64. Adoption in God and Rational Creatures
Summary
Listen to Lecture
Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript
Lecture Notes
Main Topics #
Divine Adoption and the Trinity #
- Whether adoption belongs to God the Father alone or to the whole Trinity
- How natural generation (proper to the Father) differs from adoptive sonship (common to the Trinity because it concerns making effects in creatures)
- The principle that where there is one nature, there must be one power and one operation—therefore, all operations ad extra belong to the whole Trinity
- The appropriation of adoption: to the Father as author, to the Son as exemplar, to the Holy Spirit as impressing the likeness
Adoption and Rational Creatures #
- Whether being adopted is proper only to rational creatures
- The distinction between God being called “father” of irrational creatures through creation versus adoption of rational creatures through grace
- Adoption requires charity, which is poured forth through the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5)
- Adoption is not a property falling upon nature but upon grace; therefore it need not belong to every rational creature, only be capable of belonging to them
- Angels too receive adoption, but this does not make adoption improper to rational creatures—angels simply received it first
Christ’s Sonship: Natural vs. Adoptive #
- Whether Christ, according as man, is an adopted son
- The hypostatic union as the key to understanding why Christ cannot be called an adopted son
- Sonship properly belongs to the person (hypostasis), not to the nature
- In Christ there is only one person—the uncreated Word—to which it belongs to be Son by nature
- Adoptive sonship is a likeness participating in natural sonship; what is said per se (by itself) cannot be said participatively (by participation)
Predestination and Human Nature #
- The distinction between the grace of union (by which Christ’s human nature was united to the Son of God) and habitual grace (by which we are made suitable for adoption)
- The grace of union does not make Christ an adopted son but is rather a certain effect showing the sonship in the soul of Christ
- To be a creature and servant regards both person and nature; but sonship regards only the person
Key Arguments #
On Whether Adoption Belongs to the Whole Trinity #
Objection: Only the one who generates can adopt; only the Father generates; therefore only the Father can adopt.
Response: While generation properly belongs to the Father alone, making any effect in creatures is common to the whole Trinity due to their unity of nature. John 5:19 states: “Whatever things the Father does, these also the Son does” equally, as principle, not as instrument.
On Whether We Become Brothers of Christ #
Objection: By adoption we become brothers of Christ; but brothers share one father; therefore we have the same father as Christ.
Response: There is a distinction: the Father is Christ’s father by natural generation (genitus, non factus), while He is our father voluntarily through making us sons by grace (factus). Thus “my Father” and “your Father” are said in different senses—the former to the first person of the Trinity, the latter to the whole Trinity.
On Whether Adoption Is Proper to Rational Creatures #
Objection: God is called father of the raven and of irrational creatures according to Job 38; therefore adoption is not proper to rational creatures.
Response: God is father of irrational creatures through creation, not through adoption. Adoption requires the capacity for grace and inheritance, which only rational creatures possess.
Second Objection: Angels are called sons of God (Job 1:6); therefore adoption is not unique to human rational creatures.
Response: Angels received adoption of sons first, but this means they received it temporally before us, not that it is more properly theirs. They are equally sons of God with us through adoption.
On Whether Christ as Man Is an Adopted Son #
Objection: Christ as man has human nature; adoption seems fitting for one with human nature; therefore Christ should be an adopted son.
Response: Sonship belongs to the person (hypostasis), not to the nature. In Christ there is only one person—the eternal Word—to which belongs natural sonship by nature. Since this one person cannot simultaneously be both natural and adopted son (for what is said per se cannot be said participatively), Christ cannot be called an adopted son.
To the First Objection (Hilary’s statement): Hilary speaks improperly (impropriate) when he says the humanity is adopted. He means the union of human nature to the divine person, not adoption properly speaking.
To the Second Objection (Augustine’s parallel): The similarity between Augustine’s statement that Christ is Christ by grace just as others are Christians by grace must be understood as regards the beginning. The difference lies as regards the end: Christ through the grace of union is the natural Son; another through habitual grace is an adopted son.
To the Third Objection (Christ as servant): Servitude or subjection regards both person and nature, so Christ can be a servant according to his human nature. But sonship regards the person alone, so Christ cannot be an adopted son—if he were, it would only pertain to some aspect, which would be false.
Important Definitions #
Adoption (adoptio) #
The act by which God admits creatures to participation in His goods and eternal inheritance through grace. In creatures, adoption supplies an extrinsic suitability that God’s love provides. It is appropriated to the Father as author, though it is an operation common to the whole Trinity.
Natural Sonship (generatio) #
Belonging only to the Father with respect to the Son. The Son is genitus, non factus—generated, not made. This is proper to the divine hypostasis.
Adoptive Sonship #
A participation in and likeness of natural sonship, received through grace by rational creatures. It is factus—made or created—rather than eternally generated. Requires charity poured forth by the Holy Spirit.
Hypostasis (ὑπόστασις) / Person #
The individual subsisting subject to which properties properly belong. Sonship belongs to the hypostasis, not to the nature. In Christ, there is one hypostasis (the Word) in two natures (divine and human).
Grace of Union (gratia unionis) #
The supernatural grace by which human nature was united to the divine person of the Son. This is distinct from habitual grace and does not make Christ an adopted son but manifests the sonship already proper to his divine person.
Appropriation (appropriatio) #
The attribution of a divine action or property common to the whole Trinity to one person of the Trinity for pedagogical clarity. Adoption is appropriated to the Father as author; this does not mean only the Father performs it.
Examples & Illustrations #
On Person vs. Nature #
Berquist uses himself as illustration: “I am the son of my father, Victor Berquist”—not my nature, but I (the person) am the son. This clarifies why Christ’s person (the Word) is the natural Son, and though His human nature is real, it does not constitute a separate sonship.
On God as Father of Irrational Creatures #
God is described in Job 38 as father of the raven and creator of dew. However, this fatherhood is through creation, not adoption. The distinction shows that not all fatherhood is adoptive fatherhood.
On Appropriation in Liturgy #
The Nicene Creed calls God the Father “Almighty” (Omnipotens). Yet all three persons are almighty. Power is appropriated to the Father, though the operation is common to the whole Trinity. This is “right there” in the liturgy every Sunday.
On Spiritual vs. Material Goods #
Spiritual goods (like divine inheritance) can be possessed simultaneously by many without diminishment, whereas material goods cannot. This is why God can give His whole inheritance to all the adopted without loss or succession.
Notable Quotes #
“Whatever things the Father does, these also the Son does.” (John 5:19, cited as defense of trinitarian operation)
“To adopt belongs to the whole Trinity.” (Conclusion after proper distinctions)
“Sonship properly belongs to the hypostasis or the person, not to the nature.” (Thomas, on why Christ cannot be adopted)
“In no way can [Christ] be said to be the adopted son.” (Nullo modo—the strength of Thomas’s conclusion)
“Adoption is not a property falling upon nature, but falling upon grace, of which the rational nature is capable.” (Thomas, on why adoption need not belong to every rational creature)
“Just as all things which are done or made in time are likenesses of those things which were from eternity.” (Thomas, on why adoptive sonship participates in natural sonship)
Questions Addressed #
Does adoption belong to the whole Trinity or only the Father? #
Although the act of generation belongs properly to the Father alone, the making of effects in creatures is common to the whole Trinity because they share one nature and one operation. Therefore adoption, as God’s act of making creatures suitable for sonship, belongs to the whole Trinity—though it is appropriated to the Father as author.
Is adoption proper to rational creatures? #
Adoption is proper to rational creatures in the sense that it requires the capacity for grace and for receiving the inheritance of God. However, it is not necessary that every rational creature actually receive adoption, only that every rational creature be capable of receiving it. The distinction parallels how “logician” is a property of man (only men can be logicians) without being true of every man actually.
Can Christ as man be called an adopted son? #
No. Sonship belongs to the person (hypostasis), and Christ has only one person—the eternal Word. This person is the natural Son of God by nature. Adoptive sonship is a participation in natural sonship, and what is said per se cannot also be said participatively. The human nature of Christ is real, but it does not constitute a separate person or sonship. If there were two persons in Christ (as some heretics claimed), then arguably the man could be adopted; but the true faith holds one person only.