Pints With Aquinas - Did Jesus need to be Redeemed? - Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P.

Episode Date: February 20, 2023

Fr. Pine talks about why Jesus did not need to be redeemed   🟣 Join Us on Locals (before we get banned on YT): https://mattfradd.locals.com/ 📖 Fr. Pine's Book: https://bit.ly/3lEsP8F ✝️ Show Sponsor: https://hallow.com/mattfradd 🖥️ Website: https://pintswithaquinas.com/ 🟢 Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/pintswithaquinas 👕 Merch: https://shop.pintswithaquinas.com 🚫 FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: https://www.strive21.com/ 🔵 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mattfradd 📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mattfradd We get a small kick back from affiliate links.

So Thomas Aquinas wrote Daily Meditations for Lent. And so what I'm gonna do over on matfrad.locals.com is read those meditations and release them every day throughout Lent. So if you've been thinking, what's a cool way I could prepare for Easter, this would be it. Go over and support us at matfrad.locals.com

and you'll get a bunch of free things in return. One of those free things will be daily Meditations for lent mat frad dot locals.com. Thanks Hello, my name is father Gregory pine and I'm a Dominican friar of the province of st. Joseph and this is pines of the Aquinas So I preached a homily recently and after having preached that homily somebody Kind of tracked me down and confronted me and explained to me that I was wrong. And the point about which I was wrong was whether or not Jesus needed to be redeemed. So I said that he did not need to be redeemed, and this person was insisting that he did need to be redeemed.

So we had a mildly contentious conversation, which was left unresolved with our relative disagreement. But I had the opportunity to reflect a little bit about it subsequently, so I thought I would take the opportunity to explain why it is important that Jesus is not redeemed, but then how we might salvage something of the other person's point. So, let's go for it.

Okay, so I preached a homily. It was on the Feast of the Presentation or Purification of Mary. And the point was to show that our Lord Jesus Christ lives his human life for our salvation, not for his own as it were. And the point was that the Gospel of Luke, when it introduces that whole sequence, which takes place in the context of the temple and you have the encounter with you know Mary and Joseph bring our Lord forty days after his birth you've got the two turtle doves signifying the fact that they're poor they present the child to Simeon and Simeon says now Lord you can let your servant go in peace your word has been fulfilled and then you have that subsequent encounter with Anna who has been in the temple precincts for some time now what's fascinating about the passage is that it starts like a redemption narrative but

then no further details of the redemption are recounted. So the question is like what's going on here or what type of redemption is at stake? So let's back up a little bit, talk about what redemption might mean in the setting of you know first century Israel or first century Judah and then talk a little bit more about redemption means to us as Christians in the 21st century. So yes, the first sense, like the kind of Old Testament biblical sense of redemption, is associated with the Exodus and if you're looking at the book of Exodus chapters 12 and 13 there you find evidence of three particular rites that would have

been performed by the Israelites so as to commemorate their departure from Egypt when the Lord saved them, delivered them by bringing them through the Red Sea and destroying Pharaoh with his chariots and charioteers. Those three rites are Passover, circumcision, and redemption. So Passover would have been commemorated by the whole family. Circumcision would have been commemorated in the flesh of all the male sons of the family, and then redemption would have been commemorated in the firstborn. And a redemption ceremony basically, I mean, it kind of unfolded like this. The father would bring the child to a Levitical priest, not necessarily to the temple itself in Jerusalem,

but to a Levitical priest and then he would kind of leave the child as it were before the priest. And then the priest would say, do you claim this child as your own? And the father would respond, yes, I do. And then the priest would say,, well then pay the price. And then the father would have some amount of money whereby he would redeem the child. And then he would leave with the child, the child knowing in a kind of metaphysical sense that he had been purchased at a price that he was claimed as the son of his father. Some people will associate this with the fact that in Hebrew scriptures you really see nothing in the way of patricide, father-killing, whereas in contemporary Rome, for instance, they just can't get enough of it. So this has a way of solidifying the family,

but mostly it has a way of commemorating the deliverance of the people of Israel from Egypt where they would have been, you know, exiled for a time and forced into heavy slavery and, you know, their national identity threatened until such time as they were delivered from Egypt and brought into the promised land. So that's like the first sense there of redemption, buying back as it were the firstborn with the recognition that it pertains by right to God but that God entrusts it to the family. So I don't know all the history of this right or the full kind of of sociological or cultural implications of it. And in that sense, my disputant, my interlocutor might have a point in that she was insisting that as a man, our Lord needed to be redeemed.

So in a certain sense, as an Israelite, this was part of their national or their kind of cultural inheritance so it was fitting and just that it be practiced as it were in the case of our Lord Jesus Christ because it serves the cult, it serves the nation, it serves the family or the Father's house which pertains to the clan which pertains to the tribe. Okay, so in that sense. But on the other hand, Jesus didn't need it even if we're just operating at this first level of the Old Testament right. Why? Well because Jesus didn't need it, even if we're just operating at this first level of the Old Testament right. Why? Well, because Jesus didn't need to do anything in the flesh. The second, I mean the Son, the Word, did not need to take human flesh in order to save

us from our sins. I mean, he just didn't need to take human flesh, period. And in choosing to save us from our sins, again, he didn't need to take human flesh. We can give arguments as to why it's very fitting that he did, why it's wonderful that he did, why we're so happy that he did, but we can't say that it's necessary. We can't say that he had to, or that he had need of it. So too, the way that the redemption rite is described, it says, for all those who open the womb of the mother, okay? So I think that's the technical language used, not necessarily

firstborn, although there was maybe just a Hebraism for firstborn. And in the case of our Lord Jesus Christ, we know that Our Lady is a virgin before, during, and after the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ. So he doesn't open her womb in the biological sense of it, I mean in the metaphorical sense of it, insofar as she is truly his mother, the mother of God, and insofar as he is truly her son, son of Mary, then he is her firstborn, he opens a room, but there's also something about this birth which is spectacular, and as a result of which, I don't know that it would observe all of the rules which are laid down or prescribed by the people of Israel.

I don't want to get, what, Supercessionist or Marcionite and distance our Lord too much from his Jewish heritage, but we also have to recognize the fact that he doesn't have to do these things. Okay, so we want to be a little looser with our sense of necessity. Also, when you think about the point of these rites, the point is to solidify Israel's identity as Israel and to solidify their relationship to God. Our Lord knows these things to the marrow of his bones. And so far as he's God, and so far as he has perfect human knowledge in these different registers which St. Thomas describes, so his identity and his mission, as it were, are totally clear.

So then we can come back to the fact that it's fitting that he submit to it. And St. Thomas does dedicate a question to our Lord's submitting to the old law. I think he speaks specifically about the case of circumcision. So it's good, yeah. And in submitting to it, he fulfills it. He gives us an example of obedience, of submission, and he also fulfills the law and passes us into the next stage, or the fullness of the revelation, the covenant, which he makes in his blood. Okay, so that's the first sense of redemption. The second sense of redemption would be more the sense of Jesus redeeming us, the people of God, the Church, by his blood, by his passion,

death, and resurrection. So what do we mean here? Well, in our first sense of redemption we talked about a kind of purchase or a kind of buying back. So that's what we mean when we talk about redemption. Sometimes you'll hear people, especially in the early church, talk about a kind of ransom and that'd be the language that's used at a couple of places in the New Testament. A most prominent place is I think Mark 1045 right after the healing of the blind Bartimaeus and right before transitioning into the time in Jerusalem at Mark 11.1, something like that.

So that he gave himself as a ransom for our sins. And the idea here is that our Lord Himself is the price. Okay, so we sinned, and in sinning, we incurred the punishment that goes with sin. So there's the fault of sin, for one, the relationships which are wounded in the way that that registers in our humanity, and then there's the punishment attached to sin, the temporal and eternal punishment that needs to be worked through in order for our minds and

hearts to be rectified, in order for our relationships to be reconciled, and then there's also the servitude that comes with that. So when you do a certain thing you become its slaves. So we seek to be slaves of our Lord Jesus Christ and of our Blessed Mother. But when you choose sin and vice and all that goes with it you become in turn a slave of sin, vice, death, the devil, etc. Now some of these theories get kind of intense where you talk about it as if like the devil had to be paid back by God. Nope, we're not talking about that. It wasn't necessary again that our Lord save us in this way and the devil only has power over us insofar as it is

conceded to him by God so as to test us in virtue and to grow us ultimately in the life of grace. So it all happens within the bounds of his providence. But God chooses as it were to pay a price which he himself sets, so as to reveal the fullness of his justice and to justify us in the process. And in doing so, we can see the fittingness of it again, because he reveals a richer justice and a richer mercy than would have been the case had he simply pardoned our sin without himself taking human flesh,

suffering, dying, rising from the dead. Because in that manifest and communicable witness we see how much God loves us. I mean we see God, period. We see how much God loves us, we see how dignified is our human state, we see that the wages of sin are indeed death, that we have killed God, we've committed the most atrocious crime, and yet by virtue of the charity which informs his decision to come in pursuit of us, he can transform it into not merely an occasion, but a wellspring of grace, virtue, gifts of the Holy Spirit to draw us back into the divine life. So, we can appreciate the fact that in upholding the order of justice in this way, by insisting on a punishment, by himself undergoing the punishment, and delivering us from the servitude to sin, death, and the't need to do this, okay?

So, he didn't need to do this and he didn't himself need to be redeemed. And that's a very important point. So, there's like that song a while ago, What if God were one of us just a slot in a pot? And Jesus said, What if God were one of us just a slot in a pot? And Jesus said, What if God were one of us just a slot in a pot?

And Jesus said, What if God were one of us just a slot in a pot? And Jesus said, What if God were one of us just a slot in a pot? Okay, so he didn't need to do this and he didn't himself need to be redeemed. And that's a very important point. So there's like that song a while ago, what if God were one of us just a slob like one of us. So God does become like one of us, but he doesn't become a slob like one of us. So our Lord assumes certain defects which are associated with our human sin, like hunger or thirst or pain, suffering, ultimately death. hunger or thirst or pain, suffering, ultimately death, but he doesn't assume certain defects which would actually impede the advance of his campaign of salvation. So our Lord doesn't assume the defect of sin, he doesn't assume the

defect of ignorance. He came to illumine us, right? Not to be himself obscured with us. And with sin, like, it just doesn't comport with God for sin to be in him because sin is any thought, word, or deed contrary to the eternal law. He is the eternal law. And also, he sees God. He looks on God face to face throughout the course of his earthly life, so he can't turn away from that vision. And so too, he has the fullness of knowledge and grace which conducts him through the whole course of this earthly life without sin, without fault, without defect. Okay, so our Lord assumes certain defects which kind of solidify his solidarity with us as human beings, which give us a handhold in his humanity so as ultimately to be

conducted into his divinity, but he doesn't assume certain defects which I said again would impede his manifestation and communication of salvation. So he's in solidarity with us in every imaginable way except for those ways which conflict with his ultimate purpose which is to save. So our Lord is not lost with the lost, he came to seek and to save the lost. And so our Lord doesn't need to be redeemed, he himself doesn't need to be saved even in his humanity. And that's in part the significance of the fact that you know

his conception is miraculous and that from the moment of his conception he enjoys every imaginable gift bestowed upon his human nature including a quasi-infinite grace which is capable of positing acts of an infinite merit or of an infinite sword of merit. Okay, so what we're dealing with here in our Lord Jesus Christ is something distinct. And in this order, He doesn't need to be redeemed. And insofar as the Old Covenant corresponds to the New Covenant, anticipates the New Covenant, and is fulfilled by the New Covenant, there is an interphase point between them.

So, one of my interlocutors points was that in the Old Testament you have a different anthropology. Well, the Jews may have understood redemption in a different way than we currently understand redemption when talking about Christian soteriology, but our Lord chooses to fill that Old Testament reality with a New Testament perfection. So there has to there is an interface point and there just is one anthropology. And then anthropology is human nature, okay? So we have different approaches to it, but there's just there's one human nature, various expressions, but is human nature, okay? So we have different approaches to it, but there's just one human nature, various expressions, but one human nature insofar as Romans 5, 12 through 21, what's lost in Adam is reclaimed in our Lord Jesus Christ,

but how much more indeed? So there has to be that common anthropology if salvation is to have any currency. I think that's the point which ultimately merits redress. So, Jesus did not mean to be redeemed. any currency. I think that's the point which ultimately merits redress. So Jesus did not mean to be redeemed. I want to concede a couple of those points insofar as there's like an Old Testament sense in which it's fitting that He undergo this rite and that it's fitting that He Himself conduct this whole process of redemption on our behalf even though neither of them are necessary in

the strict sense because of our Lord's desire to express solidarity with us as a way to commend salvation so that we can recognize it and ultimately receive it because He's awesome. So yeah, just another little insight into how very abundantly the Lord loves us and how He makes that love known to us and in turn lovable for us, which is great. So that is what I wanted to share. This is Pines with Aquinas. If you haven't yet, please do subscribe to the channel, push the little bell. So that way you get email updates when other cool things happen. And then if you haven't yet do check out God's Planning, which is a podcast to

which I contribute with four other Dominican friars. We're about to announce our retreats for this upcoming year at the beginning of March, so you can stay tuned for that. Looking forward to meeting some of you in person at our various retreats for all comers, for young adults and for men. And then the last thing is I wrote a book. It's called Prudence. Choose confidently.

Live boldly. It's just rocking and rolling. Almost a year old now. Well I suppose the idea is like three years old now but the book itself is almost a year since publication. So party on. If you haven't gotten a copy of it, please do. That's all for me. Know of my prayers for you, please pray for me and I look forward to chatting with you next time on Pines with Aquinas.