IX. OF THE DEFECTS OF CHRIST'S HUMAN NATURE; OF THOSE OF THE BODY; AND OF THOSE OF THE SOUL
(A)
Were there certain defects both in the Body and the Soul of Christ?
Yes; and such were necessary for the end of the Incarnation, which was to make satisfaction for our sins — to come on earth as one of us — to be for us an example by the practice of the highest virtues of patience and immolation (XIV, XV.).
What were the defects Christ took upon Himself in His Body?
They were all those defects or miseries and infirmities which are to be found in the whole of human nature as a result of Adam's sin, such as hunger, thirst, death, and so on; but in Christ there were none of those defects that are the result of personal sin or of heredity (XIV. i).
Was the Body of our Lord^ putting aside the above-mentioned defects, of great perfection and beauty?
Yes, for such belonged to the dignity of the Word of God, who was hypostatically united to this Body; and such, was due also to the action of the Holy Ghost, by whom this Body was formed directly in the womb of our Blessed
Lady; but of this we shall speak shortly.
(«)
What were the defects Christ took upon Himself in His Soul?
They were the capability of feeling pain, especially the sufferings inflicted upon His Body during the course of His Passion; all the interior affective motions, whether of the sensitive or intellectual order; in other words, Christ had the passions such as sadness, fear, anger, etc., except that all these passions were in perfect accord with His reason,' to which they were always perfectly subjected (XV. 1-9).
(c)
Can it he said that whilst living' on earth our Lord was both in heaven and yet on the way to heaven?
Yes; for as regards the function that is proper to the soul in heaven, this our Lord had, since He enjoyed fully this beatitude by the vision of the divine essence; but as regards the effect of this beatitude in His Body, this He had not as yet by a sort of miraculous suspension in view of our redemption; and this redundancy of the Soul’s glory in the Body did not come about until after His Resurrection and Ascension into heaven (XV. lo).
X. OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE INCARNATION OF THE SON OF GOD; AND OF THE MANNER OF EXPRESSING IN WORDS THE TRUTHS THEREOF
What follows from the Incarnation of the Son of God considered in Himself, and in what manner can we rightly express the truths concerning Him?
We may and must say in all truth, " God is man," for one and the same Person who is God is man also; " Man is God," for a Person who is truly man is a Person who is God ; all that is proper to and belongs to human nature can be said of God, for all such belongs to a Person who is God, and all that is proper to the divine nature can be said of man who is the Son of God, for this man is a Person who is God. But we may not say of the divinity what is said of the humanity, or conversely, because these two natures remain distinct and each has its own properties (XVI. 1,2).
May one say '* God was made man '^?
Yes, because the Person who is God began to be truly man at a particular time before which It was not man (XVI. 6).
May one also say ^'Man was made God"?
No, for this presupposes that there was a person who was a man first of all without being God, and that afterwards he became God (XVI. 7).
Alay one say ''Christ is a creature "?
One may not say this altogether ; but it may be said provided one adds, " by reason of the human nature which is united hypostatically to Him," for it is true that this human nature is something created (XVI. 8).
May one say *' This man^' meaning Jesus Christy " began to exist ".?
No, for the sense would be that the Person of God the Son began to exist. But it may be said provided one adds, "in so far as He is man," or "by reason of His human nature " (XVI. 9).
XI. OF THE UNITY AND MULTIPLICITY IN JESUS CHRIST: AS REGARDS HIS BEING; AS REGARDS HIS WILL; AND AS REGARDS HIS OPERATIONS
(A)
Does Jesus Christ constitute only one being or several?
He is one being only, God and man together; and this by reason of the unity of Person which subsists in both the human and the divine natures (XVII. i, 2).
May one speak of more than one will in Christ ?
Yes ; for in Him there is the divine will in so far as He is God ; and the human will ii> so far as He is man (XVIII. i).
Is there in Him as man a multiplicity of wills?
Yes, understanding the word "will" in a wide sense and in so far as it comprises the sensitive as well as the intellective appetite; or again in so far as the word sometimes signifies different acts of these faculties (XVHL 2, 3).
Had the human ?nature in Christ a free will?
Yes. Although it was absolutely impossible for Him to sin, His will being always and in every sense conformed to the divine will (XVHL'4).
(B)
Is there a multiplicity of operations in Christ?
Yes. For although on the part of the Person or the principle to which all operations are attributed there is absolute and perfect unity, on the part of the immediate principles of operation there were as many different operations as there were principles or faculties of operating in His human nature; and, further, the diversity of actions proper to the divine nature and the diversity of those proper to the human nature (XIX. 1,2).
(c)
In what sense does one speak of theandric operations in Christ, and what does this expression mean?
This expression means that since Jesus Christ is both God and man there is in Him a kind of subordination between all the principles of operation in Him, particularly between those principles proper to the human nature and those proper to the divine ; so that the human operations were divinely perfected and superexalted owing to the nearness and the influence of the divine nature ; and, on the other hand, the divine operations in some sort were humanized by the concurrence of the human operations (XIX. i, Obj. i).
Were the human operations in Christ meritorious as regards Himself?
Yes. It was meet He should merit for Himself all that from which He was separated only temporarily, and such as was not contrary to the excellence and dignity which was His ; as, for instance, the glory of the Body and all that referred to His external exaltation in heaven and on earth (XIX. 3).
(D)
Was Christ able to merit for others also ?
Yes, and by merit that was perfect or de condigno; and this by reason of the mystical unity between Him and all the members of His Church of which He is the head ; and this merit was of such a kind that all His actions were meritorious not only for Himself, but for all those who form part of His Church in general, according to the sense already explained (XIX. 4).
What is necessary that other men might share in the merit of our Lord?
They must be united to Him by the grace of baptism, which is the grace whereby they are incorporated into Christ's Church; but of this we shall speak later (XIX. 4> Obj, 3).
XII OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE INCARNATION OF GOD THE SON IN RELATION TO HIS FATHER; OF HIS SUBJECTION TO THE FATHER; OF HIS PRAYER, AND OF HIS PRIESTHOOD
(A)
As a result of the Incarnation ^ what were the relations between Christ and God the Father^ and conversely?
The consequences of the Incarnation were that Christ was subject to the Father ; that He prayed ; that He served God the Father by His priesthood; and that, although He was the Son of the Father by nature, not by adoption. He was predestined by the Father (XX.-XXIV.).
How was Christ subject to the Father?
He was subject to the Father by reason of His human nature because this had only participated goodness, whereas the Father is goodness by essence; hence whatever was related to Christ's human life was ruled, disposed, and ordered by the Father.
In Christ there was the most perfect and absolute obedience in respect of the Father (XX. i).
Was not the human part of Christ also entirely subject to Himself by reason of His divine nature?
Yes, for the divine nature, by reason of which the Father was superior to the Son in His human nature, is common to the Father and the Son (XX. 2).
(B)
In what sense was Christ able and is still able to pray ?
In this sense, that the human will being incapable of attaining the fulfilment of its desires independently of the divine will, Christ as man had perforce to address the Father in order that the Father by His all-powerful will might accomplish what the human will was unable to realize of itself (XXI. i).
Did Christ pray for Himself?
Yes; He prayed for the external glorification of His Body which He had not so long as He was on earth ; also in order to give thanks to the Father for all the gifts and privileges bestowed upon His human nature ; and in the latter way Christ will pray through all eternity (XXI. 3).
Whilst Christ was on earth were His prayers always heard?
Yes, if by prayer one understands a petition made deliberately by the will; for Christ, who knew perfectly the will of His Father, never wished anything deliberately except what He knew to be in conformity with His Father's will (XXI. 4).
(c)
What is meant by the priesthood of Christ?
By this is meant that it belonged to Him, par excellence^ to bring to men the gifts of God; and to stand before God in the name of men to offer their prayers to God to appease Him and to re-establish them in His favour (XXII. i).
Was Christ both priest and victim ?
Yes; because in accepting death for our sakes he became a victim in the threefold sense of sacrifice as established by the Old Law, viz., a victim of sin, a victim of peace, and a holocaust. He has, in fact, made satisfaction for our sins and has blotted them out; He has obtained for us the grace of God which is our peace and salvation ; and He has opened for us the gates of heaven (XXII. 2).
Did Christ need to be priest for His own sake?
No, for He Himself could approach God without need of a mediator ; further, in Him there was no sin and hence no need of a victim of expiation (XXH. 4).
Will the priesthood of Christ last for ever ?
Yes, in the sense that the effect of His priesthood which is the possession of heaven, will remain always, for the attainment of heaven by the blessed is the consummation of Christ's sacrifice (XXH. 5).
Why was Christ a priest according to the order' of Melchisedech ?
In order to show the superiority of this priesthood over the levitical priesthood of the Old Law, which was only a figure of the former (XXH. 6).
XIII. OF CHRIST'S DIVINE SONSHIP; AND OF HIS PREDESTINATION
(A)
lVhe7i one speaks of adoption on the part of God^ what does it mean ?
It means that God out of His infinite goodness has deigned to give to men a participation of the glory of His beatitude; both angels and men who participate in this glory become the sons or the children of God by adoption, since the second Person of the Blessed Trinity is the only son by nature (XXIII. i).
Is Christ as regards His human ?nature also a Son of God by adoption?
No; for since sonship is a personal property, wherever there is natural sonship there cannot be sonship by adoption, which is only a figure of the former (XXIII. 4).
(B)
Was Jesus Christ predestined?
Yes; for predestination is nothing else but a preordination fixed by God from all eternity of what is fulfilled in time in the order of grace. But that a human being was God in person and this being as man came from God was realized in time; and such event belonged in the highest degree to the order of grace. Hence it is true that Jesus Christ was predestined by God (XXIV. i).
Is this predestination of Christ the cause of our own predestination ?
Yes, God ordained that our salvation should be accomplished by Jesus Christ Himself, who is the author thereof; further, by predestination we become by adoption what Jesus Christ is by nature (XXIV. 3, 4).
XIV. OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE INCARNATION IN RELATION TO US, VIZ., THAT WE MUST ADORE CHRIST; OF CHRIST AS THE MEDIATOR
(A)
What are the consequences of the incarnation of God the Son in relation to us?
It follows that we must adore Jesus Christ, and that He is our Mediator (XXV.-XXVI.).
What is meant by saying that we must adore Jesus Christ ?
This means that we must pay to the Person of God the Son, whether as God or as man, the worship that is proper to God alone, viz., latria; but if we consider the human nature of Christ as the reason of the honour we pay Him then we must pay to Him what is called dulia (XXV. 1,2).
(B)
Must we adore the Sacred Heart of Jesus with the adoration of ''latria ".?
Yes, for the Sacred Heart is part of the Person of our Lord ; and of all that belongs to the Person of our Lord in His human nature His Heart should be worshipped with the adoration of latria in an especial manner, because it is the symbol of His great love for us.
Must we honour with the adoration of " latria " the images and pictures of Christ ?
Yes, because that movement whereby the soul is drawn towards an image precisely as an image (that is, in so far as it represents something), is the same as that movement whereby the soul is drawn towards the thing represented (XXV. 3).
(c)
Must we also honour the cross of our Lord with the adoration of^^latria "?
Yes, because for us it represents our Lord nailed upon the cross and dying for us ; and if it be question of the true cross upon which our Lord was nailed we adore it for this other reason, viz., because it was touched by our Lord's Body, and was saturated with His Blood (XXV. 4).
Must we honour our Blessed Lady, the Mother of Jesus, with the adoration of ‘latria ".?
No; for the reason why we honour her is not only because she is our Lord's Mother, but because of her own worth; but since she is a creature only we do not honour her with the adoration of latria, which is exclusively proper to God. We pay her, however, in a supereminent way an honour in the order of dulia that is due to those who are united to God; but since no other creature is so intimately united to God as she is we pay her that honour which is called hyper dulia (XXV. 5).
(H)
Must we honour the relics of the saints and especially their bodies ?
Yes, because the saints are friends of God and our intercessors before Him ; we honour their bodies in particular because they were temples of the Holy Ghost, and because they will be glorified after the Resurrection, at the last day (XXV. 6).
What is meant by saying that Jesus Christ is the Mediator between God and ?men ?
By this is meant that by reason of the hypostatic union between the human nature and God the Son, Christ is midway between God and men ; owing to this it is proper to Him to communicate to men the commands and the gifts of God, standing before God in the name of men, in order to make satisfaction for their sins and to intercede for them (XXVI . 1,2).
XV. OF THE MANNER ACCORDING TO WHICH THE INCARNATION TOOK PLACE, AND OF CHRIST'S DOINGS IN THE WORLD
In what manner did the Incarnation of the Son of God take place ^ and what were the doings of Christ in the world?
The answer to this question will be given by considering four things: (i) The coming into the world of God the Son; (2) His life in the world; (3) His leaving the world; (4) His exaltation after leaving the world (XXVII.Prologue).
