Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that Christ's body was in Adam and the patriarchs as to something signate. For Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. x) that the flesh of Christ was in Adam and Abraham "by way of a bodily substance." But bodily substance is something signate. Therefore Christ's flesh was in Adam, Abraham, and the other patriarchs, according to something signate.

Objection 2: Further, it is said (Rm. 1:3) that Christ "was made . . . of the seed of David according to the flesh." But the seed of David was something signate in him. Therefore Christ was in David, according to something signate, and for the same reason in the other patriarchs.

Objection 3: Further, the human race is Christ's kindred, inasmuch as He took flesh therefrom. But if that flesh were not something signate in Adam, the human race, which is descended from Adam, would seem to have no kindred with Christ: but rather with those other things from which the matter of His flesh was taken. Therefore it seems that Christ's flesh was in Adam and the other patriarchs according to something signate.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. x) that in whatever way Christ was in Adam and Abraham, other men were there also; but not conversely. But other men were not in Adam and Abraham by way of some signate matter, but only according to origin, as stated in the 1, Question 119 , Article 1, Article 2, ad 4. Therefore neither was Christ in Adam and Abraham according to something signate; and, for the same reason, neither was He in the other patriarchs.

I answer that, As stated above (Article 5, ad 1), the matter of Christ's body was not the flesh and bones of the Blessed Virgin, nor anything that was actually a part of her body, but her blood which was her flesh potentially. Now, whatever was in the Blessed Virgin, as received from her parents, was actually a part of her body. Consequently that which the Blessed Virgin received from her parents was not the matter of Christ's body. Therefore we must say that Christ's body was not in Adam and the other patriarchs according to something signate, in the sense that some part of Adam's or of anyone else's body could be singled out and designated as the very matter from which Christ's body was to be formed: but it was there according to origin, just as was the flesh of other men. For Christ's body is related to Adam and the other patriarchs through the medium of His Mother's body. Consequently Christ's body was in the patriarchs, in no other way than was His Mother's body, which was not in the patriarchs according to signate matter: as neither were the bodies of other men, as stated in the 1, Question 119, Article 1, Article 2, ad 4.

Reply to Objection 1: The expression "Christ was in Adam according to bodily substance," does not mean that Christ's body was a bodily substance in Adam: but that the bodily substance of Christ's body, i.e. the matter which He took from the Virgin, was in Adam as in its active principle, but not as in its material principle: in other words, by the generative power of Adam and his descendants down to the Blessed Virgin, this matter was prepared for Christ's conception. But this matter was not fashioned into Christ's body by the seminal power derived from Adam. Therefore Christ is said to have been in Adam by way of origin, according to bodily substance: but not according to seminal virtue.

Reply to Objection 2: Although Christ's body was not in Adam and the other patriarchs, according to seminal virtue, yet the Blessed Virgin's body was thus in them, through her being conceived from the seed of a man. For this reason, through the medium of the Blessed Virgin, Christ is said to be of the seed of David, according to the flesh, by way of origin.

Reply to Objection 3: Christ and the human race are kindred, through the likeness of species. Now, specific likeness results not from remote but from proximate matter, and from the active principle which begets its like in species. Thus, then, the kinship of Christ and the human race is sufficiently preserved by His body being formed from the Virgin's blood, derived in its origin from Adam and the other patriarchs. Nor is this kinship affected by the matter whence this blood is taken, as neither is it in the generation of other men, as stated in the 1, Question 119, Article 2, ad 3.

Articulus 6

Argumentum 1

Ad sextum sic proceditur. Videtur quod corpus christi fuerit secundum aliquid signatum in Adam et in aliis patribus.

Dicit enim Augustinus, X super Gen. Ad litt., quod caro christi fuit in Adam et Abraham secundum corpulentam substantiam.

Sed corpulenta substantia est quiddam signatum. Ergo caro christi fuit in Adam et Abraham et in aliis patribus secundum aliquid signatum.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, Rom. I dicitur quod christus factus est ex semine David secundum carnem.

Sed semen David fuit aliquid signatum in ipso. Ergo christus fuit in David secundum aliquid signatum, et eadem ratione in aliis patribus.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, christus ad humanum genus affinitatem habet inquantum ex humano genere carnem assumpsit. Sed si caro illa non fuit secundum aliquid signatum in Adam, nullam videtur habere affinitatem ad humanum genus, quod ex Adam derivatur, sed magis ad alias res, unde materia carnis eius assumpta est. Videtur ergo quod caro christi fuerit in Adam et aliis patribus secundum aliquid signatum.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, X super Gen. Ad litt., quocumque modo christus fuit in Adam et Abraham, alii homines ibi fuerunt, sed non convertitur.

Alii autem homines non fuerunt in Adam et Abraham secundum aliquam materiam signatam, sed solum secundum originem, ut in prima parte habitum est. Ergo neque christus fuit in Adam et Abraham secundum aliquid signatum, et, eadem ratione, nec in aliis patribus.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, materia corporis christi non fuit caro et os beatae virginis, nec aliquid quod fuerit actu pars corporis eius, sed sanguis, qui est potentia caro.

Quidquid autem fuit in beata virgine a parentibus acceptum, fuit actu pars corporis beatae virginis. Unde illud quod fuit in beata virgine a parentibus acceptum, non fuit materia corporis christi.

Et ideo dicendum est quod corpus christi non fuit in Adam et aliis patribus secundum aliquid signatum, ita scilicet quod aliqua pars corporis Adae, vel alicuius alterius, posset designari determinate, ut diceretur quod ex hac materia formabitur corpus christi, sed fuit ibi secundum originem, sicut et caro aliorum hominum. Corpus enim christi habet relationem ad Adam et alios patres mediante corpore matris eius. Unde nullo alio modo fuit in patribus corpus christi quam corpus matris eius, quod non fuit in patribus secundum materiam signatam, sicut nec corpora aliorum hominum, ut in prima parte dictum est.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, cum dicitur christus fuisse in Adam secundum corpulentam substantiam, non est intelligendum hoc modo, quod corpus christi in Adam fuerit quaedam corpulenta substantia, sed quia corpulenta substantia corporis christi, idest materia quam sumpsit ex virgine, fuit in Adam sicut in principio activo, non autem sicut in principio materiali; quia scilicet per virtutem generativam Adae, et aliorum ab Adam descendentium usque ad beatam virginem, factum est ut illa materia taliter praepararetur ad conceptum corporis christi. Non autem fuit materia illa formata in corpus christi per virtutem seminis ab Adam derivatam. Et ideo christus dicitur fuisse in Adam originaliter secundum corpulentam substantiam, non autem secundum seminalem rationem.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod, quamvis corpus christi non fuerit in Adam et in aliis patribus secundum seminalem rationem, corpus tamen beatae virginis, quod ex semine maris est conceptum, fuit in Adam et in aliis patribus secundum rationem seminalem.

Et ideo, mediante beata virgine, christus secundum carnem dicitur esse ex semine David per modum originis.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod christus habet affinitatem ad humanum genus secundum similitudinem speciei. Similitudo autem speciei attenditur, non secundum materiam remotam, sed secundum materiam proximam, et secundum principium activum, quod generat sibi simile in specie. Sic igitur affinitas christi ad humanum genus sufficienter conservatur per hoc quod corpus christi formatum est ex sanguinibus virginis, derivatis secundum originem ab Adam et aliis patribus. Nec refert ad hanc affinitatem undecumque materia illorum sanguinum sumpta fuerit, sicut nec hoc refert in generatione aliorum hominum, sicut in prima parte dictum est.