The Consolation of Philosophy · Book V
Book V · Chapter VI

Eternity and the Eternal Present

The conclusion of the work

The Text

Reading guide ↓

A new modern English rendering, made from the Latin with AI assistance — a reading aid, not a scholarly edition.

Chapter VI

"Since, then, as was shown a little while ago, everything that is known is known not according to its own nature but according to the nature of those who comprehend it, let us now examine, as far as is permitted, what the condition of the divine substance is, so that we may also be able to recognize what its knowledge is.

"That God is eternal is the common judgment of all who live by reason. Let us therefore consider what eternity is. For this lays open to us at once both the divine nature and the divine knowledge. Eternity, then, is the whole, simultaneous, and perfect possession of unending life — which becomes clearer by comparison with temporal things. For whatever lives in time, that, being present, proceeds from the past into the future, and there is nothing established in time that can equally embrace the whole span of its life. It does not yet grasp tomorrow, while it has already lost yesterday; and in today's life, too, you live no more than in that moving, transitory moment. Therefore whatever undergoes the condition of time — even if, as Aristotle judged of the world, it never began to be and never ceases, and its life is extended together with the infinity of time — is nonetheless not yet such that it may rightly be believed eternal. For it does not comprehend and embrace the whole span of an infinite life all at once, but does not yet have the future, and no longer has what is past. Therefore that which comprehends and possesses the whole fullness of unending life all at once, from which nothing future is absent and nothing past has flowed away — that is rightly held to be eternal; and it must necessarily be both ever present to itself, master of itself, and have present to it the infinity of moving time.

"Hence certain people are wrong who, when they hear that the world seemed to Plato to have had no beginning of time and to be going to have no end, in this way suppose that the created world is made coeternal with its creator. For it is one thing to be carried through an unending life — which is what Plato attributed to the world — and another to have embraced equally the whole presence of unending life, which is manifestly the property of the divine mind.

"Nor ought God to seem more ancient than created things by a quantity of time, but rather by the property of his simple nature. For that infinite movement of temporal things imitates this present-tense condition of unmoving life; and since it cannot reproduce and equal it, it falls from immobility into motion, sinks from the simplicity of the present into the infinite quantity of future and past; and since it cannot possess the whole fullness of its life all at once, by this very fact, that it never in any way ceases to be, it seems in some measure to emulate that which it cannot fill and express, binding itself to a kind of presence of this small, fleeting moment. And since this presence bears a certain image of that abiding presence, it grants to whatever it touches that they should seem to be. But since it could not remain, it seized upon the unending road of time, and in this way it came about that it continued, by going on, the life whose fullness it could not embrace by remaining. And so, if we wish to give things names worthy of them, let us, following Plato, say that God indeed is eternal, but that the world is perpetual.

"Since, then, every judgment comprehends the things subject to it according to its own nature, and since God has a condition that is forever eternal and present, his knowledge too, surpassing all movement of time, abides in the simplicity of its own presence, and, embracing the infinite spaces of past and future, considers all things in its simple knowing as though they were now being done. And so, if you wish to weigh the foresight by which he discerns all things, you will more rightly judge it to be not a foreknowledge as of something future, but the knowledge of a present that never fails. Hence it is called not 'pre-vision' but rather 'providence,' because, set far apart from the lowest things, it looks out upon all things as if from the highest peak of the world.

"Why, then, do you demand that the things illumined by the divine light become necessary, when not even men make the things they see become necessary? For surely the things which you see as present — does your gaze add any necessity to them?"

"By no means."

"And yet, if there is a worthy comparison between the divine present and the human, then, just as you see certain things in this temporal present of yours, so he beholds all things in his eternal present. And so this divine foreknowledge does not change the nature and property of things, and beholds before itself, as present, such things as will at some time come about in time. Nor does it confuse the judgments of things, but by one gaze of his mind discerns alike the things that will come about necessarily and those that will come about not necessarily — just as you, when you see at the same time a man walking on the earth and the sun rising in the sky, although you see both at once, nonetheless distinguish them, and judge the one to be voluntary, the other necessary. So, then, the divine gaze, looking down upon all things, in no way disturbs the quality of things, which are present before itself but, with respect to the condition of time, are future. So it comes about that this is not opinion but rather a knowledge grounded in truth, when he knows that something is going to be which at the same time he is not unaware lacks the necessity of existing.

"Here, if you should say that what God sees is going to come about cannot fail to come about, and that what cannot fail to come about happens by necessity, and so bind me to this word 'necessity' — I will admit that it is a matter of the most solid truth, but one which scarcely anyone but a beholder of the divine could reach. For I will answer that the same future thing, when it is referred to the divine knowing, is necessary, but when it is weighed in its own nature, seems wholly free and unconstrained. For there are two kinds of necessity: one simple, as that it is necessary that all men are mortal; the other conditional, as that, if you know someone is walking, it is necessary that he is walking. For what anyone knows cannot be otherwise than it is known. But this conditional necessity by no means drags with it that simple necessity. For it is not its own nature that makes this necessity, but the addition of a condition. For no necessity compels one who walks of his own will to advance, although it is necessary that, at the time when he walks, he is advancing. In the same way, then, if providence sees anything as present, it must necessarily be, even though it has no necessity of nature.

"And yet God beholds as present those future things which proceed from the freedom of the will. These things, therefore, when referred to the divine gaze, become necessary through the condition of the divine knowing, but considered in themselves they do not cease from the absolute freedom of their own nature. Without doubt, then, all things will come about which God foreknows will be; but certain of them proceed from free will, and although they come about, they nonetheless do not lose their own nature in coming to be — the nature by which, before they happened, they were also able not to happen.

"What does it matter, then, that they are not necessary, since, on account of the condition of the divine knowledge, the thing will come about in every way just as if it were necessary? It matters in just this respect, that the things I proposed a little while ago — the rising sun and the walking man — while they are happening, cannot not be happening; yet of these, the one was necessarily going to exist even before it happened, while the other was by no means so. In the same way, the things that God holds as present will without doubt come into being; but of them, this one descends from the necessity of things, while that one descends from the power of those who do it. And so we said, not unjustly, that these things, if referred to the divine knowing, are necessary, but if considered in themselves, are released from the bonds of necessity — just as everything that lies open to the senses, if you refer it to reason, is universal, but if you look at it in itself, is singular.

"'But if it is placed in my own power,' you will say, 'to change my purpose, I shall make providence void, since I shall perhaps change the things it foreknows.' I will answer that you can indeed turn aside your purpose, but since the present truth of providence beholds both that you can do this, and whether you will do it, and toward what you will turn, you cannot escape the divine foreknowledge — just as you cannot flee the gaze of an eye that is present, although by your free will you turn yourself to various actions.

"'What then?' you will say. 'Will the divine knowledge be changed by my arrangement, so that, when I wish now this, now that, it too seems to alternate its turns of knowing?'

"By no means. For the divine gaze runs ahead of every future thing and bends it back and recalls it to the presence of its own knowing; nor does it alternate, as you suppose, foreknowing now this, now that, but in one stroke, abiding, it anticipates and embraces your changes. And God obtained this presence of comprehending and seeing all things not from the outcome of future events, but from his own simplicity.

"By this, too, is resolved that which you put forward a little while ago — that it is unworthy that our future things should be said to provide the cause of God's knowledge. For this power of knowledge, embracing all things in its present-tense awareness, itself appoints the measure for all things, and owes nothing to things that come after.

"Since these things are so, the freedom of the will remains for mortals inviolate; nor do laws set out rewards and punishments unjustly for wills that are released from all necessity. And there remains, looking down from above, foreknowing all things, God the beholder; and the ever-present eternity of his vision concurs with the future quality of our actions, dispensing rewards to the good and punishments to the wicked. Nor are the hopes and prayers placed in God in vain, which, when they are upright, cannot be ineffective. Turn away, then, from vices, cultivate virtues, lift up your minds to upright hopes, stretch out humble prayers on high. A great necessity of probity is laid upon you, if you do not wish to dissemble, since you act before the eyes of a judge who sees all things."

Epilogue

Within a short time of writing 'The Consolation of Philosophy,' Boethius died by a cruel death. As to the manner of his death there is some uncertainty. According to one account, he was cut down by the swords of the soldiers before the very judgment-seat of Theodoric; according to another, a cord was first fastened round his forehead, and tightened till 'his eyes started'; he was then killed with a club.

— the translator's closing note