St. Thomas Aquinas

The Summa Theologica

(Benziger Bros. edition, 1947)
Translated by
Fathers of the English Dominican Province

 

Index  [<< | >>]
Third Part  [<< | >>]
Question: 58  [<< | >>]

OF CHRIST'S SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER (FOUR ARTICLES)

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?

 

Index  [<< | >>]
Third Part  [<< | >>]
Question: 58  [<< | >>]
Article: 1  [<< | >>]

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 Jn. 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.   Objection 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.   Objection 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 Lk. 24:49: "Sit [Douay: 'Stay'] 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." Secondly, 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 to Objection 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 to Objection 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 to Objection 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."

 

Index  [<< | >>]
Third Part  [<< | >>]
Question: 58  [<< | >>]
Article: 2  [<< | >>]

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.   Objection 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.   Objection 3: Further, Christ as God is the equal of the Father and of the Holy Ghost. Consequently, if Christ sits as God at the right hand of the Father, with equal reason the Holy Ghost 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 (Article [1]) three things can be understood under the expression "right hand." First of all, as Damascene takes it, "the glory of the Godhead": secondly, according to Augustine "the beatitude of the Father": thirdly, according to the same authority, "judiciary power." Now as we observed (Article [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 FP, Question [42], Articles [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 to Objection 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 to Objection 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 to Objection 3: In no way can it be said that the Father is seated at the right hand of the Son or of the Holy Ghost; because the Son and the Holy Ghost derive their origin from the Father, and not conversely. The Holy Ghost, 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 Ghost the connection of unity with equality."

 

Index  [<< | >>]
Third Part  [<< | >>]
Question: 58  [<< | >>]
Article: 3  [<< | >>]

Whether it belongs to Christ as man to sit at the right hand of the Father?

Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod sedere ad dexteram patris non conveniat Christo secundum quod homo. Ut enim Damascenus dicit dexteram patris dicimus gloriam et honorem divinitatis. Sed honor et gloria divinitatis non convenit Christo secundum quod homo. Ergo videtur quod Christus, secundum quod homo, non sedeat ad dexteram patris.   Objection 1: It would seem that it does not belong to Christ as man to sit at the right hand of the Father, because, as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv): "What we call the Father's right hand is the glory and honor of the Godhead." But the glory and honor of the Godhead do not belong to Christ as man. Consequently, it seems that Christ as man does not sit at the right hand of the Father.
Praeterea, sedere ad dexteram regnantis subiectionem excludere videtur, quia qui sedet ad dexteram regnantis, quodammodo illi conregnat. Christus autem, secundum quod homo, est subiectus patri, ut dicitur I Cor. XV. Ergo videtur quod Christus, secundum quod homo, non sit ad dexteram patris.   Objection 2: Further, to sit on the ruler's right hand seems to exclude subjection, because one so sitting seems in a measure to be reigning with him. But Christ as man is "subject unto" the Father, as is said in 1 Cor. 15:28. Therefore it seems that Christ as man does not sit at the Father's right hand.
Praeterea, Rom. VIII, super illud, qui est ad dexteram Dei, exponit Glossa, idest, aequalis patri in honore quo Deus pater est; vel, ad dexteram patris, idest in potioribus bonis Dei. Et super illud Heb. I, sedet ad dexteram Dei in excelsis, Glossa, idest, ad aequalitatem patris, super omnia et loco et dignitate. Sed esse aequalem Deo non convenit Christo secundum quod homo, nam secundum hoc ipse dicit, Ioan. XIV, pater maior me est. Ergo videtur quod sedere ad dexteram patris non conveniat Christo secundum quod homo.   Objection 3: Further, on Rm. 8:34: "Who is at the right hand of God," the gloss adds: "that is, equal to the Father in that honor, whereby God is the Father: or, on the right hand of the Father, that is, in the mightier gifts of God." And on Heb. 1:3: "sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high," the gloss adds, "that is, in equality with the Father over all things, both in place and dignity." But equality with God does not belong to Christ as man; for in this respect Christ Himself says (Jn. 14:28): "The Father is greater than I." Consequently, it appears unseemly for Christ as man to sit on the Father's right hand.
Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, in sermone de symbolo, ipsam dexteram intelligite potestatem quam accepit ille homo susceptus a Deo, ut veniat iudicaturus qui prius venerat iudicandus.   On the contrary, Augustine says (De Symb. ii): "By the expression 'right hand' understand the power which this Man, chosen of God, received, that He might come as judge, who before had come to be judged."
Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, nomine dexterae patris intelligitur vel ipsa gloria divinitatis ipsius, vel beatitudo aeterna eius, vel potestas iudiciaria et regalis. Haec autem praepositio ad quendam ad dexteram accessum designat, in quo designatur convenientia cum quadam distinctione, ut supra dictum est. Quod quidem potest esse tripliciter. Uno modo, ut sit convenientia in natura et distinctio in persona. Et sic Christus, secundum quod filius Dei, sedet ad dexteram patris, quia habet eandem naturam cum patre. Unde praedicta conveniunt essentialiter filio sicut et patri. Et hoc est esse in aequalitate patris. Alio modo, secundum gratiam unionis, quae importat e converso distinctionem naturae et unitatem personae. Et secundum hoc Christus, secundum quod homo, est filius Dei, et per consequens sedens ad dexteram patris, ita tamen quod ly secundum quod non designet conditionem naturae, sed unitatem suppositi, ut supra expositum est. Tertio modo potest praedictus accessus intelligi secundum gratiam habitualem, quae abundantior est in Christo prae omnibus aliis creaturis, in tantum quod ipsa natura humana in Christo est beatior ceteris creaturis, et super omnes alias creaturas habens regiam et iudiciariam potestatem.   I answer that, As stated above (Article [2]), by the expression "right hand" is understood either the glory of His Godhead, or His eternal beatitude, or His judicial and royal power. Now this preposition "at" signifies a kind of approach to the right hand; thus denoting something in common, and yet with a distinction, as already observed (De Symb. ii). And this can be in three ways: first of all, by something common in nature, and a distinction in person; and thus Christ as the Son of God, sits at the right hand of the Father, because He has the same Nature as the Father: hence these things belong to the Son essentially, just as to the Father; and this is to be in equality with the Father. Secondly, according to the grace of union, which, on the contrary, implies distinction of nature, and unity of person. According to this, Christ as man is the Son of God, and consequently sits at the Father's right hand; yet so that the expression "as" does not denote condition of nature, but unity of suppositum, as explained above (Question [16], Articles [10],11). Thirdly, the said approach can be understood according to habitual grace, which is more fully in Christ than in all other creatures, so much so that human nature in Christ is more blessed than all other creatures, and possesses over all other creatures royal and judiciary power.
Sic igitur, si ly secundum quod designet conditionem naturae, Christus, secundum quod Deus, sedet ad dexteram patris, idest in aequalitate patris. Secundum autem quod homo, sedet ad dexteram patris, idest in bonis paternis potioribus prae ceteris creaturis, idest in maiori beatitudine, et habens iudiciariam potestatem. Si vero ly secundum quod designet unitatem suppositi, sic etiam, secundum quod homo, sedet ad dexteram patris secundum aequalitatem honoris, inquantum scilicet eodem honore veneramur ipsum filium Dei cum eadem natura assumpta, ut supra dictum est.    So, then, if "as" denote condition of nature, then Christ, as God, sits "at the Father's right hand," that is, "in equality with the Father"; but as man, He sits "at the right hand of the Father," that is, "in the Father's mightier gifts beyond all other creatures," that is to say, "in greater beatitude," and "exercising judiciary power." But if "as" denote unity of person, thus again as man, He sits at the Father's right hand "as to equality of honor," inasmuch as with the same honor we venerate the Son of God with His assumed nature, as was said above (Question [25], Article [1]).
Ad primum ergo dicendum quod humanitas Christi, secundum conditiones suae naturae, non habet gloriam vel honorem deitatis, quem tamen habet ratione personae cui unitur. Unde ibidem Damascenus subdit, in qua, scilicet gloria deitatis, Dei filius existens ante saecula ut Deus et patri consubstantialis sedet, conglorificata ei carne eius. Adoratur enim una hypostasis una adoratione cum carne eius, ab omni creatura.   Reply to Objection 1: Christ's humanity according to the conditions of His nature has not the glory or honor of the Godhead, which it has nevertheless by reason of the Person with whom it is united. Hence Damascene adds in the passage quoted: "In which," that is, in the glory of the Godhead, "the Son of God existing before ages, as God and consubstantial with the Father, sits in His conglorified flesh; for, under one adoration the one hypostasis, together with His flesh, is adored by every creature."
Ad secundum dicendum quod Christus, secundum quod homo, subiectus est patri prout ly secundum quod designat conditionem naturae. Et secundum hoc, non competit ei sedere ad dexteram patris secundum rationem aequalitatis, secundum quod est homo. Sic autem competit ei sedere ad dexteram patris secundum quod per hoc designatur excellentia beatitudinis, et iudiciaria potestas super omnem creaturam.   Reply to Objection 2: Christ as man is subject to the Father, if "as" denote the condition of nature: in which respect it does not belong to Him as man to sit at the Father's right hand, by reason of their mutual equality. But it does thus belong to Him to sit at the right hand of the Father, according as is thereby denoted the excellence of beatitude and His judiciary power over every creature.
Ad tertium dicendum quod esse in aequalitate patris non pertinet ad ipsam naturam humanam Christi, sed solum ad personam assumentem. Sed esse in potioribus bonis Dei, secundum quod importat excessum aliarum creaturarum, convenit etiam ipsi naturae assumptae.   Reply to Objection 3: It does not belong to Christ's human nature to be in equality with the Father, but only to the Person who assumed it; but it does belong even to the assumed human nature to share in God's mightier gifts, in so far as it implies exaltation above other creatures.

 

Index  [<< | >>]
Third Part  [<< | >>]
Question: 58  [<< | >>]
Article: 4  [<< | >>]

Whether it is proper to Christ to sit at the right hand of the Father?

Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod sedere ad dexteram patris non sit proprium Christi. Dicit enim apostolus, Ephes. II, quod resuscitavit nos, et consedere fecit in caelestibus in Christo Iesu. Sed resuscitari non est proprium Christi. Ergo pari ratione etiam nec sedere ad dexteram Dei in excelsis.   Objection 1: It would seem that it is not proper to Christ to sit at the right hand of the Father, because the Apostle says (Eph. 2:4,6): "God . . . hath raised us up together, and hath made us sit together in the heavenly places through Christ Jesus." But to be raised up is not proper to Christ. Therefore for like reason neither is it proper to Him to sit "on the right hand" of God "on high" (Heb. 1:3).
Praeterea, sicut Augustinus dicit, in libro de symbolo, Christum sedere ad dexteram patris, hoc est habitare in eius beatitudine. Sed hoc multis aliis convenit. Ergo videtur quod sedere ad dexteram patris non sit proprium Christi.   Objection 2: Further, as Augustine says (De Symb. i): "For Christ to sit at the right hand of the Father, is to dwell in His beatitude." But many more share in this. Therefore it does not appear to be proper to Christ to sit at the right hand of the Father.
Praeterea, ipse dicit, Apoc. III, qui vicerit, dabo ei sedere mecum in throno meo, sicut et ego vici, et sedi cum patre meo in throno eius. Sed per hoc sedet Christus ad dexteram patris, quod sedet in throno eius. Ergo etiam et alii qui vincunt, sedent ad dexteram patris.   Objection 3: Further, Christ Himself says (Apoc. 3:21): "To him that shall overcome, I will give to sit with Me in My throne: as I also have overcome, and am set down with My Father in His throne." But it is by sitting on His Father's throne that Christ is seated at His right hand. Therefore others who overcome likewise, sit at the Father's right hand.
Praeterea, Matth. XX dominus dicit, sedere ad dexteram vel sinistram meam, non est meum dare vobis, sed quibus paratum est a patre meo. Hoc autem frustra diceretur nisi esset aliquibus paratum. Non ergo sedere ad dexteram soli Christo convenit.   Objection 4: Further, the Lord says (Mt. 20:23): "To sit on My right or left hand, is not Mine to give to you, but to them for whom it is prepared by My Father." But no purpose would be served by saying this, unless it was prepared for some. Consequently, to sit at the right hand is not proper to Christ.
Sed contra est quod dicitur ad Heb. I, ad quem aliquando dixit Angelorum, sede a dextris meis, idest, in potioribus meis, vel mihi secundum divinitatem aequalis? Quasi dicat, ad nullum. Sed Angeli sunt superiores aliis creaturis. Ergo multo minus ulli alii convenit sedere ad dexteram patris quam Christo.   On the contrary, It is written (Heb. 1:13): "To which of the angels said He at any time: Sit thou on My right hand, i.e. 'in My mightier gifts,'" or "'as my equal in the Godhead'"? [*The comment is from the gloss of Peter Lombard] as if to answer: "To none." But angels are higher than other creatures. Therefore, much less does it belong to anyone save Christ to sit at the Father's right hand.
Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, Christus dicitur sedere ad dexteram patris, inquantum secundum divinam naturam est in aequalitate patris, secundum autem humanam naturam in excellenti possessione divinorum bonorum prae ceteris aliis creaturis. Utrumque autem soli Christo convenit. Unde nulli alii, nec Angelo nec homini, convenit sedere ad dexteram patris, nisi soli Christo.   I answer that, As stated above (Article [3]), Christ is said to sit at the Father's right hand inasmuch as He is on equality with the Father in respect of His Divine Nature, while in respect of His humanity, He excels all creatures in the possession of Divine gifts. But each of these belongs exclusively to Christ. Consequently, it belongs to no one else, angel or man, but to Christ alone, to sit at the right hand of the Father.
Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, quia Christus est caput nostrum, illud quod collatum est Christo, est etiam nobis in ipso collatum. Et propter hoc, quia ipse iam resuscitatus est, dicit apostolus quod Deus nos quodammodo ei conresuscitavit, qui tamen in nobis ipsis nondum sumus resuscitati, sed resuscitandi, secundum illud Rom. VIII, qui suscitavit Iesum Christum a mortuis, vivificabit et mortalia corpora nostra. Et secundum eundem modum loquendi subdit apostolus quod consedere nos fecit in caelestibus, scilicet in hoc ipso quod caput nostrum, quod est Christus, ibi sedet.   Reply to Objection 1: Since Christ is our Head, then what was bestowed on Christ is bestowed on us through Him. And on this account, since He is already raised up, the Apostle says that God has, so to speak, "raised us up together with Him," still we ourselves are not raised up yet, but are to be raised up, according to Rm. 8:11: "He who raised up Jesus from the dead, shall quicken also your mortal bodies": and after the same manner of speech the Apostle adds that "He has made us to sit together with Him, in the heavenly places"; namely, for the very reason that Christ our Head sits there.
Ad secundum dicendum quod, quia dextera est divina beatitudo, sedere in dextera non significat simpliciter esse in beatitudine, sed habere beatitudinem cum quadam dominativa potestate, et quasi propriam et naturalem. Quod soli Christo convenit, nulli autem alii creaturae. Potest tamen dici quod omnis sanctus qui est in beatitudine, est ad dexteram Dei constitutus. Unde et dicitur Matth. XXV, quod statuet oves a dextris.   Reply to Objection 2: Since the right hand is the Divine beatitude, then "to sit on the right hand" does not mean simply to be in beatitude, but to possess beatitude with a kind of dominative power, as a property and part of one's nature. This belongs to Christ alone, and to no other creature. Yet it can be said that every saint in bliss is placed on God's right hand; hence it is written (Mt. 25:33): "He shall set the sheep on His right hand."
Ad tertium dicendum quod per thronum significatur iudiciaria potestas, quam Christus habet a patre. Et secundum hoc, dicitur sedere in throno patris. Alii autem sancti habent eam a Christo. Et secundum hoc, dicuntur in throno Christi sedere, secundum illud Matth. XIX, sedebitis et vos super sedes duodecim iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel.   Reply to Objection 3: By the "throne" is meant the judiciary power which Christ has from the Father: and in this sense He is said "to sit in the Father's throne." But other saints have it from Christ; and in this respect they are said "to sit on Christ's throne"; according to Mt. 19:28: "You also shall sit upon twelve seats, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
Ad quartum dicendum quod, sicut Chrysostomus dicit, super Matth., locus ille, idest consessus dexterae, invius est omnibus non solum hominibus, sed etiam Angelis. Sicut enim praecipuum unigeniti ponit Paulus, dicens, ad quem autem Angelorum dixit unquam, sede a dextris meis? Dominus ergo, non quasi existentibus quibusdam qui sessuri sint, sed condescendens interrogantium supplicationi, respondit. Hoc enim unum solum quaerebant, prae aliis stare apud ipsum. Potest tamen dici quod petebant filii Zebedaei excellentiam habere prae aliis in participando iudiciariam potestatem eius. Unde non petebant quod sederent ad dexteram vel sinistram patris, sed ad dexteram vel sinistram Christi.   Reply to Objection 4: As Chrysostom says (Hom. lxv in Matth.), "that place," to wit, sitting at the right hand, "is closed not only to all men, but likewise to angels: for, Paul declares it to be the prerogative of Christ, saying: 'To which of the angels said He at any time: Sit on My right hand?'" Our Lord therefore "replied not as though some were going to sit there one day, but condescending to the supplication of the questioners; since more than others they sought this one thing alone, to stand nigh to Him." Still it can be said that the sons of Zebedee sought for higher excellence in sharing His judiciary power; hence they did not ask to sit on the Father's right hand or left, but on Christ's.

This document converted to HTML on Fri Jan 02 19:10:43 1998.