How the Son of God is to be understood to have assumed a human nature in his essence.
Another doubt occurs when Athanasius says of the Son of God in his third discourse on the Council of Nicaea: “In his ousia, that is, essence, he assumed from us our human nature.” 
Since assumption terminates at union, and the union was not effected in the nature but in the person, it therefore seems that the human nature was not assumed in the essence of the Son.
Rather, this manner of speaking must be described as imprecise, and should be interpreted thus: He assumed our nature in his essence in such wise, namely, that it is united in his essence in the unity of the person.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are subject to deletion if they are not germane. I have no problem with a bit of colourful language, but blasphemy or depraved profanity will not be allowed. Attacks on the Catholic Faith will not be tolerated. Comments will be deleted that are republican (Yanks! Note the lower case 'r'!), attacks on the legitimacy of Pope Francis as the Vicar of Christ (I know he's a material heretic and a Protector of Perverts, and I definitely want him gone yesterday! However, he is Pope, and I pray for him every day.), the legitimacy of the House of Windsor or of the claims of the Elder Line of the House of France, or attacks on the legitimacy of any of the currently ruling Houses of Europe.