Natura Pura: On the Recovery of Nature in the Doctrine of Grace (Moral Philosophy and Moral Theology) 1st Edition

This book by Steven A. Long of Ave Maria University (not to be confused with D. Stephen Long of Marquette University) focuses on a very specific, in-house Catholic debate concerning whether or not there exists a natural end of man in addition to or distinct from (etc) the beatific vision. The thesis is that "there does exist a proportionate natural end distinct from the supernatural end." While the introduction along with Chapters 1 and 2 discuss this question, give the responses, and give the author's opinion, Chapters 3 and 4 look at the implications of this question in relation to some opinions of philosophers and other professional academics. I must admit that Chapters 3 and 4 were very difficult for me to understand, as I think they were written with largely an academic audience in mind who is already familiar with these issues and as well as the opinions of, say, Jean Porter. My point in saying this is that for me, I got a ton out of the first 110 pages of the book and would recommend it solely for just those first 2 chapters (i.e up to page 110). Hence that is all I will say about the last 2 chapters (I promise I actually read them!)

The first chapter of the book deals with the question and Thomistic answer. Specifically, we learn what the problem is and how we understand an answer to it, drawing heavily from the thought of Aquinas. The basic idea is this: The will's natural proclivity is ordered towards that which is naturally fitting for it. But one cannot desire what one cannot have, and if we did (naturally) desire the beatific vision, we would desire that which we cannot have since we cannot experience the Beatific vision apart from God's grace. Hence, we are not naturally ordered towards the beatific vision, but given that our final end IS of course God via the beatific vision, man has two ends. Long is careful to note that these ends are not mutually exclusive, nor is there any tension between them. Indeed, he is careful to note that man does desire naturally God in so far as God is creator. But of course, God as creator is only accidental of God, so we are not naturally desiring God in his essence i.e. God as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. We can move towards God qua creator naturally (without grace), but we cannot move towards God qua God apart from grace. Long shows why this question is important as it has implication to how we understand the incarnation, for example.

The view of Aquinas, which as Long points out was also the view of Jesuits of old, is contrasted to the teaching of the 20th century Jesuit Henri deLubac. One thing that is very refreshing about this book is that there is no animosity whatsoever towards deLubac. Long goes to great lengths to praise deLubac's accomplishments, and even places deLubac's teaching in context. That is, deLubac was responding to a crisis at the time which basically said that grace destroys or replaces nature; that there is a total separation between grace and nature. This is obviously an error, and deLubac was right to point it out as such. However, in responding to this error, Long argues that deLubac goes to the other extreme and concedes too much to human nature. Chapter 2 continues the dialogue with theologians of old, interacting again with deLubac and also vonBalthasar. Again, Long is careful to state how highly he thinks of these men, noting that he is correcting their error with respect to this debate so that one may feel comfortable reading everything else in their work. This point spoke to me personally, as I will not read anything by Rahner, vonBalthasar, or others who are very very good and solid Catholics but who may have one or two ideas that are subtelly dangerous.

I learned a lot from this book, but there is clearly much more I could get out of it. In particular, a strong understanding of Thomisim and Thomistic metaphysics is necessary to appreciate this text. But it is a very important issue, and definitely worth one's time to try and understand it. With a good background in the thinking and terminology of Aquinas, this book is a great place to start.

This is an excellent book well worth reading which focuses on the nature/grace debate and its implications. Its main thesis is a double doctrine that in the concrete order man has a natural order to the proximate, proportionate, natural end from which his species is defined (this is distinct from his supernatural end), and that this ordering could have been created outside of sanctifying grace (i.e. without a further ordering of man to the beatific vision) though man has in the actual order been created in the order of grace (created in grace, fallen from grace, restored-elevated in grace).

Chapter one focuses on Henri de Lubac in looking at the natural desire to see God, the error of de Lubac (and Gilson), and the real need behind de Lubac's understanding of nature/grace (i.e. the truth that de Lubac is trying to protect). This first chapter is a reprint of Long's article in Nova et Vetera Winter 2007 vol. 5 n. 1 with a few additional footnotes - most notably the final footnote which offers a few page response to the critique of Nick Healy (communio winter 2008). Chapter two focuses on Hans Urs von Balthasar by giving a critical commentary of his understanding of nature/grace as found in the Theology of Karl Barth as well as by looking at his understanding of "concrete nature" and comparing it to St. Thomas, and finally by how this error about nature will bring about error in other parts of his work and in the Church's relationship to the secular world. Chapter three deals with Analytic philosophy because this is the kind of philosophy that has flourished while Catholics have set aside nature. This chapter seeks to argue that this philosophy cannot replace Thomism (mostly he is thinking of metaphysics). Chapter four seeks to refute the claim made by de Lubac and others that pure nature naturally leads to atheism/secularism. In this chapter he uses Maritain, Jean Porter, and David L. Schindler in order to take into account all the problems the natura pura thesis must confront. After a short conclusion there is a very interesting appendix on the work of Cardinal Ratzinger.

This book is a very helpful commentary for those trying to understand the reality of nature/grace and its implications for the Church and the world and for those trying to understand these things in the work of de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar (and other communio scholars), and St. Thomas. This book is enriched by/founded on a deep metaphysics which is all but lost in the modern world.