|
Reply. The answer is in the affirmative, for the Psalmist says:
"Thou art a priest forever."[1563] Likewise St. Paul
declares: "[Christ is] always living to make intercession for
us."[1564]
Nevertheless the difficulty is that the priesthood does not endure
unless there is sacrifice in the strict sense, or a visible sacrifice,
and this will cease after the celebration of the last Mass at the end
of the world; for in heaven the blessed see God face to face, and no
more need sensible signs.
Therefore St. Thomas answers the question of this article more
precisely by saying that the priesthood of Christ is said to be
eternal, not because of the sacrifice that is offered, but because of
its consummation, namely, because of the perpetual union of men
redeemed with God clearly seen, for this is the eternal fruit of the
Savior's sacrifice.
Wherefore St. Paul says: "But Christ, being come a high priest
of the good things to come... by His own blood entered once into the
holies, having obtained eternal redemption."[1565] Hence,
after the celebration of the last Mass there will be no more sacrifice
in the strict sense, nor reparation, nor prayer of petition; but
there will always be the cultus of adoration and
thanksgiving.[1566]
Hence Christ's priesthood is said to be eternal: (1) because its
effect is the eternal salvation of men, (2) because He had no
successor in this respect; (3) because He continually intercedes
for us and will offer sacrifice by His ministers until the end of
time; (4) because He is anointed as High Priest.
Several Thomists, such as Billuart, say that Christ's priesthood
is said to be eternal because of His imperishable anointing, which is
nothing else but the hypostatic union itself. If there were in heaven
a sacrifice in the strict sense, then it would be a more exalted
sacrifice than the sacrifice on the cross, which would not be
subordinated to this latter sacrifice, but would be coordinated with it
also as more exalted, and therefore the words of Christ dying on the
cross, "it is consummated,"[1567] would be meaningless. On
the contrary, the sacrifice of the Last Supper is directed to the
sacrifice on the cross, and the sacrifice of the Mass is subordinated
to the sacrifice of the cross, of which it is the application.
First doubt. What formally constitutes Christ's
priesthood?[1568]
It is a disputed question among Thomists. The Salmanticenses and
certain other theologians maintain that the grace of headship is what
constitutes Christ's priesthood so far as this grace presupposes or
connotes the grace of union. Thus Christ would be a priest by the
same created habitual grace by which He is the head of the Church.
Several other Thomist theologians, such as Gonet and Hugon, are of
the opinion, which is now becoming more generally admitted, that the
substantial grace of union is what formally constitutes Christ's
priesthood, whereby Christ as man is primarily holy by a holiness that
is not only innate, but also substantial and uncreated. By this same
grace Christ is holy and the sanctifier. Hence Pius XI says in one
of his sacred discourses: "It is solely because it is the Homoousion
of Nicaea who became incarnate... who gives Himself lavishly,
inexhaustible and infinite in Jesus Christ, what the theologians call
substantial victim, which consecrated Him a priest."[1569]
Scriptural proof. Christ as man is a priest inasmuch as He is
anointed by God.[1570] But His primary anointing is by the
grace of union. Therefore Christ is a priest by the grace of union.
Theological proof. Christ is a priest who must offer sacrifice that
is of infinite value for the redemption of men. But it was only by the
grace of union that His sacrifice was of infinite value; for the
offering of Himself is a theandric act.
It is not enough for Christ to be the head of the human nature, for
Adam was the head of the human nature raised to the supernatural
order, and yet he was incapable of offering a sacrifice of infinite
value.
It does not suffice to say with the Salmanticenses that what formally
constitutes Christ's priesthood is habitual grace inasmuch as it
connotes the grace of union, because Christ's priesthood, in what
formally constitutes it as such, must be capable of offering a
sacrifice that is of intrinsically infinite value; and this formally
depends on the grace of union.
This seems to be the opinion of St. Thomas; for, speaking about
Christ's human nature, he says: "It acquired then the actual
holiness of a victim, [on the cross] from the charity it had from the
beginning and from the grace of union sanctifying it
absolutely."[1571] Likewise it is evident from another text of
St. Thomas that Christ was predestined to natural divine sonship
before He was predestined to glory and habitual grace; for it was only
because Christ had to be the Son of God that He was predestined to
the highest degree of glory.[1572]
Also, in the opinion of St. Thomas it is especially by the grace of
union that Christ is the mediator.[1573] This opinion is also
admitted by Bossuet.[1574]
Second doubt. Which title is greater in Christ, Savior or Priest
forever?
Reply. Savior is the greater title, for the name "Jesus"
signifies Savior. Hence the title generally used in the treatise on
the Word incarnate and the Redeemer is, as in the Theological Summa
of St. Thomas, the Savior, in preference to Christ the priest.
Moreover, the Savior must be a priest capable of offering a sacrifice
of infinite value. But not every priest is strictly speaking a
savior. The idea of savior includes more than the idea of priest.
Finally, the principal act of a priest is the act that belongs to the
virtue of religion, namely, to offer sacrifice for the people;
whereas the principal act of the Savior is the act of a higher virtue,
namely, of charity, which commands the virtue of religion. Thus the
principal act of Christ the Savior is the act of love, whereby on the
cross He showed His supreme love for His Father and for souls to be
saved.
|
|
