IX.

Argument:  No creature ought to be worshipped [adoranda].  Christ ought to be

worshipped.  Therefore Christ is not a creature.

Response:  Thus Schwenkfeld argues.  This is indeed one of his absurdities,

and he errs with respect to the communication of attributes.  The humanity

joined with the divinity is worshipped; the humanity of Christ is worshipped,

and not falsely, for it is inseparable from the divinity and the addition of

this posessive, "of Christ," answers the objection.  Thus Christ speaks in

John .  Philip asks Christ to show him the Father, because with the eyes of

the flesh he sees nothing but flesh, and Christ then responds:  "Have I been

with you so long, etc.?  He who sees me, sees the Father."  Christ says that

[Philip] sees the Father, when he sees [Christ], because he sees the humanity

and the divinity united in one person.  Therefore he says, "Do you not know,

that the Father is in me and I in the Father?"  Therefore it is said that he

who touches the Son of God, touches the divine nature itself.  The old

theologians went to astounding lengths [mirabiliter se cruciarunt] in

answering this question of whether the humanity is to be worshipped, and they

established three ways [species] in which the humanity may be adored:  Dulia,

when Peter and Paul and all the other saints are adored; hyperdulia, when the

Virgin Mary is adored, and here they included the humanity of Christ, and

called [this worship] hyperdulia as well; and latria, when Christ is

worshipped with regard to his divinity [cum relatione et divinitate].  Christ

clearly dissolves [the distinction, for] whoever worships the humanity of

Christ here no longer adores a creature (for this is what is meant by the 

union of natures), but the Creator himself, for the unity is what is

fundamental [quia fundamentum est in unitate].