by

the supernatural state of nature

Andrew Davison:

The worries that de Lubac’s opponents presented about a natural desire for the supernatural can be addressed. For one thing, nature itself is already an entirely gratuitous gift. Creation is the gift that invents its recipient. To any attempt to rope off the natural from the supernatural we can reply “Too late!” To risk an understatement, the creation of everything out of nothing is not something that belongs to nature. At the outset, creation has the character of superfluity and excess that we otherwise associate with miracle and grace. […]

Taking a step back again and thinking again about the foundations of our theme in terms of the words we use, de Lubac has yet more to offer. He was keen that we should use the words “nature” and “supernatural.” That’s not two nouns (nature and supernature), or even two adjectives (natural and supernatural). It’s a noun and an adjective. De Lubac’s idea was that we are only ever talking about what God makes (nature) and the state to which God might elevate it (a supernatural state). God does not make a new and independent sort of thing (supernature); he takes what he has made and pours his grace upon it. God takes what he has created and while leaving it still entirely created, raises it up. That elevation doesn’t turn nature into something else, as if it were no longer nature. God doesn’t erase anything and start again.