Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
There were others who, although they believed that the Word was not changed into flesh but assumed it, nevertheless said that he assumed flesh without a soul; for if he had assumed flesh with a soul, the Evangelist would have said, the Word was made flesh with a soul. This was the error of Arius, who said that there was no soul in Christ, but that the Word of God was there in place of a soul.
The falsity of this opinion is obvious, both because it is in conflict with Sacred Scripture, which often mentions the soul of Christ, as: my soul is sad, even to the point of death (Matt 26:38), and because certain affections of the soul are observed in Christ which can not possibly exist in the Word of God or in flesh alone: he began to be sorrowful and troubled (Matt 26:37). Also, God cannot be the form of a body. Nor can an angel be united to a body as its form, since an angel, according to its very nature, is separated from body, whereas a soul is united to a body as its form. Consequently, the Word of God cannot be the form of a body. ...
For more, see Thomas Aquinas on Christ assuming a human soul.
The falsity of this opinion is obvious, both because it is in conflict with Sacred Scripture, which often mentions the soul of Christ, as: my soul is sad, even to the point of death (Matt 26:38), and because certain affections of the soul are observed in Christ which can not possibly exist in the Word of God or in flesh alone: he began to be sorrowful and troubled (Matt 26:37). Also, God cannot be the form of a body. Nor can an angel be united to a body as its form, since an angel, according to its very nature, is separated from body, whereas a soul is united to a body as its form. Consequently, the Word of God cannot be the form of a body. ...
For more, see Thomas Aquinas on Christ assuming a human soul.