Whether Christ Was Born at a Fitting Time?
Objection 1: It would seem that Christ was not born at a fitting time. Because Christ came in order to restore liberty to His own. But He was born at a time of subjection--namely, when the whole world, as it were, tributary to Augustus, was being enrolled, at his command as Luke relates (2:1). Therefore it seems that Christ was not born at a fitting time.
Obj. 2: Further, the promises concerning the coming of Christ were not made to the Gentiles; according to Rom. 9:4: "To whom belong ... the promises." But Christ was born during the reign of a foreigner, as appears from Matt. 2:1: "When Jesus was born in the days of King Herod." Therefore it seems that He was not born at a fitting time.
Obj. 3: Further, the time of Christ"s presence on earth is compared to the day, because He is the "Light of the world"; wherefore He says Himself (John 9:4): "I must work the works of Him that sent Me, whilst it is day." But in summer the days are longer than in winter.
Therefore, since He was born in the depth of winter, eight days before the Kalends of January, it seems that He was not born at a fitting time.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Gal. 4:4): "When the fulness of the time was come, G.o.d sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law."
_I answer that,_ There is this difference between Christ and other men, that, whereas they are born subject to the restrictions of time, Christ, as Lord and Maker of all time, chose a time in which to be born, just as He chose a mother and a birthplace. And since "what is of G.o.d is well ordered" and becomingly arranged, it follows that Christ was born at a most fitting time.
Reply Obj. 1: Christ came in order to bring us back from a state of bondage to a state of liberty. And therefore, as He took our mortal nature in order to restore us to life, so, as Bede says (Super Luc.
ii, 4, 5), "He deigned to take flesh at such a time that, shortly after His birth, He would be enrolled in Caesar"s census, and thus submit Himself to bondage for the sake of our liberty."
Moreover, at that time, when the whole world lived under one ruler, peace abounded on the earth. Therefore it was a fitting time for the birth of Christ, for "He is our peace, who hath made both one," as it is written (Eph. 2:14). Wherefore Jerome says on Isa. 2:4: "If we search the page of ancient history, we shall find that throughout the whole world there was discord until the twenty-eighth year of Augustus Caesar: but when our Lord was born, all war ceased"; according to Isa. 2:4: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation."
Again, it was fitting that Christ should be born while the world was governed by one ruler, because "He came to gather His own [Vulg.: "the children of G.o.d"] together in one" (John 11:52), that there might be "one fold and one shepherd" (John 10:16).
Reply Obj. 2: Christ wished to be born during the reign of a foreigner, that the prophecy of Jacob might be fulfilled (Gen.
49:10): "The sceptre shall not be taken away from Juda, nor a ruler from his thigh, till He come that is to be sent." Because, as Chrysostom says (Hom. ii in Matth. [*Opus Imperf., falsely ascribed to Chrysostom]), as long as the Jewish "people was governed by Jewish kings, however wicked, prophets were sent for their healing. But now that the Law of G.o.d is under the power of a wicked king, Christ is born; because a grave and hopeless disease demanded a more skilful physician."
Reply Obj. 3: As says the author of the book _De Qq. Nov. et Vet.
Test.,_ "Christ wished to be born, when the light of day begins to increase in length," so as to show that He came in order that man might come nearer to the Divine Light, according to Luke 1:79: "To enlighten them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death."
In like manner He chose to be born in the rough winter season, that He might begin from then to suffer in body for us.
_______________________
QUESTION 36
OF THE MANIFESTATION OF THE NEWLY BORN CHRIST (In Eight Articles)
We must now consider the manifestation of the newly born Christ: concerning which there are eight points of inquiry:
(1) Whether Christ"s birth should have been made known to all?
(2) Whether it should have been made known to some?
(3) To whom should it have been made known?
(4) Whether He should have made Himself known, or should He rather have been manifested by others?
(5) By what other means should it have been made known?
(6) Of the order of these manifestations;
(7) Of the star by means of which His birth was made known;
(8) of the adoration of the Magi, who were informed of Christ"s nativity by means of the star.
_______________________
FIRST ARTICLE [III, Q. 36, Art. 1]
Whether Christ"s Birth Should Have Been Made Known to All?
Objection 1: It would seem that Christ"s birth should have been made known to all. Because fulfilment should correspond to promise. Now, the promise of Christ"s coming is thus expressed (Ps. 49:3): "G.o.d shall come manifestly. But He came by His birth in the flesh."
Therefore it seems that His birth should have been made known to the whole world.
Obj. 2: Further, it is written (1 Tim. 1:15): "Christ came into this world to save sinners." But this is not effected save in as far as the grace of Christ is made known to them; according to t.i.tus 2:11, 12: "The grace of G.o.d our Saviour hath appeared to all men, instructing us, that denying unG.o.dliness and worldly desires, we should live soberly, and justly, and G.o.dly in this world." Therefore it seems that Christ"s birth should have been made known to all.
Obj. 3: Further, G.o.d is most especially inclined to mercy; according to Ps. 144:9: "His tender mercies are over all His works." But in His second coming, when He will "judge justices" (Ps. 70:3), He will come before the eyes of all; according to Matt. 24:27: "As lightning cometh out of the east, and appeareth even into the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be." Much more, therefore, should His first coming, when He was born into the world according to the flesh, have been made known to all.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Isa. 45:15): "Thou art a hidden G.o.d, the Holy [Vulg.: "the G.o.d] of Israel, the Saviour." And, again (Isa. 43:3): "His look was, as it were, hidden and despised."
_I answer that,_ It was unfitting that Christ"s birth should be made known to all men without distinction. First, because this would have been a hindrance to the redemption of man, which was accomplished by means of the Cross; for, as it is written (1 Cor. 2:8): "If they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory."
Secondly, because this would have lessened the merit of faith, which He came to offer men as the way to righteousness, according to Rom.
3:22: "The justice of G.o.d by faith of Jesus Christ." For if, when Christ was born, His birth had been made known to all by evident signs, the very nature of faith would have been destroyed, since it is "the evidence of things that appear not," as stated, Heb. 11:1.
Thirdly, because thus the reality of His human nature would have come into doubt. Whence Augustine says (Ep. ad Volusianum cx.x.xvii): "If He had not pa.s.sed through the different stages of age from babyhood to youth, had neither eaten nor slept, would He not have strengthened an erroneous opinion, and made it impossible for us to believe that He had become true man? And while He is doing all things wondrously, would He have taken away that which He accomplished in mercy?"
Reply Obj. 1: According to the gloss, the words quoted must be understood of Christ"s coming as judge.
Reply Obj. 2: All men were to be instructed unto salvation, concerning the grace of G.o.d our Saviour, not at the very time of His birth, but afterwards, in due time, after He had "wrought salvation in the midst of the earth" (Ps. 73:12). Wherefore after His Pa.s.sion and Resurrection, He said to His disciples (Matt. 28:19): "Going ... teach ye all nations."
Reply Obj. 3: For judgment to be pa.s.sed, the authority of the judge needs to be known: and for this reason it behooves that the coming of Christ unto judgment should be manifest. But His first coming was unto the salvation of all, which is by faith that is of things not seen. And therefore it was fitting that His first coming should be hidden.
_______________________
SECOND ARTICLE [III, Q. 36, Art. 2]
Whether Christ"s Birth Should Have Been Made Known to Some?
Objection 1: It would seem that Christ"s birth should not have been made known to anyone. For, as stated above (A. 1, ad 3), it befitted the salvation of mankind that Christ"s first coming should be hidden.
But Christ came to save all; according to 1 Tim. 4:10: "Who is the Saviour of all men, especially of the faithful." Therefore Christ"s birth should not have been made known to anyone.
Obj. 2: Further, before Christ was born, His future birth was made known to the Blessed Virgin and Joseph. Therefore it was not necessary that it should be made known to others after His birth.
Obj. 3: Further, no wise man makes known that from which arise disturbance and harm to others. But, when Christ"s birth was made known, disturbance arose: for it is written (Matt. 2:3) that "King Herod, hearing" of Christ"s birth, "was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him." Moreover, this brought harm to others; because it was the occasion of Herod"s killing "all the male children that were in Bethlehem ... from two years old and under." Therefore it seems unfitting for Christ"s birth to have been made known to anyone.
_On the contrary,_ Christ"s birth would have been profitable to none if it had been hidden from all. But it behooved Christ"s birth to be profitable: else He were born in vain. Therefore it seems that Christ"s birth should have been made known to some.
_I answer that,_ As the Apostle says (Rom. 13:1) "what is of G.o.d is well ordered." Now it belongs to the order of Divine wisdom that G.o.d"s gifts and the secrets of His wisdom are not bestowed on all equally, but to some immediately, through whom they are made known to others. Wherefore, with regard to the mystery of the Resurrection it is written (Acts 10:40, 41): "G.o.d ... gave" Christ rising again "to be made manifest, not to all the people, but to witnesses pre-ordained by G.o.d." Consequently, that His birth might be consistent with this, it should have been made known, not to all, but to some, through whom it could be made known to others.
Reply Obj. 1: As it would have been prejudicial to the salvation of mankind if G.o.d"s birth had been made known to all men, so also would it have been if none had been informed of it. Because in either case faith is destroyed, whether a thing be perfectly manifest, or whether it be entirely unknown, so that no one can hear it from another; for "faith cometh by hearing" (Rom. 10:17).
Reply Obj. 2: Mary and Joseph needed to be instructed concerning Christ"s birth before He was born, because it devolved on them to show reverence to the child conceived in the womb, and to serve Him even before He was born. But their testimony, being of a domestic character, would have aroused suspicion in regard to Christ"s greatness: and so it behooved it to be made known to others, whose testimony could not be suspect.
Reply Obj. 3: The very disturbance that arose when it was known that Christ was born was becoming to His birth. First, because thus the heavenly dignity of Christ is made manifest. Wherefore Gregory says (Hom. x in Evang.): "After the birth of the King of heaven, the earthly king is troubled: doubtless because earthly grandeur is covered with confusion when the heavenly majesty is revealed."