even analyzed who gets the pay for the debt. All that is not my invention.
“Who received the pay for this redemption? Some represented that it was brought for the prince of this world, the devil, in whose captivity we all are. But St. Gregory discusses as follows: ‘For whom and for what was this blood spilled, which he spilled on account of us, the blood of the great and most glorious God and high priest and victim? We were in the power of the deceiver, sold for our sins, having bought our injury by our lust. And if the price of the ransom is given to no other than the one who has us in his power, I ask: To whom and for what reason was this ransom paid? If to the deceiver, then that is offensive. The robber receives the ransom, and receives not only from God, but God himself; for his oppression he takes such an extortionate price that it was right that we should be spared for it! But if to the Father, then, in the first place, in what manner? We were certainly not in captivity to him. And, in the second place, for what reason is the blood of the Only-begotten One agreeable to the Father, who did not receive even Isaac, who was offered by his father, but exchanged the offering, having given a ram in place of the sacrifice of the promise? But from this we see that the Father received the ransom not because he demanded or needed it, but on account of his house-management, and because man had to be sanctified by the manhood of God, in order that he himself might free us, having overcome the tormentor by force, and might lead us up to him through the Son, who mediates and arranges everything in the honour of the Father, to whom he turns out to be obedient in everything.’” (p. 154.)
154. The extent of the redemptory actions of Christ’s death.
Christ’s sacrifice not only redeemed the sin, but a surplus was left. This surplus is (1) for everybody; (2)
