Ad tertium dicendum quod anima Christi, si non esset unita Dei verbo esset id quod est principalissimum in homine illo. Et ideo sibi praecipue deberetur honor, quia homo est quod est potissimum in eo. Sed quia anima Christi est unita personae digniori, illi personae praecipue debetur honor cui anima Christi unitur. Nec per hoc tamen diminuitur dignitas animae Christi, sed augetur ut supra dictum est. Reply Obj. 3: If the soul of Christ were not united to the Word of God, it would be the principal thing in that Man. Wherefore honor would be due to it principally, since man is that which is principal in him. But since Christ’s soul is united to a Person of greater dignity, to that Person is honor principally due to Whom Christ’s soul is united. Nor is the dignity of Christ’s soul hereby diminished, but rather increased, as stated above (Q. 2, A. 2, ad 2). Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum humanitas Christi sit adoranda adoratione latriae Whether Christ’s humanity should be adored with the adoration of latria? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod humanitas Christi non sit adoranda adoratione latriae. Quia super illud Psalmi, adorate scabellum pedum eius quoniam sanctum est, dicit Glossa, caro a verbo Dei assumpta sine impietate adoratur a nobis, quia nemo spiritualiter carnem eius manducat nisi prius adoret; non illa dico adoratione quae latria est, quae soli creatori debetur. Caro autem est pars humanitatis. Ergo humanitas Christi non est adoranda adoratione latriae. Objection 1: It would seem that Christ’s soul should not be adored with the adoration of latria. For on the words of Ps. 98:5, Adore His foot-stool for it is holy, a gloss says: The flesh assumed by the Word of God is rightly adored by us: for no one partakes spiritually of His flesh unless he first adore it; but not indeed with the adoration called latria, which is due to the Creator alone. Now the flesh is part of the humanity. Therefore Christ’s humanity is not to be adored with the adoration of latria. Praeterea, cultus latriae nulli creaturae debetur, ex hoc enim reprobantur gentiles quod coluerunt et servierunt creaturae, ut dicitur Rom. I. Sed humanitas Christi est creatura. Ergo non est adoranda adoratione latriae. Obj. 2: Further, the worship of latria is not to be given to any creature: since for this reason were the Gentiles reproved, that they worshiped and served the creature, as it is written (Rom 1:25). But Christ’s humanity is a creature. Therefore it should not be adored with the adoration of latria. Praeterea, adoratio latriae debetur Deo in recognitionem maximi dominii, secundum illud Deut. VI, dominum Deum tuum adorabis, et illi soli servies. Sed Christus, secundum quod homo, est minor patre. Ergo humanitas eius non est adoratione latriae adoranda. Obj. 3: Further, the adoration of latria is due to God in recognition of His supreme dominion, according to Deut. 6:13: Thou shalt adore the Lord thy God, and shalt serve Him only. But Christ as man is less than the Father. Therefore His humanity is not to be adored with the adoration of latria. Sed contra est quod Damascenus dicit, in IV libro, adoratur autem caro Christi, incarnato Deo verbo, non propter seipsam, sed propter unitum ei secundum hypostasim verbum Dei. Et super illud Psalmi, adorate scabellum pedum eius, dicit Glossa, qui adorat corpus Christi, non terram intuetur, sed illum potius cuius scabellum est, in cuius honore scabellum adorat. Sed verbum incarnatum adoratur adoratione latriae. Ergo etiam corpus eius, sive eius humanitas. On the contrary, Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv, 3): On account of the Incarnation of the Divine Word, we adore the flesh of Christ not for its own sake, but because the Word of God is united thereto in person. And on Ps. 98:5, Adore His foot-stool, a gloss says: He who adores the body of Christ, regards not the earth, but rather Him whose foot-stool it is, in Whose honor he adores the foot-stool. But the incarnate Word is adored with the adoration of latria. Therefore also His body or His humanity. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, honor adorationis debetur hypostasi subsistenti, tamen ratio honoris potest esse aliquid non subsistens, propter quod honoratur persona cui illud inest. Adoratio igitur humanitatis Christi dupliciter potest intelligi. Uno modo, ut sit eius sicut rei adoratae. Et sic adorare carnem Christi nihil est aliud quam adorare verbum Dei incarnatum, sicut adorare vestem regis nihil est aliud quam adorare regem vestitum. Et secundum hoc, adoratio humanitatis Christi est adoratio latriae. Alio modo potest intelligi adoratio humanitatis Christi quae fit ratione humanitatis Christi perfectae omni munere gratiarum. Et sic adoratio humanitatis Christi non est adoratio latriae, sed adoratio duliae. Ita scilicet quod una et eadem persona Christi adoretur adoratione latriae propter suam divinitatem et adoratione duliae propter perfectionem humanitatis. I answer that, As stated above (A. 1) adoration is due to the subsisting hypostasis: yet the reason for honoring may be something non-subsistent, on account of which the person, in whom it is, is honored. And so the adoration of Christ’s humanity may be understood in two ways. First, so that the humanity is the thing adored: and thus to adore the flesh of Christ is nothing else than to adore the incarnate Word of God: just as to adore a King’s robe is nothing else than to adore a robed King. And in this sense the adoration of Christ’s humanity is the adoration of latria. Second, the adoration of Christ’s humanity may be taken as given by reason of its being perfected with every gift of grace. And so in this sense the adoration of Christ’s humanity is the adoration not of latria but of dulia. So that one and the same Person of Christ is adored with latria on account of His Divinity, and with dulia on account of His perfect humanity. Nec hoc est inconveniens. Quia ipsi Deo patri debetur honor latriae propter divinitatem, et honor duliae propter dominium quo creaturas gubernat. Unde super illud Psalmi, domine Deus meus in te speravi, dicit Glossa, domine omnium per potentiam, cui debetur dulia. Deus omnium per creationem, cui debetur latria. Nor is this unfitting. For the honor of latria is due to God the Father Himself on account of His Godhead; and the honor of dulia on account of the dominion by which He rules over creatures. Wherefore on Ps. 7:1, O Lord my God, in Thee have I hoped, a gloss says: Lord of all by power, to Whom dulia is due: God of all by creation, to Whom latria is due. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Glossa illa non est sic intelligenda quasi seorsum adoretur caro Christi ab eius divinitate, hoc enim posset contingere solum hoc modo, si esset alia hypostasis Dei et hominis. Sed quia, ut dicit Damascenus, si dividas subtilibus intelligentiis quod videtur ab eo quod intelligitur, inadorabilis est ut creatura, scilicet adoratione latriae. Et tunc sic intellectae ut separatae a Dei verbo, debetur sibi adoratio duliae, non cuiuscumque, puta quae communiter exhibetur aliis creaturis; sed quadam excellentiori, quam hyperduliam vocant. Reply Obj. 1: That gloss is not to be understood as though the flesh of Christ were adored separately from its Godhead: for this could happen only, if there were one hypostasis of God, and another of man. But since, as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv, 3): If by a subtle distinction you divide what is seen from what is understood, it cannot be adored because it is a creature—that is, with adoration of latria. And then thus understood as distinct from the Word of God, it should be adored with the adoration of dulia; not any kind of dulia, such as is given to other creatures, but with a certain higher adoration, which is called hyperdulia. Et per hoc etiam patet responsio ad secundum et tertium. Quia adoratio latriae non exhibetur humanitati Christi ratione sui ipsius, sed ratione divinitatis cui unitur, secundum quam Christus non est minor patre. Hence appear the answers to the second and third objections. Because the adoration of latria is not given to Christ’s humanity in respect of itself; but in respect of the Godhead to which it is united, by reason of which Christ is not less than the Father. Articulus 3 Article 3 Utrum imago Christi sit adoranda adoratione latriae Whether the image of Christ should be adored with the adoration of latria? Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod imago Christi non sit adoranda adoratione latriae. Dicitur enim Exod. XX, non facies tibi sculptile, neque omnem similitudinem. Sed nulla adoratio est facienda contra Dei praeceptum. Ergo imago Christi non est adoranda adoratione latriae. Objection 1: It would seem that Christ’s image should not be adored with the adoration of latria. For it is written (Exod 20:4): Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of anything. But no adoration should be given against the commandment of God. Therefore Christ’s image should not be adored with the adoration of latria. Praeterea, operibus gentilium non debemus communicare, ut apostolus dicit, Ephes. V. Sed gentiles de hoc praecipue inculpantur, quia commutaverunt gloriam incorruptibilis Dei in similitudinem imaginis corruptibilis hominis, ut dicitur Rom. I. Ergo imago Christi non est adoranda adoratione latriae. Obj. 2: Further, we should have nothing in common with the works of the Gentiles, as the Apostle says (Eph 5:11). But the Gentiles are reproached principally for that they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, as is written (Rom 1:23). Therefore Christ’s image is not to be adored with the adoration of latria. Praeterea, Christo debetur adoratio latriae ratione divinitatis, non ratione humanitatis. Sed imagini divinitatis eius, quae animae rationali est impressa, non debetur adoratio latriae. Ergo multo minus imagini corporali, quae repraesentat humanitatem ipsius Christi. Obj. 3: Further, to Christ the adoration of latria is due by reason of His Godhead, not of His humanity. But the adoration of latria is not due to the image of His Godhead, which is imprinted on the rational soul. Much less, therefore, is it due to the material image which represents the humanity of Christ Himself. Praeterea, nihil videtur in cultu divino faciendum nisi quod est a Deo institutum, unde et apostolus, I Cor. XI, traditurus doctrinam de sacrificio Ecclesiae, dicit, ego accepi a domino quod et tradidi vobis. Sed nulla traditio in Scriptura invenitur de adorandis imaginibus. Ergo imago Christi non est adoratione latriae adoranda. Obj. 4: Further, it seems that nothing should be done in the Divine worship that is not instituted by God; wherefore the Apostle (1 Cor 11:23) when about to lay down the doctrine of the sacrifice of the Church, says: I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you. But Scripture does not lay down anything concerning the adoration of images. Therefore Christ’s image is not to be adored with the adoration of latria. Sed contra est quod Damascenus inducit Basilium dicentem, imaginis honor ad prototypum pervenit, idest exemplar. Sed ipsum exemplar, scilicet Christus, est adorandus adoratione latriae. Ergo et eius imago. On the contrary, Damascene (De Fide Orth. iv, 16) quotes Basil as saying: The honor given to an image reaches to the prototype, i.e., the exemplar. But the exemplar itself—namely, Christ—is to be adored with the adoration of latria; therefore also His image. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut philosophus dicit, in libro de Mem. et Remin., duplex est motus animae in imaginem, unus quidem in imaginem ipsam secundum quod est res quaedam; alio modo, in imaginem inquantum est imago alterius. Et inter hos motus est haec differentia, quia primus motus, quo quis movetur in imaginem prout est res quaedam, est alius a motu qui est in rem, secundus autem motus, qui est in imaginem inquantum est imago, est unus et idem cum illo qui est in rem. Sic igitur dicendum est quod imagini Christi inquantum est res quaedam, puta lignum sculptum vel pictum, nulla reverentia exhibetur, quia reverentia debetur non nisi rationali naturae. Relinquitur ergo quod exhibeatur ei reverentia solum inquantum est imago. Et sic sequitur quod eadem reverentia exhibeatur imagini Christi et ipsi Christo. Cum igitur Christus adoretur adoratione latriae, consequens est quod eius imago sit adoratione latriae adoranda. I answer that, As the Philosopher says (De Memor. et Remin. i), there is a twofold movement of the mind towards an image: one indeed towards the image itself as a certain thing; another, towards the image in so far as it is the image of something else. And between these movements there is this difference; that the former, by which one is moved towards an image as a certain thing, is different from the movement towards the thing: whereas the latter movement, which is towards the image as an image, is one and the same as that which is towards the thing. Thus therefore we must say that no reverence is shown to Christ’s image, as a thing—for instance, carved or painted wood: because reverence is not due save to a rational creature. It follows therefore that reverence should be shown to it, in so far only as it is an image. Consequently the same reverence should be shown to Christ’s image as to Christ Himself. Since, therefore, Christ is adored with the adoration of latria, it follows that His image should be adored with the adoration of latria. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod non prohibetur illo praecepto facere quamcumque sculpturam vel similitudinem, sed facere ad adorandum, unde subdit non adorabis ea neque coles. Et quia, sicut dictum est, idem est motus in imaginem et in rem, eo modo prohibetur adoratio quo prohibetur adoratio rei cuius est imago. Unde ibi intelligitur prohiberi adoratio imaginum quas gentiles faciebant in venerationem deorum suorum, idest Daemonum, ideoque praemittitur, non habebis deos alienos coram me. Ipsi autem Deo vero, cum sit incorporeus, nulla imago corporalis poterat poni, quia, ut Damascenus dicit, insipientiae summae est et impietatis figurare quod est divinum. Sed quia in novo testamento Deus factus est homo, potest in sua imagine corporali adorari. Reply Obj. 1: This commandment does not forbid the making of any graven thing or likeness, but the making thereof for the purpose of adoration, wherefore it is added: Thou shalt not adore them nor serve them. And because, as stated above, the movement towards the image is the same as the movement towards the thing, adoration thereof is forbidden in the same way as adoration of the thing whose image it is. Wherefore in the passage quoted we are to understand the prohibition to adore those images which the Gentiles made for the purpose of venerating their own gods, i.e., the demons, and so it is premised: Thou shalt not have strange gods before Me. But no corporeal image could be raised to the true God Himself, since He is incorporeal; because, as Damascene observes (De Fide Orth. iv, 16): It is the highest absurdity and impiety to fashion a figure of what is Divine. But because in the New Testament God was made man, He can be adored in His corporeal image. Ad secundum dicendum quod apostolus prohibet communicare operibus infructuosis gentilium, communicare autem eorum utilibus operibus apostolus non prohibet. Adoratio autem imaginum est inter infructuosa opera computanda quantum ad duo. Primo quidem, quantum ad hoc quod quidam eorum adorabant ipsas imagines ut res quasdam, credentes in eis aliquid numinis esse, propter responsa quae Daemones in eis dabant, et alios mirabiles huiusmodi effectus. Secundo, propter res quarum erant imagines, statuebant enim imagines aliquibus creaturis, quas in eis veneratione latriae venerabantur. Nos autem adoramus adoratione latriae imaginem Christi, qui est verus Deus, non propter ipsam imaginem, sed propter rem cuius imago est, ut dictum est. Reply Obj. 2: The Apostle forbids us to have anything in common with the unfruitful works of the Gentiles, but not with their useful works. Now the adoration of images must be numbered among the unfruitful works in two respects. First, because some of the Gentiles used to adore the images themselves, as things, believing that there was something Divine therein, on account of the answers which the demons used to give in them, and on account of other such like wonderful effects. Second on account of the things of which they were images; for they set up images to certain creatures, to whom in these images they gave the veneration of latria. Whereas we give the adoration of latria to the image of Christ, Who is true God, not for the sake of the image, but for the sake of the thing whose image it is, as stated above. Ad tertium dicendum quod creaturae rationali debetur reverentia propter seipsam. Et ideo, si creaturae rationali, in qua est imago, exhiberetur adoratio latriae posset esse erroris occasio, ut scilicet motus adorantis in homine sisteret inquantum est res quaedam, et non ferretur in Deum, cuius est imago. Quod non potest contingere de imagine sculpta vel picta in materia insensibili. Reply Obj. 3: Reverence is due to the rational creature for its own sake. Consequently, if the adoration of latria were shown to the rational creature in which this image is, there might be an occasion of error—namely, lest the movement of adoration might stop short at the man, as a thing, and not be carried on to God, Whose image he is. This cannot happen in the case of a graven or painted image in insensible material. Ad quartum dicendum quod apostoli, familiari instinctu spiritus sancti, quaedam Ecclesiis tradiderunt servanda quae non reliquerunt in scriptis, sed in observatione Ecclesiae per successionem fidelium sunt ordinata. Unde ipse dicit, II Thess. II, state, et tenete traditiones quas didicistis, sive per sermonem, scilicet ab ore prolatum, sive per epistolam, scilicet scripto transmissam. Et inter huiusmodi traditiones est imaginum Christi adoratio. Unde et beatus Lucas dicitur depinxisse imaginem Christi, quae Romae habetur. Reply Obj. 4: The Apostles, led by the inward instinct of the Holy Spirit, handed down to the churches certain instructions which they did not put in writing, but which have been ordained, in accordance with the observance of the Church as practiced by the faithful as time went on. Wherefore the Apostle says (2 Thess 2:14): Stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word—that is by word of mouth—or by our epistle—that is by word put into writing. Among these traditions is the worship of Christ’s image. Wherefore it is said that Blessed Luke painted the image of Christ, which is in Rome. Articulus 4 Article 4 Utrum crux Christi sit adoranda adoratione latriae Whether Christ’s cross should be worshipped with the adoration of latria? Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod crux Christi non sit adoranda adoratione latriae. Nullus enim pius filius veneratur contumeliam patris sui, puta flagellum quo flagellatus est, vel lignum in quo erat suspensus, sed magis illud abhorret. Christus autem in ligno crucis est opprobriosissimam mortem passus, secundum illud Sap. II, morte turpissima condemnemus eum. Ergo non debemus crucem venerari, sed magis abhorrere. Objection 1: It would seem that Christ’s cross should not be worshiped with the adoration of latria. For no dutiful son honors that which dishonors his father, as the scourge with which he was scourged, or the gibbet on which he was hanged; rather does he abhor it. Now Christ underwent the most shameful death on the cross; according to Wis. 2:20: Let us condemn Him to a most shameful death. Therefore we should not venerate the cross but rather we should abhor it. Praeterea, humanitas Christi adoratione latriae adoratur inquantum est unita filio Dei in persona. Quod de cruce dici non potest. Ergo crux Christi non est adoranda adoratione latriae. Obj. 2: Further, Christ’s humanity is worshiped with the adoration of latria, inasmuch as it is united to the Son of God in Person. But this cannot be said of the cross. Therefore Christ’s cross should not be worshiped with the adoration of latria. Praeterea, sicut crux Christi fuit instrumentum passionis eius et mortis, ita etiam et multa alia, puta clavi, corona et lancea, quibus tamen non exhibemus latriae cultum. Ergo videtur quod crux Christi non sit adoratione latriae adoranda. Obj. 3: Further, as Christ’s cross was the instrument of His passion and death, so were also many other things, for instance, the nails, the crown, the lance; yet to these we do not show the worship of latria. It seems, therefore, that Christ’s cross should not be worshiped with the adoration of latria. Sed contra, illi exhibemus adorationem latriae in quo ponimus spem salutis. Sed in cruce Christi ponimus spem, cantat enim Ecclesia, o crux, ave, spes unica, hoc passionis tempore, auge piis iustitiam, reisque dona veniam. Ergo crux Christi est adoranda adoratione latriae. On the contrary, We show the worship of latria to that in which we place our hope of salvation. But we place our hope in Christ’s cross, for the Church sings: Dear Cross, best hope o’er all beside, That cheers the solemn passion-tide: Give to the just increase of grace, Give to each contrite sinner peace. Therefore Christ’s cross should be worshiped with the adoration of latria. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, honor seu reverentia non debetur nisi rationali creaturae, creaturae autem insensibili non debetur honor vel reverentia nisi ratione naturae rationalis. Et hoc dupliciter, uno modo, inquantum repraesentat naturam rationalem; alio modo, inquantum ei quocumque modo coniungitur. Primo modo consueverunt homines venerari regis imaginem, secundo modo, eius vestimentum. Utrumque autem venerantur homines eadem veneratione qua venerantur et regem. I answer that, As stated above (A. 3), honor or reverence is due to a rational creature only; while to an insensible creature, no honor or reverence is due save by reason of a rational nature. And this in two ways. First, inasmuch as it represents a rational nature: second, inasmuch as it is united to it in any way whatsoever. In the first way men are wont to venerate the king’s image; in the second way, his robe. And both are venerated by men with the same veneration as they show to the king. Si ergo loquamur de ipsa cruce in qua Christus crucifixus est, utroque modo est a nobis veneranda, uno modo scilicet inquantum repraesentat nobis figuram Christi extensi in ea; alio modo, ex contactu ad membra Christi, et ex hoc quod eius sanguine est perfusa. Unde utroque modo adoratur eadem adoratione cum Christo, scilicet adoratione latriae. Et propter hoc etiam crucem alloquimur et deprecamur, quasi ipsum crucifixum. Si vero loquamur de effigie crucis Christi in quacumque alia materia, puta lapidis vel ligni, argenti vel auri, sic veneramur crucem tantum ut imaginem Christi, quam veneramur adoratione latriae, ut supra dictum est. If, therefore, we speak of the cross itself on which Christ was crucified, it is to be venerated by us in both ways—namely, in one way in so far as it represents to us the figure of Christ extended thereon; in the other way, from its contact with the limbs of Christ, and from its being saturated with His blood. Wherefore in each way it is worshiped with the same adoration as Christ, viz. the adoration of latria. And for this reason also we speak to the cross and pray to it, as to the Crucified Himself. But if we speak of the effigy of Christ’s cross in any other material whatever—for instance, in stone or wood, silver or gold—thus we venerate the cross merely as Christ’s image, which we worship with the adoration of latria, as stated above (A. 3). Ad primum ergo dicendum quod in cruce Christi, quantum ad opinionem vel intentionem infidelium, consideratur opprobrium Christi, sed quantum ad effectum nostrae salutis, consideratur virtus divina ipsius, qua de hostibus triumphavit, secundum illud Coloss. II, ipsum tulit de medio, affigens illud cruci, et spolians principatus et potestates, traduxit confidenter, palam triumphans illos in semetipso. Et ideo dicit apostolus, I Cor. I, verbum crucis pereuntibus quidem stultitia est, his autem qui salvi fiunt, idest nobis, virtus Dei est. Reply Obj. 1: If in Christ’s cross we consider the point of view and intention of those who did not believe in Him, it will appear as His shame: but if we consider its effect, which is our salvation, it will appear as endowed with Divine power, by which it triumphed over the enemy, according to Col. 2:14, 15: He hath taken the same out of the way, fastening it to the cross, and despoiling the principalities and powers, He hath exposed them confidently, in open show, triumphing over them in Himself. Wherefore the Apostle says (1 Cor 1:18): The Word of the cross to them indeed that perish is foolishness; but to them that are saved—that is, to us—it is the power of God. Ad secundum dicendum quod crux Christi, licet non fuerit unita verbo Dei in persona, fuit tamen ei unita aliquo alio modo, scilicet per repraesentationem et contactum. Et hac sola ratione exhibetur ei reverentia. Reply Obj. 2: Although Christ’s cross was not united to the Word of God in Person, yet it was united to Him in some other way, viz. by representation and contact. And for this sole reason reverence is shown to it. Ad tertium dicendum quod, quantum ad rationem contactus membrorum Christi, adoramus non solum crucem, sed etiam omnia quae sunt Christi. Unde Damascenus dicit, in IV libro, pretiosum lignum, ut sanctificatum contactu sancti corporis et sanguinis, decenter adorandum; clavos, indumenta, lanceam; et sacra eius tabernacula. Ista tamen non repraesentant imaginem Christi, sicut crux, quae dicitur signum filii hominis, quod apparebit in caelo, ut dicitur Matth. XXIV. Ideoque mulieribus dixit Angelus, Iesum quaeritis Nazarenum crucifixum, non dixit, lanceatum, sed, crucifixum. Et inde est quod imaginem crucis Christi veneramur in quacumque materia, non autem imaginem clavorum, vel quorumcumque huiusmodi. Reply Obj. 3: By reason of the contact of Christ’s limbs we worship not only the cross, but all that belongs to Christ. Wherefore Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv, 11): The precious wood, as having been sanctified by the contact of His holy body and blood, should be meetly worshiped; as also His nails, His lance, and His sacred dwelling-places, such as the manger, the cave and so forth. Yet these very things do not represent Christ’s image as the cross does, which is called the Sign of the Son of Man that will appear in heaven, as it is written (Matt 24:30). Wherefore the angel said to the women (Mark 16:6): You seek Jesus of Nazareth, Who was crucified: he said not pierced, but crucified. For this reason we worship the image of Christ’s cross in any material, but not the image of the nails or of any such thing. Articulus 5 Article 5 Utrum mater Dei sit adoranda adoratione latriae Whether the Mother of God should be worshipped with the adoration of latria?