Reply Obj. 1: This was the argument of the Gentiles. Wherefore Augustine says (Ep. ad Volusian. cx.x.xvii): "No suitable wonders, say they, show forth the presence of so great majesty, for the ghostly cleansing" whereby He cast out demons, "the cure of the sick, the raising of the dead to life, if other miracles be taken into account, are small things before G.o.d." To this Augustine answers thus: "We own that the prophets did as much ... But even Moses himself and the other prophets made Christ the Lord the object of their prophecy, and gave Him great glory ... He, therefore, chose to do similar things to avoid the inconsistency of failing to do what He had done through others. Yet still He was bound to do something which no other had done: to be born of a virgin, to rise from the dead, and to ascend into heaven. If anyone deem this a slight thing for G.o.d to do, I know not what more he can expect. Having become man, ought He to have made another world, that we might believe Him to be Him by whom the world was made? But in this world neither a greater world could be made nor one equal to it: and if He had made a lesser world in comparison with this, that too would have been deemed a small thing."
As to the miracles worked by others, Christ did greater still. Hence on John 15:24: "If I had not done in [Douay: "among"] them the works that no other men hath done," etc., Augustine says: "None of the works of Christ seem to be greater than the raising of the dead: which thing we know the ancient prophets also did ... Yet Christ did some works "which no other man hath done." But we are told in answer that others did works which He did not, and which none other did ... But to heal with so great a power so many defects and ailments and grievances of mortal men, this we read concerning none soever of the men of old. To say nothing of those, each of whom by His bidding, as they came in His way, He made whole ... Mark saith (6:56): "Whithersoever He entered, into towns or into villages or into cities, they laid the sick in the streets, and besought Him that they might touch but the hem of His garment: and as many as touched Him were made whole." These things none other did in them; for when He saith "In them," it is not to be understood to mean "Among them,"
or "In their presence," but wholly "In them," because He healed them ... Therefore whatever works He did in them are works that none ever did; since if ever any other man did any one of them, by His doing he did it; whereas these works He did, not by their doing, but by Himself."
Reply Obj. 2: Augustine explains this pa.s.sage of John as follows (Tract. lxxi): "What are these "greater works" which believers in Him would do? That, as they pa.s.sed by, their very shadow healed the sick?
For it is greater that a shadow should heal than the hem of a garment ... When, however, He said these words, it was the deeds and works of His words that He spoke of: for when He said ... "The Father who abideth in Me, He doth the works," what works did He mean, then, but the words He was speaking? ... and the fruits of those same words was the faith of those (who believed): but when the disciples preached the Gospel, not some few like those, but the very nations believed ... (Tract. lxxii). Did not that rich man go away from His presence sorrowful? ... and yet afterwards, what one individual, having heard from Him, did not, that many did when He spake by the mouth of His disciples ... Behold, He did greater works when spoken of by men believing than when speaking to men hearing. But there is yet this difficulty: that He did these "greater works" by the apostles: whereas He saith as meaning not only them: ... "He that believeth in Me" ... Listen! ... "He that believeth in Me, the works that I do, he also shall do": first, "I do," then "he also shall do," because I do that he may do. What works--but that from unG.o.dly he should be made righteous? ... Which thing Christ worketh in him, truly, but not without him. Yes, I may affirm this to be altogether greater than to create" [*The words "to create" are not in the text of St. Augustine] "heaven and earth ... for "heaven and earth shall pa.s.s away"; but the salvation and justification of the predestinate shall remain ... But also in the heavens ... the angels are the works of Christ: and does that man do greater works than these, who co-operates with Christ in the work of his justification? ... let him, who can, judge whether it be greater to create a righteous being than to justify an unG.o.dly one. Certainly if both are works of equal power, the latter is a work of greater mercy."
"But there is no need for us to understand all the works of Christ, where He saith "Greater than these shall he do." For by "these" He meant, perhaps, those which He was doing at that hour: now at that time He was speaking words of faith: ... and certainly it is less to preach words of righteousness, which thing He did without us, than to justify the unG.o.dly, which thing He so doth in us that we also do it ourselves."
Reply Obj. 3: When some particular work is proper to some agent, then that particular work is a sufficient proof of the whole power of that agent: thus, since the act of reasoning is proper to man, the mere fact that someone reasons about any particular proposition proves him to be a man. In like manner, since it is proper to G.o.d to work miracles by His own power, any single miracle worked by Christ by His own power is a sufficient proof that He is G.o.d.
_______________________
QUESTION 44
OF (CHRIST"S) MIRACLES CONSIDERED SPECIFICALLY (In Four Articles)
We have now to consider each kind of miracle:
(1) The miracles which He worked in spiritual substances;
(2) The miracles which He worked in heavenly bodies;
(3) The miracles which He worked in man;
(4) The miracles which He worked in irrational creatures.
_______________________
FIRST ARTICLE [III, Q. 44, Art. 1]
Whether Those Miracles Were Fitting Which Christ Worked in Spiritual Substances?
Objection 1: It would seem that those miracles were unfitting which Christ worked in spiritual substances. For among spiritual substances the holy angels are above the demons; for, as Augustine says (De Trin. iii): "The treacherous and sinful rational spirit of life is ruled by the rational, pious, and just spirit of life." But we read of no miracles worked by Christ in the good angels. Therefore neither should He have worked miracles in the demons.
Obj. 2: Further, Christ"s miracles were ordained to make known His G.o.dhead. But Christ"s G.o.dhead was not to be made known to the demons: since this would have hindered the mystery of His Pa.s.sion, according to 1 Cor. 2:8: "If they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory." Therefore He should not have worked miracles in the demons.
Obj. 3: Further, Christ"s miracles were ordained to the glory of G.o.d: hence it is written (Matt. 9:8) that "the mult.i.tudes seeing" that the man sick of the palsy had been healed by Christ, "feared, and glorified G.o.d that gave such power to men." But the demons have no part in glorifying G.o.d; since "praise is not seemly in the mouth of a sinner" (Ecclus. 15:9). For which reason also "He suffered them not to speak" (Mk. 1:34; Luke 4:41) those things which reflected glory on Him. Therefore it seems that it was unfitting for Him to work miracles in the demons.
Obj. 4: Further, Christ"s miracles are ordained to the salvation of mankind. But sometimes the casting out of demons from men was detrimental to man, in some cases to the body: thus it is related (Mk. 9:24, 25) that a demon at Christ"s command, "crying out and greatly tearing" the man, "went out of him; and he became as dead, so that many said: He is dead"; sometimes also to things: as when He sent the demons, at their own request, into the swine, which they cast headlong into the sea; wherefore the inhabitants of those parts "besought Him that He would depart from their coasts" (Matt.
8:31-34). Therefore it seems unfitting that He should have worked such like miracles.
_On the contrary,_ this was foretold (Zech. 13:2), where it is written: "I will take away ... the unclean spirit out of the earth."
_I answer that,_ The miracles worked by Christ were arguments for the faith which He taught. Now, by the power of His G.o.dhead He was to rescue those who would believe in Him, from the power of the demons; according to John 12:31: "Now shall the prince of this world be cast out." Consequently it was fitting that, among other miracles, He should also deliver those who were obsessed by demons.
Reply Obj. 1: Just as men were to be delivered by Christ from the power of the demons, so by Him were they to be brought to the companionship of the angels, according to Col. 1:20: "Making peace through the blood of His cross, both as to the things on earth and the things that are in heaven." Therefore it was not fitting to show forth to men other miracles as regards the angels, except by angels appearing to men: as happened in His Nativity, His Resurrection, and His Ascension.
Reply Obj. 2: As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei ix): "Christ was known to the demons just as much as He willed; and He willed just as far as there was need. But He was known to them, not as to the holy angels, by that which is eternal life, but by certain temporal effects of His power." First, when they saw that Christ was hungry after fasting they deemed Him not to be the Son of G.o.d. Hence, on Luke 4:3, "If Thou be the Son of G.o.d," etc., Ambrose says: "What means this way of addressing Him? save that, though He knew that the Son of G.o.d was to come, yet he did not think that He had come in the weakness of the flesh?" But afterwards, when he saw Him work miracles, he had a sort of conjectural suspicion that He was the Son of G.o.d. Hence on Mk.
1:24, "I know who Thou art, the Holy one of G.o.d," Chrysostom [*Victor of Antioch. Cf. Catena Aurea] says that "he had no certain or firm knowledge of G.o.d"s coming." Yet he knew that He was "the Christ promised in the Law," wherefore it is said (Luke 4:41) that "they knew that He was Christ." But it was rather from suspicion than from certainty that they confessed Him to be the Son of G.o.d. Hence Bede says on Luke 4:41: "The demons confess the Son of G.o.d, and, as stated farther on, "they knew that He was Christ." For when the devil saw Him weakened by His fast, He knew Him to be a real man: but when He failed to overcome Him by temptation, He doubted lest He should be the Son of G.o.d. And now from the power of His miracles He either knew, or rather suspected that He was the Son of G.o.d. His reason therefore for persuading the Jews to crucify Him was not that he deemed Him not to be Christ or the Son of G.o.d, but because he did not foresee that he would be the loser by His death. For the Apostle says of this mystery" (1 Cor. 2:7, 8), "which is hidden from the beginning, that "none of the princes of this world knew it," for if they had known it they would never have crucified the Lord of glory."
Reply Obj. 3: The miracles which Christ worked in expelling demons were for the benefit, not of the demons, but of men, that they might glorify Him. Wherefore He forbade them to speak in His praise. First, to give us an example. For, as Athanasius says, "He restrained his speech, although he was confessing the truth; to teach us not to care about such things, although it may seem that what is said is true.
For it is wrong to seek to learn from the devil when we have the Divine Scripture": Besides, it is dangerous, since the demons frequently mix falsehood with truth. Or, as Chrysostom [*Cyril of Alexandria, Comment. in Luc.] says: "It was not meet for them to usurp the prerogative of the apostolic office. Nor was it fitting that the mystery of Christ should be proclaimed by a corrupt tongue"
because "praise is not seemly in the mouth of a sinner" [*Cf.
Theophylact, Enarr. in Luc.]. Thirdly, because, as Bede says, "He did not wish the envy of the Jews to be aroused thereby" [*Bede, Expos.
in Luc. iv, 41]. Hence "even the apostles are commanded to be silent about Him, lest, if His Divine majesty were proclaimed, the gift of His Pa.s.sion should be deferred."
Reply Obj. 4: Christ came specially to teach and to work miracles for the good of man, and princ.i.p.ally as to the salvation of his soul.
Consequently, He allowed the demons, that He cast out, to do man some harm, either in his body or in his goods, for the salvation of man"s soul--namely, for man"s instruction. Hence Chrysostom says on Matt.
8:32 that Christ let the demons depart into the swine, "not as yielding to the demons, but first, to show ... how harmful are the demons who attack men; secondly, that all might learn that the demons would not dare to hurt even the swine, except He allow them; thirdly, that they would have treated those men more grievously than they treated the swine, unless they had been protected by G.o.d"s providence."
And for the same motives He allowed the man, who was being delivered from the demons, to suffer grievously for the moment; yet did He release him at once from that distress. By this, moreover, we are taught, as Bede says on Mk. 9:25, that "often, when after falling into sin we strive to return to G.o.d, we experience further and more grievous attacks from the old enemy. This he does, either that he may inspire us with a distaste for virtue, or that he may avenge the shame of having been cast out." For the man who was healed "became as dead," says Jerome, "because to those who are healed it is said, "You are dead; and your life is hid with Christ in G.o.d"" (Col. 3:3) _______________________
SECOND ARTICLE [III, Q. 44, Art. 2]
Whether It Was Fitting That Christ Should Work Miracles in the Heavenly Bodies?
Objection 1: It would seem that it was unfitting that Christ should work miracles in the heavenly bodies. For, as Dionysius says (Div.
Nom. iv), "it beseems Divine providence not to destroy, but to preserve, nature." Now, the heavenly bodies are by nature incorruptible and unchangeable, as is proved _De Coelo_ i. Therefore it was unfitting that Christ should cause any change in the order of the heavenly bodies.
Obj. 2: Further, the course of time is marked out by the movement of the heavenly bodies, according to Gen. 1:14: "Let there be lights made in the firmament of heaven ... and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years." Consequently if the movement of the heavenly bodies be changed, the distinction and order of the seasons is changed. But there is no report of this having been perceived by astronomers, "who gaze at the stars and observe the months," as it is written (Isa. 47:13). Therefore it seems that Christ did not work any change in the movements of the heavenly bodies.
Obj. 3: Further, it was more fitting that Christ should work miracles in life and when teaching, than in death: both because, as it is written (2 Cor. 13:4), "He was crucified through weakness, yet He liveth by the power of G.o.d," by which He worked miracles; and because His miracles were in confirmation of His doctrine. But there is no record of Christ having worked any miracles in the heavenly bodies during His lifetime: nay, more; when the Pharisees asked Him to give "a sign from heaven," He refused, as Matthew relates (12, 16).
Therefore it seems that neither in His death should He have worked any miracles in the heavenly bodies.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Luke 23:44, 45): "There was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour; and the sun was darkened."
_I answer that,_ As stated above (Q. 43, A. 4) it behooved Christ"s miracles to be a sufficient proof of His G.o.dhead. Now this is not so sufficiently proved by changes wrought in the lower bodies, which changes can be brought about by other causes, as it is by changes wrought in the course of the heavenly bodies, which have been established by G.o.d alone in an unchangeable order. This is what Dionysius says in his epistle to Polycarp: "We must recognize that no alteration can take place in the order end movement of the heavens that is not caused by Him who made all and changes all by His word."
Therefore it was fitting that Christ should work miracles even in the heavenly bodies.
Reply Obj. 1: Just as it is natural to the lower bodies to be moved by the heavenly bodies, which are higher in the order of nature, so is it natural to any creature whatsoever to be changed by G.o.d, according to His will. Hence Augustine says (Contra Faust. xxvi; quoted by the gloss on Rom. 11:24: "Contrary to nature thou wert grafted," etc.): "G.o.d, the Creator and Author of all natures, does nothing contrary to nature: for whatsoever He does in each thing, that is its nature." Consequently the nature of a heavenly body is not destroyed when G.o.d changes its course: but it would be if the change were due to any other cause.
Reply Obj. 2: The order of the seasons was not disturbed by the miracle worked by Christ. For, according to some, this gloom or darkening of the sun, which occurred at the time of Christ"s pa.s.sion, was caused by the sun withdrawing its rays, without any change in the movement of the heavenly bodies, which measures the duration of the seasons. Hence Jerome says on Matt. 27:45: "It seems as though the "greater light" withdrew its rays, lest it should look on its Lord hanging on the Cross, or bestow its radiancy on the impious blasphemers." And this withdrawal of the rays is not to be understood as though it were in the sun"s power to send forth or withdraw its rays: for it sheds its light, not from choice, but by nature, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. iv). But the sun is said to withdraw its rays in so far as the Divine power caused the sun"s rays not to reach the earth. On the other hand, Origen says this was caused by clouds coming between (the earth and the sun). Hence on Matt. 27:45 he says: "We must therefore suppose that many large and very dense clouds were ma.s.sed together over Jerusalem and the land of Judea; so that it was exceedingly dark from the sixth to the ninth hour. Hence I am of opinion that, just as the other signs which occurred at the time of the Pa.s.sion"--namely, "the rending of the veil, the quaking of the earth," etc.--"took place in Jerusalem only, so this also: ... or if anyone prefer, it may be extended to the whole of Judea," since it is said that ""there was darkness over the whole earth," which expression refers to the land of Judea, as may be gathered from 3 Kings 18:10, where Abdias says to Elias: "As the Lord thy G.o.d liveth, there is no nation or kingdom whither my lord hath not sent to seek thee": which shows that they sought him among the nations in the neighborhood of Judea."
On this point, however, credence is to be given rather to Dionysius, who is an eyewitness as to this having occurred by the moon eclipsing the sun. For he says (Ep. ad Polycarp): "Without any doubt we saw the moon encroach on the sun," he being in Egypt at the time, as he says in the same letter. And in this he points out four miracles. The first is that the natural eclipse of the sun by interposition of the moon never takes place except when the sun and moon are in conjunction. But then the sun and moon were in opposition, it being the fifteenth day, since it was the Jewish Pa.s.sover. Wherefore he says: "For it was not the time of conjunction."--The second miracle is that whereas at the sixth hour the moon was seen, together with the sun, in the middle of the heavens, in the evening it was seen to be in its place, i.e. in the east, opposite the sun. Wherefore he says: "Again we saw it," i.e. the moon, "return supernaturally into opposition with the sun," so as to be diametrically opposite, having withdrawn from the sun "at the ninth hour," when the darkness ceased, "until evening." From this it is clear that the wonted course of the seasons was not disturbed, because the Divine power caused the moon both to approach the sun supernaturally at an unwonted season, and to withdraw from the sun and return to its proper place according to the season. The third miracle was that the eclipse of the sun naturally always begins in that part of the sun which is to the west and spreads towards the east: and this is because the moon"s proper movement from west to east is more rapid than that of the sun, and consequently the moon, coming up from the west, overtakes the sun and pa.s.ses it on its eastward course. But in this case the moon had already pa.s.sed the sun, and was distant from it by the length of half the heavenly circle, being opposite to it: consequently it had to return eastwards towards the sun, so as to come into apparent contact with it from the east, and continue in a westerly direction. This is what he refers to when he says: "Moreover, we saw the eclipse begin to the east and spread towards the western edge of the sun," for it was a total eclipse, "and afterwards pa.s.s away." The fourth miracle consisted in this, that in a natural eclipse that part of the sun which is first eclipsed is the first to reappear (because the moon, coming in front of the sun, by its natural movement pa.s.ses on to the east, so as to come away first from the western portion of the sun, which was the first part to be eclipsed), whereas in this case the moon, while returning miraculously from the east to the west, did not pa.s.s the sun so as to be to the west of it: but having reached the western edge of the sun returned towards the east: so that the last portion of the sun to be eclipsed was the first to reappear.
Consequently the eclipse began towards the east, whereas the sun began to reappear towards the west. And to this he refers by saying: "Again we observed that the occultation and emersion did not begin from the same point," i.e. on the same side of the sun, "but on opposite sides."
Chrysostom adds a fifth miracle (Hom. lx.x.xviii in Matth.), saying that "the darkness in this case lasted for three hours, whereas an eclipse of the sun lasts but a short time, for it is soon over, as those know who have seen one." Hence we are given to understand that the moon was stationary below the sun, except we prefer to say that the duration of the darkness was measured from the first moment of occultation of the sun to the moment when the sun had completely emerged from the eclipse.
But, as Origen says (on Matt. 27:45), "against this the children of this world object: How is it such a phenomenal occurrence is not related by any writer, whether Greek or barbarian?" And he says that someone of the name of Phlegon "relates in his chronicles that this took place during the reign of Tiberius Caesar, but he does not say that it occurred at the full moon." It may be, therefore, that because it was not the time for an eclipse, the various astronomers living then throughout the world were not on the look-out for one, and that they ascribed this darkness to some disturbance of the atmosphere. But in Egypt, where clouds are few on account of the tranquillity of the air, Dionysius and his companions were considerably astonished so as to make the aforesaid observations about this darkness.
Reply Obj. 3: Then, above all, was there need for miraculous proof of Christ"s G.o.dhead, when the weakness of human nature was most apparent in Him. Hence it was that at His birth a new star appeared in the heavens. Wherefore Maximus says (Serm. de Nativ. viii): "If thou disdain the manger, raise thine eyes a little and gaze on the new star in the heavens, proclaiming to the world the birth of our Lord."
But in His Pa.s.sion yet greater weakness appeared in His manhood.
Therefore there was need for yet greater miracles in the greater lights of the world. And, as Chrysostom says (Hom. lx.x.xviii in Matth.): "This is the sign which He promised to them who sought for one saying: "An evil and adulterous generation seeketh a sign; and a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet,"
referring to His Cross ... and Resurrection ... For it was much more wonderful that this should happen when He was crucified than when He was walking on earth."
_______________________
THIRD ARTICLE [III, Q. 44, Art. 3]
Whether Christ Worked Miracles Fittingly on Men?