CHAPTER 9
SECOND PETITION: PRAYER FOR PARTICIPATION IN GOD’S GLORY
| Post desiderium autem et petitionem divinae gloriae, consequens est ut homo appetat et requirat particeps gloriae divinae fieri. Et ideo secunda petitio ponitur: adveniat regnum tuum. Circa quam, sicut et in praemissa petitione, oportet primo considerare, quod regnum Dei convenienter desideretur. Secundo vero quod ad id adipiscendum homo possit pervenire. Tertio vero quod ad illud pertingere non possit propria virtute, sed solo auxilio divinae gratiae. Et sic quarto considerandum est, quomodo regnum Dei advenire petamus.
| After desiring and praying for the glory of God, man is led to desire and ask that he may be given a share in divine glory. And so the second petition is worded: “Your kingdom come.” In discussing this petition, we shall follow the same procedure as we observed in treating of the preceding petition. We shall consider, first, that we do right to desire the kingdom of God; secondly, that man can attain to the possession of this kingdom; thirdly, that he can attain to it not by his own powers, but only with the help of divine grace. And then, in the fourth place, we must inquire into the sense in which we pray that the kingdom of God may come.
|
| Est igitur circa primum considerandum quod unicuique rei naturaliter appetibile est proprium bonum, unde et bonum convenienter definiunt esse quod omnia appetunt. Proprium autem bonum uniuscuiusque rei est id quo res illa perficitur: dicimus enim unamquamque rem bonam, ex eo quod propriam perfectionem attingit. Intantum vero bonitate caret, inquantum propria perfectione caret, unde consequens est ut unaquaeque res suam perfectionem appetat, unde et homo naturaliter appetit perfici. Et cum multi sint gradus perfectionis humanae, illud praecipue et principaliter in eius appetitum naturaliter cadit, quod ad ultimam eius perfectionem spectat. Hoc autem bonum hoc indicio cognoscitur, quod naturale desiderium hominis in eo quiescit. Cum enim naturale desiderium hominis non tendat nisi in bonum proprium, quod in aliqua perfectione consistit, consequens est quod quamdiu aliquid desiderandum restat, nondum pervenit homo ad ultimam perfectionem suam.
| As to the first point, we should note that to every being its own good is naturally desirable. Hence good is conveniently defined as that which all desire. The proper good of any being is that whereby it is brought to perfection. We say that a thing is good inasmuch as it reaches its proper perfection. On the other hand, a thing lacks goodness so far as it is lacking in its proper perfection. Consequently each thing seeks its own perfection, and so man, too, naturally desires to be perfected. And, since there are many degrees of human perfection, that good chiefly and primarily comes under man’s desire which looks to his ultimate perfection. This good is recognized by the sure sign that man’s natural desire comes to rest in it. For, since man’s natural desire always inclines toward his own good which consists in some perfection, the consequence is that as long as something remains to be desired, man has not yet reached his final perfection.
|
| Dupliciter autem adhuc restat aliquid desiderandum. Uno modo, quando id quod desideratur, propter aliquid aliud quaeritur, unde oportet quod eo obtento adhuc desiderium non quiescat, sed feratur in aliud. Alio modo, quando non sufficit ad obtinendum id quod homo desiderat, sicut modicus cibus non sufficit ad sustentationem naturae, unde naturalem appetitum non satiat.
| Something can thus remain to be desired in two ways. First, when the thing desired is sought for the sake of something else; when it is obtained, desire cannot cease, but must be borne along toward that other object. Secondly, when a thing does not suffice to provide what man desires; for instance, a meager portion of food is not enough to sustain nature, and so does not satisfy natural appetite.
|
| Illud ergo bonum quod homo primo et principaliter desiderat, tale debet esse ut non quaeratur propter aliud, et sufficiat homini. Hoc autem bonum communiter felicitas nominatur, inquantum est bonum hominis principale: per hoc enim aliquos felices esse dicimus, quod eis credimus bene esse. Vocatur etiam beatitudo, inquantum excellentiam designat. Potest et pax vocari, inquantum quietat, nam quies appetitus pax interior esse videtur, unde in Psal. CXLVII, 3, dicitur: qui posuit fines tuos pacem.
| Consequently that good which man chiefly and mainly desires must be of such a nature that it is not sought for the sake of something else and that it satisfies man. This good is commonly called happiness, inasmuch as it is man’s foremost good: we say that certain people are happy because we believe that everything goes well with them. It is also known as beatitude, a word that stresses its excellence. It can also be called peace, so far as it brings quiet; for cessation of appetite appears to imply interior peace. This is indicated in the words of Psalm 147:14: “Who has placed peace in your borders.”
|
| Sic igitur apparet quod in corporalibus bonis, hominis felicitas vel beatitudo esse non potest. Primo quidem, quia non sunt propter se quaesita, sed naturaliter propter aliud desiderantur: conveniunt enim homini ratione sui corporis. Corpus autem hominis ordinatur ad animam sicut ad finem, tum quia corpus est instrumentum animae moventis, omne autem instrumentum est propter artem quae utitur eo, tum etiam quia corpus comparatur ad animam sicut materia ad formam. Forma autem est finis materiae, sicut et actus potentiae. Ex quo consequens est ut neque in divitiis neque in honoribus neque in sanitate aut pulchritudine, neque in rebus aliquibus huiusmodi ultima hominis felicitas consistat.
| We see clearly that man’s happiness or beatitude cannot consist in material goods. The first reason for this is that such goods are not sought for their own. sake, but are naturally desired because of something else. They are suitable for man by reason of his body. But man’s body is subordinated to his soul as to its end. For the body is the instrument of the soul that moves it, and every instrument exists for the good of the art that employs it. Furthermore, the body is related to the soul as matter is related to form. But form is the end of matter, just as act is the end of potency. Consequently man’s final happiness does not consist in riches or in honors or in health and beauty or in any goods of this kind.
|
| Secundo, quia impossibile est ut corporalia bona sufficiant homini; quod multipliciter apparet. Uno quidem modo, quia cum in homine sit duplex vis appetitiva, scilicet intellectiva et sensitiva, et per consequens desiderium duplex, desiderium intellectivi appetitus principaliter in bona intelligibilia tendit, ad quae bona corporalia non attingunt. Alio modo quia bona corporalia tanquam infima in rerum ordine, non collectam sed dispersam recipiunt bonitatem, ita scilicet ut hoc habeat hanc bonitatis rationem, puta delectationem, illud aliam, puta corporis salubritatem, et sic de aliis. Unde in nullo eorum appetitus humanus, qui naturaliter in bonum universale tendit, sufficientiam potest invenire. Sed neque in multis eorum, quantumcumque multiplicentur, quia deficiunt ab infinitate universalis boni: unde dicitur Eccle. V, 9: quod avarus non implebitur pecunia. Tertio quia cum homo apprehendat per intellectum bonum universale, quod neque loco neque tempore circumscribitur, consequens est quod appetitus humanus bonum desideret secundum convenientiam ad apprehensionem intellectus, quod tempore non circumscribatur: unde naturale est homini ut perpetuam stabilitatem desideret, quae quidem non potest inveniri in corporalibus rebus, quae sunt corruptioni et multiplici subiectae variationi. Unde conveniens est quod in corporalibus bonis appetitus humanus non inveniat sufficientiam quam requirit. Sic igitur in eis non potest esse ultima felicitas hominis.
| The second reason why happiness is not to be found in material goods is that such goods cannot satisfy man. This is clear on many scores. In the first place, man has a twofold appetitive power, one intellectual, the other sensitive. Consequently he has a twofold desire. But the desire of the intellectual appetite veers chiefly toward intelligible goods, which exceed the competency of material goods. Secondly, material goods, as being the lowest in the order of nature, do not contain all goodness but possess only a portion of goodness, so that one object has this particular aspect of goodness, for example, the power to give pleasure, while another object has a different advantage, for instance, the power to cause bodily well-being, and so on of the rest. In none of them can the human appetite, which naturally tends toward universal good, find complete satisfaction. Nor can full satisfaction be found even in a large number of such goods, no matter how much they may be multiplied, for they fall short of the infinity of universal good. Thus we are assured in Ecclesiastes 5:9 that “a covetous man shall not be satisfied with money.” Thirdly, since man by his intellect apprehends the universal good that is not circumscribed by space or time, the human appetite, consistently with the apprehension of the intellect, desires a good that is not circumscribed by time. Hence man naturally desires perpetual stability. But this cannot be found in material things, which are subject to corruption and to many kinds of change. Therefore the human appetite cannot find the sufficiency it needs in material goods. Accordingly man’s ultimate happiness cannot consist in such goods.
|
| Sed quia vires sensitivae corporeas operationes habent, utpote per organa corporea operantes, quae circa corporalia operantur, consequens est quod neque in operationibus sensitivae partis ultima hominis felicitas consistat, puta in quibuscumque delectationibus carnis. Habet etiam intellectus humanus aliquam circa corporalia operationem, dum et corpora cognoscit homo per speculativum intellectum, et res corporales dispensat per practicum. Et sic consequens fit quod nec in propria ipsa operatione intellectus speculativi vel practici quae corporalibus rebus intendit, ultima hominis felicitas, et perfectio possit poni.
| Moreover, since the sense faculties have bodily activities, inasmuch as they operate through bodily organs which exercise their functions on corporeal objects, man’s ultimate happiness cannot consist in the activities of his sensitive nature, for example, in certain pleasures of the flesh. The human intellect, too, has some activity with reference to corporeal things, for man knows bodies by his speculative intellect and manages corporeal things by his practical intellect. And so man’s ultimate happiness and perfection cannot be placed in the proper activity of the speculative intellect or of the practical intellect that deals with material things.
|
| Similiter etiam nec in operatione intellectus humani qua in se ipsam anima reflectitur, duplici ratione. Primo quidem quia anima secundum se considerata non est beata, alioquin non oporteret eam operari propter beatitudinem acquirendam. Non igitur beatitudinem acquirit ex hoc solo quod sibi intendit. Secundo, quia felicitas est ultima perfectio hominis, ut supra dictum est. Cum autem perfectio animae in propria operatione eius consistat, consequens est ut ultima perfectio eius attendatur secundum optimam eius operationem, quae quidem est secundum optimum obiectum, nam operationes secundum obiecta specificantur. Non autem anima est optimum in quod sua operatio tendere potest. Intelligit enim aliquid esse melius se, unde impossibile est quod ultima beatitudo hominis consistat in operatione qua sibi intendit vel quibuscumque aliis superioribus substantiis, dummodo eis sit aliquid melius, in quod humanae animae operatio tendere possit. Tendit autem operatio hominis in quodcumque bonum, quia universale bonum est quod homo desiderat, cum per intellectum universale bonum apprehendat: unde ad quemcumque gradum se porrigit bonum, aliqualiter extenditur operatio intellectus humani, et per consequens voluntatis. Bonum autem summe invenitur in Deo, qui per essentiam suam bonus est, et omnis bonitatis principium: unde consequens est ut ultima hominis perfectio et finale bonum ipsius sit in hoc quod Deo inhaeret, secundum illud Psal. LXXII, 28: mihi adhaerere Deo bonum est.
| Likewise, such happiness is not found in that activity of the human intellect whereby the soul reflects on itself. There are two reasons for this. In the first place the soul, considered in its own nature, is not beatified. Otherwise it would not have to labor for the attainment of beatitude. Therefore it does not acquire beatitude from the mere contemplation of itself. In the second place, happiness is the ultimate perfection of man, as was stated above. Since the perfection of the soul consists in its proper activity, its ultimate perfection is to be looked for on the plane of its best activity, and this is determined by its best object, for activities are specified according to their objects. But the soul is not the best object to which its activity can tend. For it is aware that something exists that is better than itself. Hence man’s ultimate beatitude cannot consist in the activity whereby he makes himself or any of the other higher substances the object of his intellection, as long as there is something better to which the action of the human soul can turn. Man’s activity may extend to any good whatever, for the universal good is what man desires, since he apprehends universal good with his intellect. Therefore, whatever may be the degree to which goodness extends, the action of the human intellect, and hence also of the will, reaches out toward it in some way. But good is found supremely in God, who is good by His very essence, and is the source of every good. Consequently man’s ultimate perfection and final good consist in union with God, according to Psalm 72:28: “It is good for me to adhere to my God.”
|
| Hoc etiam manifeste apparet, si quis ad ceterarum rerum participationem inspiciat. Omnes enim singulares homines huius praedicationis recipiunt veritatem, per hoc quod ipsam essentiam speciei participant. Nullus autem eorum ex hoc dicitur homo quod similitudinem participet alterius hominis, sed ex eo solo quod participat essentiam speciei, ad quam tamen participandam unus inducit alium per viam generationis, pater scilicet filium. Beatitudo autem, sive felicitas, nihil est aliud quam bonum perfectum. Oportet igitur per solam participationem divinae beatitudinis, quae est bonitas hominis, omnes beatitudinis participes esse beatos, quamvis unus per alium ad tendendum ad beatitudinem adiuvetur. Unde Augustinus dicit in libro de vera religione quod neque nos videndo Angelos beati sumus, sed videndo veritatem, qua ipsos diligimus, et his congratulamur.
| This truth is clearly perceived if we examine the way other things participate in being. Individual men all truly receive the predication “man,” because they share in the very essence of the species. None of them is said to be a man on the ground that he shares in the likeness of some other man, but only because he shares in the essence of the species. This is so even though one man brings another to such participation by way of generation, as a father does with regard to his son. Now beatitude or happiness is nothing else than perfect good. Therefore all who share in beatitude can be happy only by participation in the divine beatitude, which is man’s essential goodness, even though one man may be helped by another in his progress toward beatitude. This is why Augustine says in his book, De vera religione, that we are beatified, not by beholding the angels, but by seeing the Truth in which we love the angels and are happy along with the [LV, 110].
|
| Contingit autem humanam mentem ferri in Deum dupliciter: uno modo per se, alio modo per aliud. Per se quidem, puta cum in seipso videtur, et per seipsum amatur. Per aliud autem, cum ex creaturis ipsius, animus elevatur in Deum, secundum illud Rom. I, 20: invisibilia Dei per ea quae facta sunt, intellecta conspiciuntur.
| Man’s spirit is carried up to God in two ways: by God Himself, and by some other thing. It is borne up to God by God Himself when God is seen in Himself and is loved for Himself. It is raised up by something else when the soul is elevated to God by His creatures, according to Romans 1:20: “The invisible things of Him... are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made.”
|
| Non est autem possibile ut perfecta beatitudo consistat in hoc quod aliquis per aliud in Deum tendit. Primo quidem, quia cum beatitudo significet omnium humanorum actuum finem, non potest vera beatitudo et perfecta consistere in eo quod habet rationem non quidem termini, sed magis mutationis in finem. Quod autem Deus per aliud agnoscatur et ametur, quodam humanae mentis motu agitur, inquantum per unum in aliud devenitur. Non est ergo in hoc vera et perfecta beatitudo.
| Perfect beatitude cannot consist in a person’s movement toward God through the agency of something else. For, first, since beatitude denotes the ultimate term of all human actions, true and perfect happiness cannot be found in that which is of the nature of change in the direction of the end rather than of a final term. Knowledge and love of God through the medium of something other than God is brought about by a certain movement of the human mind, as it advances through one stage to another. True and perfect beatitude, therefore, is not discovered in this process.
|
| Secundo, quia si in hoc quod mens humana Deo inhaereat, eius beatitudo consistat, consequens est ut perfecta beatitudo perfectam inhaesionem ad Deum requirat. Non autem est possibile ut per aliquam creaturam mens humana Deo perfecte inhaereat neque per cognitionem neque per amorem. Quaelibet enim forma creata in infinitum deficiens est a repraesentatione divinae essentiae. Sicut ergo non est possibile ut per formam inferioris ordinis cognoscantur ea quae sunt superioris ordinis, puta per corpus spiritualis substantia, vel per elementum corpus caeleste; ita multo minus possibile est ut per aliquam formam creatam Dei essentia cognoscatur. Sed sicut per considerationem inferiorum corporum superiorum naturas negative percipimus, puta quod non sunt gravia neque levia, et per corporum considerationem negative de Angelis concipimus quod sunt immateriales vel incorporei, ita etiam per creaturas de Deo non cognoscimus quid est, sed potius quid non est. Similiter etiam quaecumque creaturae bonitas quoddam minimum est respectu bonitatis divinae, quae est bonitas infinita: unde bonitates in rebus provenientes a Deo, quae sunt Dei beneficia, non sublevant mentem usque ad perfectum Dei amorem. Non est igitur possibile quod vera et perfecta beatitudo consistat in hoc quod mens Deo per aliud inhaereat.
| Secondly, if man’s beatitude consists in the adhering of the human mind to God, perfect beatitude must require a perfect adhering to God. But the human mind cannot adhere perfectly to God through the medium of any creature, whether by way of knowledge or by way of love. All created forms fall infinitely short of representing the divine essence. Objects pertaining to a higher order of being cannot be known through a form belonging to a lower order. For example, a spiritual substance cannot be known through a body, and a heavenly body cannot be known through one of the elements. Much less can the essence of God be known through any created form. Yet, just as we gain a negative insight into higher bodies from a study of lower bodies, thus learning, for instance, that they are neither heavy nor light, and just as we conceive a negative idea about angels from a consideration of bodies, judging that they are immaterial or incorporeal, so by examining creatures we come to know, not what God is, but rather what He is not. Likewise, any goodness possessed by a creature is a definite minimum in comparison with the divine goodness, which is infinite goodness. Hence the various degrees of goodness emanating from God and discerned in things, which are benefits bestowed by God, fail to raise the mind to a perfect love of God. Therefore true and perfect beatitude cannot consist in the adherence of the mind to God through some alien medium.
|
| Tertio, quia secundum rectum ordinem minus nota, per ea quae sunt magis nota, cognoscuntur; et similiter ea quae sunt minus bona per ea quae sunt magis bona amantur. Quia igitur Deus, qui est prima veritas et summa bonitas, secundum se summe cognoscibilis et amabilis est, hoc naturalis ordo habet ut omnia cognoscantur et amentur per ipsum. Si igitur oportet alicuius mentem in Dei cognitionem et amorem per creaturas perduci, hoc ex eius imperfectione contingit. Nondum ergo consecutus est perfectam beatitudinem, quae omnem imperfectionem excludit.
| Thirdly, according to right order, things that are less familiar become known through things that are more familiar. Likewise, things that are less good are loved because of their connection with things that possess greater goodness. Consequently, as God is the first truth and supreme goodness, and is eminently knowable and lovable in Himself, the order of nature would require that all things should be known and loved through Him. Therefore, if the mind of any person has to be brought to the knowledge and love of God through creatures, this results from his imperfection. Accordingly such a one has not yet achieved perfect beatitude, which excludes all imperfection.
|
| Relinquitur ergo quod perfecta beatitudo sit in hoc quod mens Deo per se inhaereat cognoscendo et amando. Et quia regis est subditos disponere et gubernare, illud in homine regere dicitur secundum quod cetera disponuntur, unde apostolus monet Rom. VI, 12: non regnet peccatum in vestro mortali corpore. Quia igitur ad perfectam beatitudinem requiritur ut ipse Deus per se cognoscatur et ametur, ut per eum animus feratur ad alta, vere et perfecte in bonis Deus regnat, unde dicitur Isai. XLIX, 10: miserator eorum reget eos, et ad fontes aquarum potabit eos, scilicet per ipsum in quibuscumque potissimis bonis reficientur.
| We conclude, therefore, that perfect beatitude consists in the direct union of the spirit with God in knowledge and love. In the same way that a king has the office of directing and governing his subjects, that tendency is said to predominate in man which is the norm for regulating everything else in him. This is the reason for the Apostle’s warning in Romans 6:12: “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body.” Accordingly, since the notion of perfect beatitude requires that God be known and loved in Himself, so that the soul embraces other objects only through Him, God reigns truly and perfectly in the good. Hence we are told in Isaiah 49:10: “He that is merciful to them shall be their shepherd, and at the fountains of waters He shall give them drink.” In other words, by Him they shall be refreshed with all the most excellent goods, of whatever kind they may be.
|
| Est enim considerandum, quod cum intellectus per aliquam speciem seu formam intelligat omne quod novit, sicut etiam visus exterior per formam lapidis lapidem videt, non est possibile quod intellectus Deum in sua essentia videat per aliquam creatam speciem seu formam quasi divinam essentiam repraesentantem. Videmus enim quod per speciem inferioris ordinis rerum non potest repraesentari res superioris ordinis quantum ad suam essentiam: unde fit quod per nullam speciem corporalem potest intelligi spiritualis substantia quantum ad suam essentiam. Cum igitur Deus supergrediatur totum creaturae ordinem, multo magis quam spiritualis substantia excedat ordinem corporalium rerum, impossibile est quod per aliquam speciem corporalem Deus secundum suam essentiam videatur.
| We should recall, further, that the intellect understands all it knows by means of a certain likeness or form; in a similar way the external organ of sight perceives a stone by means of a form of the stone. Consequently the intellect cannot behold God as He is in His essence by means of a created likeness or form that would represent the divine essence. For we are aware that an object belonging to a higher order of being cannot be represented, so far as its essence is concerned, by a likeness pertaining to a lower order. Thus a spiritual substance cannot, if there is question of its essence, be understood by means of any bodily likeness. And so, as God transcends the whole order of creation much more than a spiritual substance excels the order of material things, He cannot be seen in His essence through the medium of a corporeal likeness.
|
| Hoc etiam manifeste apparet, si quis consideret quid sit rem aliquam per suam essentiam videre. Non enim essentiam hominis videt qui aliquid eorum quae essentialiter homini conveniunt apprehendit, sicut nec cognoscit essentiam hominis qui cognoscit animal absque rationali. Quidquid autem de Deo dicitur, essentialiter convenit ei. Non est autem possibile quod una creata species repraesentet Deum quantum ad omnia quae de Deo dicuntur. Nam in intellectu creato alia est species per quam apprehendit vitam et sapientiam et iustitiam, et omnia alia huiusmodi, quae sunt Dei essentia. Non est igitur possibile quod intellectus creatus informetur aliqua una specie sic repraesentante divinam essentiam, quod Deus in ea per suam essentiam possit videri. Si autem per multas, deficiet unitas, quae idem est quod Dei essentia. Non est igitur possibile quod intellectus creatus elevari possit ad videndum Deum in seipso per suam essentiam aliqua una specie creata, vel etiam pluribus. Relinquitur ergo quod oportet, ad hoc quod Deus per suam essentiam videatur ab intellectu creato, quod ipsa divina essentia per seipsam, non per aliam speciem videatur,
| The same truth is quite evident if we but reflect on what the vision of a thing in its essence implies. He who apprehends some property pertaining essentially to man does not perceive the essence of man, just as a person who knows what an animal is, but does not know what rationality is, fails to understand the essence of man. Any perfection predicated of God belongs to Him essentially. But no single created likeness can represent God with respect to all the perfections predicated of Him. For in the created intellect the likeness whereby man apprehends the life of God differs from the likeness whereby he apprehends God’s wisdom, and so on with regard to justice and all the other perfections that are identical with God’s essence. Therefore the created intellect cannot be informed by a single likeness representing the divine essence in such a way that the essence of God can be seen therein. And if such likenesses are multiplied, they will be lacking in unity, which is identical with God’s essence..Consequently the created intellect cannot be raised so high by a single created likeness, or even by many of them, as to see God as He is in Himself, in His own essence. In order, therefore, that God may be seen in His essence by a created intellect, the divine essence must be perceived directly in itself, and not through the medium of some likeness.
|
| et hoc per quandam unionem intellectus creati ad Deum. Unde Dionysius dicit, I capite de divinis Nomin., quod quando beatissimum consequemur finem, Dei apparitione, adimpleti erimus per quandam superintellectualem cognitionem ad Deum. Est autem hoc singulare divinae essentiae ut ei possit intellectus uniri absque omni similitudine, quia et ipsa divina essentia est eius esse, quod nulli alii formae competit.
| Such vision requires a certain union of the created intellect with God. Dionysius observes, in the first chapter of his book, De divinis nominibus, that when we arrive at our most blessed end and God appears, we shall be filled with a superintellectual knowledge of God [I, 4]. The divine essence, however, has this exclusive characteristic, that our intellect can be united to it without the medium of any likeness. The reason is that the divine essence itself is its own existence or esse, which is true of no other form.
|
| Unde oportet quod omnis forma sit in intellectu: et ideo si aliqua forma, quae per se existens non potest esse informativa intellectus, puta substantia Angeli, cognosci debeat ab intellectu alterius, oportet quod hoc fiat per aliquam eius similitudinem intellectum informantem, quod non requiritur in divina essentia, quae est suum esse.
| Knowledge always requires the presence of some form in the intellect; and so, if any form that exists by itself, for example, the substance of an angel, cannot inform an intellect, and yet is to be known by the intellect of another, such knowledge has to be brought about by some likeness of the thing informing the intellect. But this is not necessary in the case of the divine essence, which is its own existence.
|
| Sic igitur per ipsam Dei visionem mens beata fit in intelligendo unum cum Deo. Oportet igitur intelligens et intellectum esse quodammodo unum. Et ideo Deo regnante in sanctis, et ipsi etiam cum Deo conregnabunt, et ideo ex eorum persona dicitur Apoc. V, 10: fecisti nos Deo nostro regnum et sacerdotes, et regnabimus super terram. Dicitur enim hoc regnum quo Deus regnat in sanctis et sancti cum Deo, regnum caelorum, secundum illud Matth. III, 2: poenitentiam agite, appropinquavit enim regnum caelorum: eo modo loquendi quo esse in caelo Deo attribuitur, non quia corporalibus caelis contineatur, sed ut per hoc designetur Dei eminentia super omnem creaturam, sicut caeli eminent super omnem aliam creaturam corpoream, secundum illud Psal. CXII, 4: excelsus super omnes gentes dominus, et super caelos gloria eius.
| Accordingly the soul that is beatified by the vision of God is made one with Him in understanding. The knower and the known must somehow be one. And so, when God reigns in the saints, they too reign along with God. In their person are uttered the words of the Apocalypse 5: 10: “(You) hast made us to our God a kingdom and priests, and we shall reign on the earth.” This kingdom, in which God reigns in the saints and the saints reign with God, is called the kingdom of heaven, according to Matthew 3:2: “Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” This is the same manner of speaking as that whereby presence in heaven is ascribed to God, not in the sense that He is housed in the material heavens, but to show forth the eminence of God over every creature, in the way that heaven towers high above every other material creature, as is indicated in Psalm 112:4: “The Lord is high above all nations, and His glory above the heavens.”
|
| Sic igitur et beatitudo sanctorum regnum caelorum dicitur, non quia eorum remuneratio sit in corporalibus caelis, sed in contemplatione supercaelestis naturae, unde et de Angelis dicitur Matth. XVIII, 10: Angeli eorum in caelis semper vident faciem patris mei qui in caelis est. Unde et Augustinus, in libro de sermone domini in monte dicit, exponens illud quod dicitur Matth. V, 12: merces vestra copiosa est in caelis: non hic caelos dici puto superiores partes huius visibilis mundi: non enim merces nostra in rebus volubilibus collocanda est; sed in caelis dictum puto in spiritualibus firmamentis, ubi habitat sempiterna iustitia.
| The beatitude of the saints is called the kingdom of heaven, therefore, not because their reward is situated in the material heavens, but because it consists in the contemplation of super-celestial nature. This is also the reason for the statement about the angels in Matthew 18:10: “Their angels in heaven always see the face of My Father who is in heaven.” Hence Augustine, in his explanation of the passage in Matthew 5:12, “Your reward is very great in heaven,” says in his book, De sermone Domini in monte: “I do not think that heaven here means the loftier regions of this visible world. For our reward... is not to be in evanescent things. I think that the expression, ‘in heaven,’ refers rather to the spiritual firmament, where eternal justice dwells” [I, 5].
|
| Dicitur etiam et hoc finale bonum, quod in Deo consistit vita aeterna, eo modo loquendi quo actio animae vivificantis dicitur vita: unde tot modi vitae distinguuntur, quot sunt genera animae actionum, inter quas suprema est operatio intellectus, et secundum philosophum actio intellectus est vita. Et quia actus ex obiecto speciem accipit, inde est quod visio divinitatis vita aeterna nominatur, secundum illud Ioannis XVII, 3: haec est vita aeterna ut cognoscant te solum Deum verum.
| This ultimate good, which consists in God, is also called eternal life. The word is used in the sense in which the action of the animating soul is called life. Hence we distinguish as many kinds of life as there are kinds of action performed by the soul, among which the action of the intellect is supreme; and, according to the Philosopher, the action of the intellect is life [Metaphysics, XII, 7, 1072 b 27]. Furthermore, since an act receives species from its object, the vision of the divinity is called eternal life, as we read in John 17:3: “This is eternal life: that they may know You, the only true God.”
|
| Hoc etiam finale bonum comprehensio nominatur, secundum illud Philip. III, 12: sequor autem, si quo modo comprehendam. Quod quidem non dicitur eo modo loquendi quo comprehensio inclusionem importat: quod enim ab alio includitur, totum et totaliter ab eo continetur. Non est autem possibile quod intellectus creatus Dei essentiam totaliter videat, ita scilicet quod attingat ad completum et perfectum modum visionis divinae, ut scilicet Deum videat quantum visibilis est: est enim Deus visibilis secundum suae veritatis claritatem, quae infinita est, unde infinite visibilis est, quod convenire intellectui creato non potest, cuius est finita virtus in intelligendo. Solus igitur Deus per infinitam virtutem sui intellectus se infinite intelligens, totaliter se intelligendo comprehendit seipsum.
| The ultimate good is also known as comprehension (comprehensio), a word suggested by Philippians 3:12: “I follow after, if I may by any means apprehend” (comprehendam). The term is not, of course, used in the sense according to which comprehension implies enclosing; for what is enclosed by another is completely contained by it as a whole. The created intellect cannot completely see God’s essence, in such a way, that is, as to attain to the ultimate and perfect degree of the divine vision, and so to see God to the extent that He is capable of being seen. For God is knowable in a way that is proportionate to the clarity of His truth, and this is infinite. Hence He is infinitely knowable. But infinite knowledge is impossible for a created intellect, whose power of understanding is finite. God alone, therefore, who knows Himself infinitely well with the infinite power of His intellect, comprehends Himself by completely understanding Himself.
|
| Repromittitur autem sanctis comprehensio prout comprehensionis nomen importat quamdam tentionem. Cum enim aliquis insequitur aliquem, dicitur comprehendere eum, quando potuerit eum manu tenere. Sic igitur quandiu sumus in corpore, ut dicitur II Cor. V, 6, peregrinamur a domino; per fidem enim ambulamus et non per speciem, et ita in eum tendimus ut in aliquid distans. Sed quando per speciem videbimus, praesentialiter eum in nobismetipsis tenebimus, unde Cant. III, 4, sponsa quaerens quem diligit anima sua, tandem vero eum inveniens dicit: tenui eum, nec dimittam.
| Nevertheless comprehension is promised to the saints, in the sense of the word, comprehension, that implies a certain grasp. Thus when one man pursues another, he is said to apprehend (dicitur comprehendere) the latter when he can grasp him with his hand. Accordingly, “while we are in the body,” as the matter is put in 2 Corinthians 5:6 ff., “we are absent from the Lord; for we walk by faith and not by sight.” And so we press on toward Him as toward some distant goal. But when we see Him by direct vision we shall hold Him present within ourselves. Thus in Canticles 3:4, the spouse seeks him whom her soul loves; and when at last she finds him she says: “I held him, and I will not let him go.”
|
| Habet autem praedictum finale bonum perpetuum et plenum gaudium, unde dominus dicit Ioan. XVI, 24: petite et accipietis, ut gaudium vestrum plenum sit. Non potest autem esse plenum gaudium de aliqua creatura, sed de solo Deo, in quo est tota plenitudo bonitatis, unde et dominus dicit servo fideli: intra in gaudium domini tui, ut scilicet de domino tuo gaudeas, secundum illud Iob XXII, 26: super omnipotentem deliciis afflues. Et quia Deus praecipue de seipso gaudet, dicitur servus fidelis intrare in gaudium domini sui, scilicet inquantum intrat ad gaudium quo dominus eius gaudet, secundum quod alibi dominus discipulis, Luc. XXII, 29, promittit dicens: ego dispono vobis, sicut disposuit mihi pater meus regnum, ut edatis et bibatis super mensam meam in regno meo: non quod in illo finali bono corporalibus cibis sancti utantur, incorruptibiles iam effecti, sed per mensam significatur refectio gaudii quod habet Deus de seipso, et sancti de eo.
| The ultimate good we have been speaking of contains perpetual and full joy. Our Lord was thinking of this when He bade us, in John 16:24: “Ask and you shall receive, that your joy may be full.” Full joy, however, can be gained from no creature, but only from God, in whom the entire plenitude of goodness resides. And so our Lord says to the faithful servant in Matthew 25:21: “Enter into the joy of thy Lord,” that you may have the joy of your Lord, as is indicated in Job 22:26: “Then shall thou abound in delights in the Almighty.” Since God rejoices most of all in Himself, the faithful servant is said to enter into the joy of his Lord inasmuch as he enters into the joy wherein his Lord rejoices, as our Lord said on another occasion, when He made a promise to His disciples: “And I dispose to you, as My Father has disposed to Me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom” (Luke 22:29 ff.). Not that the saints, once they have been made incorruptible, have any use for bodily foods in that final state of good; no, by the table is meant rather the replenishment of joy that God has in Himself and that the saints have from Him.
|
| Oportet ergo plenitudinem gaudii attendi non solum secundum rem de qua gaudetur, sed secundum dispositionem gaudentis, ut scilicet rem de qua gaudet, praesentem habeat, et totus affectus gaudentis per amorem feratur in gaudii causam. Iam autem ostensum est, quod per visionem divinae essentiae mens creata praesentialiter tenet Deum: ipsa etiam visio totaliter affectum accendit ad divinum amorem. Si enim unumquodque est amabile inquantum est pulchrum et bonum, secundum Dionysium de divinis nominibus cap. IV, impossibile est quod Deus, qui est ipsa essentia pulchritudinis et bonitatis, absque amore videatur. Et ideo ex perfecta eius visione sequitur perfectus amor: unde et Gregorius dicit super Ezech.: amoris ignis qui hic ardere inchoat, cum ipsum quem amat viderit, in amore ipsius amplius ignescit. Tanto autem maius est gaudium de aliquo praesentialiter habito, quanto magis amatur, unde sequitur quod illud gaudium sit plenum non tantum ex parte rei de qua gaudetur, sed etiam ex parte gaudentis. Et hoc gaudium est humanae beatitudinis consummativum, unde et Augustinus dicit X confessionum, quod beatitudo est gaudium de veritate.
| This fullness of joy must be understood not only of the object of the rejoicing, but also with reference to the disposition of him who rejoices. In other words, the object of the rejoicing must be present, and the entire affection of the joyful person must be centered on the cause of the joy. As we have shown, in the vision of the divine essence the created spirit possesses God as present; and the vision itself sets the affections completely on fire with divine love. If any object is lovable so far as it is beautiful and good, as Dionysius remarks in De divinis nominibus [IV, 10], surely God, who is the very essence of beauty and goodness, cannot be gazed at without love. Therefore perfect vision is followed by perfect love. Gregory observes in one of his homilies on Ezekiel: “The fire of love which begins to burn here on earth, flares up more fiercely with love of God when He who is loved is seen” [In Ezechielem homiliae, II, 2]. Moreover, joy over an object embraced as present is keener the more that object is loved; consequently that joy is full, not only because of the object that gives joy, but also on the part of him who rejoices. This joy is what crowns human beatitude. Hence Augustine writes in his Confessions that happiness is joy in truth [X, 23].
|
| Est autem ulterius considerandum, quod quia Deus est ipsa essentia bonitatis, per consequens ipse bonum est omnis boni, unde eo viso omne bonum videtur, secundum quod dominus dicit Moysi, Exod. XXXIII, 19: ego ostendam tibi omne bonum. Per consequens igitur eo habito omne bonum habetur, secundum illud Sapient. VII, 11: venerunt mihi omnia bona pariter cum illa. Sic igitur in illo finali bono, videndo Deum, habebimus omnium bonorum plenam sufficientiam, unde et fideli servo repromittit dominus Matth. XXIV, 47: quod super omnia bona sua constituet eum.
| Another point to consider is this: as God is the very essence of goodness, He is the good of every good. Therefore all good is beheld when He is beheld, as the Lord intimated when He said to Moses: “I will show you all good” (Exod. 33:19). Consequently, if God is possessed all good is possessed, as is suggested in Wisdom 7: 11: “All good things came to me together with her” [i.e., with Wisdom]. In that final state of good, when we see God, we shall have a full abundance of all goods; and so our Lord promises the faithful servant in Matthew 24:47 that “He shall place him over all His goods.”
|
| Quia vero malum bono opponitur, necesse est ut ad praesentiam omnis boni malum universaliter excludatur. Non est enim participatio iustitiae cum iniquitate, nec societas lucis ad tenebras, ut dicitur II Corinth. VI, 14. Sic igitur in illo finali bono non solum aderit perfecta sufficientia habentibus omne bonum, sed etiam aderit plena quies et securitas per immunitatem omnis mali, secundum illud Prov. I, 33: qui me audiet absque terrore requiescet, et abundantia perfruetur, terrore malorum sublato.
| Since evil is opposed to good, the presence of all good requires the utter banishment of evil. justice has no participation with injustice, and light has no fellowship with darkness, as we are told in 2 Corinthians 6:14. In that final state of good, therefore, those who possess all good will not only have a perfect sufficiency, but they will enjoy complete serenity and security as a result of their freedom from all evil, according to Proverbs 1:33: “He who hears me, shall rest without terror and shall enjoy abundance without fear of evils.”
|
| Ex hoc autem ulterius sequitur quod sit ibi futura omnimoda pax. Non enim impeditur pax hominis nisi vel per interiorem desideriorum inquietudinem, dum desiderat habere quae nondum habet, vel per aliquorum malorum molestiam, quae vel patitur vel pati timet. Ibi autem nihil timetur: cessabit enim inquietudo desiderii propter plenitudinem omnis boni; cessabit etiam omnis molestia exterior per absentiam omnis mali; unde relinquitur quod ibi sit perfecta pacis tranquillitas. Hinc est quod dicitur Isai. XXXII, 18: sedebit populus meus in pulchritudine pacis, per quod pacis perfectio designatur: et ad ostendendum causam pacis subditur, et in tabernaculis fiduciae, quae scilicet erit subtracto timore malorum, in requie opulenta, quae pertinet ad affluentiam omnis boni.
| A further consequence is that absolute peace will reign in heaven. Man’s peace is blocked either by the inner restlessness of desire, when he covets what he does not yet possess, or by the irksomeness of certain evils which he suffers or fears he may suffer. But in heaven there is nothing to fear. All restlessness of craving will come to an end, because of the full possession of all good. And every external cause of disturbance will cease, because all evil will be absent. Hence the perfect tranquillity of peace will be enjoyed there. This is alluded to in Isaiah 3 2: 18: “My people shall sit in the beauty of peace,” by which the perfection of peace is meant. To show forth the cause of peace the Prophet adds: “And in the tabernacles of confidence,” for confidence will reign when the fear of evils is abolished; “and in wealthy rest,” which refers to the overflowing abundance of all good.
|
| Huius autem finalis boni perfectio in perpetuum durabit. Non enim poterit deficere per defectum bonorum quibus homo fruetur, quia sunt aeterna et incorruptibilia, unde dicitur Isai. XXXIII, v. 20: oculi tui videbunt Ierusalem, civitatem opulentam, tabernaculum quod nequaquam transferri poterit. Et postmodum subditur causa: quia solummodo ibi erit magnificus dominus Deus noster. Tota enim illius status perfectio erit in fruitione divinae aeternitatis.
| The perfection of this final good will endure forever. It cannot fail through any lack of the goods which man enjoys, for these are eternal and incorruptible. We are assured of this in Isaiah 33:20: “Your eyes shall see Jerusalem, a rich habitation, a tabernacle that cannot be removed.” The cause of this stability is given in the next verse: “Because only there our Lord is magnificent.” The entire perfection of that state will consist in the enjoyment of divine eternity.
|
| Consimiliter etiam non poterit ille status deficere per corruptionem ibidem existentium, quia vel sunt naturaliter incorruptibiles, sicut Angeli, vel in incorruptionem transferentur, sicut homines: oportet enim corruptibile hoc induere incorruptionem, ut dicitur I Corinth. XV, 53. Unde et Apoc. III, 12, dicitur: qui vicerit, faciam illum columnam in templo Dei mei, et foras non egredietur amplius.
| Similarly, that state cannot fail through the corruption of the beings existing there. These are either naturally incorruptible, as is the case with the angels, or they will be transferred to a condition of incorruption, as is the case with men. “For this corruptible must put on incorruption,” as we are informed in 1 Corinthians 15:53. The same is indicated in the Apocalypse 3:12: “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God.”
|
| Nec etiam poterit ille status deficere per hoc quod voluntas hominis fastidiendo se avertat, quia quanto Deus, qui est bonitatis essentia, magis videtur, tanto necesse est ut magis ametur, unde et magis eius fruitio desiderabitur, secundum illud Eccli. XXIV, 29: qui edunt me, adhuc esurient; et qui bibunt me, adhuc sitient. Propter quod et de Angelis Deum videntibus dicitur I, 12: in quem desiderant Angeli prospicere.
| Nor can that state fail by reason of the turning away of man’s will in disgust. The more clearly God, the essence of goodness, is seen, the more He must be loved; and so enjoyment of Him will be desired ever more keenly, according to Sirach 24:29: “They that eat Me shall yet hunger, and they that drink Me shall yet thirst.” For this reason the words of 1 Peter 1:12, “on whom the angels desire to look,” were spoken of the angels who see God.
|
| Similiter etiam non deficiet ille status per hostis alicuius impugnationem, quia cessabit ibi omnis mali molestia, secundum illud Isai. XXXV, 9: non erit ibi leo, idest Diabolus impugnans, et mala bestia, idest malus homo, non ascendet per eam, nec invenietur ibi; unde et dominus dicit Ioan. X, de ovibus suis, quod non peribunt in aeternum, et quod non rapiet eas quisquam de manu sua.
| That state will not be overthrown by the attack of an enemy, for no disturbing interference of any evil will be found there, as we read in Isaiah 35:9: “No lion shall be there,” that is, no assaulting devil, “nor shall any mischievous beast, that is, any evil man, “go up by it nor be found there.” Hence our Lord says of His sheep, in John 15:28: “They shall not perish forever, and no man shall pluck them out of My hand.”
|
| Sed nec finiri poterit ille status per hoc quod a Deo aliqui inde excludantur. Non enim aliquis ab illo statu repelletur propter culpam, quae omnino non erit, ubi deerit omne malum, unde dicitur Isai. LX, 21: populus tuus omnes iusti, neque etiam propter promotionem ad melius bonum, sicut in hoc mundo Deus interdum etiam iustis spirituales consolationes subtrahit, et alia sua beneficia, ut avidius quaerant, et suum defectum recognoscant, quia status ille non est emendationis aut profectus, sed perfectionis finalis: et ideo dominus dicit Ioan. VI, 37: eum qui venit ad me, non eiiciam foras. Habebit igitur status ille omnium praedictorum bonorum perpetuitatem, secundum illud Psal. V, 12: in aeternum exultabunt, et habitabis in eis. Est igitur praedictum regnum beatitudo perfecta, utpote immutabilem omnis boni sufficientiam habens. Et quia beatitudo naturaliter desideratur ab hominibus, consequens est quod regnum Dei ab omnibus desideretur.
| Furthermore, that state cannot come to an end as a result of the banishment of some of its inhabitants by God. No one will be expelled from that state on account of sin, which will be simply non-existent in a place where every evil will be absent; hence we are told in Isaiah 60:21: “Your people shall be all just.” Again, none will be exiled for the purpose of urging them on to greater good, as happens at times in this world, when God withdraws spiritual consolations even from the just and takes away other of His benefits, in order that men may seek them with greater eagerness and may acknowledge their own powerlessness; that state is not one of correction or progress, but is a life of final perfection. This is why our Lord says in John 6:37: “Him that cometh to Me, I will not cast out.” Therefore that state will consist in the everlasting enjoyment of all the goods mentioned, as is said in Psalm 5:12: “They shall rejoice forever, and You shall dwell in them.” Consequently the kingdom we have been discussing is perfect happiness, for it contains all good in changeless abundance. And, since happiness is naturally desired by men, the kingdom of God, too, is desired by all.
|