Mors ante resurrectionem
Death before the resurrection
15:35 Sed dicet aliquis: Quomodo resurgunt mortui? qualive corpore venient? [n. 964]
15:35 But some man will say: how do the dead rise again? Or with what manner of body shall they come? [n. 964]
15:36 Insipiens, tu quod seminas non vivificatur, nisi prius moriatur: [n. 966]
15:36 Senseless man, that which you sow is not quickened, except it die first. [n. 966]
15:37 et quod seminas, non corpus, quod futurum est, seminas, sed nudum granum, ut puta tritici, aut alicujus ceterorum. [n. 970]
15:37 And that which you sow, you sow not the body that shall be: but bare grain, as of wheat, or of some of the rest. [n. 970]
15:38 Deus autem dat illi corpus sicut vult: ut unicuique seminum proprium corpus. [n. 972]
15:38 But God gives it a body as he wills: and to every seed its proper body. [n. 972]
964. Superius Apostolus probavit resurrectionem mortuorum, hic ostendit qualitatem et modum resurgentium.
964. Having proved the resurrection of the dead, the Apostle now shows the quality and mode of those rising.
Et circa hoc duo facit.
In regard to this he does two things:
Primo movet quaestionem circa qualitatem resurgentium;
first, he raises a question about the quality of those rising;
secundo solvit, ibi insipiens tu, et cetera.
second, he answers it, at senseless man, that which you sow.
965. Circa resurrectionem fuerunt duo errores. Quidam enim totaliter negabant resurrectionem mortuorum futuram. Cum enim non considerarent nisi principia naturae et posse, et viderent quod secundum principia naturae et posse nullus de morte potest redire ad vitam, nec caecus potest recuperare visum, ideo totaliter negaverunt resurrectionem, ex quorum persona dicitur Sap. II, 5: umbrae transitus est tempus nostrum, et cetera. Et ibidem: de nihilo nati sumus, et cetera. Iob XIV, v. 14: putasne mortuus homo rursum vivet, et cetera.
965. In regard to the resurrection there have been two errors. For some absolutely denied the future resurrection of the dead. For since they considered only the principles and capabilities of nature and saw that according to natural principles and capabilities no one could return to life or a blind person recover sight, they absolutely denied the resurrection. From their mouth it is said: our allotted time is the passing of a shadow (Wis 2:5); we are born of nothing (Wis 2:2); do you think a dead man will live again? (Job 14:14)
Alii autem dixerunt resurrectionem mortuorum futuram esse, sed dicebant quod resurgebant ad eumdem modum vivendi, et ad eosdem actus. Et hoc etiam posuerunt quidam philosophi qui dicunt: post multa annorum curricula Plato adhuc resurget, et habebit eosdem scholares Athenis, quos aliquando habuit. Hoc etiam asserunt Pharisaei, Matth. XXII, 28, de muliere septem virorum, unde dicebant: in resurrectione cuius erit? Saraceni etiam fingunt quod habebunt post resurrectionem uxores, et voluptates, et delicias corporales. Iob XX, 17: non videat rivulos fluminis torrentis mellis et butyri. Contra quos dicitur Matth. XXII, 30, quod erunt sicut angeli Dei in caelo.
Others, on the other hand, have said there will be a resurrection, but they will rise to the same manner of living and to the same acts. Even philosophers have posited this when they said: after many years Plato will rise again and will have the same scholars in Athens, whom he had at some time. The Sadducees also assert this about the woman with seven husbands (Matt 22:29). Hence they asked: in the resurrection to which of the seven will she be wife? The Saracens, too, pretend that after the resurrection they will have wives, and pleasures, and bodily delights: he will not move upon the rivers, the streams flow with honey and curds (Job 20:17). Against these Matthew says that they will be as the angels in heaven (Matt 22:30).
Has ergo duas quaestiones movet hic Apostolus. Primam cum dicit quomodo resurgunt mortui? Quomodo est possibile quod mortui qui sunt cinis possint resurgere? Secundam, cum dicit quali autem corpore venient? Quasi dicat: numquid cum tali corpore resurgent cum quali sumus modo?
Therefore the Apostle raises two questions here. The first is when he says, how do the dead rise again? How is it possible that the dead who are dust can rise? The second when he says, or with what manner of body shall they come? As if to say: will they rise with the same kind of body as we have now?
966. Has duas quaestiones solvit cum dicit insipiens, et cetera. Primo solvit secundam, secundo vero solvit primam, ibi ecce mysterium vobis dico, et cetera.
966. He answers these two questions when he says, senseless man. First, he solves the second; second, he solves the first, at behold, I tell you a mystery (1 Cor 15:51).
Ad intellectum autem eorum quae Apostolus ponit in prima parte, oportet investigare quid Apostolus intendat. Intendit autem in ista parte Apostolus ostendere quod mortui resurgunt, et quod erit eadem substantia. Ubi
To understand what the Apostle presents in the first part, it is necessary to investigate what the Apostle intends. But in this part the Apostle intends to show that the dead will rise and that their substance will be the same.
primo ponit similitudines;
Here he first presents likenesses;
secundo adaptat, ibi sic etiam resurrectio mortuorum, etc.;
second, he adapts, at so also is the resurrection of the dead (1 Cor 15:42);
tertio probat, ibi si est corpus animale, et cetera.
third, he proves it, at it is sown a natural body (1 Cor 15:44).
Circa primum duo facit.
In regard to the first he does two things:
Primo proponit similitudines in una specie,
first, he proposes likenesses in one species;
secundo in diversis speciebus, ibi non omnis caro, eadem caro, et cetera.
second, in diverse species, at all flesh is not the same flesh (1 Cor 15:39).
967. Circa primum sciendum est quod videmus in una et eadem specie quod una res in via generationis habet diversas qualitates et formas; sicut granum aliam formam et qualitatem habet quando seminatur, aliam quando pullulat, aliam quando iam est in herba. Et ideo ex hac similitudine Apostolus intendit ostendere qualitatem resurgentium.
967. In regard to the first it should be noted that we see in one and the same species that one thing on the way to generation has diverse qualities and forms: as grain has one form and quality, when it is planted, and another, when it shoots up, and another, when it is in herb. From this likeness the Apostle intends to show the quality of the rising.
Unde circa hoc tria facit.
Hence, in regard to this he does three things:
Primo comparat ordinem seminationis ad pullulationem;
first, he compares the order of sowing to growing;
secundo differentiam qualitatis in semine et in pullulatione, ibi tu quod seminas, etc.;
second, the difference in quality in sowing and growing, at and that which you sow;
tertio causam qualitatis in pullulatione, ibi Deus autem, et cetera.
third, the cause of the quality in growing, at but God gives it a body.
968. Dicit ergo insipiens, et cetera. Sed contra Matth. V, 22: qui dixerit fratri suo: racha, et cetera.
968. He says, therefore, senseless man. But on the other hand it is said: whoever says to his brother: you fool, shall be liable to hell (Matt 5:22).
Dicendum quod Dominus prohibet dici fratri racha seu fatue, ex ira non ex correctione.
The answer is that God forbids saying, ‘you fool’ or ‘stupid’ to your brother in anger and not in correction.
Causa autem quare dicit insipiens, est quia haec obiectio contra resurrectionem procedit ex principiis humanae sapientiae, quae tamdiu est sapientia, quamdiu est subiecta sapientiae divinae; sed quando recedit a Deo, tunc vertitur in insipientiam; unde cum contradicat sapientiae divinae, vocat eam insipientem. Quasi dicat: insipiens, nonne quotidie experiris, tu, quia quod seminas, in terra, non vivificatur, id est vegetatur, nisi prius moriatur, id est putrescat? Io. XII, 24: nisi granum frumenti, et cetera.
Now the reason he says senseless man is that this objection against the resurrection proceeds from the principles of human wisdom, which is wisdom as long as it is subjected to divine wisdom. But when one departs from God, he falls back on unwisdom; hence, when he contradicts divine wisdom, he calls him foolish. As if to say: senseless man, do you not experience every day that which you sow in the earth is not quickened, except it die first, i.e., decays: unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone (John 12:24).
Ex hoc videtur Apostolus facere comparationem, quod quando corpus hominis ponitur in sepulchro in terra, tunc est quaedam seminatio; quando vero resurgit, tunc est quaedam vivificatio.
And the Apostle seems to make this comparison, that when a man’s body is put in a tomb, it is a form of sowing; but when it rises, it is coming to life.
969. Unde ex hoc opinantur aliqui, resurrectionem mortuorum esse naturalem, propter hoc quod Apostolus hic resurrectionem comparat pullulationi seminis quae est naturalis. Opinantur enim in pulveribus resolutis, in quos resolvuntur humana corpora, esse quasdam virtutes seminales activas ad corporum resurrectionem.
969. Hence, from this some suppose that the resurrection of the dead is natural, inasmuch as the Apostle here compares the resurrection of the dead to the sprouting of a seed, which is natural. For they believed that in the dust, into which human bodies are resolved, there were certain active seminal powers for the resurrection of bodies.
Sed istud non videtur esse verum. Fit enim resolutio corporis humani in elementa, sicut et aliorum mixtorum corporum, unde pulveres in quos humana corpora resolvuntur, nullam aliam habent virtutem activam quam alii pulveres, in quibus constat non esse aliam virtutem activam ad corporis humani constitutionem, sed solum in semine hominis; differunt autem pulveres in quos humana corpora resolvuntur, ab aliis pulveribus solum secundum ordinationem divinam, prout huiusmodi pulveres sunt ex divina sapientia ordinati, ut iterum ex eis humana corpora reintegrentur.
But this does not seem to be true. For the resolution of human bodies into elements happens in the same way as other mixed bodies; hence, the dust into which human bodies are resolved has no other active power than other dust, in which there is no evidence of any active power to constitute a human body, but only in man’s seed. However, the dusts into which human bodies are reduced differ from other dust only according to God’s plan, inasmuch as these dusts are ordained by divine wisdom that human bodies be formed from them again.
Unde resurrectionis activa causa solus Deus erit, etsi ad hoc utatur ministerio angelorum, quantum ad pulverum collectionem. Propter quod Apostolus infra modum resurrectionis exponens, attribuit sono tubae, et supra attribuit Christo resurgenti, non autem alicui virtuti activae in pulveribus.
Hence the active cause of the resurrection is God alone, even though for this he uses the service of angels to collect the dust. Hence, the Apostle explaining the manner of the resurrection below attributes it to Christ’s raising, but not to any active power in the dusts.
Non ergo intendit hic probare Apostolus quod resurrectio sit naturalis, per hoc quod semen naturaliter pullulat, sed intendit hic manifestare per exempla quaedam, quod non sit eadem qualitas corporum resurgentium et corporum morientium, et primo per hoc quod non est eadem qualitas seminis et pullulationis, ut ex sequentibus manifeste ostendetur.
Therefore, the Apostle does not intend to prove here that the resurrection is natural, but to manifest by certain examples that the quality of rising bodies and that of dying bodies is not the same; and, first of all, by the fact that the quality of the seed and of the sprouting bud are not the same, as will be clearly shown from the following.
970. Nam consequenter cum dicit et quod seminas, etc., ostendit qualitatem seminis differentem esse a qualitate pullulationis, cum dicit et quod seminas, non corpus, quod futurum est, seminas, id est non quale futurum est seminas. Quod exponens subdit sed nudum granum, puta tritici vel alicuius caeterorum, scilicet seminum, quia seminatur nudum semen, pullulat autem ornatum herba, et aristis, et huiusmodi. Et similiter corpus humanum aliam qualitatem habebit in resurrectione quam nunc habet, ut infra exponetur.
970. For when he says, and that which you sow, he shows that the quality of seed is different from the quality of the sprout. Hence he says, and that which you sow, you sow not the body that shall be, i.e., you do not plant it as it will be. Explaining this he says, but bare grain, as of wheat, or of some of the rest, namely, a seed, because a bare kernel is sowed, but what sprouts is fashioned as an herb, or an ear of corn and so on. Similarly, the human body will have another quality in the resurrection than it has now, as will be explained below.
Est tamen differentia inter resurrectionem humani corporis, et pullulationem seminis; nam surget idem corpus numero, sed habebit aliam qualitatem, sicut infra dicit Apostolus, quod oportet corruptibile hoc induere incorruptionem; et Iob XIX, 27 dicitur quem visurus sum ego ipse, et non alius. Sed in pullulatione nec est eadem qualitas, nec idem corpus numero, sed solum idem specie. Et ideo signanter Apostolus de pullulatione loquens, dixit non corpus, quod futurum est, seminas, dans intelligere quod non sit idem numero.
Yet there is a difference between the resurrection of the human body and the sprouting of a seed, for the same numerical body will rise, but it will have another quality, as the Apostle says below: for this corruptible must put on incorruption (2 Cor 15:53); and: and my eyes shall behold and not another (Job 19:27). But in sprouting there is neither the same quality nor the same numerical body, but only the same in species. And therefore, the Apostle speaking about sprouting said, you sow not the body that shall be, giving us to understand that it is not the same numerically.