Within doctrine, there are two poles which stand against each other and form the oppositional nature of paradox. The tendency of the mind is to seek to unify these poles, to make them one so as to resolve the paradox. In contrast, the proper integration is not to resolve the paradox, but rather to train the mind by it.
The second example we will explore is the relationship between grace and nature. Building on the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas, I will provide a simplified definition of grace that may not be the full definition but is suitable to meditation. We will define grace as God’s activity and presence. God’s activity in that God moves and directs all things as first cause and God’s presence in that he sustains all things through animating them by his divine life. This relates to both natural and supernatural ends towards which God directs activity and is presence to his creatures. The nuances of this are better handled by St. Thomas Aquinas than briefly here, but I believe this suffices for the sake of our discussion.
Nature will be defined in this manner. Within created realities, nature indicates the relatively autonomous principles and laws which govern and direct secondary causes, ie everything that is not God. Thus, we need not reference a creator directly to study natural causes such as gravity and biology. What I will flesh out is that the term “autonomous” is insufficient because nothing within creation is truly autonomous from God. Everything is directed by God and sustained in being by grace.
This creates a simple problem that our mind cannot fully circumscribe, which is to say “wrap our minds around.” When the earth orbits the sun, which is experienced on earth as sunrise and sunset, is God causing these cosmic forces to move or is it nature and the laws of nature directing the activity. The answer is both/ and. Actually this is the fundamental answer to all the questions we are going to explore, but that answer is somewhat repugnant to our reason.
It is not repugnant because it is wrong, but because the paradox sits uncomfortably with our desire to know and understand. Or at least it should. In fact, to be bothered by such a simple answer is a kind of preparation for a higher illumination. We have to wrestle with these things and not simply dismiss them with slogans or even a kind of triumphalistic approach to theology that fails to acknowledge the complexity of what we are being expected to accept.
So on one pole, it is right to understand all of creation, even human choice, as being directed and animated by God’s activity. God is the first cause that sets all things in motion and it is in his plan all that has been done and will be done. There is nothing that lies outside the realm of divine providence and God’s governance. This leads to a natural objection. If we overemphasize God’s activity, we implicitly deny free will and the independent operation of nature.
The second pole is human activity and the natural motions of created realities. We never have to be too worried about denying human free will because it is practically impossible to function in society and to operate in the natural world without at least experiencing that we all make concrete choices. No one forced me to choose what I would eat for breakfast. Also, I will make hundreds of choices each day and in no way do I feel compelled to do most of the them.
Even the things that seem a bit beyond my control, such as my reactions to people and circumstances, still don’t seem directly tied to an all powerful God. I can investigate their causes within created reality. However, to attain to wisdom is in part to see the higher cause and to perceive the plan and activity of the creator in all things. It is not uncommon for some spiritual minded authors to say things such as “everything is grace.” Technically not precise, but bears some semblance of truth, at least as a spiritual exercise.
I don’t desire to resolve this paradox because much ink has been spilled over the centuries in such an attempt. I believe the key is learning to exercise the mind to be illuminated by the paradox and to penetrate it’s hidden truth. So the question becomes, how do I exercise my mind so as to enter into this mystery? I think the pole of human activity and agency is common enough that there is less a danger in denying free will. Circumstances will draw most of us out of the belief that we have no control over our lives nor the need to take responsibility for what we choose.
So the question becomes how do we behold God working within all things without falling into heresy? First, we must recognize that we are not absorbed into the divine. We don’t lose ourselves or cease to be a creature. In other spiritual traditions, this over enthusiasm for the mystical has led many to erroneously believe that somehow they are no longer human and a creature. They mistake their experience of union and transcendence through the lens of doctrine that they are somehow now God. I have never encountered a Catholic who falls into this error, but I am sure I will at some point. The safeguard that must be put in place is sound doctrine.
And yet, to behold God working in things there is a danger in censuring our thoughts and feeling that surrender the intellect to a higher illumination is somehow erroneous. There is a kind of surrender that takes place, a kind of death, when we allow ourselves to move beyond ourselves and enter into the divine. This kind of death only takes place after there is first in place a sense of a firm identity, developed spiritual and psychologically in our youth, and a consistent life of virtue and discipline.
Once the structure of the sacramental system and a network of healthy relationships, the believer must learn to die to these things in the heart and enter the inner mansions. The innermost mansion is the divine indwelling which is paradoxically within us and yet beyond us.