CCCVIII. Concerning the final clause, ὁ δοὺς ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ πάντων, “who gave a ransom for all”; the force of τοῦ ἀντιλύτρου, “ransom,” is defined

Through him, namely, who is the one and common mediator of God and men, and who, besides discharging many other functions of mediation¹, discharged also that noblest of all which Paul² attributes to him, saying: ὁ δοὺς ἑαυτὸν ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ πάντων, that is, according to the Vulgate interpretation, “who gave himself a redemption for all.” Here both the notion of ἀντίλυτρον must be explained in a few words and the extension of the formula ὑπὲρ πάντων must be defined somewhat more accurately.

1. Accordingly, τὸ ἀντίλυτρον must altogether be rendered “a price which is paid for someone,” or “a price paid for the redemption of a thing or person which is held in the power of another.” For a) the simple noun λύτρον proves this signification, which from the usage of speech common both to the classical Greeks³ and to the Alexandrian interpreters⁴ properly denotes a price paid either for captives or for a thing which was lost. Hesychius is to the point—

—λύτρον· τίμημα· λύτρα· καθάρματα, λυτήρια καὶ πάντα τὰ διδόμενα εἰς ἀνάκτησιν ἀνθρώπων, “ransom: a price; ransoms; purifications, means of release, and all things given for the recovery of men.” The lexicon of Cyril has no otherwise: λύτρα· δῶρα ἐπ᾽ ἐλευθερίᾳ αἰχμαλώτων γινόμενα, ἤτοι διδόμενα, “ransoms: gifts made, that is, given, for the freedom of captives.” b) The very form of the noun ἀντίλυτρον proves it. For although, as Grotius⁵ shrewdly admonishes, “it should be most true that λύτρον can be taken for any expenditure whatsoever, even one by which no one is moved to liberate—which is proved by no example—nevertheless the word ἀντίλυτρον is more significant than to admit so frigid an interpretation. For the word ἀντί in composition signifies either contrariety⁶ or exchange. With Paul, contrariety has no place; compensation is therefore signified. Nor by any other form in Greek⁷ are they called ἀντίψυχοι, those supplying the place of a life, who devote themselves to death for another that they may liberate him. Thus ἀντίλυτρον is such a λύτρον, a price, in which the liberator undergoes something similar to that evil which threatened the one who is liberated; and there is an excellent, as it were, περίφρασις, circumlocution, of that word at Gal. III.13: ‘Christ ἐξηγόρασεν, redeemed⁸ us from the curse, having been made a curse for us.’” c) The wholly universal usage proves it, which Conrad Schwarz, in the Critical and Philological Commentaries on the Greek Language of the New Testament, established with a remarkable abundance of examples⁹. d) Symmachus proves it, who simply renders as ἀντίλυτρον the formula τιμὴν τῆς λυτρώσεως employed by the Alexandrians¹⁰. e) Ecclesiastical writers prove it—Chrysostom, Theodoret, John Damascene, Theophylact, and Oecumenius in their commentaries—

—in which they explain the words of the Apostle. For there is none of them who does not assent to Theophylact writing: τί δὲ ἐστιν ἀντίλυτρον; ἔνοχος ἦν ἡ φύσις, ὥστε ἀπολέσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀντ᾽ ἐκείνης ἑαυτὸν ἔδωκε. “But what is the price of redemption? Nature was liable to perdition, but he gave himself for it.” For he came¹¹ δοῦναι τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν, “to give his soul as a redemption for many.” f) The Latin interpretations prove it¹², both the Hieronymian and that more ancient one, which render the apostolic words: “who gave himself a redemption for all.” Finally, g) the words repeatedly employed concerning the same matter in the Scriptures¹³ prove it: ἀγορασμός, purchase; ἐξαγορασμός, redemption; λύτρωσις, redemption; ἀπολύτρωσις, redemption; ἀποκαταλλαγή, reconciliation; ἱλαστήριον, propitiatory; and ἱλασμός, expiation—which demand that ἀντίλυτρον be understood of a price paid for another.