|
Objection 1: It would seem that in Christ there was not the fulness
of grace. For the virtues flow from grace, as was said above (FS,
Question 110, Article 4). But in Christ there were not all
the virtues; for there was neither faith nor hope in Him, as was
shown above (Articles 3,4). Therefore in Christ there was not
the fulness of grace.
Objection 2: Further, as is plain from what was said above (FS,
Question 111, Article 2), grace is divided into operating and
cooperating. Now operating grace signifies that whereby the ungodly is
justified, which has no place in Christ, Who never lay under any
sin. Therefore in Christ there was not the fulness of grace.
Objection 3: Further, it is written (James 1:17): "Every
best gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the
Father of lights." But what comes thus is possessed partially, and
not fully. Therefore no creature, not even the soul of Christ, can
have the fulness of the gifts of grace.
On the contrary, It is written (Jn. 1:14): "We saw Him
full of grace and truth."
I answer that, To have fully is to have wholly and perfectly. Now
totality and perfection can be taken in two ways: First as regards
their "intensive" quantity; for instance, I may say that some man
has whiteness fully, because he has as much of it as can naturally be
in him; secondly, "as regards power"; for instance, if anyone be
said to have life fully, inasmuch as he has it in all the effects or
works of life; and thus man has life fully, but senseless animals or
plants have not. Now in both these ways Christ has the fulness of
grace. First, since He has grace in its highest degree, in the most
perfect way it can be had. And this appears, first, from the
nearness of Christ's soul to the cause of grace. For it was said
above (Article 1) that the nearer a recipient is to the inflowing
cause, the more it receives. And hence the soul of Christ, which is
more closely united to God than all other rational creatures, receives
the greatest outpouring of His grace. Secondly, in His relation to
the effect. For the soul of Christ so received grace, that, in a
manner, it is poured out from it upon others. And hence it behooved
Him to have the greatest grace; as fire which is the cause of heat in
other hot things, is of all things the hottest.
Likewise, as regards the "virtue" of grace, He had grace fully,
since He had it for all the operations and effects of grace; and
this, because grace was bestowed on Him, as upon a universal
principle in the genus of such as have grace. Now the virtue of the
first principle of a genus universally extends itself to all the effects
of that genus; thus the force of the sun, which is the universal cause
of generation, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. i), extends to all
things that come under generation. Hence the second fulness of grace
is seen in Christ inasmuch as His grace extends to all the effects of
grace, which are the virtues, gifts, and the like.
Reply to Objection 1: Faith and hope signify effects of grace with
certain defects on the part of the recipient of grace, inasmuch as
faith is of the unseen, and hope of what is not yet possessed. Hence
it was not necessary that in Christ, Who is the author of grace,
there should be any defects such as faith and hope imply; but whatever
perfection is in faith and hope was in Christ most perfectly; as in
fire there are not all the modes of heat which are defective by the
subject's defect, but whatever belongs to the perfection of heat.
Reply to Objection 2: It pertains essentially to operating grace to
justify; but that it makes the ungodly to be just is accidental to it
on the part of the subject, in which sin is found. Therefore the soul
of Christ was justified by operating grace, inasmuch as it was
rendered just and holy by it from the beginning of His conception; not
that it was until then sinful, or even not just.
Reply to Objection 3: The fulness of grace is attributed to the
soul of Christ according to the capacity of the creature and not by
comparison with the infinite fulness of the Divine goodness.
|
|