If Heaven’s Is So Perfect, Why Do They Saint Peter Lock The Gates To Heaven’s By George Carlin

Windy Lina Westlaw Present Our 1027th Video... How In The Name Of Jesus ? Who ? Bible 1611AD ? The Idea That Saint Peter Locks The Gates Of Heaven Is A Popular Cultural Image, But It Is Not Supported By The Bible. The concept originates from a symbolic interpretation of Matthew 16, where Jesus tells Peter, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven". These "keys" represent spiritual authority, not literal gatekeeping. They symbolize the power to proclaim the gospel, forgive sins, and lead people to salvation through Christ, not to exclude individuals.

The Bible teaches that Jesus is the only true gate to Heaven. In John 10, Jesus says, "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved." This means that access to Heaven is determined by faith in Jesus Christ, not by a judgment from Saint Peter. The image of Peter as a gatekeeper is a later tradition and folklore, not a biblical doctrine. The idea that Peter checks a list or decides who enters is a misunderstanding of his role. He is portrayed as a symbol of grace, repentance, and restoration, not as a stern judge.

Therefore, Heaven's perfection is not compromised by the absence of a literal gatekeeper. The focus is on God's grace and the invitation to salvation through faith in Jesus, not on a human figure enforcing entry. The notion of Peter locking the gates is a misinterpretation of his symbolic role in Christian tradition.

The Hitchhiker’s Guide To Heaven
What do we really know about heaven and what does the Church teach? In the final part of the Divine Comedy—Paradiso or “Paradise”—Dante is guided by his courtly love, Beatrice, who takes him through the heavens to the ultimate abode of God.

Dante’s depiction of heaven is imaginative and influential, but it is not the only one. People have been trying to imagine heaven for thousands of years, and countless variations on what it’s like have been proposed. Some of these ideas—like St. Peter at the “pearly gates”—have passed into the popular imagination.

But which of these ideas are solid and which are merely imaginative suggestions? What do we really know about heaven and what does the Church teach?

I ain’t got no body?
One of the most common misconceptions about heaven today is that it is a place of happiness where souls go when people die and leave their bodies behind forever. It’s truly startling how many people, even Christians, think of heaven in this way, as if we will spend eternity away from our bodies.

This is not the teaching of the Christian faith.

While it is true that we leave our bodies at death, we do not leave them forever. At the end of the world, at the general resurrection, we will be reunited with them. That’s why we profess in the Nicene Creed, “We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come,” and, in the Apostles Creed, we profess our belief in “the resurrection of the body.”

This means that life in heaven cannot be thought of as perpetual bodiless existence. In fact, some in heaven (at least Jesus and Mary) have their bodies with them.

But if this understanding of heaven is false, what about some of the other popular ways of envisioning it?

Clouds and harps
Cartoonists often depict the saints in heaven playing harps while sitting on clouds. Is there any basis for this?

There are two passages in Revelation that depict the saints—or some of them—playing harps. The first is 5:8, where the twenty-four elders are depicted playing harps; the second is 15:2, where “those who had conquered the beast” play harps. Both groups play their harps as part of the heavenly liturgy, but they are not depicted sitting on clouds.

Instead, the twenty-four elders are shown sitting on thrones in the heavenly temple and those who overcame the beast are depicted standing on a “sea of glass mixed with fire,” again in the heavenly temple. (This image is based on “the molten sea”—a large, metal basin filled with water that was used for ritual washing by the priests in Solomon’s temple; cf. 1 Kings 7:23-26).

So where does the idea of sitting on clouds come from?

Although Revelation does depict Jesus as sitting on a cloud at one point (Rev. 14:14-16), it does not depict the saints doing so, and this image is likely derived from the idea that heaven is somewhere up in the sky, where the clouds are.

St. Peter and the Pearly Gates
Another popular image is St. Peter standing outside “the pearly gates,” deciding whether or not a particular person is to be allowed into heaven.

This image of St. Peter is derived from Matthew 16:19, where Jesus tells him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

In its original context, this has to do with Peter being the leader of the earthly Church (the kingdom of heaven on earth) in Jesus’ absence. It does not indicate that he will literally be heaven’s gatekeeper, but that is an understandable extension of the idea.

In popular depictions, the gates of heavens may be described as “pearly,” but they are commonly shown looking like ordinary, metal gates, often sitting atop a cloud.

In Scripture, they are depicted differently. In describing the city New Jerusalem, Revelation 21:21 states: “And the twelve gates were twelve pearls, each of the gates made of a single pearl.”

What’s “pearly” about them is that each gate is set in a single gigantic pearl.

How many heavens?
One of the characteristics of Dante’s heaven is that it is multilayered, with different kinds or degrees of glory ascribed to the different levels.

This is not a concept that originated with Dante. Various ancient sources, including passages in the Bible and other early Jewish writings, speak of multiple heavens.

In fact, the Hebrew word for heaven—shamayim—is dual in number, suggesting two heavens, but other passages suggest more. In particular, St. Paul at one point speaks of being taken up to “the third heaven” (2 Cor. 12:2). Other ancient sources speak of even more heavens—up to ten of them.

It is, of course, from this tendency to speak of multiple heavens that we have the expression “in seventh heaven,” meaning a supremely happy state.

At first glance, St. Paul’s reference to “third heaven” might seem to provide proof that there are multiple spiritual realms, but this is not as certain as it seems. In the biblical languages, the words for heaven are also the words for sky, and it may be that Paul is including the physical heavens in his count.

It has been suggested that he may be envisioning the first heaven as the “atmospheric” heaven, inhabited by the birds and the second heaven as the “celestial” heaven inhabited by the stars. The third heaven would then be the “empyrean” heaven, or dwelling place of God.

If so, when he speaks of being caught up to the third heaven, Paul means simply being caught up to the presence of God, and the passage does not indicate that there are multiple spiritual realms in heaven.

Heaven is not egalitarian
The core insight behind the depictions of multilayered heavens is that heaven is not a single state in which all saints and angels are equal and all people receive the same reward. It’s more complex than that.

The same insight is behind the way that the rewards of the saints have been depicted historically.

In his book Eschatology, the future Pope Benedict XVI wrote:

“The Scholastics took these insights further and gave them systematic form. Drawing, in part, on extremely venerable traditions, they spoke of the special ‘crowns’ of martyrs, virgins, and doctors. Today, we are rather more circumspect where such assertions are concerned. It is sufficient to know that God gives each and every person his fulfillment in a way peculiar to this or that individual, and that in this way each and all receive to the uttermost” (Eschatology, 236).

In the same place, he linked the individual’s unique experience of heaven to the passage in Revelation where Jesus promises to those who remain faithful to the end, “I will give him a white stone, with a new name written on the stone, which no one knows except him who receives it” (Rev. 2:17; see Eschatology, 235).

Despite its presence in a good deal of Judeo-Christian literature, the idea that there is a specific and fairly small number of spiritual heavens is not something that the Church teaches. Instead, it teaches the core idea that this represents—that heaven is experienced differently by individuals, based on what they did in life and how much they have opened themselves to God’s love.

The idea of multiple different heavens leads to another common question . . .

Where is heaven?
It is common to picture heaven as being up in the sky. That is suggested by the word itself, which can refer both to the sky and the dwelling place of God.

This is a fairly common phenomenon, even in non-Christian cultures. Since we don’t ordinarily have powerful supernatural beings walking among us, people in different cultures frequently envision such beings dwelling in inaccessible locations, such as up on mountains, or in the sky, or deep below the earth, or in the ocean.

It’s a natural form of symbolism suggested by the way we, as land-dwelling creatures, experience the world, and the Judeo-Christian tradition has consistently depicted God as if he dwells in the sky.

But this is not meant to be taken literally. In 2010, Pope Benedict commented: “All of us today are well aware that by the term ‘heaven’ we are not referring to somewhere in the universe, to a star or such like; no. We mean something far greater and far more difficult to define with our limited human conceptions” (General Audience, Aug. 15, 2010).

Similarly, in 1999, John Paul II commented: “In the context of revelation, we know that the ‘heaven’ or ‘happiness’ in which we will find ourselves is neither an abstraction nor a physical place in the clouds, but a living, personal relationship with the Holy Trinity. It is our meeting with the Father which takes place in the risen Christ through the communion of the Holy Spirit” (General Audience, July 21, 1999).

Time and eternity
Connected with the question of whether heaven is a particular place is the issue of whether time exists in it.

A popular conception is that it does not. The logic is fairly simple: God exists outside of time. God dwells in heaven. Therefore, there is no time in heaven.

That’s true enough when heaven is conceived of exclusively as the dwelling place of God, but it is not true when it is conceived of as a place that is occupied by angels and by humans after their deaths. In that case, a different sense of the word time is involved.

The First Vatican Council taught that God “from the beginning of time brought into being from nothing the twofold created order, that is the spiritual and the bodily, the angelic and the earthly, and thereafter the human which is, in a way, common to both since it is composed of spirit and body” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith 1:3).

This indicates that the spiritual realm is created and subject to time. Thus John Paul II taught that eternity, in the sense of being beyond time, “is here the element which essentially distinguishes God from the world. While the latter is subject to change and passes away, God remains beyond the passing of the world” (General Audience, Sept. 4, 1985).

He also taught that God “is Eternity, as the preceding catechesis explained, while all that is created is contingent and subject to time” (General Audience, Sept. 11, 1985).

New heavens and a new earth
The book of Isaiah predicts a time in which God will make “new heavens and a new earth” (Is. 65:17, 66:12). This theme is picked up in the New Testament in 2 Peter (3:13) and in the book of Revelation (21:1-2).

Speaking of the present world, Peter states, “[T]he heavens will be kindled and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire” (2 Pet. 3:12). John states that, upon the coming of the new heavens and the new earth, “the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (Rev. 21:1). He also says that “from [God’s] presence earth and sky [or heaven] fled away, and no place was found for them” (Rev. 20:11).

What does all this mean?

It might be taken to refer to the complete annihilation of the current heavens and earth, followed by a new creation ex nihilo. However, it could also mean refer to a renovation, a reshaping and reordering of the present heavens and earth.

And, indeed, there are passages that seem to speak this way. St. Paul states that “the form of this world is passing away” (1 Cor. 7:31), and elsewhere he says that “the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Rom. 8:20-21).

For its part, the Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of this as a renewal and transformation of the world:

“At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal judgment, the righteous will reign for ever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. The universe itself will be renewed” (CCC 1042).

“Sacred Scripture calls this mysterious renewal, which will transform humanity and the world, ‘new heavens and a new earth’” (CCC 1043).

“The visible universe, then, is itself destined to be transformed, so that the world itself, restored to its original state, facing no further obstacles, should be at the service of the just, sharing their glorification in the risen Jesus Christ” (CCC 1047).

“We know neither the moment of the consummation of the earth and of man, nor the way in which the universe will be transformed” (CCC 1048).

The New Jerusalem
The book of Revelation offers a vivid depiction of the final destiny of the blessed in the New Jerusalem (see 21:1-22:5). This depiction includes the gates made out of giant pearls, streets made out of transparent gold, and foundations made out of precious stones.

The city itself is described as a giant cube that is 12,000 stadia (1,400 miles) wide and tall (Rev. 21:16). Despite its prodigious height, the walls protecting the city are only 144 cubits (216 feet) tall.

Both numbers are symbolic, with 12,000 echoing the 12 patriarchs and the 12 apostles, and with 144 being equal to 12 times 12.

This—plus the fact that there would seem to be no need for the city to even have defensive walls and gates given the complete overthrow of evil—suggests that these images are not meant to be taken literally and instead convey an impression of the glory of our final destiny.

The Catechism states:

“This mystery of blessed communion with God and all who are in Christ is beyond all understanding and description. Scripture speaks of it in images: life, light, peace, wedding feast, wine of the kingdom, the Father’s house, the heavenly Jerusalem, paradise: ‘No eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him’” (CCC 1027, citing 1 Cor. 2:9).

“The dwelling of God Is with men”
When John is shown the New Jerusalem, he states: “And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband; and I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling of God is with men’” (Rev. 21:2-3).

This indicates that, after the general resurrection, our existence will be embodied and earthly. Earth is not taken up into heaven, but the city of God descends to earth so that God dwells among men.

He still, of course, dwells outside of space and time, in eternity, but now the separation between God and man has been overcome, so that the community of the blessed fully corresponds to God’s will, and we experience his presence in a new manner, united with our bodies on the new earth.

How we will experience his presence is the essence of heaven.

The essence of heaven
The Catechism defines the essence of heaven this way:

“This perfect life with the Most Holy Trinity—this communion of life and love with the Trinity, with the Virgin Mary, the angels and all the blessed—is called ‘heaven.’ Heaven is the ultimate end and fulfillment of the deepest human longings, the state of supreme, definitive happiness” (CCC 1024).

This state involves a transformation that exceeds our present ability to understand and is linked to the vision of God: “It does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2).

The Catechism explains the beatific vision this way:

“Because of his transcendence, God cannot be seen as he is, unless he himself opens up his mystery to man’s immediate contemplation and gives him the capacity for it. The Church calls this contemplation of God in his heavenly glory ‘the beatific vision’” (CCC 1028).

The beatific vision does not mean that we simply perceive God and lose sight of our fellow human beings:

“In the glory of heaven the blessed continue joyfully to fulfill God’s will in relation to other men and to all creation. Already they reign with Christ; with him ‘they shall reign for ever and ever’” (CCC 1029).

Because our ultimate destiny is to live an embodied, earthly, and glorified existence, performance artist Laurie Anderson may not be far from the mark when she says, “Paradise is exactly like where you are right now, only much—much—better.”

Then Cardinal Ratzinger, in his book, Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life, published in 1988, warns against depicting heaven as an extension of this life prettied up with depictions of “lions laying down with lambs,” and eternal picnics. Not only do we have the real problem with the fact that most of the world lives in abject misery, materially speaking—we forget that living in our modern United States of America where “the poor” often means not being able to afford all 2,000 cable channels—but we also must remember that lions, lambs, and picnics get boring after a few million years. These depictions just don’t cut it for the modern, thinking man.

On the other hand, I Cor. 2:9 is overused as well. “Eye has not seen, ear has not heard,” with regard to heaven is often used as a cop out. Yes, it is true. Heaven is ultimately beyond what has ever “entered into the heart of man.” But there are certain things we can know about heaven even if now we “see in a mirror dimly” what will only be revealed fully in eternity (I Cor. 13:12). If we are going to excite people about the prospects of heaven, Ratzinger says, and if there is going to be a healthy sense of fearing the “loss of heaven” as we enter the confessional, a biblical and traditional understanding of the nature of heaven is essential.

What the Church Teaches
CCC 1023 says,
Those who die in God’s grace and friendship and are perfectly purified [whether in this life, or in the next life in Purgatory] live forever with Christ. They are like God forever, for they “see him as he is,” face to face.

The Catechism then quotes the infallible definition given by Pope Benedict XII in his Apostolic Constitution, Benedictus Deus, of Jan. 29, 1336:

By virtue of our apostolic authority, we define the following: According to the general disposition of God, the souls of all the saints . . . and other faithful who died after receiving Christ’s holy Baptism (provided they were not in need of purification when they died, . . . or, if they then did need or will need some purification, when they have been purified after death, . . .) already before they take up their bodies again and before the general judgment – and this since the Ascension of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ into heaven – have been, are and will be in heaven, in the heavenly Kingdom and celestial paradise with Christ, joined to the company of the holy angels. Since the Passion and death of our Lord Jesus Christ, these souls have seen and do see the divine essence with an intuitive vision, and even face to face, without the mediation of any creature.

At the very heart of this definition of heaven is the idea of the “beatific vision,” i.e. the blessed in heaven “see God, face to face.” But what does it mean that the saints in heaven “see God, face to face?” This would seem to contradict I Tim. 6:14-16 that says:

I charge you to keep the commandments unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ; and this will be made manifest at the proper time by the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.

Is this a contradiction? Not at all! I Tim. 6 must be understood to mean either that man unaided by grace cannot see God, or that man can never “see” God with his physical powers of sight using his eyeballs. In other words, man cannot see God in any sense with his natural powers. The saints and all of the blessed can be said to have “seen” and that they do “see” the divine essence with a directly intuited, intellectual vision. There are multiple biblical texts that bear this out:

Rev. 22:4 – “And there shall be no curse any more, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and his servants shall serve him. And they shall see his face: and his name shall be on their foreheads.”

I Cor. 13:12 – “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.”

Matt. 5:8 – “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”

I John 3:2 – “Beloved, we are God’s children now; it does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.”

This “vision” of God, again, is not to be understood as “seeing” God with human eyeballs. God is pure spirit and as such cannot be “seen.” This “vision of God” is a directly intuited and intellectual vision. Think about it this way: Matthew 18:10 tells us that the angels “behold the face of God,” yet they don’t have eyes at all. They are pure spirits. So how do they “see God?” They “see” him with an intellectual and directly intuited “vision.”

We use the verb “to see” like this in modern parlance. When someone comes to understand a physics problem he had been struggling with, for example, he may say, “Now I see it!” That doesn’t mean he “sees” it with his eyes; rather, it means he now understands it with his mind. This is analogous to the beatific vision. The faithful who endure to the end and so are saved will “see God,” but with an intellectual “vision” or comprehension of God. Each person will “see” or comprehend God in the beatific vision in accordance with his own capacity dictated to him by his state of grace at the moment of death. And this state of grace is determined by both the gift of God and the degree to which the blessed cooperated with that grace during his earthly sojourn.

The example par excellence of this truth is found in the Mother of God. No member of the body of Christ will “see” or “comprehend” God to the degree Mary does because she was given the greatest gift of grace among all of mankind; while, at the same time, no human person ever cooperated with the grace of God as perfectly as Mary did.

With this understanding, we can understand why the Church teaches heaven to be primarily a state rather than a place. You can’t travel “up there” to heaven. And the beatific vision cannot be understood as people being in heaven and “looking over there” and seeing God. And then if they look away from “over there” they don’t see God anymore. The blessed will be in a state of comprehension of God that is constant. They can’t leave heaven and then go back to heaven precisely because heaven is principally a state of being.

However, having said that, heaven can also be said to be a place, but in a qualified sense. In as much as in the end of time the blessed will have bodies in the resurrection; they can then be said to have location.

Okay, Fine, So What is Heaven?
Heaven is principally a state of utter and absolute fulfillment. In the possession of God in the beatific vision the blessed will experience what cannot be put into words; a radical union with God that transcends anything we could envisage. And it is precisely because of that radical union with God in Christ, the blessed will also experience a union with the other members of the Body of Christ that transcends our ability to imagine as well. The image of the mystical “body of Christ” that St. Paul gives us in I Cor. 12 and Romans 12 gives us some inkling of this union, but again, it can only pale in relation to the full truth of the matter. To use St. Paul’s image, the union of the members of Christ is more radical than the union of my finger here with my hand because it is Christ who makes the members of Christ one! This is truly incredible to think about, but in the end, we can only imagine.

We’ve already spoken of the beatific vision which is the most important component of what heaven is: as we saw in I John 3:2. It says we will be “like him for we shall see him as he is.” St. Thomas Aquinas helps us to get a sense of the glory of this “vision of God” by showing us some of its ramifications. According to “the angelic Doctor,” our intellects will be so illuminated by God to empower us to be able to “see God” in the beatific vision that an ancillary effect of this empowering will be the comprehension of “the whole order of the universe.”

Does anyone want to pause to say “wow” with me?

In the Summa Contra Gentiles, Bk. III, chapter 59, St. Thomas says, “the natural appetite is to know the genera, species and powers of all things, and the whole order of the universe,” it makes sense that this capacity would be filled in God in heaven. If you add to this the fact that the beatific vision will empower the intellects of the saints in heaven to be able to see God, which is far above the natural capacity, it only makes sense that, as St. Thomas again says, that after having come to know “the infinite,” or God himself, it would seem to follow that the lesser would be easily known. To quote St. Thomas: “The intellect which is elevated by divine light in order to see God’s substance is much more perfected by this same light, so that it may understand all other objects that exist in the nature of things.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church seems to concur with St. Thomas. In paragraph 2040, the Church speaks to this notion of the perfection and elevation of the intellectual powers in heaven. Talk about intellectually sharp! The Catechism says, “We shall know the ultimate meaning of the whole work of creation and of the entire economy of salvation and understand the marvelous ways by which [God’s] Providence led everything toward its final end.”

What a comfort to know that every single person among the faithful who has lost a loved one, a child, or suffered terribly in this life, will know how “all things work together for good to those who love God” as St. Paul says in Romans 8:28. We will see all of this in God, in heaven.

Doesn’t this sound a lot better than simply falling back on “eye has not seen,” or picking fruit and picnicking for all eternity?

Four Bodily Gifts That Await Us in Heaven
The principal gift of heaven—the beatific vision—could be the subject of a veritable library of books without ever plumbing its depths, but the Catechism of the Council of Trent, referring back to St. Thomas Aquinas, gave us four characteristics of heaven relating to the body that have been revealed to us in Scripture and tradition that can serve to give us a glimpse, however imperfectly, of the glory of heaven in a bodily sense.

I remember teaching this some time ago to a group of Southern California teens where I got the ultimate compliment: “Dude… that is very cool!” I think the “dude” part coupled with the “cool” was telling. Two thumbs up!

But at any rate, the Catechism of the Council of Trent, referencing the Summa Theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas, lists these four “characteristics” or “gifts” that will be communicated to the blessed in heaven:

1) Subtility – This gift entails the absolute subordination of the body to the soul. So radical is this subordination that it will empower us to be able to pass through a wall as Jesus did in the Upper Room in John 20:19-20, while possessing flesh and bone just as he did as well. Remember: the disciples were gathered together in fear behind locked doors, after the resurrection of Christ, and before they had seen the risen Lord. Jesus suddenly appeared in their midst, though the doors remained locked. He passed right through the doors! Yet, as is revealed in Luke 24:39, in a parallel account of this same event, also after the resurrection, Jesus said to the apostles, “… handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.”

2) Agility – In Acts 1:9, Jesus ascended up to heaven right before the very eyes of the apostles. And he didn’t even need rockets like R2D2! In fact, according to St. Thomas, the blessed in heaven, even after receiving their bodies in the resurrection, will be able to travel at the speed of thought, or in the “wink of an eye,” as St. Thomas says it, to any distance. Star Wars ain’t got nothin’ that can even compare with what awaits those who are faithful to Christ!

3) Impassibility – In simple terms, this means the blessed in heaven cannot suffer and cannot die (see Rev. 21:4). Indeed the bodies of the blessed will not only be immortal, but no sickness or any imperfection will be possible. We will not even so much as be able to stub a toe, even if we wanted to! Not that we would want to! But you get my drift!

4) Glory (or as the Roman Catechism calls it: “Brightness”) – The blessed in heaven will be glorified like Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. Rooted in Jesus’ own words, “… the righteous will shine like the sun,” in Matthew 13:43, the Church teaches the blessed will shine with the glory of God so brilliant that it is believed by some that we on earth could not stand to even behold one of the blessed in heaven if he were revealed in all of his glory!

If you take the Marian apparitions for example, our Lady does not appear in all of her glory. She appears in a form that the seers can handle and relate to.
But at any rate, we do catch a glimpse of the glory that awaits us in the Transfiguration where Jesus’ face “shone like the sun” (Matt. 17:2). This text not only reveals Christ’s divinity, but the glory of humanity transformed by divinity! It reveals, in that sense, what awaits our humanity. “The just shall shine like the sun.”

Heaven. — This subject will be treated under seven headings: (I) Name and Place of Heaven; (II) Existence of Heaven; (III) Supernatural Character of Heaven and the Beatific Vision; (IV) Eternity of Heaven and Impeccability of the Blessed; (V) Essential Beatitude; (VI) Accidental Beatitude; (VII) Attributes of Beatitude.

I. NAME AND PLACE OF HEAVEN.
—Heaven (A. S. heofon, O. S. hevan and himil, originally himin) corresponds to the Gothic himin-s. Both heaven and himil are formed from himin by a regular change of consonants: heaven, by changing m before n into v; and himil, by changing n of the unaccented ending into 1. Some derive heaven from the root ham, “to cover” (cf. the Gothic ham-on and the German Hem-d). According to this derivation heaven would be conceived as the roof of the world. Others trace a connection between himin (heaven) and home; according to this view, which seems to be the more probable, heaven would be the abode of the Godhead. The Latin caelum (koilon, a vault) is derived by many from the root of celare, “to cover, to conceal” (caelum, “ceiling”, “roof of the world”). Others, however, think it is connected with the Germanic himin. The Greek ouranos is derived, according to Pott, from the root var, which also connotes the idea of covering. The Hebrew SMYS—a plural of extent—is derived by many from; SMH F”to be high”; accordingly, heaven would designate the upper region of the world (cf. Grimm, “Deutsches Worterbuch”, s.v. “Himmel”; Kluge, “Etymologisches Worterbuch der d. Sprache”).

In Holy Writ the term heaven denotes, in the first place, the blue firmament, or the region of the clouds that pass along the sky. Gen., i, 20, speaks of the birds “under the firmament of heaven”. In other passages it denotes the region of the stars that shine in the sky. Furthermore heaven is spoken of as the dwelling of God; for, although God is omnipresent, yet He manifests Himself in a special manner in the light and grandeur of the firmament. Heaven also is the abode of the angels; for they are constantly with God and see His face. With God in heaven are likewise the souls of the just (II Cor., v, 1; Matt., v, 3, 12). In Eph., iv, 8 sq., we are told that Christ conducted to heaven the patriarchs who had been in limbo (limbus patrum). Thus the term heaven has come to designate both the happiness and the abode of the just in the next life. The present article treats of heaven in this sense only. In Holy Scripture it is called the kingdom of heaven (Matt., v, 3), the kingdom of God (Mark, ix, 46), the kingdom of the Father (Matt., xiii, 43), the kingdom of Christ (Luke, xxii, 30), the house of the Father (John, xiv, 2), the city of God, the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebr., xii, 22), the holy place (Hebr., ix, 12; D. V. holies), paradise (II Cor., xii, 4), life (Matt., vii, 14), life everlasting (Matt., xix, 16), the joy of the Lord (Matt., xxv, 21), crown of life (James, i, 12), crown of justice (II Tim., iv, 8), crown of glory (I Peter, v, 4), incorruptible crown (I Cor., ix, 25), great reward (Matt., v, 12), inheritance of Christ (Eph., i, 18), eternal inheritance (Hebr., ix, 15).

Where is heaven, the dwelling of God and the blessed? Some are of opinion that heaven is everywhere, as God is everywhere. According to this view the blessed can move about freely in every part of the universe, and still remain with God and see Him everywhere. Everywhere, too, they remain with Christ (in His sacred Humanity) and with the saints and the angels. For, according to the advocates of this opinion, the spatial distances of this world must no longer impede the mutual intercourse of the blessed. In general, however, theologians deem it more appropriate that there should be a special and glorious abode, in which the blessed have their peculiar home and where they usually abide, even though they be free to go about in this world. For the surroundings in the midst of which the blessed have their dwelling must be in accordance with their happy state; and the internal union of charity which joins them in affection must find its outward expression in community of habitation. At the end of the world, the earth together with the celestial bodies will be gloriously transformed into a part of the dwelling-place of the blessed (Apoc., xxi). Hence there seems to be no sufficient reason for attributing a metaphorical sense to those numerous utterances of Holy Writ which suggest a definite dwelling-place of the blessed. Theologians, therefore, generally hold that the heaven of the blessed is a special place with definite limits. Naturally, this place is held to exist, not within the earth, but, in accordance with the expressions of Scripture, without and beyond its limits. All further details regarding its locality are quite uncertain. The Church has decided nothing on this subject.

II. EXISTENCE OF HEAVEN.
—There is a heaven, i.e., God will bestow happiness and the richest gifts on all those who depart this life free from original sin and personal mortal sin, and who are, consequently, in the state of justice and friendship with God. Concerning the purification of those just souls who depart in venial sin or who are still subject to temporal punishment for sin, see Purgatory. On the lot of those who die free from personal sin, but infected with original sin, see Limbo (limbus parvulorum). On the immediate beginning of eternal happiness after death, or eventually, after the passage through purgatory, see Particular Judgment.

The existence of heaven is, of course, denied by atheists, materialists, and pantheists of all centuries, as well as by those rationalists who teach that the soul perishes with the body, in short, by all who deny the existence of God or the immortality of the soul. But, for the rest, if we abstract from the specific quality and the supernatural character of heaven, the doctrine has never met with any opposition worthy of note. Even mere reason can prove the existence of heaven or of the happy state of the just in the next life. We shall give a brief outline of the principal arguments. From these we shall, at the same time, see that the bliss of heaven is eternal and consists primarily in the possession of God, and that heaven presupposes a condition of perfect happiness, in which every wish of the heart finds adequate satisfaction.

God made all things for His objective honor and glory. Every creature was to manifest His Divine perfections by becoming a likeness of God, each according to its capacity. But man is capable of becoming in the greatest and most perfect manner a likeness of God, when he knows and loves His infinite perfections with a knowledge and love analogous to God‘s own love and knowledge. Therefore man is created to know God and to love Him. Moreover, this knowledge and love is to be eternal; for such is man’s capability and his calling, because his soul is immortal. Lastly, to know God and to love Him is the noblest occupation of the human mind, and consequently also its supreme happiness. Therefore man is created for eternal happiness; and he will infallibly attain it hereafter, unless, by sin, he renders himself unworthy of so high a destiny.

God made all things for His formal glory, which consists in the knowledge and love shown Him by rational creatures. Irrational creatures cannot give formal glory to God directly, but they should assist rational creatures in doing so. This they can do by manifesting God‘s perfections and by rendering other services; whilst rational creatures should, by their own personal knowledge and love of God, refer and direct all creatures to Him as their last end. Therefore every intelligent creature in general, and man in particular, is destined to know and love God for ever, though he may forfeit eternal happiness by sin.

God, in his infinite justice and holiness, must give virtue its due reward. But, as experience teaches, the virtuous do not obtain a sufficient reward here; hence they will be recompensed hereafter, and the reward must be everlasting, since the soul is immortal. Nor can it be supposed that the soul in the next life must merit her continuance in happiness by a continued series of combats; for this would be repugnant to all the tendencies and desires of human nature.

God, in His wisdom, must set on the moral law a sanction, sufficiently appropriate and efficacious. But, unless each man is rewarded according to the measure of his good works, such a sanction could not be said to exist. Mere infliction of punishment for sin would be insufficient. In any case, reward for good deeds is the best means of inspiring zeal for virtue. Nature itself teaches us to reward virtue in others whenever we can, and to hope for a reward of our own good actions from the Supreme Ruler of the universe. That reward, not being given here, will be given hereafter.

God has implanted in the heart of man a love of virtue and a love of happiness; consequently, God, because of His wisdom, must by rewarding virtue establish perfect harmony between these two tendencies. But such a harmony is not established in this life; therefore it will be brought about in the next.

Every man has an innate desire for perfect beatitude. Experience proves this. The sight of the imperfect goods of earth naturally leads us to form the conception of a happiness so perfect as to satisfy all the desires of our heart. But we cannot conceive such a state without desiring it. Therefore we are destined for a happiness that is perfect and, for that very reason, eternal; and it will be ours, unless we forfeit it by sin. A natural tendency without an object is incompatible both with nature and with the Creator’s goodness. The arguments thus far advanced prove the existence of heaven as a state of perfect happiness.

We are born for higher things, for the possession of God. This earth can satisfy no man, least of all the wise. “Vanity of vanities”, says the Scripture (Eccles., i, 1); and St. Augustine exclaimed: “Thou hast made us for Thyself (O God) and our heart is troubled till it rests in Thee.”

We are created for wisdom, for a possession of truth perfect in its kind. Our mental faculties and the aspirations of our nature give proof of this. But the scanty knowledge that we can acquire on earth stands in no proportion to the capabilities of our soul. We shall possess truth in higher perfection hereafter.

God made us for holiness, for a complete and final triumph over passion and for the perfect and secure possession of virtue. Our natural aptitudes and desires bear witness to this. But this happy goal is not reached on earth, but in the next life.

We are created for love and friendship, for indissoluble union with our friends. At the grave of those we love our heart longs for a future reunion. This cry of nature is no delusion. A joyful and everlasting reunion awaits the just man beyond the grave.

It is the conviction of all peoples that there is a heaven in which the just will rejoice in the next life. But, in the fundamental questions of our being and our destiny, a conviction, so unanimous and universal, cannot be erroneous. Else this world and the order of this world would remain an utter enigma to intelligent creatures, who ought to know at least the necessary means for reaching their appointed end.

Very few deny the existence of heaven; and these few are practically all atheists and epicureans. But surely it cannot be that all the rest have erred, and an isolated class of men such as these are not the true guides in the most fundamental questions of our being. For apostasy from God and His law cannot be the key to wisdom.

Revelation also proclaims the existence of heaven. This we have already seen in the preceding section from the many names by which Holy Writ designates heaven; and from the texts of Scripture, still to be quoted on the nature and peculiar conditions of heaven.

III. SUPERNATURAL CHARACTER OF HEAVEN AND THE BEATIFIC VISION.
—(1) In heaven the just will see God by direct intuition, clearly and distinctly. Here on earth we have no immediate perception of God; we see Him but indirectly in the mirror of creation. We get our first and direct knowledge from creatures, and then, by reasoning from these, we ascend to a knowledge of God according to the imperfect likeness which creatures bear to their Creator. But in doing so we proceed to a large extent by way of negation, i.e., by removing from the Divine Being the imperfections proper to creatures. In heaven, however, no creature will stand between God and the soul. He himself will be the immediate object of its vision. Scripture and theology tell us that the blessed see God face to face. And because this vision is immediate and direct, it is also exceedingly clear and distinct. Ontologists assert that we perceive God directly in this life, though our knowledge of Him is vague and obscure; but a vision of the Divine Essence, immediate yet vague and obscure, implies a contradiction. The blessed see God, not merely according to the measure of His likeness imperfectly reflected in creation, but they see Him as He is, after the manner of His own Being. That the blessed see God is a dogma of faith, expressly defined by Benedict XII (1336): “We define that the souls of all the saints in heaven have seen and do see the Divine Essence by direct intuition and face to face [visione intuitiva et etiam faciali], in such wise that nothing created intervenes as an object of vision, but the Divine Essence presents itself to their immediate gaze, unveiled, clearly and openly; moreover, that in this vision they enjoy the Divine Essence, and that, in virtue of this vision and this enjoyment, they are truly blessed and possess eternal life and eternal rest” (Denzinger, Enchiridion, ed. 10, n. 530—old edition, n. 456; cf. nn. 693, 1084, 1458, old, nn. 588, 868). The Scriptural argument is based especially on I Cor., xiii, 8-13 (see Cornely on this passage; cf. Matt., xviii, 10; I John, iii, 2; II Cor., v, 6-8, etc.). The argument from tradition is carried out in detail by Petavius (“De. theol. dogm.”, I, 1, VII, c. 7). Several Fathers, who seemingly contradict this doctrine, in reality maintain it; they merely teach that the bodily eye cannot see God, or that the blessed do not fully comprehend God, or that the soul cannot see God with its natural powers in this life (cf. Suarez, “De Deo”, 1. II, c. 7, n. 17).

It is of faith that the beatific vision is supernatural, that it transcends the powers and claims of created nature, of angels as well as of men. The opposite doctrine of the Beghards and Beguines was condemned (1311) by the Council of Vienne (Denz., n. 475—old, n. 403), and likewise a similar error of Baius by Pius V (Denz., n. 1003—old, n. 883). The Vatican Council expressly declared that man has been elevated by God to a supernatural end (Denz., n. 1786—old, n. 1635; cf. nn. 1808, 1671—old, nn. 1655, 1527). In this connection we must also mention the condemnation of the Ontologists, and in particular of Rosmini, who held that an immediate but indeterminate perception of God is essential to the human intellect and the beginning of all human knowledge (Denz., nn. 1659, 1927—old, nn. 1516, 1772). That the vision of God is supernatural can also be shown from the supernatural character of sanctifying grace (Denz., n. 1021—old, n. 901); for, if the preparation for that vision is supernatural, then it is obvious that the vision itself must be supernatural. Even unaided reason recognizes that the immediate vision of God, even if it be at all possible, can never be natural for a creature. For it is manifest that every created mind first perceives its own self and creatures similar to itself by which it is surrounded, and from these it rises to a knowledge of God as the source of their being and their last end. Hence its natural knowledge of God is necessarily mediate and analogous; since it forms its ideas and judgments about God after the imperfect likeness which its own self and its surroundings bear to Him. Such is the only means nature offers for acquiring a knowledge of God, and more than this is not due to any created intellect; consequently, the second and essentially higher way of seeing God by intuitive vision can but be a gratuitous gift of Divine goodness. These considerations prove, not merely that the immediate vision of God exceeds the natural claims of all creatures in actual existence; but they also prove against Ripalda, Becaenus, and others (recently also Morlais), that God cannot create any spirit which would, by virtue of its nature, be entitled to the intuitive vision of the Divine Essence. Therefore, as theologians express it, no created substance is of its nature supernatural; however, the Church has given no decision on this matter. Cf. Palmieri, “De Deo creante et elevante” (Rome, 1878), thes. 39; Morlais, “Le Surnaturel absolu”, in “Revue du Clerge Francais”, XXXI (1902), 464 sqq., and, for the opposite view, Bellamy, “La question du Surnaturel absolu”, ibid., XXXV (1903), 419 sqq. St. Thomas seems to teach (I, Q. xii, a. 1) that man has a natural desire for the beatific vision. Elsewhere, however, he frequently insists on the supernatural character of that vision (e.g. III, Q. ix, a. 2, ad 3um). Hence in the former place he obviously supposes that man knows from revelation both the possibility of the beatific vision and his destiny to enjoy it. On this supposition it is indeed quite natural for man to have so strong a desire for that vision, that any inferior kind of beatitude can no longer duly satisfy him.

To enable it to see God, the intellect of the blessed is supernaturally perfected by the light of glory (lumen glories). This was defined by the Council of Vienne in 1311 (Denz., n. 475; old, n. 403); and it is also evident from the supernatural character of thebeatific vision. For the beatific vision transcends the natural powers of the intellect; therefore, to see God the intellect stands in need of some supernatural strength, not merely transient, but permanent as the vision itself. This permanent invigoration is called the “light of glory”, because it enables the souls in glory to see God with their intellect, just as material light enables our bodily eyes to see corporeal objects. On the nature of the light of glory the Church has decided nothing. Theologians have elaborated various theories about it, which, however, need not be examined in detail. According to the view commonly and perhaps most reasonably held, the light of glory is a quality Divinely infused into the soul and similar to sanctifying grace, the virtue of faith, and the other supernatural virtues in the souls of the just (cf. Franzelin, “De Deo uno”, 3rd ed., Rome, 1883, thes. 16). It is controverted among theologians whether or not a mental image, be it a species expressa or a species impressa, is required for the beatific vision. But by many this is regarded as largely a controversy about the appropriateness of the term, rather than about the matter itself. The more common and probably more correct view denies the presence of any image in the strict sense of the word, because no created image can represent God as He is (cf. Mazzella, “De Deo creante”, 3rd ed., Rome, 1892, disp. IV, a. 7, sec. 1). The beatific vision is obviously a created act inherent in the soul, and not, as a few of the older theologians thought, the untreated act of God‘s own intellect communicated to the soul. For, as seeing and knowing are immanent vital actions, the soul can see or know God by its own activity only, and not through any activity exerted by some other intellect. Cf. Gutberlet, “Das lumen gloriae” in “Pastor bonus”, XIV (1901), 297 sqq.

Theologians distinguish the primary and the secondary object of the beatific vision. The primary object is God Himself as He is. The blessed see the Divine Essence by direct intuition, and, because of the absolute simplicity of God, they necessarily see all His perfections and all the persons of the Trinity. Moreover, since they see that God can create countless imitations of His Essence, the entire domain of possible creatures lies open to their view, though indeterminately and in general. For the actual decrees of God are not necessarily an object of that vision, except in as far as God pleases to manifest them. For just as the Divine Essence, notwithstanding its simplicity, could exist without these decrees, so God can also manifest His Essence without manifesting them. Therefore finite things are not necessarily seen by the blessed, even if they are an actual object of God‘s will. Still less are they a necessary object of vision as long as they are mere possible objects of the Divine will. Consequently the blessed have a distinct knowledge of individual possible things only in so far as God wishes to grant this knowledge. Thus, if God so willed, a blessed soul might see the Divine Essence without seeing in It the possibility of any individual creature in particular. But in fact, there is always connected with the beatific vision a knowledge of various things external to God, of the possible as well as of the actual. All these things, taken collectively, constitute the secondary object of the beatific vision.

The blessed soul sees these secondary objects in God either directly (formaliter), or in as far as God is their cause (causaliter). It sees in God directly what-ever the beatific vision discloses to its immediate gaze without the aid of any created mental image (species impressa); in God, as in their cause, the soul sees all those things which it perceives with the aid of a created mental image, a mode of perception granted by God as a natural complement of the beatific vision. The number of objects seen directly in God cannot be increased unless the beatific vision itself be intensified; but the number of things seen in God as their cause may be greater or smaller, or it may vary without any corresponding change in the vision itself.

The secondary object of the beatific vision comprises everything the blessed may have a reasonable interest in knowing. It includes, in the first place, all the mysteries which the soul believed while on earth. Moreover, the blessed see each other and rejoice in the company of those whom death separated from them. The veneration paid them on earth and the prayers addressed to them are also known to the blessed. All that we have said on the secondary object of the beatific vision is the common and reliable teaching of theologians. In recent times (Holy Office, December 14, 1887) Rosmini was condemned, because he taught that the blessed do not see God Himself, but only His relations to creatures (Denz., 1928-1930—old, 1773-75). In the earlier ages we find Gregory the Great (“Moral.”, 1. XVIII, c. liv, n. 90, in P.L., LXXVI, XCIII) combating the error of a few who maintained that the blessed do not see God, but only a brilliant light streaming forth from Him. Also in the Middle Ages there are traces of this error (cf. Franzelin, “De Deo uno”, 2nd ed., thes. 15, p. 192).

Although the blessed see God, they do not comprehend Him, because God is absolutely incomprehensible to every created intellect, and He cannot grant to any creature the power of comprehending Him as He comprehends Himself. Suarez rightly calls this a revealed truth (“De Deo”, 1. II, c. v, n. 6); for the Fourth Council of the Lateran and the Vatican Council enumerated incomprehensibility among the absolute attributes of God (Denz., nn. 428, 1782—old nil. 355.1631). The Fathers defend this truth against Eunomius, an Arian, who asserted that we comprehend God fully even in this life. The blessed comprehend God neither intensively nor extensively—not intensively, because their vision has not that infinite clearness with which God is knowable and with which He knows Himself, nor extensively, because their vision does not actually and clearly extend to everything that God sees in His Essence. For they cannot by a single act of their intellect represent every possible creature individually, clearly, and distinctly, as God does; such an act would be infinite, and an infinite act is incompatible with the nature of a created and finite intellect. The blessed see the Godhead in its entirety, but only with a limited clearness of vision (Deum totum sed non totaliter). They see the Godhead in its entirety, because they see all the perfections of God and all the Persons of the Trinity; and yet their vision is limited, because it has neither the infinite clearness that corresponds to the Divine perfections, nor does it extend to everything that actually is, or may still become, an object of God‘s free decrees. Hence it follows that one blessed soul may see God more perfectly than another, and that the beatific vision admits of various degrees.

The beatific vision is a mystery. Of course reason cannot prove the impossibility of such a vision. For why should God, in His omnipotence, be unable to draw so near and adapt Himself so fully to our intellect, that the soul may, as it were, directly feel Him and lay hold of Him and look on Him and become entirely immersed in Him? On the other hand, we cannot prove absolutely that this is possible; for the beatific vision lies beyond the natural destiny of our intellect, and it is so extraordinary a mode of perception that we cannot clearly understand either the fact or the manner of its possibility.

From what has been thus far said it is clear that there is a twofold beatitude: the natural and the supernatural. As we have seen, man is by nature entitled to beatitude, provided he does not forfeit it by his own fault. We have also seen that beatitude is eternal and that it consists in the possession of God, for creatures cannot truly satisfy man. Again, as we have shown, the soul is to possess God by knowledge and love. But the knowledge to which man is entitled by nature is not an immediate vision, but an analogous perception of God in the mirror of creation, still a very perfect knowledge which really satisfies the heart. Hence the beatitude to which alone we have a natural claim consists in that perfect analogous knowledge and in the love corresponding to that knowledge. This natural beatitude is the lowest kind of felicity which God, in His goodness and wisdom, can grant to sinless man. But, instead of an analogous knowledge of His Essence He may grant to the blessed a direct intuition which includes all the excellence of natural beatitude and surpasses it beyond measure. It is this higher kind of beatitude that it has pleased God to grant us. And by granting it He not merely satisfies our natural desire for happiness but He satisfies it in superabundance.

IV. ETERNITY OF HEAVEN AND IMPECCABILITY OF THE BLESSED.
—It is a dogma of faith that the happiness of the blessed is everlasting. This truth is clearly contained in Holy Writ (see Section I, SCRIPTURAL NAMES FOR HEAVEN); it is daily professed by the Church in the Apostles’ Creed (credo … vitam aeternam), and it has been repeatedly defined by the Church, especially by Benedict XII (cf. Section III). Even reason, as we have seen, can demonstrate it. And surely, if the blessed knew that their happiness was ever to come to an end, this knowledge alone would prevent their happiness from being perfect. In this matter Origen fell into error; for in several passages of his works he seems to incline to the opinion that rational creatures never reach a permanent final state (status termini), but that they remain forever capable of falling away from God and losing their beatitude and of always returning to Him again.

The blessed are confirmed in good; they can no longer commit even the slightest venial sin; every wish of their heart is inspired by the purest love of God. That is, beyond doubt, Catholic doctrine. Moreover this impossibility of sinning is physical. The blessed have no longer the power of choosing to do evil actions; they cannot but love God; they are merely free to show that love by one good action in preference to another. But whilst the impeccability of the blessed appears to be unanimously held by theologians, there is a diversity of opinion as to its cause. According to some, its proximate cause consists in this that God absolutely withholds from the blessed His cooperation to any sinful consent. The beatific vision does not, they argue, of its very nature exclude sin directly and absolutely; because God may still displease the blessed soul in various ways, e.g., by refusing a higher degree to beatitude, or by letting persons whom that soul loves die in sin and sentencing them to eternal torment. Moreover, when great sufferings and arduous duties accompany the beatific vision, as was the case in the human nature of Christ on earth, then at least the possibility of sin is not directly and absolutely excluded. The ultimate cause of impeccability is the freedom from sin or the state of grace in which at his death man passes into the final state (status termini), i.e. into a state of unchangeable attitude of mind and will. For it is quite in consonance with the nature of that state that God should offer only such cooperation as corresponds to the mental attitude man chose for himself on earth. For this reason also the souls in purgatory, although they do not see God, are still utterly incapable of sin. The beatific vision itself may be called a remote cause of impeccability; for by granting so wondrous a token of His love, God may be said to undertake the obligation of guarding from all sin those whom He so highly favors, whether by refusing all cooperation to evil acts or in some other manner. Besides, even if the clear vision of God, most worthy of their love, does not render the blessed physically unable, it certainly renders them less liable, to sin. Impeccability as explained by the representatives of this opinion, is not, properly speaking, extrinsic, as is often wrongly asserted; but it is rather intrinsic, because it is strictly due to the final state of blessedness and especially to the beatific vision. This is substantially the opinion of the Scotists, likewise of many others, especially in recent times. Nevertheless the Thomists, and with them the greater number of theologians, maintain that the beatific vision of its very nature directly excludes the possibility of sin. For no creature can have a clear intuitive view of the Supreme Good without being by that very fact alone irresistibly drawn to love it efficaciously and to fulfil for its sake even the most arduous duties without the least repugnance. The Church has left this matter undecided. The present writer rather inclines to the opinion of the Scotists because of its bearing on the question of the liberty of Christ. (See Hell. Impenitence of the Damned.)

V. ESSENTIAL BEATITUDE.
—We distinguish objective and subjective beatitude. Objective beatitude is that good the possession of which makes us happy; subjective beatitude is the possession of that good. The essence of objective beatitude, or the essential object of beatitude is God alone. For the possession of God assures us also the possession of every other good we may desire; moreover, everything else is so immeasurably inferior to God that its possession can only be looked upon as something accidental to beatitude. Finally, that all else is of minor importance for beatitude is evident from the fact that nothing save God alone is capable of satisfying man. Accordingly the essence of subjective beatitude is the possession of God, and it consists in the acts of vision, love, and joy. The blessed love God with a twofold love; with the love of complacency, by which they love God for His own sake, and secondly with the love less properly so called, by which they love Him as the source of their happiness (amor concupiscentiae). In consonance with this twofold love the blessed have a twofold joy; firstly, the joy of love in the strict sense of the word, by which they rejoice over the infinite beatitude which they see in God Himself, precisely because it is the happiness of God whom they love, and secondly, the joy springing from love in a wider sense, by which they rejoice in God because He is the source of their own supreme happiness. These five acts constitute the essence of (subjective) beatitude, or in more precise terms, its physical essence. In this theologians agree.

Here theologians go a step farther and inquire whether among those five acts of the blessed there is one act, or a combination of several acts, which constitutes the essence of beatitude in a stricter sense, i.e. its metaphysical essence in contradistinction to its physical essence. In general their answer is affirmative; but in assigning the metaphysical essence their opinions diverge. The present writer prefers the opinion of St. Thomas, who holds that the metaphysical essence consists in the vision alone. For, as we have just seen, the acts of love and joy are merely a kind of secondary attributes of the vision; and this remains true, whether love and joy result directly from the vision, as the Thomists hold, or whether the beatific vision by its very nature calls for confirmation in love and God‘s efficacious protection against sin.

We at this channel would like to add this quote for everyone to open your own mind this year: Your body diet is not only what you eat. It is also what you watch, what you listen to, what you read, the people you hang out with and the things you subject your mind, body and soul too. Always be mindful of the things you put into your body emotionally, spiritually and physically. Thank You Everyone Who Watch Our 1001+ Video&apos