Respondeo dicendum quod ascensio Christi est causa nostrae salutis dupliciter, uno modo, ex parte nostra; alio modo, ex parte ipsius. I answer that, Christ’s Ascension is the cause of our salvation in two ways: first of all, on our part; second, on His. Ex parte quidem nostra, inquantum per Christi ascensionem mens nostra movetur in ipsum. Quia per eius ascensionem, sicut supra dictum est, primo quidem datur locus fidei; secundo, spei; tertio, caritati. Quarto etiam, per hoc reverentia nostra augetur ad ipsum, dum iam non existimamus eum sicut hominem terrenum, sed sicut Deum caelestem, sicut et apostolus dicit, II Cor. V, etsi cognovimus secundum carnem Christum, idest, mortalem, per quod putavimus eum tantum hominem, ut Glossa exponit, sed nunc iam non novimus. On our part, in so far as by the Ascension our souls are uplifted to Him; because, as stated above (A. 1, ad 3), His Ascension fosters, first, faith; second, hope; third, charity. Fourth, our reverence for Him is thereby increased, since we no longer deem Him an earthly man, but the God of heaven; thus the Apostle says (2 Cor 5:16): If we have known Christ according to the flesh—‘that is, as mortal, whereby we reputed Him as a mere man,’ as the gloss interprets the words—but now we know Him so no longer. Ex parte autem sua, quantum ad ea quae ipse fecit ascendens propter nostram salutem. Et primo quidem, viam nobis praeparavit ascendendi in caelum, secundum quod ipse dicit, Ioan. XIV, vado parare vobis locum; et Mich. II, ascendit pandens iter ante eos. Quia enim ipse est caput nostrum, oportet illuc sequi membra quo caput praecessit, unde dicitur Ioan. XIV, ut ubi sum ego, et vos sitis. Et in huius signum, animas sanctorum quas de Inferno eduxerat, in caelum traduxit, secundum illud Psalmi, ascendens in altum captivam duxit captivitatem, quia scilicet eos qui fuerant a Diabolo captivati, secum duxit in caelum, quasi in locum peregrinum humanae naturae, bona captione captivos, utpote per victoriam acquisitos. On His part, in regard to those things which, in ascending, He did for our salvation. First, He prepared the way for our ascent into heaven, according to His own saying (John 14:2): I go to prepare a place for you, and the words of Micheas (2:13), He shall go up that shall open the way before them. For since He is our Head the members must follow whither the Head has gone: hence He said (John 14:3): That where I am, you also may be. In sign whereof He took to heaven the souls of the saints delivered from hell, according to Ps. 67:19 (Cf. Eph. 4:8): Ascending on high, He led captivity captive, because He took with Him to heaven those who had been held captives by the devil—to heaven, as to a place strange to human nature; captives in deed of a happy taking, since they were acquired by His victory. Secundo quia, sicut pontifex in veteri testamento intrabat sanctuarium ut assisteret Deo pro populo, ita et Christus intravit in caelum ad interpellandum pro nobis, ut dicitur Heb. VII. Ipsa enim repraesentatio sui ex natura humana, quam in caelum intulit, est quaedam interpellatio pro nobis, ut, ex quo Deus humanam naturam sic exaltavit in Christo, etiam eorum misereatur pro quibus filius Dei humanam naturam assumpsit. Tertio ut, in caelorum sede quasi Deus et dominus constitutus, exinde divina dona hominibus mitteret, secundum illud Ephes. IV, ascendit super omnes caelos ut adimpleret omnia, scilicet donis suis, secundum Glossam. Second, because as the high-priest under the Old Testament entered the holy place to stand before God for the people, so also Christ entered heaven to make intercession for us, as is said in Heb. 7:25. Because the very showing of Himself in the human nature which He took with Him to heaven is a pleading for us, so that for the very reason that God so exalted human nature in Christ, He may take pity on them for whom the Son of God took human nature. Third, that being established in His heavenly seat as God and Lord, He might send down gifts upon men, according to Eph. 4:10: He ascended above all the heavens, that He might fill all things, that is, with His gifts, according to the gloss. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod ascensio Christi est causa nostrae salutis, non per modum meriti, sed per modum efficientiae, sicut supra de resurrectione dictum est. Reply Obj. 1: Christ’s Ascension is the cause of our salvation by way not of merit, but of efficiency, as was stated above regarding His Resurrection (Q. 56, A. 1, ad 3, 4). Ad secundum dicendum quod passio Christi est causa nostrae ascensionis in caelum, proprie loquendo, per remotionem peccati prohibentis, et per modum meriti. Ascensio autem Christi est directe causa ascensionis nostrae, quasi inchoando ipsam in capite nostro, cui oportet membra coniungi. Reply Obj. 2: Christ’s Passion is the cause of our ascending to heaven, properly speaking, by removing the hindrance which is sin, and also by way of merit: whereas Christ’s Ascension is the direct cause of our ascension, as by beginning it in Him who is our Head, with whom the members must be united. Ad tertium dicendum quod Christus, semel ascendens in caelum, adeptus est sibi et nobis in perpetuum ius et dignitatem mansionis caelestis. Cui tamen dignitati non derogat si ex aliqua dispensatione Christus quandoque corporaliter ad terram descendat, vel ut ostendat se omnibus, sicut in iudicio; vel ut ostendat se alicui specialiter, sicut Paulo, ut habetur Act. IX. Et ne aliquis credat hoc factum fuisse, non Christo ibi corporaliter praesente, sed aliqualiter apparente, contrarium apparet per hoc quod ipse apostolus dicit, I Cor. XV, ad confirmandam resurrectionis fidem, novissime omnium, tanquam abortivo, visus est et mihi, quae quidem visio veritatem resurrectionis non probaret nisi ipsum verum corpus visum fuisset ab eo. Reply Obj. 3: Christ by once ascending into heaven acquired for Himself and for us in perpetuity the right and worthiness of a heavenly dwelling-place; which worthiness suffers in no way, if, from some special dispensation, He sometimes comes down in body to earth; either in order to show Himself to the whole world, as at the judgment; or else to show Himself particularly to some individual, e.g., in Paul’s case, as we read in Acts 9. And lest any man may think that Christ was not bodily present when this occurred, the contrary is shown from what the Apostle says in 1 Cor. 14:8, to confirm faith in the Resurrection: Last of all He was seen also by me, as by one born out of due time: which vision would not confirm the truth of the Resurrection except he had beheld Christ’s very body. Quaestio 58 Question 58 De sessione Christi ad dexteram Patris Christ’s Sitting at the Right Hand of the Father Deinde considerandum est de sessione Christi ad dexteram patris. Et circa hoc quaeruntur quatuor. We have now to consider Christ’s sitting at the right hand of the Father, concerning which there are four points of inquiry: Primo, utrum Christus sedeat ad dexteram patris. (1) Whether Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father? Secundo, utrum hoc conveniat sibi secundum divinam naturam. (2) Whether this belongs to Him according to the Divine Nature? Tertio, utrum conveniat sibi secundum humanam. (3) Whether it belongs to Him according to His human nature? Quarto, utrum hoc sit proprium Christi. (4) Whether it is something proper to Christ? Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum Christo conveniat sedere ad dexteram Dei Patris Whether it is fitting that Christ should sit at the right hand of God the Father? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod Christo non conveniat sedere ad dexteram Dei patris. Dextera enim et sinistra sunt differentiae positionum corporalium. Sed nihil corporale convenit Deo, quia Deus spiritus est, ut habetur Ioan. IV. Ergo videtur quod Christus non sedeat ad dexteram patris. Objection 1: It would seem unfitting that Christ should sit at the right hand of God the Father. For right and left are differences of bodily position. But nothing corporeal can be applied to God, since God is a spirit, as we read in John 4:24. Therefore it seems that Christ does not sit at the right hand of the Father. Praeterea, si aliquis sedet ad dexteram alicuius, ille sedet ad sinistram eius. Si ergo Christus sedet ad dexteram patris, sequitur quod pater sedeat ad sinistram filii. Quod est inconveniens. Obj. 2: Further, if anyone sits at another’s right hand, then the latter is seated on his left. Consequently, if Christ sits at the right hand of the Father, it follows that the Father is seated on the left of the Son; which is unseemly. Praeterea, sedere et stare videntur oppositionem habere. Sed Stephanus dicit, Act. VII, ecce, video caelos apertos, et filium hominis stantem a dextris virtutis Dei. Ergo videtur quod Christus non sedeat ad dexteram patris. Obj. 3: Further, sitting and standing savor of opposition. But Stephen (Acts 7:55) said: Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. Therefore it seems that Christ does not sit at the right hand of the Father. Sed contra est quod dicitur Marci ult., dominus quidem Iesus, postquam locutus est eis, ascendit in caelum, et sedet a dextris Dei. On the contrary, It is written in the last chapter of Mark (16:19): The Lord Jesus, after He had spoken to them, was taken up to heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God. Respondeo dicendum quod in nomine sessionis duo possumus intelligere, videlicet quietem, secundum illud Luc. ult., sedete hic in civitate; et etiam regiam vel iudiciariam potestatem, secundum illud Proverb. XX, rex qui sedet in solio iudicii, dissipat omne malum intuitu suo. Utroque igitur modo Christo convenit sedere ad dexteram patris. Uno quidem modo, inquantum aeternaliter manet incorruptibilis in beatitudine patris, quae eius dextera dicitur, secundum illud Psalmi, delectationes in dextera tua usque in finem. Unde Augustinus dicit, in libro de symbolo, sedet ad dexteram patris, sedere habitare intelligite, quomodo dicimus de quocumque homine, in illa patria sedit per tres annos. Sic ergo credite Christum habitare in dextera Dei patris, beatus enim est, et ipsius beatitudinis nomen est dextera patris. Alio modo dicitur Christus sedere in dextera patris, inquantum patri conregnat, et ab eo habet iudiciariam potestatem, sicut ille qui considet regi ad dexteram, assidet ei in regnando et iudicando. Unde Augustinus dicit, in alio sermone de symbolo, ipsam dexteram intelligite potestatem quam accepit ille homo susceptus a Deo, ut veniat iudicaturus qui prius venerat iudicandus. I answer that, The word sitting may have a twofold meaning; namely, abiding as in Luke 24:49: Sit you in the city: and royal or judiciary power, as in Prov. 20:8: The king, that sitteth on the throne of judgment, scattereth away all evil with his look. Now in either sense it belongs to Christ to sit at the Father’s right hand. First of all inasmuch as He abides eternally unchangeable in the Father’s bliss, which is termed His right hand, according to Ps. 15:11: At Thy right hand are delights even to the end. Hence Augustine says (De Symb. i): ‘Sitteth at the right hand of the Father’: To sit means to dwell, just as we say of any man: ‘He sat in that country for three years’: Believe, then, that Christ dwells so at the right hand of the Father: for He is happy, and the Father’s right hand is the name for His bliss. Second, Christ is said to sit at the right hand of the Father inasmuch as He reigns together with the Father, and has judiciary power from Him; just as he who sits at the king’s right hand helps him in ruling and judging. Hence Augustine says (De Symb. ii): By the expression ‘right hand,’ understand the power which this Man, chosen of God, received, that He might come to judge, who before had come to be judged. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut Damascenus dicit, in IV libro, non localem dexteram patris dicimus. Qualiter enim qui incircumscriptibilis est, localem adipiscetur dexteram? Dextera enim et sinistra eorum quae circumscribuntur sunt. Dexteram autem patris dicimus gloriam et honorem divinitatis. Reply Obj. 1: As Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv): We do not speak of the Father’s right hand as of a place, for how can a place be designated by His right hand, who Himself is beyond all place? Right and left belong to things definable by limit. But we style, as the Father’s right hand, the glory and honor of the Godhead. Ad secundum dicendum quod ratio illa procedit secundum quod sedere ad dexteram intelligitur corporaliter. Unde Augustinus dicit, in quodam sermone de symbolo, si carnaliter acceperimus quod Christus sedet ad dexteram patris, ille erit ad sinistram. Ibi autem, idest in aeterna beatitudine, omnis dextera est, quia nulla ibi est miseria. Reply Obj. 2: The argument holds good if sitting at the right hand be taken corporeally. Hence Augustine says (De Symb. i): If we accept it in a carnal sense that Christ sits at the Father’s right hand, then the Father will be on the left. But there—that is, in eternal bliss, it is all right hand, since no misery is there. Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut Gregorius dicit, in homilia ascensionis, sedere iudicantis est, stare vero pugnantis vel adiuvantis. Stephanus ergo, in labore certaminis positus, stantem vidit quem adiutorem habuit. Sed hunc post ascensionem Marcus sedere describit, quia post assumptionis suae gloriam, iudex in fine videbitur. Reply Obj. 3: As Gregory says in a Homily on the Ascension (Hom. xxix in Evang.), it is the judge’s place to sit, while to stand is the place of the combatant or helper. Consequently, Stephen in his toil of combat saw Him standing whom He had as his helper. But Mark describes Him as seated after the Ascension, because after the glory of His Ascension He will at the end be seen as judge. Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum sedere ad dexteram Dei Patris conveniat Christo secundum quod Deus Whether it belongs to Christ as God to sit at the right hand of the Father? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod sedere ad dexteram Dei patris non conveniat Christo secundum quod Deus. Christus enim, secundum quod est Deus, est dextera patris. Sed non videtur idem esse dextera alicuius, et ille qui sedet ad dexteram eius. Ergo Christus, secundum quod est Deus, non sedet ad dexteram patris. Objection 1: It would seem that it does not belong to Christ as God to sit at the right hand of the Father. For, as God, Christ is the Father’s right hand. But it does not appear to be the same thing to be the right hand of anyone and to sit on his right hand. Therefore, as God, Christ does not sit at the right hand of the Father. Praeterea, Marci ult. dicitur quod dominus Iesus assumptus est in caelum, et sedet a dextris Dei. Christus autem non est assumptus in caelum secundum quod Deus. Ergo etiam neque secundum quod Deus, sedet a dextris Dei. Obj. 2: Further, in the last chapter of Mark (16:19) it is said that the Lord Jesus was taken up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God. But it was not as God that Christ was taken up to heaven. Therefore neither does He, as God, sit at the right hand of God. Praeterea, Christus, secundum quod Deus, est aequalis patri et spiritui sancto. Si ergo Christus, secundum quod Deus, sedet ad dexteram patris, pari ratione et Spiritus Sanctus sedebit ad dexteram patris et filii, et ipse pater ad dexteram filii. Quod nusquam invenitur. Obj. 3: Further, Christ as God is the equal of the Father and of the Holy Spirit. Consequently, if Christ sits as God at the right hand of the Father, with equal reason the Holy Spirit sits at the right hand of the Father and of the Son, and the Father Himself on the right hand of the Son; which no one is found to say. Sed contra est quod Damascenus dicit, quod dexteram patris dicimus gloriam et honorem divinitatis, in qua Dei filius exstitit ante saecula ut Deus et patri consubstantialis. On the contrary, Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv): that what we style as the Father’s right hand, is the glory and honor of the Godhead, wherein the Son of God existed before ages as God and as consubstantial with the Father. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut ex praedictis patet, nomine dexterae tria intelligi possunt, uno modo, secundum Damascenum, gloria divinitatis; alio modo, secundum Augustinum, beatitudo patris; tertio modo, secundum eundem, iudiciaria potestas. Sessio autem, ut dictum est, vel habitationem, vel regiam vel iudiciariam dignitatem designat. Unde sedere ad dexteram patris nihil aliud est quam simul cum patre habere gloriam divinitatis, et beatitudinem, et iudiciariam potestatem, et hoc immutabiliter et regaliter. Hoc autem convenit filio secundum quod Deus. Unde manifestum est quod Christus, secundum quod Deus, sedet ad dexteram patris, ita tamen quod haec praepositio ad, quae transitiva est, solam distinctionem personalem importat et originis ordinem, non autem gradum naturae vel dignitatis, qui nullus est in divinis personis, ut in prima parte habitum est. I answer that, As may be gathered from what has been said (A. 1) three things can be understood under the expression right hand. First of all, as Damascene takes it, the glory of the Godhead: second, according to Augustine, the beatitude of the Father: third, according to the same authority, judiciary power. Now as we observed (A. 1) sitting denotes either abiding, or royal or judiciary dignity. Hence, to sit on the right hand of the Father is nothing else than to share in the glory of the Godhead with the Father, and to possess beatitude and judiciary power, and that unchangeably and royally. But this belongs to the Son as God. Hence it is manifest that Christ as God sits at the right hand of the Father; yet so that this preposition at, which is a transitive one, implies merely personal distinction and order of origin, but not degree of nature or dignity, for there is no such thing in the Divine Persons, as was shown in the First Part (Q. 42, AA. 3, 4). Ad primum ergo dicendum quod filius dicitur dextera patris appropriate, per modum quo etiam dicitur virtus patris. Sed dextera patris secundum tres significationes praedictas est aliquid commune tribus personis. Reply Obj. 1: The Son of God is called the Father’s right hand by appropriation, just as He is called the Power of the Father (1 Cor 1:24). But right hand of the Father, in its three meanings given above, is something common to the three Persons. Ad secundum dicendum quod Christus, secundum quod homo, assumptus est ad divinum honorem, qui in praedicta sessione designatur. Sed tamen ille honor divinus convenit Christo, inquantum est Deus, non per aliquam assumptionem, sed per aeternam originem. Reply Obj. 2: Christ as man is exalted to Divine honor; and this is signified in the aforesaid sitting; nevertheless such honor belongs to Him as God, not through any assumption, but through His origin from eternity. Ad tertium dicendum quod nullo modo potest dici quod pater sedeat ad dexteram filii vel spiritus sancti, quia filius et Spiritus Sanctus trahunt originem a patre, et non e converso. Sed Spiritus Sanctus proprie potest dici sedere ad dexteram patris vel filii secundum sensum praedictum, licet secundum quandam appropriationem attribuatur filio, cui appropriatur aequalitas, sicut Augustinus dicit quod in patre est unitas, in filio aequalitas, in spiritu sancto unitatis aequalitatisque connexio. Reply Obj. 3: In no way can it be said that the Father is seated at the right hand of the Son or of the Holy Spirit; because the Son and the Holy Spirit derive their origin from the Father, and not conversely. The Holy Spirit, however, can be said properly to sit at the right hand of the Father or of the Son, in the aforesaid sense, although by a kind of appropriation it is attributed to the Son, to whom equality is appropriated; thus Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i) that in the Father there is unity, in the Son equality, in the Holy Spirit the connection of unity with equality. Articulus 3 Article 3 Utrum sedere ad dexteram Patris conveniat Christo secundum quod homo Whether it belongs to Christ as man to sit at the right hand of the Father?