|
Objection 1: It would seem that Christ's body was in Adam and the
patriarchs as to something signate. For Augustine says (Gen. ad
lit. x) that the flesh of Christ was in Adam and Abraham "by way
of a bodily substance." But bodily substance is something signate.
Therefore Christ's flesh was in Adam, Abraham, and the other
patriarchs, according to something signate.
Objection 2: Further, it is said (Rm. 1:3) that Christ
"was made . . . of the seed of David according to the flesh."
But the seed of David was something signate in him. Therefore
Christ was in David, according to something signate, and for the
same reason in the other patriarchs.
Objection 3: Further, the human race is Christ's kindred,
inasmuch as He took flesh therefrom. But if that flesh were not
something signate in Adam, the human race, which is descended from
Adam, would seem to have no kindred with Christ: but rather with
those other things from which the matter of His flesh was taken.
Therefore it seems that Christ's flesh was in Adam and the other
patriarchs according to something signate.
On the contrary, Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. x) that in
whatever way Christ was in Adam and Abraham, other men were there
also; but not conversely. But other men were not in Adam and
Abraham by way of some signate matter, but only according to origin,
as stated in the FP, Question 119 , Article 1, Article 2,
ad 4. Therefore neither was Christ in Adam and Abraham according
to something signate; and, for the same reason, neither was He in
the other patriarchs.
I answer that, As stated above (Article 5, ad 1), the matter
of Christ's body was not the flesh and bones of the Blessed Virgin,
nor anything that was actually a part of her body, but her blood which
was her flesh potentially. Now, whatever was in the Blessed
Virgin, as received from her parents, was actually a part of her
body. Consequently that which the Blessed Virgin received from her
parents was not the matter of Christ's body. Therefore we must say
that Christ's body was not in Adam and the other patriarchs according
to something signate, in the sense that some part of Adam's or of
anyone else's body could be singled out and designated as the very
matter from which Christ's body was to be formed: but it was there
according to origin, just as was the flesh of other men. For
Christ's body is related to Adam and the other patriarchs through the
medium of His Mother's body. Consequently Christ's body was in
the patriarchs, in no other way than was His Mother's body, which
was not in the patriarchs according to signate matter: as neither were
the bodies of other men, as stated in the FP, Question 119,
Article 1, Article 2, ad 4.
Reply to Objection 1: The expression "Christ was in Adam
according to bodily substance," does not mean that Christ's body was
a bodily substance in Adam: but that the bodily substance of
Christ's body, i.e. the matter which He took from the Virgin,
was in Adam as in its active principle, but not as in its material
principle: in other words, by the generative power of Adam and his
descendants down to the Blessed Virgin, this matter was prepared for
Christ's conception. But this matter was not fashioned into
Christ's body by the seminal power derived from Adam. Therefore
Christ is said to have been in Adam by way of origin, according to
bodily substance: but not according to seminal virtue.
Reply to Objection 2: Although Christ's body was not in Adam and
the other patriarchs, according to seminal virtue, yet the Blessed
Virgin's body was thus in them, through her being conceived from the
seed of a man. For this reason, through the medium of the Blessed
Virgin, Christ is said to be of the seed of David, according to the
flesh, by way of origin.
Reply to Objection 3: Christ and the human race are kindred,
through the likeness of species. Now, specific likeness results not
from remote but from proximate matter, and from the active principle
which begets its like in species. Thus, then, the kinship of Christ
and the human race is sufficiently preserved by His body being formed
from the Virgin's blood, derived in its origin from Adam and the
other patriarchs. Nor is this kinship affected by the matter whence
this blood is taken, as neither is it in the generation of other men,
as stated in the FP, Question 119, Article 2, ad 3.
|
|