Thank you very much. I'd like to thank the community here in the Thomistic Institute and the Aquinas Institute for inviting me to speak to you.

And what I'm going to read is part of some ongoing thinking about the two natures of what it means to confess the divinity and humanity of Christ,

it's plenary humanity and divinity,

in complement with a kind of contemporary philosophical realism

grounded in the classical tradition.

So there's a part of the talk that you might say properly dogmatic

or pertains to dogmatics and a part of it that's more philosophical.

And I'm afraid it's, well, the bad news is it's one of those talks that does have to be read fast so that I don't keep you prisoner.

And the good news is if I succeed in doing that, I won't keep you prisoner.

One of the Trinity was crucified.

The communication of idioms pertains to the language we use in classical Catholic theology

to speak about the incarnation of God.

Just insofar as God the Son, the eternal word of the Father, has become human, as we say,

one hypostatic subject, subsisting in two natures.

Linguistic tropes, which we call idioms, are assigned to Jesus of Nazareth either in virtue

of his humanity, his nature as man, or in virtue of his divinity, as nature as God, and

are attributed hypothetically only to one personal subject, that of the Eternal Son and Word

of the Father. So, for example,

we say rightly that the Son of God personally suffered, died, and was buried, in virtue of his

human nature in which he was subject to these experiences, or we say one of the Trinity was crucified.

Or more simply, that God died by Roman crucifixion, here employing the nature term God to denote a subject

who has a divine nature, the person of the word who died a human death. And likewise we may say that

...