Thomas Aquinas

Here the Apostle shows by argument the difference of quality between dying bodies and rising bodies, which he had shown above by examples. Concerning this he does two things. For first he sets forth what he intends to prove; second he proves what he has set forth, at the place, as it is written, etc. He says therefore first: I said that what is sown animal shall rise spiritual, and, that this is true, namely that there is some spiritual body, I show, because if there is an animal body, there is also a spiritual one. And the Apostle does not intend to argue from this to his proposition, but he supposes this, intending to prove that very thing which he says, if there is a body, etc. Ecclus. XXXIII, 15: consider all the works of the Most High, two and two, one against one. As it is written, etc. Here he proves the proposition. His proof is this: there are two principles of the human race; one according to the life of nature, namely Adam, the other according to the life of grace, namely Christ; but animality is derived into all men from the first principle, namely Adam; therefore it is clear that much more from the second principle, namely Christ, spirituality will be derived into all men. Of this argument, first, he proves the first diversity of the principles, second the middle, namely the determination of the likeness from each of the principles, at the place, such as the earthy, etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he shows the difference of the principles; second the order of the principles to one another, at the place, but that is not first which is spiritual, etc.; third he assigns the order of the argument, at the place, the first, etc.

He sets down, therefore, first, the condition of the first principle according to the life of nature, taking the authority of Gen. II, 7. Whence he says, as it is written: the first man Adam was made, by God, into a living soul, namely with animal life, such as the soul can give, when, namely, the Lord breathed into his face the breath of life, Gen. II, 7. For the human form is called both soul and spirit. For insofar as it is directed to the care of the body, namely by vegetating, nourishing and generating, thus it is called soul; but insofar as it is directed to knowledge, namely by understanding, willing and the like, thus it is called spirit. Whence when he says the first man Adam was made into a living soul, the Apostle here means the life by which the soul serves about the body, not the Holy Spirit, as some imagine, because of the fact that it precedes and he breathed into his face the breath of life, saying this is the Holy Spirit.

Second he sets down the condition of the second principle, saying but the last Adam, that is, Christ. And he is called last, because Adam brought in one state, namely of guilt, but Christ that of glory and life. Whence since after this state no other follows in this life, therefore he is called last. Is. LIII, 2 f.: we have desired him despised and the last of men. And elsewhere, namely Apoc. I, 17: I am the first and the last. And elsewhere: I am alpha and omega, etc. But he says Adam, because he was made from the nature of Adam into a living spirit. And from this, the conditions of the principles having been seen, their diversity appears, because the first man was made into a soul, the last into a spirit. But the former into a living soul only, the latter however into a living and life-giving spirit. The reason of which is: because, just as Adam obtained the perfection of his being through the soul, so also Christ obtained the perfection of his being, insofar as he is man, through the Holy Spirit. And therefore since the soul cannot give life except to its own body, therefore Adam was made into a soul, not life-giving, but only living; but Christ was made into a living and life-giving spirit, and therefore Christ had the power of giving life. Jn. I, 16: of his fullness, etc., and Jn. X, 10: I have come that they may have life and have it more abundantly. And in the creed: and in the Holy Spirit, the giver of life. But lest someone should say: if Christ was made into a life-giving spirit, why is he called last? Therefore, consequently, when he says but that is not first, etc., he shows the order of the principles. For we see in nature that in one and the same thing, the imperfect is prior to the perfect. Whence since spirituality stands to animality as the perfect to the imperfect, therefore in human nature the spiritual, which is perfect, ought not to be first, but, that order may be preserved, the imperfect ought to be first, namely that which is animal, then the perfect, namely that which is spiritual. Above ch. XIII, 10: when that which is perfect has come, etc. As Augustine says, a sign of this is that firstborn sons of old were accustomed to be animal, as Cain was born before Abel, Ishmael before Isaac, and Esau before Jacob.

He assigns the reason of the said diversity, saying the first man, etc., as if he were to say: truly the first man was made into a living soul, because from the earth, Gen. II, 7: the Lord formed man from the slime of the earth, and therefore he is said to be earthy, that is, animal; the second man, namely Christ, was made into a life-giving spirit, because from heaven; because the divine nature which was united to this nature, is from heaven. And therefore he ought to be heavenly, that is, he ought to have such perfection as befits one coming from heaven, namely spiritual perfection. Jn. III, 31: he who comes from heaven is above all. But he says the first man is from the earth, according to the manner of speaking, by which things are said to be of that from which the first part is in their coming to be, just as a knife is said to be of iron because the first part from which the knife comes is iron. And because the first part from which Adam was made, is earth, therefore he is said to be from the earth. The second man is said to be from heaven, not because he brought his body from heaven, since he took it from the earth, namely from the body of the blessed virgin, but because the divinity (which is united to human nature) came from heaven, which was prior to the body of Christ.

Thus, therefore, the diversity of the principles is clear, which was the major proposition of the principal argument. Consequently when he says such as the earthy, etc., he shows the derivation of the likeness of these principles from each, and first in common, second he divides it through its parts, at the place, therefore as we have borne, etc. He says therefore such as the earthy, etc., as if he were to say: the first man, because he was earthy and mortal, therefore it was derived that all should be both earthy and mortal. Above the same v. 22: and as in Adam all die. Zach. XIII, 5: Adam is my example, etc. But because the second man was heavenly, that is, spiritual and immortal, therefore we shall all be both immortal and spiritual. Rom. VI, 5: but we have been made complanted in the likeness, etc.

Therefore as we have borne, etc. Here he concludes how in particular we ought to be conformed to the man, namely the heavenly one. Now we can be conformed to the heavenly one in two ways, namely in the life of grace and of glory, and one is the way to the other: because without the life of grace one does not arrive at the life of glory. And therefore he says as we have borne, etc., that is, as long as we were sinners, in us was the likeness of Adam. II Reg. VII, 19: this is the law of Adam, Lord God, etc. That therefore we may be able to be heavenly, that is, to arrive at the life of glory, let us bear the image of the heavenly one, through the life of grace. Col. III, 9 f.: putting off the old man, put on the new man, namely Christ. Rom. VIII, 29: whom he foreknew and predestined to be conformed, etc. Thus therefore we ought to be conformed to the heavenly one in the life of grace, because otherwise we shall not arrive at the life of glory. And this is what he says but this I say, brothers, as if he were to say: unless you live, namely the life of grace, you will not be able to arrive at the kingdom of God, namely the life of glory, because flesh and blood shall not possess the kingdom of God. This indeed is not to be understood, as certain heretics say, that flesh and blood will not rise according to substance, but that the whole body will be turned either into spirit, or into air: which is heretical and false; for the Apostle says that he will conform our body to the body of his glory. Whence since Christ after the resurrection had flesh and blood, as is said Lk. last: handle and see, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones, etc., it is clear that we too in the resurrection shall have flesh and blood. Flesh and blood is not to be understood, that is, the substance of flesh and blood, shall not possess the kingdom of God, but flesh and blood, that is, those giving effort to flesh and blood, namely men given over to vices and pleasures, shall not possess the kingdom of God. And thus flesh is taken, that is, man living carnally, Rom. VIII, 9: but you are not in the flesh, etc. Or: flesh and blood, that is, the works of flesh and blood shall not possess the kingdom of God, which is against the Jews and Saracens, who imagine that after the resurrection they will have wives, rivers of honey and milk. Or: flesh and blood, that is, the corruption of flesh and blood, shall not possess the kingdom of God, that is, after the resurrection, the body will not be subjected to the corruption of flesh and blood, according to which man lives. Whence, and according to this, he adds neither shall corruption possess incorruption, that is, neither shall the corruption of mortality, which is expressed here by the name of flesh, possess incorruption, that is, the incorruptible kingdom of God, because we shall rise in glory. Rom. VIII, 21: the creature itself shall be freed from the bondage of corruption, etc.