37. The Two Natures of Christ and their Relationship
Did the two natures of Jesus Christ undergo any change or modification as a consequence of the hypostatic union?
They did not—each nature remained unaltered. It logically follows that they continue to perform the operations proper to them. The divine operations are performed through the divine nature and the human actions through the human nature. Both types of operations, however, belong to the divine Person of Jesus Christ, Son of God.
12. The Duality of Natures in Christ
After their union, the divine and human natures of Jesus Christ are still distinct from each other, preserving intact their mode of being, that is, without being transformed or mixed (de fide).
The Church defined this doctrine by teaching that in Jesus Christ there are “two natures, without confusion or change, without division, without separation, without their differences being lost in any way due to their union, but rather each nature conserving its properties and both coming together in a single person and in a single hypostasis.”1
Sacred Scripture, upon affirming that “the Word became flesh” (Jn 1:14), shows that Jesus Christ really has two different natures: the divine—proper to the Word—and the human—designated by the expression flesh, a term that, in Sacred Scripture, frequently indicates human nature, not just the body.
The Fathers of the Church upheld the diversity of the two natures of Jesus Christ and branded the doctrine of the monophysites—that Jesus’ human nature was absorbed in the divine—as heretical. If monophysism were so, there would only be one divine nature and one divine Person in Jesus Christ, or else there would be one single but mixed divine-human nature.
The Fathers of the Church rejected the monophysite heresy because it contradicted the immutability of the divine nature. Further, if it were true, then the Redemption brought about by Christ would not have had any value: Without having our human nature, Christ could not have merited the forgiveness of our sins. Tertullian summarized the doctrine of the Church, writing, “the distinction of each nature was conserved … both natures, each one in its state, acted in distinct ways.”2
13. The Duality of Will and Operations in Christ: The Two Wills of Christ
Each of the natures of Christ possesses its own will and operations (de fide).
Some heretics affirmed that, as a consequence of the union of the two natures—understood in the monophysite way—Jesus Christ had only one will, that is, he made decisions only insofar as he was God. It seemed to them that if Jesus were to make decisions with a merely human will, these could, at times, be contrary to his divine will. This heresy is called monotheletism: “only one will” (the divine will) in Christ.
The Church condemned monotheletism when she defined that Christ “has two volitions or wills, and two natural operations, without division or change, without partition or commingling. And the two natural wills are not opposed (by no means!) as the godless heretics have said.”3
Revelation affirms the double will of Christ: “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt” (Mt 26:39).
Commenting on this text, St. Athanasius stated, “He shows here two wills, one human—which is of the flesh—and the other divine—which is of God.”4
Reason enlightened by faith shows that the will is an operation of the nature. Since Jesus Christ has a human and a divine nature, he has two wills: one human, the other divine.
14. Theandric or Divine-Human Operations of Christ
Two distinct natures exist in Christ. Therefore, there are two sets of operations in him: the divine (e.g., to create, to conserve the being of creatures) and the human (e.g., to speak, to move). However, any human operation of Christ is also divine, since it is carried out by the Person of the Word by means of his human nature. Considering it from this point of view, all the human actions of Christ can be regarded as theandric (divine-human).
Nevertheless, in theology, the term theandric operations is normally reserved for those operations that, though human, are instruments of the divine and produce effects that completely surpass human nature and that manifest the divinity of Christ. Such an operation took place when, with the clay made from his saliva, Jesus Christ cured the man who was blind from birth. There are two distinct aspects of this operation: the human action, which is to put clay in the man’s eyes, and the effect produced by the divinity, which is the curing of the blindness.
15. The Freedom of Christ
The human will of Jesus Christ is free (sent. fidei prox.).
The freedom of Jesus Christ is a property of his perfect human nature. If Jesus were not free, he would not have merited anything—he would not have been the meritorious cause of our Redemption. Sacred Scripture shows this freedom of Jesus in several passages, e.g., “Jesus went about in Galilee; he would not go about in Judea” (Jn 7:1).
Jesus was free to do or not to do something and to choose between different actions that were good. The freedom to choose evil, however, being an imperfection, is incompatible with the hypostatic union. Christ, therefore, did not have that freedom.
16. The Harmony of Christ’s Two Wills
The two wills of Jesus did not oppose each other; the free human will was completely subject to the divine will (de fide).
In a.d. 680–681, the Third Council of Constantinople defined that in Jesus Christ, “the human will is compliant, and not opposing or contrary; as a matter of fact, it is even obedient to his divine and omnipotent will.”5
Jesus said on various occasions, “I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me” (Jn 5:30).
In the agony in the garden (cf. Lk 22:39–44), the Lord, moved by a natural human resistance, wished to put aside suffering, but he fully accepted the will of the Father. Moved by his free human will, Christ felt “the anguish of death” before his Passion; at the same time, his human will freely submitted to his divine will and accepted death on the cross.
Reason enlightened by faith shows us that the human will of Jesus Christ also belongs to the divine Person—the only Person existing in Jesus—and was therefore infallibly subject to its influence and, thus, always obeyed the Person of the Word.
Footnotes:
1. DS 302.
2. Tertullian, Adv. Praex, 27.
3. DS 556; cf. CCC, 475.
4. St. Athanasius, De Inc. Dei Verbi, 21.
5. DS 556.
They did not—each nature remained unaltered. It logically follows that they continue to perform the operations proper to them. The divine operations are performed through the divine nature and the human actions through the human nature. Both types of operations, however, belong to the divine Person of Jesus Christ, Son of God.
12. The Duality of Natures in Christ
After their union, the divine and human natures of Jesus Christ are still distinct from each other, preserving intact their mode of being, that is, without being transformed or mixed (de fide).
The Church defined this doctrine by teaching that in Jesus Christ there are “two natures, without confusion or change, without division, without separation, without their differences being lost in any way due to their union, but rather each nature conserving its properties and both coming together in a single person and in a single hypostasis.”1
Sacred Scripture, upon affirming that “the Word became flesh” (Jn 1:14), shows that Jesus Christ really has two different natures: the divine—proper to the Word—and the human—designated by the expression flesh, a term that, in Sacred Scripture, frequently indicates human nature, not just the body.
The Fathers of the Church upheld the diversity of the two natures of Jesus Christ and branded the doctrine of the monophysites—that Jesus’ human nature was absorbed in the divine—as heretical. If monophysism were so, there would only be one divine nature and one divine Person in Jesus Christ, or else there would be one single but mixed divine-human nature.
The Fathers of the Church rejected the monophysite heresy because it contradicted the immutability of the divine nature. Further, if it were true, then the Redemption brought about by Christ would not have had any value: Without having our human nature, Christ could not have merited the forgiveness of our sins. Tertullian summarized the doctrine of the Church, writing, “the distinction of each nature was conserved … both natures, each one in its state, acted in distinct ways.”2
13. The Duality of Will and Operations in Christ: The Two Wills of Christ
Each of the natures of Christ possesses its own will and operations (de fide).
Some heretics affirmed that, as a consequence of the union of the two natures—understood in the monophysite way—Jesus Christ had only one will, that is, he made decisions only insofar as he was God. It seemed to them that if Jesus were to make decisions with a merely human will, these could, at times, be contrary to his divine will. This heresy is called monotheletism: “only one will” (the divine will) in Christ.
The Church condemned monotheletism when she defined that Christ “has two volitions or wills, and two natural operations, without division or change, without partition or commingling. And the two natural wills are not opposed (by no means!) as the godless heretics have said.”3
Revelation affirms the double will of Christ: “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt” (Mt 26:39).
Commenting on this text, St. Athanasius stated, “He shows here two wills, one human—which is of the flesh—and the other divine—which is of God.”4
Reason enlightened by faith shows that the will is an operation of the nature. Since Jesus Christ has a human and a divine nature, he has two wills: one human, the other divine.
14. Theandric or Divine-Human Operations of Christ
Two distinct natures exist in Christ. Therefore, there are two sets of operations in him: the divine (e.g., to create, to conserve the being of creatures) and the human (e.g., to speak, to move). However, any human operation of Christ is also divine, since it is carried out by the Person of the Word by means of his human nature. Considering it from this point of view, all the human actions of Christ can be regarded as theandric (divine-human).
Nevertheless, in theology, the term theandric operations is normally reserved for those operations that, though human, are instruments of the divine and produce effects that completely surpass human nature and that manifest the divinity of Christ. Such an operation took place when, with the clay made from his saliva, Jesus Christ cured the man who was blind from birth. There are two distinct aspects of this operation: the human action, which is to put clay in the man’s eyes, and the effect produced by the divinity, which is the curing of the blindness.
15. The Freedom of Christ
The human will of Jesus Christ is free (sent. fidei prox.).
The freedom of Jesus Christ is a property of his perfect human nature. If Jesus were not free, he would not have merited anything—he would not have been the meritorious cause of our Redemption. Sacred Scripture shows this freedom of Jesus in several passages, e.g., “Jesus went about in Galilee; he would not go about in Judea” (Jn 7:1).
Jesus was free to do or not to do something and to choose between different actions that were good. The freedom to choose evil, however, being an imperfection, is incompatible with the hypostatic union. Christ, therefore, did not have that freedom.
16. The Harmony of Christ’s Two Wills
The two wills of Jesus did not oppose each other; the free human will was completely subject to the divine will (de fide).
In a.d. 680–681, the Third Council of Constantinople defined that in Jesus Christ, “the human will is compliant, and not opposing or contrary; as a matter of fact, it is even obedient to his divine and omnipotent will.”5
Jesus said on various occasions, “I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me” (Jn 5:30).
In the agony in the garden (cf. Lk 22:39–44), the Lord, moved by a natural human resistance, wished to put aside suffering, but he fully accepted the will of the Father. Moved by his free human will, Christ felt “the anguish of death” before his Passion; at the same time, his human will freely submitted to his divine will and accepted death on the cross.
Reason enlightened by faith shows us that the human will of Jesus Christ also belongs to the divine Person—the only Person existing in Jesus—and was therefore infallibly subject to its influence and, thus, always obeyed the Person of the Word.
Footnotes:
1. DS 302.
2. Tertullian, Adv. Praex, 27.
3. DS 556; cf. CCC, 475.
4. St. Athanasius, De Inc. Dei Verbi, 21.
5. DS 556.