Folia Theologica 9. (1998)

Tibor Somlyói Tóth: "Habitu inventus ut homo"

‘HABITU INVENTUS UT HOMO”

181

made use of the Glossa ordinaria and of the work of his Dominican predecessors. Within his work on Philippians, the passage with which we are concerned is covered in lection two on the second chapter, from verse five to verse eight.9 Thomas begins by describing the Apostle’s intention — to exhort his readers to an imitation of the humility of Christ — as a framework within which there is displayed the movement from preexistence to humiliation and exaltation. According to this view, the majesty of the pre-existing divine Word is indicated for the sake of commending all the more strongly Christ’s example of humility. Thomas, therefore, proceeds to read the passage as a Christological statement presented in the tripartite sequence of majesty, humility, and exaltation.

Qui cum in forma Dei esset is understood to state that Christ has the nature of God and is truly God:

“Sed non est intelligendum quod aliud sit forma Dei et aliud ipse Deus, quia in simplicibus et immaterialibus idem est forma et id cuius est, maxime in Deo.”10 Thomas finds three reasons why forma rather than natura should be appropriate expression for indicating the deity of Christ. Since Christ is the Son, the Word, and the Image of God, forma may be used to express those three names: Son, because he is begotten of the Father, and the end of begetting is the form of the begetter; Word, because the perfection of a word is to lead to the recognition of a “thing-of-nature”, and the Word of God express the whole nature of form of God; Image, because an image is perfect when it has the form of that of which it is the image. The proof that Christ has the form of nature of God to perfection is found in the next phrase, non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo. This is not said of Christ according to his humanity, but of Christ the Word, who, in the forma Dei know his own nature and did not consider it a misappropriation to have it.

By way of contrast, Thomas then refers to the attempts of the devil and human beings to make themselves the equals of God, and cites as proof the passages in Isaiah 14 and Genesis 3, first mentioned by

9 S. THOMAE AQUINATIS in omnes S. Pauli epistolas lectura, 8th ed., P.R. CAI (Turin: Marietti, 1953), Lect. in ep ad Philippenses, cap. 2, lect. 2, vol. 2, pp. 100- 103.

10 AQUINAS, In ep. ad Phil., cap. 2, lect. 2, vol. 2, p. 101 (54): “Sed non est intelligendum quod aliud sit forma Dei et aliud ipse Deus, quia in simplicibus et immaterialibus idem est forma et id cuius est, maxime in Deo.”