Thomas Aquinas Commentary Isaiah 6:1-7

"In the year that king Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and his train filled the temple. Above him stood the seraphim: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is Jehovah of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of hosts. Then flew one of the seraphim unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: and he touched my mouth with it, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin forgiven." — Isaiah 6:1-7 (ASV)

1. In the year that king Uzziah died. After denouncing the fault of the two tribes and adding the corrective punishment, the prophet here threatens the punishment of final condemnation: namely, the punishment of hardness of heart. Therefore, this punishment is foretold in the manner of a sentence and with the solemnity of a judgment.

   This chapter is divided into three parts:

   • First, the author of the sentence, namely the judge, is described.
   • Second, the one who announces the sentence, the minister of the judge, is described where it says, and I said: Woe is me! (Isaiah 6:5).
   • Third, the sentence itself is set forth where it says, Hearing, hear (Isaiah 6:9).

   Regarding the first part, two things are presented:

   • First, the time of the vision.
   • Second, the vision itself, where it says, I saw the Lord sitting.

2. In the year that king Uzziah died. Regarding the first point, he says, in the year that king Uzziah died. Uzziah, who is called Azariah in 2 Kings 15:5, was struck with leprosy by the Lord because he wanted to usurp the priestly office, as it says in 2 Chronicles 26:21. After he was struck, his son Jotham governed the king’s house and the kingdom until his father's death.

   Nevertheless, Jotham is not said to have reigned then, but rather to have been the vice-regent for his father. He first reigned only when his father died. Thus, this vision was revealed when Jotham reigned, and the preceding vision was revealed when Uzziah reigned.

3. I saw the Lord sitting. Here the vision is set forth.

   • First, he describes the throne of the judge.
   • Second, he describes the ministry of His attendants, where it says, upon it stood the seraphim (Isaiah 6:2).

   Now, some say this vision was imaginary, while others say it was intellectual. The prophet himself may have drawn the figure from something similar, as Dionysius saysEpist. 9.1 (PG 3, 1108B; Dion. 641). in his letter to Titus. Figures are placed around things that the prophets see plainly and without figures in order to guide those who hear the prophecy, who can more easily receive through perceptible figures what the prophet has seen plainly. However that may be, it is necessary to see two things here.

   • First, the conception of the figure, whether seen by the prophet or composed by him.
   • Second, the meaning of this figure, for perceptible figures are introduced in Holy Scripture to signify something spiritually. As Dionysius says,Epist. 9.1 (PG 3, 1108A; Dion. 638), as cited by St. Thomas, In III Sent., d. 3, q. 3, a. 1, qa. 2; cf. De cael. hier. 1.2 (PG 3, 121B) acc. to the translation of Eriugena (Dion. 733), as cited in ST I.1.9. this meaning will be the literal sense, just as in metaphorical speech the literal sense is not what is signified by the words, but what the speaker wishes to signify through the words.

4. Regarding the first point, it should be known that the temple built by Solomon was 120 cubits in height, as is said in 2 Chronicles 3:3–4. This height was divided into three sections. The highest was sixty cubits, while both lower ones were thirty cubits. Of these, it is said in 1 Kings 6:8, by winding stairs they went up to the middle room, and from the middle to the third.

   Therefore, he saw the Lord’s throne in the highest room, which is why it is called exalted, that is, high,Altum. and elevated, as if raised above all the other rooms. The middle room shone from the brightness of His face, which is why it says, the house was filled with his majesty, that is, His glory. And what was beneath Him—the adornments of His throne, the splendor of His garments, or the ranks of His subjects—filled the lower room, which the priests entered. This is why he says, the temple.

   Others say differently: that he saw the high throne in the middle room, which is called the house, which was filled with the middle parts and arms of the Lord. The lower room, which is called the temple, was filled with His feet and legs, but His head and neck reached up into the third story. I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the army of heaven standing by him on the right hand and on the left (1 Kings 22:19); the king, that sits on the throne of judgment, scatters away all evil with his look (Proverbs 20:8).

5. Regarding the second point, it should be known that the meaning of this vision is explained in three ways by various interpreters.

   Some say that the sitting on the throne signifies the coming oppression of their captivity. The filling of the house with majesty signifies that their enemies, who were under His direction, were to fill the temple. The historical books touch on this.

   Jerome, however, explains it better, saying that the seat signifies the majesty of the Son of God, which is why it says in John 12:41, these things said Isaiah, when he saw his glory, and spoke of him. The throne signifies the angels, on whom God sits: you that sit upon the cherubims (Psalms 80:1). The house signifies the Church triumphant, which is full of His glory. The temple signifies the Church militant, which is full of miracles, or the ranks of angels, like guards.

   Dionysius explains this differently in the Celestial Hierarchy 13.4, and better, it seems. The throne signifies the eminence of the divine nature. It is called exalted because of its nobility, and elevated, as if raised above others, insofar as it infinitely exceeds all things. He is said to sit on this because of His immovability. Hence, Dionysius says in the Divine Names 9.8, what also do we say concerning the divine standing other than that he remains in himself singularly fixed in immovable identity? And the house is said to signify all creation, which is full of His majesty, insofar as it is filled to its capacity by participation in His goodness. By the temple, he seems to understand the superior creatures, which are filled by those things that are "beneath him" inasmuch as the goods they receive fall short of the goodness of God, which they nevertheless seem to approach.

6. On the contrary, an objection is raised that, according to Exodus 33:20, for man shall not see me and live—that is, while living in this mortal flesh. And according to 1 John 4:12, no man has seen God at any time. Therefore, Isaiah did not see God either.

   To this it must be said that neither interior nor exterior vision is able to see unless it is moved by the visible object. The more perfectly it is changed by the visible object, the better it sees, and it sees most perfectly when it receives the action of the visible object according to its full power. This is why the same thing is seen differently by different people, both interiorly and exteriorly—better by some, and worse by others.

   Therefore, nothing can see this visible object, which is God, perfectly, except that which grasps it completely, and therefore God alone sees Himself this way. Hence, according to Chrysostom,Cf. In Joh. Homily 15.1 (PG 59, 98). the heavenly secret is not seen in its essence without a medium by some people who attain to it according to the perfection they have from the divine light they have received, such as the blessed in heaven and those who are elevated by rapture to that mode of vision. However, by those who have a less perfect vision, God is seen according to certain likenesses of His goodness, whether in perceptible things, images, or intelligible forms. Of this kind is the vision that the prophets saw by the light of prophecy, which we see by faith, and which is seen by the light of reason, even by philosophers, who know God, as is said in Romans 1:19–20.

7. But then the question remains whether the prophets perceived such a vision directly from God or through the mediation of angels. It seems it was direct, from his very manner of speaking, for he says, I saw the Lord, and not, “I saw an angel.” Likewise, of Moses, Exodus 33:11 says, the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man is wont to speak to his friend. Also, they saw in the mirror of eternity, as is commonly said. Therefore, some people have seen God.

   To this it must be said, according to Dionysius in the Celestial Hierarchy 4.3, that no mere human, neither of the fathers of the New nor the Old Testament, received any revelation from God except through the mediation of angels. He says that it is an inviolable law that lower things are guided by middle things, and middle things by the highest.Per prima media reducantur infima, but cf. ST IIISup.34.1. He proves this by an argument from the greater to the lesser,Per locum a majori. for even Moses, though he saw most excellently, received the law through the mediation of angels. This is proven by what is said in Galatians 3:19, why then was the law? It was set because of transgressions, until the seed should come to whom he made the promise, being ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator, and Acts 7:53, who have received the law by the disposition of angels and have not kept it.

8. To the first objection, it must be said that the reason for this can be understood from the perspective of the vision’s purpose and from the perspective of its origin.

   From the perspective of its purpose, the revealing angel intends to lead a person to the knowledge of God, not to the knowledge of himself. Therefore, he forms a vision of God, just as something of God is understood from things that are seen figuratively.

   From the perspective of its origin, however, all the power that angelic light has to reveal something comes from God as its author, who is the fount of light, just as in matters of demonstration, all power of light or manifestation comes from first principles. Hence, Gregory says in the Gloss on Exodus 3, the angel who is described as having appeared to Moses is sometimes reported as the Lord, sometimes as an angel. An angel, because he serves in speaking outwardly; the Lord, because inwardly the director gives the efficacy of speaking. For since the speaker is directed from within, he is recounted both as an angel from his subservience, and as the Lord from his inspiration.Moralia, Pref. 1.

9. To the second objection, it must be said that this is stated because of the eminent and clear manner of vision by which Moses saw, above all the other prophets, as is said in Numbers 12:6–8.

10. To the third objection, it must be said that God Himself is not called the mirror of eternity, but rather the intelligible forms that are in the prophet's soul are. They are called a mirror insofar as the arrangement of eternal wisdom is reflected in them.

11. Stood the seraphim. Here he describes the office of the ministers.

    First, he describes the rank of the ministers, saying, upon it, namely the temple, stood the seraphim, because the order of seraphim is the highest of all, as Dionysius says in the Gloss here.Cf. De cael. hier. 7.1 (PG 3, 205; Dion. 836).

    Also, note that “seraphim,” written with an “m,” is plural in number and masculine in gender, signifying many in that order. Written with an “n,” however, “seraphin” is neuter in gender and signifies the whole rank of this order. But “seraph” is singular in number and masculine in gender, signifying only one member of this order. Below, it says, upon your walls, O Jerusalem, I have appointed watchmen all the day, and all the night, they shall never hold their peace (Isaiah 62:6). And he says they stood, upright in contemplation as if attending.

    Second, he describes the adornment of the ministers: their six wings.

    Third, he describes the use of their wings: with two they covered his face. In Hebrew, this is stated ambiguously. It can be explained that they covered the face of God, which is how Jerome understands it, or that they covered their own faces, which is how Dionysius understands it.De cael. hier. 13.4 (PG 3, 305A; Dion. 965). According to Dionysius, the sense is that with two wings they covered their faces, and with two they covered their feet, while with the middle two, they flew. Every one with two wings covered his body (Ezekiel 1:23), and below this, and I heard the noise of their wings, like the noise of many waters (Ezekiel 1:24).

12. The meaning of this vision is understood in three ways.

    The Hebrew interpretation saysJerome, Epist. 18.10 (PL 22, 368; CSEL 54, 82). that the twelve wings are understood to represent the twelve kings who were over the people from Uzziah, under whom the vision began, and following. Only four of whom were just: Uzziah, Jotham, Hezekiah, and Josiah. Therefore, they flew with four wings. The others, however, were ashamed in the sight of God, and so they covered their faces. Four of these possessed the kingdom freely: Ahaz, Manasseh, Amon, and Jotham, because they were made kings by the people. These are signified by the wings that were on the head. The other four, in truth, possessed the kingdom in servitude to others. Hence, they were also made kings by others and not by the people, such as Jehoiakim, made king by Pharaoh, and Jeconiah, Zedekiah, and Gedaliah, about whom Jeremiah 41:2 says, Ismahel and the ten men that were with him slew Godolias whom the king of Babylon had made governor over the land. For these last three were made kings by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.

13. Jerome says that the seraphim are said to be winged either because they dwell above or because of the swiftness of their ministry. He understands the twelve wings to mean the ministry of perfection, which is signified by the number twelve, like the twelve gems in the crown of the priest, and so on for the others. And with two they fly, because they conceal from us those things that were before the world or will be after the world, and they show the things that happen in the six ages of the world. Or, because the past and future are unknown to us while we know the present, this refers to the act of their ministry, and they stand in order to attend to God.

14. Dionysius explains this differently in the Celestial Hierarchy 13 and Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 4. He says that they are said to be winged because, like a flying creature, they possess deep and free contemplation. Moreover, three pairs of wings are described because the seraphim see matters pertaining to themselves (who are of the first hierarchy) and matters pertaining to the other two hierarchies more eminently than do the members of those lower hierarchies. Thus, one wing is understood as their natural capacity, and the other as the light from God in which they participate, for by these two things they are elevated.

    Now, the matters pertaining to the hierarchies come from God as their beginning and are ordered to God as their end. In neither respect—as beginning or as end—can they be perfectly understood by the angels, which is what the veiling signifies. These matters are also, in themselves, a medium between the beginning and the end. Of these matters as a medium, the angels have perfect and free knowledge, and therefore they flew with the two middle wings.

15. And they cried one to another. Here he describes their praise. Concerning this, he does three things.

    First, he describes the manner of their praise with respect to their devotion, for they cried out from the greatness of their affection; with respect to their concord, for they cry out together; and with respect to their order, for they cry out one to another, for one receives from the other, as Dionysius holds.De cael. hier. 10.2 (PG 3, 273B; Dion. 922), De eccles. hier. 4.3.9 (PG 3, 481C; Dion. 1297). Where were you . . . when the morning stars praised me together, and all the sons of God made a joyful melody? (Job 38:4, 7).

16. Second, he sets forth their song of praise, where it says, holy, holy, holy. They praise three things: the Trinity of persons: holy, holy, holy; the unity of majesty: the Lord God of hosts, who is before all things: holy, holy, holy, Lord God almighty, who was and who is and who is to come (Revelation 4:8); the generosity of His providence: all the earth is full of his glory, for He also extends the diffusion of His goodness to the last creature, which is understood by the earth: do not I fill heaven and earth, says the Lord? (Jeremiah 23:24). This is according to Dionysius in the Celestial Hierarchy 7.4. Jerome says: all the earth is full through the knowledge of faith.Cf. Epist. 18.7 (PL 22, 366; CSEL 54, 88). Sirach 42:16–17 says, full of the glory of the Lord is his work. Has not the Lord made the saints to declare all his wonderful works, which the Lord almighty has firmly settled to be established for his glory?

17. Third, where it says, and the lintels, he describes the effect of their praise, namely, the punishment of sinners. Below, it says: behold my servants shall eat, and you shall be hungry: behold my servants shall drink, and you shall be thirsty . . . Behold my servants shall praise for joyfulness of heart, and you shall cry for sorrow of heart, and shall howl for grief of spirit (Isaiah 65:13–14). The destruction of the temple is also signified: the lintels of the hinges were moved. Strike the hinges, and let the lintels be shook (Amos 9:1). And the burning of the temple is signified: and the house was filled with smoke of burning by the Romans after the faith of Christ was known. Or, the smoke signifies the infidelity of the Jews, and the movement of the hinges signifies the removal of their legal observances or ceremonies, which were like shadows enclosing the entrance to the truth.

18. And I said. Here, the announcer of the sentence is described.

    • First, his humility is shown.
    • Second, his purity: and one of the seraphim flew to me (Isaiah 6:6).
    • Third, his authority: and I heard (Isaiah 6:8).

    His humility is shown in his confession of sin. He confesses a threefold sin.

    First, in his speech, he confesses the sin of omission: woe is me, because I have held my peace, in not denouncing King Uzziah, and thus he laments his fault. Or, I have held my peace from praising God, and thus he laments the harm. Below, it says: his watchmen are all blind, they are all ignorant: dumb dogs not able to bark, seeing vain things, sleeping and loving dreams (Isaiah 56:10). Praise is not seemly in the mouth of a sinner . He also confesses the sin of commission: because I am a man of unclean lips. Let not your mouth be accustomed to indiscreet speech: for therein is the word of sin .

    Second, he confesses the sin of association with wicked men: and I dwell in the midst of a people that has unclean lips. Evil communications corrupt good manners (1 Corinthians 15:33).

    Third, he confesses the sin of presumption: I have seen with my eyes the King the Lord of hosts, as if to say, “One who is impure cannot enter the Lord’s temple; how much more, then, can he not see the Lord Himself?” We shall certainly die, because we have seen God (Judges 13:22). This came from reverence. But Jacob said, I have seen the LordDominum. Vg: Deum. DR: “God.” face to face, and my soul has been saved (Genesis 32:30), and this comes from confidence. Jerome says, happy conscience which has sinned in speech, not by his own vice, but only of a people that has unclean lips.Commentary on Isaiah, bk. 3 (BL 24, 95; CCL 73, 88).

19. And one of the seraphim flew to me. Here his purity is shown by the cleansing of his sins. He describes three things concerning this:

    First, the minister of the cleansing: one of the seraphim flew to me.

    Second, the instrument of cleansing: and in his hand was a live coal . . . off the altar of burnt offerings. The inner altar was made of earth, as is said in Exodus 20:24, you shall make an altar of earth unto me. All around it, however, was made of stone, where the fires for the sacrifice were gathered. From these he took the coal. With the tongs, that is, with an instrument having two arms, by which receptive virtue may be signified. The altar may signify divine light itself or goodness, and the coal may signify the gift received for the office of cleansing. Or, the fire may signify tribulation; the seraph, Christ; the tongs, the two Testaments; and the coal, charity, which is in his hand—that is, in his works.

    Third, the manner of cleansing: and he touched my mouth, and said. Just as in the sacraments there is an action and a form of words, so here he says, behold this has touched your lips, which expresses the act, and your iniquities, against men, shall be taken away, and your sin, against God. He does not say, “I will take away,” for forgiving sins belongs to God alone. Below, it says: I am he that blot out your iniquities for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins (Isaiah 43:25). Concerning all these things, Daniel 9:21–22 says, behold the man, Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, flying swiftly, touched me at the time of the evening sacrifice. And he instructed me, and spoke to me.

20. But an objection is raised against this: Dionysius saysDe cael. hier. 13.2 (CP 3, 300B–C; Dion. 945). that those who belong to the higher orders are not sent on missions. But it is certain that the seraphim are the highest; therefore, it does not seem true that one of them came to cleanse the prophet.

    To this it must be said that Gregory touches on this question in a certain homily on the hundred sheep, and he leaves it unresolved.Hom. in Evang. II, 34.13 (PL 76, 1254). Dionysius, however, expressly holds that only the lower orders are sent to us, and he says this is by the order of divine law, that lower things are guided by middle things.De cael. hier. 4.3 (PG 3, 181A). But he explains what is said here in two ways.De cael. hier. 13.2–3 (PG 3, 300B–D; Dion. 942–948).

    In one way, he says that this cleansing angel is called a “seraph” equivocally—not because of his order, but because of the act he was then carrying out, since he cleansed with fire, and “seraph” means “fiery.” In another way, he explains it by saying that the angel is properly called a seraph because he is of this order. He is said to cleanse, not because he himself directly cleanses, but because a lower angel cleansed by his authority or by an illumination received from him. This is just as a bishop is said to absolve when another absolves by his authority. Therefore, out of reverence, the lower angel who formed the vision attributes the act first to God and second to the seraph, as if he were saying, “I cleanse you by a light received from God, through the mediation of a seraph.” In verse 6, instead of live coal, the Septuagint has carbuncle, because of its similarity to fire, for it has a flaming color.