St Robert Bellarmine, S.J., " For It Was Fitting That If The Son Of God Wished To Become Son Of Man He Should Be Born Only From A Virgin,"

Lodovico Carracci "The Trinity with the Dead Christ"

The first testimony is the confession of Peter from the revelation of God the Father, Matthew ch.16, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Note here that Peter asserts that Christ is the true and natural Son of God, for that is why he added ‘living’, because it is proper to living things to generate for themselves something a like in nature. And it is confirmed from other places, for in John ch.3 Christ is said to be “the only begotten Son,” Romans ch.8 he is called “proper Son,” I John ch.5 he is called “true Son,”  Colossians ch.1 and Hebrews ch.1 he is called “natural” for he is called the image or the type of the paternal hypostasis, which does not belong to adoptive sons. Again in the same place he is called a Son such that with respect to him the angels are called servants, who however are otherwise adoptive Sons of God, and indeed chiefly so. Next, Christ is accused of having preached that he was the Son of God, John19, “For we have a law and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.” And it is certain that he was not accused of having made himself adoptive or metaphorical Son of God, for even the Jews say, “We have one Father, God,” John ch.8. And yet Christ did not dilute this accusation but as it were admitted it, and in that confession he wished 39 But if he is true, proper, only begotten, natural Son, then he is begotten of the substance of the Father; but he did not receive a part of the substance, because God is without parts, therefore he received the whole of it, therefore he is one God in number with the Father. The Transylvanian ministers and Blandrata reply that Christ is true and proper Son of God because he was conceived from the Holy Spirit, and they prove it from Luke ch.1 where it is said, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the virtue of the Most High will overshadow you, and therefore the holy thing that is born from you will be called the Son of God.” But on the contry, for even Adam, Eve, and all the angels were not born of the seed of man but are directly the work of God. How then is he called only begotten Son? Second if for this reason Christ is Son of God because he was conceived in the womb of a virgin by the work of the Holy Spirit, then he could be called the Son of the Holy Spirit; but Scripture never says this, nay on the contrary it says that the Spirit proceeds from the Son, John ch.15 and elsewhere. Third, this is not to be natural and true Son, for God did not generate Christ from his own substance in the womb of a virgin but from the substance alone of the Virgin; hence in Hebrews ch.7 Christ is said to be without father and without mother, that is, without father on earth and without mother in heaven, as all the Greeks and Latins expounded. To the place of Luke ch.1 I say with Ambrose, Gregory, Bede, Bernard that the virtue of the Most High is the Word of God which descended into the womb of the Virgin, and there put on flesh, and therefore the Son of Mary is called the Son of the Most High. It can also be said that conception from the Holy Spirit is a sign, not a cause, that Christ is called Son of God. For it was fitting that if the Son of God wished to become Son of Man he should be born only from a virgin, and if a virgin were to give birth, she should give birth only to God, as St. Bernard rightly said. Further, Jacob Palaeologus, who, although he was one of the chief doctors of the new Samosatans, at length at Rome, as we said above, was converted to the true faith, not only made no account of our argument but turned it back against us by means of this reasoning: any true Son of God cannot be true God; but Christ is true Son of God, therefore he is not true God. And this syllogism (as I have often heard from him) he used to boast was a very firm demonstration, even though I said to him that the major proposition of the syllogism is so false that the contrary is most true. For as the true son of man is true man, the true son of a lion is true lion, and in all others in like manner, so too the true Son of God must be true. 

Link (here) to the full book by St Robert Bellarmine, S.J.  entitled,  Disputations about Controversies of the Christian Faith against the Heretics of this Age, first published at Ingolstadt in 1581,1593 and republished several times thereafter.
The Latin text can be downloaded from Google books: 

http://books.google.com/books?id=vqJaa8h_teQC&pg=PP22&dq=bellarmini+controversiae&hl=ensa=X&ei=5ZGvUcO9HtS44APBqoHgAg&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAjgU

Fr. James V. Schall, S.J., " Christ Is Who He Said He Was"

The Roman governor of Palestine, one Pontius Pilate, found that he had to deal with a squabble among the Jews about their own law. The Romans tried the best they could to let the locals rule themselves. They reserved to themselves only cases that might cause greater problems, such as revolts or refusal to pay taxes. Both of these issues came up in the life of one Jesus Christ, who seems to have been particularly troublesome to the Jews for some reason. 

The Romans did not want to be caught up in religious controversy. It was all babble to them. If the Jews wanted to execute this man for some quibble in their own law, let them do so. But the Jewish leaders at the time tried to make Him out as an enemy of Caesar. 

Pilate examined the case but could find “no cause” that violated any important Roman concern. Christ did claim that He was a king but not in any political sense that threatened Roman rule. His kingdom, as He said to Pilate, was “not of this world.” Some people still want to make Him primarily a political revolutionary. 

But the New Testament has very little to say about politics. Indeed, it even says that there are things of Caesar, which seems but another way of saying what Aristotle said in his Politics, namely, that we can figure politics out by our own reasoning and experience. We do not need special revelation to do it for us. We can deal with those things that belong to our nature, though sometimes, often, our vices interfere. In any case, the Roman governor was satisfied that he could “find no guilt in Him.” 

 But he found himself boxed into a corner as the Jews could make it look back in Rome that Pilate was not dealing with a political threat. So in the end, Pilate washed his hands, in a famous scene. He let the Crucifixion, which the Romans reserved to themselves, go on under his authority. The special issue that comes up in the Trial and Death of Christ, of course, is who Christ was. In one sense, Christ and Socrates were both good men unjustly executed in their respective polities. The same issue arises: “Do those who are responsible for this injustice get away with it?” But Christ is not just another Socrates. 

In his Jesus of Nazareth, Benedict XVI is careful to state exactly why Jesus is different. After all the evidence is in, after all the strands of interpretation have been exhausted, Christ is who He said He was. 

He was born into the world of a woman. He was the eternal Son of the Father. The world is different because of this event and fact.

Link (here) to the full article by Fr. James Shall, S.J.