In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

The Thomist 70 (2006): 605-15 THE BEATIFIC VISION AND THE INCARNATE SON: FURTHERING THE DISCUSSION THOMAS G. WEINANDY, 0.F.M., CAP. Capuchin College Washington, D.C. THERE IS NOTHING more stimulating than to ponder the mysteries of the Catholic faith in an attempt to conceive them more dearly and to articulate them more precisely. To my mind, no mystery is more challenging than the mystery of the Incarnation-even that of the Trinity itself. My good and longstanding Dominican friend Thomas Joseph White has taken up this exhilarating challenge in his thoughtful article on the Incarnation and the necessity of the earthly Jesus possessing the beatific vision. 1 Jean Galot and I were the primary catalysts that impelled him to do so, for we have argued that a proper understanding of the Incarnation does not warrant maintaining that the earthly incarnate Son of God possessed the beatific vision, despite the venerable, and to some extent magisterial, tradition to the contrary. Although White has marshaled a formidable array of scholarly arguments in support of his position, I believe that his arguments actually undermine what he ardently wants to achieve, that is, to uphold and articulate an authentic understanding of the Incarnation. White argues that his position is in keeping with the Angelic Doctor. Here, Thomist though I am, I will not address the validity ofAquinas's arguments or White's interpretation of them. 1 "The Voluntary Action of the Earthly Christ and the Necessity of the Beatific Vision," The Thomist 69 (2005): 497-534. Parenthetical page numbers in what follows refer to this article. 605 606 THOMAS G. WEINANDY, O.F.M.Cap. My response will be threefold. First, I will briefly summarize White's position. I will then offer an assortment of critiques of his position. Finally, I will attempt to sort out the whole issue by briefly articulating how I believe it must be addressed. I. WHITE ON THE INCARNATION AND THE BEATIFIC VISION The answer to the question of whether or not the earthly Jesus possessed the beatific vision must be found in discerning the incarnational principles or rules that govern the earthly, human life of the Son of God. Given that within the Incarnation it is the Son of God who exists as man, what necessarily follows regarding the manner or type of human life that the Son of God lived? White and I disagree on the ariswer to this question, that is, as to what does or does not necessarily ensue from the Incarnation as to the human life of the Son of God. White argues that the very nature of the Incarnation demands that the Son of God as man must possess the beatific vision if he is properly to live out his human life. For White, the beatific vision ensures not only that the human intellect is cognizant of "his" divine filial identity, but also that the human intellect knows and the human will acts in complete conformity with the divine intellect and will of the Son. (I have written the above sentence in conformity to White's manner of speaking. I would not articulate the issue in such a manner, as will be seen.) As White states at the onset: [T]his unity of personal action in Jesus requires a perfect cooperation between the human will of Christ and his divine will. In effect, Christ's will and consciousness must act as the instruments of his divine subject, being directly specified at each instant by his divine will. For this, knowledge of his own filial nature and will is necessary. The virtue of faith, or a uniquely prophetic knowledge (by infused species), is not sufficient. The unity of activity of the Incarnate Word requires, therefore, the beatific vision in the intellect of Christ, so that his human will and his divine will may cooperate within one subject. (507) RESPONSE TO THOMAS JOSEPH WHITE 607 White argues that without the beatific vision the human intellect and will of Christ would exercise an autonomy that would undermine the unity of subject, that is, the Son, acting through the instrumentality of his humanity. The Son can act through the instrumentality of his humanity only...

pdf

Share