Theological Outlines • by • Francis J. Hall

« July 2005 | Main | September 2005 »

August 30, 2005

Ch. XXII. Q. 125. How did the Holy Ghost begin His work in the Church?

THE Holy Ghost began His work in the Church by descending upon the visible society, ἐκκλησία, which Christ had called together and organised, in the form of cloven tongues of fire: (a.) making that society to be the Church and mystical Body of Christ: (b.) taking up a special and permanent abode in the Church: (c.) ordaining her members for the various functions to which Christ had appointed them: (d.) bestowing such gifts upon her members, whether permanent or temporary, personal or official, as were suited to their various vocations and ministries and to the exigencies of her work. 1

2. The manner of His descent was symbolic. (a.) The fire signified the penetrating, purifying and transforming effect of His presence and work: (b.) The form of the fire, having one body but tongues distributed to the head of every person, showed that the members of the Church were to possess divers gifts proceeding from the same Spirit. 2

3. The descent of the Holy Ghost upon the disciples made the society or ἐκκλησία, into which Christ had gathered them, to be the Catholic Church and mystical extension of the Body of Christ, by means of whose organization that Body is identified. In the Church the conditions of the special presence of the Holy Ghost on earth are found, and from her proceeds every influence of the Spirit among men, whether immediate or remote. Thus the Church becomes the pillar and ground of the truth, the source of grace and holiness, and the ark of human safety. 3

4. The work of the Holy Ghost in the Church is four-fold, (a.) As Life-giver He vitalizes the whole Church by uniting her to the glorified Body of Christ and by filling her with His own presence; and both regenerates and sustains her members, whom He engrafts into the Body of Christ by Baptism and feeds with the Flesh and Blood of Christ in the Holy Eucharist4: (b.) As Illuminator, He guides the Church into all truth; enabling her to discharge her dogmatic office securely, inspiring her Sacred Scriptures and sacramentally elevating the spiritual understanding of her faithful members5: (c.) As Sanctifier, He makes the Church the channel of actual and habitual grace to her members (Q. 137. 5-8) and both cleanses and sanctifies them through the instrumentality of her Sacraments and discipline6: (d.) As Advocate, Παράκλητος, He pleads with men and aids them in their devotional approaches to the Father.7

5. The Holy Ghost ordains the members of the Church to different offices, ministerial and lay.8 These offices are permanent, and represent the divinely instituted organization of the Church. They signify the particular parts which her members discharge in her corporate and sacramental functions. The Church can be distinguished from this organization, but cannot be divorced from it. She is in fact identified by means of it. 9

6. Besides the gifts of saving and sanctifying grace in general and those gifts by which the faithful are ordained and fitted for their various corporate offices, the Holy Ghost bestows special gifts for special purposes—such as miraculous gifts, which are given when the conditions are such as to make them necessary; and those personal endowments of grace which fit individual men for their particular vocations and lines of spiritual growth. 10

---

1 Webb's Presence and Office of the H. Sp., pt. I. ch. Ill: Bp. Sessums, in N.Y. Church Club Lec. 1891: Mason's Faith of the Gosp. VII. 8: Ewer's Oper'n. of the H. Sp., Lec. II: Hutchings, on the Holy Ghost, Lec. IV.

2 Moberly's Bamp. Lec. pp. 36-40: Hutchings, 99-124. esp. 111-115.

3 Moberly's Bamp. Lec., 29 , 30: Staley's Cath. Church, I. v: Hutchings, 128 et. seq: Milligan, on the Ascension, 179-183, 209-212: Ewer, 80, 81.

4 John III. 5. 6: Rom. VIII. 15, 16: I. Cor. VI. 11: Tit. III. 5.

5 John XIV. 26: XVL 13: I. Cor. II. 10, 11: II. Tim. III. 16: II. Pet. 1. 21.

6I. Cor. VI, 11: III. 16, 17, Gal. V. 16: Ephes. IV. 12: 11. Thess. II. 13: I. Pet. I. 2.

7 Rom. VIII. 26, ,27. Pearson, 577-583: Ewer, pp. 59-78: Hutchings, 138-169, 232-238.

8 Acts XX. 28: cf. Ephes. IV. 11: John XX. 21, 22: I. Cor. XII. 28.

9 Moberly, p. 44: Palmer on the Church, Vol. I. 161-165: Pearson, 585: N.Y. Church Club Lec. 1895, Lec. V.

10 I. Cor. XII. Moberly, pp. 40-44: Palmer, Vol. I. 144,145: Hutchings' Lec's. V, VI: Ewer, IIL IV. esp. pp. 98-103, 119-125.

Posted by AKMA at 05:38 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XXII. Q. 124. What is the Economy of the Holy Ghost?

THE economy of the Holy Ghost is to sanctify those who are called of God; which He achieves by means of the Body of Christ, wherein He dwells and provides the mysteries of grace and truth. 1

2. The Holy Ghost, as we have seen, is the third Person of the Blessed Trinity, proceeding from the Father and the Son, and co-essential, co-eternal and co-equal with Both (Qq. 65. 4: 6C. 2-4). Holy Scripture speaks of Him as of a Person 2: attributes Divine characteristics and operations to Him 3: directly asserts or implies His Divinity 4: and distinguishes Him from the other Divine Persons 5.

3. The Holy Ghost is the efficient and perfecting cause of every external work of God. His operations, therefore, did not commence on the day of Pentecost, but at that time reached their final and most developed earthly stage. (a.) In the beginning He brooded with fructifying effect upon the face of the deep, and brought forth order out of chaos (Q. 74. 1, 3, 6): (b.) He was imparted to our first parents for their sanctification, and was withdrawn when they fell into sin (Qq. 86. 4: 90. 1, 2): (c.) He continued His work among the chosen people after the fall, checking the progress of wickedness among them, preparing them for salvation, and inspiring the Prophets (Qq. 93. 1-5): (d.) He also preserved the Gentiles from total depravity, and entire loss of truth, and perfected the conditions under which, in the fulness of time, they might receive the Gospel (Q. 93. 6): (e.) He overshadowed the Blessed Virgin, and filled the body and soul of Christ with His own fulness (Qq. 99. 1, 3: 113. 5): (f.) He prepared the Body of Christ for its mystical extension on earth, and employed it as a medium of His descent on the day of Pentecost and of His subsequent work of guiding and sanctifying the Church (Qq. 121. 3:122.3,4): (g.)He extends His beneficent influences outward and beyond the Body of Christ, upon those who still grope in darkness; restraining evil, and building foundations, no doubt, of better things in the world to come, for those who in this life of, probation display a moral readiness and capacity to receive and enjoy them. 6

4. The Economy of the Holy Ghost does not displace that of the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ but completes it; for the Holy Ghost works in and from the Body of Christ. He does not take the place of an absent Mediator, but secures His effective presence, and accomplishes that mystical union the achievement of which was the end for which our Lord became Incarnate (Q. 122. 3). The eternal Three work indivisibly in all their operations (Q. 67). 7

---

1 On the whole subject see Ewer's Oper'n. of the Holy Spirit: Hutchings' Holy Ghost: Moberly's Bamp. Lectures: Milligan on the Ascension, lec. IV: Pearson's Apost. Creed, Art. VIII: Mason's Faith of the Gosp. VII. 6: Norris' Rud. Theol. pt. I. c. IV: Maclear's Introd. to the Creeds, ch. 8: H.B. Swete, in Smith and Wace's Dic. of Christian Biog., etc., "Holy Ghost."

2 I. Sam. XVI. 14: John XIV. 26: XV. 26: XVI. 8,13: Acts X. 19, 20: XIII. 2: Rom. VIII. 26, 27: I. Cor. 11. 10, 12: Ephes. IV. 30.

3 Job XXVI. 13: Isa. XLVIIL 16: Matt. XII. 31, 32: Luke I. 35: Rom. XV. 19:1. Cor. II. 11: VI. 19: XII. II.

4 Acts V. 3, 4: I. Cor. III. 16. cf. II. Cor. VI. 16.

5 Matt. XXVIII. 19: Gal. IV. 6: Ephes. II. 18: I. John V. 7. Pearson 546-569: Forbes' Nic. Creed, 251-256, 264, 265: 89 Arts. L pp. 83-88: Hutchings on the Holy Ghost, 4th edit., pp. 12-32.

6 Mason VII. 6, 7: Webb's Presence and Office of the H. Sp. I. i, ii:Ewer, Lec. I, pp. 9-15, 26-34: Hutchings, 50-75, 99-124.

7 Pearson, 578: Moberby, pp. 15, 33-36: Milligan, pp. 179-183, 209-212.

Posted by Trevor at 01:01 AM | Comments (0)

August 24, 2005

Chapter XXII. The Economy of the Holy Ghost

Q. 124. What is the economy of the Holy Ghost?

Q. 125. How did the Holy Ghost begin His work in the Church?

Posted by AKMA at 01:59 AM | Comments (0)

August 23, 2005

Ch. XXI. Q. 123. The Consummation

THE final consummation of Christ's work includes (a) His quickening of the dead, at the end of the world; (b) His return in glory to judge mankind; (c) His distribution of creatures to their final habitations; (d) His final establishment of the kingdom of heaven and the Church triumphant.1

2. Our Lord did not declare the time of His coming again, except that it would be unexpected, although heralded by signs above, and by distress on earth. At the sound of the last trump, the dead are to rise with their bodies, and all men are to be assembled in flesh to meet Christ as their Judge.

3. He will appear in the clouds in glory; and, as Son of Man will sit in judgment, dispensing everlasting rewards and penalties, according to the deeds done in the body, as estimated with infallible discernment in their relation to personal character.

4. Having sent all creatures to the places prepared for and suited to them, Christ will render up His Kingdom to the Father — not as ceasing to be Lord of all, but — as displaying the mediatorial and representative nature of His rule as Image of God to creatures and as our High Priest before the Father.2

5. Henceforth there will be a new world3 — apparently not a destruction of the physical order, so much as its transfiguration into something higher. In this new order all creation will clearly minister to the consummated plan of God in Jesus Christ. Even the wicked will be unable to do otherwise than to minister to the divine purpose. Perhaps they will also share, according to their reduced capacity, in the benefits of divine goodness.4

---

1 Cf. Qq. 163, 165, in vol. III for fuller treatment and refs. on this subject.

2 Dan. vii. 13-14; 1 Cor. xv. 24-28. Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, VIII. iv. 6; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 241-243, 248-250; P.G. Medd, §200 and note xvii.; R.W. Dale, Atonement, pref. of 7th Ed., pp. xxxii.-xxxvii.

3 Revel. xxi. 1-5. Cf. Isa. Ixv. 17; Ixvi. 22; 2 St. Pet. iii. 13.

4 P.G. Medd, §§175-176, 178, 194-195; M.F. Sadler on Revel. xxi. 1-5.

Posted by AKMA at 03:57 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XXI. Q. 122. The Meaning of the Ascension

THE ascension signifies (a) Christ's withdrawal in the flesh from this world, and His ascension to the heavenly throne;1 (b) an establishment of the conditions under which the Holy Spirit brings Christ to us and enables us to participate in His grace;2 (c) our Lord's entrance into the heavenly Holy Place, and the initiation of His heavenly priesthood.3

2. The ascension was delayed for forty days4 in order that Christ might convince His disciples that He had risen; that He might in some degree exhibit to them the spiritual exaltation of the body which His faithful ones are some day to enjoy; and that He might complete the initial organization of His Church, and commission its first ministers.5 Their being endued with power from on high was postponed until the Holy Spirit should come.6

3. Our Lord's physical movement into the sky, and permanent disappearance on high, constitutes an article of faith, because it was the manner, historically speaking, in which He withdrew, and signified His withdrawal, to heaven. Ignorant as we are of the locality of heaven, we know that it is not merely a state. It is somewhere; for, as touching the risen flesh, Jesus Christ must be somewhere, and where He is in that flesh, there is heaven and paradise.7

4. In heaven that glorified body has become the veil through which we creatures gain access to God,8 the place of propitiation where Christ appears for us9 and the centre around which all nations gather in worship.10 Although it is physically present in one place only, and not in any manner omnipresent in se, the very withdrawal of its physical presence from the world has made possible, through the operation of the Holy Spirit, its mystical presence in all the Church, and its sacramental presence on every altar—a presence far more effectual and beneficial to us than any merely physical presence could be.11

5. By His ascension Christ entered the true Holy Place and began His everlasting priesthood,12 the functions of which are summarized in the term "intercession."13 (a) Appearing for us,14 He offers His living Manhood, which has been perfected by suffering,15 and which is acceptable to the Father because indelibly marked by the meritorious death of the Cross;16 (b) In this Manhood he also offers those who have been incorporated into it by Baptism and who unite in earthly Eucharists with His heavenly oblation;17 (c) In the same Manhood, through the agency of His ministers, He sacramentally imparts to His earthly members the benefits of saving and sanctifying grace; and also completes the sanctification of the faithful departed.18

---

1 St. Luke xxiv. 51; Acts i. 9; Heb. xii. 2.

2 W. Milligan, Ascension, pp. 40-46.

3 Heb. ix. 12, 15. W. Milligan, esp. Lec. i.; St. Thomas, III. Ivii.-lviii.; H.P. Liddon, Some Words of Christ, xxii.; P.G. Medd, One Mediator, §163; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 236-238; Bp. Pearson, Creed, art. vi.

4 On the forty days, Geo. Moberly, Great Forty Days; P.G. Medd, Lec. vii.; St. Thomas, III. Iv.

5 St. Matt. xxviii. 18; St. John xx. 22-23.

6 St. Luke xxiv. 49. See P.G. Medd, §§ 157-162; H.P. Liddon, Easter in St. Paul's, xxxiv; Chas. Gore, Church and the Ministry, ch. iv.; D. Stone, Christ. Church, ch. xl.

7 Cf. Q. 120.6, above, and refs. there given.

8 Heb. x. 19-20.

9 1 St. John ii. 2, Heb. ix. 24; Revel, v. 6.

10 Revel. v. 6-14.

11 St. John xiv. 16-17, 22-23; xv. 1-6; xvi. 22; St. Matt. xxviii. 20. St. Thomas, III. Iviii.; H.P. Liddon, Univ. Sermons, 1st Series, pp. 221-233; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, ch. x.; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. vii. 3.

12 Heb. v. 6-10; vii. 15-27; ix. 11-12, 24-28. H.P. Liddon, Some Works of Christ, pp. 337-341; W. Milligan, Lecs. ii.-vi.; M.F. Sadler, One Offering, chh. vii.-ix.; Geo. Milligan, Theol. of the Ep. to the Heb., chh. vi-vii.

13 Heb. vii. 25. W. Milligan, pp. 149-161.

14 Heb. ix. 24.

15 Heb. v. 6-10.

16 Revel. v. 6; xiii. 8; W. Milligan, pp. 127-142.

17 Heb. x. 10-22. P.G. Medd, §§ 179-180 and note xiv.; H.N. Oxenham, Cath. Doctr. of the Atonement, pp. 379 et seq.; W. Milligan, pp. 153-156, 204-268, 307-313.

18 H.P. Liddon, Some Words of Christ, pp. 337-341; P.G. Medd, §§ l83-187.

Posted by AKMA at 12:09 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XXI. Q. 121. The Meaning of the Resurrection

WHAT happened in the resurrection was a restoration of the living relations of our Lord's human body and spirit, and the endowment of His body with certain spiritual qualities and capacities, by reason of which it became (a) a perfected and plastic instrument of His human spirit; (b) As to its visibility and tangibility, subject to the Will of its Owner, and requiring a certain spiritual capacity in those who saw and touched it; (c) capable of new and higher modes of presence and action; (d) immortal, being independent of carnal nourishment, and incapable of suffering.1

2. The resurrection declared Jesus Christ to be the Son of God with power.2 It was supremely evidential, affording to the minds of the apostles an illuminating clue to the significance of His Person and teaching, previously not sufficiently realized, and enabling them to receive the fuller teaching of the Holy Spirit. In brief, the resurrection justified Christ, and both vindicated and interpreted His claims and mission. Once apprehended by the apostles, and considered in relation to their previous experience of Him, so far from being incredible, the resurrection was perceived to be inevitable. Such an one "could not be holden of death."3

3. The resurrection was the proper and interpretative sequel both of the Incarnation and of His death, a third critical stage in the mystery of which the Incarnation was the first. It initiated that exaltation of our nature which was involved in the hypostatic union, delayed because of the humiliation which Christ came in order to endure; and it achieved the victory over death, without which He would have died in vain, making possible that abiding priesthood of which His death is the consecrating basis. Thus the resurrection is the most critical and significant event in all history.4

4. Having died in order to expiate our sins, He was raised for our justification.5 That is, His resurrection and consequent ascension qualified His Manhood, in accordance with the purpose of His taking it and dying in it, to become an abiding source of regenerative and sanctifying grace to us in His mystical body, the Church. It is by reason of this grace, made available through Baptism, that, without unreality, God can justify us, or account us righteous, before we have actually become righteous, because He puts us in the way of truly becoming so in Jesus Christ.6

5. Christ has become the Firstfruits of them that slept,7 and this both morally and in relation to our bodies. The new vital principle which His resurrection creates for us is the power of a righteousness which is new. For it is not an improved or reformed natural morality; but is a supernatural righteousness, wherein natural virtues are absorbed and transfigured, and whereby we are equipped for our proper destiny—divine fellowship.8

6. It is a vital part of God's purpose that our whole nature should be redeemed, raised and perfected. Accordingly our Lord's resurrection in the flesh perfects our sacramental food of immortality, and becomes the earnest of our own bodily resurrection. Only in relation to the antecedent mysteries of His Incarnation and death, and to the subsequent mysteries of His mystical body and of our feeding on His flesh and blood in the Holy Eucharist, can we rightly perceive the meaning, value and necessity of the recovery of Christ's body of humiliation from death and its glorification.9

---

1 St. Thomas, III. liv.-Iv. 2; W. Milligan, Resurrection of Our Lord, pp. 7-14: and Ascension, pp. 15-20: H.P. Liddon, Easter in St. Paul's, pp. 80-83; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 101-102.

2 Rom. i. 4.

3 Act. ii. 24. Cf. St. John xx. 26-28; 1 Cor. xv. 12-19. Introduction ch. ii. 6; St. Thomas, III. liii. 4; H.P. Liddon, vi; xi. II; M. MacColl, Christianity in Rel. to Science and Morals, pp. 188-190; W. Milligan, Resurrection, pp. 153-159.

4 W. Milligan, pp. 139-152; W.J.S. Simpson, ch. x.

5 Rom. iv. 25.

6 St. Thomas, III. liii. 1; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. vii. 2; Thos. Jackson, Works, vol. X. pp. 316-325; Sanday and Headlam, Ep. to the Romans, pp. 116-118; M.F. Sadler, on Rom. iv. 25 and Justification of Life, ch. i. §11; J.H. Newman, Doctr. of Justification, Lec. ix.

7 1 Cor. xv. 16-17, 20-21.

8 St. Thomas, III. liii. 3; Ivi. 1-2; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord. p. 351; Easter in St. Paul's, xi. III, xx, xxiii, xxv. II, xxviii.; Univ. Sermons, 1st. Series, pp. 192-215; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 231-235; W. Milligan, pp. 18-24; 160-170, 183-195.

9 Cf. Q. 149.3, in vol. III. St. John vi. 53-56. Creation, ch. x. 6-7; W. Milligan, pp. 183-189.

Posted by AKMA at 04:00 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XXI. Q. 120. The Facts

THE facts whereby Christ's exaltation is declared are (a) that on the third day after His death, Jewish reckoning, His body disappeared from the tomb; (b) that He appeared alive on several occasions in visible and tangible "flesh and bones," which were recognized to constitute the body in which He died on the Cross; (c) that His body had acquired mysterious spiritual conditions and powers, transcending those possessed by us in this life ;1 (d) that forty days after the resurrection, He visibly ascended in the air, and was hidden from sight in a cloud, this proving to be His final withdrawal from this world.2

2. Our Lord's clothes were found lying in the empty tomb in positions suggestive of His body having exhaled from them, so to speak, without disturbing them except by causing them to collapse.3 The theft theory, that the body had been stolen, while it grants the fact of its disappearance, is incredible. If the Jews had stolen it, they would have produced it in confutation of the resurrection story, and the character of the apostles forbids the supposition that they stole it.4

3. The synoptic narratives of the resurrection were produced too soon after the possible date of its occurrence to be derived from either legendary or mythical sources, and St. Paul's testimony to the appearances was given while more than two hundred and fifty of the witnesses were still living. The swoon theory, that Christ did not die, but reappeared after recovery from a swoon, is inconsistent with any reasonable interpretation of the account of the crucifixion, as well as with the manner of His appearances.5 The theory of visions can be reconciled neither with the despondency and initial incredulity of the apostles, with His appearance to five hundred at once, nor with the cessation of His appearances after the fortieth day.6 Keim's theory, that the disciples were made, by a sort of telegram from heaven, to see what they would naturally suppose to be their Master in the flesh, in order that they might believe Him to be living on in the spirit, is not only contrary to the risen Lord's own testimony, but implies the use of deception by Him who is the Truth.7 No theory can be maintained which does not either reject the evidence en bloc or base itself upon acknowledgment of a real resurrection of our Lord in the flesh.

4. There are indeed mutual inconsistences in the narratives, but they concern minor details, and are such as inevitably emerge in independent human testimonies. The assertion that the Gospels preserve contradictory traditions, one that our Lord appeared after the first morning in Galilee only, and another that He appeared chiefly, if not wholly, in and near Jerusalem, is supported only by a precarious argument from silence, for each narrative, separately considered, is obviously incomplete.8

5. Objections to the possibility of the phenomena described in connection with Christ's appearances are deduced from the laws of matter. But such laws merely describe in generalized propositions our normal experience of matter. Science affords no warrant for defining the possibilities of the human body when possessed and controlled by its Creator. And no proof is to be had for the plea that flesh is incapable of being brought into such subjection to the spirit as to become a suitable medium of its self-expression.9 Every so-called scientific objection to the resurrection as described in the Gospels is really philosophical, and is based upon a priori denial of the possibility of miracles.

6. The Gospel description of our Lord's ascension into heaven is rejected on the ground that it presupposes a localization of heaven above the sky. It is to be admitted that the apostles probably did so localize heaven. But under any circumstances of human enlightenment, we can imagine no more effectual indication by our Lord of His withdrawal to heaven than an upward movement, followed by disappearance in the clouds. The symbolical form of His withdrawal does not, however, militate against the historical credibility of its Gospel description.10

7. The credibility of the narratives in question lies in the connections, and the significant place, which the facts considered have in history, as interpreted from the standpoint of belief in the divine Person of Jesus Christ. From that standpoint the resurrection and ascension are perceived to be central and determinative movements in the world-drama. They arc uniquely illuminating, and therefore uniquely credible.11

---

1 On the fact of the resurrection, 1 Cor. xv. 3-20; St. Mark xvi. 1-8 (with suppl. xvi. 9-l4); St. Luke xxiv; St. Matt. xxviii. 1-17; St. John xx. (with suppl. xxi.); Acts i. 22; ii. 24-32; 1 St. Pet. i. 3, 21; Heb. xiii. 20; etc. E.H. Day, Evidence for the Resurrection; Jas. Orr, Resurrection of Jesus; W. Milligan. Resurrection of Our Lord, Lecs. i.-iii.; W.J.S. Simpson. Resurrection of Our Lord, chh. i.-vii.; G.P. Fisher, Grounds of Theistic . . . Belief, ch. ix.; A.C. Headlam, Miracles of the New Test.Pro Fide, ch. xxii.; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 101-105; T. Christlieb, Modern Doubt, Lec. vii., T.J. Thorburn, The Resurrection Narratives; H.B. Swete, The Appearances of Our Lord after the Passion; Ch. Qly. Review, Jan. 1906, 4th art.

2 On the fact of the Ascension, St. Mark xvi. 19; St. Luke xxiv. 50-51; Acts i. 9-11. W. Milligan, Ascension, Lec. i.; W.J.S. Simpson, ch. ix.; Chas. Harris, pp. xlvi-xlvii, 501-502; M.F. Sadler, on Acts i. 9.

3 H. Latham, The Risen Master.

4 E.H. Day, pp. 25-29, W. Milligan, Resurrection, pp. 80-81.

5 T. Christlieb, pp. 455-457; W. Milligan, pp. 76-80; E.H. Day, pp. 45-50.

6 T. Christlieb, pp. 457-503; C.A. Row, Christ. Evidences, Lec. vii.; W. Milligan. pp. 81-114.

7 Found with modification in W.J.S. Simpson, Our Lord's Ressurection, ch. viii.; B.H. Streeter, in Foundations, pp. 127-141. Answered by E.D. la Touche, Person of Christ, pp. 314, 321-323; W. Milligan, pp. 114-119; E.H. Day, pp. 44-45.

8 E.H. Day, pp. 9-16; W.J.S. Simpson, ch. ii.; W. Milligan, pp. 56-62; V. Rose, Studies on the Gospels, viii.

9 The plea, e. g.. of W.J.S. Simpson, Our Lord's Resurrection, ch. viii. Cf., E.D. la Touche, pp. 32l-322.

10 T. B. Strong, Miraculous in Gospels and Creeds, pp. 14-15: Chas. Gore, Basis of Anglican Fellowship, pp. 15-20; W. Milligan, Ascension, pp. 15-26; Chas. Harris, Pro Fide, pp. xlvi-xlvii.

11 Introduction, ch. ii. 5; J.R. Illingworth, Divine Immanence, pp. 97-119; W.J.S. Simpson, app. II.; H.L. Goudge, in Ch. Qly. Review, Jan. 1914, art. II.

Posted by AKMA at 02:58 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XXI. Mysteries of Christ's Exaltation

Q. 120. The Facts

Q. 121. The Meaning of the Resurrection

Q. 122. The Meaning of the Ascension

Q. 123. The Consummation

Posted by AKMA at 01:56 AM | Comments (0)

August 22, 2005

Ch. XX. Q. 119. Survey of Effects

IN this survey of the effects of the passion effects are included which it alone made possible, but the actualization of which has been, and is being, achieved through the further mysteries of our Lord's victory over death, His heavenly priesthood, and the sacramental dispensation of saving grace. They may be divided broadly under two heads: (a) the remedy of our sinfulness and the restoration of the divine likeness in us; (b) the rectification of our personal relations, both to Satan and to God.1

2. By way of remedy for sin and of its effects upon ourselves,2 (a) our consciences are cleansed by the blood of Christ;3 (b) our spiritual wounds are healed by the infusion of Christ's life-giving Manhood, perfected through suffering;4 (c) we are strengthened against the power of concupiscence, so that we can serve God without sin.5

3. By way of restoring the divine likeness in us, the grace and righteousness of Christ are imparted.6 We are (a) regenerated through incorporation into Christ's body, thereby being endowed with sanctifying grace;7 (b) progressively sanctified and perfected in righteousness, by the power of sacramental grace, and through self-discipline, proceeding from faith and repentance;8 (c) conformed to the Image of God, His beloved Son, by adoption and grace, and thus made fit for divine communion and fellowship.9

4. By way of deliverance from Satan,10 (a) we are redeemed by the ransom of Christ's blood from sin, and therefore from Satan;11 (b) Christ has conquered Satan in our behalf, obtaining victory over the death which Satan inflicted;12 (c) in Christ we are increasingly enabled to resist the temptations of Satan, and to endure death victoriously in the power of an endless life offered up to God.13

5. By way of restoration to divine favour, and achievement of acceptable sacrifice of ourselves to God,14 Christ (a) bore our sins on the Cross;15 (b) fully expiated them, so as to become the place of our propitiation;16 (c) made reconciliation between us and the Father, so that in Him we can forever enjoy the privileges which pertain to the sons of God.17

6. By His own blood Christ once for all entered into the true Holy Place,18 and now offers to the Father His Manhood, and us in it, with perpetual intercession.19 This Manhood is an acceptable oblation to the Father because of the passion by which it has been perfected and consecrated, and by which it is indelibly marked in glory.20 On earth, we offer up the same Manhood, and ourselves in sacramental union with it, through the eucharistic mystery, in which we make a memorial of Christ's death, and receive its benefits.21

---

1 R.W. Dale, Atonement, note B, gives a full survey of biblical texts ad rem.

2 St. Thomas, III. xlix. 1; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. p. 74; J.P. Norris, Rudiments of Theol. pp. 194-197, 204-209; R.W. Dale, Lec. viii.

3 Zech. xiii. 1; St. Matt. xxvi. 28; St. Luke xxiv. 46-47; St. John i. 29; 1 Cor. xv. 3; Gal. i. 4; Ephes. i. 7; Heb. ix. 22-28; 1 St. John i. 7-9; Revel. i. 5; vii. 14.

4 Num. xxi. 8-9; Isa. liii. 5; St. Luke x. 30-35; St. John i. 12-13; iii. 14-16; Rom. v. 6; 2 Cor. v. 17; Gal. vi. 15; Tit. iii. 5-6; 1 St. Pet. ii. 24; 1 St. John v. 11; Revel. xxii. 2.

5 Rom. viii. 4; Col. 21-22; 1 St. Pet. ii. 24; Ephes. v. 25-27.

6 St. Thomas, III. xix. 3-4; xlviii. 1; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, n. 80; J.P. Norris, pp. 79-81, 223-225.

7 Isa. liii. 11; Jerem. xxiii. 5-6; xxxiii. 14-16; Rom. iii. 21-26; v. 21.

8 Acts ii. 33, 38; Rom. vii. 14-23; Ephes. v. 25-27; Tit. ii. 14; Heb. x. 10, 14-17; 1 St. Pet. i. 2.

9 Rom. viii. 28-30: Ephes. iii. 7, 11-13; iv. 24; Col. iii. 3, 10; Heb. ii. 10-11; x. 19-20.

10 St. Thomas, III. xlviii. 4-5; Thos. Jackson, Works, vol. VII. pp. 434-436, 505-507; P.G. Medd. One Mediator, §§ 175-176; J.P. Norris, pp. 81-84, 197-204, 209-212, 227-231, 268-272.

11 St. Matt. xx. 28; St. John x. 11, 15, 18; Acts xx. 28; Ephes. i. 6-7; Col. i. 13-14; 1 Tim. ii. 5-6; Tit. ii. 13-14; Heb. ix. 12; Revel. v. 9.

12 Psa. cvii. 16; St. Luke x. 17-20; St. John xii. 31-32; xiv. 30; Col. ii. 15; Heb. ii. 14-15.

13 Job xix. 25-27; 1 Cor. xv. 54-57; Ephes. ii. 5-6; Col. iii. 1-4; 2 Tim. i. 10; Heb. vi. 19-20; Revel. xxi. 4.

14 St. Thomas, III. xxii. 3-4; xlviii. 2-3; xlix. 3-4; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 215-219; W. Bright, nn, 6, 54; Thos. Jackson, vol. VII. pp. 468-472, 490-502, 507-511.

15 Isa. liii. 6, 11, 12; 2 Cor. v. 21; Gal. iii. 13; Heb. ix. 28; 1 St. Pet. ii. 24.

16 I Cor. v. 7; Heb. x. 11-12.

17 Rom. iii. 25: v. 10-11; 2 Cor. v. 18-21; Ephes. ii. 15-18; Col. i. 20-22; Heb. ii. 17; 1 St. John ii. 2; iv. 10.

18 Heb. ix. 12.

19 Ephes. ii. 18: v. 27; Col. i. 21-22; Heb. ii. 17-18; iv. 14-16; vii. 24-25; ix. 24.

20 Heb. ii. 10-11; v. 8-10; Revel, v. 6.

21 Cf. Q. 150, in vol. III. 1 Cor. xi. 24-26. St. Thomas, III. xlix. 5-6; W. Milligan, Ascension. pp. 127-142, 264-268, 307-313; P.G. Medd, §72. A.J. Mason. Faith of the Gospel, chh, vi. 19 and vii. 3. H.N. Oxenham, Cath. Doctr. of the Atonement, pp. 379 et seq.

Posted by AKMA at 07:20 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XX. Q. 118. Theories

THE mystery of the passion is so complex that no theory concerning it can be really adequate or wholly satisfactory. Those which have been offered obtain what self-coherence they possess through disregard of some or other of the truths and problems involved. They are apt to result both in onesided caricature and in ascription to certain legitimate — even scriptural — figures of speech connected with the doctrine, more definite values than they really possess. Yet each influential theory has gained its influence because of some important aspect of the mystery which it retains. A discriminating and comprehensive study of the various theories of Christ's death is therefore helpful in attaining to a well balanced hold upon the doctrine.1

2. The so-called patristic theory fastened on the figure of redemption and ransom, applied to our deliverance from servitude to the devil. Although they realized that Christ's sacrifice was offered to God, certain of the ancients held that the ransom, or price of our redemption from Satan, was paid to the devil, the ransom consisting of Christ's life-blood. As the devil could not retain the price which he exacted — God-incarnate could not be holden of death — the price proved to be of no value to him. In brief, the devil was driven by judicial blindness to overreach himself. Deceived by our Lord's human guise, he undertook to master what lie could not retain, and in doing so forfeited the form of right over men which he had obtained by seducing them into sin. The fathers were not confined in their thought concerning the death of Christ to this theory, which indeed is merely an incidental speculation, having a context of fuller doctrine.2

3. St. Anselm's theory, called "commercial," treated the death of Christ as the payment of a debt due to God because of man's sin. Justice required that man should pay the debt, but divine power alone could accomplish such payment. The Incarnation constituted One who could fulfil both requirements. His obedience was due, but not His death, because He was sinless. By dying voluntarily He earned, and paid for us, the debt which He did not owe for Himself.3

4. By breaking away from the sacramental unity of the Church, Protestants and Reformers lost hold upon the doctrine of our sacramental union with Christ, and became inclined to regard His death as an external and past fact merely — His abiding priesthood being neglected. The idea of substitutionary penalty, borne by a just person that the unjust might go free, came to the fore, and gradually secured among many the authority of orthodoxy. According to this view, our justification consists simply in a forensic imputation of Christ's righteousness to us, no other cause or warrant being admitted than God's will to accept our faith in Christ's saving death.4

5. Modern "moral" theories — theories which deny any objective or transactional value to Christ's death — owe their powerful influence to reaction from the seemingly immoral aspects of the Protestant "orthodoxy," as above described. The Socinian theory is most typical, according to which the passion is merely an exemplary drama, challenging us to save ourselves by our own efforts. The sufficiency of our natural powers is here postulated.5 The moral theories contain truth, inasmuch as they emphasize, onesidedly no doubt, aspects of Christ's death which cannot rightly be either denied or overlooked. But their denial of the objective meaning and value of the passion, and their frequent revival of Pelagian denial of our need of supernatural grace in order to be saved, constitute errors of the most fundamental kind.6

6. Compromises have been attempted. Grotius regarded Christ's death as an exhibition of governmental justice, which cleared the way for the exercise of divine mercy. But such an exhibition cannot satisfy justice unless we are somehow involved in Christ's death, e. g. by sacramental and moral identification with Him. We ourselves must die and, through Christ's victory, overcome death.7

7. Dr. McLeod Campbell makes Christ's death a manifestation by our representative of perfect sympathy with the Father's condemnation of sin — a sort of confession of sin and a perfect
"Amen" in humanity to this condemnation.8 Dr. R.C. Moberly develops this theory into that of ideal penitence.9 Since we could not repent perfectly because of our sinfulness Christ repents for us. That Christ in our behalf condemned sin in the flesh is true, although not a comprehensive description. But that He was in any proper sense a penitent cannot be granted. A penitent is by definition a sinner turning away from sin, which found no lodgment whatever in Christ. Ideal penitence — penitence which does not presuppose imperfection in the penitent — is like perfect health in a sick patient, a contradiction of terms.10

8. Our Thirty-Nine Articles emphasize the objective value of Christ's death "to reconcile the Father to us, and to be a Sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men"; declaring again that "the offering of Christ, once made, is that perfect redemption, propitiation and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual."11

---

1 On the history of the doctrine, H.N. Oxenham, Cath. Doctr. of the Atonement; J. Rivière, Doctr. of the Atonement; Aug. Neander, Hist. of Christ. Dogmas, vol. I. pp. 206-217; vol. II. pp. 514-521; 580-584; R.W. Dale, The Atonement; Lec. vii.; K.R. Hagenbach, Hist. of Christ. Doctrines; §§ 68, 134, 180-182, 268-269, 300; Jas. Orr, Progress of Dogma, Lec. vii. and pp. 300-302, 338-345; Aug. Sabatier, The Doctr. of the Atonement and its Historical Evolution.

2 H.N. Oxenham, ch. ii.-iii.; J.F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist. of Christ. Doctr., ch. xviii.; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, n. 65; F. Huidekoper, Christ's Mission to the Underworld, pp. 78-97; L. Ragg, Aspects of the Atonement, pp. 26-35; The theory is adopted by Dr. Thos. Jackson, Works, vol. VII. pp. 434-436, 502-511.

3 St. Anselm, Cur Deus Homo, i. 11, 21, 24; ii. 4, 6, 10, 18-19; H.N. Oxenham, pp. 181-188: J. Rivière, ch. xviii.; Geo. C. Foley, Anselm's Theory of the Atonement.

4 H.N. Oxenham, pp. 221-242; J.A. Mæhler, Symbolism, § 14; Jas. Orr, pp. 233-239; G.P. Fisher, Hist. of Christ. Doctr., pp. 276-278, 308-309; G.B. Stevens, Christ. Doctr. of Salvation, Pt. 11. ch. iii.

5 H.N. Oxenham, pp. 245-246; K.R. Hagenbach, §268, nn. 7-8; G.P. Fisher, pp. 323-324.

6 G.B. Stevens, Pt. II. ch. v.; Jas. Orr, Progress of Dogma, pp. 338-345; and Christian View of God, pp. 297-318; Aug. Sabatier, pp. 93-109 Cf. C.F. D'Arcy, Christianity and the Supernatural, chh. vi.-vii.

7 H.N. Oxenham, pp. 252-263; K.R. Hagenbach, § 268. n. 9.

8 In his Nature of the Atonement.

9 In Atonement and Personality, esp. ch. vi.

10 C.F. D'Arcy, pp. 79-82; G.B. Stevens, pp. 211-216.

11 A.P. Forbes, Bp. Browne and E.C.S. Gibson, on art. ii.

Posted by AKMA at 01:20 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XX. Q. 117. The Doctrine of the Passion

THE theology of the passion and death of Christ is necessarily very complex, because it is concerned with God's remedy for the most chaotic complication known to man, that of sin. But the doctrine of the passion — the determinative truth which every man needs to believe for his soul's health — can be stated in comparatively simple terms, somewhat as follows: The death of Christ is the one true sacrifice for sin, which alone gives value to repentance affords a just basis of divine pardon, and makes possible the salvation from sin thai is available in the Church through Jesus Christ, our risen and glorified Saviour. It is all this because it constitutes the objective means of redemption from the power of Satan, of expiation for sin, and of reconciliation to God, by reason of which we are given a new footing in a covenant
of cleansing and sanctifying grace.1

2. The death of Christ has very great moral or subjective value. That is, as an example it appeals most powerfully to our hearts and consciences, and, by exhibiting both the dreadfulness of sin and Christ's love in coming to the rescue, it stimulates in us the motives for repentance, self-discipline and persevering use of the means of salvation. And the convenience of the method of Christ's redemption appears in the fact that His death not only opens the road to God, but also draws us with loving appeal to travel over it.2

3. But the doctrine of Christ's death gives primary emphasis to its objective value, that is, its value as opening the road, as constituting in itself the means, the only revealed means, of making our recovery and acceptance of God possible.3 And, as such means, it has infinite value because the Person who died is infinite. Although the Godhead did not—could not—die; yet He who did die on the Cross, in the Manhood, was no less than very God.4 Accordingly, (a) His death needs no repetition, for it accomplished its purpose once for all, consecrating an ever-continuing priesthood of Christ and a dispensation of saving grace which can never be exhausted;5 (b) The redemption is universal, affording sufficient basis for the salvation of all, in every age and race, who respond to the divine call and fulfil the necessary conditions of salvation.6

4. The death of Christ was vicarious. He died for others, and by His stripes we are healed.7 This does not mean that His death is a literal substitute for our suffering and dying; but that it stands alone in consecrating the means which change our death from destructive ruin into the gateway to everlasting life. He died as our Representative, as the Second Adam; and by sacramental identification with Him we are enabled to make His sufferings our own.8 And all the sufferings which we have to endure acquire purificatory and saving value9 for ourselves, through their being sanctified by His death.10

5. This is so because of the meritoriousness of Christ's passion.11 Christ was not only perfectly righteous, as seen in His life of human obedience, but His death—the act by which He redeemed mankind—was itself an act of obedient and willing self-surrender,12 especially meritorious because He did not deserve to die. In this connection, it is to be remembered that, while the perfection of His earthly life constituted a necessary condition of His death being undeserved, and therefore a sine qua non of its meritoriousness, His death, rather than His antecedent life, was the specific means and method of our redemption.13

6. But our Lord's death is not an isolated event. Although sufficient for what it once for all achieved, it postulates, ministers to and consecrates an ever-continuing mystery of salvation, without which it could have no value for us. If Christ had not redeemed us by His death, we could have gained no footing as subjects of saving grace. But unless Christ had risen from the dead, unless He were now our living Priest in heavenly places, and unless there had been instituted a sacramental dispensation whereby we can be united with Christ and share in the grace which He merited for us by His death — unless these mysteries had been added, — we should not have been able to participate in the benefits of redemption. Christ's death avails for us only because it consecrates abiding means of salvation.14

---

1 On the doctrine of Christ's death, L. Pullan, The Atonement; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ Dogma, ch. vii.; Lux Mundi, Ess. vii.; R.W. Dale, The Atonement; St. Thomas, III. xlvi-lii; J.P. Norris, Rudiments of Theol., Pt. I. ch. iii. and Pt. II.; J. Pohle, Soteriology; L. Ragg, Aspects of the Atonement; Jas. Denney, Death of Christ; and The Atonement; R.C. Moberly, Atonement and Personality.

2 St. Thomas, III. xlvi. 1-4, 9-11; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, nn. 83, 135; Oxford House Papers, 2nd Series, pp. 40 et seq.; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. vi. 3, 11; R.C. Moberly, ch. vii.

3 W. Bright, nn. 74, 85; R.W. Dale, pp. 299-310; St. Thomas, III. xlviii, 6; J.S. Stone, The Passion of Christ, pp. 1-57; J.G. Simpson, What is the Gospel? ch. vii.; W. Sanday, Life of Christ in Recent Research, ix.

4 St. Thomas, III. xlvi. 12; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 213-214; H.P. Liddon, Univ. Sermons, 1st Series, pp. 169-182; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, pp. 156-166; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 186-188; W. Bright, nn. 6, 30.

5 Rom. vi. 9; Heb. x. 10-14; vii. 24-25; W. Milligan, Ascension, pp. 116-136.

6 St. John xii. 32; iii. 14-15; Rom. viii. 19-23; xi. 32; 1 Cor. xv. 22; 2 Cor. v. 14-15; I Tim. ii. 4, 6; Heb. v. 9; W. Bright, n. 67; J.P. Norris, pp. 74-75.

7 Isa. liii. 3-6; St. Matt. xx. 28; 2 Cor. v. 21; 1 St. Pet. iii. 18. Cf. Levit. xvi. 7-10, 20-22.

8 Col. ii. 12-14; St. John vi. 47-58; Ephes. v, 30-32.

9 Col. i. 24. Cf. 1 St. Pet. v. 10.

10 St. Thomas, III. xxii. 4; Archd. Wilberforce, pp. 39 et seq.; W. Bright, nn. 6, 72, 80; W. Milligan, pp. 268-274, 341-343; R.W. Dale, pp. 391-397, Lec. x., and note H.; L. Ragg, pp. 13-14; Chas. Gore, New Theology, pp. 135-145.

11 St. John iv. 34; v. 30; vi. 38; Heb. v. 8; x. 7-9.

12 Phil. ii. 6-8.

13 St. Matt. xx. 28; St. John x. 11, 15, 18; Rom. v. 6-8; 1 Cor. xv. 3; 2 Cor. v. 14-15; Col. i. 14, 21-22; Heb. ii. 9; ix. 12; 1 St. John i. 7; iii. 16; Revel, v. 9. St. Thomas, III. xl. 4; xlvii. 1-3: xlviii. 1; Archd. Wilberforce, pp. 151- 156; A.J. Mason, ch. vi. 12-17.

14 L. Ragg, pp. 111-114; L. Pullan, pp. 236-246; J.G. Simpson, ch. viii.

Posted by AKMA at 12:11 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XX. Q. 116. Of the Passion

POSTPONING to the next question the doctrine of the passion at large, we here deal with the more important events connected with it. On the eve of His death Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist as an abiding means of spiritual sustenance, and as a memorial for His Church to celebrate, declaring its consecrated species to be His Body and His Blood of the New Covenant. Thus He established a representative and applicatory sacrifice for Christians, whereby His redeemed can formally identify themselves with Him in His death, through feeding on His flesh and blood, and can acceptably participate under earthly conditions in His ever-continuing priestly oblation in heavenly places.1

2. On the same occasion, by a symbolical feet-washing, the deeper meaning of which He declared that His apostles could not yet understand, He in effect instituted what in its later development is called the sacrament of Penance.2

3. The acuteness of His agony in the garden appears to have been due partly to the burden of human sin which He had assumed, and partly to the fierceness of His battle with Satan, then reaching its climax. Mere dread of suffering does not account for it. The terms of His prayer reveal at once the fulness of His experience of human strain in resisting temptation and the inevitable persistence in His obedience in accepting what the Father had given Him to endure.3

4. The manner of His death shows (a) that He was reckoned among trans-gressors and slaves, as does also the price of His betrayal;4 (b) that He was forsaken of men and deprived of the felt consolations of divine favour;5 (c) that He was to draw all men by the outstretched arms of His love.6 The seven words which He uttered from the Cross declare His work to be (a) the remedy of sin;7 (b) reconciliation of penitent sinners;8 (c) provision for holy souls;9 (d) bodily pain;10 (e) spiritual pain and isolation;11 (f) complete redemption;12 (g) a sacrifice to the Father.13

5. The passion culminated in death because He came to bear all the consequences of sin, and death is one of them; and in order that He might break the power of death by His resurrection.14

6. By His descent into hades He underwent the conditions of the dead in which all men share. He also preached to the spirits in prison, and brought deliverance to His saints of previous dispensations.15 Neither His body in the grave nor His soul in hades were separated from His Person, but were sustained respectively against corruption and the power of hell by their hypostatic union with His Godhead.16

---

1 See Qq. 150-161, in vol. III.

2 St. John xiii. 4-11; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ix. 18; T.H. Bernard, Centraa Teachings of Jesus Christ, Pt. I. ch. iii.

3 St. Matt. xxvi. 36-46; St. Mark xiv. 32-42. St. Luke xxii. 39-46. Cf. Lam. i. 12; Heb. v. 7-8; St. Thomas, III xlvi. 6, 8; Thomas Jackson, Works, vol. VII, pp. 384, 472- 485, 502 et seq.; A.J. Mason, ch. vi. 17; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, p. 194.

4 Isa. liii. 12; Zech. xi. 12-13; St. Matt. xxvi. 14-15. Cf. Gen. xxxvii. 28.

5 Isa. liii. 3; St. Matt. xxvi. 56; xxvii. 46; Psa. xxii. 1, 6-8.

6 St. John xii. 32-33.

7 St. Luke xxiii. 34.

8 St. Luke xxiii. 39-43.

9 St. John xix. 25-27.

10 St. John xix. 28.

11 St. Matt. xxvii, 46.

12 St. John xix. 30.

13 St. Luke xxiii. 46. See Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 189-191, 202-206; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 209-213.

14 Ezek. xviii. 4, 20; 1 Cor. xv. 54-57; St. Thomas, III, 1.; Bp. Pearson, fol. pp. 210-217.

15 1 St. Pet. iii. 18-22; Col. ii. 15. St. Thomas, III. lii.; F. Huidekoper, Belief . . . Concerning Christ's Mission to the Underworld, pp. 48-54, 66-78, 164-171; A.P. Forbes, pp. 224-226; P. G. Medd, Our Mediator, §§ 151-153; R.E. Hutton Soul in the Unseen World, pp. 161-172; D. Stone, pp. 300-304.

16 Psa. xvi. 10; Acts ii. 24-27; St. Thomas, III. 1. 2-3; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity. V. lii. 4; A.P. Forbes. pp. 223-224; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, n. 96; A.J. Mason, ch. vii. 1.

Posted by AKMA at 11:18 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XX. Q. 115. Of His Public Ministry

CATHOLIC doctrine permits, and Gospel data require, us to believe That our Lord's human knowledge continued to grow during His public ministry. But every pertinent consideration requires us, in interpreting this ministry, to assume that, at its outset—from the time of His Baptism,—His messianic consciousness had become sufficiently mature and articulate to afford secure guidance, and to make Him an infalliable Teacher concerning the mysteries of His Kingdom.1

2. By His Baptism2 Christ (a) sanctified water to the mystical washing away of sin; (b) declared Baptism to be a part of Christian righteousness.3 The subsequent descent of the Holy Spirit upon Him (a) formally anointed Him for His ministry;4 (b) foreshadowed the Christian sacrament of Confirmation.5

3. His Temptation in the wilderness6 was external in source, because of His internal perfection,7 and came from the devil. Like the temptation to which our first parents yielded, it was threefold, and appealed to all human appetites that are open to evil assault. He was tempted to (a) lust of the flesh, by being asked to gratify His own hunger by a miracle; (b) lust of the eyes, by being offered immediate success, in His mission to mankind; (c) the pride of life, or vainglorious display of spiritual power over gravitation.8 He won His victory by divine grace, and in our behalf; affording a divine example in terms of human effort which we can gradually imitate, because His moral strength is made sacramentally available to us, under conditions of self-disciplinary practice in its use.9

4. His preaching had a twofold subject-matter —Himself, as the Way, the Truth and the Life,10 and His kingdom, of which He constituted an apostolic Church to be the earthly machinery and organic embodiment.11 His method was (a) absolutely authoritative and final;12 (b) largely parabolic, for the protection of truth from desecration, by the spiritually unready;13 (c) frequently paradoxical, in order to emphasize principles as distinguished from legalistic rules;14 (d) eschatalogical, but symbolical, aiming at the formation of minds adjusted to the future, rather than at predictions of times and seasons; (e) partly esoteric, seeking to educate apostolic pioneers of a propaganda, rather than to take all men at once into His confidence, (f) objective, revealing Himself in His daily life, by significant works, by His passion, and by His victory over death; (g) initiatory, leaving the completion of His illuminative work to the Holy Spirit.15

5. His miracles were primarily natural works, ἔργα,16 i.e., natural to His Person, and to be expected of Him, when once He entered human history. This is preeminently true of His assuming our nature by virgin conception and of His recovering His body from death. It is only in relation to the unassisted resident powers of the nature which He assumed, and through which He worked, that these ἔργα are to be called supernatural. And no natural factors were either nullified or violated by any of them.17 In detail, they are called (a) τέρατα, prodigies, as challenging men's surprise and attention;18 (b) δυνάμεις, powers, as indicating superhuman causation;19 (c) σημεῖα, signs, because of their teaching value.20 This value appears clearly both in His works of healing and in His casting out of devils. But the Virgin Birth and the resurrection are the most rationally significant of all, because they constitute epoch-making stops in the advance of human development under God.21

6. His transfiguration22 (a) revealed by anticipation the effect which the taking of flesh by very God was to display in that flesh, after His earthly humiliation was over; (b) exhibited the future glory of saints triumphant, derived from Him.23

---

1 Hastings, Dic. of Christ, vol. 1. pp. 363-364.

2 St. Matt. iii. 13-17.

3 St. Thomas, III. xxxviii.-xxxix. 4.

4 Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 98-101.

5 St. Thomas, III. xxxix. 5-8; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. lix. 7-8.

6 St. Matt. iv. 1-11; St. Luke iv. 1-3.

7 Cf. Q. 111. 4-5, above.

8 1 St. John ii. 16; Heb. ii. 18; iv. 15.

9 See refs. in Q. 111. n. 6, above.

10 St. John xiv. 6.

11 Cf. Q. 126.4, in vol. III.

12 St. Matt. vii. 29.

13 St. Matt. xiii. 9-17; vii. 6.; R. C. Trench, Parables of our Lord. Introd. ch. ii.

14 E. g. St. Matt. v. 29-30, 39-42.

15 St. John xvi. 12-13. Cf. St. Thomas, III. xlii. 1, 3; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord, pp. 169-172; and Easter in St. Paul's, xxxvi.-xxvvii.

16 St. Matt. viii. 27; St. Luke xxiv. 19.

17 R.C. Trench, Miracles of Our Lord, Prelim. Essay, ch. ii.; T.B. Strong. The Miraculous in Gospels and Creeds, pp. 19-23; J.R.Illingworth, Divine Immanence, pp. 97-119.

18 St. Matt. xxiv. 24; St. Mark xiii. 22; St. John iv. 48.

19 St. Matt. vii. 22; xi. 20; St. Mark vi. 14; St. Luke x. 13; Acts ii. 22; xix. 11; Gal. iii. 5.

20 St. John iii. 2; vii. 31; x. 41 ; 2 Cor. xii. 12.

21 R.C. Trench, ch. i.; St. Thomas, III. xliii. 1-2, 4; xliv. 3; Hastings, Dic. of Bible, s. v. "Miracle," iv.; Chas. F. D'Arcy, Christianity and the Supernatural, esp. chh. i.-iv.

22 St. Matt. xvii. 1-8; St. Mark ix. 2-8.

23 St. Thomas, III. xlv; R.C. Trench, Studies in the Gospels, Ess. viii.; A. Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, Bk. IV. ch. i.; Hastings, Dic. of Bible and Dic. of Christ, q. v.

Posted by AKMA at 06:07 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XX. Q. 114. Of His Childhood

THE events of our Lord's earthly life are called mysteries because they constitute revelations of His Person and mission; and the relations which they are described in the Gospels as having to Old Testament prophecies — not always susceptible of either discovery or verification by the methods of critical scholarship — constitute an inspired context in which to interpret what Christ did, experienced and said. No doubt this inspiration is in certain instances one of selection and divinely sanctioned reinterpretation, rather than of guidance to the original meaning of Old Testament writers. These thoughts explain the non-critical adoption in this chapter of Gospel interpretations of prophecy which cannot be successfully verified by critical methods.1

2. The nativity of Christ2 occurred in Bethlehem, in fulfilment of prophecy, in order to show His Davidic lineage and heirship to David's kingship over Israel.3 The name Bethlehem, house of bread, fittingly identifies the earthly birthplace of the true Bread, which came down from heaven to give life unto the world.4 His lowly manner of birth accords with His mission to the humble and poor;5 and the determination of His birthplace by the exigencies of taxation fits in with His submission to the law for man.6

3. The message of the angels teaches us that Jesus was Saviour, the Messiah and Lord, and that His mission was one of peace.7 His circumcision signifies that He came in order (a) to fulfil the law; (b) to shed covenant blood for His people; (c) It shows the reality of His flesh.8 The human name Jesus, then given Him, signifies in His case that He is Jehovah and the Saviour of His people.9

4. He was presented in the Temple, in obedience to the law, as Mary's Firstborn,10 and was to be the Firstborn from the dead. The accompanying gifts were suited to the poverty of His family; but His presence in the Temple made it more glorious than that of Solomon, because He, "the light to lighten the gentiles and the glory of God's people Israel," is the Being for whose worship it was built.11

5. The leading by a star to Bethlehem of the Magi,12 who appear to have belonged to a Persian priestly caste, initiated the manifestation to the gentiles of Him from whom true priesthood is derived. Their gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh lend themselves to symbolic interpretation, as respectively signifying the royal dignity, the true Godhead and the coming passion of the Babe whom they worshipped.13

6. The holy Child's hearing the doctors, and asking them questions,14 displays His submission to the intellectual conditions of childhood; while His understanding and answers reveal His possession already of supernatural endowments of mind. His words, "Wist ye not that I must be in the things of My Father," show that His human mind was already growing into a distinct consciousness of divine Sonship and mission. In the light of this consciousness, His continued subjection to His parents strikingly reveals the self-surrender with which He accepted human conditions.15

---

1 Incarnation, ch. x. 1-4, 9. The mysteries of Christ are treated by St. Thomas, III. xxvii.-lix. Modern "Lives" contain contributions, but are mostly non-relevant to this, the theological, aspect of the subject.

2 Incarnation, ch. x. 10; St. Thomas, III. xxxv. 7; Thos. Jackson, Works, vol. VII pp. 296-355; A. Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, Bk. II. eh. vi.

3 Mic. v. 2; St. Matt. ii. 2, 6; 1 Sam. xvi. 18, St. Luke ii. 4, 11.

4 St. John vi. 32-33.

5 St. Matt. xi. 5, St. Luke iv. 18; 2 Cor. viii. 9.

6 St. Luke ii. 1; Gal. iv. 4; Phil. ii. 7-8.

7 St. Luke ii. 10-14; St. Thomas, III. xxxvi. 5.

8 St. Matt. ii. 21; v. 17; xxvi. 28; St. Mark xx. 24; Heb. xiii. 20; St. Thomas, III, xvxvii. 1; Thos. Jackson, pp. 355-363; H.P. Liddon, Christmastide in St. Paul's, xxi.

9 St. Matt. i. 21; St. Thomas, III. xxxvii. 2; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 109-111; H.P. Liddon, xx.; Thomas Jackson, pp. 363-375; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 69-73.

10 St. Luke ii. 22-39.

11 Hag. ii. 6-9; St. Thomas, III. xxxvii. 3-4; A. Edersheim, Bk. II. ch. vii.

12 St. Matt. ii. l-ll; Cf. Isa. Ix.

13 St. Thomas, III. xxxvi.; H.P. Liddon, xxii.; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, nn. 38-39, 41; A. Edersheim, Bk. II. ch. viii.

14 St. Luke ii. 41-51.

15 M.F. Sadler on St. Luke ii. 48-51; A. Edersheim, Bk. II. ch. x.

Posted by AKMA at 02:35 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XX. Mysteries of Christ's Earthly Life.

Q. 114. Of His Childhood

Q. 115. Of His Public Ministry

Q. 116. Of the Passion

Q. 117. The Doctrine of the Passion

Q. 118. Theories

Q. 119. Survey of Effects

Posted by AKMA at 01:18 AM | Comments (0)

August 18, 2005

Ch. XIX. Q. 113. Their Perpetuity

THESE offices are perpetual and heavenly, and do not derive their necessity from the fact of sin; although they are partly performed under earthly conditions, and are determined in method by our need of recovery from sin.1

2. They are perpetual because they are fulfilled by an eternal Person, and from an eternal standpoint. His mediation rests for possibility upon His eternal relation to the Father, a relation which makes His work effective for, and applicable to, every age and generation. Yet His work had to be performed and manifested historically, in order that those who live under temporal and earthly conditions might apprehend and be benefited by it.2

3. In every age, men depend upon what Christ does as Mediator in order to learn of God, approach Him, receive His grace and obey His will. In no age, therefore, could the operative value of what He historically performed be wanting, if its benefits were to be available to all mankind.3

4. We do not know what would have been the method of mediation if man had not sinned;4 but in fact the Mediator has assumed flesh, and employs our nature as His mediatorial instrument. It was therefore needful that His neah sininid be anointed and consecrated by the gift of the Spirit;5 that it should be perfected for mediatorial purposes by His obedience unto death; and that it should be equipped as the medium of grace and of our approach to God by its victory over death, its glorification, and its mystical extension to us in the Church.

---

1 Heb. vii. 15-17, 24-25; viii. 1-2; xiii. 8. St. Thomas, III. xxii. 5-6; P. Freeman, Principles of Divine Service, vol. II. pp. 142-145; P.G. Medd, One Mediator, §§ 10-14, 24-25, 36-37, 40-41, 183-189, 200 and Lec. iv.; B.F. Westcott, on Heb i. 2; vii. 16.

2 W. Milligan, Ascension, pp. 97-103; P.G. Medd, §§ 10-14.

3 P.G. Medd, §§ 24, 40-41.

4 Cf. Q. 98, above.

5 Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 97-101; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 111-113; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. liv. 6.

Posted by AKMA at 08:00 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIX. Q. 112. Of Prophet, Priest and King

SHARING fully in the natures of both God and man, Jesus Christ fulfils the offices of Mediator — those of Prophet, Priest and King.1

2. In His prophetic office,2 the divine Word is "the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world."3 He enlightens men at all times through the natural order, in which He is immanent, and which declares the glory and the eternal Godhead of its Maker.4 He teaches also in all supernatural revelation: (a) in ancient times, through angel, theophany and type; and through the prophets, to whom He gave a special inspiration of the Holy Spirit;5 (b) in a new manner by His own Incarnation and earthly manifestation,6 speaking with personal and inherent authority, although in conformity to the will of the Father;7 (c) now, through His Church, which He guides with His spirit into all saving truth;8 (d) hereafter, through His glorified Manhood, through which we shall enjoy the vision of God.9

3. His priestly office is concerned with objective mediation, including the bestowal of divine gifts upon us and the offering up of our oblations to God;10 (a) Before the Incarnation, He signified this by symbols which did not "effect what they figured";11 (b) During His earthly ministry, He fulfilled the personal conditions and redemptive work to which the ancient ritual pointed; and was therein consecrated to His perfected and everlasting priesthood;12 (c) now, He offers us up in Himself to the Father, in heavenly places; and bestows gifts of grace upon the members of His mystical body, enabling them through effective sacraments to participate in His priesthood and its benefits;13 (d) Hereafter, and because of our union with Him, His flesh will be the medium of our approach to God, and the abiding source of our life and glory.14

4. His kingly office mediates the sovereignty of God, in which He shares as one with the Father, and which He reveals and executes in His Manhood.15 (a) Perpetually the angels obey His will; and the universe coheres in, and is subject to, Him;16 (b) Anciently, He gave the law for man which He subsequently obeyed as Man;17 (c) During His earthly ministry, He reënacted and interpreted the inner meaning of the law, Himself exemplifying its fulfilment;18 (d) Now, as Head of the Church, His body, and through its ministry appointed by Him, He acts as chief Shepherd and Bishop of souls;19 (e) In the last day, He will judge all men, rewarding them according to their deeds,20 (f) In the consummation, His rule will openly appear as in fact the rule of the Father, between whom and creation He is, by eternal relation, the Mediator.21

---

1 Incarnation, ch. ix; St. Thomas, III. xxvi; H.P. Liddon, Some Elements of Relig., pp. 228-231; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 92-104; Hastings, Dic. of Christ, s. v. "Mediator." Cf. 1 Tim. ii. 5; Heb. viii. 6; ix. 15; xii. 24.

2 H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord, pp. 169-172; and Some Words of Christ, St. Thomas, III. vii. 8; H.C. Powell, Principle of the Incarn., pp. 206-220.

3 St. John i. 4-5, 9-10.

4 Rom. i. 20.

5 Heb. i. 1; 2 St. Pet. i. 21.

6 St. John i. 17-18.

7 Deut. xviii. 15; St. Luke vii. 16; St. John vi. 14; viii. 28; xii. 49-50.

8 St. John xvi. 7, 13-14; Ephes. iii. 11-12; 1 Tim. iii. 15.

9 2 Cor. iii. 18; 1 Cor. xiii. 12; St. John xiv. 19; Col. i. 15; ii. 9; Heb. x. 20.

10 Heb. v., viii-ix. and passim; Psa. cx. 4. St. Thomas, III. xxii; Wm. Milligan, Ascension, Lec. ii. et seq.; Geo. Milligan, Theol. of the Ep. to the Heb., chh. vi.-vii.; R.C. Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, pp. 244-249; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, VIII. iv. 6; M.F. Sadler, One Offering, chh. vii.-ix.; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, chh. vii.-xi.

11 Heb. ix.8-15; x. 1-14.

12 Heb. ii. 9-11; v. 6-10.

13 Heb. iii. 1; iv. 14; Ephes. iv. 8; v. 27.

14 1 Tim. ii. 5-6; Heb. x. 20; 2 St. Pet. i. 4.

15 Rich. Hooker, VIII. iv. 6; Hastings, Dic. of Christ, vol. I. p. 477 and s. v. "King." Cf.. Zech. ix. 9; 1 Tim. vi. 15; Acts x. 36; Revel. xix. 16.

16 St. Luke viii. 25; St. Matt. xxvi. 53; Col. i. 15-17; Heb. i. 3, 6.

17 Jerem. xxiii.6; Mal. iv. 2.

18 St. Matt. v. 17; Heb. x. 7; 1 St. Pet. ii. 21.

19 St. Matt. ii. 6; xviii. 18; Ephes. v. 23; Col. i. 18; Heb. ii. 10; 1 St. Pet ii. 25; v. 4.

20 St. John v. 22, 27; Acts xvii. 31; Heb. xii. 23.

21 Dan. vii. 13-14; 1 Cor. xv. 24-28. Cf. Q. 123.4, below.

Posted by AKMA at 05:05 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XIX. The Offices of Christ

Q. 112. Of Prophet, Priest and King,/a>

Q. 113. Their Perpetuity

Posted by AKMA at 01:04 AM | Comments (0)

August 17, 2005

Ch. XVIII. Q. 111. Perfection and Example

THE personal character which Jesus Christ exhibited in Jewry comprehended all, even the most opposite, human virtues—each in its perfection, and all concurring in a demonstration of grace such as has never been given on earth except by Him. Tempted through all human avenues of temptation, He remained sinless;1 and approved Himself as morally invincible and as the pattern and example according to which, by His grace, we are to grow.2

2. It is true that Jesus Christ also grew, increasing in a properly human manner in favour with God, and being made perfect by suffering. But this means that His virtues actualized themselves under the conditions of human growth and experience, and that what He learned by endurance of suffering was required to bring to experiential form the perfections which constitute Him the Author of our salvation. He never grew from moral deficiency to virtue, but was at each stage of His development what He ought to be, exhibiting successively, and as widening experience afforded occasion, the highest perfections of a child, of a youth, and of fullgrown manhood.3

3. There is but one sufficient explanation of this—His divine Person and mission. He came to reveal in forms of human experience, and for our progressive appropriation, the righteousness of God. He did this because divine righteousness is the only final standard of our righteousness, and because that righteousness could not be adequately revealed unless God Himself should live our life, and thus exhibit the manner of perfection into which He wills us to grow. Jesus Christ is our Example because He is God,4 although He is an intelligible and appealing example because He became Man and translated divine righteousness into human terms. Such a mission could not have been fulfilled if by taking our nature He had lost His moral invincibility—His personal impeccability.5

4. Temptation, or moral testing, does not depend for reality upon liability to sin on the part of the person tempted, but upon his moral freedom and possession of natural appetites to which temptation can appeal. Liability to sin decreases to zero in a perfectly emancipated will. Accordingly, impeccability does not preclude real temptation and painful effort in resisting it. Impeccability is neither a defect of volitional power nor an effect of external constraint; and it does not depend upon or imply a reduction of the natural appetites to which temptations appeal. Rather it is a characteristic of perfect freedom, of entire exemption of the will from servitude to appetites. It characterizes moral perfection—initially present in Christ, and the ultimate goal of our spiritual growth. But just because it was not in Jesus Christ to do otherwise than to fight temptation and control appetites to the finish, He felt the pains of resisting temptation more fully than any one else ever did. Therein lies our assurance of His sympathy.6

5. No example contains so completely all the elements of satisfying appeal as that of Christ, although He exhibited the future goal of our growth rather than what we can now attain. If what He exemplified had been level to our immediate possibilities of achievement, either in resources employed or in character displayed, then we should have no example of what we are meant finally to become. The lives of the saints afford needed examples of repentance and struggle with one's own sinfulness; but that which makes their lives exemplary is due to their imitation of Christ, is a derivative branch of His example.7

6. The examples of the saints also confirm the practicability of Christ's example—that is, when viewed as a goal of human endeavour. And this practicability is due to the fact that the boundless resources of grace wherewith Jesus Christ won His inevitable victory are made available to us, through our sacramental union with Him, as rapidly as we learn how to utilize them by the practice of self-discipline.

---

1 Heb. iv. 15; ii. 17-18; 1 St. Pet. i. 21-22; 1 St. John iii. 4-5. Cf. St. John viii. 46; xiv. 30. Incarnation, ch. v. 3.

2 H.R. Mackintosh, Doctr. of the Person of Jesus Christ, pp. 400-404; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord, pp. 163-198; E.D. la Touche, Person of Christ, pp. 232-248; Chas. Harris, Pro Fide, pp. 388-400; E. Bougaud, Divinity of Christ, ch. iv; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 77-81; Hastings, Dic. of Christ, s. v. "Character of Christ"; C.H. Robinson, Studies in the Character of Christ.

3 K. Theory, ch. vi.

4 Cf. St. Matt. v. 48; Ephes. v. 1-2, Gen. i. 26.

5 Incarnation, ch. viii. 9-11; K. Theory, pp. 126-128; E.H. Gifford, Incarnation, pp. 101-102, Hastings, Dic. of Christ, s. v. "Example."

6 Incarnation, ch. viii. 5-7; W.H. Hutchings, Mystery of Temptation, pp. 116 et seq.; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, n. 15; H.R. Mackintosh, pp. 401-403; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. vi. 13.

7 H.P. Liddon, pp. 494-504; Ch. Qly. Review, July, 1883, art, iii.; C.H. Robinson, ch. iii.

Posted by AKMA at 06:32 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVIII. Q. 110. Twofold Operations

BEING very God, even while on earth, Jesus Christ performed, in the Godhead and in the divine manner, the operations which pertain to God; and bring truly Man, He performed, in His Manhood and in the human manner, the actions which are proper to man. Accordingly, in Him there were and are two wills and two knowledges, the divine and the human, both exercised by the same Ego and from tho same centre, but mutually different in manner of determination and operation.1

2. Willing constitutes the initial element of self-determined action, and must pertain to the same natural order with the action in which it is involved. But divine and human modes of action differ, and are mutually incommensurate.2 Divine willing is eternal and does not come within the natural order of human action, which is temporal. And human willing, being temporal, cannot constitute the determinative element of divine and eternal action. Therefore, since the God-man operates both divinely and humanly, these factors concurring to produce one harmonious personal life, the operative factors of that life must have been determined by different modes of willing, by two wills.

3. These two wills, or modes of His willing, pertain none the less to one indivisible Self, the Word-incarnate; and the fact that both wills are exercised by this self-consistent Ego precludes any mutual opposition between them. Moreover, in the activity of a divine Person, the divine will is necessarily the regulative factor. This is so in Christ, not because the divine invades human consciousness and embarrasses the freedom of human volitions in Him—an impossibility—but because these volitions, conditioned though they be by human limitations and human modes of functioning, are the self-determinations of a divine Ego. God cannot contradict Himself in any mode of volitional functioning which He may condescend to make His own.3

4. Since His Incarnation our Lord has always possessed two knowledges, two modes of knowledge, the divine and the human.4 This does not mean that He has two psychological minds, both capable of emerging in human consciousness—whether by turns or in mutually confusing parallelism. The divine mind does not function psychologically at all, and its operations, by their very nature, must forever escape the attention and scrutiny of a really human mind. Consequently, the fact that the eternal Son cannot cease to be divine and therefore must always possess divine knowledge— the omniscience of God—does not involve a confusing invasion of omniscience into the human consciousness, which, because human, must function psychologically and under the limitations of human experience. So far as we can ascertain, the divine knowledge could affect His human mind only in the manner of grace—the grace of union. It was a human mind alone, one endowed with grace but subject to human limitations, which could be expressed in our Lord's conversation with His followers; and our assurance that He possessed divine omniscience is derived from considering the truth of His Godhead and the unique authority and infallibility with which He taught.5

5. The mind of Christ of which His followers gained experience was a divinely guided and inspired human mind—one which was subject to the laws of human growth and was uninformed concerning some things. Yet, as became one whose prophetic mission was so comprehensive, the greatness and perfection of His human understanding itself constituted a revelation. He appeared as a spiritual genius; as wholly unaffected by the blindness which sin engenders in men; as divinely inspired for the most exalted and vastly significant prophecy ever given to mankind; and as having for the object of His growing human self-consciousness the eternal Son of God. The teaching of such an one is rightly accepted as inerrant, permanently valid, and final in authority over human consciences.6

---

1 Incarnation, ch. viii. 1-4. Cf. Q. 106.4, above. W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, nn. 56, 156; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 204-206; St. Thomas, III. xviii-xix. 1; H.P. Liddon, DIvinity of our Lord, pp. 265-267.

2 Incarnation, ch. vi. 2.

3 Incarnation, ch. vi. 1, 3, 7, 11.

4 K. Theory, chh. xi-xii.

5 Incarnation, ch. vi. 6-8. Cf. Q. 109.3, above.

6 Incarnation, ch. v. 6. Cf. Q. 109.4, above. D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 81-83, 295-298; H.P. Liddon, pp. 461-480; C.J. Ellicott, Christus Comprobatur, pp. 89 et seq.; Ch. Qly. Review, Oct., 1891, art. i.

Posted by AKMA at 01:41 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVIII. 109. The Exaltation of Christ

ALTHOUGH subject to the necessary limitations of a truly human earthly life, limitations which involved infinite self-abasement on Christ's part, His Manhood, by virtue of its being that of a divine Person, was endowed from the beginning with a supernatural grace of union, whereby its spiritual faculties were enhanced to a unique degree. Moreover, it could not, as His Manhood, be holden of death;1 but as a just reward for His self-effacement, Christ was exalted even in His human nature, to divine glory,—His human name, Jesus, thenceforth receiving the homage due to God.

2. The grace of Christ's Manhnod was due to its mysterious and ineffable communion with the Godhead in His inner Self. It was also due to that Manhood being filled with the Holy Spirit. These two explanations are not independent. The Holy Spirit eternally exists in the Son, and is proper to Him. As Man, Christ was endowed with a Spirit who eternally proceeds from the Father through Himself, as divine. In brief, His Manhood was endowed with His own Spirit.2

3. "Grace," as here employed, signifies an operation of the divine upon the human which cannot in any person be observed as a phenomenon of consciousness. Psychological analysis and description is applicable only to its effect—a spiritual enlargement and strengthening of our psychical powers, which leaves undisturbed their laws of development and methods of exercise. No reason exists for supposing otherwise in the case of Christ. The Godhead and the Manhood of Christ met in Himself, and the grace which flowed, sic from His Godhead into His Manhood came from Himself. This is as much as can be affirmed; and no description in terms of psychology or in regional figures—such as "sub-liminal"—can add to our knowledge of the method of grace, which wholly transcends such descriptions.3

4. But the Gospel narratives make clear the effects of grace upon our Lord's human mind and powers. He was not exempt from having to grow in human wisdom after the normal human manner4 and He gained human knowledge by experience just as we do.5 He also was subject to human motives and felt human cravings in a perfectly natural way. But His mental growth was characterized by an absolutely unique perfection, and He was morally invincible against inducements to sin. His positive virtues were incomparable. The wisdom which He displayed was invariably adequate to the exigencies of His experience and mission, and afforded satisfying evidence that His human understanding was protected from all spiritual error.6

5. His subjective advantages for moral and spiritual purposes have no parallel in history; and yet He is not thereby removed from sympathetic and helpful contact with mankind. He was so unique because He was the firstfruits; and the grace which declared itself in Him is the grace which, because of His redemptive work, and through our sacramental union with Him, will gradually declare itself in us, if we practice in the use of it by persevering self-discipline.7

6. Our Lord became man, among other reasons, for the very purpose of actualizing and exhibiting the spiritual and resourceful splendor of mind and character which is given to men ultimately to acquire through Him. And the glorification of His Manhood is not only the reward of His obedience unto death, but is the mystery whereby that Manhood is made the nucleus of His mystical body and the source of grace to us.8

---

1 Acts ii. 24.

2 Incarnation, ch. v. 8; viii. 4; St. Thomas. III. ii. 10-12; vii; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. liv. 6; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord, pp. 209-214. Cf. St. John iii. 34.

3 W. Sanday uses this description, Christology avid Personality, chh. vi-vii; and D. Stone, Church Qly. Review, Oct., 1910, art. II, welcomes it. Per contra, Bp. of Ossory, in Hibbert Journal, Jan. 1911, art. I. Cf. Incarnation, ch. vi. 11, E.D. la Touche, Person of Christ, pp. 380-386.

4 St. Luke ii. 52.

5 K. Theory, ch. x.

6 St. John viii. 38. C.F. Nolloth, Person of Our Lord, pp.149-159. E.D. la Touche, pp. 393-400; H.P. Liddon, Worth of the Old Test., pp. 25-28, note c.; Ch. Qly. Review, July, 1897, pp. 288-292; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, pp. 74-78.

7 Incarnation, ch. viii. 9, 12.

8 Col. i. 18-20

Posted by AKMA at 12:08 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVIII. Q. 108. The Humiliation of Christ

THE DOCTRINE of our Lord's humiliation is that, although He existed in the form of God, Jesus Christ did not reckon His equality with God to consist in grasping; but effaced Himself, and took the form of a servant. Moreover, obediently submitting to human limitations and to all the consequences of being found in fashion as a man, He persevered in such submission even unto the death of the Cross.1

2. Speaking of Christ, St. Paul says, ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσε.2 Apart from its context, this phrase might be taken in either of three ways: (a) Supporters of the Kenotic theory take it literally, with an implied objective genitive, "He emptied Himself" of something that He had; (b) A literal construction, but without an objective genitive, would be, He gave up (or sacrificed) Himself—a meaning quite consistent with St. Paul's general Christology, and non-kenotic; (c) A metaphorical, or rhetorical, construction, He effaced Himself, most obviously fits in with the context, which is concerned with an avoidance of vain-glory. Self-effacement is also the most obvious antithesis, introduced by ἀλλά, to grasping at honour with men. Furthermore, St. Paul's use of the verb κενόω in all other known instances is non-literal.3

3. The self-effacement of the eternal Son was actualized by what He experienced in His Manhood. It was not less truly His effacement on this account, for what He experienced in our nature was experienced by the eternal Son.4 Prior to the Incarnation there was nothing in His Person which was not essential to His being divine. Not even His glory can be said to have been "abandoned," for His divine glory had not as yet been manifest to men, and in His Father's sight He was never more glorious than when effacing Himself for our sake. His glorification in the Manhood, on the other hand, and the exaltation of His human name, Jesus, was indeed postponed until He had completed His self-effacement, but postponement is not abandonment.

4. The modem technical use of the term kenosis is not justified by St. Paul's thought, and has had confusing effect upon recent Christological enquiry. Until German theologians face the novelty of the Lutheran postulate which has made the logic of kenoticism seem valid, they cannot develop a Christology that will be either sound or permanently satisfying.5

5. Rightly defined, the doctrine of Christ's humiliation has priceless value: (a) It assures us of the greatness of God's love and mercy, which expressed itself in such a stupendous self-effacement in our behalf; (b) It reveals the true nature of sacrifice to God—complete will surrender; (c) It justifies our conviction that the fulness of divine resources has been applied to our sorrows and made available for our service; (d) It uplifts self-effacing humility as the determinative and glorifying mark of perfect human character.

---

1 Incarnation, ch. vii; K. Theory; H.C. Powell, Principle of the Incarn.; W. Bright, Waymarks in Christ. Hist., app. G. Historical and descriptive: A.B. Bruce, Humiliation of Christ; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., s. v. "Kenosis"; W. Sanday, Christology and Personality, pp. 71-78; E.D. la Touche, Person of Christ, pp. 351-356; H.C. Powell, pp. 329-336. Kenotic writers, Bp. Gore, The Incarnation; and Dissertations; W.P. Dubose, Soteriology of the New Test.; A.J. Mason, Conditions of our Lord's Life on Earth; R.L. Ottley, Incarnation; etc.

2 Phil. ii. 6-7.

3 K. Theory, pp. 57-70; Incarnation, ch. vii. 10-11; Warren, in Journ. of Theol. Stud., Apr. 1911. pp. 461-463; N. Rostron, Christology of St. Paul, pp. 113-114, note; A.E.J. Rawlinson, in Foundations, p. 174, note 1; H.C. Powell, pp. 238-255; E.D. la Touche, pp. 359-361. Cf. C.J. Ellicott, J.B. Lightfoot and H.A.A. Kennedy, in loc.; E.H. Gifford, Incarnation; H.C.G. Moule, Philippian Studies, pp. 92-96.

4 Cf. Q. 107.1-2, above. W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, n. 115; St. Augustine, de Trin., i, 7.

5 Cf. Q. 107.4-5, above.

Posted by AKMA at 04:06 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVIII. Q. 107. Communicatio Idiomatum

IN THE New Testament divine predicates are sometimes applied to Christ when the name by which He is identified is human, and elsewhere human predicates are applied to Him when He is identified by a divine name. This juxtaposition of names, derived from one nature with predications applicable only to the other is explained by the doctrine of communicatio idiomatum, ἀντίδοσις, which is as follows: Inasmuch as all our Lord's names, however derived, denote one and the same indivisible Person, and since both the Godhead and the Manhood belong to that Person, the “idioms” or predicates which pertain to either one of these natures are properly ascribed to Him even when the name by which He is signified is derived from the other nature.1

2. No confusion of natures is here involved, for we neither apply divine predicates to our Lord's Manhood nor human predicates to His Godhead. In all cases the subject of reference is the invisible Person of the God-man, and the variation of personal names does not change the reference. Moreover, when we apply divine predicates to Jesus we apply them only as touching His Godhead, and when we apply human predicates to very God we apply them only as touching His Manhood.

3. Historically this doctrine was involved in the Nestorial controversy, and gained formal status in Catholic theology through the decision that to be borne by the Blessed Virgin is properly predicable of God—i. e. as touching the nature which He took of her. This is the meaning-of her being called Θεοτόκος. 2

4. But Martin Luther gave the communicatio idiomatum a novel interpretation and application. He made it signify the transfer of the predicates of one nature of our Lord to His other nature, and held that the Incarnation has involved the infusion of divine properties into our Lord's Manhood. Modern German Christology, even when rejecting the scholastic form of this new doctrine, has been controlled by it as an implicit postulate.3

5. That this is so is shown by the novel form which the central problem of Christology has assumed. In Catholic Christology the problem has been, How can perfect Godhead and perfect Manhood meet and act in communion with each other in one divine Person or Ego. The modern problem—really disturbing, and not at all suggested by the Catholic doctrine of the hypostatic union—is, How can the divine be imparted to the human without nullifying the human. The kenotic theory, that the divine had to be reduced, is the inevitable logic of such an irrelevant line of enquiry.

6. With our finite understandings we may not hope to explain how infinite Godhead and finite Manhood can be united and function without mutual interference in one Ego. But this problem involves no stultification of faith in the hypostatic union. Inasmuch as the Godhead does not function in the human manner, and its operation cannot emerge as a confusing phenomenon within human consciousness, we can acknowledge our Lord's full and uninterrupted exercise of His divine functions, without invalidating our belief that in His Manhood He really submitted to the necessary limitations of earthly human life.4

---

1 Incarnation, chh. ii. 7. 10 and vi. 4-5; K. Theory, pp. 40-46; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, 5, 63; St. Thomas, III. xvi, esp. art. 4; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 206-208; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. Iii. 3, liii. 3-4.

2 Cf. Q. 105.2, above.

3 Incarnation, chh. i. 6; ii. 10; vi. 5.

4 Idem, chh. vi. 5-8, 11-12; vii. 3, 5, 9.

Posted by AKMA at 02:36 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XVIII. Properties of Christ

Q. 107. Communication Idiomatum

Q. 108. Humiliation of Christ

Q. 109. Exaltation of Christ

Q. 110. Twofold Operations

Q. 111. Perfection and Example

Posted by AKMA at 01:34 AM | Comments (0)

August 16, 2005

Ch. XVII. Q. 106. The Distinctness of Natures

THAT THE Godhead and the Manhood retain their respective and proper attributes and functions in the Word-incarnate, without either essential alteration or mutual interference, is as vital to the mediatorial significance of the Incarnation as is their hypostatic union in Jesus Christ.1

2. The following conceptions are erroneous: (a) of an absorption and obliteration of the human and of its limitations in and by the divine; 2 (b) of a conversion or reduction of the divine by the human; 3 (c) of an essential similarity between the divine and the human, such as identifies the divinity of Christ with the perfection of His Manhood; 4 (d) of a commixture of Godhead and Manhood in one theandric nature and mode of operation, neither truly divine nor completely human.

3. These errors are branches of monophysitism, μόνος-φύσις, and are either directly or by necessary implication excluded by the decree of faith of Chalcedon, and, more largely, by the Tome of St. Leo accepted by the fourth Council, which declared that there is to be acknowledged "one and the same Christ without mixture, change, division or separation; the Only begotten, in two natures, the difference of natures not being removed by their union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved and concurring in one Person and one Hypostasis."5 And as St. Leo says, "Each of the two forms" (natures) "does, in communion with the other, that which is proper to it."6

4. The sixth Ecumenical Council completed the work of affirming the distinction of natures, in dealing with the monothelite error, that there is but one will and operation in Christ, called "theandric." Citing the phrase of St. Leo, above quoted, the Council declared that "there are in Jesus Christ two natural wills and two natural operations, without separation, change, division, or confusion . . . And the two natural wills are not opposed to each other, . . . but His human will followed, and it does not resist and oppose, but rather is subject to the divine and almighty will."7

5. However difficult it may be to give a satisfactory definition of the term nature, φύσις, in ecumenical dogma, this decision enables us to perceive that such dogma draws the line of distinction between person and nature somewhat as follows. All that is proper in essence and operation to God is included in the divine nature, and all that is proper in essence and operation to man is included in the human nature. The Person of Christ, on the other hand, is the common inner Self, Ego, or Operator in and of all that is thus denoted by the respective phrases "divine nature" and "human nature." It is the inner and determining centre of the natures, not, as moderns often interpret the term, "the concrete individuality of Jesus Christ, embracing the human and divine nature in one unitary consciousness and experience."8

6. Knowledge that the union of natures in Christ does not involve any confusion between them, or essential change in either of them, serves to fortify our conviction (a) that we need not sacrifice belief in the reality of our Lord's submission to human limitations in order to retain our faith in Him as God; (b) that we need not reduce the infinitude of Godhead in ascribing it to Him whose self-manifestation was made in the terms of an uninterrupted human life and experience; 9 (c) that although the Godhead and the Manhood possess mutual affinities, and can be hypostatically united, their differences are ineradicable. Neither one can be either mixed with or converted into the other; (d) that any form of mysticism which tends to disregard this difference is pantheistic rather than Christian; (e) that a sacramental union of heavenly gifts with outward signs or creaturely elements — e.g., in the Holy Eucharist — need not involve mutual confusion between them.

---

1 Incarnation, ch. vi. esp. §§ 2, 5-6; St. Thomas, III. ii. 1; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. lii. 3-liv, 5; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 161-162; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 83-86; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. v. 7-9; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, pp. 132-143.

2 Eutychianism.

3 Lutheran communicatio and kenoticism.

4 Pantheistic neologism in re ὁμοούσιος.

5 Given in H.R. Percival's Seven Ecum. Councils, pp. 264-265; T.H. Bindley, Oecumenical Documents, pp. 232-233 (Greek), 297 (English).

6 Tome of St. Leo, § 4. Given in T.H. Bindley. pp.199 (Latin), 284 (English). For history, J.F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist. of Christ. Doctr., ch. xvi; C.J. Hefele, Hist. of the Christ. Councils, vol. III, pp. 182, et seq.

7 Given by H.R. Pereival, pp. 345-346; C.J. Hefele, vol. IV. pp. 174-5, who gives full history of the controversy, pp. 1-205. Cf. Blunt, Dic. of Sects etc., s. v. "Monothelites"; Cath. Encyc. s. v. "Monothelitism."

8 Thus Baldwin, Dic. of Philos., s. v. "Person of Christ." See Trinity, ch. iii. 15; Incarnatioon, ch. ii. 8:;W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, nn. 56, 156; St. Thomas, III. xviii-xix. 1; A.J. Mason, ch. v. 10.

9 Cf. Q. 108, below.

Posted by AKMA at 06:41 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVII. Q. 105. The Union of Natures

THE GODHEAD and the Manhood are inseparably united in the Person of Jesus Christ; and this means that they possess in Him but one personal subject or inner Self, the second Person of the eternal Trinity. This Person has made our nature His own, without surrendering His Godhead; and the union thus accomplished is permanent. Achieved once for all in the Virgin's womb, it abides forever through all the stages of the human—its growth, humiliation, death, resurrection and endless glory.1

2. When Nestorius assailed the description of the Blessed Virgin as Θεοτόκος, Bearer of God, he was understood to deny that the Person whom she bore is numerically the same with the eternal Logos, who became incarnate. It was this division of Christ into two persons—the man whom the Virgin bore, and the Word dwelling in and associated with the man—which the Council of Ephesus condemned under the name of Nestorianism.2 The adoptionist theory is akin to Nestorianism, distinguishing between the child of Mary and the eternal Son, with whom, by adoption, He became associated and identified in honour.3 Every theory which refuses to acknowledge a continuous identification of the Subject or Ego of our Lord's human limitations with the almighty, omnipresent and omniscient Son of God is, in that regard, "Nestorian."

3. The inseparableness of the union of Godhead and Manhood in Christ lies in their abiding possession of one Ego or inner Self, the eternal Logos. The union is not one of mutual commixture, but hypostatic, καθ’ ὑπότασιν ἓνωσις. The two natures meet and have communion with each other in the Self which is common to both; and the reality of this inner Self must be assumed if any other form of union than that of mutual commixture is to be maintained. That there is a real inner self—denoted for example, by personal pronouns, and distinguishable in personal beings from the personal
functions that emerge in consciousness—is an unavoidable postulate of belief in moral responsibility and of common speech.4

4. The indivisible unity of Christ's Person teaches5 (a) that the divine and the human have really met and operated in mutual communion in Him; (b) that the consistently human life and experience of Christ on earth is a true self-manifestation of very God-incarnate; (c) that whatever Jesus Christ did, practiced and endured in the flesh was done and submitted to by very God, and has divine significance and value; (d) that divine attributes and human limitations are to be ascribed alike, although in relation to distinct natures, to the self-same personal Subject, the Word-incarnate;6 (e) that the union of divine gifts with outward signs in the sacraments is in line with the method of mediation initiated by the Incarnation; (f) that the union of human cravings with moral invincibility which was exhibited by Him can be gradually reproduced in those who by sacramental grace and self-discipline grow in Him.

---

1 Incarnation, ch. vi.; St. Thomas, III. ii; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. Iii. 2-4; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of our Lord, Lec. v. V; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 73-82; Wilhelm and Scannell, Cath. Theol., Pt. 11. ch. ii.

2 Incarnation, ch. ii. 7; J.F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist. of Doctr., ch. xv; C.J. Hefele, Hist. of the Church Councils, vol. III. pp. l-156; St. Thomas, lII. xxiii. 4; xxxv. 5; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 177-178; Rich. Hooker, V. li. 2, lii. 2-4; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, nn. 2, 34.

3 Refs. in Q. 103. n 9, above.

4 Incarnation, chh. iv. 2 and vi. 1, 7.

5 Incarnation, ch. vi. 9-12.

6 Incarnation, ch. vi. 4.

Posted by AKMA at 04:11 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVII. Q. 104. The Manhood of Christ

CATHOLIC doctrine requires us to believe that the eternal Son took a real and complete manhood, one in all respects like ours, although wholly free from sin; and that although His Manhood was endowed with grace to a unique degree, He submitted in it to the limitations which necessarily pertain to truly human life and experience.1

2. The human birth, characteristics and deeds of the Messiah were prophesied beforehand,2 and clearly appear in the Gospels.3 He was regarded as human by His closest observers,4 and so regarded Himself.5 The genuineness of His Manhood is asserted or implied throughout the New Testament,6 as is also His freedom from sin.7

3. The ancient docetists, thinking flesh to be intrinsically evil, regarded the flesh of Christ as apparent only;8 and the Apollinarians, believing that a human will is necessarily sinful, thought that the Person of the Logos took the place in Him of a rational human spirit.9 Both errors were condemned by the ancient Church. And the recurring tendency to ignore our Lord's human limitations, in particular those of His human consciousness, is also inconsistent with full acceptance of the Catholic doctrine concerning the real Manhood of the Incarnate.

4. The Incarnation caused Godhead and manhood to meet and interact in one inner self—that of the eternal Word10—but it neither did nor could cause an infusion of Godhead with its infinite properties into manhood. The infinite and non-psychological modes of divine functioning preclude their emergence within a human consciousness. Therefore, to mention a peculiarly significant consequence, our Lord's divine omniscience could not openly emerge within a human consciousness—not even His own. Accordingly, it neither did nor could interrupt and nullify the natural conditions of His increase in human knowledge and wisdom; and it could not alter the thoroughly human quality of all the apostles were able to observe in Him, and to record in the Gospels. The laws of the human held their own in His case.11

5. According to Catholic doctrine our Lord's human nature (a) came into existence at the moment of His taking it;12 (b) derives its personality from Him, having no other than His eternal Self,13 (c) is ideally perfect after its kind and catholic, not being reduced in representative value while He was on earth by His acceptance of the conditions of His age and race;14 (d) was neither handicapped by "original sin" nor defiled by actual sin, but was morally and spiritually perfect according to the requirements of each stage of its growth;15 (e) was uniquely endowed with grace, by virtue of the hypostatic union, so as to exhibit a moral invincibility and an incorruptibiIity in death which have no historical parallels;16 (f) by being raised from death and glorified is fitted to become the medium of union between Christ and His redeemed and the source of grace and glory to the baptized;17 (g) has not ceased to be really human in glory, and therefore retains its finitude.18.

6. The following precious truths are involved;19 (a) The eternal Son became passible, and has been touched with the feeling of our infirmities, so as to be qualified as our representative;20 (b) The revelation of God in Christ has been made in the terms of human experience, alone intelligible to us; 21 (c) His example, which is determinative for us because divine, has also been made humanly significant and helpful;22 (d) We are assured that our great High Priest and Judge understands our difficulties, and can unite human sympathy with divine judgment;23 (e) The assumption of flesh by very God vindicates the essential goodness and sacred purpose of material things, justifies their use in the sacramental dispensation of grace, and fortifies our faith in the resurrection of our bodies.24

---

1 Incarnation, ch. v; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, chh. i-iv, xv; H.R. Mackintosh, Doctr. of the Person of Jesus Christ, Bk. III. ch. vi; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 67-73, 292-293; St. Thomas, III. iv-v.

2 Gen. iii. 15; xxii. IS; xxvi. 4; xxviii. 14; Deut. xviii. 15, 18; 2 Sam. vii. 12, 16; lsa. vii. 14; xi. 10; Iii. 13-liii; Jerem. xxxi. 22; etc.

3 St. John i. 14; St. Luke ii. 52.

4 St. Matt. ix. 27; xii. 23; St. John x. 33.

5 St. Matt. xvi. 13; St. John iii. 13; vi. 53; viii. 40.

6 Acts ii. 30; Rom. i. 3; 1 Cor. xv. 21-22; Gal. iii. 16, 29; Phil. ii. 7-8: 1 Tim. ii. 5; Heb. ii. 14-18; 1 St. Pet. iv. 1; 1 St. John iv. 2-3.

7 St. Matt. iv. 1-10; xxvii. 4; St. Luke i. 35; St. John iv. 34; viii. 46; Acts iv. 27; 2 Cor. v. 21; 1 St. Pet. i. 19; ii. 22; Revel, iii. 7. Cf. Rom. viii. 29.

8 J.F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist. of Christ. Doctr., pp. 75, 79-81; Dic. of Christ. Biog. and Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Docetae"; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., s. v. "Docetism."

9 Incarnation, ch. ii. 6; J.F. Bethune-Baker, ch. xiv; Hastings, s. v. "Apollinarianiim."

10 Q. 105.3, below.

11 Incarnation, ch. vi. 2, 6; K. Theory, chh. xi-xii; H.C. Powell, Principle of the Incarn., Bk. i. chh. i, iv-v.

12 St. Thomas, III. xxxiii. 3.

13 Incarnation, ch. v. 2; St. Thomas, III. iv. 2-6; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. v. 6; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, n. 26; J.F. Bethune-Baker, p. 294; R.L. Ottley, Incarnation, vol. II. pp. 123-125, 139, 269.

14 St. Thomas. III. iv. 3-5; A.J. Mason, ch. vi. 1; H.P. Liddon, Christmastide in St. Paul's, pp. 110-114; H.R. Mackintosh, pp. 391-394.

15 Incarnation, ch. v. 7; St. Thomas, III. xxxi. 7; xxxiv. 1; H.R. Mackintosh, pp. 400-404; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 190-191.

16 Incarnation, viii. 4, 7; St. Thomas, III. vii.

17 Incarnation, chh. iii. 3; v. 10; ix. 8; W. Milligan, Ascension, Lec. iv;Archd. Wilberforce, pp. 63-65.

18 Incarnation, ch. v. 4; Church Qly. Review, July, 1897, pp. 354-355 (with patristic refs.); Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. liii. 1.

19 Incarnation, ch. v. 9-12.

20 Heb. ii. 18; iv. 15; v. 8; 1 Tim. ii. 5. Archd. Wilberforce, ch. vii.

21 Incarnation, ch. v. 9; H.P. Liddon, Christmastide in St. Paul's, pp. 115-120.

22 Incarnation, v. 11; W. Bright, nn. 15, 74.

23 Q. 165.2, in vol. III.

24 Qq. 141.7 and 164.3-5, in vol. III; Incarnation, ch. v. 12. Cf. Phil. iii. 21.

Posted by AKMA at 02:55 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVII. Q. 103. The Godhead of Christ

THE DOCTRINE of Christ's Godhead is that the same Jesus Christ, who submitted in His Manhood to the limitations, and conditions of our earthly life, is, and ever has been, "the only begotten Son of God, Begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God; Begotten, not made; Being of one substance with His Father; By whom, all things were made."1

2. The Old Testament contains anticipations of the later and clear revelation that the divine rank in being is shared by more than one Person; and messianic prophecy indicated that the coming Deliverer was to be divine.2 The New Testament in many passages either describes Jesus Christ as divine or attributes properties and operations to Him which pertain exclusively to God.3 Furthermore His claims as recorded in the Gospels, are such that if He is not God, He is not good—not the ideal man whom many unbelieving writers acknowledge Him to be.4 The manner of the Man, the unique quality and significant value of His miracles,5 and His victory over death alike establish His claims.6 And the vitality and victories of His Church, founded as it is in belief that Jesus Christ is God, confirm the truth of that belief.7

3. It is erroneous to reduce the Godhead of Christ to an apotheosis, or post mortem deification of a righteous man.8 And the supposition that in Him a human child was so filled "with the Spirit that God made Him His adoptive Son and representative, ultimately sharing with Him His own divine majesty, is equally mistaken.9 The truth is that no Person ever existed in Jesus Christ except God, the eternal Word.

4. According to the Arian heresy, the sonship of Christ proves Him to be later in time than the Father and a creature, although the first of creatures and the agent employed in God's creation of other things. Arius erred in failing to perceive that a proper divine sonship is eternal, and that it involves neither division in the Godhead nor essential inferiority of the Son to the Father. Furthermore, unless, as the Nicene Council decided, the Son is ὁμοούσιος, of the self-same essence with the Father, He is not even ὁμοιούσισς, of like essence, but ἑτερούσιος, unlike the Father in essence.10

5. Upon the truth of Christ's Godhead depends the validity of His mediation, which cannot be effectual or absolute, as He taught it to be, if He is external to the Godhead. Thus (a) His prophetic office is that of a final and infallible Revealer, because in Him the fulness of the Godhead is revealed bodily; (b) His priestly office avails, because whatever He did and does for us, whatever He suffered and achieved, was done and endured by very God, and has infinite personal value; (c) Whatever kingly office is fulfilled by Christ is also fulfilled by God, and His rule is the Kingdom of God, of which there can be no end.11

6. The doctrine of Christ's Godhead, rightly defined, (a) protects the idea of God against deism, which separates the Creator from the creature; and against pantheism, which denies their essential difference, often, calling Christ divine, but acknowledging in Him no other Godhead than that in which all men are said to share;12 (b) reveals a plurality of Persons within the Godhead, as against bare unitarianism, and vindicates the self-sufficiency of divine personality in the face of modern critical objections;13 (c) vindicates the truth that God is, on the one hand, transcendent and unapproachable except through a Mediator, and, on the other hand immanent and accessible through the Manhood of God-incarnate; (d) declares the true dignity of human nature, as being capable of assumption without subversion by God Himself;14 (e) makes clear that Christ's example is that of God, apart from which we have no adequate guidance in becoming, as we were created to become, imitators of God; also that the moral strength which He imparts to us as rapidly as we learn by practice how to use it, and which explains His own moral victory, is really divine and invincible.15

---

1 Trinity, chh. ii-v, passim, vii. 5-6, and viii. 6; Incarnation, ch. iv. and passim; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 105-144; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 126-153,; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, ch. v; E.D. la Touche, Person of Christ, Lec. iii.; H.R. Mackintosh, Doctr. of the Person of Jesus, Bk. III. chh. iv-v, vii, xii.

2 For refs., Q. 61.3, in vol. I. Cf. H. P. Liddon, Lec. ii.

3 St. Matt. x. :37-40; xxviii. 18; St. Luke i. 32-33; St. John i. 1-3, 9, 14; iii. 31; v. 17, 21, 23, 26; viii. 12; xvi. 30; Rom. ix. 5; 2 Cor. iv. 4; Col. i. 13-22; ii. 9; Heb. i. 2-13, 1 St. John i. 1-4; ii. 22-23; v. 12; etc.

4 St. Matt. xi. 27-30; xii. 6; xvi. 16-19; xxv. 31-46; St. Mark xii. 6-10 (cf. St. Luke xx. 13-18); St. John vi. 47-57; viii. 46, 58; x. 30, 37-38; xiv. 6, 8-10; xvi. 15, etc. H.P. Liddon, Lec. iv; E.D. la Touche; H.R. Mackintosh, Bk. I. ch. i.

5 St. Luke vii. 19-23; St. John ii. 23; v. 36; x. 25-38.

6 St. John xx. 26-29. Cf. Rom. i. 4. Cf. G.P. Fisher, Grounds of Theistic and Christ. Belief, chh. viii-ix; A.C. Headlam, Miracles of the New Test.; Chas. Harris, Pro Fide, chh. xxi-xxii; E.D. la Touche, pp. 299-325.

7 St. Matt. xvi. 16-19; xxviii. 20; H.P. Liddon, Lec. iii; Chas. Harris, ch. xxiii.

8 H.P. Liddon, pp. 26-32, 270-276; St. Thomas, III. xvi. 7.

9 St. Thomas, III. xxiii. 4; xxxv. 5; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Adoptionism"; J.C. Robertson, Hist. of the Christ. Church, vol. III pp. 148-157.

10 Trinity, ch. iii. 10-11; Incarnation, ch. ii. 5; J.F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist. of Christ. Doctr., ch. xii; J.H. Newman, Arians, pp. 184-192, 201-234; H.P. Liddon, Lec. vii: H.R. Mackintosh, Bk. II. ch. iv; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 144-153; W. Bright, Lessons from the Lives of Three Great Fathers, pp. 16-25.

11 H.P. Liddon, Lec. viii.

12 H.P. Liddon, pp. 452-459.

13 Trinity, ch. vii. 2; W.J. Sparrow Simpson, Christ, Doctr. of God, Lec. iii. I.

14 2 St. Pet. i. 4. H.P. Liddon, pp. 459-461.

15 K. Theory, ch. vi; Incarnation, ch. viii. 9-12; H.P. Liddon, pp. 494-504.

Posted by AKMA at 12:18 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVII. Q. 102. The Hypostatic Union

THE DOCTRINE of the hypostatic union, καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἕνωσις, is that, because of the Incarnation, two natures, Φύσεις, one truly, ἀληθῶς, divine, the other perfectly, τελέως, human, are inseparably, ἀδιαιρέτως, yet unconfusedly, ἀσυγχύτως, united in one Person, ὑπόστασις , or inner Self. These four particulars of Godhead, Manhood, union and distinction were severally affirmed by the first four Ecumenical Councils.THE DOCTRINE of the hypostatic union, καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἕνωσις, is that, because of the Incarnation, two natures, Φύσεις, one truly, ἀληθῶς, divine, the other perfectly, τελέως, human, are inseparably, ἀδιαιρέτως, yet unconfusedly, ἀσυγχύτως, united in one Person, ὑπόστασις , or inner Self. These four particulars of Godhead, Manhood, union and distinction were severally affirmed by the first four Ecumenical Councils.1

2. The Athanasian Symbol declares the right faith to be "that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the substance of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the substance of His mother, born in the world; perfect God, and perfect Man: of a reasonable soul amd human flesh subsisting; Equal to the Father, as touching His Godhead: and inferior to the Father, as touching His Manhood; Who although He be God and Man: yet He is not two but one Christ; One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh: but by taking of the Manhood into God; One altogether, not by confusion of substance: but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man: so God and Man is one Christ."

3. This doctrine either contains or involves the following truths: (a) the true Godhead of Jesus Christ; (b) His real and permanent Manhood; (c) the unity of His Person; (d) The abiding diversity of His natures; (e) His uninterrupted possession of the properties of operations proper respectively to God and man; (f) His humiliation on earth; (g) the supernatural endowments of His Manhood, continuing human; h His mediatorial offices.

---

1 Incarnation, ch. iv. 1-4; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. lii; liv. 10; H.P. Liddon Divinity of Our Lord, pp. 259-267; St. Thomas, III. ii. xviii; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, ch. vi; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 73-86.

Posted by AKMA at 11:37 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XVII. The Person of Christ

Q. 102. The Hypostatic Union

Q. 103. Godhead of Christ

Q. 103. Manhood of Christ

Q. 104. Union of Natures

Q. 105. Distinctness of Natures

Posted by AKMA at 11:36 AM | Comments (0)

August 15, 2005

Ch. XVI. Q. 101. Purposes of the Incarnation

THE ULTIMATE purpose for which the eternal Son took our nature was to bring men into union with God in Himself, so that in Him they might fulfil the end for which they were created. But because of sin, His immediate purpose was to suffer and die for the redemption of mankind.1

2. As has been shown, man's chief end is "to glorify God and enjoy Him forever";2 and the relation in which he stands to God requires habitual expression in sacrifice—in corporate self-oblation to his Creator. This requirement had been ceremonially fulfilled before Christ came by a ritual which was merely symbolical.3 An offering was needed which should effect what it figured—a sacrament, in which man might truly attain to God and effectualIy offer himself.

3. The Incarnation was designed to afford this sacramental medium; which is our own nature, assumed by very God, perfected by redemptive suffering and grace, and glorified.4 This manhood, thus exalted, and mysteriously identified with consecrated symboIs of bread and wine, becomes at once (a) the food of our immortality, whereby we can live and can identify ourselves with Him who became incarnate; (b the veil and propitiatory memorial, through and by which we gain access to God; (c) the sacred gift and oblation, by offering which we effectively express and enjoy the divine communion and fellowship for which we were made.5

4. If we accept the evolutionary description of man's physical development, we seem to discover in the mystery of the Incarnation and redemption a supernatural completion of natural evolution, made effectual by purifying and redeeming grace. The native factors in human nature which make men struggle for adjustment to, and survival in, a spiritual universe, suggest that human evolution is not completed, and that the involution of a superhuman factor is needed for its completion. The glorified manhood of God-incarnate contains that factor—a factor which regenerates, purifies, recovers from physical death and finally develops in man the likeness of God in Jesus Christ. In this likeness man can forever enjoy true life with God.6

5. But this evolution is preëminently moral and spiritual, and sin has interrupted it. Sin is more than a brake upon progress. It is a violation of the moral order, which can only be remedied by expiation. It is a disease which can only be eradicated by the surgery of death—unendurable by the natural man. By the Incarnation God came to the rescue, fashioning and proving a morally perfect manhood, in which He made the required satisfaction for sin and overcame the fatal power of death. And the manhood in which He thus overcame the consequences of sin becomes not only our place of effectual propitiation, but the sustaining virus which changes death from a fatal operation to successful surgery.7

---

1 Ephes. i. 3-14; Gal. iv. 4-5; I Tim. i. 15. Incarnation, ch. iii. 5-6; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, vi. 2, 4; A.P. Forbes, ,cite>Nicene Creed, pp. 161-163.

2 Q. 87.2 above.

3 Q. 93.5 above.

4 Creation, ch. x. 1, 6-7; W.J. Carey, Life in Grace, chh. iv-v: W. Milligan, Resurrection of Our Lord, Lec. v; H.P. Liddon, Christmastide in St. Paul's, pp. 77-80, 115-121; M.F. Sadler, Second Adam, ch. ii.

5 Cf. Q. 150, in vol. III.

6 Incarnation, ch. iii. 6.

7 Incarnation, ch. iii. 5; St. Thomas, III. i. 4; A.J. Mason, vii. 3; W. Milligan, Ascension, pp. 114-142, 264-268, 307-313.

Posted by AKMA at 04:43 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVI. Q. 100. The Blessed Virgin

CERTAIN doctrines concerning the Blessed Virgin are involved in her relation to the Incarnation: (a) her pre-sanctification: (b) her virginity; (c) her being the "Mother of God"; (d) The honour due to her.

2. It was fitting that the Blessed Virgin should be sanctified for her unique function of bearing the eternal Word; and the salutation of Gabriel implied thaf such sanctification had already taken place—before the Holy Spirit caused her to conceive.1 Christian piety has created the general opinion that she was sanctified from her mother's womb.2 The more radical opinion that her sanctification coincides with her conception—the doctrine of the immaculate conception—although affirmed by papal authority,3 is neither ancient nor so generally received today.4 It is supported by no evidence. Yet the opinion is not heretical, for its maintainers acknowledge that the Blessed Virgin's sanctification was in any case an effect—anticipatively realized—of Christ's redemptive work.5

3. That the Blessed Virgin had other children is an opinion which believers in the Incarnation have almost universally regarded as incongruous with her unique vocation. According to the most widespread view our Lord's "brethern"6 were the children of Joseph by previous marriage. Although the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of His mother does not admit of formal proof, and is not de fide, the feeling which explains its acceptance is not likely to permit its future abandonment by the faithful in general.7

4. In order to vindicate the doctrine that the child of Mary is no other Person than God the Word, the Third Ecumenical Council declared the Blessed Virgin to be Θεοτόκος, Bearer of God; and the argument which justifies such a title also justifies that of "Mother of God." But the fact that her Son is God makes her neither the Mother of Godhead nor a divine Mother. She bore the Word as touching His Manhood only, and her maternal relationship to Him was purely human. Therefore she acquired no greater prerogatives than such as pertain to human mothers, and these are limited in range and temporary in duration. Whatever power her prayers for us now possess is due to her holiness—not to any continuing prerogative.8

5. The Church has ever been glad to honor the Blessed Virgin, and this for several reasons: (a) because God has honoured her with so unique a privilege; (b) because the honour given her is not only suggested by, but redounds to, the honour due to her Son; (c) because she exhibits in peculiar degree that glory of redeemed womanhood which justifies the deference paid in Christian lands to her sex. Rightly does Bishop Pearson say, "We cannot bear too reverend a regard unto the Mother of our Lord, so long as we give her not that worship which is due unto the Lord Himself."9

---

1 St. Luke i. 28.

2 Cf. St. John Baptist; St. Luke i. 15.

3 By Pius IX, Bull Ineffabilis, Dec. 8, 1854.

4 D. Stone. Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 57-61, 287-290.

5 On the immaculate conception, Incarnation, ch. iii, 11; St. Thomas, III, xxvii. 2; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord, pp. 441-443; A.P. Forbes, Thirty-Nine Arts., pp. 227-229: E.B. Pusey, First Letter to Newman; A.T. Wirgman, The Blessed Virgin, ch. i. In behalf of the doctrine, J. de Turrecremata, Tract. de veritate Concep. B. Virginis; Abp. Ullathorne, The Immac. Concep. of the Mother of God.

6 St. Matt. xii. 46; xiii. 55-56; Acts i. 14; Gal. i. 19. Cf. St. John xix. 25-27; St. Matt. xxvii. 56; St. Mark xv. 40.

7 Incarnation, ch. iii. 10; J.B. Lightfoot, Dissertations on the Apostol. Age, I; St. Thomas, III. xxviii: xxix. 2; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, note 9.

8 Incarnation, ch. ii. 7: vi, 4; W. Bright, note 3; D. Stone, pp. 75-76, 294-295; St. Thomas, III. xxxv. 3-4; A.T. Wirgman, pp. 97-101; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 177-178.

9 Incarnation, ch. iii. 12; Bp. Pearson, fol. p. 179; H.P. Liddon, Magnificat, pp. 30-40; A. T. Wirgman, Introd.

Posted by AKMA at 01:34 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVI. Q. 99. Causes of the Incarnation

THE MOVING cause of the Incarnation was the goodness and love of the Father. The efficient and operating cause was the Holy Spirit. The consenting and concurring cause was the Blessed Virgin. The conditioning cause was a miraculous conception.1

2. The goodness and love of the Father alone explain His being moved to send His Son into the world. Two points should be noted in this connection. In the first place, there was no merit on the human side that deserved such a benefit. The Manhood of Christ itself came into being by means of the Incarnation, so that its merit was an effect rather than a cause of that mystery.2 Secondly, it is erroneous to regard the Father's love as a consequence of the Son's Incarnation and death for mankind. The mystery of redemption was as truly caused by the Father's love as by that of the Son, who came to do the Father's will.3

3. No natural conception can of itself account for the fact that He who was conceived of the Virgin was the eternal Son of God. Jesus Christ was born not of blood simply, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.4 That is, the explanation of His birth lies in the fact that the Holy Spirit came upon the Blessed Virgin, and the power of the Highest overshadowed her.5

4. Yet the operation of the Holy Spirit, in causing the Blessed Virgin to conceive and bear the Son of God, was not fulfilled without the Virgin's faith and consent. If she had rejected the privilege offered to her, no doubt another maiden would have been found. She could not have defeated the divine purpose. But that the Incarnate should have had an unbelieving and unwilling mother obviously disagrees with the fitness of things.6

5. The conception of Christ was perfectly natural from the standpoint of His Person and purpose, and it could hardly fail to differ in method from the conception of a purely human child; for the causal antecedents of nativity determine the rank in being of what is born. But when considered from the standpoint of the native capacity of a human virgin, His conception was plainly supernatural and, in the order of sensible phenomena, miraculous. The effect - the entrance of very God into human life - transcends the potentialities of the sphere in which it emerged, and therefore demanded the working of a transcendant factor, the Holy Spirit; but this did not interrupt the continued validity of the laws of purely human birth. The event was not contra-natural, but super-natural.7

---

1 Incarnation, ch. iii. 2.

2 St.Thomas III. ii. 11.

3 St. John iii. 16-17; v. 17; xvii. 4, 6-8; Rom. v. 8; viii. 32; 2 Thess. ii. 16; Heb. x. 6-7; St. James i. 17-18; 1 St. John iv. 9-10. A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. vi. 7-10.

4 This is not an exegesis of St. John i. 13.

5 St. Luke i. 35. Incarnation. ch. iii. 9; St. Thomas, III. xxviii. 1-2; xxxii; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 164-181; A.J. Mason, ch. v. 4; W.H. Hutchings, Person and Work
of the Holy Ghost, pp. 72-75.

6 A.C.A. Hall, The Virgin Mother, pp. 49-57.

7 In re W. Sanday, Bp. Gore's Challenge to Criticism, esp. pp. 23-28. On the fact of the Virgin Birth, Chas. Gore, Dissertations, I; Jas. Orr, Virgin Birth; R.J. Knowling, Our Lord's Virgin Birth; T.J. Thorburn, Crit. Exam. of the Evid. for the Doctr. of the Virgin Birth; Ch. Quarterly Review, Oct. 1904, art. ix.

Posted by AKMA at 11:17 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVI. Q. 98. If Man Had Not Sinned

SCOTIST theologians say that the Incarnation would have taken place even if man had not sinned, but the Thomists deny this.1

2. The chief Scotist arguments are as follows: (a) In certain places Scripture seems to treat the Incarnation as the complement and eternally intended sequel of creation;2 (b) The fact that man is created in the divine image points to his participation in the divine nature,3 an event not possible, so far as men can see, except through the Incarnation; (c) The revealed benefits of the Incarnation exceed in range mere salvation from sin and its consequences;4 and it seems unlikely that sin should open up greater possibilities of glory than perseverance in original righteousness. No other means, apparently, could secure so great a glory for men as does the Incarnation.5

3. On the other hand, Thomists say that Scripture defines the purpose of the Incarnation to be salvation from sin and death.6 They explain the passages used by Scotists by God's foreknowledge of the fall. The Incarnation, they urge, was eternally ordained in view of sin foreseen, and not as a necessary sequel of creation. They say further that our inability to imagine a better way of bringing man to God, if he had not sinned, cannot determine the resourcefulness of God, which transcends our imagination.7

4. The question is not only speculative, but presupposes a condition contrary to fact. It admits of no final answer. The fact of sin determines the state of the question, and therefore Scripture emphasizes the remedial purpose of the Incarnation - an emphasis which Scotists are apt to disregard, at the cost of failing to do adequate justice to the doctrine of Christ's death. It is to be admitted, however, that the question under consideration, by its very suggestion, enlarges our sense of the fulness of purpose of the Incarnation.8

---

1 For the history of this question, B.F. Westcott, Epp. of St. John, pp. 285-317.

2 Ephes. i. 9-12; Col. i. 19.

3 St. Pet. i. 4.

4 Ephes. ii. 19-22; iii. 18-20; iv. 13.

5 B.F. Westcott, pp. 317-328; P.G. Medd, One Mediator, §§ 58-63; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. vi. 5: Fr. Suarez, Theologiae Summa, Pars II. T. XIV. Disp. V. §§ ii-vi: F. X. Schouppe, Elem. Theol. Dogm., VIII. §88.

6 St. Matt. xviii. 11; St. Luke xix. 10; St. John iii. 16; 1 St. John iii. 5, 8.

7 St. Thomas, III. i. 3; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo, note 134; H.P. Liddon, Univ. Sermons, 1st Series, pp. 184, 241.

8 Incarnation, ch. iii. 7; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 54-56, 286-288.

Posted by AKMA at 10:39 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVI. Q. 97. Convenience of the Incarnation

THE CONVENIENCE or reasonableness of the taking of our nature by the Son of God appears in relation to (a) the Person who took it; (b) the nature which He took; (c) the purpose of His taking it; (d) the creatures which are indirectly affected.1

2. That the Son, rather than either the Father or the Holy Spirit, should take our nature was fitting because He is the divine Word2 and Image of the invisible God,3 whose proper economy it is to mediate between God and the creature, by externally manifesting God and by elevating the creature to God.4

3. We are personal beings, and our rational nature may suitably be assumed by a Person. Then too, we have been created in the image of God,5 and the nature which is stamped with God's image is not alien to Him who Himself is that Image. Moreover, since the nature assumed is finite, so that no commixture can occur between it and infinite Godhead, neither the divine nor the human nature is either altered or infringed upon in essence and operation by the meeting of both natures in one Ego.6

4. It was the Son's purpose to suffer aud die for sinful men. Therefore, because His Godhead is not susceptible of such experiences, it was both convenient and necessary for the fulfilment of His purpose that He should make our passible nature His own. It was also His purpose to make us sharers in divine sonship and glory; and this, so far as we can imagine, could not be achieved in a more fitting manner than by His assumption of our nature, and use of it as the medium of our mystical union with Him and of our consequent enjoyment of filial relations to the Father.7

5. The mediation of the Son has to do with all creation, in which it is the Father's eternal purpose that He shall have the preëminence.8 Howbeit man is the microcosm, whose nature recapitulates the macrocosm or larger world,9 and in whose fortunes the progress of all things is involved. His fall retarded creation's advance, and his recovery constitutes the condition of remedy—of the redemption of creation at large. It is therefore fitting that the redemptive operation of God upon the disordered universe should be achieved through the taking of human nature by the Redeemer.10

---

1 Incarnation, ch. iii. 3-4; St. Thomas, III. i-iii; xvi. 6-7; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 165-172; T.B. Strong, Manual of Theol., ch. i; F. X. Schouppe, Elementa Theol. Dogm., Tr. VlII. §§ 86-94; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospels, ch. vi. 3.

2 St. John i. 1-5, 14. 17-18.

3 2 Cor. iv. 4; Col. i. 15; Heb. i. 3.

4 1 Tim. ii. 5. Cf. Job ix. 33. St. Thomas, III. iii; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. li. 2-3; A. J. Mason, ch. vi. 1.

5 Gen. i. 26. Cf. Rom. viii. 29; 2 Cor. iii. 18; Col. iii. 10; Phil. ii. 7; 1 St. John iii. 2.

6 St. Thomas, III. iv. 1.

7 St. Thomas, III. i. 2; A P. Forbes, as cited.

8 Rom. viii. 20-23; Ephes. i. 10; Col. i. 15-20.

9 Cf. Q. 85.4, above.

10 H.P. Liddon, Divinity of our Lord, pp. 208-269; A.J. Mason, ch. v. 11: P.G. Medd, One Mediator, § 56; B F. Westcott, Epp. of St. John, pp. 323-324.

Posted by AKMA at 06:50 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVI. Q. 96. The Taking of Our Nature

IN ITS stricter sense the doctrine of the Incarnation is concerned exclusively with the initial event in the Gospel drama. It declares that the second Person of the eternal Trinity, the Son of God, without change or loss of any of His eternal or divine attributes and opertions, and without division of His Person or Ego, took human nature, with all its proper elements, faculties, and necessary limitations, but without sinfulness, by being born of a pure Virgin and without earthly father, by a special operation of the Holy Ghost.1

2. Thus taken, the Incarnation is a mystery which inaugurates a fuller drama of human self- manifestation of the Word; and in a larger sense the term "Incarnation" is very widely employed to signify the whole drama, as thus regarded—i. e., as equivalent to a sound Christology. Such extension of meaning is due to the fact that the whole Gospel-drama is to be interpreted as determined in meaning by the mystery of the taking of our nature by the eternal Son, and as revealing the purpose of that mystery.2

3. The Nicene Creed declares the Catholic belief in "One Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God; begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God; begotten not made; Being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things are made: Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made man: And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried: And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; And ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of the Father: And He shall come again, with glory, to judge both the quick and the dead; Whose kingdom shall have no end."

---

1 Isa. vii. 14; ix. 6: Mic. v. 2; St. Matt. i. 18-25; xxii. 45; St. Luke i. 26-38, 42-43; ii. 4-21; St. John i. 1, 14; iii. 13; Rom. i. 3; viii. 3; 2 Cor. viii. 9; Gal. iv. 4; Phil. ii. 6-7; Col. ii. 9; 1 Tim. iii. 16; Heb. i. 6; ii. 9-18; 1 St. John i. 1. Cf. Incarnation, ch. iii; K. Theory, ch. i; A.P. Forbes, Nicene Creed, pp. 162 et seq.

2 W. Mulligan, Resurrection of our Lord, pp. 129-135; and Ascension, pp. 27-35.

Posted by AKMA at 03:20 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XVI. Q. 95. Christology

CHRISTOLOGY treats of the Incarnate Word— His taking our nature and the consequences touching His Person which flow from it, His mediatorial office, the mysteries of His earthly humiliation and heavenly exaltation, and His work for mankind on earth and in heaven.1

2. True Christology is rooted in the objective experiences of Christ which the Apostles enjoyed —which are recorded in the Gospels, and are interpreted under guidance of the Holy Spirit in other apostolic writings.

3. These experiences were results of a self-manifestation of the eternal Son of God in the terms of a truly human life. This self-manifestation, in so far as it constitutes "glad-tidings," makes up the "Gospel"; which is not to be confused with doctrines deduced from it, but consists simply of the significant events and experiences, or basic facts, that account for and justify these doctrines.2

4. Thus defined, the Gospel affords the primary and most determinative data of scientific theology. (a) It declares the Word Incarnate, through whom alone we can learn of God—the Light of the world; (b) It presents concrete facts, verifiable by historic methods, and affording to Christian students an experiential basis of the science of God -which can be trusted; (c) Every article of the Christian faith, and all the dogmatic definitions upon which Catholic theology builds, are either directly implied in the Gospel or are deducible from it by spiritually enlightened reason. Inasmuch as it is concerned with the scientific interpretation of the Gospel, Christology is the most central and important part of theology.

---

1 On Christology, Historical: J.F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist. of Christ. Doctrine; L. Pullan, Early Christ. Doctrine; J. Tixeront, Hist. of Dogmas; J.H. Newman, Arians; W. Bright, Age of the Fathers; H.R. Percival, Seven Ecum. Councils; J. A. Dorner. Hist. of the . . . Doctr. of the Person of Christ; A.B. Bruce, Humiliation of Christ; A. Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical Jesus.

Systematic, on traditional lines: St. Athanasius, de Incarnatione; St. Thomas, Pt. Ill; Archd. Wilberforce, The Incarnation; H.P. Liddon, Divinity of Our Lord; P.G. Medd, One Mediator; H.V.S. Eck, Incarnation; W. Bright, Sermons of St. Leo on the Incarnation (notes valuable); D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, ch. vi: Wilhelm and Scannell, Cath. Theol., Bk. v. Pt. II; J.B. Franzelin, de Verbo Incarnato; Dom. Auscar Vonier, The Personality of Christ.

Modern: Chas. Gore, The Incarnation; and Dissertations; R.L. Ottley, Incarnation; W. Sanday, Christology and Personality; F. Weston, The One Christ; E.D. la Touche, The Person of Christ; H.R. Mackintosh, Doct. of the Person of Jesus Christ.

2 M.F. Sadler, Church Doctrine, ch. i.

Posted by AKMA at 02:00 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XVI. The Incarnation

Q, 95. Christology

Q. 96. The Taking of Our Nature

Q. 97. Convenience of the Incarnation

Q. 98. If Man had not Sinned

Q. 99. Causes of the Incarnation

Q. 100. The Blessed Virgin

Q. 101. Purposes of the Incarnation

Posted by AKMA at 01:58 AM | Comments (0)

August 13, 2005

Ch. XV. Q. 94. The Method of Salvation

THE METHOD of salvation involves the following stages in its achievement: (a) the Incarnation, and obedience to the law for man, of the Son of God; (b) His vicarious and redemptive endurance of the fatal consequences of sin, and His resurrection-victory over death; (c) the dispensation of the Holy Spirit and the sacramental communication to us of Christ's perfected and life-giving manhood; (d) a renewal of our advance to our appointed destiny, through sacramental grace and penitential self-discipline; (e) the resurrection of the dead and the consummation.1

2. By taking our nature upon Him, and by what He did in it and for it, the Son of God perfected a leaven or medium which, when imparted to us, becomes in us the potential principle of our cleansing, sanctification and immortality—a supernatural involution, making possible the final evolution of the children of God.

3. By reason of the mystical union which He was to bring about through the Holy Spirit between Himself and His redeemed, the Incarnate became our true representative; and all that He did and suffered had vicarious efficacy for propitiation, redemption and conquest.

4. His death on the cross was a sacrifice for sin which consecrated Him to an everlasting heavenly priesthood, in which He perpetually appears in our behalf before the Father, and provides through His Holy Spirit, an effective dispensation of redeeming grace and eucharistic oblation on earth.

5. The spiritual progress of the redeemed has the following stages conditioned by persevering faith and repentance: (a) incorporation into the Body of Christ, the Church, through Baptism, whereby they are born anew and justified: (b) progressive sanctification in the Church by sacramental grace and self discipline; (c) completion of entire purification and sanctification after death; (d) resurrection of the body, followed by permanent enjoyment of God and of the communion of saints.

---

1 This question summarizes the subject matter of the rest of these Outlines.

Posted by AKMA at 12:42 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XV. Q. 93. Preparation for Salvation

MAN WAS not abandoned by God after his fall, but was assured that deliverance frum Satan should be achieved in due season by the seed of Eve. In preparation for redemption a series of dispensations or covenants was granted by God.1

2. The coming of the redeemer was delayed, apparently in order that mankind might be prepared both mentally and morally to apprehend and accept the Gospel of salvation.2 Because the fall was moral it could be remedied only in a moral way, and on the basis of men's persuasion and willingness to believe and to repent. The need of prevenient grace to enable men to turn to God does not alter the necessity of his voluntary response to grace, but long preparation was required before the Gospel could appeal to him.

3. The method of election was adopted in preparing mankind for salvation, a chosen race being gradually isolated and educated with long-suffering patience to become the immediate recipients of the covenant of salvation through Christ3 and its propagandists to the rest of the race.4

4. The chosen people were prepared both mentally and morally. The mental preparation was through (a) prefigurative ceremonial requirements of the Old Covenant;5 (b) prophecies wherein the nature of what was to come was proclaimed with increasing definiteness;6 (c) The very history of the Israelites and of their leaders was so overruled, and so recorded in sacred writings, as to afford a succession of prophetic types and object lessons concerning the messianic kingdom.7 This mental preparation was reënforced by moral factors: (a) The moral law, which, because they could not fulfil it, convicted the Israelites of ingrained siufulness;8 (b) divine judgments and national failures, which developed the sense of need of a superhuman Deliverer.9

5. All dispensations previous to the coming of Christ were prefigurative, promissory and provisional. Their rites could not effect what they figured, but pledged the benefits of redemption to those who worthily used them.10

6. In the meantime the Gentiles were not forgotten, for God was overruling all human history with reference to His redemptive purpose,11 and His spirit was acting in unseen ways to reduce the effects of evil and to develop important elements of religious truth outside the pale of supernaturally revealed religion.12 In particular: (a) The failure of successive world-empires was teaching the futility of those principles of life by which they were controlled; (b) Forms of thought and language were developed, notably among the Greeks, which were to make possible an intelligible promulgation and accurate and permanent definitions of the truths of the Gospel; (c) Under the Roman pax, conditions had developed which at the right moment brought the ends of the Mediterranean world together, facilitated travel, and made possible an effective initiation of the great work of world-evangelization.

---

1 Creation, chh. x. 1-5 and vii. 3; D. Stone. Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 50-54; A.J. Mason, Faith o[ the Gospel, ch. v. 1-3; Lux Mundi, 4th paper; T.A. Lacey, Elements of Christ. Doctr., pp. 133-141.

2 St. Thomas, III. i. 5-6.

3 Deut. vii. 6.

4 Rom. iii. 1-2.

5 Gal. iii. 24; Heb. ix. 9-10. Of. St. Matt. v. 17; Col. ii. 17.

6 On messianic prophecies, Hastings, Dic. of Bible, s. vv. '''Messiah" and "Prophecy and Prophets," C. ii. 2; Franz Delitzsch, Messianic Prophecies; Catholic Encyc., s. v. "Messias'', A. F. Kirkpatrick, Doctr. of the Prophets.

7 On O.T. symbols, A. Jukes, Types of Genesis; and Law of Offerings; A.J. Maas, Christ in Type and Prophecy; L. Ragg, ,cite>Aspects of the Atonement; W.S. Moule, Offerings Made Like Unto the Son of God.

8 Rom. iii. 20: vii. 7-13.

9 Isa. lix. 20-21; Jerem. xxxi. 33. Cf. Heb. viii. 10; x. 16; Rom. xi. 26-27.

10 St. Thomas, III. Ixii. 6.

11 On gentile preparatio, Alfred Barry, Some Lights of Science, Lec. i; A.J. Mason, ch. v. 3; Lux Mundi, pp. 138-150.

12 J.H. Newman, Arians, ch. i. § IV. 5.

Posted by AKMA at 11:45 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XV. Q. 92. External Effects

THE ENTRANCE of sin into the world has disturbed man's external relations, causing (a) alienation from God; (b) enslavement to Satan; (c) malice between man and man; (d) hindrance to man's sovereignty over the lower orders of creation.

2. Man's alienation from God has been described by the following phrases: (a) the "wrath of God," already explained in relation to "original sin" and inevitably incurred through actual sin by all who attain the years of discretion;1 (b) liability to punishment, reatus poenae, which includes poena damni, or exclusion from the enjoyment of God, and poena sensus or personal suffering.2 But divine wrath is never vindictive. It is the expression of His justice, and His justice permits and includes the love which has moved Him to redeem mankind and to afford a dispensation of mercy from which all may benefit, if they respond to His grace by faith and repentance.3

3. Sin has enslaved men to Satan in the following ways: (a) Men's natural inclinations have reduced their power to resist his seductions; (b) The gift of the Holy Spirit being withdrawn, the access of Satan and his angels to our souls is facilitated; (c) Demoniacal possession of human bodies has become possible, and painful disorders have resulted.4

4. The mainspring of sinful motives is selfishness, and this is opposed to brotherly love. Because of selfishness even acts of kindness are neither purely unselfish nor adapted to promote the highest and spiritual welfare of others. Malice is readily engendered, and this causes private injury, social disruption and international warfare. Only by supernatural grace can selfishness be overcome.5

5. All nature is interrelated, and, in ways too mysterious to define adequately, the lower orders of creation are affected by the disturbance of man's spiritual nature. The whole creation groans for redemption,6 and the destined dominion of man over nature waits for his long delayed attainment to sovereignty over himself.7 The history of civilization confirms this statement.8

---

1 In Q. 90.4. Cf. Gen. iii. 24; vi. 3; St. John iii. 36; Rom, i. 18; Ephes. ii. 3; Revel. xiv. 19-xv. 1.

2 St. Thomas, I. II. Ixxxvii.

3 On divine wrath, Jas. Orr, in Hastings, Dic. of Bible,/cite>, s. v. "Anger (Wrath) of God"; Jas. Denney, The Atonement and the Modern Mind, Lec. ii; Lux Mundi, pp. 285-288; R. Dale, Atonement, Lec. viii.

4 Cf. qq. 79.5-6 and 80.4. above. See Creation, pp. 165-168. On demoniacal possession, Hastings, Dic. of Bible, s. vv "Demon, Devil," "Exorcism, Exorcist"; R.C. Trench, Miracles of Our Lord § 5.

5 A.P. Forbes, Thirty-Nine Arts., pp. 205-208.

6 Rom. viii. 20-22.

7 Gen. iii. 17-19.

8 Cf. Q. 85.4, above.. See A. Moore, Essays Scientific and Philos., pp.61-65; T.B. Strong, Manual of Theol., pp. 246-253.

Posted by AKMA at 10:09 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XV. Q. 91. Original Sin

Broadly speaking, "original sin," "peccatum originis" is a symbolical name for the moral and spiritual condition in which men are bom by reason of Adam's sin. Formally speaking, it is the loss of grace which Adam's disobedience caused, andwhich reduces man to the spiritual insufficiency of his natural powers. Materially speaking, it is the tendency to sin which this loss of grace engenders, commonly culled "concupiscence" Our Ninth Article of Religion describes original sin in its material aspects.1

2. "Actual sin," or sin properly speaking, is always a personal, avoidable and more or less conscious disobedience of divine law.2 The phrase "original sin," inasmuch as it is distinguished in use from "actual sin," is not to be interpreted literally. It describes not an act of sin, but an inherited condition. And the word sin is employed only because the state which is indicated was caused by Adam's sin and makes us inclined to sin. In short, a moral handicap is described in terms of its cause and of its inevitable results.3

3. Similarly the phrase "inherited guilt" can not rightly be used to "mean that newborn babes are actually guilty—morally to blame for Adam's sin. If used at all, it ought to mean merely that they have inherited a state in which they will inevitably become guilty of sin when opportunities for moral action arrive.

4. The phrase "children of wrath," when employed in connection wilh the doctrine of the fall, should also be used symbolically, as describing a condition which, although itself a misfortune rather than blameworthy, will inevitably manifest itself through actual sin. The phrase may be used to express the fact that God cannot morally approve of a state which inevitably engenders sin.4

5. Our knowledge of God forbids us to believe that He holds newborn babes, prior to their committing conscious and wilful acts of sin, personally responsible because of their inheritance. They are not naturally fit for the kingdom of God, and by reason of the solidarity of mankind this is true of all the children of Adam. But the mystery of redemption is God's method of meeting the difficulty, and this mystery has to be reckoned with in considering the condition called "original sin."5

6. Christ died for all; and somehow and somewhere the opportunity of benefiting by redemption will be afforded to all. No one, we may be sure, will incur hell torment as a penalty for "original sin" only. Whatever may be God's method of dealing with the invincibly ignorant, no child of Adam will be able in the end to impugn either the justice or the mercy of God.6

---

1 On original sin, Creation, ch. ix; Evolution. pp. 133-149 and Lec. vi; Works on Thirty-Nine Arts., art. ix. by A.P. Forbes, E.C.S. Gibson and E.T. Green; Concil. Trid., Sess. v; St. Thomas, I. II. Ixxxi-lxxxiii; J.A. Mæhler, Symbolism, Bk. I., ch. ii; Wilhelm and Scannell, Cath. Theol., §§ 162-165; J.B. Mozley, Lecs. and Other Theol. Papers, ix-x: Thos. B. Strong, Manuel of Theol., pp. 250 et seq. For biblical data, Hastings. Dic. of Bible, s. vv. "Fall" and "Sin"; J. Laidlaw, Bible Doctr. of Man, chh. x-xii; A.B. Davidson, Theol. of Old Test., ch. vii; F.R. Tennant, Sources, etc., chh. i-xi; Sanday and Headlam, Epis. to the Romans, passim. For history, J.B. Mozley,Predestination, ch. iv; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Original Sin." III-IV; F.R. Tennant, chh. xii-xiii; W.E. Orchard, Modern Theories of Sin, II.

2 H.P. Liddon. Some Elements, Lec. iv; Hastings, s. v. "Sin"; J. Laidlaw, ch. x.

3 Creation, p. 284.

4 Idem., pp. 283-285.

5 St. Thomas, I. II. lxxxvii. 8. Cf. Ezek. xviii. 20.

6 St. Thomas, III. Suppl. lxxi; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. lx. 6.

Posted by AKMA at 08:01 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XV. Q. 90. Effects on Human Nature

THE EFFECTS of the fall upon man's nature were (a) a loss of grace and of the gift of the Holy Spirit; (b) certain spiritual wounds; (c) reversion to natural mortality.1

2. Divine grace, in so far as it is adapted to a state of innocence, is permanently nullified by sin. This disaster having occurred, grace had to be given, if at all, by new methods—in purificatory and remedial forms. It was God's will to show this mercy in a dispensation of redemption, and while mankind was being prepared for this, conditions were afforded under which the earlier generations of men could be enabled, in the fulness of time, to participate in its benefits.

3. Through loss of grace which he was intended to enjoy man reverted to his natural insufficiency. His animal impulses asserted their power, and his "integrity"—the harmonious ordering of his faculties—was upset. His nature was not changed in se, but certain "wounds" we're incurred: (a) blindness, or reduced capacity of spiritual discernment; (b) concupiscence, or unregulated carnal cravings; (c) malice, or reduction of desire for spiritual good; (d) weakness, or moral inability wildly to avoid sin and to attain to God. Yet human nature had not become intrinsically evil, or totally depraved. The capacities for good upon which redeeming gracce operates remained.2

4. Man is naturally liable to physical death; and the exemption therefrom which divine grace might have afforded if it had been retained was necessarily nullified by sin. Redemption has made immortality once more available, but only through resurrection from the death to which the primitive loss of grace by sin has subjected our race.3

5. Adam transmitted to his posterity the nature wherewith he was created, but to transmit the supernatural gifts by which alone his natural lack of self-sufficiency was provided for, and which he had forfeited by sin, was not within his power.4 The resulting spiritual limitations of our race are symbolized by the phrase "original sin."

---

1 Creation, ch. ix. 2; Thos. B. Strong, Manual of Theol., pp. 233-265.

2 St. Thomas. I. II. lxxxv. 1-4; A.P. Forbes, Thirty-Nine Arts., pp. 145-150; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iv. 12; A. Chandler, Spirit of Man, pp. 43-47.

3 Gen. ii. 17; iii. 19, 22-24; Rom. v. 12; 1 Cor. xv. 20-22; Wisdom ii. 23. St. Thomas, I. II. lxxxv. 5-6; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, pp. 48-49; A.B. Davidson, Theol. of Old. Test., pp. 432-436.

4 Evolution, pp. 204-218; St. Thomas, I. II. lxxxi; Thos. B. Strong, pp. 237-241; A. Moore, Essays Scientific and Phil., I.

Posted by AKMA at 06:33 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XV. Q. 89. The First Sin

OUR FIRST parents did not obey the will of God, but fell into avoidable sin. According to the symbolical description of Genesis, at the suggestion of the serpent they ate of the forbidden fruit; as a penalty were banished from Eden, and deprived of the food of immortality of the tree of life. In brief, they reverted to the moral and physical corruptibility, and the mortality of man's natural state.1

2. Some have thought that God ought not to have permitted a condition of things in which sin was possible. But such a possibility is a necessary incident in the moral probation of really free creatures. Therefore, if God was to be glorified by free creaturely service, the inevitable cost of such consummation was the possibility of sin. Moreover the coming in of sin cannot be considered justly without reckoning with the dispensation of redeeming grace.2

3. Temptation was permitted because in no other way can human obedience to God be adequately tested and perfected. It is by resisting temptation that men prove thair conformity to God's will to be positively energetic and spiritually significant—not merely passive.3 The primitive temptation was threefold, enlilisting the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye and the pride of life,4 and thus assailing our first parents through all ppossible avenues of huhuman temptation.5

4. The consequences of sin to man were immediate and twofold (a) A loss of grace, because of which he became subject to natural corruptibility, both physical and moral; (b) A disturbtince of his external relations, that is, alienation from God and enslavement to Satan. If the dispensation of redemption had not been vouchsafed, the spiritual ruin of mankind would have been hopeless.

---

1 On human sin at large, Creation, ch. viii. 9-12 and ch. ix; Evolution, pp. 133-149 and Lec. vi; St. Thomas, I. II. xviii-xxi; H.P. Liddon, Some Elements, Lec. iv; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, ch. v.; Chas. Gore. in Lux Mundi, App. ii; H.V.S. Eck, Sin, Pt.II; Wilhelm and Scannell, Cath. Theol. §§ 155-161. For evolutionary views, F. \R. Tennant, Origin and Propagation of Sin; and The Concept of Man; W.E. Orchard, Modern Theories of Sin. For non-Christian ideas, J.A. MaccuIloch, Compar. Theol., ch. vii.

2 Creation, pp. 137-138; E.H. Jewett, Diabology, pp. 59-64; J.R. Illingworth, Reason and Revel. p. 224; A.M. Fairbairn, Philos. of Christ. Religion, pp. 153-163.

3 St. Thomas, II. II. clxv.; I. II. lxxx; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel ch. iv. 6-7. A.C.A. Hall, Christ's Temptation and Ours, pp. 8-12.

4 Gen. iii. 1-6. Cf. St. John ii. 16.

5 Creation, pp. 271-273.

Posted by AKMA at 02:17 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XV. The Fall of Man

Q. 89. The First Sin

Q. 90. Effects on Human Nature

Q. 91. Original Sin

Q. 92. External Effects

Q. 93. Preparation for Salvation

Q. 94. Method of Salvation

Posted by AKMA at 01:16 AM | Comments (0)

August 12, 2005

Ch. XIV. Q. 88. Man's Primitive State

INASMUCH as man was not made naturally self-sufficient, but required divine assistance in order to avoid sin and advance on the lines foreordained for him, he was endowed in his primitive state with supernatural grace, including the gift of the Holy Spirit. This endowment was however conditional, its retention and its beneficial results depending upon man's coöperative response and obedience to divine precepts.1

2. The spiritual state to which grace elevated our first parents is called "original righteousness,"2 because it made possible a sinless advance to perfect righteousness of character, after the likeness of God, through regulation of animal propensities by man's spirit in obedience to the will of God. But man could not at the outset possess actualized virtues, for in his case these are always fruits of probationary experience rightly utilized. Furthermore primitive grace was not irresistible, but left its recipients capable of failure in the obedience which was demanded of them.3

3. The symbolic imagery of Eden fittingly exhibits the combination of natural and of supernatural elements and factors of primitive human life and probation. There were natural resources to develop and enjoy; and, so long as man remained obedient, a sacramental food of immortality was available. But there was also the possibility of gaining knowledge of evil by tasting of it, by admitting it into his experience.

4. Adam was of course but an inexperienced child, although endowed with grace; but he enjoyed some kind of communion with his Maker, wherein he had the opportunities of religion and of that self-surrender which sacrifice expresses among ancient peoples.4

5. In so far as moral obligations, however elementary they may have been, were imposed upon Adam, and the blessings of immortaliry, however inadequately understood, were promised to him, be was brought into a covenant with God, symbolized by the tree of knowledge, the fruit of which he was forbidden to eat, and by the tree of life, of whose fruit he was permitted to partake. The plain implication of the Eden narrative, as interpreted in the reflected light of the redemption, is that if he had persevered in obedience he would have attained to glorification without experiencing death to which mankind is natuarlly liable.5

6. Primitive man built no permanent structures, and left no lasting evidences of his condition; and our only available knowledge concerning his moral state is derived from the significance which the symbolical Eden narrative acquires when we reflect upon the state to which redeeming grace is intended to restore mankind. The so called "primitive savagery" is to be regarded as the condition of fallen man when he had advanced sufficiently in material arts to leave abiding traces of his degradation.6

---

1 On man's primitive state, Creation, ch. viii; Evolution, pp. 128-133 and Lec. v.; St. Thomas, I. xciii-cii; J.A. Mæhler, Symbolism, Bk. I. Pt. I, ch. i; St. Athanasius, de Incarn., 3-5; J.B. Mozley, Predestination (Svo. edit.), pp. 90-97, 109-112; Wilhelm and Scannell, Cath. Theol., Pt. II, ch. iii; Bp. Bull, Discourses/cite>, V; A.P. Forbes, Thirty-Nine Arts., ix. pp. 140-142.

2 Called "original justice" by Roman Catholic writers.

3 Creation, pp. 265-268.

4 Cf. Q. 87.4, above.

5 Cf. Rom. v. 12; Creation, ch. vi. 12.

6 Creation, ch. ix. 11.

Posted by AKMA at 12:45 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIV. Q. 87. Religion

A RELIGION, speaking in the concrete, is a working system whereby the relations and obligations by which men are bound to God are placed on a proper footing, cherished, expressed and fulfilled.1

2. The end for which man was created is to enjoy divine communion and fellowship.2 He is therefore made incapable of self-realization apart from God, and is by nature religious. The employment of God by creatures depends upon a crtain spiritual congeniality between them and God—i. e., upon their development after His likeness. The supernatural privilege's of true religion condition, and minister to, this development; and religious obligations are determinative data of a sound and adequate moral science.3

3. But, although righteousness is essential in the practice of true religion, as also are certain exercises of feeling and intelligence, neither orthodoxy, feeling of dependence nor morality constitute the definitive element of religion. This is found in the relations between God and man with which religion has to do.4

4. The characteristic and abiding function of religion is worship; and this is primarily fulfilled by sacrifice, or by the offering up to God of some gift, whereby self-oblation and accompanying devotions of adoration, praise, thanksgiving and prayer are signified and made effectual in a manner divinely approved.5

5. A true religion is one which brings men into authentic relations with God, and exhibits these relations in a manner which conforms to His revealed will. Other religions no doubt preserve important truths, forr they couid not otherwise maintain themselves and they are unquestionably overruled by God as means whereby to prepare men for true religion. But the religion of Jesus Christ alone properly fulfils the requirements of true religion.6

6. The science of comparative religion analyzes and compares all religions. Its study is both legitimate and valuable for Christian students.7 But the assumption often made that Christianity is merely one among other religions, having no higher claim to human allegiance than its comparative superiority as an embodiment of human progress, is not one which the truth of Christian doctrine permits us to accept.

---

1 On what religion is, Creation, ch. vii. 1; H.P. Liddon, Some Elements, Lec. i; Max Müller, Origin of Religion, pp. 10 et seq.

2 Creation, ch. vi. 9.

3 Idem, ch. vii. 6.

4 H.P. Liddon, as cited.

5 St. Thomas, II. II. lxxxiii-lxxxvii; Thos. B. Strong, Manual of Theol., pp.18-20; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Sacrifice"; J.A. Macculloch, Compar. Theol., ch. viii; F.B. Jevons, Introd. to the Study of Compar. Religion, pp. 175-210.

6 Creation ch. vii. 4; J.H. Newman, Arians, ch. i. § iii.5; F.B. Jevons, pp. 239-265.

7 On comparative religion, L.H. Jordan, Compar. Religion; Chas. Hardwick, Christ and Other Masters; A. Lang, The Making of Religion; J.A. Macculloch, op. cit.; F.B. Jevons, op. cit.; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Religion"; Non Christian Religious Systems (Series, pub. by S.P.C.K.); and many contemporary studies.

Posted by AKMA at 09:02 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIV. Q. 86. The Image and Likeness

THE divine is reflected in man partly by what is native and essential to human nature as such, and partly by the moral and spiritual elements of divine character which by grace he is enabled to acquire. Technicalizing an accidental turn of phrase in Genesis, Catholic theologians call the former resemblance the divine "image'' and the latter the divine "likeness."1

2. So long as man is man the image of God in him is ineffaceable, and his nature contains functional capacities designed to be employed for spiritual development after the moral likeness of God. But man was made for filial relations to God, relations with which human self-sufficiency would be inconsistent. Therefore man was made to be dependent by nature upon divine grace for the achievement of the development and destiny to which his nature points. He is in a sense an unfinished product, having part, it is true, in his own perfecting, but unable to fulfil his part without supernatural aid.2 Catholic doctrine teaches that in man's original state this aid was available. He was endowed with sufficient grace for sinless development, a condition which would still prevail if originally avoidable sin had not disturbed it.3

3. The function of grace is to preserve a harmonious use and interaction of man's natural faculties, which is called integrity, and to enhance the power of the human spirit to rule the lower and animal faculties and to enlist all natural powers in spiritual development. Grace does not therefore subvert or alter human nature, but, is a necessary factor in its being brought to perfection.

4. It is a part of man's natural insufficiency that, although made for immortality, he depends upon power from above to overcome his animal inheritance of mortality. This power was conditionally bestowed upon Adam, his retention of it depending upon his avoidance of sin. It is now bestowed upon man—not in a form which enables him to escape dying, but—in the power of resurrection from the dead through Jesus Christ.

5. A full development of the likeness of God in us carries with it a glorification of human nature, and a final subjection of the flesh to our perfected spirits. In the meantime, the divine likeness in us, so far as we are enabled to acquire it in this life, is not indelible. We can efface it by sin; and then we cannot recover it except by repentance and renewal of grace.

---

1 On the divine likeness, see refs. given in prev. Q., n. 1; and A.P. Forbes, Thirty-Nine Articles, pp. 140-142, 162-167; J.A. Mæhler, Symbolism, § 2; Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation, pp. 47-50; H.W. Robinson, Christ. Doctr. of Man, pp. 164-165.

2 Cf. Creation, pp. 206-208.

3 Q. 88, see below.

Posted by AKMA at 07:43 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIV. Q. 85. The Image of God

MAN is made in the image of God; and although this image especially appears in the spiritual part of his nature, his body, considered as part of the microcosm in which the soul is sovereign, pertains to the divine image in man.1

2. The popular disparagement of man's material organism is a survival of Manichaean error, fortified by protestant reaction from mediaeval caricatures of the sacramental principle. But the human body was made by God, and is therefore good. It was made for the use of spirit, and its anti-spiritual influence arises from our spiritual weakness and failure to rule it rightly. Apart from the flesh man is dead, and his appointed spiritual destiny cannot be attained except through restoration of the body in the resurrection of the dead. The redemption of Christ and His resurrection make possible this resurrection and the ultimate subjection of our flesh to our spirits—the originally designed purpose of our creation.2

3. The divine image is reflected in the human soul m the following ways: (a) Its essence is spiritual, although created; (b) It possesses rational freedom, and, under finite limitations, rules the body somewhat as God rules the world; (c) It is mentally present throughout space and vitally throughout the body, without either division or diffusion, although not possessed of divine omnipresence and immensity; (d) By divine grace it can participate in divine moral perfection, although liable to sin; (e) It is inside for divine fellowship, although capable of absorption in carnal associations.

4. It is part of man's function as made in the image of God to exercise a derivative and limited sovereignty over the world. This rule is exercised immediately over his own organism, which is a microcosm or recapitulation of the larger world or macrocosm.3 From this inner sphere his dominion is designed to extend itself over every creature. Sin has retarded the fulfilment of this creative purpose; and redemption enables man to resume his advance in power. The development of Christian civilization and the progress of science and invention constitute evidences of this. That there is a relation between this advance and the consummation in the new heavens and earth seems likely, but its nature is not revealed to us.4

---

1 Creation. pp. 186-188; St. Thomas, I. xciii; Cornel. A Lapide, Commentary, on Gen. i. 26; J. Laidlaw, Bible Doctr. of Man, chh. vii-viii; Darwell Stone, Outlines, pp. 41-43; Wilhelm and Scannell, Cath. Theol., §§ 124-125; Hastings, Dic. of Bible, s. v. "Image".

2 Cf. J.R. Illingworth, Divine Immanence, chh. i-ii, vi.

3 P.G. Medd, One Mediator, § 56; H. Martensen, Christ. Dogmatics, §§ 68, 72.

4 A. Moore. Science and the Faith, pp. 200 ety seq.; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iii. 9. Cf. St. Thomas, I. xcvi. 1-2.

Posted by AKMA at 06:00 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIV. Q. 84. Traducianism and Creationism

ACCORDING to the ruling opinion of Catholic theologians the human soul is not received by parental propagation (traducianism), but by immediate divine creation (creationism).1 It is also generally held that the soul's creation coincides with its infusion into the human organism. "When this occurs is not so generally agreed, but many maintain that it takes place at the moment of conception.2

2. The traducianist arguments are (a) The transmission of "original sin" is best explained by supposing a propagation of souls; (b) Children are apt to exhibit the mental and moral as well as the physiological characters of their parents; (c) The creationist view implies that the creative activity God is in this direction determined by human wills, often in moments of illicit passion.

3. In reply it may be said: (a) The soul in any case begins to be as conditioned in functioning by an organism which has been inherited from Adam. Its independence of origin does not therefore exempt it from the influence of sinful heredity; (b) Mental and moral characters are conditioned, and apt to be determined, by physiological conditions, and these are undoubtedly determined in important measure by inheritance; (c) It is a mysterious fact that human action, including sin is always made possible by divine concursus.3 The providential order includes profoundly immoral possibilities, but the uninterrupted maintenance of this order constiutes an inevitable condition of the ultimate triumph of the righteous purpose of God.

---

1 On this question, Creation, pp. 197-199; H.P. Liddon, Some Elements, pp. 93-104; A. Moore, Essays, Scientific and Phil., pp. 75-82; Cath Encyc., s. v. "Creationism''; J.O. Dykes, Divine Worker, pp. 157-165. For patristic views, J.F. Bethune-Baker, Early Hist. of Christ. Doctr., pp. 302-305.

2 On this view is based the contention that abortion is always child-murder.

3 Creation, p. 74. Cf. idem, ch. iv.

Posted by AKMA at 05:25 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIV. Q. 83. Unity and Antiquity

THE physical unity of the human race is accounted for by the fact of descent of all men from the same primitive parents.1 The antiquity of man does not admit of close determination.

2. Holy Scripture calls these parents Adam and Eve, and describes Eve as derived from Adam,2 in whose person the whole race was at first potentially contained.3 It is not necessary to take this account of human origins as scientific, or as requiring literal interpretation.4

3. But the nature which men possess is one. And this oneness is deeper than mere similarity. It is organic and in some sense numerical. There is a human solidarity, and men are united as springing from a common seed.5

4. This solidarity bears on the belief that all men have been affected by Adam's sin, and that all may be saved in the second Adam, Jesus Christ. It explains the common brotherhood of mankind, and is a conditioning factor of the special brotherhood in Christ.6

5. The ancestral unity of the race is indicated by the following facts and arguments: (a) Traditions of widely separated nations and tribes point to a common primitive home in central Asia; (b) Comparative philology affords evidences that existing human languages have developed from one primitive tongue; (c) All men display similar mental, moral and religious characteristics, and many of their traditions and myths show strong affinities; {d) The permanent fertility of unions between the most diverse races shows that these races belong to one species. More adequate evidence is from the nature of the case unavailable.

6. The chronological indications of Scripture are too inadequate and too uncertain to determine the antiquity of man.7 The most ancient date of human origins which they have been used to support, less than nine thousand years ago, is too recent to leave room for the political, ethnological and geological developments which must have taken place between man's first appearence and the dawn of history. But that man originated at a comparatively late period in geological time is beyond reasonable doubt.

---

1 On his ancestral unity, Creation, pp. 181-183; A.H. Strong, Systematic Theol. Vol. II, pp. 476-483; Encyc. Brit., 11th Ed., s. v. "Anthropology"; H. Lotze, Microcosmus, Bk. VII, ch. ii; Chas. Hardwick, Christ and Other Masters, ch. ii; St. Thomas, I. xc-xcii.

2 Gen. ii. 21-23.

3 Gen. iii. 20.

4 Authority, ch. vii. 5-6; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, Note 10, pp. 283-285.

5 Archd. Wilberforce, Incarnation. pp. 24-39; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iv. 8, 10.

6 Cf. Rom. v. 12, 19; I Cor. xv. 21-22; Acts xvii. 26; Heb. ii. 11-17.

7 On man's antiquity, Creation pp. 183-185; S.R. Driver, Genesis, pp. xxxi-xlii; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "World", pp. 706-707: E.B. Tylor, Anthropology, ch. i; Ch. Quarterly Rev., Apr., 1894, art. on "The Glacial Period und The Antiquity of Man".

Posted by AKMA at 03:34 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIV. Q. 82. Human Nature

MAN1 is a rational animal, personal, self-conscious, free and moral. He has an organic constitution, consisting of body and soul with their respective functions.2

2. The rationality, freedom and moral nature of man are closely related and mutually determinative.3 It is clear that (a) he is not free to act either irrationally or regardless of moral principle;4 (b) his reason is to a degree under his own control and subject to moral conditions;5 (c) his moral sense6 is conditioned by freedom and rational reflection. When men ignore these truths in conduct, errors and futilities result.

3. The lower animals seem to possess elementary reasoning powers, but differ from men in being neither self-conscious, capable of abstract thought, moral nor religious. Their voluntary actions are determined by instinct and unreflecting impulse rather than by deliberate choice.7

4. Human functions are threefold: (a) bodily, both active and passive; (b) physical, of intellect, feeling. and will; (c) spiritual, or moral and religious. But human nature is so constituted that they are all closely interdependent.8

5. Certain Christian writers, trichotomists, infer from this threefoldness of functioning that the body, soul and spirit constitute three distinct and substantial parts of human nature.9 But the contrary view, dichotomist, that the soul and spirit are one in substance. and signify relative and functional distinctions only, to-day holds the field.10

6. Whichever view is taken, the following truths are to be acknowledged: (a) The substantial parts of our nature are so vitally related that when they are separated the man is dead; (b) All functions of living men are organically related and mutually conditoned. The whole man is affected by, and acts in each;11 (c) Part of man's nature is spiritual and indivisible. 12

---

1 On the Doctrine of man at large. Creation, chh. vi-x: St. Thomas. I. Ixxv-cii. cxvii; Treatises on the Articles of Religion, ix-xi. by A.P. Forbes, and E.C.S. Gibson; Darwell Stone, Outlines, chh. iv-v: T.B. Strong, Manual of Theol., chh. v-vi: Wilhelm and Scannell, Cath. Theol., Bks. III-IV; H.W. Robinson, Christ. Doctr. of Man; John Laidlaw, Bible Doctr. of Man, new ed.

2 On human nature, in addition to the above, P.G. Medd, One Mediator, §§55-57; H.P. Liddon, Some Elements, Lec. iii; J.O. Dykes. Divine Worker, chh. vii-viii; Cath. Encyc., s. v. ''Man".

3 Introd., ch. ix. 4-5; R.C. Moberly, Reason and Religion, pp. 91-93; J.R. Illingworth, Reason and Revel. pp. 44-54.

4 On human freedom, Creation, pp. 241-242: St. Thomas. I. lxxxii-lxxxiii; ,Michael Maher, Psychology, ch. xviii; A. Alexander, Theories of the Will; Cath Encyc., s. v. "Determinism".

5 On man's reason, St. Thomas, I. Iviii. 3; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I. viii. 5; J.H. Newman, Grammar of Assent; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Reason"; modern psychologies. Cf. note 3, above.

6 On man's moral nature, St. Thomas, I. Ixxix. 12-13.

7 Evolution, pp. 190-192; M. Maher, pp.546-558; Henry Calderwood, Evolution, chh. vii-viii, xii, Sir O. Lodge, Life and Matter, pp. 103 et. seq.

8 Creation, pp. 190-192.

9 They cite 1 Thess. v. 23; Heb. iv. 12. Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 44 (Greek); Ephes. iv. 23. For the argument see J.B. Heard, Tripartite Nature of Man; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iv. 2.

10 Creation, pp. 194-196; J. Laidlaw, ch. iii-v; H.P. Liddon, p. 91, note; J.O. Dykes, pp. 150-157.

11 St. Thomas, I. Ixxv. 4: Ixxvi. Ixxvii. 5, 8; cxiv. 3-4; H.P. Liddon, pp. 114-116. Cf. refs. in note 3, above.

12 Creation, pp. 196-197; St. Thomas, I. Ixxv; M. Maher, pp. 361-393, 443-467; Jas. Ward, Naturalism and Agnost., Lecs. xi-xiii; H. Calderwood, chh. x-xi.

Posted by AKMA at 02:21 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XIV. Man

Q. 82. Human Nature

Q. 83. Unity and Antiquity

Q. 84. Traducianism and Creationism

Q. 85. The Image of God

Q. 86. The Image and Likeness

Q. 87. Religion

Q. 88. Man's Primitive State

Posted by AKMA at 01:51 AM | Comments (0)

August 10, 2005

Ch. XIII. Q. 81. The Work of Good Angels

THE good angels are sent forth by God to minister for the heirs of salvation,1 and to defend them against the assaults of evil angels.2 They also have work to fulfil in the ordering of nature.3

2. It has been widely agreed that a guardian angel is assigned to each heir of salvation.4 Among angelic services are to convey message's to men;5 to give them understanding;6 to succour them;7 to pray with and for the Church;8 to carry men's prayers to heaven;9 and to bear the souls of the faithful to their rest.10 They witness our actions and our judgment;11 rejoice over our repentance;12' and set an example for us.13 They will accompany our Lord at His second advent, and will have part in executing His judgments.14

3. But the evil angels, who are very numerous, and of various angelic orders are permitted to tempt men;15 although their malice is overruled by God to the furtherance of His own purpose, and for the good of those who love Him.16 They are employed by God in disciplining men,17 and are at times permitted to take possession of men's bodies and to torment them.18 But they can inflict no sufferings except those to which our bodies are naturally liable, and they cannot compel the faithful to sin.

---

1 Heb. i. 14. St. Thomas, I. cxi-cxiii.

2 St. Jude 9; Revel, xii. 7, 9; Tobit iii. 17; viii. 3.

3 Cf. Q. 76.6, above.

4 St. Matt. xviii. 10: Acts xii. 15. Cf. Psa. xci. 11. See St. Thomas, I. cxiii; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Guardian Angel".

5 St. Luke i. 19; ii. 10; Acts x. 22; etc.

6 Dan. ix. 21-22.

7 1 Kings xix. 5-8; Dan. x. 18-19; St. Matt. iv. 11; St. Luke xxii. 43. Cf. Collect for St. Michael's.

8 Zech. i. 22.

9 Revel, viii. 3-4. Cf. Tobit xii. 15.

10 St. Luke xvi. 22.

11 Eccles. v. 6; St. Matt. xxv. 31; 1 Cor. iv. 9; 1 Tim. iii. 16; v. 21: Revel, iii. 5. Cf. 2 Esdras xvi. 66.

12 St. Luke xv. 7, 10.

13 St. Matt. vi. 10.

14 St. Matt. xxiv. 31; 2 Thess. i. 7.

15 Ephes. vi. 12; 1 St. Pet. v. 8.

16 Rom. viii. 25.

17 1 Sam. xvi. 14-15.

18 Job ii. 6-7; 1 Cor. v. 5; 1 Tim. i. 20. Cf. Q. 78.5, above.

Posted by AKMA at 08:49 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIII. Q. 80. Good and Evil Angels

THE first estate of all the angels was one of grace and blameless, but probationary. "Under the leadership of Satan many of them sinned and were cast out of heaven.1 The consequence is that there are rival hosts of angels, the good and the evil, and no salvation of evil angels is now possible.2

2. The angels were created for free service under God. They had to be prepared for this by moral probation, and in this probation they must have been endowed with sufficient grace to be able to approve themselves to God.3

3. The sin by which Satan and his host fell was pride.4 Some have thought that the occasion of their rebellion was a revelation of the coming Incarnation and of their obligation to worship the Word-incarnate.5

4. The present abode of evil angels or devils is described in Scripture as partly in hell and partly in this world, especially in the air around us.6 By ensnaring men in sin they have acquired great power over them;7 but this power has been broken for those who are faithful to Christ by the redemption which He has achieved.8 Hell has been prepared for the everlasting punishment of devils and of obstinate human sinners.9

5. The opinion that men "were created to fill the place of fallen angels10 is speculative. Men are destined to angelic conditions and glory,11 but must forever remain distinct in nature.

---

1 St. John viii. 44; 2 St. Pet. ii. 4; St. Jude 6. Cf. Revel. xii. 9.

2 St. Matt. xxv. 41.

3 Creation, p. 164; St. Augustine, de Civ. Dei, XII. 9; St. Thomas, I. Ixii. 3. Cf. Ezek. xxviii 11-15.

4 Isa. xiv. 12-15. Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 6.

5 Texts appealed to are Heb. i. 6; Revel. xii. 1-9. See W.H. Hutchings Holy Ghost, pp. 53-55; Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Devil", p. 765, 2d col. On evil angels, E.H. Jewett, Diabology; W.A. Matson, The Adversary; W.H. Hutchings, Mystery of Temptation, Lec. iii; St. Thomas, I. Ixiii-lxiv, cix, cxiii-cxiv; Dic. of Christ. Biog., s. v. "Demonology". Other refs. in Creation, p. 163, n. 3.

6 St. John xii. 31; : xiv. 30; xvi. 11; 2 Cor. iv. 4; Revel. xii. 4, 7-9. Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I. iv. 3.

7 2 Cor. iv. 3-4; Ephes. ii. 2; vi. 11-12; Revel, xiii.

8 Revel. v. 9; xii. 11; vii. 13-14. Cf. St. Thomas I. cxiv; H.P. Liddon, Passiontide Serms., pp. 84-99.

9

10 Petavius, de Angelis, I. xiv, gives patristic views.

11 St. Matt. xxii. 30.

Posted by AKMA at 02:08 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIII. Q. 79. Their Nature

THE angels (αγγελος, messenger) constitute a great host of personal spirits,1 rational, free, incorporeal and immortal. Although possessed of similar natures, they do not appear to be mutually related, as men are, by the laws of ancestry or descent.2 They seem to be at least as ancient as mankind, but the time of their creation is not revealed.3

2. The fact of angelic probation, and that of the moral accountability of evil angels for their fall, 4 establish the freedom of angels, who are described in Holy Scripture as acting like free agents 5 and as possessing moral characters which pertain to such agents. 6

3. Freedom involves rational intelligence and personality. AngeIic intelligence exceeds that of man in this life, 7 but is necessarily finite. Angels cannot directly discern our thoughts, 8 and their knowledge of the mysteries of grace is limited to what is revealed to the Church. 9 They do not know the time of the judgment. 10

4. Being by nature incorporeal 11 the bodies in which angels appear to men must be either docetic or temporarily assumed. 12 Although immortal, as all spirits are, their existence and continuance is derivative, being caused by the will of God and by His creative and sustaining power. 13

5. The power which men have to manipulate the forces and operations of nature for their own purposes appears to be possessed in higher degree by the angels; 14 and they exercise some power over human organisms, 15 over physical death. 16

6. The lack of that community of nature which organic relationship imparts to mankind is thought to explain the fact that some of the angels fell without involving the rest in their ruin. 17 It is also thought to explain why the Saviour did not take the nature of angels for their salvation. 18

7. The number of angels is very great, and they are revealed as organized in hosts. 19 Following the speculative conclusions of pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, scholastic writers divide the angels, according to the names given to them in Scripture, into three hierarchies, each containing three orders : 20—(a) Thrones,21 cherubim22 and seraphim;23 (b) Dominations,24 virtues25 and powers;26 (c) Principalities,27 archangels28 and angels.29 The first hierarchy is supposed to attend immediately on God;30 the second to operate in nature 31 and in warfare; the third to fulfil special missions and minister to men. Holy Scripture seems to teach the existence of seven archangels. 32 Four of them are named in the canonical and deutero-canonical Scriptures, viz.: SS. Michael,33 Gabriel,34 Raphiel35 and Uriel.36 Three others are named in Jewish tradition,37 viz.: SS. Chamuel, Jophiel, and Zadkiel.

---

1 Neh. ix. 6; Psa. xxxiii. 6; civ. 4; Heb. i. 7: Col. i. 16; Revel. xxii. 8-9; 2 Macc. vii. 28. Cf. refs. given in n. 1 of Q. 78.

2 St. Matt. xxii. 30.

3 St. Thomas. I. lxi; Bp. Bull, Works, Vol. I., pp. 270- 272: F.X. Schoppe, Elem. Theol. Dogm., Tr. VII. 58; Darwell Stone; Outlines, pp. 34-35, 281.

4 St. Jude 6; Revel, xii. 7-9.

5 E. g. 1 Kings xxli. 19-22; 2 Tim. ii. 26.

6 Dan. iv. 13, 23; viii. 13; St. Matt. xxv. 31; Revel. xv. 6. St. Thomas, 1. lix; F.X. Schouppe, T.R. VII. §§ 49, 67.

7 2 Sam. xiv. 20. St. Thomas, I. liv-lviii; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I. vi. 1.

8 I Kings viii. 39; Jerem. xvii. 9-10.

9 Ephes. iii. 10; 1 St. Pet. i. 12.

10 St. Matt. xxiv. 36; St. Mark xiii. 32.

11 Ephes. vi. 10: Heb. i. 7, 14. St. Thomns. I. l. 1; li. 1-3; Bp. Bull. pp. 270, 277.

12 Judges xiii. 6; Tobit xii. 19.

13 St. Luke xx. 36.

14 Acts xii. 7-10; Revel. vii. 1-3; viii. 5-12; xvi. 1-14.

15 Dan. x. 18; St. Matt iv. 11; St. Luke i. 20-22; xxii. 43; St. John v. 4.

16 2 Sam. xxiv. 16; Acts xii. 23.

17 St. Thomas, I. 1. 4: A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iii. 6, Bp. Andrewes, Serrnons on the Nativity, I.

18 Heb. ii. 16. Cf., however, B. F. Westcott, in loc.

19 Gen. xxxii. 2; St. Matt. xxvi. 53; St. Luke ii. 13; Heb. xii. 22.

20 Pseudo-Dionysius Areop., Coelesti Hierarchia; St. Thomas, I. cviii. Cf. J.B. Lightfoot, Coloss.; i. 16. T.K. Abbott, Ephes., i. 21 (note).

21 Col. i. 16.

22 Gen. iii. 24; Exod. xxv. 20; Psa. Ixxx. I; xcix. I.

23 Isa. vi. 1-3.

24 Ephes. i. 21.

25 Psa. ciii. 20.

26 Ephes. i. 21; iii. 10, Col. ii. 10.

27 Idem.

28 Dan. x. 20, 21; xii. 1; I Thess. iv. 16.

29 Heb. i. 14, etc.

30 Cf. however, St. Matt. xiii. 10.

31 Psa. civ. 4; Acts xii. 7-10; Revel. vii. 1; xvi. St. Thomas, I. cx; cxiv. 4; III (suppl.) xci. vel xciii; J.H. Newman, Paroch. Sermons, xxix.

32 Zech. iii. 9; Revel. i. 4; iii. 1; iv. 5; v. 6. Cf. Tobit xii. 15.

33 Dan x. 13; xii. 1; St. Jude 9; Revel. xii. 7.

34 Dan. viii. 16; ix. 21; St. Luke i. 19, 26.

35 Tobit iii. 17; xii. 15.

36 2 Esdras iv. 1.

37 On later Jewish speculations, Hastings, Dic. of Bible, extra vol., pp. 285-290; A. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus, App. xiii.

Posted by AKMA at 12:22 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XIII. Q. 78 The Existence of Angels

The doctrine that the hierarchy of created beings includes a vast host of non-corporeal agents possessing the personal attributes of rational intelligence and freedom, and fulfilling certain functions in the universal order, is one to which the Church has always been committed; and its rejection involves important consequences.1

2. This doctrine is so generally taken for granted, and so frequently in evidence, in all parts of Holy Scripture 2 that to reject it is to weaken exceedingly the arguments for receiving biblical teaching concerning spiritual things as having divine authority. Moreover, the open acceptance of angelic doctrine by our Lord, both by word and by casting out of devils, is necessarily determinate for those who acknowledge Him to be divine Revealer. The theory that He practiced accommodation implies that He was capable of crystallizing superstitious error, and the supposition that He Himself erred is neither required by recognition of His human limitations nor consistent with the scope of His prophetic mission.3

3. Naturalistic forms of thought explain the sense of remoteness and the atmosphere of unreality which make belief in the existence of angels so difficult in this age. But the habit of disregarding; whatever eludes investigation by physical methods, allowable though it be for specializing purposes, cannot be defended when spiritual realities are in question.4

4. The physical account of nature contains gaps which cannot be bridged without, taking account of spiritual factors. For example, the widely accepted theory that the substratum, so to speak, of matter is an ether, which is at once absolutely continuous and so elastic as to offer no perceptible hindrance to moving bodies, involves difficulties which would apparently be much relieved if we regarded this hypothetical ether as a meeting point between the physical order and the working of spiritual agents.5

5. Because the disorders which in Scripture are referred to demoniacal possession are susceptible of accurate description in terms of medical science, it does not follow that demoniacal agency must be denied. This appears when we note that, if devils can disturb our bodily functions, the disorders that result must be those, and only those, to which the human organism is naturally liable. That is, they will be subject to pathological description. Our own wills frequently set in operation the physical antecedents of natural diseases, which shows that personal agency cannot be excluded in explaining the disorders in question merely because they are susceptible of scientific diagnosis.6

6. Without denying the possibility of communications from departed human spirits, we may reasonably consider that instances of spiritualistic communication which are not fraudulent—and recent investigations appear to prove that there are many such—can usually be more adequately accounted for by the agency of devils than by that of discarnate human spirits. If devils are the real agents, the supernormal knowledge of our personal affairs which they display is quite natural. And
the low tone which characterizes spiritualistic communications, often conspicuously inconsistent with the known characters of the persons who are said to be speaking, points to the demoniacal hypothesis.7

7. If false, the belief in angels is superstitious and spiritually disturbing. If true, it determines the view which we ought to take of human life and destiny in important particulars. In either case is the question of its truth or falsity a negligible one. The functions ascribed to angels in Scripture make this clear.8

---

1 On angels, Creation, ch. v; Catholic Encyc.; Blunt, Dic. of Theol., and Dic. of Christ. Biog., q. v.; St. Augustine, de Civ. Dei, IX-X; Pseudo-Dionysius Areop., de Coelesti Hierarchia, St. Thomas, I. l-lxiv, cvi-cxiv; Petavius, de Angelis; Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I. iv; E.B. Pusey, Lecs. on Daniel, viii-ix: Darwell Stone, Outlines, pp. 34-41; P.G. Medd, One Mediator, §§ 44-52 and notes i-v; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manuel, §§ 118-121.

2 A.B. Davidson, in Hastings, ,cite>Dic. of Bible, s, v. "Angel"; and in Theol. of the Old Test., pp. 289-306; J.E. Hull, The Holy Angels.

3 Creation, pp. l52-154; R.C. Trench, Miracles of our Lord, pp. 46-47, 118-119.

4 Evolution, pp. 21 et seq.; R. Otto, Naturalism and Religion.

5 Creation, pp. 92, 144-145; Baldwin, Dic. of Philos., s. v. "Ether"; W.C.D. Whetham, Recent Devel. of Phys. Science, pp. 267-272; Stewart and Tait, Unseen Universe, chh. vii and iv.

6 Creation, pp. 145-146, 166-167; R.C. Trench, pp. 119- 128; Hastings, Dic. of Bible, s. vv. "Demon, Devil'' and "Exorcism, Exorcist"; Dic. of Christ.; "Demons, and Spirits" and "Divination''; W.A. Matson, The Adversary, ch. xvi.

7 Creation, pp. 147-148, 167-168; W.A. Matson, ch. xvil; Ch. Quarterly Rev., April, 1877, pp. 212-217.

8 Summarized in Q. 81, below.

Posted by AKMA at 11:19 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XIII. Angelology

Q. 78. The Existence of Angels

Q. 79. Their Nature

Q. 80. Good and Evil Natures

Q. 81. Work of Good Angels

Posted by AKMA at 10:17 AM | Comments (0)

August 09, 2005

Ch. XII. Q. 77. Evil

EVIL is a quality or relation of things and actions which ought not to be. No thing or act is evil in itself.1

2. Substances, natural things and "natural operations cannot be evil in themselves, because they come from God, who cannot, properly speaking, be the author of what ought not to be.2 Things become evil by creaturely misuse, and actions by perversion from their proper ends. And even so, created natures and functions cannot be wholly nullified. God remains potentially present in any case, and absolute evil cannot be actualized.3 Thus a thing or act may at the same time be both good and evil, good for what it naturally is and evil for what it is unnaturally and perversely employed by creaturely wills.

3. Evils are commonly classified as metaphysical, physical and moral, either in themselves or in their causation. Metaphysical evils, or limitations which inhere in infinitude and in the laws of growth, are evil only in a metaphorical sense. Physical evils, or sufferings, so far as they do not belong to the metaphysical class, are either useful safeguards against injury, indispensable conditions of moral discipline and development, or proper consequences of moral evil. A world without pain would not afford a suitable sphere for human growth; and its unequal distribution appears to be unavoidable, an evil only in the metaphysical or metaphorical sense.4

4. That a thing or act ought not to be—the only proper sense in which it can be called evil is essentially a moral proposition. And the problem of evil is to explain the permission by a perfectly righteous God of what ought not to be, in a world of which He is the omnipotent Creator and Governor.

5. Considered intellucutally, or in the abstract, this problem cannot be adequately solved by us, but we are enabled to face the problem without loss of faith by several reasons: (a) The evidences in general of divine righteousness are sufficient to overcome the doubts which unsolved problems raise; (b) The divinely constituted possibility of human sin appears to be a necessary condition of human probation and development, and its actual commission is not due to God but to creaturely wills; (c) The attitude of God towards evil is shown by the death of His Son for our sins, and by His providential overruling of all events for the final triumph of righteousness; (d) This overruling providence, and our own experience of saving grace, alike assure us that an intellectual solution of the problem is unnecessary, because its practical solution is being perceptibly advanced in the Kingdom of God.5

---

1 On evil. Creation, ch. iv; H.P. Liddon, Some Elements, Lec, iv; J.R. Illingworth, Reason and Revelation, ch. xii; R. Flint, Theism, Lec. viii; B. Boedder, Natural Theol., pp. 393-411; A.0. Fraser. Philos. of Theism, Pt. Ill; Baldwin, Dic. of Philos., s. vv. "Origin of Evil" and "Theodicy".

2 Gen. i. 31.

3 St. Augustine, Enchirid.., 13, 14; St. Thomas, I. xlviii. 2 ad 1, 3; xlix. 3; St. Athanasius, c. Gent., vi-vii.

4 Creation, pp. 115-120; J. O. Dykes. Divine Worker, ch. x; J.R. Illingworth, in Lux Mundi, III; R. Flint, pp. 245-252.

5A. M. Fairbairn, Philos. of the Christ. Religion, p. 132, J.E. IIIingworth, pp. 234-237.

Posted by AKMA at 09:55 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XII. Q. 76. Divine Providence

THE method of divine providence in directing the course of nature and of human history is twofold: (a) by an order of casual sequences which are described, so far as we can ascertain them, as the "laws of nature"; (b) by a rational ministry of angels and men, to whom God has given finite freedom and a limited power over nature.1

2. There is a certain uniformity of nature, which arises from the law that the same unhindered causes produce the same effects. But the coming in of new causes, of factors, necessarily modifies the effects which would otherwise appear. Yet we must assume that no such intervention will be either permitted or caused by God which would either nullify the existing order or involve a breach of continuity in the progress of the divine world-drama.2

3. What would constitute such a breach of continuity cannot be determined from a purely physical or natualistic standpoint. The divine plan alone affords a proper basis of judgment;3 and historical evidence shows that this plan requires for its progressive fulfilment certain epoch-making shiftings of scenery which we call miracles, the most significant of which are connected with the entrance of very God into human history and His resurrection in our nature from the dead.4

4. Miracles constitute special signs of God's transcendent working and of His purpose, but all visible phenomena are alike manifestations of divine activity and immanence. The whole visible order is a divine revelation, and its teaching affords the larger context of the more articulate signs of supernatural revelation.5

5. The divine plan provides that men shall have a real, although limited, sovereignty over nature.6 They cannot alter or reverse natural factors, but they are enabled to ascertain their working, and by intelligent manipulation to utilize them for their own ends. God's purpose is that they shall do this in such wise as to advance His glory and their own spiritual development after His likeness. To this end He enlightens and aids them by supernatural revelation and grace; and their prayers, when rightly made, become effectual, although moral, factors in their participation in divine sovereignty.7

6. The angels are also described in Scripture as exercising a certain power in the visible order.8 According to an ancient opinion, their functions in this direction are temporary, being intended to give way to the fuller control which men will exercise when they assume their destined place in the transfigured world to come.

---

1 On providence at large, Creation, ch. iii; St. Thomas, I. ciii-cv; Petavius, de Dogmatibus,Tome I., lib. viii. chh. I-5 (historical and patristic); Rich. Hooker, Eccles. Polity, Bk. I.; A.B. Bruce, Providential Order of the World; J.O. Dykes, Divine Worker, chh. xi-xiii; the Encyclopedias, q.v. Cf. Q. 53, in Vol. 1.

2 On uniformity, Baldwin, Dic. of Philos., q.v. (3), (4); St. Thomas, I. cv. 6; F.W. Temple, Relation between Religion and Science, Lee. i; J.B.Mozley, Miracles, Lees. ii-iii.

3 On Continuity, Evolution, pp. 162-170; Bp. Gore, Incarnation, Lee. ii.; A.M. Fairbairn, Philos. of the Christ. Religion, Bk. I., ch. i.; Hatstings. Encyc. of Relig., q.v. (historical).

4 On miracles, cf. Qq. 2-4, in Vol. I; Introd., ch. ii. Also R.C. Trench, Notes on the Miracles of our Lord, Prelim. Essay; F.W. Temple, Iec. vii; J. Wendland, Miracles and Christianity; W. Lock and others, Miracles, Papers . . . contrib. to the Guardian; Chas. Gore, Incarnation, Lees. ii-iii.

5 Introd.,ch. ii. 6; J.R. Illingworth, Divine Immanence, ch. ii., esp. pp. 41 et seq.

6 Gen. i. 28. Creation, ch. iii. 4-5; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iii. 9.

7 On prayer, Creation pp. 88-90; St. Thomas, II. II. Ixxxv; H.P. Liddon, Some Elements, pp. 184-190; Chas. Gore. in Oxford House Papers, 2d; Series, vi. Gen. xxxii. 27; Jerem. xxxiii. 3; St. Matt. vii 7-11; xviii. 19-20; xxi. 22; St. Luke xi. 5-13; St. John xv. 7; xvi. 23; St. James v. 16; I St. John v. 15.

8"O.D. Watkins, Divine Providence, ch. vii; J.E. Hull, The Holy Angels, chh. i, x; J.H. Newman, Paroch. Sermons, Vol. II., Serm. xxix. Cf. Acts xii. 7-10; Revel. vii. 1-3; viii. 5-12; xvi. 1-14.

Posted by AKMA at 09:23 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XII. Q. 75. Order of Mediate Creation

Q. 75. ORDER OF MEDIATE CREATION.

ALL available indications show that mediate creation, or development of the cosmos and of its contents, has taken many ages, and has been progressive. The advance seems to have been from the simple to the complex, and, in the visible order, from the lower to the higher, from the inorganic to the organic and living, and from the irrational to the rational and moral.1

2. The Church has never required a literal interpretation of the creation narrative in Genesis, and efforts to harmonize its language with the results of scientific investigation presuppose a scientific aim and bearing which it does not exhibit.
2 But the principle of orderly progress is not less emphasized in it than in the accepted conclusions of natural science.

3. The traditional material embodied in this narrative seems to have come from heathen sources. But under an "inspiration of selection," it has been recast; and in its biblical form and context teaches that all things have been created and developed by the will of God.3 This doctrine requires us to assume that whatever has been evolved in the cosmos has been previously involved therein by the Creator. The factors of evolution are admittedly not wholly within the range of human discovery; and the doctrine that evolution presupposes divinely caused involution is in no danger of reversal.4

4. It is now generally agreed that the existing visible order has developed from relatively simple forms of inorganic matter, these primitive forms being genetically related to a still more ancient and all pervading ether. In obedience to the laws of force and motion, matter has been distributed into a stellar universe; and, in accordance with laws which still operate, the earth has become a suitable' sphere of organic life.5

5. Prior to the nineteenth century the fixity of organic species was accepted scientific doctrine, and biblical exegetes were inclined, as a rule, to read this doctrine into the creation narrative of Genesis. Owing to the labours of Charles Darwin and others, however, the theory of a natural evolution of species by variation and survival of the fittest has become the working hypothesis of biological science.6

6. After a period of hesitation, theologians have very generally adjusted themselves to the changed situation, and now rightly regard the theory of evolution, both inorganic and organic, as the best description of the method of mediate creation which existing human knowledge affords. But no description of mediate creation may be given the authority of saving doctrine, for while theological science continually adjusts itself to growing knowledge, the fundamental dogmas which it postulates remain unaltered.7

---

1 Creation: ch. iii. 6-8; J.O. Dykes, Divine Worker, chh. i, iii-vii; F. B. Jevons, Evolution.

2 Darwell Stone, Outlines, note 10: S.R. Driver. Genesis pp. Ixi-lxx; E.B. Pusey, Unscience not Science, Adverse to Faith.

3 H. P. Liddon, The Inspiration of Selection (Univ. Serms., 2d Series, xx.); the writer's Authority. pp. 209-211, 225-236 (where numerous references are given); S.R. Driver, pp. 19-33; Bp. Ryle, Early Narratives of Genesis, chh. i-ii.

4 Evolution pp. 89-95; W.C.D. Whetham, Recent Devel. of Phys. Science, pp. 16-20; V.F. Storr, Development and Divine Purpose, pp. 168-186; Sir Oliver Lodge, Life and Matter, passim; W. Profeit, The Creation of Matter, ch. xi.

5 Creation ch. iii. 6. On ether, Encyc. Brit., s.v. "Aether." On the evolution of matter, W.C.D. Whetham, ch. vii. On astronomical evolution, F.R. Moulton, Introd. to Astron., ch. xv. On the evolution of this earth, R.H. Lock, Recent Progress in the Study of Variation, etc., pp.24-28.

6 The Darwinian form of this theory has been modified. See Evolution, lecs. i-iii; Chas. Darwin, Origin of Species; A. R. Wallace, Darwinism; V.L. Kellogg, Darwinism Today; R.H. Locke, op. cit.; V.F. Storr, op. cit.

7 Evolution, pp. 26-36.

Posted by AKMA at 08:47 PM | Comments (0)

Ch. XII. Q. 74. Causes of Creation

4- CAUSES OF CREATION

THE moving cause of creation was the love of God and the Father's will of good pleasure; the mediate cause or Agent was the Son; the efficient and perfecting cause was the Holy Spirit: the final cause was the glory of God and, as pertaining thereto, the good of creatures.1

2. No creature can create substance , for this requires infinite power, which cannot be received by finite beings - not even by angels.2 By calling the Son the first of creatures Arius nullified his acknowledgment of the Son's agency in creating all other things.3

3. Creation was an act of the undivided Trinity, but the distinct relations of the divine Persons towards that action justify the several descriptions with which we are concerned.4

4. Creation was an act of the Father's good pleasure, in that the love by which He was moved did not destroy its voluntariness.5 And creation is ascribed primarily to the Father, because He is the ultimate source even of divine processions, to whose will all external operations of the Trinity are referred.6

5. The Son was the mediate cause or Agent, because He is the divine Word and Image of the Father's essence, by whom the divine nature and mind is outwardly expressed. He is the one Mediator between God and all else, the meeting point and bond of created things, and the only mediating principle of creation, of divine immanence, and of divine revelation.7

6. The Holy Spirit is the efficient principle by which, according to the Father's will and through the agency of the Son, creatures are given being, quickened and sanctified, and all things are developed to their perfect end.8

7. The final cause or purpose of creation was a communication of good to the creature; and the creature's chief end is to declare and enjoy the glory of God. But creation was not necessitated either by deficiency in God or by uncontrollable superabundance in Him. It was truly voluntary.9

---

1 Creation, ch. ii. 8-9; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma,pp.32-3; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iii. 2; St. Thomas, I. xliv. 4; xlv. 2. 5. 6; lxv. 3.

2 St. Thomas, I. xlv. 5; lxv. 3; Thos. Jackson, Works, Vol. V., pp. 258 et seq.

3 St. Athanasius, c. Arianos., II. 21.

4 Cf. Qq. 67.2 and 70.1; Trinity, chh. vii. 11; viii. 1, 3; St. Thomas, I. xlv. 6.

5 Cf. Q. 51.1.

6 Trinity, p. 265; A.J. Mason, ch. iii. 1; T.B. Strong, Manual of Theol., pp. 194-196; Bp. Pearson, Creed, fol. pp. 56-58.

7 Psa. xxxiii. 6; St. John i. 3, v. 17; I Cor. viii. 6; Col. i. 16-17: Heb. i. 2-3; I Tim. ii. 5. St. Athanasius, c. Gent., 40-44; J.B. Lightfoot on Col. i. 15-17; P.G. Medd, One Mediator, pp. 16-32; A.J. Mason, ch. iii. 4-5; Bp. Pearson, fol. pp. 113-115. T.A. Lacey, Elem. of Christ. Doctrine, pp.95-96.

8 Gen. i. 2; Job xxvi. 13; Psa. xxxiii. 6. W.H. Hutchings, Person and Work of the Holy Ghost, pp. 49-52.

9 Cf. Qq. 45.3-4 and 59. Psa. xix:1; Acts xvii. 25. Creation, ch. ii. 8; St. Thomas, I. xliv. 4; H.P. Liddon, Advent Serms., pp. 545-547.

Posted by AKMA at 11:35 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XII. Q. 73. Opposed Systems

3. OPPOSED SYSTEMS

i. THE chief systems opposed to the doctrine of creation are pantheism, dualism, eternal creation and atheism.1

ii. Pantheism confuses the universe of substance with God, and describes all events as necessary phenomena of divine substance. Like all theories of ultimate origins, including the doctrine of creation, this system can neither be proved nor disproved by unaided reason. Our only source of sure knowledge is supernatural revelation. But it has been shown elsewhere2 that pantheism has difficulties, especially moral ones, which make its acceptance unreasonable.3

iii. Emanationism is a pantheistic theory which explains the world as caused by a series of evolutions or devolutions of divine substance. It was maintained of old by the Gnostics, and more recently by Swedenborg. This theory is inconsistent with divine immutability and incurs all the difficulties of pantheism. The only emanations possible in God are the eternal processions which constitute the Trinity.4

iv. Dualism emphasizes the essential difference between God and the world; but like pantheism regards all substance as eternal. God is merely the Fashioner of things. Its axiom is ex nihilo nihil fit, which is considered elsewhere.5 It is to be noted that the appearence of manufacture, of adaptation, inheres in the most elementary forms of finite substance which scientists have investigated; and dualism has difficulties. (a) It impugns the infinity of God, which precludes the existence of independent reality; (b) To hypothecate two "ultimate principles is unscientific when one such principle sufficiently explains the universe.6

v. The theory of eternal creation represents an attmept to retain belief in the eternity of matter without falling into dualism. It makes the universe a needed objective and sphere of the personal life and operations of God, but insists that all things are grounded in God and dependent upon his will.7 This theory derives plausibility only from a non-trinitarian standpoint; for, according to the Christian doctrine, the relations between the divine Persons afford all necessary conditions of personal life and operation in God.8 The theory is inconsistent with divine infinity, since it implies a subjection of God to external necessity.9

vi. Atheism, by denying the existence of God, precludes belief in creation.10 It usually adopts the materialistic hypothesis, which declares matter to be the ultimate ground of all reality.11 In the more subtle form of naturalism, it denies reality to anything that cannot be described in the terms of physical science.12

---

1 Creation,ch. ii. 7; H.P. Liddon, Some Elem., pp. 55-60.

2 Previous vol. Q. 36.

3 On pantheism, Being and Attrib., ch. ix. 4; Baldwin, Dict. of Philos., q. v.; Cath. Encyc., q. v.; R. Flint, Anti-Theistic Theories, Lecs. ix-x; Th. Christlieb, Modern Doubt, pp. 161-190.

4 Cath. Encyc., s. v. "Emanationism."

5 Cf. Q. 72.3.

6 On Dualism, Baldwin, Dic. of Philos., s. vv. "Dualism" and "Manichaeism"; H.P. Liddon, Some Elem., pp. 142-148; St. Augustine, de Civ Dei, xii. 6, et seq..

7This theory was supported by Origen, de Prin., ii. 4; iii. 5; Jas. Martineau, Religion Vol. I., pp. 381-390.

8 Trinity, ch. vi. 11.

9 Being and Attrib., p. 142, note 1; Creation, pp. 61-63.

9 Q. 33, in Vol. I.

11 Q. 34, in Vol. I.

12 On Naturalism, Evolutionism pp.21 et seq.; Creation, pp. 109-112: R. Otto, Naturalism and Religion.

Posted by AKMA at 11:34 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XII. Q. 72. Doctrine of Creation

1. THE doctrine of creation is that in the beginning of time God created the heavens and the earth, without the use of preexisting materials; and that all things other than God depend upon Him for origination, preservation, development, and operation.1

ii. That no preexisting materials were used in creation is involved in the fact that the substance as well as the form of things was divinely created. This is signified by the traditional phrase "out of nothing," ex nihilo2, which means that the will of God was the sole cause and condition of the first origin of finite being.3

iii. The phrase ex nihilo nihil fit is true in the sense that there must be a cause of every finite substance. And nothing can come from nothing either (a) by finite power; (b) as material source; or (c) by emanation, generation and evolution. That every substance requires a preexisting material source is absurd.4

iv. Creation in its widest sense includes (a) immediate creation ex nihilo; (b) mediate creation, or the development of the existing cosmological order.

v. Time is the measure of finite events and durations. Therefore before creation there was no time. Considered as a divine act creation is necessarily eternal; but its products are temporal by created nature and began to be.5

vi. The objection that immediate creation is unimaginable is offset by the fact that the same is true of an eternal existence of matter. Every thinkable theory of the basis of existence takes us beyond the sphere of our experience and therefore beyond that of imagination.

vii. The doctrines of Preservation and of Providence are bound up with that of creation, and they will be summarized below.6

---

1 Gen. i-ii. 3; Exod. xx. 11; Neh. ix. 6; Job xii. 7, xxxviii.4 et seq.; Psa. xix. l, xxiv. 1-2, xxxiii. 6, civ; cxix. 90, cxlviii. 5-6; Prov. viii. 26-29; Isa. xl. 12, 26, 28; xliv. 24; xlv. 7-8; Jere. x. 12; Wisd. xi. 17; II Macc. vii. 28; Acts iv. 24; Rom. iv. 17; xi. 36; Heb. iii. 4; xi. 3; Rev. iv. 11; etc. On the whole subject, Creation; St. Thomas, I. xxii, xliv-xlix; A.P. Forbes, Nic. Creed. art. 4; H.P. Liddon, Some Elem. of Relig., pp. 56-66; A.J. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. iii. 1-5; D. Stone, Outlines of Christ. Dogma, ch. IV; O. Dykes, Divine Worker in Creation and Providence; F.X. Schouppe, Elementa Theol Dogmaticae, Tr. vii; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual of Cath. Theol. Bk. III; P. Ch. Pesch, de Deo Creante; H. Goodwin, Foundns. of the Creed, pp. 57-70; Hastings, Encyc. of Relig., s.v. "Creation"; and Dic. of Bible, s.v. "Cosmogony."

2 The only explicit biblical use of this phrase is in the Apocrypha, 2 Macc. vii:28

3 Creation, ch. ii. 4; C.M. Walsh, Doctr. of Creation (historical) ; St. Thomas, I. xlv. 1-2; J. O. Dykes, ch. III; W. Profeit, Creation of Matter.

4 Creation, pp.53-54; St. Thomas, I. xlv. 1. ad tert., J.O. Dykes, pp.58-63.

5 Contrast Gen. i. 1 with St. John i. 1. See Creation, ch. i. 3-4; ii. 3; St. Augustine, de Civ. Dei, xi. 4-6; T.A. Lacey, Elem. of Christ. Doctr., pp. 92-93; St. Thomas, I. xlvi: H. Martensen, Christ. Dogmatics, §§ 65-66.

6 In Q. 76.

Posted by AKMA at 11:33 AM | Comments (0)

Ch. XII. Q. 71. Cosmology

i. COSMOLOGY is that part of Dogmatics which treats of the creation, development and ordering of all things by God. As here treated, it includes (a) Cosmology Proper, or the creation and government of the universe; (b) Angelology, or the doctrine of angels; (c) Anthropology, or the doctrine of man. In philosophical use Cosmology treats of the universe in all its fundamental aspects.1

ii. Cosmogony signifies an account of how the universe originated. There are many cosmogonies, and they are reckoned with in Comparative Theology.2

---

1 See Catholic Encycopedia, q. v.; Baldwin, Dic. of Philos., s. v. "Nature (philosophy of)".

2 Cf. J.A. Maculloch, Compar. Theol., ch. V; Hastings, Dic. of Bible, s. v. "Cosmogony and Cosmology" (several arts. with bibliog.); Cath. Encyc., q. v.

Posted by AKMA at 11:32 AM | Comments (0)

Chapter XII. Creation

Q. 71. Cosmology

Q. 72. Doctrine of Creation

Q. 73. Opposed Systems

Q. 74. Causes of Creation

Q. 75. Order of Creation

Q. 76. Divine Providence

Q. 77. Evil

Posted by AKMA at 11:25 AM | Comments (0)

August 08, 2005

Ch.XI. Q.70. Divine Economies

THE Divine economies signify the particular external operations which revelation teaches us to attribute to the several Divine Persons. Thus the economy of the Father is creation of the world; of the Son, redemption of mankind; of the Holy Ghost, sanctification of the elect people of God.1

2. The term economy, οικονομία, was used in sub-apostolic days to signify (a) a dispensation or plan of God's government; in which sense it was especially applied to the Incarnation; (b) the method of reserve discernible in Divine revelation, adapted to meet the necessities of the slow understandings of men by progressive enlightenment.2

3. In later theology the word has had the following uses: (a) the progressive method of Divine revelation; (b) the special work and revelation of each Divine Person (so used in this question); (c) certain successive dispensations or covenants in the history of God's chosen people; e.g., the Mosaic economy; (d) the "disciplina arcani," or guarded instruction of Catechumens in the ancient Church.3

4. A doctrine is called economic to signify that the truth to which it refers has not been fully revealed, because of the limitations of our understandings. The revelation is true economically, i.e., so far as it goes; but it is partial. A doctrine of this sort is also called a mystery, μυστήριον, because it contains inscrutable implications, although intelligible in part, so far as revealed.

5. The greater part of Dogmatics is concerned with the economies of the Divine Persons. The economy of the Father is treated of in Cosmology, Angelology, and Anthropology; that of the Son in Christology; that of the Holy Ghost in Pneumatology and Ecclesiology; the consummation of them all in Eschatology.

---

1 Church Catechism; Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I., ii. 2; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. VI., §§ 201, 202; Martensen, Dogmatics, §§ 54, 57, 58.

2 Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, Pt. II., Vol. ii., p. 75.

3 Newman, Arians, 49-89; Ottley, Incarnation, pp. Vol. II., p. 245.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.XI. Q.69. Divine Mission

DIVINE MISSION is the procession of one person from another, having relation to some temporal effect.1

2. Two things are involved in Mission: (a) He Who is sent proceeds essentially from Him Who sends;2 (b) the Person sent stands in some new relation to the object to which, terminus ad quern, He is sent;—not that the Person changes, but the economic relation.

3. All the Divine Persons can come into the world.3 The Father does not proceed and therefore is not sent.4 The Father and the Son send, for there is a procession from Both. The Son5 and the Holy Ghost are sent, because Both proceed. The Holy Ghost does not send, but is sent by the Father and the Son, since He proceeds from Both.6

4. The external effect of mission does not pertain to the whole Trinity except by way of efficiency. The relation of each Person to that effect is different, and the difference is such that we attribute the action to one Person. For example, it is the Son, not the Father or the Holy Ghost, Who became Incarnate.7

---

1 Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 343-349; Forbes, Creed, pp. 124-125; St. Thos., Summa, I., xliii.; Schouppe, Elementa, pp. 166-173; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, lib. viii. ch. 4-7.

2 John viii. 42.

3 John xiv. 23; xvi. 7.

4 Pearson, Creed, p. 63.

5 St. John vi. 57.

6 Cf. John xiv. 26 w. xv. 26.

7 Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I., ii. 2; Schouppe, §168; Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 342, 343.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Chapter XI. Divine Economies

Question 69. Divine Mission

Question 70. Divine Economies

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.X. Q.68. Divine Monarchy

THE doctrine of the Divine Monarchy, also called Subordination, is that the principle of origin and procession of the Divine Persons is one and resides in the Father. And the manner of Divine subsistence requires us to speak of the Father as first in eternal order, the Son as second, and the Holy Ghost as third.1

2. It is to be observed that (a) this doctrine expresses a truth of the Divine essence. The order is not merely economic, but real and eternal; (b) the order is one of origin and subsistence. The Father is first because the other Two proceed from Him, and He proceeds from none; the Son second because He is begotten; the Holy Ghost third because He proceeds from the other Two; (c) No Person is "afore or after other." The order is eternal, not temporal or chronological. The Three are "co-eternal together"; (d) There is no in¬equality involved. "None is greater or less than another, but the whole Three Persons are . . .co-equal."

3. The formulation of this doctrine by the ante-Nicene fathers was undertaken in defence against the accusation that the Christian doctrine of God was tritheistic. It was subsequently and sophistically developed into the Arian heresy;2 but, when held along with the doctrine of circumcession, it (a) emphasizes the Divine Unity by teaching that there is but one principle of origin in the Trinity; (b) guards the distinction of Persons by teaching the manner of Divine Unity. It needs to be emphasized repeatedly that no doctrine, however sound, can be isolated from related truths without danger of heresy.

---

1 Bull, Defence of Nicene Faith, Bk. IV.; Newman, Tracts Theolog., pp. 161, 167-191; St. Thos., Summa, I., xxxiii.; xlii. 3; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. VI. § 174; Forbes, Creed, pp. 140-143; Liddon, Divinity of Christ, pp. 202 note 1, 431, 432 note n, 447; Pearson, Creed, pp. 64-67, 569, 670; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ii. § 8; Ottley, Incarnation, Vol. II., pp. 259-261.

2 Cf. Q. Ixi. 5, 6.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.X. Q.67. Circumcession

CIRCUMCESSION (circumcessio, circumincessio, commeatio, περιχώρησις, συμπεριχώρησις, περιεγχώρησις) "is that property by which the Divine Persons, by reason of the identity of their natures, communicate with each other. It is the internal existence of one Person in the other, without confusion of person or of personality."1

2. The Divine Persons mutually coinhere in action as well as in essence. Every Divine operation proceeds equally from the Three. The reason why it is possible, none the less, to distinguish, and to speak, for example, of the Father as Creator, of the Son as Redeemer, and of the Holy Ghost as Sanctifier, is that the distinction of Persons involves a diversity of relations between each Person and Their common operations.2

3. The doctrine of Circumcession is useful (a) to guard the truth of the Divine Unity; (b) to teach the moral harmony, or unity of purpose, which must attend Divine activity;—e.g., in the plan of Redemption; (c) to refute the error that the economy of one Person displaces that of another in this world.3

---

1 Forbes, Nicene Creed; Bright, St. Leo on the Incarn., note 83; St. Thos., Summa, I., xlii. 5; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. VI., §§ 163-165; Liddon, Divinity of Christ, p. 34, note g; Ottley, Incarnation, Vol. II., p. 253; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. v. § 7; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 336-340; Weidner, Theologia, p. 55, § 33; p. 58, § 52. Cf. John xiv. 9, 11; I. Cor. ii. 11; I. John iv. 15, 16; v. 20.

2 Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 339-340; Wilberforce, Holy Eucharist, pp. 222-228; Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I., ii. 2.

3 Wilberforce, pp. 227, 228. Divine Unity has been considered in Q. xlvi.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.X. Q.66. Divine Notions

THE Divine Notions, notiones, by which the Persons are described and discriminated, are five; viz., innascibility, paternity, filiation, spiration, and procession.1

2. Innascibility, paternity, and spiration pertain to the Father, Who is unoriginate, begets, and spirates. Filiation and spiration pertain to the Son, Who is begotten and spirates. Procession pertains to the Holy Ghost, Who is spirated.

3. All of these notions except innascibility are called RELATIONS, relationes , because they express the manners according to which the Divine Persons subsist with reference to each other. Paternity and filiation express respectively the active and passive relations existing between the Father and the Son. Spiration and procession express respectively the active and passive relations existing between the Father and the Son on the one hand and the Holy Ghost on the other. A further distinction should be made in spiration and procession, for the Holy Ghost does not proceed from the Son in the same manner in which He proceeds from the Father.2

4. Three of these Relations are called PROPERTIES (proprietates); by which is meant the several characteristics which are peculiar to each, and by which each can be distinguished. They are Paternity, filiation, and procession. In other words we distinguish the Father as the unoriginate source of the Godhead; the Son as begotten; the Holy Ghost as proceeding.3

5. It may aid the memory to notice that there are one Divine Nature, two processions, three properties, four relations, and five notions.

---

1 St. Thos. Summa, I., xxxii. 2-4; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. VI., §161; Forbes, Creed, p. 124; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 312-315.

2 Wilhelm and Scannell, p. 314.

3 Schouppe, §§159, 160; St. Thos., I., xl.; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. v. § 8; Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V., li. 1; Ottley, Incarnation, Vol. II., pp. 253, 254.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:24 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.X. Q.65. Divine Processions

ACCORDING to Holy Scripture the Son proceeds from the Father by generation, and the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son by spiration. The terms procession, generation, and spiration, like the term person, are inadequate and symbolical. Yet they express revealed truths, and sufficiently for practical purposes. These truths are necessary for us to receive, but they cannot be fully defined.1

2. The Divine processions are (a) immanent, since their objective termini are internal to their principle; (b) substantial or subsistent, since they signify a changeless movement in the Divine essence itself—the mode of the Divine subsistence; (c) necessary, for the Father cannot but generate, and the Father and the Son cannot but spirate, since the personal subsistences themselves depend upon the Divine processions. Yet we may not speak of compulsion, for the necessity is internal. It is the nature of God to generate and spirate ;2 (d) eternal, for they have neither beginning nor end. They are ever going on, yet always com¬pleted;3 (e) perfect, since they are without change of substance or diversity. The one essence is in each procession entirely communicated.4

3. Since these processions signify the mode of Divine subsistence and are immanent, eternal, and perfect, we may not speak of the Son as later in time than the Father, or inferior to Him, nor of the Holy Ghost as later than the Father and the Son, or inferior to Them. The whole Three Per¬sons are co-eternal together and co-equal.5

4. The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son, but in different manners and as from one principle. He proceeds from (̕εκ) the Father, through (δία, παρά) the Son; for the Father alone is the unoriginate source of the God-head. The Son spirates the Holy Ghost because He is consubstantial with the Father, receiving His essence from the Father, and communicating it in and with the Father to the Holy Ghost.6 This is the doctrine of the ancients, including such Easterns as SS. Athanasius, Basil, Cyril Alex., and John Damas., and of all portions of the Church to-day; although the Filioque controversy, originally one of law simply, has called forth statements from certain Eastern theologians which need careful construction. In any case, we may not deny that there is an eternal procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son.7

---

1 Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 316-330; St. Thos., Summa, I., xxvii.; Forbes, Creed, pp. 116-124, 256-262; Pearson, Creed, pp. 238-244, 252, 253, 570-577; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. VI. §§ 135-150; Ottley, Incarnation, Vol. II., pp. 261-264; Newman, Arians, App. Note 2, pp. 416-422 (these two last on generation). On the Son's generation, cf. Psa. ii. 7 w. Heb. i. 5; John v. 26; vii. 29; xvi. 15, 28; II. Cor. iv. 4; Heb. i. 3. On the Procession of the Spirit, cf. Matt. x. 20; John xiv. 26; xv. 26; xvi. 13; Rom. viii. 9; Gal. iv. 6; Phil. i. 19; I. Pet. i. 11.

2 St. Thos., I., xli. 2, 5.

3 Forbes, pp. 120-122; Liddon, Divinity of Christ, p. 431.

4 Schouppe, §§ 139-144.

5 Athanasian Creed; St. Thos., I., xlii. 1, 2.

6 Forbes, pp. 256-262; St. Thos. I., xxxvi. 2-4: Schouppe, §§ 186-190; Pearson, pp. 570-577.

7 Pusey, on "And the Son"; Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 296-307; Richey, Nicene Creed and the Filioque; Wilberforce, Holy Eucharist, pp. 225, 226 and note; Swete, Hist. of the Doc. of the Procession; Lacey, Elem. of Doctrine, pp. 83-84; Stone, Outlines, pp. 29, 30, 276; Howard, Schism bet. Oriental and Western Churches; Hutchings, Holy Ghost, pp. 32-38, 277-279.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.X. Q.64. Three Divine Persons

THE rational considerations which pantheists formulate in their effort to discredit the notion of Divine personality really make, as we have seen,1 for belief in the existence of more than one Person in the Godhead. But the truth that there are three Divine Persons is made known to us through supernatural revelation only, which teaches us to believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost as co-equal and co-eternal sharers in the one Divine essence.

2. Finite personality is conditioned by contraposition of ego and non-ego. This seems to suggest the likelihood of such a contra-position in God. Thus (a) self-consciousness is attended by the distinction between ego and non-ego; (b) love implies an object of love; (c) all action implies the distinction between state and relation. Such conditions are not satisfied by creaturehood, for the Eternal requires an eternal contra-position, and God is not dependent upon the creature for self-determination. Moreover, God is simplex; so that, if He is personal, there can be nothing impersonal in Him. Subject and object must alike be personal, if there be such distinctions in Him.2

3. We must not be led by such rational suggestions to think that reason can discover the number of Persons in God or demonstrate that number when once revealed. Certain well meant attempts, based on finite analogies, have been made to construct a rationale of the Trinity. No doubt they have a basis of truth; but they are more suggestive than final, and when unduly pressed tend to unwarrantably anthropomorphic conceptions of God. Thus it is urged that there must be a principle of origin in the Godhead, in which all that is Divine inheres, and this principle is the Father, who is called the unoriginate source of the Godhead. But the Father contemplates, and requires an infinite object of contemplation reflective of Himself. His thought conceives that object, His Personal Word, in Whom He beholds His own Image. But there can be no schism or dualism in the Godhead. Love unites the Father and the Son, and the bond of love is a Person, the Holy Ghost, Who receives the essence of Both by proceeding from Both.3

4. We cannot imagine a being who is numerically one in essence and at the same time three in person. Yet there is no logical contradiction between the phrases "One Divine Essence," and "Three Divine Persons," for essence and person are not synonymous terms.4 Furthermore, a distinction of Persons in God does not, as in the case of man, involve separation, or plurality of individuals.5 God is one individual and solus. He is also a personal individual; not because He is one Person, which He is not, but, because the manner of His subsistence is personal.6

5. The personal distinctions in the Godhead are real and eternal; but they are internal, and consist with numerical unity of essence. The two truths, indivisible unity of essence and tri-personal subsistence, are to be held together; and the manner of holding each should be such as to allow for the other.7 If we contemplate the unity too exclusively, we may fall into the Sabellian heresy, which regarded the Divine Persons as mere dramatis personae. If, again, we dwell solely on the tri-personality, we may become tritheistic. Ten¬dencies in both directions appear frequently.8

---

1 Cf. Q. Ixiii. 3.

2 St. Thos., Summa, I., xxx.; Schouppe, Elementa , Tr. VI., §§ 82-88; Martensen, Dogmatics, § 55.

3 Forbes, Creed, pp. 122-124; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ii. §6; Martensen, §56; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. v., §9; Lacey, Elem. of Doctrine, pp. 81-83; Dale, Christian Doctrine, pp. 152-153; Stone, Outlines, pp. 22-24.

4 Richey, Truth and Counter Truth, p. 13.

5 Strong, Syst. Theol., p. 160.

6 Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V. li. 1; Liddon, Divinity of Christ, pp. 438, 439; St. Thos., I., xxx. 4; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., p. 311.

7 Richey, Introd. and pp. 14, 15; St. Thos., I., xxxix., esp. 1.

8 Liddon, p. 33; Strong, p. 160. Cf. Q. Ixii. 4, 5.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.X. Q.63. Personal Subsistence of God

INASMUCH as God possesses a rational nature, and is both self-conscious and self-determining, He is rightly described as a personal Being. It does not follow, however, that we must attribute to Him the limitations of our human and really imperfect personality, or the precise methods of personal activity which we discern in ourselves. God is infinite. His personality is perfect and transcends ours.1

2. We infer that God is personal because (a) He is the ultimate Cause of all other things, and the idea of a true cause involves its possession of intelligence and will2; (b) the teleological nature of the universe shows that its Author must be capable of intelligent purpose;3 (c) in particular, an impersonal being could not be the Author of a universe containing persons, such as we are con¬scious of being; (d) our instinctive sense of responsibility to a Supreme Being, and our religious aspirations, are otherwise meaningless; (e) an impersonal God would be inferior to every personal being. The personality and supremacy of God stand or fall together; (f) the theory of an impersonal God involves all the moral difficulties of pantheism.4

3. The Pantheist objects, however, that an infinite being cannot be personal, for such a being cannot be self-conscious except by distinguishing ego from non-ego—i.e., self-consciousness is conditioned by an objective sphere of exercise. In reply, it is to be said that (a) we cannot argue precisely from what is necessary for finite self-consciousness, to what is necessary for infinite self-consciousness; (b) if Divine self-consciousness is thus conditioned, the condition is satisfied within the Godhead, by virtue of the personal distinctions existing eternally within the Divine essence.5

---

1 Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 56, 57, 121, 122, 160; Mulford, Repub of God, pp. 23-26; Liddon, Some Elements, p. 35; Illingworth, Personality, Lec III. and App. xii.; Lacey, Elem. of Doctrine, pp. 78-80.

2 Cf. Q. xxvi. 2.

3 Cf. Q. xxvii.

4 Cf. Q. xxxvi. 3. See Christlieb, Modern Doubt, pp. 161-190.

5 Mulford; Strong, pp. 56, 57; Weidner, Theologia, pp. 24-25; Iverach, Theism, pp. 208-209; Fisher, Grounds of Belief, p. 61; Bruce, Apologetics, pp. 80-84.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.X. Q. 62. Technical Terms

WE have seen that although various metaphysical terms are employed in Trinitarian Theology, their theological meaning is determined by their theological use and historical connection in Catholic thought, rather than by their use in human philosophies. Forgetfulness of this causes the doctrine of the Trinity to appear purely abstract. It loses its practical value and credibility, and much error follows. The chief terms which re¬quire notice here are defined below.1

2. Essence (essentia, ουσία) is that which constitutes a thing what it is. It is expressed by the definition of a thing.2 Nature (natura, φύσις) is (a) that which has its origin from another; (b) the same as essence, but with an interior principle of action, i.e., the first principle and subject of all activity in a being.3 Substance (substantia) is (a) the same as essence; (b) that which underlies accidents; (c) that which exists per se, and needs no subject in which to inhere.4 In the doctrine of the Trinity these terms are used to protect the truth that God is one.

3. The next three terms are involved in an adequate understanding of the term Person. Existence (existentia) is essence in actuality, as distinguished from potentiality.5 Subsistence (subsistentia) is that by which a single substance or substantial nature is constituted with its proper and independent mode of existence.6 Suppositum is concrete subsistence, or a substantial nature constituted with a natural mode of existence of its own. Any man, e.g., Peter, is a suppositum; but the human soul by itself is not. Nor is the humanity of Christ, since its subsistence is not natural to itself. It pertains to the suppositum of the Word Incarnate.7

4. Person (persona, υπόστασις) is a rational suppositum, being related to suppositum as species to genus; or, as defined by Boethius, Persona est animae rationalis individua substantia; or, in more modern terminology, Person is the indivisible subject or self, αυτός, of a rational nature, self-conscious and self-determining.8 It is clearly to be distinguished in theological use from the nature and properties of which it is the subject, often included by moderns in what they term personality. Failure to make this distinction has confused much modern Theology.9

5. The term Person in Theology is applied to One who transcends human limitations and conceptions. It is, therefore, used symbolically in part of what escapes adequate expression. Neither human analogies nor etymological considerations may be pressed. Thus (a) the Divine Persons are not separate individuals, but possess one nature and substance in common—their distinction lying in the several manners in which they share in this substance; (b) yet we may not say that these Persons are mere aspects, manifestations, or representations of one proper person—dramatis personae; (c) One of the Divine Persons has come to possess two distinct and complete natures, which have in Him but one personal subject.10

6. Certain other terms need definition in considering the Divine Persons. Procession(processio) is the origin of one from another.11 Notion (notio) is that by which we can distinguish one person from another.12 Relation (relatio) is the order or status of one towards another.13 Property (proprietas) is the peculiar characteristic of a person.14

---

1 Forbes, Creed, pp. 20, 21; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. VI., §§ 6-47; St. Thos., Summa, in passim.

2 Ottley, Incarnation, Vol. II., pp. 255, 256; Rickaby, Metaphysics, Pt. I., ch. iii.

3 Ottley, p. 258; Schouppe, §§ 10-12.

4 Rickaby, Pt. II., ch. i.; Schouppe, §§20-24.

5 Rickaby, pp. 84, 85.

6 St. Thos., I., xxiv. 2; Schouppe, § 25.

7 Schouppe, §§26, 29, 30; St. Thos., III. ii. 2.

8 St. Thos., I. xxix.; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. v. § 5; Hall, Kenotic Theory, pp. 49-51; Davis, Elem. of Ethics, pp. 19, 20; Moberly, Reason and Religion, p. 141; Illingworth, Personality, Lec. III. and App. xii.; Ottley, pp. 256-259; Rickaby, Pt. II., ch. ii.; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 308-312; Eck, Incarnation, pp. 166-168.

9 Lacey, Elem. of Doctrine, p. 80.

10 Hall, pp. 49-51; Liddon, Divinity of Christ, pp. 33, 34 and note on p. 33. For History of the term person, see: Newman, Arians, ch. v. §i. 3, pp. 365 et seq.; Forbes, Creed, pp. 83-87;Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ii. §§ 3, 4; Illingworth, Personality, Lecs. i., iii.; Powell, Prin. of the Incarnation, pp. 145-169.

11 Schouppe, §§ 40-42.

12 Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 314, 315.

13 Schouppe, §§ 43-46.

14 Wilhelm and Scannell, p. 314.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 05, 2005

Ch.X. Q.61. History of the Doctrine

THE doctrine of the Trinity is involved in the Baptismal formula, and has been held in its integrity by the Church from pentecostal days. Its ecclesiastical form summarizes the contents of a protracted and progressive self-revelation of God, and is the result of much subsequent conflict in the Church with error. In patriarchal ages polytheism prevailed widely, and had to be guarded against strictly. Therefore the truth of the Divine unity was revealed and emphasized for ages before the tri-personal mode of this unity could safely be made known.1 Yet the earlier revelations contained implicit anticipations of the more explicit revelation which was to come.

2. Thus it happens that those who have received the Faith once for all delivered can discern hints and shadows of the Trinity, without being able to find explicit proofs of it, in the Old Testament. The Divine Name, Elohim, occurs many times in the plural number:2—and with plural adjectives,3 plural pronouns,4 and plural verbs.5 Other Names of God also appear in the plural.6 God is spoken of, and speaks of Himself as more than one Person.7 Finally in certain passages three Divine Persons seem to be implied.8

3. Several New Testament passages mention the three Divine Persons as Divine.9 A comparison of texts taken from all parts of Scripture shows that (a) Each of these Persons is Creator, although it is also stated that there is but one Creator;10 (b) Each is called Jehovah,11 the Lord,12 the God of Israel,13 the Law-giver,14 Omnipresent,15 and the Source of life;16 while it is denied that there is more than one Being who may thus be described;17 (c) Each made mankind,18 quickens the dead,19 raised Christ,20 commissions the ministry,21 sanctifies the elect,22 and performs all spiritual operations,23 although obviously but one God is capable of these things.

4. Ancient Christian writers were accustomed to emphasize Divine unity as against prevailing polytheism. Their own belief in the Godhead of three Persons caused them to be charged with inconsistency. To meet this difficulty attempts were made to unite the doctrines thought to be opposed to each other in one consistent theory and formula.24 The first attempts were crude and unsatisfactory. At the close of the second century Theodotus and Artemon rejected the super-human personality of Christ, psilanthropism; and the effort to exclude this heresy led Praxeas to merge Christ's person in that of the Father and to assert that the Father Himself suffered on the Cross, Patripassianism. In the next generation Sabellius developed this heresy into the theory that the Divine Persons are mere economic manifestations or modes, dramatis personae, so that there is but one Divine Person strictly speaking, Sabellianism.

5. Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, and others endeavoured to correct these heresies. The doctrines of circumcession and subordination, or the Divine Monarchy, were formulated as protectives respectively of the essential unity and tri-personality of God. Origen, in particular, set forth the eternal nature of the Son's generation in such wise as to guard at once His co-eternity with and subordination to the Father. As against Sabellius a tendency appeared to substitute the term ύπόστασιςfor προσωπον, person, in order to vindicate the real and substantial nature of personal distinctions in the Godhead.

6. Origen employed crude language at times in formulating the doctrine of subordination, and in the fourth century Arius gave his language a heretical twist, urging that as Son the Word must be later in time than the Father and a creature, although very exalted and the agent by whom all else was made. The Council of Nicea, 325 A. D., shut this error out by affirming the Son to be co-essential, ομοούσιος, with the Father; and, after over half a century of conflict this term prevailed. The Macedonian denial of the Godhead of the Holy Spirit was also repudiated by the Council of Constantinople, 381 A. D.

7. The Nicene Creed asserted the procession of the Spirit from the Father only, although His procession through and therefore from the Son was not denied. The Council of Toledo in Spain, 589 A. D., sanctioned the addition of Filioque to the Creed. This was rejected in the East, on canonical grounds at first, but prevailed in the West.

8. The Athanasian Symbol, which appeared early in the fifth century in Gaul, crystalized the ecclesiastical dogma of the Trinity; and, with a slight verbal difference as to the procession of the Spirit, gained ecumenical acceptance.

---

1 Jones of Nayland, Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity, has been followed in our arrangement of scriptural evidence. Cf. also Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 265-286; Weidner, Theologia, pp. 42-51.

2 E.g., in Gen. i.

3 Deut. iv. 7; Josh. xxiv. 19.

4 Gen. i. 26; xi. 6, 7; Isa. vi. 8 and espec. Gen. iii. 22.

5 Gen. xx. 13; xxxv. 7.

6 Psa. Ixxviii. 25; Prov. ix. 10; Eccles. v. 8; xii. 1; Isa. liv. 5; Dan. iv. 17, 26; v. 18, 20; Mal. i. 6.

7 Gen. xix. 24; Psa. cx. 1; Prov. xxx. 4; Isa. x. 12; xiii. 13; xxii. 19; Ixiv. 4; Dan. ix. 17; Hos. i. 7; Zech. ii. 10, 11; x. 12.

8 Num. vi. 24-26; Psa. xxxiii. 6; Isa .vi. 3; xlviii. 16.

9 Matt. iii. 16, 17; xxviii. 19; John xiv. 16, 17, 26; xv. 26; II. Cor. xiii. 14; Gal. iv. 6; Ephes. ii. 18; II. Thess. iii. 5. Cf. the disputed text, I. John v. 7.

10 Cf. Psa. xxxiii. 6; w. Isa. xliv. 24.

11 Deut. vi. 4; Jer. xxiii. 6; Ezek. viii. 1, 3.

12 Rom. x. 12; Luke ii. 11; II. Cor. iii. 18.

13 Matt. xv. 31; Luke i. 16, 17; II. Sam. xxiii. 2, 3.

14 Rom. vii. 25; Gal. vi. 2; Rom. viii. 2; Jas. iv. 12.

15 Jer. xxiii. 24; Ephes. i. 22; Psa. cxxxix. 7, 8.

16 Deut. xxx. 20; Col. iii. 4; Rom. viii. 10.

17 Cf. Q. xlvi.

18 Psa. c. 3; John i. 3; Job xxxiii. 4.

19 John v. 21; ibid; vi. 33.

20 I. Cor. vi. 14; John ii. 19; I. Pet. iii. 18.

21 II. Cor. iii. 5, 6; I. Tim. i. 12; Acts v. 28.

22 Jude 1; Heb. ii. 11; Rom. xv. 16.

23 I. Cor. xii. 16; Col. iii. 11; I. Cor. xii. 11.

24 For the history of the ecclesiastical dogma see: Browne, XXXIX. Arts., pp. 21-34; Newman, Arians; Bull, Defence of the Nicene Faith; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. II., Pref. et. lib. i.; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Pt. II., ch. iii.; Weidner, Theologia, pp. 51-54; Neander, Hist, of Dogma, Vol. I., pp. 130-176, 285-339; Hagenbach, Hist. of Doctrines, Vol. I., pp. 133-183, 344-383.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 11:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

CH.X. Q.60. The Dogma

THE dogma of the Trinity, as stated in our articles, is, that, There is but one living and true God. .... And in the unity of this Godhead there be Three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost .1

2. The Athanasian Creed says, that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost; but the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father . . . the Son . . . the Holy Ghost uncreate . . . incomprehensible . . . eternal ... almighty . . . God . . . Lord, and yet not three Lords but one Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic religion to say there be three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after other, none is great¬er or less than another; but the whole Three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

3. Four truths are involved in the doctrine of the Trinity: (a) The Unity of essence;2 (b) the threefold personal subsistence;3 (c) the Circumcession;4 (d) the Divine Monarchy.5

4. The doctrine of the Trinity has a real bearing on human conduct and destiny. It is defined metaphysically to guard it from metaphysical perversions. But the terms employed do not carry with them the philosophical systems from which they are derived. They simply protect the scriptural doctrine of the Divine Persons. This doctrine is practically necessary because of the relations and duties which we have to each of these Persons—relations which cannot be understood, and duties which cannot rightly be fulfilled, without such knowledge as the doctrine in question affords.6 It is true that metaphysical terms can be understood only by theologians; but, in view of the inevitable influence of theological error upon the mind of the multitude, terms which are necessary for an accurate theology are also necessary for the protection of the faithful at large. Popular preaching becomes erroneous when not grounded in sound theology. It should be added that Theism is relieved of difficulties connected with infinite personality by the doctrine of the Trinity.

---

1 Forbes, XXXIX. Articles, i.; Creed, pp. 70-87; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Part II.; Browne, XXXIX. Articles, i.; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. VI.; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. II. et seq.; Liddon, Divinity of Christ, Lec. I., § i.; St. Thos., Summa, I., xxvii.-xliii.; Newman, Arians; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ii.; Waterland, Works, Vol. i.-iii.; Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I., ii. 2; V., li. 1; Richey, Truth and Counter-Truth, ch. i.; St. Augustine, De Trinitate; Mortimer, Cath. Faith and Practice, Vol. I., pp. 12-18;Stone, Outlines, ch. iii.

2 Cf. Q. xlvi.

3 Cf. Qq. Ixiv.-lxvi.

4 Cf. Q. Ixvii.

5 Cf. Q. Ixviii. See Newman, Tracts Theol. and Eccles., pp. 160-161.

6 Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 351-354. Cf. John xvii. 3.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 11:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Chapter X. The Trinity

Question. 60. The Dogma

Question 61. History of the Doctrine

Question 62. Technical Terms

Question 63. Personal Subsistence of God

Question 64. Three Divine Persons

Question 65. Divine Processions

Question 66. Divine Notions

Question 67. Circumcession

Question 68. Divine Monarchy

Posted by Debra Bullock at 11:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 04, 2005

Ch.IX. Q.59. Divine Blessedness

THE Blessedness of God is the richness and joy of His life, arising from the internal relations of the Divine Persons, and also from the relations subsisting between God and His saints.1

2. The Blessedness of God is the reflection of Divine love, both within the Trinity and in the Kingdom of God. The latter is conditioned. It arises from the creative activity of God, and His condescension revealed in the Incarnation and the descent of the Holy Ghost.

3. The pity, grief, and anger of God, as they are metaphorically described in Scripture, caused by human sin and its consequences, do not interrupt the Divine blessedness. Our inability to see how this can be is but a branch of our inability to reconcile the existence of evil with Divine sovereignty. But we know that where sin abounds grace abounds still more, rendering the Divine dispensation of mercy fruitful in glory. We also know that the triumphant future is as immediately present to the eternal contemplation of God as is the present evil.2

4. The response of man to the grace of God finds articulate expression in the worship of the faithful—their Eucharistic Oblations here, and the heavenly worship hereafter, which those Oblations anticipate. In this worship on earth men find the beginnings of their participation in Divine blessedness.3

---

1 St. Thos., Summa, I., xxvi.; Martensen, Dogmatics, §51; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 254-256. Cf. Psa. cxlvii. 11; cxlix. 4; Prov. xv. 8; Isa. Ixii. 5; John xvii. 5.

2 Luke xv. 7, 10, 22-24; Rom. v. 20, 21.

3 Rev. vii. 9-17.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.IX. Q.58. Divine Justice

THE Justice of God is "His constant and efficacious will of dispensing rewards and punishments to creatures according to the merits of each."1

2. The Justice of God is the counterpart of His righteousness, and is sometimes identified with it;2 Justice being the foundation of Divine Law, righteousness the basis of Divine judgment passed upon failure to fulfil the law.3

3. The merits of the creature do not, in the first instance, arise from his own efforts, but from the meritorious passion of Christ. But the blood of Christ is the seal of an everlasting covenant, by virtue of which the members of Christ are enabled to do the will of God and deserve His favour.4 "God rewards Christ's work for us and in us"—not, in the first instance, on account of man's works, but, none the less, according to them.5

4. The judgments of God are without respect of persons, being the impartial expression of His righteousness in the presence of moral evil. They are not vindictive but vindicative. It is consistent with this impartiality, and involved in it, that personal conditions—knowledge and opportunities—should be allowed for in Divine judgments.6

---

1 St. Thos., Summa, I., xxi. 1, 2, 4; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§208, 210; Weidner, Theologia, pp. 39-40; Clarke, Outline of Theol., pp. 92-93; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 241-246. Cf. Gen. xviii. 25; Psa. vii. 9-11; xviii. 24; Ixxxix. 14; cxix. 37; Jer. xxiii. 5; Rom. ii. 2-11; I. Pet. i. 17; Jas. ii. 12 et seq.; Rev. xix. 11; xx. 13.

2 Rom. iii. 26.

3 Strong, Syst. Theol., p. 138. Cf. Heb. x. 30, 31.

4 Rom. iv. 25; Heb. xiii. 20, 21.

5 Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 244, 245. Cf. Luke xvii. 7-10, w. Acts x. 34, 35; II. John 8 and Tit. iii. 4-7, w. Rom. ii. 6.

6 Strong, p. 139e. Cf. Acts x. 34, 35; Rom. ii. 11.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.IX. Q.57. Divine Holiness

THE Holiness of God is His self affirming purity; the attribute which guards the distinction between God and the creature. It is the ground of reverence and adoration.1 It is not to be confused with the aggregate of Divine perfections. The idea of separation is involved; and, in creatures, of consecration. For us to be holy is to be set apart to God.

2. The Holiness of God involves (a) freedom and separation from moral evil; (b) positive moral perfection. God is the source of holiness to His creatures, and can only be seen or approached by the holy.2

3. The RIGHTEOUSNESS of God is His relative Holiness, by virtue of which His treatment of the creature conforms to the purity of His nature. It is legislative Holiness, or the revelation of Divine Holiness in the form of moral requirement.3

4. The TRUTH of God involves that all His manifestations, whether natural or supernatural, should be consistent with Himself and each other. Earlier and more rudimentary indications are not contradicted, but are illuminated, by later and fuller knowledge.4

5. The FAITHFULNESS of God secures the fulfilment of His promises, which are based, not upon what we are or have done, but upon what Christ is and has done. Our sins do not invalidate them so long as we fulfil the conditions of repentance and good works.5

---

1 Martensen, Dogmatics, § 51; Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 128-130; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V. §§174-176; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. i. § 13; Weidner, Theologia, pp. 38-39; Clarke, Outline of Theol., pp. 89-94; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 253-254. Exod. iii. 5; xv. 11; xix. 10-16; Isa. vi. 3, 5-7: Psa. xcix. 9; II. Cor. vii. 1; I. Thes. iii. 13; iv. 7; Heb. xii. 29.

2 Schouppe; Pearson, De Deo, VII., p. 73; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I., lib. vi., ch. 6.

3 Strong, pp. 138-140. Cf. Matt. v. 48; I. Pet. i. 16.

4 Strong, p. 137; Schouppe, §§202-205; Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 247, 248. Cf. Isa. xl. 8; Matt. v. 18; John iii. 33; xiv. 6, 17; Rom. i. 25; iii. 4; I. John v. 6.

5 Strong, p. 137; Wilhelm and Scannell, p. 248. Cf. Num. xxiii. 19; I. Cor. i. 9; II. Cor. i. 20; I. Thes. v. 24; Tit. i. 2; Heb. vi. 18; I. Pet. iv. 19.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.IX. Q.56. Divine Love and Mercy

The love of God is the attribute by reason of which God wills a personal fellowship with Himself of those who are holy or capable of being made so.1

2. Love pre-supposes a personal subject loving, and discharges itself towards a personal object.2 Mutual congeniality is involved also. These conditions are satisfied within the Divine essence. The Father loves His Son, and is loved by the Son, and the Holy Ghost is the bond of Divine love. Love is in fact the moral expression of the Divine unity, and is the focus of all Divine attributes. God is Love;3 and Divine love did not begin with the appearance of creatures.

3. The goodness of God moved Him to create other beings on whom He might pour forth His love. He made man in His own image and after His own likeness, thus producing mutual congeniality between man and Himself. Because of this congeniality, and because the nature which He has imparted to them is good,4 God loves all men. But, so far as they depart from His holiness and corrupt themselves, He does not love them.5 Mutual congeniality is to that extent destroyed. Yet God loves sinners in so far as they are His creatures, made for Himself, and capable of being restored to the Divine likeness.6

4. The MERCY of God is that characteristic of His love which moves Him to plan the salvation of sinners, that they may become worthy of union with Himself. If they take advantage of His salvation, mutual congeniality is restored, and He unites them to Himself in everlasting love. To save them, He goes so far as to give His Beloved Son to die for them.7

5. The dispensation of God's mercy is embodied in a kingdom of GRACE, wherein every help and sanctifying instrument which the wisdom of God has devised, is gathered and administered.8 But the grace of God is not confined to the Church. It is imparted to all men in various measures, under different conditions, and with various possibilities.

---

1 St. Thos., Summa, I., xx.; Martensen, Dogmatics, §51; Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 127, 137; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. i., § 14; Clarke, Outline of Theol., pp. 94-102; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 233-237.

2 Martensen.

3 John xvii. 26; Ephes. ii. 4, 7; I. John iv. 16.

4 Gen. i. 26, 31.

5 Mal. i. 3; Rom. ix. 13.

6 St. Thos., I., xx. 2 ad quart.; Clarke, pp. 98-102.

7 St. Thos., I., xxi. 3, 4; Strong, p. 137; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§207, 209; Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 246-247. Cf. Exod. xxiv. 6, 7; Num. xiv. 18; II. Chr. xxx. 9; Neh. ix. 17, 31; Lam. iii. 22, 23; Dan. ix. 9; Joel, ii. 13; Luke i, 50; Ephes. ii. 4, 7; Jas. v. 11; II. Pet. iii. 9, 15.

8 Divine grace treated of in Vol. III.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 07:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.IX. Q.55. Divine Goodness

THE goodness of God is the attribute by reason of which He imparts life and other blessings to His creatures.1

2. The term good signifies in general what is desirable, whether because of utility, pleasure, or morality. A good person may mean either one who possesses desirable qualities, morally speaking, or one who is wont to give desirable things to others. It is in the latter sense that we speak of Divine goodness—His bountifulness. But God is good also in the former sense; and it is by reason of His perfection that, comprehending in Himself everything desirable, He is the source of all good things to others.2

3. Divine goodness is eternal and necessary. It does not depend upon the existence of creatures for its exercise. Apart from time the goodness of the Father moved Him to beget His Beloved Son, to whom He eternally communicates His own self-existent essence. By virtue of the same attribute, the Father and the Son eternally communicate their common essence to the Holy Ghost; and all the Blessed Three eternally communicate of their richness to each other.

4. Ad extra, the goodness of God moves Him to create and communicate being and life to finite things, external to His own essence, in order that He may impart to them such good gifts as they can receive. This communication is voluntary, and is determined as to its results by finite conditions imposed by the Creator Himself. The creatures are made indigentia Dei, and satisfaction of the need is made possible.3

5. The goodness of God ad extra includes His BENEVOLENCE, by which is meant "the constant will of God to communicate felicity to His creatures, according to their conditions and His own wisdom."4

6. Because of His benevolence, God has determined, by His will of good pleasure, to alleviate the miseries of this life which have been caused by the sins of the creature, and to employ such means for the Salvation of mankind as are consistent with His own holiness and creaturely responsibility.5

---

1 Martensen, Dogmatics, § 50-51; Strong, Syst. Theol., p. 138b; Hodge, Syst. Theol., Vol. I., pp. 427-436; Pearson, De Deo, VII., pp. 73, 74; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§ 173, 177, 179-194; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I. pp. 205-206. Cf. Psa. Ixv. 4; cxlv. 7-16; Neh. ix. 35; Jerem. xxxi. 12, 14; Zech. ix. 17; Matt. v. 45; Jas. i. 5, 17.

2 St. Thos., Summa, I., vi. 1.

3 Pearson, p. 74; Martensen, § 50.

4 Schouppe, § 173. Neh. i. 7; Psa. cxlv. 9.

5 Schouppe, § 177-194.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 07:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.IX. Q.54. Moral Perfection of God

THE Moral Perfection of God signifies (a) the absolute integrity of each and every moral attribute in all Divine action; (b) the infinite degree of each attribute.

2. No Divine attribute may be emphasized at the expense of another. For example, God is infinitely merciful and infinitely just in all His actions. His mercy may be most apparent, in His forgiveness of sinners, and His justice in the reprobation of the obstinate; but we may not suppose that justice is waived or curtailed in the one case, or mercy shortened in the other.1

3. The Divine character is as inscrutable as His essence. It is therefore impossible for us to discover or explain the harmony which lies behind the various, and apparently opposing, manifestations of His moral attributes.2 Humanly devised theodicies, or theories of evil, are at best imperfect and speculative.

---

1 St. Thos., Summa, I., xxi. 4.

2 Cf. Q. xl.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 07:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Chapter IX. Moral Attributes

Question 54. Moral Perfection of God

Question 55. Divine Goodness

Question 56. Divine Love and Mercy

Question 57. Divine Holiness

Question 58. Divine Justice

Question 59. Divine Blessedness

Posted by Debra Bullock at 06:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 02, 2005

Ch.VIII. Q.53. Divine Wisdom

THE Wisdom of God is His absolute infallibility of judgment, by virtue of which He provides perfectly for all things and cannot err in any question of action, whether that action springs from Himself or the creature, and whether it is past, present, or future.1

2. The wisdom of God combines His omnipotence and omniscience. It is His teleological knowledge, whereby He designs all things, and overrules the course of events to the furtherance of His own ends. This action is called the PROVIDENCE of God.2

3. The providence of God is distinguished as general and particular, the former having to do with the teleological government of the universe as a whole, the latter with provisions for its minutest details—e.g., the exigencies arising from the free actions of men. This distinction is relative, and from the finite point of view. There is but one Divine providence in all things, strictly speaking. Yet the distinction is useful and relatively true.3

4. The relations between Divine sovereignty and creaturely freedom, as has been said,4 are inscrutable; but we know that God and man cooperate in every human action, whether good or evil, in such wise that the integrity of each is preserved and the holiness of God uncontaminated. God supplies the power in evil conduct, but is not so much its Author as its overruling Cause.5

5. The prayers of men are real moral forces, fore-seen and for-seen by God from the beginning, and used as His instruments in accomplishing His designs. If the contents of a prayer are inconsistent with His will, it is none the less a genuine moral force, but will be overruled to subserve Divine ends.6

6. The wisdom of God is displayed, not only in His ordinary providence, but, pre-eminently, in the Redemption of men from sin, and in the judgment of those who neglect His grace—a judgment at once just and merciful, satisfying and final.

---

1 Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§167-170; Martensen, Dogmatics, § 50; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual Vol. I., pp. 225-227; Weidner, Theologia, p. 37. Cf. Psa. civ. 24; Prov. viii. 11-31; I. Cor. i. 18-30; Ephes. iii. 10; Jas. i. 5.

2 St. Thos., Summa, I. xxii.; Schouppe, §§ 195-201; Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 207-220; Forbes, Creed, pp. 61-63; Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I. iii. 4; Pearson, De Deo, XXII., pp. 232-242; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I., lib. viii., oh. 1-5; Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 372-375; Clarke, Outline of Theol., pp. 147-153. Cf. Gen. xx. 6; 1. 20; Exod. xii. 36; II. Sam. xvi. 10; xxiv. 1; Job xxx.-xxxvii.; Psa. xxxiii. 12-22; civ.; cxxxv. 5-7; Prov. xvi. 1; xix. 21; Jerem. x. 23; Matt. vi. 25-32; x. 30; Rom. xi. 32-36; Ephes. ii. 10; Philip, ii. 13.

3 Liddon, Some Elements, pp. 192-194.

4 Cf. Q. Ii. 5.

5 Strong, pp. 209, 210, 219, 220.

6 Strong, pp. 215-218; Liddon, pp. 184-190; Ward, W. G., Ward and the Cath. Revival, pp. 285-295; Gore, in Oxford House Papers, 2nd Series, 6th Paper. Cf. Psa. x. 17; Ixv. 2; xcix. 6; Isa. Iviii. 9; John xi. 42; xv. 7; Jas. iv. 3; v. 16.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 11:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VIII. Q.52. Divine Omniscience and Omnipresence

THE Omniscience of God is His infinite knowledge of all things which can be objects of knowledge. It is a knowledge the limitations of which, in range and method, arise only from the intrinsic nature of knowledge in its perfection.1

2. Divine knowledge is (a) intuitive, without mental process; (b) immediate, independent of external media; (c) eternal, without temporal limitation; (d) actual, not a mere power of knowing, nor ever suppressed; (e) universal, including all knowable things in its range, real or possible, internal or external to Himself, general or particular; (f) perfect, without possibility of development or forgetfulness.

3. God knows all things, past, present, and future, as such, for He has created and entered into real relations with the temporal. But His knowledge of them all is simultaneous. He is said to fore-know,2 but there is no temporal interval between His act of knowing and the event known. The interval exists only in our temporal point of view, from which we see that His knowledge touching any effect in time did not originate at that time, or at any time.3

4. God also knows things everywhere, and their spatial relations, but there is no spatial separation between Himself and what He knows. The OMNIPRESENCE of God is deduced from (a) this omniscience;4 (b) His immensity;5 (c) His operations.6

5. The Divine omnipresence is (a) free, for the created things which it presupposes came into existence by the will of God; (b) actual and not potential merely; (c) penetrative, but not diffusive or expansive; (d) indivisible and entire in every thing.
"Though God extends beyond creation's rim,
Each smallest atom holds the whole of Him."

6. If God were omnipresent simply, communion with Him would be impossible. But He has revealed to us special and limited modes of presence, according to which He wills to be present to His creatures. He is present (a) in glory, to the adoring hosts of heaven;7 (b) with efficiency, in the natural order;8 (c) providentially, in the affairs of men;9 (d) attentively, to those who seek him;10 (e) judicially, to the consciences of the wicked;11 (f) bodily, in the Incarnate Son;12 (g) mystically, in the Church of Christ;13 (h) officially, with His Ministers;14 (i) sacramentally and adorably, in the Holy Eucharist.15

---

1 Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 214-224; Forbes, Creed, pp. 52-56; Strong, Syst. Theol., p. 133; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. iv., § 11; Pearson, De Deo, XV.-XIX., pp. 149-205; St. Thos. Summa, I. xiv.; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I., lib. iv.; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§ 136-154; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. I., § 11; Clarke, Outline of Theol., pp. 80-85; Powell, Prin. of the Incarn., pp. 126-132; Weidner, Theologia, pp. 35-37. Cf. I. Sam. ii. 3; I. Kings viii. 39; I. Chr. xxviii. 9; Job xxvi. 6; xxviii. 10, 24; Psa. xxxiii. 13, 14; xciv. 1-11; cxxxix. 1-24; cxlvii. 4, 5; Isa. xlvi. 9, 10; Jerem. xxiii. 24; Ezek. xi. 5; Matt. vi. 8; x. 29, 30; Acts ii. 23; xv. 8, 18; Rom. xi. 33; Heb. iv. 12, 13; I John iii. 20.

2 Isa. xlii. 9; xlvi. 10; Jerem. i. 5; Acts xv. 18; Rom. viii. 29.

3 Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 219-224.

4 Psa. cxiii. 5, 6.

5 Jerem. xxiii. 23, 24; I. Kings viii. 27.

6 Psa. cxxxix. 7-13. Forbes, p. 51; Owen, ch. IV. §9; Pearson, VIII., pp. 76-86; St. Thos., I. viii.; Petavius, T. I., lib. iii. ch. 7-10; Strong, p. 132; Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 211-213; Clarke, pp. 79, 80; 81, 82; Weidner, pp. 34-35; St. Anselm, Monologium, ch. xx.-xxiv. Cf. Isa. Ixvi. 1; Acts xvii. 24, 27, 28; Ephes. i. 23.

7 Isa. vi. 1-3; Rev. vii. 9-12.

8 Nah. i. 3-5.

9 Psa. Ixviii. 7-8.

10 Matt, xviii. 19, 20; Acts xvii. 27.

11 Gen. iii. 8; Psa. Ixviii. 1, 2.

12 Col. ii. 9.

13 Ephes. ii. 12-22.

14 Matt, xxviii. 19, 20.

15 John vi. 56; Luke xxii. 19, 20. Martensen, Dogmatics § 48.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 11:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VIII. Q.51. The Divine Will

THE will of God is distinguished as (a) the will of good pleasure; (b) the will of the signs.1 We are here chiefly concerned with the will of good pleasure, or the will of God, properly speaking. The will of the signs is a metaphorical phrase, meaning the revelations of God's will to us— not that will itself.

2. The will of God (of good pleasure) is eternal in itself. There can be no temporal interval between His will and its fulfilment, and nothing contingent can determine its nature or fulfilment.2 But in so far as the Divine will has to do with temporal effects, and is viewed from a temporal standpoint, we describe it relatively and in temporal and contingent terms, as (a) antecedent and consequent; (b) absolute and conditional.

3. From such a point of view we say that by His antecedent will God wills anything secundum se, without reference to particular circumstances; e.g., the salvation of mankind.3 And by His consequent will we say God wills a thing in view of circumstances foreseen; e.g., the everlasting punishment of obstinate sinners.4 Strictly speaking, there can be no temporal development or modification of God's will of good pleasure. But, since His will is accomplished in time, it exhibits to us the relations of antecedence and consequence.5

4. Similarly we say that the absolute will of God depends upon no external conditions. Thus, He willed to create. But His conditional will is said to depend upon some action on the part of His free creatures. Thus He wills the future glory of those whom He has called in Christ, if they make their calling and election sure. The relation between the will of God and the will of man, is mysterious. The former is eternal and irreversible, the latter real and free, within its proper limits. The appearance of contradiction in this, arises from the finiteness of our understandings, and the necessity of contemplating the infinite and immutable from a finite and mutable point of view.6 This bears upon Divine Predestination, which will be discussed in connection with the doctrine of grace.

5. The will of the signs is divided into five parts: (a) commandment; (b) prohibition; (c) permission; (d) counsel; (e) operation and example. The last mentioned includes the natural and supernatural orders, so far as we know them, and the life of Christ.7 The will of signs constitutes the chief subject matter of Moral Theology Proper.

---

1 Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§155-160; St. Thos., Summa, I., xix.; Forbes, Creed, pp. 47, 56-61; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. iv., § 13; Pearson, De Deo, XX., XXI., pp. 206-231; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I., lib. v., ch. 1-4; Liddon, Some Elements, pp. 56-57, 184-190; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 227-233; Weidner, Theologia, p. 38.

2 Psa. cxv. 3.

3 II. Tim. ii. 4.

4 Rom. ix. 22.

5 Hodge, Syst. Theol., Vol. I., p. 404.

6 Hodge, pp. 404-405. Cf. Q. liii. 4.

7 Schouppe, § 158; Sanderson, Conscience, Lec. iv. § 20. Cf. St. Matt. vii. 21.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 11:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VIII. Q.50. Divine Omnipotence

THE Omnipotence of God signifies (a) His infinite energy and freedom to do all that is consistent with His nature; (b) His sovereignty over all that is or can be done.1

2. God is not tied to the use of means, nor to any particular use of them, by any principle which is external to Himself.2 For all things other than Himself, as well as the forces resident in them, owe their existence to Himself. He cannot, however, do anything (a) which is inconsistent with His own holiness ;3 (b) which would involve a change in His own nature or purposes; (c) which would be self-contradictory and absurd; e.g., to make a fact not a fact, or to draw a shorter line between two points than a straight one. What cannot be done in se, cannot be done by Him —not as implying external limit to power, but as indicating its non-pertinency. Power is in such case limited by its own nature, as is the infinite, not by degree or extent.4

3. By virtue of His sovereignty, all creaturely actions, even when free, are done by His permission and with power then supplied by Him. Evil actions, though designed to thwart His will, are overruled by Him to the accomplishment of it.

4. The exercise of Divine energy is twofold (a) internal action of generation and spiration, which is necessary; (b) external action, which is voluntary, and concerned with originating, preserving, energizing, developing, and governing created things.5

5. Both of these actions are eternal and immutable, but the latter has temporal and mutable relations and aspects, owing to the finite nature which is imposed upon its results. Thus the action of God is often described in Holy Scripture as if temporal—not in its nature, but in its creatureward relations.6

---

1 Pearson, Creed, pp. 75-83; St. Thos., Summa, I. xxv.; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§161-165; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. i., § 12; Forbes, Creed, pp. 48, 49, 91-93; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I., lib. v., ch. 5-11; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 208-210; Clarke, Outline of Theol., pp. 85-88; Weidner, Theologia, pp. 37-38. Cf. Gen. xvii. 1; xviii. 14; Job xlii. 2; Ixii. 11; Ixvi. 7; Isa. xxvi. 4; Jerem. xxxii. 17; Dan. iv. 35; Matt. vi. 13; xix. 26; Mark x. 27; xiv. 36; Luke i. 37; Acts xxvi. 8; Rom. i. 20; iv. 21; Ephes. i. 11, 19-22; iii. 20; Heb. i. 3; Rev. xv. 3; xix. 6.

2 Matt. iii. 9.

3 II. Tim. ii. 13; Heb. vi. 18.

4 Clarke, pp. 86-88; St. Anselm, Proslogium, ch, vii.

5 Schouppe, Tr. V., § 134.

6 Cf. Q. liv. 2.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Chapter VIII. Active Attributes

Question 50. Divine Omnipotence

Question 51. The Divine Will

Question 52. Divine Omniscience and Omnipresence

Question 53. Divine Wisdom

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.49. Divine Eternity

THE Eternity of God is that Divine attribute of which temporal relations are the finite shadow; or, Divine infinity as contemplated from the point of view of time.1

2. The word Eternal has three uses: (a) with beginning but without end—life eternal of the saints: (b) without beginning or end but unnecessary—the creative act of God; (c) without beginning or end and necessary. The last is peculiar to the life of God, and is not possible elsewhere, even for the saints.2 The time that shall be no longer is that which is measured by the events of this world.

3. Time is a relation of created things and of finite events. When of things, it expresses their duration; when of events, it is the measure of their succession. But Divine eternity is an idea which transcends duration and excludes all but logical succession. Boethius and the scholastics describe it as "Interminibilis vitae tota simul et perfecta possessio."3

4. We may not describe time as eternal in the Divine sense—i.e., as infinite. In a sense both time and space are boundless. There is no "before" or "after" time, which would mean time beyond the temporal; and there is no outside of space, for space does not extend beyond the spatial. Neither space nor time have independent reality except in the abstract. They are not what they are of themselves. They are not things at all. They are relations simply, and relations of finite things and events. Divine eternity transcends time.4

5. Time and eternity have been illustrated by the circumference of a circle and its centre. The centre corresponds to every division and motion of the circumference, without being divisible or movable itself. There is a succession of parts in the circumference, but none in the centre. The circumference may be indefinitely expanded, yet the centre will correspond to a larger circle still. Yet eternity is neither an extension nor a modification of time. Time is nunc volans, eternity nunc stans.5

6. The Eternal One has no involuntary relations to time, but freely enters into temporal relations by virtue of creation. He is therefore said to fore-know and to pre-destinate.

7. God is immutable—free from the vicissitudes of change, although He enters into changeable relations with mutability. This latter truth justifies the metaphorical allusions in Holy Scripture to Divine providence, and the delay of the Incarnation until the fulness of time.6 The kenotic theory, that the Divine Son abandoned certain of His eternal attributes in order to become man, is inconsistent with this truth.7

8. God is described in Holy Scripture as alone immortal.8 By this is meant that He is not subject, in His essence, either to development or corruption. The saints are subject to both in this life, and to development in the world to come.9 Their immortality is also derived, while that of God is underived.10

---

1 Jackson, Works, Vol. V., pp. 60-78; St. Thos., Summa, I, x.; St. Augustine, Confessions, xi. 10-31; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§ 112-116; Forbes, Creed, pp. 51, 52; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. iv., § 8; Pearson, De Deo, X., pp. 96-98; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I., lib. iii., ch. 3-6; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 195-197; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. i., §11; Blunt, Dic. of Theol., "Eternity." Cf. Exod. iii. 14; Deut. xxxiii. 27; Job. xxxvi. 26; Psa. xc. 2-4; xciii. 2; Isa. xli. 4; xliii. 13; xlviii. 12; Ivii. 15; Lam. v. 19; Mic. v. 2; Rom. i. 20; Ephes. iii. 11; I. Tim. i. 17; II. Pet. iii. 8; Rev. i. 8; xxii. 13.

2 Schouppe, § 112.

3 St. Thos., I., x. 1; Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V., Ixix. 1, 2.

4 Calderwood, Philos. of Infin., ch. vi.

5 Strong, Syst. Theol., p. 131; Schouppe, § 114.

6 Nicene Anathema; Forbes, pp. 47, 48; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§ 124-131; Martensen, Dogmatics, §48; Owen, ch. iv., § 7; Pearson, IX., pp. 87-95; St. Thos., I., ix.; Petavius, T. I., lib. iii. ch. 1, 2; Hooker, I., v. 1. Cf. Num. xxiii. 19; I. Sam. xv. 29; Psa. xxxiii. 11; cii. 26, 27; Eccl. iii. 14; Mal. iii. 6; Rom. xi. 29; Heb. i. 12; vi. 17; xiii. 8; Jas. i. 17.

7 Powell, Principle of the Incarn., pp. 265-270; Hall, Kenotic Theory, pp. 233, 234.

8 Deut. xxxii. 40; I. Tim. i. 17; vi. 16; Rev. iv. 9; x. 6.

9 I. Cor. xv. 36; II. Cor. iii. 18; Heb. x. 27.

10 Martensen, § 48. Cf. Q. xliv. 3.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.48. Divine Immensity

THE Immensity of God is that Divine attribute of which spatial relations are the finite shadow; or, Divine infinity as contemplated from the point of view of space. 1 In the English verion of the Athanasian Creed the word "incomprehensible" signifies this attribute.

2. By virtue of His immensity, God is essentially present in all substances2 but is not comprehended in created things. He is thus both immanent and transcendent.3 St. Gregory4 says, "Deus est intra omnia, non inclusus; extra omnia, non exclusus; supra omnia, non elatus." To which may be added, "infra omnia, non depressus." Bonaventura says, "His centre is everywhere, His circumference nowhere."5

3. Space is a relation of created substances which came into existence with them. The relations between God and space are therefore voluntary to Him, springing from His act of creation. Space is not infinite, as many think, for it is not a thing in itself. It is what it is only as a relation of finite substances. Moreover the infinite is not quantitative. It transcends all such measures. There is but one Infinite—God. There is indeed no "beyond" space, but that is because beyond is a spatial relation.6

---

1 Athanasian Creed, v. 9; Jackson, Works, Vol. V., pp. 42-59; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§118-121; Forbes, Creed, pp. 50-51; Pearson, De Deo, VIII., pp. 78-86; Suarez, Summa, Tr., I. lib. ii., ch. 2; St. Anselm, Proslogium, ch. xiii. Cf. Psa. cxxxix. 7-10; Jerem. xxiii. 23-24.

2 Cf. Q. lii. 4-6.

3 Cf. Deut. iv. 39, with I. Kings viii. 27.

4 In Psa. cxxxix.

5 Moore, Science and the Faith, p. xliii.; Malebranche, cited in Bowen, Modern Philos., pp. 83, 84.

6 Calderwood, Philos. of Infin., ch. vi., esp. pp. 131-135; Jackson.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.47. Divine Simplicity and Spirituality

THE Simplicity of God signifies (a) His spiritual essence; (b) that He is pure form; (c) the identity of His essence and attributes with Himself.1

2. That God is incorporeal, and therefore without parts or extension is argued because (a) He is the Prime Mover of all things; but bodies, in themselves are inert; (b) He is the most eminent of beings; but the eminence of bodies is entirely due to the life which is in them. This life is not corporeal.2

3. The spirituality of the Divine essence signifies more than the absence of corporeity. It means, positively, that attribute by virtue of which, God is a living God. Because the Spirit is life, it can assume that which is not spirit into hypostatic union with itself. The Incarnation was such an event.3

4. By form, forma, is meant the actuality of a thing; by matter, materia, its potential principle. God is pure form; actual but not potential. He is, and always has been, in essence what He can be. There is no foundation (prior) for what He is. The distinction between power and energy, δύναμις και ενεργεια, is misleading in connection with God. He is absolute energy, purus actus.4

5. The attributes of God, as we have seen,5 do not differ from each other in re, but in ratione, although they are true distinctions rooted in His inmost essence. For instance, His goodness is a distinct reality, as is also His immutability; but the two are one, ontologically speaking, and inseparable. Furthermore, God is not merely good, but more exactly, He is goodness and the source of it. When we speak of the Divine Nature, we speak of the Divine Being.6

---

1 St. Thos., Summa, I., iii.; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 182-185; Forbes, Creed, pp. 40, 41; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. iv. § 4; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I. lib. ii., ch. 1, 2; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§96-104; Lacey, Elem. of Doctrine, p. 74; Weidner, Theologia, p. 34. Cf. Deut. iv. 16; John iv. 24.

2 St. Thos., I., iii. 1; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. I., §8; Pearson, De Deo, V., pp. 47-51; Schouppe, § 101.

3 Cf. Q. xliv. 3.

4 St. Thos., I., iii. 2; Pearson, p. 46; Schouppe, § 103; Wilhelm and Scannell, p. 183.

5 Cf. Q. xliii. 3, 4.

6 St. Thos., I., iii. 3, 4, 6, 7; Jackson, Works, Vol. V., pp. 38-42; Pearson, p. 52; Wilhelm and Scannell, pp. 184-5.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 10:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

August 01, 2005

Ch.VII. Q.46. Divine Unity

BY THE Unity of God is meant (a) the fact that He is but one, unus; (b) His integral unity, or the fact that He is indivisible; (c) His uniqueness, or the fact that He cannot be classed with any other being in genus or species. He is unus et unicus.1

2. That the Lord our God is One Lord (monotheism) is asserted or implied in every part of Holy Scripture; which also bears frequent witness against polytheism or idolatry.2 It is also argued (a) from His simplicity. The individuality and the essence of God are identical, but that which constitutes the individuality of a being can be but one; (b) from the infinity of His perfection and His supremacy. There can be but one most perfect and supreme; (c) from the teleological unity of the world.3 We should not confound monotheism with henotheism, or the acceptance by a people of one tribal or national god, to the exclusion of the gods of other nations — acknowledged also to be real.

3. The integral unity of God does not signify the absence of real distinctions in His nature, but the absence of divisions simply. His tri-personal subsistence is not inconsistent with this.4

4. No other being can be comprehended in the same category with God. This fact does not preclude the existence of other beings, but of other Divine beings. Moreover all other beings are dependent upon, and owe their existence to, the One, with whom nothing can be coordinated.5

5. The doctrine of Divine unity has had a long history, (a) At the beginning it was accepted until sin led to the setting up of other wills against God's will; (b) Polytheism developed rapidly after the fall, but with an undercurrent of recognition of the Supreme — too remote for direct service and worship; (c) The Chosen People were educated slowly and painfully out of polytheism by Divine interventions; (d) Heathen philosophy soared above polytheism, but with pantheistic tendency; (e) Christian revelation enriched the doctrine of unity and extricated it from deistic remoteness; (f) The doctrine has been tested and made clearer since apostolic times by conflict with (1) polytheism; (2) gnostic and Manichaean dualism; (3) Sabellian impoverishment; (4) Arianism; (5) Mariolatry; (6) nominalistic tri-theism; (7) modern Deism; (8) pantheism.

---

1 St. Thos., Summa, I., xi.; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, i. 10; Strong, Syst. Theol., p. 125; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. iv., § 6; Forbes, Creed, pp. 25-38; Pearson, De Deo, XI. pp. 109-117; Weidner, Theologia, p. 55.

2 Deut, iv. 35; vi. 4; I. Kings viii. 60; Isa. xlii. 8; xliv. 6, 8 et seq.; Mark xii. 29; John xvii. 3; Rom. iii. 29, 30; I. Cor. viii. 4-6; Gal. iii. 20; I. Tim. i. 17; ii. 5; Jas. ii. 19.

3 St. Thos., I. xi. 3; Pearson, pp. 114, 115.

4 Mason; Strong.

5 Dorner, Christian Doctrine, Vol. I., pp. 230-234; Jackson; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, pp. 203-204. Cf. Exod. ix. 14; Deut. xxxiii. 26; II. Sam. vii. 22; Isa. xl. 18-25; xlvi. 5-9; Jerem. x. 6; Matt. xix. 17.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.45. Divine Perfection

THE perfection of God signifies that every excellence proper to the Divine nature is found in Him in unlimited degree. Nothing falls short according to the mode of Divine perfection. Divine perfection is involved in Divine infinity, for He who is not limited by anything external to Himself must be perfect in Himself. 1

2. All the perfections of every creature have God for their Author, and are evidences of His perfection. They are not, however, reproductions of Divine perfection, but shadows of it. The perfection of God is not the totality of creaturely perfection, although the cause of it; but is peculiar to Himself and simple. "Not all the excellencies of all (creatures) can so fully represent His nature as an ape's shadow doth a man's body. But . . . infinite variety best sets forth the admirable excellency of His indivisible unity. . . . So all plurality be excluded, we express His being and perfection best by leaving them, as they truly are, without all quantity." 2

3. By virtue of His infinite perfection, God is self-sufficient. Nothing is wanting to His essence which is needed for His blessedness. Neither His knowledge, nor His will, nor His love, depend upon the existence of the creature, but have sufficient scope for their activity in the eternal relations subsisting between the Persons of the Trinity. Creation is an act of the Divine will, not the result of necessity. 3

4. God is the Summum Bonum, the devout contemplation and enjoyment of which is the true and chief end of man; for, as the infinitely Perfect One, and the source of all good, He comprehends in His own essence all that is needed for our eternal blessedness.4

---

1 St. Thos., Summa, I., iv.; Jackson, Works, Vol. V., ch. iv.; Pearson, De Deo, VI., pp. 55-60; VII. pp. 67-73; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I., lib. vi., ch. 7; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V., §§ 105-110; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 177-179, 186.

2 Jackson, pp. 36, 37; St. Thos., I., iv. 2.

3 Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 125, 126. Cf. Acts xvii. 25; and Q. lix.

4 St. Thos., I., vi. 1, 2; Pearson, pp. 70, 71; Westminster Catechism, 1st Ans. Cf. Psa. Ixxiii. 24-26; John xvii. 22, 24; Rom. xi. 35, 36.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.44. Divine Self-Existence

THE self-existence of God is that whereby He is without origin and uncreate. He simply is.1 God is not self-caused, but uncaused. His being and mode of subsistence are not the product of His will, but facts of His essence. By that He is determined, since nothing else determines Him and He is not indeterminate.2

2. To deny the self-existence of God is to deny that He is supreme, for, if He were not self-existent, His existence would be caused by another, to whom He would be inferior. The cosmological argument for the existence of God is also an argument for His self-existence.

3. God is a LIVING God, for He is the Author of life to His creatures;3 and since He is self-existent, He has life in Himself.4

---

1 Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 123-124; Pearson, De Deo, V., p. 47; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, i. 9; St. Anselm, Monologium, ch. v., vi. Cf. Exod. iii. 14; John v. 26; viii. 58; Acts xvii. 24-25. Also Q. xlii. 3.

2 St. Thos., Summa, I., iii. 4; Pearson, IV, pp. 35, 36.

3 Gen. ii. 7; Deut. v. 26; Josh. iii. 10; Acts xvii. 25, 28; Col. iii. 3.

4 Owen, Dogmatics, ch. iv. § 10; Pearson, XIV., pp. 137-143; St. Thos., I., xviii. Cf. John i. 4; v. 26.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.43. Divine Attributes

DIVINE ATTRIBUTES are certain true and distinct predicates, which our knowledge of God, however derived, enables us to apply to Him.1

2. To discuss the Divine Attributes in detail is to analyze the contents of our knowledge of the Divine nature.

3. The Divine Attributes are true predicates, and not simply "man's modes of apprehending God." They are "objective determinations in His revelation, and as such are rooted in His inmost essence."2

4. The Divine Attributes express distinct perfections in the Divine essence. They do not indeed differ in re, as if the essence of God could be divided, but in ratione, which means that the Divine attributes are logical distinctions rather than ontological, although necessary and grounded in the eternal and immutable essence of God.3

5. The Divine attributes are not adequate expressions of the Divine nature, but such as can be framed in human language. They are true as far as they go, and are sufficient for the correct guidance of our apprehensions. But they indicate lines of truth, to the end of which our minds are unable to travel.4

6. The Divine attributes are ascertained in three ways: (a) by analyzing the idea of infinity and absolute perfection; (b) by inference from the character of those Divine operations which are observable in the physical and moral world; (c) by studying the indications given in supernatural revelation. This last method secures the most complete and trustworthy results, and it must be employed to correct and supplement the results of other methods.

7. There are many ways of dividing and arranging the Divine attributes.5 We shall consider the nature of God (a) according to His essence, as self-existent, living, perfect, sole and incommunicable: (b) according to His substance, as spiritual and immense: (c) according to His life, as eternal, immutable, and eternally active: (d) according to His action, as omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, wise, and morally perfect. The first three of these divisions are often treated under the heading "the Nature of God," the last under the heading, "the Active Attributes of God." This usage is followed here.

---

1 Owen, Dogmatics, ch. iv. § 2; Pearson, De Deo, IV., pp. 37-41; Schouppe, Elementa, Tr. V. § 61-84; Stone, Outlines, ch. ii.; Mortimer, Cath. Faith, Vol. I., pp. 3-12; Lacey, Elem, of Doctrine, pp. 85-92; Clarke, Outline of Theol., pp. 75-77.

2 Martensen, Dogmatics, § 46.

3 Hodge, Syst. Theol., Vol. I., pp. 373, 374; Forbes, Creed, pp. 38, 39; Pearson, pp. 39, 40.

4 Mozley, Predestination, pp. 15-21.

5 Hodge, Outlines, pp. 137, 138.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.42. Divine Names

THE Names of God in Scripture are so many intimations of His nature. Some of the more important ones are Elohim, Jehovah, Adonai, Father, and the threefold Name.1

2. ELOHIM is a plural noun, used in the first chapter of Genesis and in many other places. It signifies the Mighty One, and is employed where the creative power and omnipotence of God are described or implied. Its plural form may be interpreted as a plural majesty, but also as indicating the plural personality of God.2

3. JEHOVAH signifies the self-existence and eternal unchangeableness of God. It is the incommunicable Name, which the Jews never pronounced, but read as if it were Adonai. In the A. V. it is translated LORD, and printed in capitals.3 It occurs frequently in conjunction with Elohim, when the phrase is translated LORD God.

4. ADONAI signifies Lord, expressing possession and dominion over all. Like Elohim, it occurs in the plural.

5. FATHER signifies the Producer of all things, and involves the ideas of authority and providence derived from that relation. God is Father of all things as their Creator, and of men as their personal Governor; but especially of baptized Christians, who have been mystically united with His Only-Begotten, and made His children par excellence by adoption and grace. This Name is also specially applied to the First Person of the Blessed Trinity as the unoriginate source of the Godhead.4

6. The most perfect Name of God is that of the Blessed Trinity—THE FATHER, THE SON, AND THE HOLY GHOST, which Name is one and singular, though threefold in its articulation. It expresses the internal and personal distinctions in the Godhead, and the eternal relations which are involved in them.5

7. The Names of God constitute one of five ways by which Holy Scripture reveals God to us. These ways are the following: (a) by His Names; (b) by the works which they ascribe to Him; (c) by the attributes which they predicate of Him; (d) by the worship of Him which they prescribe; (e) by the revelation of "the fulness of the Godhead bodily," in Christ.6

---

1 Hodge, Outlines, pp. 134-135; Owen, Dogmatics, ch. ii. § 14; St. Thos., Summa, I. xiii.; Petavius, De Dogmatibus, T. I. lib. viii. ch. 6-9; Suarez, Summa, Tr. I. lib. ii. ch. 32; Weidner, Theologia, p. 27.

2 Liddon, Divinity of Christ, pp. 49-51; Driver, Genesis, pp. 402.

3 Driver, pp. 407-409.

4 Pearson, Creed, pp. 45-50; 52-74.

5 Mason, Faith of the Gospel, ch. ii. § 2.

6 Hodge, p. 134.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.41. Formulation of the Idea of God

WE FORMULATE our idea of God (a) by way of negation, denying all external limitation; (b)by way of eminence, ascribing to Him the highest degree of His every attribute; (c) by way of causality, inferring the nature of His attributes from the nature of His works.1 This last way does not mean that God must resemble His creatures, but that He must be capable of creating everything in the universe. Thus an impersonal being could not create a world containing persons; and a finite being could not be prior in causation to all else.

2. Our ideas of God are necessarily anthropomorphic, because human. Moreover man was made in the image of God and after His likeness. If man is like God in any respect, in that respect God is like man. There is a true anthropomorphism. False anthropomorphism arises from forgetting that man is not a complete image of God, but inferior to Him. The higher cannot be adequately interpreted by means of the lower, but the lower is properly interpreted by the higher.2

3. Holy Scripture uses much language about God which is metaphorical.3 False anthropomorphism interprets such language literally, and attributes body, parts, and passions to God. To do so is to violate the rule of Biblical interpretation that one passage should not be so interpreted as to conflict with another.4

---

1 Hodge, Syst. Theol., Vol. I., p. 339; St. Thos. in Gratry, Introduction, p. 170; Weidner, Theologia, p. 32.

2 Moore, Science and the Faith, pp. 50-53; Hodge, Outlines, pp. 130-133; Forbes, Creed, pp. 41-42; Lacey, Elem. of Doctrine, pp. 91-92; Illingworth, Personality, pp. 219-222; Iverach, Theism, pp. 268 et seq.; Martineau, Religion, Vol. I., pp. 313-318; Davis, Elem. of Ethics, p. 200 and footnote. Cf. Q. xxii. 8.

3 E.g., Gen. vi. 6, 7; Exod. xxxiii. 11, 20; Deut. xxix. 20; II. Sam. xxii. 9, 16; II. Chron. xvi. 9; Psa. xviii. 9; xcv. 10; Isa. lii. 10; Jerem. xv. 6.

4 Isa. lv. 8, 9; XXXIX. Articles, xx.; Pearson, De Deo, iv., p. 37.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.40. Divine Inscrutability

GOD is inscrutable. That is, His nature is too great for man to acquire an exhaustive knowledge or understanding of Him or of His ways.1

2. It should not be supposed, however, that no knowledge of God is possible. We have a true and adequate knowledge and understanding of God which will be greater, although not exhaustive, hereafter. There is a true theologia viatorum et beatorum.2

3. The possibility of revelation depends upon the fact that God is apprehensible and at least partially comprehensible. We say partially, not as meaning knowledge of a part, for God must be known in toto if at all. He is simplex. We mean that our knowledge is imperfect. We know relatively little of Him, but that little knowledge is of the whole of Him. Yet the terms of revelation are symbolic, using analogies which the Divine nature transcends. But as used in revelation these symbols and analogies are true. They do not misrepresent unless we misinterpret them.x

---

1 Hooker, Eccles. Polity, I., ii., 2; Pearson, De Deo, xiii., pp. 128-136; St. Thos., Summa, I., xii.; Suarez, Summa, Tr. I., lib. ii., ch. 5-31; Petavius, De Deo , vii., 3, 4; Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 197-202; Flint, Agnosticism, pp. 578-585; cf. Job xi. 7-9; xxxvi. 26; Psa. Ixxvii. 19; cxxxix. 6; Prov. xxx. 4; Isa. xlv. 15; Iv. 8, 9; Rom. xi. 33, 34; I. Cor. ii. 11. For the Invisibility of God, see Exod. xxxiii. 20; Job ix. 11; John i. 18; v. 37; I Tim vi. 16; Heb. xi. 1.

2 Petavius, T. I., lib. vii.; Suarez, ch. 8-30; Calderwood, Phil. of Infin., pp. 145-148, 207-233; Wilhelm and Scannell, Bk. II., ch. i. Cf. Rom. i. 20; I. Tim. i. 17; ii. 16; I. John iv. 12; I. Cor. ii. 9-10; xiii. 12; John xvii. 3.

3 Martensen, Dogmatics, §45; Fiske, Idea of God, viii., xii.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Ch.VII. Q.39. The Infinite

OUR primary notion of God is of the Infinite Being—i.e., not limited in essence except by what is internal to Himself. God is what He is, not by virtue of, nor in relation to, anything else; but simply by virtue of Himself and in relation to Himself. The idea of God is not abstract but the most perfect concrete, the most completely real.1

2. The term infinite is negative. It signifies the non-finite, or what does not depend on external relations and limitations to be what it is. It escapes positive definition, but is not indefinite. The word stands for a positive idea. There is nothing absurd in this. We have a positive idea of perfection, but we cannot define it because it is unique. There is no basis of comparison. The infinite is also unique, but there is also another reason for our inability to define it. It trancends all things and exceeds our powers of mental comprehension.2

3. The infinity of God is not extensive, as if it were a matter of size or quantity. Size is not a Divine attribute. It is intensive and relates to the character and quality of His essence. Hence there is no inconsistency in saying that other beings exist which are not included in His substance. They do not limit His substance for it is spiritual, nor His perfection for it is not dependent. The Infinite is not the all.

4. The Infinite is neither the undetermined nor the unconditioned, but the self-determined and the self-conditioned. External conditions are unnecessary to Him but not impossible. It is an element in His greatness that He can submit without loss to finite conditions of His own making, if He wills. He has done this by creating and sustaining the world, and by entering into economic and incarnate relations with His creatures.3

---

1 Strong, Syst. Theol., pp. 122-123; St. Thos., Summa, I., vii.; Suarez, Summa, Tr. I., lib. ii. c. 1; Perrone, Praelec., Vol. II., Pars. II., c. iii.; Fisher, Grounds of Belief, pp. 24-26; Pearson, De Deo, vi. 60-64. Cf. Job xi. 7-9.

2 Mansel, Bamp. Lecs., reduces the Infinite to vacancy of thought, and Spencer, First Prins., deduces his Agnosticism therefrom. Calderwood, Philos. of Infin., esp. pp. 76-94, replies to Mansel, and his forerunner Hamilton, and shows that they treat the notion as purely abstract—not taking note that God, the highest reality, is its subject.

3 Strong, pp. 123-124.

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Chapter VII. The Divine Nature

Question 39. The Infinite

Question 40. Divine Inscrutability

Question 41. Formulation of the Idea of God

Question 42. Divine Names

Question 43. Divine Attributes

Question 44. Divine Self-Existence

Question 45. Divine Perfection

Question 46. Divine Unity

Question 47. Divine Simplicity and Spirituality

Question 48. Divine Immensity

Question 49. Divine Eternity

Posted by Debra Bullock at 09:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack