← Back to Distinction 6

Dist. 6, Art. 2, Q. 3

Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 6

Textus Latinus
p. 162

Quaestio III. Utrum illa unitas quantum ad gradum excellat omnes unitates creatas.

Tertio quaeritur de illa unione quantum ad gradum, et est quaestio, utrum illa unitas excellat omnes unitates creatas. Et quod sic, videtur:

1. (Fundamenta.) Auctoritate Bernardi, ad Eugenium in quinto1: « Inter omnia, quae vere dicuntur unum, arcem tenet unitas Trinitatis. Secundo illa praecellit, qua tres substantiae in Christo sunt una persona »: ergo unitas, qua Christus est unus, omnes unitates creatas excellit.

2. Item, tanto magis aliqua uniuntur, quanto inseparabilius sunt unita; sed naturae illae in Christo uniuntur tanta inseparabilitate, qua maior esse non potest2: ergo videtur, quod unitas illa, ad quam terminatur unio illa, maxima sit inter omnes unitates creatas.

3. Item, tanto magis aliqua uniuntur, quanto magis communicant sibi suas proprietates et idiomata; sed in Christo est perfecta idiomatum communicatio3: ergo videtur, quod ad summam unionem terminetur illa unio.

4. Item, unio illa terminatur ad unitatem in persona, persona autem illa est persona Verbi4; sed persona Verbi in simplicitate et nobilitate in infinitum excellit omnem unitatem creatam: ergo videtur similiter, quod illa unitas, ad quam terminatur unio, dignativa.

Sed contra: (Ad oppositum.) 1. Quae maxime distant minime sunt unibilia, et quae minime sunt unibilia minime faciunt unum; sed talia sunt divinitas et humanitas: ergo videtur, quod unio, quae est in Christo, terminetur ad gradum unitatis infimum.

2. Item, quanto aliquid ex paucioribus constat, tanto magis est unum; sed in Christo reperitur maior naturarum pluralitas, quam sit sub caelo: ergo videtur, quod unitas illa infimum teneat unitatis locum.

3. Item, magis est unum quod est unum in natura et persona, quam quod est in persona tantum5; sed quilibet homo unitatem habet in persona et natura, Christus autem unitatem habet in persona tantum, non in natura: ergo maior unitatis perfectio reperitur in quolibet homine quam in Christo.

4. Item, magis est unum quod non est multiplicabile nec multiplicatum, quam quod est multiplicabile et multiplicatum; sed unitas et punctus habent unitatem, quae nec est multiplicabilis nec p. 163 multiplicata1b; in Christo autem reperitur actu naturarum multitudo et differentia: ergo videtur, quod in Christo sit unitas minima.

Conclusio.

Unitas, quae est in Christo, omnem unitatem creatam, simpliciter loquendo, superexcedit.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod est loqui de unitate (Duplex unitas.), qua aliqua dicuntur unum per convenientiam in natura, et est loqui de unitate, qua aliqua dicuntur unum per convenientiam in persona. Si autem2b loquamur de unitate, qua aliqua dicuntur unum per convenientiam in natura, sic est dicere (Conclusio 1.), quod in Christo talis unitas quodam modo est nulla, quodam modo est magna, quodam modo est parva, quodam modo est summa. — Si enim comparemus divinam naturam ad humanam, sic nulla est in Christo unitas naturae, pro eo quod istae duae naturae non possunt simul in unam naturam concurrere. — Si autem loquamur de natura Christi ex parte corporis, sic parva est unitas propter partium multiplicitatem. — Si autem loquamur de unitate quantum ad animam, sic est in eo unitas magna propter animae simplicitatem. — Si autem loquamur de eo quantum ad divinam naturam, sic summa est in eo unitas propter illius naturae simplicitatem superexcellentissimam.

Quantum igitur ad unitatem naturae, secundum diversas considerationes est in Christo unitas summa, unitas nulla, unitas parva, unitas magna. (Corollarium.) Sic enim decet reperiri in eo, qui est super omnia exaltatus et infra omnes humiliatus.

Si vero3b fiat sermo de unitate, qua aliqua dicuntur unum per convenientiam in persona, sic (Conclusio 2.), simpliciter loquendo, unitas illa, quae est in Christo, unitas est super omnes unitates suprema; et hoc (Ratio quadruplex.) quadruplici ex causa: videlicet propter illius personae simplicitatem, propter unibilium dignitatem, propter unitorum inseparabilitatem et propter unionis singularitatem. — Propter personae simplicitatem, quia unio est in persona Verbi, quae quidem est simplicissima. — Propter unibilium dignitatem, quia tam natura assumens quam assumta inter cetera, quae sunt, habet excellentiam. — Propter inseparabilitatem, quia tanto vinculo fortificata est illarum naturarum unio, ut nunquam fiat nec possit fieri separatio. Natura enim illa inter ceteras naturas adhaesit aeterno Verbo (Notandum.), quo portatur et sustentatur omne quod est sub Deo. — Propter singularitatem, quia nunquam ulla unio fuit huic unioni similis. Haec enim fuit excellentissimae dignationis; et ideo nomen dignitatis et dignationis sibi appropriat, ut dicatur unitas dignativa4b. Et quoniam, cum de unitate Christi loquimur, ad quam unio terminatur, est sermo de unitate personae (Conclusio 3.), non de unitate naturae; ideo simpliciter concedendum est, unitatem, quae est in Christo, omnem unitatem creatam superexcedere. — Unde etiam concedendae sunt rationes ad hanc partem inductae.

Ad oppositum: (Solutio oppositorum.) 1. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur, quod quae maxime distant minime sunt unibilia; dicendum, quod Deus ab omni creatura maximam habet differentiam in natura, quantum tamen ad influentiam et creaturae sustentationem (Notandum.) maximam habet approximationem; et ideo maxima potest esse unitas inter Creatorem et creaturam, quamvis naturalis unitas nulla intercidat5b.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod magis est unum illud quod ex paucioribus constituitur; dicendum, quod verum est de illa unione, cuius unitas resultat ex partium constitutione. Unitas autem, quae est in Christo, ex partium constitutione non resultat; et ideo, quamvis in eo sit naturarum pluralitas, non sequitur, quod sit in eo unitas diminuta6b.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod magis est unum, quod est unum in persona et natura; dicendum, quod verum est, quando unitas personae sequitur unitatem naturae; tunc enim compositio in natura facit compositionem in persona; non sic autem est in proposito, quia unitas personae in Christo antecedit unitatem naturae assumtae, ita quod nullam inducit compositionem natura assumta, sicut ostensum fuit supra7b.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod magis est unum quod non est multiplicatum etc.: dicendum, quod verum est de illa unitate et multiplicatione, quae habent aliquam oppositionem — minuitur enim oppositum, cum suo opposito permiscetur — non sic autem est in proposito, quia ut saepe dictum est8b, multiplicitas in natura non repugnat unitati in persona. — Et sic patet responsio ad omnia quaesita9b.

---

English Translation

Question III. Whether that unity, with respect to its degree, excels all created unities.

In the third place, inquiry is made about that union with respect to its degree, and the question is whether that unity excels all created unities. And that it does seems so:

1. (Foundations.) On the authority of Bernard, To Eugenius, in book five1: « Among all the things that are truly called one, the unity of the Trinity holds the citadel. In the second place that unity excels, by which three substances in Christ are one person »: therefore the unity by which Christ is one excels all created unities.

2. Likewise, things are united the more, the more inseparably they are joined; but those natures in Christ are united with so great an inseparability that none could be greater2: therefore it seems that that unity, at which that union is terminated, is the greatest among all created unities.

3. Likewise, things are united the more, the more they communicate to one another their properties and idioms; but in Christ there is a perfect communication of idioms3: therefore it seems that that union is terminated at the highest union.

4. Likewise, that union is terminated at a unity in a person, but that person is the person of the Word4; but the person of the Word in simplicity and nobility infinitely excels every created unity: therefore it seems likewise that that unity, at which the union is terminated, is a unity of dignity.

On the contrary: (To the opposite.) 1. Things that are most distant are least unitable, and the things that are least unitable least make one; but such are divinity and humanity: therefore it seems that the union which is in Christ is terminated at the lowest degree of unity.

2. Likewise, the fewer the things of which something is constituted, the more it is one; but in Christ is found a greater plurality of natures than is found beneath heaven: therefore it seems that that unity holds the lowest place of unity.

3. Likewise, that is more one which is one in nature and person, than that which is one in person only5; but every man has unity in person and nature, whereas Christ has unity in person only, not in nature: therefore a greater perfection of unity is found in any man than in Christ.

4. Likewise, that is more one which is neither multipliable nor multiplied, than that which is multipliable and multiplied; but unity and a point have a unity which is neither multipliable nor multiplied1b; whereas in Christ is found in act a multitude and difference of natures: therefore it seems that in Christ there is the least unity.

Conclusion.

The unity which is in Christ, simply speaking, surpasses every created unity.

I respond: It must be said that there is to speak of the unity (A twofold unity.) by which things are called one through a coming-together in nature, and there is to speak of the unity by which things are called one through a coming-together in person. Now if2b we speak of the unity by which things are called one through a coming-together in nature, then it is to be said (Conclusion 1.) that in Christ such a unity is in one way none, in one way great, in one way small, in one way supreme. — For if we compare the divine nature to the human, then there is in Christ no unity of nature, for the reason that these two natures cannot concur at once into one nature. — But if we speak of the nature of Christ on the side of the body, then the unity is small on account of the multiplicity of parts. — But if we speak of the unity as regards the soul, then there is in him a great unity on account of the simplicity of the soul. — But if we speak of him as regards the divine nature, then there is in him a supreme unity on account of the most-surpassing simplicity of that nature.

As regards the unity of nature, therefore, according to diverse considerations there is in Christ a supreme unity, no unity, a small unity, a great unity. (Corollary.) For thus it befits to be found in him who is exalted above all things and humbled beneath all.

But if3b there be discourse about the unity by which things are called one through a coming-together in person, then (Conclusion 2.), simply speaking, that unity which is in Christ is a unity supreme above all unities; and this (A fourfold ground.) from a fourfold cause: namely on account of the simplicity of that person, on account of the dignity of the things united, on account of the inseparability of the things united, and on account of the singularity of the union. — On account of the simplicity of the person, because the union is in the person of the Word, which indeed is most simple. — On account of the dignity of the things united, because both the assuming nature and the assumed have excellence among the things that are. — On account of the inseparability, because the union of those natures is fortified by so great a bond that separation never happens nor can happen. For that nature, among the other natures, adhered to the eternal Word (Note.), by whom is carried and sustained everything that is beneath God. — On account of the singularity, because never was any union like to this union. For this was of the most excellent condescension; and therefore it appropriates to itself the name of dignity and condescension, so that it is called a unity of dignity4b. And since, when we speak of the unity of Christ at which the union is terminated, there is discourse about the unity of the person (Conclusion 3.), not about the unity of nature; therefore it is simply to be conceded that the unity which is in Christ surpasses every created unity. — Whence also the reasons adduced for this side are to be conceded.

To the opposite: (Solution of the opposing arguments.) 1. To that which is objected, that things which are most distant are least unitable; it must be said that God has the greatest difference from every creature in nature, yet as regards influence and the sustaining of the creature (Note.) he has the greatest nearness; and therefore there can be the greatest unity between Creator and creature, although no natural unity intervenes5b.

2. To that which is objected, that that is more one which is constituted of fewer parts; it must be said that this is true of that union whose unity results from the constitution of parts. But the unity which is in Christ does not result from the constitution of parts; and therefore, although in him there be a plurality of natures, it does not follow that there is in him a diminished unity6b.

3. To that which is objected, that that is more one which is one in person and nature; it must be said that this is true when the unity of person follows the unity of nature; for then composition in nature makes composition in person; but it is not so in the case at hand, because the unity of person in Christ precedes the unity of the assumed nature, so that the assumed nature induces no composition, as was shown above7b.

4. To that which is objected, that that is more one which is not multiplied, etc.: it must be said that this is true of that unity and multiplication which have some opposition — for the opposite is diminished when it is mixed with its opposite — but it is not so in the case at hand, because, as has often been said8b, multiplicity in nature is not repugnant to unity in person. — And so the reply to all that is asked is clear9b.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Sive de Consider. c. 8. n. 19. In testimonio allato post Trinitatis textus originalis addit qua tres personae una substantia sunt, et dein pro Secundo exhibet Secundo loco, ac post qua inserit e converso.
    That is, On Consideration c. 8, n. 19. In the testimony cited, after Trinitatis the original text adds qua tres personae una substantia sunt ("by which three persons are one substance"), and then for Secundo it presents Secundo loco, and after qua inserts e converso.
  2. Leo I. in Serm. 17. c. 1. de Passione ait: In tantam unitatem Dei et hominis natura convenit, ut nec supplicio potuerit dirimi nec morte disiungi. Cfr. Bernard., V. de Consider. c. 9. n. 21; Serm. 2. in Nativ. Domini, n. 4. seq., et supra pag. 138, nota 8.
    Leo I, in Sermon 17, c. 1, On the Passion, says: "Into so great a unity did the nature of God and of man come together, that it could neither be parted by torment nor disjoined by death." Cf. Bernard, On Consideration V, c. 9, n. 21; Sermon 2 on the Nativity of the Lord, n. 4 ff., and above p. 138, note 8.
  3. Vide supra pag. 14, nota 3; August., I. de Trin. c. 13. n. 28; de Praedest. Sanctor. c. 15. n. 31; Bernard., V. de Consider. c. 9. n. 21.
    See above p. 14, note 3; Augustine, On the Trinity I, c. 13, n. 28; On the Predestination of the Saints c. 15, n. 31; Bernard, On Consideration V, c. 9, n. 21.
  4. Ut ostensum est supra q. I.
    As was shown above in question I.
  5. Cod. Z addit non in natura.
    Codex Z adds non in natura ("not in nature").
  6. Cfr. supra q. 2. fundam. 1. — Mox edd. omittunt actu.
    Cf. above, q. 2, foundation 1. — Just after, the editions omit actu ("in act").
  7. Edd. enim.
    The editions read enim ("for").
  8. Pro vero plurimi codd. ergo; non convenienter.
    For vero very many codices read ergo ("therefore"); not fittingly.
  9. Cfr. q. praeced. fundam. 3. — Paulo superius pro ulla unio cod. Q aliqua unio.
    Cf. the preceding question, foundation 3. — A little above, for ulla unio ("any union") codex Q reads aliqua unio ("some union").
  10. Vide supra d. I. a. I. q. I. ad 5. Ad rem dicit Rusticus Diaconus in sua disputatione contra Acephalos (ed. Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. 67. col. 1230), circa finem: Admirando enim ego tecum confiteor, quia et maior unitio est in Domino Christo et quae multo maius effecit, et unam tamen naturam minime fecit. Tanto enim unitio Deitatis et humanitatis, quae in Domino Christo facta est, et ipse effectus unitionis, illam quae fit in homine superexcellit, quanto longius a se distantia univit... Si igitur Dei quidem virtus infinita est, nostrae autem substantiae finita, magna illa et supereffulgens unitio est, quae valuit inter illa tantum discrepantia unam personam facere etc. — Pro naturalis unitas codd. A E G I N T U X naturalis veritas; perperam.
    See above d. 1, a. 1, q. 1, to the 5th. To the point Rusticus the Deacon says, in his Disputation against the Acephali (ed. Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. 67, col. 1230), near the end: "For marvelling I confess together with you that there is both a greater uniting in the Lord Christ, and one which effected much more, and yet it by no means made one nature. For the uniting of the Godhead and the humanity which took place in the Lord Christ, and the very effect of the uniting, surpasses that which takes place in man by as much as it united things farther distant from one another... If therefore the power of God is indeed infinite, but that of our substance finite, that uniting is great and over-shining, which had power to make of things so discrepant one person," etc. — For naturalis unitas ("natural unity") codices A E G I N T U X read naturalis veritas ("natural truth"); wrongly.
  11. Vide supra a. I. q. I. — Pro non sequitur edd. non tamen sequitur.
    See above a. 1, q. 1. — For non sequitur ("it does not follow") the editions read non tamen sequitur ("it does not however follow").
  12. Hic a. I. q. I. ad 3. et q. 2. ad 3. seq.
    Here a. 1, q. 1, to the 3rd, and q. 2, to the 3rd, following.
  13. Praesertim hic (a. 2.) q. I; a. I. q. I; d. 5. a. I. q. 2. Vide etiam I. Sent. d. 8. p. II. q. 1.
    Especially here (a. 2) q. 1; a. 1, q. 1; d. 5, a. 1, q. 2. See also I Sent., d. 8, p. II, q. 1.
  14. Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.
    See the scholion on the preceding question.
← Dist. 6, Art. 2, Q. 2Dist. 6, Dubia→