|
Reply. The proposition is not false, because predestination is
attributed to Christ only on account of His human nature, which means
as man.
Reply to first objection. The meaning is that Christ as man was
predestinated the Son of God, inasmuch as His human nature received
the grace of union.
Reply to second objection. It is false to say that, just as Christ
is visible by reason of His human nature, so it would be natural for
Him to be the Son of God; but it is so inasmuch as His human nature
is hypostatically united to the Word of God. Hence it is said that
Christ as man was predestined the natural Son of God, but not the
adopted son.
Doubt. Was Christ, as man, predestined primarily and principally
to be the natural Son of God, and only secondarily to the beatific
vision and other supernatural gifts bestowed on Him?
Reply. The Thomists affirm, against Scotus, that Christ was so
predestined. They say that what was intended first and principally in
the decree of predestination is to be the natural Son of God, or the
hypostatic union, because it is greater to be God than to enjoy Him
as the other blessed do. This decree of Christ's predestination to
be the natural Son of God is nothing else but the decree of the
Incarnation. It is only in consequence of this decree that Christ
was predestined to glory, as to something secondary, resulting from
the grace of union.
Likewise, in the treatise on Mariology, St. Thomas and very many
theologians, such as Suarez and several others, say that by the
decree of the Incarnation the Blessed Virgin Mary was first
predestined to be the Mother of God, and only as a consequence of
this to fullness of grace and glory "so that she might be fittingly and
worthily the Mother of God."[1611]
Objection. But Christ is made more perfect by the light of glory and
the beatific vision. Therefore these are more perfect than the
hypostatic union.
Reply. I deny the consequence, because the hypostatic union is not
related to the light of glory, as a disposition to a more perfect
form, but rather as an eminent cause to what results from it. In
fact, the hypostatic union formally constitutes the hypostatic order,
which infinitely transcends the order of grace and glory. Even the
divine maternity belongs, because of that in which it terminates, to
the hypostatic order, and it transcends the plenitude of grace in Mary
although this plenitude is, indeed, a derived and most fitting
perfection so that the Blessed Virgin Mary may be worthy to be the
Mother of God.
Thus the rational soul, inasmuch as it pertains to the substantial
order, is more perfect than the intellectual faculty and intellection,
which pertain to the order of accidents and properties, though they
perfect the substance.
Moreover, it must be noted that the common saying, namely, that
everything is for its operation, does not mean that substance is for
accident, for this would be false. The meaning of this axiomatic
statement is, as Cajetan observes, that everything operates for its
own sake. And the thing with its operation is a greater perfection
than the thing apart from its operation, just as a tree and its fruit
are more perfect than the tree alone. But it is better to give the
tree than to give only the fruit or the usufruct. Wherefore, St.
Thomas says: "He who vows something and does it, subjects himself
to God more than he who only does it; for he subjects himself to God
not only as to the act, but also as to the power, since in future he
cannot do something else. Even so he gives more who gives the tree
with its fruit than he who gives the fruit only, as Anselm
says."[1612] Operation follows being, and operation is for the
perfection of the substance.
Hence Christ certainly was predestined to be the natural Son of God
prior to His predestination to glory, and the Blessed Virgin Mary,
by the same decree of the Incarnation, was predestined to be the
Mother of God prior to her predestination to plenitude of grace and
glory.
Corollary. Evidently both the predestination of Christ and that of
the Blessed Virgin Mary are absolutely gratuitous. Neither Christ
nor the Blessed Virgin Mary could merit the Incarnation, and the
merits of Christ and of the Blessed Virgin Mary are the effects,
and not the cause of their predestination; just as the merits of the
elect are the effects and not cause of their predestination, as St.
Thomas shows.[1613] St. Paul says: "What hast thou that
thou hast not received?"[1614] And again: "God chose us
before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and
unspotted in His sight in charity,"[1615] not because He
foresaw our future holiness. God is not only the spectator, but the
author of salvation.
|
|
