Dist. 17, Art. 2, Q. 2
Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 17
Quaestio II. Utrum Christus in omni oratione sua fuerit exauditus.
Secundo quaeritur, utrum Christus in omni oratione sua fuerit exauditus. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. Per illud quod dicitur Ioannis undecimop373-1: Ego autem sciebam, quoniam semper audis me; sed illud audire non est aliud quam exaudire: ergo etc.
2. Item, super illud Psalmip373-2: Desiderium animae eius tribuisti ei, et voluntate labiorum eius non fraudasti eum; Glossa: « Voluntate labiorum, id est verborum eius, hoc est per verba prolata, non fraudasti eum; quidquid enim dixit, factum est »: ergo etc.
3. Item, Christus magis dignus est exaudiri quam membra eius, petentia in nomine eius; sed Ioannis decimo quartop373-3 dicitur: Quidquid petieritis Patrem in nomine meo, dabit vobis: ergo multo fortius, quidquid ipse petiit, obtinuit.
4. Item, voluntas Christi fuit divinae voluntati conformis, ergo nihil desideravit et petiit, nisi quod Deus voluit; sed omne quod Deus voluit, fecitp373-4 et facit: ergo omne quod Christus petiit, impetravit.
5. Item, quod Christus petiit, petiit pie, perseveranter et ad salutem, nec habuit in aliquo remorsum conscientiae; sed quicumque petit sic, impetrat quod petitp373-5: ergo omne quod Christus petiit, obtinuit.
Sed contra: 1. In Psalmop373-6 dicitur de Christo: Deus meus, clamabo per diem, et non exaudies: ergo non exaudivit ipsum in eo quod clamavit: non ergo exaudivit ipsum in omni eo, quod petiit.
2. Item, in litterap373-7 dicitur: « Christus clamans non exauditur ad salutem corporalem; bonum quidem petiit, scilicet ut non moreretur; sed melius erat, ut moreretur »: ergo Christus non fuit in omni eo, quod petiit, exauditus.
3. Item, Christus petiit et oravit, ut calix transiret ab eop373-8; sed calix non transiit ab eo: ergo non in omni eo, quod petiit, fuit exauditus.
4. Item, Christus oravit pro suis crucifixoribusp373-9; nec tamen omnes salvati fuerunt: ergo non fuit exauditus in omnibus.
5. Item, Christus oravit pro discipulis suis, ut servarentur a malo, secundum quod dicitur Ioannis decimo septimop373-10: Non tantum pro eis, sed etiam pro eis qui credituri sunt etc.; sed non omnes fuerunt servati a malo: ergo non in omnibus quae petiit, exauditus fuit.
Conclusio.
Christus exauditus fuit in omni eo, quod petiit voluntate rationis sive absoluta, non vero in omni eo, quod petiit voluntate pietatis vel carnis.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod cum oratio sit petitio procedens ex voluntate et desideriop373-11; secundum quod voluntas humana fuit in Christo secundum triplicem differentiam, sic et oratio. Nam quaedam oratio fuit exprimens sive procedens a voluntate rationis, quaedam a voluntate pietatis, quaedam a voluntate carnis. — Oratio procedens a voluntate rationis procedebat a voluntate, quae quidem requirebat exaudiri; et talis oratio in omnibus est exaudita, tum propter hoc, quod ista voluntas erat per omnia conformis voluntati divinae; tum etiam, quia adeo petebat digne et sancte, quod in omnibus erat exaudienda pro sua reverentiap373-12 et dignitate. — Oratio autem procedens a voluntate pietatis et voluntate carnis non fuit in Christo exaudita per omnia, tum quia hac voluntate non conformabatur Deo in omni volito, sicut habitum est priusp373-13; tum etiam, quia illa petitio plus ordinabatur ad nostram instrup. 374ctionem quam ad divinam exauditionem. Magis enim petebat hac voluntate, ut nos erudiret, quam ut Deum ad suam petitionem inclinaret.
Ex his patet responsio ad quaestionem propositam et ad rationes ad utramque partem. Concedendum est enim, quod Christus exauditus fuit in omni petitione, qua petiitp374-1, ut exaudiretur, hoc est in omni eo, quod petiit voluntate rationis sive voluntate absoluta. Unde rationes, quae ad primam partem inducuntur, verum concludunt. Concedendum est nihilominus, quod non in omni eo, quod petiit voluntate carnis vel pietatis, fuit exauditus, sicut rationes ad secundam partem inductae ostendunt. Non enim petebat, ut exaudiretur, sed ut nos erudiremur; sicut petiit, calicem a se transferri, et suis crucifixoribus condonari, unump374-2 ex voluntate carnis ad ostensionem naturae assumtae, alterum ex voluntate pietatis ad ostensionem benignitatis et misericordiae.
Ad 1. 2. Ad illud tamen quod obiicitur de auctoritate Psalmi, dicendum, quod hoc dicitur de capite ratione membrorum, sicut Glossa ibidemp374-3 exponit; et multa consimilia reperiri consueverunt in Scriptura.
Ad 3. 4. 5. Ad tres rationes sequentes patet responsio per iam dicta, quia non ferunt instantiam pro quacumque oratione Christi, sed pro ea solum, quae procedebat ex voluntate carnis vel pietatis, sicut patet aspicienti.
I. Omnes concorditer docent, hanc quaestionem cum distinctione esse solvendam, quod scilicet, si consideratur materia petita, non omnis oratio Christi fuit exaudita, quia nec ipsa voluntatis intentio hanc exauditionem volebat; sed si loquimur de fine intento, sine dubio omnis eius oratio fuit exaudita. — Quoad solutionem 3. obiecti, scilicet quoad petitionem de translatione calicis, variae sunt expositiones. Opinio Hilarii refertur hic dub. 4; aliorum Sanctorum verba vide apud S. Thom. (S. III. q. 21. a. 4. ad 1.). De hac (2.) quaestione: Alex. Hal., S. p. III. q. 16. m. 2. — Scot., Report. hic q. 2. — S. Thom., hic a. 3. quaestiunc. 4; S. art. cit. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 4. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 4.
II. Eandem solutionem sequentis (3.) quaestionis aliis verbis exhibet S. Thom. in Comment. (loc. cit. quaestiunc. 3.), scilicet quod illa oratio non fuerit a sensualitate ut principio eliciente actum orationis, sed ut obiecto movente rationem ad proponendum. Cfr. Alex. Hal., loc. cit. m. I. — Scot., loc. cit. n. 7. — S. Thom., Sum. loc. cit. a. 2. — B. Albert., hic a. 7. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 3. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. q. 3.
---
Question II. Whether Christ in all his prayer was heard.
Secondly it is asked whether Christ in all his prayer was heard. And that he was, it seems:
1. From what is said in John, chapter elevenp373-1: But I knew that thou hearest me always; but that hearing is nothing other than being heard: therefore etc.
2. Likewise, upon that of the Psalmp373-2: Thou hast given him his soul's desire, and hast not defrauded him of the will of his lips; the Gloss: « Of the will of his lips, that is, of his words, that is, through words uttered, thou hast not defrauded him; for whatever he said was done »: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, Christ is more worthy to be heard than his members, who ask in his name; but in John, chapter fourteenp373-3, it is said: Whatsoever you shall ask the Father in my name, he will give you: therefore much more strongly, whatever he himself asked, he obtained.
4. Likewise, Christ's will was conformed to the divine will, therefore he desired and asked nothing except what God willed; but everything that God willed, he didp373-4 and does: therefore everything that Christ asked, he obtained.
5. Likewise, what Christ asked, he asked piously, perseveringly, and unto salvation, nor did he have in anything a remorse of conscience; but whoever asks thus, obtains what he asksp373-5: therefore everything that Christ asked, he obtained.
On the contrary: 1. In the Psalmp373-6 it is said of Christ: My God, I shall cry by day, and thou wilt not hear: therefore he did not hear him in that which he cried out: therefore he did not hear him in everything that he asked.
2. Likewise, in the textp373-7 it is said: « Christ crying out is not heard unto bodily salvation; he asked indeed a good thing, namely that he might not die; but it was better that he should die »: therefore Christ was not heard in everything that he asked.
3. Likewise, Christ asked and prayed that the cup might pass from himp373-8; but the cup did not pass from him: therefore he was not heard in everything that he asked.
4. Likewise, Christ prayed for those who crucified himp373-9; yet not all were saved: therefore he was not heard in all things.
5. Likewise, Christ prayed for his disciples, that they might be kept from evil, according to what is said in John, chapter seventeenp373-10: Not for them only, but for them also who through their word shall believe etc.; but not all were kept from evil: therefore he was not heard in all the things that he asked.
Conclusion.
Christ was heard in everything that he asked by the will of reason, or absolute will, but not in everything that he asked by the will of piety or of the flesh.
I respond: It must be said that, since prayer is a petition proceeding from will and desirep373-11, according as the human will was in Christ under a threefold difference, so too was prayer. For one prayer was expressing or proceeding from the will of reason, another from the will of piety, another from the will of the flesh. — The prayer proceeding from the will of reason proceeded from a will which indeed required to be heard; and such prayer is heard in all things, both because that will was in all respects conformed to the divine will, and also because he asked so worthily and holily that in all things it had to be heard on account of his reverencep373-12 and dignity. — But the prayer proceeding from the will of piety and the will of the flesh was not heard in Christ through all things, both because by this will he was not conformed to God in every thing willed, as was held beforep373-13; and also because that petition was ordered more to our instruction than to the divine hearing. For by this will he asked more that he might instruct us than that he might incline God to his petition.
From these things the response to the proposed question and to the reasons on either side is clear. For it must be granted that Christ was heard in every petition by which he askedp374-1 to be heard, that is, in everything that he asked by the will of reason or absolute will. Hence the reasons which are adduced for the first part conclude truly. It must nonetheless be granted that he was not heard in everything that he asked by the will of the flesh or of piety, as the reasons adduced for the second part show. For he did not ask that he might be heard, but that we might be instructed; as he asked that the cup be removed from him, and that his crucifiers be forgiven, the onep374-2 from the will of the flesh for the showing of the assumed nature, the other from the will of piety for the showing of kindness and mercy.
To 1 and 2. As to what is objected from the authority of the Psalm, it must be said that this is said of the head by reason of the members, as the Gloss in the same placep374-3 explains; and many similar things are wont to be found in Scripture.
To 3, 4, 5. To the three following reasons the response is clear from what has already been said, because they do not bring an instance against any prayer whatever of Christ, but only against that which proceeded from the will of the flesh or of piety, as is clear to one who looks.
I. All teach concordantly that this question is to be resolved with a distinction, namely that, if the matter asked is considered, not every prayer of Christ was heard, because not even the intention of the will itself willed this hearing; but if we speak of the end intended, without doubt every prayer of his was heard. — As to the solution of the third objection, namely as to the petition concerning the removal of the cup, there are various expositions. The opinion of Hilary is reported here in doubt 4; the words of the other Saints see in St. Thomas (Summa III. q. 21. a. 4. ad 1.). On this (2nd) question: Alexander of Hales, Summa p. III. q. 16. m. 2. — Scotus, Reportatio here q. 2. — St. Thomas, here a. 3. little-question 4; Summa, the cited article. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3. a. 4. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 2. q. 4.
II. The same solution of the following (3rd) question St. Thomas presents in other words in the Commentary (cited place, little-question 3.), namely that that prayer was not from sensuality as the principle eliciting the act of prayer, but as an object moving reason to propose [it]. Cf. Alexander of Hales, cited place m. I. — Scotus, cited place n. 7. — St. Thomas, Summa cited place a. 2. — Blessed Albert, here a. 7. — Peter of Tarentaise, cited place a. 3. — Richard of Middleton, cited place q. 3.
---
- Vers. 42.Verse 42.
- Psalm. 20, 3. — Glossa, quae apud Petr. Lombard. nec non apud Lyranum habetur ut interlinearis, est secundum Cassiodorum.Psalm 20:3. — The Gloss, which in Peter Lombard and likewise in Lyranus is given as interlinear, is according to Cassiodorus.
- Vers. 13. — In fine arg. pro obtinuit cod. K impetravit.Verse 13. — At the end of the argument, for obtinuit codex K [reads] impetravit.
- Psalm. 134, 6: Omnia quaecumque voluit Dominus fecit etc.Psalm 134:6: All whatsoever the Lord willed he did, etc.
- Cfr. supra pag. 104, nota 9, et Guliel. Antissiodor., S. p. III. tr. 5. c. 5. q. 3. — Post Item codd. F bb (aa a secunda manu) omittunt quod, et subinde edd. 1, 2 cum codd. F aa et non paucis aliis supprimunt semel petiit. In fine arg. pro obtinuit codd. A (K primitus) X substituunt impetravit.Cf. above p. 104, note 9, and William of Auxerre, Summa p. III. tr. 5. c. 5. q. 3. — After Item codices F bb (aa by a second hand) omit quod, and accordingly editions 1, 2 together with codex F aa and not a few others suppress petiit once. At the end of the argument, for obtinuit codices A (K originally) X substitute impetravit.
- Psalm. 21, 3.Psalm 21:3.
- Hic c. 2. in fine.Here, chapter 2, at the end.
- Matth. 26, 39. — In minori plurimi codd. omittunt ab eo.Matthew 26:39. — In the lesser [text] very many codices omit ab eo [from him].
- Luc. 23, 34.Luke 23:34.
- Vers. 20. — Vat. cum paucis codd. post Non tantum pro eis supplet rogo, quod et in Vulgata habetur.Verse 20. — The Vatican edition, with a few codices, after Non tantum pro eis supplies rogo [I pray], which is also found in the Vulgate.
- Cfr. supra pag. 371, nota 6. — De triplici voluntate vide supra a. 1. q. 3. in corp. — Cod. F ex voluntatis desiderio.Cf. above p. 371, note 6. — On the threefold will see above a. 1. q. 3. in the body. — Codex F [reads] ex voluntatis desiderio.
- Hebr. 5, 7. — Pro exaudienda, quae scriptura est codd. A F (N U a secunda manu) X bb, alii codd. et edd. exaudita.Hebrews 5:7. — For exaudienda, which is the reading of codices A F (N U by a second hand) X bb, other codices and editions [read] exaudita.
- Art. 1. q. 3. — De secunda ratione vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 2. in fine et c. 3. in fine. — Mox pro ordinabatur, quam lectionem ex codd. A K M (N a secunda manu) O U bb restituimus, alii codd. nec non edd. ordinatur.Article 1, q. 3. — On the second reason see here the text of the Master, c. 2 at the end and c. 3 at the end. — Presently for ordinabatur, which reading we have restored from codices A K M (N by a second hand) O U bb, other codices and also the editions [read] ordinatur.
- Non pauci codd. quam petiit; cod. A in omni quod petiit.Not a few codices [read] quam petiit; codex A [reads] in omni quod petiit.
- Pro unum cod. S unde hoc fuit.For unum codex S [reads] unde hoc fuit.
- His verbis a Petro Lombardo relatis: Dixit enim: Pacem meam relinquo vobis (Ioan. 14, 27.); et factum est. Verbum quoque eius impletum est, fugando daemones, sanando infirmos; praedicatio eius quoque recepta est.In these words reported by Peter Lombard: For he said: My peace I leave with you (John 14:27); and it was done. His word too was fulfilled, by driving out demons, by healing the sick; his preaching too was received.