阿奎那 神学总纲， 简本
The Council of Chalcedon laid down that the union of natures in the only-begotten son in no way removed their distinctness…. for in Christ each nature, God's and man's, is a whole; and these natures cannot combine like parts of the body or like body and soul, since God's nature is neither a body nor a form bodies can take born. (And if it was, we would get a nature of which there could be many instances, not Christ. And it would be a new species, neither God nor man) p477--478
迦克顿会议立論說，在独生子里面，性情(神性与人性)的联合不能取消其間(性情间)的分别，因為在基督裡的每一個性情，不論是神的或是人的，都是完整的；這些性情不能如同身體上的肢體被結合起來，也不像身體與魂那樣，因為神的性情既不是一個身體，也不是身體的一部分能被生的。（如果是的話，我們會得到一個有許多情況的性情，但不是基督了，而其所成乃是一個新的種類，既不是神，也不是人了。）…..
….The Son of God does not exist simply speaking by reason of His human nature, since He has existed from all eternity; He exists as man by his human nature but simple speaking by His divine nature; so he is said to take on human nature but not to take His divine nature. p.482
我们不能说，神子是因為他的人性而存在，因为祂在永遠裡就存在了; 祂作为人的存在乃是因著祂的人性，而不是因為祂的神性; 所以应该说，祂取了人性，而不是取了祂的神性。
The term a man, used to refer to Christ, signifies his human nature which stated to exist, but refers to the eternal subject whose existence has no beginning. When use as a subject term it refers to a subject, and when used in a predicate it signifies a nature; so it is false to say A man Christ started to be, but true to say Christ started to be a man. The phrase Christ as man contains a doubling-up that could induce reference to the subject or to the nature. The later is more proper, because a doubled-up term is a sort of predicate and should be interpreted formally: Christ as man means Christ as being a man. So it is better to admit Christ as man is a creature than deny it; though if we added to the doubling-up something clearly involving reference to the subject we should have to deny it, saying that Christ, as this man, is not a creature. In the same way, we deny rather than admit that Christ as man is God, thought if would be true to say that Christ as man has the grace of union. The son of man has power on earth to forgive sins not in verture of his human nature but in virtue of his divine nature. The divine nature is the source of that power, the human nature its tool or minister.
当用"人"这个词来指"基督"時，意指他那開始存在的人性 而不是指那无始就永远存在的一位….當『人』被用來作主詞時，它是指一件事之存在，而當它被用來作謂語時，它就是表徵一個性情；所以我們不能說，一位人基督開始存在，必須說基督開始是一個人。"基督作為人"这个片語有双重意义，既可指他的存在（位格），或指他的性情，而後者比較妥當，因為一個雙重意義的片語是一種謂語，應該被正式解釋成：作为人的基督就是基督成了一個有人性情的人。所以最好承认是基督作為人是一个受造之物，而不要去否定它。如果我们在这个双重意义的词上加上一些清楚指明他的存在，那我们就应该否认它，比如说『基督』这个人，不是受造之物. 同样的，虽然我們可以说这位基督作為人有(与神)联合的恩典，我们也该否认这位"基督作為人"就是神. 在地上，人子有赦罪的能力并非出於他人性的本質（或能力），而是从他神性的本质（或能力）来的. 神聖的性情才是能力的源頭，人的性情僅是它(神性)的工具，或是执行者。
