|
State of the question. It seems that also God the Father redeemed
us, because He gave His Son in redemption for our sins. Moreover
the sufferings of other saints were also conducive to our salvation for
the Apostle says: "I rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up
those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ in my flesh
for His body, which is the Church."[1960] Therefore it seems
that not only Christ ought to be called the Redeemer.
Reply. Nevertheless the answer is that to be the Redeemer
immediately belongs properly to Christ, inasmuch as He is man,
although the redemption may be ascribed to the whole Trinity as its
first cause.
This article concerns the redemption of the whole human race, which,
as stated in the preceding article, is the effect of Christ's
passion.
Scriptural proof. St. Luke records that St. Peter says:
"There is not salvation in any other. For there is no other name
under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."[1961]
The Apostle declares that Christ is the Savior of all men, without
exception, saying: "For all have sinned, and do need the glory of
God, being justified freely by His grace, through the redemption
that is in Christ Jesus."[1962] He also says: "For it
became Him... who had brought many children into glory, to perfect
the author of their salvation, by His passion."[1963]
Hence, too, the Blessed Virgin Mary was redeemed by Her Son, by
the merits of her Son suffering, but by a preservative and most
perfect redemption. Thus Christ merited de condigno for His mother
also the first and last graces, but not the divine maternity, because
thus He would have merited the Incarnation and Himself.
Theological proof. It is as follows: For someone to redeem, two
things are required, namely, the act of paying and the price paid,
which is his own. But the price of our redemption is Christ's
blood, or His bodily life, which is what Christ paid. Hence each
of these belongs immediately to Christ as man; but to the whole
Trinity, as to the first cause, to whom Christ's life belonged,
and from whom He received the inspiration to suffer for us.
Reply to first objection. Thus the redemption belongs immediately to
the man Christ, but principally to God.[1964]
Reply to third objection. As Cajetan observes, a doubt arises
concerning this reply, because the holy Doctor says
elsewhere[1965] that the treasury of the Church, from which
indulgences derive their efficacy, contains the sufferings of the
saints. Pope Clement VI expressly says the same.[1966] But
it is an evident fact that the sufferings applied to us through
indulgences by way of satisfaction and by this way of redemption, are
of benefit to the Church.[1967]
Cajetan justly replies to this difficulty, by saying: "The author
has in mind, however, the sufferings of the saints absolutely
considered. Thus between Christ's sufferings and those of the saints
there are many points of difference. The first is in the word
'sufferings. ' For Christ's sufferings absolutely redeem the
Church; whereas the sufferings of the saints do not do so absolutely,
but satisfy for us only by way of superfluity, as stated by St.
Thomas, here and as contained in the bull of Clement VI. The
second difference is in the word "redemption'; for Christ's passion
redeems us absolutely, because it liberates us from guilt and
punishment; but the sufferings of the saints redeem us only in a
relative sense, namely, from a certain punishment, the temporal
punishment that is due to actual sin. The third is in the word
'beneficial. ' It is because Christ's passion is of benefit to the
Church by way of redemption, even if there is no key of the Church
that unlocks the door for us; but the sufferings of the saints are
satisfactory on my behalf only if by means of the authoritative power of
the keys they be applied to me.
"Therefore so many conditions are required so as to verify the fact
that the sufferings of the saints benefit the Church by way of
redemption, and for this reason the affirmative answer is only
relatively true; we could simply and unconditionally deny the assertion
without any prejudice to the truth, and say that the sufferings of the
saints do not benefit the Church by way of redemption. And along with
the truth of this negative conclusion it is already evident that the
same must be said of the doctrine concerning the efficacy of indulgences
from the merits of the saints."[1968] Such is Cajetan's
conclusion. More briefly, it is only Christ who frees us from guilt
and eternal punishment, the merits of the saints free us from temporal
punishment, and this only on the previous understanding that "our
redemption was accomplished by Christ alone... inasmuch as He is
the Head of the Church, and the Author of human salvation, as the
Scripture says, and the saints can merit the first grace for another
only congruously."[1969]
Moreover, St. Thomas makes known more explicitly his mind on this
subject concerning the words of the Apostle: "I fill up those things
that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ."[1970] He says:
"These words, taken literally, could be interpreted in a wrong
sense, as meaning that Christ's passion was not sufficient for our
redemption, but that the sufferings of the saints were added as
complementary. But this view is heretical, because Christ's blood
is sufficient for the redemption even of many worlds.... These
words, however, must be understood as meaning that Christ and the
Church constitute one mystical person, whose head is Christ, and all
the just are the body; any just person is, so to speak, a member of
this head.... However, God ordained and predestined how much
merit there must be in the whole Church both in the head and in the
members, just as He predestined the number of the elect. Among these
merits the sufferings of the holy martyrs are especially included. The
merits of Christ, the Head, are infinite; but each saint
contributes proportionately his or her share of merits.... Thus
also all the saints suffer for the Church, which is fortified by their
example."[1971]
Hence Christ alone is the Redeemer. Nevertheless the Blessed
Virgin Mary, as explained in Mariology, can truly be called the
co-Redemptress, though subordinate to Christ. As Pius X said:
"The Blessed Virgin Mary was admitted with Christ and by Christ
to cooperate in the salvation of the human race, congruously as they
say, to merit for us, what Christ condignly merited."[1972]
Likewise, along with Him, she satisfied congruously, for Benedict
XV says: "As she suffered with her Son in His passion and, so to
speak, shared in His death, so she abdicated her maternal rights over
her Son for the salvation of men and, as far as it was in her power,
sacrificed her Son for the appeasement of divine justice, so that it
can properly be said, that along with Christ she redeemed the human
race."[1973]
In this sense the Blessed Virgin Mary cooperated in the acquisition
of graces that flow from the sacrifice on the cross. The other
saints, however, do not cooperate in the acquisition, but in the
application of the fruits of the Passion.[1974] Finally, since
the merits of Christ are infinite and those of the saints are finite,
it can be said that the sufferings of the saints add something that is
not intensively, but only extensively finite, as when we say that God
and the creature do not make more of being than God alone, for after
creation there are more beings, but only extensively more of being.
Therefore only Christ is absolutely the Redeemer of the human race.
|
|
