|
The principal conclusion of this article is that there are two
operations in Christ, one of the human nature, the other of the
divine nature. It is of faith, decided in the Third Council of
Constantinople, against Monothelitism as quoted in the body of this
article.[1467]
Theological proof. It is evident, for operations follow forms,
which are principles of action. But in Christ there are two
principles of action, namely, two distinct natures and two wills.
Therefore in Christ there are diverse operations.
Confirmation. The Scripture says that Christ was obedient and
merited. But He could neither obey nor merit by the divine will.
Therefore He obeyed and merited by the human will that was in
conformity with the divine will. Manifestly obedience and merit
presuppose subordination of the lower will to the higher will.
Second conclusion. Nevertheless the divine nature operates by means
of the human nature, using it as an instrument. Thus Christ as man
in His ministry worked miracles, and the principal cause of these can
be only God.[1468]
Reply to fifth objection. It is pointed out that the two operations
concurred even in these miracles; there was, for example, in the
healing of the leper the proper operation of Christ's human nature,
namely, contact with the body of the leper, and the divine operation,
namely, the miraculous healing of the leper.
Corollary. We distinguish between three kinds of operations in
Christ. Some are merely divine, such as creation and conservation.
Some are merely human, namely, those which Christ performed by the
power of His own human nature, such as eating, drinking, weeping,
deliberating. Some are mixed, namely, those to which each nature
contributes, the divine as the principal cause, the human as the
instrumental cause, such as the raising of Lazarus, sight given to
the man born blind, and others of this nature. The strictly
miraculous operation, for example, the raising of the dead to life,
is indeed one operation, which depends on God as the principal cause
and on the human nature of Christ as the instrument in conjunction with
it. But even in such a case there is at the same time the operation
that belongs properly to the instrument, which does not exceed its own
power, such as shouting, touching, speaking. This operation
disposes for the effect of the principal agent, either producing its
own disposition to be accomplished in the subject, as the pen
contributes the ink, or acting only in a dispositive way, as the
trumpet transmits the sound in a certain direction rather than in
another.
What is the theandric or God-man operation?
St. Thomas explains this term in his reply to the first objection
where he says: "Dionysius places in Christ a theandric, that is a
God-man-like or divino-human operation not by any confusion of the
operations or powers of both natures, but inasmuch as His divine
operation employs the human, and his human operation shares in the
power of the divine as when He healed the leper with a touch." Then
there are two subordinated operations, namely, the touch that need not
be miraculous, and the actual miraculous healing, which proceeds from
God as the principal cause and from Christ's human nature as the
instrumental cause. Yet it must furthermore be remarked that the very
action alone of Christ's human will is usually called in another sense
theandric on account of the infinite value it derives from the divine
suppositum that is the agent which operates. Thus it is said that
Christ's meritorious and satisfactory acts were theandric in this
sense, that they proceeded both from His human will and from His
divine personality. And herein consists the essence of the very
mystery of Redemption, in that the infinite value of these theandric
acts of Christ, which are called theandric because of the suppositum
or divine person of the Word incarnate, who operates through
Christ's most holy soul.
|
|
