|
This article is inserted here to refute the error of certain
Platonists, who admitted that the Son of God ought to have assumed
such a nature.
It is denied that the Son of God assumed a nature abstracted from
individuals, because such a nature has only mental
existence,[713] and also because by the very fact that the nature
is assumed by some person, it belongs properly to this person.
Moreover, only common and universal operations can be attributed to
the common nature, by which a person does not merit, because merit
pertains to a particular circumstance and time. Finally, even though
the human nature were to exist apart from sensible things, as Plato
contended, the assumption of this kind of separated human nature would
not be fitting, because the Son of God assumed the human nature so
that He could be seen by men.
Reply to first objection. Nevertheless, it remains true that Christ
is "the universal cause of human salvation," for this universality is
not of predication, but of causation.
|
|
