The notion that death can be life-giving doesn’t appear to make philosophical sense, Thomas notes ( ST III, 50, 6). Death is a privation of life, and a privation doesn’t have power to act. Therefore, no death, including Christ’s, has power to give life. Thomas admits that . . . . Continue Reading »
Like all medievals, like all scholastics, Thomas asks unusual questions. Nearly always they are odd questions that help you turn corners to see roads you wouldn’t have seen otherwise. He asks, “Was the Godhead of the Son separated from the flesh of Christ when he died?” ( ST III, . . . . Continue Reading »
How does Christ’s passion liberate from sin? Perhaps surprisingly, Thomas’s first answer (III, 49, 1) is entirely Abelardian: “Christ’s Passion is the proper cause of the forgiveness of sins in three ways. First of all, by way of exciting our charity . . . it is by charity . . . . Continue Reading »
The variety and flexibility of Thomas’s terminology regarding Christ’s passion and sin is remarkable. In ST III, 49, 1, he asks whether Christ’s passion liberates from sin ( liberati a peccato ). Christ’s death brings freedom. Then he shifts gears. Objection 2 says that . . . . Continue Reading »
Christ’s death fulfills the figures of Israel’s sacrificial system ( ST III, 48, 3). It exceeds them in being the sacrifice of human flesh for humanity. But it’s not just reality in relation to figure, but is itself a figure, a “sign for of something to be observed by . . . . Continue Reading »
How could Christ’s death be a sacrifice, since “those men who slew Christ did not perform any sacred act but rather wrought a great wrong”? ( ST , III, 48, 3). Christ’s passion is no sacrificium but a maleficium . Thomas answers by stressing the voluntary character of . . . . Continue Reading »
Did Christ effect salvation by way of redemption? Thomas asks ( ST III, 48, 4). It’s a question about salvation as payment . The first objection states that Christ could not have saved by way of redemption because no one buys or buys back ( emit vel redimit ) what already belongs to him. Sed . . . . Continue Reading »
Wright ( How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels ) claims that “the creeds were remarkable, a unique postbiblical innovation to meet a fresh need. They have functioned as the badge and symbol of the Christian family . . . for a millennium and a half. They are more than merely . . . . Continue Reading »
In his recent How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels , N.T. Wright argues that many forms of atonement theology detach the cross from its proper context in the gospels - that is, the context of God’s coming kingdom. He finds that many “devour works” that deal with . . . . Continue Reading »
Brian Leftow ends his 1995 Modern Schoolman article with this: “Anselm’s appeal to fittingness, then, might serve to undermine the claim the value of efficiency has on God’s choices. For if beauty can trump efficiency, it could be a rational virtue for a perfectly wise being to . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
