SECTION 2

THE ATTRIBUTES OF CHRIST ACCORDING TO HIS HUMANITY
In consequence of the Hypostatic Union, Jesus Christ was more than an ordinary man. The di- vine element in Him, not as an inherent form (forma inhaerens) but per modum effectus, over- flowed into His sacred humanity and conferred upon it an altogether unique dignity, (i) His will was distinguished by extraordinary ethical perfection or holiness; (2) His intellect com- manded an unusual wealth of human knowledge ; (3) His entire manhood with all its essential and integral constituents was and is worthy of divine adoration.
ARTICLE I
THE ETHICAL PERFECTION OF CHRIST's HUMAN WILL, OR HIS HOLINESS
All that we have said in a previous treatise^ of the ethical goodness or sanctity of God, applies to Christ in so far as He is God. In the present Article we are concerned only with the human holiness of our Lord, that
1 God: His Knowahility, Essence, and Attributes, St. Louis 1911, pp. 231 sqq.
207
2o8 UNITY IN DUALITY
is to say, the holiness of His created soul, or, more specifically, of one particular faculty of that soul, namely. His will. The formality of holiness, i. e., the char- acter wherein exactly it consists, is " exemption from sin combined with rectitude of moral conduct." ^ Bear- ing this definition in mind, we proceed to prove the holiness of Christ's humanity in a systematic series of theses, in which we shall bring out (i) the negative element of holiness, i. e., sinlessness, and (2) its posi- tive element, i. e., moral purity.
Thesis I: Christ, as man, was exempt from orig- inal sin and concupiscence.
This thesis is of faith in both its parts.
Proof. Christ's freedom from original sin is defined in the Decretum pro lac otitis of Pope Eugene IV (1439): ''Qui sine peccato concep- tus, natus et mortuus humani generis hostem pec- cata nostra delendo solus sua morte prostravit." ^
Freedom from original sin implies freedom from all the evil consequences thereof, espe- cially from concupiscence (fomes peccati). "Si quis defendit Theodorum impiissimum Mopsue- stenmn, qui dixit, alium esse Deum Verhum et alium Christum a passionibus animae et concupi- scentiis carnis molestias patientem, talis anathema sit," says the Fifth General Council of Constan- tinople.^
2 Ibid. 4 Held A. D. 553. Cfr. Denzin-
8 Cfr. Denzinger-Bannwart, Enchi- ger-Bannwart, Enchiridion, n. 224. ridion, n. 711.
CHRIST'S HOLINESS 209
a) That Christ was actually and by right free from original sin appears from all those Scrip- tural texts which in general terms aver His sin- lessness and impeccability, or specially emphasize the fact that He appeared in the flesh for the pur- pose of expiating the inherited guilt which weighed upon the human race. Had He been tainted by original sin, He would not have been the "lamb unspotted and undefiled," ^ nor would He have been able to take away "the sin of the world," ^ for the sin of the world is original sin, and it is impossible to assume that He who was destined to take away original sin was tainted by it Himself. For this reason St. Paul, who re- peatedly ascribes to the Godman genuine "flesh," (i. e., a human nature), never calls this flesh "sinful." Cfr. Rom. VIII, 3 : "God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh and of sin, hath condemned sin in the flesh." In drawing a parallel ^ between Adam, the first man, who was "of the earth, earthly," ^ and Christ, the second Adam, who was "from heaven, heavenly," ^ the Apostle virtually excludes original sin from the Godman; else the parallel would be absolutely meaningless.
5 I Pet. I, 19: dfipos ifJLWfios Kal 7 i Cor. XV, 47. On this parallel dffirtXos. Cfr. Wilhelm-Scannell, see F. Prat, La Thiologie de Saint Manual, Vol. II, pp. 132 sq. Paul, Vol. II, pp. 261 sqq.
6 John I, 29: Tiji> d/iapriav rov ^ ivOpwiros ck yijs xoFac»s. KOCfiov, 0 dvBpunros i^ oipavov.
210 UNITY IN DUALITY
The Fathers regarded Oirist's freedom from original sin as a self-evident corollary flowing from His divine dignity and the origin of His human nature. As man no less than as God Christ is the natural Son of God, and to assert that He was conceived in original sin would be equivalent to affirming that the Divine Logos was tainted by sin. " God alone is without sin," says Tertullian, " and the only man without sin is Christ, be- cause Christ is God." ^^ Another argument may be for- mulated thus: Original sin can be transmitted in no other way than by natural, i. e., sexual generation. But Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of a virgin. Consequently He can not be tainted by orig- inal sin.^^
b) If Christ was conceived without original sin, He must have been exempt from concupis- cence (fomes peccati). This conclusion is so patent that even the heretics (Apollinarists and Monothelites, for instance) who denied Him in- tellect (voiis) and a human will (i9eA7;o-ts), did not venture to charge Him with moral imperfection.
" If any one believe that the flesh of Christ lusted against the spirit," exclaims St. Augustine, " let him be anathema." ^^ The temptations of Christ recorded in
10 " Solus Deus sine peccato, et ecce Agnus Dei. Non habet iste
solus homo sine peccato Christus, traduccm de Adam; carnem tantum
quia et Deus Christus." {De Ani- suscepit de Adam, peccatum non as-
ma, 41.) sumpsit. Qui non assumpsit de
11 " Non enim in iniquitate con- nostra massa peccatum, ipse est qui
ccptus est, quia non de mortalitate tollit nostrum peccatum." (St. Au-
conceptus est. Nee eum in peccatis gustine, Tr. in loa., IV, c. i.)
mater eius in utero aluit, quern la " Quisquis credit, carnem
virgo concepit, virgo peperit: quia Christi contra spiritum concupivisse,
fide concepit, fide suscepit. Ergo anathema sit." (Op. Imperf., IV,
CHRIST'S HOLINESS 211
Sacred Scripture were external occasions or suggestions which did not elicit consent or delectation, but were promptly repulsed (" Begone, Satan ! "). " God who, by- becoming incarnate in the womb of the Virgin, had en- tered this world without sin, tolerated no contradiction in Himself. While it was possible, therefore, for Him to be tempted by suggestion, no sinful delectation ever en- tered His soul." ^^
Thesis II : Christ was free from all personal sin.
The truth embodied in this thesis is an article
of faith.
Proof. The actual sinlessness of our Lord (impeccantia) is unquestionably an article of faith. "Si quis dicit," says the Council of Ephe- sus, "et pro se obtulisse semetipsum oblationem et noil potiiis pro nobis solis — non enim eguit oblatione, qui peccatum omnino nescivit, — ana- thema sit — If any one assert that Christ sacri- ficed Himself for Himself, and not for us alone, — for He who was absolutely free from sin had no need of sacrifice — let him be anathema." ^* The Council of Chalcedon calls Him "like unto us in all things except sin." ^^
4;.) Other Patristic texts in Pe- i*Conc. Ephes. (A. D. 431), can.
tavius, De Incarn., XI, 11. 10. Cfr. Denzinger-Bannwart, En-
13 St. Gregory the Great, Horn. chiridion, n. 122.
in Ev., XVI (Migne, P. L., 15 " Per omnia nobis similem
LXXVI, 113s). Cfr. also St. absque peccato." Cone. Chalced.
Thomas, S. Theol., 3a, qu. 15, art. (A. D. 451). Cfr. Denzinger-Bann-
2; Suarez, De Incarn., disp. 34, wart, n. 148. sect. 2; De Lugo, De Myst. Incarn., disp. 26, sect. 4.
212 UNITY IN DUALITY
Even without these plain ecclesiastical defini- tions the sinlessness of Christ would have to be received as a revealed dogma, because it is ex- pressly taught in Holy Scripture. The prophet Isaias says of the coming Messiah: "He hath done no iniquity, neither was there deceit in his mouth," ^^ and the Archangel Gabriel declares to the Virgin Mary: ''Quod nascetur ex te sanc- tum ^'^ vocahitur Filius Dei — The Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." ^^ St. Paul declares that Christ "knew no sin," and says ^^ that, though He was "tempted in all things like as we are," ^^ He yet remained "without sin." ^^ In another place he describes our Lord as "holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners." ^^ No man ever dared to chal- lenge his accusers as Jesus did according to the testimony of the fourth Evangelist. John VIII, 46: "Quis ex vobis arguet me de peccatof — Which of you shall convince me of sin?" His whole life was so pure that thousands have at- tained to sainthood by following Him. In fact, there is no other way of being delivered from blindness of heart than by "endeavoring to con- form one's life wholly to the life of Christ." ^^
16 Is. LIII, 9. Cfr. 1 Pet. II, 22: 20 jcotf' i>tt.oi6T7iTa = similiter ac " Who did no sin, neither was guile nos.
found in his mouth." 21 j^^upU ifiaprlas.
17 rh yevvdffievop iK
18 Luke I, 35. liittis, scgrcgatus a pcccatoribus." i9Heb. IV, 15. (Heb. VII, 26.)
28 Thomas k Kempis, The Imita-
CHRIST'S HOLINESS 213
Thesis III: Christ as man, was incapable of sin- ning.
This proposition is iidei proxima.
Proof. In our Second Thesis we proved Christ's sinlessness {im peccant ia). We now proceed to demonstrate Plis impeccabihty {iiii- peccabilitas) , which the Vatican Council intended to define as an article of faith.^*
Theologians are not fully agreed as to the true concep- tion of Christ's " impeccability." We may distinguish three leading opinions. ( i ) The shallowest one, least in harmony with Catholic belief, is that held by Anton Glinther, who, in order to safeguard Christ's free-will, maintained that He was impeccable because God fore- saw from all eternity that He would never actually sin.-^ (2) Durandus, Scotus, and the Nominalists contended that our Lord's impeccability was founded, not on an in- trinsic quality of His will, but on an extrinsic disposition of Divine Providence by which His will, which was in itself capable of committing sin, was prevented from yielding to temptation. This is what is called the theory of external impeccability.-® Because of its consonance with the Scotistic doctrine of the impeccability of the Elect in Heaven,-^ this rather unsatisfactory theory is ex-
tion of Christ, Ch. i. On the lectio Lacensis, \ll, 560): " Non
" Spiritual Sense of the Imitation " solum non peccavit, sed nee peccare
see Brother Azarias, Phases of potuit."
Thought and Criticism, pp. 89 sqq., 25 This is called impeccabililas
New York 1896. For the argu- consequens.
ment from Tradition the reader is 26 Impeccabilitas externa.
referred to the Patristic texts 27 Impeccabilitas beatorum. Cfr.
quoted below in support of Thesis the dogmatic treatise on Eschatol-