Part IV (Tertia Pars) Part 72 (2/2)
When it is said that in raising Lazarus He lifted up His eyes (John 11:41), 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.”
Reply Obj. 3: 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 cast 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 G.o.d; 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 [*Cf. Matt. 12:24-30; Mk. 3:22; Luke 11:15-32].
_______________________
THIRD ARTICLE [III, Q. 43, Art. 3]
Whether Christ Began to Work Miracles When He Changed Water into Wine at the Marriage Feast?
Objection 1: 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 Infantia Salvatoris_ that Christ worked many miracles in His childhood. But the miracle of changing water into wine at the marriage feast took place in the thirtieth or thirty-first year of His age. Therefore it seems that it was not then that He began to work miracles.
Obj. 2: 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 G.o.d and man. Therefore it seems that He worked miracles from the very first.
Obj. 3: Further, Christ began to gather His disciples after His baptism and temptation, as related Matt. 4:18 and John 1:35. But the disciples gathered around Him, princ.i.p.ally on account of His miracles: thus it is written (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 (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 until He reached the perfect age, as we stated above, in speaking of His baptism (Q. 39, A. 3). But as to the second, it was right that He should so manifest His G.o.dhead by working miracles that men should believe in the reality of His manhood. And, consequently, as Chrysostom says (Hom. xxi in Joan.), ”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 Obj. 1: As Chrysostom says (Hom. xvii in Joan.), in regard to the saying of John the Baptist, ”'That He may be made manifest in Israel, therefore am I 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 fict.i.tious. 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 Obj. 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 Obj. 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 (Hom. v in Evang.). And, as Chrysostom says (Hom. xxiii in Joan.), ”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 (De Consensu Evang. ii).
_______________________
FOURTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 43, Art. 4]
Whether the Miracles Which Christ Worked Were a Sufficient Proof of His G.o.dhead?
Objection 1: It would seem that the miracles which Christ worked were not a sufficient proof of His G.o.dhead. For it is proper to Christ to be both G.o.d and man. But the miracles which Christ worked have been done by others also. Therefore they were not a sufficient proof of His G.o.dhead.
Obj. 2: Further, no power surpa.s.ses that of the G.o.dhead. But some have worked greater miracles than Christ, for it is written (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 G.o.dhead.
Obj. 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 G.o.dhead, by reason of which He had universal power over all things.
_On the contrary,_ our Lord said (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 G.o.dhead in three respects. First, as to the very nature of the works, which surpa.s.sed 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 (John 9:32, 33): ”From the beginning of the world it has not been heard, that any man hath opened the eyes of one born blind. Unless this man were of G.o.d, 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. Wherefore it is written (Luke 6:19) that ”virtue went out from Him and healed all.” Whereby it is proved, as Cyril says (Comment. in Lucam) that ”He did not receive power from another, but, being G.o.d by nature, He showed His own power over the sick. And this is how He worked countless miracles.” Hence on Matt. 8:16: ”He cast out spirits with His word, and all that were sick He healed,”
Chrysostom says: ”Mark how great a mult.i.tude of persons healed, the Evangelists pa.s.s 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 G.o.d the Father, according to John 5:19: ”What things soever” the Father ”doth, these the Son doth also in like manner”; and, again (John 5:21): ”As the Father raiseth 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 G.o.d; for unless this were true it would not be confirmed by miracles worked by Divine power. Hence it was said (Mk. 1:27): ”What is this new doctrine? For with power He commandeth the unclean spirits, and they obey Him.”
<script>