|
The relation's being in the subject ("esse
in") is not the foundation of the relation but it is
the relation itself in the general nature of an accident
and not under the special aspect of a relation. The reply
of the Thomists is that existence does not belong formally
to a predicamental relation according to its being with
reference to its terminus ("esse
ad") because according to this being with
reference to another ("esse ad")
the relation abstracts from existence and could be a
relation of reason. Existence, however, belongs to a
predicamental relation according to its being in a
subject, that is, its "inesse"," or its
inherence in the subject. Since, however, as we shall
see below, in God the "esse in" cannot be an
accident, but must be the divine substance, it follows,
according to St. Thomas, that there is one being in the
Trinity for the different divine relations. Suarez, on
the contrary, thought that a relation had its own proper
existence and therefore he taught that there were three
relative existences in God. Similarly he taught that
there were two beings in Christ because he denied the real
distinction between the created essence and being. For
St. Thomas there was but one being for the three divine
persons and one being in Christ.
This distinction between the "esse in" of a
relation and its "esse ad" is clearly
explained by St. Thomas: "The relation itself, which
is nothing else than the reference of one creature to
another, has one kind of being inasmuch as it is an
accident and another being inasmuch as it is a relation or
order to another. Inasmuch as it is an accident it has
its being in a subject, but not as it is a relation or an
order, for as a relation it has being exclusively with
reference to another, a something passing over to another
and in some way assisting the thing to which it is
related."[206] Thus the "esse in", which
is something the relation has in common with all
accidents, gives title to reality to the relation's
"esse ad".[207]
From various examples, especially in the supernatural
order, we shall see that this concept of relation is of
great importance. In Christ the hypostatic union is the
real relation of the dependence of the humanity of Christ
on the person of the divine Word. "The hypostatic union
is that relation which is found between the divine and
human natures... . This union is not really in God
but is only a relation of reason; but it really is in the
human nature, which is a kind of creature. Therefore it
is proper to say that it (the hypostatic union) is
something created."[208]
Similarly, in the Blessed Virgin Mary the divine
maternity is a real relation to the person of the incarnate
Word, and because of its terminus this real relation
belongs to the hypostatic order and transcends the order of
grace. Hence it is commonly held that the Blessed
Virgin Mary was predestined to the divine maternity
before she was predestined to the fullness of glory and
grace. It should be noted, however, that the person of
the Word does not acquire a real relation to the Blessed
Virgin but only a relation of reason because the relation
of God to creatures is only a relation of reason. So
also St. Joseph's great dignity of foster-father of
the incarnate Word is a relation. Finally, our adoptive
sonship is a relation to God the author of grace; it is a
participation in the likeness of the eternal filiation of
the only-begotten Son.
|
|