2. The other is, What adoration or cultus is due to the Humanity of our Lord in abstracto, that is 'per mentem concepta tanquam separata a Persona Verbi;' or, as they say, 'præcisione facta ab unione hypostatica.'

The former of these two questions is resolved by every Catholic authority, by fathers, councils, schoolmen, and theologians, in one and the same sentence: namely, that the Sacred Humanity in concreto—that is, as subsisting by hypostatic union in the Person of Christ is to be worshipped with one and the same adoration; namely, with Latria. This was the affirmation of the Archbishop and of F. Guiron, and with this solely and exclusively they had to do.

The other scholastic question was brought in by Dr. Nicholson, and imputed without shadow of reason to the Archbishop. And it is evident that he picked up this notion out of Dens, altogether misunderstand`ing its meaning. At page 39, vol. v. De Incarnatione (Dublin, 1832), Dens says that the Humanity of Christ, concepta per mentem ut separata a Persona Verbi' is to be adored, not with latria, but with hyperdulia.

6

Now this question is both treated and resolved by a line of scholastics and theologians from S. Thomas downwards. All who have commented on the twentyfifth Question of the Third Part of S. Thomas have more or less treated of it.

But Dr. Nicholson did not know, at least so we hope, that this question has nothing whatever to do with the Adoration of the Sacred Humanity as subsist

ing in the Incarnate Word. And this alone is the Adoration of the Sacred Heart.

The meaning of this scholastic question as to the Humanity in abstracto is as follows: Treating of the cultus due to persons or objects separate from the Divine Nature, theologians say: The Humanity of Christ is the most perfect Humanity in and by itself. It was conceived of the Holy Ghost. It was born of the Virgin Mary, who by special privilege was exempt from original sin. It was, in its origin and in its perfections natural and supernatural, of a greater excellence than the Humanity of His Blessed Mother, who, though without stain of original sin, was born in the order of nature. It is more excellent than the Humanity of the first Adam made of the earth, and is therefore of the highest excellence among the works of God; and, as such, is an object of veneration or cultus proportioned to that excellence. Now its excellence transcends that of all Saints, and it is therefore to be worshipped with hyperdulia.

Bellarmine holds this opinion. Suarez maintains the same. Vasquez maintains that it is impossible to conceive the thought, and that if it were possible, it is not right to do so. De Lugo holds the balance between them, agreeing partially with both, but treats the question as a pure speculation. Nobody ever dreamed of bringing S. Thomas and all the Scholastics under the anathema of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, which condemns two adorations to the two natures God and Man separately in Christ. The question is one of mere intellectual abstraction. All alike affirm, as a

matter of faith, that the Sacred Humanity in concreto, that is, as subsisting in the Incarnate Word, is to be adored una eademque Divini Cultus adoratione.

But Dr. Nicholson, it appears, knows nothing of this scholastic question, and in his haste to accuse Archbishops and priests has fallen into his own snare. He denies that the Sacred Humanity as it subsists in the Incarnate Word is an object of latria.

He thus falls directly under the anathema condemning two adorations, because he thereby separates the natures in Christ.

We say we hope he was ignorant, though such ignorance in an accuser is very culpable. And yet we do not know how to believe that he could be ignorant of it, for in the paragraph immediately going before his quotation, Dens says: Q. Quo cultu adoratur Christus Homo? R. Cultu Latriæ.. .... Adoratur enim Humanitas ut subsistens in Verbo.'

We will now give the evidence to show that the Catholic Church distinctly teaches, and has always distinctly taught, that the Sacred Humanity, as subsisting in the Incarnate Word, is an object of latria.

We will proceed to prove this as follows:

I. First by Scripture. The three following passages have been from the earliest ages quoted to prove that the Humanity of Christ is an object of latria :

1. When He bringeth in the first-begotten into the world He saith: And let all the angels of God adore Him '—that is, the Incarnate Son.*

2. For which cause God also hath exalted Him,

4 Heb. i. 6.

and hath given Him a name which is above all names: that at the Name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth and that every tongue shall confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father' -that is Jesus, God and Man.5

Now in both these texts the object of divine worship in heaven and earth, that is of angels and men, is Christ, God and Man.

But to preclude cavil we add a third text:

3. Adore the fcotstool of His feet, for it is holy." S. Ambrose, S. Augustin, and others quote these words, and explain them thus: 'Itaque per scabellum terra intelligitur: per terram autem Caro Christi, quam hodie quoque in mysterio adoramus, et quam Apostoli in Domino Jesu, ut supra diximus, adorarunt ; neque enim divisus est Christus, sed unus." 'There

fore by the word footstool the earth is to be understood, and by the earth the Flesh of Christ, which to-day also we adore in a mystery, and which the Apostles worshipped in the Lord Jesus as we before said. For Christ is not divided, but is one.'

In like manner S. Augustin: 'Suscepit enim de terra terram, quia caro de terra est: et de carne Mariæ carnem accepit nemo autem illam carnem manducat nisi prius adoraverit, inventum est quemadmo

Phil. ii. 9-11.

6 Ps. xcviii. 5.

7 S. Ambros. De Spiritu Sancto, lib. iii. 79. For greater convenience, we refer to the reprint of the Dogmata Theologica of Thomassinus (Vives, Paris, 1872) for this and the following quotations. See De Incarnatione, lib. xi. tom. iv. p. 500.

dum adoretur tale scabellum pedum Domini, et non solum non peccamus adorando, sed peccamus non adorando.'8 'For He took earth from the earth, because flesh is of earth, and He received flesh from the flesh of Mary . . . but no one eats that flesh except he has first adored it, and so we have shown how such a footstool of the Lord's feet is adored, and not only do we not sin in adoring it, but we sin in not adoring it.'

These quotations serve two purposes. They prove that latria is due to the Sacred Humanity, and to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament; but we confine ourselves to our thesis.

II. Secondly, the same is proved by tradition, of which the following passages are sufficient evidence. S. Athanasius writes: We do not adore a creature, God forbid. Such madness belongs to heathens and to Arians. But we adore the Lord of things created, the Incarnate Word of God. For though the flesh itself, by itself, be a part of things created, yet it is made the body of God. Neither do we adore His body divided and apart from the Word; nor when we adore the Word do we separate the Word from the flesh for inasmuch as we know that the Word was made flesh, we acknowledge God the Word dwelling in the flesh."

S. John Damascene says: 'Christ therefore is one, perfect God and perfect Man, whom we adore

8 S. August. Enarr. in Ps. xcviii. 9.

9 S. Athan. Epist. ad Adelphium, sect. 3.