|
Objection 1: It would seem that Christ Himself was not both priest
and victim. For it is the duty of the priest to slay the victim. But
Christ did not kill Himself. Therefore He was not both priest and
victim.
Objection 2: Further, the priesthood of Christ has a greater
similarity to the Jewish priesthood, instituted by God, than to the
priesthood of the Gentiles, by which the demons were worshiped. Now
in the old Law man was never offered up in sacrifice: whereas this was
very much to be reprehended in the sacrifices of the Gentiles,
according to Ps. 105:38: "They shed innocent blood; the
blood of their sons and of their daughters, which they sacrificed to
the idols of Chanaan." Therefore in Christ's priesthood the Man
Christ should not have been the victim.
Objection 3: Further, every victim, through being offered to
God, is consecrated to God. But the humanity of Christ was from
the beginning consecrated and united to God. Therefore it cannot be
said fittingly that Christ as man was a victim.
On the contrary, The Apostle says (Eph. 5:2): "Christ hath
loved us, and hath delivered Himself for us, an oblation and a victim
to God for an odor of sweetness."
I answer that, As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x, 5):
"Every visible sacrifice is a sacrament, that is a sacred sign, of
the invisible sacrifice." Now the invisible sacrifice is that by
which a man offers his spirit to God, according to Ps. 50:19:
"A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit." Wherefore, whatever
is offered to God in order to raise man's spirit to Him, may be
called a sacrifice.
Now man is required to offer sacrifice for three reasons. First, for
the remission of sin, by which he is turned away from God. Hence the
Apostle says (Heb. 5:1) that it appertains to the priest "to
offer gifts and sacrifices for sins." Secondly, that man may be
preserved in a state of grace, by ever adhering to God, wherein his
peace and salvation consist. Wherefore under the old Law the
sacrifice of peace-offerings was offered up for the salvation of the
offerers, as is prescribed in the third chapter of Leviticus.
Thirdly, in order that the spirit of man be perfectly united to God:
which will be most perfectly realized in glory. Hence, under the Old
Law, the holocaust was offered, so called because the victim was
wholly burnt, as we read in the first chapter of Leviticus.
Now these effects were conferred on us by the humanity of Christ.
For, in the first place, our sins were blotted out, according to
Rm. 4:25: "Who was delivered up for our sins." Secondly,
through Him we received the grace of salvation, according to Heb.
5:9: "He became to all that obey Him the cause of eternal
salvation." Thirdly, through Him we have acquired the perfection of
glory, according to Heb. 10:19: "We have a confidence in the
entering into the Holies" (i.e. the heavenly glory) "through His
Blood." Therefore Christ Himself, as man, was not only priest,
but also a perfect victim, being at the same time victim for sin,
victim for a peace-offering, and a holocaust.
Reply to Objection 1: Christ did not slay Himself, but of His
own free-will He exposed Himself to death, according to Is.
53:7: "He was offered because it was His own will." Thus He
is said to have offered Himself.
Reply to Objection 2: The slaying of the Man Christ may be
referred to a twofold will. First, to the will of those who slew
Him: and in this respect He was not a victim: for the slayers of
Christ are not accounted as offering a sacrifice to God, but as
guilty of a great crime: a similitude of which was borne by the wicked
sacrifices of the Gentiles, in which they offered up men to idols.
Secondly, the slaying of Christ may be considered in reference to the
will of the Sufferer, Who freely offered Himself to suffering. In
this respect He is a victim, and in this He differs from the
sacrifices of the Gentiles.
Reply to Objection 3: The fact that Christ's manhood was holy
from its beginning does not prevent that same manhood, when it was
offered to God in the Passion, being sanctified in a new
way---namely, as a victim actually offered then. For it acquired
then the actual holiness of a victim, from the charity which it had
from the beginning, and from the grace of union sanctifying it
absolutely.
|
|