← Back to Distinction 3

Dist. 3, Part 2, Art. 3, Q. 1

Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 3

Textus Latinus
p. 90

Articulus III. De perfectione corporis dominici.

Consequenter quaeritur de perfectione corporis dominici. Et circa hoc quaeruntur duo. Primo quaeritur de perfectione dominici corporis quantum ad molem. Secundo de eius perfectione quantum ad membrorum distinctionem.

Quaestio I. Utrum corpus Christi productum fuerit ad perfectam molem subito, an successive.

Quaeritur ergo primo, utrum corpus Christi productum fuerit ad perfectam molem subito, aut successive. Et quod successive, ostenditur.

1. Lucae secundo1: Puer iste crescebat aetate; sed ad crementum aetatis sequitur crementum molis: ergo etc.

2. Item, sicut patet ex historia evangelica, Christus habuit necessitates infantiles, unde et lactatus fuit a Matre2; hoc autem non esset, nisi parvulus fuisset in quantitate: ergo videtur, quod prius tempore fuerit in quantitate modica quam perfecta.

3. Item, augmentum sequitur nutrimentum3; sed corpus Christi alebatur, sicut corpus alterius hominis, successive: ergo similiter videtur, quod augebatur paulative et successive.

4. Item, Christus assumsit naturam passibilem et mortalem; sed talis est natura mortalis, quod aut crescit, aut decrescit; aut proficit, aut deficit — vix enim unquam in eodem statu permanet, ut dicitur in Iob4 — ergo si non competebat Christo decrescere, videtur, quod talem naturam assumserit, quod semper in hac vita quantum ad corpus profecerit: ergo p. 91 per successionem temporum ad perfectam quantitatem pervenit.

Sed contra: 1. Ieremiae trigesimo primo5: Mulier circumdabit virum; hoc intelligitur de Christo et beata Virgine; sed virum circumdari in utero est in utero contineri, ad virum autem spectat corpus perfectae quantitatis habere: ergo videtur, quod corpus Christi in utero Virginis fuerit secundum quantitatem molis: non igitur ad perfectionem venit per successionem temporis.

2. Item, hoc ipsum videtur per hoc quod sequitur in eadem auctoritate6: Novum faciet Dominus super terram; sed novum est cuius simile non praecessit; sed quod mulier in utero habeat puerum parvae quantitatis, hoc non est novum: ergo videtur, quod Christus statim fuit ad perfectionem quantitatis productus, ex quo de Virgine est conceptus.

3. Item, divina virtus summa est et perfecta; quia summa est, nata est operari subito et in instanti; quia perfecta est, nata est educere operationem perfectam7: si ergo formatio corporis Christi fuit a virtute increata, videtur, quod ab instanti conceptionis corpus illud eductum fuerit in quantitate perfecta.

4. Item, sicut anima coniuncta est Verbo in unitate personae immediate, ita et corpus; sed anima statim, quando unita fuit Verbo Dei, perfecta fuit in virtute et scientia8, ergo pari ratione et corpus in quantitate et figura: non igitur videtur, quod per successionem temporis quantitas corporis Christi fuerit ad perfectionem deducta.

Conclusio

Corpus Christi quoad quantitatem molis ad perfectionem deductum est per successionem temporis, quod fuit valde congruum.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod corpus Christi quantum ad quantitatem molis ad perfectionem deductum est per successionem temporis. — Et ratio huius est, quia perfectio quantitatis illius corporis fuit operatione naturae, cuius est operari secundum successionem temporis.

Si autem quaeratur: unde est hoc, quod Deus corpus illud ad perfectionem voluit deduci mediante naturae operatione? dicendum, quod hoc fecit Deus valde congrue. Hoc enim quamvis alio modo facere posset, sic9 fecit ad confirmandam fidei veritatem, ad commendandam humilitatis virtutem, ad conservandam universitatis legem. — In hoc enim fidei veritas confirmatur, dum manifeste ostenditur per conversationem diuturnam et similem modum proficiendi in aetate, quod Christus non phantasticam, sed veram carnem assumsit. Et hoc quidem fuit valde opportunum, quia sine fidei veritate nullus est incarnationis fructus10. — Humilitatis etiam virtus in hoc commendatur, dum Dei Filius, qui est Rex regum et Dominus dominantium11, factus est parvulus; et qui prius nullo indigebat, lacte materno, sicut alii parvuli, pascebatur, pannis involvebatur et alia plura gessit, in quibus humilitatis utilitas commendatur. Et hoc fuit valde opportunum, quia propter hoc potissime Deus de caelo descendit, ut superbiam exstirparet12. — Universitatis etiam lex et ordo conservatur, quia Deus unicuique naturae concessit propriam operationem, nec utitur miraculis, ubi natura sufficienter per se potest operari13. Et quia natura in Christo satis sufficienter poterat corpus Christi ad perfectam quantitatem deducere, ita quod in nullo derogabatur eius dignitati; ideo noluit Deus tempus anticipare, ut tanquam iustus universitatis administrator unumquodque iuxta virtutem sibi competentem operari sineret14. Et hoc quidem conveniebat, quia naturam nolebat perimere, sed reparare. — Et in hoc insinuat, quod maior potestas usum inferioris potestatis non debet absque causa privare.

Et sic patet, quod valde rationabiliter Deus corpus Christi ad perfectam quantitatem molis deduxerit15 per temporis successionem. Unde et rationes hoc probantes concedendae sunt. p. 92 1. Ad illud ergo quod primo obiicitur in contrarium de auctoritate Ieremiae, dicendum, quod vir dicitur ibi Christus non ab aetate corporis, sed a vigore animi, quia plenus fuit virtutibus et scientia ab instanti conceptionis16.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod novum fuit; dicendum, quod novitas attenditur in hoc, quod ipse erat Deus et homo, cuius simile nunquam praecesserat; et in hoc, quod ab instanti conceptionis vir fuerat adeo perfectus, quod proficere nunquam potuit, et huius simile nunquam fuit17. Et sic patet, quod non oportuit, quod esset quantitatis perfectae ad hoc, quod novum quid esset. Unde ratio illa peccat secundum consequens.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod virtus infinita operatur in instanti; dicendum, quod verum est, quando virtus infinita operatur secundum totalitatem suae potentiae et operatur per se. In perfectione autem dominici corporis non tantum operatur virtus divina, sed etiam creata, cuius est operari successive, sicut ostensum est supra18; et illius est operari successive, cum sit virtus finita.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod ab instanti conceptionis fuit perfectus virtute et scientia; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia, quamvis deceret Deum assumere aliquas poenalitates ad redemptionem nostram, non tamen decebat assumere culpam, vel ignorantiam; ideo magis habuit horum opposita, scilicet virtutem et scientiam, quam in instanti perduci19 ad corporis quantitatem perfectam.

Scholion

I. De 1. quaestione huius articuli nulla est difficultas, nec de ea alii magistri explicite tractant. — In solvenda 2. quaestione omnes concedunt, carnem Christi in eodem instanti divina virtute et conceptam et animatam et assumtam fuisse. Haec doctrina Ss. Patrum (cfr. lit. Magistri d. 11. c. 3.) confirmatur Epistola synodica Sophronii, confirmata a Concilio oecumenico VI, ubi inter alia dicitur: Incarnatur Verbum et Deus, non prius formatae carni se coaptans, vel corpori iam prius formato et in se subsistenti se connectens, vel prius subsistenti animae se componens, sed tunc his productis ad existentiam, quando eis Verbum ipsum et Deus se componebat... Simul enim caro et simul Dei Verbi caro: simul caro animata rationalis, quia in ipso et non in se habuit existentiam. Hoc supposito communiter Ss. Patres et theologi tenent, in ipso conceptionis momento id quod concipiebatur perfectum fuisse hominem perfectumque Deum (cfr. supra d. 2. dub. 3, et lit. Magistri, hic c. 4. in fine.).

II. De 2. quaestione: Alex. Hal., S. p. III. q. 9. m. 4. — Scot., in utroque Scripto III. Sent. d. 2. q. 3. — S. Thom., hic q. 5. a. 2; S. III. q. 33. a. 1-3. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 3. quaestiunc. 4. — Richard. a Med., III. Sent. d. 2. a. 2. q. 4. — Aegid. R., III. Sent. d. 2. q. 2. a. 4. — Dionys. Carth., III. Sent. d. 2. q. 6. — Biel, III. Sent. d. 2. q. unica in princ.

---

English Translation

Article III. On the perfection of the Lord's body.

It is asked next concerning the perfection of the Lord's body. And about this two things are asked. First, concerning the perfection of the Lord's body with respect to its mass. Second, concerning its perfection with respect to the distinction of its members.

Question I. Whether the body of Christ was brought to its perfect mass suddenly or successively.

It is therefore asked first whether the body of Christ was brought to its perfect mass suddenly or successively. And that it was successively is shown:

1. Luke chapter two1: This child grew in age; but to growth in age there follows growth in mass: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, as is plain from the gospel history, Christ had the needs of infancy, whence also He was nursed by His Mother2; but this would not be so, unless He had been small in quantity: therefore it seems that He was prior in time in a modest quantity than in a perfect one.

3. Likewise, increase follows nourishment3; but the body of Christ was nourished, like the body of any other man, successively: therefore likewise it seems that it was increased gradually and successively.

4. Likewise, Christ assumed a passible and mortal nature; but such is mortal nature, that it either grows or diminishes; either advances or declines — for scarcely ever does it remain in the same state, as is said in Job4 — therefore if it did not befit Christ to diminish, it seems that He assumed such a nature that throughout this life He always advanced with respect to the body: therefore p. 91 through the succession of times He arrived at perfect quantity.

Sed contra: 1. Jeremiah chapter thirty-one5: A woman shall encompass a man; this is understood of Christ and the blessed Virgin; but for a man to be encompassed in the womb is to be contained in the womb, while it belongs to a man to have a body of perfect quantity: therefore it seems that the body of Christ in the womb of the Virgin was according to the quantity of its mass: therefore it did not come to perfection through the succession of time.

2. Likewise, this same thing is seen through what follows in the same authority6: The Lord shall make a new thing upon the earth; but a new thing is one whose like has not preceded; but that a woman should have in her womb a child of small quantity, this is not new: therefore it seems that Christ was produced to the perfection of quantity at once, from the moment He was conceived of the Virgin.

3. Likewise, the divine power is supreme and perfect; because it is supreme, it is fitted to operate suddenly and in an instant; because it is perfect, it is fitted to bring forth a perfect operation7: if then the formation of the body of Christ was by an uncreated power, it seems that from the instant of conception that body was brought forth in perfect quantity.

4. Likewise, just as the soul is joined to the Word in the unity of the person immediately, so too is the body; but the soul at once, when it was united to the Word of God, was perfect in power and knowledge8, therefore by parity of reasoning so too the body in quantity and figure: therefore it does not seem that the quantity of the body of Christ was brought to perfection through the succession of time.

Conclusio

The body of Christ, as to the quantity of its mass, was brought to perfection through the succession of time, which was most fitting.

Respondeo: It must be said that the body of Christ, with respect to the quantity of its mass, was brought to perfection through the succession of time. — And the reason for this is that the perfection of the quantity of that body was by the operation of nature, whose property is to operate according to the succession of time.

But if it be asked: whence is this, that God willed that body to be brought to perfection by the mediation of nature's operation? it must be said that God did this most fittingly. For although He could do it in another way, He did it thus9 for the confirming of the truth of the faith, for the commending of the virtue of humility, for the conserving of the law of the universe. — For in this the truth of the faith is confirmed, while it is manifestly shown, through a prolonged manner of life and a similar mode of advancing in age, that Christ assumed not a phantasmal but a true flesh. And this indeed was most opportune, because without the truth of the faith there is no fruit of the Incarnation10. — The virtue of humility also is commended in this, while the Son of God, who is King of kings and Lord of lords11, became a little child; and He who before needed nothing was fed, like other little children, with His Mother's milk, was wrapped in swaddling clothes and did many other things in which the usefulness of humility is commended. And this was most opportune, because chiefly for this God came down from heaven, that He might root out pride12. — The law and order of the universe also is conserved, because God granted to each nature its proper operation, nor does He use miracles where nature can sufficiently operate by itself13. And because nature in Christ could sufficiently bring the body of Christ to perfect quantity, in such a way that nothing was detracted from His dignity; therefore God did not will to anticipate time, so that, as the just administrator of the universe, He might let each thing operate according to the power befitting it14. And this indeed was fitting, because He did not wish to destroy nature but to repair it. — And in this He intimates that a greater power ought not without cause to deprive a lesser power of its use.

And thus it is plain that most reasonably God brought the body of Christ to the perfect quantity of its mass15 through the succession of time. Whence also the reasons proving this are to be conceded. p. 92 Ad 1. To that, then, which is objected first to the contrary from the authority of Jeremiah, it must be said that there a man is called Christ not from the age of the body, but from the vigor of the mind, because He was full of virtues and knowledge from the instant of conception16.

Ad 2. To that which is objected, that it was new; it must be said that the novelty is regarded in this, that He was God and man, whose like had never preceded; and in this, that from the instant of conception the man had been so perfect that He could never advance, and the like of this never was17. And thus it is plain that it was not necessary that He should be of perfect quantity in order that something new should be. Whence that reason errs according to the consequent.

Ad 3. To that which is objected, that an infinite power operates in an instant; it must be said that this is true when an infinite power operates according to the totality of its power and operates by itself. But in the perfecting of the Lord's body not only the divine power operates, but also a created one, whose property is to operate successively, as was shown above18; and the property of the latter is to operate successively, since it is a finite power.

Ad 4. To that which is objected, that from the instant of conception He was perfect in power and knowledge; it must be said that it is not alike, because, although it befitted God to assume some penalties for our redemption, yet it did not befit Him to assume fault or ignorance; therefore He rather had the opposites of these, namely power and knowledge, than to be brought in an instant19 to the perfect quantity of the body.

Scholion

I. Concerning the 1st question of this article there is no difficulty, nor do the other masters treat of it explicitly. — In solving the 2nd question all concede that the flesh of Christ was, in the same instant, by the divine power both conceived and animated and assumed. This doctrine of the holy Fathers (cf. the text of the Master, d. 11, c. 3) is confirmed by the synodical Epistle of Sophronius, confirmed by the sixth ecumenical Council, where among other things it is said: The Word and God is incarnate, not adapting Himself to a flesh formed beforehand, nor connecting Himself to a body already formerly formed and subsisting in itself, nor composing Himself with a soul previously subsisting, but then producing these to existence, when the Word Himself and God composed Himself with them... For at once flesh and at once the flesh of the Word of God: at once rational animated flesh, because it had existence in Him and not in itself. This being supposed, the holy Fathers and theologians commonly hold that in the very moment of conception that which was being conceived was a perfect man and a perfect God (cf. above, d. 2, dub. 3, and the text of the Master, here c. 4 at the end).

II. Concerning the 2nd question: Alex. of Hales, Summa p. III, q. 9, m. 4. — Scotus, in both Writings on III Sent., d. 2, q. 3. — St. Thomas, here q. 5, a. 2; S. III, q. 33, a. 1–3. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 3, quaestiunc. 4. — Richard of Middleton, III Sent., d. 2, a. 2, q. 4. — Giles of Rome, III Sent., d. 2, q. 2, a. 4. — Dionysius the Carthusian, III Sent., d. 2, q. 6. — Biel, III Sent., d. 2, q. unica in princ.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Vers. 40, ubi Vulgata: Puer autem crescebat, omisso aetate, quae vox etiam in cod. V deest.; sed v. 52. legitur: Et Iesus proficiebat sapientia et aetate etc. — Paulo ante pro productum Vat. cum nonnullis codd. perductum.
    Verse 40, where the Vulgate has: And the child grew, the word in age being omitted, which word is also absent in cod. V; but at v. 52 it reads: And Jesus advanced in wisdom and age, etc. — A little before, for productum (brought forth) the Vatican edition with some codices reads perductum (carried through).
  2. Cfr. Luc. 2, 12. et 11, 27.
    Cf. Luke 2:12 and 11:27.
  3. Vide Aristot., I. de Generat. et corrupt. text. 28-42. (c. 5.) et II. de Anima, text. 37. (c. 4.).
    See Aristotle, On Generation and Corruption I, text 28–42 (c. 5) and On the Soul II, text 37 (c. 4).
  4. Cap. 14, 2. — Pro unquam multi codd. incongrue nunquam; edd. vix enim aut nunquam; cod. G breviter non enim in eodem etc. Paulo post pro quod semper cod. K quae semper.
    Chapter 14:2. — For unquam (ever) many codices incongruously have nunquam (never); the editions read vix enim aut nunquam (for scarcely or never); cod. G briefly non enim in eodem etc. A little after, for quod semper cod. K has quae semper.
  5. Vers. 22. — Paulo inferius post in utero Virginis codd. M O adiungunt perfectum; edd. ante quantitatem molis inserunt perfectum.
    Verse 22. — A little below, after in the womb of the Virgin codices M O add perfect; the editions insert perfect before the quantity of mass.
  6. Ierem. 31, 22. — Circa finem arg. edd. cum nonnullis codd. perductus pro productus.
    Jeremiah 31:22. — Near the end of the argument the editions with some codices read perductus for productus.
  7. Cod. H quia perfecta, non operatur imperfectione; sed corpus Christi eductum est per divinam virtutem: ergo ab instanti etc. Paulo inferius pro ab instanti cod. T (a secunda manu) a primo instanti, edd. in instanti.
    Cod. H reads because it is perfect, it does not operate by imperfection; but the body of Christ was brought forth by the divine power: therefore from the instant etc. A little below, for from the instant cod. T (by a second hand) reads from the first instant, the editions in the instant.
  8. Vide infra d. 15. a. 2. q. 1. — Circa finem arg. edd. post Christi addunt quantum ad quantitatem molis et pro fuerit deducta habent sit deducta.
    See below, d. 15, a. 2, q. 1. — Near the end of the argument the editions add after of Christ the words with respect to the quantity of mass, and for was brought down they have be brought down.
  9. Edd. cum paucis codd. adiiciunt tamen.
    The editions with a few codices add yet.
  10. Cfr. supra d. 2. a. 2. q. 1. — Paulo superius pro diuturnam, quod cod. V et edd. 1, 2 omittunt, codd. L aa et Vat. diutinam. Deinde pro in aetate, quod desideratur in cod. V, plurimi codd. in aetatem. Mox pro opportunum codd. L aa cum edd. 1, 2 optimum.
    Cf. above, d. 2, a. 2, q. 1. — A little above, for prolonged, which cod. V and editions 1, 2 omit, codices L aa and the Vatican read long-lasting. Then for in age, which is wanting in cod. V, very many codices read into age. Soon after, for opportune codices L aa with editions 1, 2 read best.
  11. Epist. I. Tim. 6, 15. et Apoc. 19, 16.
    First Epistle to Timothy 6:15 and Apocalypse 19:16.
  12. De quo August., Enarrat. in Ps. 33. enarrat. I. n. 4: Omnis enim mortalitas hominum superbia tumuerat! Et si existeret aliquis humilis vir in spiritu, sicut erant Prophetae, Patriarchae, dedignabatur genus humanum imitari humiles homines. Ne ergo dedignaretur homo imitari hominem humilem, Deus factus est humilis, ut vel sic superbia generis humani non dedignaretur sequi vestigia Dei. — Paulo superius pro humilitatis utilitas cod. bb substituit humilitatis virtus, quae lectio revera sincerior est; codd. C H K L N aa habent humilitatis veritas.
    On which Augustine, Enarration on Psalm 33, enarr. I, n. 4: For the whole mortality of men had swelled with pride! And if there existed any man humble in spirit, as were the Prophets, the Patriarchs, the human race disdained to imitate humble men. Lest, therefore, man should disdain to imitate a humble man, God became humble, that in this way at least the pride of the human race might not disdain to follow the footsteps of God. — A little above, for the usefulness of humility cod. bb substitutes the virtue of humility, which reading is in truth more genuine; codices C H K L N aa have the truth of humility.
  13. Cfr. Aristot., I. de Caelo et mundo, text. 32. (c. 4.), ubi Deum et naturam nihil frustra facere asserit. Vide tom. I. pag. 746, nota 6, et tom. II. pag. 198, nota 3.
    Cf. Aristotle, On the Heavens I, text 32 (c. 4), where he asserts that God and nature do nothing in vain. See vol. I, p. 746, note 6, and vol. II, p. 198, note 3.
  14. August., VII. de Civ. Dei, c. 30: Sic itaque administrat omnia quae creavit, ut etiam ipsa proprios exercere et agere motus sinat. — Paulo superius cod. Q adducere pro deducere.
    Augustine, On the City of God VII, c. 30: Thus, therefore, He administers all the things He created, that He also lets them exercise and carry out their own motions. — A little above, cod. Q reads adducere (lead to) for deducere (bring down).
  15. Codd. A H perduxerit.
    Codices A H read perduxerit (carried through).
  16. Cfr. supra part. 1. huius dist. a. 1. q. 3. in corp. — Pro non ab aetate [cod. G a venustate] corporis, sed Vat. scilicet.
    Cf. above, part 1 of this distinction, a. 1, q. 3, in the body. — For not from the age [cod. G from the comeliness] of the body, but the Vatican edition reads namely.
  17. Vide solut. ad 1. De perfectione corporis Christi vide q. seq. — Pro proficere cod. N perfici. In fine solut. cod. A peccat et est ibi consequens, de qua fallacia agit Aristot., I. Elench. c. 4. (c. 5.); cfr. tom. I. pag. 628, nota 1. et pag. 691, nota 5.
    See the solution to the 1st. On the perfection of the body of Christ see the following question. — For to advance cod. N reads to be perfected. At the end of the solution cod. A reads it errs and there is consequent there, a fallacy treated by Aristotle, Sophistical Refutations I, c. 4 (c. 5); cf. vol. I, p. 628, note 1, and p. 691, note 5.
  18. In corp. quaest. — In codd. G H L M N O Z aa bb et aliis desunt verba sicut ostensum est... successive.
    In the body of the question. — In codices G H L M N O Z aa bb and others the words as was shown... successively are wanting.
  19. Cod. K supplet vellet. Pro perduci cod. bb et edd. 1, 2 produci, cod. G adduci. Post opposita Vat. addit in conceptione. Paulo superius pro aliquas poenalitates codd. G K L Z aa alias poenalitates.
    Cod. K supplies He willed. For to be brought through cod. bb and editions 1, 2 read to be brought forth, cod. G to be led. After the opposites the Vatican edition adds in the conception. A little above, for some penalties codices G K L Z aa read other penalties.
← Dist. 3, Part 2, Art. 2, Q. 2Dist. 3, Part 2, Art. 3, Q. 2→