 Question 42 of Summa Theologica Terziapars, Trietis on the Saviour. This is the LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Summa Theologica Terziapars, Trietis on the Saviour, by St. Thomas Aquinas, translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Question 42 of Christ's Doctrine in four articles. We have now to consider Christ's Doctrine, about which there are four points of inquiry. First, whether Christ should have preached to the Jews only or to the Gentiles also. Second, whether in preaching he should have avoided the opposition of the Jews. Third, whether he should have preached in an open or in a hidden manner. Fourth, whether he should have preached by word only or also by writing. Concerning the time when he began to teach, we have spoken above when treating of his baptism, in Question 29, Article 3. First, article. Whether Christ should have preached not only to the Jews but also to the Gentiles. Objection one, it would seem that Christ should have preached not only to the Jews but also to the Gentiles, for it is written in Isaiah 49 verse 6. It is a small thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Israel and to convert the dregs of Jacob. Behold, I have given thee to be the light of the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation even to the farthest part of the earth. But Christ gave light and salvation through his Doctrine. Therefore it seems that it was a small thing that he preached to the Jews alone and not to the Gentiles. Objection two further, as it is written in Matthew 7 verse 29. He was teaching them as one having power. Now the power of doctrine is made more manifest in the instruction of those who, like the Gentiles, have received no tidings whatever. Hence the apostle says in Romans 15-20, I have so preached the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation. Therefore much rather should Christ have preached to the Gentiles than to the Jews. Objection three further, it is more useful to instruct many than one. But Christ instructed some individual Gentiles such as the Samaritan woman in John 4 and the Canaanine woman in Matthew 15. Much more reason therefore was there for Christ to preach to the Gentiles in general. On the contrary, our Lord said in Matthew 15-24, I was not sent but to the sheep that are lost of the house of Israel and in Romans 10 verse 15 it is written. How shall they preach unless they be sent? Therefore Christ should not have preached to the Gentiles. I answer that it was fitting that Christ's preaching, whether through himself or through his apostles, should be directed at first to the Jews alone. First in order to show that by his coming the promises were fulfilled which had been made to the Jews of old and not to the Gentiles. Thus the apostle says in Romans 15 verse 8, I say that Christ was minister of the circumcision, that is the apostle and preacher of the Jews, for the truth of God to confirm the promises made unto the fathers. Secondly, in order to show that his coming was of God, because as is written in Romans 13 verse 1, those things which are of God are well ordered. Now the right order demanded that the doctrine of Christ should be made to known first to the Jews who by believing in and worshiping one God were nearer to God and that it should be transmitted through them to the Gentiles. Just as in the heavenly hierarchy, the divine enlightenment comes to the lower angels through the higher. Hence on Matthew 15 verse 24, I was not sent but to the sheep that are lost in the house of Israel. Jerome says, He does not mean by this that he was not sent to the Gentiles, but that he was sent to the Jews first. And so we read in Isaiah 66 verse 19, I will send of them that shall be saved, that is of the Jews, to the Gentiles, and they shall declare my glory unto the Gentiles. Thirdly, in order to deprive the Jews of ground for quibbling, hence on Matthew 10 verse 5, go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, Jerome says, It behooved Christ's coming to be announced to the Jews first, lest they should have a valid excuse and say that they had rejected our Lord because he had sent his apostles to the Gentiles and Samaritans. Fourthly, because it was through the triumph of the cross that Christ merited power and lordship over the Gentiles. Hence it is written in Apocalypse 2 verses 26 and 28, He that shall overcome, I will give him power over the nations, as I also have received of my Father, and that because he became obedient unto the death of the cross, God hath exalted him, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, and that every tongue should confess him, as is written in Philippians 2 verses 8 through 11. Consequently, he did not wish his doctrine to be preached to the Gentiles before his passion. It was after his passion that he said to his disciples, as is written in Matthew 28 verse 19, Going, teach ye all nations. For this reason, it was that when, shortly before his passion, certain Gentiles wished to see Jesus, he said, Unless the grain of wheat falling into the ground dyeth, itself remaineth alone, but if it die it bringeth forth much fruit, as is written in John 12 verses 20 through 25. And as Augustine says, commenting on this passage, He called himself the grain of wheat that must be mortified by the unbelief of the Jews, multiplied by the faith of the nations. Reply to Objection 1. Christ was given to be the light and salvation of the Gentiles through his disciples, whom he sent to preach to them. Reply to Objection 2. It is a sign, not of lesser, but of greater power, to do something by means of others rather than by oneself. And thus the divine power of Christ was especially shown in this, that he bestowed on the teaching of his disciples such a power that they converted the Gentiles to Christ, although these had heard nothing of him. Now the power of Christ's teaching is to be considered in the miracles by which he confirmed his doctrine, in the efficacy of his persuasion, and in the authority of his words. For he spoke as being himself above the law when he said, But I say to you, as is written in Matthew chapter 5 verse 22, verse 28, verse 32, verse 34, verse 39, verse 44, etc. And again, in the force of his righteousness, shown in his sinless manner of life. Reply to Objection 3. Just as it was unfitting that Christ should at the outset make his doctrine known to the Gentiles equally with the Jews in order that he might appear as being sent to the Jews as to the firstborn people. So neither was it fitting for him to neglect the Gentiles altogether, lest they should be deprived of the hope of salvation. For this reason, certain individual Gentiles were admitted, on account of the excellence of their faith and devotedness. Second article. Whether Christ should have preached to the Jews without offending them? Objection 1. It would seem that Christ should have preached to the Jews without offending them. For as Augustine says in On Christian Struggle 11, In the man Jesus Christ, a model of life is given us by the Son of God. But we should avoid offending not only the faithful but even unbelievers according to 1 Corinthians 10.32. Be without offence to the Jews and to the Gentiles and to the Church of God. Therefore it seems that, in his teaching, Christ should also have avoided giving offence to the Jews. Objection 2 further. No wise man should do anything that will hinder the result of his labor. Now, through the disturbance which his teaching occasioned among the Jews, it was deprived of its results. For it is written in Luke 11 verses 53 and 54 that when our Lord reproved the Pharisees and scribes, they began vehemently to urge him and to oppress his mouth about many things, lying and wait for him and seeking to catch something from his mouth that they might accuse him. It seems therefore unfitting that he should have given them offence by his teaching. Objection 3 further. The apostle says in 1 Timothy 5.1, An ancient man rebuked not, but entreat him as a father. But the priests and princes of the Jews were the elders of that people. Therefore it seems that they should not have been rebuked with severity. On the contrary, it was foretold in Isaiah 8 verse 14 that Christ would be for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to the two houses of Israel. I answer that the salvation of the multitude is to be preferred to the peace of any individuals whatsoever. Consequently, when certain ones, by their perverseness, hinder the salvation of the multitude, the preacher and the teacher should not fear to offend those men in order that he may ensure the salvation of the multitude. Now the scribes and Pharisees and the princes of the Jews were by their malice a considerable hindrance to the salvation of the people, both because they opposed themselves to Christ's doctrine, which was the only way to salvation, and because their evil ways corrupted the morals of the people, for which reason our Lord, undeterred by their taking offense, publicly taught the truth which they hated and condemned their vices. Hence we read in Matthew 15 verses 12 and 14 that when the disciples of our Lord said, Dost thou know that the Pharisees, when they heard this word, were scandalized? He answered, Let them alone. They are blind and leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit. Reply to Objection 1. A man ought so to avoid giving offense as neither by wrong deed or word to be the occasion of anyone's downfall. But if scandal arise from truth, the scandal should be born rather than the truth be set aside, as Gregory says in his homily number 7 on Ezekiel. Reply to Objection 2. By publicly reproving the scribes and Pharisees, Christ promoted rather than hindered the effect of his teaching, because when the people came to know the vices of those men, they were less inclined to be prejudiced against Christ by hearing what was said of him by the scribes and Pharisees, who were everwithstanding his doctrine. Reply to Objection 3. This saying of the Apostle is to be understood of those elders whose years are reckoned not only in age and authority, but also in property. According to Numbers 11-16, Gather unto me seventy men of the ancients of Israel, whom thou knowest to be ancients of the people, but if by sinning openly they turn the authority of their years into an instrument of wickedness, they should be rebuked openly and severely, as also Daniel says in Daniel 13 verse 52, O thou that art grown old in evil days, etc. Third Article Whether Christ should have taught all things openly. Objection 1. It would seem that Christ should not have taught all things openly, for we read that he taught many things to his disciples apart, as is seen clearly in the Sermon at the Supper. Wherefore, he said, That which you heard in the ear in the chambers shall be preached on the housetops. Translators note St. Thomas, probably quoting from memory, combines Matthew 10-27 with Luke 12-3. Therefore, he did not teach all things openly. Objection 2 further. The depths of wisdom should not be expounded save to the perfect, according to 1 Corinthians 2-6. We speak wisdom among the perfect. Now Christ's doctrine contained the most profound wisdom. Therefore, it should not have been made known to the imperfect crowd. Objection 3 further. It comes to the same, to hide the truth whether by saying nothing or by making use of a language that is difficult to understand. Now Christ, by speaking to the multitudes a language they would not understand, hid from them the truth that he preached, since without parables he did not speak to them, as is recorded in Matthew 13-34. In the same way, therefore, he could have hidden it from them by saying nothing at all. On the contrary, he says himself in John 18-20, In secret I have spoken nothing. I answer that. Anyone's doctrine may be hidden in three ways. First, on the part of the intention of the teacher, who does not wish to make his doctrine known to many, but rather to hide it. And this may happen in two ways. Sometimes through envy on the part of the teacher, who desires to excel in his knowledge, wherefore he is unwilling to communicate it to others. But this was not the case with Christ in whose person the following words are spoken. In wisdom 7-13, Which I have learned without guile, and communicate without envy, and her riches I hide not. But sometimes this happens through the vileness of the things taught. Thus Augustine says on John 16-12, There are some things so bad that no sort of human modesty can bear them. Wherefore of heretical doctrine it is written in Proverbs 9-17, Stolen waters are sweeter. Now Christ's doctrine is, Not of error nor of uncleanness, according to 1 Thessalonians 2-3. Wherefore our Lord says in Mark 4-21, Doth a candle, that is true and pure doctrine, Come in to be put under a bushel. Secondly, doctrine is hidden because it is put before few. And thus again did Christ teach nothing in secret, for he propounded his entire doctrine either to the whole crowd or to his disciples gathered together. Hence Augustine says on John 18-20, How can it be said that he speaks in secret when he speaks before so many men? Especially if what he says to few he wishes through them to be made known to many. Thirdly, doctrine is hidden as to the manner in which it is propounded. And thus Christ spoke certain things in secret to the crowds by employing parables in teaching them spiritual mysteries which they were either unable or unworthy to grasp. And yet it was better for them to be instructed in the knowledge of spiritual things, albeit hidden under the garb of parables, than to be deprived of it altogether. Nevertheless, our Lord expounded the open and unveiled truth of these parables to his disciples so that they might hand it down to others worthy of it, according to 2 Timothy 2-2. The things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same command to faithful men who shall be fit to teach others. This is foreshadowed in Numbers 4, where the sons of Aaron are commanded to wrap up the sacred vessels that were to be carried by the Levites. Reply to Objection 1. As Hillary says, commenting on the passage quoted, We do not read that our Lord was want to preach at night and expound his doctrine in the dark. But he says this because his speech is darkness to the carnal-minded, and his words are night to the unbeliever. His meaning, therefore, is that whatever he said we also should say in the midst of unbelievers by openly believing and professing it. Or, according to Jerome, he speaks comparatively, that is to say, because he was instructing them in Judea, which was a small place compared with the whole world, where Christ's doctrine was to be published by the preaching of the apostles. Reply to Objection 2. By his doctrine our Lord did not make known all the depths of his wisdom, neither to the multitudes nor indeed to his disciples, to whom he said in John 16-12, I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. Yet whatever things out of his wisdom he judged it right to make known to others, he expounded not in secret but openly, although he was not understood by all. Hence Augustine says on John 18-20, We must understand this. I have spoke openly to the world, as though our Lord had said, Many have hurt me, and again it was not openly, because they did not understand. Reply to Objection 3. As stated above, Our Lord spoke to the multitudes and parables, because they were neither able nor worthy to receive the naked truth, which he revealed to his disciples. And when it is said that, without parables he did not speak to them, according to Chrysostom, as is homily 47 on the Gospel of Matthew, we are to understand this of that particular sermon, since on other occasions he said many things to the multitude without parables. Or again as Augustine says, in his Questions on the Gospel, Question 17, this means, Not that he spoke nothing literally, but that he scarcely ever spoke without introducing a parable, although he also spoke some things in the literal sense. Fourth Article Whether Christ should have committed his doctrine to writing. Objection 1. It would seem that Christ should have committed his doctrine to writing, for the purpose of writing is to hand down doctrine to posterity. Now Christ's doctrine was destined to endure forever, according to Luke 21-33, Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. Therefore it seems that Christ should have committed his doctrine to writing. Objection 2 further. The old law was a foreshadowing of Christ, according to Hebrews 10-1. The law has a shadow of the good things to come. Now the old law was put into writing by God, according to Exodus 24-12. I will give the two tables of stone and the law, and the commandments which I have written. Therefore it seems that Christ also should have put his doctrine into writing. Objection 3 further. To Christ, who came to enlighten them that sit in darkness, according to Luke 1-79, it belonged to remove occasions of error and to open out the road to faith. Now he would have done this by putting his teaching into writing, as what Augustine says in his consensus of the evangelists one that some there are who wonder why our Lord wrote nothing, so that we have to believe what others have written about him. Especially do the pagans ask this question who dare not blame or blaspheme Christ and who ascribe to him most excellent, but merely human wisdom. These say that the disciples made out the master to be more than he really was when they said he was the Son of God and the Word of God by whom all things were made. And farther on he adds, it seems as though they were prepared to believe whatever he might have written of himself, but not what others at their discretion published about him. Therefore it seems that Christ should have himself committed his doctrine to writing. On the contrary, no books written by him were to be found in the canon of Scripture. I answer that it was fitting that Christ should not commit his doctrine to writing. First, on account of his dignity, for the more excellent the teacher, the more excellent should be his manner of teaching. Consequently it was fitting that Christ, as the most excellent of teachers, should adopt that manner of teaching whereby his doctrine is imprinted on the hearts of his hearers, wherefore it is written in Matthew 729 that he was teaching them as one having power, and so it was that among the Gentiles, Pythagoras and Socrates, who were teachers of great excellence, were unwilling to write anything. For writings are ordained, as to an end, unto the imprinting of doctrine in the hearts of the hearers. Secondly, on account of the excellence of Christ's doctrine, which cannot be expressed in writing, according to John 21 25, there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they were written, everyone, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written, which Augustine explains by saying, We are not to believe that in respect of space the world could not contain them, but that by the capacity of the readers they could not be comprehended, and if Christ had committed his doctrine to writing, men would have had no deeper thought of his doctrine than that which appears on the surface of the writing. Thirdly, that his doctrine might reach all in an orderly manner. Himself teaching his disciples immediately, and they subsequently teaching others by preaching and writing, whereas if he himself had written his doctrine would have reached all immediately. Hence it is said of Wisdom, in Proverbs 9.3 that she hath sent her maids to invite to the tower. It is to be observed, however, that, as Augustine says in his Consensus of the Evangelists 1, some of the Gentiles thought that Christ wrote certain books of the magic art whereby he worked miracles, which art is condemned by the Christian learning, and yet they who claim to have read those books of Christ do none of those things which they marvel at his doing according to those same books. Moreover, it is by a divine judgment that they err so far as to assert that these books were, as it were, entitled as Letters to Peter and Paul, for that they found them in several places depicted in company with Christ. No wonder that the inventors were deceived by the painters. For as long as Christ lived in the mortal flesh with his disciples, Paul was no disciple of his. Reply to Objection 1, as Augustine says in the same book, Christ is the head of all his disciples who are members of his body. Consequently, when they put into writing what he showed forth and said to them, by no means must we say that he wrote nothing, since his members put forth that which they knew under his dictation. For at his command they, being his hands, as it were, wrote whatever he wished us to read concerning his deeds and words. Reply to Objection 2, since the old law was given under the form of sensible signs, therefore also was it fittingly written with sensible signs. But Christ's doctrine, which is the law of the spirit of life, according to Romans 8, 2, had to be written not with ink, but with the spirit of the living God, not in tables of stone, but in the fleshly tables of the heart, as the apostle says in 2 Corinthians 3, 3. Reply to Objection 3, those who were unwilling to believe what the apostles wrote of Christ would have refused to believe the writings of Christ, whom they deemed to work miracles by the magic art. End of Question 42 Read by Michael Shane Craig Lambert, LC. Question 43 of Summa Theologica Terziapars, Trietis on the Saviour. This is a Librivox recording. All Librivox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit Librivox.org. Summa Theologica Terziapars, Trietis on the Saviour, by Saint Thomas Aquinas, translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Question 43 of the miracles worked by Christ in general, in four articles. We must now consider the miracles worked by Christ, one in general, two specifically of each kind of miracle, and three in particular of His Transfiguration. Concerning the first, there are four points of inquiry. First, whether Christ should have worked miracles. Second, whether He worked them by divine power. Third, when did He begin to work miracles? Fourth, whether His miracles are a sufficient proof of His Godhead. First article, whether Christ should have worked miracles. Objection 1 It would seem that Christ should not have worked miracles. For Christ's deeds should have been consistent with His words. But He Himself said in Matthew 16.4, A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas the Prophet. Therefore He should not have worked miracles. Objection 2 Further, just as Christ, at His second coming, is to come with great power and majesty, as is written in Matthew 24.30, so at His first coming He came in infirmity, according to Isaiah 53.3, a man of sorrows and acquainted with infirmity. But the working of miracles belongs to power, rather than to infirmity. Therefore it was not fitting that He should work miracles in His first coming. Objection 3 Further, Christ came that He might save men by faith, according to Hebrews 12.2. Looking on Jesus, the author and finisher of faith. But miracles lessen the merit of faith, and Sire Lord says in John 4.48, Unless you see signs and wonders, you believe not. Therefore it seems that Christ should not have worked miracles. On the contrary, it was said in the person of His adversaries in John 11.47, What do we for this man doth many miracles? I answer that God enables man to work miracles for two reasons. First and principally, in confirmation of the doctrine that a man teaches. For since those things which are of faith surpass human reason, they cannot be proved by human arguments, but need to be proved by the argument of divine power. So that when a man does works that God alone can do, we may believe that what he says is from God. Just as when a man is the bearer of letters sealed with the king's ring, it is believed to be that what they contain expresses the king's will. Secondly, in order to make known God's presence in a man by the grace of the Holy Ghost, so that when a man does the works of God, we may believe that God dwells in him by his grace. Wherefore it is written in Galatians 3.5, He who giveth to you the Spirit and worketh miracles among you. Now both these things were to be made known to men concerning Christ, namely that God dwelt in him by grace not of adoption, but of union, and that his supernatural doctrine was from God. And therefore it was most fitting that he should work miracles. Wherefore he himself says in John 10.38, Though you will not believe me, believe the works, and in John 5.36, the works which the Father hath given me to perfect themselves give testimony to me. Reply to Objection 1. These words a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas. Mean, as Chrysostom says in his 43rd homily on the Gospel of Matthew, that they did not receive a sign such as they sought, notably from heaven. But not that he gave them no sign at all, or that he worked signs not for the sake of those whom he knew to be hardened, but to amend others. Therefore those signs were given not to them, but to others. Reply to Objection 2. Although Christ came in the infirmity of the flesh, which is manifested in the passions, yet he came in the power of God, Confir 2 Corinthians 13.4, and this had to be made manifest by miracles. Reply to Objection 3. Miracles lessen the merit of faith insofar as those are shown to be heart of heart who are unwilling to believe what is proved from the Scriptures unless they are convinced by miracles. Yet it is better for them to be converted to the faith even by miracles than that they should remain altogether in their unbelief. For it is written in 1 Corinthians 14-22 that signs are given to unbelievers, notably that they may be converted to the faith. Second Article Whether Christ worked miracles by divine power Objection 1. He would seem that Christ did not work miracles by divine power. For the divine power is omnipotent. But it seems that Christ was not omnipotent in working miracles, for it is written in Mark 6-5 that he could not do any miracles there. That is, in his own country. Therefore it seems that he did not work miracles by divine power. Objection 2 further God does not pray. But Christ sometimes prayed when working miracles as may be seen in the raising of Lazarus in John 11 verses 41 and 42 and in the multiplication of the loaves as related in Matthew 14-19. Therefore it seems that he did not work miracles by divine power. Objection 3 further What is done by divine power cannot be done by the power of any creature. But the things which Christ did could be done also by the power of a creature wherefor the Pharisees said in Luke 11-15 that he cast out devils by Beelzebub the Prince of Devils. Therefore it seems that Christ did not work miracles by divine power. On the contrary, our Lord said in John 14-10 The Father who abideth in me he doth the works. I answer that as stated in the first part in question 110 article 4 True miracles cannot be wrought saved by divine power because God alone can change the order of nature and this is what is meant by a miracle. Wherefor Pope Leo says in his letter to Flavius number 28 that while there are two natures in Christ there is one, notably the divine which shines forth in miracles and another, notably the human which submits to insults yet each communicates its actions to the other in as far as the human nature is the instrument of the divine action and the human action receives power from the divine nature as stated above in question 19 article 1. Reply to Objection 1 When it is said that he could not do any miracles there it is not to be understood that he could not do them absolutely but that it was not fitting for him to do them for it was unfitting for him to work miracles among unbelievers wherefore it is said further on and he wondered because of their unbelief in like manner it is said in Genesis 1817 can I hide from Abraham what I am about to do and in Genesis 1922 I cannot do anything till thou go in thither Reply to Objection 2 as Chrysostom says on Matthew 14 19 he took the five loaves and the two fishes and looking up to heaven he blessed and break he was to be believed of him both that he is of the Father and that he is equal to him therefore that he might prove both he works miracles now with authority now with prayer in the lesser things indeed he looks up to heaven for instance in multiplying the loaves but in the greater which belong to God alone he acts with authority for example when he forgave sins and raised the dead when it is said that in raising Lazarus he lifted up his eyes as is remarked in John 1141 this was not because he needed to pray but because he wished to teach us how to pray wherefore he said because of the people who stand about have I said it that they may believe that thou hast sent me Christ cast out demons otherwise than they are cast out by the power of demons for demons are cast out from bodies by the power of higher demons in such a way that they retain their power over the soul since the devil does not work against his own kingdom on the other hand Christ casts out demons not only from the body but still more from the soul for this reason our Lord rebuked the blasphemy of the Jews who said that he cast out demons by the power of the demons first by saying that Satan is not divided against himself secondly by quoting the instance of others who cast out demons by the spirit of God thirdly because he could not have cast out a demon unless he had overcome him by divine power fourthly because there was nothing in common between his works and their effects and those of Satan since Satan's purpose was to scatter those whom Christ gathered together confirm Matthew 12, 24 to 30 Mark 3, 22 and Luke 11, 15 to 32 third article whether Christ began to work miracles when he changed water into wine at the marriage feast Objection one it would seem that Christ did not begin to work miracles when he changed water into wine at the marriage feast for we read in the book De Infancia Salvatore's that Christ worked many miracles in his childhood but the miracle of changing water into wine at the marriage feast took place in the 30th or 31st year of his age therefore it seems that it was not then that he began to work miracles Objection two further Christ worked miracles by divine power now he was possessed of divine power from the first moment of his conception for from that instant he was both God and man therefore it seems that he worked miracles from the very first Objection three further Christ began to gather his disciples after his baptism and temptation as related in Matthew 4, 18 and John 135 but the disciples gathered around him principally on account of his miracles thus it is written in Luke 5, 4 that he called Peter when he was astonished at the miracle which he had worked in the draught of fishes therefore it seems that he worked other miracles before that of the marriage feast on the contrary it is written in John 2, 11 this beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee I answer that Christ worked miracles in order to confirm his doctrine and in order to show forth his divine power therefore as to the first it was unbecoming for him to work miracles before he began to teach and it was unfitting that he should begin to teach unless he reached the perfect age as we stated above in speaking of his baptism in question 39, Article 3 but as to the second it was right that he should so manifest his Godhead by working miracles that men should believe in the reality of his manhood and consequently as Chrysostom says in his 21st homily on the Gospel of John it was fitting that he should not begin to work wonders from his early years for men would have deemed the incarnation to be imaginary and would have crucified him before the proper time reply to Objection 1 as Chrysostom says in his 17th homily on the Gospel of John in regard to the saying of John the Baptist that he may be made manifest in Israel therefore I am come baptizing with water it is clear that the wonders which some pretend to have been worked by Christ in his childhood are untrue and fictitious for had Christ worked miracles from his early years John would by no means have been unacquainted with him nor would the rest of the people have stood in need of a teacher to point him out to them reply to Objection 2 what the divine power achieved in Christ was in proportion to the needs of the salvation of mankind the achievement of which was the purpose of his taking flesh consequently he so worked miracles by the divine power as not to prejudice our belief in the reality of his flesh reply to Objection 3 the disciples were to be commended precisely because they followed Christ without having seen him work any miracles as Gregory says in a homily his fifth on the Gospel and as Chrysostom says in his 23rd homily on the Gospel of John the need for working miracles arose then especially when the disciples were already gathered around and attached to him and attentive to what was going on around them hence it is added and his disciples believed in him not because they then believed in him for the first time but because then they believed with greater discernment and perfection or they are called disciples because they were to be disciples later on as Augustine observes in his Consensus of the Evangelists 2 fourth article whether the miracles which Christ worked were a sufficient proof of his Godhead Objection 1 it would seem that the miracles which Christ worked were not a sufficient proof of his Godhead for it is proper to Christ to be both God and man but the miracles which Christ worked have been done by others also therefore they were not a sufficient proof of his Godhead Objection 2 further no power surpasses that of the Godhead but some have worked greater miracles than Christ for it is written in John 14-12 he that believeth in me the works that I do he also shall do and greater than these shall he do therefore it seems that the miracles which Christ worked are not sufficient proof of his Godhead Objection 3 further the particular is not a sufficient proof of the universal but any one of Christ's miracles was one particular work therefore none of them was a sufficient proof of his Godhead by reason of which he had universal power over all things on the contrary our Lord said in John 5-36 the works which the Father hath given me to perfect themselves give testimony of me I answer that the miracles which Christ worked were a sufficient proof of his Godhead in three respects first as to the very nature of the works which surpassed the entire capability of created power and therefore could not be done save by divine power for this reason the blind man after his sight had been restored said in John 9-32 and 33 from the beginning of the world it is not been heard that any man hath opened the eyes of one born blind unless this man were of God he could not do anything secondly as to the way in which he worked miracles namely because he worked miracles as though of his own power and not by praying as others do therefore it is written in Luke 6-19 that virtue went out from him and healed all whereby it is proved as Cyril says in his commentary on Luke that he did not receive power from another but being God by nature he showed his own power over the sick and this is how he worked countless miracles hence on Matthew 8-16 he cast out spirits with his word and all that were sick he healed Chrysostom says Mark how great a multitude of persons healed the evangelists passed quickly over not mentioning one by one but in one word traversing an unspeakable sea of miracles and thus it was shown that his power was co-equal with that of God the Father according to John 5-19 what things so ever the Father doth these the Son doth also in like manner and again in John 5-21 as the Father raises up the dead and giveth life so the Son also giveth life to whom he will thirdly from the very fact that he taught that he was God for unless this were true he would not be confirmed by miracles worked by divine power hence it was said in Mark 1-27 what is this new doctrine for with power he commandeth the unclean spirits and they obey him reply to Objection 1 this was the argument of the Gentiles wherefore Augustine says in his letter 137 to Volusianus 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 God 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 deemed this a slight thing for God 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 1524 if I had not done in them the works that no other man hath done etc. Augustine says none of the works of Christ seem to be greater than the rising 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 an answer that others did works which he did not and which none other did but to heal with so greater power so many defects and ailments and grievances of mortal men this we read concerning none so ever 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 sayeth in chapter 6 verse 56 whether so ever 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 sayeth 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 to objection 2 Augustine explains this passage of John as follows what are these greater works which believers and him would do that as they passed 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 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 spoke 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 ungodly he should be me righteous which thing Christ worketh in him truly but not without him yes I may affirm this to be altogether greater than to create heaven and earth for heaven and earth shall pass 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 cooperates 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 ungodly 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 ungodly which thing he so doth in us that we also do it ourselves reply to objection 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 God to work miracles by his own power any single miracle worked by Christ by his own power is a sufficient proof that he is God End of Question 43 Read by Michael Shane Craig Lambert, LC Question 44 of Summa Theologica Terziapars Treaties on the Saviour This is a LibriVox recording All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Summa Theologica Terziapars Treaties on the Saviour by Saint Thomas Aquinas Translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province Question 44 Of Christ's miracles considered specifically in four articles We have now to consider each kind of miracle First, the miracles which he worked in spiritual substances Second, the miracles which he worked in heavenly bodies Third, the miracles which he worked in man Fourth, the miracles which he worked in irrational creatures First article 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 on the Trinity 3 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 Objection 2 Further, Christ's miracles were ordained to make known his Godhead But Christ's Godhead was not to be made known to the demons Since his world would have hindered the mystery of his passion According to 1 Corinthians 2.8 If they had known it, they would have never crucified the Lord of glory Therefore, he should not have worked miracles in the demons Objection 3 Further, Christ's miracles were ordained to the glory of God And so it is written in Matthew 9.8 that The multitude seeing that the man sick of the palsy had been healed by Christ The Lord and glorified God that gave such powers to men But the demons have no part in glorifying God Since praise is not seemingly in the mouth of a sinner According to Ecclesiasticus 15.9 For which reason also he suffered them not to speak According to Mark 1.34 and 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 Objection 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 in Mark 9.24 and 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 Be sought him that he would depart from their coasts As related in Matthew 8.31 to 34 Therefore it seems unfitting that he should have worked such like miracles On the contrary, this was foretold by Zachariah 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 Godhead 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 the other miracles He should also deliver those who were obsessed by demons Reply to Objection 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 Colossians 120 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 to the angels Except by angels appearing to men as happened in his nativity, his resurrection, and his ascension Reply to Objection 2 As Augustine says in On the City of God 9 Christ was known to the demons just as much as 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 God Hence on Luke 4.3 If thou be the son of God etc. Ambrose says What means this way of addressing him? Save that though he knew that the son of God 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 God Hence on Mark 1.24 I know who thou art, the holy one of God Christastom says that He had no certain or firm knowledge of God's coming Yet he knew that he was the Christ promised in the law Wherefore it is said in Luke 4.41 that They knew that he was the Christ But it was rather from suspicion than from certainty That they confessed him to be the son of God Hence Bede says on Luke 4.41 The demons confessed the son of God And stated further on They knew that he was the 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 God And now from the power of his miracles He either knew or rather suspected That he was the son of God His reason therefore for persuading the Jews to crucify him Was not that he deemed him not to be the Christ Or the son of God But because he did not foresee that he would be the loser by his death For the apostle says of this mystery In 1 Corinthians 2 verses 7 and 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 to Objection 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 says It was not meat 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 seemingly In the mouth of a sinner Thirdly, because as Bede explains He did not wish the envy of the Jews To be aroused thereby Hence even the apostles Are commanded to be silent about him Lest, if his divine majesty were proclaimed The gift of his passion should be deferred Reply to Objection 4 Christ came specially to teach and to work miracles For the good of man And principally 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 Matthew 832 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 allowed them Thirdly that they would have treated those men More grievously than they treated the swine Unless they had been protected by God'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 he did release him at once from that distress By this moreover we are taught as Bede says On Mark 925 that Often when after falling into sin We strive to return to God 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 God Confer conlosions 3-3 Second article Whether it was fitting that Christ Should work miracles in the heavenly bodies Objection one It would seem that it was unfitting That Christ should work miracles in the heavenly bodies For as Dionysius says In On the Divine Names 4 It besiems divine providence Not to destroy but to preserve nature Now the heavenly bodies Are by nature incorruptible and unchangeable As is proved in On the Heavens 1 Therefore it was unfitting That Christ should cause any change In the order of the heavenly bodies Objection two further The course of time is marked out By the movement of the heavenly bodies According to Genesis 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 in 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 in Isaiah 47.13 Therefore it seems that Christ Did not work any change in the movements Of the heavenly bodies Objection three further It was more fitting that Christ Should work miracles in life And when teaching than in death Both because as it is written In 2 Corinthians 13.4 He was crucified through weakness Yet he liveth by the power of God 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 Namor, when the Pharisees asked him To give him a sign from heaven He refused as Matthew relates In chapter 12 verse 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 in Luke 23 verses 44 and 45 There was darkness over all the earth Until the ninth hour And the sun was darkened I answer that as stated above In question 43 article 4 It behooved Christ's miracles To be as sufficient proof of his Godhead 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 God 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 And 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 to Objection 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 it is natural to any creature What so ever to be changed by God According to his will Hence Augustine says In his treatise against Faustus Number 26 Quoted by the gloss on Romans 1124 Contrary to nature thou wert grafted God, 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 God changes its course But it would be if the change were due to any other cause Reply to Objection 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 passion 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 Matthew 2745 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 In On the Divine Names Four But the sun is said to withdraw its rays Insofar 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 Matthew 2745 he says We must therefore suppose That many large and very dense clouds Were massed 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 the opinion that Just as the other signs Which occurred at the time of the passion 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 Third Kings 1810 Where Abba Dias says to Elias As the Lord thy God 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 neighbourhood of Judea On this point however It is said that There is no nation or kingdom Which shows that they sought him 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 in his letter To 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 Passover 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 That is in the east opposite the sun Wherefore he says Again we saw it That is 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 Yes it is clear that the wanted Course of the seasons was not disturbed Because the divine power Caused the moon both to Approach the sun supernaturally At an unwanted 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 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 passes it on its eastward Course But in this case the moon had already Passed the sun and was distant From it by the length of half The heavenly circle being Opposite to it Consequently it had to return eastward 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 pass 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 Passes 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 pass the sun's Was 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 immersion Did not begin from the same point That is On the same side of the sun But on opposite sides Chrysostom adds A fifth miracle In his 88th homily On the Gospel of Matthew 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 who know 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 In his commentary on Matthew 2745 Against this The children of the 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 Is not related by any writer 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 lookout for one And that they ascribed this darkness To some disturbance of the atmosphere But in Egypt Where the depths are few On account of the tranquility of the air Dionysius and his companions Were considerably astonished So as to make the aforesaid observations About this darkness Reply to Objection 3 Then above all Was their need for miraculous proof Of Christ's Godhead When the weakness of human nature Was most apparent in him Hence it was That at his birth Appeared in the heavens Wherefore Maximus says 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 passion 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 On the Gospel of Matthew 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 The article Whether Christ worked miracles Fittingly on men Objection won He would seem that Christ worked Miracles unfittingly on men For in man The soul is of more import Than the body Now Christ worked many miracles On bodies But we do not read of his working Any miracles on souls For neither did he convert By persuading and convincing them With outward miracles Nor is it related of him That he made wise men out of fools Therefore It seems that he worked miracles On men in an unfitting manner Objection to further As stated above In question 43 article 2 Christ worked miracles By divine power To which it is proper To work suddenly, perfectly Without any assistance Now Christ did not always Heal men suddenly As to their bodies For it is written in Mark 8 verses 22 to 25 That Taking the blind man By the hand He led him out of the town And spitting upon his eyes Laying his hands on him He asked him if he saw anything And looking up he said I see men as it were Walking After that again he laid His hands upon his eyes And he began to see and was restored And that he saw all things clearly It is clear from this That he did not heal him suddenly But at first imperfectly And by means of his spittle Therefore it seems That he worked miracles on men Unfittingly Objection 3 further There is no need to remove In time things which do not follow From one another Now bodily ailments Are not always the result of sin As appears from our Lord's words In John 9.3 Neither hath this man sinned Nor his parents That he should be born blind It was Unseemly therefore for him To forgive the sins of those Who sought the healing of the body As he is related to have done In the case of the man sick of the palsy In Matthew 9.2 The more That the healing of the body Being of less account than the forgiveness Of sins does not seem A sufficient argument for the power Of forgiving sins Objection 4 further Christ's miracles were worked In order to confirm his doctrine And witness to his Godhead As stated above In Question 43 Article 4 Now no man should Hinder the purpose of his own work Therefore It seems unfitting that Christ commanded Those who had been healed miraculously To tell no one As appears from Matthew 9.30 And Mark 8.26 The more so Since he commanded others to proclaim The miracles worked on them Thus it is related In Mark 5.19 That after delivering a man from the demons As stated to him Go into thy house to thy friends And tell them how great things The Lord hath done for thee On the contrary it is written In Mark 7.37 He hath done all things well He hath made both the deaf to hear And the dumb to speak I answer that The means Should be proportionate To the end Now Christ came into the world And taught in order to save man According to John 3.17 For God Sent not his son into the world To judge the world But that the world May be saved by him Therefore it was fitting that Christ By miraculously healing men In particular Should prove himself to be the universal And spiritual savior of all Reply to Objection 1 The means Are distinct from the end Now the end for which Christ's miracles were worked Was the health of the rational part Which is healed by the light of wisdom And the gift of righteousness The former of which Presupposes the latter Since as it is written In Wisdom 1.4 Wisdom will not enter Into a malicious soul Nor dwell in a body Subject to sins Now it was unfitting That man should be made righteous Unless he willed For this would be both against the nature Of righteousness Which implies rectitude of the will And contrary to the very nature Of man Which requires to be led to good By the free will, not by force Christ therefore justified man Inwardly by the divine power But not against man's will Nor did this Pertain to his miracles But to the end of his miracles In like manner By the divine power he infused wisdom Into the simple minds of his disciples Hence he said to them In Luke 21 verse 15 I will give you a mouth And wisdom Which all your adversaries Will not be able to resist And gain say And this insofar as the enlightenment Is not to be reckoned as a miracle But only as regards The outward action Namely insofar as men Saw that those who had been unlettered And simple spoke with such wisdom And constancy Wherefore it is written In Acts 4.13 That the Jews seeing The constancy of Peter and of John Understanding that they were Illiterate and ignorant men Wondered. Although such like spiritual effects Are different from visible miracles Yet they do testify To Christ's doctrine and power According to Hebrews 2.4 God also bearing them witness By signs and wonders And diverse miracles And distributions of the Holy Ghost Nevertheless Christ did work some miracles On the soul of man Principally by changing its lower powers Hence Jerome commenting On Matthew 9.9 He rose up and followed him Says Such was the splendour and majesty Of his hidden Godhead Which shone forth even in his human Continence That those who gazed on it were drawn To him at first sight And on Matthew 21.12 Jesus cast out All them that sold and bought The same Jerome says Of all the signs worked by our Lord This seems to me the most Wondrous That one man At that time despised Could with the blows of one scourge Cast out such a multitude For a fiery and heavenly light Flashed from his eyes And the majesty of his Godhead Shone in his continence And origin says On John 21.15 that This was a greater miracle Than when he changed water Into wine For there he shows his power Over inanimate matter Whereas here he tames the minds Of a thousands of men Again on John 18.6 They went backward and fell to the ground Augustine says Though that the crowd Was fierce in hate And terrible with arms Yet did that one word Without any weapon Drive them back, lay them prostrate For God lay hidden In that flesh Moreover, to this must be Referred what Luke says In chapter 4 verse 30, namely that Jesus Passing through the midst Of them went his way On which Chrysostom observes In one of his homilies On the Gospel of John That he stood in the midst of those Who were lying in wait for him And was not seized by them By the power of his Godhead And again that which is written In John 8 verse 59 Jesus hid himself And went out of the temple On which Theoflact says He did not hide himself In a corner of the temple As if afraid, or take shelter Behind a wall or pillar But by his heavenly power Making himself invisible to those Who were threatening him He passed through the midst of them From all these instances It is clear that Christ, when he Willed, changed the minds Of men by his divine power Not only by the bestowal Of righteousness and the infusion Of wisdom which pertains To the end of miracles But also by outwardly drawing Men to himself, or by terrifying Or stupefying them which Pertains to the miraculous itself Reply to objection too Christ came to save The world Not only by divine power But also through the mystery Of his incarnation Consequently, in healing The sick he frequently not Only made use of his divine power Healing by way of command But also by applying something Pertaining to his human nature Hence on Luke 440 He laying his hands on Every one of them healed them Cyril says Although as God He might, by one word Have driven out all diseases Yet he touched them Showing that his own flesh Was endowed with a healing virtue And on Mark 823 Spitting upon his eyes Laying his hands on him etc Chrysostom says He spat And laid his hands upon The blind man That his divine word Accompanied by his operation Works and wonders For the hand signifies operation The spittle signifies The word which proceeds From the mouth Again on John 9.6 He made clay of the spittle And spread the clay upon The eyes of the blind man Augustine says Of his spittle he made clay Because the word He made flesh Or again as Chrysostom says To signify that it was he Who made man Of the slime of the earth It is furthermore to be observed Concerning Christ's miracles That generally what he did Was most perfect Hence on John 210 Every man at first Seteth forth good wine Chrysostom says Christ's miracles are such As to far surpass the works of nature In splendour and usefulness Likewise In an instant he conferred Perfect health on the sick Hence on Matthew 815 She arose and ministered To them Jerome says Health restored by our Lord Returns wholly and instantly There was however special reason For the contrary happening In the case of the man born blind And this was his want of faith As Chrysostom says Or as Bede observes On Mark 823 Whom he might have healed Whom he might have healed Whom he might have healed wholly And instantly by a single word He heals little by little To show the extent of human blindness Which hardly, and that Only by degrees, can come Back to the light And to point out that each Step forward in the way Of perfection is due to the help Of his grace. Reply to Objection 3 As stated above in Question 43 Article 2 Christ's work miracles by divine Power. Now the works of God are Perfect according to Deuteronomy 32 verse 4 But nothing is perfect Except it attain its end. Now the end Of the outward healing worked Christ is the healing of the soul Consequently It was not fitting that Christ Should heal a man's body Without healing his soul Wherefore on John 723 I have healed The whole man on the Sabbath day Augustine says Because he was cured So as to be whole in body He believed so as to be whole In soul To the man sick of the palsy It is said specially Thy sins are forgiven thee Because as Jerome Observes on Matthew 9 verses 5 And 6 We are hereby given to understand That ailments of the body are Frequently due to sin For which reason perhaps First are his sins forgiven That the cause of the ailment Being removed health may return Wherefore also in John 4 14 it is said Sin no more Lest some worse thing happen to thee Wents says Chrysostom We learn that his sickness was The result of sin Nevertheless As Chrysostom says on Matthew 9 5 By how much a soul Is of more account than a body By so much is the forgiving Of sins a greater work Than healing the body But because the one is unseen He does the lesser and more Manifest thing in order to prove The greater and more unseen Reply to objection 4 On Matthew 9 30 See that no man know this Chrysostom says If in another place we find him Saying go and declare the glory Of God Confirm Mark 5 19 Luke 8 39 That is not contrary to this For he instructs us to Forbid them that would praise us On our own account But if the glory be referred to God Then we must not forbid But command that it be done Fourth article Whether Christ worked miracles Fittingly on irrational creatures Objection 1 It would seem that Christ Worked miracles unfittingly On irrational creatures For brute animals Are more noble than plants But Christ worked a miracle On plants as when the fig tree Withered away at his command Confirm Matthew 21 verse 19 Therefore Christ should have worked miracles Also on brute animals Objection 2 further Punishment is not Justly inflicted Save for a fault But it was not the fault of the fig tree That Christ found no fruit on it When fruit was not in season Confirm Mark 11 verse 13 Therefore it seems unfitting That he withered it up Objection 3 further Air and water Are between earth and heaven But Christ worked some miracles In the heavens as stated above In article 2 And likewise in the earth When it quaked at the time 27 verse 51 Therefore it seems that he Should have also worked miracles In the air and water Such as to divide the sea As did Moses in Exodus 1421 Or a river as did Joshua And Elias And to cause thunder to be heard In the air as occurred on Mount Sinai When the law was given And like to what Elias did Objection 4 further Miraculous works pertain To the work of divine providence In governing the world But this work presupposes creation It seems therefore unfitting That in his miracles Christ Made use of creation When to wit he multiplied The loaves Therefore his miracles in regard To irrational creatures Seem to have been unfitting On the contrary Christ is The wisdom of God According to 1 Corinthians 124 Of whom it is said In wisdom chapter 8 verse 1 that She ordereth all things sweetly I answer that as stated above Christ's miracles were ordained To the end that he should be Recognized as having divine power Unto the salvation of mankind Now it belongs to the divine power That every creature be subject There too Consequently it behoved him To work miracles on every kind Of creature not only on man But also on irrational creatures Reply to Objection 1 Brut animals are akin Generically to man Wherefore they were created On the same day as man And since he had worked Many miracles on the bodies Of men there was no need For him to work miracles On the bodies of brute animals And so much the less that As to their sensible And corporeal nature The same reason applies To both men and animals Especially terrestrial But fish, from living in water Are more alien from human nature Wherefore they were made On another day On them Christ worked A miracle in the plentiful drought Of fishes related in Luke 5 And John 21 And again in the fish Caught by Peter who found A stator in it Confer Matthew 17 verse 26 As to this wine Who were cast headlong Into the sea, this was not The effect of a divine miracle But of the action of the demons God permitting Reply to Objection 2 As Chrysostom says On Matthew 21 verse 19 When our Lord Does any such like thing On plants or brute animals Ask not how it was just To wither up the fig tree Since it was not the fruit season To ask such a question Is foolish in the extreme Because such things cannot Commit a fault or be punished But look at the miracle And wonder at the worker Nor does the creator Inflict any hurt on the owner If he choose to make use Of his own creature for the Salvation of others Rather as Hilary says On Matthew 21 verse 19 We should see in this A proof of God's goodness When he wished To afford an example of salvation As being procured by him He exercised his mighty power On the human body But when he wished To picture to them his severity Towards those who willfully Disobey him He foreshadows their doom By his sentence on the tree This is the more noteworthy In a fig tree which As Chrysostom observes On Matthew 21 verse 19 Being full of moisture Makes the miracle all the Reply to Objection 3 Christ also Worked miracles befitting to himself In the air and water When to it as related In Matthew 826 He commanded the winds And the sea and there came A great calm But it was not befitting that he Who came to restore all things To a state of peace and calm Should cause either a disturbance In the atmosphere or a division Of waters Hence the apostle says In Hebrews 1218 You are not come to a fire That may be touched and approached And whirlwind and darkness And storm At the time of his passion however The veil was rent To signify the unfolding Of the mysteries of the law The graves were opened To signify that his death Gave life to the dead The earth quaked and the rocks were Rent To signify that man's stony heart Would be softened and the whole world Changed for the better by the virtue Of his passion. Reply to Objection 4 The multiplication of the loaves Was not affected by way of creation But by an addition Of extraneous matter transformed Into loaves. Hence Augustine says On John 6 verses 1 through 14 Whence he multiplieth A few grains into harvests Thence in his hands He multiplied the five loaves And it is clearly by a process Of transformation that grains Are multiplied into harvests End of question 44 Read by Michael Shane Craig Lambert, LC