The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: the Second Epistle to the Corinthians
A second question arises : Was Paul truly and really caught up into the empyrean, so as to be in it as in a place, or was he there only by way of imagination or of understanding, so that he seemed to himself in his imagination to be in heaven, and saw what was being done there, while his body and soul remained on earth? Some think with probability that he was not caught up actually and truly, but only imaginarily, because he includes this rapture in vers. 1 and 7, under the head of visions and revelations of the Lord. God can bring it to pass that I in Belgium can see what is going on in India, and even what is passing in heaven. This may be brought about either through the imagination or the understanding, or even by the eyes of the body ; for God can so raise these above themselves , so co-operate with them above nature, so strengthen and extend the visual powers as to make them reach even to heaven. If that power may be increased beyond what is natural by spectacles or medicaments, why may not God extend this power yet further and further ? Thus it happened to S. Anselm, that he was able to see through a wall what was going on on the other side, by God imprinting the proper images on his retina. So Bede says that S. Diethelmus and others saw in imagination the pains of purgatory. Why, then, should not Paul have seen in the same way the empyrean, and what was passing in it ?
Others, with perhaps greater probability on their side, think that he was actually and truly caught up into the empyrean. They give as their reasons : (1.) That the Greek verb used is not the technical term for casting into an ecstasy, but a word which denotes an actual rapture. (2.) That Paul is doubtful whether his soul was caught up with his body or without his body ; therefore he presupposes that his soul was truly and really caught up; for in a vision that is merely imaginary there is no doubt that the soul alone and not the body is caught up by the imagination. (3.) That there he actually heard mysterious words, so that, as the destined teacher of the world, he seemed to go forth from heaven, and to communicate to men what he had there seen and heard as God willed him, and so brought to men as from heaven heavenly wisdom. Cf. ver. 4, note.
Now if the soul was really caught up, and yet remained united to the body (as I said in the opening note on this verse), then the body of Paul seems to have been caught up into paradise; and indeed this is as easy with God as taking up the soul only. This would be fitting to S. Paul’s office, who was to be the teacher and Apostle, not, like Moses, of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles, and so should wholly come forth, like another Moses, from intercourse with God in heaven.
Ver. 3. — Whether in the body or out of the body I cannot tell. S. Athanasius (Serm. 4 contra Arian.) thinks that Paul knew the mode in which he was caught up, yet says : “ I do not know,” or, " I cannot tell ; ” because he could not reveal it to others, in the same way that Christ, in S. Mark xiii. 32, says that He did not know the day of judgment. For though in himself he knew, yet as far as others were concerned he did not know, for he could not explain it. But others do better in understanding him simply to mean : " I do not know,” and his simple recital of the event seems to require this.
Ver. 4. — Into paradise . Ambrose, (Ecumenius, Haymo, Anselm, and Theophylact think that Paul was twice caught up : (1.) into the third heaven, and (2.) then higher still into paradise. If so, the third heaven would be the heaven of sun, moon, and stars ; but what would Paul have done there? Hence others hold that the events are one and the same, and that the third heaven and paradise are identical.
It may be asked : Why, after saying that he was caught up into the third heaven, does Paul say that he was caught up into paradise, as though it were a place higher still ? I reply that of the vast empyrean paradise is one particular part where the Blessed are, and a more glorious part than the rest. S. Paul would imply that not only did he see deepest mysteries by his understanding, but also in his will drank in ineffable happiness. He signifies this by the term paradise, which, both in Greek and Latin, denotes a place of happiness.
Paradise is not a Greek word meaning, as Suidas thinks, a well-watered garden, nor yet a herb-garden, as others suppose, but, as Pollux says, it is a Persian word, or rather Hebrew, denoting a garden planted with pleasant trees and fruits. Cf. Eccles. ii. 5 ; Neh. ii. 8 ; Cant. iv. 11. It is derived from two Hebrew words, denoting to bring forth myrtles. Then, because myrtle is of a pleasant smell, and does best in gardens, the name has been transferred to pleasure-gardens, plantations, and glades, and then again to any pleasant place. Here the third heaven is called paradise.
Did Paul see there the Divine Essence? S. Augustine ( Ep . 112, c. 13), Clement ( Stromata , c. 5), Anselm, and S. Thomas (ii. ii. qu. 175, art 5) say that he did, and their opinion is probable; for he was for this purpose caught up into paradise, or the place where the Blessed see God. Again, he heard secret things of which it is not lawful for man to speak : but men may speak of everything except the Divine Essence.
It may be objected that in that case he ought to have said that he saw things, not heard words. I reply that, by a common Hebraism, “to hear words” means “to see things” (Theodoret); as, with the prophets vision and hearing are the same, so is it in the minds of the Blessed.
But the contrary seems more probable. (1.) For even with a separated soul, to hear does not mean to behold a thing clearly, but to take in the words of God, or of an angel, or of man ; otherwise he would have said without ambiguity, I saw ineffable things, even God Himself. (2.) S. Paul says, in 1 Tim. vi. 16, speaking of God, “ Whom no man hath seen.” (3.) If he saw God he must have seen also his own state, whether he was in the body or not. But he says that he did not. (4.) But he gives a scanty account of his visions here, and says that, out of humility, he passes over greater things. Cf. Gregory ( Moral. , lib. xviii. c. 5), Jerome, Cyril, Chrysostom , and the Fathers and Schoolmen in general, and also Lud. Molina (pt i. qu. xii. art. 11, disp. 2). (5.) Scripture says more plainly of Moses that he saw the Essence of God, and yet I have shown clearly enough, in the notes to Exod. xxxiii., that Moses did not seek to see the Essence of God, and would not have obtained such a request if he had made it. In Exod. xxxiii. 20 the Lord distinctly replies to him in the negative : “Thou canst not see My face, for no man shall see Me and live.” It was only conceded to him that he should see the back parts of God, that is, the back of the body assumed by the Angel who represented God. Moses, however, sought that God, or the angel, who behind a cloud stood in the place of God, and spoke with him from the cloud, should unfold Himself, that he might see Him clearly and converse with Him face to face. The angel answered him that the eyes of man cannot see His face, but only His back; because the face assumed by the angel was so shining and so gloriously bright and majestic that it shone to a certain extent with the glory of God. It surpassed, therefore, the splendour of the sun, which man cannot look on directly with unveiled eyes, nay, rather man is blinded by the splendour. It follows from this that much less could this far more splendid face of the angel be seen by Moses ; nay, he would have been blinded by it. But in the back of the body that the angel had assumed the light was so toned down that Moses could look upon it. Moses looking upon this was so covered as it were with light that his face shone, and seemed to emit two horns of rays of light. This vision of Moses was a bodily vision, for with the eyes of his body he saw the back of the angel’s body. He was, therefore, far from seeing the Divine Essence ; and if he did not see it, much less did S. Paul, who speaks more obscurely and more humbly of his vision.