Dist. 8
Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 8
DISTINCTIO VIII.
Cap. I. An divina natura debeat dici nata de Virgine.
Post praedicta inquiri debet, utrum de natura divina concedendum sit, quod de Virgine sit nata, sicut dicitur in Virgine incarnata. Et videtur utique non debere dici nata de Virgine, cum non sit nata de Patre. (Dubium 1.) Quae enim res non est de Patre genita, non videtur de Matre nata; ne res aliqua filiationis nomen habeat in humanitate, quae illud non teneat in divinitate. — (Obiicitur.) Videtur tamen posse probari, quod sit nata de Virgine, quia, si hoc est Deum nasci de Virgine, scilicet hominem assumere in utero Virginis, cum natura divina superius1 dicta sit hominem assumsisse, videtur debere dici nata. De hoc Augustinus in libro de Fide ad Petrum2 sic ait: «Natura aeterna atque divina non posset temporaliter concipi et nasci ex natura humana, nisi secundum susceptionem veritatis humanae veram temporaliter conceptionem et nativitatem ineffabilis divinitas in se accepisset. Sic est Deus aeternus veraciter secundum tempus et conceptus et natus ex Virgine». — Ista auctoritate videtur insinuari, quod natura divina sit nata et concepta de Virgine. (Solvitur.) Sed si diligenter notentur verba, potius de persona agi intelligitur, quae sine dubitatione et de Patre et de Matre nata esse dici debet.
Cap. II. De gemina nativitate Christi, qui bis natus est.
(Dubium 2.) Quaeri etiam solet, utrum debeat dici Christus bis genitus, ut dicitur Dei et hominis Filius. — Ad quod dici potest, Christum bis natum esse duasque nativitates habuisse. Unde Augustinus in libro de Fide ad Petrum3: «Pater Deus de sua natura genuit Filium, Deum sibi coaequalem et coaeternum». «Idem quoque unigenitus Deus secundo natus est: semel ex Patre, semel ex Matre. Natus est enim de Patre Dei Verbum, natus est de Matre Verbum caro factum. Unus igitur atque idem Dei Filius natus est ante saecula et natus in saeculo; et utraque nativitas unius est Filii Dei, divina scilicet et humana». De hoc etiam Ioannes Damascenus4 ait: «Duas Christi nativitates veneramur: unam ex Patre ante saecula, quae est super causam et rationem et
tempus et naturam; et unam, quae in ultimis temporibus, (Dubium 3.) propter nos et secundum nos et super nos: propter nos, quia propter nostram salutem; secundum nos, quia natus est homo ex muliere et tempore conceptionis, scilicet novem mensium; super nos, quia non ex semine, sed ex Spiritu sancto et sancta Virgine supra legem conceptionis». — Ex his manifeste apparet, Christi duas esse nativitates, eundemque bis natum fore.
---
DISTINCTION VIII.
Ch. I. Whether the divine nature ought to be said to be born of the Virgin.
After what has been said, it must be inquired whether it is to be conceded of the divine nature that it was born of the Virgin, as it is said to have been incarnate in the Virgin. And it seems indeed that it ought not to be said to have been born of the Virgin, since it was not born of the Father. (Doubt 1.) For a thing that is not begotten of the Father does not seem to be born of the Mother; lest some thing have the name of filiation in the humanity which it does not hold in the divinity. — (It is objected.) Yet it seems it can be proved that it was born of the Virgin, because, if this is for God to be born of the Virgin, namely to assume a man in the womb of the Virgin, then, since the divine nature was said above1 to have assumed a man, it seems it ought to be said to have been born. On this Augustine says, in the book On Faith, to Peter2: «The eternal and divine nature could not be temporally conceived and born of the human nature, unless, according to the assumption of the true human [nature], the ineffable divinity had received in itself a true conception and nativity in time. Thus God eternal is, truly and according to time, both conceived and born of the Virgin». — By this authority it seems to be insinuated that the divine nature was born and conceived of the Virgin. (It is resolved.) But if the words are diligently noted, it is rather understood that the person is being treated of, which without doubt ought to be said to have been born both of the Father and of the Mother.
Ch. II. On the twofold nativity of Christ, who was born twice.
(Doubt 2.) It is also wont to be asked whether Christ ought to be said to be twice begotten, as he is called the Son of God and of man. — To which it can be said that Christ was twice born and had two nativities. Whence Augustine, in the book On Faith, to Peter3: «God the Father begot from his own nature the Son, God coequal and coeternal to himself». «The same only-begotten God was likewise born a second time: once from the Father, once from the Mother. For the Word of God was born of the Father, [and] the Word made flesh was born of the Mother. Therefore one and the same Son of God was born before the ages and born in time; and each nativity is of the one Son of God, namely the divine and the human». On this also John Damascene4 says: «We venerate two nativities of Christ: one from the Father before the ages, which is above cause and reason and
time and nature; and one which is in the last times, (Doubt 3.) for us and according to us and above us: for us, because it is for our salvation; according to us, because he was born a man from a woman and in the time of conception, namely of nine months; above us, because [he was born] not from seed, but from the Holy Spirit and the holy Virgin, above the law of conception». — From these things it manifestly appears that Christ has two nativities, and that the same one was to be born twice.
---
- Dist. V. c. 1.Distinction V, ch. 1.
- Cap. 2. n. 14.Ch. 2, n. 14.
- Cap. 2. n. 10; seq. locus parum inferius, in quo textu post unigenitus Vat. omittit secundo; et postea pro Dei Verbum codd. A E Deus Verbum.Ch. 2, n. 10; the following passage [is found] a little lower down, in which text, after only-begotten, the Vatican edition omits a second time; and afterwards, for the Word of God, codices A and E read God the Word.
- Libr. III. de Fide orthod. c. 7, ubi post ante saecula codd. A D E omittunt cum originali quae est.Book III, On the Orthodox Faith, ch. 7, where, after before the ages, codices A, D, and E omit, along with the original, which is. ---