|
Objection 1: It seems that of those who see the essence of God,
one does not see more perfectly than another. For it is written (1
Jn. 3:2): "We shall see Him as He is." But He is only in
one way. Therefore He will be seen by all in one way only; and
therefore He will not be seen more perfectly by one and less perfectly
by another.
Objection 2: Further, Augustine says (Octog. Tri. Quaest.
qu. xxxii): "One person cannot see one and the same thing more
perfectly than another." But all who see the essence of God,
understand the Divine essence, for God is seen by the intellect and
not by sense, as was shown above (Article 3). Therefore of those
who see the divine essence, one does not see more clearly than
another.
Objection 3: Further, That anything be seen more perfectly than
another can happen in two ways: either on the part of the visible
object, or on the part of the visual power of the seer. On the part
of the object, it may so happen because the object is received more
perfectly in the seer, that is, according to the greater perfection of
the similitude; but this does not apply to the present question, for
God is present to the intellect seeing Him not by way of similitude,
but by His essence. It follows then that if one sees Him more
perfectly than another, this happens according to the difference of the
intellectual power; thus it follows too that the one whose intellectual
power is higher, will see Him the more clearly; and this is
incongruous; since equality with angels is promised to men as their
beatitude.
On the contrary, Eternal life consists in the vision of God,
according to Jn. 17:3: "This is eternal life, that they may
know Thee the only true God," etc. Therefore if all saw the
essence of God equally in eternal life, all would be equal; the
contrary to which is declared by the Apostle: "Star differs from
star in glory" (1 Cor. 15:41).
I answer that, Of those who see the essence of God, one sees Him
more perfectly than another. This, indeed, does not take place as if
one had a more perfect similitude of God than another, since that
vision will not spring from any similitude; but it will take place
because one intellect will have a greater power or faculty to see God
than another. The faculty of seeing God, however, does not belong
to the created intellect naturally, but is given to it by the light of
glory, which establishes the intellect in a kind of "deiformity," as
appears from what is said above, in the preceding article.
Hence the intellect which has more of the light of glory will see God
the more perfectly; and he will have a fuller participation of the
light of glory who has more charity; because where there is the greater
charity, there is the more desire; and desire in a certain degree
makes the one desiring apt and prepared to receive the object desired.
Hence he who possesses the more charity, will see God the more
perfectly, and will be the more beatified.
Reply to Objection 1: In the words,"We shall see Him as He
is," the conjunction "as" determines the mode of vision on the part
of the object seen, so that the meaning is, we shall see Him to be as
He is, because we shall see His existence, which is His essence.
But it does not determine the mode of vision on the part of the one
seeing; as if the meaning was that the mode of seeing God will be as
perfect as is the perfect mode of God's existence.
Thus appears the answer to the Second Objection. For when it is
said that one intellect does not understand one and the same thing
better than another, this would be true if referred to the mode of the
thing understood, for whoever understands it otherwise than it really
is, does not truly understand it, but not if referred to the mode of
understanding, for the understanding of one is more perfect than the
understanding of another.
Reply to Objection 3: The diversity of seeing will not arise on the
part of the object seen, for the same object will be presented to
all---viz. the essence of God; nor will it arise from the diverse
participation of the object seen by different similitudes; but it will
arise on the part of the diverse faculty of the intellect, not,
indeed, the natural faculty, but the glorified faculty.
|
|