1 The principle of economy, as applied to theology, refers to the divine plan in God's external operations. Here it is the relation of the Incarnation to the divine plan. The ultimate principle to which everything is referred is the hypostatic union. (Tr.)
2 Summa Theol., Ia, q. 2, introd. to a. 1
3 Ibid., IIIa, Prologue.
4 Ibid., q. 1, a. 3, 4.
5 For a fuller explanation of the objectum formale quod and quo, see The One God, p. 57, footnotes. (Tr.)
6 Thus a theological knowledge about human nature, habitual grace, the infused virtues is required in advance to discuss such questions as: whether Christ was endowed with habitual grace as well as having the grace of union—whether He had faith, hope, and penance considered as a virtue.
7 John 14:6.
8 Ibid., 3:16.
9 I John 4:10.
10 John 3:16.
11 Life of Jesus (about end).
12 Denz., no. 1796.
13 Hermeneutica biblica, sect. 1: de heuristica rationali; sect. 2: de heuristica christiana; sect. 3: de heuristica catholica.
14 Denz., no. 1943
15 Ibid., no. 1788.
16 Hermeneutica biblica, p. 21.
17 I Pet. 1:10f.
18 Summa Theol., IIa IIae, q. 173, a. 4; John 11:50.
19 Denz., nos. 2027-38.
20 See Lepin, Jesus Messie et Fils de Dieu, p. 223; Lebreton, La vie et l'enseignement de Jesus.
21 Lepin, op. cit., p. 237
22 "Messias" comes from the Hebrew "masiah, " which means "anointed, " being derived from the Hebrew verb "masah, " "to anoint." It corresponds to the Greek Christos, Messias (John 1:42; 4:25), and to "Christus" in the Latin Vulgate.
23 See Garrigou-Lagrange, De revelatione, Part II, chap. 3.
24 Mark 1:14f.
25 Matt. 4:19.
26 Ibid., 4:23.
27 Ibid., 5:21
28 Ibid., 7:29.
29 Ibid., 12:8.
30 Ibid., 12:41f.
31 Mark 12:35f.
32 Luke 4:18f.; Mark 2:3; Luke 5:18.
33 Matt. 13:55; Luke 4:22f.
34 Ibid., 9:2-7; Mark 2:3 ff.; Luke 5:24.
35 John, chap. 5
36 Ibid., 1:41f.
37 Ibid., 1:43f.
38 Matt. 10:1, 7, 20, 40; Mark 9:36
39 Luke 10:16
40 Matt. 11:4.
41 Isa. 35:5.
42 John 3:13f.
43 Ibid., 4:25.
44 Ibid., 4:42.
45 Matt. 16:13f.; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20
46 John 7:15f.
47 Ibid., 8:12f.
48 Matt. 21:9.
49 Luke 19:40
50 Ibid., 26:62f.; Mark 16:60f.
51 Luke 24:26.
52 John 20:21
53 L'essence du Christianisme (Fr. tr., p. 140).
54 Acts 2:36; 3:13f. Catholics and conservative Protestants agree that the Acts of the Apostles was written by St. Luke about A.D. 70. Harnack says A.D. 78-83, or perhaps 60-70.
55 Concerning the opinion of these rationalists of modern times, cf. Lepin, Jesus Messie et Fils de Dieu, p. 228.
56 About the opinion of these Protestants, cf. ibid., p. 237; see also M. Braun, O.P., Ou en est le probleme de Jesus.
57 Denz., nos. 2027-38.
58 Dict. de la Bible, art. "Jesus-Christ"; Dict. de theol. cath., col. 1132-1246.
59 Tekna Theou (Gr.)
60 John 1:18; Ho uios tou Theou (Gr.)
61 Mark 3:11
62 Even Christians are said to be "partakers of the divine nature" (II Pet. 1:4).
63 Cf. Lepin, Jesus Messie et Fils de Dieu, pp. 267-371.
64 Matt. 12:41f.
65 Mark 12:36; Matt. 22:45.
66 Matt. 17:3.
67 Ibid., 11:3, 11; Mark 1:13; Matt. 4:11
68 Matt. 16:27; 24:31
69 Ibid., 5:21, 48
70 Ibid., 5:32; 19:9.
71 Mark 2:27f.
72 Matt. 9:6.
73 Ibid., 18:18
74 Ibid., 9:6; Mark 2:9; 5:41; Luke 7:14.
75 Mark 4:39
76 Matt. 7:22; Acts 3:6; 4:10
77 Matt. 10:37 Luke 14:26
78 Mark 10:29 Matt. 12:30
79 Mark 14:62; 8:38; 13:26
80 Matt. 24:31
81 Luke 24:49
82 Acts 10:25f; 14:14 Apoc. 19:10; 22:8
83 Cf. P. F. Ceuppens, O.P., Theologia biblica, De incarn., III, 35-51.
84 Matt. 11:27; Luke 10:21
85 Cf. M. J. Lagrange, Ev. de S. Matthieu, pp. 226-30; L. de Grandmaison, Jesus Christ, II, 60-62; F. Ceuppens Theol., bibl. de SS. Trinitate, II, 89
86 St. Thomas, In Matt., chap. 11
87 John 1:18.
88 Matt. 16:16f.
89 Mark 8:29
90 Luke 9:20
91 John 1:41f.; Matt. 11:4. Cf. M. J. Lagrange, op. cit., p. 322, with whom Lepin, F. Prat, D. Busy, and Ceuppens agree
92 Matt. 21:33; Mark 12:1f.; Luke 20:1f.
93 Matt. 23:31
94 Heb. 1:1f.
95 Matt. 22:42; Luke 20:41f.; Mark 12:35f.
96 Matt. 26:63f.; Mark 14:61f.; Luke 22:66, 70
97 John 5:18
98 Ibid., 19:7.
99 Cf. J. Lebreton, Histoire du dogme de la Trinite, I, 311-13
100 Matt. 28:18f.; concerning the authenticity of this formula, cf. Lepin, Dict. Apol., art. "Evangiles canoniques, " col. 1621
101This formula is found in Didache, VII, 1
102Cf. E. Jacquier, Histoire des Livres du N. T., III, 80
103A Harnack, Die apostelgesch., p. 22.
108Ibid., 2:36; 11:20.
111Ibid., 7:58. The Word "Lord" (ho Kyrios, (Gr.)) in the Acts of the Apostles as in other books of the New Testament, denotes the divinity itself. See A. Lemmonyer, Theologie du N. T., pp. 151-56
112These epistles are I and II Thess., Gal., I and II Cor., Rom., Eph., Col., and Phil. Cf. F. Prat, Theologie de St. Paul
114Ibid., 8:3, 32.
116II Cor. 4:4
119Cf. P. F. Ceuppens, Theol. biblica, De incarn., III, 47.
120I Cor. 1:23f.
122Phil. 2:5f. In this utterance the phrase "being in the form of God" (hos en morphe theou (Gr.)) the word morphe (Gr.) ("form") signifies something that belongs inseparably to the essence of any being. Thus in the present instance it designates the divine essence or nature, and this is confirmed from the words that follow, namely, "to be equal with God."
126Ibid., 1:6, 7, 13, 14.
128It is unfortunate that we have not a more accurate translation of the Greek verb egeneto (Gr.) in the Vulgate, which the Douai Version translate "were made." The same applies to the phrase, "The Word was made flesh, " which would have no meaning to the Greek mind if used in this sense. (Tr.)
130Ibid., 17:1, 10
133Ibid., 16:28, 32.
135Ibid., 17:5, 24.
138Ibid., 10:30; cf. 17:11, 21.
140I John 1:1f.
142Apoc. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13
144Ibid., 17:14; 19:6; as God, 6:15f.; 15:3.
146Ibid., 2:23; as God, Jer. 17:10
147Ibid., chaps. 5f.
148Ibid., 1:4; 2:26; 4:5.
149Ibid., 1:8; 4:8.
151Ibid., 2:13, 20; 17:14.
153Ibid., 5:8, 12f
154Ibid., 19:10; 22:9
155Summa theol., IIIa, q. 19, 48
157Deut. 10:17; Isa. 10:21; Jer. 32:18; Neh. 9:32; Theol. biblica, De incarn., III, 33.
158Dict. theol. cath., art. "Jesus-Christ, " col. 1247-62.
159St. Clement, I Cor. 32, 2; 36, 2-5; St. Ignatius, Magn., 6, 1; 8:2; Eph., 1, 1; 7, 2; 15, 3; Pseudo Barnabas, 5, 11.
160St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres., III, xviii, 1; xxi, 10; v, 18. Tertullian, adv. Praxeam; St. Hippolytus, Philosophumena.
161Adv. Praxeam, P.L., II, 191
162Cf. Contra Apollinarium, a work that has been unjustifiably attributed to St. Athanasius. See also St. Gregory of Nazianzus in several of his epistles; St. Epiphanies, De haeresibus. Cf. also Denzinger, nos. 65, 85, in which the Apollinarians were condemned by Pope St. Damasus and by the First Council of Constantinople.
163S. Cyrillus Alex., Epist. I; P.G., LXXVII, 27. See Denz., nos. 113f., Anathematismi Cyrilli contra Nestorium. Also Conc. Chalcedonense, Denz., no. 148
164Denz. (16 ed.), p. 20
165Ibid., no 1.
166Ibid., no. 2.
167Ibid., no. 13. This creed is the formula of the Nicene Council: see Denz., no. 54.
168Ibid., no 54
169Denz., no. 1796
170An example would be to prove that the following proposition: The Word, who is consubstantial with the Father, was made man, is equivalent to this revealed truth: The Word was made flesh
171Com. in III Sent., d. 1, a. 1.
173Cf. St. Thomas, Com. in III Sent., d. 1, a. 2, q. 1.
175Denz., nos. 282, 284f.
176Ibid., nos. 1669-71. A few lines above in this same document, Frohschammer applied this teaching about reason to the supernatural end of man and the most sacred mystery of the Incarnation. (Tr.)
177Ibid., no. 1671
178Ibid., nos. 1671, 1795.
179Cf. Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chap. 27; cf. also Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " colt 1453-63; E. Hugon, Le mystère de l'Incarnation, pp. 52f.
180See St. Thomas Com. in Boetium de Trinit., q. 2, a. 3
181De incarnatione, beginning of treatise
182The expression according to scholastic terminology, means that the truth of this proposition: God exists, understood as the Creator of the universe, has its foundation and objective validity in the subject itself of the proposition, inasmuch as God is externally related to all things He has created, real on the part of creatures to God, though logical on the part of God to creatures. (Tr.)
183Summa theol., Ia, q. 3, a. 4, ad 2
184See Chapters 2-16 (passim).
185Summa theol., IIIa, q. 16, a. 6, 2nd. obj. Also III sent., d. 1, a. 1, ad 1.
186Summa theol., IIa, q. 16, a. 6, ad 2.
187Ibid., ad 2
188Com. in III Sent., d. 1, q. 1, ad 1.
189Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, a. 6, ad 2.
190Cf. Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chaps. 40, 49f.
191See infra, chap. 5, art. 8.
192See infra, chap. 6, art. 1.
193Cf. Contra Gentes Bk. IV, chap. 40, for other objections
194Cf. Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " col. 1463-73
197Summa theol., Ia, q. 5, a. 4, ad 2
198Div. nom., Bk. IV.
199Summa theol., Ia, q. 5, a. 4, ad 2
200 Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 1, a. 4, ad 1. See also Ia, q. 19, a. 2; Contra Gentes, Bk. II, chap. 30, no. 3; chap. 45, no. 1
201Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chap. 11
202Denz., no. 1783
203They said that God was obliged not by a physical but a moral necessity to create the best possible world which finds its ultimate perfection in the Incarnation, thus making this latter morally necessary. This is contrary to the gratuity of this greatest gift
204Summa theol., Ia, q. 19, a. 3.
205 Ibid., Ia, q. 6, a. 1, 2.
206 Ibid., IIIa, q. 1, a. 1, c.
207Com. in IIIam, q. 1, a. 1.
208 Ibid., q. 1, a. 1, no. 6. The author remarks that what Cajetan says here is more forcible than what he said previously on this point. Cf. in Iam, q. 19, a. 3.
209Summa theol., Ia, q. 23, a. 5, ad 5
210See q. 1, a. 2.
211I Cor. 3:22f.
212Summa theol., Ia, q. 25, a. 6, ad 1.
213Cf. Monsabre, Conference 34
214Denz., no. 607
215De natura et gratia, no. 5.
216Summa, Ia, q. 64, a. 2.
217Cur Deus homo, Bk. I, chap. 4.
218 Ibid., Bk. II, chaps. 5, 17.
219Cf. Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " cols. 1474-82.
220Com. in IIIam., q. 1, a. 2.
221De agone christiano, chap. 11. See also De Trinitate, Bk. XIII, chap. 10.
222Summa, IIIa, q. 1, a. 2, § 1
223 Ibid., IIIa, q. 46, a. 2, ad 3.
225 Ibid., 8:18
226 Ibid., 14:6.
227 Ibid., 17:8.
228 Ibid., 4:41f.
229 Ibid., 1:16f.
230I John 1:1f.
232 Ibid., 2:2f.
233De civ. Dei, Bk. XL, chap. 2.
235Matt. 11:28; 10:37.
238Sermon 53, Vol. 38.
241 Ibid., 9:6.
243I Tim. 1:1.
245Summa theol., IIIa, q. 1, a. 2, c.
248 Ibid., 15:9
249 Ibid., 15:13
250I John 4:9f.
251 Ibid., 4:19
253Titus 2:11f. See also 2:4
255I Cor. 15:10.
256Cf. ad 3.
257 Ibid., ad 2
258Denz., no. 3034
259Epistle, March 22, 1918
260Council of Cologne, 1860.
261Enchir., chap. 108
262Sermo I, De nativitate
263Encycl., Miserentissimus Redemptor
264Cf. ad. 2
265Cf. Salmant., De incar., disp. I
266De veritate, q. 28, a. 2
267See Billuart, De peccatis, dist. VIII, a. 5.
268Cf. IIIa, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2
269De veritate, q. 28, a. 2. See also Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " col 1478-82
270As philosophers say: an absolute denial, since it is of a malignant nature, entirely destroys or excludes. For this reason, negative universal propositions are very dangerous, for a single example to the contrary suffices to show their falsity. Such propositions are totally exclusive.
271Summa theol., la, q. 3, prologue
272 Ibid., Ia, q. 12, a. 8
273 Ibid., IIIa, q. 48, a. 2
274De peccatis, dist. VIII, a. 5
275Summa theol., IIIa, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2
276 Ibid., IIIa, q. 48, a. 2
277Cf. especially St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses III, vi 12, also St. Basil, Com. in Ps. 48, no. 4. See also Petavius, Bk. II, no. 12 (beginning).
278St. Thomas, loc. cit.
279 Ibid., Ia, q. 19, a. 5
280See III Sent., d. 1, q. 1, a. 3. Also Com. in Tim., chap. 1, lect. 4
281See Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " col 1482-1506
282Cf. Com. in III Sent., d. 1, q. 1, a. 3.
283De Trinit., Bk. XIII chap. 17
284Com. in III Sent., d. 1, q. 1, a. 3.
285Com. in I Tim., chap. 1, lect. 4
286If it is a question of things in nature already produced, it is possible for us from things naturally knowable to know that God freely willed to create them
289 Ibid., 19:10
290I Tim. 1:15.
293 Ibid., 1:29. See also Rom. 3:22; I John 1:7; 2:12:3:5, 4:10.
294Cf. Isa. 61:1; Dan. 9:24 Zach. 3:9.
295Cf F. Ceuppens, O.P. (Theol. biblica, De incarnatione, pp. 6-
29) whose conclusion is: "The motive of the Incarnation, according to the teaching of Sacred Scripture, is the redemption of the human race, and no other motive is given in the pages of Sacred Literature."
296Denz., no. 54. Someone wrote recently: "No Scholastic, as far as we know, would be so imprudent as to quote this text of the Creed on this disputed point." On the contrary, appeal to this text is made by the Salmanticenses, Gonet, Billuart, and many others.
297 Ibid. no. 371
298Cf. Rouet de Journel, Enchiridion patristicum, nos. 406-15. Adv. haer., chap. 14; cf. Rouet de Journel, op. cit., no. 254.
299De Trinitate, dial. 5 (about middle).
300Adv. Arianos, Oratio 2, no. 56; Rouet de Journel, op. cit., no. 765
301Oratio 30, no. 2. see also Rouet de Journel, op. cit., no. 991
302Homily 5, in Epist. ad Hebraeos; Journel, no. 1218
303Enchiridion, no. 108; Journel, no. 1218
304Com. in Tim., 1:15; cf. Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " col. 1489-91, in which we find a collection of patristic texts which testify that the Incarnation is for the redemption of the human race. See also Petavius, De incarnatione, Bk. II, chap. 9.
306Cf. Billot, De incarnatione, thesis 3; A. Michel, Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " col. 1500-1506. Father Chrysostom, O.F.M., wrote an article entitled: "Is the redemption the motive of the incarnation?" On page 5 he asserts, and several Scotists agree with him, that according to Scotus there is neither a proximate end nor a proximate motive for the Incarnation; for God willed it because of His own excellence, as being the greatest manifestation of His goodness.
We reply to this by saying that, nevertheless, in Sacred Scripture not only the ultimate and most common end of God's works is assigned for the Incarnation, but also its proximate and special end, which is our redemption. At least the texts of Scripture seem to state clearly that the redemption is the principal and proximate motive, and hence the indispensable condition of the Incarnation.
307Summa theol., IIIa, q. 1, a. 3.
308 Ibid., Ia, q. 19, a. 6, ad 1.
309Suarez argues that the Incarnation was willed for two ultimate ends, namely, because of its excellence and for the redemption of the human race.
In refutation of Suarez, cf. Gonet (Clypeus, De incarnatione, disp. V, par. 3), who says: "The same effect cannot proceed from two causes that are each totally efficient and adequate; otherwise the effect would and would not depend on each cause for the same reason; but there is the same reason for each of the totally final and adequate causes." Hence the two above-mentioned ends are not coordinated, as Suarez would have it, but they are subordinated to each other, in such manner that the redemption of the human race is the proximate reason of the Incarnation.
Moreover, this opinion posits, like that of Scotus, mutability and imperfection in God. God, who foresees everything from all eternity, had foreseen and permitted from all eternity Adam's sin, and therefore does not begin to have another motive for His willing, but He persists immutably in the motive once chosen.
Finally, in the opinions of both Suarez and Scotus, the first decree abstracting from the condition of passible flesh cannot be efficacious, because the efficacious decree is directed to the object right at the moment to be produced, as it truly will be in time. Hence the Thomists, in opposition to Scotus and Suarez, admit only one efficacious decree of the Incarnation, willed by God in manifestation of His goodness by way of mercy for the redemption of man.
310De Trinitate, Bk. XIII, chap. 17.
311Summa theol., IIIa, q 24, a. 1
312 Ibid., Ia, q. 23, a. 5
314Com. in IIIam, q. 1, a. 3, no 6
315 Ibid.. no. 7.
316Summa theol.. IIIa, a. 7, q. 3.
317See St. Thomas, Com. in Sent., d. 41, q. 1, a. 4.
319Com. in Summam, IIIa, q. 1, a. 3, no. 7.
320 Ibid., no. 9.
323 Ibid., no. 10.
324See his Com. in III Sent., d. 7, q. 3. Cf. also Father Chrysostom's "Le motif de l'Incarnation, " in the Etudes franciscaines, 1913; also "La Redemption este-elle le motif de l'Incarnation, " in La France franciscaine, 1931, p. 10.
325Com. in Summam, IIIa, q. 1, a. 3, no. 5.
326 Ibid., no. 10
327God permits the elect to fall into sin, as in Peter's case, for the sole reason of causing them to be more humble. Thus "to them that love God[unto the end] all things work together unto good" (Rom. 8:28), and Augustine adds "even sins."
328Loc. cit., nos. 9 and l0.
329 Ibid., no. 10
330 Ibid., no. 9
331La Redemption est-elle le motif de l'Incarnation?, pp. 24 and 50
332Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 30, a. 2.
333The exact words of St. Thomas in this third article are: "Unde cum in Sacra Scriptura ubique incarnationis ratio ex peccato primi hominis assignetur, convenientius dicitur, incarnationis opus ordinatum esse a Deo in remedium contra peccatum." (Tr.)
335 Ibid., 24:16.
336 Ibid., 30:10
337Com. in Summam, IIa IIae, q. 30, a. 2.
338Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 30, a. 2.
339 Ibid., a. 4.
340Com. in Joann., 14:12; see also St. Thomas, op. cit., Ia IIae, q. 113, a. 9.
341Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 30. a. 4. See also Ia, q. 21, a. 4
342 Ibid., IIa IIae, q. 30, a. 2, 4.
343Collect for Tenth Sunday after Pentecost
344This thesis was developed by the author in the periodical Angelicum, 1930, pp. 289f., under the title: "Mercy was the motive of the Incarnation."
345Summa theol, Ia, q. 20, a. 4, ad 2.
346 Ibid., ad 1
347Com in IIa IIae q. 17, a. 5, no. 6.
348If certain Thomists of more recent times say that the Incarnation is subordinated to the redemption, they use the word subordination in a broad sense; for the eminent cause cannot be subordinated to its effect in the strict sense, but in some way it is ordained to produce it; otherwise divine omnipotence would be subordinated to creatures which it produced.
349Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 188, a. 6.
350I Cor. 3:23
351Cf. ad 3; also Ia, q. 20, a. 4, ad 1.
352Com. in lam, q. 22, a. 2, ad 2 and a. 4.
353These two possible worlds, the second of which God chose by one sole efficacious decree in all its component parts, may be illustrated by the following schema.
Innocent world to be preserved in its innocence: preservation of original justice = Christ not the Redemeer
Sinful world to be redeemed: Original justice with permission of original sin = reparation to be made = Christ the Redeemer.
Cf. E. Hugon, Le mystere de l'Incarnation, p. 75; also Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " col. 1504.
354Summa theol., Ia, q. 20, a. 4, ad 1.
356Blessing of paschal candle
357P.L., XXXVI, 539
358For example, that a certain man die, indeed, from a disease right at the moment when in the state of grace, and that he should have the grace of final perseverance, this depends on supernatural predestination; similarly, the end of the world, in the material sense, will come when the number of the elect is completed. Therefore it cannot be said that God willed the natural order and its events independent of the order of grace, and this latter independently of the order of the hypostatic union; but by one decree He willed this present world and its three orders.
359See God, His existence, II, 54
360John 3 16.
361I Cor. 1:27f. For this same reason, frequently in the supernatural order God by an inequality of graces compensates for the inequality of natural conditions; for this is what is meant when it is said in the beatitudes, as recorded in the Gospels: "Blessed are the pure in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven; blessed are the meek; blessed are they that mourn; blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake" (Matt. 5:3f.; Luke 6:20f.). Therefore we must not say: (1) God willed the natural order with its events; (2) the supernatural order; (3) the hypostatic union. But He first had in mind the present world as possible with all its subordinated parts and by a single decree chose it in preference to other equally possible worlds.
362Le Sauveur et son amour pour nous, p. 136f.
363Summa theol., Ia, q. 20, a. 4, ad 1.
365But this view of the Christian life completely harmonizes with that held by St. Francis of Assisi and St. Bonaventure. Scotus seems to take a somewhat different view of the Christian life, however, in his thesis on the motive of the Incarnation.
366Summa theol., IIIa. q. 62, a. 2.
370Cf P. Roschini, Mariologia, II, 40f.
372See Angelicum, January, 1942, pp. 97-103: "Ancora intorno alla ragione primaria dell'esistenza di Cristo."
373Com. in Ep. ad Tim. They are two very different questions, just as these two are: (1) Would this building remain intact if this column were removed? (2) If the architect had not willed this particular column in the building, what would he have ordered in its place for the permanence of the structure?
374For a complete examination of this problem in answer to recent objections, cf. the article "De motivo incarnationis, " pp. 7-45, in the Acta Acad. Romanae S. Thomae, 1945.
376Nestle's critical edition of St. John's Greek text has ten hamartian tou kosmou (Gr.)
377Rom. 5:15f. These words are quoted from the Vulgate, which differs somewhat from the text as given by St. Thomas in this article.
378Cf. the Sixth Council of Toledo, and the Council of Trent, Sess. VI, chap. 2; Denz., no. 794
379If there had been no original sin, then a number of persons would not have needed redemption, because they would have remained in the state of grace, in fact, of innocence; but in the others there would have been actual or personal sin, which is not transmitted except by example or by a sort of heredity. It must be noted that St. Thomas says in this fourth article: "It is certain that Christ came into this world... also to take away all sins that are subsequently added to original sin; not that all are taken away, and this is from men's fault, inasmuch as they do not adhere to Christ..., but because He offered what was sufficient for blotting out all sins."
382Hab. 3:2. This text is quoted by St. Thomas in the counterargument of this article
383See Tixeront, History of Dogmas, for an account of these heresies in their historical aspect
384Contra Arianos, II, 7
385Denz., nos. 54, 61, 705, concerning the definitions of the Church against the Arians. Cf. Dict. theol. cath., art. "Arianisme.
386Denz., nos. 85, 206, 223, 227, 271; definitions of the Church against Apollinaris
387Ibid., nos. 113, 168. Cf. also P. Jugie, Nestorius et la controverse Nestorienne; also Dict. theol. cath., art. "Union hypostatique, " col. 471, and art. "Nestorius"
388Denz., no. 1917
389Cf. Dict. theol. cath., art. "Eutyches."
390Ibid., art. "Kenose." This heresy is also known as the kenotic theory, from the Greek kenosis, which means "an emptying."
391Denz., no. 6.
392The Greek text reads: Homoosion toi patri, "of one and the same nature with the Father."
393Denz., nos. 85, 86.
394Ibid., no 40
395Ibid., no. 114
396Ibid., no. 118
397The Greek text reads: kai eis hen prosopon kai mian hupistasin
398Ibid., no. 148
399Ibid., no. 2031; proposition 31
400Ibid., no. 220
401Ibid., no. 115. St. Cyril's expression is: henosis physiche
402Ibid., no. 114 kath hypostasin
403The exact signification of the terms ousia, hypostasis, prosopon in the Greek Church, however, was the result of a gradual process of determination. In the Greek language prosopon signifies a theatrical mask or face, a figure used by actors to represent heroes, and therefore it often designates a dramatic person on the stage
404The Greek text reads: en duo physesin asygchytos
405Denz., no. 148. The concluding words of this quotation in the Greek read: eis en prosopon kai mian hypostasin.
406Ibid., nos. 219f.
407Ibid., no. 40
411I John 1:1.
412Cf. II Phys., chap. 1
413Similarly pantheism, since it confuses the divine nature with created natures, involves a contradiction, and de facto this theory means either that the world is absorbed in God, and then we have acosmism as taught by Parmenides, or pantheism; or else it means that God is absorbed in the world, as in the case of absolute evolutionism, a theory that maintains God is in a process of becoming in the world and never will be a reality.
414Denz., no. 220
415The Greek text is: henosis physike
416Denz., no. 114. The Greek words are: henosis kath hypostasin
417Ibid., nos. 114-18; henosis kath hypostasin
418Ibid., no. 117.
419 Ibid., no. 124
421 Denz., no. 113
422 Ibid., no. 148
423 Ibid., no. 40
425 Ibid., 1:14
426The expression sui juris as applied to the definition of person implies a subject to whom ultimately all the actions are attributed. It also means a subject that has a complete nature that is individualized, and consequently incommunicable as such to any other. Just what constitutes a subject sui juris is very much disputed in the schools of Catholic theology. When a subject is intelligent and sui juris it follows that it must be endowed with freedom, though it may not always be able to exercise this power. On this point, cf. Garrigou-Lagrange, II, 306
428Cf. Rouet de Journel, Enchiridion patristicum, Index theol., nos. 384f.
429Summa theol., Ia, q. 54, a. 1.
430Concerning the correlation prevailing between abstract terms and concrete terms, it must be said: just as humanity is that by which a man is a man, so personality is that by which a person is a person, and subsistence is that by which a suppositum is a suppositum; more briefly, subsistence or even personality is that by which a thing is a what or subject of attribution.
431 The words in parentheses are the translator's explanation.
432This fundamental doctrine concerning the suppositum is found in the writings of Aristotle. In his Perihermeneias (On Judgment), Bk. 1, lect. 3, 5, 8, the significance of the verb "is" in affirmative judgments is explained. In the Metaphysics, Bk. V, chap. 6, lect. 7, it is shown that every verb is resolved into the following parts of the verb "to be": "am, art, is, " and its participle.
The source of judgment is the verb "is." Thus, "Peter walks" signifies "Peter is walking, " or that Peter is the same real subject that is walking.
See also Met., chap. 7, lect. 9 of St. Thomas, no. 893, where we read: "Any verb whatever can be reduced to a form that includes the verb 'is.' Hence it is evident that there are as many modes of predication as there are modes of being, such as substantive, or quantitative, qualitative, active, passive, relative, and so forth. Thus the predicaments or categories of being are like different adornments of the verb 'is, ' as when we say: "Peter is substantially a man, quantitatively great, qualitatively wise, " and so forth.
Similarly, in Aristotle's Post. Analytics, Bk. II, lect. 10 of St. Thomas, on the third mode of per se predication, it is stated that first substance, or anything that subsists by itself (Peter, for instance), is not in another as in its subject, whereas second substance, as in the case of humanity, is attributed to Peter, as also are his accidents, although in another manner. The first mode of per se predication is the definition, the second is the necessary property, the third is first substance, the fourth is the proper cause which is of itself and immediately as such required for the production of its proper effect, as singing is required for a singer, or killing for a killer. On this point God, His existence, I, 379f. (Tr.)
St. Thomas says (Ia, q. 13, a. 12): "In every true affirmative proposition the predicate and the subjects signify in some way the same thing in reality, and different things in idea." Other citations on this point from St. Thomas are: Ia, q. 14, a. 14; q. 85, a. 5; IIIa, q. 2, a. 2, 6; q. 4, a. 2 (Cajetan's Comment.) q. 16, a. 1; q. 17, a. 2. Contra Gentes, Bk. 1, chap. 57.
Cf. also the Tabula aurea of the works of St. Thomas, under the word verbum, nos 77f.
We have treated this question at length in Le sens commun et la philosophie de l'etre. pp. 50, 320-58.
433Summa theol., Ia, q. 29, a. 3
434Ibid., Ia, q. 13, a. 9; IIIa, q. 77, a. 2.
435 De ente et essentia
436 Summa theol., Ia, q. 29, a. 3.
437If matter were that which is, and not that by which stones, plants, and animals are something material, materialism would be true: for then all bodies, even the human body, and man himself would be accidental modifications of this particular matter that exists by itself, which was the view of Thales, Anaximenes, and Heraclitus
438Summa theol., Ia, q. 29, a. 3 et ad 4.
440Ibid., Ia, q. 3, a. 3, ad 4; q. 19, a. 3, ad 4.; q. 29, a. 3, ad 4. De potentia, q. 9, a. 2, ad 2; Summa theol., IIIa, q. 72, a. 2. Cf. Tabula aurea, under the heading "Incommunicable." This question has been given considerable attention in the book entitled Le sens commun, pp. 320-58.
441See the appendix to this article, concerning the various theories about personality
442See Cajetan's commentary, nos. 6f.
443Ibid., no. 8
445Ibid., no. 9
446Summa theol., IIIa., q. 2, a. 2, ad 2; see also IIIa, q. 4, a. 2, ad 2 et ad 3.
447cf. God, His Existence. I, 216, no. 19
448Denz., nos. 1655f.
449 Ibid., no 1917
450Summa theol., Ia., q. 29, a. 1, which gives the definition of person; a. 3, which asks whether the name "person" should be applied to God; also IIIa, q. 2, which inquires whether the union took place in the person.
451Denz., no. 1810
452See Aristotle's Ethics, definition of virtue.
453Magna moralis, Bk. VII, De bona fortuna
456 Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 17, a. 6, ad 3
459Com. in Epist. ad Phil., 1:21
460 Les Pensees, p. 267
461Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 17, a. 6, ad 3
463Denz., no. 1917
466 Summa theol., IIIa, q. 1, a. 1
467 Ibid., IIIa, q. 9, a. 22.
468Ibid., q. 18, a. 5
469 kath hypostasin
470Denz., no. 114
471 nos. 1665f.; see also Vacant, Etudes sur le Concile du Vatican, I, 130. Gunther was a German priest born in 1873, who sought to put new life into theology by means of a Kantian inspired philosophy
472Denz., no. 1655
473Cf. Zigliara's Ontologia, chap. 29
474Summa theol., Ia, q. 5, a. 2, C
476Ibid., no. 1893
477Ibid., no. 1897
478Ibid., nos. 1915f.
479Ibid., nos. 1908
480 Ibid., nos. 1911
481Ibid., no. 1917. This philosophical system about person was condemned by the Holy Office, December 14, 1887
482Le sens commun, pp. 320-23.
483Renouvier, Logique, II, 493.
484Revue de philosophie, December, 1938
485De veritate, q. 27, a. 1, ad 8. See also Contra Gentes, Bk. II, chap. 52
486Cf. I Sent., d. 19, q. 2, a. 2
487De veritate fundamentali philosophiae Christianae, pp. 23f.
488Cf. III Sent., d. 1, q. 1, nos. 5f. According to Scotus, person and personality are negative notions, since not being assumed by a higher principle constitutes the formal notion of person or personality in human beings. Since the human nature of Christ was actually and aptitudinally such that it was assumed by the person of the Word, it did not have its own person or personality. As Garrigou-Lagrange points out, therefore the hypostatic union for Scotus consisted in something negative in this respect. The term "singular" is applied to anything that cannot be multiplied numerically. (Tr.)
489 Disp. Met., disp. 34, sects. 1, 2, 4; disp. II, sect. 3.
490Cajetan, 4, a. 2, no. 8.
491Cf. Capreolus, Com in IV Sent., d. 5, q. 3, a. 3, pp. 109-19
492De Verbo incarnato, q. 2, pp. 75, 84, 140. See also Dict. theol. cath., art. "HypoStase cols. 411f.
494 Summa theol., Ia, q. 3, a. 4
497Com. in III Sent., d. 5, q. 3, par. 2, p. 105
499Ibid., q. 4, a. 2, nos. 3, 13.
500Ibid., nos. 15f.
501Ibid., d. 5, q. 3, par. 2, p. 105
502Cursus phil., phil. nat., q. 7, a. 1
503Ont., chap. 29.
504De Verbo incarn., q. 2, par. 1, p. 125
505Summa theol., Ia, q. 29, a. 3
506Cursus phil, m phil. nat., q. 7, a. 1
507Our conception of God's independence is negative, because our first knowledge is of creatures that are dependent on God. So also we conceive spiritual beings negatively, as immaterial, because our first knowledge is of material things. On the contrary, God and the angels, whose first knowledge is of spiritual beings, must conceive material beings negatively, as non-spiritual. See in which Garrigou-Lagrange points out that self-subsisting Being is the supreme truth from which all God's attributes are derived. (Tr.)
508 The One God, loc. cit.
509Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, a. 2, ad 2.
510Ibid., q. 17, a. 2.
512Billot, De Verbo incarn., q. 2, p. 125; also Zigliara, Summa phil., Ontologia, chap. 29, par. 4.
Father Billot says that Scotus and Father Tiphanus, S.J., hold almost similar views on this question. The latter, in his work entitled De hypostasi et persona, chaps. 10-24, holds that there is merely a logical distinction between nature and suppositum, inasmuch as a complete and singular nature is a person by the very fact that it is a whole in itself, or because it is not either actually or aptitudinally united with another suppositum. According to Father Billot the arguments against Scotus are equally valid against Tiphanus on this point, concerning the concept of person.
This seems true, as also Father Hugon observes in his De Verbo incarnato., q. 2, a. 2. But Tiphanus, op. cit., chap. 7, differs from Scotus in that he holds a real distinction between essence and existence, which he says is fundamental and clearly taught by St. Thomas.
Opinions similar to that of Scotus are held by Franzelin, De Verbo incarnato., props. 7-9; Galtier, De incarnatione et redemptione, thesis 15.
Hugon, De Verbo incarnato., q. 2, a. 2, par. 5, sums up all the arguments against the aforesaid opinion of Scotus as follows: "The constituent of that which is most perfect in nature cannot consist in something negative. But person, as St. Thomas says (Ia, q. 29, a. 3), is that which is most perfect in nature. Therefore the constituent of person cannot consist in something negative."
513Disp. Metaph., disp. 34, sects., 1, 2, 4, nos. 9f.: De incarn., disp. 11, sect. 3. Almost similar views are held by De Lugo De incarn., disp. 12, sect. 1, nos. 1-4. Vasquez, Com. in Summam theol., IIIa, q. 4, a. 2, disp. 31, chap. 6
516Acta Apost., Sedis, VI, 383
517Cursus philosophicus, loc. cit.
518Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, ad 1.
519Ibid., q. 2, a. 5, ad 1
520 Ibid., Ia, q. 45, a. 4
521Similarly the period serves a useful purpose in terminating a proposition, such as: This is My body. For if the period is not inserted at the end, the proposition is not considered complete, and someone could add an adjective, such as figurative, which would completely change the meaning of the proposition, because then the body of Christ would be in the Eucharist only figuratively and not really
522Cursus phil., phil. nat., q. 7, a. 1.
523De Verbo incarn., q. 2, pp. 75-84, 137f.
524Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, and similar passages
525 De Verbo incarn. p. 88
526It was Euclid who gave us the postulate, that a point is that which has position but not magnitude. (Tr.)
527Roundness is indeed a mode that is really distinct from quantity, for the same quantity could have another shape. But there could be no roundness without quantity, whereas in the Eucharist the quantity of the bread is without substance
528De Verbo incarn., pp. 89, 140
529Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2.
530De Verbo incarnato., p. 69
531Com in IIIam., d. 5, q. 3 (toward the end).
532Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, ad 1
533Ibid., q. 17 (in toto)
534Ibid., q. 16
535Ibid., q. 2.
537Ibid., q. 17.
538De generatione, disp. 15, q. 3
539Summa theol., Ia, q. 50, a. 2, ad 3
540By the principium quod is meant the suppositum or. person that performs the act.(Tr.)
541Quodlibet 2, q. 2, a. 4
543Cf. Angelicum, June, 1945, pp. 83-55
544I grandi commentatori di S. Tomasso.
545De Verbo incarnato., p. 116.
546Ibid., pp. 118f
547Summa theol., Ia, q. 29, a. 2; De potentia, q. 9, a. 1; I Sent., d. 23, q. 1, a. 1. In the above-quoted text it is manifest that subsistence or personality is distinct from existential substance or from subsisting; for St. Thomas says in this text: "Subsistence or personality is said of that whose act is to subsist"; therefore it is not identified with the act that is received in it. In other words, subsistence is an abstract term that does not correspond to this concrete that is said to subsist, but to this concrete that is the suppositum.
548De generatione, disp. 15, q. 3
549Objection. But subsistence or personality also is related to the subject as that by which. Therefore the difficulty remains.
Reply. Personality is that by which a person is formally a what, or a subject of itself separately existing. But essence is that which constitutes the being in a certain species and existence places it outside nothing. Hence there is no parity of argument, for personality is that by which most formally anything is constituted a what but it differs from a person as the abstract term does from the concrete term.
550Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, ad 3
551Cf. Penido, Le role de l'analogie en theologie dogmatique, Part II, chap. 1, La Trinite.
552Com. in IIIam Sent., d. 5, q. 3, a. 3, no. 2
553Cf. no. 5, the refutation of Scotus' opinion.
554Com. in IIIam, q. 4, a
555Cajetan, loc. cit., nos. 6-11, gives the following interpretation of St. Thomas' doctrine on this point: "We must say that there is some real difference between this humanity and this man, so that man includes something real... whereby this man is susceptible of both the act of existing, as of real filiation.... For this difference between this man and this humanity belongs to the nature of things... and for this reason cannot be reduced to a difference in the various ways of understanding the terms, or to a difference according as it is outside the scope of connotated things, whatever these may be; for this difference precedes all extrinsic things and modes of understanding and signifying. The difference does not come within the scope of negations, for a negation does not constitute the real entity of the subject.... Hence there must be something positive included in this man that is not included in this humanity, by which this man becomes primarily and directly susceptible of this thing (existence) of which humanity is not capable."
But this positive element must be that whereby first substance is what exists separately of itself. Therefore it must be something substantial, like a terminus, as the point is the terminus of the line. Cajetan says (loc. cit., no. 11): "Just by dividing a line each part acquires a new terminus in the genus of quantity... for each part becomes actually a whole (something)." Likewise, as Aristotle teaches (De anima, Bk. II, chap. 2, lect. 4 of St. Thomas): "just by dividing an imperfect animal, such as a worm, we get two actual substances, two animals." St. Thomas considers that this analogy applies to the Incarnation, for he says (III Sent., d. 5, q. 3, a. 3): "What is assumed, is drawn to something more complete, existing incomplete before its assumption; and this is contrary to the notion of person, which has the maximum of completion."
And St. Thomas concedes (Ibid., ad 3): "If Christ were separated from His assumed humanity, solely by such separation this humanity would become this man." To the objection that, from the thing separated nothing is acquired by the thing separated, St. Thomas replies: "Separation gives to each of the parts totality, and in things of continued quantity it also gives to each of the parts actual existence. Hence, in the supposition that Christ were to cease as man, that man would subsist of himself in the rational nature, and by this very fact would be entitled to be called a person, " just as in things of continued quantity, by the fact that the part separated from the whole is terminated, and has actual existence, so in the substantial order, a singular nature by the fact that it is terminated receives actual existence.
556 Bk. IV, chap. 43.
557Com. in Iam, q. 3 a. 5
558 d. 4, a. 1
559 a. 2.
560 2, ad 1
561 q. 35, a. 5, ad 1
562Ibid., q. 4, a. 2, ad 3; see also q. 4, a. 1, c. et ad 3; q. 2, a. 3, ad 2.
563Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chap. 43.
564Com. in I Sent., d. 23, q. I, ad. I. See also De potentia, q. 9, a. I; Summa theol., Ia, q. 29, a. 2; III Sent., d. 5, q. 3, a. 3, c. et ad 3.
565Summa theol., Ia, q. 39, a. 3, ad 4
566Com. in I Sent., d. 73, q. l, a. 4, ad 4. See also I Sent., d. 4, q. 2, a. 2, ad 4.
567Com. in IIIam, q. 4, a. 2, no. 8
568Cf. Billuart, Index, the word "person"; also his Dialectica, Bk. II, chap. 1, art. 2 (19); III, chap. 2; Ibid., 21, nos. 5, 6; Ibid., 22, no. 7. Also Zigliara, Della luce intellectuale, II, Bk. III, no. 374. Gonzales, Logica, p. 51; St. Bonaventure says something similar in his Com. in IIIam Sent., d. 4, a. 1, q. 3, and IV Sent., d. 8, q. 1.
569Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, ad 3.
570Ibid., ad I.
571Ibid., Ia, q. 50, ad 3
572Quodl., II, q. 2, a. 4.
573Ibid., II, a. 3, 4; Com. in II Sent., d. 3, a. 1, 2.
574Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, ad 1
575Quodl., II, a. 3, 4
576De generatione, disp. 15, q. 3.
577Cf. Dict. theol. cath., art. "hypostase, " col. 418
578Contra Gentes, Bk. II, chap. 52
579Summa theol., Ia, q. 54, a. 1, ad 2.
580Ibid., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, ad 3.
581Ibid., q. 19, a. 1, ad 4.
582Ibid., Ia, q. 29, a. 1, 2; also IIIa, q. 2, a. 2.
583Ibid., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, ad 3.
584Ibid., q. 17, a. 2.
585Ibid., q. 19
586De Verbo incarnato, p. 118
587Cf. I Sent. d. 23, q. I, a. I; De pot., q. 9, a. 1. Summa theol., Ia, q. 29, a. 2.
588One per se, or unity per se, is said of a being that is specifically one, lion, and not a combination of several specific essences. (Tr.)
589Post Anal., Bk. I, lect. 10.
590Etudes carmelitaines, April, 1936, pp. 125f., art. "Recherche de la personne."
591Com. in IIIam, q. 4, a. 2, no. 8.
592De Verbo incarnato, p. 351.
593Denz., no. 114.
594Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, a. 3, ad. 2., for a more complete explanation of the notion of person
595Denz., no. 216
596Cf. Com. in II Sent., d. 6, q. 2, a. 3.
597Cf. ad I, ad 2, ad 3
598Denz., no. 114
599See replies to objections in this article, especially ad 2 and ad 3
600See his commentary on this article, no. 10
601Cf. Post. Anal., Bk. 1, chap. 4 (lect. 10 of St. Thomas).
602The expression per se as used here, means that the humanity is in the Word as a substance, and not as in a subject of inhesion, in that the Word has given to the humanity, not only individualization, but also subsistence and existence. (Tr.)
603Com. in IIIam, q. 2, a. 6, no. 9.
604See reply to the second objection of this article
605See a. 8 of this question.
606In fact, Father de la Taille says that the grace of union may be called created, whereas St. Thomas and the majority of theologians say that this grace is uncreated. See infra q. 6, a. 6; De veritate q. 29, a. 2 (about end); also the Tabula aurea of the works of St. Thomas, under the word "Christ, " nos. 68f.
607Cf. Dict, theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " cols. 1525f.
608Cf. Summa theol., Ia, q. 45, a. 3.
609Cf. Com. in III Sent., d. 2, q. 2, a. 2, quaestiuncula prima
610Summa theol., Ia, q. 45, a. 3
611Ibid., a. 2. ad 2
612Ibid., a. 3, c. Transitive action is motion as it is coming from the agent, and passion is motion as it is in the patient. Therefore, when motion is removed from action and passion, nothing remains but a relation of dependence operates by an action that is not formally transitive
613See reply to the second objection of this article
614Cf. IIIa, q. 17, a. 2, for a clearer explanation of this truth
615See reply to the fourth objection of this article
616De consideratione Bk. V, chap. 8.
617Cf. IIIa, q. 2, a. 9, obj 3
618Ibid., ad 3.
619Ibid. q. 2, a. 2, ad 2.
622Com in IIIam, 2, a. 9.
624Cf. argumentative part of this article, and ad 1.
625 Little Office of B.V.M., Ant. at Benedicturs
626De praed. sanct., chap. 15
628Summa theol., Ia, q. 23, a. 5.
629Denz., nos. 65, 85, 88, 233
632Cf. IIIa, q. 2, a. 2, ad 3
633St. Thomas seems to say something more (III Sent., d. 4, q. 3, a. 1, ad 6.), for he writes: "The Blessed Virgin did not merit the Incarnation, but, presupposing the Incarnation as an established fact, she merited that it should take place through her not by condign merit, but by congruous merit, inasmuch as it was becoming for the Mother of God to be most pure and most perfect." On careful consideration, however, this way of presenting the case does not make any addition to the previous statement. It merely asserts that the Blessed Virgin merited that the Incarnation should take place through her, inasmuch as she merited that degree of purity and holiness, which befitted the Mother of God, and no other virgin could merit this, because no other virgin received from her conception this original plentitude of grace. So the Blessed Virgin Mary in the order of execution could have prepared herself for the divine maternity, but she could not have merited it, for, such being the case, she would have merited the Incarnation.
634Cf. Gonet, disp. 7, a. 3.
635Summa theol., Ia IIae, q. 114, a. 9; De veritate q. 29, a. 6.
636See solution of objections in Gonet, disp. 7, a. 3; Billuart, diss. 5, a. 1.
637Cf. Salamenticenses disp., 7, dub. 2, par. 7.
638We are here concerned with circumstances that are necessarily connected according to a hypothetical necessity with the Incarnation in the concrete, as it is willed by God, such as the conception and birth of Jesus
639That Christ merited what preceded His conception presents no difficulty, and so He merited the redemption of the just of the old Testament. The reason is that merit is not a physical but a moral cause; a physical cause exerts no influence before it exists, whereas God, foreseeing and willing the future merits of Christ, gave grace to those who were justified before the coming of Christ.
640Cf. IIIa, q. 19, a. 3
641Com. in IIIam, disp. 7, dub. 2, par. 7, no. 53
642Luke 1 78
644Denz., no. 1641. Bull Ineffabilis Deus
645Because of this principle, St. Thomas at times feared to affirm the privilege of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, when, for instance, he did not have in mind her preservative redemption.
646Summa theol., IIIa, q. 27, a. 2, ad 2.
648Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, ad 2.
649Cf. Billuart and Gotti on this difficulty, who discuss the problem better than Gonet and the Salmanticenses
650By the word "adult" the Catholic Church understands those who have come to the use of reason. (Tr.)
651Whereas merit refers to divine justice, at least according to an amicable right, prayer as such not necessarily meritorious, refers to divine mercy
652Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, a. 11, c (end).
653Ibid., ad 3
654Com. in III Sent., d. 4, q. 3, a. 1, ad 6
655Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, a. 11 c (middle).
656Ibid., q. 31, a. 5; a. 32, a. 4, c.
657Ibid., Ia, q. 45, a. 5.
658 Cf. Dict. theol. cath., art. "Incarnation, " cols. 1509 Also art. "Marie, " col. 2362. Cf. also John of St. Thomas, Gonet, Salmanticenses, Contenson.
659For a fuller explanation of this distinction, which is called a virtual minor distinction, see The One God, pp. 168f.; also God, His Existence, II, 203-46. (Tr.)
660Cf. IIIa, q. 3, a. I, ad 2, quaestiuncula 3a
661Ibid., ad 1
662Ibid., ad 3
663Ibid., ad 1, ad 2, ad 3.
664Cf. ad 2.
665Cf. Ia, q. 3, a. 3
666Cf. IIIa, q. 3, a. 2, 4
667Denz., no. 285
668Cf. IIIa, q. 3, a. 3, ad 1, ad 2.
669Ibid., a. 1, ad 2. See also Penido, Le role de l'analogie en theologie dogmatique, PP 337f.
670The Deity is not communicated internally inasmuch as it is terminated by paternity. Thus in the figure that represents the Holy Trinity, in the equilateral triangle, the first angle that is formed communicates indeed to the second and third angles its superficies, but not itself, nor its superficies so far as this latter is terminated by itself. Thus it is that this same superficies is terminated by the three angles that are really distinct from one another and are not really distinct from their common superficies
671Summa theol., Ia, q. 32, a. 2
672Ibid., a. 1
673Denz., no. 282. See also no. 422, profession of faith enjoined upon the Waldensians
674The entire reply should be read
675Cf. ad 8.
676Consult the Thomist theologians for the solution of the objections raised by Scotus
677Cf. ad 3, which should read: "It would not be necessary (non oporteret), " according to the Leonine edition.
678Cf. Summa theol., Ia, q. 36, a. 4, ad 2; q. 39, a. 3; IIIa, q. 3, a. 6, ad 1; a. 7, ad 2.
679This analogy enables us to see more clearly that adoptive sonship is a certain participated likeness of eternal natural sonship. See a. 5, ad 2, of this question. St. Paul expresses the same analogy in the following text: "God predestinated us to be made conformable to the image of His Son. that He might be the first-born among many brethren" (Rom. 8:29).
680Read the text of St. Thomas, the second reason
682Com. in Ep. ad Rom
683Cf. supra, a. 5, ad 2.
684Ibid., IIIa, q 23, a. 1
685Ibid., a. 2.
686Ibid., ad 3. Cf. Ia, q. 93, a. 4, ad. 2; IIa IIae, q. 45, a. 6; IIIa, q. 3, a. 5, ad 2; a. 8; q. 39, a. 8, ad 3; q. 45, a. 4
687Cf. IIIa, q. 1, a. 3, ad 3.
688The obediential power in itself implies only a non-repugnance to elevation, because God's power to elevate is limited only by repugnance. Thus in every individualized human nature, such as in Peter and Paul, there is an obediential power for the hypostatic union, and this applies even to the angelic nature; but besides the obediential power there can be a certain fitness in the nature. But besides the obediential power in our intellect to be raised to the supernatural order and hence to the beatific vision, there is a certain fitness in the intellect, which is not absolutely the same as the obediential power or capacity of being raised to this order. This point is not sufficiently taken note of by some theologians, when they read in the works of St. Thomas (Ia q. 12, a. 1) of the natural desire of seeing God in His essence
689Com. in III Sent., d. 2, q. 1, a. 1.
691Heb. 2:10, 16f.
692Wherefore only a rational nature or intellectual nature is capable of the merit and satisfaction that are required in offering the sacrifice of redemption, and this sacrifice had to be offered by one whose nature is specifically the same as the human race that had to be redeemed.
693Com. in III Sent., d. 2, q. 1, a. 1
694Cf. IIIa, q. 10, a. 4, ad 3.
695Cf. ad 3
696Cf. Ia, q. 64, a. 2
697But the devil, after his confirmation in sin, cannot consider anything previously not considered about the sin. There is only one way for him to return to God, which is by humility and obedience, and pride makes him unwilling to accept this way, even though it were offered to him
698Summa theol., Ia, q. 3, a. 3.
699Ibid., IIIa, q. 4, a. 1, ad 3
700Cf. Ia, q. 3, a. 3
701Contra Gentes, Bk. II, chap. 52
702Denz., no. 217
703Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, a. 2, ad 2. Cf. Cajetan, who in his famous commentary on this article gave his interpretation of St. Thomas' teaching on personality. We have already (supra, q. 2, a. 2) expounded the doctrine of St. Thomas on personality, and there is no need of again referring to it.
704Contra Gentes, Bk. II, chap. 2: "In intellectual substances (and in every creature), there is a difference between existence and what is."
705Com. in IIIam, q. 4, a. 2, no. 7
706Ibid., no. 8.
707Contra Gentes, Bk. II, chap. 52
708Objection. But Peter is not his personality.
Reply. I concede the statement. But personality is a most formal part of Peter, formally constituting Peter as a person, thus enabling him to receive existence
709Matt. 1:21f. Cf. infra, q. 16, a. 1
710These personalities or subsistent relations are only virtually distinct from the divine nature or essence. See God, His Existence, II, 7f. Also The One God, pp. 303-5. There is also a virtual distinction between God's absolute subsistence and the relative subsistences of the divine persons. The human nature was united with the relative subsistence of the Word, for, as the absolute subsistence of God cannot denote incommunicability of perseity to the other persons, all. three persons would have assumed the human nature, which is contrary to revelation. (Tr.)
711Cf. infra, q. 16, a. 1.
713The human nature can be considered apart from its individualizing notes, but it cannot exist separated from them; for it implies common matter, that is, bones and flesh, which can exist only if they are these particular bones and this particular flesh. (Cf. Met., Bk. VII, chap. 15, no. 2.) On the contrary, being, one, true, good, do not claim in their definition common matter, and can exist apart from singular sensible things.
714I Cor. 3:22..
715Feast of Ascension, Hymn for Matins
717Summa theol., IIIa, q. 2, a. 2, ad. 2
718Denz., nos. 20, 216, 255, 344, 393, 462.
719Adversus haereses, Bk. I, chap. 24
721I John 4:2
725Contra Marcionem, Bk. III, chap. 8
726Adversus haereses, Bk. V, chap. 20.
728Denz., no. 710. This heresy is recalled in the decree for the Jacobites
735I Cor. 15:47.
736Cf. ad I.
737Cf. IIIa, q. 50, a. 1. The entire article ought to be read.
738Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chap. 30.
739He was so called because of his having been appointed bishop of Avila. (Tr.)
740The Catholic Encyclopedia says of him that he was a Franciscan whose origin and nationality are unknown. (Tr.)
741Cf. IIIa, q. 54, a. 2.
742Denz., no. 718.
743Billuart, De Verbo incarnato
745I John I: 7. See also I Pet. 1:2
746Denz., no. 876.
747Ibid., no. 550
748Cf. IIIa, q. 54, a. 2, especially the argumentative part, and the replies to the second and third objections
749Ibid., a. 3, ad 3.
750The author means only that amount of blood that was required for reassumption. (Tr.)
751Denz., no 876
752Summa theol., IIIa, q. 5, a. 3, ad 3. 3
753Denz., nos. 216, 223, 227, 271, 710.
758Denz., no. 204
759Ibid., no. 205.
760Cf. infra, IIIa, q. 33, a. 2, in which St. Thomas asks whether Christ's body was animated at the first moment of its conception. He answers in the affirmative, giving as his reason that for the conception to be attributed to the Son of God, as we say in the Apostles' Creed, "who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, " We must say that the body itself of Christ, When it was conceived, was assumed by the Word of God. But now in this first article it is shown that the Word assumed the body through the intermediary of the soul without which the body would not have been a human body
St. Thomas also says (loc. cit.): "In the generation of other men, he is first of all a living thing, and afterward an animal, and after that a man (so that animation or passive conception is completed after the inceptive passive conception of the embryonic body), because the body is successively formed and disposed for the soul...; but Christ's body, on account of the infinite power of the agent was perfectly disposed instantaneously. Wherefore, at once and in the first instant it received a perfect form, that is, the rational soul." Nevertheless the period of gestation was not shortened. Even in accordance with the present condition of medical science, the hypothesis can very safely be admitted which teaches that the ordinary process is for the spiritual soul not to be created and united with the embryonic body until one month after the conception of the embryonic body. The dogmatic definition of the Immaculate Conception affirms nothing that is contrary to this hypothesis, for it is concerned solely with the preservation of the person of the Blessed Virgin Mary from original sin; but the person does not exist prior to the existence of the spiritual soul. The dogmatic definition is not concerned with the question of the first moment of the conception of the body as distinct from its animation.
761Denz., no. 204
762Cf. IIIa, q. 33, a. 3.
763Denz., nos. 63, 85, 88, 233.
764Summa theol., IIIa, q. 33, a. 3.
765Cf. IIIa, q. 50, a. 2, 3, where this statement is made clearer
766The Greek word nous corresponds to "intellect, " whereas psyche refers to the sensitive soul
767Denz., no. 204
768Cf. ad 2
769Cf. Ia, q. 85, a. 7; IIIa, q. 31, a. 5. Also Tabula aurea, under the word "anima, " nos. 69, 72, 73.
770Cf. Ia, q. 76, a. 5
771Aristotle, De anima, Bk. II, chap. 9
772Summa theol., Ia, q. 85, a. 7.
773Ibid., IIIa, q. 31, a. 5.
774De veritate, q. 24, a. 8, ad 6
775Elementa philosophiae, I, no. 461
776Summa theol., IIIa, q. 33, a. 2, 3
777Denz., nos. 204, 205; also nos. 63, 85, 88, 233
778De fide orthod., Bk. III, chap. 2 (about the end); see also IIIa, q. 33, a. 2, sed contra
779Denz., no. 205: "If anyone says or thinks that the body of our Lord Jesus Christ was first formed in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and that afterward God, the Word, and the soul were united with it, as if it had already existed, let him be anathema." Thus St. Gregory says (Moral., Bk. XVIII, chap. 27): "As soon as the angel announced it, as soon as the Spirit came down, the Word was in the womb within the womb the Word was made flesh." St. Thomas says: "For the conception to be attributed to the very Son of God, as we confess in the Creed, when we say, Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, we must say that the body itself, in being conceived, was assumed by the Word of God. Now it has been shown above (q. 6 a. 1, 2) that the Word of God assumed the body by means of the soul, and the soul by means of the spirit" (IIIa, q. 33, a. 2), because it is only by means of the rational soul that the flesh is human (cf. Ibid., ad 3). If the divine maternity were to terminate in the conception of the flesh that is not united with the Word, the Blessed Virgin would not be the Mother of God, but the mother of a man, who in losing afterward His own personality, would have received the divine personality.
780Cajetan says (Com. in IIIam, q. 6, a. 4, no. 3): "The proper matter of any form is said to be either in the process of becoming, and so it is prior even in time to the reception of the form; or else it is actually in being, and thus it is proper only at the very moment that it receives the form."
781Summa theol., IIIa, q. 33, a. 2, ad 3.
782Ibid., a. 4.
783Ibid., q. 27, a. 2.
784Elementa philosophiae, no. 536.
785Propedeutica ad psychologiam, p. 461 (Mss.).
786Cf. ad 1 (end).
787Cf. Ia, q. 23, a. 2. The whole of this article should be read, as also the replies to the first and second objections
788Cf. IIIa, q. 2, a. 7
789Ibid., q. 2, a. 10
790Ibid., q. 6, ad 2
791Com. in III Sent., d. 2, q. 2., quaestiuncula Ia
792Ibid., q. 3
793Summa theol., Ia, q. 45, a. 3; IIIa, q. 2, a. 7.
794Ibid., IIIa, q. 2, a. 7.
795Ibid., Ia, q. 45, a. 2
796Ibid., a. 3. Transitive action is motion as coming from the agent, and passion is motion that is in the patient. Hence with the removal of action and passion, there is nothing left but a relation of real dependence
797Com. in III Sent., d. 2, q. 2, quaestiuncula Ia.
798Cf. IIIa, q. 16, 17
799Ibid., q. 17, a. 2
800Cf. L. B. Gillon, O.P., Angelicum: "La notion de consequence de l'union hypostatique dans le cadre de la IIIe pars. q. 2-26."
802Clypeus theol. thom., de incarn., disp. II
803Com. in IIIam, d. 13, q. 1, no. 7.
804Dict. theol. cath., art. "Jesus-Christ, " cols. 1274-85. See also E. Hugon, Le mystere de l'incarnation, part 4, chap. 1; also Garrigou-Lagrange, Le Sauveur; Monsabre Expose du dogme catholique, conference 40
805Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 81, a. 8. The Greek word for holy is a hagios as though meaning earthless
807Com. in Joan., Bk. IV, chap. 29
808Oratio 30, no. 31 (cf. Rouet de Journel, no. 995).
809De fide orthod., Bk. III, chap. 3 (Rouet de Journel, no. 1842
811Com. in Joan., tract. 108, no. 5
812De Trinitate. Bk. XV, chap. 26, no. 46 (Rouet de Journel, no. 1680). See also Council of Frankfort (Denz., no. 311). This council says: "Christ is by nature anointed, but we are by grace; because in Him was the fullness of the divinity." Otherwise there would be only an accidental difference in accordance with the degree of grace between Christ's sanctification and ours.
813Summa theol., IIIa, q. 6, a. 6
814Ibid., q. 7, a. 1.
815Ibid., q. 22, a. 2, ad 3.
816Comp. theol., chap. 214; Matt. 3:17. Even though Christ's soul were not adorned with habitual grace, these words of God the Father would still be true.
817Summa theol., IIIa, q. 23, a. 4.
818Ibid., q. 24, a. 1, 2
819John 10:36. Catena aurea., Com. in Joan. 10:36
820Catena aurea, loc. cit
821Summa theol., IIIa, q. I, a. 1, 2
822It is almost impossible to give the concise equivalent in English of "principium quod." By this expression the Scholastics meant the suppositum or person that performs the act, in accordance with the axiom that actions are attributed either to the suppositum or to the person. (Tr.)
823Cf. IIIa, q. 15, a. 1.
825Oratio 30, no. 21
826In other words, the person of the Word sanctifies the human nature of Christ, because the person is divine.
827Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2
828Com. in IIIam, d. 13, q. 2
829Gonet, De incarnatione, disp. 12, a. 2, nos. 35, 44-53
830Cf. Salmanticenses, De incarnatione, disp. XIII, dub. 4, nos. 60, 62, 90. Nevertheless the Salmanticenses (Ibid., nos. 66, 70) say: "Christ could not merit de condigno supernatural rewards without habitual grace, " because in their opinion, as given in the places cited above: "Condign merit of any reward has a connatural tendency for this reward."
On this point, the Salmanticenses differ from Godoy, Gonet, Billuart, and a fortiori from Suarez, who unjustifiably holds that Christ could have merited de condigno the supernatural rewards without the assistance, by way of transient help, of supernatural and elevating grace (cf. Ibid., no. 92). Suarez says this because he admits against the Thomists, that there is in our nature an obediential potentiality that is not only passive and elevational, but also active.
831Com. in IIIam, d. 13
836Rouet de Journel, Enchiridion patristicum, Index theol., no. 394
837Com. in Ps. 44. (Journel, op. cit., no. 1208.)
838Dial. de SS. Trinitate (op. cit., no. 2088). P. G., LXXV, 1018
842De Trinit., Bk. XV, chap. 26, no. 46 (op. cit., no. 1680).
843Luke I: 35.
844Hom. 4 super Missus est, no. 5
845Summa theol., IIIa, q. 7, a. 1, ad 3.
846Ibid., ad 1.
847Ibid., q. 6, a. 6
848Ibid., q. 7, a. 1, ad 2.
850Summa theol., IIIa, q. 8, a. 5.
851De veritate, q. 29, a. 5, ad 4.
852De incarnatione, disp. 12, a. 2, no. 45.
853De incarnatione, disp. 8, a. 2, no. 2
854Cf. IIIa, q. 34, a. 1
855Ibid., q. 34, a. 3
856Ibid., a. 2, ad 3
857Ibid., Ia, q. 76, a. 4, ad 1
858Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 113, a. 8, ad 1
864cf. IIIa, q 7, a. 9f.
865This argument presupposes that created habitual grace is in Christ's soul. But we can invert the process of argumentation by appealing to Sacred scripture where it is asserted that infused virtues, such as charity and humility, were and are in Christ's most holy soul so as to prove likewise that this created habitual grace, which is the root of the infused virtues and the gifts, and which, for this reason, is called "the grace of the virtues and the gifts, " was and still is in the soul Of Christ (cf. IIIa, q 62, a. 2).
This argument in reverse now makes it clear that it would have been most unbefitting for Christ's most holy soul not to have had created habitual grace for then the infused virtues would have been in His soul without their proximate and normal foundation, or rather instead of the infused virtues there would have been in His soul only a transient supernatural help, functioning like a transient light of glory.
Hence, although the created habitual grace is not absolutely necessary, presupposing the actual presence of the increate grace of union (by which Christ's soul is already most holy), but only most fitting; nevertheless this fitness is such that its absence would be most unfitting; for it would mean that Christ's soul would then be imperfect, in fact, a sort of monstrosity in the supernatural order. On the contrary, when it is said that "it was fitting for God to create, rather than not to create, to raise us to the supernatural order, and will the Incarnation... rather than not to will such things, " then the absence of such would have meant no unfitness.
In this we see how very fitting it was for Christ to have habitual grace. Thus all due proportion preserved, it is fitting for the just to have the seven sacred gifts of the Holy Ghost. Otherwise their life of grace would be imperfect, which would be unbefitting as regards Providence that disposes all things sweetly and firmly. (Cf. Ia IIae, q. 68, a. 2.)
866Cf. infra, q. 15, a. 1, ad 5. Although Christ's detestation of sin was perfect, yet there could be no repentance in Him, simply because He could not sin.
867In somno Scipionis, Bk. I, chap. 8.
868Cf. IIIa, q. 15, a. 1, 2.
869Com. in IIIam, q. 7, a. 2, ad 3.
870The infused virtue of itself does indeed give intrinsic facility for its acts, but there may be an extrinsic difficulty because of inordinate passions, if the acquired correlative virtue is lacking, as in the case of the repentant drunkard in whom the acquired virtue of sobriety is wanting
871Cf. IIIa, q. 9, a. 4.
873Cf. IIIa, q. 15, a. 2
874Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 67, a. 1
875So say Gonet, Billuart, as also Suarez and Vasquez, but the latter on different grounds.
876Denz., no. 224
878Cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 12, ad 3.
879Ibid., q. 9, a. 4, and especially q. 12, a. 2, c; also ad 3
881Cf. IIIa, q. 34, a. 4
883Cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 4.
884However, in the case of the infused moral virtues, the imperfection of the discursive method of prudence enters in, and for this reason they are inferior to the gifts
889Cf. a. 1.
890Cf. IIIa, q. 34, a. 4.
892Stabat Mater. After Christ's death, the Blessed Virgin Mary, during her life on earth, made more sublime acts of faith and hope subjectively, but not objectively. Thus it is said that all Christ's acts were personally of infinite value subjectively, but His act of love on the cross was nobler objectively. Thus to teach the subject matter of theology is more meritorious than to be engaged in any other material pursuit, even though done under obedience; but to teach theology subjectively and personally is less meritorious when one is not actuated so much by charity.
894A.S.S., XXXVI, 319.
895Cf. IIIa, q. 80, a. 2.
896Ibid., q. 15.
897Isa. 11:2. See also q. 7, a. 1.
898Although in this text of Isaias there is no mention made of the gift of godliness yet St. Paul refers to it when he says: "You have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry: Abba (Father)" (Rom. 8:15). The liturgy of Pentecost attests that the doctrine of the sacred sevenfold gifts is the constant tradition of the Church.
899Summa theol., Ia IIae, q. 68, a. 5
901See God, His Existence, II, 57.
902Cf. IIIa, q. 15, a. 10.
903Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 68, a. 6
904De Spiritu Sancto, Bk. I, chap. I.
906Denz., no. 378
908Preface of Mass
909Summa theol., IIIa, q. 17, a. 2.
910Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 111. a. 4; IIa IIae, q. 171.
911Ep ad Dardan., no. 287
912Com. in IIIam, d. 13.
913I Cor. 12:7f.
914Cf. Ia IIae, q. 111, a. 4; IIa IIae, q. 171.
915This faith is not the theological virtue, but a gift whereby those who instruct others in the principles of the faith are endowed with certainty
916I Cor. 12:4
917Summa theol., IIIa, q. 12, a. 1; q. 20, a. 2
918Cf. Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 111, a. 4
919Com. in I Cor., XII, lect 2.
923I Cor. 13:8
927Ibid., chaps. 15, 20
928I Cor. 13:8.
930This text is clarified from what St. Paul says in one of his epistles: "The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, who is given to us" (Rom. 5:5). St. Thomas explains (Ia, 9. q. 43, a. 3) that the mission of the Holy Ghost takes place in that the Holy Ghost becomes present in the soul in a new way by sanctifying grace, and by an increase of this grace. Hence Christ, inasmuch as He received the fullness of grace, is said not to have been limited in His reception of the Spirit.
931Cf. Rouet de Journel, Enchiridion patristicum, no. 394. See also St. Augustine's Com. in Joan., loc. cit.
934Cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 9, c
940Cf. ad 1. The whole of this article should be read
941Cf. infra, q. 35, a. 5.
944Versicle and response for Second Vespers of Assumption
945Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 24, a. 5
946Com. in Joan., Bk. XVI, lect. 10
947Summa theol., IIIa, q. 59, a. 6.
948Ibid., q. 7, a. 12
949Ibid. q. 6, a. 6.
951Com in III Sent., d 13, q 3
952Com. in Lucam, 2:40.
953Phys., disp. 13, par. 47.
956Cf. q. 6, a. 6.
957Thus a distinction can be made in our intellect, first in that it is a being and accident of the soul; secondly in that it is an intellect that is intentionally infinite, inasmuch as it regards universal truth. The same distinction must be made for the will, and even for habitual grace, which, as a grace, is a participation of the divine nature
958When it is said that this habitual grace is morally infinite, this means that it is not physically infinite, since it is a formal participation of the divine nature, but it means that it implies a dignity to merit and satisfy for us, a participated dignity from its personal union with the Word of God. But there is such a great difference between each kind of grace; for grace considered in the first sense is actually finite, although taken in the second or moral sense it is absolutely infinite, as when we say that Christ's merit is absolutely infinite in value
959De veritate, q. 29, a. 3, ad 3. See also IIa IIae, q. 29, a. 3, ad 3
960In this passage St. Thomas says: "Although the divine power can make something greater than the habitual grace of Christ, yet it could not make it to be ordained to anything greater than the personal union with the only begotten Son of the Father; and to this union, by the purpose of the divine wisdom, the measure of grace is sufficient."
961Cf. q. 7, a. 12, ad 1, where it is said that "Christ's grace is finite in its essence."
962Ibid., ad 2
963Ibid., a. 11, ad 2.
964Ibid., q. 19, a. 4
965Ibid., a. 12, ad 2; q. 10, a. 4, ad 3
967Cf. IIIa, q. 8, a. 5
969An editorial footnote to this article in the English Dominican translation remarks that perhaps we should read "infinity" instead of "unity." (Tr.)
970Denz., no. 471.
971Com. in IIIam, q. 7, a. 11, no. 5.
972This last example supposes that fire, according to the physics of the ancients, is a substance, namely, one of the four elements: earth, air, fire and water. Nowadays physicists look upon fire as an incandescent body, for example, like coal or vapor, resulting from the combustion of certain bodies. Thus they consider a flame to be a burning, lucent vapor, of greater or less intensity
973Com. in IIam IIae, q. 24, a. 7
974Cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 12, ad 2
975De veritate, q. 29, a. 3, ad 3.
976Com. in IIIam, q. 10, a. 4, ad 3.
977Com. in IIIam, q. 10, a. 4, ad 3
978Com. in IIam IIae, q. 24, a. 7
981Counterargument of St. Thomas
982Denz., no. 224
983Ibid., no. 122
985Cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 12, ad 3.
986Enchiridion patristicum, nos. 394, 399, 404, 405. See also IIIa, q. 10, on the beatific knowledge of Christ
987Cf. infra, q. 10
988Ibid., q. 10, a. 4, ad 3.
989Com. in IIIam, q. 7, a. 11, no. 2
990Ibid., no. 5 (the end).
991Ibid., no. 6
992Ibid., q. 10, a. 4, ad 2.
993Ibid., ad 3
994Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 113, a. 9, ad 2
995Ibid., IIIa, q. 7, a. 12, ad 2.
996Ibid., Ia, q. 25.
997Some think that such a consideration of God's merely absolute power is useless, because truly God can act only by His power as regulated by His wisdom. Reply. This consideration is not useless; it must be properly understood, namely, on the part of possible effects. This explains why certain effects are intrinsically possible, such as the annihilation of all creatures, both material and spiritual, although such effects may not be extrinsically possible on the part of the end and the agent, because God can have neither motive nor end in annihilating spiritual creatures.
998Com. in IIIam, d. 13
999Summa theol., IIIa, q. 10, a. 4, ad 3.
1000Ibid., q. 7, a. 12, ad 2
1001De Verbo incarnato, thesis 17, p. 208. Father Billot asks why God, as the author of grace, cannot be participated in various species of grace, since there is such participation of God as the author of nature. Against this thesis of Father Billot, it must be said that there is, indeed, a participation of God as the author of nature in divers natural species, through the intermediary of the divine ideas, but habitual grace is the immediate participation of the divine nature, or of the Deity as It is in Itself, that is, of God's intimate life. Hence for there to be two species of habitual grace is impossible. Moreover, if Christ's grace were of a higher species than ours, then His beatific vision would be of a higher species, because it is immediately specified by God Himself clearly seen, by the very Deity as It is in Itself. Therefore only different degrees of this vision are possible, and only God's uncreated and comprehensive vision of Himself transcends all other visions.
1002Summa theol.. IIa IIae, q. 24, a. 7.
1003Ibid., ad 2
1004De veritate, q. 29, a. 3 ad 3
1005Cf. ad 2.
1006Com. in IIIam, q. 7, a. 12, no. 24.
1007Denz., no. 224
1009Cf q. 7, a. 12, ad 2.
1010John 11:1f. See also Com. of St. Thomas on St. John's Gospel
1011Eph. 1:22f. cf. Rom. 12:4f.; I Cor. 12:13f.; Eph. 4:15f.; 6:5; Col. 4:18f. cf. also Father Voste, O.P., Com. in Ep. ad Eph., p. 289.
1014Cf. IIIa, q. 1, a. 3, ad 3.
1016Col. 2:10; Eph. 1:20; Col. 1:18
1017Col. 2:19. See also Eph. 4:11f.; 5:23
1018I Cor. 12:12f.; 10:16f.; also I Cor. 15:21f.
1019Denz., no. 809
1020Ibid., no. 936. cf. also St. Augustine's Book of 83 questions, chap. 9, no. 69; De civitate Dei, Bk. X, chap. 20
1024Cf. ad 1, and also IIIa, q. 13, a. 2, where we shall engage in a long discussion on the question of the physical and instrumental causality of Christ's soul. Likewise q. 43, a. 2: Whether Christ worked miracles by divine power. Also see IIIa., q. 48, a. 6: Whether Christ's passion brought about our salvation efficiently. And q. 49, a. 1: Whether we were delivered from sin through Christ's passion
1025Cf. St. Thomas, Com. in Ep. ad Cor., chap. 12; also De veritate, q. 29, a. 4, ad 6.
1027I Tim. 4:10
1028I John 2:2.
1029Denz., nos. 631, 1422-30.
1030Matt. 3:12; 13:29, 47
1032Denz., no. 430
1033cf. Gonet, De incarnatione, disp. 14, nos. 64, 104.
1034De correptione et gratia, chap. 11
1035Ibid., chap. 12
1036De veritate, q. 29, a. 4, ad 3.
1037cf. IIIa, q. 24
1038cf. De incarnatione, disp. XVI, dub. 4, par. 1, nos. 52f.
1039cf. De incarnatione, disp. IX, a. 2, par. 3, solv. obj. 4
1040See pp. 32-71
1041Thus by the diagrams given below we may again represent these two possible worlds, the second of which was chosen by God by one sole efficacious decree together with all its parts.
preservation of original justice = Christ not Redeemer
original justice with permission of original sin = reparation to be made = Christ the Redeemer
1042De incarnatione, disp XVI, nos. 69f.
1043Ibid., no. 61
1045Billuart, De praedest.
1046De incarn., disp. XIV, a. 3, par. 3, no. 52. See also IIIa, q. 1, a. 3, ad 5; and for the angels: Ia, q. 64, a. 1, ad 4.
1047De incarn., disp. IV, chap. 2, no. 54.
1053Ibid., 28:18. This text is commonly quoted in our times to show that Christ even as man, because of His grace of union and fullness of habitual grace, is king of all creatures, even of angels.
1054Heb. 1:4; 2:1-4; I Cor. 15:25f
1055cf. a. 4, c.
1058Matt. 28:18. See also Heb., chaps. 1 and 2
1059cf. IIIa, q. 57, a. 5
1061De incarn., disp. XVI, dub. 5, no. 76.
1062cf. Gonet, Salmanticenses, De incarnatione
1065Hom. 3 super Missus est
1066Com. in I Reg., Bk. I, chap. 2.
1068De veritate, q. 29, a. 7, ad 5.
1069Com. in III Sent., d. 13, q. 2, a. 3, quaestiuncula, 1
1070cf. IIIa, q. 59, a. 6.
1071cf. infra, q. 24
1075De incarn., disp. IV, chap. 2
1078De incarn., disp. XVI, dub. 5, par. 1, no. 76. This view is also affirmed by several other Thomists, though more or less incidentally, whereas the Salmanticenses insist on this, and rightly so, inasmuch as it can clearly be seen from their interpretation of St. Thomas' teaching on the motive of the Incarnation.
1079This opinion becomes increasingly evident from what we said concerning the motive of the Incarnation (Com. in IIIam, q. 1, a. 3), in explaining the reply to the third objection of this article. See also what we shall say further on (IIIa, q. 24, a. 3, 4) concerning Christ's predestination as He is the exemplary cause of our predestination.
This view presupposes that God by one decree chose all parts of this possible world, which includes angels and men to be redeemed by Christ. In this possible world Christ is the end of all, although He is not either the meritorious cause or the efficient cause of essential grace in the angels; for everything in such a world is subordinated to Him inasmuch as He is the God-man, for St. Paul says: "All things are yours... and you[even the angels] are Christ's, and Christ is God's" (I Cor. 3:21).
1080De incarn., disp. II, dub. 1, nos. 4, 26
1081Heb. 2:10; Col. 1:15.
1082De veritate, q. 29, a. 4, ad 5
1084cf. infra, q. 19, a. 3, on Christ's merits
1085cf. IIIa, q. 43, a. 2.; q. 48, a. 6; q. 62, a. 4.
1086cf. infra, q. 13, a. 2: the power of Christ's soul; its physical and instrumental causality
1087Com. in IIIam, q. 8, a. 5, no. 5
1088cf. IIIa, q. 6, a. 6. See Cajetan's comment on the reply to this third objection
1089See note 75.
1090However, according to the common teaching of theologians, what Christ merited for us de condigno, the Blessed Virgin merited for us strictly de congruo, namely, by merit that had its foundation not in justice, but in charity which united her to God and to us, or by an amicable right. Wherefore Mary is the universal Mediatrix and Mother of all men, and is like the neck that joins the head to the body. She is also called the aqueduct of all graces.
1091In recapitulation of those things that pertain to Christ's capital grace, read carefully the encyclical of Pius XII on "The Mystical Body of Christ" (1944).
1092cf. IIIa, q. 9, a. 1 (about end).
1093Dict. theol. cath., art. "Jesus-Christ, " cols. 1273f. See also "Science du Christ."
1095Denz., nos. 290f.
1097He is so called from the monastery of Good Hope in which he lived. (Tr.)
1098Dict. theol. cath., art. "Agnoetes"
1101Denz., nos. 1665f.
1102Ibid., nos. 2032-35.
1104Matt. 23:10; John 3:11; 9:16; 19:37
1107Ibid., 20:18f.; 26:21f.; 24:5f.; 16:18f.; 28:19f.
1109cf. IIIa, q. 10, a. 2; q. 11, a. 1.
1111Matt. 16:8; Mark 7:17; John 2:24f
1112John 1:48; 11:14; Matt. 20:15f.
1116Denz., no. 248..
1117cf. IIIa, q. 10, a. 2, ad 1
1118Such are the comments of St. Basil, Adv. Eunom., Bk. IV, chap. 3.
1119De peccatorum meritis et remissione, Bk. II, chap. 48.
1120Ep. ad Sergium, Rouet de Journel, no. 2290
1121De fide Orthod., Bk. III, chap. 22. cf. Journel, no. 2368
1123Denz., nos. 2032-35 Decree Lamentabili
1126Denz., nos. 2183-85.
1127De revelatione, Bk. II, chap. 4, a. 4; chap. 11, a. 1
1130For already Christ gloriously risen from the dead, by divers apparitions, came forth as victor over the devil, sin, and death in His kingdom
1131cf. Lepin, Jesus Messie et Fils de Dieu, pp. 385-99
1133Matt. 28:19; Luke 24:47
1135Matt. 8:24; Luke 13:29; Rom. 11:25f
1138cf. Rouet de Journel, nos. 774, 925, 2072.
1140cf. Salmanticenses, De incarn., disp. 17, dub. 4, nos. 42, 44; Melchior Cano, Loc. theol., Bk. XII, chap. 14; S. R. Bellarminus, De anima Christi, Bk. I, chaps. 1, 8; Suarez, De incarn., disp. 25
1141Denz., no. 2183
1153Denz. no. 224
1154Enchiridion patristicum, nos. 670, 2238, 2239
1155Ibid., no. 670
1156Ibid., no. 913
1157Ibid., nos. 2238f.
1159Epist. 147, chap. 13; also Super Gen. ad lit., Bk. XII, chap. 27, which is quoted by St. Thomas in IIa IIae, q. 175, a. 3
1160cf. IIIa, q. 9, a. 2, c. (end).
1161The Dominicans have translated "oportuit', by "necessary", but perhaps they mean "necessary" in a broad sense. (Tr.)
1164Ibid., chaps. 1, 2.
1166Plato, speaking of the ideal teacher, says (in his Banquet, chap. 29): "Do we not think it would be a fortunate sight, if man had eyes to see the true beauty, the divine beauty, I mean, pure and clear and unalloyed, not clogged with the pollutions of mortality and all the colors and vanities of human life? Do you not think such a man would produce not the semblances of virtues, since He attains not to the image but to the reality, and since he begets and feeds upon true virtue, will be made the friend of God and of all other men, he will be immortal in the highest degree?" But this finds its verification in Christ already in this life
1167The Jews distinguished between three heavens: (1) the aerial or atmospheric heavens; (2) the astronomical or ethereal heaven; (3) the spiritual or empyrean heaven where God dwells and is seen by the angels
1168II Cor. 12:2f.
1169cf. IIa IIae q. 188, a. 6.
1170Ibid., q. 175, a. 3
1171Ibid., (about end). cf. P. Sales, O.P., Le lettere degli Apostoli, II Cor. 12:4.
1172See also P. B. Allo, O.P., Commentaire sur la IIe Ep. aux Corinthiens, 12-4. Allo says that St. Paul was raised to the highest form of contemplation, and he refers to the interpretation given by St. Augustine and St. Thomas, having nothing to say against it, merely remarking that it is not admitted by Estius and Cornelius a Lapide
1173De veritate, q. 18, a. 1
1175Discours sur l'histoire universelle, Part II, chap. 19
1176It is in this way that apologetics develops the argument taken from the sublimity of Christ's doctrine and His manner of preaching. cf. the author's work De revelatione Bk. II, chap. 8.
1177cf. Ia, q. 12, a. 2: "The essence of God cannot be seen by any created likeness whatever."
1180Ibid., 16:28f. The expression "I came from the Father" can signify, indeed, the particular and eternal generation of the Word, but the following words, "'I came into the world, " signify the very incarnation of the Word. But Christ says: "I know whence I came"; therefore He does not believe but sees the mystery of the Incarnation and His own divine personality
1182Even the most sublime prophetic illumination and the more exalted intellectual visions of the mystics do not go beyond the order of faith.
1184Com. in Rom., 8:16
1187Ibid., 8:38. See St. Thomas, De veritate, q. 18, a. 1.
1188cf. IIIa., q. 7, a. 1, 9.
1189Ibid., q. 24
1190cf. Tabula aurea, under the word "Apostle." Here the holy doctor shows that the apostles were more perfect than the other saints, having all knowledge of things pertaining to faith and morals, inasmuch as this was expedient for the conversion of the world. The Holy Ghost taught the apostles all truth that was necessary for salvation, but not all future happenings. The words of the apostles are the result of intimate revelation received from the Holy Ghost and from Christ. Therefore they must be retained, because they belong to the canon of the Scripture, which forbids us to believe that it contains anything false. God gave the apostles knowledge of the scriptures and of divers tongues, which men can acquire by study or by accustoming themselves to speak the language, although they do not succeed in speaking it so perfectly. But if the apostles were so illumined concerning divine truth, Christ Himself must have been far more illumined concerning God's intimate life and more than all doctors and contemplatives after His time.
1191cf. IIIa, q. 34, a. 4
1192Denz., no. 224
1194cf. IIIa, q. 19, a. 3
1197cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 8, c. et ad 3; a. 6, ad 4; q. 84, a. 9, ad 2.
1198cf. The Love of God and the Cross of Jesus, I, 189-223. From this plenitude of grace there resulted in Christ, on the one hand, the light of glory and beatific charity, and on the other hand, utmost zeal for God's glory and the salvation of souls, by which He willed most perfectly to fulfill His redemptive mission by His holocaust on the cross offered with utmost grief of soul, as a better manifestation of His love for the human race.
1199cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 6, ad 4.
1200Comp., theol., chap. 232.
1202II Cor. 12:4
1204cf. IIIa, q. 15, a. 4
1205De veritate, q. 20, a. 3, ad 1.
1206cf. IIIa, q. 9, a. 3, c (end).
1207Thus the saints even in this life sometimes knew the secrets of hearts as if they saw another person not only exactly as in the flesh, but also had complete knowledge of the interior disposition of such a person, a quasi-photograph of the other person's soul, so that they could detect whether the acts of such a person were the result of true or false humility.
1208St. Angela de Foligno saw her own soul, just as the angels see themselves
1209Several saints had knowledge that is per se infused concerning the secrets of hearts, and knowledge of languages that is per accidens infused.
1211cf. IIIa, q. 12, a. 2
1213cf. III Sent., q. 3, a. 3, quaestiuncula 5 a.
1215cf. ad 2. The whole reply should be read.
1216cf. Ia, q. 12, a. 10.
1218Denz., no. 248. Moreover, as St. Augustine remarked, Christ as the best of teachers taught His disciples what was necessary and nothing more, because He said: "You cannot bear them now" (John 16:12).
In this we see pedagogy in its splendor. Thus it is said that younger professors seek to teach what they do not know; older professors seek to teach what they know; and teachers advanced in years what is useful to their disciples. This is what Christ did.
1219cf. ad 3.
1220Ibid., Ia, q. 7, a. 4.
1221Ibid., IIIa, q. 10, a. 3, ad 1.
1222Ibid., Ia, q. 34, a. 3
1224cf. Ia, q. 12, a. 4.
1225cf. IIIa, q. 10, a. 4, ad 3.
1226Com. in IIIam, q. 10, a. 4, ad 3
1227cf. supra q. 7, a. 11f.
1228Ibid., a. 1, 9, 10, 11, 12.
1230Because the normal method of knowing separated souls is by infused species, which is the same for comprehensors, and Christ already in this life was both wayfarer and comprehensor
1231He knew particulars, even the least of those that are recorded in the Old Testament, for example, in Deuteronomy or the books of Paralipomenon. If He had been questioned about them, He would not have shown Himself ignorant of anything, especially of even the least things that pertain to Sacred Scripture.
1232cf. Summa theol., q. 7, a. 12, ad 2.
1233Ibid., Ia, q. 89, a. 1, 2.
1234Ibid., Ia, q. 55, 56. These infused species are not abstract but concrete universals, for they represent even singulars that are contained under the universal; consequently each one is a quasi-intelligible but not sensible panorama. And the gifts of the Holy Ghost in Christ made use not only of acquired species, but also of infused species.
1235Discrete time differs from continuous time, for instance, solar time, because it is not the measure of continuous time, but of a succession of thoughts, as in the case of the angels
1236cf. Ia, q. 14, a. 13
1237Com. in IIam IIae, q. 5, a. 1
1238Disp. 61, 118f.
1239cf. c. et ad 3
1240cf. IIIa, q. 11, a. 6.
1241Com. in III Sent., d. 14, q. 1, a. 3, quaestiuncula 4.
1242Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 4, a. 8
1243Ibid. q. 175, a. 2
1244cf. ad 3.
1246Com. in Heb., 10:25
1248Summa theol., Ia, q. 85, a. 7.
1249Com. on Aristotle's De anima, Bk. II, lect. 94
1250De veritate, q. 12, a. 6, ad 4; q. 24, a. 8, ad 6.
1252De incarnatione Domini, chap. 7
1253Com. in III Sent., d. 14, q. 1, a. 3, quaestiuncula 5.
1254cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 9, 11, 12.
1256cf. IIIa, q. 12, a. 3, c. (end).
1257Hom. 19, in Lucam
1258This is known as the Socratic method in philosophy. It consisted in drawing the knowledge of the subject sought for gradually from the students by a series of easy questions; granted as implicitly known by them
1260cf. ad 1
1261Com. in Lucam, 22:43
1262Luke 23:46; John 19:30. See also IIIa, q. 46, a. 7, 8.
1263cf. IIIa, q. 42.
1264Ibid.. a. 4.
1265II Cor. 3:3.
1267cf. IIIa, q. 16, on predication of idioms or properties
1268Ibid., Ia, q. 45, a. 5
1271Ibid., 28:19. See also IIIa, q. 13, a. 2, ad 1
1272cf. IIIa, q. 17, a. 2
1273Ibid., q. 13, a. 2, c. (end); see also Ia, q. 105, a. 1, 5, 6; q. 110, a. 2
1274cf. De revelatione, Bk. I, chap. 19, a. 3, on the discernibility of the miracle, where this subject has been fully treated by the author, in which it is shown that the most universal effects can be produced only by God, who is the most universal cause, and these are produced by Him as the principal cause
1276cf. Ia, q. 45, a. 5
1277In the expression "'physically instrumental causality, " the term "physical', is not used in opposition to either metaphysical or spiritual and incorporeal, but to moral causality, by which the object proposed attracts the agent to act, or it is a causality that operates by way of merit, satisfaction, or prayer. The question concerns the instrumental production of some effect that is either corporeal, as in the case of physical miracles, or spiritual, as in the production of grace.
1278Among those theologians who admit only a moral causality, we mention St. Bonaventure, Durandus, Scotus, Vasquez, Melchior Cano, Franzelin. On the contrary, St. Thomas, the Thomists, Suarez, Billot, and several others admit also a physically instrumental causality
1279Summa theol., Ia IIae, q. 112, a. 1.
1283Denz., no. 123
1284Lauda Sion, liturgical hymn for Mass of Corpus Christi.
1285cf. IIIa, q. 8, a. 1, ad 1; see also IIIa, q. 48, a. 6; q. 49, a. 1; q. 50, a. 6; q. 62, a. 1; De potentia, q. 6, a. 4
1287Denz., no 940
1288cf. E. Hugon, O.P., La causalite instrumentale en theologie, chap. 3, pp. 73-118; especially, pp. 101f., 108, 111; see also Summa theol., IIIa, q. 48, a. 6, ad 2
1289cf. IIIa, q. 8
1290Ibid., q. 13, a. 3, ad 2; also q. 14, a. 1
1291Ibid., q. 13, a. 4, ad 3; also q. 18, a. 5; q. 21, a. 4.
1293Summa theol., q. 21, a. 4.
1294For this same reason Christ merited absolutely the efficacious graces bestowed or to be bestowed on men. Other graces that are not bestowed, these He merited in a qualified sense, namely, as offered, but not as bestowed. Thus, as will be stated farther on, His passion is of infinite value inasmuch as it sufficed for the salvation of all men, and it was efficacious to those to whom it is applied, namely, to the baptized children and to adults who place no obstacle in the way. But efficacious grace is included in the sufficient grace that is offered to the sinner, just as the fruit is included in the flower. Yet, if the sinner of his own accord refuses the sufficient grace, he deserves to be deprived of the efficacious grace
1298Denz., no. 124
1300The principle of merit is the same as the principle of satisfaction, for the meritorious act becomes satisfactory when it is of an afflictive nature, or when it is accompanied by a feeling of pain
1301Summa theol., IIIa, q. 48, a. 2
1305Cf. ad 3
1306Cf. ad I et ad 2
1307Com. in Ps. 44
1308Com. in Isa., chap. 53.
1312I Pet. 2:22
1313Heb. 7:26. See also Isa. 53:12; II Cor. 5:21; I John 3:5
1314Denz., nos. 13, 65, 122, 148, 224f., 251, 258, 286, 290, 711
1315Ibid., no. 224
1316Ibid., no. 1314
1318cf. q. 14, a. 1, 2.
1319Ps. 21:1f. According to the Hebraic text, the reading should be "my salvation is far from me", and not "far from my salvation are the words of my sins", which is the Septuagint and Vulgate version
1320cf. ad 1
1323Gen. ad lit., 10:20
1325Denz., no. 1314, one of the condemned Jansenist errors
1326II Cor. 5:21
1328cf. Summa theol., IIIa, q. 15, a. 1, ad 5
1329Harmonia, Matt. 27:46
1334Denz., no 224
1335This fullness of grace and charity was inamissible inasmuch as it flowed from the grace of union as its quasi-property, and moreover, inasmuch as the fervor of this fullness of charity was itself inamissible, for it excluded venial sin, which does not intrinsically diminish charity, but its fervor.
1336cf. q. 19
1337Objection. The Scotists say that the divine permission to sin is not evil, and thus God permits certain sins, even in the saints, as is evident in the life of St. Peter. Why could not the Word permit sin in the assumed nature?
Reply. The difference here is that, with respect to other men, God is related to them as the universal cause, the general foreseer, directing them in accordance with the laws of His general providence, to whom it pertains that what is defectible should fail at times, so that this should be the occasion of a greater good resulting therefrom. Thus God permitted Peter to deny Christ three times during His passion, so as to take away Peter's presumption and make him more humble.
On the contrary, as regards the actions of the assumed human nature, the Word stands in relation to these as the cause and particular foreseer, positing them as His own actions and as especially imputable to Him. These actions proceed from the Word as the particular principle that operates, and it is incumbent upon Him so to govern the human nature that it does not sin.
1338Summa theol., Ia IIae, q. 4, a. 4. See also Ia IIae, q. 5, a. 4, and q. 10, a. 2
1339Ibid., q. 10, a. 4, ad 3
1340Ibid., q. 18, a. 4
1341This question is sometimes directed solely against casuistry, according to which frequently and unjustifiably that is called an imperfection which truly is a venial sin. But this question must be examined in itself, and with reference to Christ and the Blessed Virgin, on a much higher plane than that of customary casuistic consideration
1342De incarnatione, disp. 25, dub. 5
1343cf. Christian Perfection and Contemplation, pp. 429-31; also The Love of God and the Cross of Jesus, I, 318 ff. in which we have discussed this question at length. Hence those who refuse to admit the distinction between imperfection and venial sin tend to confuse what is a less good with what is evil, which is against the first principle of ethics, namely, that there is a distinction between moral good and moral evil. Hence they ought to say that a less evil is good, and that a less evil is not only to be tolerated so as to avoid committing a greater evil, but that it is actually preferable as a good in itself.
Thus this confusion is accompanied by and is the cause of many other confusions. However, as there are venial sins that dispose a person to commit mortal sin, so there are certain imperfections that dispose a person to commit venial sin. And although the call to religious life does not in itself oblige anyone to enter this state, yet this way of life must be followed, as being an invitation to salvation especially if other ways seem to us more dangerous; Jesus saying to the young man: "If thou wilt be perfect... follow Me" (Matt. 19:21). Then if anyone, because of too great an attachment to the things of this world, refuses to enter the religious life, such a person sins, not because of the obligation of entering religion, but because of the aforesaid obligation of avoiding the too great attachment to the things of this world
1344Denz. no. 224.
1345cf. IIIa, q. 41, a. 1, ad 3.
1347See the replies to the second and third objections of this article
1348cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 9; q. 9, a. 1, 2
1351cf. IIIa, q. 12, a. 2.
1354See argumentative part of this article
1355De civitate Dei, Bk. XIV, chap. 9
1357Com. in Matt. 26:37
1360Cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 6.
1364Cf. q. 16, a. 5.
1365However, since God is His Godhead, in the material sense the following propositions are true: This man is the Godhead; the Godhead is this man. Taken in the material and identical sense the propositions are true because the subject of attribution is identical; but they are not strictly true in the formal sense, namely, in virtue of the difference of meaning in the terms. The meaning of the first proposition is: This man is God, who is His Godhead.
1366Denz., nos. 116, 124
1367Ibid., nos. 213, 215
1368Summa theol. Ia, q. 13, a. 12
1369Ibid., IIIa, q. 16, a. 5
1370Denz. nos. 116, 124. Council of Ephesus
1371cf. IIIa, q. 4, a. 2
1373Denz., no. 40. Athanasian Creed
1374Ibid., no. 54; Council of Nicaea. See also Denz. nos. 118f.; Council of Ephesus, can. 6.
1375cf. IIIa, q. 2, a. 2, 3.
1376This entire article I should be read
1377See Father Billot's opinion, pp. 153-60 (De Christo Salvatore).
1379cf. IIIa, q. 2
1381cf. IIIa, q. 2, a. 6.
1382Ibid., q. 2, a. 2, 6
1383Ibid., q. 17, a. 2, ad 1
1384This article must be read carefully, and Cajetan's commentary on it.
1385It must be observed that Christ, although He has two distinct natures, is essentially one, not indeed in nature, but in suppositum or person, that per se subsists (in the third mode of per se predication). See Aristotle's Post. Anal., Bk. I, chap. 4, lect. 10 of St. Thomas: On the four modes of per se (essential) predication.
1386The person of the Word incarnate is really distinct from His human nature, just as there is a real distinction between the whole and its part; for before any consideration of our mind, the whole is not its part. This distinction is real and inadequate between created essence and being (existence).
1387The entire answer to this fourth objection should be read
1389Several are mistaken in thinking that subsistence is the abstract term that corresponds to what in the concrete subsists; whereas it corresponds to what in the concrete is the suppositum. Confusion is removed by substituting for "subsistence" the equivalent word "personality, " because it is evident that person is the correlative concrete to it. and not to subsist.
1390Quaest. disp. de unione Verbi, a. 4, ad. 1.
1391Grabmann says the composition of this disputed question occurred between the years 1260-68; Mandonnet assigns it to the year 1268. Thus both maintain that it was written before the third part of the Summa theologica (1271-73). However, Father Peltzer, S.J., Father Synave, O.P. (Bulletin Thomiste, 1926), and Glorieux maintain that this disputed question was completed later. Yet the Compendium of theology appeared still later, and it contains the same doctrine as the Commentary of St. Thomas on the Book of the Sentences, and what is found in his Summa theol., and he says nothing in these works about secondary being. cf. Heris, O.P., Le Verbe incarne, 1931, pp. 291-93, 329
1392Quaest. disp. de unioni Verbi, a. 4, ad 1
1393cf. IIIa, q. 17, a. 2
1394Ibid., q. 2, a. 2, 6
1395Denz., no. 251, Epistle of Pope Honorius I (634); see also no. 289, Third Council of Constantinople (680), in which it was defined that there are two wills in Christ; also no. 1465.
1399cf. Summa theol., q. 18, a. I, ad 4
1400Denz., no. 1094
1401De malo, q. 6
1402cf. IIIa, q. 18, a. 4
1403Denz., nos. 148, 288
1404Ibid., nos. 122, 286, 319, 462, 794f.
1405cf. IIIa, q. 15, a. 1
1406Denz., no. 224
1407cf. Summa theol., IIIa, q. 15, a. 1
1410Rom. 5:19; Phil. 2:8; I Pet. 2:21
1411Dict. theol. cathol
1412De incarnatione, theses 29, 30
1413Mysterium fidei, elucid., 7, 8; pp. 89, 95, 99
1414De incarnatione, disp. 74, chap. 5.
1415Ibid., disp. 26, sect. 7, no. 82; sect. 8, no. 102
1416De Summo Bono Bk. II, no 185
1417De justificatione, Bk. V, chap. II
1418Summa theol., Ia, q. 19, a. 2, 3.
1419Ibid., Ia, q. 20, a. 3, 4
1420Mysterium fidei, elucidationes 7, 8, pp. 89-93.
1422Ibid., 1:18; 14:31. St. John, who wrote his Gospel in Greek, used the words entello, entole which always mean a strict command. (Tr.)
1423Matt. 5:19; 22:36.
1428Heb. 10:5f. Also Acts 4:28; Ps. 39:8.
1431Acts 4:28. If God had only permitted the crime of the Jews against Jesus, as He permitted the persecution against the martyrs, Christ's death would also infallibly have come to pass and He would have had to accept this consequence of the divine permission
1436Denz., nos. 799f.
1439See pp. 324f.
1440See God, His Existence, II, 293f. (Tr.)
1441Hence St. Thomas defines liberty as the faculty of choosing the means, "'keeping the order of the end in view, " but "it comes of the defect of liberty for it to choose anything by turning away from the order of the end, and this is to sin... just as it belongs to the power of the intellect to be able to proceed to different conclusions, according to different principles; but for it to proceed to some conclusion, by passing out of the order of principles, comes of its own defect" (Ia, q. 62, a. 8, ad 3). See also Ia, q. 83, a. 4, c
1442The French word "desobeir" means more than "ne pas obeir."
1443This distinction is of great importance, and in omitting it there is danger of saying that a person can be punished before that person has begun to be guilty whereas punishment can be inflicted only on account of guilt. Such a doctrine would lead to Calvinism
1444Summa theol., Ia, q. 14, a. 13, ad 2, 3
1445Perihermeneias, Bk. 1, chap. 9 (lect. 15 of St. Thomas).
1446Denz., no. 1783
1447This point has been explained at length in God, His Existence, II, 342-54
1448Summa theol., Ia, q. 19, a. 2, 3
1449Ibid., Ia, q. 19, a. 2. See also IIIa, q. 1, a. 1, in which the same reason is given for the manifestation of the possibility and fitness of the Incarnation
1450OEuvres de Leibnitz (Erdmann ed.), 563 a
1451Denz., no. 1783
1452Summa theol., la, q. 19, a. 3. See also ad 5; and Contra Gentes, Bk. I, chaps. 76, 82
1453There is a distinction between the speculative-practical judgment and the practico-practical judgment as in the common saying I see and approve of the better (speculative-practical judgment), but I choose the worse (ultimate practico-practical judgment and choice). The ultimate practico-practical judgment that immediately directs the choice, is not always in conformity with the speculative-practical judgment, and this already presupposes an actual affection for the object to be chosen. In the absence of this actual affection the practico-practical judgment, as is evident in the above-mentioned saying and in any sin, is not in conformity with the speculative-practical judgment, from which there arises in the intellect advertence to sin.
1454cf. a. 4, ad 3
1455cf. Billuart, Com. in Iam IIae, q. 13
1456See God, His Existence, II, 296f. The aforesaid Molinist definition does not sufficiently consider the object from which freedom receives its specification; but the faculty must be defined with reference to its specificative object; that is, freedom is the dominating indifference of judgment and will concerning an object that is not universally good. The determinate act also remains intrinsically free because of the object.
1457Summa theol. Ia, q. 23, a. 5, ad 3.
1458Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 10, a. 2
1459Ibid., Ia, q. 19, a. 3
1460Ibid., c. et ad 2
1461De incarnatione, disp. 17, a. 3, no. 14.
1462Other Thomists, who appeal to Christ's infused knowledge, nevertheless say that this act as regulated by the beatific vision belonged to Christ not as wayfarer, but as comprehensor. Thus this act, although it was free, was not meritorious, for merit requires not only freedom, but the state of the wayfarer. To this we can reply by saying that this act belonged, however, to Christ, who at this particular time was still a wayfarer
1465cf. IIIa, q. 18, a. 5, c
1466Denz., no. 291
1467Denz., nos. 290-92
1468Summa theol., IIIa, q. 19, a. 1, ad 1, ad 2.
1469Ibid., q. 17, a. 5
1470For He was full of grace and charity, free and a wayfarer
1471Denz., nos. 799, 820
1476Summa theol., IIIa, q. 19, a. 3, c.
1477Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 114, a. 5.
1478See introduction to q. 18, a. 5, supra.
1479See St. Thomas, his com. on Ep. to Heb., chap. 1.
1480Denz., no. 122, can. 10.
1481cf. Summa theol., IIIa, q. 24
1482Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 114, a. 6
1483Tabula aurea, nos. 106, 115
1488Denz., nos. 103f.
1489Ibid., no. 197
1492Denz., no. 799
1493Ibid., no. 820
1494Summa theol., IIIa, q. 24, a. 4.
1495This means that Christ did not merit the uncreated act by which God predestined us, but He merited whatever was willed by this divine act, that is, He merited our predestination not on the part of God willing, but on the part of the object willed and eternally willed. Hence St. Thomas says: "God wills this to be as means to that; but He does not will this on account of that" (Ia, q. 19, a. 5, the end). For example, God wills the effects of our predestination to be on account of Christ's merits, but He does not will this, namely, the act of God willing our predestination. The fundamental reason is, as stated in Ia, q. 19, a. 5, that there is only one act of will in God, for which no cause can be assigned in the created order.
1499Com. ad Eph., I, lect. 1. See also St. Thomas' Com. in Joan., 17:24; also Salmanticenses, De incarnatione, disp. 28, dub. 8, nos. 93, 98, 99, 102; dub. 9, no. 107, especially no. 109. Also John of St. Thomas, Com. in Iam, q. 23, a. 5.
1501Such is the common teaching of the Thomists either in their commentaries on our predestination (cf. in Iam, q. 23, a. 5) or concerning Christ's predestination as the cause of ours (cf. in IIIam, q. 24, a. 4).
1502cf. IIIa, q. 21, a. 4; also ad 2.
1504cf. IIIa, q. 21, a. 4, ad 2; q. 48, a. 1; q. 62, a. 5; De veritate, q. 29, a. 7, ad 8 et 13; also Com. in Joan., 17:24.
1505Denz., no. 842, also nos. 803, 809f.
1506Panoplia gratiae, Vol. II, tr. 5, c. 20, no. 215.
1507Com. in Iam, q. 23, a. 5 (end).
1508Com. in IIIam, disp. 28, dub. 9, no. 109; dub. 8, nos. 93, 102
1509Summa theol., IIIa, q. 21, a. 4, ad 2. See also Billuart's De incarnatione, disp. 22, a. 2
1513cf. IIIa, q. 8, a. 4.
1515Ibid., q. 34, a. 3
1516Heb. 10 5
1517Summa theol., IIIa, q. 50, a. 6. It is said to be by way of causality, as pointed out here: "inasmuch as the Godhead was not separated from Christ's flesh by death; and therefore, whatever befell Christ's flesh, even when the soul was separated from the body, was conducive to salvation in virtue of the Godhead united to it."
1519See St. Thomas, Com. in III Sent., d. 18, a. 5.
1520cf. IIIa, q. 19, a. 4.
1521This reason is not cogent, because for a meritorious act it suffices that the subject of this free act be still a wayfarer. But Christ was still a wayfarer in that His soul was still the form of His passible body; but neither did infused knowledge belong to His soul inasmuch as it was the form of His passible body. Therefore, if He could merit by a free act regulated by infused knowledge, so also He could merit by a free act regulated by the beatific vision.
1523On this subject cf. Billuart and Other commentators of St. Thomas
1524Summa theol., IIIa, q. 47, a. 1. St. Thomas says in this passage: "'Christ could have prevented His passion and death. First, by holding His enemies in check, so that they would not have been eager to slay Him, or would have been powerless to do so. Secondly, because His spirit had the power of preserving His fleshly nature from the infliction of any injury, and Christ's soul had this power, because it was united in unity of person with the divine Word, as Augustine says (De Trin., IV, chap. 13). Therefore, since Christ's soul did not repel the injury inflicted on His body, but willed His corporeal nature to succumb to such injury, He is said to have laid down His life, or to have died voluntarily." See also ad 1, 2, 3. Concerning the absolutely infinite value of Christ's merits, see q. 48.
1527See Billuart's De incarnatione, Com. in q. 20.
1530I John 2:1
1531cf. IIa IIae, q. 83, a. 11
1532Concerning this doubt, cf. St. Thomas, Com. in Ep. ad Rom. 8:34; also ad Heb., and the Salmanticenses in their commentaries
1540Luke 23 34
1541Certain professors of the Duacene theological faculty reviled this reply of St. Thomas as Jansenistic in their censure of August 22, 1722, which censure was condemned by Rome on June 18, 1726. These professors did not understand that St. Thomas in this reply to the second objection has in mind only efficacious prayer that is the result of what is simply willed; he is not speaking of conditional prayer that is in conformity with God's conditional will to save all.
1542See St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, chaps. 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, in which he states that Christ as priest is more excellent than the angels, Moses, and the priests of the Old Testament. Also Garrigou-Lagrange, Le Sauveur, pp. 282-93; J. M. Voste, Studia paulina, sec. 6: also for Christ the priest, see St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, chaps. 5-8, for Christ the victim
1544Denz., nos. 122f.
1545Ibid., nos. 938f.
1546Ibid., no. 2195.
1547II Pet. 1:4.
1551Denz., nos. 938-40
1553Com. in Lev. chap. 1.
1554cf. ad 2, ad 3.
1555cf. Garrigou-Lagrange, Le Sauveur, pp. 284f.
1556Summa theol., IIIa, q. 22, a. 3, ad 3; q. 48, a. 3.
1557Rom. 3:24; Heb. 9:14.
1559Denz., nos. 938-40
1561Denz., no. 122
1565The whole article should be read
1566cf. ad 1, ad 2.
1568See Garrigou-Lagrange, Le Sauveur, pp. 289f.
1569Civilta cattolica, 1926, p. 182
1570Ps, 44:8; 9:24
1571Summa theol., IIIa, q. 22, a. 2, ad 3. But this text is perhaps spurious. See Leonine edition
1572Ibid., q. 24, a. 1, ad 2.
1573Ibid., q. 26, a. 2; q. 58, a. 3.
1574Elevations sur les mysteres, elevations I and 6.
1575Ps. 109:4. See also Heb. 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:1, 10, 11, 15, 17.
1578cf. IIIa, q. 48, a. 3; also q. 83
1579Denz., nos. 2, 143, 1460
1580Ibid., nos. 299, 309f., 344, 462, 3007.
1581Ibid., nos. 210, 313
1582Ibid., no. 282
1583Ibid., nos. 20, 422
1584Ibid., nos. 257, 290, 344
1585Ibid., nos. 309-14
1586Ibid., no. 3007
1587Ibid., no. 462
1589cf. IIIa, q. 23, a. 1, c. (end).
1591cf. Ia, q. 27, a. 2
1594cf. Ia, q. 33, a. 3; q. 39, a. 7
1599cf. IIIa, q. 23, a. 2, ad 3
1600Ibid., ad 3
1601Ibid., Ia., q. 39, a. 7, 8; q. 45, a. 6, ad 2..
1602Gal., chap. 4; Rom., chap. 8
1603cf. Ia IIae, q. 106, a. 1
1604Denz., nos. 309-14. See also Billuart's De incarnatione
1607The Vulgate has "praedestinatus, " as if the Greek reading were prooristhentos; in the Greek we find horisthentos which has more the meaning of declaratus est, " that is, "He was declared the Son of God, in power, according to the spirit of sanctification, from the resurrection of the dead." This last interpretation is the one proposed by St. John Chrysostom, Theophylactus, and others, as well as by many exegetes.
1608De praed. sanct., chap. 15.
1609Ibid., no. 31
1610Summa theol., Ia, q. 23, a. 1, 5
1611Ibid., IIIa, q. 27, a. 5, c. et ad 2.
1612Ibid., IIa IIae, q. 88, a. 6.
1613Ibid., Ia, q. 23, a. 5
1614I Cor. 4:7.
1616De praed. sanct., chap. 15
1617Summa theol., Ia, q. 19, a. 5.
1619Summa theol., IIIa, q. 24, a. 3, c.
1621I Cor. 3:23.
1623Predestination is man's choicest benediction
1625cf. the Salmanticenses, Gonet, and John of St. Thomas in their commentaries on Ia, q. 23, a. 5. Also Billuart in his commentary on the present article. See also what we said above on Christ's merit
1626John 15 16
1627De praed. sanct., chap. 19; De corrept. et gratia, chap. 7.
1628Com. in Joan., chap. 15; also Ep. ad Eph
1630I Cor. 4:7.
1632See p. 482.
1633Bull Ineffabilis Deus
1634I Cor. 3:22f.
1635Consult Father Hugon's Tract. theol.
1636Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 84
1639III Kings 1:23
1641Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 84 a. 2.
1643Summa theol., loc. cit., ad 2.
1644Denz., nos. 120, 221; Council of Ephesus and Second Council of Constantinople
1645Ibid., nos. 224, 1561
1646Ibid., no. 221
1647Ibid., no. 1255
1648Ibid., nos. 478, 878, 888; Councils of Vienne and Trent.
1649Ibid., no. 1563; errors of Pistoia
1650Ibid., nos. 120, 221; Council of Ephesus and Second Council of Constantinople. Concerning the patristic doctrine, cf. Rouet de Journel
1651Ibid., nos. 1562f. against the Jansenists
1654Epistle on the occasion of the establishment of the Archconfraternity of the Eucharistic Heart in the Church of St. Joachim at Rome, February 16, 1903.
1655De fide orthod., IV, 16.
1656Denz., no. 302. See also nos. 304, 337, 679, and the Council of Trent, nos. 985f., 998
1657Hymn, VexiIla Regis
1658See St. Epiphanius in his Adv. haereses, no. 79.
1659cf. Father Merkelbach's Mariology, last chapter
1660Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 152, a. 5
1661This quotation refers to the image of God imprinted on the soul. (Tr.)
1662Summa theol., loc. cit., a. 6, c
1663I Tim. 2:5f.
1664cf. Heb. 8:6; 9:15; 12:24
1665II Cor. 5:19
1666I Tim. 2:6.
1667cf. IIIa, q. 26, a. 1, ad 1
1668Heb. 7 25
1669Denz., nos. 3033 and 3034 note
1671De civ. Dei, Bk. IX, chap. 15
1672cf. IIIa, q. 22, a. 1
1673See pp. 1012f. (manuscript)
1674This sacerdotal unction is the very consecration of the priest. But Christ's humanity is consecrated to God, first and formally by the uncreated grace of union
1675Denz., no. 2194
1676Summa theol., IIIa, q. 59, a. 3, c
1677Ibid., a. 4, c.
1678Ibid., a. 6, c.
1679Prologue to q. 29
1680cf. Denzinger's Enchiridion, Index systematicus, VIII, h. on what the Church has defined and declared about the mysteries of Christ's life.
Concerning this part of St. Thomas' treatise, cf. such commentators as Cajetan and Bartholomew de Medina; Suarez, St. Robert Bellarmine, Petavius, L. Billot, L. Janssens, E. Hugon. Th. Pegues must also be noted. Father Voste, O.P., has recently published a Commentary on the Theological Summa of St. Thomas, entitled "De mysteriis vitae Christi" (IIIa, q. 27-59), and another work, De passione et morte Jesu Christi, Rome, 1937.
On the history of the theology of redemption, cf. J. Riviere, "Le dogme de la Redemption, " Etude theologique; Le dogme de la redemption chez S. Augustin; Le dogme de la redemption apres S. Augustin; Le dogme de la redemption au debut du Moyen-age.
1681cf. IIIa, q. 27-45.
1682Ibid., q. 32-35
1683Ibid., q. 35, a. 5
1684See Part I, q. 1, a. 2
1685Tractactus dogmatici de Verbo incarnato, p. 667. This liberation and reparation of the human race is called objective redemption to which Jesus the Redeemer has condign right; the application of this liberation and reparation to such an individual, as Peter or Paul, is called subjective redemption
1686cf. IIIa, q. 48
1687cf. IIIa, q. 48, a. 2
1688Merit primarily belongs to charity, sacrifice to religion, satisfaction to justice, but in us it is a part of penance, which was not in Christ, who was impeccable, and martyrdom is an act of fortitude
1689I Cor. 6:20.
1690cf. q. 48, a. 1
1691cf. infra, q. 48 of St. Thomas, for division and arrangement of this question
1692Summa theol., Ia IIae, q. 113, a. 8, ad 1
1693Such as Kant, Schleiermacher, Ritsch, A. Harnack, A. Sabatier. cf. A. Sabatier, La doctrine de l'expiation et son evolution historique, pp. 38f. See also Riviere, Le dogme de la redemption, chap. 2, pp. 15f.
1694Denz., no. 2038. cf. Riviere, op. cit., p. 16
1695cf. infra, chap. 33, on the stand taken by liberal Protestants (q. 48, a. 2, of St. Thomas).
1696Denz., no. 86
1697Ibid., no. 112.
1698Ibid., no. 286
1699Ibid., no. 429
1700Ibid., no. 711
1701Ibid., no. 799
1702Ibid, no. 371
1703Ibid., no. 943
1704Ibid., no. 2038
1705See Denzinger, nos. 794f., 799, 319, 552, 1019, 3051
1709cf. IIIa., q. 46, a. 1
1710Ibid., q. 48, a. 2
1711Ibid., q. 1, a. 2.
1712Ibid., q. 48, a. 2
1713Ibid., Ia, q. 21, a. 4.
1716Luke 4:18, Mark 10:45
1717Matt. 9:13, Mark 2:17.
1720Ibid., 18:14; Luke 9:56
1721Ibid., 20:28; Mark 10:45.
1722Ibid., 20:18f.; Mark 10:34; Luke 18:32
1723Luke 22:19f.; Matt. 26:28; Mark 14:24
1726Ibid., 12 24f.
1728Ibid., 12:23; 13:1; 16:32. 17:1.
1730cf. Riviere, Le dogme de la redemption, pp. 68-99.
1731Denz., no. 2038
1741I John 2:2
1742Luke 22:19; I Cor. 11:24f.
1743cf. Rouet de Journel, Enchiridion patristicum, Index theologicus, nos. 416-21, for their principal testimonies
1744cf. J. Riviere, Dict. theol. cath., art. "Redemption, " cols. 1932-42. Columns 1941f. contain the best conclusion of this entire historical compilation
1745Ep. ad Cor., 21:6
1746Ibid., 49:6; Journel, no. 26
1747To the Trallians, 2:1.
1748To the Smyrnaeans, 7:1; Journel, 75
1749I Pet. 2:24
1750To the Philippians, 8:1; Journel, 75.
1751Dial. cum Tryph., 95; Journel, 140
1752De lapsis, 17; Journel, 552.
1753Oratio de incar. Verbi, chap. 9; Journel, 751.
1754Com. in Ps. 53, no. 13; Journel, 889.
1755Epist. 260, 9; Journel, 927
1756Oratio, 33, 9; Journel, 998.
1757In Epist. ad Gal., chaps. 2, 8; Journel, 1201
1758Epist. 41, chap. 7; Journel, 1252; see also 1275, 1313
1759Com. in Isa., 53:5; Journel, 1401
1760Contra Faustum, Bk. XIV, chap. 17.
1761De Trinit., Bk. IV, chap. 17
1762Com. in Rom., 2:13; 4:11; 5:3
1763Ibid., Bk. III, no. 8; Contra Celsum, Bk. VII, chap. 17; Journel, 498, 533
1764Journel, op. cit., Index theol., no. 420. J. Riviere, Le dogme de la redemption, Essai historique, pp. 374-446. Dict. theol. cath., art. "Redemption."
1765cf. Cur Deus Homo
1766cf. IIIa, q. 1, a. 1, 2
1770I Pet. 2:21
1771I Cor. 6:20
1773Preface of Passiontide
1774Com. in Joan., tract. 109
1775cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 4, ad 1
1780Cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 3, ad 2
1782This proposition was condemned: "The inferior part of Christ's soul on the cross did not communicate to the higher part its involuntary emotions" (Denz., no. 1339); but this proposition was condemned because of the word "involuntary." Christ willed to permit these emotions.
1783cf. De veritate, q. 26, a. 9, 10. As we shall see farther on, in chapter 32, a. 2, concerning the union in Christ of extreme grief and supreme happiness, although Christ's sadness and joy were not about the same object, and hence they were not strictly contraries, nevertheless their union was a miracle; for, because of the different ways in which joy tends toward its object, if the joy is most perfect, then it naturally is incompatible with sadness.
As the commentators observe, to understand what St. Thomas says in his reply to the second objection of article 7 of this question, the higher reason and the lower reason are one faculty, it being called higher, inasmuch as it considers divine and eternal things (cf. Ia, q. 79, a. 9). For example, if sin is considered according to lower and human reason, then sorrow arises in the inferior parts of the will. But if sin is considered according to higher and divine reason, inasmuch as it is an offense against God, then there is sadness in the higher part of the will.
But Christ was sorry for our sins inasmuch as they are an offense against God; hence He felt sad, not only in the sensitive faculty, but in the lower reason inasmuch as it was ruled by the higher reason, as Cajetan maintains (Com. in art. 7, no. 6), because sin is something temporal, which is then considered in its eternal aspects. Others, such as Sylvius, say that Christ, grieving over the offense against God, was sad also in the higher reason or in the higher part of the will, but not from its primary object, which is God. So Sylvius interprets the words of St. Thomas in his reply to the second objection of the seventh article of this question, who says: "On the part of the proper object, Christ's higher reason did not suffer." See below, chap. 32.
1787St. Thomas is not here speaking of the strictly moral indirect cause, but of the accidental cause in the physical sense. That anyone be called the moral and indirect cause of any effect, it is not enough that such a person can prevent the effect and does not do so; but it is also necessary that such person is bound to do so; otherwise the effect is neither imputed to such person, nor considered a morally voluntary act. But Christ was not bound to resist His persecutors in the protection of His life, but He could expose Himself to death for the redemption of mankind. Such is the opinion of Suarez
1788cf. IIIa, q. 47, a, 1, c.
1789Ibid., ad 2
1794John 14:31; 10:10
1801Epist. 140 (120 in some editions).
1802cf. Ia, q. 19, a. 8
1805Acts, chaps. 2 and 3.
1806cf. Voste, Com. in IIIam, q. 48, a. 4
1810Luke 23:34; I Cor. 23:34
1811I Cor. 2:8.
1813Questions of New and Old Testaments
1814cf. IIIa, q. 47, a. 5, c. See also John 15:22.
1815John 7:31, 41
1816IIIa, q. 47, a. 5, c. See also Cajetan's commentary on this article
1823Com. in IIIam, q. 47, a. 6, ad 2
1826Denz., no. 799
1827Ibid., no. 820
1834cf. IIIa, q. 19, a. 4.
1835Ibid., q. 52, a. 5
1836Ibid., ad 2
1837Ibid., q. 69, a. 3, ad 3.
1838Ibid., q. 46, a. 3, 4
1843cf. IIIa, q. 19, a. 4.
1845cf. IIIa, q. 24, a. 4
1848Denz., no. 993
1849Ibid., no. 2038
1850cf. chap. 1
1854I Cor. 6:20
1856I Pet. 1:18f.
1857I John 2:2.
1858I Cor. 15:3. See also Rom. 3:24f.; Eph. 1:7; 5:2; 1 Tim. 2:6; 4:10; Apoc. 1:5; 5:9. cf. Prat's Theology of St. Paul, II, 311
1859Com. in Gal., chap. 2, no. 8.
1860De Trinitate, Bk. XIII, chap. 14, no. 18; chap. XV, no. 19. cf. Rouet de Journel, Index patrist., Index theol., no. 419
1861Denz., no. 194 (Council of Orange); nos. 794, 800 (Council of Trent).
1862Ibid., nos. 122f., 286, 319, 323, 462, 794f., 799, 809, 820, 1096, 1294f., 1409. Christ accomplished our redemption by way of true vicarious satisfaction. cf. also J. Riviere, Le dogme de la redemption; La redemption chez les Peres Grecs, pp. 101-210. La redemption chez les Peres Latins, pp. 211-78. Le dogme de la redemption chez St. Augustin; Le dogme de la redemption, etude theologique; and Dict. theol. cath., art. "Redemption, " cols. 1932-42
1863Ibid., nos. 319, 552, 1019
1864Ibid., no. 3051
1865Denz., nos. 286, 993f
1866Ibid., no. 3051
1867Ibid., nos. 711, 790, 794, 796
1868Deut. 13:5; 9:26; 21:8
1870Denz., no. 1796
1871cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 6
1872I John 2:2. See also IIIa, q. 48, a. 1, c
1873Supplement, q. 13, a. 2
1874Consult Cajetan's commentary on this article
1875Redemption, inasmuch as it is willed by God, is indeed by way of merit, satisfaction, and sacrifice, but absolutely speaking redemption can be conceived, so it seems, by way of a theandric act, without pain, satisfaction. and sacrifice each in the strict sense; because the theandric act of love even of itself is more pleasing to God than all sins are displeasing to Him. But we human beings acknowledge the generosity of love only if it be manifested by a generous acceptance of suffering. Thus it is commonly said that sacrifice is a real manifestation or proof of true love
1876cf. IIIa, q. 69, a. 3, ad 3
1879Cf. Ia, q. 20, a. 4, ad 1.
1880St. Thomas explained above (q. 47, a. 3) in what sense "God the Father spared not even His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all" (Rom. 8:32). He delivered Him up: (1) by eternally preordaining Christ's passion for the liberation of the human race; (2) by inspiring Him with the will to suffer for us and by infusing charity in Him; (3) by not shielding Him from the Passion, but exposing Him to His persecutors.
1883Summa theol., IIIa, q. 49, a. I, ad 4, and a. 3.
1884Ibid., Ia, q. 21, a. 4
1885Denz., no. 1796
1886cf. Durandus, Com. in III Sent., d. 20, q. 2; Scotus, Com. in III Sent., d. 19, q. un., no. 7; G. Biel, Com. in III Sent., d. 19, q. un.; Lychetus, Com. ad Scotum in III Sent., d. 19, q. un., nos. 9-11.
Cf. M. J. Scheeben, Dogmatik, Bk. IV, no. 415, his judgment on the insufficiency of Scotus' doctrine concerning the Incarnation.
1887Cf. Gulielmus Paris., Cur Deus Homo (before middle); Alensis, Part III, q. 1, no. 4; St. Thomas, IIIa, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2; q. 46, a. 6, ad 6; St. Bonaventure, III Sent., d. 20, a. 1, 2, 3-5
1888It must be noted that for Thomists, in the order of grace and glory, several of these operations are of intrinsic value, such as intrinsically efficacious grace, happiness of heaven which is intrinsically impossible to lose; whereas, on the contrary, in the opinion of certain theologians, these have only an extrinsic value. The reason for this difference of opinion is that in these questions the Thomists consider, not only the fact itself, but the nature of this fact or act, or divine gift
1890I Pet. 1:18
1892Denz., nos. 550-52. Bull Unigenitus Dei Filius.
1893Ibid., no. 550
1894Summa theol., IIIa, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2.
1895Ibid., q. 46, a. 6, ad 6
1896Ibid., 6th obj
1897Ibid., ad 3
1899Thus it is generally said that it is objectively more meritorious to teach theology from love for God, than equally from love for God to perform some manual work; but personally it is more meritorious to do manual work with great love for God, than to teach theology with very little love for God
1900I Tim. 2:5f
1901Denz., no. 799
1903Com. in Rom., Hom. 10. cf. Rouet de Journel, Enchiridion patristicum, nos. 421f., for testimony of several other Fathers
1904cf. IIIa, q. 48, a. 2, c
1905I John 22. cf. Denz., no 795
1906"Ex parte formae" here means those elements that constitute justice truly as such, just as body and rational soul truly constitute the nature of man. (Tr.)
1907Vasquez, in IIIam, disp. 3, c. 1f. Molina, in lam, q. 21, a. 1; Lugo, De mysterio incarnationis, disp. 3, sect. 1, no. 4; L. Billot, De Verbo incarnato, thesis 53.
1908cf. Cajetan, in IIIam, q. 1, a. 2. Salmanticenses, De incarnatione, disp. 1, no. 214. See also Capreolus, Ferrariensis, Alvarez, John of St. Thomas, and others in their commentaries on St. Thomas. Among texts from St. Thomas, cf. IIIa, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2; q. 48, a. 2. Also St. Bonaventure, in III Sent., disp. 20, q. 5.
1909Suarez (disp., IV, sect. 3, no. 11) says about this opinion of the Thomists: "I consider it so certain that the contrary opinion seems neither probable nor pious nor sufficiently consistent with the faith."
1910Ethics, V, 2.
1911cf. IIIa, q. 20, a. 2
1912Ibid., q. 48, a. 2, c.
1913I Cor. 6:20
1914See infra, chap. 34.
1915cf. IIIa, q. 48, a. 2, c.
1916So says A. Sabatier, La doctrine de l'expiation et son evolution historique, pp. 37, 97f. So also Loisy, L'evangile et l'Eglise, chaps. 3 and 4.
1917Denz., no. 122; Eph. 5:2
1918Ibid., no. 938. On the priesthood of Christ, cf. IIIa, q. 22
1922I Cor. 5:7.
1923II Cor. 5:21
1932See Rouet de Journel's Enchir. patrist., nos. 416-18
1934cf. IIIa, q. 48, a. 3. c
1935Ibid., IIa IIae, q. 85
1936Ibid., IIIa, q. 47, a. 1, 2
1937Com. in IIIam, p. 367
1938De Trinit., Bk. IV, chap. 14
1940cf. I Pet. 6:1f.
1941Denz., no. 940
1942Mysterium fidei, pp. 101-6; also Esquisse du mystere de la foi, pp. 9, 13
1943cf. E. Hugon, Revue thomiste, July-September, 1922. See refutation of Father de la Taille's theory in Lepin's L'idee du sacrifice de la Messe, pp. 688-90, also A. Michel, Dict. de theol. cath., art. "Messe, " cols. 1245f.
1945Denz., no. 938
1954Rouet de Journel, Enchiridion patrist., nos. 413, 420
1956II Pet. 2:19
1957cf. IIIa., q. 48, a. 4, c.
1958Denz., no. 799
1959cf. Rouet de Journel, op. cit., no. 420
1962Rom. 3:23; cf. Ibid., 5:12, 19; see also Gal. 3:13, 22; II Cor. 5:14; 1 Tim. 2:6
1964cf. ad 2.
1965Com. in IV Sent., d. 20, a. 1, quaestiuncula prima
1966Denz., nos. 552, 757, 1471, 3051
1967Thus the just person can merit de congruo (fittingly), the conversion of a sinner, as St. Monica merited the conversion of St. Augustine. See also Ia IIae, q. 114, a. 6.
1968Com. in IV Sent., d. 20, a. 1, quaestiuncula Ia. See also Cajetan's Com. in Ep. ad Gal., 120, and his treatise De fide et moribus contra Lutherum, chap. 9, translated by Em. Mersch, S.J., in his "Le corps mystique, " Etude de theol. historique, II, 275.
1969cf. Ia IIae, q. 114, a. 6, c.; Heb. 2:10
1971Com. in. Ep. ad Col.
1972Denz., no. 3034
1973Ibid., note 4
1974The Blessed Virgin Mary congruously merited the liberation and the reparation of the human race, whereas the other saints congruously merited the application of this liberation and reparation to this particular person, as St. Monica to St. Augustine. Thus it is said that the Blessed Virgin Mary congruously merited the objective redemption of the human race, not indeed redemption taken in the active sense, for this is a theandric act of Christ the Redeemer but the effect of this redemption. Christ had a condign right to this effect, and the Blessed Virgin Mary a congruous right to the same. The application of objective redemption to Peter or to Paul is called subjective redemption, namely, of this particular man or the other.
1975cf. IIIa, q. 13, a. 2
1976Ibid., q. 8, a. 1, ad 1; q. 43, a. 2; De veritate, q. 27, a. 3
1977I Cor. 1:25
1978cf. IIIa, q. 49, a. 1 (end).
1979Denz., no. 194.
1980Ibid., nos. 794, 800
1981Ibid., nos. 286, 993f.
1982Ibid., nos. 122f., 286, 319, 323, 462, 794, 799, 809, 820, 1096, 1294f., 1409
1983Ibid., nos. 319, 462, 480, 551
1984Ibid., no. 323
1985cf. ad 3
1987Denz., no. 1096
1989Denz., no. 1294
1990II Cor. 4:15
1991Denz., no. 795
1993II Cor. 5:15
1994I Tim. 2:4f.
1996I John 2:2
1997Enchiridion patristicum, no. 422. See especially texts from St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Ambrose, St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustine.
1998Contra Julianum, chap. 4, nos. 8, 24
1999De natura et gratia, chap. 43, no. 50
2000Denz., no 319
2002Denz., no. 794; I John 2:2..
2003cf. IIIa, q. 49, a. 1
2005I Pet. 2:21. cf. II Cor. 4:10; Gal. 5:24; Heb. 5 1; Rom. 8:17; II Pet. 1:10.
2006cf. IIIa, q. 49, a. 1-5.
2007Ibid., q. 69, a. 3.
2008Rom. 5:3f.; II Cor. 4:17
2009So St. Thomas has spoken in several places. see the Tabula aurea of his works, under the heading "satisfaction, " no. 36, where he says that Christ satisfied sufficiently for the whole human race, but not efficaciously. cf. IIIa, q. 79, a. 7, ad 2, where he says "Christ's passion benefits all, for the forgiveness of sin and the attaining of grace and glory, whereas it produces no effect except in those who are united with Christ's passion through faith and charity." In the Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chap. 55, ad 7, we read "There is sufficient power in the divine Incarnation for the salvation of all men; but that not all are saved thereby happens because of their disposition, in that they refuse to receive in themselves the fruit of the Incarnation, by not abiding in the incarnate God by faith and charity." Likewise in De veritate, q. 29, a. 7, ad 4, he remarks: "Christ's merit was sufficient for the salvation of all men, but it was not efficacious for all, partly because of free will, partly because of divine choice, by which the effect of Christ's merits is conferred mercifully on some, but on others it is withdrawn by God's just judgment." We find the same formula in his Com. on St. Matthew, chap. 20 (end); also in his Com. on I Tim., chap. 2, lect. 1 (end), where he says: "[Christ merited] efficaciously for some, but sufficiently for all, because the price of His blood is sufficient for the salvation of all, but it is efficacious only for the elect, because of the obstacle."
2010cf. IIIa, q. 19, a. 4; q. 21, a. 4
2011Summa theol., IIIa, q. 46-49.
2012Ibid., q. 46, a. 5, ad 3
2013Liturgical hymn Adoro Te
2014Denz., no. 550
2016Ibid., 27:46; Mark 15:34.
2017cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 3, 4.
2018Ibid., q. 47, a. 2
2019Ibid., a. 3
2021Com in Joan., 15
2023cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 3; Rom. 5:8.
2024Ibid.; I Pet. 2:21
2025Summa theol., IIIa, q. 46, a. 4
2026Ibid., a. 3
2027Ibid., q. 47, a. 2.
2028Ibid., q. 46, a. 3; I Cor. 15:57.
2029Ibid., q. 47, a. 2.
2030Ibid., q. 46, a. 4, ad I.
2033St. Augustine's De Trinitate, Bk. IV, chap. 14
2034cf. IIIa, q 19, a. 3
2035Ibid., q. 46, a. 6, ad 4; Isa. 53:4
2039cf. Ia, q. 20, a. 4, ad 1
2040Ibid., 1st obj.; Rom. 8:32
2041Summa theol., loc. cit.; Isa. 9:6
2045Com. in Joan., 10:17. See also his Com. Epist. ad Rom. 8:32; also in Epist. ad Phil. 2:8
2046cf. IIIa, q. 47, a. 3
2047Ibid.; Rom. 8:32
2048Evidently here we have the predominating decree, independently of the scientia media or the conditionally free future merits of Christ; for Christ's merits are the effect and not the cause of His predestination. cf. Ia, q. 23, a. 5
2051Ibid., 53:7. At Least in Vulgate
2053cf. IIIa, q. 47, a. 3, c. Also Epist. 120, no. 6, of St. Augustine
2054Ibid., ad 1
2059De civitate Dei, chap. 28
2061cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 4, ad 3
2063cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 3
2064Ibid., ad 2
2065Ibid., q. 47, a. 2.
2066Feast of Finding of the Holy Cross. First antiphon of Lauds
2067Phil. 2: 8. St. Thomas (Com. in Epist. ad Phil. 2:8) quotes this text from Job 22:29; "He that hath been humbled shall be in glory." He also quotes this text from St. Paul (Eph. 1:21): "God set Him on His right hand in the heavenly places, above all."
2068This doctrine is confirmed by the Scripture; for the Gospel says: "On the last and great day of the festivity, Jesus stood and cried, saying: If any man thirst, let him come to Me and drink. He that believeth in Me, as the Scripture saith: From within Him shall flow rivers of living water. Now this He said of the Spirit which they should receive, who believed in Him; for as yet the Spirit was not given, because Jesus was not yet glorified" (John 8:37f.). St. Thomas (Com. in Joan. 8:38) says: "These words "the Spirit was not yet given, must be understood of that abundant bestowal, and by visible signs, such as was given to the apostles after the resurrection and ascension in the form of fiery tongues.... And the reason assigned why Christ willed to be glorified before He would give the Holy Spirit, is that the Holy Spirit is given for the purpose of weaning our hearts from attachment to worldly things so that they be centered on our spiritual resurrection and hasten with all our supernatural powers toward God." Moreover, the Holy Spirit is Christ's supreme gift, namely, the uncreated gift, which is ultimately granted on the culmination of His mission and glorification, that is, after the humiliations of His passion.
2069I Cor. 3:22f.
2070Collect for Tenth Sunday after Pentecost
2074Hymn Vexilla Regis
2075Hymn Stabat Mater
2076cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 5-8
2077Ibid., a. 5, 6
2078Ibid., a. 7, 8
2080cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 9-13
2081Dan. 9:23; 10:11
2086Matt. 26:39; Luke 22:42; Mark 14:36..
2088cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 12
2091Ibid., 10:39. See also Mark 8:34; 10:35.
2092Matt. 20:20; Mark 10:38
2099Ibid., 17:17, 20.
2100cf. IIIa, q. 7, a. 9-13
2101Christ willed that certain martyrs at the moment of their martyrdom should experience the greatest joy that would lessen the pain, as in the case of St. Lawrence, St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St. Andrew: but Christ Himself willed to experience "sorrow even unto death" (Matt. 26:38) so that His sacrifice might be more perfect and meritorious.
2104cf. Louis Chardon, O.P., La Croix de Jesus, chap. 5, wherein he says: "The plenitude of grace that belongs properly to Jesus, as head of His mystical body, causes in His soul a desire for the cross, " (pp. 46-52).
2105cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 5, 6
2106Ibid., q. 14, a. 4.
2107Ibid., q. 46, a. 6.
2109cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 6, first reason
2110Ibid., second reason.
2111Ibid., fourth reason
2114cf. IIIa, q. 84, a. 9; q. 85, a. 1
2116I Pet. 2:24.
2117I John 3:5
2119cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 7, 8
2120Ibid., q. 9, a. 2.
2125Denz., no. 2183
2126cf. IIIa, q. 9, a. 2; q. 10.
2127Denz., no. 224
2128cf. IIIa, q. 9, a. 3
2138Clypeus theol., de Incarn., disp. XVI, a. 1, solv. obj., no. 14.
2139Summa theol., Ia IIae, q. 10, a. 2; see also Ibid., q. 5, a. 4.
2140Ibid., IIIa, q. 46, a. 8 ad 1.
2143cf. IIa, IIae, q. 28, 29
2144Denz., no. 1796
2151John 19 30.
2153See p. 785
2154John 19 30
2157cf. IIIa, q. 47, a. 3
2159Isa. 53:6, 10.
2160Com. in IIIam, d. 16, q. 1, a. 2
2162cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 8
2163Com. in IIIam, q. 46, a. 8.
2164See p. 783
2165Clypeus theol., disp. 16, a. 1, no. 14
2166cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 7; also q. 9, a. 2. See also Salmanticenses, Gonet, and Cajetan in their commentaries on these articles.
2167cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 8, 1st obj. See also Aristotle's Ethics, Bk. XIV, chap. 4
2169De fide orthod., Bk. III, chap. 15
2170cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 8
2171Ibid., a. 8, c.
2172Ibid., a. 6, ad 4
2173cf. De veritate, q. 26, a. 9, ad 7; Compend. theol., chap. 232. He had said in De veritate, q. 26, a. 9, ad 7: "The rational will regarded Christ's passion only as it concerned eternal truths, and according to these the will rejoiced in the Passion inasmuch as it was pleasing to God." See also Quodl. VII, a. 5, and III Sent., d. 15, q. 2, a. 1; q. 3, a. 3, q. 2. Also in Compend. theol., chap. 232, he said: "Christ's soul enjoyed the perfect vision of God. Therefore in the rational will of Christ's soul, whose particular function... is to contemplate and take counsel concerning eternal truths, there was nothing adverse or repugnant therein, which would give rise to any suffering detrimental to it.... Christ suffered sadness inasmuch as He knew there was imminent danger of guilt or punishment for those whom He loved because of His charity. Hence He grieved not only for Himself, but also for others. And because the love of one's neighbor belongs in a certain way to the higher reason, inasmuch as one's neighbor from charity is loved for God's sake, yet Christ's higher reason could not feel sad about the defects of His neighbors as it is possible for us to be sad. Because Christ's higher reason fully enjoyed the beatific vision, and so He apprehended that whatever pertains to the defects of others, inasmuch as this is included in divine wisdom, is fittingly ordained for some purpose, and inasmuch as anyone is permitted to sin and will be punished for the sin. Therefore neither Christ's soul, nor the souls of any of the blessed, who see God, can feel sad about the defects of others here on earth. But such is not the case with wayfarers, who as yet do not see the purpose of divine wisdom. These also according to the rational will are saddened at the defects of others, when they think that it belongs to God's honor and the exaltation of the faith, that some be saved, who nevertheless will be lost. Thus, therefore, such a person grieves according to the senses, imagination, and sensitive will for those who will be lost, but rejoices according to the rational will, inasmuch as these defects are referred to the ordering of divine wisdom. Therefore it could happen that Christ's sensitive will shrank from something that His rational will desired; yet there was no contrariety of appetites in Him, or rebellion of the flesh against the spirit..., but Christ permitted each of His lower faculties to be moved in its own way, as was becoming to Him."
2174Summa theol., IIIa, q. 46, a. 7, c. and ad 2
2175Com. in IIIam, q. 46, a. 7, no. 6.
2176Summa theol., Ia, q. 113, a. 7
2177Com. in IIIam, loc. cit.
2178De veritate, q. 26, a. 9, ad 7; Compend. theol., chap. 232.
2179St. Thomas says: "Angels do not grieve, either for sin or for the pains inflicted on men. For grief and sorrow, according to St. Augustine, are for those things which occur against our will. But nothing happens in the world contrary to the will of the angels and the other blessed, because their will cleaves entirely to the ordering of divine justice; while nothing happens in the world except what is effected or permitted by divine justice. Therefore, simply speaking, nothing occurs in the world against the will of the blessed.... Therefore, universally and absolutely speaking, the angels do not will sin and the pains inflicted on its account; but they do will the fulfillment of the ordering of divine justice in this matter, in respect to which some are subjected to pains and are allowed to fall into sin." To quote Cajetan again (Com. in IIIam, q. 46, a. 7, no. 6): "'sin displeases the blessed, but this displeasure is not sadness, because this sadness adds to the displeasure, depression, and worry that afflict the nature." See note 163 concerning what St. Thomas says in his Compend. theol., chap. 232: "Christ's higher reason fully enjoyed the beatific vision, and so He apprehended whatever pertains to the defects of others, inasmuch as this is included in divine wisdom, is fittingly ordained for some purpose, and inasmuch as anyone is permitted to sin and will be punished for the sin."
Cf. Xenia thomistica, II, 349-491, by Fr. Sadoc Szabo, O.P. De scientia beata Christi, especially the part that treats of the compatibility of the simultaneous presence in Christ of utmost joy and utmost grief, pp. 432-48.
2180cf. Salmanticenses, De incarnatione, disp. XVII, dub. 4, no. 47, who say: "The prevention of the overflow of joy (in the higher reason) was against the connatural consent of these parts (of the soul) and was a miracle. Hence the union of utmost joy and utmost sadness in Christ is miraculous, at least according to our previous supposition; just as proportionately is the case with the union of the state of comprehensor and wayfarer in the same Christ."
2182Summa theol., IIIa, q. 46, a. 8, 2nd obj
2183cf. Compend. theol., chap. 232
2184cf. IIIa, q. 84, a. 9, ad 2.
2185Compend. theol., chap. 232
2186Acts 5. 41.
2187Ignatius to Romans, no. 4.
2188cf. IIIa, q. 46, a. 6, ad 4.
2189cf. De incarnat., disp. XXII, dub. 4, no. 47.
2190cf. IIIa, q. 15, a. 6, ad 3. See also Cajetan, Gonet, Billuart, S. Szabo, loc. cit.
2193cf. La Croix de Jesus (ed. 1937).
2194cf. Oraison et ascension mystique de Saint Paul de la Croix, by Father Cajetan of the Name of Mary, C. P.
2196Com. in Joan. 2:16.
2199Rom. 5:18f. See also St. Thomas, Com. on Romans.
2200cf. IIIa, q. 69, a. 3, ad 3.
2208I John 5:4f.
2211Com. S. Thomae in Joan. 12:21.
2212I John 3:8
2213Col. 2:13 ff.
2222I Pet. 2 7; Ps. 117:22; Isa. 8 14.
22231 Cor. 1:23f.
2225Exorcismus, Rit. Rom., Titulus XI, chap. 3.
2226Summa theol., IIIa, q. 49, a. 1
2227Ibid., a. 2
2228Matt. 12:39f.; 16:21; 17:22; 20:19; Luke 11:29; 18:33; Mark 8:31; 9:30; 10:34; 14:28; John 2:19
2229Acts 2:32f.; 17:31; I Cor. 15:5f.
2230I Cor. 15:13f.
2234P. G., LXI, 335.
2235P. G., CXXIV, 759
2236Ibid., CXVIII, 867.
2237"La resurrection du Christ devant la critique contemporaine, " Science et foi, pp. 1-6
2238Studia Paulina, p. 62. Father Voste gives a good explanation of St. Pauls' words: "If Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain" (I Cor. 15:14); "vain" (Greek kene) not only means without foundation, but it also signifies "empty, " which means that there is no purpose to our faith in Christ the Savior.
2242St. Peter says: "Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell as it was impossible that He should be holden by it" (Acts 2:24). This means that it was impossible for Christ to be held in the bonds of death, for then He would have been conquered by death, instead of being its conqueror
2244Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chap. 79; Rom. 5:17
2245See Appendix: The definability of the Blessed Virgin Mary's Assumption
2246John 6:40, 44, 55
2247I Cor. 15:22, 26, 54, 57.
2248Contra Gentes, Bk. IV, chap. 82
2250Oration "Veneranda, " for Assumption, now abrogated.
2251Summa theol., IIIa, q. 50-59
2254Matt. 27:1f.; John 19:1f.
2257Denz., nos. 3, 6, 40, 462
2258Ibid., nos. 385, 429
2259Ibid., no. 532.
2263See Catechism of the Council of Trent; also Dict. theol. cath., art. "Descente aux enfers."
2264Denz., nos. 3, 6, 40, 462, Christ descended into hell; nos. 385, 429, His soul descended; no. 532, but He did not abolish hell.
2267Journel, Enchiridion patrist., no. 426.
2271cf., IIIa, q. 52, a. 2, for the solution of objections taken from certain passages of Sacred Scripture. He delivered them from the penalty that was due to them.
2272Exultet of Holy Saturday.
2274Col. 2:1 5.
2275Hom. 57 in Evang.
2276Hom. 22 in Evang.
2277Com, in cap. IIum Jonae
2278Litany of the Sacred Heart.
2280cf. IIIa, q. 52, a. 8, ad 1, ad 2.
2281See IIIa, q. 53-58.
2282Dict. theol. cath., art. "Jesus-Christ, " La resurrection, col. 1213-24.
2283Denz., nos. 2f., 13, 16, 20, 40, 54, 86, 255, 994, 2036, 2084.
2284Ibid., no. 286.
2285Ibid., nos. 344, 422
2286Ibid., nos. 422, 462.
2287Ibid., nos. 344, 422
2288cf. Ps. 138:1; Luke 24:26
2289I Cor. 15:12
2293Luke 24:47; John 7:39
2294Matt. 28:1. See Mark 16:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:1. cf. St. Thomas, Summa theol., IIIa, q. 53, a. 2, ad 3
2295Ibid., a. 3, ad 2. On this subject cf. Billuart, who refutes Sylvius, and defends the second opinion
2296Ibid., a. 4
2297Ibid., q. 53, a. 4.
2298Ibid., q. 54, a. 1
2299Ibid., a. 3
2300John 20:27; cf. St. Thomas, Summa theol., IIIa, q. 54, a. 3
2301cf. IIIa, q. 55, a. 1, ad 3.
2303Com. Lucam 24:22
2304If the objection is raised that "Christ appeared first to Mary Magdalen" (Mark 16:9), we reply to this that the appearance was the first reported by the Evangelists, and that she preceded the disciples, the witnesses and the messengers, in this respect.
2306Read the entire answer
2307Summa theol., IIIa, q. 53, a. 3, ad 2.
2308Ibid., ad 3.
2309I Cor. 15:6
2313Com. in Joan. 20:17.
2314cf. IIIa, q. 55, a. 4.
2316Matt. 28 5f.
2317Luke 24 39f.
2321Summa theol., IIIa, q. 55, a. 6, ad 1
2322Ibid., q. 56, a. 1, ad 3
2323Ibid., a. 2, ad 2.
2324Denz., nos. 2f., 13, 20, 54, 86
2325Ibid., nos. 13, 344, 429, 462.
2326Ibid., nos. 2f., 13, 16, 86
2327Ibid., no. 874
2328Ibid., nos. 9, 13, 16, 86
2329Ibid., nos. 2f., 13, 40, 54, 86, 287, 344, 422, 427, 429, 462, 994, 3028.
2330Ibid., nos. 13, 225
2333Acts 1:9f. cf. Eph. 4:8; Col. 3:1f. Also testimony of the Fathers; Enchir. patrist., nos. 427, 428. On this mystery, see Catechism of Council of Trent, chap. 7, Apostle's Creed.
2336cf. IIIa, q. 57, a. 1, ad 4.
2338cf. Suppl., q. 84, a. 1
2339cf. IIIa, q. 57, a. 3, ad 1.
2342cf. IIIa, q. 57, a. 4, ad 1
2345Eph. 4:8; Ps. 67:19
2346Heb. 7:25; 9:24.
2349I Cor. 15:8
2350cf. Ia, q. 43
2352I Cor. 12:8f.
2355I Cor. 14:18
2356Denz., nos. 2f., 9, 13, 16, 86, 874. cf. IIIa, q. 58, Christ sitting at the right hand of the Father.
2362Matt. 21:5; see also John 12:15.
2367Mark 13:27; see also Matt. 13:41; 24:31
2370Apoc. 1:5f., 19:16, 22:13.
2372Rom. 8:34; see also Exod. 1:20
2373I Cor. 15:25f.
2375Antiphon before Christmas.
2376Invitatory for Corpus Christi
2378Denz., no. 2195; Encycl. Quas primas.
2379Denz., no. 2194; Quas primas
2381I Pet. 1:18f.
2382I Cor. 6:20.
2383Ibid., 6:15; Denz.., no. 2194
2384cf. IIIa, q. 58, a. 2.
2385Ibid., ad 2.
2386Ibid., a. 3
2387Ibid., a. 3; see also ad 1.
2388Ibid., q. 59, a. 4, ad 1.
2389Ibid., q. 58, a. 4; q. 59, a. 2, c., ad 2
2390Ibid., q. 59, a. 3; see also a. 6
2391Opusc. 20, no. 12
2392Summa theol., IIa IIae, q. 50, a. 1, ad 1.
2393Ibid., Ia, q. 103, a. 1.
2394Ibid.. a. 3
2398De justitia, diss. III, a. 6
2399De incarn., disp. 32, dub. 2.
2400cf. IIIa, q. 59, a. 4, ad 1; q. 58, a. 2
2401Denz., no. 2194
2403Ibid., no. 2196.
2404Ibid., no. 2197
2405cf. IIIa, q. 59, a. 4, ad 1.
2406Denz., nos. 2195f.; Quas primas
2407Ibid., nos. 2195f
2408Ibid., no. 2195
2409Ibid., no. 1295
2410Rom. 6:13; Quas primas
2411Immortale. See Denz., no. 1866
2413cf. Ia IIae, q. 109, a. 4
2414Denz., no. 2197; Quas primas
2417The title of Savior or Priest and victim thus transcends the title of King
2418Denz., nos. 2f., 13, 40, 54, 86, 255, 287, 422, 427, 429, 462, 994, 3028. See Acts 10:42; Rom. 14:9
2419cf. IIIa, q. 59, a. 1-3.
2421cf. IIIa, q. 59, a. 3.
2422Ibid., a. 4.
2427Com. in IV Sent., d. 47, q. 1, a. 1, q. 2.
2428Ibid., d. 48, q. 1, a. 4, q. 1, 6
2429Com. St. Thomae in Ps. 50
2430Summa theol., q. 59, a. 6, c.
2431Ibid.; cf. Phil. 2:10
2433Suppl., q. 90.
2437cf. IIIa, q. 58, a. 1-4
2440Com. in Heb. 9:11
2442De praedest. sanct., chap. 3.
2443Gloria of Mass
2444Apoc. 5:13; also 7:10
2445L'idee du sacrifice de la Messe, pp. 698f., 745f.
2448Summa theol., IIIa, q. 22, a. 5, c.
2449cf. Heb. 7:24f.; 9:12f., 24f.; 10:12f.; I Cor. 15:55f.; Rom. 6:6f.; Col. 2:14f.; see Bossuet, Sermon pour la fete de tous les saints; Monsabre, Exposition du dogme catholique, careme, 1879. This same doctrine has also been well explained by J. Grimal, Le sacerdoce et le sacrifice de N. S.J. Chr., pp. 189-228; A. Michel, Dict. theol. cath., art. "Jesus-Christ, " cols. 1340-42; J. M. Herve, Manual theol. dogm., II, 587f.
2450La Mere du Sauveur et notre vie interieure. see also Bittremieux, De meditatione universali B. M. Virginis quoad gratias; B. H. Merkelbach, O.P., Mariologia; Friethoff, O.P., De Alma Socia Christi mediatoris; Dict. theol. cath., art. "Marie", (Duplanchy).
2451Denz., no. 113; see also nos. 218, 290, 708, 993, 1462
2452Summa theol., IIIa, q. 35, a. 4
2453Ibid., q. 27, a. 5
2456Denz., no. 86
2457The Blessed Virgin Mary did not even merit congruously in the strict sense the Incarnation and the divine motherhood, because the principle of merit does not come under merit, as Billuart well explains, De incarnatione, diss. V, a. 3; for the Incarnation and future merits of Christ are the foundation and principle of all the Blessed Virgin Mary's merits and not the effects. From this it would also follow that the Blessed Virgin Mary merited something better than Christ Himself merited; and so the Incarnation would not be a work of pure mercy, for congruous merit, strictly so called, implies an amicable right to a reward as a compensation.
But the Blessed Virgin Mary merited congruously in the broad sense the Incarnation and divine motherhood.
2458See reply of Congregation of Rites, June 1, 1884
2459cf. La Mere du Sauveur, pp. 24f.
2460Denz., no. 1641; see also, nos. 256, 734f., 792, 1073, 1100, 3035
2461Ibid., no. 1641
2464cf. P. Le Bachelet, Dict. apol., art. "Marie, " Immaculate Conception, cols. 210-75. Rouet de Journel, Ench. patrist., no. 435
2465cf. IIIa, q. 27, a. 1
2466Com. in III Sent., d. 3, q. 1, et Reportata, Bk. III, d. 3, q. 1
2467Com. in I Sent., d. 44, q. 1, a. 3, ad 3
2468Rom. 3:23; 5:12, 19; Gal. 3:22; II Cor. 5:14; I Tim. 2:6
2469cf. IIIa, q. 27, a. 2
2470Ibid., ad 2
2471Quodl VI, a. 7.
2472cf. IIIa, q. 27, a. 2, ad 3.
2473Santo Tomas y la Immaculada
2474Dict. theol. cath., art. "Freres-Precheurs, " col. 899
2475Tractatus dogmatici, II, 749.
2476cf. IIIa, q. 27, a. 2, ad 3
2477This work is entitled "Expositio super salutatione angelica "
2478cf. Divus Thomas, pp. 445-79, and Monografie del Collegio Alberoni. Sixteen out of the nineteen codices have the words "nec originale"; hence Father Rossi concludes that the text is authentic
2479cf. Com. in I Sent., d. 44, q. 1, a. 3, ad 3
2480cf. Compendium theologiae, chap. 224, wherein we read: "Not only was the Blessed Virgin Mary immune from actual sin, but also from original sin, being purified in a special manner." But it would not have been a special privilege if she had been purified as Jeremias and St. John the Baptist had been in the womb, some time after her animation. Likewise in the explanation of the Lord's Prayer, the fifth petition, St. Thomas says: "Full of grace, in whom there was no sin." Also in the Com. in Ps. 14:2, we read: "There was absolutely no stain of sin both in Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary." Also Com. in Ps. 18:6, he writes: "There was no obscurity of sin in the Blessed Virgin."
2481Bulletin thomiste, January to March, 1933, pp. 164-67
2482See his Com. in Summam theol. S. Thomae. De mysteriis vitae Christi; 18f. In the explanation of the Hail Mary, St. Thomas still says: "The Blessed Virgin was conceived in original sin, " but, as Father Voste observes: "Unless we admit an intolerable contradiction in this same passage, it must evidently be understood... as referring to the stain that is to be instrumentally transmitted through the seed and the flesh, but not at all of formal original sin personally, contracted by the soul and person of Mary."
2483Denz., no. 833.
2484De natura et gratia, 36.
2485II Cor. 3:6
2486cf. IIIa, q. 27, a. 4; Cant. 4:7
2487Bull Ineffabilis Deus
2488Summa theol., IIIa, q. 27, a. 5
2489Bull Ineffabilis Deus
2492This point has been more fully examined by us in La Mere du Sauveur, pp. 77f., in which we quote authors who admit this opinion, especially St. Francis de Sales (Sermon 38) and St. Alphonsus (Glories of Mary, II, discourse 2, second point).
2493Denz., no. 224
2494St. Thomas says (Com. in Epist. ad Heb. 10:25): "The natural motion (for example of a falling stone), the more swift it becomes, the more it approaches its destined end.... But grace inclines the will after the manner of nature. Therefore those who are in a state of grace must all the more increase in it, the more they approach their end... for the path of the just, as a shining light, goeth forwards and increaseth even to perfect day" (Prov. 4:18).
2496Denz., nos. 91, 256, 282, 993, 3029
2497Ibid., no. 1314.
2498cf. Rouet de Journel's Enchiridion patrist., no. 432
2499Summa theol., IIIa, q. 28, a. 3.
2500Denz., no. 1073.
2501Homiliae duae de dormitione Virginis Mariae
2502Amour de Dieu, Bk. VII, chaps. 13, 14
2503Premier Sermon pour la fete de l'Assomption, Ier point
2504Summa theol., IIIa, q. 55, a. 2, ad 2.
2509Hymn Veneranda in Ambrosian and Dominican rites
2510Enchiridion, no. 1641, note 1; see also Coll. Lacensis, VII, 868f.; and Appendix: The definability of the Blessed Virgin Mary's Assumption
2511Responsory for Vespers of Assumption.
2512cf. Rouet de Journel, Enchir. patrist., no. 433. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Epiphanius, St. Jerome, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Ephrem are quoted, agreeing substantially in praying: "Hail, best mediatrix between God and men. Hail, most efficacious conciliatrix... and after the Mediator, the Mediatrix of the whole world." cf. St. Ephrem, Opera omnia, Vol. III, col. 528
2514Mariali, q. 42.
2515Encyclical, On the Rosary, September 22, 1891
2516Encyclical Fidentem, September 20, 1896
2517Denz., no 3034
2518Litt. Apost., "Inter sodalicia, " March 22, 1918
2519Litt. Apost.; "Explorata res, " February 2, 1923
2520Section, De indulgentiis, decree "sunt quos amor, " June 26, 1913
2521Denz., no. 3034 note
2522Mariale, q. 42.
2523cf. Ia IIae, q. 114, a. 6.
2524Denz., no. 3034
2525On this controversy, cf. B. H. Merchelbach, O.P., Mariologia, pp. 327-44, and C. Friethoff, O.P., De Alma socia Christi mediatoris. P. G. M. Roschini O. S. M., De Corredemptrice.
2526Summa theol., Ia IIae, q. 88, a. 1, ad 1
2527Ibid., a. 6, c.; also ad 1
2528The present objection is similar to this: Christ Himself was predestined, therefore He could not merit our predestination. We reply with St. Thomas, IIIa, q. 24, a. 4: Christ was predestined by an eternal decree before us, and could not merit our predestination on the part of God predestining, that is, He could not merit the eternal act of our predestination, for, as St. Thomas says: "By one and the same act God predestined Him and us" (Ibid.). But He merited our predestination on the part of the effects, that is, He merited all the effects of our predestination. Christ has a condign right to these effects, and this does not exclude a congruous right, in a subordinate sense, by the Blessed Virgin Mary to these effects. Christ vivifies us through the mediation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, just as the head through the medium of the neck moves the members. We never said that the Blessed Virgin Mary merited the theandric act of Christ the Redeemer, which is impossible, just as Christ did not merit the uncreated and eternal act of our predestination. These distinctions, which all should know, are classical ones.
Thus in an army, although the head of a legion is commanded by the general of the whole army, this latter commands the soldier, because between the two commanders there is not coordination but subordination. More briefly, although the Blessed Virgin Mary is redeemed by Christ, she is our coredemptrix, because between her and us there is not coordination but subordination, just as between Christ and Mary. Hence it is easy to see that she is the mediatrix to the Redeemer.
2529Denz., no. 3034 note. Pius XI is also quoted in this note as saying: "The Virgin by her bitter sorrows shared with Jesus Christ in the work of redemption."
2530cf. Hymns of the Breviary, by Matthew Britt, O.S.B., though I preferred to depart slightly at times from his rendition. (Tr.)
2531In what our true and perfect devotion toward her should consist is best explained in Blessed Louis Mary de Montfort's golden book entitled: Le traite de la vraie devotion a la Sainte Vierge
2532cf. Dict. de theol. cath., art. "Joseph."
2533Encyclical Quamquam pluries, August 15, 1889
2535Litany of St. Joseph
2537cf. IIIa, q. 24, a. 1-4.
2538La Grandezza di S. Giuseppe, pp. 36f.
2539Luke 2:43, 48
2540cf. Tabula aurea, under the words "Father, " no. 3, and "Sonship, " nos. 6, 11
2541cf. Com. in IV Sent., d. 30, q. 2, a. 2, ad 4.
2542This has been more fully explained by us in the Angelicum of October 1, 1945, under the title, "De paternitate Sancti Joseph, " and in the book, The Mother of the Savior, pp. 342-61: "The predestination of St. Joseph and his eminent sanctity."
2543Typis polyglottis Vaticani, 1942
2544The work by Hentrich and Gualtero, II, 740.
2545Ibid., p. 739
2546About 97 per cent.
2547op. cit., I, xx, the proportion was 73 per cent.
2548Ibid., I, xxiii.
2549Ibid., II, 825
2550The movement began in 1863 and showed notable progress, excluding the period of Modernism, until 1940.
2551op. cit., II, 740
2552Ibid., I, 94.
2553cf. IIIa, q. 55, a. 2, ad. 2
2554op. cit., I, 740
2555This theological proof was invoked by St. Germanus Constant., P. G., XCVIII, 345; by St. Anselm, P.L., CLVIII, 966; by Peter Cell., P.L., CCII, 850, by St. Bernardine of Siena, De assumpt., a. 3, chap. 1.
2556Bull Ineffabilis Deus: "[The holy Virgin Mary] united by a most close and indissoluble bond with Him[Christ] together with Him and through Him exerted everlasting enmity against the venomous serpent, and completely triumphing over him crushed his head with her immaculate foot."
2557op. cit., 1, 97f. See also Acta Conc. Vat., Collectio Lacensis, VII, 868f.
2558op. cit., II, 740
2559Rom. 5:9-21; 6:12-17; I Cor. 15:24-26, 54-57; Col. 2:15; Heb. 2:14f.; John 12:31; 1:29; 6:40-44, 55; 10:25; Acts 27:31
2560The minor is likewise formally and progressively revealed in the following texts: Gen. 3:15; Luke 1:28, 42; 2:35, 51; John 19:25. These texts must be read by the guiding light of tradition, and this minor was proclaimed by Pius IX in his above-quoted dogmatic bull.
2561See the ancient oration "Veneranda", which was formerly recited in Rome before the procession on the feast of the Assumption, and which still remains in the Dominican rite and also in the Ambrosian rite.
2562Luke 1:28, 42
2563Gen. 3 19.
2564op. cit., II, 739.
Provided Courtesy of: