Summa Theologica III, 48, 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Augustine3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Augustine3

Guest
“But by suffering out of love and obedience, Christ gave more to God than was required to compensate for the offense of the whole human race.”

Source: newadvent.org/summa/4048.htm

I’m a little confused. Since God the infinite was offended, we can only conclude nothing less than an infinite atonement would make satisfaction for our sins. If that is the case, how could Christ offer up more than infinity?
 
Augustine3 said:
“But by suffering out of love and obedience, Christ gave more to God than was required to compensate for the offense of the whole human race.”

Source: newadvent.org/summa/4048.htm

I’m a little confused. Since God the infinite was offended, we can only conclude nothing less than an infinite atonement would make satisfaction for our sins. If that is the case, how could Christ offer up more than infinity?
Click to expand...
Yes, an infinite atonement was needed to make satisfaction for our sins. But Christ could have made that infinite atonement by shedding a single drop of His blood. And, at least according to some theologians (I believe Aquinas is one of them), Christ could have atoned for our sins with even less: a single prayer of His would have the infinite value needed. But clearly, Christ paid much more than a single drop of blood to atone for our sins, and therefore He gave more than was required.

It is possible to have “more than infinity”. The set of all real numbers is larger than the set of all integers, even though both are infinite (If you don’t believe me, google “orders of infinity”).
 
Mark1124 said:
Yes, an infinite atonement was needed to make satisfaction for our sins. But Christ could have made that infinite atonement by shedding a single drop of His blood. And, at least according to some theologians (I believe Aquinas is one of them), Christ could have atoned for our sins with even less: a single prayer of His would have the infinite value needed. But clearly, Christ paid much more than a single drop of blood to atone for our sins, and therefore He gave more than was required.

It is possible to have “more than infinity”. The set of all real numbers is larger than the set of all integers, even though both are infinite (If you don’t believe me, google “orders of infinity”).
Click to expand...
A very good explanation, thanks brother!
 
Christ was both God and man. When he atoned on the cross, he was atoning both finitely as man and infinitely as God.
 
Hi all,

I think we’re missing what Aquinas is saying here:

“But by suffering out of love and obedience, Christ gave more to God than was required to compensate for the offense of the whole human race.”

His emphasis seems to be that Christ gave more in a qualitative sense. If what was required for our atonement was the sacrifice of a perfect human being, Christ did this, and as God-man was able to atone infinitely for our sins against God quantitatively. However, because Jesus did this out of love and obedience it was grace upon grace. 😉
 
jonathan_hili said:
Hi all,

I think we’re missing what Aquinas is saying here:

“But by suffering out of love and obedience, Christ gave more to God than was required to compensate for the offense of the whole human race.”

His emphasis seems to be that Christ gave more in a qualitative sense. If what was required for our atonement was the sacrifice of a perfect human being, Christ did this, and as God-man was able to atone infinitely for our sins against God quantitatively. However, because Jesus did this out of love and obedience it was grace upon grace. 😉
Click to expand...
True!

I should have considered what St Paul said “For if, by the transgression of one person, death came to reign through that one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of justification come to reign in life through the one person Jesus Christ” – Romans 5:17
 
Augustine3 said:
“
I’m a little confused. Since God the infinite was offended, we can only conclude nothing less than an infinite atonement would make satisfaction for our sins. If that is the case, how could Christ offer up more than infinity?
Click to expand...
You ought to read the Cur Deus Homo by St. Anselm too.

Anyhow, Mark1124 is right. A single scratch would seem to be enough.

The reasoning, as far as I can tell, is as follows:

Christ, rightfully being owed everything (by His righteousness and Godhood), would incur an unlimited(infinite) debt for the slightest wrong against Him. This is because anything taken from Him could never be repaid (on account of being owed everything) and because of His infinite dignity which was violated. This becomes the source of our inability to make satisfactions for our sins (as you have already determined) and the ability for the slightest sacrifice, freely borne by Him, to atone for all our sins. Since God, the invulnerable/unchangeable, cannot actually suffer, those who commit the wrong would bear their own debt (eternal damnation) as He demands perfect justice. Thus God assumed the form of a vulnerable man so that justice (in Christ’s sacrifice) and mercy (in our redemption) kissed.

Anyhow, this can be more than infinite in the same way of transfinites (see Cantor; which I believe Mark is alluding to). Also, consider the old poetic concept of layers of hell. Obviously each layer is an infinite punishment (eternal), but some layers are more punishment than others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top