Chapter IX. On attaining beatitude (q. 5)

OF THESE eight articles, the first four deal with the attainability and inamissibility of beatitude; the last four, with the means whereby man attains beatitude.

ART. 1. CAN MAN ATTAIN BEATITUDE?

The affirmative answer is a truth of faith. A persuasive argument is based on our natural inefficacious desire of seeing God. The adequate object of our intellect is all reality, including the vision of the Blessed Trinity.

ART. 2. CAN ONE MAN BE MORE BLESSED THAN ANOTHER?

One man can be more blessed than another, not indeed in the object possessed, but in the measure of that possession.

Authority. The thesis is of faith, against Jovinian and the pseudo-Reformers. “The souls of the just see God, triune and one, clearly as He is, but one more perfectly than another by reason of diversity of merit.” + “He who says that by good works eternal life, and the attainment of life eternal, and increase of glory cannot be merited, let him be anathema.” ?

Scripture abounds in this line. “In the house of my father there are many mansions.” * “God will render to each one according to his works.” + “He who shows sparingly will reap sparingly. He who sows in blessings will reap in blessings.” * “Star differs from star in brightness.” ¢¹

Reason. Enjoyment follows disposition, the remote disposition of merit and the proximate disposition of glory. Since the beatific vision is absolutely supernatural, its greater intensity depends, not on greater natural vigor of intellect, but on the more intense light infused into it. Obediential capacity is equally gratuitous for angels and for men. But does not he who comes last receive as much as those who labored the whole day? Answer: This parable pictures the gratuitousness of objective beatitude, not the degree. The degree of glory depends on the degree of charity at death. Sudden conversions (the good thief on Mount Calvary and the public sinner) may include a surpassing degree of grace and merit.

ART. 3. CAN ANYONE IN THIS LIFE BE BLESSED?

Answer: Perfect beatitude is not possible in this life. This sentence is of faith, Against the Beghards and Beguines, the following proposition was condemned: “Every intellectual nature is in itself naturally blessed, and the soul does not need the light of glory to elevate it to see God and to enjoy Him in bliss.” * Scripture is eloquent on the miseries of this life: “Man, born of woman, lives a short time and is replete with many miseries.” * Since man cannot understand except by turning to sense-images, he cannot, in this life, come to the vision of God’s essence. Yet, notwithstanding ignorance, inordinate affections, suffering, and fear of death, man can still in this life have a kind of participation in future beatitude, by reason of hope and charity, especially if he reaches the unitive way, as is clear from the lives of the saints.

ART. 4. CAN PERFECT BEATITUDE BE LOST?

Inamissibility, the cause of perpetuity, is a truth of faith, expressed by the Gospel term “eternal life,” by the symbol, “I believe in life everlasting,” and by the statement of Benedict XII that the beatific vision suffers no interruption.®

Scripture speaks often of this inamissibility: “The just will go into eternal life.” ° “I give them eternal life.” = “The many who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake, some unto eternal life, others unto shame and opprobrium.” +? “Blessed are those who live in Thy house, O Lord, forever and forever they will praise Thee.” *

Is this inamissibility intrinsic or extrinsic? Scotists, followed later by Molina and Suarez, tend to depreciate the supernatural gifts of God, their elevation above the order of nature, in contrast to St. Thomas, who gives to the gifts of God all their sublimity, and amplitude, and intrinsic inamissibility. Man naturally desires to retain the good he has, without fear of losing it. But beatitude is perfect good, satisfying all desires and excluding all evils. Hence beatitude includes inamissibility and excludes all fear of loss.

1. The argument rests, not on a contingent decree of God, but on the very nature of beatitude. The greatest fortune granted for one day only, or for a month, or for a year, would not make a man blessed. Even a transient glimpse of the beatific vision did not make St. Paul blessed.

2. The beatific vision, arising from the permanent light of glory, can cease only in one of these three ways: by reason of him who sees; by reason of God withdrawing the vision; or by reason of some created cause corrupting the vision. But it cannot cease in any of these ways.

The beatific vision cannot cease on the part of him who sees, because the will simply cannot find in the beatific vision anything deficient or unpleasant. It cannot cease on the part of God, considering His ordinary power, because to act thus would be to inflict punishment, and punishment presupposes guilt, and the blessed are impeccable. Nor can it cease by reason of a created cause, because the beatific vision unites

the blessed soul immediately with God, elevating it above all created agents, above all demonic influence.

Confirmations. First, the sources of the beatific vision are absolutely spiritual and incorruptible: namely, the intellective soul, the intellect, the permanent light of glory, the divine essence taking the place of the impressed and expressed species. Hence the beatific vision is absolutely and intrinsically immutable.

Second, charity, which is the beginning of eternal life, is in itself incorruptible. Here on earth it can be lost, but only by mortal sin, since we carry this treasure in earthen vessels. But the treasure, in itself, is the beginning of eternal life, and the charity of Christ, preserving us in life, is stronger than every temptation. “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities nor any other creature can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” If these words are spoken of eternal life as begun here below, how much more true they are of eternal life there where sin is impossible!

How is the beatific vision measured? Not by time, whether continuous or discrete, but by participated eternity, which infinitely transcends our continuous time and also the discrete time of the angels. In this eternity, the vision is one unbroken instant, of which a remote image can be found in the life of union as led by saints on earth.

Eternity is the perfect possession of interminable life, a possession that is simultaneously whole and perfect. The discrete time of the angels measures their succession of thoughts and affections. Continuous time, the measure of motion, is constituted by the flowing now. The one single instant of immutable eternity is related to continuous time, as is the apex of a cone to its base.

Corollary. The term “eternal life” is very profound. “Eternal” means intrinsically invariable, simultaneously whole, altogether without succession. It is variable only extrinsically, by the absolute power of God, who, as He began it, can also cease to support it, by suspending His own concursus. This He will never do, because there is no motive for doing so. God will never annihilate the human nature of Christ, or of the Blessed Virgin. This annihilation is not a contradiction if we look at matter and form, but it is if we look at purpose. Even the beatific vision, granted for a transient moment, as it was possibly granted to St. Paul, is measured by participated eternity, because it contains in itself no succession.

Scotist Objections Analyzed

1. That which has potency to nonexistence can be lost. Yes, if the potency is intrinsic; but no, if it is merely extrinsic.

2. Since the beatific vision is not a debt due to any creature, it can be lost. Answer: If it is not due, either in its collation or in its conservation, we grant. But if it is due to the subject at least as far as conservation goes, then we deny. It is true that the beatific vision is given gratuitously, since God gratuitously gave us the principle of merit, namely, grace. But the beatific vision is due to the blessed as a reward, and as an eternal reward, given even to children by reason of the merits of Christ.

3. Form received into a nonconnatural subject can be lost. Answer: If the form is in itself corruptible, I grant. If the form is in itself incorruptible like charity, I subdistinguish: if you can assign a cause why it should be lost, I grant; otherwise, I deny. Charity, on earth, is lost by mortal sin, but sin is impossible in heaven.

4. Whatever is received is received in the manner of the recipient. Yes, if the gift is subordinated to the recipient; no, if the gift subordinates the recipient to itself. To explain. The light of glory subjects to itself the intellect, and thereby elevates the will to immobility in good. Thus vision differs from grace on earth, which is dependent on man’s subjective will.

The Word, united to the humanity of Christ, does not participate in the latter’s mutability, but communicates to it its own immutability.

5. St. Paul’s vision was lost, because it was transient. But the vision of the blessed is of the same species. Answer: St. Paul had the blessed vision by a miraculous privilege, granted: as an ordinary grace, denied. The vision given to St. Paul was not the reward of perfect beatitude. The life of glory, given miraculously and transiently, does not have the immobility of a habit, because it does not flow from habitual grace as a characteristic.

6. The light of glory is not more inamissible than habitual grace, which can be lost. Answer: Grace on earth is amissible, not by reason of itself, but by reason of the changeable subject in which it is. But the habitual grace of a soul confirmed in good, as was the Blessed Virgin on earth, or as are the souls in purgatory, or as are the blessed who see God clearly and cannot sin: this habitual grace cannot be lost.

Corollary. Heavenly bliss has three principal characteristics. First, love for God, necessary also in its exercise, a love which transcends liberty and merit, like the love whereby God loves Himself. Secondly, intrinsic impeccability. Thirdly, intrinsic inamissibility. Thus we explain the last words of the Creed, “I believe in eternal life.” St. Augustine dwells on the perpetual newness of eternal life. The joy of entering into heaven lasts forever. It is eternal springtime, always new, always young, insatiably satiating.

ART. 5. CAN A CREATURE BY HIS NATURAL POWERS ATTAIN BEATITUDE?

Neither man nor angel can attain the beatitude of the fatherland by his natural powers. This conclusion is a truth of faith, against the Beghards. It is founded on the text of St. Paul: “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard.” * Reason agrees. Reason can prove, not indeed the existence or the possibility of the beatific vision, but its supernaturalness, namely, that it is naturally unattainable. Cognition means that the object known exists in the knowing subject, by reason of the subjects immateriality. But God’s immateriality infinitely transcends the immateriality of the created intellect. Like the eye of the owl to the sun, so is the created intellect to uncreated Light. Hence the infinite abyss between natural cognition and the beatific vision. Natural knowledge, though it should grow to infinity in its own line, would still not be one step nearer to the vision of God, just as a polygon, inscribed in a circle, could never be identified with the circumference, because a line can never become a point, and a line is divisible into infinity.

ART. 6. CAN MAN ATTAIN BEATITUDE BY THE ACTION OF SOME HIGHER CREATURE?

Man cannot attain beatitude by the action of some higher creature. This is again a truth of faith. “God gives grace and glory.” 16 God alone is the author of grace and of glory. Grace and glory are participations in the divine nature which, much more wonderfully than physical miracles, transcend all created powers. Corporeal vision, given miraculously to a man born blind, is a natural thing, though supernaturally restored, whereas grace is essentially supernatural.

Angels can dispose man toward attaining his last end, but the order of agents corresponds to the order of goals, and only the supreme Agent can efficaciously lead the creature to its ultimate goal.

Why cannot a blessed angel communicate to us a participation in his light of glory? The angel, even naturally, can communicate to us good thoughts, also in relation to supernatural mysteries. But he cannot communicate to us supernatural light, except instrumentally, as do the sacraments, because this effect transcends the angel’s proper form, natural or supernatural. Light illuminates, but not everything that is illumined can in turn illuminate others.

ART. 7, ARE GOOD WORKS PREREQUIRED FOR BEATITUDE?

The affirmative answer is of faith, against the Calvinists." “If you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.” ** The creature cannot naturally have supernatural beatitude, but must strive to reach it, and beatitude is the reward of good works. Christ, indeed, in the first moment of His conception, enjoyed the beatific vision. But this was an extraordinary grace, like the creation of the first individuals in each species, and it was restricted to Christ, because He is the God-man, and the head of humanity.

ART. 8. DOES EVERY MAN DESIRE BEATITUDE?

First conclusion, Every man desires beatitude in common. The reason is that, thus to will beatitude, is nothing else than willing that the will be satiated. But this every man wills, as is clear both by experience and by reason, since the object of the will is universal good, not limited to this or that particular good.

Second conclusion. Not all men will that special beatitude which is found in God alone, since some men will pleasure or riches or honor, instead of God.

Summary

The essence of beatitude consists in the beatific vision. Its principal characteristics are fruition, impeccability, and inamissibility. The attainment of beatitude, not possible by nature, is possible therefore only by grace, which, when it is consummated, is called glory. May God in mercy grant to us all this greatest of all His gifts.

Supplement On Natural Beatitude

What would constitute that beatitude which can be attained by the powers of nature, in cooperation with the natu-

17Conc. Trident. sess. 6, can. 26. 18 John 13:17. Cf. Matt. 7:21; Luke 11:28; Rom. 2:13; Gal. 5:6; James 3:24.

ral help of God? In the case of men, it would consist in perfect cognition of God, the Author of nature, and in a consequent love of God, the source of all natural good. For the angels, it would consist in the natural cognition of God as the Author of each angel’s individual nature, and in the natural love proportionate to this cognition. God is the objective beatitude of men and angels, both in the order of nature and in the order of grace. The creature’s will is like a point from which infinite lines of desire reach out in every direction. Divine goodness, even as naturally known, is the circumference which unites it itself all these myriads of lines.

The Salmanticenses pose three questions: first, is natural beatitude possible; second, in what natural operation would it consist; third, in what state would men attain natural beatitude? Answer: Within the order of nature there is possible an operation, to which, however imperfectly, the name “‘beatitude” can properly be applied. For this view they cite Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, St. Thomas, Durandus, Scotus, Cajetan, Bellarmine, Bañez, and Suarez. They conclude: “The distinction between natural beatitude and supernatural beatitude is commonly received.” The chief reason for this assertion, taken from St. Thomas, runs thus: The rational creature, since it is by its nature ordained to some last end in its own order, must be able to attain that end, and this attainment is natural beatitude.

They cite Vasquez to the contrary. Neither in men nor in angels does Vasquez admit any beatitude except supernatural beatitude. He rejects the common distinction between natural and supernatural, which all other theologians admit. This singular opinion of Vasquez has been renewed in our days by Henry de Lubac, who maintains that human nature is not a defined essence, with necessary characteristics and proportioned natural end, but rather an essence open to indefinite progress.” Traditional theologians reply thus: Then not even

19 Le Surnaturel, 1946, pp. 434 f; 485-87; 252-54. Cf. in confutation, P. Boyer, S.J. (Gregorianum, 1947, pp. 390 sqq); P. Gagnebct, O.P. (Revue Thomiste, 1948, 1949).

God would have a definite and clear idea of human nature, He would know only human individuals, as was maintained by the nominalists of the fifteenth century, especially by Occam. Further: then there would no longer be a natural right, distinct from divine positive right, nor would natural ethics be immutable. Juridic positivism, the offspring of nominalism, would be true. Lastly, since the supernatural is defined by the Church as a perfection which transcends the natural, if there is no longer human nature nor angelic nature, then there is no longer anything properly speaking supernatural. The distinction between the natural order and the order of grace, far from being a Thomistic invention, is thus proclaimed by the Vatican Council: “The perpetual teaching of the Catholic Church has held, and still holds, that there is a twofold order of cognition, distinct, not only in source, but also in object.” ? And the encyclical Humani generis rejects the opinion of those who corrupt the “genuine gratuitousness of the supernatural order,” since they maintain that God could not create an intellectual creature without calling it to the beatific vision.

SECOND PART

HUMAN ACTS

Footnotes

1. Council of Trent. D. 693. 2 Ibid., D. 842. ↩