Is joy infinite?

[Thomas_Jennings]

Joy has been described again and again, notably by Peter Kreeft and CS Lewis, as being ‘infinite’. Is that so (in Heaven at least)?
Bearing in mind that we shall have new bodies, so presumably finite intellects?

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Joy, if considered an attribute of God, could be called truly infinite. In the Beatific Vision we will experience God as he is, and so perhaps we could say (if joy is an attribute of God) that we will experience infinite Joy (though how this works when we ourselves remain finite creatures is a mystery).

Without seeing the context I can only guess, but my guess would be that these authors instead simply meant the word to mean “everlasting.” Once commenced the joy of heaven will never end.

 

[SteveVH]

Joy has been described again and again, notably by Peter Kreeft and CS Lewis, as being ‘infinite’. Is that so (in Heaven at least)?
Bearing in mind that we shall have new bodies, so presumably finite intellects?

If heaven is infinite then so is joy. As Catholics we believe that we become partakers in the life of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That is joy beyond anything we have experienced here on earth. As Scripture tells us, we shall see God as he truly is. That cannot happen with a finite mind. We will not just have new bodies, we will have glorified bodies, just as Jesus has. So I would not presume that our intellects will remain finite.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

If heaven is infinite then so is joy. As Catholics we believe that we become partakers in the life of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That is joy beyond anything we have experienced here on earth. As Scripture tells us, we shall see God as he truly is. That cannot happen with a finite mind. We will not just have new bodies, we will have glorified bodies, just as Jesus has. So I would not presume that our intellects will remain finite.

Careful there. In heaven we do not simply become God Himself, losing our individual identities or becoming Divine Persons like the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is hard to see how one could have a literally infinite intellect without actually being God. There is only one Infinite Being.

Yes we are deified in heaven, but this is through a partial participation in the divine nature which does not obliterate our creaturely identities.

 

[Thomas_Jennings]

Joy, if considered an attribute of God, could be called truly infinite. In the Beatific Vision we will experience God as he is, and so perhaps we could say (if joy is an attribute of God) that we will experience infinite Joy (though how this works when we ourselves remain finite creatures is a mystery).

Without seeing the context I can only guess, but my guess would be that these authors instead simply meant the word to mean “everlasting.” Once commenced the joy of heaven will never end.

Thanks. However, surely if they meant eternal they would have said ‘joy lasting for infinite time’ rather than ‘infinite joy’. Then again…

Peter Kreeft says we are not satisfied with the ‘finite and partial’ and that, for example, God is infinite beauty. I dare say he doesn’t mean we can contain this beauty but, to be only experiencers (think I just invented a new word there) I think might save us from being ‘gods’.

" What it proves is an unknown X, but an unknown whose direction, so to speak, is known. This X is more: more beauty, more desirability, more awesomeness, more joy. This X is to great beauty as, for example, great beauty is to small beauty or to a mixture of beauty and ugliness. And the same is true of other perfections.

But the “more” is infinitely more, for we are not satisfied with the finite and partial. Thus the analogy (X is to great beauty as great beauty is to small beauty) is not proportionate. Twenty is to ten as ten is to five, but infinite is not to twenty as twenty is to ten. The argument points down an infinite corridor in a definite direction. Its conclusion is not “God” as already conceived or defined, but a moving and mysterious X which pulls us to itself and pulls all our images and concepts out of themselves."- Peter Kreeft

Again, MAYBE.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Thanks. However, surely if they meant eternal they would have said ‘joy lasting for infinite time’ rather than ‘infinite joy’. Then again…

Peter Kreeft says we are not satisfied with the ‘finite and partial’ and that, for example, God is infinite beauty. I dare say he doesn’t mean we can contain this beauty but, to be only experiencers (think I just invented a new word there) I think might save us from being ‘gods’.

" What it proves is an unknown X, but an unknown whose direction, so to speak, is known. This X is more: more beauty, more desirability, more awesomeness, more joy. This X is to great beauty as, for example, great beauty is to small beauty or to a mixture of beauty and ugliness. And the same is true of other perfections.

But the “more” is infinitely more, for we are not satisfied with the finite and partial. Thus the analogy (X is to great beauty as great beauty is to small beauty) is not proportionate. Twenty is to ten as ten is to five, but infinite is not to twenty as twenty is to ten. The argument points down an infinite corridor in a definite direction. Its conclusion is not “God” as already conceived or defined, but a moving and mysterious X which pulls us to itself and pulls all our images and concepts out of themselves."- Peter Kreeft

Again, MAYBE.

Sounds like another way of saying that our wills are naturally directed towards universal goodness and so we are never fully satisfied with partial goods. Every partial good can be thought of as a mix of good and not-good, and our intellects perceive this. Only with the Beatific Vision will our intellects encounter a good that has nothing not-good about it at all, and so only this Infinite Good will hold our love completely and securely.

 

[SteveVH]

Careful there. In heaven we do not simply become God Himself, losing our individual identities or becoming Divine Persons like the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is hard to see how one could have a literally infinite intellect without actually being God. There is only one Infinite Being.

Yes we are deified in heaven, but this is through a partial participation in the divine nature which does not obliterate our creaturely identities.

Careful there. I did not say that we simply become God. I said that we partake in the life of the Trinity. We become part of God’s family. And yes, of course, we retain our individuality.

As far as our intellect is concerned you make a fair point. Calling it an “infinite” intellect is going too far; maybe. We know the angels have a perfect intellect, but neither are they infinite beings. While we will not, of course, become God, we will be ‘like’ God.

“Those who die in God’s grace and friendship and are perfectly purified live for ever with Christ. They are like God for ever, for they “see him as he is,” face to face:” (CCC par. 1023)

So what does that really means as far as our intellect is concerned? I guess we’ll find out someday.

Peace

 

[joe371]

Joy has been described again and again, notably by Peter Kreeft and CS Lewis, as being ‘infinite’. Is that so (in Heaven at least)?
Bearing in mind that we shall have new bodies, so presumably finite intellects?

Well, the opposite of joy is sorrow and we know there is no place in heaven for sorrow, so perhaps the joy a person feels in heaven is eternal and infinite.

If, in our glorified state, we are perfectly conformed to God, and God’s will, I do not believe it is a stretch of the imagination, to ponder the idea that our intellect will also be perfectly configured to God and God’s will, via the power of God of course. Logically speaking, in the gloried state in heaven, a person’s intellectual capacity would be determined by God, and maybe God endows each individual with an infinite capacity, due to our new eternal and infinite existence. Of course I am only guessing.

 

[mayogirl25]

Joy has been described again and again, notably by Peter Kreeft and CS Lewis, as being ‘infinite’. Is that so (in Heaven at least)?
Bearing in mind that we shall have new bodies, so presumably finite intellects?

I certainly hope Heaven is all it is cracked up to be. I certainly hope to meet up with my darling brother and my parents and all my friends and especially all my animals when I get there. That is “Infinite Joy” to my way of thinking. Certainly worth striving for while we are still here.

 

[Thomas_Jennings]

Sounds like another way of saying that our wills are naturally directed towards universal goodness and so we are never fully satisfied with partial goods. Every partial good can be thought of as a mix of good and not-good, and our intellects perceive this. Only with the Beatific Vision will our intellects encounter a good that has nothing not-good about it at all, and so only this Infinite Good will hold our love completely and securely.

I know this is a very late response, so, sorry! I have just read a quote from Lewis explaining that one should never use the word ‘infinite’ unless you mean it, otherwise how could you describe the genuine ‘infinite’ afterwards…
So he must have really meant ‘infinite’ as opposed to ‘eternal’. However, you are quite right, we are finite so how this might work is beyond me…

 

[BeProfOSX]

I would say that it’s infinite in the sense that we will (Lord willing) have an infinite amount of time to experience it.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I know this is a very late response, so, sorry! I have just read a quote from Lewis explaining that one should never use the word ‘infinite’ unless you mean it, otherwise how could you describe the genuine ‘infinite’ afterwards…
So he must have really meant ‘infinite’ as opposed to ‘eternal’. However, you are quite right, we are finite so how this might work is beyond me…

Authors sometimes contradict their own advice, but if Lewis did not then I suppose that by infinite joy he meant our finite participation in the infinite joy of God, as I mentioned as a possibility in one of my posts above.

Of course C.S. Lewis does not seem to have been entirely orthodox on the subject of time and eternity and heaven and hell, so perhaps he meant something else.