De Moor IX:22: The Cause of the Wickedness of Demons, Part 1

As every created thing is Metaphysically true, so also in the same sense it is Good; and so, to the extent that those Evil Angels possess real Being, to such an extent they possess Goodness.  But it is asked here concerning their Moral Wickedness, whereby they are out of conformity with God and the rule of His most holy Law:  Whence did that derive its origin?  Our AUTHOR warns that care is to be taken, lest we look for that Wickedness from the very Creation of these Angels:  just as Valentinus,[1] disseminating his deliria concerning the thirty Æons, said, that the Devil was begotten of the thirtieth Æon; namely, in such a way that from his very nativity he was the Devil, not by nature a Good Angel; and he related that of the Devil others were born, who made this World.  And, therefore, he attributed Wickedness, not to choice, but to the nature of the World, that is, to diabolical descent.  Thus concerning him in AUGUSTINE, de Hæresibus, chapter XI, to whom compare DANÆUS, Opusculis, page 931a.  Yet the Benedictines advise that the words cited are not present in the Manuscript Codices of Augustine, for which reason they have omitted the same in the text of their edition.  But, to the extent that those things that other Heresiologists relate concerning the errors of Valentinus agree with these things, this is not the place for a painstaking examination.  But, that Devils were Evil by Creation, ought certainly to follow from the two Principia of the Manicheans, diverse and adverse to each other, eternal and co-eternal, and two natures and substances, that is, of good and evil, as the same AUGUSTINE narrates concerning him, de Hæresibus, chapter XLVI, upon whom DANÆUS consequently observes, page 970a, that the first source of the Error belongs to the Manicheans:  There are two diverse eternal Principia of things, contrary to each other, of which the one is good and the source of good:  the other evil, who is the prince of evil and of the race of darkness:  the former, says he, they call God, but the latter the Devil and Hyle;[2] although they also maintain that the Devil himself arose from that first prince of Darkness as from a Father, since he is called, John 8:44, ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ, the father of him, which term αὐτοῦ, of him, they refer to the Devil, not to lying, to which rather it ought to be referred; Augustine’s tractate XLII on the Gospel of John.  Hence the Wickedness naturally indwelling Devils by Creation is everywhere also reckoned as the error of the Manicheans; as this is observed by, among others, GERHARD JOHANN VOSSIUS, de Idololatria Gentili, book I, chapter V, page 18a at the end, Much more truly those that assign to them a beginning both in origin and in time.  In which very thing, nevertheless, there have been various errors, since Mani attributes their rise to the supreme principle of evil:  likewise MARESIUS, Systemate Theologico, common place V, § 38, note a.  OTTO CASMANN,[3] who died at the beginning of the last century, in his Angelographia, part II, chapter X, question I, with the Most Illustrious ODÉ repeating it in his Commentario de Angelis, page 433, observes concerning the Manicheans and Priscillianists,[4] that they asserted, that by their very nature Devils are evil and unclean, and that God created the dæmons iniquitous, impure, and deceitful.  Our Belgic Confession itself, Article XII near the end, says:  we detest the error of the Manichees, who assert that the Devils derive their origin of themselves, and that they are wicked of their own nature, without the corruption of it.  Manasseh ben Israel appears to be guilty of the same error, who, since in problem XXII de Creatione he had thus concluded, Since these things are so, we say that in the Creation of the world there were spirits, who are vulgarly called Demons; in the following problem XXIII asking, on what day were Demons created? responds, But as far as their Creation is concerned, it can be said in a way not too distant from the truth, that they were created at once in hell…on the second day;  which he also says is proven in Bereshith Rabba.[5]  That according to a great many Kabbalists one Demon derives its origin from another, VOSSIUS relates, in the passage just now cited, chapter VII, page 18.  But from the observation of ANTONIUS HULSIUS in his Theologia Judaica, book I, part I, pages 71, 72:  The Jews do not acknowledge Demons as sinners, but only Demons as torturers, tormentors, executioners of divine wrath and justice, and by them they are called Evil Angels, not so much morally as effectively:  for they relate nothing concerning the fall of Evil Spirits, and teach that there are such, which sort were created by God in and with hell.  And so they constitute three classes of Angels….  But the third is filled…by Angels of loss or Angels of death, who occupy sublunary and infernal seats, designed for the tormenting of men because of their sins, and for afflicting death and calamities of every sort.  However, the Jews are not able to deny that among those הבלה מלאכי, destroying Angels, are also spirits formally and materially evil; but they do not refer them to those three Classes, and maintain that they were neither created by God, nor defected from God through a fall, but were begotten by an impure and carnal comingling with men, whence come the many fables concerning Lilith, the first wife of Adam, who afterwards degenerated into an evil spirit, etc.  Consult also À LENT, de moderna Theologia Judaica, chapter VIII, § 10-12.

Certainly it is easily demonstrated, that Angels are not able to be Evil by Creation:  for, α.  thus either they were not created by God, or God is considered the author and cause of evil.  Both are equally absurd.  1.  The former is absurd, a.  because of God’s Independence and Unity, both of which we proved in Chapter IV, § 20, 21, 23; where at the same time we evinced that another principium, diverse from the Good God, and co-eternal with Him, which would be the cause of evil, as the Manicheans maintained, is by no means able to obtain.  b.  Because of the authority of Scripture, which abundantly teaches, both that all things were created by the One true God, with no exception, as we saw in Chapter VIII; and that Evil Angels are subject to the Good God in all things, and are dependent upon His government.  2.  The latter is also absurd.  Seeing that, a.  the Most High God is not at all able to be considered as the cause of moral evil, which, consisting in privation, requires, not so much an efficient cause, as a deficient.  b.  He, with an approving Will, is not able to acquiesce in a creature declining from His perfections; but who would say that God involuntarily produced anything?  c.  Thus Evil Angels would not have been able to answer to the end that God proposed to Himself in all His works, namely, His own glorification:  For Angels created evil were not able to glorify God by observance of His Law, but thus they were perpetually obliged ἀτιμάζειν, to dishonor, God by transgression of His Law:  neither was God able to glorify Himself in them through the exercise of vindicatory Justice; seeing that He was not rightfully able to exact obedience from them, for the furnishing of which they were inept by the very constitution of their nature, as they proceeded from God their Creator; neither were they able to be punished on account of the want of obedience, of which they were not at all capable.

β.  Scripture expressly testifies to the primeval Goodness of all created things, and so also of Evil Angels, Genesis 1:31, compared with Genesis 2:1.

γ.  At the same time, it teaches that the source of their Wickedness was their own voluntary defection, as we shall see in § 23.

δ.  And thus you may find here and there among the most excellent Fathers, that the Evil Angels were not created evil by God, but that they were made evil by sinning:  see the many testimonies of the Fathers cited by the Most Illustrious ODÉ, Commentario de Angelis, section III, chapter IV, § 3, pages 432, 433.  On this thesis consult also CALVIN’S Institutes of the Christian Religion, book I, chapter XIV, § 16.

[1] Valentinus (c. 100-c. 160) was perhaps the most influential Gnostic of his day, with many followers.  Although his work survives only in fragments, his system continued, albeit in modified forms, in his disciples.

[2] Ὕλη/hule means matter, or material substance.

[3] Otto Casmann (1562-1607) was a German Reformed theologian and educator.

[4] Priscillianism is a Gnostic and Manichean/dualistic Christian heresy.  It was championed by Priscillian, Bishop of Avila, in the late fourth century.  Priscillianism was condemned as heresy, but it continued in Hispania and Gaul until the late sixth century.

[5] Bereshith Rabba, or Genesis Rabbah, is a sixth century midrash on Genesis.  It provides explanations and interpretations of words and phrases, which explanations are often only loosely connected with the text.  It draws upon Mishna, Tosefta, and the Targums.