Chapter 16: The Mission of Christ

1. Introduction
   • Christianity and Human History Interlinked
     • The moment that St. Paul refers to as the “fullness of time” has been “dated for us with some precision” by St. Luke. He dates it in reference to the political events of the Roman Empire, whose history was destined to be linked to Christ’s kingdom (231-2).
       • “In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, each to his own city” (Lk 2:1-3).
     • Caesar Augustus, first Emperor of the Roman Empire, ruled from 27 BC until his death in 14 AD (231-2).
       • He is largely responsible for the “Pax Romana” (ca. 27 BC to 180 AD), which, in turn, made travel throughout the Empire relatively easy during the Apostolic Age.
2. The Incarnation
   • Background: The Davidic Ancestry of Jesus
     • “Joseph, a carpenter, ‘a man of David’s clan’” (231-3).
       • “And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child” (Lk 2:4-5).
     • “Mary, also of David’s line” (231-3).
       • Scripture implies that Mary also descended from David, if the following verses are to be taken literally, since Jesus did not descend from Joseph, according to the flesh.
         • “The LORD swore to David a sure oath from which he will not turn back: ‘One of the sons of your body I will set on your throne’” (Ps 132:11)
         • “[I was set apart for] the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh” (Rom 1:3).
   • Preparation of the Virgin Mary
     • “For [the Virgin Mary’s role as Mother of God], the highest function to which any human person had ever been called, God had prepared Mary most exquisitely,” and this by her Immaculate Conception and its attendant fullness of grace (231-4).
     • The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary tells us that “from the moment that she was conceived, sanctifying grace was, by the power of the Blessed Trinity, in her soul; thus she was never stained by the sin at man’s origin,” and throughout her life she was “preserved from all personal sin” (232-1).
       • “To become the mother of the Savior, Mary ‘was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role.’ . . . In order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God’s grace” (CCC 490).
   • The Virgin Mary and the Annunciation of the Lord
     • The Virgin Mary was betrothed to Joseph at the time of the annunciation, which took place when Elizabeth was in her sixth month:
       • “In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary” (Lk 1:26-27).
       • “Betrothal in ancient Judaism was unlike modern-day engagements. It was a temporary period (up to one year) between the covenant of marriage itself and the time when spouses lived together. Because couples were legally married during this intervening phase, a betrothal could be terminated only by death or divorce (Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament, hereafter ICSB, commentary on Mt 1:18, p. 8).
       • A word study on the proper translation of “aras” (Hebrew) and “mnesteuo” (Greek), the words that are sometimes translated as “betrothed” and sometimes translated as “engaged” shows that there is no support in Scripture for the idea that Joseph and Mary were not married at the time of the Annunciation. The word study can be found at the link below:
         • https://dicklandkamer.wordpress.com/betrothal-in-scripture/
       • Note that the entire pregnancy of Mary apparently took place within the time of betrothal.
         • “Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. And while they were there, the time came for her to be delivered” (Lk 2:4-5).
     • Mary is given a name by the angel: “Full of Grace” (232-2):
       • “And he came to her and said, ‘Hail, full of grace [or ‘O favored one’], the Lord is with you!’” (Lk 1:28).
         • Other ancient authorities add “Blessed are you among women!”
         • “This is the only biblical instance where an angel addresses someone by a title instead of a personal name” (ICSB, p. 105).
           • “In the angel’s greeting to Mary, we find ‘gratia plena’, full of grace, where we would expect to find her name. John Paul II says of this: ‘The messenger greets Mary as “full of grace”; he calls her thus as if it were her real name” (John Paul II, “Theotokos,” p. 8).
         • “The expression ‘full of grace’ . . . Although fundamentally accurate . . . lacks some of the depth of the Greek original . . . [which] is even more revealing than the traditional rendering. It indicates that God has already ‘graced’ Mary previous to this point, making her a vessel who ‘has been’ and ‘is now’ filled with divine life” (see ICSB, p. 105).
     • The angel’s message reveals the Divine Maternity and the Messiah’s dual nature (232-3):
       • “And the angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High [reference to His divine nature]; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David [reference to His human nature], and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Lk 1:30-33).
     • Mary’s initial response expresses a concern about her vowed virginity (232-4):
       • “How shall this be, since I do not know man?” (Lk 1:34).
         • “This is sometimes translated, “How shall this be, since I do not have a husband?”, but this is a paraphrase of the literal Greek, “I do not know man” (ICSB), and it contradicts the fact they are betrothed in verse 27. Properly translated, the verse “refers to Mary’s virginal status rather than her marital status. Her concern is not that she is unmarried but that she is a virgin at present and that she intends to remain one in the future. . . . [The angel’s message] causes Mary to wonder aloud how God will bless her with a son and yet preserve her virginal purity. Her words are inexplicable otherwise. For nothing about the angel’s announcement should have perplexed Mary – whose betrothal to Joseph was already a legally binding marriage – unless she intended to forego ordinary sexual relations even as a married woman” (Ibid).
       • Note that the Virgin Mary’s vow of virginity had to be known to Joseph before they were betrothed, for she could not validly enter into marriage without his knowledge of her vow. Withholding that information would violate the moral law, as stated by St. Paul:
         • “The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband” (1 Cor 7:3).
         • “It may be presumed that at the time of their betrothal there was an understanding between Joseph and Mary about the plan to live as a virgin. Moreover, the Holy Spirit, who had inspired Mary to choose virginity in view of the mystery of the Incarnation and who wanted the latter to come about in a family setting suited to the child’s growth, was quite able to instill in Joseph the ideal of virginity as well” John Paul II, “Theotokos,” 127).
     • The angel answers Mary’s concern with the first revelation of the Blessed Trinity:
       • “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God” (Lk 1:35).
         • “It is precisely in the scene of the Annunciation that the angel’s threefold speech is the first explicit mention of the three hypostases [persons] of the Godhead” (von Balthasar, “Mary: The Church at the Source,” 154).
         • “The most correct reading of this text is: ‘he who will be born holy will be called Son of God’: in this translation the adjective “holy” qualifies the ‘birth.’ Being ‘born holy’ implies the absence of contamination and, more specifically, the contamination through bleeding, which made a woman unclean [according to the Mosaic Law]. Therefore, when the angel says, ‘He will be born holy,’ he is saying the childbirth will be virginal” (Juan Bastero, “Mary, Mother of the Redeemer,” 170).
         • “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Is 7:14).
           • Grammatically, this verse indicates the virgin shall conceive, the virgin shall bear, and the virgin shall call His name.
   • The Incarnation and a Concern of Joseph
     • Scripture indicates that, for whatever reason, Mary did not share the angel’s revelation with Joseph prior to visiting her cousin Elizabeth. She would eventually have to share it with Joseph, but it is standard procedure among the saints not to share such private revelations.
     • Upon visiting her cousin Elizabeth, the private revelation was made public by Elizabeth at the prompting of the Holy Spirit. Accordingly, the revelation was confirmed (not that Mary needed the confirmation) and the fact of the Incarnation was made known to Mary (the angel did not tell Mary when the child would be conceived). At this point, there is no obstacle to telling Joseph of the revelation.
       • “Why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Lk 1:43).
     • Some three months after Jesus is conceived, Joseph learns of the fact and he is troubled by what he learns (232-6), but there is a question about what exactly troubles him:
       • There are three schools of thought (see ICSB for additional information):
         • The suspicion theory: Joseph suspected Mary of adultery (St. John Chrysostom (d. 407) and St. Augustine (d. 430) are proponents).
         • The perplexity theory: Joseph found the situation to be inexplicable, being unable to believe that Mary had been unfaithful (St. Jerome (d. 420) is the main proponent).
         • The reverence theory: Joseph knew the miraculous cause from the beginning, and considering himself to be unworthy of involvement in such a great event, he decided to step away from the situation (St. Bernard of Clairvaux (d. 1153) and St. Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274) are proponents). This view has a parallel, of sorts, in Luke’s Gospel:
           • “But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, ‘Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.’ For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at the catch of fish which they had taken” (Lk 5:8-9).
     • She was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit:
       • “Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit; and her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly” (Mt 1:18-19).
     • In St. Thomas Aquinas’ great commentary on the Gospels, the “Catena Aurea,” we find three strong arguments against the idea of Joseph thinking his espoused was an adulteress. Commenting on Matthew 1:18-19:
       • “But how is Joseph thus called just, when he is ready to hide his wife’s sin? For the Law enacts, that not only the doers of evil, but [also] they who are privy to any evil done, shall be held to be guilty” (St. Jerome, quoted in “Catena Aurea,” vol. I, 45).
       • “He beheld her to be with child, whom he knew to be chaste; and because he had read . . . “Behold, a virgin shall conceive,” [Is 7:14] he did not doubt that this prophecy should be fulfilled in her” (Rabanus Maurus, quoted in “Catena Aurea,” vol. I, 46).
       • “He sought to put her away, because he saw in her a great sacrament, to approach which he thought himself unworthy” (Origen, quoted in “Catena Aurea,” vol. I, 46).
     • Note that she was not merely found to be “with child,” but “with child of the Holy Spirit.” This means that the finding had to be from hearing not seeing, for no one could see that she was with child of the Holy Spirit.
     • Since Mary would be the only source of this information, it follows that as soon as she returned to Nazareth, she told Joseph that the Messiah had been conceived in her womb by the power of the Holy Spirit.
       • St. Basil of Caesarea, Father and Doctor of the Church: “‘Before they came to live together, she was found with child by the working of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:18). Joseph found both things: both the conception and its cause, namely, the intervention of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, fearing to be called the husband of such a woman, he ‘wanted to send her away quietly’ (Mt 1:19), not daring to make public what had happened to her” (Luigi Gambero, “Mary and the Fathers of the Church,” 150).
     • An angel relieved Joseph of his concern, assuring him that he was involved in the plan:
       • “But as he considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, ‘Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit; she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins’” (Mt 1:20-21).
   • The Presentation of the Lord
     • Jesus is born in Bethlehem, and forty days later, He is “redeemed” (232-7).
       • “And when the time came for their purification according to the law of Moses, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, ‘Every male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord’) and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the law of the Lord, ‘a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons’” (Lk 2:22-24).
         • “All the first-born of your sons you shall redeem” (Ex 34:20).
         • “And if she cannot afford a lamb, then she shall take two turtledoves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for her, and she shall be clean” (Lev 12:8).
     • At the time of the Presentation, Simeon refers to Jesus as “a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to thy people Israel” (Lk 2:32), which indicates, once again, that the kingdom was intended for both Jew and Gentile (233-1).
   • The Hidden Life of Jesus
     • We know nothing of Jesus’ first thirty years other than what we learn in the Nativity accounts and the “curious episode” of the finding of Jesus in the Temple when He was twelve (Lk 2:41ff, 233-1, 321-1, 322-1).
     • The time of Jesus’ hidden life is completed during the time of John the Baptist’s ministry (233-2).
   • The Beginning of Jesus’ Public Ministry
     • The date of the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry is captured with respect to Roman Law and Jewish Law:
       • “In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness” (Lk 3:1-2).
       • “In those days [that saw the advent of John’s baptizing] came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’” (Mt 3:1-2).
       • “In those days [days of John’ baptizing] Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan” (Mk 1:9).
       • After Jesus returned from His forty days in the desert, John saw Him and exclaimed, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn 1:29).
       • “Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel’” (Mk 1:14-15).
     • Note the continuity between John and Jesus that is highlighted by the theme of repentance in Matthew’s Gospel:
       • “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Mt 3:2).
       • “From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Mt 4:17).
3. What Christ Came to Do
   • As Told by the Angel Gabriel
     • To Mary: Savior and everlasting ruler (233-3)
       • “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus [i.e., savior; lit. “God saves”]. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob [i.e., ruler] forever; and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Lk 1:31-33).
     • To Joseph, further precision of “savior”
       • “She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Mt 1:21).
   • As Told by John the Baptist
     • The savior would be offered in sacrifice for the sin of Adam as well as all other sins (234-1, 2).
       • “The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, ‘Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!’” (Jn 1:29).
     • John gives us “the hint that he will be offered in sacrifice” (234-2) when he calls Jesus the “Lamb of God.”
       • This is a clear prophecy in hindsight, but it could only be a hint to the people who first heard it. We have seen that this is the case with most prophecies regarding Jesus (see 220-3).
       • “Sin of the world” can be understood as a collective noun meaning all of the world’s sins, or it can refer to a specific sin, the sin of Adam. The Church Fathers understand it both ways. Later in the chapter (see 239-1), Sheed uses it in the latter sense.
   • Jesus’ General Statements about the Result of His Coming
     • Some of Jesus’ sayings speak of the certain result result of His coming:
       • “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law” (Mt 10:34-35).
       • “Jesus said, ‘For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind’” (Jn 9:39).
       • “I came to cast fire upon the earth; and would that it were already kindled!” (Lk 12:49).
         • At Pentecost, “there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them” (Acts 2:3).
   • Jesus’ Direct Statements about the Purpose of His Coming:
     • Our primary focus here is with His statements on the purpose of His coming. Note that in all of these sayings, we have nothing new. Rather, we have a development of the prophecies that preceded the Incarnation (235-7).
       • To Zacchaeus: “The Son of man came to seek and to save the lost” (Lk 19:10).
       • To Nicodemus: “The Son of man [must] be lifted up [so] that whoever believes in him may have eternal life” (Jn 3:15).
         • “So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live” (Num 21:9).
       • To Nicodemus: “God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him” (Jn 3:17).
       • To Pilate: “For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth” (Jn 18:37).
       • To the Pharisees: “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Lk 5:32).
       • To the Apostles: “He called the twelve together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to preach the kingdom of God and to heal” (Lk 9:1-2).
         • In other words, He came to send others to preach and heal.
       • To the Apostles when they were upset by the aspirations of James and John: “The Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28).
       • To the Pharisees: “I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (Jn 10:10).
     • Thus, He came to save a lost world from sin, to found a Kingdom, to give His life as ransom for many, to assert truth (i.e., the reality of things), to give us abundant life, life everlasting, eternal life in union with God (235-7).
   • St. Paul’s Analysis of the Purpose of Jesus’ Mission
     • “[St. Paul] analyzed more fully and closely than any others what Our Lord came to do” (235-8).
       • Note that in the case of St. Paul, it may have been more a matter of revelation than analysis:
         • “For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal 1:11-12; also see 1 Cor 11:23, 1 Cor 15:3).
     • Paul used many different words to express the work of Jesus because “what He did was as many-sided as the damage we received from Adam . . . and one word or another is more appropriate according to which particular effect [of His work] . . . Paul has in mind” (236-1).
     • His analysis hinges repeatedly on three words: redemption (ransom), reconciliation, justification (236-1).
       • Redemption – to buy back, to pay a price for something lost, ransom (236-1)
         • “In [Him] we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Col 1:14).
       • Reconciliation (of the human race) – restoring broken relationships; reconciliation is at the heart of at-one-ment (236-1; this refers to the original meaning of atonement, not its more common meaning of expiation – see 198-2).
         • “We were reconciled to God through the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10).
           • Also see 2 Cor 5:18-20 where there are four references in three verses!
         • Reconciliation gives us a new relationship, making us children of God by adoption (237-1):
           • “The spirit you have now received is not, as of old, a spirit of slavery, to govern you by fear; it is the spirit of adoption, which makes us cry out, Abba, Father” (Rom 8:15).
       • Justification (the application of reconciliation to the individual) – the natural and supernatural rightness which God designed for us; man’s right relationship to God; it expresses the result of reconciliation and, for this reason, justification implies reconciliation (236-1).
         • The living element in justification is that of being adopted children of God (237-1).
           • “We are now justified by his blood” (Rom 5:9).
           • “For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the spirit of sonship. Whereby we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’” (Rom 8:15).
       • The “three-in-one” verse Sheed references (Rom 3:24) is from the Knox translation (based on the Vulgate) (236-5).
         • “And justification comes to us as a free gift from his grace, through our redemption in Christ Jesus. God has offered him to us as a means of reconciliation, in virtue of faith, ransoming us with his blood” (Rom 3:24).
     • If we know only these few things about redemption, reconciliation, and justification, we can easily see that the world, with its urgent need of profound healing, finds its only hope for that healing in Jesus Christ (237-2).
     • “There are depths below depths of understanding possible, and theology can open them to us. There is immense gain of every sort in seeing the detail of the relation between men’s need and Christ’s work. For our special purpose in this study – to get some understanding of what life is about – it [i.e., theology] is indispensable” (237-2).
   • The Catechism of the Catholic Church and Jesus’ Mission
     • “The Word became flesh to make us ‘partakers of the divine nature’ (2 Pt 1:4): ‘For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.’ (St. Irenaeus). ‘For the Son of God became man so that we might become God’ (St. Athanasius). ‘The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods’ (St. Thomas Aquinas)”81 (CCC 460).
4. How the God-man Could Effect Satisfaction and Restoration
   • The Two-Fold Problem
     • “St. Paul’s words, ‘redeem’ and ‘reconcile’ and ‘justify’ are the fundamental ways of saying what Christ came to do; for they state the ways in which His one single action solved the twofold problem set by the sin of Adam” (237-3).
       • Recall from chapter 14 that honor is measured relative to the dignity of the person who bestows the honor, whereas offense is measured relative to the dignity of the person who received the offense.
     • The twofold problem consisted of (1) the broken relationship between God and man (237-4) and (2) the infinite debt to God’s justice, both of which were incurred by Adam’s sin (237-4).
       • First problem: “The race had lost its oneness with God” and needed to be reconciled to Him or face the condemnation brought on by Adam’s sin (237-4):
         • “One man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men,” (Rom 5:18).
         • Note that Adam’s sin had greater consequences than any sin we can commit, for it created a breach between God and man. Our sins only create a breach between God and ourselves as individuals.
         • The reason for this is that, as we see in the creation account, the entire human race existed in Adam. Eve was taken from Adam, and all future human beings would be their biological offspring. Because the race was in Adam, when Adam sinned, the race sinned (Gen 2:22; 168-2).
           • “[God] made from one [man] every nation of men to live on all the face of the earth” (Acts 17:26).
       • Second problem: The human race had put itself in an infinite “moral” debt to God’s justice by Adam’s sin, which finite man could not repay (238-1). The result of this debt is that man was in a state of injustice.
         • Now, justice is the condition for holiness (i.e., sanctifying grace – the power to live in heaven). As long as man was in the state of injustice, he could not receive sanctifying grace, and, thus, could not live in heaven even if it were open to him.
   • Ransom: The One Solution to the Two-Fold Problem
     • “There is a real sense of a price paid; something was due from man as a preliminary to restoration, and Christ rendered it for us by His death [i.e., through His Passion which was completed in His death]” (238-1).
       • “Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (Jn 15:13).
       • “For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it [up] again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it [up] again; this charge I have received from my Father” (Jn 10:18).
       • “Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints” (Ps 116:15).
     • Note that it was not Jesus’ physical death itself that paid the price, but the act of charity that accompanied it. That is what “expiated, balanced, [and] compensated for the act by which the race had chosen itself as apart from God” (238-1).
       • “The other virtues are meritorious only as they are commanded by charity” (Garrigou-Lagrange, “Christ the Savior,” ch. 33; also “Reality,” p. 284)
   • The Price of Redemption
     • The “buying back” that is indicated by the word “redeem” should not lead us to think of God as holding us captive” (238-1).
     • Rather, it was sin that held man captive, and the object of redemption was not to take men and women from God but to bind them to Him in a life-giving union” (238-1).
       • “You were bought with a price” (1 Cor 6:20, 7:23).
       • “You were ransomed . . . with the precious blood of Christ” (1 Pt 1:18-19).
5. To Whom the Ransom Was Paid
   • The Devil Was Not the Recipient of the Ransom
     • The Devil sinned in tempting man. Because “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23), the Devil could gain nothing but death from his temptation of Adam and Eve; therefore, the Devil did not own man and could not exchange him for a ransom.
       • He gained dominion over mankind only in the sense that “alcohol can become the lord of a man” (204-2).
         • “The Devil possesses a certain dominion over mankind by reason of Adam’s sin (De fide) (Ott, 121).
         • “Christ designates the Devil as ‘the prince of this world’ (Jn 12:31, 14:30). St. Paul calls him ‘the god of this world’ (2 Cor. 4:4)” (Ott, 121)
         • “Adam . . . incurred . . . captivity under [the Devil’s] power” (Trent, Session V, Decree Concerning Original Sin).
           • http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TRENT5.HTM
       • However, by way of Jesus’ Redeeming act, the Devil lost, in principle, the apparent gain he obtained through Adam’s sin. His dominion will be “completely and finally broken at the General Judgment” (2 Pet 2:4; Jud 6, Ott, 121).
         • “Now shall the prince of the world be cast out” (Jn 12:31).
         • “The Devil who had deceived [the saints] was thrown into the lake of fire and sulphur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever” (Rev 20:10).
   • The Ransom Was Paid to God
     • The punishment assigned to man, as a result of Adam’s sin, was decreed by the just Judge so as to satisfy the demands of divine justice. The just Judge was also the One who suffered the injustice and, thus, the one to whom restitution was due.
       • “Because, with regard to God, redemption was necessary for man’s deliverance, but not with regard to the devil, the price had to be paid not to the devil, but to God” (Summa III, q. 48, a. 5, ad 3).
     • Recall that evil has no being. It is an absence of good. Hence, Adam’s sin deprived the universe of a moral good that was intended to exist, and the context of reality suffered from the absence of that good.
     • Jesus infinite act of charity brought about full restoration of the context of reality.
       • “Christ’s Passion was a sufficient and a superabundant atonement for the sin and the debt of the human race” (Summa III, q. 48, a. 4).
     • There are four slaveries from which Christ purchased mankind through His sacrificial death (see Ott, 185):
       • The slavery of sin: “[He] gave himself for us to redeem us from all iniquity” (Tit. 2:14)
       • The slavery of the Mosaic Law: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law” (Gal 3:13)
       • The slavery of the Devil:
         • “He has delivered us from the dominion of darkness” (Col 1:13)
         • “He himself likewise partook of the same nature, that through death he might destroy him who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb 2:14).
       • The slavery of death: “[He] abolished death” (2 Tim 1:10).
   • Redemption: Reconciliation and Justification
     • There are two elements in the redemptive work of Christ: (1) satisfaction for man’s sins and (2) reconciliation with the Father (238-2).
     • The word “redemption,” which is especially suited for the element of satisfaction for sin (paying the debt, buying back), is commonly used to refer to reconciliation and justification as well (238-2).
       • Hence, the Council of Trent says that Jesus, “by His most Holy Passion on the wood of the cross, merited justification [which implies reconciliation] for us and made satisfaction to God on our behalf” (238-2).
     • In order to be theologically precise, we can speak of redemption, reconciliation, and justification in the following ways:
       • Redemption is the act by which the infinite debt is paid.
       • Reconciliation is the general application of the Redemption to the human race.
       • Justification is the specific application of the Redemption to the individual.
         • “Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ. . . . [It] is conferred in Baptism” (CCC 1992).
     • Note that John the Baptist speaks of the Lamb of God as the one who “takes away the sin [note the singular] of the world!” (Jn 1:29). This tells us that the Redemption was primarily concerned with the human race as a whole (239-1).
       • “It is written: ‘Behold the Lamb of God, behold Him Who taketh away the sin of the world’: and the reason for the employment of the singular is that the ‘sin of the world’ is original sin” (Summa Ia of II, q. 82, a. 2).
     • This “sin” was the breach between God and mankind brought about by Adam’s sin. The breach stood between man and sonship with God. Christ healed the breach. “It is in this widest sense that He is the Savior of mankind” (239-1).
       • An individual does not need to sin in order for Jesus to be his savior because it was the human race, in Adam, that was separated from God, and it was the human race, in Jesus, that was reconciled to God (239-1).
       • For this reason, the Blessed Virgin Mary rightly says “my spirit rejoices in God my Savior” (Lk 1:47), though she was free from the effects of original sin.
         • Jesus is doubly her savior, because he also saved her from the commission of personal sins as well (239-1).
   • Person, nature, and the Incarnation
     • If we are to understand Our Lord’s mission at all, we must see that the primary thing He came to do was to restore the broken relationship between God and man (239-2).
       • The relationship couldn’t be repaired without paying the infinite debt, but payment of the debt by itself did not heal the breach between God and man.
     • We have already seen that Christ is both God and man (239-2).
       • “In him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Col 2:9).
       • “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father” (Jn 1:14).
     • Since what God does is done necessarily [i.e., purposely; He doesn’t act arbitrarily], we know that the dual nature of Christ was necessary for the restoration of that relationship.
       • “It is the law of the wisdom of God never to do a thing by an extraordinary intervention of His power whenever that same effect can be obtained by the natural development of the forces already existing in creation” (De Concilio, The Knowledge of Mary, 74).
       • “To act wisely . . . is to act for a reasonable motive. To act . . . without a reason or motive is to act without intelligence, and could never be supposed of God, who is intelligence itself. Now, to intervene by an extraordinary display of power, in order to produce an effect which could be obtained with the forces already existing in creation, would be to act without a reason – in fact, against reason, as it would be letting forces and energies go to waste. God, therefore, . . . cannot intervene by an extraordinary effort of his action to produce an effect otherwise obtainable from the forces already in existence” (De Concilio, The Knowledge of Mary, 74).
     • Hence, “the Incarnation was God’s answer to the double problem that faced fallen mankind” (240-2).
       • Recalling the distinction between person and nature (see 94-1).
         • For a rational being, nature answers the question “what,” person answers the question “who” (240-3).
         • “The nature is a source of possible actions . . . it is person who does them” (240-3).
           • “Philosophers speak of . . . person as the center of attribution in a rational nature” (93-1).
         • Nature determines not only what a person can do, but also, in the case of a finite person, what can be done to a person, what a person can suffer or experience. But it is the person who does, suffers, or experiences (240-3).
     • With Jesus, we have the unique instance of a single person having two natures. His personality is divine only; his nature is both divine and human (241-1; also see 243-2).
       • When asked “who are you,” He could have but one answer: the Son of God (i.e., the second person of the Blessed Trinity).
       • When asked “what are you,” He could answer either of two ways, God or man
         • Note: The titles Son of God and Son of Man point to His nature, not His personality.
       • “This one Person had two natures, two sources of action from which He could draw” (241-1).
         • In His divine nature, He could do all that goes with being God, and, in His human nature, He could do all that goes with being man. Either way, it was the divine person who was doing whatever was being done (241-1).
   • Expiation and Reconciliation
     • The expiation of Adam’s debt:
       • “Christ, having a human nature, was able to perform a human act; but He who performed it was a divine Person. Being able to perform a human act, He could offer it [as a human act] in expiation of the human act of Adam” (241-2).
       • “Because He was a divine Person, His human act had [an infinite] value that no act of a merely human person could have had” (241-2).
     • The reconciliation of mankind is also grounded in the divine-human union of natures of Christ [i.e., the hypostatic union] (241-3).
       • The human race needed to be brought back from servitude to sonship. In Jesus Christ there was a man “who in Himself was Son and not servant” (241-3).
         • In Jesus, humanity was united with God from the moment of His conception, but only in Him; hence, Christ was the at-one-ment before he made the atonement (241-3).
         • For this reason we can say the at-one-ment that already existed in Him was extended to the rest of humanity by His Passion and Death, so as to be made actual in each individual via Baptism.
       • In summary, Christ alone could perform an act that was both human and divine. “Thus He could offer to God an act of obedience in love which, as human, could rightly be set against humanity’s sin of rebellion in self-love, which, as divine, must have all the value needed, or immeasurably more than all the value needed, to satisfy for it” (241-3).