SECTION 3

THE INSEPARABILITY OF THE TWO NATURES IN
CHRIST
The inseparability of the two natures, while not an essential mark, is an integral property of the Hypostatic Union.
A separation between the two natures is con- ceivable only in one of three ways : ( i ) Christ's manhood might have existed prior to its union with the Godhead and become united with it at a later period of its existence; (2) the sacred man- hood might have dissociated itself temporarily from the Logos in the past; (3) the Logos might dissociate Himself from His manhood at some future time. All three of these suppositions are inadmissible, as we will show in three distinct theses.
Thesis I : The Hypostatic Union of the Logos with His manhood began at the moment of Christ's con- ception.
This proposition embodies an article of faith. Proof. At a Council held in Constantinople (A. D. 543) against the unorthodox teachings of
166
THE TWO NATURES INSEPARABLE 167
Origen/ the proposition that Christ's human na- ture existed prior to the Incarnation was con- demned as heretical. The Sixth Ecumenical Council expressly defined: '7w incarnatione Verhi non fiiit deltas copulata carni prius ani- matae ant prius praefactae vel animae praeexi- stenti coniuncta, . . . sed cum ipso Verho {caro et anima] exist entiam habuerunt: . . . simid quippe caro, simul Dei Verhi caro; simid caro aniniata rationalis, simid Dei Verhi caro animata rationalis." ^
a) That this teaching has a solid foundation in Scripture can be shown from Rom. I, 3: "F actus ex semine David," and Gal. IV, 4: ^'Factum ex midiere." These texts not only as- sert that Christ was true man, but that He be- came man through His conception by the Virgin Mary, that is to say, in the instant of His con- ception. If the conception of the man Christ and the Incarnation of the Divine Logos had not been absolutely simultaneous, but separate and inde- pendent events, JMary would not be really and truly the Mother of God.^ She would indeed have given birth to the Son of God, but she would
1 The researches of Fr. Diekamp Bannwart, Enchiridion, n. 204;
{Die origenistischen Streitigkeiten Xicephorus Callistus, Hist. EccL.
im 6. Jahrhundert und das V. XVII, 28.
AUgemeine Konsil, pp. 46 sqq., 2 Acta, art. 11.
Munster 1899) have established the 3 OforoKos. Cfr. Newman, Select
fact that this Council enjoyed ecu- Orations of St. Athanasius, Vol.
menical authority. Cfr. Denzinger- II, 210 sqq.
i68 UNITY IN DUALITY
not have conceived Him; the Hypostatic Union would have occurred some time between the con- ception and the birth of Jesus.
b) St. Cyril was well aware of this, for he remarked against Nestorius : "The Blessed Vir- gin did not conceive a mere man, upon whom the Logos subsequently descended; but He subjected Himself to a carnal birth by a union which had its inception in the maternal womb." ^ The dogma was most clearly and trenchantly for- mulated by Pope St. Leo the Great in the follow- ing terms: "Natura quippe nostra non sic as- sumpta est, ut prius areata post assumeretur, sed ut ipsa assumptione crearetur." ^
Thesis II: The Logos never even for an instant dissociated Himself from His manhood.
This thesis may be characterized as "doctrina catholica."
Proof. The Sixth Ecumenical Council de- clared that the two wills and two operations in Christ are united inseparably (dx^^piWws). Since this Council did not expressly mean to de- fine the inseparability of the two natures, but had in view the inseparable personal unity of our Lord, it may be objected that a dogmatic argu-
4 Ep, ad Nestor., i. gcnitus Deus, sed in ea est Deus
•5 Ep., 35, c. 3. Cfr. St. Fulgen- altissimd humilitate conceptus."
tius, De Incarn., 4: "Quant car- See also Petavius, De Incarn., IV,
nem non conceptam accepit uni- 11; Suarez, De Incarti,, disp. 16.
THE TWO NATURES INSEPARABLE 169
ment based upon its definition would not be con- clusive in support of our present thesis. This ob- jection cannot, however, be urged against the fol- lowing canon of the Eleventh Council of Toledo (675) : ". . . quas [duas naturas] ita in se una Christi persona univit, lit nee divinitas ab hiuna- nitate nee humanitas a divinitate possit aliquando seiimgi." The Ethiopian liturgy contains the sentence : "I believe that the Godhead has never, even for an hour or for a moment, been separated from the manhood."
a) The only juncture at which a temporary cessation of the Hypostatic Union could possibly have occurred, was the triduiim mortis, i. e., the time that elapsed between the death of Christ and His Resurrection. But we have it on the authority of the Apostles' Creed that the dis- solution of the human nature of our Lord did not in matter of fact entail the cessation of the Hypostatic Union. "He was buried, and de- scended into hell," i. e., His body was buried, but His soul descended into hell. The death of Christ did not consist in a separation of His manhood from His Godhead, but in the dissolution of His human nature, 1. e., the separation of body from soul, both of which, though temporarily dissoci- ated, remained the true body and soul of the Son of God. From our Lord's exclamation on the Cross: **My God, why hast thou forsaken me!"
I70 UNITY IN DUALITY
certain heretics argued that the Hypostatic Union was interrupted during His Passion and death. But this conclusion is absolutely unwarranted. Hugh of St. Victor in conformity with the teach- ing of the Fathers explains the passage as fol- lows : "God merely withdrew His protection, He did not sever the union." ^
b) Did the blood shed by our Lord during His sacred Passion remain hypostatically united with the Godhead during the triduum mortis f This is a somewhat more difficult question, which de- mands an extended explanation.
a) Though not of faith, it is theologically certain that in Christ's living body, both before His death and after the Resurrection, His sacred Blood was united to the Logos hypostatically, not merely in a mediate manner, as were, for instance, His hair, nails, etc.'' Whether and how far a man's blood is informed by his soul is a ques- tion in regard to which physicians, physiologists, and philosophers have not yet reached an agreement. Many hold that the blood is merely an inanimate medium by which the tissues of the body are nourished and relieved of effete matter.^ Putting this controversy aside, it is theologically certain that the Hypostatic Union is not limited to the sphere informed by the soul, but comprises
6 " Deus subtraxit protectionem, mini proxime et immediate fuit
sed non separavit unionem." De unitus Verba Dei. Haec conclusio
Sacram., II, i, lo. On certain dif- est hoc tempore ita certa, ut con-
ficult Patristic passages cfr. Peta- traria non possit sine errore de-
vius, De Incarn., XII, 19. fendi." (De Incarn., disp. 15,
7 Suarez contended against Du- sect. 6, n. 2.)
randus and some of the earlier 8 Cfr. Urraburu, Psychol., pp. 800
Schoolmen: "Sanguis Christi Do- sqq., Vallisoleti 1897.
THE TWO NATURES INSEPARABLE 171
all those factors which constitute the proper essence and integrity of human nature. It would be wrong, there- fore, to argue that since, according to one theory at least, the spiritual soul immediately informs only the spinal and sympathetic nerves, the nervous system alone in Christ was immediately {secundum hypostasin) united with the Logos, all other parts of His body only mediately (in hypostasi). Whatever physiological theory one may prefer to adopt, the hypostatic (i. e., immediate) union of the Logos with His living blood can be demonstrated independently of the question whether or not the soul of Christ animated this blood from within. Holy Scripture tells us that we were redeemed " with the Precious Blood of Christ," ^ and it is this same Precious Blood which is proposed to our adoration in the con- secrated chalice during ]Mass.^° Pope Clement VI ex- pressly declares ^^ that, because of its union with the Di- vine Word, a single drop of the Precious Blood of our Lord would have sufficed to redeem the world. St. Thomas voices the opinion of the medieval Schoolmen when he says: " Manifestum est quod sanguis in pas- sione effusus, qui maxime fuit .saluhris, fuit divinitati unitus; et ideo oportuit quod in resurrectione iungeretur aliis humanitatis partihus." ^^
j8) It is not easy to demonstrate that, like His soul or His inanimate body, the blood which our Saviour shed on the Cross remained hypostatically united with the Logos during the three days that elapsed between
9 Cfr. I Pet. I, 18 sq.; i John quae tamen propter unionem ad I, 7; Heb. IX, 12 sqq.; Apoc. VII, Verbum pro redemptione totius hu- 14. mani generis suffecisset, sed copiose
10 See the dogmatic treatise on velut quoddam effluvium noscitur the Holy Eucharist. effudisse."
11 Extrav. Com., 1. V, tit. 9, c. 2: 12 Quodlib., V, art. 5. " Non guttam sanguinis modicam,
12
172 UNITY IN DUALITY
His death and Resurrection. In the fifteenth century a violent controversy broke out over this question between members of the Dominican and the Franciscan Orders. Pope Pius II, in 1464, after hstening to a formal debate which lasted three days, commanded both parties to cease quarrelling and reserved the final decision to the Holy See.^^ No such decision was ever published. Since the Council of Trent the opinion of the Dominicans has become the prevailing one among theologians. It is to the effect that during the triduum mortis the Logos re- mained hypostatically united at least with that portion of His Precious Blood which He re-assumed after the Resurrection. The contradictory opinion of the Fran- ciscans no longer has any prominent defenders outside of Scotist circles.^* Some older theologians ^^ held that the Blood of Christ was never at any time united with the Divine Logos secundum hypostasin, so that, had the Apostles during the triduum mortis consecrated bread and wine, it would have become mere blood, but not the blood of the Godman. This view is altogether obsolete and untenable. The dogmatic definition of the Triden- tine Council: " Ipsum autem corpus sub specie vini et sanguinem sub specie panis animamque sub utraque [specie existere non quidem vi verborum, sed'l vi na- turalis illius connexionis et concomitantiae, qua partes Christi Domini . . . inter se copulantiir," ^* plainly inti- mates that " body " and " blood " stand on the same level, and consequently either both are united with the Divine Logos, or neither of them is. It follows that since the bloodless corpse of our Redeemer was still truly the body
18 Cfr. Denzinger-Bannwart, En- IB E. g., Alphonsus Tostatus
chiridion, n. 718. (+ i455) and Gabriel Biel ( +
14 Its last notable champion was 1495).
Fr. CoUius {De Sanguine Christi, 18 Denzinger-Bannwart, Enchiri-
Mediol. 1612). dion, n. 876.
THE TWO NATURES INSEPARABLE 173
of the Logos, the blood that had flown from it was not dissociated from the Hypostatic L'nion.
y) Jerusalem, Bey rout, Rome, Alantua, Boulogne, Bruges, Weingarten, Reichenau, Stans, Neury Saint- Sepulchre, and a number of other places claim, or at one time claimed, to possess authentic relics of the Precious Blood of our Divine Saviour.^' If these relics were genuine blood shed by our Lord during His sacred Passion, this would merely prove that some particles of Christ's body were not re-assumed but permanently eliminated from the Godhead, They may be venerated like particles of the holy Cross, but it would be idolatry to give them divine worship. ^^ This principle applies a fortiori to blood which is believed to have flown mi- raculously from consecrated hosts or images of Christ. St. Thomas inclines to the opinion that all the alleged relics of the Precious Blood preserved in different churches throughout Christendom belong to this class. "Sanguis autem ille, qui in quibusdam ecclesiis pro re- liquiis conservatur, non Hiixit ex latere Christi, sed mi- raculose dicitur eMuxisse de quadam imagine Christi per- cussa." ^® This fluid is not the blood of Christ at all, because the glorified Saviour " no longer dies," and consequently sheds no more blood. For the rest it is well to be cautious in accepting such medieval leg- ends. The phenomenon of " bleeding hosts " may be caused by a certain rare micrococcus, called prodigiosus,-^ the action of which is described thus by one of our leading
IT Cfr. the Catholic Fortnightly On the different kinds of worship
Review, VoL XVI (1909), No. 10, (Jatria, dulia, hyperdulia, etc.) see
pp. 296 sqq. Pohle-Preuss, Mariology,
18 Cfr. Benedict XIV, De Festis, 19 5. Theol.. 3a, qu. 4, art 2.
§374. See A. Jox, Die Reliquien 20 Also Monas prodigiosa Ehren-
des kostbaren Blutes unseres gott- berg. lichen Heilandes, Luxemburg 1880.
174 UNITY IN DUALITY
bacteriologists : " Starchy substances, such as boiled potatoes, bread, rice, hosts, etc., show moist, blood-red spots, which sometimes spread rapidly. The sudden ap- pearance of such spots on articles of daily use has given rise to all sorts of curious superstitions." ^^
8) The theological axiom : " Quod semel Verhum as- sumpsit, nunquam dimisit " applies absolutely only to the soul of our Divine Redeemer; in regard of His body, including His Precious Blood, it has but relative value. The blood which Christ shed at the circumcision, and when He was scourged, and during His agony on Mount Olivet, unquestionably left the union with His Godhead for ever. This applies in an even greater measure to the secretions incident to the ordinary anabolic and catabolic processes of nature, e. g., tears, perspiration, sputum.-^
Thesis III : The Logos will never dissociate Him- self from His manhood.
This proposition embodies an article of faith.
Proof. While the so-called Seleticians heret- ically taught that Christ had "transplanted His sacred humanity to the sun," ^^ Marcellus of An- cyra,^* and his disciple Photinus of Sirmium,^'^
21 A. de Bary, Vorlesungen uber 24 Died about 374. Cfr. New- Bakterien, p. ii, Leipsic 1885. Cfr. man. Select Orations of St. Athana- the article " Hostien " in Burg's sius. Vol. II, pp. 196 sqq.; Barden- Kontrovers-Lexikon, pp. 414 sqq., hewer-Shahan, Patrology, pp. 241 Essen-Ruhr, 1905. sq. What remains of Marcellus'
22 Cfr. Tepe, Jnstit. TheoL, Vol. writings is to be found in Chr. H. Ill, pp. 541 sqq., Paris 1896; Chr. G. Rettberg, Marcclliana, Gottingen arded., pp. 80 sqq., 95 sqq., Friburgi J794'
Pesch, Praelect, Dogmat., Vol. IV, 25 Died about 376. His numer-
1909; L. Janssens, De Deo-Homine, ous writings have all perished.
Vol. I, pp. 294 sqq., Friburgi 1901. Cfr. Th. Zahn, Marcellus von An-
28 Cfr. Ps. XVIII, 6: "In sole cyra, pp. 189 sqq., Gotha 1867. posuit tabernaculum suum."
THE TWO NATURES INSEPARABLE 175
maintained that the Saviour would not dispossess Himseh' of His body until after the resurrection of the flesh. The Second General Council of Constantinople (A. D. 381) rejected this heresy by adding to the Nicene Creed the phrase : "Of whose kingdom there .shall be no end." -^
a) The perpetual inseparability of our Lord's two natures is implied in the Scriptural teach- ing (i) that Christ is eternal and (2) that He is forever our High Priest and King. The eter- nal existence of Christ (not to be confounded with the eternity of the Divine Logos) is taught in Heb. XHI, 8: "lesus CJiristus heri et Jiodie, ipse et in saecnla — Jesus Christ, yesterday, and to-day, and the same for ever." That the Apos- tle in this passage means the Godman, i. e., the synthesis of Logos and manhood, is evidenced by his teaching in regard to Christ's eternal priest- hood. Cfr. Heb. VH, 24: "Hie [scil. Christus] eo quod maneat in aeternnm, seinpitermim Jiabet sacerdotimn — But this one [Christ] for that he continueth for ever, hath an everlasting priest- hood." He is also called Eternal King. Cfr. Luke I, 33: "Et regni eiiis non erit finis — And of his kingdom there shall be no end." God Him- self "hath sworn" that the priesthood "according to the order of Melchisedech" shall never come
26 otS T^j PaaiXeias ovk IcttOi rekos- Cfr. Denzinger-Bannwart, Enchiridion, n. 86.
176 UNITY IN DUALITY
to an end.^^ It is equally certain that the king- dom of Christ, i. e., the triumphant Church which is His mystical body, together with its High Priest and King, will endure for ever.
b) The unanimity of the holy Fathers in re- gard to this dogma makes it unnecessary for us to elaborate the argument from Tradition. In his controversy with Marcellus of Ancyra St. Cyril of Jerusalem denounces the new heresy as ''another dragon's head lately arisen in Galatia," and he concludes his exposition of the orthodox belief with the injunction: "This hold fast, this believe; but what heresy has brought forth, that reject; for thou hast been most clearly instructed regarding the kingdom of Christ which will never end." ^^ St. Chrysostom writes trench- antly: "[Christ] put on our flesh, not to put it off again, but to keep it for ever." ^®
Readings: — Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, t. II, dissert. De Monophysitis, Romae 1721. — Ph. Kuhn, Die Christologie Leos I. des Grossen in systematischer Darstellung, Wiirzburg 1894. — Hefele, Konsiliengeschichte, 2nd ed., Vols. II and III, Freiburg 1875-1877. — Chr. Walch, Historic der Ketsereien, Vols. IV to VIII, Leipsic 1878. — J. A. Dorner, History of the Develop- ment of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, 5 vols., Edinburgh 1861-63. — Wilhelm-Scannell, A Manual of Catholic Theology, Vol. II, pp. 74 sqq., 82 sqq., 2nd ed., London 1901. — Funk-Cappa- delta, A Manual of Church History, Vol. I, pp. 157 sqq., 163 sqq., London 1910. — J. H. Newman, Select Treatises of St. Athanasius,
27 Cfr. Ps. CIX, 4. vius, De Incar., XII, 18; Siiarez,
2S Catech., 15, n. 27. De Myst. Vit. Christi, disp. 51,
20 Horn, in loa., 11. Cfr. Peta- sect, i.
THE TWO NATURES INSEPARABLE 177
Vol. ir, pp. 331 sqq., 412 sqq. — Freddi-Sullivan, Jesus Christ the Word Incarnate, Considerations Gathered from the Works of the Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas, pp. 169 sqq., 195 sqq., St. Louis 1904.— W. H. Hutton, The Church of the Sixth Cen- tury, London 1897.