Opening the text

The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor, on the theology of Plato (vol. 1 of 2) : $b translated from the Greek, to which a seventh book is added, in order to supply the deficiency of another book on this subject, which was written by Proclus, but since lost, also, a translation from the Greek of Proclus' Elements of theology, to which are added a translation of the treatise of Proclus, On providence and fate, a translation of extracts from his treatise, entitled, Ten doubts concerning Proclus

Philosophy

The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor, on the theology of Plato (vol. 1 of 2) : $b translated from the Greek, to which a seventh book is added, in order to supply the deficiency of another book on this subject, which was written by Proclus, but since lost, also, a translation from the Greek of Proclus' Elements of theology, to which are added a translation of the treatise of Proclus, On providence and fate, a translation of extracts from his treatise, entitled, Ten doubts concerning

Name: The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor, on the theology of Plato (vol. 1 of 2) : $b translated from the Greek, to which a seventh book is added, in order to supply the deficiency of another book on this subject, which was written by Proclus, but since lost, also, a translation from the Greek of Proclus' Elements of theology, to which are added a translation of the treatise of Proclus, On providence and fate, a translation of extracts from his treatise, entitled, Ten doubts concerning
Author: Proclus

Proclus

Neoplatonism -- Early works to 1800; Plato -- Early works to 1800; Theology -- Early works to 1800

that all these should be partakers of the providence of preceding
causes, being vivified indeed from the psychical gods, and circulating
according to temporal periods; and participating of sameness and at the
same time a stable condition of forms from the intellectual gods;[115]
but receiving into themselves the presence of union, of measure, and
of the distribution of good from the first Gods. It is necessary,
therefore, either that the Gods should know that a providential care
of their own offspring is natural to them, and should not only give
subsistence to secondary beings, and supply them with life, essence and
union, but also previously comprehend in themselves the primary cause
of the goods they contain, or, which it is not lawful to assert, that
being Gods, they are ignorant of what is proper and fit.

For what ignorance can there be of beautiful things, with those who are
the causes of beauty, or of things good, with those who are allotted
an hyparxis defined by the nature of _the good_? But if they are
ignorant, neither do souls govern the universe according to intellect,
nor are intellects carried in souls as in a vehicle, nor prior to
these do the unities of the Gods contractedly comprehend in themselves
all knowledge, which we have acknowledged they do through the former
demonstrations. If, therefore, they are not deprived of knowledge,
being the fathers, leaders and governors of every thing in the world,
and[116] to them as being such a providential care of the things
governed by, and following them, and generated by them, pertains,
whether shall we say that they knowing the law which is according
to nature, accomplish this law, or that through imbecility they are
deprived of a providential attention to their possessions or progeny,
for it is of no consequence as to the present discussion which of these
two appellations you are willing to adopt? For if through want of power
they neglect the superintendence of wholes, what is the cause of this
want of power? For they do not move things externally, nor are other
things indeed the causes of essence, but they assume the government of
the things they have produced, but they rule over all things as if from
the stern of a ship, themselves supplying being, themselves containing
the measures of life, and themselves distributing to things their
respective energies.

Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.