|
Objection 1: It would seem that it was not fitting that Christ
should be transfigured. For it is not fitting for a true body to be
changed into various shapes [figuras], but only for an imaginary
body. Now Christ's body was not imaginary, but real, as stated
above (Question 5, Article 1). Therefore it seems that it
should not have been transfigured.
Objection 2: Further, figure is in the fourth species of quality,
whereas clarity is in the third, since it is a sensible quality.
Therefore Christ's assuming clarity should not be called a
transfiguration.
Objection 3: Further, a glorified body has four gifts, as we shall
state farther on (XP, Question 82), viz. impassibility,
agility, subtlety, and clarity. Therefore His transfiguration
should not have consisted in an assumption of clarity rather than of the
other gifts.
On the contrary, It is written (Mt. 17:2) that Jesus "was
transfigured" in the presence of three of His disciples.
I answer that, Our Lord, after foretelling His Passion to His
disciples, had exhorted them to follow the path of His sufferings
(Mt. 16:21,24). Now in order that anyone go straight along
a road, he must have some knowledge of the end: thus an archer will
not shoot the arrow straight unless he first see the target. Hence
Thomas said (Jn. 14:5): "Lord, we know not whither Thou
goest; and how can we know the way?" Above all is this necessary
when hard and rough is the road, heavy the going, but delightful the
end. Now by His Passion Christ achieved glory, not only of His
soul, not only of His soul, which He had from the first moment of
His conception, but also of His body; according to Luke
(24:26): "Christ ought to have suffered these things, and so
to enter into His glory (?)." To which glory He brings those who
follow the footsteps of His Passion, according to Acts 14:21:
"Through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God."
Therefore it was fitting that He should show His disciples the glory
of His clarity (which is to be transfigured), to which He will
configure those who are His; according to Phil. 3:21:
"(Who) will reform the body of our lowness configured to the body of
His glory." Hence Bede says on Mk. 8:39: "By His loving
foresight He allowed them to taste for a short time the contemplation
of eternal joy, so that they might bear persecution bravely."
Reply to Objection 1: As Jerome says on Mt. 17:2: "Let no
one suppose that Christ," through being said to be transfigured,
"laid aside His natural shape and countenance, or substituted an
imaginary or aerial body for His real body. The Evangelist describes
the manner of His transfiguration when he says: 'His face did shine
as the sun, and His garments became white as snow.' Brightness of
face and whiteness of garments argue not a change of substance, but a
putting on of glory."
Reply to Objection 2: Figure is seen in the outline of a body, for
it is "that which is enclosed by one or more boundaries" [Euclid,
bk i, def. xiv]. Therefore whatever has to do with the outline of a
body seems to pertain to the figure. Now the clarity, just as the
color, of a non-transparent body is seen on its surface, and
consequently the assumption of clarity is called transfiguration.
Reply to Objection 3: Of those four gifts, clarity alone is a
quality of the very person in himself; whereas the other three are not
perceptible, save in some action or movement, or in some passion.
Christ, then, did show in Himself certain indications of those three
gifts---of agility, for instance, when He walked on the waves of
the sea; of subtlety, when He came forth from the closed womb of the
Virgin; of impassibility, when He escaped unhurt from the hands of
the Jews who wished to hurl Him down or to stone Him. And yet He
is not said, on account of this, to be transfigured, but only on
account of clarity, which pertains to the aspect of His Person.
|
|