Substantial Act and Esse Secundarium: A Critique of Lonergan's Ontological and Psychological Constitution of Christ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lonergan proposes in his Ontological and Psychological Constitution of Christ that in Christ there are two substantial acts, one the divine act of the Word, the other a created supernatural act actuating the human nature of Christ. He derives this teaching from a reading of Aquinas' Quaestio Disputata de Unione Verbi Incarnati, where Aquinas speaks of a secondary esse in Christ, besides the primary divine esse. Lonergan does not properly appropriate Thomistic metaphysics, since for Aquinas a single hypostasis can only have one substantial esse. He also reduces the Incarnation to a relation, thereby making it an accidental rather than substantial union. He also introduces something which is neither human (since the secondary act is supernatural) nor divine (since it is created) into Christ. Rather than reading the secondary esse in terms of substantial act, a more fruitful approach is to read it in terms of Aquinas' theology of kenosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".