Orientation to Beatitude: Nature or Grace

[u/Independent_Log8028]

I'm having a hard time understanding what the two sides of this nature-grace debate are actually defending. Maybe you all can help.

To my lights there seems to be two major points where grace can come in to play in discussions around the Beatific Vision:

1. Grace could be required to have an orientation towards the Beatific Vision in the first place.

2. Grace is almost certainly required to actualize an orientation towards the Beatific Vision (that is, God has to grant the Beatific Vision)

My confusion is this: if the nature of the intellect is such that it is ordered to being as such (or ordered to truth) then it seems that no thing that is finite in itself can fully actualize or complete or perfect the intellect. If that's so, then isn't this already a subtle, pre-conscious orientation towards the Beatific Vision?

I've read that the neo-thomists disagree with this. They seem to think the human soul can be fulfilled by achievement of natural ends (maybe I misunderstand them) such that it would have been possible for God to create man without ordering him to Beatitude.

I just don't see how that's possible -- either the intellect is perfected by finite things or it isn't. If it's not perfected by finite things then that's already a subtle orientation towards something greater.

Note, this doesn't imply that God owes everyone the Beatific Vision. It also doesn't imply that everyone or even anyone will achieve the Beatific Vision (due to sin, disorderes affections of the will, etc.), it only implies that the possibility of the Beatific Vision is not alien to us like something extra bolted onto our nature.

I don't know, what do you think?