Thomas On Nature

A common confusion in the history of Thomist scholarship is his use of the term natural. On the one hand, Thomas claims that humans possess a “natural desire to know God.” On the other hand, Thomas claims that humans cannot naturally seek God. At first glance, these two statements appear to contradict each other. How is it possible for the fulfillment of a natural desire to be unattainable? A natural desire would be without utility if the goal were unreachable. In fact, Thomas himself argues this in SCG III. 51. In this section, I clear up this confusion by distinguishing between two ways in which Thomas uses the term natural. I argue that a natural desire can simply be natural in the sense of what one was created for—or a bestowed possibility.
According to Aquinas, there are different kinds of humans. For example, male and female. These two belong to the same species, but they are different in kind. Therefore, the beatific vision received will be perfect in each accordance with their kind. “Perfection” means that the being has all the parts and powers it ought to have as that type of particular being, but there are still graded levels of perfection. For example, a plant is a perfect plant if it can grow and reproduce, but a dog is a more perfect being because it can do all those plant things, and also move about and bark. In the same way, the general intellectual inferiority of women (according to Thomas) makes a woman a less perfect being than a man. Women still attain perfect womanness eschatologically, which includes a beatific vision appropriate to their station as women with less intellectual power to contribute to the reception of that vision then men.
At the same time, not only does one’s disposition of mind matter, but also one’s disposition of character. The degree of perfection one attains in the eschaton depends on individual merit or their charity on earth. Thus, a more meritorious individual will have a more comprehensive vision than a less meritorious individual. For this reason, it is possible for some women to attain a more perfect beatific vision then some men. Although for Aquinas, generally speaking,
Both the individual’s disposition of mind and character actually matter for the degree of reception of the beatific vision. The individual must contain the intellectual power necessary for understanding ordinary things in order for the divine to replace the phantasm with God’s essence. A disposition towards moral perfection determines the degree of divine light given to the human for the illumination of God’s essence. For those with limited cognitive capacities, both their intellectual powers and the possibility for a virtuous earthly life is compromised. They have not gone through the necessary preparatory stages for the beatific vision. Yet, if they are baptized and faith has been actualized in them, they will receive a beatific vision, which is appropriate to their status. This vision is less perfect in comparison to one who has reached maturity in mind and heart, since the “mature” person has more to contribute to the reception of the vision. Since graded degrees of beatific vision are objectionable, some Thomists have come to amend Thomas’s thought to say that all persons will reach maturity in both body and mind eschatologically for the purpose of granting everyone an equal beatific vision. This emendation poses another problem, because the newly granted status of mind to some persons, makes them no longer