Part I Chapter I §1: Christ's Mediatorship and the Possibility of the Redemption

Part I: The Work of Redemption

Chapter I: Christ’s Mediatorship as a Condition of Our Redemption

§1: The Possibility of the Redemption

PART I THE WORK OF REDEMPTION PREFATORY REMARKS The Redemption could not have been effected by a mediator who was either mere God or mere man. It required one who was both God and man. Christ, alone, being both God and man, was in a position to act as natural and moral mediator and to reconcile the human race to its Creator. We have shown in a previous treatise that Christology 1 is founded on the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union. Similarly, Soteriology turns on the pivotal concept of the mediatorship of Christ and may be said to be implicitly contained in 2 Cor. V, 19: God indeed was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself. We have, therefore, to consider: (Ch. I), the mediatorship of Christ, the possibility of the Redemption, its congruity arid necessity, and, by way of a corollary, the highly interesting question whether or not the Incarnation was absolutely l Pohle-Preuss, Christology, A Dogmatic Treatise on the Incarnation, St. Louis 1913. x 3 preordained; (Ch. II), the fact of the Redemption, its reality, its properties, and the concrete mode of its realization. In connection with the last-mentioned point we shall also treat (Ch. Ill) of Christ’s Descent into hell and His Resurrection from the soteriological point of view. CHAPTER I Christ’s mediatorship as a condition of our redemption , SECTION i THE POSSIBILITY OF THE REDEMPTION I. Definition of the Term “Mediator.” — A mediator (mediator, j*™^) is one who holds a neutral position between parties at variance, and is therefore apt to interpose between them as the equal friend of each. a) Thus, in the political domain, a neutral government sometimes intervenes between quarrelling powers by proffering its friendly offices as arbitrator. The notion of a mediator, therefore, comprises two distinct elements, viz.: (i) The existence of two extremes in contrary opposition, and (2) a quality or characteristic proper to him who interposes, which enables him to reconcile the parties at variance. This is the true Catholic notion of mediatorship. There is also an heretical one, which appears in the religious 5 , 6 THE WORK OF REDEMPTION systems of the Gnostics and the Arians. To exalt the Creator of the universe as far as possible above mere matter, which they regarded as intrinsically evil, the Gnostics invented a series of ” intermediate beings/* which they called aeons, and which were supposed to bridge the gap between the Godhead and the material world. The last of these in a descending line was the so-called Demiurge, who as creator of the material universe was believed to be the proper mediator between the absolute Being and the physical cosmos.2 The Arians regarded the Logos as the most exalted of creatures and as creator of all the rest, and ascribed to him the office of mediator between God the Father and the universe created by the Logos. We have already disproved this error by showing, in our treatises on the Divine Trinity 8 and the Incarnation,4 that, so far from being a creature, the Logos is true God, consubstantial (6/aoovcnos) with the Father. b) A duly qualified mediator may exercise his functions either in the moral or in the ontological order.5 In some manner or other moral always presupposes ontological mediation, and hence the one cannot be conceived apart from the other. To perform the part of a moral mediator one must be able, either by one’s natural powers, or through the instrumentality of grace, to reconcile opposing extremes in the order of being. Hence the distinction between 2 For a refutation of this dualistic Trinity, 2nd ed., pp. 49 sqq., St error see Pohle-Preuss, God the Au- Louis 191 5. thor of Nature and the Supernatural, 4 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, Christology, 2nd ed., pp. 17 sq., St Louis 1915* and ed., pp. 10 sqq., St Louis 1916. 3 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Divine 5 In ordine morali sive ethico; in or dine ontologico sive essendi.

mediator naturalis and mediator per gratiam. Moses,9 the Levites, the Prophets, and the Apostles were mediators by grace. So is every Catholic priest in virtue of his ordination. As regards natural mediatorship, Christ is our only Mediator in the moral order, because He is the sole natural Mediator between God and man. ” The fact of Christ’s existence is in itself a mediation, a bond between the Creator and His creatures. By uniting our humanity to His Divinity, He united us to God and God to us. He is of God and in God, but He is also of us and in us.”7 Being consubstantial with man as well as with God,8 Christ is the born mediator between God and man (mediator naturalis). This unique natural mediatorship constitutes the foundation of an equally unique moral mediatorship. The offended Deity exacted adequate atonement for the sins of mankind, and therefore redemption or moral mediation was impossible except on the basis of a natural mediatorship.9 c) It follows, by way of a corollary, (i) that mankind has but one mediator, because there is no natural mediator between God and man other than the Godman Jesus Christ; (2) that all other so-called “mediators” are such merely by grace. They owe their mediatorial power solely and entirely to Christ, and can consequently be called mediators only in a subordinate and secondary sense. eCfr. Deut. V, 5: ” Medius fui Catholic Theology, Vol. II, p. 140, inter Dominum et vos — I stood 2nd ed., London 1901. between the Lord and you.” 8 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, Christology. T Wilhelm-Scannell, A Manual of 9 V. infra, Sect. 2. No further argument is required to disprove the Protestant objection that Catholics obscure and degrade the unique mediatorship of Christ by admitting a host of priests and saints as co-mediators between God and man. ” It is an essential function of the office of a mediator,” says Aquinas, “to join together and unite those between whom he is to interpose; for it is in the middle that extremes meet. Now, to unite men with God perfectively belongs to Christ, through whom men are reconciled to God… . And therefore Christ alone is a perfect mediator between God and men, inasmuch as, by His death, He reconciled the human race to God… . There is, however, nothing to forbid others from being called mediators between God and men under a certain respect (secundum quid), in so far, namely, as they cooperate in uniting men with ,God, either by disposing them for such a union (dispositive), or by assisting them in the process of unification (ministerialiter) ” 10 2. The Dogma. — Theologically speaking, Mediation is synonymous with Redemption. That Christ was our natural Mediator is an article of faith, defined by the Council of Trent. “Si quis hoc Adae peccatum [originale] … per aliud remedium asserit tolli quam per meritukt unius mediatoris Domini nostri Iesu Christi, qui nos 10” Ad ptediatoris officium proprie pertinet coniungere et unire eos, inter quos est mediator; nam extrema uniuntur in medio. Unire autem homines Deo perfective quidem convenit Christo, per quern homines sunt reconciliati Deo… . Et ideo solus Christus est perfectus Dei et hominum mediator, inquantum per suam mortem humanum genus Deo reconciliavit Nihil tamen prohibet aliquos alios secundum quid did mediatores inter Deum et homines, prout scil. cooperantur ad unionem hominum cum Deo dispositive vel ministerialiter.” S. Theol., 3a, qu. 26, art. i. — Cfr. Franzclin, De Verbo Incarnato, thes. 46, Rome 1 881. Deo reconciliavit in sanguine suo … anathema sit/9 Anglice : ” If any one asserts that this sin of Adam [original sin], … is taken away … by any other remedy than the merit of the one Mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath reconciled us to God in His own blood, … let him be anathema.” 11 a) Moral mediation, or the Redemption . , proper, according to Holy Scripture, consists in the shedding of the blood of liim who was the sole, because the natural, Mediator between God and man. Consequently, Christ’s moral mediatorship is based upon His natural mediatorship. Cfr. Col. I, 19 sq. : “Quia in ipso [scil. Christ 0] complacuit omnem plenitudinem inhabitare [ = mediatio ontologica naturalis] et per eum reconciliare omnia in ipsum paciUcans per sanguinem crucis eius [= mediatio moralis] — Because in him it hath well pleased the Father, that all fulness should dwell; and through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross.” 12 Both the ontological and the moral mediatorship of Christ are pregnantly summed up by St. Paul in I Tim. II, 5 sq. : ” Unus enim Deus, unus 11 Cone. Trid., Sess. V, can. 3 12 For a full explanation of this (in Denzinger’s Enchiridion Sym- text cfr. J. N. Schneider, Die Verbolorum, Definitionum et Declara- sdhnung des Weltalls durch das Blut tionum in Rebus Fidei et Morum, Jesu Christi nach KoL I, go, Rati* ed. Bannwart, n. 790, Friburgi bon 1857. xoo8). io THE WORK OF REDEMPTION et mediator Dei et hominum™ homo Christus Iesus, qui dedit redemptionem semetipsum pro omnibus 14 — For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a redemption for all.” The Redemption of the human race began with the conception of Jesus Christ and was consummated in the shedding of His precious Blood on the Cross.15 Hence the functions of His moral mediatorship comprise all His human-divine (theandric) acts from the manger to Calvary. His mediatorial act par excellence was the institution of the New Covenant. ” Et ideo Novi Testamenti mediator19 est, ut morte intercedente in redemptionem earum praevaricationum, quae erant sub priori Testamento, repromissionem accipiant — And therefore he is the mediator of the New Testament : that by means of his death, for the redemption of those transgressions which were under the former testament, they that are called may receive the promise of eternal inheritance.” 17 In fact everything that Christ did and does for us must be regarded as the result of His mediatorship, e. g., the institution of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the establishment of His Church, the mission of the Holy Ghost, the sanctification of souls,18 etc. b) We meet with a profound conception of Christ’s mediatorship in the writings of St. Augustine. This Father may be said to have anticipated the objections of such later heretics as 18 elf Kal fiefftrrjs OeoO koI ™ Cfr. Heb. X, 5 sqq. dpOptoirwp. 10 diadriKTfs Koivijs ficalrris. 1*6 dobs iavrbr dprCkvrpop Mp it Heb. IX, 15. w&ptwp. 18 Cfr. John XIV, 6. CHRIST OUR MEDIATOR II Calvin, who held that Christ is our mediator onlyaccording to His Divinity, and the older Lutheran theologians, who attributed His mediatorial action exclusively to His human nature.19 The truth lies between these extremes. It is the Godman as such who is our Mediator, but only in His human nature. ” He is the mediator between God and man,” says St. Augustine, ” because He is God with the Father, and a man with men. A mere man could not be a mediator between God and man ; nor could a mere God. Behold the mediator : Divinity without humanity cannot act as mediator; nor can humanity without Divinity ; but the human Divinity and the Divine humanity of Christ is the sole mediator between Divinity and humanity.” 20 And again : ” Christ is the mediator [between God and man] not because He is the Word ; for the Word, being immortal and happy in the highest degree, is far removed from the miseries of mortal men; but He is the mediator as man.” 21 c) The Schoolmen went into the matter even more deeply by resolving the concept of mediation into its constituent elements. 19 Cfr. Bellarmine, De Christo, V, I-IO. 20 ” Mediator Dei et hominum, quia Deus cum Patre, quia homo cum hominibus. Non mediator homo praeter deitatem, non mediator Deus Praeter humanitatem, Ecce mediator: divinitas sine humanitate non est mediatrix, humanitas sine divinitate non est mediatrix, sed inter divinitatem solam et humanitatem solam mediatrix est humana divinitas et divina humanitas Christi” Serm., 47, c. i2, n. 21. 21 ” Non ob hoc mediator est Chris tus, quia Verbum; maxime quippe immortale et maxime beatum Verbum longe est a mortalibufi miseriis; sed mediator est secundum quod homo” De Civ. Dei, IX, 15. For additional Patristic texts see Petavius, De Incarn., XII, 1-4; Vasquez, Comment, in S, TheoL, III, disp. 83, c. x. They had to meet this logical difficulty: The idea of natural mediation essentially implies three distinct elements, viz.: the two extremes God and man, and a mediator who must be both God and man, i. e., Godman (OedvOpuno?) . Christ, being God according to His Divine Nature, is identical with the first of these two extremes. Consequently, He cannot be a true and natural mediator, for it is impossible to conceive Him as a go-between between Himself and man. Cfr. Gal. Ill, 20: “A mediator is not of one.” The Scholastics retorted that Christ is the mediator between God and man not qua Logos, but qua Word Incarnate, i. e. as man. Cfr. 1 Tim. II, 5 : ” One mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” The God man Christ Jesus is not only numerically distinct from all other men, He is likewise hypostatically distinct from the Father and the Holy Ghost, being a different Person than either. Hence His mediatorship involves three distinct factors: God, man, and Christ. It is true that, regarded in His Divine Nature, as God, Christ is the mediator between Himself and mankind. But his mediation is not effected by the Godhead as such, it is effected solely by His manhood, which is hypostatically united with the Second Person of the Trinity. This gives rise to seeming paradoxes, e. g.: As man He adores, as God He is adored; as man He gives satisfaction, as God he receives it; as man He offers sacrifices, as God He accepts them. But this two-sidedness does not destroy the reality of Christ’s natural and moral mediation. It simply constitutes its substratum. To postulate a numerical distinction between the Divine Nature of Christ and the Godhead of the Father and the Holy Ghost, would be to base the possibility of the atonement on Tritheism.22 22 Cfr. St. Thomas, S. Theol., 3a, qu. 26, art. 2.