FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225  
226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   >>   >|  
man nature, but by virtue of the Divine Nature, in which Divine Nature resides the power of forgiving sins authoritatively; whereas in the human nature it resides instrumentally and ministerially. Hence Chrysostom expounding this passage says [*Implicitly. Hom. xxx in Matth; cf. St. Thomas, Catena Aurea on Mk. 2:10]: "He said pointedly 'on earth to forgive sins,' in order to show that by an indivisible union He united human nature to the power of the Godhead, since although He was made Man, yet He remained the Word of God." Reply Obj. 3: When we say "this man," the demonstrative pronoun "this" attracts "man" to the suppositum; and hence "Christ as this Man, is God, is a truer proposition than Christ as Man is God." _______________________ TWELFTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 16, Art. 12] Whether This Is True: "Christ As Man Is a Hypostasis or Person"? Objection 1: It would seem that Christ as Man is a hypostasis or person. For what belongs to every man belongs to Christ as Man, since He is like other men according to Phil. 2:7: "Being made in the likeness of men." But every man is a person. Therefore Christ as Man is a person. Obj. 2: Further, Christ as Man is a substance of rational nature. But He is not a universal substance: therefore He is an individual substance. Now a person is nothing else than an individual substance of rational nature; as Boethius says (De Duab. Nat.). Therefore Christ as Man is a person. Obj. 3: Further, Christ as Man is a being of human nature, and a suppositum and a hypostasis of the same nature. But every hypostasis and suppositum and being of human nature is a person. Therefore Christ as Man is a person. _On the contrary,_ Christ as Man is not an eternal person. Therefore if Christ as Man is a person it would follow that in Christ there are two persons--one temporal and the other eternal, which is erroneous, as was said above (Q. 2, A. 6; Q. 4, A. 2). _I answer that,_ As was said (AA. 10, 11), the term "Man" placed in the reduplication may refer either to the suppositum or to the nature. Hence when it is said: "Christ as Man is a person," if it is taken as referring to the suppositum, it is clear that Christ as Man is a person, since the suppositum of human nature is nothing else than the Person of the Son of God. But if it be taken as referring to the nature, it may be understood in two ways. First, we may so understand it as if it belonged to human nature to be in a person, and i
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225  
226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Christ

 

nature

 

person

 

suppositum

 
substance
 
Therefore
 

hypostasis

 

individual

 

eternal

 

Person


resides

 
belongs
 

Nature

 

Further

 
rational
 

Divine

 
referring
 
universal
 
understood
 

belonged


likeness

 

understand

 
reduplication
 

temporal

 

erroneous

 
persons
 

answer

 

follow

 
virtue
 
contrary

Boethius
 

remained

 
Implicitly
 
Godhead
 

passage

 

demonstrative

 

expounding

 

united

 
pointedly
 

Thomas


Catena

 
forgive
 

indivisible

 

pronoun

 

attracts

 

Objection

 

Hypostasis

 

Whether

 

forgiving

 

instrumentally