What's Heaven like?

  • Thread starter Thread starter valueperson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
valueperson said:
Thank you for your very thoughtful response.

I did not have it in mind to dismiss potentiality in Heaven, but rather to dismiss action. I was thinking that, in a state of perfection, there is nothing for which to act, and it is the absence of action that makes it non-human.
Click to expand...
But for action to be incompatible with perfection, it would mean that man can only act for the purpose of gaining perfection and nothing else. But the motive for man’s action is not limited to the perfection of his being. In fact, if a man’s motive for acting was to perfect himself, the perection of himself would only be the the object of his action; not the motive itself. In other words, something would have to move man toward that end - to the object of perfecting himself. What is this thing that moves man to act?

Man’s actions flow from his will, and his will is moved by love. When a person loves, or “desires”, soemthing (perfection, for example), the thing desired is only the object of his love - it is the* thing* that he loves - but it is love that is the interior motive for his action. To will something, or to desire something, or to love something is one and the same; but the “thing” itself that is desired (perfection, for example) is only the *object *of the love. The object is that thing that causes love to move the will into action.

Now, if a man was acting to perfect himself, it means that he has a desire, or a will, to be perfect. This shows that perfection was merely the object of his motive, while the motive itself was desire (or “will” or “love”). Love is what moves the will into action toward a particular object. (As an aside, due to our disordered nature, we often desire (or love) what we should not. Seeking perfection is actually trying to bring under control our disordered desires so that we can will what we ought to will.)

As we have seen, the motive for action is love. The thing that is loved (or desired) is the object of the love.

Now, in heaven, even though we are perfected, we will still love. In fact, since we are perfected, our love will be purified of any disordered desires. In heaven we will love *what *we should love and in the way we should love. In heaven what will be the object of our love? It will be the very thing that *should *be the primary object of our love now. In heaven, the object of our love will be God, who Himself is uncreated love personified. In fact, by seeing and loving this God, Who is so far above our nature, we will love in a way and in a degree that we cannot now comprehend.

So, not only will there be action in heaven, but it will be a perfect and purified action. The most perfect and joyful action possible: to love God with a supernatural love that we cannot fully understand in this life. In heaven, the object of our love will be infinite uncreated love (God); and since love moves our will to action, the action in heaven will be to love and possess more than we could possibly desire to have.
40.png
Valueperson:
You introduce, with higher and lower angels, the concept of perfection in degrees, which seems to me a contradiction in terms. Or, perhaps you mean that entry into Heaven is a sort of milestone, past which there is infinite further progress (and it would have to be infinite, or you run into the same issue eventually), in which case perfection, as a term, doesn’t really mean anything.
Click to expand...
No, I didn’t mean it that way. I think you are understanding perfection in the sense of being infinite, but that would only apply to an infinite being.

Perfection consists in the potentiality of a thing being fully actualized. A thing is perfect when it has reached the perfection possible to it by nature. So, for example, a perfect man would not have to be able to fly, since flying is not compatible with his nature. A perfect dog would not have to speak since speech is not part of a dog’s nature. Perfection simply means there are no natural defects to the thing, and that the thing has reached the full potential of its nature.

So there can be different levels of perfection based on the different levels of being. For example, if a man was perfect he would need to actualize every potential, including actually speaking all languages. A dog, however, would be perfect without having to speak any languages since the dog does not possess the ability to speak. The different levels of potentiality in the dog and man shows the different degrees of perfection.
Where does the idea of higher angels teaching lower angels come from?
Click to expand...
It is a teaching of Catholicism. In the Summa, St. Thomas discusses it.
 
👍 An excellent response, thank you again. You show the “degrees of perfection” thing really well, in a way that hadn’t occurred to me.

Now.

If a lower angel has the capacity to learn, does that not imply that he has not reached his potential, i.e. that he is imperfect? Or do you mean that potentiality itself can grow, that’s one’s nature can change? If so, perfection, as a term, again loses its meaning.
 
valueperson said:
👍 An excellent response, thank you again. You show the “degrees of perfection” thing really well, in a way that hadn’t occurred to me.

Now.

If a lower angel has the capacity to learn, does that not imply that he has not reached his potential, i.e. that he is imperfect? Or do you mean that potentiality itself can grow, that’s one’s nature can change? If so, perfection, as a term, again loses its meaning.
Click to expand...
Your not going to believe it, but I knew you were going to ask that question. As soon as I sent that last post, the thought came to me that you were going to ask the very question that you asked… and it is a very good question.

Potentiality can be understood in two ways. The way I have been using it is the normal way it is used, but there is another way as well.

Normally, potentiality is understood to mean the potential of the thing according to its nature. When all of the natural potentiality of a thing has been actualized, the thing is then perfect. Earlier I said that the intellect of an angel has no pentency because it is in a state of complete act. All that the angel can know by nature is known; therefore there remains no more potency to be actualized.

But there is a second kind of potency; and this applies, not only to the angelic intellects, but to the intellects of humans as well. This is the potency to receive knowledge that is above the level of our natural intellectual abilities. An example would be the higher angels communicating knowledge to the lower angels. The knowledge communicated is above the natural intellectual capacity of the lower angels to arrive at by itself, but they do have the “potency” to possess such knowledge when it is communicated to them by the higher angels. So even though the intellect of the lower angel is in a state of pure act (pure natural act), nevertheless, it does possess the potency to receive higher knowledge if such knowledge is revealed to it.

This also happens with man in heaven. By possessing the beatific vision, he will receive knowledge from God that is above the level of his human intellect. If we experience intellectual joy by merely bringing into act some of our human intellectual potency (as we discussed earlier), imagine how much more joy would we experience if we received an infusion of supernatural knowledge? Actually, some of this supernatural knowledge has already been communicated to man by God. The Trinity, for example, is a truth that man would not be able to arrive at without it being revealed directly by God.

The Trinity is a deep and profound mystery. It is not a “mystery” in the sense that we are unable to understand it at all. There is much that we can understand about it; but it is so profound that as we make progress contemplating it, we never fully exhaust it. Some truths are simple to grasp. Therefore it would be boring to continue thinking about them. The higher truths (such as the ones you and I are discussing) are more profound and therefore more interesting. The truths that are above our human intellect (such as the Trinity) are even more profound and interesting, and therefore bring a much higher intellectual joy.

But to answer your question: The angelic intellect that is in a state of act is perfect because it is in the state of perfection according to its nature. Since perfection is when a thing is perfect according to its nature, the angelic intellect would therefore be perfect. But, even though it is perfect, it could be raised to a higher level (a level above its own nature) by having knowledge communicated to it by the higher angels.

By receiving this higher knowledge, the lower angel would then be participating in the perfection of the higher angel. In this sense, it would increase in perfection by participating in the perfection of the higher angel.

That thought is actually interesting to think about when considering what the Catholic Church teaches about a soul who is in the state of grace. “Grace” is a share in the life of God - a form of life that is obviously of a much higher level than our human life. By possessing this supernatural life with us, we are raised to a higher level of life by way of participation. Since the very essense of God is love, this supernatural life of God within us is also love - supernatural love. And since love is what moves the will, this supernatural love perfects the human will above the level of its nature.

By participating in the life of God, our being is raised to a higher level of perfection. Similarly, the lower angels are raised to a higher level of perfection by participating in the knowledge of the higher angels.
 
You are super cool. Thank you again for a stimulating discussion. Having said that, we’d do well to define our terms further.

To me, perfection is the ultimate (in the sense of being the last) fulfillment, via action or grace, of potency. It seems to me that we should not define perfection as various degrees of excellence.

If a lower angel can realistically aspire to knowledge held by a higher angel, then that higher knowledge is part of the lower angel’s potency, and therefore part of its nature. So, the lower angel is not actually perfect, but merely excellent. (Not that that’s bad or anything, but you see what I mean.)

I realize we’re getting pretty far into abstraction here. I’d still be interested to hear further from wcknight and others who think of Heaven in humanist terms.
 
valueperson said:
You are super cool. Thank you again for a stimulating discussion. Having said that, we’d do well to define our terms further.

To me, perfection is the ultimate (in the sense of being the last) fulfillment, via action or grace, of potency. It seems to me that we should not define perfection as various degrees of excellence.

If a lower angel can realistically aspire to knowledge held by a higher angel, then that higher knowledge is part of the lower angel’s potency, and therefore part of its nature. So, the lower angel is not actually perfect, but merely excellent. (Not that that’s bad or anything, but you see what I mean.)
Click to expand...
I only have a moment to reply. I’ll be leaving for a week long retreat at a Benedictine Monastery in a few minutes so we’ll have to continue this when I get back. But I will take a moment to reply.

Now, as you said, we are getting pretty deep here. Since I have not put a lot of thought into this, I my thoughts my not be as precise as I would like, and I might also have to adjust some of the terms I am using after thinking it through further. With that being said, here are my thoughts on perfection.

God is the only all-perfect being. As such, all perfection is a participation in God’s uncreated perfection.

Now, when God creates things, the things created have a certain *natural *potency, or “potentiality”. When all of the potency of a thing is actualized, the thing is perfect according to its nature. In this sense, God, who created the thing, gave it a certain natural potency for perfection. Therefore, the participated perfection belongs to the thing by nature - since God created it with this potentiality as part of its nature.

But it is also possible for some things (those that are created in the image of God and possess an intellect and will) it to receive a higher perfection by way of grace. Here I might be using some imprecise terms.) Such perfection (if that is the correct word) would be a pure gift. Our “potency” to receive it would be according to the generosity of the giver - not because we can attain it through any efforts of our own. An example would be the “state of grace” which is a share in the Divine nature of God Himself.

At baptism, God infuses a share of His own life into the human soul, thereby raising it up to a supernatural level. This is what is meant by being “born again”. It is a new birth of the soul brought about by the infusion of Divine life. It is by sharing in this life of God that we become His “adopted children” as the Bible says. This actually raises man up to a higher state of being and unites his soul to God. Man has no claim to this gift according to his nature and there is nothing he can do to earn it. The only way he can receive it is if God gives it to him gratuitously. That’s why it is called grace, which means “unmerited”. I’m not sure if it would be correct to refer to such gifts as an increase of “perfection”. It seems that it would be something more. I’ll have to think about that.

But to answer you question: I would define perfection as the state where all *natural *potency has been actualized. Since no progress is possible to it by nature, the thing would be naturally perfect. It would be exactly as it was created to be. But some created things (such as angels and men) can receive more by grace than the level of perfection they can attain by nature, but I’m not sure if “perfection” would be the precise word to describe that which is received by grace, since it would actually be a share in something greater than its own nature. I’ll have to think about that

Well, that’s all I have time for now. We’ll have to take this up again in a week or so. Feel free to post any thoughts that you have. I might have a chance to respond one more time tonight from the hotel.

Oh… and thanks for the compliment. I am enjoying this discussion as well.
 
Well, laying the definition of perfection aside for the moment, we seem at least to have dismissed the quasi-humanist idea of Heaven being whatever you’d like it to be, and also the quasi-Buddhist idea of heaven being a sort of static/eternal state of worship. Corrections appreciated, but there doesn’t seem to be any biblical basis for either idea. The essential (though not complete) unknowability of heaven seems the most reasonable idea from a logical and theological point of view.

(A bit awkward for modern day evangelism, no?)

NON-CHRISTIAN: So, what’s Heaven like?

MISSIONARY: It’s eternal life and eternal joy.

NON-CHRISTIAN: You mean it’s like my life now, only always happy and it lasts forever?

MISSIONARY: Well, we don’t know that, specifically. That is, we have no reason to think that. Just that it’s eternal and joyful.

NON-CHRISTIAN: Can you be more specific? Will I have a body? Eat, sleep, all that stuff? What kind of joy are we talking about?

MISSIONARY: What kind of joy?

NON-CHRISTIAN: Yes, what kind of joy? You know how joyful it is, but what is it that actually occurs for all eternity?

MISSIONARY: Well, we don’t know. It’ll be joyful, though. I mean, as far as a body goes, the Bible talks about eventual corporeal resurrection for everybody, but what being in Heaven is like in the meantime, as an experience? We don’t know much about that, really, except that it’s joyful in a way we don’t understand.

NON-CHRISTIAN: Oh. Um… Well, will I meet my loved ones there?

MISSIONARY: Maybe. Anything’s possible, I guess.

NON-CHRISTIAN: Well, I have to get back to work now. Thanks, though.

MISSIONARY: Wait! Have I mentioned Hell?
 
To answer the OP’s question…Can’t say that I know. And being perfectly honest, I am not quite ready to find out…no offense intended
Kathy
 
I don’t know what heaven’s like…but I’ve been to hell and I can tell you what that is like.
 
None of us - even priests / Apologetics have the answer. Perhaps, someone like St. Padre Pio knew more while on earth - but I don’t think any human being knows. But to address a few comments:

We are taught that Heaven is where we see / experience the Beatific Vision (i.e. seeing the Face of God). How can one describe that until it has been experienced?

Is it a place? I’ve wondered, since three issues come to mind:
  1. Our Lord’s Body was not only resurrected from death but ascended to Heaven.
  2. We’re taught that Elijah was taken in a fiery chariot to Heaven & would come back - THAT begs the question where was he?
  3. The Blessed Mother was assumed into Heaven.
  4. We’re told that at the Final Judgement bodies will rise and be reunited with their souls
    Where will these bodies and souls go?
The above would beg the question that Heaven is a physical place/location. I don’t know. Someone has suggested to me recently that perhaps, it’s another dimension. Who knows?

As to seeing our loved ones, I was taught that even if we don’t see them, we will be happy if we know that they, too, made it to Heaven. We can only say - God alone knows. This is to be left an unanswered question until our time comes - and the Final Judgement takes place - God help us all. Please God, save my soul - and so many souls I have in mind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top