|
Objection 1: It would seem that the Son of God did not assume a
human mind or intellect. For where a thing is present, its image is
not required. But man is made to God's image, as regards his mind,
as Augustine says (De Trin. xiv, 3,6). Hence, since in
Christ there was the presence of the Divine Word itself, there was
no need of a human mind.
Objection 2: Further, the greater light dims the lesser. But the
Word of God, Who is "the light, which enlighteneth every man that
cometh into this world," as is written Jn. 1:9, is compared to
the mind as the greater light to the lesser; since our mind is a
light, being as it were a lamp enkindled by the First Light (Prov.
20:27): "The spirit of a man is the lamp of the Lord."
Therefore in Christ Who is the Word of God, there is no need of a
human mind.
Objection 3: Further, the assumption of human nature by the Word
of God is called His Incarnation. But the intellect or human mind
is nothing carnal, either in its substance or in its act. for it is
not the act of a body, as is proved De Anima iii, 6. Hence it
would seem that the Son of God did not assume a human mind.
On the contrary, Augustine [Fulgentius] says (De Fide ad
Petrum xiv): "Firmly hold and nowise doubt that Christ the Son of
God has true flesh and a rational soul of the same kind as ours, since
of His flesh He says (Lk. 24:39): 'Handle, and see; for
a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as you see Me to have.' And He
proves that He has a soul, saying (Jn. 10:17): 'I lay down
My soul that I may take it again.' And He proves that He has an
intellect, saying (Mt. 11:29): 'Learn of Me, because I
am meek and humble of heart.' And God says of Him by the prophet
(Is. 52:13): 'Behold my servant shall understand.'"
I answer that, As Augustine says (De Haeres. 49,50),
"the Apollinarists thought differently from the Catholic Church
concerning the soul of Christ, saying with the Arians, that Christ
took flesh alone, without a soul; and on being overcome on this point
by the Gospel witness, they went on to say that the mind was wanting
to Christ's soul, but that the Word supplied its place." But this
position is refuted by the same arguments as the preceding. First,
because it runs counter to the Gospel story, which relates how He
marveled (as is plain from Mt. 8:10). Now marveling cannot be
without reason, since it implies the collation of effect and cause,
i.e. inasmuch as when we see an effect and are ignorant of its cause,
we seek to know it, as is said Metaph. i, 2. Secondly, it is
inconsistent with the purpose of the Incarnation, which is the
justification of man from sin. For the human soul is not capable of
sin nor of justifying grace except through the mind. Hence it was
especially necessary for the mind to be assumed. Hence Damascene says
(De Fide Orth. iii, 6) that "the Word of God assumed a body
and an intellectual and rational soul," and adds afterwards: "The
whole was united to the whole, that He might bestow salvation on me
wholly; for what was not assumed is not curable." Thirdly, it is
against the truth of the Incarnation. For since the body is
proportioned to the soul as matter to its proper form, it is not truly
human flesh if it is not perfected by human, i.e. a rational soul.
And hence if Christ had had a soul without a mind, He would not have
had true human flesh, but irrational flesh, since our soul differs
from an animal soul by the mind alone. Hence Augustine says (Qq.
lxxxiii, qu. 80) that from this error it would have followed that
the Son of God "took an animal with the form of a human body,"
which, again, is against the Divine truth, which cannot suffer any
fictitious untruth.
Reply to Objection 1: Where a thing is by its presence, its image
is not required to supply the place of the thing, as where the emperor
is the soldiers do not pay homage to his image. Yet the image of a
thing is required together with its presence, that it may be perfected
by the presence of the thing, just as the image in the wax is perfected
by the impression of the seal, and as the image of man is reflected in
the mirror by his presence. Hence in order to perfect the human mind
it was necessary that the Word should unite it to Himself.
Reply to Objection 2: The greater light dims the lesser light of
another luminous body; but it does not dim, rather it perfects the
light of the body illuminated---at the presence of the sun the light
of the stars is put out, but the light of the air is perfected. Now
the intellect or mind of man is, as it were, a light lit up by the
light of the Divine Word; and hence by the presence of the Word the
mind of man is perfected rather than overshadowed.
Reply to Objection 3: Although the intellective power is not the
act of a body, nevertheless the essence of the human soul, which is
the form of the body, requires that it should be more noble, in order
that it may have the power of understanding; and hence it is necessary
that a better disposed body should correspond to it.
|
|