|
Objection 1: It would seem that there was no other possible way of
human deliverance besides Christ's Passion. For our Lord says
(Jn. 12:24): "Amen, amen I say to you, unless the grain
of wheat falling into the ground dieth, itself remaineth alone; but if
it die, it bringeth forth much fruit." Upon this St. Augustine
(Tract. li) observes that "Christ called Himself the seed."
Consequently, unless He suffered death, He would not otherwise have
produced the fruit of our redemption.
Objection 2: Further, our Lord addresses the Father (Mt.
26:42): "My Father, if this chalice may not pass away but I
must drink it, Thy will be done." But He spoke there of the
chalice of the Passion. Therefore Christ's Passion could not pass
away; hence Hilary says (Comm. 31 in Matth.): "Therefore
the chalice cannot pass except He drink of it, because we cannot be
restored except through His Passion."
Objection 3: Further, God's justice required that Christ should
satisfy by the Passion in order that man might be delivered from sin.
But Christ cannot let His justice pass; for it is written (2
Tim. 2:13): "If we believe not, He continueth faithful, He
cannot deny Himself." But He would deny Himself were He to deny
His justice, since He is justice itself. It seems impossible,
then, for man to be delivered otherwise than by Christ's Passion.
Objection 4: Further, there can be no falsehood underlying faith.
But the Fathers of old believed that Christ would suffer.
Consequently, it seems that it had to be that Christ should suffer.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Trin. xiii): "We assert
that the way whereby God deigned to deliver us by the man Jesus
Christ, who is mediator between God and man, is both good and
befitting the Divine dignity; but let us also show that other possible
means were not lacking on God's part, to whose power all things are
equally subordinate."
I answer that, A thing may be said to be possible or impossible in
two ways: first of all, simply and absolutely; or secondly, from
supposition. Therefore, speaking simply and absolutely, it was
possible for God to deliver mankind otherwise than by the Passion of
Christ, because "no word shall be impossible with God" (Lk.
1:37). Yet it was impossible if some supposition be made. For
since it is impossible for God's foreknowledge to be deceived and His
will or ordinance to be frustrated, then, supposing God's
foreknowledge and ordinance regarding Christ's Passion, it was not
possible at the same time for Christ not to suffer, and for mankind to
be delivered otherwise than by Christ's Passion. And the same holds
good of all things foreknown and preordained by God, as was laid down
in the FP, Question 14, Article 13.
Reply to Objection 1: Our Lord is speaking there presupposing
God's foreknowledge and predetermination, according to which it was
resolved that the fruit of man's salvation should not follow unless
Christ suffered.
Reply to Objection 2: In the same way we must understand what is
here objected to in the second instance: "If this chalice may not
pass away but I must drink of it"---that is to say, because Thou
hast so ordained it---hence He adds: "Thy will be done."
Reply to Objection 3: Even this justice depends on the Divine
will, requiring satisfaction for sin from the human race. But if He
had willed to free man from sin without any satisfaction, He would not
have acted against justice. For a judge, while preserving justice,
cannot pardon fault without penalty, if he must visit fault committed
against another---for instance, against another man, or against the
State, or any Prince in higher authority. But God has no one
higher than Himself, for He is the sovereign and common good of the
whole universe. Consequently, if He forgive sin, which has the
formality of fault in that it is committed against Himself, He wrongs
no one: just as anyone else, overlooking a personal trespass, without
satisfaction, acts mercifully and not unjustly. And so David
exclaimed when he sought mercy: "To Thee only have I sinned"
(Ps. 50:6), as if to say: "Thou canst pardon me without
injustice."
Reply to Objection 4: Human faith, and even the Divine
Scriptures upon which faith is based, are both based on the Divine
foreknowledge and ordinance. And the same reason holds good of that
necessity which comes of supposition, and of the necessity which arises
of the Divine foreknowledge and will.
|
|