TALK FOUR - REDEMPTION (120m)
---- AV - Puccini: Turandot 11-21: solving of riddles (24m)
---- AV - The Prince of Egypt 1-2: Moses (7m)
---- AV - SuperStar 6: Hosanna (2m)
---- AV - SuperStar 22: thirsty (6m)
---- Audio - Pablo Casals: O Vos Omnes (4m)
---- City of God - Bk 10: Ch 19-26
---- ST: P2-1, Q82, A1; P2-1,Q74, A2; P2-1,Q74, A4
---- Catechism - 456-463, 571, 601
BOOK X CHAPTER 19
ON THE REASONABLENESS OF OFFERING, AS THE TRUE RELIGION TEACHES, A
VISIBLE SACRIFICE TO THE ONE TRUE AND INVISIBLE GOD
As to those who think that these visible sacrifices are suitably
offered to other gods, but that invisible sacrifices, the graces of purity of
mind and holiness of will, should be offered, as greater and better, to the
invisible God, Himself greater and better than all others, they must be
oblivious that these visible sacrifices are signs of the invisible, as the
words we utter are the signs of things. And therefore, as in prayer or praise
we direct intelligible words to Him to whom in our heart we offer the very
feelings we are expressing, so we are to understand that in sacrifice we offer
visible sacrifice only to Him to whom in our heart we ought to present
ourselves an invisible sacrifice. It is then that the angels, and all those
superior powers who are mighty by their goodness and piety, regard us with
pleasure, and rejoice with us and assist us to the utmost of their power. But
if we offer such worship to them, they decline it; and when on any mission to
men they become visible to the senses, they positively forbid it. Examples of
this occur in holy writ. Some fancied they should, by adoration or sacrifice,
pay the same honor to angels as is due to God, and were prevented from doing so
by the angels themselves, and ordered to render it to Him to whom alone they
know it to be due. And the holy angels have in this been imitated by holy men
of God. For Paul and Barnabas, when they had wrought a miracle of healing in
Lycaonia, were thought to be gods, and the Lycaonians desired to sacrifice to
them, and they humbly and piously declined this honor, and announced to them
the God in whom they should believe. And those deceitful and proud spirits, who
exact worship, do so simply because they know it to be due to the true God. For
that which they take pleasure in is not, as Porphyry says and some fancy, the
smell of the victims, but divine honors. They have, in fact, plenty odors on
all hands, and if they wished more, they could provide them for themselves. But
the spirits who arrogate to themselves divinity are delighted not with the
smoke of carcasses but with the suppliant spirit which they deceive and hold in
subjection, and hinder from drawing near to God, preventing him from offering
himself in sacrifice to God by inducing him to sacrifice to others.
BOOK X CHAPTER 20
OF THE SUPREME AND TRUE SACRIFICE WHICH WAS EFFECTED BY THE
MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN
And hence that true Mediator, in so far as, by assuming the form
of a servant, He became the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
though in the form of God He received sacrifice together with the Father, with
whom He is one God, yet in the form of a servant He chose rather to be than to
receive a sacrifice, that not even by this instance any one might have occasion
to suppose that sacrifice should be rendered to any creature. Thus He is both
the Priest who offers and the Sacrifice offered. And He designed that there
should be a daily sign of this in the sacrifice of the Church, which, being His
body, learns 13 to offer herself through Him. Of this true Sacrifice the
ancient sacrifices of the saints were the various and numerous signs; and it
was thus variously figured, just as one thing is signified by a variety of
words, that there may be less weariness when we speak of it much. To this supreme
and true sacrifice all false sacrifices have given place.
BOOK X CHAPTER 21
OF THE POWER DELEGATED TO DEMONS FOR THE TRIAL AND GLORIFICATION
OF THE SAINTS, WHO CONQUER NOT BY PROPITIATING THE SPIRITS OF THE AIR, BUT BY
ABIDING IN GOD
The power delegated to the demons at certain appointed and
well-adjusted seasons, that they may give expression to their hostility to the
city of God by stirring up against it the men who are under their influence,
and may not only receive sacrifice from those who willingly offer it, but may
also extort it from the unwilling by violent persecution; ‹ this power is found
to be not merely harmless, but even useful to the Church, completing as it does
the number of martyrs, whom the city of God esteems as all the more illustrious
and honored citizens, because they have striven even to blood against the sin
of impiety. If the ordinary language of the Church allowed it, we might more
elegantly call these men our heroes. For this name is said to be derived from
Juno, who in Greek is called Here, and hence, according to the Greek myths, one
of her sons was called Heros. And these fables mystically signified that Juno
was mistress of the air, which they suppose to be inhabited by the demons and
the heroes, understanding by heroes the souls of the well-deserving dead. But
for a quite opposite reason would we call our martyrs heroes, ‹ supposing, as I
said, that the usage of ecclesiastical language would admit of it, ‹ not because they
lived along with the demons in the air, but because they conquered these demons
or powers of the air, and among them Juno herself, be she what she may, not
unsuitably represented, as she commonly is by the poets, as hostile to virtue,
and jealous of men of mark aspiring to the heavens. Virgil, however, unhappily
gives way, and yields to her; for, though he represents her as saying, "I
am conquered by Aeneas," Helenus gives. Aeneas himself this religious
advice:
"Pay vows to Juno: overbear Her queenly soul with gift and
prayer."
In conformity with this opinion, Porphyry-expressing, however, not
so much his own views as other people's ‹ says that a good
god or genius cannot come to a man unless the evil genius has been first of all
propitiated, implying that the evil deities had greater power than the good;
for, until they have been appeased and give place, the good can give no
assistance; and if the evil deities oppose, the good can give no help; whereas
the evil can do injury without the good being able to prevent them. This is not
the way of the true and truly holy religion; not thus do our martyrs conquer
Juno, that is to say, the powers of the air, who envy the virtues of the pious.
Our heroes, if we could so call them, overcome Here, not by suppliant gifts,
but by divine virtues. As Scipio, who conquered Africa by his valor, is more
suitably styled Africanus than if he had appeased his enemies by gifts, and so
won their mercy.
BOOK X CHAPTER 24
OF THE ONE ONLY TRUE PRINCIPLE WHICH ALONE PURIFIES AND RENEWS
HUMAN NATURE
Accordingly, when we speak of God, we do not affirm two or three
principles, no more than we are at liberty to affirm two or three gods;
although, speaking of each, of the Father, or of the Son, or of the Holy Ghost,
we confess that each is God: and yet we do not say, as the Sabellian heretics
say, that the Father is the same as the Son, and the Holy Spirit the same as
the Father and the Son; but we say that the Father is the Father of the Son,
and the Son the Son of the Father, and that the Holy Spirit of the Father and
the Son is neither the Father nor the Son. It was therefore truly said that man
is cleansed only by a Principle, although the Platonists erred in speaking in
the plural of principles. But Porphyry, being under the dominion of these
envious powers, whose influence he was at once ashamed of and afraid to throw
off, refused to recognize that Christ is the Principle by whose incarnation we
are purified. Indeed he despised Him, because of the flesh itself which He
assumed, that He might offer a sacrifice for our purification, ‹ a great mystery,
unintelligible to Porphyry's pride, which that true and benignant Redeemer
brought low by His humility, manifesting Himself to mortals by the mortality
which He assumed, and which the malignant and deceitful mediators are proud of
wanting, promising, as the boon of immortals, a deceptive assistance to
wretched men. Thus the good and true Mediator showed that it is sin which is
evil, and not the substance or nature of flesh; for this, together with the
human soul, could without sin be both assumed and retained, and laid down in
death, and changed to something better by resurrection. He showed also that
death itself, although the punishment of sin, was submitted to by Him for our
sakes without sin, and must not be evaded by sin on our part, but rather, if
opportunity serves, be born for righteousness' sake. For he was able to expiate
sins by dying, because He both died, and not for sin of His own. But He has not
been recognized by Porphyry as the Principle, otherwise he would have
recognized Him as the Purifier. The Principle is neither the flesh nor the
human soul in Christ but the Word by which all things were made. The flesh,
therefore, does not by its own virtue purify, but by virtue of the Word by
which it was assumed, when "the Word became flesh and dwelt among
us." For speaking mystically of eating His flesh, when those who did not
understand Him were offended and went away, saying, "This is an hard
saying, who can hear it?" He answered to the rest who remained, "It
is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing." The
Principle, therefore, having assumed a human soul and flesh, cleanses the soul
and flesh of believers. Therefore, when the Jews asked Him who He was, He
answered that He was the Principle. And this we carnal and feeble men, liable
to sin, and involved in the darkness of ignorance, could not possibly
understand, unless we were cleansed and healed by Him, both by means of what we
were, and of what we were not. For we were men, but we were not righteous;
whereas in His incarnation there was a human nature, but it was righteous, and
not sinful. This is the mediation whereby a hand is stretched to the lapsed and
fallen; this is the seed "ordained by angels," by whose ministry the
law also was given enjoining the worship of one God, and promising that this
Mediator should come.
BOOK X CHAPTER 25
THAT ALL THE SAINTS, BOTH UNDER THE LAW AND BEFORE IT, WERE
JUSTIFIED BY FAITH IN THE MYSTERY OF CHRIST'S INCARNATION
It was by faith in this mystery, and godliness of life, that purification
was attainable even by the saints of old, whether before the law was given to
the Hebrews (for God and the angels were even then present as instructors), or
in the periods under the law, although the promises of spiritual things, being
presented in figure, seemed to be carnal, and hence the name of Old Testament.
For it was then the prophets lived, by whom, as by angels, the same promise was
announced; and among them was he whose grand and divine sentiment regarding the
end and supreme good of man I have just now quoted, "It is good for me to
cleave to God." In this psalm the distinction between the Old and New
Testaments is distinctly announced. For the Psalmist says, that when he saw
that the carnal and earthly promises were abundantly enjoyed by the ungodly,
his feet were almost gone, his steps had well-nigh slipped; and that it seemed
to him as if he had served God in vain, when he saw that those who despised God
increased in that prosperity which he looked for at God's hand. He says, too,
that, in investigating this matter with the desire of understanding why it was
so, he had labored in vain, until he went into the sanctuary of God, and
understood the end of those whom he had erroneously considered happy. Then he
understood that they were cast down by that very thing, as he says, which they
had made their boast, and that they had been consumed and perished for their
inequities; and that that whole fabric of temporal prosperity had become as a
dream when one awaketh, and suddenly finds himself destitute of all the joys he
had imaged in sleep. And, as in this earth or earthy city they seemed to
themselves to be great, he says, "O Lord, in Thy city Thou wilt reduce
their image to nothing." He also shows how beneficial it had been for him to
seek even earthly blessings only from the one true God, in whose power are all
things, for he says, "As a beast was I before Thee, and I am always with
Thee." "As a beast," he says, meaning that he was stupid. For I
ought to have sought from Thee such things as the ungodly could not enjoy as
well as I, and not those things which I saw them enjoying in abundance, and
hence concluded I was serving Thee in vain, because they who declined to serve
Thee had what I had not. Nevertheless, "I am always with Thee,"
because even in my desire for such things I did not pray to other gods. And
consequently he goes on, "Thou hast holden me by my right hand, and by Thy
counsel Thou hast guided me, and with glory hast taken me up;" as if all
earthly advantages were left-hand blessings, though, when he saw them enjoyed
by the wicked, his feet had almost gone. "For what," he says,
"have I in heaven, and what have I desired from Thee upon earth?" He
blames himself, and is justly displeased with himself; because, though he had
in heaven so vast a possession (as he afterwards understood), he yet sought
from his God on earth a transitory and fleeting happiness; ‹ a happiness of
mire, we may say. "My heart and my flesh," he says, "fail, O God
of my heart." Happy failure, from things below to things above! And hence
in another psalm He says, "My soul longeth, yea, even faileth, for the
courts of the Lord." Yet, though he had said of both his heart and his
flesh that they were failing, he did not say, O God of my heart and my flesh,
but, O God of my heart; for by the heart the flesh is made clean. Therefore,
says the Lord, "Cleanse that which is within, and the outside shall be
clean also." He then says that God Himself, ‹ not anything
received from Him, but Himself, ‹ is his portion.
"The God of my heart, and my portion for ever." Among the various
objects of human choice, God alone satisfied him. "For, lo," he says,
"they that are far from Thee shall perish: Thou destroyest all them that
go a ‹ whoring from Thee," ‹ that is, who
prostitute themselves to many gods. And then follows the verse for which all
the rest of the psalm seems to prepare: "It is good for me to cleave to
God," ‹ not to go far off; not to go a-whoring with a multitude of gods.
And then shall this union with God be perfected, when all that is to be
redeemed in us has been redeemed. But for the present we must, as he goes on to
say, "place our hope in God." "For that which is seen,"
says the apostle, "is not hope. For what a man sees, why does he yet hope
for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for
it." Being, then, for the present established in this hope, let us do what
the Psalmist further indicates, and become in our measure angels or messengers
of God, declaring His will, and praising His glory and His grace. For when he
had said, "To place my hope in God," he goes on, "that I may
declare all Thy praises in the gates of the daughter of Zion." This is the
most glorious city of God; this is the city which knows and worships one God:
she is celebrated by the holy angels, who invite us to their society, and
desire us to become fellow-citizens with them in this city; for they do not
wish us to worship them as our gods, but to join them in worshipping their God
and ours; nor to sacrifice to them, but, together with them, to become a
sacrifice to God. Accordingly, whoever will lay aside malignant obstinacy, and
consider these things, shall be assured that all these blessed and immortal
spirits, who do not envy us (for if they envied they were not blessed), but
rather love us, and desire us to be as blessed as themselves, look on us with
greater pleasure, and give us greater assistance, when we join them in
worshipping one God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, than if we were to offer to
themselves sacrifice and worship.
BOOK X CHAPTER 26
OF PORPHYRY'S WEAKNESS IN WAVERING BETWEEN THE CONFESSION OF THE
TRUE GOD AND THE WORSHIP OF DEMONS
I know not how it is so, but it seems to me that Porphyry brushed
for his friends the theurgists; for he knew all that I have adduced, but did
not frankly condemn polytheistic worship. He said, in fact, that there are some
angels who visit earth, and reveal divine truth to theurgists, and others who
publish on earth the things that belong to the Father, His height and depth. Can
we believe, then, that the angels whose office it is to declare the will of the
Father, wish us to be subject to any but Him whose will they declare? And
hence, even this Platonist himself judiciously observes that we should rather
imitate than invoke them. We ought not, then, to fear that we may offend these
immortal and happy subjects of the one God by not sacrificing to them; for this
they know to be due only to the one true God, in allegiance to whom they
themselves find their blessedness, and therefore they will not have it given to
them, either in figure or in the reality, which the mysteries of sacrifice
symbolized. Such arrogance belongs to proud and wretched demons, whose
disposition is diametrically opposite to the piety of those who are subject to
God, and whose blessedness consists in attachment to Him. And, that we also may
attain to this bliss, they aid us, as is fit, with sincere kindliness, and
usurp over us no dominion, but declare to us Him under whose rule we are then
fellow-subjects. Why, then, O philosopher, do you still fear to speak freely
against the powers which are inimical both to true virtue and to the gifts of
the true God? Already you have discriminated between the angels who proclaim
God's will, and those who visit theurgists, drawn down by I know not what art.
Why do you still ascribe to these latter the honor of declaring divine truth?
If they do not declare the will of the Father, what divine revelations can they
make? Are not these the evil spirits who were bound over by the incantations of
an envious man, that they should not grant purity of soul to another, and could
not, as you say, be set free from these bonds by a good man anxious for purity,
and recover power over their own actions? Do you still doubt whether these are
wicked demons; or do you, perhaps, feign ignorance, that you may not give
offense to the theurgists, who have allured you by their secret rites, and have
taught you, as a mighty boon, these insane and pernicious devilries? Do you
dare to elevate above the air, and even to heaven, these envious powers, or
pests, let me rather call them, less worthy of the name of sovereign than of
slave, as you yourself own; and are you not ashamed to place them even among
your sidereal gods, and so put a slight upon the stars themselves?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P2-1, Q82, A1 - Whether original sin is a habit?
Objection 1: It would seem that original sin is not a habit. For
original sin is the absence of original justice, as Anselm states (De Concep.
Virg. ii, iii, xxvi), so that original sin is a privation. But privation is
opposed to habit. Therefore original sin is nota habit.
Objection 2: Further, actual sin has the nature of fault more than
original sin, in so far as it is more voluntary. Now the habit of actual sin
has not the nature of a fault, else it would follow that a man while asleep,
would be guilty of sin. Therefore no original habit has the nature of a fault.
Objection 3: Further, in wickedness act always precedes habit,
because evil habits are not infused, but acquired. Now original sin is not
preceded by an act. Therefore original sin is not a habit.
On the contrary, Augustine says in his book on the Baptism of
infants (De Pecc. Merit. et Remiss. i, 39) that on account of original sin
little children have the aptitude of concupiscence though they have not the
act. Now aptitude denotes some kind of habit. Therefore original sin is a
habit.
I answer that, habit is twofold. The first is a habit whereby power
is inclined to an act: thus science and virtue are called habits. In this way
original sin is not a habit. The second kind of habit is the disposition of a
complex nature, whereby that nature is well or ill disposed to something,
chiefly when such a disposition has become like a second nature, as in the case
of sickness or health. In this sense original sin is a habit. For it is an
inordinate disposition, arising from the destruction of the harmony which was
essential to original justice, even as bodily sickness is an in ordinate disposition
of the body, by reason of the destruction of that equilibrium which is
essential to health. Hence it is that original sin is called the "languor
of nature" [*Cf. Augustine, In Ps. 118, serm. iii].
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P2-1,Q74, A2 - Whether there are several original sins in one man?
Objection 1: It would seem that there are many original sins in
one man. For it is written (Ps.1:7): "Behold I was conceived in iniquities,
and in sins did my mother conceive me." But the sin in which a man is
conceived is original sin. Therefore there are several original sins in man.
Objection 2: Further, one and the same habit does not incline its
subject to contraries: since the inclination of habit is like that of nature
which tends to one thing. Now original sin, even in one man, inclines to
various and contrary sins. Therefore original sin is not one habit; but
several.
Objection 3: Further, original sin infects every part of the soul.
Now the different parts of the soul are different subjects of sin, as shown
above (Question [74]). Since then one sin cannot be in different subjects, it
seems that original sin is not one but several.
On the contrary, It is written (Jn. 1:29): "Behold the Lamb
of God, behold Him Who taketh away the sin of the world": and the reason
for the employment of the singular is that the "sin of the world" is
original sin, as a gloss expounds this passage.
I answer that, In one man there is one original sin. Two reasons
may be assigned for this. The first is on the part of the cause of original
sin. For it has been stated (Question [81], Article [2]), that the first sin
alone of our first parent was transmitted to his posterity. Wherefore in one
man original sin is one in number; and in all men, it is one in proportion,
i.e. in relation to its first principle. The second reason may be taken from
the very essence of original sin. Because in every inordinate disposition,
unity of species depends on the cause, while the unity of number is derived
from the subject. For example, take bodily sickness: various species of
sickness proceed from different causes, e.g. from excessive heat or cold, or
from a lesion in the lung or liver; while one specific sickness in one man will
be one in number. Now the cause of this corrupt disposition that is called
original sin, is one only, viz. the privation of original justice, removing the
subjection of man's mind to God. Consequently original sin is specifically one,
and, in one man, can be only one in number; while, in different men, it is one
in species and in proportion, but is numerically many.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P2-1,Q74, A4 - Whether original sin is equally in all?
Objection 1: It would seem that original sin is not equally in
all. Because original sin is inordinate concupiscence, as stated above (Article
[3]). Now all are not equally prone to acts of concupiscence. Therefore
original sin is not equally in all.
Objection 2: Further, original sin is an inordinate disposition of
the soul, just as sickness is an inordinate disposition of the body. But
sickness is subject to degrees. Therefore original sin is subject to degrees.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says (De Nup. et Concep. i, 23)
that "lust transmits original sin to the child." But the act of
generation may be more lustful in one than in another. Therefore original sin
may be greater in one than in another.
On the contrary, Original sin is the sin of nature, as stated
above (Question [81],Article [1]). But nature is equally in all. Therefore
original sin is too.
I answer that, There are two things in original sin: one is the
privation of original justice; the other is the relation of this privation to
the sin of our first parent, from whom it is transmitted to man through his
corrupt origin. As to the first, original sin has no degrees, since the gift of
original justice is taken away entirely; and privations that remove something
entirely, such as death and darkness, cannot be more or less, as stated above
(Question [73],Article [2]). In like manner, neither is this possible, as to
the second: since all are related equally to the first principle of our corrupt
origin, from which principle original sin takes the nature of guilt; for
relations cannot be more or less. Consequently it is evident that original sin
cannot be more in one than in another.
================
Paragraph 1. The Son of God Became Man
I. WHY DID THE WORD BECOME FLESH?
456 With the Nicene Creed, we answer by confessing: "For us
men and for our salvation he came down from heaven; by the power of the Holy
Spirit, he became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and was made man."
457 The Word became flesh for us in order to save us by
reconciling us with God, who "loved us and sent his Son to be the
expiation for our sins": "the Father has sent his Son as the Savior
of the world", and "he was revealed to take away sins":70
Sick, our nature demanded to be healed; fallen, to be raised up;
dead, to rise again. We had lost the possession of the good; it was necessary
for it to be given back to us. Closed in the darkness, it was necessary to
bring us the light; captives, we awaited a Savior; prisoners, help; slaves, a
liberator. Are these things minor or insignificant? Did they not move God to
descend to human nature and visit it, since humanity was in so miserable and
unhappy a state?71
458 The Word became flesh so that thus we might know God's love:
"In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his
only Son into the world, so that we might live through him."72 "For
God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him
should not perish but have eternal life."73
459 The Word became flesh to be our model of holiness: "Take
my yoke upon you, and learn from me." "I am the way, and the truth,
and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me."74 On the mountain of
the Transfiguration, the Father commands: "Listen to him!"75 Jesus is
the model for the Beatitudes and the norm of the new law: "Love one
another as I have loved you."76 This love implies an effective offering of
oneself, after his example.77
460 The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine
nature":78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God
became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word
and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For
the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The
only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed
our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81
II. THE INCARNATION
461 Taking up St. John's expression, "The Word became
flesh",82 the Church calls "Incarnation" the fact that the Son
of God assumed a human nature in order to accomplish our salvation in it. In a
hymn cited by St. Paul, the Church sings the mystery of the Incarnation:
Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing
to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in
the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and
became obedient unto death, even death on a cross.83
462 The Letter to the Hebrews refers to the same mystery:
Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said,
"Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you
prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no
pleasure. Then I said, Lo, I have come to do your will, O God."84
463 Belief in the true Incarnation of the Son of God is the
distinctive sign of Christian faith: "By this you know the Spirit of God:
every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of
God."85 Such is the joyous conviction of the Church from her beginning
whenever she sings "the mystery of our religion": "He was
manifested in the flesh."86
ARTICLE 4 "JESUS CHRIST SUFFERED UNDER PONTIUS PILATE, WAS
CRUCIFIED, DIED, AND WAS BURIED"
571 The Paschal mystery of Christ's cross and Resurrection stands
at the center of the Good News that the apostles, and the Church following
them, are to proclaim to the world. God's saving plan was accomplished
"once for all"313 by the redemptive death of his Son Jesus Christ.
572 The Church remains faithful to the interpretation of "all
the Scriptures" that Jesus gave both before and after his Passover:
"Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter
into his glory?"314 Jesus' sufferings took their historical, concrete form
from the fact that he was "rejected by the elders and the chief priests
and the scribes", who handed "him to the Gentiles to be mocked and
scourged and crucified".315
573 Faith can therefore try to examine the circumstances of Jesus'
death, faithfully handed on by the Gospels316 and illuminated by other
historical sources, the better to understand the meaning of the Redemption.
II. CHRIST'S REDEMPTIVE DEATH IN GOD'S PLAN OF SALVATION
"Jesus handed over according to the definite plan of
God"
599 Jesus' violent death was not the result of chance in an
unfortunate coincidence of circumstances, but is part of the mystery of God's
plan, as St. Peter explains to the Jews of Jerusalem in his first sermon on Pentecost:
"This Jesus [was] delivered up according to the definite plan and
foreknowledge of God."393 This Biblical language does not mean that those
who handed him over were merely passive players in a scenario written in
advance by God.394
600 To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy.
When therefore he establishes his eternal plan of "predestination",
he includes in it each person's free response to his grace: "In this city,
in fact, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of
Israel, gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed,
to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place."395
For the sake of accomplishing his plan of salvation, God permitted the acts
that flowed from their blindness.396
"He died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures"
601 The Scriptures had foretold this divine plan of salvation
through the putting to death of "the righteous one, my Servant" as a
mystery of universal redemption, that is, as the ransom that would free men
from the slavery of sin.397 Citing a confession of faith that he himself had
"received", St. Paul professes that "Christ died for our sins in
accordance with the scriptures."398 In particular Jesus' redemptive death
fulfills Isaiah's prophecy of the suffering Servant.399 Indeed Jesus himself
explained the meaning of his life and death in the light of God's suffering
Servant.400 After his Resurrection he gave this interpretation of the
Scriptures to the disciples at Emmaus, and then to the apostles.401
"For our sake God made him to be sin"
602 Consequently, St. Peter can formulate the apostolic faith in
the divine plan of salvation in this way: "You were ransomed from the
futile ways inherited from your fathers... with the precious blood of Christ,
like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was destined before the
foundation of the world but was made manifest at the end of the times for your
sake."402 Man's sins, following on original sin, are punishable by death.403
By sending his own Son in the form of a slave, in the form of a fallen
humanity, on account of sin, God "made him to be sin who knew no sin, so
that in him we might become the righteousness of God."404
603 Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had
sinned.405 But in the redeeming love that always united him to the Father, he
assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin, to the point that he could
say in our name from the cross: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"406
Having thus established him in solidarity with us sinners, God "did not
spare his own Son but gave him up for us all", so that we might be
"reconciled to God by the death of his Son".407
God takes the initiative of universal redeeming love
604 By giving up his own Son for our sins, God manifests that his
plan for us is one of benevolent love, prior to any merit on our part: "In
this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be
the expiation for our sins."408 God "shows his love for us in that
while we were yet sinners Christ died for us."409
605 At the end of the parable of the lost sheep Jesus recalled
that God's love excludes no one: "So it is not the will of your Father who
is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish."410 He affirms
that he came "to give his life as a ransom for many"; this last term
is not restrictive, but contrasts the whole of humanity with the unique person
of the redeemer who hands himself over to save us.411 The Church, following the
apostles, teaches that Christ died for all men without exception: "There
is not, never has been, and never will be a single human being for whom Christ
did not suffer."412
III. CHRIST OFFERED HIMSELF TO HIS FATHER FOR OUR SINS
Christ's whole life is an offering to the Father
606 The Son of God, who came down "from heaven, not to do
[his] own will, but the will of him who sent [him]",413 said on coming
into the world, "Lo, I have come to do your will, O God." "And
by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus
Christ once for all."414 From the first moment of his Incarnation the Son
embraces the Father's plan of divine salvation in his redemptive mission:
"My food is to do the will of him who sent me, and to accomplish his work."415
The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"416 expresses
his loving communion with the Father. "The Father loves me, because I lay
down my life", said the Lord, "[for] I do as the Father has commanded
me, so that the world may know that I love the Father."417
607 The desire to embrace his Father's plan of redeeming love
inspired Jesus' whole life,418 for his redemptive passion was the very reason
for his Incarnation. And so he asked, "And what shall I say? 'Father, save
me from this hour'? No, for this purpose I have come to this hour."419 And
again, "Shall I not drink the cup which the Father has given me?"420
From the cross, just before "It is finished", he said, "I
thirst."421
"The Lamb who takes away the sin of the world"
608 After agreeing to baptize him along with the sinners, John the
Baptist looked at Jesus and pointed him out as the "Lamb of God, who takes
away the sin of the world".422 By doing so, he reveals that Jesus is at
the same time the suffering Servant who silently allows himself to be led to
the slaughter and who bears the sin of the multitudes, and also the Paschal
Lamb, the symbol of Israel's redemption at the first Passover.423 Christ's
whole life expresses his mission: "to serve, and to give his life as a
ransom for many."424
Jesus freely embraced the Father's redeeming love
609 By embracing in his human heart the Father's love for men,
Jesus "loved them to the end", for "greater love has no man than
this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."425 In suffering and
death his humanity became the free and perfect instrument of his divine love
which desires the salvation of men.426 Indeed, out of love for his Father and
for men, whom the Father wants to save, Jesus freely accepted his Passion and
death: "No one takes [my life] from me, but I lay it down of my own
accord."427 Hence the sovereign freedom of God's Son as he went out to his
death.428
At the Last Supper Jesus anticipated the free offering of his life
610 Jesus gave the supreme expression of his free offering of
himself at the meal shared with the twelve Apostles "on the night he was
betrayed".429 On the eve of his Passion, while still free, Jesus
transformed this Last Supper with the apostles into the memorial of his
voluntary offering to the Father for the salvation of men: "This is my
body which is given for you." "This is my blood of the covenant,
which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."430
611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be
the memorial of his sacrifice.431 Jesus includes the apostles in his own
offering and bids them perpetuate it.432 By doing so, the Lord institutes his
apostles as priests of the New Covenant: "For their sakes I sanctify
myself, so that they also may be sanctified in truth."433
The agony at Gethsemani
612 The cup of the New Covenant, which Jesus anticipated when he
offered himself at the Last Supper, is afterwards accepted by him from his
Father's hands in his agony in the garden at Gethsemani,434 making himself
"obedient unto death". Jesus prays: "My Father, if it be
possible, let this cup pass from me..."435 Thus he expresses the horror
that death represented for his human nature. Like ours, his human nature is
destined for eternal life; but unlike ours, it is perfectly exempt from sin,
the cause of death.436 Above all, his human nature has been assumed by the
divine person of the "Author of life", the "Living One".437
By accepting in his human will that the Father's will be done, he accepts his death
as redemptive, for "he himself bore our sins in his body on the
tree."438
Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes
the definitive redemption of men, through "the Lamb of God, who takes away
the sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which
restores man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the
"blood of the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness
of sins".440
614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses
all other sacrifices.441 First, it is a gift from God the Father himself, for
the Father handed his Son over to sinners in order to reconcile us with
himself. At the same time it is the offering of the Son of God made man, who in
freedom and love offered his life to his Father through the Holy Spirit in
reparation for our disobedience.442
Jesus substitutes his obedience for our disobedience
615 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,
so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous."443 By his
obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering
Servant, who "makes himself an offering for sin", when "he bore
the sin of many", and who "shall make many to be accounted
righteous", for "he shall bear their iniquities".444 Jesus
atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.445
Jesus consummates his sacrifice on the cross
616 It is love "to the end"446 that confers on Christ's
sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as atonement and
satisfaction. He knew and loved us all when he offered his life.447 Now
"the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has
died for all; therefore all have died."448 No man, not even the holiest,
was ever able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a
sacrifice for all. The existence in Christ of the divine person of the Son, who
at once surpasses and embraces all human persons, and constitutes himself as
the Head of all mankind, makes possible his redemptive sacrifice for all.
617 The Council of Trent emphasizes the unique character of
Christ's sacrifice as "the source of eternal salvation"449 and
teaches that "his most holy Passion on the wood of the cross merited justification
for us."450 And the Church venerates his cross as she sings: "Hail, O
Cross, our only hope."451
Our participation in Christ's sacrifice
618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one
mediator between God and men".452 But because in his incarnate divine
person he has in some way united himself to every man, "the possibility of
being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery" is
offered to all men.453 He calls his disciples to "take up [their] cross
and follow [him]",454 for "Christ also suffered for [us], leaving
[us] an example so that [we] should follow in his steps."455 In fact Jesus
desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its
first beneficiaries.456 This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother,
who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his
redemptive suffering.457