Everything

Question 1

Nestorianism and the Council of Ephesus (431)

Answer 1

* Nester said we can call Mary the Christotokos (Christ-Bearer) * Nester said we can’t call Mary Theotokos because Mary didn’t generate the divine nature (which is true, she generated the human nature) * Nestorianism is the heresy of two-subjects/persons in Christ (according to Cyril) * Nestor emphasized the two natures of Christ saying that (a) the two natures remain unmixed (b) each of the two natures had its own prosopon BUT this implies that there are separate subjects in Christ * Cyril responds by saying the union is hypostatic * Nestor says this destroys the distinction of the natures and says that the union is voluntary (WRONG!) * Nestor insisted that there was only one person in Christ but that this person wasn’t identical to the word - BUT this means that Christ’s actions weren’t God and couldn’t be redemptive * Cyril said there were two stages: (1) before the incarnation (only the divine nature of Logos existed) and (2) after the incarnation (existence of divine and human natures) * Cyril said human nature could suffer, but not the divine nature (communication of idioms) * Results of Ephesus: (1) only person in Jesus is the eternal word (2) natures were not united by conjunction, yet emphasizes the duality of the natures

Question 2

Monophysitism

Answer 2

* Monophysitism: the heresy of one nature * Monophysites thought that two natures would lead to two subjects * Eutyches (head abbot) thought that Christ had two natures before the union and one nature afterwards which was fused into a third thing (tertium quid); thus Christ’s flesh wasn’t the same as ours (not consubstantial); chronological problem cause there was no human nature before the union * Robber Synod: (not ecumenical council) condemned language of union

Question 3

Leo’s Tome

Answer 3

(a) condemns the one nature theory (b) summarizes teachings of the fathers (Hillary, Ambrose, Augustine) (c) Four Main Points (i) Person of God-man identical with the Logos (ii) Divine and Human natures co-exist in Logos without mixture (each retains its properties); redemption required that the one mediator should be able both to die in one nature (human) and not die in the other (divine) (iii) The two natures are separate principles of operation, but act in harmony (iv) The oneness of the Logos justifies the communication of properties (we can say the Son of God died in his human nature)

Question 4

Council of Chalcedon (451)

Answer 4

* Leo’s Tome was read: “Peter has spoken through Leo” * Condemned Eutyches * Confirmed: one person in two natures in Christ * Significance: (a) 1st Ecumenical Council where both east/west showed up. Synthesis of Alex. & Antioch (b) Clarified terms: two natures (physis/substance/nature/ousia & one person (hypostasis/prosopon) (c) Emphasized preposition IN two natures and not FROM two natures; rejects Eutyches (who said from); Christ is IN two natures (not from)

Question 5

Monothelitism

Answer 5

* Two natures of Christ (Chalcedon) implies that there are two intellects and two wills * Monothelitism: Heresy that Christ had only one will; Christ didn’t have a human will because his nature was just an instrument moved by the divine will * Sergius (heretic): said that human will in Christ was passive and moved by the divine will (two wills but human one ‘dead’)

Question 6

Council of Constantinople III (680-681)

Answer 6

* Christ has two wills and two intellects which aren’t opposed * Human will follows the divine will ACTIVELY * Aquinas explains that human will actively follows the divine will (and thus merits our salvation); human will is ruled by reason which means it is ruled by the divine will (it actively follows it)

Question 7

Four main points of Leo’s Tome

Answer 7

(i) Person of God-man identical with the Logos (ii) Divine and Human natures co-exist in Logos without mixture (each retains its properties); redemption required that the one mediator should be able both to die in one nature (human) and not die in the other (divine) (iii) The two natures are separate principles of operation, but act in harmony (iv) The oneness of the Logos justifies the communication of properties (we can say the Son of God died in his human nature)

Question 8

Significance of Chalcedon

Answer 8

(1) First ecumenical council where both east and west showed up. It reached a synthesis of the two eastern schools: Alexandria & Antioch (2) It clarified the terms with precision: two natures (fusus/substance/nature/ousia), one person (hypostasis/prosopon) (3) Emphasized the preposition “in” two natures and not “from” two natures * This rejects the Eutyucean notion of a mixture of the natures. Eutyches taught that Christ was one person that came from two natures. * Christ is in two natures or of two natures but not from two. * To say “from” implies that he no longer had them, that before he had two and after there was one. But this is illogical because he never had two natures before the union. * Considered a triumph of western theology and Antioch (which stressed two natures)

Question 9

Three reasons the Incarnation was appropriate from the view of the Word

Answer 9

(1) The Son was the one through whom all things were made (John 1). It was fitting that the Son would be the one who would come to remake all things. (2) The Word is the perfect image and refulgence of the Father (Heb 1:3, Col 1:15). It is fitting that the one who is the image of God would come and restore man who is in the image of God. St Athanasius compared the fall to a portrait that was blurred. (3) The Word is the son of God by nature, so it is fitting that that natural son would come to make us adopted sons of God.

Question 10

Aquinas’ 3 reasons why the Incarnation was appropriate from the point of view of man

Answer 10

(1) Justice: It would seem to belong to justice that the one who offended God should make amends. (2) Dignity: To invest man with greater dignity, it was appropriate that the conqueror of the Devil should spring from the same stock that was conquered by the Devil. (3) God’s Power: is made more manifest through the Incarnation. God took from the corrupt and defeated nature to defeat its conqueror.

Question 11

Explain why the Incarnation is a free decision of God

Answer 11

(1) Creation: he doesn’t have to create us, but he did (2) Salvation: he doesn’t have to save us, but he decided to (3) Redemption: he doesn’t have to choose redemption as the method to save us, but he did (he could have freed us by an offering or any other means) (4) Satisfaction: he was free to choose to require perfect satisfaction or not (5) Incarnation: since he choose to require satisfaction, God became man.

Question 12

How is the incarnation necessary based on the hypothesis that God chose to redeem man in the most perfect way?

Answer 12

* Redemption is the method of salvation that requires payment of a price. God was free to choose this method or any other method. He did choose to save us by redemption, but he could have done it any variety of ways. But given that he did choose redemption, he still had many options that would not have required the payment of a price. * Satisfaction is the payment of a price proportional to the offense. The satisfaction we owed was an infinite price, but God didn’t have to require this. The debtor owes the entire debt, but there is no violation of justice for the creditor to require less (this is mercy). * Since God chose to require satisfaction, the Incarnation becomes necessary in this sense since only God can pay our infinite debt.

Question 13

Ontological Unity of the Person: What is the term nature?

Answer 13

What a person is (quid) * Ousia * Substance * Essence

Question 14

Ontological Unity of the Person: What is the term person?

Answer 14

Who a person is (quis) * Hypostasis * Subject * Subsistence * Boethius: Individual substance (hypostasis) of a rational nature ** Hypostasis is ousia insofar as it is individualized

Question 15

How is it that Christ had a complete human nature but was not a human person?

Answer 15

(1) Explain what it means to be a true man: to have a body and soul (2) Explain why being a true man doesn’t require a human person: * Person is a possessor of nature; nothing was lacking in the human nature; * Aquinas: Every created thing is a metaphysical composition of essence (what it is) and existence (the act of being). Human nature requires body and soul, but it still needs an act of existence (esse) to exist. A person (hypostasis) is a complete substance subsisting of itself: an active subject. A person is a subsistence of a complete nature. * Normally, every complete human nature is also a human person because it has a proportional act of being (esse) which makes it exist. * But in the case of the Incarnation, the human nature that Christ assumed did not have its own esse. The Divine nature gives the act of being (esse) to the human nature, so that human nature belongs to the divine person. The human nature did not have or need its own existence/subsistence because he was already the possessor of existence. The human nature of Christ does not need to be a human person because it doesn’t have its own act of being. (3) Explain the hypostatic union: * Two natures united in the person of Christ ** The human nature gets its esse (act of being) from the divine hypostasis of the Word. It gets an immediate, direct infusion of uncreated esse. This is why Christ’s human nature is not a human person…he doesn’t have his own independent existence…his own subsistence. The human nature doesn’t have its own independent existence apart from the Word. ** The subsistence of the human nature is the subsistence of the Word. The subsistence is distinct from the human nature because it’s a pre-existent subsistence. (This is why there is no change in God through the Incarnation).

Question 16

Four propositions we hold concerning the Consciousness of Christ from Scripture and Tradition:

Answer 16

(1) Jesus, in his human intellect, was conscious that he was the Son of God. The reason the first Christians believed that he was the Son of God was that He knew he was Son of God. (2) Christ was aware of the purpose of his mission: he was sent to redeem mankind. Jesus was aware that his mission in time was a prolongation of his eternal procession from the Father. (3) Christ knew precisely how his mission would be fulfilled: he knew he would die on the cross. He died because he loves us, which is a concrete love for every individual that he would save. The continuum of love: the love of Christ for sinners was an extension of his pre-existing love as the Logos. (4) Christ intended to found the Church. This countered the theory that claimed that Christ wanted to found a kingdom of peace and love, but what “happened” was a human institution with structures.

Question 17

Christ’s Consciousness Concerning Himself and his mission:

Answer 17

* Christ’s divine intellect is omniscient, so everything is contained in it. * Scripture confirms that Christ had human knowledge. Luke 2:52 “He advanced in wisdom and favor with God.” * Although the Magisterium has never said anything about the existence of human knowledge in Christ, this truth is implicitly defined when it states that he has a rational soul, and that each of his natures acts in a way proper to it.” (p150)

Question 18

Three types of knowledge that Christ had in his human intellect:

Answer 18

(1) Acquired (2) Infused (3) Beatific Vision

Question 19

First type of knowledge that Christ has:

Answer 19

Acquired (1) Things we learn through sensory knowledge; either direct or through others. It’s limited because experiences are limited. (2) That Christ assumed a human nature means that he had this knowledge. (3) Aquinas initially thought that it was unfitting and undignified for the Word to have had to learn things. Common exegesis held that Christ didn’t ask questions because he didn’t know something, but in order to teach others. They held that if Christ had acquired knowledge, then it would be unlimited. (4) he had the acquired knowledge that someone in his historical circumstances would and could have; based on his experiences and those that were told to him by others.

Question 20

Second type of knowledge that Christ has:

Answer 20

Infused (1) The same kind of knowledge as acquired knowledge, just obtained in a different way. It’s created knowledge that gets into ones mind by infusion; (2) The angels have infused knowledge. (3) It’s fitting that Christ had infused knowledge; things he knew but didn’t learn ** The human intellect has the ability (obediential potency) to receive this knowledge. (a) prophets had it (b) angels have it (4) The Gospels show that Christ had knowledge of things that were not acquired: (a) He reads hearts: Nathanial, Samaritan woman (b) He predicts the future: Passover preparation prediction (Luke 22:18-15), donkey tied up, etc. ** different from divine knowledge. ** Created knowledge in the human intellect would blow it up! ** This infusion was limited to things that were applicable to his mission.

Question 21

Third type of knowledge that Christ has:

Answer 21

Beatific Vision (1) The beatific vision is the knowledge that the blessed have in heaven: an intuitive knowledge of the Godhead, a contemplation of God’s being. Immediate, direct, intuitive knowledge between the human intellect and God. It’s not mediated by images or concepts. (2) Four Reasons Christ had the Knowledge of the Beatific Vision (see other) (3) The beatific vision explains why Christ always acts with absolute certainty.

Question 22

Four reasons that Jesus had the knowledge of the Beatific Vision:

Answer 22

(1) Scriptural testimony: refers to Christ’s vision/knowledge of the Father (John 6:46, John 8:55) (2) When Christ made revelations, he did not have to wait to pass on revelations that he received from God. He had a power to reveal that was rooted in his direct knowledge of God. (3) It was fitting that Christ would have the beatific vision. Man has an obediential potency to obtain the beatific vision (the ability if God chooses to give it), and man is ordained to such and end by God’s supernatural elevation. Christ is the one who brings men to this end (the cause of the goal), so it is fitting that Christ should have the beatific vision because the cause ought to always be more perfect than its effects. ** To those who say he only had the beatific vision after the resurrection, we answer: He is the Mediator, and the beatific vision is the climax of this union. It cannot be allowed that Christ, as man, needed to be united to God, for he would have needed mediation, but he is the first and only mediator. (4) If Christ had perfect holiness and fullness of grace, it would seem to require that he had the beatific vision because such a vision of God is the summit of the union of the soul with God.

Question 23

Three objections to Jesus’ beatific vision:

Answer 23

(1) How can Christ be both simultaneously viator (on the way) and comprehensor (at the goal)? * Reply: Some say Christ voluntarily gave up the beatific vision in order to undergo suffering. This is not convincing. Aquinas says before his passion, Christ had beatitude as far as what regards the soul, but he was missing elements that are integral to beatitude. Christ is viator insofar as his body and soul are passible and a comprehensor insofar as, in the depths of his soul, he is already at the end of his journey. (2) How was Christ able to suffer if he had the beatific vision? How do you explain the co-existence of supreme joy and intense suffering? * Reply: The glory in the depths of Christ’s soul did not flow into the other parts of his soul or body. He has the beatific vision at one level of his soul and on a lower part of the man he’s capable of suffering and sorrow. * The soul is like a mountain peak that is bathed in sunlight yet below the mountain is encased in storm. * “There is nothing to prevent two contrary things coexisting in the same subject if they are there under different formalities.” There can be a coexistence of pain and joy in our own lives: having a toothache and also receiving great news. (3) How could Christ have genuine acquired knowledge if he had the beatific vision? It seems that the total knowledge of the beatific vision would not require you to learn anything. * Reply: These are two different types of knowledge. Acquired knowledge is mediated and acquired through the senses via images. The beatific vision is direct and involves no images. You can have both without any contradiction.

Question 24

The Faith of Christ

Answer 24

Christ didn’t have faith, he had vision. Faith means believing what one does not see. Christ sees. * Faith is not direct and immediate knowledge or the object; it is **mediated knowledge**, it needs the mediation of the authority of the witness. One believes on the word of the witness, and not because one sees with one’s own eyes the evidence of the thing believed in.

Question 25

The Infallibility of Christ

Answer 25

* Theological truth of Christ’s infallibility must guide our interpretation of the Scripture passages that seem to indicate Christ got things wrong. * We must look at the totality of what he taught to see that he was not meaning to suggest that the world’s end would be immanent. He would not have founded a church or used parables to teach, etc. Must distinguish between:: (1) Error: regarding something as false that’s true or vice versa. We can’t attribute this to Christ. (2) Ignorance: not knowing something one ought to know; a lack of perfection. “Of that day and hour no one knows, but only the Father.” It’s reasonable to assume that Christ should know when he will return since it’s a critical component of his mission. Possible explanations: (a) The Son has no knowledge that he has been authorized to share. (b) He has no knowledge of this from his human nature. (3) Nescience: not knowing something one does not need to know. Nescience isn’t culpable, so there is no offence to Christ’s dignity to say that he is nescient.

Question 26

Aquinas: Three reasons why Christ is holy:

Answer 26

(1) There was no sin in Christ because Christ is the one who expiates sin. Sin cannot be the quality of one who expiates sin. (2) Christ can be true man without being sinful, because sin is not a part of human nature as part of God’s original plan. (3) Christ could not have been an example to us if he had been sinful. He came not only to save us, but also to show us how to live. There was no sin and no concupiscence in Christ (if concupiscence is defined as the inclination to sin)

Question 27

Three ways holiness is communicated to Christ’s nature:

Answer 27

(1) Grace of Union (2) Habitual (Sanctifying) Grace (3) Capital Grace

Question 28

Grace of Union

Answer 28

* It’s a holiness that comes with the gift of esse. * The grace of union is an uncreated grace from the uncreated personality of the Word.

Question 29

Habitual Grace & Three reasons why Christ had it:

Answer 29

Uncreated, sanctifying grace * Three reasons why Christ had it: (1) [proximity] Because Christ’s soul is in union with the Word of God, who is the source of habitual grace. T (2) Because of the dignity of Christ’s soul, which operates through knowledge and love to attain so closely to God. The human soul needs to be elevated by grace to operate in order to God’s will. (3) Because of the relationship of Christ to the human race. His mission was to impart this grace to others,

Question 30

Why is it necessary for Christ to have habitual grace if he has the grace of union?

Answer 30

* Since Christ assumed real human nature, his human nature still needs to be raised to the supernatural order through habitual grace. * the grace of union is sufficient to make Christ’s human nature holy. The habitual grace gives him the ability to avoid sin.

Question 31

Capital Grace:

Answer 31

* An aspect of Christ’s habitual grace, not a different type of grace. It’s the habitual grace that Christ has as the source and cause of all the grace men receive. * Christ is the mediator, and those who are redeemed are the branches. The branches receive their life through the vine. * Christ is the author and efficient cause of holiness.

Question 32

Christ’s Impeccability

Answer 32

* Christ is incapable of sinning. Not only that he did not sin, but that he could not sin. * Sin is a violation of God’s will, so it’s logically impossible for God to sin because he cannot violate/turn away from himself. This relates to the hypostatic union.

Question 33

Christ’s Freedom

Answer 33

* Human nature was not created for the purpose of sinning. * sin does not belong to human nature. * Christ was truly free because he was able to obey. Only a free being is able to be obedient.

Question 34

Christ’s Freedom WRT Obedience:

Answer 34

* Christ was given a commandment to die, which he obeyed with impeccable freedom. This freedom is defined without the possibility to disobey God. It’s freedom for excellence vs. freedom for indifference. This explanation is faithful to the truth of the revelation. Both freedom and impeccability are matters of faith. Christ’s obedience was the reason his sacrifice was acceptable to the Father. * Just as error does not perfect the intellect, even though it is a sign of the existence of the intellect, so does sin not perfect man’s freedom, but it does show that freedom exists. * What is essential to the free act is the absence of coercion.

Question 35

Temptations of Christ

Answer 35

* Christ was tested (not tempted – that would imply internal stress) * The temptations were external tests (thought they are real because they require strength to resist)

Question 36

Why does Christ undergo temptation?

Answer 36

* To give us an example in how to overcome temptation * Christ’s resistance to temptation is part of his battle against Satan. His temptations are efficacious: he caused something to change. * Christ be tested in “every way”: meaning that Christ experienced the same external temptations that we face.

Question 37

Four Features of a priest present in Christ:

Answer 37

(1) Humanity * “Every high priest is taken from among men and made their representative before God.” (Heb 5:1) * Christ needed humanity to offer sacrifice, since God does not offer, but receives sacrifice. (2) A Divine Calling * “In the same way, it was not Christ who glorified himself in becoming high priest, but rather the one who said to him: ‘You are my son, this day I have begotten you’” (Heb 5:5) (3) Consecration * Jesus was consecrated a priest at the moment of the Incarnation. * If Christ were just a man as us, the moment of Baptism would be his anointing, but a divine person has already acted on this humanity through the hypostatic union: (4) Offers Sacrifice “He has no need to offer sacrifice day after day…he did that once for all when he offered himself.” (Heb 7:27) * When Christ offers his humanity on the cross, he offers a victim of infinite value. There is a perfect identity between the one who offers and what is offered. This perfectly unites the interior and exterior aspects of the sacrifice. This is the goal in worship: to unite our external activity with our interior intentions.

Question 38

Three mediations of Christ

Answer 38

(1) Christ is both Priest and Victim * A priest is one who offers sacrifice, so Christ is a priest on the Cross. * The fact that Christ says his sacrifice would be offered for the forgiveness of sins indicates his priesthood. Christ’s sacrifice has redemptive value: once it’s offered, something comes in return (once a ransom is paid, one is returned) (2) The One and Eternal Sacrifice of Christ * Christ’s priesthood is forever: The event of Christ’s sacrifice is not eternal, but it has eternal value. He continues to intercede for us in heaven. Christ asks the Father to reward the people who ask for help through the merits he gained through the Cross. The sacrifice of the Cross can be re- presented in time through the sacrifice of the Mass. (3) Participation in the Priesthood of Christ Christ is the one and unique mediator, but he permits subordinate participators in his one priesthood (Mary, saints, priests, laity, etc).