Chapter XXI.—The Word of God Did Not Become Flesh Except in the Virgin’s Womb and of Her Substance. Through His Mother He is Descended from Her Great Ancestor David. He is Described Both in the Old and in the New Testament as “The Fruit of David’s Loins.”

Whereas, then, they contend that the novelty (of Christ’s birth) consisted in this, that as the Word of God became flesh without the seed of a human father, so there should be no flesh of the virgin mother (assisting in the transaction), why should not the novelty rather be confined to this, that His flesh, although not born of seed, should yet have proceeded from flesh? I should like to go more closely into this discussion.  “Behold,” says he, “a virgin shall conceive in the womb.”290    Isa. vii. 14; Matt. i. 23.Conceive what? I ask. The Word of God, of course, and not the seed of man, and in order, certainly, to bring forth a son. “For,” says he, “she shall bring forth a son.”291    See the same passages. Therefore, as the act of conception was her own,292    Ipsius. so also what she brought forth was her own, also, although the cause of conception293    Quod concepit: or, “what she conceived.” was not. If, on the other hand, the Word became flesh of Himself, then He both conceived and brought forth Himself, and the prophecy is stultified. For in that case a virgin did not conceive, and did not bring forth; since whatever she brought forth from the conception of the Word, is not her own flesh. But is this the only statement of prophecy which will be frustrated?294    Evacuabitur. Will not the angel’s announcement also be subverted, that the virgin should “conceive in her womb and bring forth a son?”295    Luke i. 31. And will not in fact every scripture which declares that Christ had a mother? For how could she have been His mother, unless He had been in her womb? But then He received nothing from her womb which could make her a mother in whose womb He had been.296    An objection. Such a name as this297    The rejoinder. a strange flesh ought not to assume. No flesh can speak of a mother’s womb but that which is itself the offspring of that womb; nor can any be the offspring of the said womb if it owe its birth solely to itself. Therefore even Elisabeth must be silent although she is carrying in her womb the prophetic babe, which was already conscious of his Lord, and is, moreover, filled with the Holy Ghost.298    Luke i. 41. For without reason does she say, “and whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”299    Ver. 43. If it was not as her son, but only as a stranger that Mary carried Jesus in her womb, how is it she says, “Blessed is the fruit of thy womb”?300    Ver. 42. What is this fruit of the womb, which received not its germ from the womb, which had not its root in the womb, which belongs not to her whose is the womb, and which is no doubt the real fruit of the womb—even Christ? Now, since He is the blossom of the stem which sprouts from the root of Jesse; since, moreover, the root of Jesse is the family of David, and the stem of the root is Mary descended from David, and the blossom of the stem is Mary’s son, who is called Jesus Christ, will not He also be the fruit?  For the blossom is the fruit, because through the blossom and from the blossom every product advances from its rudimental condition301    Eruditur. to perfect fruit. What then? They, deny to the fruit its blossom, and to the blossom its stem, and to the stem its root; so that the root fails to secure302    Quominus vindicet. for itself, by means of the stem, that special product which comes from the stem, even the blossom and the fruit; for every step indeed in a genealogy is traced from the latest up to the first, so that it is now a well-known fact that the flesh of Christ is inseparable,303    Adhærere. not merely from Mary, but also from David through Mary, and from Jesse through David. “This fruit,” therefore, “of David’s loins,” that is to say, of his posterity in the flesh, God swears to him that “He will raise up to sit upon his throne.”304    Ps. cxxxii. 11; also Acts ii. 30. If “of David’s loins,” how much rather is He of Mary’s loins, by virtue of whom He is in “the loins of David?”

CAPUT XXI.

Si ergo contendunt hoc competisse novitati, ut quemadmodum non ex viri semine, ita nec ex virginis carne caro fieret Dei Verbum; quare non hoc sit tota novitas, ut caro non semine nata , carne processerit? Accedant adhuc cominus ad congressum: Ecce, inquit, virgo concipiet in utero. Quidnam? utique Dei Verbum, non viri semen : certe ut pareret filium. Nam, Et pariet, inquit, filium. Ergo, ut ipsius fuit concepisse, ita ipsius est quod peperit; licet non ipsius fuerit quod concepit. Contra si Verbum ex se caro factum est, jam ipsum se concepit, 0787C et peperit, et vacat prophetia. Non enim virgo concepit, neque peperit, si non quicquid peperit ex verbi concepto, caro ipsius est. Sola haec autem prophetae vox evacuabitur? an et angeli, conceptum et partum virginis annuntiantis? an et omnis jam Scriptura, 0788A quaecumque matrem pronuntiat Christi? Quomodo enim mater, nisi quia in utero ejus fuit? Sed nihil ex utero ejus accepit, quod matrem eam faceret, in cujus utero fuit Hoc nomen non debet caro extranea . Matris uterum non appellat, nisi filia uteri, caro. Filia uteri porro non est, si sibi nata est. Tacebit igitur et Elizabeth prophetam portans jam Domini sui conscium infantem, et in super Spiritu Sancto adimpleta. Sine caussa enim dicit (Luc., I): Et unde mihi, ut mater Domini mei ad me veniat ? si Maria non filium, sed hospitem in utero gestabat Jesum. Quomodo dicit: Benedictus fructus uteri tui? Quis hic fructus uteri, qui non ex utero germinavit; qui non in utero radicem egit; qui non ejus est, cujus est uterus? Et qui utique fructus uteri? Christus. An quia ipse est 0788B flos de virga profecta ex radice Jesse; radix autem Jesse, genus David; virga ex radice, Maria ex David? Flos ex virga, filius Mariae, qui dicitur Jesus Christus, ipse erit et fructus. Flos enim fructus: quia per florem, et ex flore, omnis fructus eruditur in fructum. Quid ergo? negant et fructui suum florem, et flori suam virgam et virgae suam radicem, quo minus suam radix sibi vindicet per virgam proprietatem ejus quod ex virga est, floris et fructus. Siquidem omnis gradus generis ab ultimo ad principalem recensetur, ut jam nunc carnem Christi, non tantum Mariae, sed et David per Mariam, et Jesse per David, sciant adhaerere. Ideo hunc fructum ex lumbis David, id est, ex posteritate carnis ejus jurat illi Deus concessurum in throno ipsius. Si ex lumbis David, quanto 0788C magis ex lumbis Mariae, ob quam in lumbis David!