I. State of the Question. — Having given

a full dogmatic demonstration of the Divinity of Jesus Christ in our treatise on the Trinity/ we here confine ourselves to showing how that dem- onstration is to be regarded for the purposes of Christology.
In our treatise on the Blessed Trinity we had merely to establish the fact that there are Three Divine Persons in one Divine Nature, zdz.: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. That the Son of God became man did not concern us there. In expounding the dogma of the Trinity, therefore, it would not have been necessary to deal with the historic fact of the Incarnation were it not for the circumstance that nearly all the Scrip- tural and Patristic texts which can be adduced to prove the existence of the Divine Logos (Adyos ao-ap/cos) are based on the existence of Jesus Christ as the Godman or Word Incarnate (Adyos evaapKo^).
St. John the Evangelist, in describing the Logos as He existed before all time in His eternal Godhead,^ did not fail to add the significant statement : " And the
1 Pohle-Preuss, The Divine Trin- man, Tracts Theological and Ec- ity, PP- 63-96, St. Louis 1912. clesiastical, pp. 228 sq., new cd.,
2 John I, I sqq. Cfr. J. H. New- London 1895.
10
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST ii
Word was made flesh," ^ Following his example the Fathers invariably identified the Divine Logos, or Son of God, with Jesus of Nazareth. Accordingly, nearly all the texts which can be gathered from Patristic lit- erature in favor of the dogma of the Divine Trinity, have a Christological as well as a Trinitarian bearing. In other words, the Scriptural and Patristic teaching on the Divinity of Christ proves the existence of a Sec- ond Person in the Blessed Trinity (and therefore the dogma of the Trinity) quite as clearly and stringently as the Scriptural and Patristic teaching on the Incarna- tion of the Logos demonstrates the dogma of Christ's Divinity. It is due to this close interrelation of the two dogmas that the fundamental Christological thesis with which we are here concerned has really, for the most part, been already established in the treatise on the Di- vine Trinity.*
Generally speaking, the Divinity of Christ may- be demonstrated either dogmatically or apologet- ically.
The dogmatic argument rests on the inspira- tion of Holy Scripture and the dogmatic va- lidity of the evidence furnished by Tradition.
The apologetic argument has a much broader basis. It is both historical and philosophical. It takes the Bible as a genuine and credible docu- ment and from it, in connection with pagan and Jewish sources, proves that Jesus Christ is true God.
3 Kal 6 A670S crap^ eyivero. * Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Divine
John I, 14. Trinity, 1. c
8
12 DUALITY IN UNITY
For the apologetic argument in proof of Christ's Divinity we may refer the reader to any approved text-book of Christian Apologetics.^ The dogmatic argument, as we have already noted, is set forth with considerable fulness in our own treatise on the Divine Trinity. We will merely recapitulate it here.
2. The Dogmatic Argument. — Holy Scrip- ture teaches that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that He is true God and the Divine Logos. With this teaching Ecclesiastical Tradition is in perfect accord. The contrary doctrine was rejected as heretical very early in the Church's history, and we may therefore truly say that mod- ern Rationalism stands condemned at the bar of Primitive Christianity.
a) The Scriptural doctrine concerning the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity culminates in these three propositions: (i) Christ is truly and properly the Son of God, consubstantial with the Father; therefore (2) He is not an ordinary man, but true God as well as man; (3) "Logos" is merely another name for the Second Person of the Divine Trinity, who became incarnate in Jesus Christ.
B For instance, Devivier-Sasia, Revealed Religion, pp. 130 sqq., and
Christian Apologetics, or A Rational ed., London s. a.; P. Schanz, A
Exposition of the Foundations of Christian Apology, 4th ed., New
Faith, Vol. I, pp. 33 sqq., San York 4. a.; O. R. Vassall-Phillips,
Jose, Cal., 1903. Cfr. also Bou- The Mustard Tree. An Argument
gaud-Currie, The Divinity of Christ, on Behalf of the Divinity of Christ,
New York 1906; Hettinger-Bowden, London 1912.
I
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 13
a) The Biblical argument for the Divinity of Christ rests upon the fact that Scripture de- scribes and declares Him to be really and truly the Son of God. How absolutely conclusive this argument is, appears from the desperate efforts made by contemporary Rationalists and Modern- ists to weaken its force by attributing to Christ a divine sonship wholly foreign to that meant by the inspired writers.
Thus Hamack writes : " The Gospel, as Jesus pro- claimed it, has to do with the Father only and not with the Son."* According to this Rationalist theologian " the whole of the Gospel is contained " in the formula : " God and the soul, the soul and its God." ^ But did not Christ Himself put His Divine Sonship prominently in the foreground — so much so that our belief in the existence of the Father as the First Person of the Blessed Trinity, in its last analysis really rests upon this emphatic self-assertion of the Son ? ® Hamack cannot deny that " this Jesus who preached humility and knowl- edge of self, nevertheless named himself, and himself alone, as the Son of God." ^ But he prefers to call this astonishing fact a psychological riddle and pleads ig- norance of its meaning. " How he [Jesus] came to this consciousness of the unique character of his relation to God as a Son ... is his secret, and no psychology will ever fathom it." ^° To solve this enigma, if
6 A. Hamack, Das Wesen des 8 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Divine Christentums, p. 91, Leipzig 1902 Trinity, pp. 44.
(English translation, IVhat is Chris- 9 Das Wesen des Christentums, p.
iianityf by T. B. Saunders, 2nd 81 (English translation, p. 139).
ed., p. 154, London 1908). 10 Ibid., p. 81 (English transla-
7 Ibid., p. 90 (English translation, tion, p. 138). p. 153).
14 DUALITY IN UNITY
Harnack's theory were true, would be the business of psychiatry rather than of psychology, for in that case Jesus Christ was either a fool or a knave. Unwilling to take either horn of the dilemma, Harnack can find no other way out of the difficulty than the assumption that " The sentence ' I am the Son of God ' was not inserted in the Gospel by Jesus himself, and to put that sentence there side by side with the others is to make an addition to the Gospel." ^^ It is difficult to imagine a more frivolous asseveration. Even the superficial reader can easily see that to obliterate this sentence would be to take away an essential part of the Gospel. Cfr. John IX, 35 sqq. : " Dost thou believe in the Son of God ? He answered, and said: Who is he. Lord, that I may believe in him? And Jesus said to him: Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee." "
To realize the hollowness of Harnack's contention we need but reflect that Jesus suffered torture and death deliberately and with a solemn oath in confirmation of His claim that He was the Son of God.^^
The appellation " Son of man," ^* which Jesus applied to Himself with predilection, and which in no wise de- tracts from His other name, " Son of God," was no doubt designed to safeguard the doctrine of His humanity against future errors, such as that of the Docetae." We should remember, however, that in calling Him-
11 Ibid., p. 92 (English transla- burgh 1897. Cfr, also H. P. Lid- tion, p. 156). don, The Divinity of Our Lord and
12 On the teaching of St. John Saviour Jest4S Christ, pp. 311 sqq., and St. Paul concerning the Logos, 454 sqq., and J. Lebreton, Lcs Orl- see Pohle-Preuss, The Divine Trin- ' gines du Dogme de la Trinitc, pp. *iy> PP- 88 sqq., St. Louis 1912; on 291 sqq., 364 sqq., 49s sqq., 515 that of St. Paul in particular, F. sqq., Paris 191 o.
Prat, La Thcologie de Saint Paul, is Pohle-Preuss, op. cit., pp. 54
Vol. II, pp. 67 sqq., 165 sqq., Paris sqq.
1912; D. Somerville (Prot.), St, i
Paul's Conception of Christ, Edin- 15 See infra, pp. 41 sqq.
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST
15
self " Son of Man," Jesus evidently had in mind the famous prophecy of Daniel, which heralded the Messias by this very name. " Aspkieham ergo in visione noctis, et ecce cum nttbibiis coeli quasi Filius hominis (^^?!il "^^S) veniehat et usque ad antiquum dierum pervenit: et in conspectu eius obtulerunt eum. Et dedit ei potestatem et honorem et regnum, et omnes populi, trihus et linguae ipsi servient; potestas eius potestas ae- terna, quae non auferetur, et regnum eius, quod non cor- rumpetur — I beheld therefore in the vision of the night, and lo, one like the son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and he came even to the Ancient of days: and they presented him before him. And he gave him power, and glory, and a kingdom : and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve him : his power is an everlasting power that shall not be taken away: and his kingdom that shall not be destroyed." ^" With unmistakable ref- erence to this prophecy Christ tells His Apostles that " the Son of man shall be betrayed " and delivered to the Gentiles, " to be mocked, and scourged, and crucified, and the third day he shall rise again." ^'' With this same text in mind He assures Caiphas that he " shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God, and coming in the clouds of heaven." ^^
^) If Christ is truly the Son of God, it log- ically follows that He is true God.^^ For He
16 Dan. VII, 13 sqq.
17 Matth. XX, 18 sq. isMatth. XXVI, 64. Cfr. B.
Bartmann, Das Himmelreich und sein Konig nach den Synoptikern, pp. 85 sqq., Paderborn 1904; H. Schell, Jahwe ur.d Christus, pp. 332 sqq., Paderborn 1903; Fr. Tillmann, Der Menschensohn, Frei-
burg 1907; A. Seltz, Das Evan- gelium vom Gottessohn, eine Apo- logie der wesenhaften Gottessohn- schaft Christi, pp. 310 sqq., Frei- burg 1908.
19 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, God: His Knowahility, Essence, and Attri- butes, pp. 63 sqq.
i6 DUALITY IN UNITY
who originates in the substance of God must be consubstantial with God, because He participates in the Divine Nature by eternal generation. In the mouth of Christ, therefore, "Son of God" signifies nothing less, but rather something more than ''God," because it is through our Lord's Sonship rather than through His Divinity that we arrive at a knowledge of the truth that there are three Persons in one Godhead.^*^
The Divinity of Christ can also be proved from the various divine attributes ascribed to Him in Sacred Scripture, the divine worship (latria) which He exacted and- received,^ ^ and the applica- tion to Him of the predicate "God."^^ The argu- ments based on the divine attributes ascribed to Jesus and the latreutic adoration offered to Him, sufficiently disprove the Rationalist contention that He is called "God" in a metaphorical sense only, as, e. g., Moses was called the "god of Pharaoh." 23 Moreover, Christ is called "God" in precisely the same sense in which the Old Testament applies the term to Yahweh Him- self.2*
Our main proof rests upon the ascription to Christ by Holy Scripture of such distinctively divine attributes as self -existence, eternity, immutability, creative power, om-
20 Cfr. J. Kleutgen, Theologie 22 See Pohle-Preuss, The Divine der Vorzeit, Vol. Ill, pp. 38 sq., Trinity, pp. 63 sqq.
2nd ed., Munster 1870. 23 Ex. VII, i.
21 V. infra, pp. 282 sq. 24 Pohle-Preuss, /. c, pp. 79 sqq.
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 17
niscience, universal dominion, etc., rather than upon the fact that it applies to Him the abstract predicate of " God."
In our treatise on the Blessed Trinity we cited five New Testament texts in which Christ is expressly called " God." -^ There is a sixth, which would be even more conclusive, were it not for the fact that textual criticism throws a doubt upon its authenticity. A few Greek codices, and several of the Fathers,-® interpret this obscure passage as referring to the " apparition of God in the flesh." It reads as follows: " Et manifeste ma- gnum est pietatis sacramentiim, quod manifestatum est in came." Our English Bible renders it thus : " And evidently great is the mystery of godliness, which was manifested in the flesh." -^ The textiis receptus has : Kat 6fiokoyovfJL€v
[0eos] e av€p large-letter Greek manuscript ©5 (= deo's) could be mis- read for 02 (=os).
The Scriptural argument for the Divinity of Christ, as set forth in our treatise on the Trinity, may be sup- plemented from other New Testament writers besides the Synoptics and SS. John and Paul.
That St. Peter really addressed Jesus as his "God" and " Saviour," as the Evangelists relate,-* is confirmed by the opening words of his Second Epistle : " Simon Petriis . . . iis qui coaeqiialem nobiscum sortiti sunt fidem in iiistitia Dei nostri et Salvatoris lesii Christi — Simon Peter ... to them that have obtained equal faith with us in the justice of our God and Saviour
25 John XX, 28; Tit. II, 13; i 27 i Tim. Ill, 16.
John V, 20; Rom. IX, 5; and John 28 Matth. XIV, 28; X\T:, 16; John
I, I. VI, 69; XXI, 17; cfr. Acts III, 6,
26 £. g., Gregory of Nyssa. 15; IV, 10.
i8 DUALITY IN UNITY
Jesus Christ," ^^ and in 2 Pet. I, 1 1 : " Sic enim abun- danter ministrabitur vobis introitus in aeternum regnum Domini nostri et Salvatoris lesu Christi — For so an en- trance shall be ministered to you abundantly into the ever- lasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." The apposition " our Lord and Saviour " manifestly refers to Christ, and the parallelism running through the whole passage demands that the attributes " our God " and " Saviour " in the first verse of the Epistle be applied to the one person of " Jesus Christ." This interpreta- tion is confirmed by the circumstance that the definite article is used but once (tou ©eov rjfiwv koL [no rov here]
(Tiarrjpo'i).
St. Jude attests that it was Jesus who " saved the peo- ple out of the land of Egypt." ^^ Jesus must therefore be identical with Yahweh, who said : "I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of Egypt." ^^ According to St. Jude,^^ " Jesus . . . hath reserved the angels [who kept not their principality, but forsook their own habitation] under darkness in everlasting chains, unto the judgment of the great day." And St. Peter assures us that " God ^* spared not the angels that sinned, but delivered them, drawn down by infernal ropes to the lower hell, unto torments, to be reserved unto judgment." By comparing these two passages we arrive at the equation : Jesus = God, and the context moreover shows that the term " God " must be taken in its strict sense.''
29 7-00 Qeov iiiiwp Kal ffuTijpos vtov auaas. Epistle of St. Jude, 'lr\
30 On the Christological teaching 82 Ex. XX, 2.
of St. Peter cfr. Liddon, The Di- 83 Epistle of St. Jude, verse 6.
vinity of Our Lord and Saviour S4 6 Geoj.
Jesus Christ, pp. 435 sqq. SB Cfr. Cardinal Bellarmine, De
81 in 'Iriffovi "Kabv Ik 7^j Myi- Christo, I, 4.
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 19
In conclusion we will quote a passage from the Epis- tle of St. James : " You have heard the patience of Job, and you have seen the end of the Lord,'^ that the Lord is merciful and compassionate." ^^ " Misericors Dominus et miserator" is a standing phrase which the Bible applies exclusively to God,^* and in this same sense, writing to the witnesses of the Ascension, St. James predicates it of Christ the " Lord."
y) The use of the term "Logos" ( Verhum Dei) to designate the "Son of God" who became incar- nate in Jesus Christ, is peculiar to St. John.^^ He ascribes to the Logos eternal pre-existence,*° aseity, creative power, and the authorship of su- pernatural grace, truth, and divine sonship. Hence the fundamental teaching of the Johan- nean Gospel, that "the Logos [Word] was God," ^^ can have but one meaning, viz.: that the Logos is God in the strict sense of the term, not merely figuratively or metaphorically. Now St, John Himself tells us that Jesus Christ is the Word made fiesh,^^ and consequently Jesus Christ, being the Logos, must be true God.
In the light of these Scriptural texts it is passing strange to hear Harnack declare.: " The most impor- ts rd TeXos 'Kvplov etdere, ■*<> This eternal pre-existence is
37 Ep. of St. James V, ii. real, not merely logical in the Di-
38 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, God: His vine Intellect or Knowledge, be- Knowability, Essence, and Attri- cause the Logos is " unigenitus in butes, pp. 464 sqq. sinu Patris — only-begotten in the
39 John I, I sqq.; i John I, i; bosom of the Father" (John I, i8). V, 7; Apoc XIX, 13. Cfr. Pohle- 41 John I, i.
Preuss, The Divine Trinity, pp. 88 42 John I, 14, 17.
sqq.
20 DUALITY IN UNITY
tant step that was ever taken in the domain of Christian doctrine was when the Christian apologists at the be- ginning of the second century drew the equation : the Logos = Jesus Christ." *^ In matter of fact St. John " drew this equation " long before the apologists. He employed the term " Logos " in a higher sense than that of " a mere predicate," ** by ascribing to Him a variety of indisputably divine attributes.*^
b) Because of the importance of this dogma we proceed to develop the argument from Tradi- tion.^^
a) The belief of the Primitive Church is clearly recorded in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers.
St. Clement of Rome,*^ who was a disciple and fellow- laborer of St. Paul,*^ and the third successor of St. Peter in the See of Rome/'' invariably refers to Christ as " the Lord," ^° — a title proper to God alone.°^ He furthermore expressly teaches that " The scepter of the
*Z Das Wesen des Christentums, Enchiridion, n. 2027). On the
p. 127 (English translation, p. 218). teaching of the Modernists see F.
44 Harnack, /. c. Heiner, Dcr neue Syllabus Pius X.,
45 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Divine pp. 114-159, Mainz 1907.
Trinity, pp. 91 sqq. For a detailed 46 On certain difficulties con- refutation of Harnack's denial of nected with the Patristic argument the genuinity of the Fourth Gospel, cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Divine Trin- see Al. Schafer, Einleitung in das ity, pp. 142 sqq. Neue Testament, pp. 255 sqq'., Pa- 47 Died about the year 96. derborn 1898. We need hardly add 48 Phil. IV, 3. that the above argument abundantly 40 Cfr. St. Irenseus, Adv. Haer., refutes the contention of the Mod- III, 3, 3. ernists, that " the Divinity of bo Dominus, 6 Ki^ptos. Christ cannot be demonstrated from 61 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, God: His the Gospels." (Cfr. Syllabus of Knowability, Essence and Attri- Pius X, apud Denzinger-Bannwart, butes, pp. 140 sqq.
I
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 21
majesty of God,°^ the Lord Jesus Christ, did not come with arrogance of pride and overbearing, which He might have done, but with humiHty." While this text does not embody an explicit profession of faith in the Divinity of Christ, it involves such a profession, inas- much as no mere creature, whether man or angel, could without blasphemy be called " the scepter of the majesty of God." Had St. Clement not believed in the Divinity of Christ, he could not reasonably have asserted that our Lord, had He so desired, instead of coming " with hu- mility," might have come " cum iactantia superhiae," that is, with a just claim to divine honors.
The so-called Second Letter of St. Clement, though now generally admitted to be the work of a writer living in the middle of the second century ,^^ may yet, because of its antiquity and the high esteem in which it has always been held in the Church,^* claim considerable dogmatic authority. It begins with the significant ex- hortation : " Brethren, thus we must think of Jesus Christ as God, as the Judge of the quick and the dead." "
The so-called Epistle of St. Barnabas, though reck- oned among the non-canonical writings by Eusebius,^® is as old as, if not older than St. Clement's undoubtedly genuine First Letter to the Corinthians.'^^ As a witness
52 rb ffKyjvrpov t^s /xr7aXo Tou GeoO. I Cor. XVI, 2 (ed. 38, 1) as purporting to be the Sec- Funk, I, 41, Tubingen 1887). end Letter of St. aement.
53 This opinion is based on both 55 Patres Apostolici, Ed. Funk, I, internal and external evidence. The 81.
complete Greek text of this " Sec- 56 Hist. EccL, VI, 13, 6.
end Letter," as first published in 57 According to the most ap-
1875, makes it evident that it is not proved conjectures (Funk, Hilgen-
a letter but a sermon, probably feld) this Letter was composed in
preached at Corinth. Cfr. Harden- the reign of the Emperor Nerva
hewer-Shahan, Patrology, p. 29. (A. D. 96-98). Cfr. Bardenhewer-
64 The " Letter " is first men- Shahan, Patrology, pp. 22 sqq.
22 DUALITY IN UNITY
to primitive Tradition its authority is unexceptionable. It teaches : " Jesus is not [only] the Son of man, but the Son of God, though as to form revealed in the flesh. But because they would say that He was the son of David, David himself, apprehending and foreseeing the error of impious men, prophesied : ' The Lord spoke to my Lord ' . . . Behold how David calls Him ' Lord ' and not son." ^«
The author of the work known as the Shepherd of Hernias was not, as he represents himself, a contem- porary of St. Clement of Rome, but probably a brother of Pope Pius I (about 140-155).^® Funk justly charges him with teaching a false Christology.*'" Nevertheless he may be cited as a witness -to primitive Tradition. He says: " The Son is older than any creature, so much so that He ministered as counsellor to the Father at the creation of the creature." ®^ And again : " The name of the Son of God is grand and immeasurable and supports the whole world." '^ Pre-existence, the power of creation and pres- ervation are divine attributes, and He to whom they are ascribed (the " Son of God," or Christ), must be Divine. However, as the phraseology of the Shepherd occa- sionally savors of Adoptionism, it will be well not to attach too much importance to his testimony.^'
68 E p. Barnabae, XII, lo, ed. 60 Hernias identifies the "Son of
Funk, I, 41. On the testimony of God " with the Holy Ghost, and
Polycarp and St. Ignatius of An- the Holy Ghost, as it would seem,
tioch, cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Di- with the Archangel Michael. Cfr.
vine Trinity, p. 137, and Nirschl, Pohle-Preuss, The Divine Trinity,
Die Theologic des hi. Ignatius, p. 151.
Mainz 1 880. «i Pastor Hermae, 1. Ill, sim. 9,
59 This theory, upon which com- c. 12, 2. petent critics are now almost unan- 62 Ibid., c, 14, 5. imously agreed, is based on a pas- 63 Cfr. Tixeront, History of Dog- sage of the Muratorian Fragment, mas (Engl, ed.). Vol. I, pp. iis which the reader will find quoted in sqq., St. Louis 191 1. Bardenhewer-Shahan, Patrology, p. 40.
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 23
P) The Christian apologists of the second cen- tury are a unit in their Logos-teaching, though it should be borne in mind that their theory of the Aoyo« oTrep/uiTuco^, as wcll as the distinction they make between Aoyos evBidOero^ and Ao'yos '7rpo opLK6s are not derived from Revelation but from the philo- sophical systems of the Platonists and Stoics.'^"'
A most important witness to primitive Christian be- lief in the Divinity of Jesus is Aristides of Athens. His Apology, already mentioned by Eusebius,*^ was re- garded as lost until the year 1878, when the Mechitarists of San Lazzaro published a fragment of an Armenian translation. In 1891, Rendel Harris made known a complete Syriac translation, and a Greek recension of the text was simultaneously edited by Armitage Rob- inson.^ The original of this Apology was probably offered to the Emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161). '* The Christians," says Aristides,'' " date the beginning of their religion from Jesus Christ. He, Himself, is
64 " The view of the Logos as safe -would appear from its history
ivBidderos and as irpo(f>opiK6s^ as in the Church, Into which the above
the Word conceived and the Word theologians [Tatian, Tertullian,
uttered, the Word mental and the Xovatian, etc.], by their mode of
Word active and effectual — to dis- teaching the yeyprjcti of the Word,
ting^uish the two senses of Logos, introduce as." (Newman, Select
thought and speech — came from Treatises of St. Athanasius, Vol.
the Stoics, and is found in Philo, U, p. 340, 9th impression, London
and was, under certain limitations, 1903.) On the history of these
allowed in Catholic theology. terms see the same eminent au-
(Damasc., F. O., II, 21). To use, thor's Tracts Theological and Ec-
indeed, either of the two absolutely clesiastical, pp. 209 sqq., new ed.,
and to the exclusion of the other, London 1895.
would have involved some form of 65 Chron. ad a. Abrah. 2140; cfr. Sabellianisra, or Arianism, as the Hist. Eccl., IV, 3, 3. case might be; but each term might 66 Cfr. Bardenhewer-Shahan, Pa- correct the defective sense of the trology, p. 46. other. That the use was not over- 67 Apol.^ II, 6. .
•24 DUALITY IN UNITY
called the Son of God the Most High, and they teach of Him that God descended from heaven and assumed flesh from a Hebrew virgin. Therefore the Son of God hath dwelled in a daughter of man."
To the same Emperor Antoninus Pius, and to his adopted sons, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, is ad- dressed the " First " Apology of St. Justin Martyr, com- posed about A. D. 150.®* Justin attempts to demonstrate from the Old Testament ^® that " Jesus Christ is the Son of God," and thereupon continues : " Who, being the first-bom word of God, is also God." ''° On the authority of Sacred Scripture he rejects the contention of the Ebionites that Christ is a " mere man," ''^ and declares that He is " alone " called " Son of God " in " the proper sense." ^^ St. Justin concludes his argu- ment against the Jew Trypho with the remark : " That Christ the Lord, therefore, is both God and the Son of God,^^ . . . has been repeatedly proved." He accord- ingly does not hesitate to assign to Jesus Christ, as Second Person of the Divine Trinity, a place in the baptismal form, saying that all Christians are baptized " in the name of the Parent of all things, the Lord God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Ghost." ■"■
68 On St. Justin's teaching con- is Dial. c. Tryph., 128 (Migne,
cerning the Logos cfr. Pohle-Preuss, I. c, 774) : ica2 Qebs 6eov vlbi
The Divine Trinity, p. 144. vir6.px<>>v.
60 Apol., I, n. 63 (Migne, P. G., 74 ApoL, I, n. 61 (Migne, /. c,
VI, 423 sq.). 419)* "In nomine Parentis uni-
70 Ibid. (Migne, P. G., VI, 426) : versorum ac Domini Dei, ac Salva- Ss Kal A6yoi rrpwrdTOKOi S)v rov toris nostri lesu Christi, et Spirilus Oeov Kal Geij viripxei. Sancti." On the Christological
71 Dial. c. Tryph., 48 (Migne, /. teaching of St. Justin consult A. L. c, 579). Feder, S.J., Justins des Martyrcrs
72 Apol., II, n. 6 (Migne, /. c, Lehre von Jesus Christus, Freiburg 453) : b fihvoi \ey6fj.ei>oi Kvptwt 1906.
vl6s> i A6yoi irp6 ruv woiTindruv.
I
I
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 25
One of the most beautiful professions of faith in the Divinity of Christ that has come down to us from the early days is contained in the Letter to Diognetus, which on internal evidence is commonly ascribed to the era of the persecutions/^ The author of this Letter '® devotes an entire chapter (the seventh) to Christ as " the Logos sent upon this earth by the invisible Creator," and who is " no angel," but the " Creator of the Universe " Him- self."
y) An important doctrinal role in the tradition of our dogma must be assigned to St. Irenaeus of Lyons (born about 140). He was a disciple of St. Polycarp of Smyrna (d. 155), who had re- ceived the faith from St. John, the Apostle.
St. Irenaeus emphasizes the fact that Christ is truly the Son of God, and consequently true God. " No one else, therefore," he writes, ..." is called God or Lord, except He who is the God and Lord of all [/. e., the Father] . . . and His Son Jesus Christ, our Lord." ^'
75 Cfr. Bardenhewer-Shahan, Pa- eorum infixit; non quemadmodum trology, p. 68. aliquis coniicere possit, hominibus
76 The authorship of the Letter minisfrum aliquem mittens aut on- to Diognetus has been variously at- gelutn aut principem, . . . sed ip- tributed: by Bunsen to Marcion, by sum opificem et creatorem omnium Draseke to Apelles, by Doulcet, (rov rexvirr^v Kol Stifiiovpyov rwv Kihn, and Kriiger to Aristidcs of tikwv) ^ per quern coelos condidit. Athens. Bardenhewer says that . , . In dementia et lenitate ut rex " the latter hypothesis alone merits mittens Filium regem misit eum, ut attention." (Bardenhewer-Shahan, Deum misit, ut hominem ad homines
•I- c.) misit."
77 Ep. ad Diognet., VII, 2, 4 (ed. 78 " Nemo igitur alius. . . . Deus Funk, I, 321): "Ipse vere om- nominatur aut Dominus appellatur nium regenerator et omnium condi- nisi qui est omnium Deus et Domi- tor et invisibilis Deus {= Pater) nus [i. e.. Pater] . . . et huius ipse e coelis veritatem et Verbum Filius lesus Christus Dominus no- sanctum et incomprehensibile (^rbv ster." Contr. Haer., Ill, 6, 2 Adyov rbv ayiop Kal a-n-epiv6i)Tov) (Migne, P. G., VII, 861).
inter homines locavit et cordibvs
26 DUALITY IN UNITY
" He [i. e., Christ] alone of all men who lived up to that time is properly called God, and Lord, and Eternal King, and Only-Begotten, and Word Incarnate, by all the proph- ets and Apostles, and by the [Holy] Spirit Himself, as any one can see who has attained to even a modicum of truth. The Scriptures would not give such testimony of Him if He were a mere man like the rest of us." ^® In virtue of this belief St. Irenseus unhesitatingly iden- tifies Christ with the Second Person of the Divine Trinity : " The Church received from the Apostles and their disciples that faith which is in one God, the Father Almighty . . . and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was made Flesh for our salvation, and in the Holy Ghost." «
As for Origen (185-255), he is quite orthodox in his Christological teaching when he speaks as a simple witness to ecclesiastical Tradition. It is only when he en- gages in philosophical speculation that he seems to deviate from the truth. In his first-mentioned capacity he says in the preface to his famous work Ilcpt 'Apx^v : " Jesus Christ, who has come, was begotten from the Father be- fore all creatures. And having ministered to the Father at the creation of all things — for through Him all
79 Contr. Haer., Ill, 19, 2 stolis et a discipulis eorum accepit (Migne, P. G., VII, 910): "Quo- earn fidem, quae est in unum Deum fiiam autem ipse [«". e., Christus} Patrem ontnipotentem . . . et in proprie praeter otnnes, qui fucrunt unum lesum Christum Filium Dei tunc hetnines, Deus et Dominus et incarnatum pro nostra salute (k Rex aeternus et Unigenitus et Ver- els iVo "Kpiffrbv 'Irjaovi'^ rhv vliv bum incarnatum praedicatur et a roi) QeoiJ, rbv aapKoiOevra, vvip Prophetis omnibus et Apostolis et rrjs "fiixeripas ffwrriplas) ct in Spi- ab ipso Spiritu, adest videre om- ritum Sanctum." A cognate text nibus, qui vel modicum dc veritate from the writings of Clement of attigerint; haec autem non testifi- Alexandria is cited in Pohle-Preuss, carentur Scripturae de eo, si simili- The Divine Trinity, p. 141. On ter ut omnes homo tantum fuisset." traces of Subordinationism in Ire-
80 Ibid., I, 10, 1-2 (Migne, /. c, nacus cfr. Tixeront, History of S49i 550) : " Ecclesia et ab Apa- Dogmas, p. 234.
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 27
things were made — He emptied Himself in recent days, became man and assumed flesh, notwithstanding He was God, and having become man, He nevertheless remained what He was, namely God." *^ Of the author of the Johannine Gospel Origen observes : " None of the Evan- gelists has proclaimed the Divinity of Christ so clearly as John." 82
8) Among the ecclesiastical writers of the West, Tertullian taught and defended the Di- vinity of Christ and the dogma of the Trinity. In his Apologeticum (or ApologeticusY^ he says: "Verum neque de Christo eriihescimus, quum sub nomine eiiis deputari et damnari itcvat, neque de Deo aliter praesumimus. Necesse est igitur paitca dicamus de Christo ut Deo. . . . Hunc ex Deo prolatum didicimus et prolatione generation et idcirco Filiiim Dei et Deum dictum ex imitate substantiae; nam et Deiis spiritus. . . . Quod de Deo profectum est, Dens est et Dei Filius et unus ambo." ^^
81 Orig., De Princ, Praef., 5. serves that Tertullian " in his de-
82 Tract, in loa., 6 (Migne, P. G., fense of the personal distinction be- XIV, 29). On the controversy be- tween the Father and the Son . . . tween Dionysius the Great of Alex- does not, apparently, avoid a cer- andria (d. 265) and Pope Diony- tain Subordinationism, although in sius, cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Divine many very clear expressions and Trinity, pp. 121 sqq., 142. On Ori- turns of thought he almost ap- gen's Christological teaching cfr. proaches the decision of the Nicene Liddon, The Divinity of Christ, pp. Council." (Otto Bardenhewer, Pa- 573 sqq.; Tixeront, History of Dog- trologie, 2nd ed., p. 162, Freiburg mas, I, 264 sqq. 1901. Shahan's translation, p. 185.
83 The most ancient text-wit- We have slightly altered Dr. Sha- nesses do not agree with regard to ban's wording, in order to bring out the precise title of this famous book. our point more eflFectively). The
6i Apologet., 21. Bardenhewer ob- difficulty is one of terminology
2B DUALITY IN UNITY
The writings of St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage (about AD. 200-258), who was a countryman of TertulHan, abound in passages affirming the Divinity of Christ and the dogma of the Trinity. "If he has obtained for- giveness of his sins . . .," Cyprian says in one place, " he has been made a temple of God. I ask : Of which God? Not of the Creator, because he does not believe in Him. Not of Christ, because he denies that Christ is God. Not of the Holy Ghost, because, if the Three are One, how can the Holy Ghost be pacified in regard to him who is an enemy of either the Father or the Son?"«''
The Patristic texts which we have quoted show how utterly groundless is the Modernist assertion, solemnly condemned in the " Syllabus of Pius X," that " the Christ of history [i. e., Jesus as depicted in the four Gos- pels] is far inferior to the Christ who is the object of faith." «•
3. The Apologetic Argument. — Apologeti- cally, the Divinity of Christ can be demonstrated in a twofold manner : ( i ) against the Jews, by showing that the Messianic prophecies were ful- filled in Christ; (2) against unbelievers, from internal and external criteria furnished by His life and teaching and by the testimony of His
rather than real. Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, labus, pp. 121 sqq., Mainz 1907.
The Divine Trinity, pp. 141 sqq.; On the Nicene decision see Pohle-
also, Tixeront, History of Dogmas, Preuss, The Divine Trinity^ pp. 125
Vol. I, p. 312 sqq. On the testimony of the mar-
8S Ep, ad lubaian., 23, 12. tyrs to the Divinity of Christ, ibid.,
69"Concedere licet Christum, pp. 137 sqq. On the teaching of the
quern exhihet historia, multo inferi- Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers,
orem esse Christo, qui est obiectum ibid., pp. 153 sqq. fidei," Cfr. Heiner, Der neue Syl-
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 29
Apostles. It belongs to Fundamental Theology to develop this argument fully; in the present, purely dogmatic treatise we shall merely sketch its outlines.
a) Against the Jews we must prove that Jesus Christ is the " Messias" ^" promised in the Old Testament. If He is the Messias, He is true God, for as such the prophets predicted that He would appear.^^ If He were not the Messias, the Jewish religion would be based on fraud, be- cause the idea of the Messias forms its very foun- dation-stone.®^
All the Messianic prophecies were fulfilled in that his- toric personage known as Jesus of Nazareth, who proved Himself by word and deed to be the true Messias.®"
The well-known prediction of Jacob (Gen. XLIX, 10 sqq.) : "The sceptre shall not be taken away ®^ from Juda, nor a ruler from his thigh, till he come that is to be sent, etc.," either has not yet been fulfilled, and must forever remain unfulfilled, or it is fulfilled in Jesus Christ.*- The same holds good of the famous prophecy
87 n^gfjj. i'. e. uncfus, i "KpuTTSs. Vol. II, pp. 192 sqq., Munster 1895; ~ ■ ^ H. P. Liddon, The Divinity of Our
88 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss. The Divine ^^^j „„j Saz-iour Jesus Christ, pp. Trinity, pp. 15 sq. ,05 gqq^ London, Oxford, and Cam-
89 Cfr. F. Hettinger, Fundamen- bridge 1867; Maas, Christ in Type taltheologie, 2nd ed., pp. 321 sqq., „„j Prophecv, Vol. I. pp. 56 sqq.. Freiburg 1888: Hettinger-Bowden, jjew York 1893: H. J. Coleridge, Repealed Religxon. pp. 149 sqq.. 2nd g. J., The Preparation of the In- ed.; A. J. Maas. S. J.. Chnsf in carnation, pp. 59 sqq., 2nd cd., Lon- Type and Prophecy. 2 vols.. New j^jj ,gg^_
York 1893. 91 Qq jj,;, rendering of the He-
90 On the Messianic expectations ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^.^„ ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^j^ of the Jews and Gentiles at the passage, see Maas, Christ in Type t.me ot Christ cfr. Hettinger, Fun- „„j Prophecy. Vol. I, pp. 288 sqq. damentaltheologie, pp 339 sqq.; C. „ q^ ^^ain strange Jewish at- Gutberlet, Lehrbuch der Apologetxk,
30 DUALITY IN UNITY
of Daniel (Dan. IX, 24-27: "Seventy weeks are shortened upon thy people, etc."). No matter how we may interpret it in detail, as a whole it was either realized in Christ or must remain forever unfulfilled.^^ Now there can be no reasonable doubt that the Danielle pre- diction has found its consummation in Christ, for since His time the Jewish sacrifices have ceased and the city of Jerusalem with its Temple has been destroyed. Sim- ilar arguments can be constructed from the prophecies of the "virgin birth" (Is. VII, 14), the passion (Ps. XXI; Is. LIII, I sqq.), the "clean oblation" (Mai. I, II sqq.), and so forth.^*
Furthermore, all Old Testament types, both personal and real, have been fulfilled in Christ and His Church.®' Hence, for an orthodox Jew to deny the Messiahship and consequently the Divinity of Christ, means to reject the Jewish religion as an empty superstition.
b) Against unbelievers the Divinity of Jesus Christ can be demonstrated : ( i ) from internal criteria such as the divine character of His teach- ing and the superhuman majesty of His Person ; and (2) from external evidence, especially His
tempts at evading this dilemma cfr. Childhood of Jesus Christ Accord-
Billuart, De Incarn., diss. 2, art. 2, ing to the Canonical Gospels, Phil-
gi, adelphia 1910, and G. Oussani, " The
93 Cfr. Fraidl, Die Exegese der Virgin Kirth of Christ and Modern
70 Wochen Daniels in der dlteren Criticism " in the New York Re-
und tnittleren Zeit, Graz 1883; view, Vol. Ill (1907), No. 2-3
Dusterwald, Die Weltreiche und das (1908), No. 4-5.
Gottesreich nach den Weissagungen 05 Cfr. J. Selbst, Die Kirche Jesu
des Propheten Daniel, Freiburg Christi nach den Weissagungen der
1890; Maas, Christ in Type and Propheten, Mainz 1883; A. Schop-
Prophecy, Vol. I, pp. 299 sqq. fer, Geschichte des Alten Testa-
84 These arguments are well de- mentcs, 4th ed., pp. 370 sqq., Brixen
veloped by G. B. Tepe, S. J., Instit. 1906; A J. Maas, S. J., Christ in
Theol., Vol. I, pp. 132 sqq., Paris Type and Prophecy, New York
1894. On the dogma of the virgin 1893, birth consult Durand-Bruneau, The
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 31
prophecies and the miracles wrought by Him in confirmation of His mission and teaching.
This argument derives additional force from the ad- mission of modem Rationahsts, that " the historical crit- icism of two generations has resulted in restoring the credibility of the first three Gospels " (which had been impugned by David Friedrich Strauss),"* and that St. Paul " understood the Master and continued His work." »^
a) The Rationalists are forced to admit that Christ's religious and moral teaching was as sub- lime as it was simple, and that not the slightest moral taint attaches to His Person.
" That Jesus' message is so great and so powerful," says, e. g., Harnack,^* " lies in the fact that it is so simple and on the other hand so rich; so simple as to be exhausted in each of the leading thoughts which he uttered ; so rich that every one of these thoughts seems to be inexhaustible and the full meaning of the sayings and parables beyond our reach. But more than that — he himself stands behind everj-thing that he has said. His words speak to us across the centuries with the freshness of the present. It is here that that profound saying is truly verified : ' Speak, that I may see thee.* " Sublime indeed, bom of superhuman wisdom and celes- tial holiness is the teaching of Jesus Christ,®" and con- sequently, He Himself must be more than a mere man.^°°
96 A. Hamack, Dai Wesen d'es 99 Consider, for instance, the Chrtstcntums, p. 14. (English edi- Lord's Prayer and the Sermon on tion, p. 22). the Mount.
97 Ibid., p. no. (English ed., p. 100 The student will find this 189.) thought forcefully developed by P.
98 Ibid., p. 33. (English transla- Hake in his Handbuch der allge- tion, pp. 5S sq.)
32 DUALITY IN UNITY
By the compelling majesty of His Person Jesus looms as the ideal " Superman." His very features, His words and actions, are so human and yet at the same time so exalted, that we instinctively feel He is a supe- rior being. We are justified in asking Professor Har- nack whether his own description of Christ would fit a mere man : " The sphere in which he lived, above the earth and its concerns, did not destroy his interest in it ; no, he brought everything in it into relation with the God whom he knew, and he saw it as protected in him : * Your Father in heaven feeds them.' The parable is his most familiar form of speech. Insensibly, how- ever, parable and sympathy pass into each other. Yet he who had not where to lay his head does not speak like one who has broken with everything, or like an he- roic penitent, or like an ecstatic prophet, but like a man who has rest and peace for his soul and who is able to give life and strength to others. He strikes the might- iest notes; he offers men an inexorable alternative; he leaves them no escape; and yet the strongest emotion seems to come naturally to him, and he expresses it as something natural ; he clothes it in the language in which a mother speaks to her child." ^°^
There is another characteristic which, even more than those we have already mentioned, stamps the Person of Jesus Christ with the seal of Divinity, — His abso- lute exemption from error and sin. No mere man is immune from sin and error. If any man really en- joyed these prerogatives, he could not proclaim the fact to his fellow men without making himself the butt of ridicule. Jesus, the Godman, speaking 'as one hav-
tneinen Religionswissenschaft, Vol. pp. 23 sq. (English translation, pp. II, pp. 131 sqq., Freiburg 1887. 39-4o0
lOXDas Wesen des Christentums,
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST
33
ing power," ^°- fears not error, nor doubt, nor contra- diction. He bases His instructions on a categorical : " I tell you," and meets the objections of His opponents in the majestic posture of a true sovereign. Still more marvellous is His freedom from sin. Neither His friends ^''^ nor His enemies,^*** including Judas the traitor, were able " to find a cause " in Him. Nay, more — He Himself was in a position to say without the slightest conceit : " I am meek and humble of heart," ^*'* and to ask : " Which of you shall convince me of sin ? " ^°' — the same Jesus who taught His Apostles to pray : " Father . . . forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors." ^°"
Christ thus stands before us both in the intellectual and the moral order as a wondrous apparition, a super- human, heavenly Being of divine origin. Closely bound up with His character and teaching is His own asser- tion of His Divine Sonship and Divinity. It puts all men face to face with the terrible dilemma : " Either Jesus Christ is true God, or the Christian religion is a blasphemous deception, and its Founder a knave or a fool. This alternative ought to convince all who are able and willing to use their reason, that Christ is true God and that the Christian religion is a divine institution." ^°* In vain does Harnack declare it unevangelical to " put a Christological creed in the forefront of the Gospel " and to " teach that before a man can approach [the Gospel] he must learn to think rightly about Christ." "^ Christ
102 Matth. VII, 29.
103 Cfr. Acts III, 14; XIII, 3s; Heb. IV, 15; I Pet. I, 19; 1 John III, 7; II, I.
104 Cfr. Luke XXIII, 4.
105 Matth. XI, 29.
106 John VIII, 46.
107 Matth. VI, 12.
108 J. Kleutgen, Theologie der Vorzeit, Vol. Ill, p. 17, 2nd ed., Munster 1870. Cfr. M. Lepin, Christ and the Gospel, English tr., pp. 128 sqq., Philadelphia 1910.
109 Das Wesen des Christentums, p. 93. (English translation, p. 158.)
34 DUALITY IN UNITY
Himself imposed " a Christological profession of faith on His Apostles," ^^° and confronted the Jews with the cate- gorical question : " What think you of Christ ? whose son is he?""^ In proof of His own conviction and of His assertion that He is the Messiah and the true Son of God, He suffered ignominious death.^^^ Upon a right conception of the Person of Christ, therefore, de- pends the truth or falsity of the Christian religion. It is a question of eternal life or death.^^^
P) External proofs for the Divinity of Christ's Person and mission are the prophecies He ut- tered and the miracles He performed.
His prophecies concern partly His own future,^^* partly the fate of His Church,^^^ partly the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple,^^^ and the dispersion of the Jews.^^^ The fact that these predictions were ful- filled to the letter, furnishes a sufficient guaranty that those which still remain unfulfilled (e. g., the resurrec- tion of the dead and the last judgment), will also come
110 Matth. XVI, i6 sqq. secutions, the conversion of the
111 Matth. XXII, 42. Gentiles, the indestructibility of His
112 Matth. XXVI, 23 sqq.; Luke Church.
XXII, 66 sqq.; John XIX, 7. 116 Cfr. Matth. XXIV, 5; Luke
113 Cfr. K. Hennemann, Die XIX, 43 sqq.
Heiligkeit Jesu als Beweis seiner iiT Cfr. Luke XXI, 24. On the
Gottheit, Wurzburg 1898; A. Seitz, literal fulfillment of these proph-
Das Evangelium vom Gottessohn, ecies cfr. P. Hake, Handbuch der
Freiburg 1908, pp. 171 sqq., 343 allgemeinen Religionswisscnsehaft,
gqq. ; H. P. Liddon, The Divinity Vol. II, pp. 193 sqq.; G. B. Tepe,
of Christ, pp. 243 sqq.; F. Sawicki, Instit. TheoL, Vol. I, pp. 193 sqq.
Die Wahrheit des Christentums, pp. On the destruction of Jerusalem in
35S sqq., Paderborn 1911. particular, see Josephus, Bell. lud.,
114 As, e. g.. His betrayal at the II, 13; VI, 3 sqq.; VII, i; Tacitus, hands of Judas, the denial of Peter, Hist., I, 2; Ammian. Marcellin., Rer. the Passion and the Resurrection. Gest., XXIII, i sqq. (Kirch, En-
115 For instance, the sending of chiridion Fontium Historiae Ec- the Holy Ghost, the heathen per- clesiasticae, n. 606, Friburgi 1910).
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 35
true. Meanwhile the Catholic Church resides among us as a living tangible proof of Christ's prophetic power. Her existence, teaching, character, and indefectibility supply the earnest inquirer with a sufficiently strong ar- gument for the Godhead of her Founder,"*
The historicity of the Gospel miracles cannot be brushed aside on Harnack's frivolous pretext that " what happens in space and time is subject to the general laws of motion, and that in this sense, as an interruption of the order of Nature, there can be no such thing as ' miracles.' " If the Gospels are authentic and gen- uine documents, — and Harnack admits that at least three of them are, — the wonderful events which they record must be accepted as historic facts, because they are inseparably bound up with the narrative as a whole. The moral character of Jesus stands or falls with His miracles, to which He so frequently appeals in proof of His doctrine and mission.^^® In matter of fact tHese miracles were wrought before the eyes of the whole Jewish nation, their genuineness is attested alike by friend and foe, and at least one of them was established by a searching legal investigation.^-" Harnack arbi- trarily disrupts the texture of the Gospel miracles when he says : " That the earth in its course stood still, that a she-ass spoke, that a storm was quieted by a word, we do not believe and we shall never again believe; but that the lame walked, the blind saw, and the deaf heard, will not be so summarily dismissed as an illu-
118 This argument is well devel- 4, s; XII, 25 sqq.; Luke V, 23 oped by O. R. Vassall-Phillips. C. sqq.; John V, 21, 36; VI, 30; X, 37 SS. R., The Mustard Tree: An Ar- sq.; XI, 42; XIV, 10 sq., etc., etc. gument on Behalf of the Divinity of On the historic character of the Christ. London 1912. Gospels see P. Batiffol, The Credi-
119 Harnack, Das Wesen des bility of the Gospel, tr. by G. C. H. Christentums, p. 17 (English trans- Pollen, S. J., London 1912, lation, pp. 28 sq.) Cfr. Matth. XI, 120 Cfr. John IX, 1 sqq.
36 DUALITY IN UNITY
sion." "^ The miracles of the Gospel cannot be divided off into credible cures and incredible interruptions of the order of Nature without destroying the harmonious unity of the sacred narrative. Furthermore, such unwarranted discrimination would cast a slur on the moral character of Jesus, who in His sermons con- stantly appeals to both classes of miracles. If some of them were unreal, Christ would be a contemptible im- postor.^22
And now to the final question: What attitude does modern Rationalism take with regard to the Resurrection, that pivotal miracle which constitutes the climax of our Lord's earthly career and the foundation stone of Christian belief ? ^^* Will Harnack here too make the reservation : " We are not yet by any means acquainted with all the forces working in it [i. e., the order of Nature] and acting reciprocally with other forces " ? ^^* It is here that the unbeliever meets with his final Water- loo. The hypothesis that the death of Christ was merely apparent, and that His disciples were impostors, has now been universally abandoned. The so-called vision theory is flatly contradicted by the facts.^^'* There- fore our Lord's triumphant Resurrection forms the pillar and groundwork of the Christian dispensation and the test and touchstone of true belief.^-"
121 Das IVesen des Christentums, surely neither a visionary nor a p, i8 (English translation, pp. 30 day-dreamer.
sq.). 126 The student will find this sub-
122 Cfr. Luke VII, 13 sqq.; jcct more fully developed in Tepe, Matth. VII, 18 sqq.; John XI, 43. Instit. TheoL, Vol. I, pp. 97 sqq.
123 " If Christ be not risen again, He may also consult with profit: then is our preaching vain, and P. Hake, Handbuch der allgemeinen your faith is also vain." (1 Cor. Religionswisscnschaft, Vol. II, pp. XV, 14.) 171 sqq.; F. Hettinger, Fundamen-
124 Das IVesen des Christentums, taltheologie, 2nd ed., pp. 368 sqq., p. 18 (English translation, p. 30). Freiburg 1888; Fl. Chable, Die
12s The doubting Thomas was Wunder Jesu in ihrem inneren
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 37
Readings : — * St. Thomas Aquinas, Contr. Gent, IV, 2 sqq. (Rickaby, Of God and His Creatures, pp. 340 sqq., London 1905). — Suarez, De Incarnatione, disp. 2. — * Prudentius Maranus, De Divinitate Domini Nostri lesu Christi, ed. Wirceb., 1859. — P. Hake, Handbuch der allgemeinen Religionswissenschaft, VoL n, §§ 30 sqq., Freiburg 1887. — * C. Gutberlet, Apologetik, 2nd ed., Vol. II, 2, §§ 5-10, Munster 1895. — * Fr. Hettinger, Apologia des Christentums, I, i, Vortr. 14-18, 9th ed., Freiburg 1906. (English tr. by H. S. Bowden, Revealed Religion, pp. 130 sqq., 2nd ed., Lon- don s. a.) — J. Bade, Christotheologie oder Jesus Christus, der Sohn Gottes und ivahre Gott, 2nd ed., Paderbom 1870. — L. Reinke, Die messianischen Psahnen, 2 vols., Giessen 1857-58. — Idem, Die messianischen Weissagungen bet den Prophet en, 4 vols., Giessen 1859-62. — M. Lendovsek, Divina Maiestas Verbi Incarnati Elucidata ex Libris Novi Testamenti, Graz 1896. — Endler, Apologetische Vortrdge iiber die Gottheit lesu, Prague 1900. — W. Capitaine, Jesus von Nazareth, eine Priifung seiner Gott- heit, Ratisbon 1904. — H. Schell, Jahwe und Christus, Pader- born 1905. — G. W. B. Marsh, Messianic Philosophy, an Historical and Critical Exanvination of the Evidence for the Existence, Death, Resurrection, Ascension, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, London 1908. — Idem, Miracles, London 1906. — Idem, The Resur- rection of Christ, Is it a Fact? London 1905. — Devivier-Sasia, Christian Apologetics, Vol. I, pp. ZZ sqq., San Jose, Gal., 1903. — Bougaud-Currie, The Divinity of Christ, New York 1906. — J. H. Newman, An Essay in Aid of a Grammar of Assent, New York ed., 1870, pp. 420 sqq. — Freddi-SuUivan, S. J., Jesus Christ the Word Incarnate, pp. 12 sqq., St. Louis 1904. — V. Rose, O. P., Studies on the Gospels, English tr. by R. Eraser, London 1903. — * H. Felder, O. M. Cap., Jesus Christus, Apologie seiner Messia- nitdt und Gottheit gegeniiber der neuestcn ungldubigen Jesus-For- schung, VoL I, Paderbom 1911, VoL II, 1914. — Jkl. Lepin, Christ and the Gospel, Philadelphia 1910. — O. R. Vassall- Phillips, C. SS. R., The Mustard Tree: An Argument on Behalf of the Di-
Zusammenhang, Freiburg 1897; H. Christ, pp. 232 sqq., London, Ox-
Schell, Jahwe und Christus, pp. 278 ford, and Cambridge 1867; J. B.
sqq., Paderbom 1905; L. Fonck, Disteldorf, Die Auferstehung
S. J., Die Wunder des Herrn im Christi, Trier 1906; G. W. B.
Evangelium, 2nd ed., Innsbruck Marsh, The Resurrection of Christ,
1907; H. P. Liddon, The Diinnity London 1905: E. Mangenot, La
of 0%r Lord and Saviour Jesus Resurrection de Jesus, Paris 1910.
38 DUALITY IN UNITY
vinity of Christ, London 1912. — F. X. Kiefl, Der geschkhtliche Christus und die moderne Philosophie, Mainz 191 1. — P. Batiffol, The Credibility of the Gospels (tr. by G. C. H. Pollen, S. J.), London 1912. — H, Schumacher, Die Selbstoffenbarung Jesu bei Mat. II, 5/ {Luc. 10, 22), Freiburg 1912. — Jesus Christus, Vor- trdge von Braig, Hoberg, Krieg, Weber, Esser, 2nd ed., Freiburg 191 1. — A. L. Williams (Prot.). The Hebrew-Christian Messiah, London 1917.
Additional literature in Pohle-Preuss, The Divine Trinity, pp. 95 sqq., St. Louis 1912.