7

2. Defining the essential constitution of man in our treatise on Dogmatic Anthropology we answered two questions, viz.: (1) How many constitutive elements are there in man? and (2) How are these elements united? We ascertained by the light of Divine Revelation that there is in man a real "duality in unity," in as much as he is composed of a material body essentially informed by a spiritual soul.

Similarly, though not in precisely the same sense, we may ask: (1) What is the number of constitutive elements in Christ? and (2) How are these elements united?

Revelation answers these two questions thus: (1) There are two constitutive elements in Christ, a divine nature and a human nature; and (2) these two natures are united hypostatically. The "Athanasian Creed" points out this analogy when it says: "For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man: so God and Man is one Christ." 8

According to Cardinal Franzelin the dogma of the Incarnation may be most effectively expounded from the following points of view: (1) Who assumed human nature? (2) What did the Son of God assume? (3).

1834. Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, God: His Knowability, Essence, and Attributes, p. 318, note 6.

7 See Pohle-Preuss, God the Author of Nature and the Supernatural, pp. 124 $qq.

8" Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus."

9 Cfr. Franzelin, De Verbo Incarnato, thes. 1, 4th ed., Rome 1910.

How are Divinity and humanity united in Christ? (4) Why did the Son of God hypostatically assume a human nature? The answer to the first question (quis?) is: The Divine Logos. The answer to the second question (quid?) is: A real and genuine human nature. The answer to the third question (quomodo?) is: Godhead and manhood are hypostatically united in Christ. The answer to the fourth question (ad quid?) is: The Son of God assumed flesh in order to redeem the human race.

Of these questions the first three alone belong to Christology proper; the fourth finds its place in Soteriology.

The division we have chosen coincides materially, though not formally, with that suggested by Cardinal Franzelin. The only difference is that we base our exposition on the "Athanasian Creed." Our reasons for so doing are purely didactic. The concept "duality in unity" contains the reply to the questions quis? and quid?, while the answer to quomodo? is supplied by the concept of "unity in duality."

It may be objected that the so-called Athanasian Creed is not the work of St. Athanasius and lacks the authority of a primitive symbol. We reply that, though "of Western origin and ... composed (probably) during the fifth century in Southern Gaul," 10 this symbol is "an admirable résumé of the doctrine of Athanasius. In the West it was recited at Prime since the ninth century, was used by the clergy in giving popular instruction as a summary of Christian doctrine, and was held in particular esteem as a basis and criterion of ecclesiastical faith." 11 Dr. Künstle holds 12 that the

10 Its authorship is variously attributed to Honoratus of Arles, Eusebius of Vercelli, and Vincent of Lerins.

11 Bardenhewer-Shahan,

Patrol

ogy, p. 255, Freiburg and St. Louis 1908.

12 Antipriscilliana, pp. 204 sqq., Freiburg 1905.

Athanasian Creed was written in Spain against Priscillianism, while H. Brewer 13 attributes it to St. Ambrose.

We now enter upon the treatment of Christology according to the division already indicated, viz.: (1) Duality in Unity, or the Constitutive Elements of Christ, and (2) Unity in Duality, or the Hypostatic Union of the two Natures in Christ.

GENERAL READINGS: Among the Fathers: Athanasius, De Incarnatione Verbi (Migne, P.G., XXV, 95 sqq., 938 sqq.).—* Cyril of Alexandria (Migne, P.G., LXXV, LXXVI).— Leontius, Adv. Nest. et Eutych. (Migne, P.G., LXXXVI, 1267 sqq.).— Maximus Confessor (Migne, P.G., XC, XCI).— The teaching of these writers is summarized by St. John Damascene, De Fide Orthodoxa, l. III (Migne, P.G., XCIV).— On the teaching of Theodoret see A. Bertram, Theodoreti Episcopi Cyrensis Doctrina Christologica, Hildesheim 1883.- On the doctrine of St. Cyril, cfr. A. Rehrmann, Die Christologie des hl. Cyrillus von Alexandrien, Hildesheim 1902.

The student may also consult with profit St. Augustine's Enchiridion (Migne, P.L., XC; English translation by J. F. Shaw, in Vol. IX of The Works of Aurelius Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, 3rd ed., Edinburgh 1892); St. Ambrose, De Incarnat. Dominicae Sacram. (Migne, P.L., XVI, 817 sqq.), and Fulgentius, De Incarnatione Filii Dei (Migne, P.L., LXV).

Among the Schoolmen: * St. Thomas, S. Theol., ça, qu. 1– 26 (summarized in Freddi-Sullivan, Jesus Christ the Word Incarnate, Considerations Gathered from the Works of the Angelic Doctor St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Louis 1904; A. Vonier, O. S. B., The Personality of Christ, London 1915 ("a very unconventional rendering of the most important points of the third part of the Summa." Preface, p. vi).—*IDEM, Contr. Gent., IV, 27 sqq. (Rickaby, Of God and His Creatures, pp. 359 sqq., London 1905).-Billuart, De Incarnatione, t. V, ed. Lequette.- Salmanticenses, De Incarn., Vols. 13-16, ed. Paris 1870 sq.- Suarez, De Incarn., Lugd. 1592.-*Bellarmine, De Christo, t. I, ed. Vivès, Paris 1870.-*De Lugo, De Mysterio Incarnationis, t. II, III, ed. Vivès, Paris 1890-92.- Gregory of Valentia, De Incarn. Divini Verbi, Venice 1600.-*Ysambert, De Mysterio Incarnationis, Paris 1639.- Wirceburgenses (Holtzclau, S. J.),

13 Das sogenannte Athanasianische Glaubensbekenntnis ein Werk des hl. Ambrosius, Paderborn 1909.

De Incarn. Verbi, Vol. VI, ed. Paris 1879.- Legrand, Tract. de Incarn. Verbi Divini (Migne, Cursus Compl., t. IX, Paris 1860). - Fr. I. Bertieri, De Verbo Dei Incarnato, Vindob. 1773.

Among later theological writers: Bautz, Einig. B. Jungmann, Heinrich, Hurter, Hunter, van Noort, in their respective textbooks. Also *Franzelin, De Verbo Incarnato, ed. 6, Romae 1910.-*F. A. Stentrup, De Verbo Incarnato, I: Christologia, 2 vols., Oeniponte 1882.—*L. Billot, De Verbo Incarnato, ed. 5, Romae 1912.- Chr. Pesch, Praelect. Dogmat., t. IV, ed. 3, Friburgi 1909.-G. B. Tepe, Instit. Theol., Vol. III, Paris 1896.*L. Janssens, De Deo-Homine, I: Christologia, Friburgi 1901. — C. v. Schäzler, Das Dogma von der Menschwerdung Gottes, Freiburg 1870.- Oswald, Die Erlösung in Christo Jesu, 2 vols., 2nd ed., Paderborn 1887.- Scheeben, Dogmatik, Vols. II and III, Freiburg 1878 sq. (summarized in Wilhelm-Scannell, A Manual of Catholic Theology Based on Scheeben's "Dogmatik," Vol. II, pp. 45 sqq., 2nd ed., London 1901).— IDEM, Die Mysterien des Christentums, 3d ed., Freiburg 1912.-H. P. Liddon, The Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (Bampton Lectures) London, Oxford, and Cambridge 1867.-E. C. Minjard, L'Homme-Dieu, 2 vols., Paris 1898-99.-I. Souben, Le Verbe Incarné, Paris 1902.-E. Krebs, Der Logos als Heiland im ersten Jahrhundert, Freiburg 1910.- Cfr. also W. Drum, art. Incarnation" in Vol. VII of the Catholic Encyclopedia.

On the history of the dogma, consult *Schwane, Dogmengeschichte, Vols. I and II, 2nd ed., Freiburg 1892-95.—*J. Bach, Dogmengeschichte des Mittelalters vom christologischen Standpunkte, 2 vols., Vienna 1873-75.-H. Kihn, Patrologie, 2 vols., Paderborn 1904-08.-J. Tixeront, History of Dogmas, Vol. I. English ed., St. Louis 1911; Vol. II, 1914; Vol. III, 1916.

Against Modernism: M. Lepin, S. S., Christ and the Gospel, or Jesus the Messiah and Son of God, Engl. tr., Philadelphia 1910. -M. E. Mangenot, Christologie, Commentaire des Propositions XXVII-XXXVIII du Décret du Saint-Office Lamentabili," Paris 1910.

On the Christological teaching of St. Paul, cfr. F. Prat, S. J., La Théologie de Saint Paul, Vol. II, pp. 165-243, Paris 1912.

PART I

DUALITY IN UNITY, OR THE CONSTITUTIVE ELEMENTS

OF CHRIST

Jesus Christ is true God; more specifically, He is the Son of God, or Logos, and consequently the Second Person of the Divine Trinity. As Son of the Virgin-Mother Mary He is also true

man.

We therefore divide the first part of this volume into two Chapters: (1) The Divinity of Christ, and (2) His Humanity.