hards,59 that "Anima non indiget lumine gloriae ipsam elevante ad Deum videndum et eo beate fruendum." &

60

a) The necessity of the light of glory flows as a corollary from what we have said above. If the order of grace and salvation instituted for all rational creatures is a strictly supernatural state, absolutely unattainable by purely natural means; if, in particular, the natural power of the created intellect is not sufficient to enable it to attain to an intuitive vision of God's essence because He "dwells in light inaccessible;"-then manifestly the cognitive faculty of rational creatures must, in virtue of the potentia obedientialis latent therein, be elevated to the supernatural sphere and endowed with the supernatural power necessary for it to see God. Whoever denies this conclusion must perforce accept the heretical antecedent that the created intellect is able by its own natural powers to arrive at an intuitive vision of God.61

b) The necessity of the light of glory can be proved even more cogently from its relation to the habitus of theological faith. For while the supernatural habitus of love (habitus caritatis) will continue in the beyond,62 faith, on the other

59 On the Beguines and the Beghards, see E. Gilliat-Smith in the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. II, pp. 389 sq.

80 Clement., 1. V, tit. 3, cap. 3. 61 Cfr. Supra, Article 1, No. 2. 62 Cfr. 1 Cor. XIII, 8: ǹ ȧyáπη οὐδέποτε ἐκπίπτει,

hand, will cease, being changed into vision.63 Now, if the supernatural life of faith here on earth is supported by a special habitus, viz., theological faith, it is plain that the light of glory, too, which takes the place of faith in Heaven, requires a habitus for its foundation; the more so because the beatific vision is far superior to the knowledge of faith, representing, as it does, the summit which grace makes it possible for any created intellect to attain. Cfr. Apoc. XXII, 4 sqq.: "Et videbunt faciem eius; 64 et nox ultra non erit; et non egebunt lumine lucernae, neque lumine solis, quoniam Dominus Deus illuminabit illos,65 et regnabunt in saecula saeculorum-And they shall see his face; .`. . and night shall be no more: and they shall not need the light of the lamp, nor the light of the sun, because the Lord God shall enlighten them, and they shall reign for ever and ever."

3. SCHOLASTIC CONTROVERSIES REGARDING the NATURE OF THE LIGHT OF GLORY.-While no Catholic is allowed to doubt the existence and the necessity of the light of glory-in the sense of "supernatural assistance"-we are free to discuss the question, in what the essence of this light consists, and what are its qualities; provided, of

63 Cfr. I Cor. XIII, 10: ÖтαV δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον, τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεται.

64 ὄψονται τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ. 65 ὁ Θεὸς φωτιεῖ ἐπ ̓ αὐτούς.

course, that the dogma itself is duly safeguarded.

a) Three Scholastic theories on the matter must be rejected as partly erroneous and partly inadequate.

67

a) We must reject as incorrect in the first place the opinion of that school which holds that a mere extrinsic elevation (elevatio extrinseca) is sufficient 66 for the supernatural equipment of the human intellect, or that it is at least possible. The essence of this elevatio extrinseca is held by its champions to consist not in any intrinsic strengthening of the cognitive faculty, but in the exercise by God Himself of an immediate influence on the natural intellect, enabling it to attain to supernatural vision. Some theologians, as, e. g., Cardinals Cajetan and Franzelin, regard this opinion as theologically unsound, and as involving a philosophic contradiction, on the ground that no vital potency can produce a supernatural act without undergoing an intrinsic alteration.68 Whatever view one may take of the possibility or impossibility of the elevatio extrinseca, this much appears to be certain: the theory does not accord with the spirit of the Clementine decision, because the term "lumen gloriae elevans animam ad Deum videndum" implies just as much of an intrinsic (qualitative) change in the principle of cognition as does the phrase, "lumen fidei elevans animam ad credendum."

B) There is a second theory, which accords somewhat better with the sense of the dogma. It postulates an intrinsic strengthening of the soul by the agency

66 Durandus, Comment. in Quatuor Libros Sent., IV, dist. 49, qu.

20.

67 Cfr. Suarez, De Deo, II, 13;

Toletus, Comment. in S. Theol., 1, qu. 12, art. 5, concl. 3.

68 Cfr., however, G. B. Tepe, S. J., Instit. Theol., II, pp. 137 sqq., Paris 1895.

of an unbroken chain of actual graces (gratiae actuales). If it is true that in Heaven faith gives way to vision, while charity remains, and both are of the same species, i. e., habitual virtues, then should we not expect a corresponding habitus visionis to replace the former habitus fidei? But this habitus visionis would be identical with the lumen gloriae. Hence, if the latter is at all to be compared to supernatural grace, it must be compared not to actual grace (gratia actualis), but to sanctifying grace (gratia habitualis), which inheres in the soul of the justified as a permanent quality, a habitus infusus.

69

y) Thomassin and several other theologians 9 held that the beatific vision of God consists in a direct participation by the Elect in the Divine Vision itself, i. e., in an actual transfer of the divine act of intuition to the intellect of the Just. Thomassin says: 70 "Videtur Deus a beatis non alia specie intelligibili quam Verbo ipso mentem informante." Nay, he does not shrink from identifying the light of glory with the Holy Ghost, falsely drawing from Ps. XXXV, 10: "In lumine tuo videbimus lumen," the conclusion: "Ideoque lumen gloriae, quo videtur Deus, est Spiritus sanctus." Such a confusion of the beatific vision with the uncreated Logos, and of the light of glory with the Person of the Holy Ghost, deserves to be called adventurous. While it is quite certain that God cannot transfer His own vital act of self-contemplation to any extraneous being, it is equally certain that the Blessed in Heaven behold Him in virtue of a vital act of vision proper to, and immanent in, their own intellects. Can I see with the eyes of another? True, the Holy Ghost elevates and strengthens the intellect per appropriationem; but He is not the sub69 Mentioned by Lessius, De Summo Bono, II, 2.

70 De Deo, VI, 16.

jective principle of energy from which the supernatural act of vision vitally emanates. Pursued to its logical conclusion this theory leads directly to Pantheism.

b) From what we have said in refutation of these false theories the reader can easily formulate the true view. According to the sententia communis, the light of glory consists in that "supernatural power which inheres in the intellect of the Blessed as a permanent habitus, enabling them to see the Divine Countenance." This definition possesses the twofold advantage of being in full accord with the Clementine decree, and of satisfying the scientific dogmatician.71

ARTICLE 3

THE BEATIFIC VISION IN ITS RELATION TO THE DIVINE INCOMPREHENSIBILITY

I. STATE OF THE QUESTION.-The incomprehensibility of the Divine Essence must not be conceived as merely relative. God is incomprehensible to us not only in the natural condition of our intellect here below, but likewise in the supernatural state of glory in Heaven. Holy Scripture 72 and Tradition both define incomprehen

71 On some of the deeper problems concerning the species impressa and expressa, cfr. G. B. Tepe, Instit. Theol., pp. 145 sqq. Chr. Pesch, S. J., treats the same sub

ject more briefly in his Praelect. Dogmat., vol. II, 3rd ed., pp. 41 sqq. Friburgi 1906.

72 Cfr. Job XI, 7; Ps. CXLIV, 3.