SECOND ARTICLE [III, Q. 24, Art. 2]

Whether This Proposition Is False: "Christ As Man Was Predestinated

to Be the Son of God"?

Objection 1: It would seem that this proposition is false: "Christ as

man was predestinated to be the Son of God." For at some time a man

is that which he was predestinated to be: since God's predestination

does not fail. If, therefore, Christ as man was predestinated the Son

of God, it seems to follow that as man He is the Son of God. But the

latter is false. Therefore the former is false.

Obj. 2: Further, what is befitting to Christ as man is befitting to

any man; since He belongs to the same species as other men. If,

therefore, Christ, as man, was predestinated the Son of God, it will

follow that this is befitting to any other man. But the latter is

false. Therefore the former is false.

Obj. 3: Further, that is predestinated from eternity which is to take

place at some time. But this proposition, "The Son of God was made

man," is truer than this, "Man was made the Son of God." Therefore

this proposition, "Christ, as the Son of God, was predestinated to be

man," is truer than this, "Christ as Man was predestinated to be the

Son of God."

_On the contrary,_ Augustine (De Praedest. Sanct. xv) says:

"Forasmuch as God the Son was made Man, we say that the Lord of Glory

was predestinated."

_I answer that,_ Two things may be considered in predestination. One

on the part of eternal predestination itself: and in this respect it

implies a certain antecedence in regard to that which comes under

predestination. Secondly, predestination may be considered as regards

its temporal effect, which is some gratuitous gift of God. Therefore

from both points of view we must say that predestination is ascribed

to Christ by reason of His human nature alone: for human nature was

not always united to the Word; and by grace bestowed on it was it

united in Person to the Son of God. Consequently, by reason of human

nature alone can predestination be attributed to Christ. Wherefore

Augustine says (De Praedest. Sanct. xv): "This human nature of ours

was predestinated to be raised to so great, so lofty, so exalted a

position, that it would be impossible to raise it higher." Now that

is said to belong to anyone as man which belongs to him by reason of

human nature. Consequently, we must say that "Christ, as Man, was

predestinated the Son of God."

Reply Obj. 1: When we say, "Christ, as Man, was predestinated the Son

of God," this qualification, "as Man," can be referred in two ways to

the action signified by the participle. First, as regards what comes

under predestination materially, and thus it is false. For the sense

would be that it was predestinated that Christ, as Man, should be the

Son of God. And in this sense the objection takes it.

Secondly, it may be referred to the very nature of the action itself:

that is, forasmuch as predestination implies antecedence and

gratuitous effect. And thus predestination belongs to Christ by

reason of His human nature, as stated above. And in this sense He is

said to be predestinated as Man.

Reply Obj. 2: Something may be befitting to a man by reason of human

nature, in two ways. First, so that human nature be the cause

thereof: thus risibility is befitting to Socrates by reason of human

nature, being caused by its principles. In this manner predestination

is not befitting either to Christ or to any other man, by reason of

human nature. This is the sense of the objection. Secondly, a thing

may be befitting to someone by reason of human nature, because human

nature is susceptible of it. And in this sense we say that Christ was

predestinated by reason of human nature; because predestination

refers to the exaltation of human nature in Him, as stated above.

Reply Obj. 3: As Augustine says (Praedest. Sanct. xv): "The Word of

God assumed Man to Himself in such a singular and ineffable manner

that at the same time He may be truly and correctly called the Son of

Man, because He assumed Man to Himself; and the Son of God, because

it was the Only-begotten of God Who assumed human nature."

Consequently, since this assumption comes under predestination by

reason of its being gratuitous, we can say both that the Son of God

was predestinated to be man, and that the Son of Man was

predestinated to be the Son of God. But because grace was not

bestowed on the Son of God that He might be man, but rather on human

nature, that it might be united to the Son of God; it is more proper

to say that "Christ, as Man, was predestinated to be the Son of God,"

than that, "Christ, as Son of God, was predestinated to be Man."

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part III (Tertia Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 174 / 654 题