De peste quaestiones duae explicatae

Tell me, why do they exclude all of these at once, so much so that they want those who attribute the plague to them, under God, to be considered poorly versed in the Sacred Scriptures? Because, they say, the Sacred Scriptures testify that the plague is sent by angels, as in Psalm 88, 1 Chronicles 21, Ezekiel 9, and also in the history of Sennacherib, and in the Apocalypse, where mention is made of a most grievous ulcer. For, they say, what God sends through angels is not from natural causes. I admit this as far as the angels themselves are concerned, whom I concede are not numbered among natural instruments. But what prevents natural causes from being stirred up by the angels themselves, with God so commanding? For it cannot be doubted that they can stir up the will of man in some way, whether they are good or bad angels, whoever that motion might eventually be, since Satan is said to have entered into the heart of Judas (unless perhaps we say that less is permitted to good angels than to bad ones), and this is also clear from the history of Ahab, and from the efficacy of the spirits of error. And who would dare to deny that the will is to be numbered among the primary, or at least chief, principles of human actions? But if the will of man is not excluded by the ministry of angels, why shall we think that other natural causes are necessarily removed by it? Moses, with his rod raised, stirred up lice and infinite kinds of flies, suddenly elicited a horrible hailstorm, and struck the Egyptians with most grievous ulcers. And that was certainly an extraordinary thing of Moses, not otherwise