8. The Possibility of Revelation
7. Revealable Truths
Studying the possibility of revelation is especially urgent and relevant due to current theories doubting or altogether denying it. The appearance of such theories has even influenced the way the subject is approached. Beside this reason, studying the possibility of revelation will help us understand it better.
The traditional approach to studying the possibility of revelation consists in finding out if there is any obstacle to the transmission of revealable truths:
· on the part of the truths themselves, considering the intellectual capacity of man to receive them, or
· on the part of God who reveals them.
7a) Natural Truths
Certain truths hidden from men are “natural,” accessible to natural reason. These are called natural mysteries (from “mysterion,” something hidden). Though hidden, they are natural and, in themselves, do not pose any problem for being communicated to—or understood by—mankind.
Among these truths, some pose even fewer problems due to their simplicity, for they can be perfectly understood once they are communicated. For example, the creation of Eve after Adam or Jerusalem’s impending destruction are such truths. These truths are called mysteria late dicta.
Other natural truths, due to their depth and closer proximity to God, evade people’s complete understanding as a result of limited human intelligence.
Thus, using reason, people can discover that God knows a person’s actions before the act occurs. (This truth can also be received by supernatural revelation.) One can also discover that people are free to perform or not perform these actions. However, one cannot grasp how God’s foreknowledge and man’s freedom are compatible with each other.
The same can be said of our knowledge of God’s being infinitely just and infinitely merciful and the identity between his justice and his mercy. Reason tells us that it ought to be so, but we fail to understand how such an identity is possible, since from a human point of view, justice and mercy seem opposed. Such examples abound.
These truths are usually called “mysteries in a certain way” (mysteria secundum quid). They are mysteries from our point of view because they are much beyond our limited capacity of understanding. The angelic intelligence, being superior to ours, understands these truths better, but not perfectly.
7b) Supernatural Truths
There is a third category of hidden truths (or mysteries) that, by their nature, are far beyond the reach of any created or could-be-created being. These are supernatural mysteries; they cannot be communicated to a contingent being as something proper to it, as something in a certain way flowing from its very nature, because they are proper and exclusive to the self-subsistent Being (ipsum esse subsistens).
For the same reason, these supernatural mysteries cannot be known by any created or could-be-created intelligence. They are called absolute mysteries (mysteria absoluta).
These truths include, for example, the existence of three divine Persons in one God, the divinity of Jesus, that the sacraments give grace, and the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist.
At first glance, revelation of this type of mystery does not seem possible. We could say that, since a person is incapable of knowing these truths, the most he can do is understand the words, but not their meaning. How can our intelligence grasp things that we acknowledge to be beyond our reach? Like the Immanentist Philosopher, we could ask ourselves, “Can those things that are unthinkable for us exist?”
7c) The Existence of Supernatural Truths
Human reason alone can answer this immanentist question: Not only can mysteria absoluta exist, they do, in fact, exist. The mere consideration of God’s infinite perfection, which we know through human reason, makes us see the impossibility of reproducing all of the richness of his Being in created beings. Thus, even if we were capable of understanding all of created nature, we would still not be able to know God perfectly.
Similarly, even if we recognize the existence of the wide range of truths that escape our natural reason, we cannot pinpoint, identify, or advance any sound hypothesis about any of these mysteries. If we could, that specific truth would not be an absolute mystery at all.
7d) Can Supernatural Truths Be Known?
Once we know that absolute mysteries exist and cannot be known by any created or could-be-created intelligence, we should consider why we actually talk about the Blessed Trinity and other such mysteries.
Absolute mysteries are not unintelligible in themselves. On the contrary, they are the most intelligible, because being is intelligible insofar as it is. Thus, the richer its content, the greater its intelligibility. God is, thereby, the most intelligible being. We cannot know these mysteries because of their excessive clarity, which blinds our limited and created intelligence. We are, St. Thomas says, like an owl blinded by sunlight.
On the other hand, the created intellect has a basic and radical capacity to be elevated beyond its own natural powers. Upon being elevated, it can understand supernatural truths (although not perfectly) in proportion to the intensity of its elevation, that is, in proportion to the sanctifying grace received in this life and to the “lumen gloriae” received in the next.
We realize that the intellect is capable of being elevated beyond its natural powers because some supernatural truths have actually been revealed to us. Still, in theory at least, we could discover the existence of this capacity even if no supernatural revelation had taken place.
This capacity is similar to the capacity of a marble block, which can be carved into a statue through the work of a sculptor. Marble does not, and cannot, transform itself into a statue. However, its nature is such that it is capable of receiving another being’s operation and so become a statue. It is merely a passive capacity, but a real one, stemming from the very nature of marble. Such a capacity is wanting, for example, in water.
This passive but real capacity of a being to receive something beyond its nature is usually called obediential potency. The words clearly indicate a capacity (potential) to receive (to obey, obediential) an agent’s action.
We affirm the existence of an obediential potency in the created intellect based on the existence of revelation, a fact that we do not want to ignore. Now, we should try to understand how is it possible that the created intellect has an obediential potency to be elevated to the perception of absolute mysteries. In other words, we must investigate why we can affirm that the intellect’s condition with regard to absolute mysteries resembles that of marble toward a statue rather than that of water.
The proper object of the human intellect is the essence of sensible things (with the appropriate modifications, this reasoning can be applied to any created intellect). However, its “appropriate” or exact object—that which is perceivable by an intelligence because it is intelligent (not because it is this or that being’s intelligence)—is the truth in its entirety. In the same way, the sense of sight perceives color in general, although different animal species may see a greater or lesser range of specific colors.
Truth in its entirety corresponds to being in its entirety. Therefore, it does not seem contradictory that a created intellect may be elevated to perceive some naturally veiled areas beyond the visible spectrum. It is not contradictory because the intellect is generally open to being and the truth. Further, those areas of being, though veiled, are the type of function for which the intellect is fit. This is much like the case of human sight with regard to the invisible areas of light’s spectrum, such as the infrared.
8. God’s Power to Reveal Natural and Supernatural Truths
If revelation is possible on the part of the very nature of revealable truths and on the part of man’s receptive capacity, it is obviously possible on God’s part also. He is the Author of revelation; he knows these truths perfectly, and he has the infinite power to elevate human nature and to communicate the truths to mankind. The only things God cannot do are evil (which is a non-being) and that which contradicts itself (which is likewise a non-being). Moreover, this is not a real limitation—the inability to make a non-being is not a limitation.
Moreover, revelation is not unbecoming to God, since it does not imply any imperfection in him. It is just another sign of the fullness of his completely free love for his creatures.
9. Possibility and Fittingness of Mediate Revelation
Mediate (i.e., by means of a human person) revelation is fitting and possible inasmuch as it does occur.
Still, we can easily understand the possibility of mediate revelation even before we discover its existence. God not wanting to communicate directly with each individual does not bespeak any imperfection in him. Rather, it is proof of his wisdom and gentleness in dealing with humanity, since he acts in accordance with humanity’s social nature.
Thus, every person receives revealed knowledge from other people, in the same way that the individual receives life and culture from others. Humanity, as guardian and transmitter of that divine treasure, takes part in God’s action and is exalted. The receiver is not debased either, because the transmitter speaks in God’s name, not in his or her own, and in believing the transmitter, the receiver really believes God.
At the same time, a special intervention by God ensures the effectiveness of revelation. This action is necessary since, abandoned to human transmitters, revelation could be adulterated. This special act of God, guaranteeing the faithful transmission of revelation, is perfectly possible for him and befits his dignity.
10. Some Errors
The following currents of thought deny the possibility of revelation:
· Atheism, as expected, does so by denying the very existence of God.
· Agnosticism, not unlike the former in its practical consequences, denies the possibility of knowing anything about God and, therefore, brands as useless any inquiry into divine matters.
· Pantheism likewise denies the possibility of revelation. It identifies God with the world.
· Deism deems the intervention of God in the world unworthy of God’s wisdom, since it would mean tampering with the order that he himself had given the world upon creating it.
· Naturalism is the pure and simple negation of the supernatural order.
· Rationalism accepts only that which human reason is capable of understanding.
· Some relativistic theories seek to justify religious pluralism:
The roots of these problems are to be found in certain presuppositions of both a philosophical and theological nature, which hinder the understanding and acceptance of the revealed truth. Some of these can be mentioned: the conviction of the elusiveness and inexpressibility of divine truth, even by Christian revelation; relativistic attitudes toward truth itself, according to which what is true for some would not be true for others; the radical opposition posited between the logical mentality of the West and the symbolic mentality of the East; the subjectivism which, by regarding reason as the only source of knowledge, becomes incapable of raising its “gaze to the heights, not daring to rise to the truth of being”; the difficulty in understanding and accepting the presence of definitive and eschatological events in history; the metaphysical emptying of the historical incarnation of the Eternal Logos, reduced to a mere appearing of God in history; the eclecticism of those who, in theological research, uncritically absorb ideas from a variety of philosophical and theological contexts without regard for consistency, systematic connection, or compatibility with Christian truth; finally, the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.1
Thus, “the theory of the limited, incomplete, or imperfect character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, which would be complementary to that found in other religions, is contrary to the Church’s faith.” 2 “As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ.”3
Footnotes:
1. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decl. Dominus Iesus, 4. Aug. 6, 2000.
2. Ibid., 6.
3. Ibid., 2.
Studying the possibility of revelation is especially urgent and relevant due to current theories doubting or altogether denying it. The appearance of such theories has even influenced the way the subject is approached. Beside this reason, studying the possibility of revelation will help us understand it better.
The traditional approach to studying the possibility of revelation consists in finding out if there is any obstacle to the transmission of revealable truths:
· on the part of the truths themselves, considering the intellectual capacity of man to receive them, or
· on the part of God who reveals them.
7a) Natural Truths
Certain truths hidden from men are “natural,” accessible to natural reason. These are called natural mysteries (from “mysterion,” something hidden). Though hidden, they are natural and, in themselves, do not pose any problem for being communicated to—or understood by—mankind.
Among these truths, some pose even fewer problems due to their simplicity, for they can be perfectly understood once they are communicated. For example, the creation of Eve after Adam or Jerusalem’s impending destruction are such truths. These truths are called mysteria late dicta.
Other natural truths, due to their depth and closer proximity to God, evade people’s complete understanding as a result of limited human intelligence.
Thus, using reason, people can discover that God knows a person’s actions before the act occurs. (This truth can also be received by supernatural revelation.) One can also discover that people are free to perform or not perform these actions. However, one cannot grasp how God’s foreknowledge and man’s freedom are compatible with each other.
The same can be said of our knowledge of God’s being infinitely just and infinitely merciful and the identity between his justice and his mercy. Reason tells us that it ought to be so, but we fail to understand how such an identity is possible, since from a human point of view, justice and mercy seem opposed. Such examples abound.
These truths are usually called “mysteries in a certain way” (mysteria secundum quid). They are mysteries from our point of view because they are much beyond our limited capacity of understanding. The angelic intelligence, being superior to ours, understands these truths better, but not perfectly.
7b) Supernatural Truths
There is a third category of hidden truths (or mysteries) that, by their nature, are far beyond the reach of any created or could-be-created being. These are supernatural mysteries; they cannot be communicated to a contingent being as something proper to it, as something in a certain way flowing from its very nature, because they are proper and exclusive to the self-subsistent Being (ipsum esse subsistens).
For the same reason, these supernatural mysteries cannot be known by any created or could-be-created intelligence. They are called absolute mysteries (mysteria absoluta).
These truths include, for example, the existence of three divine Persons in one God, the divinity of Jesus, that the sacraments give grace, and the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist.
At first glance, revelation of this type of mystery does not seem possible. We could say that, since a person is incapable of knowing these truths, the most he can do is understand the words, but not their meaning. How can our intelligence grasp things that we acknowledge to be beyond our reach? Like the Immanentist Philosopher, we could ask ourselves, “Can those things that are unthinkable for us exist?”
7c) The Existence of Supernatural Truths
Human reason alone can answer this immanentist question: Not only can mysteria absoluta exist, they do, in fact, exist. The mere consideration of God’s infinite perfection, which we know through human reason, makes us see the impossibility of reproducing all of the richness of his Being in created beings. Thus, even if we were capable of understanding all of created nature, we would still not be able to know God perfectly.
Similarly, even if we recognize the existence of the wide range of truths that escape our natural reason, we cannot pinpoint, identify, or advance any sound hypothesis about any of these mysteries. If we could, that specific truth would not be an absolute mystery at all.
7d) Can Supernatural Truths Be Known?
Once we know that absolute mysteries exist and cannot be known by any created or could-be-created intelligence, we should consider why we actually talk about the Blessed Trinity and other such mysteries.
Absolute mysteries are not unintelligible in themselves. On the contrary, they are the most intelligible, because being is intelligible insofar as it is. Thus, the richer its content, the greater its intelligibility. God is, thereby, the most intelligible being. We cannot know these mysteries because of their excessive clarity, which blinds our limited and created intelligence. We are, St. Thomas says, like an owl blinded by sunlight.
On the other hand, the created intellect has a basic and radical capacity to be elevated beyond its own natural powers. Upon being elevated, it can understand supernatural truths (although not perfectly) in proportion to the intensity of its elevation, that is, in proportion to the sanctifying grace received in this life and to the “lumen gloriae” received in the next.
We realize that the intellect is capable of being elevated beyond its natural powers because some supernatural truths have actually been revealed to us. Still, in theory at least, we could discover the existence of this capacity even if no supernatural revelation had taken place.
This capacity is similar to the capacity of a marble block, which can be carved into a statue through the work of a sculptor. Marble does not, and cannot, transform itself into a statue. However, its nature is such that it is capable of receiving another being’s operation and so become a statue. It is merely a passive capacity, but a real one, stemming from the very nature of marble. Such a capacity is wanting, for example, in water.
This passive but real capacity of a being to receive something beyond its nature is usually called obediential potency. The words clearly indicate a capacity (potential) to receive (to obey, obediential) an agent’s action.
We affirm the existence of an obediential potency in the created intellect based on the existence of revelation, a fact that we do not want to ignore. Now, we should try to understand how is it possible that the created intellect has an obediential potency to be elevated to the perception of absolute mysteries. In other words, we must investigate why we can affirm that the intellect’s condition with regard to absolute mysteries resembles that of marble toward a statue rather than that of water.
The proper object of the human intellect is the essence of sensible things (with the appropriate modifications, this reasoning can be applied to any created intellect). However, its “appropriate” or exact object—that which is perceivable by an intelligence because it is intelligent (not because it is this or that being’s intelligence)—is the truth in its entirety. In the same way, the sense of sight perceives color in general, although different animal species may see a greater or lesser range of specific colors.
Truth in its entirety corresponds to being in its entirety. Therefore, it does not seem contradictory that a created intellect may be elevated to perceive some naturally veiled areas beyond the visible spectrum. It is not contradictory because the intellect is generally open to being and the truth. Further, those areas of being, though veiled, are the type of function for which the intellect is fit. This is much like the case of human sight with regard to the invisible areas of light’s spectrum, such as the infrared.
8. God’s Power to Reveal Natural and Supernatural Truths
If revelation is possible on the part of the very nature of revealable truths and on the part of man’s receptive capacity, it is obviously possible on God’s part also. He is the Author of revelation; he knows these truths perfectly, and he has the infinite power to elevate human nature and to communicate the truths to mankind. The only things God cannot do are evil (which is a non-being) and that which contradicts itself (which is likewise a non-being). Moreover, this is not a real limitation—the inability to make a non-being is not a limitation.
Moreover, revelation is not unbecoming to God, since it does not imply any imperfection in him. It is just another sign of the fullness of his completely free love for his creatures.
9. Possibility and Fittingness of Mediate Revelation
Mediate (i.e., by means of a human person) revelation is fitting and possible inasmuch as it does occur.
Still, we can easily understand the possibility of mediate revelation even before we discover its existence. God not wanting to communicate directly with each individual does not bespeak any imperfection in him. Rather, it is proof of his wisdom and gentleness in dealing with humanity, since he acts in accordance with humanity’s social nature.
Thus, every person receives revealed knowledge from other people, in the same way that the individual receives life and culture from others. Humanity, as guardian and transmitter of that divine treasure, takes part in God’s action and is exalted. The receiver is not debased either, because the transmitter speaks in God’s name, not in his or her own, and in believing the transmitter, the receiver really believes God.
At the same time, a special intervention by God ensures the effectiveness of revelation. This action is necessary since, abandoned to human transmitters, revelation could be adulterated. This special act of God, guaranteeing the faithful transmission of revelation, is perfectly possible for him and befits his dignity.
10. Some Errors
The following currents of thought deny the possibility of revelation:
· Atheism, as expected, does so by denying the very existence of God.
· Agnosticism, not unlike the former in its practical consequences, denies the possibility of knowing anything about God and, therefore, brands as useless any inquiry into divine matters.
· Pantheism likewise denies the possibility of revelation. It identifies God with the world.
· Deism deems the intervention of God in the world unworthy of God’s wisdom, since it would mean tampering with the order that he himself had given the world upon creating it.
· Naturalism is the pure and simple negation of the supernatural order.
· Rationalism accepts only that which human reason is capable of understanding.
· Some relativistic theories seek to justify religious pluralism:
The roots of these problems are to be found in certain presuppositions of both a philosophical and theological nature, which hinder the understanding and acceptance of the revealed truth. Some of these can be mentioned: the conviction of the elusiveness and inexpressibility of divine truth, even by Christian revelation; relativistic attitudes toward truth itself, according to which what is true for some would not be true for others; the radical opposition posited between the logical mentality of the West and the symbolic mentality of the East; the subjectivism which, by regarding reason as the only source of knowledge, becomes incapable of raising its “gaze to the heights, not daring to rise to the truth of being”; the difficulty in understanding and accepting the presence of definitive and eschatological events in history; the metaphysical emptying of the historical incarnation of the Eternal Logos, reduced to a mere appearing of God in history; the eclecticism of those who, in theological research, uncritically absorb ideas from a variety of philosophical and theological contexts without regard for consistency, systematic connection, or compatibility with Christian truth; finally, the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.1
Thus, “the theory of the limited, incomplete, or imperfect character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, which would be complementary to that found in other religions, is contrary to the Church’s faith.” 2 “As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ.”3
Footnotes:
1. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decl. Dominus Iesus, 4. Aug. 6, 2000.
2. Ibid., 6.
3. Ibid., 2.