies were made to the holy ones, [sed] according to what befits God, and through certain sacred manifestations of proportional visions to those who see. Therefore the most wise theology itself revealed that vision which is described in it to be divine, so that, as it were, a likeness in the form of the formless, from the leading-back of the seers into the divine, is beautifully called a theophany, as though through it divine things were made to the seers by illumination, the divine ones themselves indeed holily perfecting them. But these divine visions our glorious fathers accomplished through the mediating heavenly powers. Does not also the tradition of the words say that the sacred legislation was given, as it were of itself indeed, from God to Moses, so that it may truly teach us also [1004D] that it and the sacred characters are divine? [n: (Deut. IX.)] But theology also wisely teaches that it came unto us through angels, as though the divine legal order legally set that down — that is, that the second things are led back into the divine through the first. For not only in the superposed and subject souls, but also in the equally powerful, is the law itself defined out of the superessential principle of the ordination of all things. This is: through each single hierarchy there are the first, and the middle, and the last, and ordinations, and powers, and the teachers of the least are the more divine, and the guides-by-hand unto the divine leading, and illumination, [1005A] and communication. But I see that the angels first taught the divine mystery of the humanity of Christ, and then through them the grace of knowledge descended unto us [n: (Matth. I; Luc. I, II)]*. *Thus, therefore, the most divine Gabriel taught the mysteries to Zacharias, the high priest [n: (Luc. I)]*, *that is, that from him a prophet should come to be, against hope — a boy to be born divinely by divine grace — and, for the salutary manifestation to the world of the manly divine operation of Jesus. And Mary too, how in her there should be the divine mystery of the ineffable divine formation [n: (ibid.)]*. *But another of the angels was instructing Joseph, how the things divinely promised to the forefather David were truly to be fulfilled [n: (Matth. I; Luc. II)]*. *But another evangelized the shepherds, as those purged, as it were, by the return of the many and by silence, and with him a multitude of the heavenly host [1005B] was delivering to those who are on earth that greatly laudable doxology. And let us look also to the most excellent apparitions of the light of the words. For I see that Jesus himself, the superessential essence of the supercelestial essences, coming unchangeably unto that which is according to us, does not recoil from the human ordination ordained and assumed by himself, but, obedient, is made subject to the dispositions of the Father, and of God, through angels. And through those very mediators there is announced to Joseph the withdrawal of the Son to Egypt, disposed by the Father, and again the leading-across into Judaea out of Egypt [n: (Matth. II)]*. *And through angels we see him ordained under the paternal legislations [n: (Luc. XXII)]*. *For I press on to say (as to one who knows the things expressed in our priestly traditions) also concerning the angel strengthening Jesus [sic: Vesum] himself; or because Jesus himself too, coming through our [1005C] salutary, beneficent, and manifesting ordination, is called the Angel of great counsel. For indeed, as the angel himself said, whatsoever things he heard from the Father, he announced to us [n: (Joan. XV; Isai. IX)]*.

## EXPOSITION.

After he has shown — the general definition having been given and set forth — how the hierarchy is to be understood according to the angelic and human ordering (for the divine hierarchy, which is infinite, cannot be defined), he now begins to treat especially of the angelic hierarchy, first showing how the names of the angels, which have been given by men and after the manner of men, are to be understood in that spiritual and heavenly nature. He links what precedes to the narrative that follows, saying: « Therefore, what the hierarchy is, as [1005D] I think, the angelic hierarchy having been well defined by us, is next to be praised; and its wondrous fashionings of forms in the sacred words are to be beheld with supramundane eyes. » As if he should say: After we have, according to our estimation, well shown what the hierarchy is from the definition of it set forth, now it follows that we praise the angelic hierarchy — that is, that we show how greatly it has been praised in the Holy Scriptures, or that we demonstrate how praiseworthy it appears from the things that have been said about it. And to demonstrate this it is fitting that we behold with supramundane eyes, that is, with spiritual eyes and eyes that see spiritually, the wondrous fashionings, that is, the compositions or adaptations of forms, which in the sacred words are [1006A] attributed to it, in order to demonstrate its invisible nature. For the things that are set forth visibly are to be beheld with spiritual eyes for this reason: lest what is seen be thought to be the only thing that is, lest the mind remain in that which it looks upon outwardly. But through that which is set forth outwardly for demonstration, it is invited to contemplate that which is truer and more sublime.

Therefore there follows: « That we may ascend to the most deiform » — namely of the angels — « simplicity through the mystical formations. » Therefore, he says, « the wondrous fashionings of forms are to be beheld with supramundane eyes, so that through those very mystical formations » — considered outwardly — being roused, we may inwardly « ascend to the most deiform » « simplicity » of the angels themselves. For it is as though a certain multiplicity belongs to the angels [1006B], through which the truth of the mystical formations is demonstrated outwardly. But their simplicity is the unity of their spiritual and unvarying nature. Therefore in their multiplicity they do not have deiformity, but in their simplicity; because in that part in which they are shown through visible forms, they take on the likeness of corporeal nature. But in that part in which they themselves are understood as spiritual and as an incorporeal nature, they look toward the image and likeness of God. Which likeness is called not only deiform but even most deiform; because, although the very same is found in men too, yet in the angels it is believed to be more excellent.

There follows: « And at the same time we shall praise the principle of the knowledge of every hierarchy in divine religiousness, and [1006C] in most perfect acts of thanksgiving. » In this, he says, that we shall praise the angelic hierarchy, at the same time we shall also praise the divine and highest hierarchy, which is the principle of all the knowledge of the hierarchy — that is, the knowledge which every hierarchy has, and through which every hierarchy is ordered, because every hierarchy is both ordered through it and illumined by it. « We shall praise, I say, the principle of every hierarchy, » of knowledge — yet not by definition and demonstration as we praise the angelic hierarchy, nor by definition and comprehension as we praise the human, of which the one, invisible, is demonstrated through visible things, the other, visible, is known in itself. But we shall praise it with divine religiousness and most perfect acts of thanksgiving. [1006D] For that which is unthinkable is not praised by demonstration, nor is that which is incomprehensible praised by comprehension. Therefore God, who cannot be searched out and comprehended, can be praised by religion and thanksgiving alone. If, then, you cannot praise by speaking, praise by living. What the tongue does not unfold, a good life commends; he who is not searched out through knowledge is attained by good will. If, then, you do not comprehend him, by living according to him, reach toward him; this is to praise with divine religion. Again, if you cannot speak him, you can speak the things that have been given by him; to commend his best gifts, to proclaim him ineffably good — this is to praise with a most perfect act of thanksgiving. Thus, then, we shall praise our principle with divine religiousness [1007A] and most perfect acts of thanksgiving. But in the very praising of our principle, first of all this must be called to mind: how the divine goodness, which is poured out upon all things, first brought into being the things to be created; then established beneath itself the things to be governed, and reformed unto itself the things to be nourished. This is what he says: « First of all together, » that is, first before all things, one must « speak that true thing, » that is, speak that truth, « namely how, » that is in what manner, the superessential divinity « by its universal goodness brought into being the essences of the things that are; substituting, » after creation, namely disposing and ordering, or establishing beneath itself, and ordering according to itself. « For it is, » etc. As if he should say: For this reason the divine goodness recalls to itself and reforms the things which it created, [1007B] because it is proper to it, out of its innate kindness, to call to its own communion the things which have received being from it, so that they may be able to be blessed — namely, as far as each one, according to the order of its condition and its measure, can be capable of that participation. « For this, he says, is proper to the cause of all things, and to the goodness that is above all things, » that is, to the goodness which is the cause of all things, because through it all things were made, and is above all things, because it draws to itself the things made by it; this, namely, is proper to it: to call the things that are to its own communion — that is, as it is defined or dispensed to each one of the things that are according to its proper analogy, that is, its measure, and mode, and order. For in this very thing the beauty [1007C] of the universe is perfected: that not all things in one and the same way, but each single thing according to its own order and grade, are variously and manifoldly recalled to the communion of the divine goodness — so that, in that they are not forsaken, the work of goodness may be completed; but in that they are variously disposed unto the comeliness and beauty of all, the work of wisdom may be perfected. « All things, therefore, that are, participate in the providence flowing from the superessential and most causal divinity. » Since, he says, this is proper to the divine goodness — that it recall all things to participation in itself, so that, turned back to it, the things which proceeded from it in order to receive being may subsist — therefore « all things that are participate in providence, » that is, in the provided good and the provided grace flowing from [1007D] the divinity itself, as from a fountain and the first principle of all goodness, which is superessential, because in the excellence of its nature it is supereminent over all essences and subsisting natures; and is most causal, that is, the cause of all causes and the first cause, since from its goodness proceeds every good which it offers to be participated by all the things founded by it, that they may subsist. « For perhaps they would not be, except by the assumption of the essences of the things that are, and of their principle. » From this, he says, it can be proved that all things that are participate in divine providence, because they could not otherwise subsist, unless they subsisted by participation in the divine goodness itself, from which all things received being, and in which all things subsist. For all things that are, unless they had received their principle from the divine goodness, [1008A] would not have begun; and unless they had their essence in it, they would not remain in that which they are. Therefore it is the principle of all things, by assuming and participating in which they begin; and it is the essence of all things, by assuming and participating in which they subsist.

Whence there follows: « All existing things, therefore, participate in its being. » As if he should say: Because without it nothing can subsist, it is manifest that all things which subsist participate in its being. Therefore the divine nature, being one and the same in itself, as regards effect and power and operation, is, to all subsisting essences and natures created by it, both the principle from which they receive being, and the essence of all in which they subsist; and it is the life, not [1008B] of all indeed (because not all things live), but is the life of all living things, from which and through which they are made alive and live; and it is the wisdom, not of all existing or living things — because not all existing or living things are wise — but is the wisdom of all wise things; and it is the intellect and reason, from which and through which they are illumined and are wise and understand and discern.

This is what he says: « For the being of all things is the super-being of the divinity, » because through the being of the divinity, which is above all being, whatever is has being and subsists. « But living things, » which now receive from it not only being but also life, by participating in that same life which is above all life, and [1008C] by participating in that same life-giving power, are made alive and live. « But rational and intellectual things, » by participating in « that same » wisdom itself, existing « above all reason and intellect, perfect through itself and pre-perfect, » that is, by participating in the wisdom perfect above all things, reason and understand and are wise. They reason indeed by searching out, they understand by knowing, they are wise by participating — so that one and the same divine goodness is both essence to subsisting things, and life to living things, and wisdom to wise things. From which it is clear that those created things are nearer to the creating nature in likeness and in truth which have received more from it as a gift.

[1008D]This is what follows: « And it is clear that those of the essences are around it which have received innumerably from it. » Around it, namely the divine nature — that is, they are near and neighboring to it, and immediately joined to it, those of the essences, that is those essences or natures, whichever, after being itself was given, have received innumerably or manifoldly from it the gifts of powers. Among which in the first place are reckoned those heavenly and spiritual natures of the angels, which are rational not only through the subtlety of wisdom, because they discern by intellect; but are also intellectual through the subtlety of their spiritual nature, because they are perceived in their nature by intellect alone, and do not touch the sense of the body; and through this they have been made above all things that are, because they live; and above [1009A] all things that live irrationally, because they discern.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

This is what he says: « The holy dispositions, therefore, of the heavenly essences, » that is, the holy orders of the heavenly spirits, « have been made by participation in the tradition of the hierarchy, » that is, by participation in the grace which is handed on to the hierarchy ordered according to God, « above those things which only are, » because they live; « and above those things » which « are living irrationally, » because they discern; in comparison with which irrationally living things we men are called, and are, rational animals. Nor is it any wonder, he says, if the angelic spirits have been made superior in dignity not only to existing and non-living things, and to living and non-discerning things, but even to rational and corporeal things; because rational [1009B] corporeal things, that is, men, although they are reformed unto the divine likeness, nevertheless look toward it only when instructed and roused by the mediation of corporeal things. But the angelic sublimity, established above all corporeal things, invisibly and immediately, no other creature set between it and God, is conformed to the divine likeness more copiously, drawing grace from it more manifoldly, and contemplating it more nearly, as being close at hand. « Invisibly, » he says, that is, conforming themselves unto the divine imitation without material and corporeal instruments and visible signs — namely the dispositions themselves of the heavenly essences. « And unto the divine likeness, » through imitation and conformation, « supramundanely, » that is, spiritually, « looking, they have beautifully more copious [1009C] communions with it, » that is, they take more manifold perceptions of spiritual gifts from it, namely from the divine likeness, in which they have communion with it; because, by perceiving and sharing its good in those very spiritual gifts, they possess it in it and with it. Beautifully indeed, and purely, and without corporeal contagion and material contact; being simply taken up into it. « They are attending » indeed « unto all life, » that is, unto the highest life, in which is all life; which is wholly life, not living from elsewhere, but is itself life; and through this, perceiving all life from the highest life, so that, by the very fact that they receive the fullness of life immediately in themselves, in them life may never fail.

[1009D]There follows: « They themselves, therefore, are — firstly, and manifoldly, and always, unto the highest, as far as is lawful — intent upon the conformation of divine and inflexible love; and receiving the principal illuminations immaterially and purely, and ordered unto them, and having all intellectual life. » They themselves, he says, are intent — namely upon the highest good — firstly because immediately, and manifoldly because perfectly, and always because intent without intermission, « namely as far as is lawful, » that is, permitted or possible to a creature so placed, « in the conformation of divine and inflexible love, » that is, of a creature loving God inflexibly or immutably, and turning itself and reforming itself toward God through inflexible and divine love. « They themselves also are, » namely the heavenly powers, « receiving the principal [1010A] illuminations, » that is, those given firstly and principally — immaterially, without body, and purely, without contagion. Immaterially, without visible signification, and purely, without the contagion of error. « They are also ordered unto them, » namely unto the illuminations to be received, so that according to the difference of order there may be a difference of perception; or, ordered unto them, they are by justice subjecting themselves and fitting themselves to the divine will in all things, so that in this very thing they may perceive the illumination of grace without impediment, in that they do not disagree from its truth through desire of iniquity. « They are » also « having all intellectual life, » because the very thing that they are, they are life, and their spiritual substances have this very same thing — to live — that they have to be. Because, therefore, in them there is not one thing which gives life [1010B] and another which is given life, but the whole is one and the same; they are said to have all life, or to be all life, because the whole of what they are, they are life — just as the highest life itself also, in which they are and in which they live, is all life; because it lives of itself, and is life, and the whole of what it is, is life.

There follows: « They themselves, therefore, have been made — firstly, and manifoldly — in the participation of God, and are — firstly, and manifoldly — the manifesters of the divine hiddenness. » They themselves, he says, the heavenly dispositions, « have been made in the participation of God, » that is, so that they may participate in God and in the divine grace; firstly, because no creature is before them; « and manifoldly, » because no creature is above them. « Firstly, » because before all; « and manifoldly, » because more than all. And they are « manifesters of the divine hiddenness, » [1010C] that is, of the divine grace invisibly and secretly breathed into them, while that which they inwardly perceive from a hidden inspiration they afterward transfuse to others by manifesting it. Or « of the divine hiddenness, » that is, they are manifesters of the hidden and invisible divinity; because in them and through them the invisible things of God come forth unto manifestation, when the divine brightness both first shines in them and afterward, through them, illumines the subject orders of those provided for. Therefore, he says, « they have been made worthy, by selection, » that is, specially or singularly, « beyond all things, of the angelic appellation, in that they first put forth into themselves the divine illumination, and through themselves bring down to us the manifestations which are above us. » Therefore, because the divine light pours itself into [1010D] them in the first place, and afterward descends through them to illumine us, they have been made worthy, beyond all things, of the angelic appellation. For 'angel' is interpreted *messenger*. Those, therefore, who bring down the grace they have received by ministering it to others, what else are they than messengers of the author and bestower of that same grace? But there are messengers — some prior, some posterior. For the angels, who, perceiving the divine grace in the first place, afterward bring it down to the knowledge of men, are, as it were, the first messengers of that same grace. But men themselves, when they bring down the grace they have received to others by preaching and announcing it, are indeed called messengers, but are not the first messengers, because they have perceived what they announce from others first illumined and first announcing. Therefore those heavenly and invisible [1011A] spirits are named angels both by a singular dignity and by a proper appellation; because to them first, through hidden inspiration, is manifested that which they behold in themselves of the invisible light of the divinity, and through them in the first place is transfused to us that which they themselves carry to be manifested to our knowledge. For in the first place, as though giving birth out of the hidden womb of divine conception, they put forth into themselves the divine illumination — not by drawing it from without, but by conceiving from within the light of eternal brightness — so that there may come forth from within, to themselves, that which they see in themselves, and that they may transfuse to us through themselves. For thus, by first perceiving the divine illuminations in themselves through themselves, they afterward bring down to us the manifestations of those very illuminations, which are above us. For « thus indeed the manifestations, » namely the divine ones, « have been given [1011B] to us through the angels, as theology, » that is, Holy Scripture, « testifies. And the angels led back also our glorious fathers, both before the law and after the law, unto the divine, introducing that which was to be done, and leading them back from error and unclean life unto the right way of truth; either revealing the sacred orders of the supramundane mysteries, or the hidden visions, or certain divine fore-preachings prophetically. » Thus, he says, as theology, that is, Holy Scripture, testifies and manifests, the divine manifestations have been given to us through the angels; because both before the law, namely before it was given, and after the law was given, that is, under law and under grace, the angels led back our glorious fathers, that is, the elect and just, by imitating whose life we are sons, unto the divine, that is, [1011C] unto the divine knowledge: introducing, namely, that which was to be done, that is, leading them to live justly and piously, and leading them back from error and unclean life unto the right way of truth, that is, teaching them to believe rightly, so that both their faith might be right and their life clean. Or also revealing the sacred orders of the supramundane mysteries, that is, of the heavenly secrets — namely concerning the blessed life, and the joys of the heavenly fatherland, and the invisible ordination of the blessed spirits: how all are happy in the one good, yet not co-equal; and how the superior are set above without pride, the inferior subjected without misery; or revealing the sacred orders of the supramundane mysteries, that is, of the divine secrets: namely how it must be fulfilled visibly [1011D] and temporally by men, which God disposed to be done by an invisible and secret dispensation; or also revealing certain hidden visions, signifying something concerning things past, or present, or future; or revealing certain divine fore-preachings made prophetically, that is, divine preachings in which something, before it came to pass, was prophetically foretold — ministering, namely, to those who spoke them the knowledge of things to come, or to those who heard them the understanding of what was said, and in all these things, by instructing holy men either unto right faith or unto good working, leading them back unto divine knowledge and participation.

There follows: « But if anyone should say that there have also been theophanies to certain persons immediately [1012A] from thence, let him learn this too wisely from the most sacred words: how this indeed is a certain thing: No one has seen, nor will see, the hidden thing of God. » If anyone, he says, against what I have said — that divine revelations come to the knowledge of men through the angels — should say that sometimes, without the angels mediating, certain of the holy Fathers received revelations from the divinity itself, let him learn from the most sacred words this: that the hidden thing of God itself no one has seen, nor will see. If, then, anyone — that is, some person — should say that from thence, that is, from the divine secret, theophanies were made to certain of the holy ones, that is, divine apparitions immediately, that is, descending into them in the first place with no other creature mediating; if anyone, I say, should say this, let him [1012B] also learn to understand this wisely from the most sacred words: how « no one » ever « has seen, nor will see, the hidden thing of God, » that is, the divine nature, which is hidden and removed from every sense. He has seen, I say — namely what this very hidden thing is; that is: even if he has seen it in a figure, he has not seen it in essence; he has not seen it in its proper form, even if he has seen it in signification. And when he has come to know this from the most sacred words, let him understand that the human mind cannot by itself approach immediately unto the contemplation of the inaccessible light, unless, roused by theophanies, that is, by divine apparitions, it be lifted up. « But theophanies have been made to the holy ones [but] according to what befits God: and through certain sacred manifestations of proportional visions to those who see. » Theophanies, he says, that [1012C] is, divine revelations, or revelations of the divinity, have been made to the holy ones — yet not in this manner, that the human mind, placed in mortal flesh and established within human sense, should approach immediately to touch the incomprehensible nature; but they were made according to certain sacred manifestations, whether of visible forms applied outwardly to the sense, or of imaginations brought inwardly into the mind according to visible things, or impressed spiritually upon human reason in some other, higher and more excellent way whatsoever — fitted with such suitability that they both befitted God himself, concerning whom they were made, and were congruous to those very seers to whom they were made, according to the proportion and capacity of each.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

[1012D]This is what he says: To the holy ones there have been made theophanies according to certain sacred manifestations befitting God, and through manifestations of proportional visions to those who see. Which, namely, were so proportionally tempered to the capacity of those seeing, that the more imperfect indeed perceived the truth of heavenly things by an inferior and more imperfect kind of vision; but the more excellent came to know the divine secrets in a more sublime manner. And yet, whether in these or in those, whatever could come from God unto human knowledge was less than himself, and in a certain manner beneath himself. For hence it is written: « The things that were under him filled the temple [n: (Isai. VI)]: » because everything that the human mind in this life can grasp of the knowledge [1013A] of him cannot be made equal to his ineffable majesty. Nevertheless Holy Scripture has been accustomed to call those manifestations, by which God reveals himself to human minds, [sic: *theopbanias*], that is, divine apparitions; because, although that which is discerned is not God by nature, according to demonstration it is, since through it and in it God is manifested.

This is what follows: « That most wise theology, therefore, revealed that vision which is described in it to be a divine one, and to be beautifully called a theophany, as a likeness of formless things in a form, from the leading-back of those who see unto the divine. » « That most wise theology itself, he says, » that is, Holy Scripture, which wisely brings forth the divine secrets unto human knowledge, « revealed that that vision which is described in it is beautifully, » that is, fittingly, called [1013B] a theophany — inasmuch as it is « a divine likeness of formless things, » that is, of spiritual natures, and of natures not having corporeal form, expressed in a visible form, or taken according to visible things. It revealed, I say, that it is beautifully called a theophany from the leading-back of those who see unto divine things — that is, because through it those who see are led back to knowing divine things, as though, through it, divine things were made illumination to those who see, and indeed the divine things themselves holily perfecting them; that is, not only because it manifested divine things to those who see, but because it also made the seers themselves divine.

There follows: « But these divine visions our glorious fathers accomplished, through the mediating heavenly powers, » [1013C] that is, by the heavenly powers mediating, through which they were brought down to the knowledge of men: our glorious fathers attained, and obtained, and perfectly comprehended those visions.

There follows: « Does not the tradition of the words also say that the sacred legislation was given to Moses by God, as it were through himself, so that it may also truly teach us that they are divine and sacred characters? » Does not, he says, « the tradition of the words, » that is, the authority of the Scriptures, « say that the sacred legislation, » that is, the giving of the sacred law, « was given to Moses by God through himself, » namely commemorating no mediator in the giving of the law between God and Moses. But testifying that God himself, through himself, spoke to Moses: so that it may also teach us that it, namely the law, are sacred and divine [1013D] characters, that is, signs of sacred and divine things, so that through the things which were done visibly in the legislation it may show certain other invisible things signified and demonstrated, as it is written: « Thou shalt therefore make the tabernacle according to the pattern which was shown thee in the mount [n: (Exod. XXVI)]. » According to this manner, therefore, the visible manifestation itself and the material address, by which the invisible God willed to show himself to men, is said to be God, or to be of God, because in it the invisible God came forth unto manifestation, and brought forth to knowledge the things of his own which were hidden. In which visible manifestation, nevertheless, he worked all things by the mediating ministry of the angels, so that that which was made visible might be said to be both of God, by the first [1014A] authority, and of the angels, by the subordinate operation.

For hence it is that there follows: « But theology also teaches this wisely: that it came unto us through the angels. » Not only, he says, does theology testify that the legislation was given to Moses by God immediately, but it also teaches that it, namely the law, came unto us — that is, was set forth to our knowledge through the angels — so that it may be openly demonstrated that that legislation was both of God, from whose authority it proceeded, and of the angels, whose ministry too it employed. « As though, he says, the divine legal order itself was setting that down legally, that is, that through the first things the second are led back unto the divine. » Thus, he says, Scripture shows the legislation to have been ordained by God through the angels among men, as though [1014B] the legal order itself, divinely made, established that legally, that is, instituted or sanctioned it — namely, that the second things are led back unto the divine through the first. For when the divine law is declared to have proceeded first from God unto the angels, and then through the angels unto men, it is manifestly shown that through the first and superior things, the second and inferior things are led back unto the divine knowledge: and this must be understood not only between God and the angels, or between the angels and men, but also among the angels themselves, since the superior lead back the inferior unto the divine knowledge. Since among the angels themselves too there are orders, some superior, some inferior; and those who are superior draw more copiously the light of the divinity, and transfuse it to those who follow after them, to be illumined. And in those very orders too, [1014C] in which, according to an equal disposition, many are equal, this definition of the law is kept: that in the perception of divine grace some are first, some second, some last; and even those who are equal in order are not equal in the perception of grace. This is what he says: « For indeed not only among the placed-above and among the subject minds, that is, spirits, but even among the equally powerful, the very law is defined from the superessential principle of the ordering of all things, that is, » namely this, « that through each hierarchy, » that is, sacred ordination, « there are both first, and middle, and last ordinations and powers: » and that in those very ordinations and powers, the more divine are always the teachers « and hand-leaders » of divine things, [1014D] so that they may teach them and lead them « into the divine leading, and illumination, and communication. Into the leading » by conversion, « into illumination » by knowledge, « into communication » by perception.

There follows: « But I see that the angels first taught the divine mystery of Christ's humanity. Then through them the grace of that knowledge descended unto us. » From this, he says, it is clear that the things which are commanded by God to men are announced through the angels, since the angels taught even the divine mystery of Christ's humanity itself — both those who foretold and believed, and those who saw and received. And then, that is, consequently, through those very angels the grace of this knowledge descended unto us. Thus, therefore, just as [1015A] Christ's nativity was announced through the angels, so too the nativity of his forerunner is read to have been announced through the angel Gabriel. « Thus, he says, the most divine Gabriel taught Zachariah, the high priest, the mysteries, that is, the boy to be born of him against hope, » because of a barren mother and an aged father: by divine grace « that he would be a Prophet, to manifest to the world the manly divine operation of Jesus, divinely and salvifically. » As if he should say: The most divine Gabriel taught Zachariah the high priest that the boy to be born of him would be a prophet of the operation of Jesus — a manly operation, because it was displayed in the nature of humanity, in which he took on the sex of flesh; and a divine operation, because it was accomplished through the power of the divinity, in which also he founded his own flesh. An operation, I say, to be manifested to the world through him [1015B] divinely and salvifically, that is, one to come forth divinely unto the salvation of the world. For the same most divine Gabriel taught « Mary how, » namely, « in her the divine mystery of the ineffable divine formation was to be completed. » Namely, that the divine operation, ineffably, above the use and law of nature, would take flesh from the flesh of the Virgin herself without the admixture of male seed, and would wondrously form it as the garment of the eternal Word. « But another of the angels was instructing Joseph, how the things divinely promised to his forefather David were truly fulfilled. » That is, how those things were fulfilled which had been promised divinely, that is, by God, to his forefather David.

« But another evangelized the shepherds, as those purged by the withdrawal of the many and by silence: and with him the multitude [1015C] of the heavenly host were delivering to those who are on earth that most praiseworthy doxology. Another angel again, he says, evangelized the shepherds, as those purged and made pure by the withdrawal of the many, » that is, by the separation or segregation from the multitude and the tumult and the din; and purged also by silence, that is, by quiet of mind and inner peace, so that in this very thing they might become worthy of the Gospel and of the evangelic address, in that, returning apart from the multitude unto themselves, established in silence and quiet of mind, they had shown themselves capable of the spiritual announcement. Whence, the grace gradually growing, after the evangelization of the one, the multitude of the heavenly host is heard, who were delivering that most praiseworthy doxology, that is, hymn of glory, to those who are on earth, namely to men of good will.

[1015D]There follows: « And let me look also to the most excellent apparitions of the light of the words. » As if he should say: Not only in the things which were announced to men through the angels concerning the incarnation of the Word does it appear that the knowledge of divine things descends to men by the mediation and ministry of the angels themselves; but the same can also be seen in the very person of the incarnate Word: who, although by the majesty of his divinity he commanded the angels, nevertheless willed that the things which had to be done temporally about his humanity should be dispensed through the angels: in this very thing deigning to take up the condition of humanity, in that, lacking all necessity, by dispensation alone, for an example of humanity and a lesson of truth, [1016A] he inclined himself to the angelic dispositions. « I shall look, he says, also to the most excellent apparitions of the light of the words, » that is, to the apparitions of Jesus Christ himself, namely when Jesus himself, who is the true light, appeared visibly in the flesh he had assumed. Which apparitions of the light are the most excellent, beyond all the other apparitions [sic: *eloquiorom*], that is, beyond all the other apparitions which are reported in the sacred words; because never before did God manifest himself to the world so excellently as when he himself appeared visibly in the flesh he had assumed. To these apparitions of the light, therefore, he says, the most lofty above all the apparitions of the words, I shall look, so that in them too I may prove this: that the divine secrets are dispensed to men through the angels. For if, about that [1016B] man who is above men, the angelic dispensation was not repudiated, how much more is it proved to be necessary in those who are subject to sin and established in the darkness of ignorance. In that man, therefore, who is the head of men, we can recognize what we ought to think about other men, his members.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

« For I see, he says, that Jesus himself too, coming immutably — in the superessential essence of the supercelestial essences — unto that which is according to us, does not recoil from the human ordination ordained and assumed by himself. » Jesus himself, he says, who according to his divinity, by which all things subsist, is also the essence of the supercelestial essences, that is, of the angelic spirits, who transcend not only earthly things by purity, but also [1016C] the heavenly things by subtlety; and not only their essence, because in him they subsist, but the superessential essence, because they do not attain to his equality. Jesus himself, whose ineffable majesty and power of divinity both bears up the angels themselves through grace and transcends them through nature, coming unto that which is according to us, that is, unto the taking-on of flesh, which was of our nature and was like unto us; and coming immutably, that is, without diminution or change of his divinity, does not recoil from the human ordination, that is, from the ordination or law owed to humanity. An ordination, I say, first ordained by him, when he earlier instructed man; afterward assumed by him, when he took on the form and nature of humanity. But if he had assumed the human [1016D] nature and yet spurned the human condition, he would recoil from the human ordination. For it would be, as it were, a recoiling for him to be unwilling to endure by condition that which he had assumed by nature. But now, coming unto the human nature through the assumption of flesh, he does not recoil from the human ordination, by the keeping of humility. « But, obedient, he is made subject to the dispositions of God the Father through the angels, » administered about his humanity: « and through those very » angels as intermediaries, that is, by the mediation of the angels themselves, « there is announced to Joseph, » as to the guardian of his infancy, « the withdrawal » of the « Son » of God himself « into Egypt, » disposed by God the Father, « and again the leading-across, or leading-back, from Egypt into Judea. » « But we see him too, he says, [1017A] ordained through the angels under the paternal legislations. » We see him ordained through the angels, that is, disposed, « under the paternal legislations, » that is, under the legal commandments, which commandments those whom he had as fathers and forefathers according to the flesh had received to be observed. Under these legal commandments, therefore, he was ordained through the angels, when, according to the precepts of the paternal law, he was both circumcised on the eighth day, and on the fortieth day presented in the temple with gifts and victims — the Lord of the angels observing the law given through the angels.

There follows: « For I am urgent to say, as to you who know the things expressed in our priestly traditions, also concerning the angel comforting Jesus himself. » It is a small thing, he says, that I say, that Jesus in his humanity was ordained by the angels under the paternal [1017B] laws: he who, in the same humanity, drawing near to the passion, was even comforted by an angel. I am urgent to say what perhaps, if it had not been said before, would not be credible at all. I am urgent to say, also concerning the angel comforting Jesus himself. I am urgent to say what I myself too cannot utter without wonder — what I certainly believe and pursue: which, if I were about to say it to one who did not know, I would not presume to say at all. I am urgent to say what is so great that it cannot be comprehended by the little in knowledge; so wondrous that it cannot be believed by the little in faith — concerning the angel comforting him. I am urgent to say what, if it were thought to have been said by me, would not be believed. But to you, who know the things which are expressed, that is, manifestly set forth by our priestly traditions, that is, by the Scriptures, [1017C] which were handed on to us by priestly men who minister sacred things and are sanctified, to you I boldly am urgent to say the truth, hesitating nothing about your faith, which is firm and admits no scandal, having discernment of what was done, what was said. To you, therefore, O Timothy, son, as to one who knows the things expressed in our priestly traditions, to you confidently « I am urgent to say, also concerning the angel comforting Jesus, » so that in this it may become plain without doubt how greatly the humanity [1018A] was subjected, according to the divine ordination, to the angelic dispensation — the humanity which, in the man, at the time of the passion, willed to be comforted by an angel; yet not seeking aid, but forming an example; not having necessity, and nevertheless showing the condition. Therefore, then, « I am urgent » to « say to you, also concerning the angel comforting Jesus himself. » Or also I « am urgent » to « say this to you: that Jesus himself, coming through our salvific, beneficent, and manifestative ordination, is called the angel of great counsel. » This is that Jesus himself is called « the angel of great counsel, coming, » that is, in that he came to us, through our ordination, that is, according to what he had ordained, or what had been ordained — to come in our nature: which ordination was salvific, and beneficent, and manifestative. [1018B] Salvific in redemption, beneficent in the bestowal of grace, manifestative in glorification. Salvific, because he redeemed from death; beneficent, because to the redeemed he conferred the gifts of graces unto justification; manifestative, because he first set forth God, in his humanity, to be seen visibly by those to be justified, and afterward leads the justified, through the vision of his humanity, unto the contemplation of the divinity. According to this « manifestative ordination, therefore, Jesus, coming, is called the angel of great counsel. » Because, « as the angel himself says, whatsoever he heard from the Father, he announced to us. » If, then, an angel is called a messenger, deservedly the Savior himself too is called a messenger. Who announces to us the will of God the Father, and reveals the inward goods to our minds by breathing them in through his Spirit. In [1018C] which the angelic dignity is also manifestly shown: that the Savior himself too, bringing down to us the commands of the Father, is surnamed an angel. For since the sum of our salvation through redemption is accomplished not without the angelic appellation, it is clear that the rest too, which pertain to that same salvation, are dispensed by angelic administration. And these things indeed have been said concerning the angelic appellation.

## TITLE OF CHAPTER V *Why all the heavenly essences are commonly called angels, and specially have their own proper appellations, except those of the first and second orders.*

## THE TEXT.

[1017D]

*This indeed is, as far as concerns us, the cause of the angelic surname in the oracles. But it is fitting, as I think, to search out for what cause the theologians call all the heavenly essences at once angels, yet, coming to the manifestation of the supramundane dispositions themselves, they specially name the angelic order, which completively terminates the divine and heavenly things; but before it they set in order, placed above, the archangelic adornments, and the princes, and the powers, and the virtues, and whatever essences the manifestative traditions of the oracles know to be established above these. But we say that, throughout every holy disposition, the excelling orders have the illuminations and virtues of the inferior dispositions, but they that do not participate [1018D] in the things that excel them are last. Therefore the theologians call the most holy orders of the most excellent essences angels; for these too are manifesters of the divine illumination [n: (Hebr. I)]*. *But the lowest order of the heavenly minds have no ground for being named principalities, or thrones, or seraphim. For it is not in the participation of the most lofty virtues. But just as he himself leads back our divine high priests to the brightnesses of the divinity known to him, so also the wholly sacred virtues of the essences [still unclean] altogether lead back that which is before it, and they are ordered unto the divine, unto the disposition that consummates the angelic hierarchies. Unless indeed someone should say this too: that all the angelic namings are common, according to the subjection of all the heavenly virtues unto the deiform and God-given light, and their supereminent [1019A] communication. But that the matter may be the more discerned by us, we shall consider the holy and comely properties of each heavenly disposition, expressed in the sacred oracles.*

## EXPOSITION.

« This indeed is, » etc. In this fifth chapter it is inquired why all the heavenly essences are surnamed angels. But this question seems to have arisen from this: that in the sacred word certain of the heavenly spirits are declared [sic: *sempe*] to stand by God and always to see his face; but certain others are said to be sent forth outward, to fulfill exterior ministries. For hence it seems to follow that those who always stand by the divine countenance do not go forth to announce exterior things; but those [1019B] who are sent forth do not stand by the divine sight immovably, or immutably. For it is written in the book of the prophet Daniel: « Thousands of thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times a hundred thousand stood by him [n: (Dan. VII)]. » In which distinction, by those who stand by seem to be signified those who do not go forth to exterior things; but by those who minister, those who, by going forth to exterior things, do not always stand by. On which account, because the inferior and lowest orders together go forth to exterior things, while only the superior and more excellent stand by the divine contemplation without intermission, those who stand by are declared to be fewer, but those who minister more. For since there are nine orders of angels, only two, that is, angels and archangels — inasmuch as they specially, from the distribution of their office, [1019C] are appointed to be sent — have received their surname from the very thing. Angels, namely, are called messengers, but archangels chief messengers; since the former announce lesser things, the latter greater, as it were from the dignity of their ministry. But because again, in Holy Scripture, we read that certain ones of the superior orders were sent — as in Isaiah one of the seraphim is recorded to have flown to the prophet and to have touched his lips with a coal which he had taken with tongs from the altar [n: (Isa. VI)]; and in the Epistle to the Hebrews the Apostle testifies that all are ministering spirits, and sent into ministry, for the sake of those who receive the inheritance of salvation [n: (Hebr. I)]: a great difficulty of ambiguity arises for us, and what is rather to be asserted here is not easily found. The author solves this question in this manner. He testifies that the name of angels belongs [1019D] only to the inferior orders, and to those which, from their office, are properly appointed to announce exterior things. But because the divine secrets, which by those inferior ones are brought down outwardly to the knowledge of men, are announced to those same ones by the superior: the name of angels too is communicable to the superior: who, although they do not go forth to announce exterior things, nevertheless — themselves receiving from above the things which are to be announced outwardly, according to the law of the divine ordination, and by announcing carrying them across to the inferior orders that follow after them — and the superior participate in every virtue, and grace, and property of the inferior: and therefore the surnames of the inferior also pass over to the superior; but the virtue, and grace, and [1020A] property of the superior are not all communicable to the inferior, and therefore their surnames too, by a like reasoning, cannot universally be brought down to the inferior. Yet sometimes the inferior, when they take up the property of the superior from the quality of an office, assume their name too in the execution of that same office. Hence is that which we commemorated above, that the angel who had come to kindle and purge the lips of the prophet is called a seraph, because in the quality of this work he was carrying out the property of the one who kindles or inflames. But that which the Apostle says, that all are ministering spirits and sent into ministry, they think is to be understood in this way: that, as we said above, those too are not unfittingly said to be sent; [1020B] because, although they do not go forth to exterior things, nevertheless they bring the things which are to be announced outwardly, by announcing them to the inferior and following orders. Others think that all the heavenly orders, both superior and inferior, are directed to exterior things according to time, and place, and cause; yet that those which have this as proper from their office are specially surnamed angels or archangels. For that all are sometimes sent, the Apostle seems to assert by testimony, in that which we commemorated above, saying: « Are they not all ministering spirits, sent into ministry, for the sake of those who receive the inheritance of salvation? » But that even certain superior ones are sometimes directed to exterior things not from office, but from an accidental cause, the Psalmist seems to assert, when he says: « Who [1020C] makes his angels spirits, and his ministers a burning fire [n: (Psal. CIII)]." Thus, then, there are some who stand by from office; and others who go forth to fulfill exterior things; and yet those who stand by, being sometimes sent into ministry, while they take up the property of the inferior, assume their name too in signification. Who, nevertheless, when they go forth to exterior things, do not withdraw from the interior contemplation, because they behold him who is present to them wherever they go. And in this way indeed, before we should examine the words of the book, we thought that mention of a question of this kind should be made briefly, for the clearness of the things to be said — defining nothing rashly, but venerating the secret, of which perhaps to have been ignorant is a venial infirmity, [1020D] but to assert presumptuously is a damnable rashness. This, however, must be known: that the author seems rather to lend his assent to that part which holds that only certain, not all, of the heavenly orders are sent to exterior things; and yet that, on account of the participation of the same property, by which the superior share the grace and virtue of the inferior, the names of the inferior too are assumed by the superior. Just as also sometimes the inferior, when they take up the property of the superior from the quality of an office, assume their name too in signification. Now to the text: « This indeed is, as far as concerns us, the cause of the angelic surname in the words. » « This, he says, is » — which we have said above — « the cause of the angelic surname; » namely because the divine secrets are announced to us through them, [1021A] and therefore, because they bring down to us the divine precepts by announcing them, as far as concerns us — that is, as far as regards that, or on account of that, which they work toward us — they assume the name of angels. But because this — that is, carry ye the messages of the interior teacher outward to the knowledge of men — whether it befits all is not yet proved by manifest reason or authority, it must now be inquired, he says, why in the sacred word he attributes the name of angels commonly to all the heavenly virtues.

This is what he says: « It is fitting, as I think, to search out for what cause the theologians call all the heavenly essences at once angels; but, uniting unto the manifestation, they specially name the angelic order of the supramundane dispositions themselves, [1021B] which completively terminates the divine and heavenly things; » as if he should say: This now remains to be inquired: why the theologians universally name all those heavenly natures angels, when nevertheless they specially name one order of them — namely of the spirits who come to us to manifest the supramundane dispositions themselves, that is, the spiritual, and divine, and invisible ordinations — the angelic order; « completively terminating the divine and heavenly things, » that is, leading through, unto completion and end, the things divinely disposed in a heavenly and secret ordination. For the divine precept, running down from the highest, is brought through the superior orders to the inferior, until at last, coming to the knowledge of men, it is completed in work: on which account [1021C] that heavenly order too, to which the command of the divinity descends last of all through the powers placed above, and then through it is announced outwardly, is said to terminate it completively, or unto completion, because through its announcement it is brought to that place where it is last to be completed by visible operation. This, therefore, must be inquired: why, namely, although this last order is specially marked with the angelic surname, all the orders of the heavenly essences are named angels. « But before it, those placed above set in order the archangelic adornments, and the princes, and the powers, and the virtues, and whatever essences established above these the manifestative traditions of the words know. » As if he should say: The theologians indeed establish the angelic order itself [1021D] as the last and latest, and nearest to human things, and as carrying forth the divine visions by a final announcement, and determining them; but before it they set in order those placed above, that is, they describe those placed above in the order. « The archangelic adornments, » that is, the choirs of the archangels, ordered and beautifully disposed, who in order are both superior to the angels themselves in dignity, and prior in announcement. Then the theologians themselves also establish — not only above the angels, but even above the archangels — the princes, that is, the principalities, and the powers, and the virtues, and other essences, that is, « whatever spiritual natures the manifestative traditions of the sacred words know, » that is, set forth to knowledge. Essences, I say, established above these, namely [1022A] the angels, or whatever others established above all these aforesaid, so that they are not only more sublime in dignity, but also stronger in firmness of perfection, and more stable unto eternity and immutability.

There follows: « But we say that, throughout every holy disposition, the excelling orders have the illuminations and virtues of the inferior dispositions; but they that do not participate in the things that excel them are last. » As if he should say: Since in that disposition of the heavenly spirits some are superior, others inferior, the superior indeed have every illumination and virtue of the inferior; but the inferior do not have all the illuminations and virtues of the superior orders. And therefore the names of the inferior [1022B] are sometimes transferred to the superior orders, inasmuch as these participate with them in the same properties of names. But the names of the superior cannot be so assumed by the inferior, since the properties of the names do not universally pass over to them: this is what he says: « But we say that, throughout every holy disposition » — namely of the heavenly spirits — « the excelling, » or superior, « orders have » all the illuminations and virtues « of the inferior dispositions, » that is, of the subject orders. But the last, that is, the inferior, and those following in order, do not participate — "in all," it is understood, the illuminations and virtues of those that excel them, that is, of those who are more excellent than they. We understand the illuminations [1022C] as being in the knowledge of truth; but the virtues as being in the love of goodness and the perfection of work.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « Therefore the theologians call the most holy orders of the most excellent essences angels. For they too are manifesters of the divine illumination. » Since he says that the higher orders have all the properties of the lower ones: therefore the theologians call the most holy orders of the most excellent essences — that is, of the most excellent spirits — angels; because they too partake of the angelic property, in this respect, that although they do not go out to announce outward things, nevertheless to those orders which follow after them they manifest, by transfusing and as it were by announcing, the divine illumination which they receive concerning themselves. « But the lowest order of the heavenly minds does not have [1022D] the ground for being named archas, or thrones, or seraphim. » — « They do not have, he says, the ground, » those same theologians, « for naming the lowest order of the heavenly minds, » that is, the last order of the heavenly spirits, namely the angels, « archas, » that is princes, or thrones, or seraphim, because that lowest order of the angels is not in participation of the most exalted powers. For this reason the angels cannot be named princes, or thrones, or seraphim, as princes and thrones and seraphim are named angels; because the higher ones partake of the angelic property universally, whereas the angels do not partake universally of the illuminations and powers of the higher ones; and those very ones especially, for which the higher ones received their special surnames, the angels possess only in part [1023A], and yet they do not have the dignity and the property of that surname. For not everyone who has some power or property by partaking of it ought at once to be surnamed according to that property, unless he holds it either singularly among the rest or excellently above the rest. For not everyone who knows something is at once called wise; nor is he who has done something right forthwith called just. But he alone who holds wisdom and justice either singularly or excellently ought to be called wise and just by a proper and express surname. So then those heavenly orders of the holy spirits have proper surnames, in which is signified not what they have received singularly, but what they possess excellently. For the seraphim [1023B] — because out of love of their Creator, as neighbors and those nearest, they both are burning in themselves and set others alight from themselves — are interpreted *burning* or *kindling*, not because they alone among the rest have this singularly, but because with the rest, and above the rest, excellently. For all burn with the love of God, and yet they especially ought to be called burning, who both first conceive the fire of that love and, burning more strongly, send out the flame of love to set the rest also alight. So too the cherubim (which name is interpreted *fullness of knowledge*) — because they have a greater knowledge of God than the rest — take their name from that alone which, possessing it with the rest, they merited to perceive more excellently than all the rest. The thrones too are so called, not because in them alone does God sit and discern [1023C] his judgments, but because they received this in their office more excellently than the rest, and on that account they draw their surname specially from it. And in this manner indeed the other orders too must be understood, namely, that each is believed to receive its proper surnames from that which it is proved to possess more excellently by the gift of grace.

But there arises a question not to be despised, and one which would bring great confusion to the mind if it were not examined by applying reason. For if, as has been said, in that heavenly arrangement each and every order draws its own surnames from that property in which they are proved to be more excellent than the rest, since the higher ones possess universally and excellently all the illuminations and [1023D] powers of the subject orders, nothing singular is left to the orders placed beneath and following, from which they might obtain a surname proper to them and distinct among the rest. Whence it behooves us to consider more diligently in what way both are at once true: namely, that the higher ones possess universally and excellently the illuminations and gifts of the subject orders, and yet that each and every one retains something proper and special from which it can be marked by a proper and distinct appellation. For the seraphim by their name express a singular love. The cherubim, however, intimate a more excellent knowledge. But the thrones show a greater force of discernment. Yet it is established that those who love more ardently look more deeply, and discern more subtly. [1024A] For those who look from nearer at hand undoubtedly recognize more evidently. How then is the order of the cherubim said to be surnamed from the privilege of a singular grace, if another retains this more excellently in its office, from which the cherubim obtains its appellation? But this question is perhaps not unfittingly solved by this reasoning: yet only so, if the secret of truth be violated by no rashness of prejudgment. For it can come to pass that, although the higher orders possess more excellently all the gifts of the powers, nevertheless they draw their surname only from those which among the gifts of the powers themselves are the more sublime; and they leave the others, which follow in the order of dignity, to those following after them for their denomination, so that the first may obtain its name from the first, the second from the second, the third from the third. For we know, [1024B] Scripture bearing witness, that among all the gifts of the powers charity excels; wherefore it was consequent that that order which is the most eminent of all should take its singular appellation, in its own distinction, from charity alone, although it might possess the other gifts of the powers too more excellently, from which it could have taken its appellation and name. But because the knowledge of truth is recognized as next in dignity after the love of virtue: therefore from that same dignity those who are second are, after the first, deservedly surnamed angelic spirits. But the judgment of discerning truth, because it seems to have a verdict still as it were doubtful, and appears in a certain manner suspended by a less perfect knowledge; and therefore because it, after full contemplation, in which truth is not sought but [1024C] possessed, looks back to that same knowledge of the highest truth, gave its name to the third order after the two former: this, however, must be understood according to man, for whose sake the names were given to those spirits themselves. For there judgment is not the settling of ambiguity, but the discernment of truth; nor there, where all things are manifest, is something that lies hidden discussed, but what is certain is esteemed according to its merit. Wherefore in this judgment too we hold that the knowledge of truth is to be preferred, since wisdom judges simplicity and unity; but judgment proves itself, through the force of discernment, to look toward diverse and contrary things. Whence the more excellent surname was to be taken from wisdom itself, by which the more excellent order was to be designated [1024D]: which order, although, as more sublime and more perfect, it possessed both wisdom and judgment more fully, yet, taking its name from wisdom alone, left judgment as the surname of the order following after it. According to this consideration, therefore, whoever should wish to interpret the surnames of the angels, there will perhaps be no unfittingness, if the higher orders possess more perfectly all the gifts of the powers, and yet the lower orders have their proper surnames from certain gifts specially. But concerning the orders of the angels themselves, in the first and the last at least, the same opinion of all is established. For that the seraphim are placed in the highest place, and after them the cherubim, and then the thrones, can be unknown to no one who knows the testimonies of the holy Scriptures. [1025A] It is manifest too that, for the lower ones ascending from the bottom upward, the angels and archangels are placed first. The four following orders certain men arrange in this manner, that from the thrones downward they set first the dominations, then the principalities, then the powers, then the virtues, so that in this manner the nine orders are distinguished by three triads: of which the first and highest contains the seraphim, cherubim, thrones; the second and middle comprises the dominations, principalities, and powers; the third and lowest arranges together the virtues, archangels, and angels. And so from the bottom upward the angels are numbered first; then the archangels, then the virtues, then the powers, then the principalities, then the dominations, then the thrones, then the cherubim, then the seraphim. But the Theologian [1025B] places first the angels, then the archangels, then the principalities, and these he assigns to the first triad. But in the second he sets first the powers, then the virtues, then the dominations. And in the third he judges that first the thrones, afterward the cherubim, afterward the seraphim are to be placed, the progression being made from the lower to the higher. But in this threefold triple distinction it especially behooves us to consider this: that the highest three orders, that is, the seraphim, and the cherubim, and the thrones, by the power of their singular excellence and the force of their denomination, seem to look only toward the interior. For to love and to know and to judge is proper to those presiding within, and having their conversion toward the interior. But the last three, and lowest orders, by the property of their surname [1025C], are proved to be arranged toward outward things only according to the office of their ministry; whether the angels and archangels, in that they announce outwardly whatever is to be done and manifested to men; or the principalities, in that they dispense by invisible power whatever things are to be administered and arranged concerning men. But the middle orders, as in arrangement, so also in office, seem to be borne between the invisible and the visible things; and to administer, according to their dignity and office, the things which are to be brought down from the higher ones to the lower. And among these the dominations are first, which by a singular excellence form by command alone the invisible announcement in the virtues; but the virtues are second, which, executing the enjoined command, publish it in [1025D] the powers. But the powers are third, which perfect the mandate conceived in the principalities, archangels, and angels, subjected to them for the operation. But those who set the virtues after the angels and archangels understand thereby, of course, those spirits through whom signs and miracles are more frequently done. In this too let the property of the last arrangement be preserved, whose ministry we hold to have been ordained for dispensing outward things alone. But the powers, they say, are those spirits so called who have the adverse virtues subjected to them, and freely restrain them according to the power given, lest they be able to harm as much as they will. But the principalities, they hold, are those spirits so named who are set over even the good spirits of the angels themselves: to whom, while they command whatever is to be done, [1026A] they act as princes over their subjects for the fulfilling of the divine ministries, and stand as superiors. But the dominations are those so called who surpass even the principalities by a more excellent power, so that they have as subjects even those who merited to command others for the fulfilling of the ministry. These things briefly concerning the orders of the angels, and their names, we thought had to be tasted beforehand as necessary for the coming narration, so that the reader, once these things are said, may take up the several matters — as reason and cause shall demand, to be recalled in what follows — that concern these things, and perhaps, without these, the obscure things that are to be said. Now let us return to explaining the sequence of the text itself. Above he said that the theologians do not have the ground for naming the angelic order archas, or thrones, or seraphim; because that angelic order [1026B] is not in participation of those most exalted powers, so as to partake with them in name, when it does not partake in the property of the name. Now he proves this same thing by the following words, namely, that the angelic order does not partake of the most exalted powers. It does not, he says, partake with them; but what it partakes, it partakes from them. For it is one thing to partake in the fullness, and another to receive participation from the fullness. And so the angelic order is subjected to the most exalted powers in such a way that it does not partake with them, but from them; because, just as it, by illuminating and instructing, leads back those men who are led back to divine knowledge, so also it receives divine illumination from those powers which are before it.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

[1026C]This is what he says: « As it, » namely the angelic order, « leads back our divine highest priests, » that is, the holy men who received the sacred divine things immediately from the angels and handed them on to us, « to the splendors of the divinity known to it, » that is, the divine knowledge which it received, and, having received, bestowed, « so also it is led back by the virtues of the essences which are before it, » that is, before it, or above it, « the virtues, I say, pure, » that is, exceedingly sacred, or wholly sacred, so that by the excellence of holiness they can be a form of perfection to those subject to them. And these same « virtues are also sacred toward the divine, » namely, toward what is to be conferred; that is, toward the knowledge of divinity to be given, « to the arrangement consummating the angelic hierarchies, » [1026D] that is, to the arrangement which perfects, or contains as perfected, or terminates the angelic hierarchies; this is, namely, the last arrangement, in which both the angelic order, in that it is perfected, is consummated, and, in that it is last, the hierarchies of all spirits are terminated. Indeed, here the execrable error of the interpreter must be guarded against, who supposed that the celestial virtues are called unclean. For the Greek πανιερὸν panieron, which is interpreted *exceedingly sacred,* or *wholly sacred,* or *universally sacred,* he thought was here to be understood as ἀνιερὸν anieron, that is, *unsacred,* or *not sacred,* or *without the sacred.*

There follows: « Unless indeed someone should also say this: that all the angelic namings are common, according to the subjection of all the celestial virtues to the deiform, and [1027A] God-given light, and their supereminent communication. » The lower orders cannot, he says, take up the names of the higher, because they do not partake in the same excellence of virtues with them, unless one should wish to say that, for this reason, all the namings of the angels ought to be common, because all alike, as subjects, perceive the one light given by God, and from that same perceived light all are made conformed to God, and exist as partakers of one supereminent communication in one light. Unless, he says, someone should also say this: that all the angelic surnames are common, according to the subjection of all the celestial virtues into the light, or toward the deiform and God-given light to be perceived, and according to the supereminent communication of spiritual or special grace: so that, just as one [1028A] grace diffuses itself for the participation of all, so one surname may reasonably be attributed to all. « But, that the reason may be more judged by us, we shall consider the holy and comely properties, expressed in the sacred oracles, of each celestial arrangement. » That we may be more able, he says, to judge this reason — namely, whether the angelic surnames ought to be common or not — we shall consider the holy and comely properties of each celestial arrangement, expressed in the sacred oracles. For from the properties of each, diligently considered, it will perhaps be able to be recognized whether the communication of the naming can be the same: to whom, even if one grace is infused, yet it is not given in one measure and proportion.

## TITLE OF CHAPTER VI. *What is the first arrangement of the celestial essences: what the middle, and what the last.*

## THE TEXT.

[1027B]

*How many indeed and of what sort are the adornments of the supercelestial essences, and how according to them the Hierarchies are perfected, I say that she alone diligently knows, the contemplative sovereign of their perfection; and moreover that they themselves are ignorant of their own proper virtues and illuminations, and of their own sacred and super-adorned ordination. For it is impossible for us to know the ministries of the supercelestial minds, and their most holy perfections, unless one should tell to himself whatever mysteries the divinity taught us through them, as through those who well know their own. Not therefore do we ourselves say anything of our own motion. But whatever of the angelic contemplations have been contemplated by the holy theologians, these, teaching us, as much as we are able, we shall expound. All theology [1027C] called the celestial essences by nine manifesting surnames [n: (Colos. I)]*. *These our divine holy perfecter separates into three ternary arrangements. And the first indeed he says to be that existing about God always, and attentively united to him, and, before the others, immediately — so it has been handed down. For the most holy thrones, and the eyed and winged orders, named cherubim in the voice of the Hebrews, and seraphim, according to a nearness set above all things, are placed immediately about God, he says, as the manifestation of the divine oracles hands down. This threefold adornment therefore, as one and equally ordered and truly the first hierarchy, our common master calls it: than which [n: (Ephes. III; Coloss. I)] there is no other more deiform, and, of itself, more immediately intent upon the pre-operating illuminations of the divinity. [1027D] But the second he says to be completed from the powers, and dominations, and virtues. And the arrangement, last of the celestial hierarchies, of the threefold company of the angels, archangels, and principalities [n: (I Thess. IV)].*

## EXPOSITION

The title of the sixth chapter is: « What is the first arrangement of the celestial essences, what the middle, and what [1028B] the last. » For in this chapter he treats of the threefold arrangement of the nine orders: of which the first, which is also the highest, contains three orders, the seraphim, cherubim, and thrones; the second, which is also the middle, likewise three, the dominations, virtues, and powers; the third, which is also the last, likewise three, the principalities, archangels, and angels: in which the arrangement of the nine orders is consummated. But being about to treat of things so sublime and remote from human sense, he first modestly confesses his own ignorance, showing that those celestial secrets are not only unknown to men, but cannot be wholly comprehended perfectly, as they are, even by the angelic spirits themselves, and that the divine power alone, from which they are, perfectly knows what they are.

[1028C]This is what he says: « How many indeed, and of what sort, are the adornments of the supercelestial essences, and how according to them the hierarchies are perfected: I say that she alone diligently knows, the contemplative sovereign of their perfection, » that is, the divine wisdom alone, which they have both as principle that they may be, and toward which they look through contemplation that they may be perfect. That divine wisdom therefore, he says, I say alone knows how many and of what sort are the adornments of the supercelestial essences, that is, of the invisible natures: because, of course, not even they themselves can perfectly comprehend of what sort they were created by God. For this reason, he says, I say moreover that they too are ignorant of their own proper virtues, and illuminations, and their own sacred and super-adorned ordination. [1028D] Therefore the divine wisdom alone, which made them, perfectly comprehends both of what sort it made them and how it arranged them, so that in this it may be openly shown how much the immensity of the Creator transcends all the possibility of the creature, since the creature does not at all suffice even to comprehend itself.

There follows: « For it is impossible for us to know the ministries of the supercelestial minds, and their most holy [1029A] perfections. » For it is not greatly to be wondered at, if we cannot know this concerning them, which they themselves are unable to comprehend concerning themselves, since we can know even that which we know concerning them only through what is given and ministered by God through them. For this reason it is impossible for us to know anything concerning them, except what the divinity taught us through them. « Unless, he says, one should there say, whatever mysteries the divinity taught, as through those well knowing their own. » It is impossible for us to know, unless one should say there, that we know only there where we have been taught through them whatever mysteries, that is, secrets, the divinity taught us through them, as through those well knowing their own ministries. Well therefore do they know their own ministries, as much as suffices for our instruction; and well are they ignorant, [1029B] as much as suffices for full and perfect comprehension.

There follows: « Not therefore do we ourselves say anything of our own motion: but whatever of the angelic contemplations have been contemplated by the holy theologians, these, teaching us, as much as we are able, we shall expound. » Since, he says, we of ourselves can know nothing concerning them, which we have not learned from them: therefore in those things which we wish to say concerning them, we do not say of ourselves, that is, of our own motion, or sense, or thought — we say nothing. But whatever the holy theologians have contemplated through contemplation concerning the angels themselves, we, following their authority as much as we can, teach this. « All theology called the celestial essences by nine [1029C] manifesting surnames. » All the celestial essences, he says, that is, the spirits, theology called by nine manifesting surnames, that is, distinguished them by nine manifest and evident surnames, namely angels, archangels, principalities, powers, virtues, dominations, thrones, cherubim, and seraphim, marking them off by their proper names. « These, he says, our divine holy perfecter separates into three ternary arrangements. » It is believed that no one is here better signified as his divine and holy perfecter, or teacher, than the apostle Paul, by whom he had been baptized and instructed in the catholic faith; who, caught up as far as the third heaven into the paradise of God, and there hearing secret things which it is not lawful for a man to speak, is thought to have revealed — as much [1029D] as it was either useful or possible to know of these things for this mortal life — by transmitting them to the memory of posterity, through this holy man as well as through others who by the Spirit of God had passed beyond human understanding. Relying therefore on his authority, and supported by the testimonies of the holy Scriptures, he brought down the knowledge of the celestial things to earth. These, he says, namely the essences, that is, these nine orders, « our divine holy perfecter separates, » that is, distinguishes, « into three ternary, » that is, threefold, « arrangements. And the first indeed he says to be that existing about God, always, and attentively united to him, and, before the others, immediately, as has been handed down. » He says the first arrangement to be about God, always [1030A] existing, and never at any time going out to outward things; and handed down, that is, ordained and arranged, to be united, namely, to God himself, that is, that it may be attentively united to him, being always intent, of course, upon him; and that it may be united to him before the other celestial virtues, which are after it, and united immediately, so that there are none before it. « For the most holy thrones, and the eyed and winged orders, named cherubim in the voice of the Hebrews, and seraphim, according to a nearness set above all, are placed immediately about God, he says, as the manifestation of the divine oracles hands down. » He himself therefore, our perfecter and teacher, says that the manifestation, or authority, of the divine oracles hands down or attests the most holy thrones, and the eyed and winged orders, named in the voice of the Hebrews [1030B] cherubim and seraphim — the eyed, namely, the cherubim, on account of contemplation, the winged, namely the seraphim, on account of love. These orders, I say, that is the thrones, cherubim, and seraphim, he himself says to be placed immediately about God according to the nearness which they have set above toward God, and more excellent than all the other orders. « This threefold adornment therefore, as one, and equally ordered, and truly the first hierarchy, our common master calls it. » These three orders therefore he says to constitute one hierarchy, first in relation to the others, equally ordered in itself. In which hierarchy, namely, although they are more exalted than the others in singular grace, yet all are in a certain manner equal in one arrangement: and from this, according to something, they [1030C] exist as equal, that all look immediately upon God: the first in love, the second in knowledge, the third in discernment. « Than which, » namely hierarchy, « there is no other more deiform, and, of itself, more immediately intent upon the pre-operating illuminations of the divinity. » No other hierarchy, he says, is more deiform than this one, nor more nearly approaching the likeness of God, nor more intent upon the illuminations of the divinity pre-operating in it alone, because before the others; and operating of itself, because not through others. For the divine illuminations operate in this hierarchy alone before the others, because all after this hierarchy are illuminated by those same divine illuminations; and of themselves the divine illuminations operate in this one alone, because through it all the other hierarchies [1030D] are consequently illuminated by the divine illuminations. « But the second he says to be, » namely hierarchy, « completed from the powers, and dominations, and virtues: » the order however being changed, so that the dominations are understood as first, the virtues as second, the powers as third. « And the arrangement of the threefold, last, of the celestial hierarchies, of the angels, archangels, and principalities. » It must be supplied from what precedes, our master himself says, to have known the arranged arrangement of the threefold celestial hierarchies, of the angels, archangels, and principalities. Where, if it be asked why Paul in his Epistles, when he was enumerating the arrangement of the angels by distinguishing it, did not preserve this order, since [1031A] he had asserted to others that such was the order among them. It can be said that there he wished to explain not so much the order of the celestial arrangements as their number, especially since in one place he enumerates only certain ones; but in another he explains those which he had there passed over in silence, without [1032A] repetition of the others. In which it is manifest that, if he were attending to order and number, he would have been zealous to explain all of them at once in one series of narration. And if there is any other reason which can be fittingly answered to this objection.

## THE SIXTH BOOK.

[1031]

## TITLE OF CHAPTER VII. *On the seraphim and thrones, that is, on the first hierarchy of the angels.*

## THE TEXT.

[1031B]

*We, being about to receive this order of the holy hierarchies, say that all the surnames of the celestial intellects have a declaration of the deiform property of each one. And indeed the holy naming of the seraphim — which are of the Hebrews — [we, ] knowing, [know it] to signify either the intent ones, or the heating ones; but that of the cherubim, a multitude of knowledge, or a fusion of wisdom. Beautifully, therefore, the first of the celestial hierarchies is sanctified by the most excellent essences, having an order higher than all, that is, it is placed immediately about God; and the first-operating theophanies and perfections are borne down into it, as into the nearest, more principally. Heating ones therefore are they named, both the thrones, and a fusion of wisdom, by a name manifesting their deiform [1031C] dispositions. For their ever-moving about the divine things, and unceasing, and hot, and sharp, and super-fervid — of an intent, and perhaps innermost, and ever-inflexible motion, and reductive of the things placed beneath, and active — the exemplative [property], as it were re-heating those things, and resuscitating them into a like heat, and fiery from heaven, and purgative by whole-burnt-offering, and unveiled, and inextinguishable, and having thus ever a light-form and illuminative property, persecutrix of every dark obscuring, and manifestatrix — this the manifestation, or surname, of the seraphim teaches. But that of the cherubim [teaches] their knowable, and bared [property], and receptive of the highest giving of lights, and contemplative, filled in the first operatrix power of the divine beauty, and of the wisdom-making tradition, and communicative [1031D] copiously to the second things, of the wisdom given for outpouring. But that [naming] of the highest and compacted seats [teaches] the being diligently exalted above every ignominy of subjection, and bearing upward to the summit in a supermundane way, and, by every extremity ineffably, into the most sublime, and, about the truly exalted, placed with all its powers unchangeably and stably, and receptive of the divine super-advent in all impassibility and immateriality, and God-bearing, and, in a servant-like manner, open unto the divine receivings. This indeed is the declaration of their names, as far as pertains to us. But it must be said what hierarchy of theirs we deem it. That the speculation of every hierarchy hangs ineffably upon a deiformity imitating God, and that every hierarchic action is divided into a sacred participation, and a tradition [1032B] of pure purgation, and of the divine light, and of perfective knowledge, I judge to have been already sufficiently said by us. But now let us worthily proceed to speak of the most excellent intellects, how now, according to them, the hierarchy is manifested by the oracles. In the first essences, which, placed after their substance-making divinity, and, as it were, ordained in its vestibules, super-excel every made power visible and invisible, it must be deemed that there is a proper, and wholly equiform, hierarchy. It must therefore be deemed that they are pure, not as freed from unclean stains and defilements, nor as receptive of material phantasies, but as clean by every diminishment, and higher, and, above every super-firmed temple, according to the most exalted chastity, super-placed above all the most deiform powers [1032C], and, by their own motion of themselves according to the unconvertible order of one loving God, ineffably received, and knowing wholly no contumely among the things subjected, but having a non-casual, as also an unchangeable, most pure placing of their proper deiform specialty. And [they are] again contemplative of the sensible symbols, or speculative of the intellectual ones, not as led back into the divine by the variety of a sacred-writing theory, but as filled with the higher light of all immaterial knowledge, and stuffed, as much as is lawful, with the contemplation of the form-making, and principal beauty, and superessential, and thrice-shining; and made worthy likewise of the communion of Jesus. Not in sacredly feigned images do they formatively figure the deific likeness, but as truly approaching him in the first participation [1032D] of knowledge [they figure] the deific [thing] of his lights, and because what is like God has been substantially given to them. But he communicates such a thing, as far as possible, in the pre-operatrix power, to his deific and human virtues. But [they are] perfect likewise, not as illuminated by a sacred variety in an analectic [analyticum] knowledge, but as filled with a first and supereminent deification, according to the most excellent knowledge of the divine works, as far as is in angels. For not through other holy essences, but sanctified by the divinity itself, they are extended immediately into it, by a virtue and order supereminent to all, and are placed unto a wholly most chaste fortitude, and are led into contemplation of the immaterial and invisible beauty, as much as is lawful, and are bent toward the knowable reasons of the divine works, as first, and about [1033A] God, essences, and are most excellently [excelsissime] sanctified by the very sovereign of perfection. This therefore the theologians also openly declare: that the subordinate arrangements of the celestial essences are ornately instructed in the deific sciences by their super-firmed [superiors], but that the higher of all are illuminated in doctrine by the divinity itself, as much as is lawful. For they introduce certain of them, sacredly instructed by the former ones, [saying] that the Lord is [Lord] of the celestial powers, and the King of glory received into the heavens in a human manner [n: (Psal. XXIII)]*. *But certain [others] inquiring with Jesus himself, and learning for us the knowledge of his divine action, and [they introduce] Jesus himself immediately teaching them, and, lavishing upon them, manifesting his human benignity. For I, he says, dispute justice, and the judgment of salvation [n: (Isa. LXIII)]*. *But I wonder that even [1033B] the first of the celestial essences, and — so many all together — supereminent by divine illuminations, reverently seek, as it were, mediated questionings. For indeed they do not thereupon ask: Why are thy [tibi] garments red? But among themselves they deliberate before asking, showing indeed that they learn, and seek the deific knowledge, yet not leaping before the illumination imparted through the divine procession. Is not, then, the first hierarchy of the celestial intellects, sanctified by the very sovereign of perfection, in that it is extended immediately into it — by a most holy purgation, by much light, by a perfect consummation beforehand, filling it proportionally — purged, and illuminated, and perfected; pure indeed by every diminution, but full of the first light, and partaking of the knowledge first given, and of the perfect knowledge [1033C]? But comprehending (and this I would say perhaps not undeservedly) that both purgation, and illumination, and perfection, is an assumption of the divine knowledge. Purging, namely, ignorance, inasmuch as the knowledge of the perfect doctrines is imparted according to order; but illuminating by that same divine knowledge through which it also purges the one not first contemplating, before it manifests through the higher illumination; and again perfecting, by that same light, according to habit, by the knowledge of the most lucid doctrines. This therefore is, as far as pertains to our knowledge, the first arrangement of the celestial essences, standing in the circuit of God, and immediately about God, and simply and unceasingly circling his eternal knowledge, according to the most excellent, ever-moving placing, as far as is in angels. Seeing indeed many [1033D] and blessed contemplations purely, and illuminated by the simple and immediate splendors, and filled with divine nourishment; by much given at first in outpouring, and by the sole domestic and unific unity of the divine refection, and made worthy of much communion of God and of cooperation toward it, by a likeness, as far as possible, of good dispositions and actions; and knowing many of the divine things in a super-placed manner, and made a partaker of the divine knowledge and cognition, according to what is lawful. Therefore theology handed down its praises also to those who are on earth, in which the eminence of its most excellent illumination is wonderfully manifested. For certain of them, speaking sensibly, re-echo as the voice of waters: Blessed be the glory of the Lord from his place. [1034A] But others cry back that very laudable and most devout theology: Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God of Sabaoth; full is all the earth of his glory [n: (Ezech. I; Ezech. III; Isa. VI; Apoc. IV)]*. *But these most exalted hymnologies of the celestial minds we have already, indeed, opened as much as possible in those [treatises] which are on the divine praises, and it has been said of them in those [places], as far as pertains to us, sufficiently. From which, for remembrance, it suffices to say only, according to the present time, that the first arrangement itself was illuminated in the theological [sic: *seientiam*], as far as is lawful, by the divine goodness, through which it then handed itself down also to others as a deiform hierarchy, introducing that [truth] by way of brevity in saying: that it is lawful for that most devout, and supremely blessed, and wholly blessed divinity to be blessed [1034B] — as far as is possible — to be known and praised by the intellects that receive God. For they themselves are, as it were, deiform divine places, of divine, as the oracles say [n: (Psal. IX, XLVI, LXXIX; Isa. LXVI)]*, *rest. And because it is a monad and unity, three substantially, and, from the supercelestial essences even to the last things of the earth, extending its goodness into all things that are, [and its] providence, as the super-principal principle of every essence, and cause, and binding all things around by a super-essentially immeasurable containment.*

## EXPOSITION.

The title of the seventh chapter is: On the interpretation of the seraphim, and cherubim, and thrones; and on the first hierarchy, which is theirs. For after he enumerated [1034C] the orders of the celestial hierarchies, he now begins to treat of the interpretation and signification of the surnames. And first concerning those which are counted in the first hierarchy, that is, concerning the seraphim, and cherubim, and thrones, demonstrating their virtue according to the property of the appellation.

« We, being about to receive this order of the holy hierarchies. » We, he says, being about to receive and approve this order of the holy hierarchies, which we spoke of above: « We say » consequently, « that all the surnames of the celestial intellects have a declaration of the deiform property of each one. » For all the surnames of the holy intellects, that is, of the spirits, have a declaration [1034D] of the deiform property of each order. The surname declares what is proper to it, and singular, conferred through the excellence of the gift in deiformity. For every grace reforms the mind to the likeness of God; and yet what is conferred as proper to each in that one form, just as it is distinguished in the office, so was to be distinguished in the appellation.

There follows: « And indeed the holy naming of the seraphim — which are of the Hebrews — knowing [it] to manifest either the kindling ones, or the heating ones; but that of the cherubim, a multitude of knowledge, or a fusion of wisdom. We say, he says, that all the surnames of the celestial intellects have a declaration [1035A] of the deiform property of each one. » We, I say, knowing the naming of the seraphim: which seraphim are of the Hebrews, that is, are so called in Hebrew, [know it] to manifest either the kindling ones, or the heating ones; but that naming — supply it — which is of the cherubim, [we, ] knowing, [know it] to manifest a multitude of knowledge, or a fusion of wisdom, so that in the very expression of the spiritual names may be declared the grace of the gifts, which, even if they are not singular, yet are established as excellent. « Beautifully, therefore, the first of the celestial hierarchies is sanctified by the most excellent essences, having an order higher than all, that is, it is placed immediately about God: and the first-operating theophanies and perfections are borne down into it, as into the nearest, more principally. » This, he says, is beautiful [1035B] and fitting, that the first hierarchy should have more excellent spirits, since it too is by its order higher than all the other hierarchies, and nearer to God, placed immediately about him, that is, with no other standing between it and God. And therefore, because it is nearest to God, on that account the theophanies — that is, the divine apparitions, or manifestations, or illuminations first-operating, namely from the Creator into the creature, not through a creature (for those are the first operations of the divine illumination into the creature, or [rather] the creature; the second are through a creature into a creature): and the perfections too of the spiritual gifts are borne down more principally into that first hierarchy than into the others which follow and are subject: inasmuch as they conceive every participation of spiritual grace [1035C] only by its mediation. « Heating ones therefore are they named, both the thrones, and a fusion of wisdom, by a name manifesting their deiform dispositions. » Since the divine illuminations and perfections are borne down more principally into it, on that account the orders constituted in it — some, by conceiving and furnishing the fire of love, are named heating ones, like the seraphim; others, powerful by the judgment of truth, thrones; others, shining and illuminating by the knowledge of science, a fusion of wisdom, like the cherubim — are called by a name manifesting their deiform dispositions. For from the very name of the appellation is manifested the virtue of the deiform disposition, so that by it they may be known to be endowed with the divine likeness, by which they are known to be marked with a distinct [1035D] and singular appellation. For that in each order the distinction of the name marks a certain singular and proper disposition of the divine participation, he proves from the sentence set below, saying:

« For their ever-moving about the divine things, and unceasing, and hot, and sharp, and super-fervid — of an intent, and perhaps innermost, and ever-inflexible motion, and reductive of the things placed beneath, and active — the exemplative [property], as it were re-heating those things, and resuscitating them into a like heat, and fiery from heaven, and purgative by whole-burnt-offering, and unveiled, and inextinguishable, and having thus ever a light-form and illuminative property, persecutrix of every dark obscuring, and manifestatrix — this the naming, [1036A] or manifestation, of the seraphim teaches. » If I should say what I feel, first I confess this: that I have heard words either not spoken to a man, or not spoken by a man. For that they should even be spoken through a man seems to me so great a thing that nothing more could be given to a man. And perhaps, because these words were born from those which could be heard, they ought not to have been spoken. For he indeed who suggested or taught these things had reached even to the third heaven, and had entered into the paradise of God, and there had heard certain words concerning the Word, wholly secret, and next to silence, [reaching] even to those which the human ear could not touch: which no one would hear, until he knew. For within they were heard where they were spoken, and could not go forth outside where man was. Therefore by him who was within, and deeply within, they could be heard within and inwardly [1036B]; but to those who were outside they ought not say. Yet lest even those who were outside should be abandoned, if they were not called by him who was within: words were born from words, just as the words were born from the Word: from the words which had to be kept within, words which could be brought forth outside; from immense things, great ones; from hidden things, obscure ones; from impenetrable things, profound ones — which, though heard by us, whether they were understood, I do not know. These are the very words which the disciple of the master, and the master of disciples, set before us to be searched out, or rather to be wondered at. For the first disciple of the Word heard words from the Word, and he, made a teacher by other words, had a disciple, and made a teacher. When this at length descended to our hearing, the voice, as if from heaven, resounded upon the earth, and already filled our ears [1036C] with amazement; yet it had not yet illuminated our hearts with manifest truth. Therefore those who were men, and could not yet grasp divine things, said that a thunder had come to pass, because they were only dismayed, and not instructed. Others, illuminated a little, not yet consummated, thought it an angel; they did not understand it to be God. And so we too have heard the thunder of the heavenly voice, and have begun to wonder, not yet to be illuminated. Yet if our wonder be an awakening, by that same wonder we shall be converted, that by conversion we may be illuminated. And then those very words will be sweet, not only to be wondered at, but to be loved, when they begin to be heard and known, if only we shall be gracious toward them. [1036D] For if they are not loved, they are not understood; nor are they loved, if they are not tasted. What then? Why have we heard, if we do not understand; or how do we understand, if we do not love? I, for my part, answer: If I do not presume upon love, I do not depart from wonder. Perhaps by that same wonder I shall wake up to knowledge: and if I am less roused to knowledge, I shall be incited to love. And meanwhile love itself will be a refreshment, until from it there arises contemplation, through which illumination may come to be.

What is that [saying] of the angels — « the ever-moving about the divine things, and unceasing, and hot, and sharp, and super-fervid, of an ever-intent, and perhaps innermost, and ever-inflexible motion? » If we should say that this is love, perhaps we may seem to have said little, [1037A] to those not knowing what love is. For never does he say little who says love, unless perchance he means a small love. But this one did not wish to mean a small love, who said so many things about love. « Moving, he says, and unceasing, and hot, and sharp, and super-fervid. » Moving, because it is life; unceasing, because it is perpetual; hot, because it is love; sharp, because it is wisdom. Is this enough? He said life, he named it perpetual, he set down love, and he added wisdom. And all this is in one love, and it is one love. Do you wish to know that love is life? Hear that beloved one, and the lover, commending love. « He who does not love, he says, remains in death [n: (Joan. I)]. » Therefore love is life; and what kind of life? « Charity never falls away [n: (I Cor. XIII)]. » But if [1037B] charity never falls away, love is perpetual life. And what of love? Where shall we be able to show that hot and fervid quality in love? Where did love have fervor and heat; or rather, where was love without heat and fervor? Walking and loving, kindling and fervent, what did they say of Jesus, whom they heard, and did not recognize on the way? For they were walking and being moved, driven by the impatience of love, because if they stood still they would not love. For the moving quality belongs to love as does the hot, so that true love may not grow numb. They were walking therefore in the moving quality of love, and were burning in the hot, and were saying: « Was not our heart burning within us concerning Jesus, while he was speaking to us on the way? [n: (Luc. XXIV.)] » For because they were walking, they had the moving quality; and the hot, because they were burning; but the sharp [1037C] they did not have, because they did not recognize [him]. For this reason, because they did not have the sharp, they heard: « Foolish ones, and slow to believe in all the things that the prophets have spoken [n: (ibid.)]. » Therefore they were dull, and slow to know; but not lukewarm, or sluggish to love. Yet because they first loved, afterward they knew, so that the sharp might be in love just as the hot also. First the hot, afterward the sharp. Therefore he did not love the sharp and the hot, but the hot and the sharp: just as first the moving, afterward the unceasing, so that the moving may rouse to inquiry, the unceasing may confirm to perseverance; the hot, that it may vivify the sense; but the sharp, that it may penetrate to comprehension. For the sharp signifies a certain onrush of love, and the vehemence of an ardent desire, bearing [1037D] itself into the beloved, and entering, and penetrating, so that it may be there where the very thing which is loved is, with it, and in it, so that not only may the warmth be from it, but the sharp may pass over into it. For it could be hot, and, as it were, be warmed from afar: for which it would be enough to love one so absent, and not to see him present, or to possess him most present. But the love of the hierarchy was not perfect, nor much to be loved, unless it made the sharp for itself, and passed through all things, and penetrated, until it reached the beloved, nay rather went into the beloved. For if you do not go into the beloved, you still love outside, nor do you have the sharpness of love. But you have [only warmth], and, growing numb, you remain divided, and outside him, so that you are not made one [with him]. But love wishes to make you one with [1038A] him: and therefore it penetrates all things, and approaches as much as it can, unto him who is one.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

Consider now what keenness of love they had, of whom it was said: « Where the impulse of the spirit was, thither they went [n: (Ezech. I)]. » For that very impulse was keen, just as in a certain other place the liquid too is named as the keenness of love. And I think that it was the bride herself who was speaking; and it was not fitting that anything hard or harsh be brought to one who was fearful and timid. Therefore the liquid was named instead of the keen, in the blandishment of love. For the liquid too penetrates like the keen, and does not cease until it has reached the inmost parts. Therefore she says: « My soul melted when the beloved spoke; I sought him [n: (Cant. III)]. » For she sought him for this reason, that [1038B] she had been melted toward him. For unless she had been melted toward him, she would not have run after him; but she would have stood hard, and would not have entered. But now she has been melted, and has begun to run; yet she did not straightway find him, until she arrived. Therefore here too the unceasing was necessary, that she might enter, and penetrate, and say: « I held him, nor will I let him go, until I bring him, she says, into the house of my mother, and into the chamber of her that bore me [n: (Cant. V)]. I will bring him, she says, into the house of my mother, into the chamber of her that bore me. » Therefore he himself will enter in to you, that you may go in to him. For then you enter in to him, when he enters in to you. When his love enters your heart, and penetrates it, and his love reaches to the inmost part of your heart, then he himself enters into you, and you too enter [1038C] into yourself, that you may go in to him. Therefore do you bring him in to yourself; and bring him in to yourself in no such way that he should merely remain or subsist outside, near you, or in your gates, or in your courts; or before the door of your house, or even only in your house — because this is not much, nor is it great for a great love, unless it reach as far as the marriage-chamber, and enter the inner room, and penetrate to the inmost parts, and rest in your innermost places. I will say something further still: that even the chamber of him who begot perhaps she does not love, unless she be brought into the chamber of her that bore, where love is more tender and the blandishments sweeter, so that it may find in you nothing hard or rigid of manly fierceness. But let the whole be melted, and grow soft with the fire of love. For then nothing of hardness will withstand, so that charity may reach to the [1038D] inmost parts, and love may have the keenness to penetrate all things; this it was we had to say, concerning the keen of love and the liquid, that you may understand the force of love and affection, how great it is. If, however, this can be understood, since love surpasses knowledge, and is greater than understanding. For more is loved than is understood, and love enters and draws near where knowledge is outside. Nor is this to be wondered at: for love always presumes further, and always trusts; love brings itself in without hesitation. Therefore it has the keen, and the liquid that penetrates all things, and follows the impulse of its own ardent desire, unable to dissemble until it reach the beloved; and by that very fact thirsting still more to enter into him, and to be with him, and so near that, [1039A] if it could be, it might be the very same thing that he is. Is it not exceedingly keen, to penetrate all these things, and to enter into the inmost parts, so that it cannot be repelled by any power, until it reach where it loves? « Who, says the Apostle, shall separate us from the charity of Christ? Persecution, or famine, or the sword? [n: (Rom. VIII)] » and many other things, which could have been a hindrance, had love not withstood them. But love, because it had the keen, could not be held; but it passed through, and penetrated, escaping freely, and running to its own desire. If, then, such is the hot and the keen of love, of what sort do you think is that which follows, the « superfervent »? For that must have something more, which has been added to the increase of the preceding powers. And the very matter admonishes us to think something greater in that [1039B] which is superfervent, than in that which is hot and keen.

For you know how that which boils is cast beyond itself by a certain violence of its heat and burning, and is lifted above itself, and makes a great movement out of the underlying and invisible seething of the fervor conceived. And the heat of the hidden burning, which is within and moves, is not seen; but that which is moved is seen by it: and from that which is seen, we conceive and understand the great force, and the robust power, and the strong violence of that which lies hidden and is not seen. Who will be able worthily to bring the emulation of visible things to the majesty of invisible things? Spectacles are set before us, and there is shown to us fervor from heat and moisture, or rather in moisture from heat: and we see how the heat [1039C] without tumult gradually enters into the moisture, so that, having entered, it may powerfully and violently cast it out. It brings itself in invisibly, that it may manifestly raise it up, as though it would not have it there, the thing which it hastens to cast out with so vehement, as it were, an indignation of a certain impulse. The hot, therefore, is moved to the keen, then the keen is advanced to the superfervent. For that which was first keen, and liquid in love, able to penetrate other things that stand in its way, now becomes superfervent, and boiling, unable to stand still in itself. For the keen belongs to love, when by passing through it despises all things; but the superfervent, when by despising it forsakes even its own self. For he who desires this alone which he loves despises even his own self in comparison with it. For neither would he truly desire that alone, if he loved [1039D] even his own self along with it. But this a great and singular love alone can do: that for love of that which alone is loved, even he who loves should be despised, as it were, by his own self. It comes to pass, therefore, in a wondrous manner, that while through the fire of love he is lifted up into him who is above himself, by the force of love he begins to be driven out, and even to go out of himself. How, then, does he grow fervent, and how does he boil in heart, who through the fire of the supernal love conceived, while by thought and desire he is borne toward the desiring of him alone who is above, is cast beyond his own self, and is lifted above himself, and does not think of himself, while he loves him alone? Thus we understand the mobile, and the unceasing, and the hot, and the keen, and the superfervent of love.

[1040A]But how shall we be able to assign these things in those supercelestial natures, in which the same thing is life as is essence, because they have no other essence than life? What is that unceasing movement of theirs about divine things, and the hot, and the keen, and the superfervent? What are those divine things, about which they are unceasingly moved, and grow hot, and are sharpened, and are superfervent? For he who is in a circuit does not yet enter; because either he is lukewarm from the hot, or he is numb from the keen. If, then, they have the keen, how are they in a circuit? Perhaps because those divine things, of which Scripture has spoken, are within every creature, and so utterly secret and hidden, that even if they can be touched, they cannot be penetrated. But there are certain other divine things, which come into manifestation, and in some manner set themselves forth to knowledge, [1040B] either while they come forth inwardly to the mind, or while they proceed outwardly as far as the sense. For the Apostle intimates that certain divine things are utterly within, and hidden, and latent, but that certain things have gone forth outwardly, and have been manifested, saying: « What is known of God is manifest in them [n: (Rom. I)]. » For when he says, « what is known of God, » that is, the knowable concerning God, he plainly shows that of the things which are of God, and are in God, something is manifest, something hidden. And that indeed which is manifest can be touched through knowledge; but that which is utterly hidden can by no reasoning be penetrated. There are, therefore, certain divine things, and certain things of God set forth for manifestation, which according to something can be penetrated and comprehended; but certain things so deep, and hidden, [1040C] and exceedingly inward, and altogether impenetrable, that no intellect can search them out, nor any wisdom investigate them: concerning which it is a great thing, when it is granted to touch them, even if it be not granted to penetrate them; and when by penetrating one arrives at them, they nevertheless are not penetrated, but remain impenetrable and incomprehensible, in which this alone, which is outside, is shown to the arriving understanding for knowledge, and that which is always within is not opened for comprehension.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

Consider now and see whether the things which have been made visible by God do not instruct you concerning the invisible things of God. For the things which by reason alone are sometimes less investigated, are not seldom made knowable by the light of examples. See, therefore, what the sense of the flesh can do in [1040D] the world, that from it you may understand, as far as it can be understood, what the sense of the mind can do in God. When we touch the just visible world with the eye of the flesh, we perceive the things which are outside it; and to the things which lie hidden within, by that same sense we are not able to penetrate. And even if certain things which lay hidden are sometimes opened, still many others lie hidden which cannot be comprehended, either by their immensity, because they exceed the sense; or by their subtlety, because they escape the sense; or by their obscurity, because they do not admit the sense to themselves. So consider that the sense of the rational mind, that by which we perceive divine things, if ever it be admitted to touch God, perceives those things only which are, as it were, outside him; and the things which lie hidden within, secret and concealed, it does not comprehend. [1041A] But he said that it is outside him, and not outside us, for this reason: because everything that is in God is within to every creature; but yet, in comparison with those things which cannot at all be comprehended, that which even of the most secret and most subtle understanding is manifested concerning him is said in some manner to be to him, or in him, outside. Through the keen of love, therefore, they penetrate to him; and yet, through his incomprehensible majesty, they remain about him, so that they do not enter into the whole, even though they penetrate as far as something. But this very thing also must be considered, that they are said to be about him, and not in some one part. For they encompass with desire that which they do not penetrate with the intellect, so that they may leave nothing unconsidered of all the things that can be known, [1041B] always seeing, and always thirsting to see. Stable, that they may not depart; mobile, that they may unceasingly desire. In a circuit, because they do not enter into the whole of that which is. In a circuit, because they draw near immediately. In a circuit, because they survey by contemplation and love all that is knowable in him. Thus, therefore, the mobile of them about divine things, and the unceasing, and the hot, and the keen, and the superfervent of that unceasing, and intent, and perhaps inmost, and inflexible movement itself, can fittingly be understood. This, however, must not be passed over, that he named the movement of the invisible natures unceasing, and intent, and perhaps inmost, and inflexible, using the voice of one doubting in this one thing alone, when he said "perhaps," as though he asserted the rest without hesitation, and this one thing alone he would not venture to affirm except with the qualification [1041C] of doubt. The movement, therefore, of those spirits that draw near to the supreme divinity is called unceasing, and inmost, and inflexible; because, tending from itself toward God through the desire of love, it is both always mobile, so that it never rests in itself; and intent, that it may press on toward him; and inmost, that it may not flow out to outward things; and inflexible, that it may not turn aside to other things outside itself and beside him. Why, then, does he not say absolutely "inmost," but, as if doubting, and as if he knew not whether it were so, or whether it were so to be said, did he add "perhaps"? Perhaps because he judged that this alone was to be understood and called truly inmost, than which nothing is more inward. An inmost movement, therefore, there is not, except that which is either from the inmost, or is unto the inmost. Because, therefore, the divine nature [1041D] alone is within to every nature, it alone is inmost to every nature; whose movement, without movement toward the creature, is alone called inmost in reality, because it is from that than which nothing more inmost is found. But the movement of the creature toward the Creator, however secret and penetrating, cannot properly be called inmost; because it is from that which is outside, toward which it is: and when it is led to touch him who is inmost, the way is not opened to it as far as his inmost parts. Because, therefore, it comes in some respect and outwardly, going out from the creature, and subsists outwardly, not reaching to the penetrating of the inmost parts of the Creator, it ought by no means to be called inmost; although, however, for the reason that it is from an inner nature unto the inmost, it can fittingly be called inmost: on account of this he says well, "perhaps inmost," that he might intimate [1042A] that it could according to something be called inmost, which according to every mode was not inmost. For it can be called inmost by property, not by comparison. Inmost to that from which it is; but not to that toward which it is.

There follows: « And the exemplative of the reductive and active of the subjects. » In the enumeration above he expressed the power of true love toward God, whether how great it is, I know not; but I think, as great as it can be told. Now, in what follows, he shows the force and effect of the same love toward the neighbor. There he demonstrated its movement and its turning to higher things, by which they thirst after their Creator: but here he sets forth its movement, and its turning to lower and nearer things, by which they do not withdraw from one another. The movement, therefore, of love, which there toward higher things [1042B] is called intent, and inmost, and inflexible, here toward the subject and lower things is named the exemplative of the reductive and active. For that movement, which in the higher is contemplation, in the lower is operation. It tends to higher things, that it may rest in them; it tends to lower things, that it may bring them back to itself. Upward, therefore, charity is moved, that it may abide there; downward, that it may return. Therefore the movement of charity in the higher beings is called reductive and active toward the lower. Reductive in this, that, kindling those beings with the same fire of charity, it turns them to their Creator. Active in this, that, illumining them with the brightness received, it composes them to his will. It is reductive, therefore, of the subjects, because it draws them to higher things. Active, because it disposes them in lower things. Reductive, that they may tend to God. [1042C] Active, that they may walk according to God. Of such a reductive and active movement of the subjects, therefore — that is, which brings back the subjects to those things which are above them, and disposes them to acting in themselves — the exemplative is that form of love, in which by the example of the higher beings it is shown to the subjects with how great an affection of charity they ought both to walk according to God, and to pant after him. Or so that it be read thus, the exemplative of the subjects, that is, that which is set before the subjects as an example: "reductively" and "actively" being pronounced adverbially, the same sense remaining. See, therefore, how charity spreads itself out, desiring to embrace all things in those blessed spirits, and those near to God, as though burning from close at hand, and fervent the more. The fire of love [1042D] is indeed brought back to higher things, while, thirsting for its own good through the love of God, it is moved also to lower and subject beings, wishing to gather to itself partakers and companions of its good. Loving, therefore, they bestow upon the subjects the form of loving, and, burning in themselves, they kindle others also with the flame of love. On account of this, therefore, their love has been made an example to the subjects of tending to higher things, and of walking according to the higher things, as though rewarming those, namely the subjects, and re-arousing them into a like warmth, so that they may similarly burn, though not equally. But that he says « rewarming, and re-arousing, » it is not so to be understood as though, being first extinguished and dead, they are again kindled and made alive; but that through the love coming from above they are aroused again to the loving and seeking of those things which are above. [1043A] Through the fire of love, therefore, they are as it were rewarmed and re-aroused, in whom the kindled flame of love is brought back again to the loving of those things from which, in the first and principal lovers, it arose upon the following and subject lovers. All these things, therefore, the surname of the Seraphim, or its manifestation, teaches. For in that they are surnamed Seraphim, that is, "the enkindling," or "the warming," it is both a surname to them, and a manifestation to us; because both to them the surname is expressed in the word, and to us the property of the surname is manifested in the interpretation of the word, since they would not be manifested unless they were surnamed. For those who are known to themselves by contemplation become known to us by surname: and therefore to them, as regards the word, it is called a surname; [1043B] to us, as regards the interpretation of the word, it is called a manifestation. That very surname, therefore, or manifestation of the Seraphim teaches all these things, that is, namely, their mobile about divine things, and unceasing; and it teaches also the hot, and the keen, and the superfervent of their intent, and inmost, and inflexible movement; and it teaches also the exemplative of the subjects, reductively and actively, which is in them, and is furnished by them to the subjects for reduction and action, that they may be rewarmed and re-aroused into a warmth like the warmth and fervor of the higher beings. The surname of the Seraphim teaches also the « fiery from heaven, and the purgative by holocaust, and the unveiled, and the inextinguishable. » Which is in them first from heaven, or descending divinely into them: then from them, [1043C] that they may burn and enkindle, be purged and purge, be revealed and reveal.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

And that very surname of the Seraphim teaches also their light-formed and illuminative property, holding itself always thus: thus, that is, in one and the same mode, and remaining without variety and mutability, and the pursuer of all dark obscuration, so that it does not draw near to it; and the manifester, so that nothing lies hidden outside it: all these things, therefore, the surname or manifestation of the Seraphim teaches. And all these things, as we have said, are in one love, and are one love: which is given to them from above, and is derived through them to the subjects. Of which love the author distinguishes a threefold power in those highest spirits by this enumeration: above them, in them, and beneath [1043D] them. Above them, mobile; in them, vital; beneath them, operative. Above them, through desire; in them, through sense; beneath them, through affection. Above them, seeking; in them, perceiving; beneath them, gathering. Above them, in that which they desire; in them, in that which they perceive; beneath them, on behalf of those whom they draw along with themselves to that which they perceive in themselves, and to that which they desire above themselves. On account of such wondrous operations of love he said so many things about it: in which he would perhaps have said the whole, if the whole could have been said. But we fear both, [1044A] if we be either negligent or fastidious. It is hard for us, in a matter so sweet, to deny anything which we have received: and again it seems to us rash to add anything which we ought not. What, do you think, is love? When shall the whole be told? Behold, we have said the « mobile » that is theirs, « and the unceasing, and the hot, and the keen, and the superfervent, and the intent, and the inmost, and the inflexible, and the exemplative, and the reductive, and the active, and the rewarming, and the re-arousing: » and this seemed to be much, and perhaps enough: except that other wondrous things still followed, I know not whether more wondrous. « Fiery, » he says, « from heaven, and purgative by holocaust. » Two things are to be noted, that he named it fiery, and that same fiery from heaven. For the fiery too is one thing from the earth, but is not like that which is [1044B] fiery from heaven. For it burns, and consumes, and lays waste, and destroys; nor can there be any fellowship with it for another. For those who draw near to it are harmed; and if they touch it at all, they already begin to be consumed. But that which is fiery from heaven burns sweetly; and it kindles indeed, but does not consume; and if it consumes anything, yet not unto harm, but unto purgation: for it consumes this, which would harm, if it were not consumed. Therefore after « fiery from heaven » there follows « purgative by holocaust; » because that fiery thing purges, and purges the whole, and purges from the whole, not only from the corruption of evil, but also from the defect of good. For there were certain things which had contracted the corruption of evil; there were certain things which had not yet received the perfection of good: and [1044C] both were to be purged; the one from corruption, the other from imperfection. Those which were on earth were to be purged from corruption; those which were in heaven were to be purged from imperfection. The heavenly, because in their first condition they were not perfect; the earthly, because after their first condition they had been corrupted. The heavenly have been purged from imperfection, when they are consummated in glorification; the earthly have been purged from corruption, when they are freed from sin. Of the heavenly, therefore, the purgation was not the amendment of an evil which they did not have; but the consummation of a good which they had in lesser measure. But of the earthly the purgation was first amendment; afterward consummation. Such a purgation, therefore, we understand in that spiritual and heavenly nature. But even if anyone should understand in those beings a purgation, [1044D] not of the corruption which was in them, because they were always clean, but of the perfect cleanness, to which no corruption could be present, this too he will understand fittingly. That « fiery from heaven, » therefore, by which they are inflamed, that they may burn, and are purged either from imperfection unto consummation, or unto full cleanness against all corruption, is « purgative by holocaust, » that is, universally purgative, or wholly purgative, because it purges the whole and purges from the whole; whether that no corruption may be present, or that no perfection may be lacking. For a holocaust is that which is wholly kindled, and wholly burned up.

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.*

[1045]

[1045A]Long leisures demand a new beginning. A little above we had entered upon the discourse concerning the surname of the angels, where the author shows why such surnames or appellations have been attributed to the several orders of the angels. And concerning the first, and highest, order indeed, which is surnamed Seraphim, we have pursued, according to our capacity, the account of that appellation which has been given by theology. Now it remains that we also consider the account which he renders of the surname of the following order. He had first said that the surname, or manifestation, of the Seraphim teaches « their mobile, and the unceasing, and the hot, and the keen, and the superfervent, » which were added after these: but now he brings in and says that the surname, [1045B] or manifestation, of the Cherubim teaches « their knowable, and the deiform, » etc. For he says: « But the Cherubim itself. » Two things are to be repeated from what precedes, "the surname" and "teaches." As if he should say: The very surname of the Cherubim teaches, that is, in that they are surnamed Cherubim, which is interpreted *fullness of knowledge,* there is taught and signified « their knowable, » that is, the knowledge or acquaintance and science which they have; and by this name there is signified also « their deiform, » that is, the vision of God which is in them, because through the light of wisdom implanted in them they clearly contemplate the majesty of their Creator. There is signified also « the receptive of the highest bestowal of lights: » that is, it is signified that they have received the lights divinely given most highly [1045C] and most perfectly. For in that they are signified, by their very surname, to have the fullness of knowledge, they are assuredly taught to have received the light of that same wisdom from elsewhere; because, according to the saying of the Apostle: « If they had not received it, they could not have had it at all [n: (I Cor. IV)]. » But in that they have it, reception is noted; in that they have the fullness, advance is noted. And the order is this, that first they receive the light of wisdom divinely given, and afterward, illumined by that same light, they see and know God, the author of the light. Well, therefore, are they illumined, who are so illumined that they see and know him by whom they are illumined. Many are illumined that they may see other things, and see not him himself through whom they see. But it is no great thing to see a work, if you [1045D] know not the craftsman. A thing made cannot beatify, if you do not reach to the beauty of the one who wrought it. Therefore the surname of the Cherubim teaches « their knowable, and the deiform, and the receptive of the highest streaming-in of light. » Note the unusual compositions in that he says "deiform," and "streaming-in of light." The surname of the Cherubim teaches [1046A] also, namely, their contemplative in the first working power of the divine beauty, and their repleteness of wise handing-down, and their communicative of the copious wisdom given for the outpouring unto the second beings. Distinguish thus: The surname of the Cherubim teaches the contemplative of the divine beauty in the first working power. For in that they are called Cherubim, that is, full of knowledge, it is shown that through the light of the wisdom given they contemplate the divine beauty; since assuredly, whatever they knew, they would not be full of wisdom, if they did not know the divine beauty, from which, and in which, all things are beautifully and reasonably ordered. Because, therefore, they are full of wisdom, they assuredly contemplate the divine beauty. Nor do they contemplate it in any way whatever, [1046B] but in the first working power, so that, namely, being first and principally illumined by God, they may illumine the rest that come after them. For the divine power works first, and principally, and of itself in those who are nearest; but afterward through them in the others who follow. This, therefore, the surname of the Cherubim teaches, namely that the contemplation of the divine beauty is in them through the first working power; because God works first in them, that afterward he may work through them. It teaches also the repleteness of the wise handing-down, that is, it teaches that they are replete with divine grace: which by the wise handing-down of the Creator is distributed in participation to some more, and to some less. A wondrous excellence of theirs, therefore, is shown, because of that good which the wisdom [1046C] of the Creator handed down unequally unto the beauty of the universe, they are proclaimed to have not a part but the fullness. It can also be distinguished otherwise, so that it be said that the surname of the Cherubim teaches their contemplative replete, that is, their contemplation replete with the divine beauty, and with the wise handing-down, in the first working power. And it can be understood, not unfittingly, by the divine beauty and the wise handing-down, that the divine wisdom effects a greater beauty in its works from this very thing, that it did not settle its gifts to be participated by all in one and the same mode. Of which beauty, indeed, and of which handing-down, those highest spirits are for this reason replete; because the gifts which were given in part to the lower and subject beings, they have merited [1046D] to possess according to the fullness.

There follows: « And the communicative of the wisdom given copiously for the outpouring unto the second beings. » Again it must be repeated from what precedes. The surname of the Cherubim teaches their communicative, that is, the communication, or participation, of the wisdom given copiously for the outpouring, [1047A] that is, that in communicating they participate not slightly, but copiously, in the wisdom given to them for the outpouring. Which outpouring, namely, was first made in them copiously, that through them it might afterward be made unto the second beings: inasmuch as the light of wisdom, which is first poured copiously into them from above, is afterward through them transfused unto the second, that is, the following orders, to be illumined. This fullness, therefore, and dignity, and excellence in the gift of wisdom, and in the light of truth, the surname of the Cherubim teaches.

There follows: « But it itself, of the highest and compacted seats, diligently to be exalted from all the ignominy of subjection, and bearing upward supramundanely unto the summit, and by every extremity ineffably unto the most sublime, and about the truly lofty placed with all its powers unchangeably [1047B] and stably: and receptive of the divine coming-upon in all impassibility and immateriality, and God-bearing, and in a servile manner opened unto the divine receptions. » After the surname of the Seraphim, and of the Cherubim, he passes to explaining the surname of the Thrones. As if he should say: As the surname of the Seraphim signifies the ardor of love, and the surname of the Cherubim the brightness of knowledge, so also the surname of the Thrones signifies the loftiness of dignity, for the reason that the invisible Founder, sitting in them, through them disposes all subject things by judging. For on account of this dignity and excellence of the divine judgment, which is exercised through them, he named the Thrones themselves the highest and compacted seats; the highest, [1047C] on account of their dignity; compacted, on account of their truth. For it is manifest that thrones are the seats of those who reign and judge. And to the one reigning belongs sublimity, but to the one judging belongs truth. And therefore he deservedly named the Thrones themselves the highest seats, because he who reigns in them has no superior; and compacted, because he who judges in them does not depart from the truth. What is "compacted"? Fitly and suitably joined together. See the joining of the seats of God. The joining of the seats of God is the fittingness of judgments. Every judgment infers one thing from another. From fault, punishment; from justice, glory; from merit, reward; from the quality of the work, the quality of the retribution. It finds fault, it adjudges punishment. It finds justice, it adjudges glory. Well is it joined, that seat is compacted. Well does it accord and [1047D] fitly cohere. Punishment to fault, glory to justice. If glory were joined to fault, and punishment to justice, they would not accord with one another, nor would the judgment have a compacted seat. The compaction, therefore, of the seats is the truth of the judgments. But it must be known that every lower judgment, when it comes into question or contradiction, is wont to take from a higher either testimony or confirmation. But the highest judgment, because it has not another above itself by which it may be confirmed; by right the seats of God are named not only compacted through truth, but also highest through dignity. But if we read not "compacted," but "raised up," which from the ambiguity of the Greek word can likewise be understood: this is signified, that those heavenly spirits, over whom God presides for judging, have merited to be singularly high [1048A] in glory, not through the loftiness of nature, but through the raising-up of grace. Let him say, therefore: « But it itself, of the highest and compacted seats, » that is, of the Thrones (again from what precedes "the surname" must be supplied) teaches this, namely that those same Thrones are exalted, or have been exalted, diligently, that is, perfectly, from all the ignominy of subjection, that is, from all ignominious subjection. For the more perfectly they are subject to the presiding God, the more truly they have merited to be raised above all other things through him, and in him. Because, therefore, thrones signify not subjection, but dominion, when the word of God names those heavenly spirits thrones, in that very thing he demonstrates them to be perfectly ruling, and free from all subjection. So, therefore, the surname of the Thrones teaches them to be exalted from all [1048B] the ignominy of subjection; it teaches also their bearing upward, that is, their raising-up unto the summit: and this supramundanely, that is, spiritually or invisibly, namely by a spiritual and invisible exaltation, and one transcending all mundane and visible loftiness. The surname of the Thrones, therefore, not only teaches them to be preferred to the lower beings through dominion; but also, through sublimation, to be exalted unto the summit, so that, namely, between them and him who is the highest there be nothing in the middle.

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

There follows: « And by every extremity ineffably unto the most sublime: and about the truly lofty placed with all its powers unchangeably, and stably. [1048C]" Namely, the surname of the Thrones teaches the placed, that is, their placing, or their establishment, made unchangeably, and stably, with all its powers, that is, with every kind of power, and unshaken strength. Made, I say, ineffably far from all extremity, that is, beyond every end, unto the most sublime, and about the truly lofty. For where would the seat of God be, except where God sits? Where God dwells, where he reigns, where he sits, where he rests, where his thrones are, and his seats. See how far they are from us. How far is the highest majesty from all subjection, the eternal unchangeableness from all corruption. Where majesty is, there is a throne; where unchangeableness is, there is a seat. A throne signifies unchangeableness. Therefore in that very eternity, in that very unchangeableness, the seats of God [1048D] have been placed. And how far this is from all extremity, who can tell? What is extremity? An end: where an end is, there is extremity. An end at the top, an end at the bottom. In both the creature has an end. The end is at the bottom, where the falling-away ceases, lest that which is something go into nothing. The end is at the top, where the advancing sets a limit to itself, lest that which is great extend itself beyond measure. By how much, then, do those surpass the lowest things, who ineffably transcend the highest? We can still, not unfittingly, interpret those extremities in another mode. For all visible things are extremes; because, as to one ascending upward from the lowest there is a highest, than which nothing is higher, so to one coming forth outward from the inmost there is an extreme, than which nothing is more outward. The divine benches, therefore, as, in that they are called thrones, [1049A] they are shown to be excellently raised up, through dignity, in the summit, above the subjection of the lowest things, so also, in that they are called seats, they are demonstrated to be placed unchangeably, through stability, in the inmost, above all fluctuation of the extremes. And yet neither, raised up on high, can they be made equal to the ineffable loftiness under which they are; nor, gathered to the inner parts, can they be compared to the simple unity about which they are. On account of this, therefore, they are called seats, because they are both underneath, through the ineffable majesty, to him who presides above, and are in a circuit, through the unchangeable unity, to him who rests within. This, therefore, the surname of the Thrones teaches: and not only this, but it teaches also « the receptive of the divine coming-upon, » that is, that they receive the divinity coming upon them from above in all impassibility and [1049B] immateriality, that is, incorruptly and purely. For because they receive it in purity, they receive it immaterially; and again, because they receive it flowing in sweetly, without labor and weariness, they receive it impassibly. Those who advance to the knowledge of the hidden divinity through study and labor, these receive the divine coming-upon passibly. Again, those to whom the hidden divinity presses itself in to be known through outward signs and corporeal figures, to these it comes in some manner as it were materially. Because, therefore, those highest spirits, in perceiving the knowledge of the divinity, neither advance by study, nor are taught by material figures: rightly are they declared to receive the divine coming-upon both impassibly and immaterially.

[1049C]There follows: « And God-bearing, and in a servant's manner opened unto the divine receptions. » From what precedes it must again be supplied, "the surname of the Thrones teaches," namely their God-bearing, that is, that they bear God presiding over them; and "opened in a servant's manner unto the divine receptions," that is, that in a servant's manner, that is, obediently, they open themselves and voluntarily fit themselves, that they may receive into themselves God himself coming, inasmuch as the will subject to the divine operation may respond, and the sacred ministry may be proved to be not of constraint, but of love. A right order. First the benches of God are raised up through dignity; then they are placed on account of stability; afterward they receive God coming into themselves, and bear him. Lastly, because they are rational vehicles, that the work may be one of felicity, to the ministry they join desire, [1049D] and will.

There follows: « This indeed is the declaration of their names, as far as it concerns us. » He continues himself unto what follows. For, the surnames of the three orders having been told, he now passes to defining and setting forth their hierarchy, that is, their sacred power. « This indeed, » namely this which we have said above, « is the declaration of their names, » namely of the three orders. It is, I say, as far as it concerns us, that is, as far as it seems to us, or as far as it concerns us it is the declaration of their names, that is, for our sake, that they may be declared to us through names, not for their own sake, who can be known to themselves, and without names.

There follows: « But it must be told, what hierarchy [1050A] of theirs we deem it to be. » As if he should say: Thus far we have spoken concerning their surname; but now we ought to speak concerning their sacred power, of what sort we deem it to be. « For that the speculation of every hierarchy, depending ineffably upon a deiformity imitating God, is; and that every hierarchic action is divided into a sacred participation, and a handing-down of pure purgation, and of divine light, and of perfective knowledge: I think has already been sufficiently said by us. » The sense is this: I think it has already been sufficiently said by us, that the speculation of every hierarchy, that is, the general definition of the hierarchy, depends ineffably upon deiformity, that is, upon likeness to God: a likeness, I say, imitating God, that is, upon a likeness of the imitation of God. Enough, he says, [1050B] I think has already been said, what the hierarchy is, defined generally, namely deiformity, that is, a conformation or likeness to God, which is in those who imitate God. For above, in the third chapter, he defines the hierarchy universally thus. The hierarchy is likeness and unity to God, as far as is possible. On account of this, therefore, I think it has now been sufficiently said what the hierarchy is, namely as far as pertains to the general definition. Likewise I think it has now been sufficiently said, that every hierarchic action is divided, that is, that every hierarchic action is divided into a sacred participation, and a handing-down of pure purgation, and of divine light, and of perfective knowledge. For the action of every sacred power consists either in this, [1050C] that they participate from a higher; or in this, that they hand down to the lower purgation, and illumination, and perfection. Threefold is the grace, which they exercise in two modes, by receiving, and by imparting: first is purgation unto purity; then illumination unto truth; then perfection unto goodness. For this is the perfective knowledge, which perfects, and makes perfect, when from the habit of virtue truth is perceived. « But now let us worthily go on to tell of the most excellent intellects, how already according to them the hierarchy is manifested by the sacred words. » As if he should say: Since above the definition and the division of the hierarchy have been universally and sufficiently given by us; now let us go on worthily to tell of the most excellent intellects, that is, the highest spirits, [1050D] namely the Seraphim, the Cherubim, and the Thrones, in whom the first angelic hierarchy is ordered. Let us go on, I say, to tell how the hierarchy according to them, that is, how their hierarchy is manifested by the sacred words. For this the order of reason demands, that after the general definition and division of the hierarchy, the discourse descend to the special treatment of it. First indeed, concerning the first hierarchy, which consists in those three highest orders, it must be asked of what sort the sacred words manifest it to be. And lest perhaps anyone should think their sacred power to be diverse for this reason, that their orders are found to be differing, he says that in all three there is one and altogether like hierarchy, [1051A] inasmuch, namely, as they are all in the first place united to the highest and principal hierarchy, and immediately obtain from it the dignity of their sacred power.

For this is what he subjoins, saying: « In the first essences, which, placed after their substantifying divinity, and ordered as it were in its vestibules, are made to be above all invisible and visible power, it must be deemed that there is a proper and altogether uniform hierarchy. » The first essences are those highest and principal three orders of angels, which among all creatures are first, and, after their substantifying divinity, that is, that which makes them subsist, are first constituted, and ordered as it were in its vestibules, that is [1051B] so near, that whatever is beyond, is only in it, and is itself the divinity. In those first essences, therefore, which, so placed and ordered, are next to the divinity, superexcellent, and transgressing every made power, invisible and visible, that is, the power of every making, or creature, invisible and visible; in those essences, I say, it must be deemed that there is a hierarchy, that is, a sacred power; proper, that is, distinct, and differing from others in itself, and altogether uniform, that is, like and equal among themselves. For in that sacred power which they have, as they are more excellent than all others, so among themselves they exist altogether equal, so that each in that which they receive immediately from the highest divinity have not others superior; and in that which to the lower beings [1051C] they bestow out of the divine participation, all alike exist as first dispensers. In this, therefore, the hierarchy is one, and alike, in the three.

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

There follows: « They are therefore to be reckoned pure: not as freed from unclean stains and defilements, nor as receptive of material phantasms, but as clean of all diminution, and higher; and, above every over-established temple, set on high above all things according to the most exalted chastity, with all their most God-formed virtues; and by their own proper motion through themselves, and by that same motion, according to the unturnable [character] of the order that loves God, ineffably received; and altogether knowing no contumely in things subordinate, but holding the incapable-of-falling and also unchangeable [1051D] most pure placement of their own God-formed specialty. » Above he said that in those three most excellent orders of angels there is one, and an altogether similar, hierarchy — that is, a sacred power; now, consequently, he adds that those things which pertain to hierarchical action — that is, to the operation of the sacred power — are perfectly present in them, namely purgation, illumination, perfection. These three every sacred power ordered under the supreme power exercises in two ways, namely by receiving from what is above and imparting to what is below. He says, therefore, that those first essences, in which the first hierarchy is ordered, have purgation, which they both receive from the divinity above, that they may be purged, and confer on those below, that they may purge. But they receive purgation not as though they were to be freed from some [1052A] uncleanness or corruption, but as to be perfected from all imperfection and diminution — this is what he says: They are to be reckoned pure, namely those first essences; pure, I say, yet not as though freed from certain unclean stains and defilements, since they never had any uncleanness or defilement; nor pure as though receptive of material phantasms, since they do not at all receive material phantasms, and therefore do not need to be purged of them, since they do not have them at all; but rather pure as clean, and estranged from all diminution and imperfection. Indeed, by unclean stains and material phantasms he has expressed two kinds of spiritual defilement: one which is in depraved desires, the other [1052B] which is in vain thoughts. For depraved desires defile the cleanness of the heart like mud, while vain thoughts, like a certain dust sprinkled over it, becloud its brightness. Since therefore those most pure essences of the highest spirits take on no corruption either in depraved desires or in vain thoughts, they consequently do not require to be cleansed either from unclean stains or from material phantasms. They are therefore to be understood as pure, not as purified from corruption, but as clean from imperfection; and not only estranged from imperfection, but also, through the excellence of their perfection, higher than all the rest that are perfect, and set on high above them.

[1052C]For this is what follows: « And higher » — supply: they are to be reckoned to be, those first essences — « and set on high above the over-established temple of all, » that is, above every rational creature in which God dwells, and which, through him dwelling within it, is confirmed toward the highest good. Above all these those first essences are set on high according to their most excellent chastity — that is, more excellent than the chastity of all the rest; a chastity, I say, existing in all their virtues, that is, in their virtues of every kind, the most God-formed, that is, drawing nearer to conformity with God than the virtues of others draw near. Thus, therefore, those first essences are to be reckoned both to be pure, and, through the excellence of their purity, higher than the rest, and set on high [1052D] above them. And they are also to be reckoned to have been ineffably received, for the participating of that purity in God, by their own motion through themselves — that is, without a mediator; and by that same motion — that is, ever straining without deviation toward the selfsame thing; according to the unturnable — that is, according to the unturnableness of the order that loves God. For those who never grow lukewarm in love are never bent aside or turned away from their straining.

There follows: « And in things subordinate knowing no contumely at all — supply: they are to be reckoned. For just as they participate the purity of God from above without diminution, so they offer it to be participated below without elation; in this very thing imitating God, « who gives to all abundantly, and does not upbraid [n: (Jac. I)]. » [1053A] For this reason, he says, « they are to be reckoned as knowing no contumely in things subordinate, but rather as holding the incapable-of-falling and also unchangeable placement of their own God-formed specialty. » By 'their own God-formed specialty' he understands the excellent and singular beauty of divine conformation, which is in those highest essences; in which they, most pure and most perfect, are so placed and grounded that they have a placement incapable of falling, over which a fall cannot hold sway; and rightly incapable of falling, inasmuch as it is unchangeable, or immutable. The sum, then, of this chapter is this: that those first and principal essences participate their purgation, or purity, without diminution, offer it to be participated without elation, and possess it uncorrupted without mutability. [1053B] And these things, indeed, have been said concerning their purgation.

Afterward he adds concerning illumination, saying: « And again, contemplative of sensible symbols, or speculative of intellectual things, not as brought back into the divine by the variety of sacred-writing theory; but as filled with the higher light of every immaterial knowledge, and, as far as is lawful, replete with the contemplation of the form-making and principal beauty, both super-essential and thrice-shining; and likewise made worthy by the communion of Jesus: they do not figure the deiform likeness formatively in sacredly-fashioned images; but as truly drawing near to him himself in the first participation of the knowledge of his deiform lights; and because what is like to God has been substantially bestowed on them. And they communicate [1053C] in this manner, as is possible, in his pre-operative power, in his deiform and human virtues. » All this has been said concerning illumination. As if he said: Not only are those first essences to be reckoned to have purgation and to be pure; but again — that is, further — they are to be reckoned to have illumination, and to be contemplative of sensible symbols, and speculative of intellectual things. Sensible symbols are material signs — whether in creatures, or in the Scriptures, or in the divine sacraments — set forth for the demonstration of invisible things; whose mystical signification and invisible truth those highest angelic spirits recognize by contemplating through divine illumination. They also behold, through that same illumination, intellectual things [1053D] — supply: symbols — that is, spiritual theophanies, that is, divine manifestations, through which the nature of the hidden and invisible divinity is manifested to them within. Or it can be read thus: They — namely the essences — are to be reckoned to be contemplative of sensible symbols, and speculative of intellectual things, and not (supply) of symbols. For outwardly, in sensible things, where there are material signs, there are symbols; but inwardly, in intellectual things, where there are no signs but truth, there are no symbols. Therefore in sensible sacred symbols they contemplate the signs of truth, but inwardly, in intellectual things, they behold the naked truth without signs. Therefore they are to be reckoned to be contemplative of sensible symbols, and likewise [1054A] speculative of intellectual things; yet not as brought back into the divine — that is, into the divine cognition — by variety, that is, by the manifold teaching of theory, that is, of divine Scripture; theory, I say, of the sacred-writing [kind], because, namely, it writes and speaks about divine and sacred things. For, instructed by the simple illumination of divine contemplation, not by the varied and manifold teaching of the Scriptures, they contemplate all the sacred figurations and sensible signs which, whether in the Old or in the New Testament — such as the tabernacle of the covenant, and the ark of the testament, and other things of this kind, which Scripture sets forth for the demonstration of invisible things; the visible appearances of creatures too, through which invisible things are demonstrated; the mystical revelations also made through sensible formations — all these, namely, [1054B] sacred symbols they contemplate. And not only these things that are outward, but intellectual things too, which shine within through pure and naked truth, they behold. But to the beholding of all these things, and to the divine cognition, they are not to be reckoned to have been brought back by the variety of sacred-writing theory — that is, by the manifold teaching of the divine Scriptures, which is necessary only for this: that the minds of men, estranged from God, may be brought back to the knowledge of truth, and, scattered through diverse things, may be gathered into one. Therefore those highest essences are not to be reckoned to have the cognition of all these things as though instructed through the teaching of the Scriptures, but rather as filled with a higher light — that is, with a more excellent cognition of every immaterial, that is spiritual, knowledge. For higher and [1054C] more worthy is the light of cognition that is poured in within through invisible inspiration than that which is possessed from without through the instruction of teaching. And so those highest essences are to be reckoned to have the cognition of things visible and invisible, inasmuch as they are filled with such a light; and also as replete with the contemplation of the form-making, principal, super-essential, and thrice-shining beauty. Replete, I say, as far as is lawful — that is, as is granted to the possibility of the creature. Now he signifies the divine beauty, which is form-making, because according to itself it formed all things made by itself; and is principal, because, though it is the form of all things, it itself received its form from no other; and is super-essential, because it not only goes before through [1054D] form, in that it is the exemplar of all things, but also transcends through essence, in that it is the creatress of all things.

There follows: « And of the thrice-shining » — namely beauty — « they are to be reckoned replete with the contemplation. » By 'thrice-shining beauty' he signifies that same divine beauty, which shines in three, though it itself is not triple, but one: Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons; but God is one, the Godhead one, the nature one, the essence one, the beauty one. You see the Father: you see that shining beauty in the Father; you see the Son: you see that shining beauty in the Son; you see the Holy Spirit: you see that shining beauty in the Holy Spirit. So it, as it were, shines thrice, because it shines in three, [1055A] though it itself is not triple; but it is one that shines. The Father is another in person: there it shines. The Son is another in person: there it shines. The Holy Spirit is another in person: there it shines. And yet, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, as the Godhead is one and the nature one, so the beauty is one. Therefore, he says, « they are to be reckoned replete with the contemplation of the thrice-shining beauty. » What wonder, then, is it if those highest essences perfectly know the divine works, visible and invisible — they who are full of the contemplation of the Creator himself, as far, namely, as is possible for a creature.

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

There follows: « And likewise made worthy by the communion of Jesus, » — supply: they are to be reckoned. Note [1055B] that there is a compound there, « made-worthy, » that is, made worthy. Not only, he says, did they merit to receive the contemplation and cognition of the divinity, but they were also made worthy — by the communion of that salvation which was accomplished in the humanity of Jesus, both by knowing and by participating. For they had communion with Jesus: the mystery of his incarnation — both by foretelling it before it came to pass, and by ministering when it came to pass, and, after it was accomplished, by rejoicing together with man, restored to eternity, in the same fellowship of blessedness. Afterward he adds, showing that they receive the divine contemplation without any figures, illumined immediately by the divinity itself. For just as above he demonstrated that they read and draw the cognition of all things visible and invisible not through outward teaching, [1055C] but through the inner [teaching] in the very wisdom of God; so now he demonstrates that they receive that same divine contemplation not through any intervening forms or images, but from the divinity itself, in the first place, immediately, nakedly, and purely. « They do not, he says, figure the deiform likeness formatively in sacredly-fashioned images; but rather they figure it as truly drawing near to it, » namely to the deiform likeness, or to the divinity, « drawing near, » I say, in the first participation of the knowledge « of his deiform lights, » that is, of his deifying illuminations. The deiform likeness is the divine contemplation itself; because, while, illumined through it, they are shining, they in a certain manner receive the likeness of the illuminating light itself. But in this [1055D] deiform likeness they do not figure themselves, nor do they acquire it for themselves through any sacred images formed and fashioned — that is, composed for the demonstration of spiritual things; as do men, who through visible and material demonstrations in the sacred discourse are instructed unto the cognition of invisible things. Therefore those highest essences are not illumined with the divine contemplation by means of such things. But, as truly drawing near to it — that is, drawing near to truth itself not through another, but through truth itself, since between them and truth there is nothing in between; and therefore they are drawing near in the first participation of knowledge, because in the first place they participate the knowledge of his deiform lights; because immediately they contemplate, and know, and recognize his deiform — that is, deifying — lights; [1056A] because those illumined by them through the divine likeness they in a certain manner make gods.

There follows: « And because what is like to God has been substantially bestowed on them. » For this reason too, he says, they are truly, and in the first participation, drawing near to the Divinity itself; because what is like to God has been bestowed on them — that is, because the likeness of God has been substantially bestowed on them. For that they are like to God they have not from another, or through another; but because they receive the divinity itself substantially, nakedly, and purely. Or, what is like to God has been bestowed on them most subordinately, because in the nearest place they are subordinate, so that they receive the likeness of God itself by first participation.

There follows: « They communicate in this manner, as is possible, in his pre-operative power, in his deiform and [1056B] human virtues. » He concludes what was said above. For because they are replete in this manner — that is, those highest essences [are replete] with the contemplation of the principal beauty — therefore they communicate in the deiform virtues; and because they are made worthy by the communion of Jesus, therefore they communicate in the human virtues; and because they participate in the first and nearest place, therefore they communicate in the pre-operative power of God, which, namely, first operates in them, and afterward operates through them. Or he calls 'the human virtues of Jesus' his virtues [shown] from his humanity — that is, shown from clemency or kindness; so that the sense is: Since, just as they communicate in his virtues in the contemplation of his majesty, so also they communicate in the co-operation of his kindness. They communicate with him through contemplation in his majesty; they communicate [1056C] with him through the ministry of co-operation in our redemption. Thus, therefore, they communicate in his deiform and human virtues; and this is as far as is possible for them, according to the measure of grace given. Thus far it has been said concerning their illumination. Now, in the third place, he adds concerning perfection.

There follows: « And likewise perfect, not as illumined unto analytic knowledge by the sacred variety, but as filled with the first and supereminent deification, according to the most excellent knowledge — as far as [is possible] in angels — of the divine works. » As if he said: Not only are they to be reckoned pure and illumined; but also perfect in the knowledge received from the habit of virtue, yet not as illumined, or instructed [1056D] [in] analytic knowledge or discipline — that is, resolutory — by the sacred variety, that is, by the manifold sacred teaching of Scripture. For they are not, like men, instructed outwardly by the multiplicity of speech, so that for them, through disputations and distinctions, the things that are hidden and intricate are resolved in knowledge and discipline; but rather they receive to be illumined through simple contemplation within, so that from their cognition nothing of the things that can be known is hidden. Thus, therefore, they are to be reckoned to be perfect, not as illumined unto a resolutive and explicable knowledge through the variety of the sacred discourse; but as filled with the first and supereminent deification — that is, with the divine illumination by which they are illumined before all the other celestial essences, according to the knowledge of the divine works, [1057A] a most excellent knowledge, as far, namely, as it can be excellent in angels.

« For not through other holy essences, but sanctified by the Divinity itself, they are extended immediately into it; they are placed, with a virtue and order supereminent above all, unto an altogether most chaste fortitude, and are led into the contemplation of the immaterial and invisible beauty, as far as is lawful; and unto the knowable reasons of the divine works, as the first essences and [those] around God, they are bent, and by the very Prince of perfection are most exaltedly sanctified. » He proves in sum that those essences receive the divine illumination before all others, and above all other celestial essences; because, not through other holy essences, but sanctified by the Divinity itself, they are extended immediately into it through love and [1057B] exaltation, according to the virtue and order — that is, the grace and dignity — which they have supereminent above all. And so, thus immediately joined to the Divinity, they receive from it alone both purgation, and illumination, and perfection — this is what he says: they are placed, that is, established, unto an altogether most chaste fortitude, or inflexibility — that is, a strong and inflexible and incorruptible chastity. They are also led, through illumination, as far as is lawful — that is, as is permitted or granted — into contemplation, unto the contemplating of the immaterial and invisible beauty of the Creator. They are also bent, as into soft wax, or informed, or instructed, or even perfected unto the knowable reasons of the divine works, as the first essences [1057C] and [those] standing in the nearest place around God, and which are most exaltedly sanctified by the very Prince of perfection — namely the Divinity.

There follows: « This, therefore, the theologians also openly declare: that the subordinate dispositions of the celestial essences are indeed instructed in the deiform sciences by those set over them in an ordered way; but that those higher than all are illumined unto teaching by the Divinity itself, as far as is lawful. » By authority he proves what he had said: namely, that the supreme orders of angels are illumined by the Divinity alone; but that the lower are instructed by the higher. For this the theologians — that is, the prophets, and those holy men who spoke about celestial and divine things — openly declare: that the subordinate dispositions — that is, the lower orders of the celestial essences — [1057D] are instructed in an ordered way, that is, beautifully and fittingly, unto the deiform sciences, by those set over them, that is, by the orders placed above; but that those which are higher than all are illumined unto teaching by the Divinity itself, as far as is lawful — that is, as is possible for them.

There follows: « For some of them they introduce as sacredly instructed by those before them, that the Lord of the celestial powers, and the King of glory, has been received into the heavens according to his humanity. » He sets forth an example where the lower celestial essences were instructed by the higher: namely, where the theologians introduce some of them as instructed by those before them, or by the higher, so that they might know that God, the Lord of the celestial powers, and the King of glory, was received into the heavens according to his humanity. For thus [1058A] it is written that, when the Savior, according to the flesh he had taken, was ascending into heaven, some of the angels, still ignorant of the exaltation of his humanity, and therefore marveling, and saying: « Who is this King of glory? » it was said by others, more fully illumined: The Lord of powers, he himself is the King of glory. » [n: (Psal. XXIII.)] In which it is proved that at times some are instructed by others.

There follows: « But some [they introduce as] inquiring of Jesus himself, and learning the knowledge of his divine action [performed] for us; and [they introduce] Jesus himself as immediately teaching them, and, bestowing it beforehand upon them, manifesting his human kindness. For I, he says, dispute justice, and the judgment of salvation. » This example is taken from Isaiah, to prove that the supreme orders [1058B] of angels are illumined by God alone unto the knowledge of truth. But some celestial essences alone the theologians themselves introduce as inquiring — that is, making inquiry of Jesus himself; and learning, not from another, but from him who is God, the knowledge of his divine action displayed for us. By the divine action of Jesus himself he means the passion and death which he underwent for us. Which action is therefore called divine, because it was possible for God alone that, through death, he should destroy the power of death. The knowledge of this action, then, they introduce the celestial essences inquiring of Jesus himself, where, beholding the garment of the assumed flesh made bloody with the blood of the passion, they say: « Who is this that comes from Edom, with dyed garments from Bosra? [n: (Isai. LXIII.)] » And thereafter: « Why [1058C] then is thy garment red, and thy raiment like theirs that tread in the winepress? [n: (ibid.)] » Thus, therefore, they introduce them as inquiring and desiring to learn. They also introduce Jesus himself as teaching them immediately, and through his very self, and manifesting to them his human — that is, clement — kindness, which he displayed to us. Which manifestation he confers on them, bestowing it beforehand — that is, granting before all others the knowledge of his operation. « I, » he says, « dispute justice, and the judgment of salvation [n: (ibid.)]. » Justice and the judgment of salvation — that is, of the Savior, or of salvation — signifies the redemption of the human race. In which there was both justice, inasmuch, namely, as the Maker called back his own creature from an alien domination; [1058D] and judgment, inasmuch as he powerfully cast out the devil, the invader of another's right, from the man whom he possessed. And he says that he disputes this justice and judgment for this reason: because that [work] which pertained to the sufferings of the assumed flesh he fulfilled with labor, and as it were with a certain struggle.

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

There follows: « But I marvel that even the first of the celestial essences, and [those] alone at once supereminent above all in the divine illuminations, seek questions reverently, as though mediated. » This looks back to what is said, that the highest essences are immediately illumined and instructed by God; for the contrary seems to be the case, that in this passage they are found inquiring not only of their superior, but also of one another, and as it were wishing to learn. But it must be known that this questioning is not [1059A] an inquiry after teaching, but a profession of ignorance. For they question, showing that they do not know, and that they have need to be taught. But where all question, they assuredly show that they ought to be taught from elsewhere. They question, therefore, among themselves, [being] to be taught from above themselves. Because so mutual a questioning seems to be an inquiry of teaching and knowledge from one another, whereas it is established that they are instructed by their superior alone, therefore he says: I marvel that those first and principal of the celestial essences — that is, among the celestial essences, and so far supereminent above all the other celestial essences at once in the divine illuminations — I marvel, I say, that they seek questions, that is, that they make questions seeking knowledge, reverently, that is, humbly like the humble and lower, and as though not attending to the excellence of their own illumination; and [1059B] this is what he says, « as mediated, » that is, like those who have something in between themselves and God, and need to be instructed by others; or 'as mediated,' because they are not truly mediated, since they make no question to others; nor yet truly immediate, since they refer their question not to their own principle, but to one another.

There follows: « For indeed they do not thence ask: Why thy red garments? » He proves that they truly make their question 'as mediated,' because they direct their words not first to Jesus himself, but to one another, saying: « Who is this that comes from Edom, with dyed garments from Bosra? » For they do not, he says, thence ask — that is, they do not begin their questioning from him — 'Why thy red garments?' where they would direct their speech immediately to Jesus himself; [1059C] but first among themselves, as though mediately: « Who is this, » and the rest. Whence it is a marvel that those supreme essences, though they are first, and nearest to the Divinity, make their questions as though mediated.

There follows: « But among themselves they deliberate before asking, showing that they learn, and seek the deiform knowledge. » He now resolves the question, namely why those highest essences, though they are nearest to God, make their question among themselves; namely, because among themselves they deliberate about asking, lest perhaps by too eager a questioning they leap ahead of, or anticipate, that illumination which comes to be in them through the divine procession — that is, through the divine grace [1059D] proceeding to illumine them; showing also, by the very deliberation of their questioning, that they seek the deiform knowledge. For in that they ask, they signify that they seek knowledge; but in that they first confer among themselves, questioning and deliberating, they demonstrate that they do not dare to anticipate the divine procession into themselves.

For this is what follows: « But not leaping ahead of the illumination implanted through the divine procession. » For they seek knowledge, and therefore they ask, but not leaping ahead of the divine illumination, until it offers itself, proceeding of its own accord into them; therefore they deliberate among themselves, and do not first dare to question Jesus until he himself offers himself, saying: « I am he who speaks justice. » Then at last, [1060A] having taken confidence, they direct their question to him: « Why is thy raiment red, and thy garment like theirs that tread in the winepress? »

There follows: « Is not, then, the first hierarchy of the celestial intellects, sanctified by the very Prince of perfection in that it is extended immediately into it, purged, and illumined, and perfected — with a most holy purgation, with much light, with a fore-perfected consummation filling it proportionally? » The sense is this: Is not, then — 'num' for 'nonne' — the first hierarchy of the celestial intellects purged, and illumined, and perfected? Sanctified by the very Prince of perfection — that is, by the divinity itself, which is the prince and principle of all sanctification. Sanctified, I say, in that the divinity itself is extended immediately into it, [1060B] illuminating, or irradiating, or filling it proportionally — that is, by a participation differing from the illumination of the rest — with a most holy purgation, and with much light, and with a fore-perfected — that is, super-excellent — consummation or perfection. « It is purged, » I say, and « illumined, and perfected, that it may be pure from all lessening or imperfection, and full of the first light, » that is, of the [light] shining into it first before the others; and that it may be « perfect, participating the perfect knowledge and cognition first given to it. » But when he says « sanctified » — or, as perhaps it is more fittingly, though less usually, translated, 'made pontiff' by the very Prince of purgation — he signifies, as we said, the divinity itself, which in Greek is called teletarchia, that is, the prince of purgation, or [1060C] of sanctification.

There follows: « But, comprehending, this too I would perhaps not undeservedly have said. » As though it were asked what this purgation is, he answers that the taking-up of the divine knowledge in the rational soul is both purgation, and illumination, and perfection. Purgation, because it purges ignorance; illumination, because it illumines with divine cognition; perfection, because, by illuminating, it consummates by the knowledge of perfect teachings, or disciplines, according to the illumined habit — this is what he says: « Comprehending, » that is, briefly gathering into one the things said above; this too I would perhaps not undeservedly have said, that the taking-up of the divine knowledge is both purgation, and illumination, and perfection. [1060D] And he gives the reason why it is called purgation, and illumination, and perfection. « Purging, indeed, ignorance, inasmuch as the knowledge of perfect teachings is implanted according to order. » For this reason it is called purgation, inasmuch as it purges ignorance by implanted knowledge — that is, through the implanted knowledge of perfect teachings. Implanted, I say, according to order — that is, according to what the dignity and excellence of each order demands. « But illuminating by that very divine cognition, through which it also purges [the hierarchy] that does not contemplate beforehand. » For this reason it is called illumination, because it illumines each hierarchy with divine cognition, through which divine cognition, namely, it also purges that hierarchy. The hierarchy, I say, that does not contemplate before it is purged, as it is written: [1061A] « Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God [n: (Matth. V)]. »

There follows: « Which it manifests through a higher illumination, and again perfecting, by that very light, according to habit, with the knowledge of the most lucid teachings. » Which hierarchy, namely, the very taking-up of the divine knowledge manifests through a higher illumination. For in this it declares it to be higher than all the rest: that it illuminates it with a higher and more excellent light of divine cognition.

There follows: « And again perfecting, by that very light, according to habit, with the knowledge of the most lucid teachings. » He does not distinguish illumination and perfection clearly enough, in that he seems to assign both to cognition and knowledge. Yet this [1061B] is the difference: that illumination properly pertains to that cognition which builds up knowledge; but perfection to that cognition which shows the form of good morals and the habit of the virtues. For there are certain things which are investigated only for the cognition of understanding; but certain things pertain especially to the understanding of doing. For the former, illumination is necessary; for the latter, perfection. For the cognition of truth does not make [a man] perfect, unless the habit of virtue follows. Therefore he calls 'most lucid teaching' that which consists in the habit of virtue, because experience is the mistress of understanding; and he knows virtue best who has learned it not by hearing alone, but also by tasting and by doing. In the experience and habit of virtue, the cognition of truth is perfected, which is begun in the illumination [1061C] of understanding alone. All of which, because it is acquired through the taking-up of the divine knowledge, is therefore fittingly called both purgation, and illumination, and perfection.

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

There follows: « This, therefore, as far as regards our knowledge, is the first disposition of the celestial essences, standing in the encircling of God, and around God, immediately, and simply, and incessantly encircling his eternal knowledge, according to a most excellent — as far as [is possible] in angels — ever-mobile placement. » He infers from what was said above. As if he said: Since that hierarchy of the highest spirits is first and principally both purged, and illumined, and perfected by the Divinity itself; therefore it is the first and principal [1061D] disposition, or the principal order, of the celestial essences, standing immediately, both in the encircling of, and around, God. For it stands through the immutability of contemplation; but it encircles through the life-giving and unceasing desire of eternal love. Therefore incessantly, because it does not fail from love; therefore simply, because, encircling, it does not withdraw from unity. That unity in the midst is the simplicity of the Divinity, around which and in the encircling of which they are, inasmuch as they immediately draw near to it. In the encircling too, because to his ineffable and hidden incomprehensibility they too are in a certain manner outside, into which they do not at all penetrate. Yet they go about it and desire it; and they strive toward the inner things; and, drawing near by cognition and by love, they become nearest, according to the most excellent placement which [1062A] they have beside God; most excellent, I say, as far as [is possible] in angels — that is, in comparison with that [placement] which is found in all the other angels. And I call the placement 'ever-mobile,' because both by contemplation they do not withdraw, and by desire they ever draw near. For all these reasons, then, this disposition is principal among all the other celestial essences; principal, I say, as far as regards our knowledge — namely, as far as it can be comprehended through our knowledge. He further adds, in praise of this hierarchy, one thing after another, heaping up many lofty and sublime things worthy of divine wonder, and certain profound things, and [things] known only to the pure. Such, he says, is that disposition, or order, of the first hierarchy — nearest in placement, most ardent in desire and intention; [1062B] which, although it cannot penetrate to the whole of what belongs to God, [which is] incomprehensible, yet with eternal love does not cease to go about [it] as far as it can be grasped and comprehended by a creature. But lest perhaps it should seem a pursuit of toil, not of happiness, if it were always to go about [it] and never attain [it], always to seek and never to grasp, always to desire and never to taste, he adds the fruit of the inquiry and the effect of the desire, saying: « Seeing indeed many and blessed contemplations purely, and simple and immediate splendors, illumined, and filled with divine nourishment. [Filled] with many things, indeed, by the first given outpouring, and by the unity — sole, domestic, and unifying — of the divine refreshment; and made worthy by much communion with God, and co-operation with him, unto that [likeness], as is possible, by the likeness of good dispositions [1062C] and actions; and knowing many of the divine things super-positively, and made a partaker, according to what is lawful, of the divine knowledge and cognition. » He said, as best he could say it: Three stand about the Trinity — the Seraphim by love, the Cherubim by cognition, the Thrones by domination. Here is the whole Trinity. Domination in the Father, wisdom in the Son, love in the Holy Spirit. It seemed that he had set the Seraphim above, because charity is supereminent; but behold, we also see that the throne belongs to the Father, and the Thrones are joined with the Father, and love is given to the Holy Spirit. If you think the Thrones subordinate, because they are named after the Seraphim and Cherubim, then think them also set above, because they pertain to the Father, who is named before the Son and the Holy Spirit. But in [1062D] the Trinity there is no degree. Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit is one God. Unity cannot be lower than itself. Therefore that hierarchy of the highest spirits, which is formed first and principally by the highest and supereminent domination of the Divinity, as far as concerns the most excellent likeness by which it imitates the simple unity, has no degree in domination — although, nevertheless, according to that measure of participation and distribution of grace (by which a creature cannot be made equal to the Creator) it has a difference. Therefore the domination of the three is one, by which they are universally set before all things subordinate — after the supreme and supereminent domination of the Deity — [but] are not subordinated to one another. Therefore they all together hold the first place, and they stand about [him], [1063A] each in the nearest placement, so that one does not come between another by position, nor anticipate [another] by participation, nor surpass [another] by domination. Thus is this first disposition, standing in the encircling of God, and around God, immediately — thus properly. And what is the fruit of so great a familiarity?

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

Hear what follows: « Seeing indeed many and blessed contemplations purely, and simple and immediate splendors, illumined, and filled with divine nourishment. » Do not, then, marvel if they go about [it] thus, and do not suffer themselves to be drawn far off. There is something there that draws [them]; and what is this? You are waiting for it to be said what that is which so incites the affection of those who desire, and provokes their love. But how do you think it will be told by us, which is not penetrated by them? They themselves have not yet entered, but [1063B] stand in the encircling; and it is a great thing for them to draw near to it, that they may see, and touch, and taste, and experience what the sweetness of the good is — [the good] set forth to its lovers without obstacle; yet they neither enter nor penetrate so as to comprehend it, and to grasp even to the whole how great is the immensity of the hidden. How, then, do you think to set it forth outwardly, from which even those who are within remain outside? That good, then, cannot be told by us — [the good] which holds those blessed spirits immovable beside itself through the joy of eternal contemplation, that they may not flow away toward perishable things; and again, moving [them] by desire, draws them to itself, that they may seek it with unceasing love. But lest that be altogether passed over in silence which cannot be told at all, hear what it is that both holds them beside itself and draws them to itself. A certain good, and great above [1063C] all those goods that you know, quite other — not only in difference, but in supereminence; yet, that it may be conveyed to you and made known according to these goods that you know, as far as can be, let us say: that good is light and sweetness. Why light? Because it makes the eyes grow bright. Why sweetness? Because it refreshes. These are two great goods among us, and no others are found greater than these, nor any that work more toward our joy or our happiness: light and sweetness. The one is for illumination, the other for refreshment. If you are illumined and not satisfied, it is a great good, but not a full one. If you are satisfied and not illumined, it is again a great good, but not a perfect one. Refreshment makes pleasant what is within; illumination [1063D] presents as pleasant what is without; both are required for full joy. For if you are refreshed in the one and afflicted in the other, the gladness is not perfect, to which sadness is mixed. Seek, therefore, refreshment, that what is in you may be pleasant to you; seek also illumination, that what is outside you may be pleasant to you. Refreshment indeed would seem to be more necessary, just as the good which is in you is more properly your own than the good which is outside you. Nevertheless, how much pleasantness does the illumination of contemplation add? Sweet is the light, and delightful for the eyes to see the sun. Behold this world, which offers many spectacles of pleasantness? And all these things were made through the wisdom of God. All that you see went forth from there, where is the reason and cause of all things. If, then, it is so beautiful [1064A] to see the disposition and form of the work, how pleasant and delightful do you think it is to contemplate the wisdom of the craftsman? But do not think, because it is named one wisdom, [that it offers] a certain solitary and wearisome contemplation to those who see it: it is one, but not one in that way. For how do you think the wisdom of God is one? Perhaps as you call one essence, one species and one form, one place and one time: all these are one in number. What is [it] to be one in number? By distinction. What is [it] to be one in number? By smallness. What is [it] to be one in number? By imperfection. For thus you number this and that. For when you number, you say this and not that. What, therefore, is numbered by unity is separated by unity; and by that same unity it is proved to be diminished from all those from which it is shown, [1064B] by that very unity, to be distinct. Do you think the wisdom of God to be one in that way? Then you number it, and say, rightly, this and not that. If, then, it is [this] and not that, then it is not the whole; and there is something outside it which is not in it. If the whole is in it, it is the whole; how do you say [that] it is this and not that? Do not, then, number. Scripture tells you: « His wisdom is not number. All things that are from it were made in number, and weight, and measure. But it itself is not under number; » in which there is true unity without smallness, and universality without multiplicity; nor is it under weight, [being] inestimable; nor under measure, [being] incomprehensible. What, then, do you think it is to see the wisdom of God? When you see this world, how many things do you see in them? And all [1064C] this comes from there; and the whole is there, where the wisdom of God is. And why do I say 'all this'? For it would be too little a thing, were there in the wisdom of God nothing else [but this]. If God understands his own work, and does not understand himself, what wisdom is that? For what God is is more than what is made by God. If, then, he knows what he made, and does not know what he himself who made [it] is, he is ignorant of what is greater, and there is not perfect wisdom in him. If your heart can grasp and comprehend the things that you do and that you unfold in work — you dispose all things by reason dictating within, and all that you are about to do you first conceive in reason; and when they go forth into work, they do not withdraw from reason — how can it be that in the eternal reason of the Founder there is not everything [1064D] that has been made? Again, if it is a small thing for a rational soul to see and comprehend the things that are outside, unless it contemplate those things that are within — [things] far greater and more wonderful — and recognizes that what it itself is is greater than everything that is outside it: [then] the eternal craftsman cannot, in that wisdom by which he sees all that he himself made, be ignorant of what is greater than all things — which is he himself who made [them]. Consider, then, what that wisdom is, in which are all things that have been made, and — beyond all things and above all things — that which is greater than all things: he by whom all things were made. What kind of form do you think that is, in which there is such great beauty? When, therefore, you hear the wisdom of God named, think of all this: all this is in it; and to see it is to see all this. In it are seen all things that have been made; [1065A] and in it is seen he by whom all things were made. Therefore those highest spirits, who through the excellence of supereminent grace draw near immediately, are illumined by it to contemplate it, and in the contemplation of it they see both what was made through it, and what is in it, and him who through it made [all things], in whom it [itself] is. These, then, are the contemplations which the first hierarchy sees purely, immediately illumined unto the simple splendors — which contemplations are both many, inasmuch as all things are seen there; and blessed, because, with all things, he too who made all things is seen. For what is seen in him is not seen apart from him, because that which is seen is one, which is he himself; and in that one all things are seen, in which all things are one and one is all things. See how [1065B] many are the contemplations, where nothing of all things is hidden; how blessed the contemplations, where in the highest good all things are seen; where to see and to have, to love and to taste the good, is the same; where nothing is seen but truth, nothing is loved but goodness. For there are two things: cognition and love. The one pertains to illumination; the other to refreshment. Cognition illumines, love satisfies. Cognition of truth, love of goodness: in these blessedness consists — to know and to love the good. « Taste, says Scripture, and see, for the Lord is sweet [n: (Psal. XXXIII)]. » In « taste » is love; in « see » is cognition. These two he commends distinctly, namely cognition and love. « Seeing indeed many and blessed contemplations purely, and simple and immediate splendors, [1065C] illumined. » This has been said concerning illumination and cognition.

There follows: « Filled with divine nourishment. [Filled] with many things, indeed, by the first given outpouring, and by the unity — sole, domestic, and unifying — of the divine refreshment. » This has been said concerning love and refreshment. He commends both in many ways. First, cognition, in the many and blessed contemplations seen purely through the illumination of the simple splendors. What are the simple splendors? Pure illuminations. Through pure illuminations one comes to pure contemplations. Pure illumination is when the truth is conceived through itself; pure contemplation is when the truth is seen in itself. When the truth is learned through an underlying image or figure, [1065D] it is not pure illumination; when the truth is known in an underlying image or figure, it is not pure contemplation. For there can be neither simplicity except where there is [only] the one thing, nor purity except where there is the true. Simplicity in the one alone; purity in the true. Therefore those who contemplate immediately, and draw near to the truth through themselves, alone have simple illuminations and pure contemplations.

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

There follows: « Filled with divine nourishment. » What is the divine nourishment? The divine refreshment. And this refreshment, what is it but the love of God? Therefore, when he had said, « that surpassing angelic ordering filled with divine nourishment, » he added also, saying: « filled with the unity of the divine refreshment. » But what is the divine refreshment, if not the divine nourishment? [1066A] Therefore the unity of refreshment and the unity of nourishment is one refreshment and one nourishment. Therefore at the table of God only one dish is set. But do not despise it. The satiety is great. « I shall be satisfied, » says the Psalmist, « when thy glory shall appear [n: (Psal. XVI)]. » There are many things in this world, and all these cannot satisfy the heart of man. But there is one good with God, and when this alone is received, satiety is found. Therefore satiety is not in multitude, but in unity. When is there satiety? When the satiety is enough. Suppose now that of these many things which are in the world you have some few that you love, and you will see that it is not enough. Let more come: still you will not say, it is enough. Let all things be set before you; and you will find yourself still in need, and not yet having enough. In all these things, therefore, there [1066B] can be no satiety, where there can be no enough. But that one good will come; and there will be satiety, because there will be enough. Do not wonder. All these are many, but they are not much. That is one, and it is much. Therefore that sinful woman, because she had many things to be forgiven, loved not many things but much. She let go many things, and chose much. She was wise; she did not regard the heap, but weighed the value. In many things, little; in one thing, much. Therefore do not attend [sic: *atttendas*] to the number, but seek the fruit. There is one good, which God has prepared for you. Do not be afraid when you hear "one"; it is one good, but in that good is every good. He has prepared one refreshment, one food, one dish, one bread — but do not despise it. Hear what is written: « Having every taste, and [1066C] every delight of sweetness [n: (Sap. XV)]. » This is the divine nourishment, and the great outpouring, or abundant effusion, by which outpouring, namely, that blessed society, granted the first place, is filled. There is also the unity of the divine refreshment, by which unity alone — that is, singular and domestic and unifying — it has been made specially worthy. But this one and simple divine refreshment is called singular for this reason, that it is not received with any foreign delight or outside sweetness; domestic, because it is prepared only for friends and members of the household; unifying, because it makes one with itself all those to whom it grants itself to be taken and shared.

There follows: « And by much communion with God and cooperation: » — understood, the ordering is filled, or the [1066D] first hierarchy of the celestial essences. This, I say, has been made worthy of that communion and cooperation with God, as far as is possible for it; by the likeness of good dispositions, that is, of virtues and actions. For by good dispositions it has been made worthy of communion; by good actions, worthy of cooperation. And the order is right. First it is illumined by the brightness of knowledge; then it is refreshed by the sweetness of love, so that thus it may both commune with God in virtue and cooperate in action, as it is written: « If any one love me, he will keep my word; and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our abode with him [n: (Joan. XIV)]. »

There follows: « And knowing many divine things in a supereminent way, and made a partaker of divine knowledge and cognition, [1067A] according to what is lawful. » That is, this hierarchy knows many of the divine things, that is, many things concerning the divine, or concerning God, in a supereminent way, that is, more excellently than the other hierarchies « and it has been made in participation, » that is, it has been made a partaker of divine knowledge and of divine cognition, according to what is lawful for it, that is, granted to it.

There follows: « Therefore theology has handed down its praises also to those who are on earth, in which the eminence of its most exalted illumination is wondrously made manifest. » As if he said: Because so great is the excellence of the hierarchy of the first essences, therefore theology, that is Holy Scripture, has handed down to those who are on earth, that is, to men, its praises or laudations. In which laudations, namely, [1067B] the eminence of its most exalted illumination is wondrously made manifest. As if he said: Because so great is its sublimity, therefore theology has made manifest to men its laudations, by which it praises God, so that through the excellence of the laudation the eminence of the illumination might be made manifest.

There follows: « For some of it, speaking perceptibly, resound like the voice of waters: Blessed be the glory of the Lord from his place. » As if he said: Truly excellent are the laudations of this hierarchy, which are made manifest by Holy Scripture, because some of it, that is certain of them, sounding perceptibly resound, or re-echo, or cry out like the voice of waters: Blessed be the glory of the Lord from his place. Or it can be read thus. Theology has handed down its praises perceptibly, that is, [1067C] by the likeness of sensible and corporeal things, speaking of spiritual things, namely that « some of it. » That is, of its number « resound like the voice of waters. Blessed be the glory of the Lord from his place. » This testimony is taken from Ezekiel, where the prophet records a voice of great commotion made behind him. Which voice, although it is not said there by whom it was uttered, yet this author testifies without ambiguity that it was made by the highest spirits of the celestial orders.

There follows: « But others cry back that most laudable and most holy theology: Holy, holy, holy: the Lord God of Sabaoth. All the earth is full of his glory [n: (Isa. VI)]. » This testimony is taken from Isaiah, where two seraphim, flying, are recorded to have proclaimed this theology, that is, this divine address or laudation, one to [1067D] another, back and forth.

There follows: « But these most exalted hymnologies of the celestial minds we have already, indeed, opened up as far as possible in those things which concern the divine praises. And it has been said of these, in those places, sufficiently as far as we are concerned. » These aforesaid hymnologies, that is, the divine laudations of the celestial minds, that is, of the celestial spirits, he says that he has opened up, or expounded, as far as was possible for him, in other writings, which were made by him concerning the divine praises; and concerning these hymnologies, namely, he testifies that it has been said sufficiently in those (understood) writings, as far as pertained to him, that is, to his capacity. But this [1068A] writing, which he asserts that he made concerning the divine praises, is nowhere found among these his writings which are with us. Yet from this statement we can know that he wrote concerning the divine praises, since in the book *On the Divine Names* he introduced certain things from the amatory hymns of Saint Hierotheus, in which something of the aforesaid praises is treated.

There follows: « Of which it suffices, for a reminder, to say only this much according to the present occasion: that this first ordering has been illumined in theological knowledge, as far as is lawful, by the divine goodness, through which, as a deiform hierarchy, it then handed itself down to others also. » As if he said: Of which, namely of the divine praises sufficiently [1068B] expounded in the aforementioned book, now, according to the present occasion, it suffices to say only this much for a reminder or admonition, namely that this first ordering, that is, the first hierarchy of angels, has been illumined in theological, that is divine, knowledge by the divine goodness itself. Note the construction in that he says, "illumined knowledge." For it is said thus: But I am instructed, I am taught a discipline. He says, therefore, that the first ordering has been illumined unto knowledge by the divine goodness alone; through which knowledge, namely, this ordering handed down itself; then, that is, consequently, to the other hierarchies following after it. « It handed down, » I say, « itself as a deiform hierarchy, » that is, having conformity and likeness to God, and imitating God in this, that, being illumined by him, [1068C] it illumines others, and sets forth itself, as it were, as a form and exemplar of divine conformity. This, therefore, now suffices to say concerning the aforesaid praises: that in them the first ordering of angels, praising its Creator, handed down itself as a form of praising to the other hierarchies following after, « introducing, » that is, suggesting to them, or insinuating, « that by speaking briefly. » For it introduced, or suggested, as it were something hidden, and manifest to few. And it suggested by speaking briefly the other thing which it suggested. And rightly was that suggested only in a hidden way which was invisible, and that spoken only briefly which was ineffable. For however much it were expounded unto knowledge, that would remain hidden which was impenetrable; [1068D] and however much it were extended through speech, it would be brief in relation to it, which was without end. Yet it suggested, and insinuated, and expounded, so that through it there might come to the knowledge of others that which it itself had perceived with no intermediary. What did it suggest?

## BOOK SEVEN. *Exposition of the remaining part of the seventh chapter of the divine Dionysius the Areopagite on the celestial hierarchy, the text of which has been set out above.* (cont.)

Hear: « That most holy, and supremely blessed, and altogether blessed divinity, it is lawful that it be blessed by those receiving God, as far as it is possible for it to be known and praised by the intellects. For they are, as it were, deiform divine places, of the divine repose, as the oracles say. » He expounds the aforementioned testimony taken from Ezekiel. « Blessed be the glory of the Lord from his place. » This first hierarchy, he says, crying out, « Blessed be the glory of the Lord from his [1069A] place, » teaches that it is lawful — that is, just, or due, or worthy — that this most holy and supremely blessed and altogether blessed divinity be blessed by the intellects that receive God, and blessed to just such a degree as it is possible for it to be known and praised. It is just, he says, that this divinity, which is in itself ever most holy — ready, namely, to bestow, and not needing to receive — and which is supremely blessed, and altogether, or most strongly, blessed, that is, whose glory in itself is so great that it can neither be increased by another's benefit nor be further commended by another's praise. It is lawful, he says, that although it be in itself so perfect that it needs not to be blessed or praised, yet that the intellects — that is, rational hearts — should bless and praise it, as far, namely, as they can know it [1069B] and praise it according to the knowledge received. For although his glory be perfect of itself, yet we ought not to cease from blessing and praising him: we who, even if by blessing and praising we add no perfection to him, are nevertheless perfected by him. Or what he says can be understood otherwise: that it is just that the divinity, which is in itself supremely blessed, be blessed by the intellects that receive God. As if he said: Although the praise of God be in itself supremely perfect, yet this is by right assigned to his praise, that through grace he deigns to inhabit the hearts made by him. Thus, then, it is just that the divinity, in itself supremely blessed, be blessed also for this, and be blessed, that it offers itself to be received by the minds to be beatified, and deigns to inhabit them as its own [1069C] place. For it does not so dwell in them as though seeking a support, and as though about to fall if it had no prop. For God does not seek a place for himself, as though he could not exist unless he were contained; but he seeks, as it were, a receptacle into which to pour himself: which certainly could not be blessed, unless it were filled by him. Therefore it is added, above all his praise, that he who is supremely blessed in himself makes others blessed from himself. Let him be blessed by them, let him be blessed also for them. Let him be blessed by them, in so far as he is revealed to them to be known and praised; let him be blessed for them, in so far as he is made manifest in them.

There follows: « For they are, as it were, deiform divine places, of the divine repose, as the oracles say. » He gives the reason why, from that which has been said, « Blessed be the [1069D] glory of the Lord from his place, » he understands it to be signified that the glory ought to be blessed by the intellects that receive God: because, he says, these intellects that receive God, they themselves are the divine places. For "Theodocos" is said in Greek, that is, "receiver of God." By which name every pure mind, whether human or angelic, can be signified. For in these two God dwells and rests. They, then, are as it were deiform divine places. He gives, as it were, the reason why they are called divine places. For the cause is the same why they are places and why they are deiform. For from the fact that they receive light, they become a place of light. And again from the very fact that they receive light, they become shining, and exist conformed to the light. They are, then, divine places, inasmuch as [1070A] they are deiform, and have the likeness of God from the God who dwells within. Again, because they are divine places, it is clear that they are places of the divine repose, because they could not be divine places at all unless they were places of repose and peace, as the oracles say: « In peace is his place made [n: (Psal. LXXV)]. »

There follows: « And that it is a monad, and a unity three substantially: and, over the celestial essences down to the uttermost parts of the earth, extending its goodness into all things that are — a providence, as the super-principal principle of all essence, and the cause, and binding all things about, superessentially, with an immeasurable containment. » This he adds concerning the exposition of what follows, which had been taken from Isaiah. As if he said: Just as that first celestial hierarchy, crying out, [1070B] « Blessed be the glory of the Lord from his place, » taught that God is to be blessed and glorified not only in himself, but also in his saints, so too, by proclaiming him thrice holy, and by adding not "lords" but "the Lord of Sabaoth," it signified that there are three persons in one Godhead — not three gods, but one God. This is what he says. And because it is a monad, and a unity three substantially, as if he said: Not only this, which was said above concerning the glory of the Lord to be blessed from his place, did this first celestial hierarchy introduce to the hierarchies following after it; but also this, that the monad and unity — that is, the divinity, which is truly one and a simple nature — is three persons substantially, that is, that the three persons are one essence or substance, and the one essence is three persons; [1070C] because God is one in essence, and three in persons. Truly, that "monad" and "unity," though they seem to be the same, are set down doubled, is done on account of the Greek: in which there are two names, "monas" and "henas": which, although they have one interpretation with us (for both sound "unity"), yet this difference seems to exist, that "monas" signifies rather that unity which is spoken of according to distinction, while "henas" signifies that which is marked according to simplicity. For everything that is simple is one. But not everything that is one is simple; since a thing is called one by collection, and one by composition, and one by likeness. All of which, because it is not the whole of what they are that is one, are not truly one, and borrow the name of unity by likeness only, not by property. [1070D] But to the divine nature, for which to be one and to be simple is the same, its whole being is truly to be one; and therefore rightly it had to be called not only "monas," but "henas" also; because its unity subsists ever in the true simplicity of the same and undivided substance. Let him say, then, that in the true Godhead the monad and unity are substantially; because, as the trinity of persons in God does not divide the unity of essence, so the unity of nature does not confound the trinity of persons. But the three are substantially one, of which three the substance is one.

There follows: « And, over the celestial essences down to the uttermost parts of the earth, extending its goodness into all things that are — a providence. » And this too, he says, [1071A] the first hierarchy insinuated to those following after it: that the true unity and supreme trinity extends, or makes to penetrate, its goodness from the supercelestial essences down to the uttermost parts of the earth, that is, from the highest things to the lowest; its goodness, I say, being a providence into all things, because it provides for all and leaves nothing foreign to itself, inasmuch as it is above the principal, or super-essential, principle of all essence, and the cause of all; because from it and unto it all things were made: and which is the binding-about of all things [1072A] — that is, the encirclement, because it binds about all things, and embraces, and contains them superessentially with an immeasurable containment, which comprehends the whole, and in it itself remains incomprehensible. Because, then, it is the principle from which all things were made, and the cause through which all things were made, and the binding-about containment in which all things subsist, therefore all the earth is full of his glory, since from that goodness all things are filled and nourished, that they may subsist in it, which were made through it.

## BOOK EIGHT.

[1071]

## TITLE OF CHAPTER VIII: *On the dominations, and the powers, and on their middle hierarchy.*

## THE TEXT.

[1071B]

*But now we must pass over into the middle ordering of the celestial intellects, exploring those dominations, as far as is possible, with supermundane eyes, and the truly powerful contemplations of the divine powers and virtues. For each appellation, among the essences above us, signifies their deiform properties, imitative of God. Therefore I judge that the manifesting naming of the holy dominations declares a certain absolute anagogy, free from all pedestrian diminishment, and in no way whatsoever universally inclined by any of the tyrannical dissimilitudes, a dominion liberally severe, set above all diminishing servitude, superior to every subjection, and remote [1071C] from every dissimilitude, and unceasingly desirous of dominion, and conforming, as far as is possible, both itself and the things that are after it, in the best and most beautiful way, to the likeness of that very virtue subsisting naturally, turned toward none of the things seen as one, but toward the properly* ὄν *universal, and made, as far as is possible for it, ever in participation of the Lordly deiformity. But that certain strong and unchangeable manliness of the holy virtues, in all their operations according to their deiformity, in no way feebly weakened toward any reception of the divine illuminations imparted to it, powerfully led back into the imitation of God, not abandoning by its own feebleness the deiform motion, but firmly bearing itself into the superessential [1071D] and power-making virtue, and made its image like to the virtue, according to what is permitted, and powerfully turned toward it indeed as toward the principal virtue: but toward the second things, giving [dans et] virtue, coming forth deiformly. But that ordination of the holy powers, equal in power to the divine dominations and virtues, well-ordered and unconfused about the divine receptions, and the ordered rank of the supermundane and intellectual power, not tyrannically [1072B] hurled down by its power-wielding virtues into the things that are lower, but powerfully led back into the divine things after the well-ordered ones, and leading back deiformly the things that are after it, and assimilated, as far as is lawful, to the power-making causal power, and revealing it, as is possible, to the angels in the ranks well-ordered through it by its power-wielding virtue. Having these deiform properties, the middle ordering of the celestial minds is indeed purged, and illumined, and perfected, as has been said, by the divine illuminations imparted to it in the second place through the first hierarchical ordering, and conveyed through that middle one by a second manifestation. And so, by the utterance passing from one angel [and] heard in another angel, we shall make a symbol of the perfection which is from afar above [all], and [1072C] hidden through the procession into the things that follow. For those wise concerning our sacred immolations say that the plenitudes of the divine things, shining through themselves, are more perfect than [those] through other contemplative participations. So too I judge that the immediate participation of the angelic orders first extended into God is more perfect than that accomplished through the mediation of the perfected. On which account, by our priestly tradition, the first intellects are named the perfective, light-bringing, and purgative virtues of the lower ones, as of those led back through them into the superessential principle of all, and made partakers of the mystical purgations, and illuminations, and perfections, according to what is lawful for them. For [sic: *Poc*] has been divinely promulgated altogether by the divine ordination: that the second things participate in the divine [1072D] illuminations through the first. And you will find this too expressed many times by the theologians. For when the divine and paternal humanity, correcting Israel nurturingly for its sacred salvation, and handing it over into correction to avenging and monstrous nations, by an all-kinds conveyance of things provided for unto the better, both dismissed the captivity and clemently led it back to its former beneficence, one of the theologians, Zachariah, saw one of the first — as I judge — and of the angels about God (for this angelic appellation is common [1073A] to all, as I said) learning from God himself concerning this the consoling, as has been said, words. But another of the subject angels coming forth to meet the first, as to the reception and perception of illumination, then instructed by him in the divine counsel as by a high priest, and turned to teach this to the theologian, namely that Jerusalem shall be fruitfully inhabited by a multitude of men [n: (Zach. I)]*. *But another of the theologians, Ezekiel [n: (Ezech. VIII)]*, *[says] that this too, he says, was most sacredly promulgated by the most glorious divinity established above the cherubim. For Israel itself, as has been said — the leader of the host, the humanity, conveying it unto the better through disciplines, divine justice being rendered to those who correct — justified the corrected. This [1073B] is taught: the first after the cherubim, girt about the loins with sapphire, who was clothed in the podere according to the hierarchic symbol. But the rest of the angels, who had axes, the divine ordination commands to be taught by the prior one concerning this divine judgment [n: (Ezech. X)]*. *For to him indeed it said to pass through the midst of Jerusalem, and to give a sign on the foreheads of the corrected men; to the others: Go out into the city after him, and strike, and spare not your eyes; but to all, upon whom the sign is, do not draw near [n: (Ezech. IX)]*. *What, perhaps, would one say of the angel saying to Daniel: The word went forth; or of that first one receiving fire from the midst of the cherubim [n: (Dan. IX)]*. *Or that [saying] of the same, which [is] more abundantly toward the showing of the angelic order, namely that [1073C] the cherub also puts fire into the hands of the one clothed in the holy stole [n: (Ezech. X)]*; *or of the one calling the most divine Gabriel, and saying to him: « Make him understand the vision [n: (Zach. I)]*; » *or whatever other things have been said by the sacred theologians concerning the deiform adornment of the celestial hierarchies. To which the ordination of our hierarchy, assimilated as far as is possible, will have the angelic beauty, in so far as it is formed in characters through it, and led back to the superessential of the whole hierarchy at once.*

## THE EXPOSITION.

The eighth chapter is on the dominations, and the virtues, and the powers, and on the middle hierarchy, which is theirs. For in the preceding chapter he treated [1073D] of the three first orders — the seraphim, and the cherubim, and the thrones — and of the hierarchy, that is, their sacred power, which in the celestial ordering is first and principal, and ordered immediately after God. Now, therefore, he proceeds consequently to treat of the three following orders, that is, the dominations, virtues, and powers; and of the hierarchy, that is, their sacred power, which in the celestial ordering is constituted second, or middle, that is, after the first and before the last. Of this hierarchy, then, he treats in the same manner as he does of the higher order: first by showing the cause or reason of the appellation which is attributed to the orders themselves of this hierarchy, then by expounding more fully the power of that sacred authority.

[1074A] « We must now, he says, pass over into the middle ordering of the celestial intellects: exploring those dominations, as far as is possible, with supermundane eyes, and the truly powerful contemplations of the divine powers and virtues. » Join it together: himself to the following statement, as if he said. After the exposition of the supreme hierarchy, the order demands that we pass over to the middle, that is, to the exposition of the middle hierarchy of the celestial intellects, that is, of the angelic spirits. Afterward he sets forth by name which are those orders of angels in which that middle sacred power consists: to whose exposition he says he ought to pass over, adding: « The dominations: exploring those, as far as is possible, with supermundane eyes, and the truly powerful [1074B] contemplations of the divine powers and virtues. We must pass over, he says, » he says, « as we explore in that » — namely hierarchy — « the dominations, and the truly powerful contemplations of the powers and virtues, » that is, both the powers and the virtues. For these are the three orders of the second hierarchy, whose power and offices he must diligently explore who desires to expound their sacred power. Therefore, he says, « with supermundane eyes, » that is, with spiritual ones, it must be explored. For these things are not seen with bodily eyes. « As we explore, » therefore, « those, » namely the celestial dominations, and « as we explore the contemplations, » that is, the speculations or contemplations « of the powers and virtues. » As to his saying that he will explore the speculations or contemplations [1074C] of the powers and virtues; either it is to be understood thus, as if he said, that through the speculation or contemplation had concerning them he will explore their dignity, or he testifies that he will explore and investigate their very contemplation, by which they contemplate God and perceive divine things. He calls them "truly powerful contemplations," or "powerful speculations," for this reason, that they explore those who are truly powerful. For by "powerful speculation" he understands "speculation of the powerful." He names them "truly powerful" for this reason, that they are powerful in goodness and in truth. For to be able to do evil is not truly to be able, but to be unable, as it is written: « Why dost thou glory in malice, thou that art mighty in iniquity [n: (Psal. LI)]: » Wherefore he also calls those [1074D] powers divine, because from God and in God they can do all that they can.

There follows: « For each appellation of the essences which are above us signifies their deiform properties, imitative of God. As if he said: Rightly have I named the powers and virtues divine, because their very appellation also teaches this. Just as each appellation of the essences which are above us, that is, the celestial ones, signifies their deiform properties: and they are deiform for this reason, that they are imitative of God. For that those celestial essences have conformity, they have it not from quality, but from imitation, because it is not nature that confers on them the likeness of God, but grace.

There follows: « Therefore I judge that the manifesting naming of the holy dominations declares a certain absolute [1075A] anagogy, free from all pedestrian diminishment; and in no way whatsoever universally inclined by any of the tyrannical dissimilitudes, a dominion liberally severe, set above all diminishing servitude: superior to every subjection, and remote from every dissimulation, and unceasingly desirous of dominion; and conforming, as far as is possible, both itself and the things that are after it, in the best and most beautiful way, to the likeness of that very virtue subsisting naturally; turned toward none of the things seen as vain, but toward the properly ὄν on universal, and made, according to what is possible for it, ever in participation of the Lordly deiformity. » All these things the naming of the dominations teaches; for in that they are called dominations, they are signified to have and to do all these things [1075B] which have been said of them. This is what he says: « I judge the manifesting naming of the holy dominations, » that is, the naming by which their power and excellence and dignity is manifested and declared: I judge, he says, that that naming declares all these things. All what things? Hear. « For they are many. » Therefore I said "all these things": because they are many with respect to us, but few with respect to them. « I judge, he says, that the naming of the holy dominations declares a certain absolute, » that is, free, and estranged from all depression, « anagogy, » that is, their excellence, or sublimity, or upward leading, by which they are raised to the highest, so that they are subjected to none below the highest. And I judge that this naming also [1075C] declares that this anagogy, or their excellence, is not universally inclined in any way — that is, that it is in no way at all inclined by any of the tyrannical dissimilitudes, that is, through any, or according to any, tyrannical dissimilitude, that is, according to any tyranny, which is wholly dissimilar from their dominion. As if he said: Just as by their universal excellence they are raised above all subjection, so toward the oppression of their subjects they are inclined by no tyranny.

There follows: « A dominion liberally severe; set above all diminishing servitude. » From what precedes (it is to be understood) "I judge the naming of the dominations to declare" their dominion "liberally severe," that is, kindly severe. Having severity [1075D] in power, liberality in kindness. Severe, because power is exercised from the superior; yet liberty is not taken away from the inferior. Therefore he calls it a dominion liberally severe, set above all diminishing servitude, that is, not subject to anyone unto a servitude which would diminish liberty, but superior to every subjection, and remote from every dissimilitude, that is, from all inferiority or imperfection which would make it dissimilar to its Creator, and unceasingly desirous of dominion, that is, looking toward — or tending toward, or clinging to — the Creator through likeness of dominion and conformity, and conforming both itself and the things that are after it, so that each, as far as is possible for it, may [1076A] imitate the divine virtue in the best and most beautiful way. Therefore he says, « I judge their naming to declare their dominion conforming itself, and the things that are after it, to the divine virtue; and turned toward none of the things seen as vain, but toward the properly on universal. » He puts "of those seeing" (videntium) for what he ought to have said, "of things seen" (visorum), by the most usual manner of the Greeks; since it is derived from the verb δοκοῦμαι, that is, "I see" or "I am seen," because it is common: so that the sense is: I judge it to declare her turned not toward any of those things which seem vain, that is, which, considered in themselves, appear lowly and transitory. But rather turned toward the properly on universal, that is, turned toward that which is properly and universally; namely toward God, to whom being is both proper, because he subsists through himself, and universal, [1076B] because he grants being to all. But it must be known that ὄν on among the Greeks, when it is written with ὄντῶν μικρὸν, through omicron — that is, a short or small "o" — is neuter, and is interpreted *that which is.* But when ὤν is written with ω τὸν μέγα, that is, a long or great "ω," it is masculine, and is interpreted *who is.* "On," therefore, is the Creator of all himself, and the principle, who is, and that which is properly in himself, and universal toward all: toward which principle he says this dominion is turned, and made in participation, that is, made a partaker of the Lordly deiformity, that is, of the divine likeness, which it retains always, that is, unchangeably: made, I say, according to what is possible for it. Thus far he has shown what the naming of the dominations signifies; now he passes on to show what the naming [1076C] of the virtues signifies.

## THE EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « But that certain strong and unchangeable manliness of the holy virtues, in all their operations according to their deiformity, in no way feebly weakened toward any reception of the divine illuminations imparted to them, powerfully led back into the imitation of God: not abandoning by its own feebleness the deiform motion, but firmly bearing itself into the superessential and power-making virtue, and made its image like to the virtue, according to what is permitted, and powerfully turned toward it indeed as toward the principal virtue. But toward the second virtue giving and coming forth deiformly. » That, he says, of the holy virtues (understood: the appellation) [1076D] I judge to declare a certain strong and unchangeable manliness in all their operations: a manliness, I say, imparted to them according to their deiformity, because in this they are like, or conformed, to God, that they have merited to receive a strong and unchangeable manliness, or virtue, for the doing of all things. For the divine virtue is both strong for acting, so that it is not broken by the difficulty of any work, and unchangeable for persevering, so that it does not grow faint or be weakened by the length of duration. In this, therefore, the virtues are deiform, and therefore they are alike in that for the doing of all things they have a strong and unchangeable vigor. Nor do they only have a manliness strong and unchangeable for doing all things beneath them, but they have also a manliness or virtue not feebly weakened [1077A] toward that reception of the divine illuminations imparted to it. For they are strong in the execution of works, and strong also in the reception of gifts, because their virtue, even if it be weak when compared to the divine virtue, is nevertheless not weak when conformed to the divine. It is weak by its condition for grasping the whole that is proper to the Creator; but it is not weak by corruption for receiving the whole that is owed to a creature. It is not, therefore, feebly weakened: for even if it does not have a virtue equal to the Creator, it nevertheless has a strength sufficient for a creature. Therefore it has a manliness strong and unchangeable for the execution of things to be done, and not weakened for the reception of gifts; and powerfully led back, that is, turned or [1077B] reformed in the imitation of God, that is, that it may imitate God; led back indeed through illuminations, into imitation through operations. And they have a manliness not abandoning the deiform motion by any feebleness of their own. He calls it "deiform motion," that these celestial virtues are moved unceasingly, that they may imitate God; either from above, namely by desiring to receive what he has, that they may be the same with him; or downward, by doing what he does, that they may not depart from him. And so they have a manliness not abandoning the deiform motion; but through that deiform motion firmly bearing or exalting itself into the superessential and power-making virtue of the Creator: and through this made an image like to the virtue of the Creator himself, according to what is permitted, that is, according to what [1077C] is granted to them, or possible. For in this, that their manliness is raised through the deiform motion into the superessential and power-making virtue of the Creator, it is proven to become the image and likeness of that same divine virtue. Therefore, he says, I judge their manliness to be made an image like to the divine virtue, and turned toward that divine virtue, inasmuch as toward the principal virtue; but toward the second things giving virtue, and coming forth deiformly. Thus, he says, the appellation of the virtues teaches that their manliness is turned toward the higher virtue of God, that from it, as from the first, it may receive deiformity; and it teaches also that it comes forth or proceeds toward the second things, that is, toward the subsequent orders, that it may come forth to them deiformly, giving them virtue, and in that virtue [1077D] conformity to God, so that it both receives that deiformity from the superior and bestows it on the inferiors: receiving through gift, bestowing through example.

There follows: « But that of the holy powers, equal in power to the divine dominations and virtues, well-ordered and unconfused about the divine receptions by its ordination, and the ordered rank of the supermundane and intellectual power, not tyrannically hurled down by power-wielding virtues into the things that are lower, but powerfully led back into the divine things after the well-ordered ones: and leading back deiformly the things after it, and assimilated, as far as is lawful, to the power-making causal power: and revealing it, as is possible, to the angels in the ranks well-ordered through it by its power-wielding [1078A] virtue. » After the appellation of the virtues he passes on to the appellation of the powers. But that of the holy powers (understood: the naming) I judge to declare a certain ordination of theirs, equal in power to the divine dominations and virtues, that is, an ordination — I say — of equal power with the dominations and virtues, well-ordered and unconfused about the divine receptions, that is, about the divine gifts to be received, because the gifts of God, which it receives for the adornment of spiritual beauty, it guards without confusion, humbly persisting in its own degree and order. I judge also that this naming of the powers declares the ordered rank, that is, the ordination of the supermundane and intellectual power: a power, I say, not tyrannically hurled down into the things [1078B] that are lower, with power-wielding virtues, that is, with violent force. But rather a power led back, or powerfully turned, into the divine things after the well-ordered ones, that is, after the virtues, which are ordered before it: and a power, I say, leading back deiformly, that is, according to the divine likeness, the things that are after it, that is, those orders of angels which follow after it. For just as it itself is turned to the likeness of God by the superiors meditating [cj: *meditantibus*; read *mediantibus*, "mediating"], so, with it mediating, the things that are lower are called back to the same likeness of God. There follows further: The powers assimilated, as far as is lawful, that is, either permitted or granted, to the power-making, causal power; because it can do all things, and is the cause of all. And a power, I say, revealing, namely that divine [1078C] power, as far as it is possible to reveal it to the angels. Revealing how? By its power-wielding virtue. Where revealing? In the ranks well-ordered through it, that is, in the subsequent orders, which it adorns, by revealing to them the divine power by its own example.

There follows: « Having these deiform properties, the middle ordering of the celestial minds is indeed purged, and illumined, and perfected, as has been said, by the divine illuminations imparted to it in the second place through the first hierarchical ordering, and conveyed through that middle one by a second manifestation. » The middle ordering of the celestial minds, he says — of which, namely, treatment has thus far been made, which consists of dominations and virtues and powers: this, having the deiform properties, namely those [1078D] which we said above, is purged and illumined and perfected, just as was said above concerning the first hierarchy; purged, I say, by the divine illuminations imparted to it in the second (understood: place) through the first hierarchical ordering. The first hierarchical ordering consists of the three first orders, that is, seraphim, cherubim, and thrones: which in the first place receives the divine illuminations from the divinity itself: which illuminations afterward being conveyed by a second manifestation, through that middle one, to the second hierarchy, this second hierarchy is in the second place purged, and illumined, and perfected, through those same divine illuminations.

There follows: « And so, by the utterance passing [1079A] from one angel [and] heard in another angel, we shall make a symbol of the perfection which is from afar above [all] perfect, and hidden through the procession into the things that follow. » By example and authority he proves what he had said, namely that the middle ordering of angels is illumined by the first, or through the first, that is, what he says: We shall make a symbol, that is an example, or a demonstration, of the perfection, namely the divine perfection perfect from afar above all things: and hidden, through the procession, into the things that follow; because, although in itself it is hidden and invisible, yet through the procession it goes forth and is made manifest in the things that follow, that is, in those who are immediately after it in the first place, or in those who follow after them. Of this kind of divine perfection, I say — perfect in itself and hidden, and yet, through the bestowal of grace, proceeding into the things that follow [1079B] — we shall make a symbol: the utterance, that is, the saying or word brought forth by one angel, and afterward passing into another angel, and heard by him. For in this, that one angel spoke, another heard, one brought forth the teaching, another received it: a symbol has been made, that is a demonstration or argument, that the divine perfection proceeds, to be participated, through the prior and superior ones to the following and inferior ones. « For those wise concerning our sacred immolations say that the plenitudes of the divine things, shining through themselves, are more perfect than [those] through other contemplative participations. » As if he said: It is no wonder if among the angels one taught and another was taught, since one is more learned than another. For those who are wise concerning our sacred immolations, [1079C] that is, concerning our sacrifices or sacraments, they say that the plenitudes of the divine things, that is, those angels who are full of divine gifts, or illuminations, and shine through themselves, are more perfect than the contemplative participations through others, that is, than those participating by contemplative participations through others. For he put the genitive for the ablative. Those who are wise, he says, or skilled in our sacraments, testify that those angelic spirits who receive the divine contemplation immediately through themselves are more perfect than the rest, who, with the superiors mediating, participate in the same contemplation.

There follows: « So too I judge that the immediate participation of the angelic orders first extended [1079D] into God is more perfect through the mediation of the perfected. » Because, he says, the wise testify this, therefore I too judge that the immediate participation of the angelic orders first extended into God — that is, those angelic orders which, in the first place and principally extended into God, participate in him immediately — is more perfect, that is, that they are more perfect in participation than the perfected who participate through mediation, that is, than the perfected participating through mediation, that is, that they are more perfect than those who are made perfect by others mediating.

There follows: « On which account, by our priestly tradition, the first intellects are named the perfective, light-bringing, and purgative virtues of the lower ones; as of those led back through themselves into the superessential principle of all, [1080A] and made partakers of the mystical purgations, and illuminations, and perfections, according to what is lawful for them. » As if he said: Because the superior spirits are more perfect than the inferior and following ones, therefore by our priestly tradition the first intellects, that is, the supreme orders of angels, are called the perfective, and light-bringing, and purgative virtues of the inferiors, because through them the inferiors are perfected and purged and illumined: they are named the virtues of the inferiors, inasmuch as these are led back through themselves, that is, through their own selves, into the superessential principle of all, that is, God; and the inferiors, I say, made in participation, because they have been made partakers, as far as is lawful for them, of the mystical purgations, and illuminations, and perfections. [1080B] Through those superiors, therefore, by whom they are purged, and illumined, and perfected.

There follows: « For this has been divinely promulgated altogether by the divine ordination: that the second things participate through the first in the divine illuminations: this, he says, has been divinely promulgated, » or made manifest, « altogether, » that is, universally, concerning the divine ordination — that the second things everywhere participate in the divine illuminations through the first.

There follows: « But you will find this too expressed many times by the theologians: » this, he says — that I say the second things participate in the divine illuminations through the first — you will find expressed, that is, manifestly magnified and marked in the Scriptures, namely the sacred ones: by the theologians, that is, those who have reasoned [1080C] concerning divine things and written.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « For when the divine and paternal humanity, in a nurturing way correcting Israel for the sake of its holy salvation, and handing it over for correction to avenging and savage nations, by a universal translation of the things provided-for unto the better: both dismissed the captivity, and mercifully led it back to its former beneficence: one of the theologians, Zechariah, saw one of the first angels, as I suppose, and of those about God (for this angelic surname is, as I have said, common to all), learning from God himself, concerning this matter, consoling words, as has been said. But another of the subject angels coming to meet the first, as if unto the reception and perception of illumination; [1080D] then instructed by him in the divine counsel as by a high priest: and this angel, being turned, teaches the theologian, that Jerusalem is fruitfully inhabited by a multitude of men. » He proves by an example what he had said. In the prophet Zechariah it is read that an angel, having received a command from God, went forth, and gave a command to another angel meeting him, that he should run and announce to the prophet that Jerusalem was as yet inhabited without walls. For this is what he says: « When the divine and paternal humanity, » that is, the paternal mercy of God, « in a nurturing way correcting, » that is, in the manner of a foster-father who scourges his little son for this end, that he may chastise him, correcting Israel with the scourge of the Babylonian captivity for the sake of its holy salvation, namely so that, while for a time he outwardly dispersed it in bodily fashion, he might inwardly [1081A] save it by restoring it unto holiness. And so thus the mercy of God, in a fatherly way correcting Israel and handing it over unto correction — that is, handing it over to the nations that it might be corrected, namely to the Chaldeans: nations, I say, both avenging and savage; because they both avenged the injury done to God, and yet did this not out of zeal for justice but out of the fury of cruelty. Handing over, I say, by a translation; namely that they might be carried over from their homeland into exile, from their own land into a foreign land, from Jerusalem into Babylon, from the vision of peace into the captivity of confusion: by a translation, I say, that is universal, that is, general, of all the things provided-for unto the better — that is, unto the salvation of the predestined. For indeed through this captivity and leading-back, which was done bodily in one people, [1081B] there was shown forth a figure of all the elect, and of those to be freed from the captivity of sin. When therefore the divine mercy, in a fatherly way handing over Israel by such a translation, afterward both dismissed the captivity, and mercifully led Israel itself back to its former beneficence. Then « one of the theologians, namely Zechariah, saw one of the first angels, » that is, one of the first angels, that is, one of the excellent and superior angels, and of those set about God. He says, « one of the first, as I suppose: » for theology does not say this, that that one was of the first. But I suppose that that one was of the first, because he did not receive a command from another prior to him, but gave a command to the second. Therefore, he says, « I suppose » that that one was of the first angels. How [1081C] of the first angels, since the angels are not first, seeing that only those who are last and lowest are named angels? Not so, he says, do I mean 'angel.' But according to this, that this angelic surname is sometimes common to all, as was said above, I now call the supreme orders angels. And so thus one of the theologians, Zechariah, saw one of the first angels learning from God himself consoling words, namely concerning this matter of the captivity and the leading-back of Israel, as was said in the prophecy, namely of Zechariah himself. He saw also another of the subject angels coming forth to meet the first angel, that is, going out, or coming before, that is, running on ahead before he is called, as one ready and [1081D] devoted of himself unto the reception and perception of his illumination, which he was about to receive from him. Then Zechariah himself saw that second angel instructed in the counsel by the first angel himself as by a high priest, namely as by a superior, and one giving holy things: and he saw also that same second angel afterward turned, teaching the theologian this — that is, turned away from the first angel, to whom he was attending, toward the theologian, that is, toward Zechariah himself, that he might teach him this, namely the divine counsel which he himself had learned from the first angel: but the first angel from God — and this is the counsel which he himself announced, « that fruitfully, » that is, abundantly, « Jerusalem shall be inhabited » by a multitude of men. Another translation says: « Without walls [1082A] shall Jerusalem be inhabited. » Under the same sense assuredly, in that after the slaughter of the captivity that people would, by divine grace, be multiplied to such a degree that the multitude of those dwelling in Jerusalem could not be enclosed within the circuit of its walls.

There follows: « But the other of the theologians, Ezekiel: and, he says, this was most sacredly promulgated to the cherubim by that same most glorious divinity, established firmly above. » By the testimony of the other theologian he proves what he said, namely that the divine counsels, immediately received by the first angels, are then carried through the lower angels even unto the minds of the theologians — that is, what he says: « The other of the theologians, Ezekiel, » namely that this divine counsel was most sacredly promulgated to the cherubim by the most glorious divinity itself, established firmly above [1082B]: this, he says. Ezekiel says that the most glorious divinity itself, established firmly above in majesty, in eternity, most sacredly promulgated or revealed its counsel to the cherubim, from whom it was afterward manifested more fully to the following orders? « For humanity itself — as has been said, the leader of the army — translating Israel unto the better through chastisements, is answered by divine Justice to those who correct, [and] justified the corrected. » Humanity, he says, that is, mercy, the leader of the army, or the mistress of the exercise, translating Israel itself unto the better through disciplines, condemned the guilty, justified the corrected; and this, namely the judgment, is answered out of divine justice to the correcting angels, who had been sent to punish: because for this reason the divine mercy brought in the scourges, that [1082C] it might condemn the reprobate, and justify the corrected. Or the divine justice itself is answered to those who correct, in that which is just, that the reprobate be condemned, and the corrected be justified. Or, to the correcting Chaldeans, that is, the persecutors through whom God scourged and corrected his people, it is answered out of divine justice, that they may receive as they have deserved; but the divine mercy justified the corrected Israelites. « This is taught to the first after the cherubim, girded about the loins with sapphire, who was clothed with the *podere* according to the hierarchical symbol: » this, he says, divine counsel of condemnation and justification « is taught to the one set first after the cherubim, who was clothed with the *podere* according to the hierarchical symbol. » For the fact that after the cherubim a certain one [1082D] appeared girded about the loins with sapphire, and clothed with the *podere*, was a hierarchical symbol, that is, a hierarchical figure, because the hierarchy uses visible figures for the demonstration of invisible things. And not only is he who was first after the cherubim taught the divine counsel, but also the rest who follow. For this is what he subjoins: But the divine ordinance commands that the rest of the angels, who had axes, be taught concerning this the divine judgment by the one prior to them. Namely concerning this counsel, or concerning this work, the divine ordinance commands the cherubim themselves « that the rest of the angels be taught by him » who was first after the cherubim, so that in that order the divine precept might first descend into the cherubim, then through the cherubim to him who was next, clothed with the *podere*, through whom it might at last come to the following [1083A] angels, who were made ready with axes.

There follows: « For to him indeed he said to pass through the midst of Jerusalem, and to give a sign upon the foreheads of the corrected men: » — either 'to him,' that is, the divine ordinance said to the cherubim, that he should command the one following him to pass through the midst of Jerusalem, etc. Or 'to him,' that is, to the one following after the cherubim, through the cherubim itself he « said to pass through the midst of Jerusalem, » etc. And not only did he give the precept to that one through the cherubim, but also to the others following after him — this is what is added: « To the others: Go forth into the city after him, and strike; and do not spare your eyes. But to all upon whom is the sign, draw not near. » But all these things, which have been taken from the prophetic visions, [1083B] avail for this, that it may be shown that the first and highest angels are instructed by God himself, the second by the first, the third by the second.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « What perhaps might someone say of the angel saying to Daniel: The word went forth; or of that first one himself receiving fire from the midst of the cherubim? or that saying of the same, which is more abundantly for the showing of the angelic order; namely that the cherubim also sends fire into the hands of the one clothed with the holy stole; or of the one calling the most divine Gabriel, and saying to him: Make him understand the vision. Or whatsoever other things have been said by the sacred theologians concerning the deiform adornment of the celestial hierarchies, unto which the ordination of our hierarchy, assimilated according to what is possible, will have the angelic beauty, as far as in figures, [1083C] being formed through it and led back to the superessential at once of every hierarchy. » In these prophetic testimonies, as we said above, he intends to prove this alone: that among the angels some teach others, and the lower receive precept and doctrine from the higher; or also when men are instructed by the angels, and the lower receive knowledge from the higher. For what might one — that is, someone — say of the angel speaking to Daniel, except that the lower is instructed by the higher, and receives doctrine? Or again, what might someone say of that first one, mentioned above after the cherubim, clothed with the *podere*, and receiving fire from the midst of the cherubim, except this likewise, that one is shown to receive from another that which [1083D] he cannot have of himself? Or what else also is that saying of the same — namely of the vision, or of the example — which is more abundantly, or more copiously, for the showing of the angelic order, that is, for showing that among the angels some superior orders are set over others, as I say, that the cherubim sends fire into the hands of the one clothed with the holy stole, except that manifestly a dispensation is demonstrated to be made through [1084A] one into another? That testimony, indeed, in the vision of Ezekiel, from which this is taken, is rather conjectured than expounded; because from the fact that that first one after the cherubim, clothed with the holy stole, or *podere*, is bidden to receive fire from the midst of the cherubim, he is believed, not unfittingly, to have received that same fire from the cherubim itself. Concerning this, therefore, what will anyone be able to say, except that it is manifestly shown that the divine bounty passes through some unto others? Or again, of the angel calling the most divine Gabriel, and saying to him: Make him understand the word [visionem]: what will anyone be able to say, except that, according to the ordination of the same disposition, the divine precept descends through some unto others; and those who are superior [1084B] command to the inferior the things to be done, even as they insinuate the things to be known? Concerning these things therefore, or also concerning all the others, whatsoever other things have been said by the sacred theologians concerning the deiform adornment of the celestial hierarchies, what will anyone be able to say, except what has been said above? Unto which adornment of the celestial hierarchies, namely, the ordination of our — that is, of the human, or Ecclesiastical — hierarchy being assimilated, as far as is possible for it (namely, to be assimilated), will have from that very likeness the angelic beauty, as far as in figures, that is, in figures and likenesses. For as much as it now has in the figure of likeness, so much will it afterward have in the loftiness of glorification. Now indeed it has the character and the sign in figure; then it will have the reality and the truth in glory. Certain men have tried to interpret these characters [1084C] in a strange way; setting before those who contemplate, in that future glory of the supernal blessedness, certain phantasms and images of errors in place of God, asserting that God is never visible to anyone in his own substance. But we do not await blessedness in the contemplation of figures, to whom the very truth has been promised. Therefore the disposition of our hierarchy, formed unto the angelic adornment, as much as it now has of likeness in characters and figure, so much will it afterward have in the glory of beauty. Now indeed it is formed through it: that is, both according to it, namely the angelic adornment, and by the mediation of that same angelic adornment, led back to the superessential at once of every hierarchy — that is, [1084D] restored unto the likeness of God, who is the superessential of every hierarchy; because from him every hierarchy has not only form, but also substance; because he himself not only instituted every hierarchy, but also created it, so that it might be after him in likeness, under him in condition.

## BOOK NINE.

[1083]

## TITLE OF CHAPTER IX: *On the principalities, archangels, and angels, and on their last hierarchy.*

## THE TEXT.

[1083D]

*The adornment remaining to us for contemplation, [1084D] concluding the angelic hierarchies disposed by the deiform principalities, archangels, and angels. And first indeed [1085A] I judge it necessary to speak, according to what is impossible for me, the manifestations of their sacred surnames. For it manifests, indeed, that deiform principal eductive of the celestial principalities, together with the sacred order and the most becoming principal powers, and that they are universally converted unto the superprincipal principle, and lead others hierarchically, and are, as far as possible, formed unto that very principial principle, and that it manifests his superessential ordination and the adornment of the principal powers. But that of the holy archangels is indeed of equal power with the celestial principalities. For there is, both of them and of the angels, as I have said, one hierarchy and disposition. Nevertheless, since indeed there is no hierarchy not having also first, and middle, and last powers, the [1085B] holy order of the archangels is received into the communicative hierarchical middle of the extremes. For it communicates with the most sacred principalities, and with the holy angels. With the former indeed, because it is principally converted unto the superessential principle, and is, as far as possible, reformed unto it, and unifies the angels according to its well-adorned, and ordered, and invisible leadings. But with the latter, because it is to them also a prophetic order, receiving the divine illuminations hierarchically through the first powers, and announcing them deiformly to the angels, and manifesting them through the angels to us according to the sacred analogy of each of those divinely illumined. For the angels themselves, as we have said before, completively consummate all the dispositions of the celestial minds, according to what is to be consummated: inasmuch as, in the celestial essences, [1085C] having the angelic property, and more fittingly named angels among us than the prior ones, in so far as, concerning that which is more manifest, there is to them a hierarchy, and more of the circum-adornment. For it is to be judged that the most excellent disposition, as itself firstly and orderly approaching the hidden one, secretly, forming [formantem], ordains the second. But the second, which is completed by the holy dominations, and virtues, and powers, presides over that hierarchy which is of the principalities, and archangels, and angels. The first hierarchy indeed more manifestly; but that which is after it, more hiddenly. But the manifestative disposition of the principalities, archangels, and angels commands the human hierarchies through the consequent things, so that there be through order an ascent unto God, and conversion, [1085D] and communication, and unity. And indeed also, from God, best imparted to all the hierarchical ones, and communicatively supervening, and a procession with most sacred adornment. Thence theology distributes our hierarchy to the angels, naming Michael the prince of the people of the Jews [n: (Dan. X)]*, *and others, diverse, of the nations. For the Most High established the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God [n: (Deut. XXXII)]*. *But if anyone should say, and how was the people of the Hebrews alone led back into the divine illuminations? it must be answered that the right dominations of the angels are not to be accused of the error of the other nations unto non-existent gods, but those very ones, by their own inflexions, falling away from that right leading-back which is unto the divine, by their own love, and by pride [1086A] of the things divinely seen by them, and, in a co-rational manner, unto worship. This is reported that the people of the Hebrews itself also suffered. For thou hast repelled the knowledge of God, he says, and hast gone forth after thy own heart [n: (Ose. IV; Jer. II)]*. *For neither do we have a coerced life; nor are the divine lights of provident illumination revealed through the proper power of those who provide, but the dissimilarity of the intellectual visions makes the donation of light, out of the superfull paternal goodness, either wholly not participated, not distributed unto their reformation, or makes the participations differing — small or great, obscure or clear — of the one and simple, and ever holding itself in the same mode, and superexpended fontal ray. Then, because also to the other nations, out of which we also have looked back unto that, [there is] prepared unto tradition and open the [ray] of divine light, and the great, [1086B] and copious sea, no alien gods indeed ruled: but the one principle of all, and unto it the angels, exercising the priesthood according to each several nation, led back their followers. Melchizedek is to be understood as a high priest, existing most friendly to the Lord — not of the non-existent, but of the truly existent, most high God. For thus simply the theosophists themselves called Melchizedek not only the friend of God, but also priest [n: (Gen. XIV)]*. *Or, that to the wise they might openly signify, that he converted not only out of them unto that God who truly is. But still also to others, as a high priest, he brings forth those things which are of the leading-back unto the true and sole divinity. And this, moreover, we shall admonish thy most-priestly understanding: that both with the angel ruling over Pharaoh among the Egyptians themselves [1086C] [n: (Gen. XLI)]*, *and with the prince of the Babylonians having his own presiding one — with all providence, both provident and empowered of domination, distributed according to the divisions — and for those nations there were established leaders, ministers of the true God, by the manifestation of the vision of the formations from the angels; the [visions] revealed continually by the angels, from God through the angels, to the holy men Joseph and Daniel [n: (Dan. II)]*. *For there is one principle and providence of all. And in no way is it to be judged that the Jews indeed spoke of the divinity fully; but that the angels specially, or equally honorably, or oppositely, or that certain gods, one over another, rule the other nations. But that saying also is to be received according to the sacred understanding itself, not as though God, together with other gods, or angels, contending, suffered our leadership — the principate in Israel, and the leadership of the nation Israel. [1086D] But as, that same one and lofty providence at once salutarily distributing all men by the restorative hand-leadings of their proper angels, Israel almost alone beyond all being converted unto the illumination and knowledge of the man of God. Whence theology, signifying that he possessed Israel unto the service of the true God, said, He became the portion of the Lord [n: (Psal. CXXXIV; Deut. XXXII; Isa. XIX)]*. *But showing that he also distributed, man by man, to the rest of the nations, [and] to a certain one of the holy angels, Michael, for the knowing through him of the one principle of all, said that he led the Jewish people [n: (Dan. X)]*. *openly teaching us that there is one providence of all, superessentially set above at once all the invisible and visible powers. [1087A] And all the angels ruling throughout the several nations extend their several powers unto him, as unto their proper principle, following him by an essential will*

## EXPOSITION.

« The adornment remaining to us for contemplation, concluding the angelic hierarchies disposed by the deiform principalities, archangels, and angels. » The words are plain. The adornment, he says, concluding the angelic hierarchies, disposed by the deiform principalities, archangels, and angels, is remaining to us — that is, it now remains for us to contemplate or consider the adornment, that is, the beautiful disposition of the angelic hierarchy, which is, as it were, the conclusion of the two preceding, and the end, in which three orders are disposed, that is, principalities, angels, and archangels.

[1087B]There follows: « And first indeed I judge it necessary to speak, according to what is possible for me, the manifestations of their holy surnames. » I, he says, judge it to be necessary that I first speak the manifestations of their surnames, so that through the interpretation of the surnames their properties may be manifested. This therefore he judges must first be expounded: why in this last hierarchy some are named principalities, others archangels, others angels, because from the very distinct surname the properties of each are manifested. This is what he adds: « For it manifests, indeed, that deiform principal eductive of the celestial principalities, together with the sacred order and the most becoming principal powers, [1087C] and that they are universally converted unto the superprincipal principle, and lead others hierarchically; and that they are, as far as possible, formed unto that very principial principle, and that it manifests his superessential ordination, and the adornment of the principal powers. » He expounds what the several surnames in this last hierarchy signify: and first he treats of the surname of the principalities, showing that this very surname manifests that principal eductive, that is, that principal leadership which they have, deiformly, that is, [in] the likeness of God; because just as God is the one and highest prince of all, so they themselves are the princes and leaders of the subject angels and men. This [1087D] leadership, therefore, the surname itself manifests together with the sacred order and the most becoming principal powers, because they have that leadership both from the sacred order and from the principal powers. For that they are leaders and princes of others, they have both from this, that they have been ordained to this by office, and from this, that by their principal powers they are more excellent than the rest.

There follows: « And that they are universally converted unto the superprincipal principle; » this also, he says, the surname of the principalities manifests, namely those powers which they themselves have: that they are universally converted unto the superprincipal principle, that is, God. And their surname also signifies that they lead other powers, or the powers of others, unto that very [1088A] principial principle, [and], as far as is possible, that those powers are formed unto it, or conformed to it: to lead, I say, hierarchically, that is, according to the manner and measure of their own precedence. For their own powers they lead unto their principle by universally converting; the powers of others they lead unto their principle by hierarchically preceding; because they have to lead only in so far as they ought to precede or preside. Therefore they lead hierarchically, because in that in which they are not set above, they cannot rightly be leaders. This therefore their surname manifests: namely that they have a principate in the likeness of God, from office and from power; and that they convert both their own powers unto their principle, and lead the powers of others. Their surname also manifests the adornment [1088B] of the principal powers themselves — that is, the disposition of the principalities themselves manifests the superessential ordination of that first principle. For from the very surname of the principalities it is intimated that in their precedence the first Principate is manifested, because by ruling they both imitate it and manifest it.

There follows: « But that of the holy archangels is indeed of equal power with the celestial principalities. For there is, both of them and of the angels, as I have said, one hierarchy and disposition. » That surname (it is understood) « of the holy archangels is of equal power, » that is, signifies an equal power, or an equal potency, « with the celestial principalities; » because there is one hierarchy and one disposition of the three orders, [1088C] that is, of the angels, and of them, namely the archangels, and of the principalities. And although from this — that the hierarchy is one — there is also one and equal power of the three: nevertheless, because there is no hierarchy which does not have first, and middle, and last orders, therefore the archangels, set in the middle place between the principalities, who are first, and the angels, who are last, participate in the property of both. This is what he says: « Nevertheless, since indeed there is no hierarchy not having also first, and middle, and last powers, the holy order of the archangels is received communicatively into the middle of the extremes of the hierarchy. » Since, he says, there is no hierarchy which does not have first, and middle, and last powers: [1088D] therefore « the holy order of the archangels is received communicatively into the middle of the extremes of the hierarchy: » that is, it is received so as to be in the middle of the extremes, communicating with the hierarchy, that is, with their sacred power; or it is received into the hierarchical middle, that is, for the possessing of the hierarchical middle, which is communicative of the extremes — this is what follows: « For it communicates both with the most sacred principalities, and with the holy angels. » But in what it communicates with each, he shows subsequently, saying: « With the former indeed, because it is principally converted unto the superessential principle, and is, as far as possible, reformed unto it; and it unifies the angels according to its well-adorned, and ordered, and invisible leadings. » In this, he says, the order of the archangels participates with [1089A] the principalities in the same power, because « it is converted unto its superessential principle, and is reformed unto it, » as far as is possible for it: and because it also unifies — that is, gathers unto the unity of that same principle — by leading the angels after itself according to invisible and ordered leadings, by which it has to lead those subject and following ones. In this, therefore, the order of the archangels communicates with the power of the principalities: that in the likeness, or imitation, of them it both converts itself unto its first principle, and gathers those following it. And not only with the principalities set above, but also with the angels established below, does the order of the archangels itself communicate. This is what he adds: « But with the latter, because it is to them also a prophetic order, receiving the divine illuminations hierarchically through the first [1089B] powers: and announcing them deiformly to the angels: and manifesting them through the angels to us according to the sacred analogy of each of those divinely illumined. » With the former, he says, that is, with the principalities, the order of the archangels communicates, as we said above. But with the latter, that is, with the angels, it communicates in this: that it is to them also a prophetic order — that is, an order prophetic, and ordained for prophesying — prophesying to them, as to inferiors, the divine secrets, receiving indeed the divine illuminations through the first powers, that is, through the principalities, who are prior and superior: itself receiving, I say, « hierarchically, » that is, according to what the hierarchical order and disposition requires, namely that the inferior receive their illuminations from the superior. « Receiving, » [1089C] I say, « and announcing them, » namely the illuminations which it receives from the superiors, to the inferior angels: but announcing deiformly, so that in this — that it receives from the superiors — it may keep the hierarchical disposition; but in this — that it imparts to the inferiors — it may not depart from conformity to God, who, the highest of all, bestows his gifts upon all subject things to be participated. For to receive illumination from a superior is a hierarchical thing, but to give to an inferior is a divine thing. And through this the archangelic order, established in the middle according to the disposition of the hierarchy, participates both with the superiors and with the inferiors — receiving the divine illuminations from the superior principalities, and announcing them to the inferior angels: and through the angels [1089D] announcing to us, as though to the last and lowest, those same divine illuminations according to the sacred analogy of each of those divinely illumined, that is, according to the manner and measure of the capacity of each of us for perceiving that same divine illumination; or, announcing to us through the angels according to the sacred analogy of each of them, namely of the angels divinely illumined — that is, they announce the divine illumination through each one only in so far as each is fit to receive it in himself, and to announce it to others through himself.

There follows: « For the angels themselves, as we have said before, completively consummate all the dispositions of the celestial minds, according to what is to be [1090A] consummated. » As if he should say: Fittingly does the archangelic order announce the divine illuminations to us through the angels, because the angels themselves are last in the celestial disposition, and nearest to men, and in them are completed, or terminated and consummated, all the dispositions or orders of the celestial minds, that is, of the angels. Thus therefore the angels consummate all the celestial orders, according to what is to be consummated, so that it may be understood concerning them; or, that it may be said more expressly, according as they themselves, namely the orders of the angels, are to be consummated. But in what way the angels themselves perfect, or consummate, the celestial orders, he subjoins, saying: « Inasmuch as, in the celestial essences, having the angelic property, and more fittingly named angels among us than the prior ones, in so far as, [1090B] concerning that which is more manifest, there is to them a hierarchy, and more of the circum-adornment. » It is not, he says, wondrous if the celestial orders are terminated in them, because among all the celestial essences it is their property to announce the divine secrets to us; and in this they have the angelic property, that it is their property to be messengers to us; and therefore they are named angels more fittingly among not [cj: *non*; read *nos*, "us"] than the prior or superior ones, namely in so far as there is to them a hierarchy, that is, a power or office concerning that which is more manifest to us, and in so far also as their adornment, or disposition, or order is more 'circum-,' that is, is more circumscribable and intelligible to us, approaching visible things because of their ministry. Therefore to them belongs more the circum-adornment — that is, a knowable or comprehensible [1090C] order — because it is nearest to us.

There follows: « For it is to be judged that the most excellent disposition, as itself firstly approaching to order the hidden one, secretly forming [forma], ordains the second. But the second, which is completed by the holy dominations, and virtues, and powers, presides over that hierarchy which is of the principalities, and archangels, and angels. The first hierarchy indeed more manifestly, but that which is after it, more hiddenly. But the manifestative disposition of the principalities, and archangels, and angels commands the human hierarchies through the consequent things, so that there be through order an ascent unto God, and conversion, and communication, and unity. » It is to be judged, [1090D] he says, that the most excellent disposition — that is, the supreme hierarchy, as firstly, that is, principally, approaching the hidden one, that is, God — ordains the second, secretly, that is, hiddenly, or incomprehensibly forming it. But the second hierarchy, which is completed by the holy dominations, and virtues, and powers, is to be judged to preside over that — namely the hierarchy which is of the principalities, and archangels, and angels; and the first hierarchy, that is, the supreme, is to be judged to perceive the divine illuminations more manifestly, or to preside more manifestly over the third; but that which is after it, that is, the second, to preside, namely, more hiddenly. But the disposition — that is, the hierarchy of the principalities, and archangels, and angels — [1091A] the manifestative, that is, the known and notifying one, is to be judged to command the human hierarchies through the consequent things, that is, consequently, after a precept has been given to it by the superiors: so that thus there may be through order an ascent unto God, and conversion, and communication, and unity — that is, so that human minds, turned through the lower hierarchy unto the middle, and from the middle unto the supreme, may ascend unto that one thing to be communicated which God is.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « And indeed also, from God, best imparted to all the hierarchical ones, and communicatively supervening, and a procession with most sacred adornment. » By such an order, he says, the one good is communicated by all, proceeding from God into all the hierarchical orders, so that it may adorn them, supervening upon them and imparted [1091B] through communication. This is what he says: *And indeed also,* that is, even so, there comes to be from God a procession of that highest good, namely, best imparted to all the hierarchical — it is understood, orders: upon them « supervening communicatively, » that is, unto communicating, and with most sacred adornment. For in this is the great adornment of the divine disposition: that, although all participate in the one good, yet it comes forth to be communicated not in one mode, but some perceive it through others, and in turn offer it to be communicated to others after them. Just as, among those spirits, the first hierarchy offers the divine illuminations to be communicated to the second, the second to the third, the third to ours, that is, to the human. This is what he subsequently adds, saying: « Thence theology distributes our hierarchy [1091C] to the angels, naming Michael the prince of the people of the Jews, and others, diverse, of the nations. » Thence, he says, that is, for this reason — because the inferior are ruled by the superior — theology, that is, Holy Scripture, distributes our hierarchy to the angels to be ruled, naming Michael the prince of the people of the Jews, and naming other diverse angels as princes of the nations, namely: as in Daniel we read the prince of the Persians, and the prince of the Greeks named. And not only in those testimonies is it proved that the angels have rule over men, but Scripture also testifies elsewhere, saying: « The Most High established the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God [n: (Dan. X)]. » The bounds — that is, the divisions, or distributions, of the nations — the Most High established according to the number [1091D] of the angels of God: because he fitted the number of the nations to the number of the angels, so that individual angels might preside over individual nations; although, because according to another translation there not 'angels' but 'sons of God' are named, something else seems to be signified.

There follows: « But if anyone should say: And how was the people of the Hebrews alone led back into the divine illuminations? It must be answered that the right dominations of the angels are not to be accused of the error of the other nations unto non-existent gods, but those very ones, by their own inflexions, falling away from that right leading-back which is unto the divine, by their own love, and by pride — [pride] of the things divinely seen by them, and, in a co-rational manner, unto worship. » As if he should say: It seems indeed wondrous. If [1092A] anyone, he says, wonders why the good angels suffered those nations over which they presided to fall away from the knowledge of the true God, it must be answered that this was not done by the fault of the angels, and that the right dominations of the angels ought not to be accused for the error of the other nations, which were not of Israel, unto non-existent gods — that is, because by erring they worshipped those who were not gods; but that those very ones, by their own inflexions, that is, by their own will, falling away from the right leading-back, that is, from the knowledge by which man is led back unto the divine, so that they believed [to be] gods those who were not gods; those very ones, I say, are to be accused, who by their own will, in so far as they were of free choice, slipped from the truth into error, and this out of their own love, because they loved themselves more than God, and sought their own glory, [1092B] and were therefore proud; and out of the pride of the things divinely seen by them, that is, of those things which were divinely revealed to them, and which were revealed to them also in a co-rational manner unto worship, namely the divine — that is, from which they might reasonably or probably have understood in what manner they ought to worship God. For as the Apostle says: « When they had known God, they glorified him not as God; but they became vain in their thoughts. For saying themselves to be wise [behold, pride], they were made fools, and their senseless heart was darkened [behold, the error unto non-existent gods], because they served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever [n: (Rom. I)]. » Or, 'divinely and co-rationally' [means] with God recompensing — it is understood, to them: that is, wisely and worthily [1092C] unto worship; that is, as was fitting for the worshippers of false [gods], namely gods seen by them — that is, who seemed to them gods, and were not. For in this God recompensed them wisely and reasonably: that, as the Apostle says, because they approved not to have God in [their] knowledge, God delivered them up unto a reprobate sense, that they should do the things which are not fitting, in their very selves. For they were to be punished in their very selves, who had sinned in their very selves.

There follows: « This is reported that the people of the Hebrews itself also suffered — namely this, that it withdrew from the worship of God, just as the other nations also had withdrawn unto the cult of idols; or this, that is, a like divine vengeance, because it likewise withdrew from the worship of God, and cast off the knowledge of God. For the divine voice says to Israel itself [1092D]: « Thou hast repelled the knowledge of God: and hast gone forth after thy own heart. » Namely, God being forsaken, who is worshipped within by a pure mind. Thou hast gone forth outward through the love of visible things, whither thy own heart — that is, thy desire and depraved will — was drawing thee. In all which the power of free choice appears, because without coercion man — whether aided unto good, or permitted unto evil — is inclined by his own will. This is what follows: « For neither do we have a coerced life. » For the will can be given free to a rational creature, but it cannot be coerced at all. And just as it is not in our power that the gift of divine illumination be offered to us, so it is only in our power that, once offered, it be received. For sometimes it is offered even when we are unwilling, [1093A] but it is never received except when we are willing. And when we are willing, we are willing indeed from God, because a good will is the gift of God. But when we are unwilling, we are unwilling from ourselves, because to be unwilling is nothing other than not to will: which is a desertion of the good unto non-being, and nothing, which was made without it. And so « the divine lights of provident illumination, » because through them God providently illumines, are indeed not « revealed through the proper power of providence: » that is, of those who, having received them, become provident; or 'of the things provided-for,' that is, of those who have been provided for, or predestined by God to receive them. It is to be noted that where we have *revelantur* ('are revealed'), another text has *obcaecantur* ('are blinded'); which, although they are different, yet pertain to establishing the same truth: namely that it may be shown [1093B] that whether the divine lights be revealed, that is, manifested, or blinded, that is, hidden and concealed, this stands not in the power of those receiving, but in the choice of the giver. But nevertheless, although the manifestation or concealment itself is not in their power, yet the reception never comes to be except with their will, because a rational good is that which cannot be perceived except by one who knows and wills. Therefore either it comes about, by a depraved will, that they are wholly repelled, or, by a difference of good will, that they are participated dissimilarly. This is what he says: « But of the intellectual visions, » that is, of the spiritual eyes, namely of the rational minds, « the dissimilarity makes the donation of light, » coming namely « out of the superfull, » that is, out of the exceedingly full and eminently full paternal [1093C] goodness; that donation, I say, the dissimilarity itself makes either wholly non-participating, and not distributed unto the reformation of those visions: « or it makes the participations differing, that is, small or great, obscure or clear, of the one fontal ray, and simple, and ever holding itself in the same mode, and superexpanded. » For the ray of divine illumination, descending from the fount of the good, in itself one and simple, and ever holding itself in the same mode, is superexpanded upon all rational minds, and is participated by them differently, not according to its own simplicity, but according to their diversity. For either they are depraved, and wholly repel it, and cause that it be in no way participated, nor [1093D] distributed unto their reformation; or they are dissimilarly good, and receive it differently.

There follows: « Then, because also to the other nations — out of which we also have looked back unto that — [there was], prepared unto tradition and open to all, the great and copious sea of the divine light; no alien gods indeed ruled, but the one principle of all; and unto it the angels, exercising the priesthood according to each several nation, led back their followers. » As if he should say: That good angels were set over the nations can be proved not only from this, that the Most High is said to have established the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the angels of God, but also from this, that over those nations no alien gods ruled from the beginning, but one God. For it is altogether probable [1094A] that the good Lord established in his commonwealth good ministers under himself: by whose ministry this too was afterward done, that we, who have believed out of the nations, looked back through faith unto God, and unto the fullness of his illumination, being led back through them: which assuredly they would not have done, if they had not been good. This is what he says. Then also from this it can be proved that good angels were set over the nations: namely because to those other nations, which were not of Israel — out of which nations we also, who afterward believed, looked back, turned through faith unto that great and copious sea of the divine light, which is prepared and open to all unto tradition, or bestowal, because it bestows itself and hands itself over to all who will and desire to receive it. Over those nations, namely, [1094B] no alien gods ruled, although this might seem [so], because they worshipped idols, and adored false gods. But one God ruled over them, and had dominion, because just as there is one principle of all, from whom are all things, so there is one Lord and ruler, under whose power all things are established. Who, as he is good in himself, so established good ministers under himself, as rulers and leaders, [namely] angels, and those angels led us back, following through faith, unto that very principle of ours. They led back, I say, according as they were exercising the priesthood — that is, the sacred precedence — according to each several nation; that is, each one, out of that nation in which he exercised the priesthood, that is, the sacred power, converted unto the faith those who believed, and looked back unto their principle.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

[1094C]There follows: « Melchizedek, it is to be understood, being the highest priest, most beloved by the Lord of those that exist — nay, not of those that exist, but of the truly existing most high God. » Treating of the ministry and office of the angels, he suddenly introduces a narrative about Melchizedek: not because, as certain men have supposed, he holds that Melchizedek himself was an angel, or that on this account his priesthood is to be commemorated among the ministries of the angels, but that he may show that it was not only by the work and ministry of angels, but also of the saints and of men pleasing to God, and set over other men in the things that were divine, that unbelievers from among the Gentiles were converted to the faith and worship of the true God. According to this manner, then, [1094D] by which the angels, from the office of their prelacy, exercised the priesthood among the Gentiles, converting them to the faith of the true God, it is to be understood that Melchizedek was the highest priest, being most beloved by the Lord of all that exist — nay rather, of those that do not exist, but of the truly existing most high God. The letter is intricate. But the sense is this. Since he had said that Melchizedek was most beloved by the Lord of all that exist, as though correcting his own statement — because he had called those who truly are not "existing" — he adds "of those not existing," according to what is written: « All the nations are before him as though they were not [n: (Isa. XL)]. » And, as though it were asked who then exists, he adds: « The most high God alone, who has true existence. » But that he does not say "the truly existing most high [1095A] God," « but of the truly existing most high God, this was done because of the likeness of the preceding word, so that by the same case it might answer to "of those not existing," « if of the truly existing most high God. » Or it may be read thus. It is to be understood that Melchizedek, being most beloved by the Lord of all that exist, was a priest not of any existing things whatsoever, but of the most high God who truly exists, as it is written: « For he was a priest of the most high God [n: (Gen. XIV)]. »

And there follows: « For indeed thus simply the theosophers themselves called Melchizedek not a friend of God, but also a priest. » Rightly, he says, did I say that Melchizedek is to be understood a priest, since the theosophers, that is, those who write of divine things, called him not thus simply a friend of God only, but also a priest. And why [1095B] they called him a priest he adds, saying: « Was it that they might signify openly to the wise that he converted not only from among them into him who truly is God? But moreover also others, that as highest priest he may lead them forth by that leading-back which is unto the true and sole divinity. » That Melchizedek, he says, who was not of the Jews, they called not only a friend of God, but also a priest of God — did they do this for this reason? Assuredly they did this for this reason: that they might openly signify to the wise that he converted not only from among them, that is, from Israel, who alone then seemed to be led back and converted to divine knowledge, into God himself, that is, to the faith and knowledge of that same God who truly is, but that he would also lead forth many from other nations out of the darkness of ignorance, namely by that leading-back which is unto the true [1095C] and sole divinity, that is, unto the knowledge of God. Not that Melchizedek himself is read to have converted any from Israel, which was not yet a people: unless perhaps we take Israel in the earlier fathers, of whom some perhaps through Melchizedek himself, in his own time, were led to the knowledge of God. Or so that it be read thus, namely that for this reason he was called not only a friend of God, but also a priest, because he converted — understand: the ignorant and those who knew not — unto God himself, in whom truly one must believe. And as though someone should object that Melchizedek himself, who was not of Israel but a foreigner, converted no one to the faith of God, since Israel alone knew God, he answers that not only from Israel were men converted to the faith of God, but also from other nations: which conversion of the others, namely, was accomplished through Melchizedek himself. Who then indeed, that is, when he blessed Abraham, was called a priest of the most high God, though he was not of Israel, that it might be shown that he was to lead forth many unto God, and that God had both a priest and a people not only in Israel, but also among the Gentiles. Therefore he does not say "he led forth," but « he shall lead forth, » he says. Signifying indeed something future to that time when these things were said — when either Melchizedek himself afterward by himself converted men from the Gentiles unto God, or Christ, of whom he was a type, led forth many, not only from Israel but also from all nations, through faith, unto his Church out of the darkness of unbelief.

There follows: « And this also we shall bring to the notice of thy highest [1096A] priestly understanding: that — the angel ruling over Pharaoh among the Egyptians themselves, and its own president presiding over the prince of the Babylonians, by all providence both provident of dominion and endowed with power, distributed according to the divisions — for those nations also the ministers of the true God were established as leaders of the formations by the manifestation of the vision from the angels, the angels forthwith revealing to the holy men Joseph and Daniel from God through the angels. » He adds yet another authority, from which he wishes to prove that good angels were set by God over the Gentiles: namely, that among the Egyptians the angel shows a vision to Pharaoh, and through it enjoins upon him a precaution concerning the coming barrenness; the same vision being then made manifest through Joseph; and likewise upon the prince of the Babylonians, namely Nebuchadnezzar, his own president, that is, his own [1096B] appointed one, namely his own angel, forms a vision, and afterward makes it manifest by unlocking it through Daniel. In all which it appears that God has both providence, and dominion, and power over all things, according to which, through those visions, it was discerned, or distinguished, or distributed: which visions were first revealed to the angels by God, and then forthwith through the angels to the holy men Joseph and Daniel. This is what he says: O Timothy, not only the higher things, but this also shall we bring to the notice of thy highest priestly understanding, that is, thy understanding — thou who art the highest priest — we shall bring this to thy notice, that, the angel ruling over Pharaoh among the Egyptians, and its own president ruling over the prince of the Babylonians, that is, the angel who was set over [1096C] him; by this, I say, that the angels are read to have ruled over them, there was distributed the provident and powerful quality of the divine providence and dominion according to those, namely, visions — that is, it was shown that God distributes his providence and power for the governing of the several nations; and it was also shown that for those nations the ministers of the true God were established as leaders; and how it was shown, this he adds: by the manifestation, namely, of the vision of the formations by the angels, that is, of the vision in which were displayed the formations, or figures, made by the angels in the minds of the prophets, to signify things to come — such as were the cows and the ears of grain which Pharaoh saw [n: (Gen. XLI)], and the tree and the statue which Nebuchadnezzar saw [n: (Dan. II)]. By the manifestation, therefore, of such a vision was displayed the divine providence and power, disposing the nations through the angels; the vision, I say, first revealed to the angels by God, and then forthwith revealed through the angels to the holy men, namely Joseph and Daniel, from God.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « For one is the principle and providence of all; and by no means is it to be supposed that the divinity indeed led the Jews fully, but that the angels, either specially, or equally honorably, or as opposites, or certain other gods, ruled over the other nations. » The repetition proves what he said above, that one is the principle and providence of all, that is, one God, from whom are all things, and by whom all things are ruled; and therefore by no means [1097A] is it to be supposed that the divinity led the Jews, that is, that it furnished leadership to the Jews fully, or absolutely, that is, through itself, namely without the intervening ministry of angels; but that over the other nations the angels ruled specially, that is, particularly, or with a less excellent power; or equally honorably, that is, with a power equal and like to the divine dominion; or as opposites (understand: with opposing sovereignties), just as the apostate angel is read to have said that he would set his seat toward the north and would be like to the Most High in power [n: (Isa. XIV)]. Or, again, it is not to be supposed that certain other gods ruled over the other nations, as though all things were not subject to the power and dominion of the one and true God. It is not, he says, so to be supposed, as though the true God had power [1097B] over the Jews alone, and over the other nations either angels, or certain other gods, ruled with a power either equal or unequal, yet contrary and foreign to the divine dominion. Or let it be read thus: By no means is it to be supposed that the Divinity, through itself, without an interposed subject angelic power, furnished leadership to the Jews; but that the angels ruled over the other nations specially, that is, particularly, namely among nations of a power and dignity inferior to that of the Jews themselves; or equally honorably, that is, among nations, namely, equally powerful and honorable; or even among opposing nations, which, namely, were opposed and contrary to the Jews themselves, assailing and oppressing them. It is not, he says, so to be supposed — namely that God for this reason led the Jews through himself [1097C] as though they were more honorable than all the other nations, and left the other nations, as inferior and baser, to the angelic dominion — since in other peoples many are not doubted to have been not only equally honorable, but even stronger and more powerful, oppressing the Jews themselves by their power and strength. For what has been said: « When the Most High divided the nations, he set the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the angels of God; but the Lord's portion is his people, Jacob the cord of his inheritance; » is not to be so understood, as though he had given the other nations to be ruled by angels, retaining Israel alone to himself, that is, to his own providence and governance — as if either Israel itself, without angels, or the angels, without him, [1097D] disposed the remaining nations; since both Michael is read to be set over Israel, and God is recorded in the sacred eloquence to possess and govern all nations. Not thus, therefore, is what is written to be understood: « But that eloquence, » in which, namely, this is said to be taken, « is according to the sacred understanding itself, » that is, according to such an understanding as does not disagree with the sacred, that is, with the truth. And this is the sacred understanding: that we understand this saying not as if, that is, as though, God dividing our leadership, that is, the leadership of the human race, with certain other gods or angels — dividing it, I say, into the principate of Israel and into the leadership of the nation, God being content, namely, with the principate over Israel, that is, retaining it to himself, so that [1098A] he alone should be to that people prince and leader. Not, I say, is it so to be understood. But so as, that is, as though, the exalted providence itself, or the providence of the Exalted One, which is one and at once of all, because it provides for all — that providence, I say, salutarily distributing all men by the restorative hand-leadings of their own angels, that is, by leaderships, by which as blind men in the darkness of ignorance they were led by the hand, and restored to the light of truth; and Israel alone being converted to the illumination and knowledge of the true God almost beyond all nations. For on this account Israel alone is read to have been received by God into a portion, and led; because it alone then, out of all nations, was called back to the knowledge of God, and established in the divine worship. « Whence, he says, theology, signifying that he, [1098B] that is God, » « possessed Israel unto the service of the true God, » says: « It became the portion of the Lord, » namely Israel itself. Thus, therefore, Israel was his portion, which was so possessed by him that it possessed and had him.

There follows: « But showing that he distributed even it, man by man, to the other nations, he said that Michael led the Jewish people, unto a certain one of the holy angels, that through him the one principle of all might be known. » In this, he says, that Holy Scripture said Michael led the Jewish people, it plainly shows that he, that is God, distributed also among the other nations, namely, leadership man by man, that is, one by one, to a certain one, that is, to some one of the holy angels — or, to say it more expressly, one nation to one, or each nation [1098C] to each, or the several to the several: distributed it, I say, that through him, namely the angel, that is, that each nation, through its own angel, might know the one principle of all, from whom are all things, and under whom all are ruled; so that, in order that Holy Scripture might show this, he says, it said that Michael was the leader of the Jewish people, whom God had specially taken up to be guarded under his own providence and governance. For, in saying this, it plainly taught us that there is one providence which presides over all in governing, under which the angels ruling over the several nations extend, or promote, those same nations that follow them by essential will, that is, by free choice naturally implanted, [1098D] into their own proper principle, namely by suggesting and helping; Scripture, he says, said that Michael led the Jewish people, whose leader it had elsewhere recorded him to be from God. In this « plainly teaching us that there is one providence of all, superessentially set above, » that is, presiding not only potentially, but even naturally, over all invisible and visible virtues at once, namely of angels and of men. For this is what stands as good in both. Showing also « that all the angels under that providence, ruling over the several nations, extend each, » or the several virtues of those nations, namely, into (understand: God) himself, « as into their own proper principle: » the virtues, I say, « following [1099A] by essential will, » that is, by free natural choice. For the angels arouse human minds to love God [1100A] by suggesting virtues, not compelled by necessity, but « following by will. »

## TITLE OF CHAPTER X. *A recapitulation of the ordering of the angelic synagogue.*

## THE TEXT.

[1099A]

*Thus, therefore, is the most honorable disposition of the minds about God connected, ordered from the perfective illumination, immediately ascending into it, more hidden: and by the more manifest illumination of the divinity it is purged, and illuminated, and perfected. More hidden indeed [1099B] as being more invisible, and more simplified and unified. But more manifest as given before, and shining first, and more universal, and having form more poured out into it, as is fitting. But from it again proportionally the second, and from the second the third, and from the third the hierarchy according to us, according to that same law of the well-adorning ordination, in the divine harmony and analogy unto the whole adornment of all good at once, is led back to the sovereign principle and consummation of the hierarchy. And all are manifesters, even the angels of those who are before them. They themselves indeed the most honorable of God who moves them, but proportionally the rest of those moved by God. For the superessential harmony of all foresaw for each of the rational and intellectual ones, with sacred adornment [1099C] and ordered leading, as much as each order of the hierarchies itself is sacredly and becomingly placed. And we see every hierarchy divided into first, and middle, and last virtues. But it also distinguished the very disposition — speaking specially, through each one — by those divine harmonies themselves. For which reason the theologians say that the most divine seraphim themselves cry one to another [n: (Isai. IV)]*, *openly declaring this, as I suppose: that the first themselves hand on the theological utterances to the second. But I would add perhaps, and this not incongruously, that each celestial and human mind, according to itself also, has special first, and middle, and last ordinations and virtues, manifested proportionally through each of the hierarchic illuminations, unto the aforesaid proper anagogies: [1099D] through which each is made, insofar as this itself is both lawful and possible, in participation of the most superunknown purgation, of the fullest light, of the fore-perfected perfection. For nothing is perfect through itself, needing the universal perfection, save only the truly most perfect and fore-perfect.*

## EXPOSITION.

The title of the tenth chapter is: A recapitulation of the ordering of the angelic synagogue. For here is briefly repeated what was said above, namely, the ordered synagogue, that is, the congregation, or angelic multitude, in all its first, and second, and third members. And the chapter thus begins:

« Thus, therefore, is the most honorable disposition of the minds about God connected, ordered from the perfective illumination, immediately ascending into it, [1100A] more hidden and more manifest; and by the illumination of the divinity it is purged, and illuminated, and perfected. » He speaks of the first hierarchy, which consists of three orders — seraphim, cherubim, and thrones. This disposition, then, or ordination, of the minds, that is, of the spirits, the most honorable or most excellent of all, [1100B] is connected about God, that is, both joined among themselves in concord, and immediately associated to God; thus ordered from the perfective illumination, that is, the divine, which alone perfectly shines and illuminates. For whosoever are illuminated by it are indeed, in shining, made like to it, and in illuminating others, imitate it. Yet neither in that they shine are they made equal to it, nor in that they illuminate are they compared to it. Therefore this hierarchy, which alone is illuminated by it immediately, is singularly ordered from the perfective illumination. Others, indeed, who receive the lower illuminations mediately, are also fittingly disposed and ordered lower down. But this hierarchy, which is ordered from the perfective, or teletarchic, and divine illumination, which is the sovereign [1100C] of sanctification, that is, the first and greatest and singular cause of sanctification — or, to say it more expressly, is made pontiff, that is, is raised into the pontifical order, or dignity — is fittingly set above all in dignity, namely by immediately ascending into that illumination, being more hidden, and more manifest, and by that same illumination of the divinity being purged, and illuminated, and perfected. But how the first hierarchy, from the fact that it receives the divine illumination immediately, is both more hidden and more manifest, he sets forth in the following words, saying: « More hidden indeed as being more invisible, and more simplified and vivified. But more manifest as that which, given before, shines, and shines first, and is more universal, and has form [1100D] more poured out into it, as is fitting. » It is more hidden, he says, in that it is more invisible, and more simplified, and unified. In this it is more hidden, that it is more invisible, and nearer to the simplicity and unity of the Godhead. But it is more manifest, inasmuch as it shines from the light given to it before, that is, before it was given to others: therefore it shines first, and more excellently. It is also more manifest because it is more universal, in which one likeness stands in many, since that is more known which is more common and suits more. And whence it is more universal and more alike, he consequently shows in turn, namely, because the form, that is, the divine illumination, from which it is formed so as to shine, is more, that is, more expressly, or more abundantly, poured out into it than into the other hierarchies below it. But the sense is this: because, namely, the divine illumination is poured first into this hierarchy, therefore [1101A] it is itself more perfectly illuminated. And by how much the more perfectly they who are in it, the spirits, receive the one illumination, by so much the more perfectly and clearly do they, shining in that one form of one light, become one; and what in them is diverse by nature and manifoldly distinguished, when the one form of clarity comes upon all, does not appear unlike. Thus, therefore, this hierarchy, because it shines first, shines more perfectly; and because it shines more perfectly, it shines more universally, or more alike, or more expressly; because it shines more expressly, it shines more manifestly. That, then, which is essentially more hidden, is formally more manifest; and that which is subtler by nature is clearer by grace.

There follows: « But from it again proportionally the second, and from the second the third, and from the third the hierarchy according to [1101B] us, according to that same law of the well-adorning ordination, in the divine harmony and analogy, unto the whole adornment of all good at once, is led back to the sovereign principle and consummation of the hierarchy. » From it, he says, the first hierarchy, is led back or converted the second, and by the second the third is converted, and by the third is converted that hierarchy, namely, which is according to us. For the first angelic hierarchy converts the second, the second the third, the third angelic converts the human. But how it converts he shows, saying: Unto the sovereign principle, and the consummation of the whole good adornment at once, that is, unto God, who is the principle and perfection of every good and beautiful disposition. And it leads back hierarchically, that is, according to the office, or [1101C] ordination, or law of the hierarchies, in which it is ordained that the higher, according to their manner and virtue, by illuminating and suggesting to the lower, convert them to their principle. And they convert according to that same law of the well-adorning ordination, that is, of the divine ordination, which adorns all things: whose law and institution it is, that some be illuminated by others, and converted in divine harmony and analogy, that is, in the concord and proportion conferred by God upon the universe. For in this, that the participation of the good is transfused through some to others proportionally, the concord in the universe is perfected and consummated. But that he says, "is again led back," is to be so understood as by a second leading-back. For the first leading-back is when [1101D] the first, illuminated by God himself, are converted unto God himself. The second, when the second are converted by the first, or the third by the second. « And all are manifesters, even the angels of those who are before them. » All the celestial spirits, he says, are manifesters, and angels, that is, messengers, of those who are before them. For what they receive from those preceding, they announce and manifest to those following after them.

There follows: « They themselves indeed the most honorable of God who moves them, but proportionally the rest of those moved by God. » He had said that all are messengers of those preceding to those following: now he subdistinguishes, that they themselves indeed, the most honorable, that is, the most excellent spirits, who have God alone before them, are messengers of God himself moving them by inspiration, that through them his secrets [1102A] he may reveal to those following. The rest, who follow after them, are messengers of those same, who are moved by God. Messengers, I say, they are proportionally, that is: the second, of the first, and of God through the first; the third, of the second, and of the first through the second; but of God, through the second and the first; and in this manner the rest that follow after this. But how the several proportionally reveal the divine secrets, he sets forth in the following words, showing that to each is given only so much power as befits the order and place in which it is set. This is what he says: « For the superessential harmony of all foresaw for each of the rational and intellectual ones, with sacred adornment and ordered leading, as much as each order of the hierarchies itself is sacredly and becomingly placed. » [1102B] The superessential harmony, he says, that is, the divine providence, which disposed all things concordantly, foresaw only so much, namely of virtue or power, for each of the rational or intellectual ones, with sacred adornment and ordered leading, namely sacredly adorning and orderly leading; foresaw only so much, I say, as each order of the hierarchies is sacredly and becomingly placed — this, as much as befits the holiness and becomingness of the order of each. Concerning which order in each hierarchy he adds distinctions, saying: « And we see every hierarchy divided into first, and middle, and last virtues, or orders. » And not only each hierarchy, but also each order through the several hierarchies. This is what follows: « But it also distinguished the very [1102C] disposition — speaking specially through each one — by those divine harmonies themselves. » The divine providence itself, he says, distinguished, or distinguished apart, the very disposition, namely each one, that is, the order, by the divine harmonies, so that, namely, there might be distinction, and there might be no discrepancy. And this is to be said specially through the several hierarchies: the several orders have special distinctions.

There follows: « For which reason the theologians themselves say that the most divine seraphim themselves cry one to another: openly, as I openly suppose, declaring that the first themselves hand on the theological utterances to the second. » For which reason — namely, because the several orders are distinct within themselves — therefore the theologians themselves say that the seraphim themselves, [1102D] who are most divine, that is, nearest to the divinity, cry one to another, as is read in Isaiah [n: (Isai. VI)]. In this, namely, that they say they cry one to another, openly declaring that the theological, that is, divine utterances, they who are first in that order hand on to those who are constituted second in the same order. In which it is clear that one and the same order has first and second. But if this is truly taken of the first and highest order, of those following it can by no means be doubted.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « But I would add perhaps, and this not incongruously, that each celestial and human mind, according to itself also, has special first, and middle, and last ordinations and virtues, assigned through each of the hierarchic [1103A] illuminations, manifested proportionally unto its proper anagogies: through which each is made, insofar as this itself is both lawful and possible, in participation of the most superunknown purgation, and of the fullest light, and of the fore-perfected perfection. » The sense is this: that not only is the universal hierarchy divided into a first, and a middle, and a last hierarchy, and the several hierarchies into first, and middle, and last orders, and the several orders into first, and middle, and last spirits; but even the several angelic, or human, spirits themselves are, within themselves, virtually distinct, containing first, and middle, and last virtues: through which, by their own anagogies, that is, upward-leadings, or ascensions, from the lowest to the middle, and from the middle to the highest, ascending proportionally according to the hierarchic [1103B] illuminations, they are made partakers, as far as is possible for them, of the divine purgation, which is most unknown, or most hidden, because it purges inwardly; and of the divine light, which is fullest, because it puts all darkness to flight; and of the divine perfection, which is fore-perfected, because it is prior to all in eternity, and higher in dignity, and fuller in truth. But he calls the hierarchic illuminations proportional for this reason, because in the sacred powers, where some are constituted higher, others lower, they do not all perceive the divine illuminations in one manner. For to the higher and more capacious, more is bestowed in the gifts of grace; to the lower, according to the measure of their capacity, less is granted to be participated. According to this manner, then, by which, whether in the several [1103C] hierarchies to the diverse orders, and to the diverse minds, the divine illuminations are differently bestowed, each mind also within itself, in those same illuminations, growing by a reasonable difference from lesser to greater, is advanced. This is what he says: « But I would add this also, not incongruously, » as if he should say: Not only concerning the several hierarchies or orders can I fittingly say that they have first, and middle, and last orders, or spirits; but this also perhaps I can, not incongruously, add to what has been said above, namely, that each celestial and human mind, according to itself, or in itself, has special, that is, proper, first, and middle, and last ordinations and virtues, that is, virtues ordained in the first, and middle, and last place within it. To [1103D] what end it has differing virtues, he adds, [1104A] namely, unto its proper anagogies — that each, namely, may have its own proper ascensions, and advancements unto the better, as it is written: « He hath disposed ascensions in his heart [n: (Psal. LXXXIII)]; » and again: « They go from virtue to virtue: and the God of gods shall be seen in Sion. » And unto these anagogies, that is, ascensions, are disposed the virtues, some lower, some higher, so that, by ascending from the lower to the higher, they may at length be made partakers of the highest good, which is the God of gods in Sion. Each spirit, he says, has its own proper virtues, first, and middle, and last, unto its proper anagogies, that is, ascensions, to be made. Anagogies, I say, already spoken of, that is, which we have already spoken of above, namely, through each order of the hierarchic illuminations: [1104B] because, when we showed how, in the distribution of the hierarchies, the distinct orders perceive differing illuminations, we also demonstrated in what manner among them the lower ascend proportionally, that is, by a reasonable difference of advancement, through the higher unto the highest. Therefore he said the anagogies of the hierarchic illuminations manifested proportionally, or manifested in proportions, or from the preceding treatment, in which this was demonstrated, that those ascensions are made proportionally; or manifested proportionally in this, because by how much the more the ascension grows, by so much the more the knowledge grows. On account of these ascensions, therefore, the grades of virtues are disposed, by which ascensions, namely, each thing, that is, each mind ascending [1104C] through them, is made in participation, that is, is made partaker of the most superunknown purgation, and of the fullest light, and of the fore-perfected perfection. Partaker, I say, it is made "as this itself," that is, that it may be made partaker, is both lawful and possible: lawful, as to the dignity of the good to be participated; possible, as to its own capacity.

There follows: « For nothing is perfect through itself, needing the universal perfection, save the truly most perfect, and fore-perfect. » Rightly, he says, did I call the divine perfection fore-perfected; because all things that are perfect are perfect from it; because nothing is perfect through itself, and there is nothing which is not through itself imperfect, and which is not through itself needy of the invisible, or of every perfection, save that highest good: [1104D] which is both truly most perfect, because nothing is lacking to it; and fore-perfect, because its fullness is eternal.

## TITLE OF CHAPTER XI. *Why all the celestial essences are commonly named celestial virtues.*

## THE TEXT.

[1103D]

*But these things being defined, it behooves to understand that which is worthy: for what cause we are wont to call all the angelic essences alike celestial virtues. For it is not to be said, as in the angels, that the very disposition of the holy virtues is the last of all. And indeed the dispositions of the superposed essences partake the holy and comely illumination of the last; [1104D] but the last in no wise the illumination of the first. And for whose sake are all the divine intellects indeed named celestial virtues; but the seraphim, and thrones, and dominations in no wise. For the extremes are partaken of by the most excellent, in the universal properties. For the angels themselves, and before the angels the archangels, and the principalities, and the powers, ordered after the virtues by theology itself, are often commonly called by us, together with the other [1105A] holy essences, celestial virtues. But we say that, using commonly in all the naming of celestial virtues, we do not introduce a certain confusion of the properties of each disposition; but, because they are divided into three according to themselves by a supermundane reason — all the divine intellects — into essence, and virtue, and operation, when we call all of them at once, or certain of them unobservantly, either celestial essences, or celestial virtues, it is to be supposed that we signify periphrastically those of whom the discourse is, from that essence or virtue which is through each of them. For neither is it easy for us now to annex the superposed property of the holy virtues, already distinguished by us, altogether to the lesser essences, in a turning-about of the unconfused ordination of the angelic adornments. For according to the reason often rightly [1105B] rendered by us, the superfirmed dispositions indeed have abundantly the sacred properties even of the lesser; but the last do not have the superposed universalities of the greater, the illuminations first appearing particularly into them, distributed to them proportionally through the first.*

## EXPOSITION.

The title of the eleventh chapter is: Why all the celestial essences are commonly called virtues. This is the question: since only one order among the celestial spirits is called virtues, why is this name commonly attributed to all. And he says:

« But these things being defined, it behooves to understand that which is worthy: for what cause we are wont to call all the angelic essences alike celestial virtues. » [1105C] This indeed is worthy of inquiry; because it is not established that the cause here is the one which we render when we call all the celestial essences angels: namely, that the order of the angels is the last, and therefore its name is assumed to the higher orders, because its property is partaken by them; since all the higher, just as they partake all the properties of the lower, so also fittingly sometimes assume their name. But here we cannot say likewise, when we name all the celestial spirits virtues; because, since certain orders are lower than the virtues themselves, they, just as they do not partake in the property of the higher, so also it seems that they ought not to partake in the name. This is what he says: « For it is not [1105D] to be said, as in the angels, namely, that the disposition of the holy virtues itself is the last of all. » For if this were true, it would be no wonder if all the other orders partook their name, because they would partake their property as being higher. This is what follows: « And indeed of the last essences, » that is, of the last spirits, « the dispositions of the superposed essences partake the holy and comely illumination; but the last, » understand: dispositions, « in no wise, » namely, partake the illumination of the first essences.

There follows: « And for whose sake are all the divine intellects indeed named celestial virtues; but the seraphim, and thrones, and dominations in no wise. » [1106A] It is worthy, he says, to understand for what — understand: thing — cause all the divine intellects are named celestial virtues, whereas the seraphim, and thrones, and dominations are in no wise named. For that they are named angels is no wonder, because the angels are last, and their property is universally partaken by the higher. This is what he says: « For the extremes, » understand: essences, such as are the angels, « are partaken of by the most excellent virtues » in all their properties; but not conversely do the properties of the higher come universally to the participation of the lower. Therefore it is a wonder how the angels, and those who are before the angels, the archangels, and the principalities, and the powers, assume the name of virtues, since they do not partake the property; because « after the virtues [1106B] they are ordered by theology itself, » that is, they are reported to be ordered after the virtues by the divine Scripture. And yet « together with the other holy essences they are called by us celestial virtues. »

There follows: « But we say that, using commonly in all the naming of celestial virtues, we do not introduce a certain confusion of the properties of each disposition. » Now he resolves the question, why the name of virtues is attributed to the lower orders. « We say, he says, that we, using the naming of celestial virtues, commonly also for all, do not bring in any confusion of the properties of each disposition, » that is, by this, that we make the name common, we do not confound the property of distinction. But rather, when [1106C] we name the lower orders virtues, we signify not the property of that order, but the virtue common to all. For all the divine intellects are divided into three, not among themselves, one, namely, in relation to another, but each according to itself, or in itself, « by a supermundane reason, » that is, spiritual. For that they are divided is not made from a consideration of parts, where there is not simplicity of essence, but there is a spiritual distinction, where not the whole is discerned into parts, but the nature into properties. Afterward he adds into what three each spirit is divided within itself, namely « into essence, and virtue, and operation. » For in every spirit these three are. First, essence, in which it subsists; then virtue, according to which it is strong; then operation, [1106D] through which it effects. « When therefore we call all together, » namely spirits, « or certain of them, unobservantly, » that is, indistinctly or commonly, « either celestial essences, or celestial virtues, it is to be supposed that we signify those, of whom the discourse is, periphrastically, » that is, by circumlocution, « from that essence, or virtue, which is through each of them, » that is, which is common to all, not from that which is properly singular, which discerns the dignity of its order. But why he is unwilling to attribute the singular property of one order to the other subject orders, he shows, saying: « For neither, he says, is it easy for us to annex the superposed property of the holy virtues, already distinguished by us, » that is, properly and singularly attributed to them, « to the lesser essences, » or to bestow it, [1107A] « in a turning-about of the unconfused ordination of the angelic adornments; » because if I should do this, I should turn about, or pervert, the ordination of the angelic adornments, which is unconfused. But how the ordination of the angelic adornments, that is, of the angelic orders beautifully or comely disposed, is unconfused, he shows, namely, because they keep their own distinction, and do not mingle themselves with the higher, in whose properties they have no part. « The superfirmed dispositions indeed, » that is, the higher orders, « have abundantly, » or fully, « even the sacred properties of the lesser; but the last do not have the superposed universalities of the greater. » A little above we already said how, there, where God is all in all, anything proper can belong to any one, which [1107B] is not common to all. Here too the author has not altogether kept silence how this is to be understood, in that he says: « They have abundantly. » In this, then, is the property to be understood, which befits the higher, [1108A] does not befit the lower; that the higher have abundantly whatever the lower have; but the lower do not have abundantly whatever the higher have. For what can be so great there, which does not pass into the communion of all — there, where charity is common, which is greater than all? Therefore all things are of all. But this alone is proper there, that it is abundantly to any one what is not to all; because the higher virtues indeed have universally and abundantly those of the lower; but the lower do not equally have the virtues of the higher universally, that is, according to all fullness, of the divine illuminations, « only particularly first appearing into them. » Not first appearing into them, but first particularly into them. For into others, that is, [1108B] into the higher, they first appear universally, and then afterward through those first ones they are distributed proportionally, that is, according to proportion, not according to all its fullness.

## TITLE OF CHAPTER XII. *Why hierarchies according to men are called angels.*

## THE TEXT.

[1107B]

*But this also is inquired by those studiously beholding the intelligible oracles. For if the participants of the more excellent universalities of the virtues are not the last, for what cause is the highest priest according to us named an angel of God almighty by the oracles? [n: (Malach. II; Apoc. II.)] But there is not a contrary reason, as I suppose, to the things before defined. For we say that [1107C] by the universal and superposed virtue of the greater adornments the last are left behind. For they partake the middle and proportional according to the one conjunctive society of all at once: such as is that the order of the holy cherubim partakes wisdom and a higher knowledge. But under them the dispositions of the essences do indeed themselves also partake wisdom and knowledge, particular, however, in relation to those, and subject. And indeed to be altogether in participation of wisdom and of knowledge is common to all deiform intellects. But attentively, and firstly, or secondly, or below, is by no means common; but as for each one before, its proper analogy is defined. And this, of all the divine minds, one perhaps not erring will define. For as the first have more abundantly the holy and beautiful [1107D] properties of the lesser, so the last have those of the first; not however alike, but below. Nothing therefore, as I suppose, is inordinate, if theology also calls the highest priest according to us an angel, according to the proper virtue of the angels partaking of the prophetic property, and, unto a manifestative likeness of them, extended as far as is possible for men. But thou wilt find that theology calls both gods, and the celestial essences above us, and those among us most beloved of God, and wonderful men. And indeed the divine secret, superessentially at once remote from all, and set above, and none of those things which are from it can properly, or at all, be named like to it. Nevertheless whatsoever, both of the intellectual [1108B] and of the rational, is universally converted to the unity of it, and whatever virtue, and is unceasingly extended to its divine illuminations, as far as is possible, according to virtue — if it is just to say it — is made worthy by divine imitation, and by a divine univocation.*

## EXPOSITION.

The title of the twelfth chapter is: Why the hierarchies according to men are called angels. The sense of it is: [1108C] Why those who are hierarchies, that is, the sacred princes according to men or among men — such as are the highest pontiffs, or any priests and the other ministers of the word of God — why, namely, those are called angels, since it was said above that the lower, just as they do not partake the properties of the higher, so also ought not to assume their names. For if the order of the angels, because it is lower than the virtues, cannot partake their name according to their property, neither can men (because they are undoubtedly lower than the angels) usurp their name according to their property. But this question is resolved by that which we said above: that the gifts of spiritual grace, which pass into the communion of all, [1108D] also bring their appellation into the participation of all; and although, by the fact that they are possessed singularly through excellence by certain ones, they make a distinct appellation, yet by the fact that in some manner they are common, they also sometimes, according to the requirement of the causes, bring their names to a common appellation.

« But this also is inquired by those who studiously behold the intelligible oracles. » By those studiously beholding, that is, by the studious inspectors of the intelligible oracles, that is, of the divine oracles — which are intelligible, that is, spiritual and profound, made concerning intelligible things — is inquired, I say, this, namely, why men set over others are called angels. [1109A] But why this is inquired he subjoins the reason: « For if the last, that is, the lower orders, are not partaking of the virtues of the higher universalities, » that is, of the properties which are in the higher universally, or, to say it more expressly, universally, that is, fully and perfectly: « for what cause then is the priest, who according to us » or among us, namely men, « is the highest, named by the oracles an angel of God almighty? » For if he does not have the singularity of the property, why does he assume the expression of the appellation? It seems contrary that a name of distinction should be brought to communion. But yet, he says, « this reason, » or assertion, « is not contrary, as I suppose, to the things before defined, » that is, to those which were defined before, namely concerning the distinction of the several ones. For in [1109B] this, that we concede such a communion of appellation to the many, we do not take away the distinction of the several ones. « For we truly say that the last, » or lowest, namely orders, « are left behind by the universal and superposed virtue of the greater adornments, » that is, of the more excellent orders, so that, namely, they do not partake the virtues of the higher according to that universality, or totality, or fullness by which those partake. And yet they can sometimes fittingly partake their name; because, although they do not partake their virtue according to an equal fullness, they nevertheless partake it according to a like imitation.

« For they partake, he says, the middle and the proportional, » understand: virtue — that is, they partake [1109C] their virtue, and though not according to the highest participation, in which they would be equal, yet they partake according to a middle, or moderate and lower, participation, in which they can be alike; but this participation is made not according to the singular perfection of each one, but « according to the one and conjunctive society of all at once, » that is, not according to that which is singular to each one, but according to that which is common to all. And because it is one, that is, common to all, in it all are at once joined and associated. And so, according to that which is common to all, the singular names are drawn to a common signification; because, as we said, even that which through excellence [1109D] is proper to certain ones is, through participation, common to all. « Such as is that the order of the holy cherubim partakes wisdom, and a higher knowledge, » etc. By the subjoined example he proves what he said: that that which certain ones alone excellently possess comes, according to a lower communion, into the participation of all; such as is this, that the order of the holy cherubim partakes wisdom and a higher knowledge. « But the dispositions of the essences, » that is, the orders of spirits which are under the cherubim themselves, « do indeed themselves also partake wisdom and knowledge; but particular, however, and subject in relation to those, » that is, not so perfectly nor so excellently as they. And truly not the cherubim alone partake wisdom and knowledge, but also others lower; [1110A] because « to be altogether, » that is, universally, « in the participation of wisdom and knowledge is common to all deiform intellects, » that is, to all spirits conformable and like to God through the reason implanted in them. To partake wisdom in some manner is indeed common to all. But « to partake it attentively and firstly, » that is, expressly and principally, « or secondly, or even to partake it below, is by no means common to all. » For those who do not partake firstly partake secondly, or below, that is, they partake more lowly and more imperfectly; but they do not also partake firstly; because whoever have perfection have also the beginning; but not whoever have the beginning can straightway have perfection. « But » they have each thing only [1110B] « as it is defined to each one, » or dispensed, or as some one thing is determinately assigned, « according to its proper analogy, » that is, according to the rule, or manner, or proper measure, which was predestined and foreseen for it before all things in the eternal providence of God. « But this, » namely that the lower partake the virtues of the higher not according to fullness, yet in some manner, perhaps « someone will define, » or affirm, « of all the divine minds, » that is, of the rational spirits, « not erring » in this, because it is true. « For indeed as the first, » and the higher orders, « have more abundantly the holy and beautiful properties of the lesser, so the last themselves and the lesser have those properties which are of the former: not however alike, but below, » that is, more imperfectly than they. Therefore, [1110C] he says, « as I suppose, nothing is inordinate, » understand: was or is, « if theology calls the highest priest according to us an angel, » that is, him who according to us men discharges the highest priesthood, or calls him an angel according to us, because, namely, he announces to us the word of God; and therefore an angel, because « partaking according to his proper virtue, » that is, according to the grace given to him from his proper office: « partaking, » I say, « of the prophetic property » of the angels, because it belongs to him to prophesy, and to announce the word of God as the angels announce. And him, I say, also « extended, » or advanced, or exalted, unto the manifestative likeness of them, namely of the angels, because in this he is like the angels, that he manifests [1110D] or reveals the secrets of God for the instruction of his subjects. Nor is it a wonder if men are called angels, since angels and men alike have been called gods.

This is what he says: « But thou wilt find that theology calls even gods the celestial and higher essences themselves, » that is, the angels, and not only those, but « also certain ones » among us, that is, men of our kind, namely « wonderful, and most beloved of God. » But why men are called angels, or men gods, he subjoins the cause: namely, because the divinity, although it is secret and remote, according to the excellence of its nature, from every creature, is nevertheless in some manner conceived and partaken by the rational minds which turn themselves through virtue to its unity and illumination; and therefore, inasmuch as they are [1111A] partakers of the divinity, they can in some manner not unfittingly be called gods.

This is what he says: « And indeed the divine secret, » that is, the secret of the divinity, « both is remote and is set above, superessentially, at once above all things; and none of those which are from it, » understand: created, « can at all and properly be named like to it; » because the Creator and the creature cannot expressly be alike. « Nevertheless whatsoever virtue of the intellectual and the rational, » that is, of the angels, « and, » to say it universally, « whatsoever [1112A] virtue, » whether of angels or of men, « is converted to the unity of it, » namely of the divinity; and whatsoever virtue is unceasingly extended to receive the divine illuminations of that same Deity, that virtue is made worthy of divine imitation through likeness, and of divine univocation through appellation: made worthy, I say, is that virtue according to virtue, that is, worthy in so far as it is virtue. Yet only if it is just to say this, that any virtue, however great, can be worthy of « divine imitation, and divine univocation. »

## TITLE OF CHAPTER XIII. *Why the prophet Isaiah is said to have been purged by a seraph.*

## THE TEXT.

[1111B]

*Come, let us consider this also according to our power: for what reason one of the seraphim is said by the theologians to have been sent [n: (Isai. VI)]. For someone may answer that it is not one of the subordinate angels, but a certain one of the greatest and innermost essences, that purges the priest. Some therefore say that, according to the definition of the society of all the intellects already rendered before, the oracle does not name one of the first minds about God to have come unto the purgation of the theologian; but that a certain one of the angels excelling us, performing the sacrifice of the prophet's purgation, was called seraph by equivocation, on account of the fiery and celestial washing away of the aforesaid sins, and the raising up of the purged one into the divine obedience. And they say the oracle said 'one of the seraphim' simply, [1111C] not one of those set about God, but of the purgative virtues excelling us. But another furnished me a certain not too unfitting apology concerning this kind of state. For he says that the great angel who then was, forming the vision to teach the theologian divine things, referred his own purgative sacrifice unto God, and after God unto the pre-operative hierarchy. And is not this reason then truthful? For he who said this says: How the divine virtue, coming into all things, fills them, and immeasurably penetrates through all, and again is invisible to all — not only as being superessentially remote from all, but also as secretly letting into all things its provident operations. But nevertheless it also shines above proportionally in all the intellectual beings, and, bringing its own [1111D] illumination into the most precious essences, through those as the first ones distributes itself in well-ordered fashion into others established under them, according to the contemplative commensuration of each disposition. Which, that I may say it more openly, also through examples proper — though deficient in relation to God, remote from all, yet more manifest to us. The distributions of the solar ray, well distributed into the first matter, fill it, the most lucid of all, and through it more manifestly it declares its own splendors. But approaching grosser matters it has a dimmer distributive over-appearance, from the matters to be illuminated in relation to the distributive habit of illumination in point of opportuneness; and a little afterward, from this, it is contracted to what is almost perfectly undistributed. Again the heat of fire distributes itself more into the more capacious things, and into those well suited and easy [1112B] to its own likeness. But toward the essences contrary to its re-formings, it manifests no hidden trace of its primal operation. And this the more, because to those things which are not cognate it is admitted through the things possessing what is opportune to it — first, inasmuch as it makes things easily movable ignited from the fiery ones, and through these heating proportionally either water, or something else of the things not easily kindled. According to this reason then of natural ordination, the supernatural ordination itself of every good adornment, visible and invisible, fittingly manifests to the most exalted essences the brightness of illumination first appearing, as in the most copious outpourings; and through those the essences which are after partake the divine ray. For these first ones, knowing God, and supereminently desiring the divine [1112C] virtue, and to become pre-operative, as far as is possible, with a virtue like to God, have been made worthy also in action; and they themselves extend deiformly the essences after them unto a like virtue, as virtue, copiously delivering to them from the brightness supervening upon them, and those again to their subjects; and through each one the first delivers to that which is after it. Does not the water itself also proportionally reach into all? God then is at once, to all the illuminated, the principle of illuminating — by nature indeed, and truly and properly, as the essence of light, and causal of its very being and seeing. Then, deiformly and God-likely remaining superposed, transferring through itself the divine lights after it into each one, into that. Therefore the essences of all the remaining ones at once [1112D] marvel at the most excellent disposition of the celestial minds, as, according to what is consequent, the principle after God of all sacred and divine knowledge and of divine imitation — the divine illumination being distributed, as it were, through those into all, and into us. Wherefore they also refer every sacred and God-like operation unto God as the causal one; then unto the first deiform intellects as the first operators of divine things, and masters. Does not then the first disposition of the holy angels have, more than all together, the fiery property, and the poured-out tradition of the divine wisdom, and the mystical property of the most exalted knowledge of the divine illuminations, and, bearing the sedent property, signifying the divine reception. But the dispositions themselves of the subordinate essences do indeed partake the fiery, the wise, and the knowing receptive virtue of God — but below, and looking to the first [1113A] ones, and through them, as made worthy by divine imitation to be pre-operative, brought back into what is possible of deiformity. The said holy properties, therefore, of which the participation comes about through the first ones for those subsisting after them, they place back in those very ones, after God, as in hierarchies. He says therefore these things, saying [n: (ibid.)]: That the vision descending from her was received by him for the theologian, through one of the holy and blessed angels ruling over us, and that he referred back his illuminative leading-by-the-hand into that holy contemplation before. And he saw the most exalted essences sitting above — as far as is to be said in symbols — placed after God, and about God, and with God; and, more sublime than all these themselves in a super-arcane way, the super-principal summit super-placed in the midst of the super-firmed virtues. The theologian himself therefore learned by the visions [1113B] that, according to every superessential super-excellence, the divine is incomparably super-placed above every invisible and visible virtue of all things. And that it is remote from all as universal, nor like even to the first essences of the things that are. Moreover, that it is itself the principle of all, and the substance-making cause, and, in secret singularity, the immutable foundation of the things that are — from which being, and well-being, is even to the supremely established virtues themselves. Then he was taught the same deiform virtues of the most holy seraphim; by their sacred surname indeed — which is the fiery, concerning which we shall speak a little later, as far as is possible for us — to introduce, into the deiform, the anagogies of the fiery virtue. But by the sacred formation of the expanded wings, the absolute and highest extension into the divine, in the first, and in the middle, [1113C] and in the last intellects. But the intellectual theologian, seeing also their manifold and multiform character, and that the vision was distinguished by wings beneath the feet, and it beneath the faces, and its ever-motion in the midst of the wings, was brought back to the invisible knowledge of the things which were seen, the many-wayed and many-seeing virtue of the highest intellects being manifested to him; and by their sacred awe, which they have supermundanely against the proud, and bold, and impossible scrutiny of higher things and of lower; and, in the commensuration of the actions imitating God, the unceasing and high-flying character of their ever-motion. But he was also instructed in that divine and much precious hymnody, the angel forming the vision according to virtue for the theologian himself, and [1113D] delivering his own sacred knowledge. He taught him therefore this also, that purgation is, for those purged however much, the participation, as far as is possible, of the divine brightness itself, unknown. But this brightness, from the remote causes themselves of the divinity, by which it perfects all sacred intellects with superessential occultation, is somehow more manifest to the highest virtues about itself, and more manifests and distributes itself. Then to the second, or the last, or our intellectual virtues — as far as each one has come forth from it according to the deiform — thus it conducts its manifest illumination unto the praising of the unknown of its own occultation. But it shines through the several ones, to the second through the first. And if it behooves to say it briefly, it is first led from the hidden to the manifest through the first virtues. This therefore the theologian learned from the light-[1114A]leading angel, namely purgation, and that all the divine operations, shining back through the first essences, are distributed into all the rest, according to the analogy of each one unto the deifying participations. Wherefore he consequently placed back the fierily purgative property in the seraphim themselves, after God. Nothing therefore is inordinate, if a seraph is said to purge the theologian. For thus God purges all, of whose whole purgation he is the cause. But let us more closely use an example: just as he who according to us is the highest priest, purging or illuminating through his ministers or priests, is himself said to purge and to illuminate — the orders purged through him referring back through themselves unto him their own sacred operations; so also the angel accomplishing the purgation of the theologian places back his own purgative knowledge and virtue [1114B] unto God as the causal one, then unto the seraph itself as the highest priest first acting: as perhaps someone, with angelic reverence, teaching the purged one, might say that the principle of the purgation to be accomplished in thee, before me, is indeed the exalted one, and essence, and creator, and causal, bringing the first essences to be present, and containing them about himself in their collocation; and keeping them unturnable and free from falling; and moving himself into the first participations of his own provident operations; for this, teaching me these things, he says the mission of the seraph itself manifests. But the highest priest, and after God the leader himself, the adornment of the excelling essences, from whom I have been deiformly instructed to purge, he therefore it is who through me purges thee — he through whom the very cause and artificer of the whole purgation brought forth from the [1114C] hidden even into us his own provident actions. These things indeed he taught me; but to thee I deliver them, and I would grant to thy intellectual and discerning knowledge either to absolve one part of the said causes from doubt, and to honor the same before the other as having what is consequent, and reasonable, and equally true; or, from thyself — which is truly nearer to the truth — to find it, or to learn it from another; God, namely, giving it, and the angels first receiving it, and to us, the friends of the angels, revealing it, through his more lovable contemplation.*

## EXPOSITION.

« Come, let us consider this also according to virtue. » Come now, he says, O Timothy, after the other things which have been said, [1114D] let us consider this also according to our virtue and possibility, « for what reason, namely, it is said by the theologians that one of the seraphim was sent » — in Isaiah, namely, when, the coal having been taken up from the altar with the tongs, he purged the lips of the prophet [n: (Isa. VII)]. And it is necessary that we inspect this question, and discuss it, because it can become doubtful whether by 'seraph' here some one of the higher order is to be understood, on account of the property of the name; or one of the lower, on account of the property of administration, because it is proper to the weak and the lowest to administer our hierarchy. Therefore the question is to be inspected, that the ambiguity of the estimation may be taken away. For perhaps « someone may answer that it is not one of the subordinate ones, » that is, some one of the Angels, « that purges the priest, » [1115A] namely Isaiah; « but a certain one of the innermost and greatest essences, » that is, the supreme spirits. But this again can be doubtful to someone, for the reason that the supreme orders are not sent to dispense, or administer, exterior things.

Therefore « certain ones say that, according to the definition of the society of all the intellects already rendered before » by us, that is, according to that which we defined above — they say that all spirits have among themselves a certain society of properties and names — that the oracle « does not name, » that is, « does not » say « that some one of the first minds came unto the purgation of the theologian, » that is, of the first spirits about God, understand: established. But they say « that a certain one rather of those excelling us, » who [1115B] are set only over us men, « performing the sacrifice of the prophet's purgation, » that is, making it holy, and offering as it were a sacrifice pleasing to God, « was called seraph, by equivocation, » that is, of the name, not by the excellence of the property. But by what likeness an angel of the lowest order was called seraph, he subjoins: « On account of the fiery and celestial washing away, » or cleansing, « of the » sins « aforesaid » already above, of the prophet himself, and on account of the « raising up » also, or vivification, of that same one « purged into the divine obedience; » because just as it belongs to fire to purge rust by burning, and to vivify dead and extinguished things by heating, so by that divine fire he was both purged from sins, and inflamed [1115C] to the love of God. And because this was done by the ministry of an angel, certain ones « say » that the sacred « oracle » « said 'one of the seraphim' simply, not one » of the virtues « set about God, » but rather one « of the purgative virtues excelling us, » that is, one of the angels set over us, that is, over men — yet him called 'seraph' on account of the likeness of the action.

There follows: « But another furnished me a certain not too unfitting apology concerning this kind of state. » Certain ones, he says, hold that the angel who purged the prophet was of the supreme spirits, on account of this, that he was called seraph. But others say that he was of the lower ones, and called seraph only on account of the likeness of the action: [1115D] thus each one defining probably according to his own opinion. But a certain « other, » agreeing wholly neither with those nor with these, « furnished me a certain apology, » that is, an excuse, or satisfaction, or defense, « not too unfitting, » concerning this kind of state, that is, definition, by which the state of the matter is described; or concerning this kind of instance, that is, question, which in some manner presses, and is importunate until it is resolved. But what satisfaction or defense he himself furnished concerning this question, he subjoins: « For he says (understand: he who furnishes the apology) that that great angel, who then was forming the vision for teaching the theologian divine things, » that is, in the mind of the theologian, whom that angel was bound to teach divine things through that vision [1116A] — namely, his own purgative sacrifice, that is, the operation by which he then properly and singularly purged the lips of the prophet, and made them holy, that operation of his he referred back « unto God, » that is, attributed to God, « and after God referred it back unto the pre-operative hierarchy, » that is, unto the hierarchy in which and through which God first, that is, before all the others, operates. But he attributed his action to that hierarchy for this reason, that from it, after God, he principally received that he should do this. And this is the reason why the seraph is said to be the highest, namely because the angel who did this, just as he principally received it, after God, from the seraph, so also, after God, attributed it to the seraph itself. This reason therefore he rendered concerning this kind of question. « And is not this reason then [1116B] truthful? » These are the words of the author, who seems to accommodate his own estimation to this opinion.

This reason seems to be truthful because that man, « who said this, » says, showing « how the divine virtue, coming into all things, fills all » — and not only comes, but also penetrates, and passes through all, immeasurably crossing over them, « and is invisible to all. » And again this is invisible, thus transcending all without end, as it is invisible to all, subsisting before all without beginning. Or « again it is invisible » through immensity, as it is invisible through eternity, because just as temporal intelligence does not grasp eternity, so a circumscribable nature does not comprehend immensity. Or again « it is invisible, » that is, not only in itself, according as [1116C] it is essentially and ineffably remote from all, but also to us, according as it is incomprehensibly hidden from all. In itself therefore it is invisible, and in us it is invisible, and in both ways it remains incomprehensible. This is what he says: « Because it is not only invisible in itself, as being superessentially remote from all, but » it is also invisible in us, « as secretly letting, » or causing to penetrate, « into all things its provident operations. » Thus therefore the divine virtue is both invisible in itself as remote, and invisible in us as hidden, through operation, because according to its providence it operates in us. « But nevertheless, » although it is thus invisible, it shines above, pouring itself out [1116D] unto manifestation « to all the intellectual beings, » that is, to the rational minds. « It shines above, » I say, « proportionally, » that is, to some more, to others less, namely according to the measure and capacity of each one. And though it shines above commonly to all, yet excellently « bringing its own illumination into the most precious essences, » that is, into the subtlest and most excellent spirits: « through those » essences, namely, « as the first ones » it afterward distributes itself in well-adorned fashion « into others, » namely essences, « established » « under those » first ones, that is, made firm, or collocated, or disposed. « It distributes, » I say, « according to the contemplative commensuration of each disposition, » that is, according as each disposition, or order, is capable of that contemplation according to its proper [1117A] measure: « which, » understand: distribution of the divine illumination, arriving thus differently according to the measure of the receivers, « that I may say it more openly, also through examples proper; » proper, I say, « though » that is, although, yet « deficient in relation to God, remote from all; » that is, deficient in comparison with God, who is remote from all things, and can properly be demonstrated by no likeness. Therefore deficient, and not proper. « Nevertheless » proper, because « more manifest to us. » Not proper to the divine majesty, proper to human possibility; not proper as it is in him, proper as it can be shown to us. That therefore I may show, through examples not proper to God but proper to us, the distribution of the divine illumination to be dispensed, [1117B] I set forth this likeness. « The distributions of the solar ray, well distributed into the first matter, fill it, the most lucid of all, and through it it more manifestly declares its own splendors. » The distributions, he says, or outpourings of the solar ray, well distributed into the first matter, that is, coming into that matter which is first, that is, best and purest, and most apt for illumination; coming, I say, to such a matter, they fill it, finding in no part any obstacle to the light, and by filling they make it more lucid, most lucid of all; and thus through it the ray itself more manifestly declares its own splendors, because the more perfectly it radiates, the more perfectly it will be illuminated; and the more perfectly it is poured into it, the more brightly [1117C] it is poured back from it. « But approaching grosser matters, » that is, the grosser matters, and those which are less apt for illumination, there « it has a dimmer distributive over-appearance. » For just as, when it pours itself into them, it is received imperfectly, so also, when it pours itself out through them, over this it appears dimly from without: which comes from « the inopportuneness of the matters to be illuminated; » the inopportuneness harms, and is a hindrance to « the distributive habit of illumination, » that is, to this, that the illumination itself be either distributed, or possessed. Thus therefore in pure and polished bodies it shines more perfectly, in the grosser and coarser ones it is lessened; and a little afterward, descending to others still less apt, from this defect, [1117D] that is, after this defect, it is contracted almost to the perfectly undistributed, that is, to this, that it be in no way distributed. For from the subtlest matters, by which it is perfectly comprehended, descending to the less apt, by which it is imperfectly received, it comes at last to others so dreggy, and gross, and dull, that they almost wholly repel the light, and can receive nothing of the illumination. In this manner the spiritual light, coming to the rational minds, perfectly illuminates those which it finds pure and purified, but those which it finds less apt it illumines with a lesser brightness, and, so to speak, with a dimmer light. But those which it meets as wholly contrary and dreggy, it leaves altogether free from its participation and communion. Thus through the likeness of visible things the truth of invisible things is demonstrated. [1118A] Not only in light, but also in material heat, is there an image of the invisible truth. For heat itself more kindles those bodies which it finds more apt for its reception, but others less, until at last, meeting things wholly contrary and dissimilar, it shows in them no effect of its operation.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

This is what he says: « Again the heat of fire, » as if he said: Not only in the splendor of light, but also in the heat of fire, can the aforesaid likeness be seen. « For the heat of fire distributes itself more into the more capacious ones » — understand: bodies — and into those which are well suited to its likeness, so that, namely, they may be heated by the heat, because between the hot and heat there stands a likeness, as between the white and whiteness, and the good and goodness, and, in short, of every [1118B] property to its own affection. But coming, namely the heat, « to the essences contrary to its re-formings, » because, namely, they resist by a contrary quality the heating through which they ought to have been re-formed unto the likeness of heat, in them the heat itself « manifests no trace, » or at least « hidden, » or obscure, « of its primal operation; » that is, it shows there no effect, in which it could even faintly be recognized that it has there at least some beginning of operation. In this manner the rational substances either receive the fire of celestial love, if they have been apt, and dwelling-places prepared and suited to its reception, or they wholly repel it, if they disagree by a contrary quality, or cannot [1118C] be kindled. I desire that my soul repel not, by any dregginess of earthly filth, the light of the inner brightness, that it shut not out, by any coldness of malice, the heat of holy devotion, but that it grow bright and grow warm, re-formed from heaven unto the divine likeness. O what an essence, joined to the superessential good! A blessed nature, full of the supernatural good! Happily has it been made, which merits thus to be refreshed. If this be granted to me, I have nothing further to complain of concerning all these things which have passed before. The creature shows the craftsman, and the form of wonderful works commends the beauty of the author. There is one good and one beauty, and the good itself is the very beauty. The highest good and the highest beauty, and in the highest good every good, one good, and in the highest beauty every beauty, [1118D] one beauty. But the visible nature could not contain all things in that one; and by God many good things were made, that they might show forth one highest good, and likewise many beautiful things, that they might demonstrate the image of one highest beauty. But many lives too were established in those whose condition merited to have something more, beyond those which were made indeed good and beautiful, and yet cannot receive this good which is life. And all these lives emulate one highest life: each in its own kind, in that which it is, and inasmuch as it is from her, and according to her who alone is true. But of every corporeal life there are two principles, heat and moisture: the one, namely moisture, furnishes the nourishment of life; the other, that is, heat, makes life to feel. Without heat [1119A] that which subsists does not live; without moisture that which lives does not subsist. Therefore these two, by a rational tempering, pour themselves into all things to be vivified, so that from them each life may receive the measure of its own capacity, as much as is fitting, to the end that the lower lives may advance, through the steps of their increments, unto the image of the highest life. For the first step of corporeal life is sense-making; the second, entering through sense, imagination; the third, through the imagination of the things conceived, memory; the fourth, according to the passible application of sense, a certain foresight without the discernment of understanding. In which there is indeed as it were an image of reason, but there is no reason. According to this, certain brute animals too seem craftier than others of their kind, and, by a certain readiness as it were of sense, imitating the foresight of a rational [1119B] mind. Which nevertheless is proved to be rather a passion of sense than an operation of the understanding. But in all these the corporeal life imitates the spiritual life. First, namely, in that it feels; secondly, in that it conceives sense; thirdly, in that it retains the things conceived; fourthly, in that, whether in things imagined or in things felt, through the passion of sense, according to a certain likeness of reason, it bends itself either to seeking or to fleeing. And so in all these the corporeal lives hold the image of the spiritual lives, and through them as intermediaries emulate, as far as they can, the highest life. For the spiritual lives themselves too all receive from the highest life that they are lives, partaking the spiritual heat and moisture descending thence, whereby they may be nourished and vivified that they may live. [1119C] These two, spiritually conceived, perfect the spiritual life: the spiritual moisture nourishing through joy; and there stands no life which has not its own heat and moisture nourishing and making to feel, that it may be able to subsist in that which is life; and that which has these more is deservedly called more a life. As there are many lives, so there are many participations, and every participation is from one, and every life from one; and so the highest good, diffusing itself into all things, constitutes every life, and by forming leads back every life unto the highest life.

There follows: « And this the more. » As if he said: Not only is this an argument of the invisible truth, that some bodies receive corporeal light and material heat, while some [1119D] wholly repel them, but this also, that through those which are more warm the other less warm ones are kindled: this, he says, is a still further argument. Further after the first, not further above the first: this is an argument of the invisible truth. Because the heat itself of material fire is admitted, and poured into those bodies, namely, « which are not cognate » to it, that is, apt to receive it: poured, I say, into them « through others having what is opportune, » that is, which stand opportunely toward it. « First, » they receive it, « inasmuch as it makes things easily movable ignited from the fiery ones. » For the heat itself, from the fiery things which, more warm, are ignited, makes others, which are secondarily and less heated, which yet themselves become ignited from the fiery ones for this reason, that they are easily movable [1120A] and apt for the reception of heat. And so from the fiery things first and principally warm it makes things ignited, and through these ignited things, namely afterward, it heats still colder and more remote ones, that is, either water, or something else, that is, « something other of the things not easily catching fire, » that is, of those which do not easily catch fire. « It heats, » I say, « proportionally, » that is, each thing according to its manner, and its measure, and its capacity for receiving heat.

There follows: « According to this then, » etc. He adapts the likeness. « According to this, he says, reason, » that is, likeness « of natural ordination, » that is, of the ordination of natural and visible things, « the [sic: *supernatur alis*] ordination itself also, » that is, the [1120B] distribution of divine grace, which is « the ordination of every good adornment, » that is, of every order well and comelily disposed, whether « visible » as in men, or « invisible » as in angels; that, I say, supernatural ordination fittingly manifests first « the brightness of illumination, » that is, of manifestation, or revelation, « to the most exalted essences, » that is, to the supreme spirits: that « brightness, » I say, « first appearing » in them, inasmuch as « in the most copious outpourings, » that is, as it befits it to appear when it copiously pours itself out, or to those into whom it has most copiously poured itself. « And through those, » namely the most exalted essences, those essences « which are after » them « partake the divine ray, » that is, the divine brightness. « For these, » [1120C] namely the most exalted essences, « are the first knowing God, and supereminently desiring the divine virtue. » And because they principally know and love, they have been made worthy « to become pre-operative, as far as is possible, with virtue and action like to God; » that is, that before all the others, first after God, they may operate into all subject things, by bestowing the divine virtue; and in that very thing become like to God, because the virtue which they receive from above they expend upon their subjects. For they « extend the essences which are after them, or subject to them, unto a like virtue, » namely to their own virtue, inasmuch as it is a virtue holding itself deiformly, because in that they do this, by their virtue they imitate God, « copiously delivering to them, » namely to the subject essences, « from the brightness supervening upon them. And those, » [1120D] namely the subject essences, « again » deliver « to their own subjects; » « and » thus « through each one, » the outpouring of the divine gift running on, « the first delivers to that which is after it, » and so onward unto the end.

There follows: « The water itself, » etc. After the likeness which he set forth concerning fire according to brightness and heat, he sets forth again another likeness concerning water. « The water itself, he says, does it not proportionally reach into all? » The moisture itself of water, which diffuses itself through all the parts of earthly bodies, proportionally fills all, moistening some more, some less, according to this, namely, that each one is more or less capable of moistening. In this example therefore is fittingly demonstrated, likewise, the distribution of divine grace, coming forth to all in no equal [1121A] manner.

There follows: « It is therefore, » etc. Since, he says, just as one visible light illuminates many things, and from that light many shining things shine, so the invisible light illumines all things invisibly shining. « Therefore God is the principle of illuminating, » or of illumination, « at once to all the illuminated. » Nor is it a wonder: since he too is light, and not light in any manner whatsoever, but by nature, that is, naturally, and truly, and properly. Naturally, because from himself; and truly, because in himself; and properly, because through himself. Naturally, because from that which he is he is light; and truly, because that very thing which he is is light; and properly, because through that which he is he is light. For that is natural which is not taken from elsewhere, [1121B] that is truly which is essentially possessed, that is properly which is not conferred through another. And so thus God is light: and I say too little when I say that he is light, inasmuch as he is the essence of the light itself. For the rest, who shine, are not the essence of light, but its effect. They therefore, in that they are lights, are from light; but he is light from that which he is. « And it is also causal of being and seeing, that is, of the essence and vision of the light itself; » as if it were said thus: God is the essence of light, and is also the cause of that essence, because that which is light, is essentially; and that which is essentially, is from itself. Thus therefore he is the cause of the essence of light: and not only of the essence of light, but also of the vision itself, or manifestation, of the light, because he has from himself not only that he is essentially light [1121C] shining by nature, but this also, that he temporally shines, illuminating by grace.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « Then, deiformly and God-likely remaining superposed, » etc. In God, he says, the light itself is nothing other than the essence itself, to him for whom to be and to be light are the same, who from his very self is the principle of illuminating, because those who first shine he illuminates from his very self. But then, that is, thereafter, after him, namely God, each thing « remaining superposed deiformly and God-likely, » that is, according to the conformation and likeness of God — understand: it becomes the principle of illuminating after itself, « transferring through itself the divine lights into that, » namely into what is constituted after itself. The sense is this: That God, who is superposed to all, illuminates through himself those who are nearest; [1121D] and thus he becomes the principle of illumination, illuminating the first shining ones; then each one of those first shining ones, superposed to all the other subjects according to the conformity and likeness of God, becomes the principle of illumination to each one of the subjects, transferring through himself the divine lights into that, namely the subject. But that he put 'superposed' in the neuter, in place of what he should have said, 'superposed' in the masculine, namely order, or angel, was done after the manner of Scripture, especially when unknown and wonderful things are treated of, when it is said 'that,' as if it were said, 'whatever that is.' But that he subjoined 'to each one after itself,' this seems said as though that superposed thing, whatever it is, being one, is the principle of illumination to the several [1122A] subjects, so that it may furnish a light not as many to many, but as one to many. But in that which after this he again added, « transferring the divine lights into that, » it seems to minister illumination not as one to many, but as one to one. Whence it is plain that, according to the manner of Scripture, whether number be put alternately for number, or gender for gender, the truth of the same understanding is not changed.

There follows: « Therefore the most exalted disposition of the celestial minds. » He infers from the aforesaid, as if he said: Since the first disposition has received the divine things, and furnishes illumination to all its subjects; « therefore the essences of all the remaining ones marvel at the disposition, » that is, the spirits of all the remaining orders [1122B] contemplate with admiration and astonishment « that most exalted disposition of the celestial minds itself, the principle after God, according to what is consequent. » For thus it is consequent, that they should know God as the first principle; then also should venerate those who are first after God, as in their own manner a principle unto the things that follow, through whom the divine grace descends to those who are subject. And this is what follows: « They marvel that these are the principle of all sacred and divine knowledge and of divine imitation: » which, namely, flow to the subjects through them, as the divine illumination distributed through them into all the other celestial virtues, and not only into them, but also into us; namely men, who receive the divine illuminations by their mediation. And because all the remaining celestial [1122C] essences are illuminated by the mediation of the first ones, therefore whatever sacred thing they can perform, and like to God, this indeed they first attribute to God, who is the cause of all; then to those first spirits, by whose operating and mediation they receive the divine grace. This is what he says: « Wherefore, » namely, because through those illuminated by God the rest are illuminated, therefore the rest themselves « refer every sacred and God-like operation of theirs unto God as the causal one, » because he is the first cause of all; « then they refer it unto the first intellects, » that is, the supreme spirits, who are deiform, or conformable to God, in this, that they bestow the spiritual gifts: not however as God, who is the first cause from whom they are, but [1122D] as the first effects, through whom they are. Therefore they refer their good to those, through whom it is, « as through the first operators, and masters of divine things, » namely of gifts. Operators indeed in that they move by effecting, but masters in that they preside by directing.

There follows: « Does not then the first, » etc. *Num* stands for *nonne*. « Does not then, he says, the first disposition of the holy angels, » which is so greatly more sublime than all the rest, « have more than all » the highest and « fiery property, » that is, charity, as in the seraphim; « and the poured-out, » that is, abundant « tradition of the divine wisdom, and the mystical of the most exalted knowledge of the divine illuminations, » that is, the mystical, or hidden, or profound, most exalted [1123A] knowledge, which it perceives from the divine illuminations, as in the cherubim; and the sedent property, as in the thrones, bearing, namely, God, and « signifying the divine reception: » because in that they are called thrones, it is openly signified that they receive God sitting and resting in them. The sense is: Does not the first hierarchy, more excellently and more abundantly than all the rest, have both the fire of charity, and the light of knowledge, and the judgment of discernment? It has assuredly all these more than all the rest. « But the » dispositions themselves « of the subordinate essences, » that is, of the subject orders, do indeed themselves also partake the « fiery virtue, » that is, charity, as the seraphim; the wise and knowing « virtue, » that is, knowledge, as the [1123B] cherubim; and the virtue receptive of God, as the thrones: « they partake, » I say; but « below, » that is, more imperfectly than the first ones: « and looking to the first ones, » that is, imitating the first ones, « and through them, » namely the first ones, brought back into that of deiformity which is possible for them, that is, brought back to as much deiformity as is possible for them; through them, namely the first ones, I say, « made worthily, » that is, made worthy, « by divine imitation, » that is, that they may imitate God, « pre-operative, » that is, operating, before and more excellently than all the others, from him and according to him.

There follows: « The said holy properties therefore, » etc. Since, he says, through the first ones the subsequent ones receive the gifts of graces, therefore the holy properties already said above — such as was to set the prophet's lips on fire with a coal, [1123C] which seems to be proper to the seraphim, and to teach knowledge, which seems proper to the cherubim. Such properties therefore, « of which the participation comes about through the first essences, » the other essences « subsisting after them, » these properties, I say, « place back in them, » that is, attribute to those first ones, namely through whom they partake them: « as in hierarchs, » that is, in princes, and superiors, so that they may refer them to those from whom they received them. « They place back, » I say, « in them after God: » because they first attribute them to God, then to those who are nearest after God. But that he says that the subsequent essences become the participation of the properties of the first ones, the manner of speaking is such as if he said: They become partakers [1123D] of the properties of the first ones, because that which the first possess through property, the second share through participation.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « He says therefore these things, saying, » etc. He, he says, of whom I spoke above, who furnished me a not unfitting apology. He, saying these things which have thus far been said concerning the divine illumination descending through some to others, says that the aforesaid vision — about which the question arose concerning the purification of the prophet's lips — « was received by the theologian himself, » namely Isaiah, « through one of the holy and blessed » angels « ruling over us, » that is, over men, « descending from that, » understand: the first hierarchy. For he says this, that that vision which Isaiah saw descended from the first hierarchy, and was brought to the prophet himself [1124A] through one angel of the last order of them, who are the lowest among the angels and preside over us alone: and therefore he says that that angel « before its own illuminative hand-leading, » that is, that revelation by which he himself led the prophet by the hand and instructed him, and by which he himself had before been illuminated by the first hierarchy: « had reposed in, » that is, had referred to « that holy contemplation, » that is, to the first hierarchy itself, from which he contemplated that he had had what he had, and had done what he did. « He sees also, » Isaiah himself, « sitting above, » that is, sitting on high and aloft, « the most exalted essences, placed after God, and about God, and with God, as far as, in symbols, » that is, in figures and likenesses, it « is to be said. » For all this is symbolic and figurative, [1124B] that God, according to a corporeal likeness, is said to sit upon a lofty throne; and the seraphim are reported to stand about him and beside him. And Isaiah himself sees also a summit more sublime than « all these, » namely than the most exalted essences of the blessed spirits; « even super-secretly, » that is, in a most excellent manner: « the summit, » I say, « above the principal, » that is, God, who is the highest and principal of all, superplaced « in the midst of the superfirmed virtues. » For in the midst of the virtues, that is, of the holy spirits, who are firmed and established by an eternal placing about God above all things, God himself, the highest and principal, is seen sitting upon a throne lofty and elevated. « In these visions therefore the theologian himself learned, » namely Isaiah this, « that the divine, » that is, the divinity, [1124C] « is superplaced incomparably above every superessential superexcellence, above every invisible and visible virtue, » that is, that the divinity incomparably transcends, according to every mode of excelling, every virtue, visible and invisible. And no wonder, if the divine itself transcends all things: « and yet, » that is, assuredly, « because it is removed from all, » namely by excellence, inasmuch as that which is universal is removed from those things which are all in part, and so far removed and excelling that « it is not like » « even to the first essences of those » which are, but far distant and transcending. But that he says « to the first essences of those which are, » it is as if he should say, to the essences of those who are first, or to the essences which [1124D] are first, that is, to the supreme spirits of the angels. Nor did he learn only that the divine is removed from all, and like to none. « But still, » or moreover, he learned this also, that it « is the principle of all, » because from it are all things; and the sanctifying cause, because through it all things subsist; and the immutable foundation of those things which are, by a secret singularity, because all things persevere subsisting in it: which, containing all things by its secret and hidden divinity, as a unity gathers together the universe, and as a singularity binds together multiplicity. From which both being and well-being belongs even to those most highly fortified virtues, that is, to those spirits who are firmed and established in the highest virtue and felicity: who have from it not only that they are, but also that they are blessed. All this therefore he learned in [1125A] that vision concerning the excellence of the divinity. « Then, » he also learned, and « was taught, the same deiform virtues of the most holy seraphim, » or, to speak more expressly, of the same most holy seraphim, « the deiform virtues, » or the same virtues which he had learned to be in God, he learned also to be in the seraphim out of conformity to God; because, what God has by nature, they have by grace, being conformed to God. But which and what sort of virtues, or also from what he learned the virtues to be in the seraphim, he subjoins, saying: « From their sacred surname indeed, which, » that is, which surname, « is fiery. » Because seraphim is interpreted *burning,* or *succeeding,* [cj: *succedens*; read *succendens*, "kindling"] and signifies fiery: « concerning which » fiery thing, he says, we « shall a little later, as far as it will be possible for us, introduce the anagogies, » [1125B] that is, the upward-leadings « of the fiery virtue, » namely of the charity of the seraphim themselves, « into the deiform: » that is, into a thing so worthy and altogether like to God. Or thus: From this sacred surname, I say, the prophet himself learned the anagogies, that is, the upward-leadings, or ascents, or advancements of the fiery virtue, that is, of the charity of the seraphim themselves. « But in the expanded sacred formation of the wings, » that is, in the sacred formation of the expanded wings, the prophet himself learned « an absolute and most lofty extension into the divine, » which is « in the first, and in the middle, and in the last intellects. » Through the surname therefore, which sounds "fiery," he learned the fiery virtue; that is, charity ascending to the heights by desire; but through the expansion of the wings, he learned knowledge stretching itself by subtlety [1125C] into far-off things, and extending itself even unto the divine to be grasped, in the first, and middle, and last intellects, that is, in the spirits first, and middle, and last in that order: or in the first intellects by which they grasp the divine above themselves, the middle by which they grasp the divine in themselves, the last by which they grasp the divine below themselves. But the extension itself, or the stretching-forth of knowledge, is both absolute, because, diffusing itself unto immensity, it is enwrapped by no darkness of ignorance; and most lofty, because, pressing on to the highest things, it is weighed down by no infirmity. And not only from these things which have been said did he recognize the virtue of their love and knowledge, « but also, seeing their manifold and multiform character, the intellectual theologian himself » [1125D] Isaiah, « and seeing also that vision distinguished by wings beneath the feet, and it distinguished by wings beneath the faces: and seeing also the ever-moved, » that is, that which ever is, in the middle wings: through all these things « was led back, » and instructed « to the invisible knowledge of the things which were seen. » For through this, that he saw the distinction of the wings which downward beneath the feet; and of the wings which beneath the faces of the one sitting were stretched upward; and of the wings which in the middle were ever moved: through this, namely, he himself saw the manifold virtue of them, which is both multiplied in operation, signified through the motion, and multiform in knowledge and love, signified through the stretching-forth. And in all these things he was led back and admonished, that he might invisibly recognize what he saw according to the appearance of visible things: [1126A] « the manifold-wayed and manifold-seeing virtue of those most lofty intellects being manifested to him through all these things. » Which virtue, namely, is both manifold-wayed, inasmuch as it is moved in manifold ways by desiring; and manifold-seeing, inasmuch as it is beatified in manifold ways by possessing. Manifold-wayed in that by which it presses on by searching; manifold-seeing in that which it finds by penetrating. Many are the ways by which one goes to the one good: therefore rightly manifold-wayed. But why manifold-seeing, since it is one that is seen, unless because in the one all things are seen? Thus therefore the prophet was led back to the knowledge of truth, the manifold-wayed and manifold-seeing virtue of the most lofty intellects being shown to him through sacred images. There being shown to him also « their sacred dread, » or reverence, « which they have supermundanely, » that is, impassibly and [1126B] purely, « against a proud and audacious and impossible searching-out of higher and lower things, » that is, lest they should proudly, and audaciously, and impossibly search out, beyond the measure of their possibility, the secrets of God, which are higher than they by majesty, and lower by profundity. For this reason indeed they veil the head, that they may profess the higher things to be covered from them: for this reason they veil the feet, that they may testify the lower and deeper things to be impenetrable. On this account they dread to be proud and audacious toward that which is impossible to be searched out. Proud toward the heights, audacious toward the depths; proud, lest they be too much lifted up; audacious, lest they be cast down headlong. In this therefore they have a sacred dread, because it is a sacred thing to fear that which, if presumed, would do harm; and they have it supermundanely, because they dread without passion and affliction. For they fear, [1126C] and are not affected; they tremble, and are not shaken. They are afraid, yet secure, and without any trouble, or corruption of their rest, they are wary of passing, toward the incomprehensible majesty, beyond the measure of their possibility. To the knowledge of all these things the prophet was led back, seeing the aforesaid things, in the extension of the wings. And seeing also the unceasing and ever-high-flying character, namely of the persevering motion in the commotion of the wings: which commotion consists in the commensuration of actions imitating God, that is, in their actions by which they imitate God, commensurating themselves to their possibility, so that they presume to do nothing beyond reason and measure.

There follows: « But he was instructed also in that divine and much [1126D] precious hymnody. » As if he should say: Not only in the habit of the seraphim did he recognize their virtue; but also in their voice he learned the hymnody, that is, the divine praise, « the angel forming the vision for the theologian himself according to the virtue » of his capacity, « and handing on his own sacred knowledge: » because what the angel himself knew, through this sacred vision he made the theologian to know. « He taught therefore » the angel himself « him, » namely the theologian, in this, that he purged his lips — of him who already seemed just — with a coal taken from the altar, « because the very participation of the unknown divine brightness, received as far as is possible, is a purgation to however perfect ones. » Because however much anyone has been purged, he becomes more purged when that is received.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

[1127A]There follows: « But these things, » etc. He said that the perception of the divine brightness is a purgation: now consequently he shows that this brightness, proceeding from the hidden depth of the highest divinity, unto the perfecting and illuminating of all the sacred intellects, first manifests itself to the most lofty virtues placed more openly about it: and he shows how it is in its own and true being; then after the first ones it shows itself to the second; and afterward to the last; and at the very last also to our human intellects, and so, descending, it conducts its illumination to each virtue, according as each has been made deiform by it, this is what he says: « This, » namely « brightness proceeding from the remote causes of the divinity, going forth from which divinity it perfects all the sacred intellects, » that [1127B] is, the rational minds, illuminating them « by a superessential hiddenness, » that is, by a very hidden and secret inspiration: proceeding, I say, from those remote causes unto manifestation, it first becomes more manifest as it is, that is, according to its true being, to the most lofty virtues placed about it: and it manifests, « and distributes itself to those more » than to others; « and then » after those « it manifests itself to the second, » « then to the last, » lastly also « to our intellectual virtues, » that is, to the rational minds; « and so, » descending from the first even to the last, « it conducts its illumination through the several virtues: so, » that is, manifest in the several ones to just so great a degree as each virtue exists from that same brightness according to the deiform, that is, according to [1127C] conformity to God. For it illuminates each virtue the more, the more it fits it to deiformity. But why this brightness proceeds to manifestation he subjoins: « Unto the praising of the unknown thing of its own hiddenness. » For we perceive something of it for this reason, that in that, and through that which is hidden, and unknown, and altogether incomprehensible in it, we may praise it.

There follows: « But it shines through the several ones, to the second through the first. » For everywhere it shines to the second through the first, or through the first ones. « And if it behooves to say it briefly, » this can be said in sum, that « the first is led from the hidden to the manifest through the first virtues. » For that which is in itself is altogether hidden; and it then [1127D] first begins to be seen when it first begins to be had. For neither is it ever seen by anyone, except by him by whom it is had. « This therefore the theologian learned from the light-leading angel. » From the angel that is leader of the brightness he learned this. A new composition, "light-leading," as if he should say "light-leader." From him therefore the theologian learned this. What is this? this, namely, is what he learned: « That the purgation, and all the divine operations shining back through the first essences, are distributed through them into all the rest, according to the analogy of each of the rest, » that is, the mode and measure, « unto the deifying participations. Wherefore also he reposed the fierily-purgative property » — that angel, that is, attributed it — « to the seraphim themselves consequently after God: » and therefore « nothing inordinate » is said « if the seraphim is said to purge [1128A] the theologian. For so also God purges all, of whose whole purgation, » or of whose purgation of all, « he is the cause; » and not only God, but rather in this example it can be seen how not only he through whom something is done, but also he from whom it is done, is said to do it. Because « we shall use an example more nearly at hand. » Thus the seraphim is said to purge him whom the inferior angel purges, the virtue and mandate having been received from the seraphim: « Just as, according to us, the highest priest, purging or illuminating through his ministers, or priests, is himself said to purge and to illuminate, the orders purged through him reposing their own sacred operations upon him, » that is, attributing them to him of themselves. For what he works through them, is through them attributed to him. « So also his own purgative knowledge [1128B] and virtue, the angel himself perfecting the purgation of the theologian, reposes upon God indeed as upon the causal one, then upon the seraphim itself as upon the highest priest that first acts. » So therefore the angel attributed what he did, first to God, then to the seraphim, through whom he did it. « As perhaps someone would say, » that is, for example: « If anyone with angelic reverence, » that is, under the person of an angel, which is to be revered: « teaching » the prophet « to be purged » by him, « should say » to him: O Isaiah, « of the purgation to be perfected in thee, » namely through me, « I am not the principle, but before me the principle is exalted indeed, » that is, God, who is both « essence, and Creator, and causal » of all and bringing the first essences to be present; « and containing them about himself by a placing, » that [1128C] is, by stable firmness; « and preserving them unchangeable, and lacking a fall, » that is, lest they be together turned from themselves, and fall; « and moving himself into the first ones of the participation of his own provident operations, » that is, of the operations which he does according to providence; because everything that he does in time, he disposed in eternal providence. The proper operation of God is when he works through his very self without a mediating creature, from which, doubtless, the first participation comes; because they receive him without a medium who become the first effects of his operation. For the first operation of God is when he moves himself from himself; the first participation, when he presents himself through himself. And that indeed is the most lofty creature, unto which the first operation is, [1128D] and in which is the first participation through it, then descending to the things that follow. In this manner the subject angel attributed what he did to the superior seraphim, from whom he received the power to be able to do this. « For this, » that he received from another the power to do it, he says, « teaching me to manifest these things, » or to signify « the mission of the seraphim itself. » He, he says, who, furnishing an apology for all these aforesaid things, taught me, himself says that the mission of the seraphim signifies this, namely that what he did he had assuredly received to do from him from whom he came. Therefore fittingly the angel himself can say to the prophet: « I am not the principle of the purgation which I work in thee. But the exalted and first principle before me is » God, who is Creator and cause of all. Then, moreover, that « adornment [1129A] of the excelling essences, » that is, the order of the highest spirits, which is « after God the priest, and leader » bestowing divine things, and leading back to God: « from which » order « I also was instructed to purge deiformly, » even as now I do in thee. « It, » namely the order, « is that which purges thee through me, » on this account, because it taught me to purge: « through which, » namely order, the very cause and worker of the whole purgation (understand: the divinity) « brings forth its provident actions from the hidden even into us » lowest ones, namely the angels. If the angel working the purgation should say these and words like these to the prophet, it would not be unfitting: whence it is plain that when the seraphim is said to fly to the prophet, and is said to purge the prophet, it can be understood not unfittingly that this operation [1129B] was indeed administered through the subject angel, but attributed to the superior one, from whom it was.

There follows: « These things indeed he taught me: » they are the words of the author returning to his subject. He, he says, who furnished me the apology, taught me all these aforesaid things. « But I, » O Timothy! « hand on to thee » all things either said by me, or approved, but holding to either side. « But to thy intellectual and discretive knowledge, » that is, to thy discretion: « I would grant that the one part of the said causes be released, » namely by thee, « from doubt, » that is, to be held as ratified and undoubted: « and that the same be honored before the other as having what is consequent, and reasonable, and equally true. » This I grant both to thy will, and to thy discretion, and to thy knowledge, that thou choose the one part of these opinions, doubt being removed, [1130A] and honor it more than the other as true and reasonable. « Or, » if this pleases not, I grant thee « to find from thyself what is truly nearer to the true. Or, » if that still pleases not, I grant thee « to learn from another, God, namely, giving it, » whether thou recognize it in this or in any other way: « yet the angels first » receiving the very knowledge of truth « from God, » and afterward, through the angels, revealing it to us holy men, the friends of the angels — that is, receiving it for this, that they may reveal it to us. Or thus. And I grant thee to reveal to us « through its more lovable contemplation, » the angels, and the friends of the angels, first receiving, namely, the very knowledge of truth. A wonderful word. The angels receive from God, and men from the angels; and men themselves in turn, [1130B] taught by the angels, teach other men; and the doctrine of truth comes through some into others, and many seem to be masters and teachers of truth; and yet no one is taught, because he is not illuminated from the contemplation of it. Other masters apply the ministry; there is one master, who alone furnishes the understanding. He can teach without the others; the others cannot without him. Thou givest me the word. But what is a word without intelligence? Through the word indeed intelligence comes. But he places intelligence in the heart who illuminates within, not he who sounds without. His unction teaches us concerning all things. Thou speakest without; but within thou dost not anoint. Therefore thy erudition is indeed lovable to me. But more lovable is the contemplation of him; because even this, which in thy erudition is lovable, is nothing except from the contemplation of him.

## TITLE OF CHAPTER XIV. *What the handed-down angelic number signifies.*

## THE TEXT.

[1129C]

*What the handed-down angelic number signifies. And this too is worthy, as I judge, of intellectual cognition, because the tradition of the oracles concerning the angels says there to be « a thousand times a thousand, » and « ten thousand ten thousand times [n: (Dan. VII)]*, *according to us the most sublime of numbers, revolving them into itself, and multiplying them, and through this openly signifying the innumerable ordinations of the celestial essences. For many are the blessed hosts of the supermundane intellects, surpassing the weak and constricted commensuration of material numbers according to us, and defined by the gnostic supermundane and celestial intelligence and knowledge alone, according to the very health most richly bestowed on them of the divine and manifold knowledge, sapiential of all things at once which are — of the principle superessentially [1129D] subsisting, and of the substance-making cause, and of the containing virtue, and of the environing consummation.*

## EXPOSITION.

« What the angelic number handed down signifies, » that is, given, or defined by the Holy Scriptures? Not only, he says, the aforesaid things; but « this too is worthy of intellectual cognition, » namely, why a certain and defined number is attributed to the angelic spirits: [1130C] « because the tradition » of the divine « words concerning the angels says there to be a thousand times a thousand, and ten thousand times ten thousand » angels, « revolving the most sublime of numbers according to us, » that is, the numbers which according to us are most sublime. Revolving, I say, into itself, that is, in the utterance of the words — the words which are contained in it — revolving them into words, and multiplying some through others, just as thousands are revolved into "a thousand times" and ten thousands into "ten thousand times" by multiplication. Which he would have said more plainly as "revolving the numbers into themselves," although this was nevertheless said more expressly, because not the numbers, but the names of the numbers, placed into themselves by multiplication, are revolved. If therefore the tradition of the words, signifying the multitude of the celestial spirits, says there to be a thousand times a thousand, and ten thousand [1130D] times ten thousand angels, revolving into itself the most sublime numbers according to us, or comparing them among themselves, and multiplying some by others. « And through this openly signifying that the ordinations of the celestial essences are innumerable. » For in that he set down the greatest numbers, he plainly intimates that he ought still to have said more, if he had been able to say more. Truly it must be known that this, which he says — a thousand times a thousand, and ten thousand times ten thousand — our translation does not contain in this manner; [1131A] but a thousand of thousands, and ten thousand times a hundred thousand, which nevertheless pertains to the same truth. Therefore, wishing to signify infinite numbers, he set down the greatest finite numbers, because « many are the blessed hosts, » that is, the blessed multitudes warring for God, « of the supermundane intellects, surpassing the weak and constricted commensuration of material numbers according to us, and defined by the sole gnostic, that is, cognitive knowledge; or, namely, by the divine cognition, which knows all things, and alone knows the number of those supernal virtues, and alone discerns them, and fully knows them according to that health, that is, the purity, or integrity, of their simple and incorruptible nature, bestowed on them most richly and most abundantly by the supermundane and [1131B] celestial sapiential intelligence and knowledge of the divine and manifold knowledge — of the principle of all things which are superessentially and existing, and of the substance-making cause of all, and of the virtue containing all things, and of the consummation environing all things. » The sense is such: that the wisdom of God alone, which is gnostic, that is, cognitive of all things, definitely and perfectly knows the number [1132A] of those celestial essences in that purity and integrity in which it created and formed them. Which knowledge, namely, is both celestial, and divine, and manifold. Celestial, by purity; divine, by truth; manifold, by incomprehensibility. And though it be such in itself, it is also sapiential in its work, making all things wisely, and establishing nothing worthy of reproof. And this such wisdom, through which all things were created, and all things are known, is the wisdom of him who is the principle of all things which are (because from him are all things), subsisting superessentially through himself, namely perfect, and needing nothing; and who is the substance-making cause of all, because he makes all things to subsist, that they may be; and is the virtue containing all things, that they may remain in that which they are; and is the consummation [1132B] environing all things, lest they flow apart, or fall away from that whereby they thus are. It is no wonder therefore, if those spirits whose number is incomprehensible to us can be discerned through so great a knowledge, and the knowledge of so great a one: through which all things, when they were not, were created; and now, lest the things made revert to nothing, subsist in it.

## BOOK TEN.

## TITLE OF CHAPTER XV. *What are the formative images of the angelic virtues, and what next, that is, and the rest?*

## THE TEXT.

[1131C]

## THE TEXT. (cont.)

*Come, on then, let us say what remains, sending back, if it seems good, our intellectual eye, intent about the sublime contemplations by an angelic vigor, to the divided and much-parted breadth of the multiform variety of the angelic specifications, descending again to them, as being inconsequent, analytically reflected back into the simplicity of the celestial minds. But let one thing be foreknown by thee: how the sacred discretions of the formed images sometimes signify the same dispositions of the celestial essences as ordaining, and again as ordained, and the last as ordaining, and the first as ordained, and the same, as has been said, as having first, and middle, and last virtues, no inordinate reasoning being introduced, according to the manner of such unlockings. [1131D] For if we should say that certain ones are ordained by the prior ones, then that the prior ones themselves ordain the same, and again ordain of the last ones, and are ordained by those very ones that were ordained, truly the interposed matter would be commingled with much inordination and confusion. But if we say that the same both ordain and are ordained, yet not that they ordain and are ordained by the same, but that they severally are indeed ordained by the prior ones, and ordain the last: not inconsequently perhaps would someone say that the sacred-made forms in the oracles can sometimes be beautifully and truly encompassed about by first, and middle, and last virtues. And that they can therefore be extended upward convertibly, and be firmly enwrapped about themselves, being keepers of their own virtues, [1132C] and, by a sociable procession toward the things that come, be providently in participation of virtue — this one will not falsely conjoin to all the celestial essences, although to some superplacedly and universally, as has often been said, but to others particularly and subjectly. But one must begin with reason, and inquire in the first discretion of the forms, for what cause theology is found honoring the fiery sacred description almost beyond all. Thou wilt find it therefore not only conforming fiery wheels, but also fiery animals, and men flashing as it were with fire, and setting about those celestial essences heaps of coals of fire, and rivers blazing with fire with an immeasurable sound [n: (Ezech. I; Dan. VII; IV Reg. II)]*. *But it says also that thrones are fiery, and that the most exalted seraphim themselves signify by their surname that they are burning after a heavenly manner: and [1132D] it distributes to them the property and operation of fire, and altogether, upward and downward, it selectively honors the fiery making of the forms. Therefore I judge the fiery to signify the most deiform thing of the celestial minds. For the holy theologians themselves [n: (Hebr. X)] often describe the superessential and formless essence in fire, as having (if it is lawful to say) many images of the divine property, as far as is possible in things invisible. For fire perceptible — thus indeed must it be said — comes clearly in all things and through all things, and is removed from all; luminous at once, and as it were hidden; itself unknown through itself, no matter lying by in which it manifests its own action, and immeasurable and invisible, through itself [1133A] at once potent over all, and, whatsoever things are done among them, movable to its own action, delivering itself to all that in any way draw near, renovative, a guardianship of nature, illuminative by veiled-about splendors, incomprehensible, clear, discrete, leaping back, bearing upward, acutely passing, exalted, not to receive the contumely of diminution, ever-moved with a motion through itself, moving another, comprehending, uncomprehended, not needing another, latently growing of itself, and, to the materials it has taken up, manifesting its own magnitude, active, potent, present to all at once invisibly, when neglected it is thought not to be, but it is rubbed into being, as by a certain vengeance, connaturally and properly it suddenly shines back forth, and again incomprehensibly impalpable, not lessened, in all its most rich [1133B] deliveries of itself. And perhaps someone will find many other beautiful properties of fire, as images, though insensible, of the divine operation. Knowing this therefore, the theosophers conform the celestial essences out of fire, signifying their deiform and, as far as possible, God-imitable character. But they also describe them as human-formed, on account of the intellectual nature, and by having upward the intuitive virtues, and the straightness and brightness of the figure, and, according to nature, the principal and regal quality, and, according to sense, the least indeed as compared with the remaining virtues of the irrational animals. Yet potent over all, by virtue according to the magnitude of intellect, and by continuity according to rational knowledge, and, according to the nature of the soul, free and most potent. It is possible also, as I judge, through the several members of our corporeal manifold [1133C] partition to find the celestial virtues, saying that the sight-virtues indeed signify their most clear regard toward the divine luminaries, and again the tender and liquid and not-repercussed, but acutely movable, and pure, and full reception, impassibly, of the divine illuminations. But the discretive virtues of the smells signify that reception, as far as possible, of the above-intellect distribution of the sweetly-smelling thing, and the discernment through knowledge of those things which are not so, and the utterly-fleeing from them. But the virtues of the ears, that partaking and gnostic reception of the divine inspiration. And the tasting virtues, that reception of the fullness of the invisible foods, and of the divine and nourishing advancements. But the touching virtues, the discernment through knowledge of what is fitting or hurtful. Then the eyelids [1133D] and eyebrows, the keeping of the divine visions and of intelligence. And youthful and adult age, that property of the ever-renewing vital virtue. But the teeth, the dividing of the imparted nourishing perfection. For each intellectual essence divides by provident virtue the uniform intelligence bestowed on it by a more divine one, and multiplies it unto the leading analogy of the lower. But the shoulders, and arms, and likewise hands, the making, and operative, and active power. But the heart to be a symbol of deiform life, sowing its own vital virtue deiformly into those things which were pre-understood. The breasts again to signify the hard and keeping power, as of the life-giving distribution from the heart placed beneath; but the back, the continuous holding at once of all the fertile virtues. But the feet, [1134A] the movable, and swift, and running power of the motion ever going into the divine; on which account theology figured also the feet of the holy intellects as winged [n: (Ezech. I)]*. *For the winged signifies anagogic velocity, and the celestial active power of the upward journey, and the removed-from-all-that-is-lowly by bearing upward. But the very lightness of the wings signifies nothing earthly, but the whole that is cleanly and without weight ascending on high. The naked also, and unshod [n: (Gen. XVIII, XIX)]*, *and the loosed, and the let-down, and the immeasurable, and the pure, is assimilative, by the setting-away of those things which are outside, and to the divine simplicity as far as possible. But since again the simple and much-varied wisdom both clothes the naked, and gives them certain vessels to carry about, come, let us open up, as far as is possible [1134B] for us, the sacred vestments and the instruments of the celestial minds. For the bright and fiery garment [n: (Apoc. I)]*, *I judge to signify the deiform, according to the image of fire and its brightness, on account of the reposes in heaven, where the light must be said to be altogether invisible, or intellectually illuminating, or intellectually illuminated. But the priestly vestment signifies the leading toward the divine and mystical contemplations, and the vow of the whole life. The girdles also signify the keeping of their fecund virtues, and the habit that gathers them to be turned unitedly into itself, and to be carried round about itself circularly with ease, lacking a fall, from the likeness of nature. The rods also signify the regal and principal power, and that which defines all things straight. But the darts, and axes, the separative power of dissimilitudes, and the acumen of the discerning virtues, both efficacious and full of action. The geometric and tectonic vessels [1134C] signify the founding, and building, and perfecting power, and whatsoever else belongs to the providence of the seconds that lead back and convert. But there is a time when the instruments too, those things which have been done by the holy angels, are symbols unto us of the divine judgments; some declaring the correcting discipline, or the punishing justice; but others, liberty from anguish, or the end of discipline, or the resumption of the prior beneficence, or the addition of other goods, small or great, sensible or invisible [n: (Ezech. X; Judic. VI; II Machab. V; Ezech. XXXI; Apoc. III; Zach. VIII)]*. *And altogether perhaps a perspicacious mind would not doubt to unite beautifully the visible things to the invisible. That they are named winds also, signifies their velocity, and their effect arriving almost without delay upon all, [1134D] and the transporting motion from above into the things that are below, and upward into the things that are below, and the wind as raising the seconds to a higher loftiness, and moving the first to a communicative and provident procession of the lesser [n: (Gen. XXVIII; Joan. I)]*. *But perhaps someone will say that the windy surname of the aerial spirit signifies also the deiform character of the celestial ones: for this too has an image and form of the divine operation, as in the symbolic theology it is demonstrated through many things by a four-line adjudication, according to the moving, and generating, and swift, and potent capacity of nature, and the unknown to us, and invisible hiding-place of the moving principles and consummations. « For thou knowest not, he says, whence it comes, and whither it goes (Joan. III [1135A] Isai. V)*. » *But theology forms also about them the appearance of a cloud, signifying through this that the sacred intellects, supermundanely over-filled indeed with hidden light, receive the first manifestation pompously, and distribute the same copiously, lucidly and proportionally, into the things that are second: and that there subsists in them a genital, and vivific, and active, and perfective power, according to the intellectual conception of showers, receiving the bosom that calls forth into vital births by moist rains. Theology also sets about the celestial essences the appearance of brass, and of electrum, and of many-colored stones [n: (Isai. XXXV; Apoc. I; Dan. II)]*. *The electrum indeed signifies as it were the gold-formed, and at once the silvery: an incorruptible, as in gold, and ample, and not lessened, and uncontaminated splendor; and an open, as in silver, [1135B] and light-formed and celestial clarity. But in brass, according to the traditions handed down, either the fiery or the gold-formed is to be attributed. But the many-colored kinds of stones must be thought to signify: either, as it were, the white ones, the light-formed; or, as it were, the ruddy ones, the gold-formed; or, as it were, the pallid ones, the youthful and new; and through the several kinds thou wilt find an anagogic adjudication of the typic images. But since indeed I judge these things to have been sufficiently said by us according to our virtue, we must pass over to the sacred unlocking of the sacred-figured bestial formation of the celestial minds. For the lion must be thought to signify the principal, and robust, and untamed power, and the hidden power of the ineffable divinity, as a virtue, assimilative of the intellectual traces by a veiling-about and, mystically perhaps, by a pompous garment, its journey being restored into itself according to the divine [1135C] illumination. But the form of the ox signifies the firm and new, and that which recalls [renovans] the intellectual furrows into the reception of the celestial and generating showers, and the keeping and most strong power. Thence the form of the eagle signifies the regal, and high-bearing, and swift-flying, and, unto potent nourishment, the sharp, and sober, and agile, and well-contrived power, and, unto the copious and much-lucent ray of the divine sun, the power contemplative by desire, immediately, rightly and inflexibly, in the sound gazes of the speculative virtues. But that form of the horses signifies the obedient, and bridle-able; and the white indeed signifies the truly lucid, and, as it were, most greatly most-akin to the divine light. But of those which are black, the hidden; the red indeed the fiery, and active; and of those commingled of white and black, the power conjunctive of the extremes [1135D] with a perfective virtue, and connecting the first to the seconds, and the seconds to the first, convertibly and providently. But if we should not be limiting the commensuration of the discourse, we should perhaps not incongruously have united, part by part, the properties of the said animals, and all their corporeal conformations, to the celestial virtues according to unlike likenesses. The furious indeed to their intellectual fortitude, of which fury is the lowest image; but concupiscence again to the divine love: and, to be said summarily, referring at once all the senses, and the manifold parts of the irrational animals, unto the immaterial intelligences and uniform virtues of the celestial essence. But for the wise there suffice not only these very things, but the adjudication of one significative [1136A] image, unto the declaration, in like manner, of the neighboring ones. And this too must be inspected, that rivers were said to be, and wheels, and chariots connected with the celestial essences [n: (Dan. VII; Ezech. I, X)]*. *For the rivers signify the fiery divine advancements, giving to them a copious and not-failing affluence, and nourishing them with a vivific fecundity. But the chariots, the conjunctive society of likenesses [n: (IV Reg. I; Ezech. I)]*, *But the wheels, since indeed they are winged, going unconvertibly into the things that are before the sight, by a straight and just way signify the virtue of their outgoing operation into the same way without bending, and rightly cut, all of them at once by an intellectual rotation supermundanely directed. But it is possible also, by another anagogy, to adjudge the imaginary description of the intellectual wheels. For there was cried out [1136B] to them, as the theologian says, gel, gel, gel [n: (Ezech. X)]*. *But this signifies, according to the Hebrew word, revolutions and revelations. For the fiery and deiform wheels have revolutions indeed about the very same best thing by an ever-movable motion; but revelations, by the manifestation of secrets, and the circular-leading-back of the things subjected, and by the deductive perfection of high illuminations into the things which are subjected. But there remains to us the discourse in explanation concerning the joy of the celestial dispositions. For they are altogether not receivers of that passible delight which is according to us. But they are said to rejoice together with God [n: (Luc. XVI)] at the finding of the lost, according to the deiform banqueting, and at the deiformity of those returning into God in providence and in salvation, and the gladness of incorruption, and that ineffable beneficence, [1136C] in the participation of which holy men too have often been made partakers through the deific advents, from above, of the divine illuminations. So many things have been said by me concerning the holy formations, deficient indeed as regards a diligent manifestation of them; but perfect, as I judge, for our not remaining lowlily in figurative phantasies. But if thou shouldest say this also, why then we have not made mention of all the angelic virtues, or operations, or images in the oracles, we answer the truth: that of those whose supermundane knowledge we have been ignorant, we desire in them another light-leader to teach us [n: (Job XII)]*. *But certain things, as being equally potent with the things said, we have passed over, providing for the commensuration of the discourse, and honoring by silence the secret that is above us.*

## EXPOSITION.

[1136D]

The title of the fifteenth and last chapter is: What are the formative images of the angelic virtues, and what next, that is, and the rest? For thus far he has treated of the invisible properties of the angels: which are, namely, those gifts of the virtues, the invisible operations in them. Now consequently he begins to treat of the visible formations: which the sacred word attributes to them by a mystical signification according to the images and likenesses of corporeal things. "Come, on, speak, ho!" is the voice of one exhorting either himself, or also Timothy, to whom he speaks: « Ho, let us say what remains. » What is it that remains? This, namely, that we, « if it so seems, » send back to thee, or relax, [1137A] « our intellectual eye, » hitherto « intent about the sublime contemplations » held by beholding « concerning the angelic vigor; » and, the eye being turned back, that we descend « to the divided and much-parted breadth of the multiform variety of the angelic specifications, » that is, to the multiform variety, or the variety of many forms, which is in the angelic specifications, or formations: in which variety, because there is an ample multitude, or a manifold amplitude, in place of simplicity the divided is found, and in place of unity the much-parted. Thus therefore let us say what remains, sending back our eye from the invisible things, and descending to the visible. « Again in them, » namely descending, and fixing our consideration, and yet « he reflected » again, or those images being led back [1137B] « analytically, » that is, resolutively, « into the simplicity of the celestial minds: as » of themselves « in things consequent, » that is, in things unfitting. And the sense is: we, descending through contemplation from the invisible things to the visible, and fixing our consideration namely in the visible things themselves, let us again reflect them back to the simplicity of the invisible things, by resolving and expounding, or showing how, through that which is discerned as visible, that which cannot be seen is signified. Otherwise the visible formation would be inconsequent and unfitting, if in that simple nature this were believed to be by the truth of essence, which is attributed to it as manifold in signification according to the various species of corporeal things. As therefore we descend [1137C] by representing the simple natures through visible things, so we ascend, and, as it were resolutively, reflect ourselves back to the divine consideration, when, by expounding the same forms spiritually, we declare them to be understood mystically. We descend, when we fit the multiplicity of corporeal formations to the simplicity of the celestial natures through signification: we ascend, when we resolve the same multiplicity of visible figurations, by expounding it, unto the understanding of the simple truth.

There follows: « But one thing, etc. » O Timothy, before we treat of the visible formations of the angels, let one thing be foreknown by thee, that thou first know this. What is that? this, namely, that thou know it. « How the sacred discretions of the formed [1137D] images, » that is, how the Holy Scriptures, distinguished in the images which they form concerning them, the angels, « signify and represent the same dispositions, » that is, the orders « of the celestial essences. » Sometimes the lower ones as « ordaining, and again » the same as « ordained » by the higher: wherein they signify in a certain way that these are middle, and that they have lower ones whom they may ordain, and higher ones by whom they may be ordained. « And again sometimes they signify even the last dispositions as ordaining, and the first as ordained: » which nevertheless seems a wonder, since neither do those lower ones have any whom they may ordain, nor do these higher ones have any by whom they may be ordained. Wherein nevertheless it is given to be understood that the supreme ones, although they have no other angels above themselves by whom they may be ordained, yet have God, by whom they are ordained [1138A] and sanctified. And the last ones again, although they have no angels beneath themselves whom they may ordain, yet have men, who are ordained, and disposed, and sanctified by them. Or certainly in this, that the supreme ones are introduced as ordained, and the last as ordaining, it is signified that among them some differ from others: and there are among the higher ones certain lower ones, who are nevertheless ordained unto something by others established in the same order; and among the lower ones certain higher ones, who ordain unto something others placed in the same order. And this is what follows: That the very words signify the same dispositions, namely, as having first, and middle, and last virtues. As has already been said above, that each disposition has distinction in the persons, and each person in [1138B] the properties, so, he says, the discretions of the sacred formations represent the first, and middle, and last spirits in the same order, and the first, and middle, and last virtues in the same person; « yet no » « inordinate reasoning being introduced in this, according to the manner of such unlockings, » that is, expositions. For if it is understood in this manner, as we have expounded above, there is nothing unfitting in this representation. And I well say that in this representation, by which the same ones are introduced both as ordaining and as ordained, there is no unfittingness, because there is no confusion, or transposition, of the right disposition there, since they are introduced as ordained by some and as ordaining others. But if they were said to be ordaining and [1138C] ordained in respect of the same ones, it would be unfitting, this is what he says: « If indeed we should say that certain ones, » understand: dispositions, namely the middle ones, « are ordained by the prior ones; » and then that those « prior ones ordain, » or are ordainers, « of the same, » namely of the middle ones, « and again, » through those middle ones, « ordain, » or are ordainers, « of the last ones: » if, he says, we should say that those prior ordainers of the middle and last ones, in a reversed order, « are ordained by those very ones that were ordained: truly the interposed matter would be commingled with much inordination and confusion; » because it would not be orderly that some should be ordained by those whom they ordain. « But if we say that the same ones, » in a different respect, « ordain and are ordained; yet not that they are ordainers of the same ones » by whom they are ordained, « or that they are ordained by the same ones » whom [1138D] they ordain; « but that they severally, » that is, remaining distinct without confusion of reciprocation, « are indeed ordained by the prior ones, but ordain the last ones, » there is nothing unfitting. And according to this perhaps « not inconsequently, » that is, not unfittingly, « someone would say that the sacred-made forms which are in the words can sometimes both beautifully, and truly, » that is, fittingly and truthfully, « be encompassed about, » that is, be fitted, « the same forms, to first, and middle, and last virtues. »

There follows: « And upward therefore, etc. » As if he should say: Since someone can truthfully say that the same forms are fittingly fitted to first, and middle, and last virtues. Therefore that very one who shall have said this will not falsely conjoin, that is, will commonly [1139A] attribute to all the celestial essences: both to be extended upward through the love of God, and to be firmed in themselves through the keeping of themselves, and to advance below themselves through the love of the neighbor — this is what he says: « To be extended upward convertibly [ *convertibiliter* ], » namely through the love of God, « and to be firmly enwrapped about themselves, » that is, to be constrained and encompassed: constrained, lest the good flow out; encompassed, lest the evil flow in. Wherein, namely, because they are enwrapped about themselves, « they exist as keepers of their own virtues, » that is, they keep their own virtues. This therefore, that is, to be extended upward, and to be enwrapped in themselves, « and that they are in participation of virtue, » understand: prepared, « providently, » that is, intently or devotedly, « toward the things that come, by an associable procession. » These three things therefore someone will commonly and truly [1139B] attribute to all « the celestial essences, » namely that they are extended upward through the love of God, and that they are enwrapped about themselves through the keeping of themselves, and that they are prepared providently, and intently, and devotedly to impart their virtue toward the things that come to them, proceeding by a social love, and freely offering themselves unto social love. All these things therefore can be commonly attributed to all: « although, » that is, though, « to some indeed superplacedly and universally, » that is, they belong excellently and fully, as « has already often been said; but to others particularly and subjectly. »

There follows: « But one must begin with reason, » etc. As if he should say: Since we must treat of the angelic formations, therefore we must in the first place begin [1139C] with reason, that is, rationally, « and inquire in the first discretion » of the very « forms, » why « theology is found honoring the fiery sacred description, » that is, formation, in which the species of fire is set forth for signification, « almost beyond all the other descriptions. » For rarely is any visible species found (if indeed it is found) having a more excellent demonstration toward the invisible things. « Thou wilt find it therefore, » namely theology, « not only forming fiery wheels » for the signification of those invisible things, « but also fiery animals, and men flashing as it were with fire; » and thou wilt find that theology also « sets heaps of coals of fire about those celestial essences, » and also describes « rivers blazing with fire with an immeasurable [1139D] sound. » And not only this: « But it says also that thrones are fiery, » namely theology itself, that they are in heaven; and it says also « that the most exalted seraphim themselves signify by their surname that they are burning after a heavenly manner, and it distributes » also « to them, » the seraphim, « the property and operation of fire. And, » to say it briefly, « altogether, upward, and downward, everywhere it selectively honors, » that is, specially, the fiery making of the forms.

There follows: « Therefore the fiery, » etc. As if he should say: Since theology so greatly venerates the fiery formation: « Therefore, » I judge « the fiery to signify the most deiform thing of the celestial minds, » that is, that virtue which is most deiform in them. And rightly, because « the theologians themselves often describe in [1140A] fire, » that is, in the species and figure of fire, even the very « superessential and formless essence » of the divinity: which is both superessential by majesty, and formless by incomprehensibility. They describe, I say, in fire « as having many images of the divine property, as far as, in » « visible » things, an image of the divine property can be had. Yet I say thus, « if it is lawful to say it, » that the divine property has some likeness, the property which is very incomprehensible and invisible.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « For fire, » etc. Now he enters upon describing the properties of fire, in which he shows its nature, and quality, and wonderful power, and demonstrates its excellent signification. « For fire, » he says, « is sensible. So indeed [1140B] it must be said, » namely that it is sensible. He adds this for this reason: because to some, perhaps, it could seem — on the ground that the nature of fire is perceived by sense only in subjacent matter — that fire is not a body at all. He says therefore that fire is truly sensible, and a body, though far more excellent and subtle than all other corporeal things, and nearest to the spiritual nature, and by this demonstrating its effect far more unlike all others. « For fire in all things, and through all things comes clearly, and » yet « is removed from all things. » It is near by presence; it is far by excellence. It is in all things because it makes itself visible through illumination, and it is far from all things because it does not offer itself perceptible through a distinct perception of its substance. [1140C] This is what follows: And « it is at once bright, and as it were hidden. » For it is bright, because it is perceived in subjacent matter; hidden, because in its own essence it is not seen corporeally. « It is unknown » itself « through itself, matter not lying by; » because without subjacent matter, as has been said, it cannot be perceived: « in which » matter, namely, « it manifests its proper action. » From which in a certain way it seems to be more incorporeal; because apart from subjacent matter it does not come to sense. Whence fire seems in a certain way to be midway between the invisible and the visible? inasmuch as it approaches those, incorporeal, and is corporeal inasmuch as it draws near to these. It is also immeasurable, because it grows out [1140D] into the infinite, and as far as the subjacent matter suffices, it itself does not fail; and it is invisible, because in its pure substance, outside subjacent matter, it is not seen. It is also « through itself potent over all things at once, » namely things, « and potent » also « over all things, whatsoever in them, » namely in things, « come to pass unto proper action. For in fire indeed is the first corporeal motion, which moves all other things, and is itself not moved by another. Therefore whatever is done in all things is not proper to those in which it comes to pass, but rather to that itself through which it comes to pass.

There follows: « Movable, giving itself to all things drawing near in whatsoever manner. » For because it is moved of itself by its own motion, it diffuses itself into all things, moving each according as it draws near to it, [1141A] that is, according as it is found more or less movable. It is also « renovative » of all things, because it renews things growing old, lest they wholly fail and go into nothing. For we see through the several years how fire renews nature, when those things which had grown old with the winter's cold, warmed by the spring's heat, revive. In this therefore fire itself is « the guardian » of « nature; » because it guards nature, lest it wholly cease to be, if it always suffered defect and were never repaired. It is also « illuminative, » because it illuminates all things, « with splendors veiled about. » For its splendors flash forth without unto illumination, but are veiled about when, drawn back again to the secret of their nature, they hide themselves. Therefore, then, it is « incomprehensible, » because outwardly indeed [1141B] poured forth it is perceived by sense, but inwardly withdrawn it is not comprehended. It is also « clear, » manifestly appearing, and « distinct, » distinguishing diverse things. And it is « resilient, » because it is fed downward, and is moved upward — laying hold of lower things by its ardor, but from its own lightness rebounding to the heights.

Therefore there follows: « Bearing upward, » because, lacking [sic: *carons*] weight, it seeks the highest things, « and going acutely, » because by the motion of its proper power it penetrates all things, « and lofty, » because it stands eminent above the universe; because whatever is corporeal besides itself is by nature beneath itself: « Not about to receive the affront of diminution; » because, just as when it is poured forth it is not increased, if [cj: *si*; read *sic*, "so"] when it is received it is not diminished, neither, in that [1141C] it seems to receive increase, taking glory, nor, in that it is thought to be diminished, having suffered affront, because what it is in itself it is always whole. It is also « always moved, » that is, having motion, and it is « moved through itself, » because the motion which it has is not from another; and in that it moves itself, it moves all other things having motion; and therefore it is « moving another, » and is itself « comprehending » though « incomprehended. » For changing all matter by its own power, by using and consuming it it draws it into itself, and is held by no body, since, that which it burns up being consumed, it returns into itself. It is therefore « not needing another, » because through the subjacent matter, in which it burns, it is not so much held that it may be, as held that it may be there; and if it seem to grow from [1141D] it, it does not receive from it the substance of increase, although from it it takes in it the cause of growing, because it becomes not greater in itself, but rather in it. Therefore he says that it is « latently growing from itself, » because, as to the manifest, it seems to grow from the subjacent matter itself; but in the truth of the thing it grows from itself, not that it be greater in itself, but that it be more in the matter itself: therefore it receives increase indeed from itself, when it seems to grow into the subjacent things, « manifesting only its own magnitude unto those matters, » in which it is; that is, it so grows in the matter which it takes up, that is, lays hold of, that in it indeed it appears greater, but nevertheless in itself it is not greater. For it does not there [1142A] receive magnitude, but shows it, manifesting there sometimes what in itself it has always. It is also « active, » and « potent, » because it acts powerfully, and is moved, destroying all things standing in the way; and it is « at once present to all things invisibly. » For in certain things it is only seen, but it is held present to all things invisibly: which appears from this, that sometimes by the striking and collision of bodies without attrition it is struck out even thence where it seemed not to be. « Neglected » indeed, and not moved, or remaining quiet, « it is thought not to be; but by attrition » or rubbing, provoked and set in motion, « as though by a certain vengeance it suddenly shines forth » leaping out, and raging upon those things which it has seized: which nevertheless it does « connaturally and properly, » that is, out of its own power and potency. [1142B] « And again incomprehensibly impalpable, » when it slides back, it remains incomprehensible to sense: « not lessened » by extinction, just as neither increased by kindling. All of which it does « in all » things, « by its most rich deliveries; » because whatever from itself it delivers to the subjacent things unto some power, it has not the less in itself, ever persisting full. These properties of fire, then, I have enumerated; and perhaps « someone will find many other properties of fire, beautiful » — namely, likenesses — « of the divine operation: as, » that is, just as « in sensible images, » namely, the likeness of it can be. And therefore « the theosophists, knowing this, » that is, so great an excellence of fire, « conform, » or figure, « the celestial essences out of fire: signifying » by this « their deiform, [1142C] and God-imitable, » quality which is in them, « as far as is possible » to be had. And not only do they conform them out of fire, « but they also describe them humaniform, » that is, in human form, « on account of the intellectual, » or rational, in them — that is, their rationality — since man alone among all visible things is found rational. Likewise in human form they describe them, on account of « the intuitive, » that is, contemplative, « virtues » of them, which they have by holding themselves upward, just as man alone among all living things has his countenance erect toward things above: « and » they also describe them in human form on account of the « rectitude » of the human « figure » itself, that is, the uprightness, because the human stature is erect, not prone like that of other [1142D] living things; « and » on account of « the luculent, » that is, the clear and evident, without [cj: *sine*; read *sive*, "or"] the distinguishing mark of the human figure itself; because from its very erectness it affords a more evident and more comely aspect; « and » on account of « the principal, and regal, » which is given to man himself « according to nature, » that he may have the first place and rule over the other creatures; and on account of « the least according to sense as regards the remaining virtues of the irrational animals, » that is, because man is less strong in corporeal sense than the other living things, which in the power of perceiving received a greater strength than he. On account of the least indeed in sense, and on account of the Omnipotent in power, or on account of « potent » with every power « according to the greatness of the intellect and according to rational knowledge remaining in continuity, » [1143A] « and on account of the free, and most potent, » which is in him « according to the nature of the soul. » For on account of this the angel is described in human form; because man, by how much he is less strong in sense, where he is surpassed by the beasts, by so much is he more potent in reason, and intelligence, and the freedom of natural choice, where he is likened to the angels.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

« But there is, » etc. As if he should say: Not only on account of these things which I have said is the human form fittingly adapted to the angels by signification, but also it « is, » that is, it happens, possible « to find the celestial virtues through the several parts of our corporeal manifold partition. » For in the several parts of the human body, through mystical signification, spiritual virtues can be found; because all things which have been visibly made have some [1143B] signification unto the invisible. Thus those who consider rightly can weigh the invisible from the visible. Whence it happens to find this, « saying, » that is, they who say, that « that clearest gaze, » which is given to man « toward the divine luminaries, » such as the sun, and the moon, and the stars, « signifies the conspective virtues, » that is, the contemplative, which are in the rational. Likewise saying that that same gaze of the exterior sight further signifies a certain « reception » of « the divine illuminations, tender, » that is, easily perceiving, and liquid, that is, clearly seeing through, « and not beaten back, » that is, effectually comprehending, « but acutely mobile, » because not beaten back; « pure, » because liquid; « fully impassibly, » because tender. [1143C] So indeed speaking of corporeal sight: « But the smell, » they say, signifies the « discretive virtues » of corporeal things, « that receptive of the distribution, » or bestowal, or effusion, of spiritual grace, « sweetly smelling above the intellect. » Receptive, I say, as far as it is possible to be receptive; « and of those things which are not so, » that is, of those which do not smell sweetly, « discretive by knowledge, and altogether refugitive. » That is, they say that smell signifies specially that force or virtue of the soul which spiritually discerns between those things which spiritually smell well, and those which do not; and desires the well-smelling, but flees the ill-smelling. « But the virtues of the ears » they say signify « that » which is in the soul « participant; [1143D] and gnostic, » that is, cognitive and receptive of the divine inspiration. « The gustative, » etc. He says the same, that is, they say that the gustative virtues signify « the fulness of the invisible and divine foods, » by which the celestial essences are refreshed; signify also « that receptive of the nourishing promotions, that is, that which receives for them the nourishing promotions, that is, the nurturing increases. But the tactive virtues » they say signify that which is in the soul, « discretive by knowledge of the fitting, or the harmful. Then the eyelids, and the eyebrows » they say signify « that custoditive of the intelligence of the divine visions; but the youthful and the adult age » they say signify « that » which is in the soul « of the vital virtue ever renewing » it. « But the teeth, » [1144A] by which food is divided, and broken small, and passed over into the body to be nourished, they say signify « the divisive of the nourishing perfection put into, » or engrafted in, the rational spirit itself. « For each intellectual essence divides and multiplies, by a provident virtue, the uniform intelligence given to it by a diviner essence » as it were whole food: breaking small, and adapting it « to the leading analogy of the inferior, » that is, to the measure by which it may be conveyed to the participation of the inferior knowledge. For unless it broke small to measure that which it receives great, it could by no means pass over to the participation of the inferior intelligence. « But the shoulders, and the arms, and likewise the hands » they say signify « the factive, and operative, and active. But the heart [1144B] » they say « is a symbol, » that is, a figure, « of the deiform life, » sowing, or scattering, or diffusing, « its own vital virtue into those things which have been foreknown: » just as the heart diffuses vital motion to the other members. Therefore they say that the heart is, in God, or in the rational spirit, that virtue from which vital grace is diffused into others, who have been foreseen by God to receive it. For it is given only to those who have been foreseen to receive it, and predestined unto life. « The breasts again » they say « signify the hard, and the firm; and the custoditive » of that « life-giving distribution proceeding from the heart, » inasmuch as « from a thing placed beneath, » because the heart is placed beneath the breast, that by it it may be fortified and guarded. « But the backs, » they say, signify « the continuous, » [1144C] that is, the continuation « of all the fertile virtues; » because, just as in the back spine is coupled to spine, so in the virtues one coheres to another. « But the feet » they say signify « the mobile, and swift, and cursive of the motion ever going into the divine. On account of which, » because they have swift motion, « theology has figured the feet of the holy intellects as winged. » And rightly, because « the winged signifies the anagogic, » that is, upward-leading, « swiftness; » and it signifies also « the celestial active, » that is, the celestial action, or impulse, or promotion of the journey, which is upward: and it signifies also « the removed, » that is, the removal, « from all that is lowly, » that is, from lowliness, or abjection, or depression: [1144D] which « removed » is in them « by the bearing upward, » because in that they are borne upward, they are removed from all things which are in the depth. But the very lightness of the wings signifies that there is nothing earthly or heavy in them, « but the whole ascending on high purely, and without weight. The naked, too, and the unshod, » which is attributed to them, signifies « the lowered » of them, « and the loosed, and the immeasurable, and the pure from » all « apposition of those things which are without; » that is, that the angels are described naked and unshod signifies that they are lowered, that is, loosed, and absolved, and pure, « from » all « apposition, » or conjunction, « of those things which are without, » that is, of visible things, and by this immeasurable. For by how much the less they are constrained by corporeal mingling, or apposition, [1145A] by so much the more they are, through the purity of intelligence, immeasurably dilated. It signifies also « the naked, and unshod, assimilative of them to the divine simplicity, as far as is possible, » because, pure from corporeal admixture, they do not subsist out of a double substance. By which sentence they are struck who say that the angels have bodies. For the author testifies that they are pure from all apposition of the things which are without, and that through their naked and pure essence, in which they subsist, they imitate the divine simplicity.

There follows: « But since again, » etc. As if he should say: I have said that divine Scripture, in that it describes the angels as naked, signifies their purity and simplicity. But since again that very wisdom, which is both simple by truth, and much varied [1145B] through the diversity of formations — « since, » I say, that same such « wisdom both again clothes the naked, and gives them certain vessels, » that is, instruments, « to carry about: come, » that is, up now, « let us open, according as it is possible for us, the sacred garments of the celestial spirits, and their organs, » that is, instruments; because, as has been said, they are described both with clothing, and certain vessels, or organs, are attributed to them to be carried about in that mystical description. And I well say let us open what these signify, because all are significative. First, then, « the bright and fiery garment, » which is attributed to them, « I esteem to signify the deiform, » which is in them, « according to the image of fire, » which is the likeness of deiformity; « and the luculent, that is, the clear, I esteem to be attributed to them, on account of the reposes, » which are [1145C] « in heaven, where light is, » but not any light whatever, but « altogether invisible » (for so it must be said, that that light which is there is altogether invisible), « either intellectually illuminating, » as in God, « or intellectually illuminated, » as in the angels. « But the sacerdotal garment » I esteem signifies « the leading, » or leadership, or direction, « to the divine and mystical contemplations, » and signifies « the vow of the whole life. » For in the sacerdotal garment is signified that they are leaders unto the divine, mystical contemplations, that is, unto the divine and mystical contemplations, instructing their subjects unto knowledge, and that they dedicate their life to God, exhorting, and confirming the devotion of a good work. « The girdles, too, » they say signify « the custoditive of those fecund virtues: » [1145D] and signify « the habit gathering them, » namely the virtues, « to be converted unitedly into itself, and to be carried about circularly around itself, with a faculty free from falling, from the likeness of nature. » The sense is: that the girdle, which surrounds and constrains the loins and the navel, in which is the seminative of propagation, signifies the guardianship of the fecund virtues; which guardianship surrounds those virtues, and guards, or constrains them, lest in their multiplication they be relaxed beyond the bounds of justice, or flow apart. It is also signified in the girdle itself, in that by surrounding the body after the manner of a circle it is turned into itself, and united: namely, that the habit of the virtues, gathering those virtues into one, lest they flow apart or recede from the unity of concord; [1146A] namely, that that habit, I say, is bent about circularly around itself through the coherence of all things and through the mutual consideration of those virtues: bent about, I say, with ease, because there is made an easy progression from virtue to virtue on account of the likeness and concord: which ease is free from falling, from the likeness of nature. For the progression of the virtues is not the corruption, but the reparation, of nature. « The rods, too, » or scepters, they say signify « the regal and principal, and defining all things right; » just as a rod is straight, and a royal bearing. « But the darts, and the axes, » by which whole things are wont to be cut, or divided, or severed, they say signify « the separative of dissimilitudes, » that is, that force which separates dissimilitudes, and discerns between good and evil; [1146B] « and » they say it signifies that same « acumen of the discerning virtues, » that is, subtlety, namely in inspecting; « and the efficacious, and the actuous, » that is, the efficacy of acting by perfecting: But « the geometric » « and tectonic vessels, » that is, the instruments of measuring and building, they say signify « the fundative, and edificative, and perfective, and whatsoever else there are of the providence reducing and converting the second things. » For the providence of the first and higher things, which converts and reduces unto the better the second and lower things, founds, and builds, and perfects in them a spiritual edifice. Of which work the signs are the geometric and tectonic vessels, formed in the vision according to a corporeal appearance.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « But there is, etc. » As if he should say: Those [1146C] things which are attributed to the angels according to the form of visible things are not only signs of their invisible virtue, but signify also sometimes those things which are done in us and about us. This is what he says: « There is, » that is, it happens, « when those organs, » that is, instruments, « which are enacted, » that is, exhibited or presented, « by the holy angels, are symbols, » that is, signs and demonstrations « of the divine judgments, » which are exercised upon us or toward us. « Some, » namely organs, by signification « declaring the corrective discipline, » namely of God, as the rod, which seems to strike, « or » declaring « the punishing justice, » as the axes and swords. « But others, » organs declaring « liberty, » or liberation from distress, « or the end of discipline, » that is, [1146D] of correction, and punishment, « or resumption, » that is, recuperation « of the prior beneficence, or the apposition of other gifts » after the prior ones given, « small or great, sensible, » as in corporeal goods, « or invisible, » as in spiritual. « And, that » I may say it universally, « perchance a perspicacious mind would not doubt at all, that is, in all things, beautifully to unite, » that is, to adapt by signification, « the visible to the invisible, » so that, namely, it would leave nothing of all visible things which it would not demonstrate to have some signification unto the invisible. And rightly: because even « that » — namely, the angels — « are named winds, » that is, that even this, that the angels themselves are named winds, « signifies their [1147A] swiftness, and their effect reaching into almost all things without delay. » And it signifies also their transvective motion « from above into those things which are below, and » again from those « which are below into those which are above. » But what that motion may convey hither and thither he consequently adds. « A motion, » I say, « erecting the second things, » that is, the lower unto the higher loftiness, « and moving the first things, » that is, the higher, « to a communicative and provident procession of the lesser, » that is, that they proceed to the lesser, that is, the lower, to provide for them, and to communicate to them their virtue.

There follows: « But perhaps someone will say, » etc. He had said above that the angels are named winds on account of their swiftness; now he subjoins that perhaps [1147B] someone will be able to say that they are named winds on account of the divine likeness; because the wind too, according to something, has the form and image of the divine operation, as in another theology, concerning the quaternary dijudication, that is, concerning the signification of the four elements by several examples, or arguments, he testifies that he has demonstrated: which work is not had among us. « Perhaps someone will say, he says, that is, some one, that the windy denomination of the aerial spirit signifies » not only swiftness, but also « the deiform, » that is, the deiformity of the celestial spirits. « For it has even this » (understand: element) in itself « both the image, and the form, of the divine operation, » as, that is, just as by several examples, namely, it is demonstrated « in the symbolic theology, » that is, in the theology [1147C] which is demonstrated concerning symbols, that is, concerning figures and visible likenesses: I say « by the tetrastic, » that is, quaternary « dijudication, » where by the four elements severally it is shown how the visible are both likenesses and signs of the invisible. According to that dijudication, then, it was demonstrated how this element, that is, the wind, has both the image and the form of the divine operation. But wherein it has this image and form, he subjoins: « According to the motive capacity of its nature, and generative, and swift, and potent, » because the moved air subjects motion and increase to things, and running swiftly from without impels potently, or violently, « and according to the unknown to us, [1147D] and invisible lurking-place of the moving principles and consummations. » For the wind moved comes forth to sense; but the beginning and end of its motion sense does not apprehend. Whence it is written: « Who produces the winds out of his treasuries [n: (Psal. CXXXIV)]. » For to produce the winds out of treasuries is to bring forth to sense, by manifest agitation, the breathings of the winds out of hidden and latent causes. According to this likeness also the Creator Spirit, hiddenly presiding over all things and remaining invisible, moves and promotes all things by his virtue; and the things which are moved are seen, but he who moves is not seen; potent in doing, swift in perfecting; whose works indeed are discerned without, but the unknown and invisible lurking-place of the first causes and [1148A] the principles moving those very works unto effect is not penetrated. Likewise also the unknown lurking-place of the consummations is not penetrated; because, when anything is moved unto effect, we discern indeed that which comes to pass; but whence it so comes to pass, or unto what it comes to pass, we do not see. This is that, in the vision of the seraphim, they cover the head and the feet of him sitting on the throne, because we discern the middle things of the divine operation, which are done in time; but the things which were first before the times, and which shall be last after the times, we cannot investigate, because the lurking-place of the moving principles, and of the consummations, is invisible to us and unknown. Likewise also when the Spirit comes to the heart, it is felt indeed in that it is perceived. « But whence » it « comes, or whither it goes, » is not investigated. Whence [1148B] it comes, is the beginning; whither it goes, is the consummation and end. « But thou knowest not, » he says, « whence it comes, or whither it goes, » because the lurking-place both of the beginning and of the end is at once unknown and invisible. Therefore thou knowest not whence it comes, because thou findest no merit in thee for which thou mightest say thyself to be the grace. Thou knowest not whither it goes, because from the gift received thou dost not understand unto what faith thou mayest attain. According to these things, therefore, every wind has the image and form of the divine operation.

There follows: « But also of the cloud, » etc. Not only, he says, does theology name the angels winds, « but it also forms about the appearance of a cloud, or adapts it to them: by calling them clouds, signifying by this the sacred intellects super-filled supermundanely, » that is, spiritually, « with the occult light, » that is, invisible charity: those [1148C] I say « receiving pompously, » that is, excellently, « the first manifestation » of that light in its first appearing, because it is first shown to them, and excellently perceived by them: therefore they themselves are « receiving the first manifestation of it pompously, » and gloriously; and they are also distributing that same, namely the manifestation, « into those which are second after them; distributing it to them lucidly, » that is, clearly, « and proportionally, » that is, according to the measure of each one. So also the clouds first receive the light of the sun, then diffuse it, resplendent from themselves, into the things below. And therefore also the angels are called clouds, because « in them subsists the general, and vivific, and active, and perfective, according to the intellectual conception [1148D] of » spiritual « showers. » As the clouds, which by the effusion of showers, making the earth fruitful, give to the things born of it the force of generating, and of vivification, and of the increase of perfection. So then they are called clouds, on account of such a conception of showers — I say « evoking, » or provoking, or eliciting, « unto vital births » the receiving bosom, that is, the earth, which receives the showers in its bosom: « evoking, I say, by moist rains, » that is, through moist rains. « For through the rains it provokes the earth by nourishing to bring forth vital births.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « It itself also, » etc. As if he should say: Not only in the appearance of a cloud does theology itself describe the angels, « but it also puts about the appearance of air, and of electrum, and of many-colored stones about them itself by » signification [1149A] « on the celestial essences. » And rightly. For « electrum » indeed, inasmuch as « gold-formed, and at once silvern, signifies, » inasmuch as in gold, the splendor « imputrescible, and at once ample, and not diminished, and uncontaminated, » as gold does not at any time rust, but has a « splendor » pure, and perpetual. « And » it signifies also, inasmuch as « in silver, brightness open, and light-formed, and celestial, » as silver is bright and shining. So then electrum, according to each appearance, namely of gold and of silver, signifies the bright and the fulgid, that is, the clear and the fiery, because the supernal wisdom, which shines in those spirits, is both clear through knowledge, and fiery through love. This, then, through the appearance of electrum is signified in the supernal spirits. « But in the air there is to be attributed » [1149B] to them « either the fiery or the gold-formed, according to the reasons » already « delivered, » namely in the exposition of electrum, where according to something a similar appearance is found. « But the many-colored appearances of stones it is to be esteemed signify either the light-formed, as it were the white ones, » that is, as the white appearances, namely, signify, « or the gold-formed, as it were the red ones, or the youthful and new, as it were the pallid ones. » And, that I may say it briefly, « through the several appearances thou wilt find an anagogic, that is, spiritual, dijudication of the typic, » that is, figurative, images. « But since indeed I judge these things to have been said by us sufficiently according to our virtue, therefore there must be a passing over » — it is now — « into the sacred unlocking, » that is, exposition, « of the sacredly-figured bestial formation of the celestial spirits, [1149C] namely that we may expound the bestial forms which are sacredly figured to the celestial spirits for signifying them. For the lion is to be reckoned to signify the principal, and robust, and indomitable, » which subsists in them spiritually, and to signify also « the assimilative of the intellectual footprints » going « to the hidden, » that is, secret, « of the ineffable divinity. » Which footprints, as, that is, as the virtue, that is, the spiritual thing, is able, imitate the footprints of the lion, because, just as the lion wipes out his footprints with his tail and in a certain way reforms and restores the level ground which he had impressed with his foot, that his going may be hidden, so the invisible step of the celestial spirits is in a certain way figured, « its journey restored into itself, » that is, brought back to [1149D] the prior state, and reduced to the level, the signs of the footprints being wiped out, « by a veiling-about, that is, through a veiling-about; and, that so it may perhaps rather be mystically said, it restores in a journey with a pompous garment, » that is, a distinguished, or excellent, or splendid and glorious garment coming to them « according to the divine illumination. » For to those going inward to contemplate the secret light of the divinity, from the supervening splendor the footprints are wiped out; because everything which before adhered through knowledge is wiped from the memory, when to the souls desiring, the desired brightness is manifested. Hence it is that Paul says: « One thing — forgetting the things indeed which are behind, I stretch myself unto those things which are before. » As therefore to go with the footprints wiped out is, the thought of all [1150A] [sic: *imagitionum*] being wiped from the mind, to set forth with the mind to contemplate the [sic: *incircumpscritum*] light. For there indeed the intellect, while it is surrounded with the splendor of the supervening brightness, as though covered by a certain garment, whatever besides that light is in itself, even that it cannot see. All these things, then, it is to be esteemed the form of the lion signifies. « But that of the ox » (understand: the form) it is to be esteemed signifies « the firm and new, » and recalling or renewing, « and repairing the intellectual furrows unto the reception of the celestial and generative showers; and » it is to be esteemed to signify also « the custoditive and most strong. » For because the ox firmly fixes its foot, it signifies the firmness and stability of immutability. But in this, that furrowing the earth it recalls it, and renews it unto the reception [1150B] of the celestial showers by which it is made fruitful for generating, it signifies the interior newness, by which the mind is tempered and adapted to the reception of the celestial grace, which, being made fruitful, brings forth the germs of the virtues. In this, then, that the ox is eminent by the strength of its neck, and bearing the yoke keeps guard, is signified the guardianship of the mind, by which in every act it perseveres in its own guardianship without defect. « That of the eagle thereafter » (understand: the form) it is to be esteemed signifies « the regal, » because it is preeminent over the other birds; « and the high-bearing, » because by flight it bears itself on high; « and the swift-flying, » because it flies swiftly; « and, unto potent nourishment, acute and sober, » because flying in the height it acutely descries its nourishment, soberly desires it, potently seizes it. [1150C] The form of the eagle also signifies « the agile, » because it is expeditious for moving itself; « and » it signifies « the well-contrived, » because in its motion it fittingly coadapts itself; « and » it signifies also the contemplative « unto the ray of the divine sun copious, and much-shining, » that is, much shining, one word. « Contemplative, » I say, « by desire, » that is, through the desire « of the inspective virtues, » that is, of those beholding within, or the interior things: and I say the contemplation « with sound gazes, and immediately, and rightly, and inflexibly, » just as the eagle with unbeaten eyes beholds the ray of the sun. All these things, then, in the contemplative spirits, it is to be esteemed the form of the eagle signifies. « But that of horses » (understand: the form) it is to be esteemed signifies « obedient, and bridleable, [1150D] and white indeed, » that is, the white form is to be esteemed to signify « truly lucid, and as it were most cognate to the divine light. But of those, » namely of horses, « which are black, » the form is to be esteemed to signify « the hidden, » that is, the occult, namely of the divine incomprehensibility, as the black color is dark, and repels the sight. « But the red » color it is to be esteemed signifies « the fiery and active, » because it intimates the fervor of a good will, which is exercised in work. « Of the mingled ones, too » (understand: horses), « from white and black » color, it is to be esteemed to signify « the conjunctive of the extremes with a perfective virtue: » which associates through [1151A] charity « the first to the second, and the second to the first, convertibly, and consequently connecting » them, namely that they be connected to one another through mutual love and providence. This, therefore, can be understood in the aforesaid formations. And perhaps, « if we did not terminate the commensuration of the discourse, » that is, if it were not this that we wish to terminate the discourse by such measure, and not to go further through the several things to be expounded: and unless we also terminated all the properties, « and all the corporeal conformations » of the aforesaid animals « through their parts » already said — that is, unless by this, that we have already said of them in part, we wish to signify by one likeness whatever can universally be said of them, whether in the interior properties, or in the exterior conformations: [1151B] unless this, I say, be that through the several things by expounding we are unwilling to go, « perhaps not incongruously we should have united to the celestial virtues, » even the furious, « according to dissimilar likenesses, » as was said above, that some dissimilitudes are like, but some are dissimilar. According to this manner, then, not incongruously we should have adapted « the furious » to the celestial virtues, for signifying « their intellectual fortitude: » « of which » fortitude, namely, « the fury is the lowest image, » because, namely, through the contrary and from afar it signifies. « But the concupiscence » of the irrational, not incongruously we should have adapted « unto the divine love, » for signifying it. « And, that we may say it universally, » as it is to be said summarily, fittingly we should have adapted « at once [1151C] both all the senses, and all the manifold parts of the irrational animals, » namely to those spiritual beings by signification — the senses and the parts, I say, « reducing » us by signifying « into the immaterial, » that is, spiritual « intelligences, and uniform virtues of the essence of the celestial; » because through those things which are corporeally and materially described in the senses and members of the irrational animals we are stirred up to the immaterial, that is, spiritual intelligence of those virtues which uniformly and purely are in the essence of the spiritual beings. Many other things could be said, « but there suffice to the wise not only these things themselves » which have been said, « but » also « the dijudication of one significative image unto the declaration of the neighboring, » that is, similar images, « to be made in like manner. » And therefore [1151D] « this too is to be inspected, » namely that the angels themselves « are said to have been called rivers, and wheels and chariots connected, » that is, adapted by signification « to the celestial essences, » or it is to be inspected that in the celestial essences they were said, that is, named, to be rivers, and wheels and chariots connected, that is, coupled and conjoined to one another. For « the fiery rivers signify the divine promotions, » that is, the promotions or effusions of divine grace, « giving » to those celestial essences « a copious, » that is, « not failing affluence, and nourishing them » with a life-giving fecundity. But the chariots, » in which many things coupled are rolled together, signify « the conjunctive society of the likenesses » which are in them, through [1152A] which they are moved concordantly by one assent unto all things. « But the wheels, » since they are indeed « winged, » that is, agile; « and since they are going inconvertibly, » that is, without retrogradation, and inflexibly, that is, without deviation, « into those things which are before the sight, » that is, the anterior things, signify « the virtue of the operation of them, namely of the essences: of the operation, I say, going forth by a right and just way, » by the intellectual rotation of all those essences at once, « supermundanely, » that is, spiritually « directed » into the same right way, that they may at once and concordantly go the proposed journey, without bending, that is, without deviation, « and rightly, » that is, without retrogradation. This, then, the wheels signify. And not only this, but « there is also, » that is, it happens, or is fitting, « by another [1152B] anagogy, » that is, spiritual interpretation, « to dijudicate the imaginary description of the intellectual wheels. For it was cried out to them, » namely the angels, « as the theologian says, » that is, the prophet: « Gel, gel, gel. » For Ezekiel says that, the wheels appearing and running, himself hearing, the angel called them voluble. In this, then, was cried out and shouted gel, whether to them, or by them. « But this signifies, » that is, gel, « according to the Hebrew word, revolutions and revelations. » The cause of each interpretation he subjoins: « For the fiery and Deiform wheels have indeed revolutions about the same best thing, with a motion ever movable, » that is, by a motion ever movable. Even as a circle for this reason is revolved into itself, because around one and [1152C] the same thing itself, that is, the center, it is ever moved; so the spiritual wheels as it were are revolved into themselves, while about that same thing which is best, that is, God, as though about their center, they are moved by ever surrounding it by contemplation. And therefore they are moved with an ever-movable motion, because both the desire is inextinguishable, and that which is desired is incomprehensible. On account of all these things the spiritual wheels have revolutions. « But they have revelations » in the manifestation « of the secret things, and in the circum-reduction of the subjects, » because to the subjects indeed they descend, illuminating them: but again they return, reducing them through contemplation to the higher things; and so they have revelations in « the deductive perfection of the high illuminations into those things which are subject; » because the illuminations [1152D] which they receive from on high they lead down unto the perfection of the subjects, through which they lead back those same subjects again to the higher things.

## EXPOSITION. (cont.)

There follows: « But there remains for us, » etc. After the explanation of the material figures and descriptions, he turns again to the interior things, about to contemplate last of all the joys of the angels. And well is the discourse concerning the celestial ones terminated in joy, because joy is the end of all celestial things. « There remains for us » a « discourse unto the explanation concerning the joy of the celestial dispositions, » because this alone now remains, that we make some discourse, for the sake of explanation, concerning the joy of the celestial ones. And well did he say that there remains a discourse not simply concerning joy, but concerning the joy of the celestial ones [1153A], because the celestial dispositions « are not at all receivers of that passible delectation which is according to us, » but « are said to rejoice together with God, » that is, to rejoice with a joy like the divine joy, at the « finding of the lost, » as when, the lost sheep being brought back, and the drachma found, they are invited to rejoice together. And « according to that deiform exultation » which, at the return of the prodigal son, was figured and perfected in the fatted calf. Or it can be read thus: They are said to rejoice together with God at the finding of the lost, not affected by any temporal and suddenly, passibly arisen gladness, but « according to a deiform feasting, » that is, the delectation and pleasantness which they impassibly enjoy, imitating the eternal joy of God. And [1153B] « they are said to rejoice together with God » according to deiformity, « in the providence and salvation of those returning unto God, » because after the likeness of God they provide for the salvation of those returning to God. They are said also to rejoice together with God according to « the gladness of incorruption, » that is, the incorrupt, or fully and perfectly sweet gladness, to which no bitterness is mingled; and according to that « ineffable beneficence » of divine grace, through which, an interior sweetness being poured forth, it refreshes the holy hearts, « in the participation of which, » that is, of which, namely, sweetness or beneficence, « holy men » also, that is, even holy men, « have been made partakers, through the deific advents of the divine illuminations, » coming, namely, from above. « So much by me, » etc. [1153C] He forms a clause in which by a brief recapitulation he establishes the end of the narration. « So much, » he says, « has been said by me concerning the sacred formations: » said, I say, « deficient from a diligent manifestation, » that is, from a diligent manifestation « of them, » namely the formations; because I confess that those things which have been said by me are less than sufficient unto the diligent and perfect manifestation of the sacred formations. But nevertheless, although unto this they are not perfect, they are yet « perfect, » « as I esteem, » unto another thing, namely « unto our not remaining lowlily in the figurative [1154A] phantasies, » that is, unto this, that they may instruct us how (at least altogether) we may not remain « lowlily, » that is, abjectly, « in the figurative phantasies, » believing nothing else to be than what we find written according to the formation of visible things. But rather, being instructed by the figurative things, let us ascend to the knowledge of those things which are true. « But if thou also shalt say this, » thou, some one, or thou, Timothy, « how » we « have not made » memory, or « mention, of all the angelic virtues » and « operations » and « images » which « are found in the oracles: » then, that is, after those things which we have said, « we answer the truth, » that is, « that » which is true; and that in those very things, namely virtues, or operations, or images, « of which the supermundane, » [1154B] that is, the too-lofty, « knowledge we have been ignorant, we desire another leader of light teaching » us, that is, that he may teach us, and lead us to the light of knowledge. « But certain things, as being equipotent to the things said, » that is, equal and not greater to those which we have said, « we have passed over; » yet « providing for the commensuration of the discourse, » that is, providing that our discourse should not pass its measure, and that we should say too much, if we said even this whole which we could say. Likewise also « honoring the secret » which is « above us » « with silence, » that is, by being silent, or through silence. For silence honors the secret, because to that which is kept silent a greater reverence is sometimes shown. And [1154C] some things which could be said must sometimes be covered, that there may always remain over what is to be sought within, and lest it grow cheap if the whole be expounded.

These things indeed upon the hierarchy of blessed Dionysius, according to the possibility of our understanding, I have presumed. But I fear lest, adding my own things to his, I be convicted of having overlaid a marble wall with mud. Therefore let the presumption be turned aside, let devotion implore. But it brings me solace, that of him whom he undertook to expound, in whom wisdom transcends, holiness condescends.