Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut saepe dictum est, descensus Christi ad Inferos liberatorius fuit in virtute passionis ipsius. Passio autem eius non habuit temporalem virtutem et transitoriam sed sempiternam, secundum illud Heb. X, una oblatione consummavit sanctificatos in sempiternum. Et sic patet quod non habuit tunc maiorem efficaciam passio Christi quam habeat nunc. Et ideo illi qui fuerunt tales quales nunc sunt qui in Purgatorio detinentur, non fuerunt a Purgatorio liberati per descensum Christi ad Inferos. Si qui autem inventi sunt ibi tales quales etiam nunc virtute passionis Christi a Purgatorio liberantur, tales nihil prohibet per descensum Christi ad Inferos a Purgatorio esse liberatos. I answer that, As we have stated more than once (A. 4, ad 2, AA. 5, 6, 7), Christ’s descent into hell was one of deliverance in virtue of His Passion. Now Christ’s Passion had a virtue which was neither temporal nor transitory, but everlasting, according to Heb. 10:14: For by one oblation He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. And so it is evident that Christ’s Passion had no greater efficacy then than it has now. Consequently, they who were such as those who are now in Purgatory, were not set free from Purgatory by Christ’s descent into hell. But if any were found such as are now set free from Purgatory by virtue of Christ’s Passion, then there was nothing to hinder them from being delivered from Purgatory by Christ’s descent into hell. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod ex illa auctoritate Augustini non potest concludi quod omnes illi qui in Purgatorio erant, fuerint a Purgatorio liberati, sed quod aliquibus eorum fuerit hoc beneficium collatum, illis scilicet qui iam sufficienter purgati erant; vel etiam qui, dum adhuc viverent, meruerunt per fidem et dilectionem, et devotionem ad mortem Christi, ut, eo descendente, liberarentur a temporali Purgatorii poena. Reply Obj. 1: From this passage of Augustine it cannot be concluded that all who were in Purgatory were delivered from it, but that such a benefit was bestowed upon some persons, that is to say, upon such as were already cleansed sufficiently, or who in life, by their faith and devotion towards Christ’s death, so merited, that when He descended, they were delivered from the temporal punishment of Purgatory. Ad secundum dicendum quod virtus Christi operatur in sacramentis per modum sanationis et expiationis cuiusdam. Unde sacramentum Eucharistiae liberat homines a Purgatorio inquantum est quoddam sacrificium satisfactorium pro peccato. Descensus autem Christi ad Inferos non fuit satisfactorius. Operabatur tamen in virtute passionis, quae fuit satisfactoria, ut supra habitum est, sed erat satisfactoria in generali, cuius virtutem oportebat applicari ad unumquemque per aliquid specialiter ad ipsum pertinens. Et ideo non oportet quod per descensum Christi ad Inferos omnes fuerint a Purgatorio liberati. Reply Obj. 2: Christ’s power operates in the sacraments by way of healing and expiation. Consequently, the sacrament of the Eucharist delivers men from Purgatory inasmuch as it is a satisfactory sacrifice for sin. But Christ’s descent into hell was not satisfactory; yet it operated in virtue of the Passion, which was satisfactory, as stated above (Q. 48, A. 2), but satisfactory in general, since its virtue had to be applied to each individual by something specially personal (Q. 49, A. 1, ad 4, 5). Consequently, it does not follow of necessity that all were delivered from Purgatory by Christ’s descent into hell. Ad tertium dicendum quod illi defectus a quibus Christus simul in hoc mundo homines liberabat, erant personales, proprie ad unumquemque pertinentes. Sed exclusio a gloria Dei erat quidam defectus generalis pertinens ad totam humanam naturam. Et ideo nihil prohibet eos qui erant in Purgatorio, per Christum esse liberatos ab exclusione a gloria, non autem a reatu poenae Purgatorii, qui pertinet ad proprium defectum. Sicut e converso sancti patres, ante Christi adventum, liberati sunt a propriis defectibus, non autem a defectu communi, sicut supra dictum est. Reply Obj. 3: Those defects from which Christ altogether delivered men in this world were purely personal, and concerned the individual; whereas exclusion from God’s glory was a general defect and common to all human nature. Consequently, there was nothing to prevent those detained in Purgatory being delivered by Christ from their privation of glory, but not from the debt of punishment in Purgatory which pertains to personal defect. Just as on the other hand, the holy Fathers before Christ’s coming were delivered from their personal defects, but not from the common defect, as was stated above (A. 7, ad 1; Q. 49, A. 5, ad 1). Quaestio 53 Question 53 De resurrectione Christi Christ’s Resurrection Consequenter considerandum est de his quae pertinent ad exaltationem Christi. Et primo, de eius resurrectione; secundo, de eius ascensione; tertio, de sessione ad dexteram patris; quarto, de iudiciaria potestate. Circa primum occurrit quadruplex consideratio, quarum prima est de ipsa Christi resurrectione; secunda, de qualitate resurgentis; tertia, de manifestatione resurrectionis; quarta, de eius causalitate. Circa primum quaeruntur quatuor. We have now to consider those things that concern Christ’s Exaltation; and we shall deal with (1) His Resurrection; (2) His Ascension; (3) His sitting at the right hand of God the Father; (4) His Judiciary Power. Under the first heading there is a fourfold consideration: (1) Christ’s Resurrection in itself; (2) the quality of the Person rising; (3) the manifestation of the Resurrection; (4) its causality. Concerning the first there are four points of inquiry: Primo, de necessitate resurrectionis eius. (1) The necessity of His Resurrection; Secundo, de tempore. (2) The time of the Resurrection; Tertio, de ordine. (3) Its order; Quarto, de causa. (4) Its cause. Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum fuerit necessarium Christum resurgere Whether it was necessary for Christ to rise again? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non fuerit necessarium Christum resurgere. Dicit enim Damascenus, in IV libro, resurrectio est secunda eius quod dissolutum est et cecidit animalis surrectio. Sed Christus non cecidit per peccatum, nec corpus eius est dissolutum, ut ex supra dictis patet. Non ergo proprie convenit sibi resurgere. Objection 1: It would seem that it was not necessary for Christ to rise again. For Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv): Resurrection is the rising again of an animate being, which was disintegrated and fallen. But Christ did not fall by sinning, nor was His body dissolved, as is manifest from what was stated above (Q. 51, A. 3). Therefore, it does not properly belong to Him to rise again. Praeterea, quicumque resurgit, ad aliquid altius promovetur, quia surgere est sursum moveri. Sed corpus Christi remansit post mortem divinitati unitum, et ita non potuit in aliquid altius promoveri. Ergo non competebat sibi resurgere. Obj. 2: Further, whoever rises again is promoted to a higher state, since to rise is to be uplifted. But after death Christ’s body continued to be united with the Godhead, hence it could not be uplifted to any higher condition. Therefore, it was not due to it to rise again. Praeterea, ea quae circa humanitatem Christi sunt acta, ad nostram salutem ordinantur. Sed sufficiebat ad salutem nostram passio Christi, per quam sumus liberati a culpa et poena, ut ex supra dictis patet. Non ergo fuit necessarium quod Christus a mortuis resurgeret. Obj. 3: Further, all that befell Christ’s humanity was ordained for our salvation. But Christ’s Passion sufficed for our salvation, since by it we were loosed from guilt and punishment, as is clear from what was said above (Q. 49, A. 1, 3). Consequently, it was not necessary for Christ to rise again from the dead. Sed contra est quod dicitur Luc. ult., oportebat Christum pati et resurgere a mortuis. On the contrary, It is written (Luke 24:46): It behooved Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead. Respondeo dicendum quod necessarium fuit Christum resurgere, propter quinque. Primo quidem, ad commendationem divinae iustitiae, ad quam pertinet exaltare illos qui se propter Deum humiliant, secundum illud Luc. I, deposuit potentes de sede, et exaltavit humiles. Quia igitur Christus, propter caritatem et obedientiam Dei, se humiliavit usque ad mortem crucis, oportebat quod exaltaretur a Deo usque ad gloriosam resurrectionem. Unde ex eius persona dicitur in Psalmo, tu cognovisti, idest approbasti, sessionem meam, idest humilitatem et passionem, et resurrectionem meam, idest glorificationem in resurrectione, sicut Glossa exponit. I answer that, It behooved Christ to rise again, for five reasons. First of all; for the commendation of Divine Justice, to which it belongs to exalt them who humble themselves for God’s sake, according to Luke 1:52: He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble. Consequently, because Christ humbled Himself even to the death of the Cross, from love and obedience to God, it behooved Him to be uplifted by God to a glorious resurrection; hence it is said in His Person (Ps 138:2): Thou hast known, i.e., approved, my sitting down, i.e., My humiliation and Passion, and my rising up, i.e., My glorification in the resurrection; as the gloss expounds. Secundo, ad fidei nostrae instructionem. Quia per eius resurrectionem confirmata est fides nostra circa divinitatem Christi, quia, ut dicitur II Cor. ult., etsi crucifixus est ex infirmitate nostra, sed vivit ex virtute Dei. Et ideo I Cor. XV dicitur, si Christus non resurrexit, inanis est praedicatio nostra, inanis est et fides nostra. Et in Psalmo, quae utilitas erit in sanguine meo, idest in effusione sanguinis mei, dum descendo, quasi per quosdam gradus malorum, in corruptionem? Quasi dicat, nulla. Si enim statim non resurgo, corruptumque fuerit corpus meum, nemini annuntiabo, nullum lucrabor ut Glossa exponit. Second, for our instruction in the faith, since our belief in Christ’s Godhead is confirmed by His rising again, because, according to 2 Cor. 13:4, although He was crucified through weakness, yet He liveth by the power of God. And therefore it is written (1 Cor 15:14): If Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and our faith is also vain: and (Ps 29:10): What profit is there in my blood? that is, in the shedding of My blood, while I go down, as by various degrees of evils, into corruption? As though He were to answer: None. ‘For if I do not at once rise again but My body be corrupted, I shall preach to no one, I shall gain no one,’ as the gloss expounds. Tertio, ad sublevationem nostrae spei. Quia, dum videmus Christum resurgere, qui est caput nostrum, speramus et nos resurrecturos. Unde dicitur I Cor. XV, si Christus praedicatur quod resurrexit a mortuis, quomodo quidam dicunt in vobis quoniam resurrectio mortuorum non est? Et Iob XIX dicitur, scio, scilicet per certitudinem fidei, quod redemptor meus, idest Christus, vivit, a mortuis resurgens, et ideo in novissimo die de terra surrecturus sum, reposita est haec spes mea in sinu meo. Third, for the raising of our hope, since through seeing Christ, who is our head, rise again, we hope that we likewise shall rise again. Hence it is written (1 Cor 15:12): Now if Christ be preached that He rose from the dead, how do some among you say, that there is no resurrection of the dead? And (Job 19:25, 27): I know, that is with certainty of faith, that my Redeemer, i.e., Christ, liveth, having risen from the dead; and therefore in the last day I shall rise out of the earth . . . this my hope is laid up in my bosom. Quarto, ad informationem vitae fidelium, secundum illud Rom. VI, quomodo Christus resurrexit a mortuis per gloriam patris, ita et nos in novitate vitae ambulemus. Et infra, Christus resurgens ex mortuis iam non moritur, ita et vos existimate mortuos esse peccato, viventes autem Deo. Fourth, to set in order the lives of the faithful: according to Rom. 6:4: As Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life: and further on; Christ rising from the dead dieth now no more; so do you also reckon that you are dead to sin, but alive to God. Quinto, ad complementum nostrae salutis. Quia sicut propter hoc mala sustinuit moriendo ut nos liberaret a malis, ita glorificatus est resurgendo ut nos promoveret ad bona, secundum illud Rom. IV, traditus est propter delicta nostra, et resurrexit propter iustificationem nostram. Fifth, in order to complete the work of our salvation: because, just as for this reason did He endure evil things in dying that He might deliver us from evil, so was He glorified in rising again in order to advance us towards good things; according to Rom. 4:25: He was delivered up for our sins, and rose again for our justification. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, licet Christus non ceciderit per peccatum, cecidit tamen per mortem, quia sicut peccatum est casus a iustitia, ita mors est casus a vita. Unde ex persona Christi potest intelligi quod dicitur Mich. VII, ne laeteris, inimica mea, super me, quia cecidi, consurgam. Similiter etiam, licet corpus Christi non fuerit dissolutum per incinerationem, ipsa tamen separatio animae a corpore dissolutio quaedam fuit. Reply Obj. 1: Although Christ did not fall by sin, yet He fell by death, because as sin is a fall from righteousness, so death is a fall from life: hence the words of Mic. 7:8 can be taken as though spoken by Christ: Rejoice not thou, my enemy, over me, because I am fallen: I shall rise again. Likewise, although Christ’s body was not disintegrated by returning to dust, yet the separation of His soul and body was a kind of disintegration. Ad secundum dicendum quod divinitas erat carni Christi post mortem unita unione personali, non autem unione naturae, sicut anima unitur corpori ut forma ad constituendam humanam naturam. Et ideo per hoc quod corpus eius unitum est animae, promotum est in altiorem statum naturae, non autem in altiorem statum personae. Reply Obj. 2: The Godhead was united with Christ’s flesh after death by personal union, but not by natural union; thus the soul is united with the body as its form, so as to constitute human nature. Consequently, by the union of the body and soul, the body was uplifted to a higher condition of nature, but not to a higher personal state. Ad tertium dicendum quod passio Christi operata est nostram salutem, proprie loquendo, quantum ad remotionem malorum, resurrectio autem quantum ad inchoationem et exemplar bonorum. Reply Obj. 3: Christ’s Passion wrought our salvation, properly speaking, by removing evils; but the Resurrection did so as the beginning and exemplar of all good things. Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum fuerit conveniens Christum tertia die resurgere Whether it was fitting for Christ to rise again on the third day? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non fuerit conveniens Christum tertia die resurgere. Membra enim debent capiti conformari. Sed nos, qui sumus membra Christi, non resurgimus a morte tertia die, sed nostra resurrectio differtur usque ad finem mundi. Ergo videtur quod Christus, qui est caput nostrum, non debuit tertia die resurgere, sed debuit eius resurrectio differri usque ad finem mundi. Objection 1: It would seem unfitting that Christ should have risen again on the third day. For the members ought to be in conformity with their head. But we who are His members do not rise from death on the third day, since our rising is put off until the end of the world. Therefore, it seems that Christ, who is our head, should not have risen on the third day, but that His Resurrection ought to have been deferred until the end of the world. Praeterea, Act. II dicit Petrus quod impossibile erat Christum detineri ab Inferno et morte. Sed quandiu aliquis est mortuus, detinetur a morte. Ergo videtur quod Christi resurrectio non debuerit differri usque ad tertiam diem, sed statim eodem die resurgere, praecipue cum Glossa super inducta dicat nullam esse utilitatem in effusione sanguinis Christi si non statim resurgeret. Obj. 2: Further, Peter said (Acts 2:24) that it was impossible for Christ to be held fast by hell and death. Therefore it seems that Christ’s rising ought not to have been deferred until the third day, but that He ought to have risen at once on the same day; especially since the gloss quoted above (A. 1) says that there is no profit in the shedding of Christ’s blood, if He did not rise at once. Praeterea, dies incipere videtur ab ortu solis, qui sua praesentia diem causat. Sed ante ortum solis Christus resurrexit, dicitur enim Ioan. XX, quod una sabbati Maria Magdalene venit mane, cum adhuc tenebrae essent, ad monumentum, et tunc Christus iam resurrexerat, quia sequitur, et vidit revolutum lapidem a monumento. Ergo non resurrexit Christus tertia die. Obj. 3: The day seems to start with the rising of the sun, the presence of which causes the day. But Christ rose before sunrise: for it is related (John 20:1) that Mary Magdalen cometh early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre: but Christ was already risen, for it goes on to say: And she saw the stone taken away from the sepulchre. Therefore Christ did not rise on the third day. Sed contra est quod dicitur Matth. XX, tradent eum gentibus ad illudendum et flagellandum et crucifigendum, et tertia die resurget. On the contrary, It is written (Matt 20:19): They shall deliver Him to the Gentiles to be mocked, and scourged, and crucified, and the third day He shall rise again. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, resurrectio Christi necessaria fuit ad instructionem fidei nostrae. Est autem fides nostra et de divinitate et de humanitate Christi, non enim sufficit alterum sine altero credere, ut ex praedictis patet. Et ideo, ad hoc quod confirmaretur fides divinitatis ipsius, oportuit quod cito resurgeret, et eius resurrectio non differretur usque ad finem mundi, ad hoc autem quod confirmaretur fides de veritate humanitatis et mortis eius, oportuit moram esse inter mortem et resurrectionem; si enim statim post mortem resurrexisset videri posset quod eius mors vera non fuerit, et per consequens nec resurrectio vera. Ad veritatem autem mortis Christi manifestandam, sufficiebat quod usque ad tertiam diem eius resurrectio differretur, quia non contingit quin infra hoc tempus, in homine qui mortuus videtur cum vivat, appareant aliqua indicia vitae. I answer that, As stated above (A. 1) Christ’s Resurrection was necessary for the instruction of our faith. But our faith regards Christ’s Godhead and humanity, for it is not enough to believe the one without the other, as is evident from what has been said (Q. 36, A. 4; cf. II-II, Q. 2, AA. 7, 8). Consequently, in order that our faith in the truth of His Godhead might be confirmed it was necessary that He should rise speedily, and that His Resurrection should not be deferred until the end of the world. But to confirm our faith regarding the truth of His humanity and death, it was needful that there should be some interval between His death and rising. For if He had risen directly after death, it might seem that His death was not genuine and consequently neither would His Resurrection be true. But to establish the truth of Christ’s death, it was enough for His rising to be deferred until the third day, for within that time some signs of life always appear in one who appears to be dead whereas he is alive. Per hoc etiam quod tertia die resurrexit, commendatur perfectio ternarii, qui est numerus omnis rei, utpote habens principium, medium et finem, ut dicitur in I de caelo. Ostenditur etiam, secundum mysterium, quod Christus una sua morte, quae fuit lux propter iustitiam, corporali scilicet, duas nostras mortes destruxit, scilicet corporis et animae, quae sunt tenebrosae propter peccatum, et ideo una die integra et duabus noctibus permansit in morte, ut Augustinus dicit, in IV de Trin. Furthermore, by His rising on the third day, the perfection of the number three is commended, which is the number of everything, as having beginning, middle, and end, as is said in De Coelo i. Again in the mystical sense we are taught that Christ by His one death (i.e., of the body) which was light, by reason of His righteousness, destroyed our two deaths (i.e., of soul and body), which are as darkness on account of sin; consequently, He remained in death for one day and two nights, as Augustine observes (De Trin. iv). Per hoc etiam significatur quod per resurrectionem Christi tertium tempus incipiebat. Nam primum fuit ante legem; secundum sub lege; tertium sub gratia. Incipit etiam in Christi resurrectione tertius status sanctorum. Nam primus fuit sub figuris legis; secundus, sub veritate fidei; tertius erit in aeternitate gloriae, quam Christus resurgendo inchoavit. And thereby is also signified that a third epoch began with the Resurrection: for the first was before the Law; the second under the Law; and the third under grace. Moreover the third state of the saints began with the Resurrection of Christ: for, the first was under figures of the Law; the second under the truth of faith; while the third will be in the eternity of glory, which Christ inaugurated by rising again. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod caput et membra conformantur in natura, sed non in virtute, excellentior est enim virtus capitis quam membrorum. Et ideo, ad demonstrandam excellentiam virtutis Christi, conveniens fuit ipsum tertia die resurgere, aliorum resurrectione dilata usque ad finem mundi. Reply Obj. 1: The head and members are likened in nature, but not in power; because the power of the head is more excellent than that of the members. Accordingly, to show forth the excellence of Christ’s power, it was fitting that He should rise on the third day, while the resurrection of the rest is put off until the end of the world. Ad secundum dicendum quod detentio coactionem quandam importat. Christus autem nulla necessitate mortis tenebatur adstrictus, sed erat inter mortuos liber. Et ideo aliquandiu in morte mansit, non quasi detentus, sed propria voluntate, quandiu iudicavit hoc esse necessarium ad instructionem fidei nostrae. Dicitur autem statim fieri quod fit brevi interposito tempore. Reply Obj. 2: Detention implies a certain compulsion. But Christ was not held fast by any necessity of death, but was free among the dead: and therefore He abode a while in death, not as one held fast, but of His own will, just so long as He deemed necessary for the instruction of our faith. And a task is said to be done at once which is performed within a short space of time.