To show that by his Baptisme (being the Sacrament of illumination or faith) he vvil take avvay the blindnes of the vvorld, he giueth vvith strange ceremonies sight to one borne blinde. 8 By vvhich vvonderful miracle (the attestation of the partie him self and of his parents concurring) first the neighbours, then also the Pharisees them selues are plainely confounded. Yet so obstinate they are, that because it was the Sabboth vvhen he vvrought it. they inferre that he is not of God: yea and throvv out of their Synagogue the partie for confessing him. 35 But our Lord receiueth him: 39 and foretelleth by this occasion, the excecation of the Ievves (because of their vvilful obstinacie) and illumination of the Gentils vvho confesse their ovvne blindnes.
1And Jesus passing by, saw a man who was blind from his birth.E in passando vide Gesù un uomo cieco dalla sua nascita:AND IESVS passing by, savv a man blinde from his natiuitie:Et præteriens Jesus vidit hominem cæcum a nativitate: 2And his disciples asked him: Rabbi, who hath sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?E i suoi discepoli gli dimandarono: Maestro, di chi è stata la colpa, di costui, o de' suoi genitori, ch'ei sia nato cieco?and his disciples asked him, Rabbi, vvho hath sinned, this man, or his parents, that he should be borne blinde?et interrogaverunt eum discipuli ejus: Rabbi, quis peccavit, hic, aut parentes ejus, ut cæcus nasceretur ? 3Jesus answered: Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents; but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.Rispose Gesù: Né egli, nè i suoi genitori han peccato; ma perché in lui si manifestino le opere di Dio.IESVS ansvvered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the vvorkes of God may be manifested in him.Respondit Jesus: Neque hic peccavit, neque parentes ejus: sed ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo. 4I must work the works of him that sent me, whilst it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.Conviene, che io faccia le opere di lui, che mi ha mandato, fintantoché è giorno: viene la notte, quando nissuno può operare.I must vvorke the vvorkes of him that sent me, vvhiles it is day. The night commeth, vvhen no man can vvorke.Me oportet operari opera ejus qui misit me, donec dies est: venit nox, quando nemo potest operari: 5As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.Sino a tanto che io sono nel mondo, sono luce del mondo.As long as I am in the vvorld, I am the light of the vvorld.quamdiu sum in mundo, lux sum mundi. 6When he had said these things, he spat on the ground and made clay of the spittle and spread the clay upon his eyes,Ciò detto sputò in terra, e fece con lo sputo del fango, e ne fece un impiastro sopra gli occhi di colui,Vvhen he had said these things, he spit on the ground, and made clay of the spettle, and spred the clay vpō his eies,Hæc cum dixisset, exspuit in terram, et fecit lutum ex sputo, et linivit lutum super oculos ejus, 7And said to him: Go, wash in the pool of Siloe, which is interpreted, Sent. He went therefore and washed: and he came seeing.E disselli: Va', lavati nella piscina di Siloe (parola, che significa il Messo). Andò pertanto, e si lavò, e tornò, che vedeva.and said to him, Goe, vvash in the poole of Siloé, vvhich is interpreted, Sent. He vvent therfore, and vvashed: and he came seeing.et dixit ei: Vade, lava in natatoria Siloë (quod interpretatur Missus). Abiit ergo, et lavit, et venit videns.
8The neighbours, therefore, and they who had seen him before that he was a beggar, said: Is not this he that sat and begged? Some said: This is he.Quindi è, che i vicini, e quelli, che l'avevan prima veduto mendicare, dicevano: Non è questi colui, che si stava a sedere chiedendo limosina? Altri dicevano: È desso.Therfore the neighbours, and they vvhich had seen him before, that he vvas a begger, said, Is not this he that sate, and begged?Itaque vicini, et qui viderant eum prius quia mendicus erat, dicebant: Nonne hic est qui sedebat, et mendicabat ? Alii dicebant: Quia hic est. 9But others said: No, but he is like him. But he said: I am he.Altri: No, ma è uno, che lo somiglia. Ma egli diceva: Io son quel desso.Others said, That this is he. But others, No, not so, but he is like him. But he said, That I am he.Alii autem: Nequaquam, sed similis est ei. Ille vero dicebat: Quia ego sum. 10They said therefore to him: How were thy eyes opened?Ed essi dicevangli: Come mai ti si sono aperti gli occhi?They said therfore to him, Hovv vvere thine eies opened?Dicebant ergo ei: Quomodo aperti sunt tibi oculi ? 11He answered: That man that is called Jesus made clay and anointed my eyes and said to me: Go to the pool of Siloe and wash. And I went: I washed: and I see.Rispose egli: Quell'uomo, che si chiama Gesù, fece del fango, e unse i miei occhi, e mi disse: Va' alla piscina di Siloam, e lavati. Sono andato, mi son lavato, e veggio.He ansvvered, That man that is called IESVS, made clay: and anointed mine eies, and said to me, Goe to the poole of Siloé, and wash. And I vvent, and vvashed, and savv.Respondit: Ille homo qui dicitur Jesus, lutum fecit: et unxit oculos meos, et dixit mihi: Vade ad natatoria Siloë, et lava. Et abii, et lavi, et video. 12And they said to him: Where is he? He saith: I know not.Allora gli dissero: Dev'è colui! Rispose: Nol so.And they said to him, Vvhere is he? He saith, I knovv not.Et dixerunt ei: Ubi est ille ? Ait: Nescio. 13They bring him that had been blind to the Pharisees.Menano il già cieco da' Farisei.They bring him that had been blinde, to the Pharisees.Adducunt eum ad pharisæos, qui cæcus fuerat. 14Now it was the sabbath, when Jesus made the clay and opened his eyes.Ed era giorno di sabato, quando Gesù fece quel fango, e aprì a lui gli occhi.And it vvas the Sabboth vvhen IESVS made the clay, and opened his eies.Erat autem sabbatum quando lutum fecit Jesus, et aperuit oculos ejus. 15Again therefore the Pharisees asked him how he had received his sight. But he said to them: He put clay upon my eyes: and I washed: and I see.Di nuovo adunque l'interrogavano anche i Farisei, in qual modo avesse ottenuto il vedere. Ed ei disse loro: Mise del fango sopra i miei occhi, e mi lavai, e veggio.Againe therfore the Pharisees asked him, hovv he savv. But he said to them, He put clay vpō mine eies, & I vvashed: and I see.Iterum ergo interrogabant eum pharisæi quomodo vidisset. Ille autem dixit eis: Lutum mihi posuit super oculos, et lavi, et video.
16Some therefore of the Pharisees said: This man is not of God, who keepeth not the sabbath. But others said: How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.Dicevan perciò alcuni de' Farisei: Non è da Dio quest'uomo, che non osserva il sabato. Altri dicevano: Come può un uom peccatore far tali prodigj? Ed erano tra loro in scissura.Certaine therfore of the Pharisees said, This man is not of God, that keepeth not the Sabboth. But others said, Hovv can a man that is a sinner doe these signes? And there vvas a schisme among them.Dicebant ergo ex pharisæis quidam: Non est hic homo a Deo, qui sabbatum non custodit. Alii autem dicebant: Quomodo potest homo peccator hæc signa facere ? Et schisma erat inter eos. 17They say therefore to the blind man again: What sayest thou of him that hath opened thy eyes? And he said: He is a prophet.Disser perciò di nuovo al cieco: Tu, che dici di colui, che ti ha aperti gli occhi? Egli rispose: Che è un profeta.They say therfore to the blinde againe, Thou, vvhat saiest thou of him that opened thine eies? And he said, That he is a Prophet.Dicunt ergo cæco iterum: Tu quid dicis de illo qui aperuit oculos tuos ? Ille autem dixit: Quia propheta est. 18The Jews then did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight,Non credettero però i Giudei, che egli fosse stato cieco, e avesse riavuto il vedere, sino a tanto che ebber chiamati i genitori dell'illuminato.The levves therfore did not beleeue of him, that he had been blinde and savv: vntil they called the parents of him that savv,Non crediderunt ergo Judæi de illo, quia cæcus fuisset et vidisset, donec vocaverunt parentes ejus, qui viderat: 19And asked them, saying: Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then doth he now see?E gli interrogaron, dicendo: È questo quel vostro figliuolo, il quale dite, che nacque cieco? Come dunque ora ci vede?and asked them, saying, Is this your sonne, vvhom you say that he vvas borne blinde? hovv then doeth he novv see?et interrogaverunt eos, dicentes: Hic est filius vester, quem vos dicitis quia cæcus natus est ? quomodo ergo nunc videt ? 20His parents answered them and said: We know that this is our son and that he was born blind:Risposer loro i genitori di lui, e dissero: Sappiamo, che questi è nostro figliuolo, e che cieco nacque:His parents ansvvered them, and said, Vve knovv that this is our sonne, and that he vvas borne blinde:Responderunt eis parentes ejus, et dixerunt: Scimus quia hic est filius noster, et quia cæcus natus est:
21But how he now seeth, we know not: or who hath opened his eyes, we know not. Ask himself: he is of age: Let him speak for himself.Come poi ora ci vegga, noi sappiamo: e chi gli abbia aperti gli occhi noi noi sappiamo: domandatene a lui: Ha i suoi anni: parli egli da se di quel, che gli tocca.but hovv he novv seeth, vve knovv not, or vvho hath opened his eies, vve knovv not, aske him self: he is of age, let him self speake of him self.quomodo autem nunc videat, nescimus: aut quis ejus aperuit oculos, nos nescimus; ipsum interrogate: ætatem habet, ipse de se loquatur. 22These things his parents said, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had already agreed among themselves that if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.Così parlarono i genitori di lui, perché avean paura de' Giudei: imperocché avean già decretato i Giudei, che se alcuno riconoscesse Gesù per il Cristo, fosse cacciato dalla Sinagoga.These things his parents said, because they feared the levves. for the Ievves had novv conspired, that if any mā should cōfesse him to be CHRIST, he should be put out of the Synagogue.Hæc dixerunt parentes ejus, quoniam timebant Judæos: jam enim conspiraverunt Judæi, ut si quis eum confiteretur esse Christum, extra synagogam fieret. 23Therefore did his parents say: He is of age. Ask himself.Per questo dissero i genitori di lui: Ha i suoi anni, domandatene a lui.Therfore did his parents say, That he is of age, aske him self.Propterea parentes ejus dixerunt: Quia ætatem habet, ipsum interrogate. 24They therefore called the man again that had been blind and said to him: Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner.Chiamarono adunque di bel nuovo colui, che era stato cieco, e gli dissero: Da' gloria a Dio: noi sappiamo, che quest'uomo è un uomo peccatore.They therfore againe called the man that had been blinde, and said to him, Giue glorie to God. vve knovv that this man is a sinner.Vocaverunt ergo rursum hominem qui fuerat cæcus, et dixerunt ei: Da gloriam Deo: nos scimus quia hic homo peccator est. 25He said therefore to them: If he be a sinner, I know not. One thing I know, that whereas I was blind. now I see.Disse egli loro: Se ei sia peccatore, nol so: questo solo io so, che era cieco, e ora veggio.He therfore said to them, Whether he be a sinner, I know not: one thing I know, that vvhereas I vvas blinde, novv I see.Dixit ergo eis ille: si peccator est, nescio; unum scio, quia cæcus cum essem, modo video. 26They said then to him: What did he to thee? How did he open thy eyes?Gli disser perciò: Che ti fece egli? Come aprì a te gli occhi?They said therfore to him, Vvhat did he to thee? hovv did he open thine eies?Dixerunt ergo illi: Quid fecit tibi ? quomodo aperuit tibi oculos ?
27He answered them: I have told you already, and you have heard. Why would you hear it again? Will you also become his disciples?Rispose loro: Ve l'ho già detto, e l'avete udito: perché volete sentirlo di nuovo? Volete forse diventar anche voi suoi discepoli?He ansvvered them, I haue novv told you, and you haue heard: vvhy vvil you heare it againe? vvil you also become his disciples?Respondit eis: Dixi vobis jam, et audistis: quod iterum vultis audire ? numquid et vos vultis discipuli ejus fieri ? 28They reviled him therefore and said: Be thou his disciple; but we are the disciples of Moses.Ma essi lo strapazzarono, e dissero: Sii tu suo discepolo: quanto a noi siami discepoli di Mosè.They reuiled him therfore, & said, Be thou his disciple: but we are the disciples of Moyses.Maledixerunt ergo ei, et dixerunt: Tu discipulus illius sis: nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus. 29We know that God spoke to Moses: but as to this man, we know not from whence he is.Noi sappiamo, che a Mosè parlò Dio: ma costui non sappiamo, donde si sia.We know that to Moyses God did speake: but this man vve knovv not vvhence he is.Nos scimus quia Moysi locutus est Deus; hunc autem nescimus unde sit. 30The man answered and said to them: why, herein is a wonderful thing, that you know not from whence he is, and he hath opened my eyes.Rispose colui, e disse loro: E qui appunto sta la meraviglia, che voi non sapete, donde ei si sia, ed ha aperti i miei occhi.The man ansvvered and said to them, For in this it is marueilous that you knovv not vvhence he is, and he hath opened mine eies.Respondit ille homo, et dixit eis: In hoc enim mirabile est quia vos nescitis unde sit, et aperuit meos oculos: 31Now we know that God doth not hear sinners: but if a man be a server of God and doth his, will, him he heareth.Or sappiamo, che Dio non ode i peccatori: ma chi onora Dio, e fa la sua volontà, questi è esaudito da Dio.and vve knovv that sinners God doth not heare. but if a man be a seruer of God, and doe the vvil of him, him he heareth.scimus autem quia peccatores Deus non audit: sed si quis Dei cultor est, et voluntatem ejus facit, hunc exaudit. 32From the beginning of the world it hath not been heard, that any man hath opened the eyes of one born blind.Dacché mondo è mondo, non si è udito dire, che alcuno abbia aperti gli irriti a un cieco nato.From the beginning of the vvorld it hath not been heard that any man hath opened the eies of one borne blinde.A sæculo non est auditum quia quis aperuit oculos cæci nati.
33Unless this man were of God, he could not do anything.Se questi non fosse da Dio, non potrebbe far nulla,Vnles this man vvere of God, he could not doe any thing.Nisi esset hic a Deo, non poterat facere quidquam. 34They answered and said to him: Thou wast wholly born in sins; and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out.Gli risposero, e dissero: Tu se' venuto al mondo ricoperto di peccati, e tu ci fai il maestro? E lo cacciaron fuora.They ansvvered, and said to him, Thou vvast vvholy borne in sinnes, and doest thou teach vs? And they did cast him forth.Responderunt, et dixerunt ei: In peccatis natus es totus, et tu doces nos ? Et ejecerunt eum foras. 35Jesus heard that they had cast him out. And when he had found him, he said to him: Dost thou believe in the Son of God?Sentì dire Gesù, che lo avevan cacciato fuora: e avendolo incontrato, gli disse: Credi tu nel Figliuolo di Dio?IESVS heard that they cast him forth: and vvhen he had found him, he said to him, Doest thou beleeue in the sonne of God?Audivit Jesus quia ejecerunt eum foras: et cum invenisset eum, dixit ei: Tu credis in Filium Dei ? 36He answered, and said: Who is he, Lord, that I may believe in him?Rispose quegli, e disse: Chi è egli Signore, affinchè io in lui creda?He ansvvered, and said, Vvho is he Lord, that I may beleeue in him?Respondit ille, et dixit: Quis est, Domine, ut credam in eum ? 37And Jesus said to him: Thou hast both seen him; and it is he that talketh with thee.Disselli Gesù: E lo hai veduto, è colui, che teco parla, è quel desso.And IESVS said to him, Both thou hast seen him: and he that talketh vvith thee, he it is.Et dixit ei Jesus: Et vidisti eum, et qui loquitur tecum, ipse est. 38And he said: I believe, Lord. And falling down, he adored him.Allora quegli disse: Signore, io credo. E prostratosi lo adorò.But he said, I beleeue Lord. And falling dovvne he adored him.At ille ait: Credo, Domine. Et procidens adoravit eum. 39And Jesus said: For judgment I am come into this world: that they who see not may see; and they who see may become blind.E Gesù disse: Io son venuto in questo mondo per far giudizio: onde quei, che non vedono, veggano, e que', che veggono, diventino ciechi.And IESVS said to him, For iudgement came I into this vvorld: that they that see not, may see: and they that see, may become blinde.Et dixit Jesus: In judicium ego in hunc mundum veni: ut qui non vident videant, et qui vident cæci fiant. 40And some of the Pharisees, who were with him, heard: and they said unto him: Are we also blind?E lo udirono alcuni de' Farisei, che eran con lui, e gli dissero: Siamo forse ciechi anche noi?And certaine of the Pharisees that vvere vvith him, heard: and they said to him, Vvhy, are vve also blinde?Et audierunt quidam ex pharisæis qui cum ipso erant, et dixerunt ei: Numquid et nos cæci sumus ?
41Jesus said to them: If you were blind, you should not have sin: but now you say: We see. Your sin remaineth.Disse loro Gesù: Se foste ciechi, non sareste in colpa; ma al contrario voi dite: Noi veggiamo. Sussiste adunque il vostro peccato.IESVS said to them, If you vvere blinde, you should not haue sinne. but novv you say, That vve see. Your sinne remaineth.Dixit eis Jesus: Si cæci essetis, non haberetis peccatum. Nunc vero dicitis, Quia videmus: peccatum vestrum manet.
9:2
St. John Chrysostom
When Christ healed the paralytic, he dismissed him with this injunction: Behold thou art made whole; now sin no more. From this the disciples concluded, that his infirmity was sent him in punishment of former sins. When, therefore, they saw this man afflicted with blindness, they inquired of their divine Master, whether it was on account of his or his parents' sin. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lv. in Joan.)
9:3
St. Augustine
When Christ says that neither he nor his parents had sinned, we must not understand that he was born without original sin, nor even that he had not committed other sins. For both he and his parents had sinned; but the meaning is, that this blindness was not a penal blindness inflicted in punishment of any sin either himself or his parents had committed; but, as is afterwards subjoined, it was sent him for the manifestation of the glory of God. (St. Augustine, tract. xliv. in Joan.)
9:4
Witham
Whilst it is day. That is, during all the time of this mortal life; the night comes, that is, death. (Witham)
St. Chrysostom
He speaks of that night of which mention is made is St. Matthew 22. Cast him into exterior darkness. This is a night in which none can work, but only receive the reward of their labours. If you wish to work, work now whilst you live; for beyond the grave there is neither faith, nor labour, nor repentance. (St. Chrysostom, as above.)
9:5
Bible de Vence
Thus the day of which I am to avail myself is the time of my mortal life; and the night which is to follow this, is that of my death. (Bible de Vence)
9:6
Witham
He spat on the ground. With clay and spittle he cured the blind man, to make the miracle more visible. (Witham)
Haydock
From the example of Jesus Christ, religious ceremonies are introduced in the administration of the sacraments; and can the Church be blamed for copying her divine Founder? (Haydock)
9:7
Calmet
The fountain of Siloe was at the foot of the walls of Jerusalem, to the east, where its waters were collected in a reservoir for the benefit of the city. Thither our Saviour sent the blind man. The word Siloe signifies sent, and was a figure of Christ, who was sent by his eternal Father into the world to enlighten all men, of whom this blind man was the emblem. The pool of Siloe represents the sacrament of baptism, by which we are sanctified and made Christians. It is still to this day held in great veneration by the Turks, who think its waters very beneficial in diseases of the eyes. (Calmet)
Bible de Vence
Its waters signify those of divine grace and light, communicated to the faithful soul through Jesus Christ, who was sent of God. (Bible de Vence)
Thus Sedulius: ---------------------------Cognoscite cuncti, Mystica quid doceant animos miracula nostros. Coeca sumus proles miserae de foetibus Hevae, Portantes longo natas errore tenebras. Sed dignante Deo mortalem sumere formam Tegminis humani, facta est de Virgine nobis Terra salutaris, quae fontibus oblita sacris Clara renascentis referat spiracula lucis.
9:17
Calmet
The Hebrews gave the name of prophet to all those who were honoured by the Almighty in a particular manner. And it was a maxim amongst them, that a prophet could dispense with the law of the sabbath. (Calmet)
Calmet
Do you wish to know what he believed Jesus to be? asks St. Augustine. And falling down, he adored him. Before, he regarded him as a holy man, as a prophet; but he did not adore him until he understood him to be the Son of God; whereas no sooner did he know this, than, falling down, he paid him that sovereign worship which is due to God alone. (Calmet)
9:22
Witham
The Jews had already agreed, or combined together, that if any one owned him for the Messias, he should be turned out of their synagogues, as a person excommunicated. (Witham)
9:24
Bible de Vence
Give glory to God, before whom thou art speaking, and tell us the truth. It could not be this man who cured thee; for we know he is a sinner, who seduceth the people. (Bible de Vence)
So say our separated brethren, when they derogate from miracles done by saints, pharisaically pretending the glory of God, as if it were not God's glory when his servants act by his power and virtue. Witness Peter's shadow, (Acts v.) and Paul's handkerchiefs that cured diseases, and expelled wicked spirits. (Acts 19:11, 12.)
9:27
Witham
I have told you already, and you have heard. In almost all Greek manuscripts we now read, and you have not heard. Beza, with good reason, here prefers the Latin Vulgate, as more correct than the Greek. (Witham)
9:28
Witham
They reviled him with scornful[Ver. 28. Maledixerunt, eloidoresan, reviled, rather than cursed.] and disdainful language. (Witham)
9:31
Witham
God doth not hear sinners. That is, in so particular a manner, as to work miracles in favour of them and their doctrine. (Witham)
9:32
Witham
From the beginning of the world it hath not been heard. Though we read of many miracles done by Moses and the prophets, this, saith he, is the first example of any man receiving his sight who had been born blind. (Witham)
9:39
Witham
For judgment I am come into this world. Christ said (chap. 3:17.) that God did not send his Son to judge the world: the same he repeats; (John 12:47.) nor is this contradictory to those words: the meaning here is not that he is come to exercise the office of a judge, but he tells them what will be the consequences of his coming, and their refusing to believe in him, that they shall be justly punished with the greatest severity for their wilful blindness. (Witham)
Calmet
Jesus Christ came into the world that the pagans, who were yet in darkness, might receive light, and that the Jews, who enjoyed the light, might fall into darkness. The Jews were thus condemned, on account of their presumption and hardness of heart, and grace was granted to the Gentiles to enter into the true Church. These are the designs of the Almighty upon mankind, some of whom remain in infidelity, whilst others receive the light of faith; but all is done by the secret and impenetrable decrees of the justice and wisdom of God. The Holy Ghost, by these words, tells us only what was to be the event, not what was the cause of these things. We must seek for the cause of them in the malice of the heart of man, and in the depth of the judgments of God. (Calmet)
Challoner
I am come, etc. Not that Christ came for that end, that any one should be made blind; but that the Jews, by the abuse of his coming, and by their not receiving him, brought upon themselves this judgment of blindness. (Challoner)
9:40
Witham
The Pharisees then replied: and are we also blind? Jesus said to them: if you were blind, by ignorance in not having heard of me, and my doctrine, you might be excused for not believing; but now saying, we see: and having been yourselves in the occasions and opportunities of seeing, your sin remaineth, and you in your sins. (Witham)
Challoner
If you were blind, etc. If you were invincibly ignorant, and had neither read the Scriptures, nor seen my miracles, you would not be guilty of the sin of infidelity: but now, as you boast of your knowledge of the Scriptures, you are inexcusable. (Challoner)
Calmet
If you had humility enough to acknowledge your blindness and ignorance, and seriously to seek for a remedy, you would soon be delivered from sin, and freed from the evil of blindness. But filled as you are with presumption, you remain still in blindness, which, as it is voluntary, is at the same time criminal and inexcusable. This is your evil; this your sin. (Calmet)
Sherl. Def. of Stillingfl
We here see that it is judged by truth itself far better not to read the Scriptures at all, than to read them with bad dispositions; not to see the miracles of Jesus Christ, than to refuse our assent to their author. At the present day all read the Scriptures, but do we see any marked improvement in the moral world? The text, without any comment, is given to Churchmen and to Dissenters: the latter gladly accept the offering, because, as the Rev. Frederick Noland observes, (in his objections of a Churchman to uniting with the Bible society, p. 34) "the authorized version is in many places accommodated to their peculiar opinions, through the conciliatory spirit of the Church, which revised the text for the purpose of doing their objections away." And in his note on this part, he adds: "The last revisal of the translation of the Bible was undertaken, as is notorious, for the purpose of removing certain objections made to the old version by the non-conformists. That the execution has been answerable to the intent, is evident from the fact of the Dissenters having withdrawn their exceptions, and adopted the version. Comp. Nichols. Defens. Eccles. Anglic. p. 33. Pierre. Vindic. Fratr. Dissent. p. 60-67." Thus (Acts 14:23.) "cheirotonesantes de autois presbuterous kat ekklesian. When they had ordained them elders by election, in every church. (Bp's Bible.) When they had ordained them elders in every church. (Authors. vers.) These words, as applied to St. Paul and St. Barnabas, who had merely received first orders, (Acts 13:2.) form in the former version an argument against presbyters' right to ordain, and in the latter one in favour of that practice." As a further accommodation, he says the word elders was substituted for presbyters, etc. "Independency in the very nature of it is schism; for every congregation is a different church." (Sherl. Def. of Stillingfl.)
9:39
9:41
If you were blind, etc.... If you were invincibly ignorant, and had neither read the scriptures, nor seen my miracles, you would not be guilty of the sin of infidelity: but now, as you boast of your knowledge of the scriptures, you are inexcusable.
9:1
Liturgia The Gospel vpō wenesday in the 4 weeke of Le•t.
9:3
Though many infirmities fall for sinne, yet not al, some cōming for probation, and some sent that God by the cure thereof may be glorified.
9:4
The time of working, and meriting, i• in this life: after death we can deserue no more by our deedes, but must onely receiue good or il, according to the difference of workes here.
9:6
6. Made clay.] External ceremonies. Christ that could haue cured this man by his onely wil or word, yet vsed certaine creatures as his instruments in working, and diuers circumstances and ceremonies, clay, water, anoynting, washing, &c. No maruel then that he and his Church vse such diuersities of Sacraments and ceremonies external in curing our soules.
9:7
This was a figure of Baptisme, to which al men borne in sinne and blindnes are sent for health & sight. Ambr. li. • c. 2 de Sacramentis.
9:22
22. Put out of the Synagogue.) Heretical trāslation. The Heretikes vntruely translate here (& v. 35.) Excommunicate: to make the simple conceaue the Churches Excōmunication to be no other, or no better, or no more rightly vsed against them, then this casting our of the Synagogue of such as confesssed our Sauiour. They might as wel haue translated for Synagogue, Casting out of the Synagogue. Church: for the Old Testament, the new: for Law, grace: for flesh, spirit: for Moyses, Christ. For no lesse difference is there betwene, casting out of the Synagogue, and, Excommunication. Besides that, not euery one which was not of the Iewes Synagogue, was therfore out of the communion of the Faithful, many true beleeuers being in other partes of the world not subiect to the Iewes Synagogue, The Churches Excōmunicatiō. Law, nor Sacraments. And therfore it was not al one to be out of the Synagogue, and to be excommunicated, as now, whosoeuer is out of the Churches communion, See in the Annot. Mat. 18, 17. either by his owne wil, or for his iust deserts thrust out of it by the spiritual Magistrate, he is quite abandoned out of al the societie of Saincts in heauen and earth, so long as he so continueth.
As for the cause of thrusting this poore man and such other out of the Synagogue, and excommunicating Heretikes, there is as great oddes as betwixt heauen and hel: he being vsed so for folowing Christ and his Church, these for forsaking Christ and his Church. Some more agreement there is betwene that corrupt sentence of the Iewes against the folowers of Christ, and the pretended excommunication executed against Catholike men by our Heretikes. although in truth there is no great resemblance. For, the Iewes though they abused their power sometimes, yet had they authoritie in deed by Gods law so to punish contemners of their Law, The Heretikes ridiculous Excommunicatiō. & therfore it was feared and respected euen of good men. But the excommunication vsed by heretikes against Catholikes or any offenders, is not to be respected at al, being no more but a ridiculous vsurpation of the Churches right and fashion of the same. for, out of their Synagogues al faithful men ought to flee, and not tarie to be thrust out: according to the warning giuen against Coré and Dathan. Be ye separated from their tabernacles, Num. 16. lest you be vvrapped in their sinnes.
9:24
So say the Heretikes whē they derogat frō miracles done by Saincts or their Relikes, pharisaically pretending the glorie of God. As though it were not Gods glorie, whē his Saincts do it by his power and vertue: yea his greater glorie, that doeth such things by his seruants, & by the meanest things belonging to them, as Peters shadow Act. 5. & Paules napkin Act. 9.
9:39
By this we see that this miracle was not onely maruelous and beneficial to the blinde, but also significatiue of taking away spiritual blindnesse.
9:1
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… From eternity hath it not been heard of, that a man [42] opened the eyes of a blind man , who had been born in blindness. If then this man [43] were not from God, he could not do that. They answered and said unto him, Thou wast all of thee born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they put him forth without.
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 2.17.9
… They also maintain that the Saviour exhibited an emblem of this mystery in the case of that man who was blind from his birth,
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 1.5
… Again, if God set in the Church apostles and prophets and evangelists (gospellers), pastors and teachers, we must first enquire what was the office of the evangelist, and mark that it is not only to narrate how the Saviour cured a man who was blind from his birth,
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 2.12
… Shall I, perchance, bid you shut your eyes to heresy, and pass it by in silence, on the ground that sufficient reverence is shown to Him Whom we preach if we believe that lepers were cleansed, the deaf heard, the lame ran, the palsied stood, the blind (in general) received sight, the blind from his birth had eyes given to him
sant'Efrem il Siro † 373 d.C. Ephraim Syrus: Three Homilies 3.11
… The widow, the desolate one who was following her only son, on the way to the grave He consoled her. He gave him to her and gladdened her heart. To one man who was dumb and blind, by His voice He brought healing. The lepers He cleansed by His word; to the limbs of the palsied He restored strength. For the blind man,
san Giovanni Damasceno † 749 d.C. An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 2.29
… For it belongs to our nature to be cast down when we see persons in distress. Another is deserted by Providence in order that another may be glorified, and not for his own sin or that of his parents, just as the man who was blind from his birth ministered to the glory of the Son of Man
9:2
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
[10] And as he passed, he saw a man blind from his mother’s womb.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 68
… When the Apostles speculated concerning the man that was born blind from the womb and asked our Lord and Saviour: “Who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” they were told “Neither hath this man sinned nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 130.16
… This according to them is the prophet’s reason for saying: “Before I was afflicted I went astray,” and again, “Bring my soul out of prison.” They explain in the same way the question of the disciples in the gospel: “Who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.1
… Now when He gave that man no eyes, it was no mistake of His surely; but a delay with a view to a miracle. You are saying, it may be, “Whence knowest thou this?” From Himself I have heard it; He just now said it; we heard it all together. For when His disciples asked Him, and said, “Lord, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 19.22
… Whence our Teacher, when we inquired of Him in regard to the man who was blind from his birth, and recovered his sight, if this man sinned, or his parents, that he should be born blind, answered, ‘Neither did he sin at all, nor his parents, but that the power of God might be made manifest through him in healing the sins of ignorance.’
9:3
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
[10] And as he passed, he saw a man blind from his mother’s womb. And his [11] disciples asked him, and said, Our Master, who sinned, this man , or his parents, so [12] that he was born blind?
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 5.15.2
… And therefore, when His disciples asked Him for what cause the man had been born blind, whether for his own or his parents’ fault, He replied, “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.”
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 7.21
… Note also that it is the Divine nature, that through which God works, that is working here. And remember, lest you fall into the error of imagining that the operation of two unlike natures is here described, how it was said concerning the blind man, But that the works of God may be made manifest in him, I must work the works of Him that sent Me
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 56
Ver. 3 . “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 68
… However, on reaching Cissa (whether that in Thrace or that on the Adriatic is uncertain) he was induced by his friends to turn back. Jerome writes to thank him for his intention and to console him for his inability to carry it out. He then tries to comfort him in his blindness (1) by referring to Christ’s words concerning the man born blind (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.1
… He just now said it; we heard it all together. For when His disciples asked Him, and said, “Lord, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” What answer He made, ye, as I did, heard. “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 6.11
… “Neither did this man sin nor his parents, but that the works of God might be manifested in him:”
9:4
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
[10] And as he passed, he saw a man blind from his mother’s womb. And his [11] disciples asked him, and said, Our Master, who sinned, this man , or his parents, so [12] that he was born blind? Jesus said unto them, Neither did he sin, nor his parents: [13] but that the works of God may be seen in him.
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. Against Praxeas 22
… but I know Him, and keep His saying.” But when He goes on to say, “ Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad,” He certainly proves that it was not the Father that appeared to Abraham, but the Son. In like manner He declares, in the case of the man born blind, “that He must do the works of the Father which had sent Him ;”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 1.24
… He is, indeed, the most determining and distinguished part of that world, and, as we may say, the sun who makes the great day of the Lord. In view of this day He says to those who partake of His light, “Work
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Exposition of the Christian Faith 3.7
48. Now for the sake of what works the Lord was “created” of a virgin, He Himself, whilst healing the blind man, has shown, saying: “In Him must I work the works of Him that sent Me.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 56
Ver. 4 . “I must work the works of Him that sent Me.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 24
… for “work” (it is said) “while it is day” (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 85.0
On the words of the Gospel, John ix. 4 and 31 , “We must work the works of him that sent me,” etc. Against the Arians. And of that which the man who was born blind and received his sight said, “We know that God heareth not sinners.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 85.1
… The Word is as it were the spittle, the Flesh is the earth. Let them wash the face in the pool of Siloa. Now it was the Evangelist’s place to explain to us what Siloa means, and he said, “which is by interpretation, Sent.” Who is This That is Sent, but He who in this very Lesson said, “I am come to do the works of Him That sent Me.”
9:5
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… Jesus said unto them, Neither did he sin, nor his parents: [13] but that the works of God may be seen in him. It is incumbent on me to do the deeds of him that sent me, while it is day: a night will come, and no man will be [14] able to busy himself.
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. On Virginity 11
… when they receive the sunbeam they beam themselves; but they would not do this if any stain marred their pure and shining surface. We shall become then as the light, in our nearness to Christ’s true light, if we leave this dark atmosphere of the earth and dwell above; and we shall be light, as our Lord says somewhere to His disciples
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Exposition of the Christian Faith 3.7
48. Now for the sake of what works the Lord was “created” of a virgin, He Himself, whilst healing the blind man, has shown, saying: “In Him must I work the works of Him that sent Me.” Furthermore He said in the same Scripture, that we might believe Him to speak of the Incarnation: “As long as I am in this world, I am the Light of this world,”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 56
Ver. 5 . “As long as I am in the world, I am the Light of the world.”
9:6
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… Jesus said unto them, Neither did he sin, nor his parents: [13] but that the works of God may be seen in him. It is incumbent on me to do the deeds of him that sent me, while it is day: a night will come, and no man will be [14] able to busy himself. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. [15]
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 60
… So also the woman with an issue of blood, who believed, and only touched the hem of His garment, was healed , and the sea with its foaming waves heard the incarnate Word, and ceased its storm , while the man blind from birth was healed by the fleshly spitting of the Word
sant'Efrem il Siro † 373 d.C. Ephraim Syrus: Three Homilies 1.11
… that we might learn that through Him in the beginning the whole frame was constituted. He spat then on His fingers and placed them in the ears of that deaf man; and He mixed clay of His spittle, and spread it upon the eyes of the blind man;
sant'Efrem il Siro † 373 d.C. Ephraim Syrus: Three Homilies 3.1
1. Hear and be comforted, beloved, how merciful is God. To the sinful woman He forgave her offences; yea, He upheld her when she was afflicted. With clay He opened the eyes of the blind, so that the eyeballs beheld the light.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Concerning Widows 10
… He spreads clay on the eyes of some that they may see,
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 39
… It was His will indeed, but not simply so; wherefore He never breaks it without a cause, but giving reasonable excuses: that He might at once bring the law to an end, and not startle them. But there are occasions on which He even repeals it directly, and not with circumstance: as when He anoints with the clay the eyes of the blind man;
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 40
Thus, lest they have ground of obstinacy, and of accusing him again of transgression, He convicts them by this example. And do thou mark, I pray thee, how variously and suitably in each case, He introduces His pleas for the breaking of the sabbath. Thus, first, in the case of the blind man,
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Corinthians 4
… For this is a result of great power indeed. So also the Apostles prevailed, not simply without a sign, but even by a thing which seemed contrary to all the known signs. Which thing also Christ did in the case of the blind man. For when He would heal him, He took away the blindness by a thing that increased it: i.e. He put on clay. (St.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 12
… every kind of infirmity was loosed, the graves let free the dead, the devils those whom they had maddened, and diseases the sick. And one might see things strange and wonderful, such as with good cause the prophets desired to see, and saw not. One might see eyes fashioned (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 38
… But this is not the case, surely it is not; the words are words of great boldness and candor; he pro claims his Benefactor no less than the blind man did. For what said he? “He made clay, and anointed mine eyes” (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Holy Trinity 2.1
… do.” For if we shall take this to be therefore so said, because the Son is less in the form taken from the creature, it will follow that the Father must have walked on the water, or opened the eyes with clay and spittle of some other one born blind, and have done the other things which the Son appearing in the flesh did among men, before the Son did them;
9:7
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… It is incumbent on me to do the deeds of him that sent me, while it is day: a night will come, and no man will be [14] able to busy himself. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. [15] And when he said that, he spat upon the ground, and made clay of his spittle, and [16] smeared it on the eyes of the blind man, and said unto him,
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 5.15.3
… And inasmuch as man, with respect to that formation which, was after Adam, having fallen into transgression, needed the laver of regeneration, [the Lord] said to him [upon whom He had conferred sight], after He had smeared his eyes with the clay, “Go to Siloam, and wash;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Christian Doctrine 2.16
… The pool of Siloam, for example, where the man whose eyes our Lord had anointed with clay made out of spittle was commanded to wash, has a figurative significance, and undoubtedly conveys a secret sense; but yet if the evangelist had not interpreted that name,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 85.1
… Let them run to the Enlightener, let them run, believe, receive the clay made of the spittle. The Word is as it were the spittle, the Flesh is the earth. Let them wash the face in the pool of Siloa. Now it was the Evangelist’s place to explain to us what Siloa means, and he said, “which is by interpretation, Sent.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.2
… did he see already in the heart? No, not yet. Wait; he will see presently. Jesus answered him, “I that speak with thee am He.” Did he doubt? No, forthwith he washed his face. For he was speaking with That Siloa, “which is by interpretation, Sent.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 91.2
… And yet there were some works that Christ did which none other man did: as, when He fed the five thousand men with five loaves, and the four thousand with seven; when He walked on the waters, and gave Peter power to do the same; when He changed the water into wine; when He opened the eyes of a man that was born blind,
9:8
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… a night will come, and no man will be [14] able to busy himself. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. [15] And when he said that, he spat upon the ground, and made clay of his spittle, and [16] smeared it on the eyes of the blind man, and said unto him, Go and wash thyself in [17] the pool of Siloam.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
Ver. 8, 9 . “The neighbors therefore, and they which had seen him, that he was a beggar, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? Some said, This is he.”
9:9
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… [15] And when he said that, he spat upon the ground, and made clay of his spittle, and [16] smeared it on the eyes of the blind man, and said unto him, Go and wash thyself in [17] the pool of Siloam. And he went and washed, and came seeing. And his neighbours, which saw him of old begging, said, Is not this he that was sitting begging? [18]
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
… to the neighbors who knew him? As I said, falsehood everywhere defeats itself by the very means by which it seems to annoy the truth, and makes the truth to appear more bright. Which was now the case. For that no one might say that his neighbors and those who had seen him did not speak with precision, but guessed from a likeness,
9:10
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And he went and washed, and came seeing. And his neighbours, which saw him of old begging, said, Is not this he that was sitting begging? [18] And some said, It is he; and others said, Nay, but he resembles him much. He [19, 20] said, I am he.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
Ver. 10, 11 . “They said unto him, How were thine eyes opened? He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus.”
9:11
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And he went and washed, and came seeing. And his neighbours, which saw him of old begging, said, Is not this he that was sitting begging? [18] And some said, It is he; and others said, Nay, but he resembles him much. He [19, 20] said, I am he. They said unto him, How then were thine eyes opened?
9:12
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… [18] And some said, It is he; and others said, Nay, but he resembles him much. He [19, 20] said, I am he. They said unto him, How then were thine eyes opened? He answered and said unto them, A man named Jesus made clay, and smeared it on my eyes, and said unto me, Go and wash in the water of Siloam: and I went and [21] washed, and received sight.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
Ver. 12 . “They said unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not.”
9:13
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… He [19, 20] said, I am he. They said unto him, How then were thine eyes opened? He answered and said unto them, A man named Jesus made clay, and smeared it on my eyes, and said unto me, Go and wash in the water of Siloam: and I went and [21] washed, and received sight. They said unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not. [22, 23] [Arabic, p. 138]
9:14
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… He answered and said unto them, A man named Jesus made clay, and smeared it on my eyes, and said unto me, Go and wash in the water of Siloam: and I went and [21] washed, and received sight. They said unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not. [22, 23] [Arabic, p. 138] And they brought him that was previously blind to the Pharisees.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
… Observe too how truthfully the blind man maketh all his answers. The Jews desired to find Christ to bring Him to the priests, but when they did not find Him, they brought the blind man to the Pharisees, as to those who would question him more severely. For which reason the Evangelist remarks, that it was “the Sabbath” (
9:15
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… and I went and [21] washed, and received sight. They said unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not. [22, 23] [Arabic, p. 138] And they brought him that was previously blind to the Pharisees. And the day in which Jesus made clay and opened with it his eyes was a sabbath [24] day.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
… 14 ), in order to point out their wicked thoughts, and the cause for which they sought Him, as though forsooth they had found a handle, and could disparage the miracle by means of what appeared to be a transgression of the Law. And this is clear from their saying immediately on seeing him nothing but, “How opened he thine eyes?”
9:16
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… He said, I know not. [22, 23] [Arabic, p. 138] And they brought him that was previously blind to the Pharisees. And the day in which Jesus made clay and opened with it his eyes was a sabbath [24] day. And again the Pharisees asked him, How didst thou receive sight? And he said [25] unto them, He put clay on mine eyes, and I washed, and received sight.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 29
… For had they well established these things in their own minds, going on orderly they would have known, that He was even the Son of God. But they did not retain these things clearly, wherefore neither were they able to approach Him. For they said again, “This man is not of God;”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 45
… For they saw even devils cast out, and said, “By Beelzebub, prince of the devils, He casteth out the devils.” They heard Him guiding them unto God, and evincing His great unanimity with Him, and they say, “This man is not of God.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 54
But besides that, one may mention another reason also: that because men were continually accusing Him of transgressing the law, and accounting Him to be a blasphemer, as appropriating to Himself a glory which belonged not to Him, even the Father’s, and were saying, “This Man is not of God, because He keepeth not the Sabbath day;”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 65
… as Ezekiel also saith, “They that build the wall, and daub it with untempered mortar.” But how did they reject Him? By saying, “This man is not of God;
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 39
… for they said, “This man is not of God” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 40
[3.] In this place He also meeteth the accusation respecting the violation of the Sabbath. For since those persons argued, “How can he be from God, seeing that he keepeth not the Sabbath?” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
Ver. 16 . “Some said,” (not all, but the more forward,) “This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the Sabbath day; others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Since they had been the first to say, “How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles?” (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 72.2
… but It will fall on him, when He shall come from on high to judge the quick and dead. Woe to the Jews, for that when Christ lay low in His humility, they stumbled against Him. “This Man,” say they, “is not of God, because He breaketh the sabbath day.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.3
… Why do the shadows delight us? Open your eyes, ye Jews; the Sun is present. “We know.” What do ye know, ye blind in heart? what know ye? “That this man is not of God, because he thus breaketh the sabbath day.”
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 1
… “The word was made flesh” and “was made in the likeness of men and being found in fashion as a man.” This is all that was looked at by the Jews, and therefore they said to him “For a good work we stone Thee not but for blasphemy and because that Thou being a man makest Thyself God,” and again “This man is not of God because He keepeth not the Sabbath Day.”
9:17
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And he said [25] unto them, He put clay on mine eyes, and I washed, and received sight. The people of the Pharisees said, This man is not from God, for he keepeth not the sabbath. And others said, How can a man that is a sinner do these signs? And there came [26] to be a division amongst them.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Surely the blind man was not terrified? That be far from him. How then doth he who said, “He is a Prophet” (
9:18
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And others said, How can a man that is a sinner do these signs? And there came [26] to be a division amongst them. And again they said to that blind man, Thou, then, what sayest thou of him that opened for thee thine eyes? He said unto them, [27] I say that he is a prophet.
9:19
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And again they said to that blind man, Thou, then, what sayest thou of him that opened for thee thine eyes? He said unto them, [27] I say that he is a prophet. And the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he was blind, and received sight, until they summoned the parents of him who received [28] sight, and asked them,
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 19 . “Is this your son?” (and they said not, “who once was blind,” but) “of whom ye say that he was born blind?”
9:20
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… He said unto them, [27] I say that he is a prophet. And the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he was blind, and received sight, until they summoned the parents of him who received [28] sight, and asked them, Is this your son, of whom ye said that he was born blind? [29] how then, behold, doth he now see?
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 20, 21 . “We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind; but by what means he now seeth we know not, or who hath opened his eyes we know not; he is of age, he shall speak for himself.”
9:21
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he was blind, and received sight, until they summoned the parents of him who received [28] sight, and asked them, Is this your son, of whom ye said that he was born blind? [29] how then, behold, doth he now see? His parents answered and said, We know [30] that this is our son, and that he was born blind:
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 107.6
… Why then, you will say, do we read:—“the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son,” but “the soul that sinneth it shall die”? The passage, I answer, refers to those who have discretion, such as he of whom his parents said in the gospel:—“he is of age…he shall speak for himself.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4.24
… But if another were to answer for one who could answer for himself, it would not be of the same avail. In accordance with which rule, we find in the gospel what strikes every one as natural when he reads it, "He is of age, he shall speak for himself."
9:22
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… [29] how then, behold, doth he now see? His parents answered and said, We know [30] that this is our son, and that he was born blind: but how he has come to see now, or who it is that opened his eyes, we know not: and he also has reached his prime; [31] ask him, and he will speak for himself.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on 1 Timothy 3
… For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” ( John xii. 42, 43 .) And Christ again said to them, “How can ye believe, who receive honor one of another” ( John v. 44 .)? and the parents of the blind man “said these things for fear of the Jews, lest they should be put out of the synagogue.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 22 . “These words spake they, because they feared the Jews.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 77
(For “the Jews had already agreed, that if any one should confess Christ, he should be put out of the synagogues”—
9:23
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… but how he has come to see now, or who it is that opened his eyes, we know not: and he also has reached his prime; [31] ask him, and he will speak for himself. This said his parents, because they were fearing the Jews: and the Jews decided, that if any man should confess of him that [32] he was the Messiah, they would put him out of the synagogue.
9:24
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… and he also has reached his prime; [31] ask him, and he will speak for himself. This said his parents, because they were fearing the Jews: and the Jews decided, that if any man should confess of him that [32] he was the Messiah, they would put him out of the synagogue. For this reason [33] said his parents, He hath reached his prime; ask him.
sant'Efrem il Siro † 373 d.C. Ephraim Syrus: Three Homilies 1.44
… But the Pharisee, though he was a teacher, did not know this. For the teachers of Israel were wont to be fools, put to shame by the despised and vile. For they were put to shame by that blind man to whom they said;— We know that this man is a sinner .
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 25
“How then elsewhere doth He bid them tell of it?” one may ask. Not as jostling with or opposing Himself, but as teaching men to be grateful. For neither in that place did He give command to proclaim Himself, but to “give glory to God;”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 24 . “Give,” saith one, “the glory to God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.3
… “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come.” He had now come whose coming these things announced. Why do the shadows delight us? Open your eyes, ye Jews; the Sun is present. “We know.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 74.18
18. “Mindful be Thou of this Thy creature” ( ver. 18 ). Of what creature of Thine? “The enemy hath reviled the Lord.” O Asaph, grieve over thine old blindness in understanding: “the enemy hath reviled the Lord.” It was said to Christ in His own nation, “a sinner is this Man: we know not whence He is:” we know Moses, to him spake God; this Man is a Samaritan.
9:25
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… and the Jews decided, that if any man should confess of him that [32] he was the Messiah, they would put him out of the synagogue. For this reason [33] said his parents, He hath reached his prime; ask him. And they called the man a second time, him that was blind, and said unto him, Praise God: we know that this [34] man is a sinner.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose 22.18
… For that which He gave to others to be done, this His Name effects in the work of others. So we read in the Gospel, that the Jews, when they saw the gift of healing in the blind man, called for the testimony of his parents, and asked: “How doth your son see?” when he said: “Whereas I was blind, now I see.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 25 . “He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not; one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see.”
9:26
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… For this reason [33] said his parents, He hath reached his prime; ask him. And they called the man a second time, him that was blind, and said unto him, Praise God: we know that this [34] man is a sinner. He answered and said unto them, Whether he be a sinner, I know [35] not: I know one thing, that I was blind, and I now see.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 57
… 14 ), in order to point out their wicked thoughts, and the cause for which they sought Him, as though forsooth they had found a handle, and could disparage the miracle by means of what appeared to be a transgression of the Law. And this is clear from their saying immediately on seeing him nothing but, “How opened he thine eyes?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 26 . “What did he to thee? How opened he thine eyes?”
9:27
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… we know that this [34] man is a sinner. He answered and said unto them, Whether he be a sinner, I know [35] not: I know one thing, that I was blind, and I now see. They said unto him again, [36] [Arabic, p. 139] What did he unto thee? how opened he for thee thine eyes?
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 27 . “I have told you once, and ye did not hear; wherefore would ye hear it again?”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 109.17
… but the Jewish people still more decidedly refused blessing, unto whom he who had been enlightened by the Lord said, “Will ye also be His disciples?”
9:28
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… I know one thing, that I was blind, and I now see. They said unto him again, [36] [Arabic, p. 139] What did he unto thee? how opened he for thee thine eyes? He said unto them, I said unto you, and ye did not hear: what wish ye further to hear? [37] ye also, do ye wish to become disciples to him?
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 19
… just man, because he is not pleasing to us .’ The end of such abandonment as this can be nothing but error, as the Lord, when reproving them, saith, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures .’ Afterwards when, being reproved, they should have come to their senses, they rather grew insolent, saying, ‘We are Moses’ disciples; and we know that God spake to Moses
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 13.29
29. But though He endured these things, having come for the salvation of all, yet the people returned Him an evil recompense. Jesus saith, I thirst
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 28 . “Thou art his disciple, but we are Moses’ disciples.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 22.7
… that so at least human pride might deign to imitate My humility. “The scorn of men, and outcast of the people.” In which humility I was made the scorn of men, so as that it should be said, as a reproachful railing, “Be thou His disciple:”
9:29
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… 139] What did he unto thee? how opened he for thee thine eyes? He said unto them, I said unto you, and ye did not hear: what wish ye further to hear? [37] ye also, do ye wish to become disciples to him? And they reviled him, and said unto him, Thou art the disciple of that man ; but as for us, we are the disciples of [38] Moses.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 20
… ii. 5 ), and produced the evidence, saying, “And thou, Bethlehem, art by no means the least among the princes of Judah.” ( Mic. v. 2 .) Before they had seen Him they bore this witness, but when they saw Him in their malice they concealed the testimony, saying, “But as for this fellow, we know not whence He is.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 40
… so when He saith, “Nor seen His shape,” He doth not mean that God hath a shape though one invisible, but that neither of these things belongeth to God. And in order that they might not say, “Thou art a boaster, God spake to Moses only”; (this at least they did say, “We know that God spake with Moses: as for this fellow, we know not whence He is”—
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 49
… And observe how prudently. “No wonder,” He saith, “if ye disobey Me, when ye disobey the Law which ye think ye obey, and which ye hold to have been given you by Moses. It is therefore no new thing, if ye give not heed to My words.” For because they said, “God spake to Moses, but as for this fellow we know not whence he is” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 50
“Yet your rulers when asked replied, that He should be born in Bethlehem.” And others again said, “God spake unto Moses, but as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 29 . “We know that God spake unto Moses.”
9:30
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… He said unto them, I said unto you, and ye did not hear: what wish ye further to hear? [37] ye also, do ye wish to become disciples to him? And they reviled him, and said unto him, Thou art the disciple of that man ; but as for us, we are the disciples of [38] Moses. And we know that God spake unto Moses: but this man, we know not [39] whence he is.
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 5.13.1
1. Let our opponents—that is, they who speak against their own salvation—inform us [as to this point]: The deceased daughter of the high priest; the widow’s dead son, who was being carried out [to burial] near the gate [of the city]; and Lazarus, who had lain four days in the tomb,
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose 22.19
… The devil yields to blows, and the Arians have not yet learned to yield. How great have been their sufferings, and yet, like Pharaoh, they are hardened by their calamities! The devil said, as we find it written: “I know Thee Who Thou art, Thou art the Son of the living God.” And the Jews said: “We know not whence He is.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 30 . “Why herein is a marvelous thing, that ye know not whence He is, and He doeth such miracles.”
9:31
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And they reviled him, and said unto him, Thou art the disciple of that man ; but as for us, we are the disciples of [38] Moses. And we know that God spake unto Moses: but this man, we know not [39] whence he is. The man answered and said unto them, From this is the wonder, [40] because ye know not whence he is, and mine eyes hath he opened.
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. The Epistles of Cyprian 63.2
… since it is written in the Gospel, “God heareth not a sinner; but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth His will, him He heareth.”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. The Epistles of Cyprian 67.2
… but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth His will, him He heareth.”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. The Epistles of Cyprian 69.2
… Besides, what prayer can a priest who is impious and a sinner offer for a baptized person? since it is written, “God heareth not a sinner; but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth His will, him He heareth.”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. The Seventh Council of Carthage under Cyprian. Concerning the Baptism of Heretics 1
Also another Lucius of Membresa said: It is written, “God heareth not a sinner.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 31 . “We know that God heareth not sinners.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 12.9
… The man who was born blind, and had been made to see, said to them, "We know that God heareth not sinners; but if any man serve Him, and do His will, him He heareth;"
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Baptism, Against the Donatists 5.20
… If, therefore, what is said in the gospel, that "God heareth not sinners,"
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 85.6
6. There is a something in the words of that man who was blind, which may cause perplexity, and peradventure make many who understand them not aright despair. For he said amongst the rest of his words, the same man whose eyes were opened, “We know that God heareth not sinners.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.2
… but ye have heard him erring. Wherein this blind man erred, I will tell you; first, in that he thought Christ a prophet, and knew not that He was the Son of God. And then we have heard an answer of his entirely false; for he said, “We know that God heareth not sinners.”
9:32
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And we know that God spake unto Moses: but this man, we know not [39] whence he is. The man answered and said unto them, From this is the wonder, [40] because ye know not whence he is, and mine eyes hath he opened. And we know that God heareth not the voice of sinners: but whosoever feareth him, and doeth [41] his will, him he heareth.
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. On the Incarnation of the Word 23-2
… Or when did He come, if not when lame men walked, and stammerers were made to speak plain, and deaf men heard, and men blind from birth regained their sight? For this was the very thing the Jews said who then witnessed it, because they had not heard of these things having taken place at any other time: “Since
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 52
Justly did Christ say, “For judgment am I come.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 56
… And He worketh a miracle which was no common one, but one which took place then for the first time. “Since the world began,” saith he who was healed, “was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 32 . “Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 77
And of this they themselves are witnesses, speaking in this way; “It was never so seen in Israel” ( Matt. ix. 33 ); and, “Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind” (
9:33
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And we know that God heareth not the voice of sinners: but whosoever feareth him, and doeth [41] his will, him he heareth. From eternity hath it not been heard of, that a man [42] opened the eyes of a blind man , who had been born in blindness.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
… Since if after many words when the blind man said, “Except this were a righteous man he could not do such miracles” (
9:34
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… And we know that God heareth not the voice of sinners: but whosoever feareth him, and doeth [41] his will, him he heareth. From eternity hath it not been heard of, that a man [42] opened the eyes of a blind man , who had been born in blindness. If then this man [43] were not from God, he could not do that.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 6
… So great was the unreasonableness of the Jews. Wherefore he also repeats nearly the very words, which they used in their boastings. See for instance what they say in the Gospels. “Thou wast altogether ( ὅλος 4 mss. ὅλως ) born in sin, and dost thou teach us?” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
Ver. 34 . “Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us?”
9:35
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
… He that was made whole answered [46] and said, Who is he, my Lord, that I may believe in him? Jesus said unto him, [47] Thou hast seen him, and he that speaketh to thee is he. And he said, I believe, my Lord. And he fell down worshipping him.
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. Against Praxeas 22
… in the case of the man born blind, “that He must do the works of the Father which had sent Him ;” and after He had given the man sight, He said to him, “Dost thou believe in the Son of God?” Then, upon the man’s inquiring who He was, He proceeded to reveal Himself to him, as that Son of God whom He had announced to him as the right object of his faith.
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 6.25
… Nor, when He calls Himself the Son, as in, For God sent not His Son into this world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved , and in, Dost thou believe on the Son of God
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 6.48
… For it was not the dispelling of his blindness that won him eternal life. And so, when the man was already healed and had suffered ejection from the synagogue, the Lord put to him the question, Dost thou believe on the Son of God
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
… viii. 46 .) Whence know ye that He is a sinner?” After that they had said, “Give God the glory,” and the man had made no reply, Christ meeting praised him, and did not rebuke him, nor say, “Wherefore hast thou not given glory to God?” But what said He? “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 85.6
… and thou wilt see that God doth hear sinners. The imagination of thine heart hath deceived thee. There is still something for Him to do to thee. We see that this man was cast out of the synagogue; Jesus heard of it, came to him, and said to him, “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” And He said, “Who is He, Lord, that I should believe on Him?”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.2
… but in the heart had not been yet effected the blessing of the grace. When did this blind man wash the face of his heart? When the Lord admitted him into Himself after he had been cast out by the Jews. For He found him, and said to him as we have heard; “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” And he, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe on Him?”
9:36
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
[44] And Jesus heard of his being put forth without, and found him, and said unto [45] him, Dost thou believe in the Son of God?
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 6.48
… This was to save him from the thought of loss, in exclusion from the synagogue, by the certainty that confession of the true faith had restored him to immortality. When the man, his soul still unenlightened, made answer, Who is He, Lord, that I may believe on Him
9:37
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
[44] And Jesus heard of his being put forth without, and found him, and said unto [45] him, Dost thou believe in the Son of God? He that was made whole answered [46] and said, Who is he, my Lord, that I may believe in him?
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 6.46
… If the Father has never asserted this, nor the Son confirmed it, nor the Apostles proclaimed it, then the dating which prompts their allegation is bred not of ignorance, but of hatred for Christ. When the Father says of His Son, This is , and the Son of Himself, It is He that talketh with Thee
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 40
… For who would not at once be troubled at hearing Christ say, “If I testify of Myself, My witness is not true”; inasmuch as He often appeareth to have testified of Himself? For instance, conversing with the Samaritan woman He said, “I Am that speak unto thee”: and in like manner to the blind man, “It is He that talketh with thee” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 59
Ver. 37 . “Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast both seen Him, and it is He that talketh with thee.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 61
… and when they could find no fault with His works, they wished to find a handle in His words. Therefore they said, “Tell us”; yet He had often told them. For He said to the woman of Samaria, “I Am that speak unto thee” ( c. iv. 26 ); and to the blind man, “Thou hast both seen Him, and it is He that talketh with thee.” (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 85.6
… he saw with the eyes, but as yet with the heart he saw not. The Lord said to him, “Thou both seest Him,” that is, with the eyes; “and He that talketh with thee is He. He then fell down, and worshipped Him.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.2
… For He found him, and said to him as we have heard; “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” And he, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe on Him?” With the eyes, it is true, he saw already; did he see already in the heart? No, not yet. Wait; he will see presently. Jesus answered him, “I that speak with thee am He.”
9:38
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 36
[44] And Jesus heard of his being put forth without, and found him, and said unto [45] him, Dost thou believe in the Son of God? He that was made whole answered [46] and said, Who is he, my Lord, that I may believe in him? Jesus said unto him, [47] Thou hast seen him, and he that speaketh to thee is he.
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 6.48
… Does the Lord demand from this man, as from others, who prayed Him to heal them, a confession of faith as the price of their recovery? Emphatically not. For the blind man could already see when he was thus addressed. The Lord asked the question in order to receive the answer, Lord, I believe
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 59
Ver. 38 . “He saith, Lord, I believe; and he worshiped Him” (straightway ).
9:39
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 37
… And some of the Pharisees which were [3] with him heard that, and they said unto him, Can it be that we are blind? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should not have sin: but now ye say, We see: and because of this your sin remaineth.
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen Against Celsus 7.39
… This twofold kind of vision in us was familiar to our Saviour, who says, “For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not, might see, and that they which see might be made blind,”
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 2.20
… in us, who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit .’ And John says, ‘For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved .’ And again, the Saviour has spoken in His own person, ‘For judgment am I come into this world, that they who see not might see, and that they which see might become blind
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Three Homilies Concerning the Power of Demons 2.4
… What is equal to that salvation? what more profitable than that presence? But this very saving presence, so profitable, became an additional means of chastening to many. “For for judgment” saith he “came I into this world, that they which see not may see, and that they which see may become blind.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Corinthians 27
… For the word, “that ,” is not every where indicative of cause, but frequently also of the event of things. Thus Christ Himself uses it, when He saith, “For judgement I am come into this world; that they which see not may see, and that they which see may be made blind.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 56
[2.] But some say, that this conjunction is not at all expressive of cause, but relates to the consequence of the miracle; as when He saith, “For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 58
… which was contrary to reason. On this point at least Christ comforting him said, “For judgment I am come into the world, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 59
Ver. 39 . “For judgment I am come into the world, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 21.2
… For in all these words quoted from the apostle no other God is understood than He whose Son, sent by Him, came saying, "For judgment am I come into this world, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind."
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 44
… by and by, however, He will come for judgment—to judge the quick and the dead. And yet even in this present time salvation itself does not eventuate without judgment—although it be a hidden one; therefore He says, “For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not may see, and that they which see may be made blind.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 3.13
… to the other, the savour of death unto death;” and adds immediately, “And who is sufficient for these things?” —that is to say, who is sufficient to comprehend how righteously that is done? The Lord Himself expresses the same when He says, “I am come that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 86.3
… He received clay with the spittle, his eyes were anointed, he came to Siloa, he washed his face, he believed on Christ, he saw, he continued not in that exceedingly fearful judgment; “For judgment I came into this world, that they which see not may see, and that they which see may be made blind.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 33.1
… But this multitude who know not the law are cursed.” They who knew not the law believed on Him who had sent the law; and those men who were teaching the law despised Him, that it might be fulfilled which the Lord Himself had said, “I am come that they who see not may see, and they that see may be made blind.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 45.1
… that they who see not might see, and they who see might be made blind,”—which, on the occasion of its reading, we expounded according to our ability,—some of the Pharisees said, “Are we blind also?” To whom He replied, “If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; [therefore] your sin remaineth.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 81.7
… 4 ). Where a commandment, there judgment. For, “They that have sinned in the Law, by the Law shall be judged.” And the very Giver of the commandment, the Lord Christ, the Word made flesh, saith, “For judgment I am come into the world, that they that see not may see, and they that see may be made blind.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 97.4
4. “Clouds and darkness are round about Him: righteousness and judgment are the direction of His seat” ( ver. 2 ).…The Lord Himself saith: “For judgment I am come into this world; that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 135.12
… Save the final judgment, the people of the Jews is judged. What is “judged”? The just are taken away, the unjust are left. But if I lie, or am thought to lie, because I have said, it is already judged, hear the Lord saying, “I have come for judgment into this world, that they who see not may see, and they who see may be made blind.”
Anonymous The Story Concerning the King of Edessa 1
“Blessed is he that hath believed in me, not having seen me. For it is written
9:40
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 37
[1] And Jesus said, To judge the world am I come, so that they that see not may [2] see, and they that see may become blind.
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 11.42
42. Does He not reveal to His Apostles the Dispensation of this glory by the express signification of the words, Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in Him. If God hath been glorified in Him, God hath glorified Him in Himself, and straightway hath He glorified Him
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 59
Ver. 40 . “Some of them that followed Him, say unto Him, Are we also blind?”
9:41
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 37
[1] And Jesus said, To judge the world am I come, so that they that see not may [2] see, and they that see may become blind. And some of the Pharisees which were [3] with him heard that, and they said unto him, Can it be that we are blind?
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 59
Ver. 41 . “If ye were blind, ye should have no sin.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 106.5
… except that we may not remain blind, as those unto whom it is said, “But now ye say we see: therefore your sin remaineth.”
9:1
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvi. 1
The Jews having rejected Christ’s words, because of their depth, He went out of the temple, and healed the blind man; that His absence might appease their fury, and the miracle soften their hard hearts, and convince their unbelief. And as Jesus passed by, He saw a man which was blind from his birth. It is to be remarked here that, on going out of the temple, He betook Himself intently to this manifestation of His power. He first saw the blind man, not the blind man Him: and so intently did He fix His eye upon him, that His disciples were struck, and asked, Rabbi, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?
san Beda † 735 d.C.
Mystically, our Lord, after being banished from the minds of the Jews, passed over to the Gentiles. (non occ.). The passage or journey here is His descent from heaven to earth, where He saw the blind man, i. e. looked with compassion on the human race.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 1, 2
For the blind man here is the human race. Blindness came upon the first man by reason of sin: and from him we all derive it: i. e. man is blind from his birth.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 1, 2
Rabbi is Master. They call Him Master, because they wished to learn: they put their question to our Lord, as to a Master.
Teofilatto † 1107
This question does not seem a proper one. For the Apostles had not been taught the fond notion of the Gentiles, that the soul has sinned in a previous state of existence. It is difficult to account for their putting it.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. liv. 1. c. 5
They were led to ask this question, by our Lord having said above, on healing the man sick of the palsy, Lo, thou art made whole; sin no more. Thinking from this that the man had been struck with the palsy for his sins, they ask our Lord of the blind man here, whether he did sin, or his parents; neither of which could have been the reason of his blindness; the former, because he had been blind from his birth; the latter, because the son does not suffer for the father. Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 3
Was he then born without original sin, or had he never added to it by actual sin? Both this man and his parents had sinned, but that sin was not the reason why he was born blind. Our Lord gives the reason; viz. That the works of God should be made manifest in him.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvi. 1, 2
He is not to be understood as meaning that others had become blind, in consequence of their parents’ sins: for one man cannot be punished for the sin of another. But had the man therefore suffered unjustly? Rather I should say that that blindness was a benefit to him: for by it he was brought to see with the inward eye. At any rate He who brought him into being out of nothing, had the power to make him in the event no loser by it. Some too say, that the that here, is expressive not of the cause, but of the event, as in the passage in Romans, The law entered that sin might abound; (Rom. 5:20) the effect in this case being, that our Lord by opening the closed eye, and healing other natural infirmities, demonstrated His own power.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. in Præf. Moral. c. 5
One stroke falls on the sinner, for punishment only, not conversion; another for correction; another not for correction of past sins, but prevention of future; another neither for correcting past, nor preventing future sins, but by the unexpected deliverance following the blow, to excite more ardent love of the Saviour’s goodness.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. liv. 2
That the glory of God should be made manifest, He saith of Himself, not of the Father; the Father’s glory was manifest already. I must work the works of Him that sent Me: i. e. I must manifest Myself, and shew that I do the same that My Father doeth.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
For when the Son declared that He worked the works of the Father, He proved that His and His Father’s works were the same: which are to heal the sick, to strengthen the weak, and enlighten man.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 4
By His saying, Who sent Me, He gives all the glory to Him from Whom He is. The Father hath a Son Who is from Him, but hath none from whom He Himself is.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvi. 2
While it is day, He adds; i. e. while men have the opportunity of believing in Me; while this life lasts; The night cometh, when none can work. Night here means that spoken of in Matthew, Cast him into outer darkness. (Mat. 22:13) Then will there be night, wherein none can work, but only receive for that which he has worked. While thou livest, do that which thou wilt do: for beyond it is neither faith, nor labour, nor repentance.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 5
But if we work now, now is the day time, now is Christ present; as He says, As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. This then is the day. The natural day is completed by the circuit of the sun, and contains only a few hours: the day of Christ’s presence will last to the end of the world: for He Himself has said, Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. (Mat. 28:20)
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvi. 2
He then confirms His words by deeds: When He had thus spoken, He spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay. He who had brought greater substances into being out of nothing, could much more have given sight without the use of any material: but He wished to shew that He was the Creator, Who in the beginning used clay for the formation of man. (Hom. lvii. 1). He makes the clay with spittle, and not with water, to make it evident that it was not the pool of Siloam, whither He was about to send him, but the virtue proceeding from His mouth, which restored the man’s sight. And then, that the cure might not seem to be the effect of the clay, He ordered the man to wash: And He said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam. The Evangelist gives the meaning of Siloam, which is by interpretation, Sent, to intimate that it was Christ’s power that cured him even there. As the Apostle says of the rock in the wilderness, that that Rock was Christ, (1 Cor. 10:14) so Siloam had a spiritual character: the sudden rise of its water being a silent figure of Christ’s unexpected manifestation in the flesh. But why did He not tell him to wash immediately, instead of sending him to Siloam? That the obstinacy of the Jews might be overcome, when they saw him going there with the clay on his eyes. Besides which, it proved that He was not averse to the Law, and the Old Testament. And there was no fear of the glory of the case being given to Siloam: as many had washed their eyes there, and received no such benefit. And to shew the faith of the blind man, who made no opposition, never argued with himself, that it was the quality of clay rather to darken, than give light, that He had often washed in Siloam, and had never been benefited; that if our Lord had the power, He might have cured him by His word; but simply obeyed: he went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing. (Hom. lvi. 2). Thus our Lord manifested His glory: and no small glory it was, to be proved the Creator of the world, as He was proved to be by this miracle. For on the principle that the greater contains the less, this act of creation included in it every other. Man is the most honourable of all creatures; the eye the most honourable member of man, directing the movements, and giving him sight. The eye is to the body, what the sun is to the universe; and therefore it is placed aloft, as it were, upon a royal eminence.
Teofilatto † 1107
Some think that the clay was not laid upon the eyes, but made into eyes.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xlv. 2
Our Lord spat upon the ground, and made clay of the spittle, because He was the Word made flesh. The man did not see immediately as he was anointed; i. e. was, as it were, only made a catechumen. But he was sent to the pool which is called Siloam, i. e. he was baptized in Christ; and then he was enlightened. The Evangelist then explains to us the name of this pool: which is by interpretation, Sent: for, if He had not been sent, none of us would have been delivered from our sins.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. viii. Moral. c. xxx. [49.]
Or thus: By His spittle understand the savour of inward contemplation. It runs down from the head into the mouth, and gives us the taste of revelation from the Divine splendour even in this life. The mixture of His spittle with clay is the mixture of supernatural grace, even the contemplation of Himself with our carnal knowledge, to the soul’s enlightenment, and restoration of the human understanding from its original blindness.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Quia Iudaei sermonum Christi altitudinem non susceperant, exiens de templo curavit caecum, sui absentia eorum furorem mitigans, et per operationem signi, eorum duritiam molliens, et de his quae dicta sunt a se, faciens fidem; unde dicitur et praeteriens Iesus, vidit hominem caecum a nativitate. Ubi considerandum, quod egrediens de templo, studiose venit ad opus sui manifestativum: ipse enim vidit caecum, non caecus ad eum accessit; et ita studiose respexit ut discipuli eius videntes eum studiose aspicientem interrogarent; sequitur enim et interrogaverunt eum discipuli eius: Rabbi, quis peccavit, hic, an parentes eius, ut caecus nasceretur?
Augustinus in Ioannem
Rabbi magister est. Magistrum appellant, quia discere cupiebant: quaestionem quippe proposuerant domino tamquam magistro
Theophylactus
Videtur tamen haec quaestio peccare: neque enim susceperant apostoli nugas gentilium, quoniam anima in alio saeculo vivens peccavit: sed diligenter intuenti non apparet simplex haec quaestio
Chrysostomus
Venerunt enim ad hanc interrogationem, quia prius paralyticum curans dixit: ecce sanus factus es: non ultra pecces. Illi igitur cogitantes quia propter peccata fuerat ille paralysi resolutus, quaerunt de isto si hic peccavit; quod non est dicere: a nativitate enim caecus est; aut parentes eius; sed neque hoc: filius enim pro patre non sustinet poenam. Sequitur respondit Iesus: neque hic peccavit, neque parentes eius
Augustinus
Numquid vel ipse sine originali peccato natus erat, vel vivendo nihil addiderat? Habebant ergo peccatum et ipse et parentes eius, sed non ipso peccato factum est ut caecus nasceretur. Ipse autem causam dicit quare caecus sit natus, cum subdit sed ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo
Chrysostomus
Non autem ex hoc ostendit quod alii caeci facti sunt propter peccata parentum: neque enim contingit uno peccante alium puniri. Quod autem dicit ut manifestetur gloria Dei, de seipso dicit, non de patre: illius enim gloria iam manifesta erat. Sed numquid iste iniuste passus est? Sed ego eum beneficium accepisse dico per caecitatem: per hanc enim interioribus respexit oculis. Qui vero ex non ente ad esse eum deduxit, potestatem habebat absque iniuria et ita eum dimittere. Dicunt autem quidam, quoniam ut hic non est causativum, sed significat eventum, sicut et illud: lex subintravit, ut abundaret delictum; sic et hoc consecutum est, ut dominus oculos clausos aperiens, et alia naturalis infirmitatis nocumenta corrigens, suam demonstravit virtutem
Gregorius Moralium
Alia itaque est percussio qua peccator percutitur, ut sine retractatione puniatur; alia qua peccator percutitur ut corrigatur; alia qua quisque percutitur non ut praeterita corrigat, sed ne ventura committat; alia per quam nec praeterita culpa corrigitur, nec futura prohibetur. Sed dum inopinata salus percussionem sequitur, salvantis virtus cognita ardentius amatur
Chrysostomus
Et quia de seipso dixit ut manifestetur gloria Dei, subiungit me oportet operari opera eius qui misit me; idest me oportet manifestare meipsum, et facere ea quae manifestent me patri eadem facientem
Beda
Cum enim filius se operari opera patris asseruit, sua et patris opera eadem esse monstravit; quae sunt infirma salvare, debilia roborare, homines illuminare
Augustinus
Per hoc autem quod dicit qui misit me, universam gloriam dat illi de quo est, quia ille habet filium qui de illo sit; ipse non habet de quo sit
Chrysostomus
Addidit autem donec dies est, idest, donec licet credere hominibus in me, donec vita haec consistit, oportet me operari; et hoc ostendit subdens venit nox, quando nemo potest operari. Nox dicta est, secundum illud: proicite eum in tenebras exteriores. Ibi ergo erit nox, ubi nemo potest operari, sed recipere quod operatus est. Cum vivis, fac si quid facturus es: ultra enim neque fides est, neque labores, neque poenitentia
Augustinus
Si autem modo operamur, hic est dies, hic est Christus; unde subdit quamdiu sum in mundo, lux sum mundi. Ecce ipse est dies. Dies iste qui circuitu solis impletur, paucas horas habet; dies praesentiae Christi usque in consummationem saeculi extendetur: ipse enim dixit: ecce ego vobiscum sum usque in consummationem saeculi
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Quia vero sermonem quem dixerat, per opera credi fecit, subiungit Evangelista haec cum dixisset, expuit in terram, et fecit lutum ex sputo, et linivit lutum super oculos caeci. Qui autem maiores substantias de nihilo ad esse perduxit, multo magis oculos sine materia fecisset; sed voluit docere seipsum esse creatorem, qui in principio usus est luto ad hominis formationem. Ideo autem non aqua utitur ad lutum faciendum, sed sputo, ut nihil ascribatur fonti; sed discas quoniam virtus oris oculos aperuit et plasmavit: et deinde ut non videatur eis ex virtute terrae esse curatio, iussit lavari; unde sequitur et dixit ei: vade, et lava ad natatoria Siloe, quod interpretatur missus: ut discas quoniam non indigeo luto ad faciendos oculos. Et quia in Siloe erat virtus Christi, quae omnia operabatur, propter hoc et interpretationem nobis Evangelista adiecit, dicens quod interpretatur missus: ut discas quoniam et illic Christus eum curavit. Sicut enim apostolus dicit quod petra erat Christus, ita et Siloe spiritualis erat, cuius repentinus aquae defluxus occulte insinuat nobis Christi manifestationem praeter omnem spem. Sed quare non statim eum fecit lavari, sed ad Siloe misit? Ut destruatur Iudaeorum indevotio: conveniens enim erat omnes eum videre euntem, et lutum super oculos habentem. Et etiam volens ostendere quoniam non alienus est a lege et veteri testamento, mittit eum ad Siloe. Non autem erat timendum ne Siloe sumeret hanc gloriam: multi enim lavantes ibi oculos, nullo tali beneficio sunt potiti. Et iterum ut discas caeci fidem, qui non contradixit, neque cogitavit apud seipsum: lutum solet magis excaecare: multoties lavi in Siloe, et in nullo sum adiutus: si quam virtutem haberet, praesens utique curasset. Sed simpliciter obedivit; unde sequitur abiit ergo, et lavit, et venit videns. Sic igitur manifestavit suam gloriam: non enim parva gloria est ut aestimetur auctor creationis: ea enim quae de maiori est fides, quod minus est certificat. In universa autem creatione honorabilior est homo, eorum autem quae in nobis sunt membrorum honorabilior est oculus: hic enim corpus gubernat, hic ornat visum; et quod sol est in orbe terrarum, hoc est oculus in corpore: unde superiorem locum sortitur, sicut in quodam regali loco collocatus
Theophylactus
Quidam tamen dicunt quod lutum non fuit depositum, sed in oculos est conversum
Beda
Mystice autem postquam expulsus est de cordibus Iudaeorum, mox transivit ad gentilium populum. Praeterire autem eius, vel iter facere, est de caelis in terram descendere. Itaque videt caecum, cum misericorditer respexit genus humanum
Augustinus
Genus enim humanum est iste caecus: haec enim caecitas contigit in primo homine per peccatum, de quo omnes originem duximus: caecus est ergo a nativitate. Spuit dominus in terram, de saliva sua lutum fecit, quia verbum caro factum est, et inunxit oculos caeci. Inunctus erat et nondum videbat: quando enim inunxit, forte eum catechumenum fecit. Mittit illum ad piscinam, quae vocatur Siloe, quia baptizatus est in Christo, et tunc eum illuminavit. Pertinuit autem ad Evangelistam ut commendaret nobis nomen huius piscinae; et ait quod interpretatur missus: nisi enim ille fuisset missus, nemo nostrum esset ab iniquitate dimissus
Gregorius Moralium
Vel aliter. Per salivam sapor intimae contemplationis accipitur, quae ad os a capite defluit, quia de claritate conditoris adhuc in hac vita nos positos gustu revelationis tangit; unde dominus salivam luto miscuit, et caeci nati oculos reparavit, quia superna gratia carnalem cognitionem nostram per admixtionem suae contemplationis irradiat, et ab originali caecitate hominem ad intellectum reformat
9:8
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvii. s. 1
The suddenness of the miracle made men incredulous: The neighbours therefore, and they which had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? Wonderful clemency and condescension of God! Even the beggars He heals with so great considerateness: thus stopping the mouths of the Jews; in that He made not the great, illustrious, and noble, but the poorest and meanest, the objects of His providence. Indeed He had come for the salvation of all. Some said, This is he. The blind man having been clearly recognised in the course of his long walk to the pool; the more so, as people’s attention was drawn by the strangeness of the event; men could no longer say, This is not he; Others said, Nay, but he is like him.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 8
His eyes being opened had altered his look. But he said, I am he. He spoke gratefully; a denial would have convicted Him of ingratitude.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvii. s. 2
He was not ashamed of his former blindness, nor afraid of the fury of the people, nor averse to shew himself, and proclaim his Benefactor. Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened? How they were, neither he nor any one knew: he only knew the fact; he could not explain it. He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes. Mark his exactness. He does not say how the clay was made; for he could not see that our Lord spat on the ground; he does not say what he does not know; but that He anointed him he could feel. And said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash. This too he could declare from his own hearing; for he had heard our Lord converse with His disciples, and so knew His voice. Lastly, he shews how strictly he had obeyed our Lord. He adds, And I went, and washed, and received sight.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. s. 8
Lo, he is become a proclaimer of grace, an evangelist, and testifies to the Jews. That blind man testified, and the ungodly were vexed at the heart, because they had not in their heart what appeared upon his countenance. Then said they unto him, Where is He?
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvii. 2
This they said, because they were meditating His death, having already begun to conspire against Him. Christ did not appear in company with those whom He cured; having no desire for glory, or display. He always withdrew, after healing any one; in order that no suspicion might attach to the miracle. His withdrawal proved the absence of all connexion between Him and the healed; and therefore that the latter did not publish a false cure out of favour to Him. He said, I know not.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 8
Here he is like one anointed, but unable yet to see: he preaches, and knows not what he preaches.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
Thus he represents the state of the catechumen, who believes in Jesus, but does not, strictly speaking, know Him, not being yet washed. It fell to the Pharisees to confirm or deny the miracle.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvii. 2
The Jews, whom they asked, Where is He? were desirous of finding Him, in order to bring Him to the Pharisees; but, as they could not find Him, they bring the blind man. They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind; i. e. that they might examine him still more closely. The Evangelist adds, And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes; in order to expose their real design, which was to accuse Him of a departure from the law, and thus detract from the miracle: as appears from what follows, Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. But mark the firmness of the blind man. To tell the truth to the multitude before, from whom he was in no danger, was not so great a matter: but it is remarkable, now that the danger is so much greater, to find him disavowing nothing, and not contradicting any thing that he said before: He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. Ho is more brief this time, as his interrogators were already informed of the matter: not mentioning the name of Jesus, nor His saying, Go, and wash; but simply, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see; the very contrary answer to what they wanted. They wanted a disavowal, and they receive a confirmation of the story. Therefore said some of the Pharisees.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 9
Some, not all: for some were already anointed. But they, who neither saw, nor were anointed, said, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Rather He kept it, in that He was without sin; for to observe the sabbath spiritually, is to have no sin. And this God admonishes us of, when He enjoins the sabbath, saying, In it thou shall do no servile work. (Exod. 20:10) What servile work is, our Lord tells us above, Whosoever committeth sin, is the servant of sin. (c. 8:34) They observed the sabbath carnally, transgressed it spiritually.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvii. 2
Passing over the miracle in silence, they give all the prominence they can to the supposed transgression; not charging Him with healing on the sabbath, but with not keeping the sabbath. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? They were impressed by His miracles, but only in a weak and unsettled way. For whereas such might have shewn them, that the sabbath was not broken; they had not yet any idea that He was God, and therefore did not know that it was the Lord of the sabbath who had worked the miracle. Nor did any of them dare to say openly what his sentiments were, but spoke ambiguously; one, because he thought the fact itself improbable; another, from his love of station. It follows, And there was a division among them. That is, the people were divided first, and then the rulers.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 4, 5
It was Christ, who divided the day into light and darkness.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 1
Those who said, Can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? wishing to stop the others’ mouths, make the object of our Lord’s goodness again come forward; but without appearing to take part with Him themselves: They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of Him, that He hath opened thine eyes?
Teofilatto † 1107
See with what good intent they put the question. They do not say, What sayest thou of Him that keepeth not the sabbath, but mention the miracle, that He hath opened thine eyes; meaning it would seem, to draw out the healed man himself; He hath benefited them, they seem to say, and thou oughtest to preach Him.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 9
Or they sought how they could throw reproach upon the man, and cast him out of their synagogue. He declares however openly what he thinks: He said, He is a Prophet. Not being anointed yet in heart, he could not confess the Son of God; nevertheless, he is not wrong in what he says: for our Lord Himself says of Himself, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country. (Luke 4:24)
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Inopinabilitas facti miraculi incredulitatem inducebat, et ideo dicitur itaque vicini, et qui viderant eum prius quia mendicus erat, dicebant: nonne hic est qui sedebat et mendicabat? Mirabilis Dei clementia quo descendebat? Eos qui mendicabant, cum multa devotione curabat, et hinc Iudaeorum os obstruens, quoniam non praeclaros, non insignes, neque principes, sed ignobiles sua dignos ducebat providentia: etenim in salutem omnium venerat. Sequitur alii dicebant, quia hic est. Caeco enim per longam viam eunte diligentes inspectores facti ex inopinabilitate eius quod viderant, non ultra poterant dicere: non est hic. Sequitur alii autem: nequaquam, sed similis eius est
Augustinus in Ioannem
Aperti enim oculi vultum mutaverunt. Sequitur ille autem dicebat: quia ego sum. Vox grata, ne damnetur ingrata
Chrysostomus
Non enim verecundatus est de priori caecitate, neque formidavit furorem plebis, neque renuit ostendere seipsum, ut praedicet benefactorem. Sequitur dicebant ergo ei: quomodo aperti sunt oculi tui? Hunc modum neque nos scimus, neque ipse qui curatus est novit: sed quod quidem factum est, noverat, modum autem comprehendere non poterat; unde sequitur respondit: ille homo qui dicitur Iesus, lutum fecit, et linivit oculos meos. Vide quomodo verax est. Non dixit unde fecit: quod enim non noverat, non dicit: neque enim scivit quoniam in terra expuit. Quoniam autem superunxit, per sensum tactus didicit. Sequitur et dixit: vade ad natatoria Siloe, et lava. Et hoc etiam ex auditu testatus est: recognovit enim eius vocem ex disputatione cum discipulis. Et quia ad unum se praeparaverat, scilicet omnia sibi suaderi a iubente, subiungit et abii et lavi et vidi
Augustinus
Ecce annuntiator factus est gratiae, ecce evangelizat et confitetur Iudaeis. Caecus ille confitebatur, et cor impiorum stringebatur, quia non habebant in corde quod iam ille habebat in facie; unde sequitur et dixerunt: ubi est ille?
Chrysostomus
Dicebant autem hoc, occisionem meditantes; iam enim adversus ipsum conspiraverant. Christus autem non aderat his qui curabantur; non enim quaerebat gloriam, neque se ostentare. Recedebat etiam semper curans Iesus, ut omnis suspicio tolleretur signorum. Qui enim non cognoscebant eum, qualiter ob gratiam eius se curatos confiterentur? Unde sequitur: ait: nescio
Augustinus
In his verbis inuncto similis erat, nondum videnti: praedicat, et nescit quid praedicat
Beda
Unde figuram tenet catechumenorum, qui etsi credunt in Iesum, adhuc tamen eum quasi nesciunt, quia nondum loti existunt. Pharisaeorum autem erat approbare opus vel improbare
Chrysostomus
Iudaei igitur quaerentes ubi est ille? Volebant eum invenire ut eum ducerent ad eos; quia vero non habuerunt eum, ducunt caecum; unde sequitur adducunt eum ad Pharisaeos qui caecus fuerat, ut scilicet vehementius eum interrogarent. Propterea autem et Evangelista subdit erat autem sabbatum quando lutum fecit Iesus, et aperuit oculos eius: ut scilicet eorum malam mentem demonstraret, et causam propter quam eum quaerebant; ut scilicet occasionem contra eum invenirent, et ut detraherent miraculo per aestimatam legis praevaricationem: quod etiam manifestum est ex his quae sequuntur; sequitur enim iterum ergo interrogabant eum Pharisaei quomodo vidisset. Vide autem qualiter non turbatur caecus: nam quandoquidem turbis dicebat sine periculo interrogatus, non ita magnum erat veritatem dicere; mirabile autem est nunc, quod in ampliori periculo constitutus, neque negat, neque contraria dicit prioribus; sequitur enim ille autem dixit eis: lutum posuit mihi super oculos meos, et lavi, et video. Hoc autem ad eos qui iam audierant succinctius loquitur: non enim dixit nomen dicentis, neque quoniam dixit mihi vade et lava; sed confestim lutum mihi posuit super oculos, et lavi, et video; et sic contrarium passi sunt eius quod volebant: duxerunt enim eum ut negaturum, sed ab eo certius didicerunt. Sequitur dicebant ergo ex Pharisaeis
Augustinus
Non omnes, sed quidam: iam enim inungebantur quidam. Dicebant ergo nec videntes nec inuncti non est hic homo a Deo, qui sabbatum non custodit. Ipse potius custodiebat qui sine peccato erat: sabbatum enim observare spiritualiter, est non habere peccatum; et hoc admonet Deus quando commendat sabbatum: omne opus servile non facietis. Quid sit opus servile a domino audite: omnis qui facit peccatum servus est peccati. Sed isti sabbatum carnaliter observabant, spiritualiter violabant
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Malitiose autem quod factum est silentes, aestimatam praevaricationem in medium ferebant: non enim dicebant quoniam sabbato curat, sed quoniam sabbatum non servat. Sequitur alii dicebant: quomodo potest homo peccator haec signa facere? A signis enim inducebantur, sed imbecilliter erant dispositi: congruum enim erat ostendere qualiter sabbatum non solvitur; sed nondum hanc habebant mentem quod Deus esset, ut possent respondere quoniam dominus sabbati haec fecit. Nullus denique eorum audebat ea quae volebat, manifeste dicere, sed in ambiguitate: hi quidem propter improbabilitatem, alii vero propter amorem principatus. Sequitur et schisma erat inter eos
Augustinus
Dies enim erat Christus, qui inter lucem et tenebras dividit
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Volentes autem qui dixerant homo peccator non potest talia signa facere, os aliorum obstruere, eum qui suscepit virtutis experientiam, in medium ducunt, ut non videantur ipsi advocatione uti; unde sequitur dicunt ergo caeco iterum: tu quid dicis de illo qui aperuit tibi oculos?
Theophylactus
Vide quomodo benevole quaerunt: non enim dixerunt: tu quid dicis de illo qui sabbatum non observat? Sed miraculum commemorant: quomodo aperuit tibi oculos? Pene ipsum sanatum concitantes; quasi dicerent: benefecit tibi, unde debes eum praedicare
Augustinus
Vel quaerebant quemadmodum hominem calumniarentur, ut eum ex synagoga eicerent. Sed ille constanter quod sentiebat expressit; unde sequitur ille autem dixit, quia propheta est. Adhuc quidem inunctus in corde, nondum Dei filium confitebatur; non mentitur tamen: ipse enim dominus de seipso ait: non est propheta sine honore nisi in patria sua
9:18
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 1
The Pharisees being unable, by intimidation, to deter the blind man from publicly proclaiming his Benefactor, try to nullify the miracle through the parents: But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they had called the parents of him that had received his sight.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. s. 10
i. e. had been blind, and now saw.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 3
But it is the nature of truth, to be strengthened by the very snares that are laid against it. A lie is its own antagonist, and by its attempts to injure the truth, sets it off to greater advantage: as is the case now. For the argument which might otherwise have been urged, that the neighbours knew nothing for certain, but spoke from a mere resemblance, is cut off by introduction of the parents, who could of course testify to their own son. Having brought these before the assembly, they interrogate them with great sharpness, saying, Is this your son, (they say not, who was born blind, but) who ye say was born blind? Say. Why what father is there, that would say such things of a son, if they were not true? Why not say at once, Whom ye made blind? They try two ways of making them deny the miracle: by saying, Who ye say was born blind, and by adding, How then doth he now see?
Teofilatto † 1107
Either, say they, it is not true that he now sees, or it is untrue that he was blind before: but it is evident that he now sees; therefore it is not true that he was born blind.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 2
Three things then being asked,—if he were their son, if he had been blind and how he saw,—they acknowledge two of them: His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind. But the third they refuse to speak to: But by what means he now seeth, we know not. The enquiry in this way ends in confirming the truth of the miracle, by making it rest upon the incontrovertible evidence of the confession of the healed person himself; He is of age, they say, ask him; he can speak for himself.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 10
As f to say, We might justly be compelled to speak for an infant, that could not speak for itself: but he, though blind from his birth, has been always able to speak.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lvii. 2
What sort of gratitude is this in the parents; concealing what they knew, from fear of the Jews? as we are next told; These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews. And then the Evangelist mentions again what the intentions and dispositions of the Jews were: For the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that He was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 10
It was no disadvantage to be put out of the synagogue: whom they cast out, Christ took in. Therefore said his parents, He is of age, ask him.
Alcuino † 804 d.C.
The Evangelist shews that it was not from ignorance, but fear, that they gave this answer.
Teofilatto † 1107
For they were fainthearted; not like their son, that intrepid witness to the truth, the eyes of whose understanding had been enlightened by God.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Quia Pharisaei caecum attonitum facere non valuerunt, sed videbant eum cum omni propalatione benefactorem suum praedicantem, per parentes putabant Christi miraculum annihilare; unde dicitur non crediderunt ergo Iudaei de illo quia caecus fuisset et vidisset, donec vocaverunt parentes eius qui viderat
Augustinus in Ioannem
Idest, caecus fuerat et viderat
Chrysostomus
Sed haec est veritatis natura: per quae putatur insidias pati, per haec fortior fit: mendacium enim sibi ipsi quidem obviat, et per ea per quae laedere veritatem videtur, per ea clariorem eam ostendit, quod et nunc factum est. Ne enim aliquis diceret quod vicini nihil certum dixerunt, sed per quamdam assimilationem locuti sunt, parentes in medium ducuntur, qui maxime suum filium cognoscebant. Statuentes autem eos in medium, cum multo furore interrogant; unde sequitur et interrogaverunt eos, dicentes: hic est filius vester? Et non dicunt: qui quandoque fuit caecus, sed quem dicitis quia natus est caecus. O iniqui. Quis pater eligeret talia mentiri de filio? Solum non dicunt: quem vos fecistis caecum. Duobus autem his ad negationem eos inducere conantur: et in hoc quod dicunt quem dicitis quia natus est caecus, et in hoc quod subdunt quomodo ergo nunc videt?
Theophylactus
Quasi dicant: aut hoc falsum est quod nunc videat, aut primum quod caecus fuerit; sed constat hoc esse verum quod videt: falsum ergo fuit quod caecum eum dicebatis
Chrysostomus
Tribus ergo interrogationibus factis: si filius eorum est, si caecus fuit, et qualiter vidit, duas confitentur; unde sequitur responderunt ergo eis parentes eius, et dixerunt: scimus quia hic est filius noster, et quia caecus natus est. Tertiam autem abiciunt; unde subdunt quomodo autem nunc videat nescimus, aut quis eius aperuit oculos nos nescimus. Et hoc etiam pro veritate factum est, ut nullus alius, sed is qui curatus est, et qui dignus fide erat, hoc confiteretur; unde sequitur ipsum interrogate: aetatem habet, ipse de se loquatur
Augustinus
Quasi dicant: iuste cogeremur loqui pro infante, quia ipse pro se loqui non posset. Caecum a nativitate novimus, sed loquentem
Chrysostomus
Qualiter ergo grati fuerint parentes, qui eorum quae sciebant quaedam tacuerunt propter timorem Iudaeorum? Sequitur enim haec dicebant parentes eius, quia timebant Iudaeos. Rursus et hic opinionem Iudaeorum et mentem Evangelista inducit; unde sequitur iam enim conspiraverant Iudaei ut si quis eum confiteretur esse Christum, extra synagogam fieret
Augustinus
Iam non erat malum fieri extra synagogam: illi expellebant, Christus suscipiebat. Sequitur propterea parentes eius dixerunt: quia aetatem habet, ipsum interrogate
Alcuinus
In quo ostendit Evangelista, illos non per ignorantiam, sed propter metum talia respondisse
Theophylactus
Imbecilliores enim filio erant, qui testis aderat intrepidus veritatis, illuminatos habens oculos intellectus a Deo
9:24
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 2
The parents having referred the Pharisees to the healed man himself, they summon him a second time: Then again called they the man that was blind. They do not openly say now, Deny that Christ has healed thee, but conceal their object under the pretence of religion: Give God the praise, i. e. confess that this man has had nothing to do with the work.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. s. 11
Deny that thou hast received the benefit. This is not to give God the glory, but rather to blaspheme Him.
Alcuino † 804 d.C.
They wished him to give glory to God, by calling Christ a sinner, as they did: We know that this man is a sinner.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 2
Why then did ye not convict Him, when He said above, Which of you convinceth Me of sin? (c. 8:46)
Alcuino † 804 d.C.
The man, that he might neither expose himself to calumny, nor at the same time conceal the truth, answers not that he knew Him to be righteous, but, Whether He be a sinner or no, I know not.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 2
But how comes this, whether He be a sinner, I know not, from one who had said, He is a Prophet? did the blind fear? far from it: he only thought that our Lord’s defence lay in the witness of the fact, more than in another’s pleading. And he gives weight to his reply by the mention of the benefit he had received: One thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see: as if to say, I say nothing as to whether He is a sinner; but only repeat what I know for certain. So being unable to overturn the fact itself of the miracle, they fall back upon former arguments, and enquire the manner of the cure: just as dogs in hunting pursue wherever the scent takes them: Then said they to him again, What did He do to thee? How opened He thine eyes? i. e. was it by any charm? For they do not say, How didst thou see? but, How opened He thine eyes? to give the man an opportunity of detracting from the operation. So long now as the matter wanted examining, the blind man answers gently and quietly; but, the victory being gained, he grows bolder: He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? i. e. Ye do not attend to what is said, and therefore I will no longer answer you vain questions, put for the sake of cavil, not to gain knowledge: Will ye also be His disciples?
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. s. 11
Will ye also? i. e. I am already, do ye wish to be? I see now, but do not envy (video, non invideo). He says this in indignation at the obstinacy of the Jews; not tolerating blindness, now that he is no longer blind himself.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 2
As then truth is strength, so falsehood is weakness: truth elevates and ennobles whomever it takes up, however mean before: falsehood brings even the strong to weakness and contempt. Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art His disciple.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 12
A malediction only in the intention of the speakers, not in the words themselves. May such a malediction (ἐλοιδόρησαν, maledixerunt, Vulg.) be upon us, and upon our children! It follows: But we are Moses’ disciples. We know that God spake unto Moses.But ye should have known, that our Lord was prophesied of by Moses, after hearing what He said, Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed Me, for he wrote of Me. (c. 5:46) Do ye follow then a servant, and turn your back on the Lord? Even so, for it follows: As for this fellow, we know not whence He is.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. s. 3
Ye think sight less evidence than hearing; for what ye say, ye know, is what ye have heard from your fathers. But is not He more worthy of belief, who has certified that He comes from God, by miracles which ye have not heard only, but seen? So argues the blind man: The man answered and said, Why herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not whence He is, and yet He hath opened mine eyes. He brings in the miracle every where, as evidence which they could not invalidate: and, inasmuch as they had said that a man that was a sinner could not do such miracles, he turns their own words against them; Now we know that God heareth not sinners; as if to say, I quite agree with you in this opinion.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. s. 13
As yet however He speaks as one but just anointed1, for God hears sinners too. Else in vain would the publican cry, God be merciful to me a sinner. (Luke 18:13) By that confession he obtained2 justification, as the blind man had his sight.
Teofilatto † 1107
Or, that God heareth not sinners, means, that God does not enable sinners to work miracles. When sinners however implore pardon for their offences, they are translated from the rank of sinners to that of penitents.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 3
Observe then, when he said above, Whether He be a sinner, I know not, it was not that he spoke in doubt; for here he not only acquits him of all sin, but holds him up as one well pleasing to God: But if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth His will, him He heareth. It is not enough to know God, we must do His will. Then he extols His deed: Since the world began, was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind: as if to say, If ye confess that God heareth not sinners; and this Man has worked a miracle, such an one, as no other man has; it is manifest that the virtue whereby He has wrought it, is more than human: If this Man were not of God, He could do nothing.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 13
Freely, stedfastly, truly. For how could what our Lord did, be done by any other than God, or by disciples even, except when their Lord dwelt in them?
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 3.
So then because speaking the truth he was in nothing confounded, when they should most have admired, they condemned him: Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us?
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 14
What meaneth altogether? That he was quite blind. Yet He who opened his eyes, also saves him altogether.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lviii. 3
Or, altogether, that is to say, from thy birth thou art in sins. They reproach his blindness, and pronounce his sins to be the cause of it; most unreasonably. So long as they expected him to deny the miracle, they were willing to believe him, but now they cast him out.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 14
It was they themselves who had made him teacher; themselves, who had asked him so many questions; and now they ungratefully cast him out for teaching.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
It is commonly the way with great persons to disdain learning any thing from their inferiors.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Quia parentes miserunt Pharisaeos ad illum qui curatus est, rursus vocaverunt eum secundo; unde dicitur vocaverunt ergo rursus hominem qui caecus fuerat. Non autem manifeste dicunt: nega quoniam Christus te curavit; sed sub praetextu religionis ad hoc eum inducere volunt; unde sequitur da gloriam Deo: quasi dicant: confitere quia hic nihil est operatus
Augustinus in Ioannem
Nega quod accepisti. Hoc plane non est Deo gloriam dare, sed Deum potius blasphemare
Alcuinus
Sic autem volebant illum dare gloriam Deo, ut, sicut et ipsi, Christum diceret peccatorem; unde sequitur nos scimus quia hic homo peccator est
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Qualiter ergo non arguistis eum dicentem: quis ex vobis arguet me de peccato?
Alcuinus
Sed ille ut neque pateret calumniae, neque veritatem celaret, non dixit: scio eum iustum; nam sequitur dicit ergo ille: si peccator est, nescio
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Qualiter qui dixit: quoniam propheta est, nunc dicit si peccator est, nescio? Numquid modo timuit caecus? Absit; sed voluit Christum a rei testimonio, et non a sua voce ab incusatione eripere, et suam responsionem facere fide dignam ab accepto beneficio; unde subdit unum scio, quia caecus cum essem, modo video; quasi dicat: nihil modo de hoc dico utrum sit peccator, sed iterum dico quod manifeste novi. Quia igitur nequiverant evertere quod factum est, ad priores redeunt sermones, rursus modum curationis inquirentes; sicut canes quidem venationem nunc huc, nunc illuc investigantes; unde sequitur dixerunt ergo illi: quid fecit tibi? Quomodo aperuit tibi oculos? Hoc est, numquid praestigio aliquo? Non enim dixerunt: qualiter vidisti? Sed: qualiter aperuit oculos tibi? Dantes occasionem detrahendi contra eius operationem. Donec igitur res inquisitione indigebat, caecus remisse loquebatur; quia vero iam vicerat, audacter de reliquo eis loquitur; unde sequitur respondit eis: dixi vobis iam, et audistis; quid iterum vultis audire? Quasi dicat: non attenditis ad ea quae dicuntur: unde ultra non respondebo vobis inaniter interrogantibus, et non volentibus addiscere, sed cavillari quae dicuntur; unde sequitur numquid et vos vultis discipuli eius fieri?
Augustinus in Ioannem
Quid est numquid et vos, nisi quia iam ego sum, numquid et vos vultis? Iam video, sed non invideo. Haec loquebatur iam stomachans adversus duritiam Iudaeorum, et ex caeco videns, non ferens caecos
Chrysostomus
Ita forte quid est veritas, ita imbecille mendacium; nam veritas quidem et si despectos assumpserit, claros eos facit vel ostendit; mendacium autem et si cum fortibus fuerit, imbecilles eos monstrat. Sequitur maledixerunt ergo ei, et dixerunt: tu discipulus eius sis
Augustinus
Maledictum est, si cor discutias, non si verba perpendas. Tale maledictum super nos et super filios nostros. Sequitur nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus; nos scimus quia Moysi locutus est Deus. Sed tunc sciretis, quia per Moysen praedictus est Deus: habetis enim dominum dicentem: si crederetis Moysi, crederetis et mihi: de me enim ille scripsit. Itane sequimini servum et dorsum ponitis contra dominum? Nam subditis hunc autem nescimus unde sit
Chrysostomus
Ea quae per visum cognoscitis, auditu minora aestimatis: illa enim quae nosse vos dicitis, a progenitoribus audistis. Sed nonne fide dignior est qui certificavit quod a Deo venit per miracula, quae non solum audistis, sed vidistis? Unde sequitur respondit ille homo, et dixit eis: in hoc enim mirabile est, quia vos nescitis unde sit, et aperuit oculos meos. Ubique signum inducit, quia hoc depravare non poterant, sed ab eo convincebantur: et quia dixerant quod homo peccator non potest talia signa facere, de cetero illorum assumit iudicium, propria verba eis in memoriam reducens; unde subdit scimus autem quia peccatores Deus non audit; quasi dicat: opinio haec mea et vestra communis est
Augustinus
Adhuc tamen unctus loquitur: nam et peccatores exaudit Deus. Si enim non exaudiret, frustra publicanus diceret: Deus, propitius esto mihi peccatori; ex illa confessione meruit iustificationem, quomodo ipse caecus illuminationem
Theophylactus
Vel dicendum est, quoniam quod dictum est, Deum non exaudire peccatores, hoc significat quod facere miracula Deus peccatoribus non concedit. Cum vero veniam implorant de commissis, translati sunt de gradu peccantium ad statum poenitentium
Chrysostomus
Et vide quod cum supra dixit si peccator est, nescio, non dubitans dixit: hic enim non solum a peccatis eum excusat; sed valde Deo placentem ostendit: nam subdit si quis Dei cultor est, et voluntatem eius facit, hunc exaudit. Non enim sufficit Deum cognoscere, sed voluntatem eius facere. Deinde extollit quod factum est, dicens a saeculo non est auditum quia quis aperuit oculos caeci nati; quasi dicat: si confitemini quoniam Deus peccatores non audit, hic autem miraculum fecit, et tale quale nullus hominum fecit, manifestum est virtutem qua hoc fecit, maiorem esse quam quae est secundum hominem virtus; unde subdit nisi esset hic a Deo, non posset facere quidquam
Augustinus
Libere, constanter, veraciter. Haec enim quae facta sunt a domino, a quo fierent nisi a Deo? Aut quando a discipulis talia fierent, nisi in eis dominus habitaret?
Chrysostomus
Quia ergo veritatem locutus, in nullo confusus est; quando maxime admirari eum oportebat, tunc eum condemnant; sequitur enim responderunt et dixerunt ei: in peccatis natus es totus, et tu doces nos?
Augustinus
Quid est totus? Cum oculis clausis. Sed qui aperuit oculos, salvat et totum
Chrysostomus
Vel dicunt totus ac si dicant: a prima aetate in peccatis es. Hic igitur eius caecitatem exprobrant, ostendentes quod propter peccata factus est caecus; quod rationem non habebat. Donec ergo expectabant eum negaturum esse, fide dignum esse putabant; sed nunc eum eiciunt; unde sequitur et eiecerunt eum foras
Augustinus
Ipsi illum magistrum fecerant, ipsi ut discerent toties interrogaverunt, et ingrati docentem proiecerunt
Beda
Solet enim maiorum consuetudo a minoribus aliquid discere dedignari
9:35
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lix. 1
Those who suffer for the truth’s sake, and confession of Christ, come to greatest honour; as we see in the instance of the blind man. For the Jews cast him out of the temple, and the Lord of the temple found him; and received him as the judge doth the wrestler after his labours, and crowned him: Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when He had found hint, He saith unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? The Evangelist makes it plain that Jesus came in order to say this to him. He asks him, however, not in ignorance, but wishing to reveal Himself to him, and to shew that He appreciated his faith; as if He said, The people have cast reproaches on Me, but I care not for them; one thing only I care for, that thou mayest believe. Better is he that doeth the will of God, than ten thousand of the wicked.
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C. vi. de Trin. circa fin.
If any mere confession whatsoever of Christ were the perfection of faith, it would have been said, Dost thou believe in Christ? But inasmuch as all heretics would have had this name in their mouths, confessing Christ, and yet denying the Son, that which is true of Christ alone, is required of our faith, viz. that we should believe in the Son of God. But what availeth it to believe on the Son of God as being a creature, when we are required to have faith in Christ, not as a creature of God, but as the Son of God.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lix. 1
But the blind man did not yet know Christ, for before he went to Christ he was blind, and after his cure, he was taken hold of by the Jews: He answered and said, Who is He, Lord, that I might believe on Him? The speech this of a longing and enquiring mind. He knows not who He is for whom he had contended so much; a proof to thee of his love of truth. The Lord however says not to him, I am He who healed thee; but uses a middle way of speaking, Thou hast both seen Him.
Teofilatto † 1107
This He says to remind him of his cure, which had given him the power to see. And observe, He that speaks is born of Mary, and the Son is the Son of God, not two different Persons, according to the error of Nestorius: And it is He that talketh with thee.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 15
First, He washes the face of his heart. Then, his heart’s face being washed, and his conscience cleansed, he acknowledges Him as not only the Son of man, which he believed before, but as the Son of God, Who had taken flesh upon Him: And he said, Lord, I believe. I believe, is a small thing. Wouldest thou see what he believes of Him? And falling down, he worshipped Him. (Vulgate)
san Beda † 735 d.C.
An example to us, not to pray to God with uplifted neck, but prostrate upon earth, suppliantly to implore His mercy.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lix. 1
He adds the deed to the word, as a clear acknowledgment of His divine power. The Lord replies in a way to confirm His faith, and at the same time stirs up the minds of His followers: And Jesus said, For judgment have I come into this world.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Tr. xliv. 16, 17
The day then was divided between light and darkness. So it is rightly added, that they which see not, may see; for He relieved men from darkness. But what is that which follows: And that they which see might he made blind. Hear what comes next. Some of the Pharisees were moved by these words: And some of the Pharisees which were with Him heard these words, and said unto Him, Are we blind also? What had moved them were the words, And that they which see might be made blind. It follows; Jesus saith unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin; i. e. If ye called yourselves blind, and ran to the physician. But now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth: for in that saying, We see, ye seek not a physician, ye shall remain in your blindness. This then which He has just before said, I came, that they that see not might see; i. e. they who confess they cannot see, and seek a physician, in order that they may see: and that they which see not may be made blind; i. e. they which think they can see, and seek not a physician, may remain in their blindness. This act of division He calls judgment, saying, For judgment have I come into this world: not that judgment by which He will judge quick and dead at the end of the world.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lix. 1
Or, for judgment, He saith; i. e. for greater punishment, shewing that they who condemned Him, were the very ones who were condemned. Respecting what He says, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind; it is the same which St. Paul says, The Gentiles which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. (Rom. 9:30, 31)
Teofilatto † 1107
As if to say, Lo, he that saw not from his birth, now sees both in body and soul; whereas they who seem to see, have had their understanding darkened.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lix. 1
For there is a twofold vision, and a twofold blindness; viz. that of sense, and that of the understanding. But they were intent only on sensible things, and were ashamed only of sensible blindness: wherefore He shews them that it would be better for them to be blind, than seeing so: If ye were blind, ye should have no sin; your punishment would be easier; But now ye say, We see.
Teofilatto † 1107
Overlooking the miracle wrought on the blind man, ye deserve no pardon; since even visible miracles make no impression on you.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lix. 1, 2
What then they thought their great praise, He shews would turn to their punishment; and at the same time consoles him who had been afflicted with bodily blindness from his birth. For it is not without reason that the Evangelist says, And some of the Pharisees which were with him, heard these words; but that he may remind us that those were the very persons who had first withstood Christ, and then wished to stone Him. For there were some who only followed in appearance, and were easily changed to the contrary side.
Teofilatto † 1107
Or, if ye were blind, i. e. ignorant of the Scriptures, your offence would be by no means so heavy a one, as erring out of ignorance: but now, seeing ye call yourselves wise and understanding in the law, your own selves condemn you.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus in Ioannem
Qui propter veritatem et Christi confessionem iniuria opprimuntur, hi maxime honorantur; quod in caeco factum est: eiecerunt enim eum ex templo Iudaei, et invenit eum dominus templi, et eum suscepit sicut agonotheta athletam multum laborantem, et coronavit; unde dicitur audivit Iesus quia eiecerunt eum foras, et cum invenisset eum, dixit ei: tu credis in filium Dei? Ostendit autem Evangelista quoniam propter hoc venit Iesus ut ei loqueretur. Interrogat autem non ignorans, sed volens seipsum notum facere, et ostendens quoniam multum appretiatur eius fidem; quasi dicat: plebs conviciata est mihi, sed nulla mihi est cura illorum: unius cura est: ut tu credas. Melior est faciens voluntatem Dei, quam decies mille iniqui
Hilarius de Trin
Si autem sola Christi qualiscumque confessio fidei esset consummatio, dictum fuisset: tu credis in Christum? Sed quia haereticis pene omnibus hoc nomen in ore esset futurum ut Christum confiterentur, et filium tamen negarent, id quod proprium Christo est, ad fidem poscitur, idest ut credatur in Dei filium. Credidisse autem in Dei filium quid proficit, si credatur in creaturam, cum a nobis fides in Christo non creaturae Dei, sed filii Dei postuletur?
Chrysostomus
Nondum autem caecus Christum noverat: caecus enim erat antequam veniret ad Christum, et post curationem a Iudaeis circum trahebatur; unde sequitur respondit ille, et dixit: quis est, domine, ut credam in eum? Desiderantis et valde inquirentis animae verbum est. Pro quo tot disputavit, hunc ignorat, ut discas in eo veritatis amorem. Non autem dixit ei dominus: ego sum qui curavi te; sed medie adhuc loquitur; unde sequitur et vidisti eum
Theophylactus
Hoc autem dicit, ut reducat ei in memoriam sanitatem, et quia ab ipso virtutem videndi acceperat. Attende autem, quoniam qui loquebatur, ex Maria natus est, et ipse idem est Dei filius, non alius et alius secundum errorem Nestorii; unde sequitur et qui loquitur tecum, ipse est
Augustinus in Ioannem
Modo lavat faciem cordis eius. Denique iam facie lota cordis, et mundata conscientia, agnoscit illum non filium hominis tantum, quod ante crediderat, sed iam filium Dei, qui carnem susceperat; unde sequitur at ille ait: credo, domine. Parum est credere; vis videre qualem credat? Et procidens adoravit eum
Beda
In quo possunt sumere exemplum, ut non erecta cervice quis dominum roget; sed supplex in terram prostratus eius misericordiam imploret
Chrysostomus
Per hoc igitur eius divinam virtutem ostendit, verbo opus adiungens. Dominus autem illum ferventiorem circa fidem fecit, et eos qui eum sequebantur, erexit; unde sequitur et dixit eis Iesus: in iudicium ego in hunc mundum veni
Augustinus
Dies enim erat inter lucem et tenebras discurrens. Recte autem subditur ut qui non vident, videant: quia de tenebris liberat. Sed quid est quod sequitur: et qui vident, caeci fiant? Audi quod sequitur: commoti sunt enim Pharisaei quidam ex verbis istis; unde sequitur et audierunt quidam ex Pharisaeis qui cum ipso erant, et dixerunt ei: numquid et nos caeci sumus? Hoc enim eos movebat et qui vident, caeci fiant. Sequitur dixit ergo eis Iesus: si caeci essetis, non haberetis peccatum; id est, si vos caecos diceretis, et ad medicum recurreretis. Nunc vero quia dicitis: videmus, peccatum vestrum manet: quia enim dicendo videmus, medicum non quaeritis, in caecitate vestra manebitis. Hoc ergo quod paulo ante dixit ego veni ut qui non vident, videant, id est, qui se non videre confitentur, et medicum quaerunt, ut videant; et qui vident, caeci fiant, id est, qui se putant videre, et medicum non quaerunt, in sua caecitate permaneant. Ergo istam discretionem vocavit iudicium, cum ait in iudicium veni in hunc mundum. Non illud iudicium iam intulit mundo quo de vivis et mortuis in fine saeculi iudicabit
Chrysostomus
Vel aliter. In iudicium dixit, id est in maius supplicium, ostendens quoniam qui condemnaverunt eum, ipsi sunt qui condemnati sunt. Quod autem dicit ut qui non vident, videant, et qui vident caeci fiant, idem est quod Paulus dicit quod gentes quae non quaerebant iustitiam, invenerunt iustitiam quae est ex fide Christi; Israel autem persequens legem iustitiae, in legem iustitiae non pervenit
Theophylactus
Quasi dicat: ecce qui a nativitate non viderat, iam videt anima et corpore; qui vero videre videntur, excaecati sunt intellectu
Chrysostomus
Sunt enim duae visiones et duae caecitates, scilicet sensibilis et intellectualis. Illi autem ad sensibilia inhiabant solum, et de sensibili solum verecundabantur caecitate; unde ostendit eis quod melius esset eos esse caecos quam sic videntes; propter quod dicit si caeci essetis, non haberetis peccatum, quia tolerabilius fieret vobis supplicium. Sed nunc dicitis, quia videtis
Theophylactus
Non considerantes factum in caeco miraculum, non estis digni venia, quasi ex visis miraculis ad fidem non attracti
Chrysostomus
Hoc igitur quod aestimabant esse magnam laudem, ostendit quod eis fert supplicium: et simul consolatus est eum qui a nativitate fuerat caecus de corporali caecitate. Non autem sine causa Evangelista dicit, quod audierunt hoc quidam ex Pharisaeis qui cum ipso erant; sed ut rememoretur quoniam isti illi erant qui prius restiterant Christo, deinde eum lapidare voluerunt. Erant enim quidam superficie tenus sequentes, et facile in contrarium transmutabantur
Theophylactus
Vel aliter. Si caeci essetis, idest inscii Scripturarum, nequaquam tam grande vobis peccatum incumberet, tamquam ignorantia peccantibus: nunc vero quia prudentes vos atque legisperitos asseritis, per vos ipsos condemnabiles estis
9:1
1. ET PRAETERIENS JESUS VIDIT HOMINEM CAECUM A NATIVITATE. — Arabicus, caecum natum. «Praeteriens,» id est transiens per medios suos hostes turbamque populi. Unde haec vox significat caeci curationem statim (licet id alii negent) ab egressu Christi e templo contigisse; cum scilicet invisibiliter abeuntem secuti discipuli, mox ubi oculos hostium effugerat, rursum visibilem factum, agnitumque consecuti sunt. Causam dat S. Chrysostomus. «Exiens e templo,» inquit, curavit caecum, sui absentia furorem mitigans, et per signi operationem eorum duritiem molliens. VIDIT, — hoc est benignis fixisque in eum oculis intuitus, tanquam ejus misertus eumque visui redditurus. Unde hic Christi intuitus dedit occasionem discipulis quaerendi causam caecitatis ejusdem. Ita S. Chrysostomus. Ipse, inquit, vidit caecum, non caecus ad eum accessit. Respexit vero ita attente, ut discipuli interrogarent id quod sequitur. Mystice, infideles et peccatores caeci sunt: quare Christum videre et quaerere nequeunt, sed necesse est ut Christus eos prior aspiciat oculisque gratiae suae complexus illuminet. CAECUM A NATIVITATE, — ut ostendatur caecitas fuisse naturalis et incurabilis; nam caeci per casum facti, ut per humores oculum obducentes, vel per pelliculam oculo obnatam, illis discussis, et hac acu diducta, naturaliter a medicis et chirurgis curantur: quod vero caecus a nativitate curetur, «non artis est, sed potestatis,» ait S. Ambrosius. «Donavit enim Dominus sanitatem, non medicinam exercuit. Eos enim sanavit Dominus, quos nemo curaret.» Porro, caecus hic vocabatur Cedonius, sive Celidonius, qui qualis quantusque per Christum evaserit, dicam vers. 38. Mystice: caecus a nativitate est genus humanum, Adae peccato originali occaecatum, ait S. Augustinus et Beda, quod Jesus praeteriens viam mortalitatis nostrae, ait Glossa, miserens vidit et illuminavit. Nam, ut ait S. Augustinus, contigit caecitas in primo homine per peccatum; de quo omnes originem duximus: caecum ergo humanum genus est a nativitate. Et Beda: Christi iter, ait, est de coelis in terram descensus; vidit autem caecum, cum misericorditer respexit humanum genus. Rursum, hic caecus natus notat Gentiles in caeca infidelitate et idololatria natos et educatos, ad quos Christus expulsus de cordibus Judaeorum, transivit, ait Beda, eosque luce fidei et Evangelii sui illuminavit, idque in hac caeci illuminatione, quasi in typo designare et praesignificare voluit Christus, inquit S. Cyrillus, Rupertus et Beda.
9:2
2. ET INTERROGAVERUNT EUM DISCIPULI EJUS: RABBI, QUIS PECCAVIT, HIC, AUT PARENTES EJUS, UT CAECUS NASCERETUR? — Interrogatio haec processit ex rudis vulgi opinione, qua censent morbos esse poenas peccatorum, et, ut ait S. Ambrosius, «debilitates corporum referunt ad merita delictorum.» Interrogant ergo, an hujus caecitatis causa sit culpa caeci, vel parentum? Qua in re errant. Etsi enim id saepe fiat, at non semper: Job enim innocens a Deo morbis multis afflictus fuit, ad probandam et augendam ejus patientiam, aeque ac Tobias aliique multi, idque hic vers. seq. docet Christus. Unde S. Chrysostomus et Theophylactus aiunt hanc interrogationem esse impertinentem et absurdam. Alii putant discipulos ad hoc interrogandum fuisse commotos, ex illo Christi ad paralyticum dicto, cap. v, 14: «Ecce sanus factus es, jam noli peccare, ne deterius aliquid tibi contingat.» HIC. — Quia propriae caecitatis, utpote poenae, videtur causa esse culpa propria, non aliena. Et vere peccatum originale est causa omnium poenarum et malorum, quae nobis in hac vita accidunt, ac nominatim morborum, qui infantibus obveniunt, uti docet S. Augustinus, lib. III Contra Julianum, cap. iv, sed tamen ipsum non fuit causa propria, cur hic prae aliis infantibus caecus nasceretur. Unde S. Augustinus ait: Non quidem hic aut sine peccato originali natus erat, aut vivendo nihil addiderat: habebat ergo peccatum ipse, et parentes ejus; sed non ipso peccato factum est, ut caecus nasceretur. Porro, S. Cyrillus putat discipulos fuisse imbutos errore Pythagorae et Platonis, qui censebant animas ante corpora extitisse, et ob peccata sua in corpora fuisse detrusas, quod postea sensit Origenes. Leontius vero putat discipulos loqui de peccato caeci, non ante nativitatem praeterito, sed post eam futuro; quasi illud futurum praevidens Deus punierit praevia caecitate. Verum sive hic, sive quis alius fuerit discipulorum sensus (quem difficile est conjectare), certum est eos errasse: nec enim animae fuerunt ante corpus, nec Deus punit peccata futura, sed praeterita. AUT PARENTES EJUS. — Solet enim Deus saepe parentes ob sua peccata punire in filiis; hi enim sunt partus et membra parentum. Unde ob parentum libidines aliasque iniquitates, proles saepe nascuntur debiles, infirmae, caecae, mancae, deformes, monstrosae, aut cito moriuntur, uti mortuus est infans Davidis ex adulterio genitus, II Regum xii, 14. Hoc est quod Deus sanxit, Exodi xx, 5: «Ego sum Deus zelotes, visitans iniquitatem patrum in filios in tertiam et quartam generationem.»
9:3
3. RESPONDIT JESUS: NEQUE HIC PECCAVIT, NEQUE PARENTES EJUS; SED UT MANIFESTENTUR OPERA DEI IN ILLO. — Christus non negat caecum et parentes ejus peccasse peccato originali aliisque actualibus illud consequentibus; sed negat eum ob haec peccata, prae aliis, qui eadem et majora commiserant, caecitate damnatum. Ita S. Augustinus, Chrysostomus, Leontius, Beda, Theophylactus, Euthymius; frustra ergo Pelagiani hoc loco abutuntur, ut peccatum originale negent et tollant. Causa igitur cur Deus huic caeco caecitatem immiserit, fuit, «ut opera Dei,» id est miraculosa Dei virtus et operatio in eo per Christum curando eluceret, ut per hoc Christus cognosceretur a Deo missus, esseque verus Messias. Ita Patres jam citati. Mysticam causam dat Glossa, scilicet ut caecum illuminando, inquit, et per eum, quid in caecitate generis humani facturus significando, Filius Dei manifestetur, q. d. Ideo Christus caecum illuminavit in carne, ut significaret se simili modo homines illuminaturum in mente per suam gratiam et doctrinam Evangelii. Hinc et caecus hic non solum carne, sed et mente a Christo illuminatus est, ut patebit vers. ult. Quocirca, dum caecus natus fuit, non injusta passus est, sed beneficium accepit per caecitatem, ait S. Chrysostomus, per hanc enim interioribus respexit oculis, et quidem eum, qui ex non ente eum deduxit ad esse, atque clarius ab eo, tam sensus quam mentis lumen accepit.
9:4
4. ME OPORTET OPERARI OPERA EJUS QUI MISIT ME, DONEC DIES EST: VENIT NOX, QUANDO NEMO POTEST OPERARI. — S. Chrysostomus, Theophylactus, Euthymius, Leontius et Rupertus per diem accipiunt praesens saeculum usque ad finem mundi, per noctem vero saeculum futurum. Verum hic dies ad operandum statutus est omnibus hominibus: Christus vero diem hunc sibi appropriat suaeque operationi attribuit; quare melius et pressius S. Augustinus, Beda, Cyrillus, per diem accipiunt tempus vitae Christi, quo corporaliter praesens erat mundo; noctem vero vocat mortem et tempus absentiae suae. Ergo venit nox, hoc est instat mihi mors, post quam nec ego, nec quis alius operari potest. Sensus est, q. d. Sicut homines noctu ob tenebras operari non possunt, ita ego post mortem nil operabor eorum quae nunc pro salute et redemptione hominum operor. Sic cap. viii, 56, dixit: «Abraham exultavit ut videret diem meum,» id est diem meae nativitatis et vitae inter homines. Dicit hoc Christus, ut sternat viam ad caeci illuminationem, q. d. Ego missus sum in mundum, ut assidue operer ea quae sunt salutis hominum, v. g., ut caecos illuminem: en hic caecus se offert; utar ergo occasione, et eum illuminabo. Symbolice Interlinearis: Nox, inquit, est persecutio Apostolorum, et maxime persecutio Antichristi. Tropologice: cuique homini tempus vitae est dies ad operandum et merendum gloriam sempiternam; nox vero est mors ejusdem. Quare qui sapit, sequatur consilium Sapientis: «Quodcumque facere potest manus tua, instanter operare, quia nec opus, nec ratio, nec sapientia, nec scientia erunt apud inferos, quo tu properas,» Eccles. cap. ix, 10. Vide ibi dicta. Unde S. Augustinus hic: Nox, inquit, est de qua dicitur: Projicite eum in tenebras exteriores: ibi ergo erit nox, ubi nemo potest operari, sed recipere quod operatus est: dum vivis, operare, ne nocte illa praeveniare. Sic et Philosophi ac Poetae vitam vocarunt diem, mortem vero noctem. Unde Pythagoras aiebat vitam hominum similem esse diei solemni, ad quem multi conveniunt, alii certaturi, alii negotiaturi, nonnulli spectatores futuri. Ita refert Laertius, lib. VIII, cap. I. Et Epicharmus, cum audisset disputantes de vivendi spatio, dum quidam tres, quidam quatuor, alii plures sibi tribuerent annos adhuc vivendos, dixit: «Quid mutuo contenditis et litigatis de paucis diebus? omnes enim qui convenimus, quodam fato propinqui sumus morti.» Ita Aelianus, lib. II De varia historia. Anonymus alter rogatus, qualis esset hominis vita? cum parumper se ostendisset, mox se abscondit, significans brevem et diariam, imo momentaneam esse hominis vitam. Thales aiebat nihil interesse inter vitam et mortem. Cuidam vero obstrepenti: Cur tu ergo non moreris? Respondit: Ob hoc ipsum, quia nihil interest; potius enim habetur id quod accersitur. Ita Laertius, lib. I, cap. I. Musonius interrogatus, «a quo optime extremum diem clauderet?» respondit: «Qui semper postremum vitae diem sibi instare proposuerit.» Ita Maximus, serm. 36. Secundus Philosophus interrogatus ab Adriano Imperatore, «quid esset mors?» respondit: «Aeternus somnus, dissolutio corporum, divitum pavor, pauperum desiderium, inevitabilis eventus, incerta peregrinatio, latro hominis, somnii pater, fuga vitae, vivorum discessio, resolutio omnium.» Ita Laertius. Hinc illud: «In aeternam clauduntur lumina noctem,» id est mortem. Et: «Omnes una manet nox: Omnibus una nox dormienda;» sed ab hac nocte evigilabimus in resurrectione. Quocirca Messodanus vir sanctissimus, jam senex, cum ab amico in crastinum vocaretur ad convivium: «Cur me vocas in crastinum, inquit, qui a multis annis crastinum non habui, sed mortis adventum in singulos dies exspectavi;» uti cuique fideli et Religioso faciendum esse monuit S. Antonius apud S. Athanasium, et Barlaam apud Damascenum, in Historia. Quocirca sapienter S. Hieronymus: «Facile, inquit, contemnit omnia, qui semper se cogitat moriturum,» qui quemlibet diem auguratur sibi fore ultimum; nam, «Stat sua cuique dies, breve et irreparabile tempus Omnibus est vitae,» ait Virgilius, lib. X Aeneid.
9:5
5. QUAMDIU SUM IN MUNDO, LUX SUM MUNDI. — q. d. Lucis autem est illuminare; ergo hunc caecum illuminabo, ut me mundi lucem et solem esse ostendam. Vide dicta cap. i, vers. 9, et cap. viii, vers. 12.
9:6
6. HAEC CUM DIXISSET, EXSPUIT IN TERRAM, ET FECIT (Syrus, pinsuit) LUTUM EX SPUTO, ET LINIVIT LUTUM SUPER OCULOS EJUS. — Christus caecum illuminavit per lutum, quod natura sua magis oculos obturat et excaecat, ut ostenderet se non naturaliter, sed supernaturaliter, puta per id quod plane morbo erat contrarium, ipsum curare. Symbolica causa fuit, ait S. Chrysostomus, ut significaret se esse eum (Deum) qui initio mundi hominem quasi figulus e luto formarat, Genes. i, ac proinde suum jam esse, hominem a se formatum, sed caecitate deformatum, illuminando refingere et reformare; atque consequenter se pariter esse Dominum omnium, etiam sabbati, ut eo operari, et caecum curare possit, quidquid obstrepant Pharisaei. Ita Cyrillus, Leontius, Theophylactus. Unde Glossa interlinearis: Ecce collyrium, ait, quo ungitur genus humanum, scilicet cogitatio suae vilitatis, quod ex luto factum sit, ut per eam superbia, quae illud excaecavit, curetur, juxta illud: «Memento homo quia pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris.» Saliva sua Christus usus est, ait Cyrillus, primo, ut ostenderet carnem suam quoque salutiferam esse, et vim medendi supernaturalem habere. Secundo, quia saliva providentia, ac consequenter visus recuperandi, erat symbolum saliva enim ex cerebro (ubi est sedes judicii et prudentiae) descendente, ciborum sapores dijudicamus. Unde et saliva a sale dicitur, quod fere salis saporem habeat: sal autem symbolum est sapientiae. Aut saliva dicitur quasi salvia, quod instar salviae multos morbos sanet et salvet, uti docet Galenus et Plinius, lib. XXII, cap. xxv, et lib. XXVIII, iv. «Hominum saliva jejuna,» ait, «contra serpentes praesidio est,» etc. Idem, lib. XXVIII, iv, ait lippitudines oculorum quotidiana jejunae salivae inunctione sanari, multaque alia salivae commoda affert, sed quae sortilega et magica sunt. Tertio, sputo usus est, ait Chrysostomus, ut nihil ascriberetur fonti Siloe, sed virtuti oris ejus, ex quo sputum manabat; suo enim ore jubens caecitatem abegit. Quartam causam dat idem Chrysostomus, ut miraculum hoc apud omnes foret magis testatum et celebre; ac quintam, ut fidem et obedientiam caeci probaret. Audi Chrysostomum: «Quare eum mittit ad Siloe? ut omnes viderent euntem, et lutum super oculos habentem. Non autem erat timendum, ne Siloe curatio ascriberetur; multi enim laverant ibi, et curati non fuerant. Adde, quod fides caeci demonstrata est, qui non contradixit, nec apud se ita cogitavit: Lutum magis excaecat, saepe lavi in Siloe, et nihil adjutus sum, si virtutem Christus haberet, praesens curasset; sed simpliciter obedivit.» Verba S. Chrysostomi aeque ac S. Augustini quia fusiora sunt, in pauca contraxi, ne lectorem prolixiore citatione morer et fatigem. Allegorice S. Augustinus: Christus fecit lutum de saliva, inquit, quia Verbum caro factum est: unxit oculos caeci, sed nondum ille videbat; quando enim unxit, forte catechumenum fecit. Mittit ad piscinam Siloe; baptizatus enim in Christo illuminatur. Et Glossa: Saliva, ait, est sapientia, quae ex ore Altissimi prodiit; terra est caro Christi: ungere oculos est catechumenum facere. Qui credit Verbum carnem factum, mittitur ut lavet, id est baptizetur, in Siloe, id est in misso, hoc est in Christo: baptizatus autem lumen mentis recipit per fidem, gratiam et charitatem, quae illi a Deo in baptismo infunduntur.
9:7
7. ET DIXIT EI: VADE, ET LAVA IN NATATORIA (piscina, in qua natant pisces; Syrus, in baptisterio) SILOE, QUOD INTERPRETATUR MISSUS. — Arabicus, vade et lavare in fonte Siloe, cujus interpretatio est missus. Nota primo: Siloe fons est ad radices montis Sion, qui non jugiter, sed incertis horis diebusque, inquit S. Hieronymus, ebullit cum sonitu, inde silet, id est abscondit se sub terra, et per canales in piscinam Siloe defertur, unde per tubos cum silentio et suaviter derivatur in hortos regios, eosque rigat. Audi S. Hieronymum, in cap. viii Isaiae: «Siloam autem fontem esse ad radices montis Sion, qui non jugibus aquis, sed incertis horis diei ebulliat, et per terrarum concava, ad antra saxi durissimi cum magno sonitu veniat, dubitare non possumus, nos praesertim qui in hac habitamus provincia.» Haec Hieronymus. Quomodo vero fons ille primum eruperit precibus Isaiae, et unde nomen acceperit, Epiphanius his verbis ejusmodi recenset historiam: «Fontem quippe Deus Siloam causa Prophetae effecit: quoniam priusquam moreretur, pusillum precatus est uti undas illinc erumpere dignaretur, et confestim dimisit illi coelitus aquam viventem; unde sortitus est fons ille appellationem Siloam: quod si quis interpretetur, sonat demissum. Sub Ezechia quoque rege, antequam stagnum piscinasque fabricasset, precibus Isaiae effectum, ut exigua lympha scaturiret; quod populus in obsidione hostium teneretur, ne ipsa periret undis destituta civitas. Milites igitur perscrutabantur undique, ubinam sedare sitim daretur, ignorabant enim. Urbe quippe jam potiti obsidebant Siloam: quandocumque itaque indigentes Judaei aquatum venerant, scaturiebat eis unda, et aquabant: exterarum vero nationum homines reperire nesciebant, latex namque aufugiebat. Eoque usque ad hodiernum diem eructatur clanculum, quo significetur mysterium.» Haec omnia S. Epiphanius, lib. De Vita Prophet., cap. vii, in Isaia. Quocirca Baronius, tomo I, anno Christi 33, cap. xxvi: Huic fonti Siloe, inquit, similis videtur fons ille sive fluvius, item in Palaestina, Sabbaticus dictus, eo quod die sabbati tantum fluat, caeteris diebus alveo sicco appareat, uti narrat et certo asseverat Josephus, lib. VII Belli Judaici, cap. xiv. Sic enim fons Siloe interruptis diebus ebulliens et fluens, maxime die sabbati, qui apud Hebraeos erat solemnis et sacer, fluxisse videtur. Quare hac de causa Christus caecum hunc ad oculos in Siloe lavandos, die sabbati pariter misisse videtur. Ita S. Irenaeus, lib. IV, cap. xix: «Siloa, inquit, saepe sabbatis curavit, et propter hoc assidebant ei multi die sabbatorum.» Nota secundo: Ex hoc fonte Siloe, cum interruptis vicibus emanet, atque in Palaestina, utpote calida regione, sit aquarum penuria, derivabatur aqua fluens silentio et sine strepitu, ut habet Isaias, viii, 6, in κολυμβήθραν, id est natatoriam, sive piscinam, ut vertit Noster, cap. v, 2, et inde in hortos aqua deducebatur, ideoque fons hic ab emissis hoc modo et derivatis aquis dictus est Siloe; et magis proprie Chald. schillucha, id est missus, emissus, dimissus, a radice שלח schalach, id est misit, emisit, dimisit. Quaeres, cur Christus caecum illuminaturus miserit eum ad fontem vel piscinam Siloe? Respondeo, quia Siloe erat typus Christi: Primo, quia Christus a Patre missus erat in mundum, ad eum luce et doctrina divina illuminandum, cujus virtute caecus hic illuminabatur, non autem aquarum Siloe vi aut efficacitate, ait S. Chrysostomus et Irenaeus, lib. IV, cap. xix. Secundo, sicut aquae Siloe vadunt cum silentio, ut ait Isaias, viii, 6, sic Christus est lenis, mansuetus, et quasi agnus ductus ad mortem: ipse enim missus et emissus est a Patre, a quo arcano silentio procedit, qua Deus in coelis, et qua homo per Virginem in terris. Rursum Christus est Siloe, id est fons aquae salientis in vitam aeternam. Tertio, quia Christus est fons gratiarum, qui sua charismata, quasi per rivos in fideles emanat et distribuit, juxta illud Isaiae xii, 3: «Haurietis aquas in gaudio de fontibus salvatoris,» et illud Zachar. xiii, 1: «In die illa erit fons patens domui David, et habitantibus Jerusalem, in ablutionem peccatoris et menstruatae.» Vide ibi dicta. Fons enim est Christus. Hinc, si credimus S. Epiphanio, fontis Siloe auctor fuit Isaias, qui suo tam nomine, quam prophetica vita et martyrio expressus fuit typus Jesu Christi. Hinc et Isaias juxta Siloe fuit sepultus. Vide tabulam urbis Hierosolymae apud Adrichomium. Quarto, quia juxta aquas Siloe, sive Geon (utroque enim nomine fons hic vocabatur), Salomon unctus est in regem, III Reg. i, 43. Hinc aquae Siloe significant regiam stirpem et sceptrum Davidis et Salomonis. Eo ergo misit Christus caecum, ibique eum illuminavit, ut innueret se esse filium Davidis et Salomonis, hoc est, se esse Messiam. Quinto, quia Messiae nomen erat Siloach, quod Latini et Graeci pronuntiant Silve, id est missus, vel mittendus, scilicet legatus a Deo, juxta illud Genes. xlix, 10: «Non auferetur sceptrum de Juda, et dux de femore ejus, donec veniat qui mittendus est;» Hebr. donec veniat Siloach: pro quo corrupte jam legitur Siloh littera ח cheth in vicinam ה he conversa et corrupta; Chald. donec veniat Messias. Misit ergo Christus caecum ad Siloe, ut refricaret Judaeis oraculum Jacobi patriarchae de Messia, q. d. Ego qui in Siloe curo caecum, sum Siloach sive Siloe, id est Messias, missus et legatus a Deo Patre, quem hoc nomine Silve venturum praedixit Jacob, ante 1500 annos. Atque hac de causa Christus passim hic disputans contra Pharisaeos, se vocat Siloach, id est missum et legatum Patris, sive eum quem misit Pater, hoc est Messiam, cujus nomen ex officio erat Siloach. Proprium enim Christi officium fuit agere legatum Dei apud homines: quare proprium officii et dignitatis ejus nomen fuit Siloach, id est missus. Sexto, Siloe erat typus baptismi Christi, quo spiritualiter illuminamur: unde et baptismus graece vocatur φωτισμός, id est illuminatio, Hebr. vi, 4: ita Rupertus, Beda, Jansenius, Maldonatus et Ambrosius, epist. 75, et S. Augustinus, hom. 43, inter. 50. Unde S. Irenaeus, lib. V, cap. xv, censet caecum hunc non tantum corpore, sed et mente fuisse illuminatum in Siloe, uti fit in baptismo. Denique, magna est affinitas fontis et lucis, ablutionis et illuminationis. Fons enim est quasi oculus et lux terrae, et flumina sunt quasi limpida agrorum lumina. Unde Hebr. עין ain tam oculum quam fontem significat. Sicut enim oculus est quasi lux totius corporis, sic fons est quasi lux terrae, et sicut ex oculo manant lacrymae, sic ex fonte aquae. Hinc et Hebr. נהר nahar tam flumen quam lumen significat, et nahar, tam confluere quam illuminare denotat: quin et Cicero ac Quintilianus lumina ingenii, animi, orationis, virtutis, vocant flumina. Imo Psaltes lumen gloriae vocat fontem sive flumen vitae: «Quoniam, inquit, apud te est fons vitae, et in lumine tuo videbimus lumen,» Ps. xxxv. Quocirca Christus hic lucem jungit fonti. Cum enim dixisset: «Ego sum lux mundi,» illico misit caecum ad fontem Siloe, ut ibi lumen oculorum reciperet. Aquae enim crassos et noxios humores oculorum abluunt et abstergunt, itaque eos illuminant. Unde medici suadent mane aqua fontana abluere oculos, ad acuendum eorum visum. Porro Bartholomaeus Saligniacus, lib. X Itinerarii Hierosol., cap. i, et ex eo Adrichomius, in Siloe, pag. 171, num. 200: «Siloe, inquit, fons, cui piscina sive natatoria Siloe, quae et piscina inferior nuncupatur, conjuncta est, in occidentali latere vallis Josaphat, e radice montis Sion scaturit. Aqua ejus clara, dulcis et uberrima, cum silentio placideque fluit in torrentem Cedron.» Et paulo post: «Fontis hujus aqua hodie adhuc ipsis etiam Saracenis in pretio est. Nam cum corpora naturaliter instar hircorum foeteant, in hoc fonte se et pueros suos lavant, eaque lotione foetorem suum mitigant. Quin et eam Turcae magni faciunt, quod ejus usum oculorum visui conferre experiantur.» Nimirum sicut Christus baptizatus in Jordane, suo contactu aquas sanctificavit, iisque vim peccata abluendi in baptismo indidit; sic et per aquas Siloe illuminans caecum, aliquam similem alios illuminandi vim eisdem communicasse videtur, ut, cum omnes aquae fontanae oculos clarificent, prae ceteris tamen id faciant aquae Siloe. Quocirca S. Helena, mater Constantini Imperatoris, ad fontem Siloe magnifica et mirifica construxit opera, ait Nicephorus, lib. VIII, cap. xxx. Audi S. Chrysostomum hic: Significat, ait, quod in Siloe erat virtus Christi, quae caecum curavit. Sicut enim Apostolus dixit Christum esse petram spiritalem, ita et Christus erat Siloe spiritalis. Sic et Cyrillus, ac S. Basilius, in Isaiae viii, 6, et Eusebius, lib. VII Demonstr., cap. ii. QUOD INTERPRETATUR MISSUS, — quia fons hic erat typus Messiae, cujus nomen erat Siloach, id est missus vel mittendus a Deo, uti jam dixi. Nam, ut ait S. Augustinus: «Nisi ille fuisset missus, nemo nostrum esset ab iniquitate dimissus.» ABIIT ERGO, ET LAVIT, ET VENIT VIDENS, — virtute non aquarum Siloe, sed Christi, aquis hisce quasi instrumento utentis ad caeci illuminationem, sicut utitur aquis baptismi ad mentis purificationem et illuminationem. «In Siloe,» inquit Chrysostomus, «erat virtus Christi, quae caecum curavit.» Meruit hoc non de condigno, sed de congruo caeci fides et obedientia, qua credidit se, lutum oculis suis a Christo impositum abluendo aquis Siloe, visum recuperaturum: nisi enim hoc credidisset, lutum super oculos non gestasset, cum irrisione intuentium, nec ad Siloe ivisset, eoque lutum ab oculis abstersisset. Minus vere ergo forte etiam id facit, ne Judaeos Christo infensos magis contra eum concitaret. AD NATATORIA, — scilicet stagna in plurali. Ita Romani; alii legunt, ad natatoriam, scilicet piscinam. Idem ergo est sensus.
9:8
8. ITAQUE VICINI, ET QUI VIDERANT EUM PRIUS, QUIA MENDICUS ERAT, DICEBANT: NONNE HIC EST, QUI SEDEBAT, ET MENDICABAT? ALII DICEBANT: QUIA HIC EST. 9. ALII AUTEM: NEQUAQUAM, SED SIMILIS EST EI. ILLE VERO DICEBAT: QUIA EGO SUM. — Magnitudo facti, ait Chrysostomus, incredulitatem inducebat; et aperti oculi vultum caeci mutaverant, ait S. Augustinus, ut eum intuentes dubitarent an videns hic esset prior ille caecus; sed diligenter inspicientes per longam viam euntem, agnoverunt eumdem esse, nec id negari posse. Ita Chrysostomus. MENDICUS. — Mirabilis Dei clementia, ait Chrysostomus, eos qui mendicabant, cum multa devotione curabat, ignobiles etiam sua dignos ducens providentia; pro salute enim omnium venerat. Sic hodie ad B. Virginem Lauretanam et Sichemensem, plerique pauperes et tenuis fortunae miracula et beneficia per B. Virginem impetrant: tum quia ipsi majori sunt in necessitate et egestate, quam divites; tum quia magis innocentis sunt vitae, tum quia majorem prae se ferunt fidem et devotionem, tum quia Deus eorum, utpote derelictorum, peculiarem gerit curam, juxta illud: «Tibi derelictus est pauper, orphano tu eris adjutor.» Unde S. Jacobus, cap. II, vers. 5: «Nonne, ait, Deus elegit pauperes in hoc mundo, divites in fide?» Et Christus: «Pauperes evangelizantur,» Matth. cap. XI. Assecla Christi ergo pauperes non spernat, sed exemplo Christi ambiat.
9:10
10. DICEBANT ERGO EI: QUOMODO APERTI SUNT TIBI OCULI? 11. RESPONDIT: ILLE HOMO, QUI DICITUR JESUS, LUTUM FECIT, ET UNXIT OCULOS MEOS, ET DIXIT MIHI: VADE AD NATATORIA SILOE, ET LAVA. ET ABII, ET LAVI, ET VIDEO. — «Ille homo,» quia nondum sciebat Jesum esse Deum, ait Euthymius et Theophylactus. QUI DICITUR JESUS. — Nomen Jesu caecus didicerat, vel ex communi fama, vel interrogando a circumstantibus. Quod Jesum non vocet Rabbi vel Dominum, partim simplicitati et candori ejus, partim veracitati ascribendum: ne quid enim suae de Christo existimationi dare videretur, nude veritatem aperit, eumque Jesum duntaxat nominat: forte etiam id facit, ne Judaeos Christo infensos magis contra eum concitaret. Adhuc inunctus, ait S. Augustinus, in corde nondum Filium Dei confitebatur, non tamen mentiebatur; ipse enim Dominus de se ait: «Non est propheta sine honore, nisi in patria sua.»
9:12
12. ET DIXERUNT EI: UBI EST ILLE? AIT: NESCIO. — Jesus enim fugiens laudem se subduxerat. Recedebat Christus ubi curasset, ait Chrysostomus: non enim quaerebat gloriam, nec se ostentare.
9:13
13. ADDUCUNT EUM AD PHARISAEOS QUI CAECUS FUERAT. ERAT AUTEM SABBATUM, QUANDO LUTUM FECIT JESUS, ET APERUIT OCULOS EJUS. — «Ad Pharisaeos,» ut illi quasi Rabbini et principes rem examinent. Consilio Dei id factum est, ut miraculum fieret testatissimum et celeberrimum, ipsique Pharisaei illud negare non possent. Unde S. Augustinus: «Caecus, inquit, confitebatur, et cor impiorum frangebatur.» Adducunt ergo caecum ad Pharisaeos, quasi ad judices, ideoque in domo judicii congregatos, ait Theodorus Heracleensis in Catena. Haec autem domus videtur fuisse synagoga, juxta templum: agebatur enim hic quaestio religionis et fidei, ut scilicet Pharisaei, quasi doctores et judices, examinarent hoc miraculum, et ex eo judicarent an ejus patrator esset Propheta et Messias, an non. ERAT AUTEM SABBATUM. — Hoc addit, ait Chrysostomus, demonstrans illorum malam mentem; quaerebant enim occasionem contra Jesum, et volebant miraculo detrahere per apparentem legis praevaricationem. Nam revera facere lutum, ut illo caecum illuminet, in sabbato, uti fecit Christus, sabbati non est praevaricatio, sed sanctificatio. Glossa hic ait: «Quomodo iste sine fide sanatus est, cum nemo legatur a Christo sanatus exterius sine sanatione interiori? Hoc de illis dicitur, qui propter peccata infirmabantur; at iste propter Dei gloriam languebat:» nam, ut ostendi, magna fuit caeci hujus fides et obedientia, ac per eam pariter justificatus est, ut audiemus in fine capitis. Sic Eliseus per aquas Jordanis Naaman Syrum purgavit a lepra, IV Reg. v. Idem per sal in aquas amaras et salsas injectum eas dulcoravit, IV Reg. II, 20. Causas varios, cur in Siloe illuminatus sit, dedi paulo ante. Hinc S. Augustinus: Dies, inquit, erat Christus, qui inter lucem et tenebras divisit, cum caeco caecitatem depulit, eique visum restituit.
9:17
17. DICUNT ERGO CAECO ITERUM: TU, QUID DICIS DE ILLO, QUI APERUIT OCULOS TUOS? ILLE AUTEM DIXIT: QUIA PROPHETA EST. — «Propheta,» id est vir sanctus, eximius, thaumaturgus et divinus. Sic Gen. XX, 7, Abraham vocatur Propheta, id est vir sanctus et eximius. Vide dicta I Cor. XIV, initio capitis, et Eccli. XLVIII, 12, ubi varias nominis Prophetae significationes recensui. TU, QUID DICIS DE ILLO? — Iterum iterumque interrogabant caecum, ex acerbo odio et invidia in Christum, tum ut caecum in eamdem cum Christo culpam et calumniam involvant; tum ut ex ore ejus aliquid eliciant, quo sibi contradicat, itaque eum mendacii arguant; sed Deus invidos et astutos comprehendit in sua astutia, dum effecit ut per hoc crebrum examen, magis constans caeci confessio, indeque Christi miraculum et gloria elucesceret. Ita Leontius et alii. Sapienter S. Chrysostomus: Haec, ait, est veritatis natura, ut per quae putatur insidias pati, fortior fiat, quod et nunc accidit: parentes in medium ducuntur, qui maxime suum filium cognoscebant, qui filii veritatem aperit, eumque Jesum duntaxat nominant.
9:18
18. NON CREDIDERUNT ERGO JUDAEI DE ILLO, QUIA CAECUS FUISSET ET VIDISSET, DONEC VOCAVERUNT PARENTES EJUS QUI VIDERAT: 19. ET INTERROGAVERUNT EOS, DICENTES: HIC EST FILIUS VESTER, QUEM VOS DICITIS, QUIA CAECUS NATUS EST? QUOMODO ERGO NUNC VIDET? 20. RESPONDERUNT EIS PARENTES EJUS, ET DIXERUNT: SCIMUS QUIA HIC EST FILIUS NOSTER, ET QUIA CAECUS NATUS EST: 21. QUOMODO AUTEM NUNC VIDEAT, NESCIMUS: AUT QUIS EJUS APERUIT OCULOS, NOS NESCIMUS: IPSUM INTERROGATE; AETATEM HABET, IPSE DE SE LOQUATUR. — Pharisaei caeci responso confusi, convertunt se ad ejus parentes ex majori livore et rabie, ut ex eorum ore eliciant quippiam quo vel caecum, vel Christum redarguant; scilicet vel caecum hunc non fuisse natum caecum, vel non fuisse plane caecum, sed lusciosum, vel per artem magicam, ut ait Chrysostomus, non per miraculum a Christo fuisse illuminatum. Quaerebant, ait S. Augustinus, quomodo hominem calumniarentur, ut eum de synagoga ejicerent, uti paulo post fecerunt. Et Theophylactus hoc eorum fuisse dilemma asserit: Aut falsum est quod filius vester nunc videat, aut quod antea caecus fuit; constat autem eum videre: falsum ergo est quod dicit, se caecum fuisse. Parentes autem caute respondent: Scire se filium hunc esse suum, ac caecum esse natum, sed a quo et quomodo sit illuminatus, nescire. Prudenter, ut nec veritatem negent, nec periculum excommunicationis incurrant: sed timide; unde aiunt: «Aetatem habet;» q. d., ait Augustinus: Juste cogeremur loqui pro infante, quia ipse pro se loqui non posset; at hic est vir qui pro se loqui potest; ergo «ipsum interrogate.»
9:22
22. HAEC DIXERUNT PARENTES EJUS, QUONIAM TIMEBANT JUDAEOS: JAM ENIM CONSPIRAVERANT JUDAEI, UT, SI QUIS EUM CONFITERETUR ESSE CHRISTUM, EXTRA SYNAGOGAM FIERET. 23. PROPTEREA PARENTES EJUS DIXERUNT: QUIA AETATEM HABET, IPSUM INTERROGATE. — «Extra synagogam;» Graece ἀποσυνάγωγος, hoc est asynagogus, scilicet ejectus e synagoga, et quasi excommunicatus. Verum, ut ait S. Augustinus, jam non erat malum fieri extra synagogam; quia illi expellebant, sed Christus expulsum suscipiebat. «Propterea parentes dixerunt:» quia imbecilliores erant filio, ait Theophylactus, qui testis aderat intrepidus veritatis.
9:24
24. VOCAVERUNT ERGO RURSUM HOMINEM, QUI FUERAT CAECUS, ET DIXERUNT EI: DA GLORIAM DEO, NOS SCIMUS QUIA (quod) HIC HOMO PECCATOR EST. 25. DIXIT ERGO EIS ILLE: SI PECCATOR EST, NESCIO: UNUM SCIO, QUIA CAECUS CUM ESSEM, MODO VIDEO. 26. DIXERUNT ERGO ILLI: QUID FECIT TIBI? QUOMODO APERUIT TIBI OCULOS? 27. RESPONDIT EIS: DIXI VOBIS JAM, ET AUDISTIS: QUID ITERUM VULTIS AUDIRE? NUMQUID ET VOS VULTIS DISCIPULI EJUS FIERI? — «Da gloriam Deo.» Est modus, sive phrasis obtestandi et adjurandi apud Hebraeos, ut patet Josue VII, 19, q. d. Dic veritatem ad Dei gloriam: fatere tu idipsum quod nos scimus esse verum, scilicet hunc hominem, puta Jesum, esse peccatorem, atque hac veritatis, quae latebat, confessione a te manifestata, glorificabis Deum, qui est prima et aeterna veritas. «Dare gloriam Deo,» inquit Glossa, est veritatem de aliquo, quasi Deo praesente dicere, q. d. Confitere istum non esse Deum, sicut nos, sed peccatorem: nimirum praetextu religionis, ait Chrysostomus, ad hoc volunt caecum inducere, ut neget se a Christo curatum, aut ficte et magice per praestigias curatum; q. d., ait Interlinearis: Nega beneficium et miraculum quod a Jesu accepisti: quod est blasphemare, non Deo gloriam dare. SI PECCATOR EST, NESCIO; UNUM SCIO, QUIA CAECUS CUM ESSEM, MODO VIDEO. — Prudenter et caute respondet, quia nec patet calumniae, nec veritatem celat, ait Interlinearis. Objicit Chrysostomus: Quomodo dixit caecus paulo ante, «Propheta est,» qui nunc dicit: «Si peccator est, nescio?» Respondet: Non hoc dicit asserendo, nec timendo, sed quia volebat Jesum a rei testimonio, non a sua voce, ab incusatione eripi, q. d. Nunc dicere vel disputare vobiscum nolo, an Jesus sit peccator, necne: unum dico, quod certo scio, me jam esse videntem, qui prius fui caecus. QUOMODO APERUIT TIBI OCULOS? — Modum curationis iterum inquirunt, more canum, ait Chrysostomus, qui leporem nunc huc, nunc illuc investigant. QUID ITERUM VULTIS AUDIRE? — q. d. Inaniter interrogatis, non volentes addiscere, sed cavillari, ait S. Chrysostomus. NUMQUID ET VOS VULTIS DISCIPULI EJUS FIERI? — sicut ego jam video, et non invideo, ait Interlinearis. Imo discipulum me esse Jesu profiteor, ac vos pariter ejus discipulos fieri opto: loquebatur haec, ait S. Augustinus, jam stomachans adversus duritiem Judaeorum, et ex caeco videns, non ferens caecos. Nota hic heroicam constantiam et magnanimitatem caeci, in tuendo Jesu coram Pharisaeis juratis Christi hostibus, unde meruit a Christo suscipi et exaltari.
9:28
28. MALEDIXERUNT ERGO EI, ET DIXERUNT: TU DISCIPULUS ILLIUS SIS: NOS AUTEM MOYSI DISCIPULI SUMUS. 29. NOS SCIMUS QUIA MOYSI LOCUTUS EST DEUS: HUNC AUTEM NESCIMUS UNDE SIT. — «Maledixerunt,» dicendo: Maledicte, esto maledictus, maledicat tibi Deus, ito in malam crucem; aut quid simile: aut «maledixerunt,» id est maledicta et convicia in eum jecerunt; Arabicus, opprobriis eum affecerunt. Verum inefficax fuit eorum maledictio, et a Christo conversa in benedictionem; laus enim piorum est ab impiis maledici. Unde S. Augustinus, maledictum est, ait, si cor discutias, non si verba perpendas: tale autem maledictum sit super nos et super filios nostros. Ex hoc loco S. Cyprianus, epistol. 64 et 80, et ejus sequaces Donatistae, inferebant baptismum a ministro haeretico collatum, esse invalidum, ideoque iterandum, quia haereticus est magnus peccator, quem Deus non audit. Sed perperam: nam simili modo Catholici sacerdotis qui in peccato vivit, baptisma esset irritum et iterandum; hic enim est peccator. Dico ergo, alia est vis Sacramenti, alia orationis. Sacramentum enim habet vim ex opere operato, oratio vero ex opere operantis, puta ex sanctitate et meritis orantis. Quare si peccator, v. g., haereticus, baptizet, validum est Sacramentum, suamque habet vim ex institutione Christi, qui per Sacramentum gratiam confert: Christus enim est principalis auctor baptismi, qui per ministrum, quasi instrumentum baptizat. Adde, esto Deus non audiat preces peccatoris in quantum ipse persona privata est; audit tamen ejusdem preces, quatenus ipse persona publica est, puta minister Ecclesiae, Ecclesia enim est sancta, quia caput, puta Christum, habet sanctum, multaque membra, hoc est multos fideles habet sanctos, quorum preces Deus exaudit. HUNC AUTEM NESCIMUS UNDE SIT. — an a Deo missus, uti fuit Moses, an a diabolo. Ita Euthymius.
9:30
30. RESPONDIT ILLE HOMO (caecus a Christo illuminatus), ET DIXIT EIS: IN HOC ENIM (q. d. Hoc sane. Est hebraismus) MIRABILE EST, QUIA VOS NESCITIS UNDE SIT, ET APERUIT OCULOS MEOS. — q. d. Vestrum, utpote doctorum et legis peritorum, erat, scire Jesum, qui tanta patrat miracula et me modo illuminavit, non nisi a Deo missum esse; Deus enim est, qui per eum miracula operatur. Ubique signum illuminationis suae inducit, ait Chrysostomus, quia hoc depravare non poterant, sed ab eo convincebantur.
9:31
31. SCIMUS AUTEM QUIA PECCATORES DEUS NON AUDIT. — Quaeres, quomodo hoc sit verum? Nam Deus peccatores, si poenitentes veniam petant, illam eis indulget, et peccatoribus bona temporalia, quin et spiritualia petentibus saepe elargitur. Respondeo primo: Deus ordinarie peccatores non exaudit, peccatores, inquam, in peccato perseverantes; aliquando tamen eos exaudit, sed id rarum est. Ita Jansenius. Id ita esse patet ex Scriptura. Audi Isaiam: «Aggravata est auris ejus, ut non exaudiat, sed iniquitates vestrae diviserunt inter vos et Deum vestrum,» Isaiae LIX, 1 et 2. Et: «Qui declinat aures suas, ne audiat legem, oratio ejus fiet execrabilis,» Prov. XXVIII, 9. Et: «Peccatori dixit Deus: Quare tu enarras justitias meas, et assumis testamentum meum per os tuum?» Psalm. XLIX, 16. Et: «Maledicam benedictionibus vestris,» Malach. II, 2. De justis autem dicitur: «Oculi Domini super justos, et aures ejus in preces eorum,» Psalm. XXXIII, 16. Et: «Oculi Domini ad timentes eum,» Eccli. XV, 20. Secundo, et magis proprie ad rem propositam, Deus non exaudit peccatores; nimirum hac ratione et modo, ut ad declarandam eorum sanctitatem (quae nulla, vel ficta et simulata est) miracula faciat, uti facit per Jesum, ad testandum ipsum esse Messiam: de hac enim re hic agebatur. Ita Theophylactus, Euthymius et Maldonatus hic, ac Suarez, tom. II De Religione, lib. De Oratione, cap. XXV: Deus, inquit, peccatores non audit, si orent mala intentione, v. g., ad confirmationem hypocrisis vel mendacii. Tertio, S. Augustinus, lib. III De Baptismo contra Donatistas, cap. XX, respondet caecum hunc id dixisse generaliter, cum adhuc esset catechumenus, et necdum satis in fide instructus; nam generaliter idipsum non esse verum. Quare sententiam hanc non omnino esse veram, nec esse sententiam S. Scripturae, sed S. Scripturam tantum asserere illam prolatam esse a caeco: quod verum est et canonicum. Audi S. Augustinum: «Haec adhuc inunctus loquitur; nam et peccatores Deus exaudit: alioqui frustra publicanus diceret, Deus propitius esto mihi peccatori; ex qua confessione meruit justificationem, sicut et caecus ille illuminationem.»
9:32
32. A SAECULO NON EST AUDITUM, QUIA (quod) QUIS APERUIT OCULOS CAECI NATI. — q. d. Esto, Moyses et Prophetae multa fecerint miracula, numquam tamen caeco nato visum restituerunt: Jesus ergo, qui mihi caeco nato visum reddidit, magnus Propheta in mundum a Deo missus sit oportet, imo major Mose et Prophetis ceteris. Pungit et retundit dictum Pharisaeorum: «Tu discipulus illius sis, nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus,» q. d. Vos Mosen antefertis Christo; ego vero Christum antefero: vos Moysi discipuli esse vultis, ego malo Jesu esse discipulus. Ita Cyrillus, Leontius et alii.
9:33
33. NISI ESSET HIC A DEO, NON POTERAT FACERE QUIDQUAM, — in curanda caecitate mea. Dicit hoc caecus libere, constanter et veraciter, ait S. Augustinus. Dei enim opus supernaturale et proprium est illuminare caecos.
9:34
34. RESPONDERUNT, ET DIXERUNT EI: IN PECCATIS NATUS ES TOTUS, ET TU DOCES NOS? — «Totus,» scilicet et anima et corpore; nam ob peccatum tuum caecus es natus: hinc stigma peccati in oculis ostentas. Censent enim cum Pythagora, Platone et aliis, animam ante corpus extitisse, et ob peccata in corpus deforme, v. g., caecum, esse detrusam. Ita Cyrillus, Leontius et alii. Aliter Maldonatus, q. d. Ab utero matris usque in hodiernum diem nihil didicisti, nisi peccare. Sic et S. Chrysostomus et Theophylactus: A prima aetate, inquiunt, continuo peccas. ET TU DOCES NOS? — q. d. Tu, o caece peccator, vis docere nos, qui sumus videntes, sapientes et justi? ET EJECERUNT EUM FORAS, — extra domum privatam, in qua erant, quasi stultum et indignum cum quo tanti magistri disputarent, ait Maldonatus; vel, ut Theophylactus ex S. Chrysostomo, extra templum, ac consequenter extra synagogam, ait Leontius, hoc est, excommunicaverunt eum, et extra coetum, sive Ecclesiam suam, ejecerunt; sed invenit eum Dominus templi (Christus), ait Chrysostomus, et suscepit. Utrumque eos fecisse est credibile, scilicet caecum ex domo, et hoc symbolo ex Ecclesia sua ejecisse. Hoc enim apud eos jam decretum erat, ut patet vers. 22. Atque hoc satis significant vers. 28, cum dicunt: «Tu illius discipulus sis, nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus,» q. d. Abi a Mose et nobis, o apostata, ad tuum Jesum; nimirum huc eos agebat livor et odium Christi. Denique idipsum suadet, quod haec acta sint in domo judicii, quae videtur fuisse domus publica, non privata, puta synagoga juxta templum, ut dixi vers. 31. Ita S. Chrysostomus, Theophylactus, Leontius. Idipsum magis patebit cap. X, vers. 1, ubi ob caecum hunc e synagoga expulsum, Christus ait se esse ostium ovilis Dei, id est Ecclesiae.
9:35
35. AUDIVIT JESUS QUIA EJECERUNT EUM FORAS: ET CUM INVENISSET EUM, DIXIT EI: TU CREDIS IN FILIUM DEI? 36. RESPONDIT ILLE, ET DIXIT: QUIS EST, DOMINE, UT CREDAM IN EUM? 37. ET DIXIT EI JESUS: ET VIDISTI EUM, ET QUI LOQUITUR TECUM, IPSE EST. 38. AT ILLE AIT: CREDO, DOMINE, ET PROCIDENS ADORAVIT EUM. — Christus caecum, a Judaeis ob sui confessionem ejectum, benigne suscipit ejusque constantiam remunerat; quare quem prius carne, eumdem nunc mente illuminat. Nam cum eum carne illuminavit, simul ei communia et confusa quaedam fidei semina injecerat, quae nunc particulatim efformat et perficit, ut Jesum quem quasi illuminatorem sui credebat esse Prophetam, sed hominem, nunc credat esse quoque Deum Deique Filium. Unde Glossa: Habebat caecus, inquit, jamdudum cor paratum ad credendum, sed in quem credere deberet, ignorabat. Unde ait: «Quis est, Domine, ut credam in eum?» Discit ergo hoc a Christo, ut scilicet in se, quasi in Messiam, Dei Filium, ideoque Deum verum, credat. ET CUM INVENISSET, — utique studio Christi quaesitum eo loci, ubi ipsum esse sciebat. Nemo enim invenit, nisi id quod antea quaesivit: nimirum pastoris boni est quaerere ovem errantem, quae se in viam reducere nequit, nisi ab illo quaesita et reducta. Unde S. Augustinus, tract. 44: «Illi pellunt, inquit, excipit Dominus: magis enim quia expulsus est, Christianus factus est.» CREDIS. — Jesus non requisivit fidem caeci in sanatione corporis, sed hic in sanatione mentis eam exposcit; quia, ut ait S. Augustinus, serm. 13 De Verbis Apostoli: «Qui fecit te sine te, non justificat te sine te; fecit nescientem, justificat scientem.» ET DIXIT EI JESUS: ET VIDISTI EUM, ET QUI LOQUITUR TECUM, IPSE EST. — «Et vidisti eum,» nunc cum se tibi ipse videndum offert, quem hucusque caecus videre non potuisti. Nam caecus illuminatus fuerat in Siloe absente Christo, unde Christum hucusque non viderat. Insinuat ergo Christus se esse eum qui ipsi paulo ante visum restituit. Reducit enim ei in memoriam sanitatem, ait Theophylactus, et quod ab eo virtutem videndi acceperat, ut sic credat ipsum non tantum esse Filium hominis, sed et Filium Dei. CREDO, DOMINE, ET PROCIDENS ADORAVIT EUM, — Jesum, tanquam genuinum et proprium Dei Filium, ideoque Deum verum latria adorandum. Porro caecus, Christo interius eum illustrante et impellente, dicens: «Credo,» simul elicuit actus spei, contritionis, charitatis, religionis et adorationis erga Christum, et per illos a peccatis purgatus et justificatus est. Quocirca vir sanctus et Apostolicus evasit: scripsit ejus vitam Petrus de Natalibus, episcopus Equilinus, in Catalogo Sanctorum, lib. V, cap. CII: «Cedonius Episcopus, inquit, vel Sidonius, fuit ille caecus a nativitate, quem Dominus lutum ex sputo faciens, et oculos liniens, illuminavit, ut habetur Joan. IX, qui et ab aliquibus dicitur fuisse unus ex 72 Christi discipulis. Sive autem ex numero illorum fuerit, sive non, planum habetur ex chronicis et gestis discipulorum, quod Christi discipulus fuit; et post ascensionem Domini ab Apostolis baptizatus, S. Maximino specialiter adhaesit, et cum eodem, et Lazaro atque sororibus ejus naviculae impositus, a finibus Judaeorum expulsus fuit. Postquam autem praefati Sancti provinciam Provinciae, ad quam Deo duce applicuerunt, ad Christum converterunt; et postquam beatus Lazarus Massiliae, et beatus Maximinus Aquis ordinati sunt, ipse in ministerio Maximini, Aquensis civitatis Episcopi, permansit, et ejusdem praedicationis coadjutor: ubi et post dies multos in pace quievit, et juxta magistrum reconditus jacuit, ut supra dictum est.»
9:39
39. ET DIXIT JESUS. — Nonnulli codices addunt ei, scilicet caeco; sed cum Romanis, Graecis, Syro et Arabico delendum «ei.» Christus enim haec dixit non ad caecum, sed ad Pharisaeos. IN JUDICIUM EGO IN HUNC MUNDUM VENI (Arabicus, veni ut judicem hunc mundum), UT QUI NON VIDENT, VIDEANT, ET QUI VIDENT, CAECI FIANT. — «In judicium,» id est ad condemnationem, ait Cyrillus, Leontius, Theophylactus et Chrysostomus, ut scilicet superbos et mundanos Pharisaeos, qui sibi videntur videre et sapere, caecitatis arguam, convincam et condemnem. Melius alii accipiunt judicium non condemnationis, sed examinis et discretionis, q. d. Ego incarnatus sum et veni in terram, ut discernam et separem credentes ab incredulis, bonos a malis, pios ab impiis; nimirum ut humiles, qui antea in ignorantia Dei et salutis vivebant in caecitate mentis, instar caeci hujus mihi credentes, Dei et rerum ad salutem spectantium cognitione illuminem; superbos vero mihi credere nolentes, uti sunt Pharisaei scientia legis inflati, superbia sua excaecari permittam, ac excaecatos excaecitatis arguam et refutem. Ita S. Augustinus. Posset secundo, judicium hic significare arcanum Dei consilium, et mirabile decretum, sed justo ejus judicio statutum et fixum, quo Deus effecit ut Gentiles Deum ignorantes, ideoque caeci, lumen fidei Christi viderent, illudque humiliter et avide susciperent; Scribae vero, Pharisaei et mundi sapientes sua scientia inflati, per infidelitatem excaecarentur, Christique fidem et lucem repellerent. Humilitas ergo Gentes insipientes se Christo subdentes fide Christi illuminavit: superbia vero Scribas sapientes Christum repellentes infidelitate caecavit. Ita Cyrillus, vel potius Clictovaeus, qui Cyrillum hic supplevit. Hoc est quod exclamat Apostolus, Rom. XI: «O altitudo divitiarum sapientiae et scientiae Dei! Quam incomprehensibilia sunt judicia ejus, et investigabiles viae ejus!» Nimirum, «judicia Dei abyssus multa.» Causam praemisit Apostolus ibidem vers. 25, dicens: «Caecitas ex parte contigit in Israel, donec plenitudo Gentium intraret.» Ita Clictovaeus, in Impresso, et Cyrillus, in Catena. Porro Theodoretus, in Catena, haec ad Paulum et Judam adaptat; Paulus enim ex caeco videns, Judas autem ex vidente caecus factus est. Ubi nota «ut,» propterea, ideo, idcirco, etc., apud Joannem saepe non causam, sed effectum vel consecutionem significare. Non enim hac causa et hoc fine venit Christus, ut Scribae excaecarentur, sed caecitas eorum ex adventu et praedicatione ejus consecuta est, non per actionem Christi, sed per ipsorum superbiam et culpam.
9:40
40. ET AUDIERUNT QUIDAM EX PHARISAEIS, QUI CUM IPSO ERANT, ET DIXERUNT EI: NUMQUID ET NOS CAECI SUMUS? — Senserunt Pharisaei Christi dictio, «ut videntes caeci fiant,» se tangi et pungi, Christumque loqui de caecitate non corporis, uti vult Theophylactus, sed animi: ita Cyrillus et Leontius. Videbant enim se corpore non esse caecos, quare si eos oculis captos dixisset, ipsum stolidum explosissent; rogant ergo: «Numquid et nos caeci sumus?» q. d. Itane tu venisti, ut caecos corporaliter illumines, et nos spiritualiter videntes legisque doctores excaeces, et insipientes amentesque efficias? Ostende nobis hanc caecitatem et amentiam.
9:41
41. DIXIT EIS JESUS: SI CAECI ESSETIS, NON HABERETIS PECCATUM; NUNC VERO DICITIS: QUIA VIDEMUS. PECCATUM VESTRUM MANET. — Arabicus, firmatum est. Primo, Chrysostomus, Theophylactus, Euthymius exponunt de caecitate corporis, q. d. Si caeci essetis corpore, minus superbiretis et peccaretis. Caecitas enim corporis humiliaret animum vestrum. Secundo, et magis genuine, S. Augustinus, tract. 44: «Si caeci essetis,» scilicet vestro sensu et judicio, hoc est, si caecos, id est ignorantes et insipientes in rebus salutis vos esse humiliter agnosceretis, non haberetis peccatum; quia caecitatis vestrae remedium quaereretis, et a me quaerentes acciperetis. Sic et Beda, Maldonatus et alii. Tertio, praecise et scholastice, q. d. Si essetis caeci, scilicet per ignorantiam Scripturae et legis naturalis, non haberetis peccatum juxta ignorantiam hanc operando, et me Messiam vestrum non agnoscendo; scilicet si ignorantia vestra esset plane inculpata et invincibilis, haberetis quidem aliquod peccatum, sed minus grave et excusabile, atque facile a me, ignorantiam vestram mea doctrina dispellente, possetis illuminari et curari; nunc vero apud vos «dicitis: Quia (quod) videmus,» hoc est, putatis vos videre esseque sapientes, ut de Christi adventu et persona optime judicetis; idcirco, ut habet Graecus, Arabicus et Syrus, «peccatum vestrum manet,» q. d. Idcirco vos ex malitia et arrogantia permanetis in vestro infidelitatis contra me peccato, idcirco obstinatis et obfirmatis animum, ut me Messiam esse credere nolitis, etiamsi ego idipsum plurimis signis et miraculis verum esse demonstrarim. Quocirca nulla ratione a me illuminari et curari potestis, quia obstinate me audire non vultis. Ita Theophylactus, Jansenius et alii.
9:1
Postquam dominus doctrinae suae illuminativam virtutem ostendit verbo, hic consequenter confirmat eam facto, caecum corporaliter illuminando. Et circa hanc illuminationem tria ponuntur. Primo infirmitas; secundo infirmitatis sanatio, ibi hoc cum dixisset, expuit in terram etc.; tertio de sanatione, Iudaeorum disceptatio, ibi itaque vicini et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponitur infirmitas; secundo inquiritur causa eius, ibi interrogaverunt eum discipuli. Sciendum est circa primum, quod Iesus abscondens se, et de templo recedens, dum praeteriret, vidit hunc caecum. Et hoc est quod dicit et praeteriens Iesus, vidit hominem caecum a nativitate. Ubi tria considerantur. Primo quidem praeterivit, ut declinaret Iudaeorum furorem; Eccli. VIII, 13: ne accendas carbones peccatorum, arguens eos, et ne incendaris flamma ignis peccatorum illorum. Secundo ut emolliret Iudaeorum duritiam ex miraculo facto et fiendo; infra c. XV, 24: si opera non fecissem in eis quae nemo alius fecit, peccatum non haberent. Tertio ut per operationem signi, verba sua firmaret; nam facta domini, eorum quae dicta sunt a se, faciunt fidem; Mc. ult., 20: sermonem confirmante, sequentibus signis. Mystice autem, secundum Augustinum, genus humanum est iste caecus. Nam spiritualis caecitas peccatum est, Sap. II, 21: excaecavit eos malitia eorum. Qui a nativitate caecus est, quia ex sua origine trahit peccatum. Haec enim caecitas contigit per peccatum in homine primo, de quo omnes originem traduximus; Eph. II, 3: eratis natura, idest naturali origine, filii irae.
9:2
Consequenter cum dicit et interrogaverunt eum discipuli eius, agitur de causa ipsius infirmitatis, et primo inquiritur causa ipsius a discipulis; secundo manifestatur a Christo, ibi neque hic peccavit. Circa primum tria quaerenda occurrunt. Primum est causa inquisitionis discipulorum a Christo, quae est, ut Chrysostomus dicit, quia Iesus egrediens de templo, et videns hunc caecum, valde studiose respexit, quasi videns in eo materiam operandae virtutis; ita ut discipuli hoc videntes, scilicet eum studiose videntem, moti fuerunt ad interrogandum. Secundo discipulorum diligentia, quia dicunt Rabbi, vocantes eum magistrum, ut innuant se sic quaerere, quasi discere desiderantes. Tertio quare, quaerentes causam peccati, dixerunt quis peccavit? Dicendum, secundum Chrysostomum, quod quia dominus supra V, 14, scilicet quando paralyticum sanavit, dixerat ei: ecce iam sanus factus es: vade, et amplius noli peccare, cogitaverunt discipuli, quod propter peccatum ei illa infirmitas accidisset, aestimantes ulterius quod omnis humana infirmitas proveniret ex peccato, secundum quod Eliphaz dicit, Iob IV, 7: quis unquam innocens periit? Et ideo quaerebant utrum ex peccato suo vel parentum caecus natus fuisset. Sed quod ex peccato suo esset, non videtur: quia nullus peccat antequam nascatur, cum animae ante corpora non fuerint, nec peccaverint, ut quidam falso opinati sunt: secundum illud Rom. IX, 11: cum nondum nati fuissent, aut aliquid boni egissent aut mali (...); non ex operibus, sed ex vocante dictum est ei; quia maior serviet minori. Quod autem hoc ex peccato parentum passus fuerit, non videtur: quia Deut. XXIV, 16, dicitur: non occidentur patres pro filiis, nec filii pro parentibus. Sed sciendum, quod est duplex poena qua homines puniuntur. Una est spiritualis quantum ad animam; alia est corporalis quantum ad corpus. Et poena quidem spirituali numquam filius pro patre punitur. Cuius ratio assignatur Ez. XVIII, 4, quia anima filii non est ex patre, sed a Deo. Omnes, inquit, animae meae sunt, scilicet per creationem, sicut anima patris, ita anima filii mea est: anima quae peccaverit ipsa punietur. Hoc etiam dicit Augustinus in quadam epistola. Sed poena corporali filius pro patre punitur, cum quantum ad corpus sit quaedam res patris. Et expresse hoc habetur Gen. XIX, ubi filii Sodomorum occisi sunt pro peccato parentum in subversione Sodomae. Multoties etiam dominus comminatur Iudaeis occisionem puerorum propter peccata parentum. Quare autem uno peccato alius puniatur, sciendum, quod poena duo habet, laesionem et remedium. Nam aliquando abscinditur membrum ut totum corpus conservetur: et sic poena huius laesionem infert inquantum abscinditur, sed remedium habet inquantum conservat corpus. Numquam tamen medicus nobilius membrum abscindit propter conservationem minus nobilis, sed e converso. In rebus autem humanis, anima nobilior est corpore, et corpus nobilius exterioribus rebus; et ideo numquam fit ut aliquis propter corpus in anima puniatur, sed potius in corpore propter remedium animae. Quandoque ergo Deus irrogat poenas corporibus, vel rebus exterioribus, propter remedium bonum animae: et tunc huiusmodi poenae non inferuntur ut laesivae tantum, sed ut purgativae in remedium. Unde et ipsa puerorum Sodomitarum occisio fuit ad bonum animarum: non quidem ad meritum, sed ne paternae malitiae imitatores, vivendo peccata cumulantes, atrocius punirentur. Sic etiam pro peccatis parentum pluries aliqui puniuntur. Consequenter cum dicit respondit Iesus etc., manifestat dominus causam infirmitatis, et primo excludit causam opinatam; secundo subdit veram; et tertio manifestat ipsam. Causam quidem opinatam excludit, cum respondit dicens neque hic peccavit, neque parentes eius. Hanc enim esse causam infirmitatis, opinati sunt discipuli, ut dictum est. Sed contra. Rom. III, 23: omnes enim peccaverunt, et egent gloria Dei. Et ibid. V, 12, dicitur, quod peccatum ab Adam in omnes pertransiit. Respondeo dicendum, quod tam caecus quam parentes eius originali peccato tenebantur, et etiam alia actualia vivendo superaddiderant, quia, si dixerimus quod peccatum non habemus, ipsi nos seducimus, et veritas in nobis non est: I Io. I, 8. Quod autem dominus dicit neque hic peccavit, intelligendum est eos non peccasse, ad hoc quod caecus nasceretur; quasi diceret, quod eius caecitas non est consecuta ex eorum peccato.
9:3
Causam autem veram subdit dicens sed ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo: nam per opera Dei in eius cognitionem ducimur; Rom. I, 20: invisibilia Dei per ea quae facta sunt, intellecta conspiciuntur; supra V: opera quae dedit mihi pater, haec sunt quae testimonium perhibent de me. Cognitio autem Dei est summum bonum hominis, cum in ea consistat hominis beatitudo; infra XVII, 3: haec est vita aeterna, ut cognoscant te solum Deum verum, et quem misisti Iesum Christum. Et Ier. IX, 24: in hoc glorietur qui gloriatur, scire et nosse me. Si ergo infirmitas contingit ut manifestentur opera Dei, et per ipsorum manifestationem Deus innotescit; manifestum est quod huiusmodi corporales infirmitates contingunt propter bonum. Posset autem alicui videri quod manifestatio operum Dei non sit sufficiens causa infirmitatis huiusmodi, praesertim cum neque hic, neque parentes eius peccaverunt, et ideo volunt dicere, quod ly ut tenetur non causaliter, sed consequenter; quasi dicat: eo existente caeco, opera Dei manifestantur ipsum curantis. Sed hoc non videtur sane dictum; et ideo melius dicendum, quod tenetur causaliter. Est enim duplex malum: scilicet culpae et poenae. Sed malum quidem culpae Deus non facit, sed permittit fieri; quod non permitteret, nisi intenderet inde bonum aliquod. Unde dicit Augustinus in Enchir.: Deus adeo bonus est, quod numquam permitteret aliquod malum fieri, nisi esset adeo potens quod de quolibet malo eliciat bonum. Sic ergo permittit aliqua peccata fieri ex intentione boni quod intendit: sicut permisit saevire tyrannos, ut coronaret martyres. Multo ergo magis debet dici, quod malum poenae, quod ipse fecit, ut dicitur Amos III, 6: non est malum quod dominus non fecerit, numquam inducit nisi ex intentione boni. Et inter alia bona optimum est quod opera Dei manifestentur, et ex eis innotescat Deus. Non est ergo inconveniens si aliqua flagella immittit, vel peccata aliqua fieri permittit, ut bonum inde proveniat. Et sciendum, quod, ut Gregorius dicit I Moral., quinque modis Deus hominibus immittit flagella. Quandoque quidem ad initium damnationis, secundum illud Ier. VII, 18: duplici contritione contere eos. Et hoc flagello percutitur peccator in hac vita sic, ut sine retractatione et fine puniatur in alia; sicut Herodes qui occidit Iacobum, punitus est in hac vita, et in Inferno similiter: Act. XII, 23. Quandoque autem ad correctionem: et de hac dicitur in Ps. XVII, 36: disciplina tua ipsa me docebit. Quandoque autem flagellatur aliquis non propter praeteritorum correctionem, sed ad futurorum praeservationem: sicut de Paulo legitur II Cor. XII, 7: ne magnitudo revelationum extollat me, datus est mihi stimulus carnis meae, Angelus Satanae, qui me colaphizet. Quandoque autem ad promotionem virtutis: ut scilicet cum in aliquo nec praeterita culpa corrigitur, nec futura prohibetur, dum inopinata salus persecutionem sequitur, salvantis virtute cognita, ardentius amatur; II ad Cor. XII, 9: virtus in infirmitate perficitur; Iac. I, 4: patientia opus perfectum habet. Quandoque vero ad manifestationem divinae gloriae: unde et hic dicitur ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo. Consequenter cum dicit me oportet operari etc., manifestat causam veram quam posuit: et quia mentionem fecerat de operibus Dei, ideo primo ponit opportunitatem opera Dei manifestandi; secundo assignat opportunitatis, seu necessitatis rationem, ibi venit nox; tertio eam exponit, ibi quamdiu in mundo sum. Dicit ergo: ideo scilicet caecus natus est, ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo, quae quidem manifestari oportebat: nam me oportet operari opera eius qui misit me. Quod quidem potest referri ad Christum secundum quod homo; et sic est sensus: me oportet operari opera eius qui misit me, idest, opera commissa mihi a patre; supra c. V, 36: opera quae dedit mihi pater ut faciam. Infra XVII, 4, dicit: pater, opus consummavi quod dedisti mihi ut faciam. Vel ad Christum, secundum quod Deus; et sic dicit aequalitatem suae potentiae ad patrem, ut sit sensus: me oportet operari opera eius qui misit me, idest, opera quae habeo a patre. Omnia enim quae filius facit, etiam secundum divinam naturam, a patre habet; supra V, 19: non potest filius a se facere quidquam, nisi quod viderit patrem facientem. Oportet, inquam, donec dies est. Dies quidem materialis ex praesentia solis super terram causatur. Sol autem iustitiae est Christus Deus noster; Mal. IV, 2: vobis timentibus nomen meum, orietur sol iustitiae. Quamdiu ergo sol iste nobis praesens est, opera Dei fieri possunt in nobis, erga nos, et a nobis. Praesens autem fuit nobis aliquando quidem corporali praesentia; et tunc dies erat; Ps. CXVII, 25: haec dies quam fecit dominus: exultemus et laetemur in ea. Et ideo oportet operari opera Dei. Est etiam nobis praesens per gratiam: et tunc est dies gratiae, in quo scilicet oportet operari opera Dei, donec dies est; Rom. XIII, v. 12: nox praecessit, dies autem appropinquabit. Abiiciamus ergo opera tenebrarum, et induamur arma lucis; I Thess. V, 7: qui dormiunt, nocte dormiunt. Vos autem non estis in tenebris et cetera. Sed sciendum, quod si praesentia solis facit diem et absentia noctem, cum sol sibi praesens sit semper, ipsi soli semper dies est: et sic soli semper est tempus operandi et lucendi. Sed quantum ad nos, quibus aliquando est praesens, aliquando absens, non semper operatur et lucet. Eodem modo apud Christum, solem iustitiae, semper est dies et tempus operandi; non autem apud nos: quia non semper sumus capaces suae gratiae, propter impedimentum ex parte nostra.
9:4
Rationem autem opportunitatis praedictae subdit, dicens venit nox, quando nemo potest operari. Sicut est duplex dies, ita est duplex nox. Una est per abscessum corporalem solis iustitiae, sicut apostoli incurrerunt, quando Christo eis corporaliter sublato tempore passionis, perturbati sunt; Matth. XVI, 31: omnes vos scandalum patiemini in me in ista nocte. Et tunc non fuit tempus operandi, sed patiendi. Sed melius est ut dicamus, quod etiam Christo absente corporaliter per ascensionem, dies apostolis erat, inquantum illucebat eis sol iustitiae, et tempus operandi. Et ideo intelligendum est de nocte quae est per spiritualem separationem solis iustitiae, scilicet per subtractionem gratiae: quae quidem nox duplex est. Una per subtractionem actualis gratiae quam inducit peccatum mortale; I Thess. V, 7: qui dormiunt, nocte dormiunt. Et quando haec nox venit, nemo potest operari opera meritoria vitae aeternae. Alia nox est consummata, quando non solum privatur actuali gratia quis per peccatum mortale, sed etiam facultate adipiscendi, per aeternam damnationem in Inferno, ubi profunda nox est, quae erit illis quibus dicitur: ite, maledicti, in ignem aeternum: Matth. XXV, 41. Et tunc nemo potest operari, quia non est tempus merendi, sed secundum merita recipiendi. Dum ergo vivis, fac sicut facturus es. Unde Eccle. IX, 10: quaecumque potest manus tua, instanter operare: quia neque ratio, neque opus, nec sapientia, nec scientia erunt apud Inferos, quo tu properas.
9:5
Rationem autem dictorum exponit dicens quamdiu sum in mundo, lux sum mundi; quasi diceret: si vultis scire quis sit dies, et quae nox, de quibus loquor; ego, inquam, sum lux mundi: nam praesentia mea diem facit, et absentia noctem; supra VIII, 12: ego sum lux mundi. Quamdiu ego sum in mundo, corporaliter per meam praesentiam; infra XVI, 28: exivi a patre, et veni in mundum; iterum relinquo mundum, et vado ad patrem. Lux sum mundi: unde dies iste duravit usque ad ascensionem Christi. Item, quamdiu sum in mundo, spiritualiter per gratiam; Matth. ult., 20: ecce ego vobiscum sum usque ad consummationem saeculi. Lux sum mundi: unde dies iste usque ad consummationem saeculi extendetur. Consequenter cum dicit hoc cum dixisset, expuit in terram etc., agitur de sanatione caeci, ad quam quinque per ordinem concurrunt facta per Christum. Primo quidem sputatio, unde dicit spuit in terram; secundo luti factio, unde dicit lutum fecit ex sputo; tertio oculorum linitio, unde dicit et linivit super oculos caeci; quarto mandatum quod lavaretur, unde dicit vade (inquit) et lava in natatoriis Siloe; quinto, visionis perceptio, unde subdit et venit videns: quae quidem omnia causam habent et litteralem et mysticam. Litteralem quidem, secundum Chrysostomum, hoc modo. Sputo illuminat, ut ostendat quod virtute a se egrediente hoc faciebat, et nulli alteri rei miraculum ascribatur; Lc. VI, 19: virtus exibat de illo. Licet enim omnia miracula dominus solo verbo facere potuisset, quia ipse dixit, et facta sunt, frequenter tamen corpore suo in eis utitur, ut ostendat ipsum, inquantum est divinitatis organum, virtutem quamdam salutarem esse sortitum. Lutum autem fecit ex sputo, ut ostendat se membra homini deficientia posse formare, qui formaverat totum primum hominem. Unde sicut primum hominem de luto formavit, ita lutum fecit ut formaret oculos caeci nati.
9:6
Linivit autem lutum super oculos caeci nati, ut ostenderet se conditorem corporum, per id quod potissimum est in corporibus. Homo enim inter creaturas corporales praecellentior est; inter membra vero hominis praecellit caput; inter membra autem capitis, oculus excellentior invenitur. Unde Matthaeus VI, 21: lucerna corporis tui est oculus tuus. Formando ergo oculum ceteris corporalibus excellentiorem, ostendit se creatorem esse totius hominis et naturae corporeae. Dixit autem ei vade, et lava te in natatoria Siloe, ne videretur terra super oculos linita virtutem sanativam oculi habere. Unde quamdiu lutum in oculis habuit, non vidit, sed postquam lavit. Misit autem eum longe ad lavandum, scilicet ad natatoria Siloe: primo quidem ad confutandam Iudaeorum duritiam; nam oportebat eum transire civitatem, ut sic omnes viderent eumdem caecum euntem, lutum super oculos habentem, et redeuntem visu suo restituto. Secundo vero ut commendetur caeci obedientia et fides: frequenter enim forte lutum in faciem receperat, frequenter in natatoria Siloe se laverat, et tamen non viderat. Unde potuisset dicere: lutum solet magis excaecare, et multoties me ibidem lavi, et in nullo sum adiutus, sicut de Naaman legitur IV Reg. V, 10 ss. Sed non contradixit, immo simpliciter obedivit. Unde sequitur abiit, et lavit. Ideo autem ad natatoria Siloe eum misit, quia per illam aquam signatus est populus Iudaeorum; Is. VIII, 6: populus iste abiecit aquas Siloe, quae currunt cum silentio. Ut ergo ostendat quod non est alienus ab amore populi Iudaici, ad Siloe mittit eum. Effectus autem sequitur, quia venit videns. Hoc praedictum fuit Is. XXXV, 5: tunc aperientur oculi caecorum. Causam vero mysticam et allegoricam assignat Augustinus, qui dicit, quod per sputum, quod est saliva de capite descendens, signatur verbum Dei, quod a patre capite omnium rerum procedit; Eccli. c. XXIV, 5: ego ex ore altissimi prodii. Tunc ergo dominus de sputo et terra lutum fecit, cum verbum caro factum est. Linivit autem oculos caeci, idest humani generis, oculos scilicet cordis, per fidem incarnationis Christi. Sed nondum videbat: quia quando forte inunxit, catechumenum fecit, qui fidem habet, sed nondum est baptizatus. Et ideo mittit eum ad piscinam, quae vocatur Siloe, ut lavetur et illuminetur, idest baptizetur et in Baptismo plenam illuminationem recipiat. Unde, secundum Dionysium, Baptismus dicitur illuminatio; Ez. XXXVI, 25: effundam super vos aquam mundam, et mundabimini ab omnibus inquinamentis vestris. Et ideo signanter hoc Evangelium legitur illo die in Quadragesima quo incipit fieri scrutinium baptizandorum in sabbato sancto.
9:7
Nec sine causa Evangelista subdit interpretationem piscinae, dicens quod interpretatur missus: quia quicumque baptizantur oportet baptizari in Christo, qui est missus a patre; Gal. III, 27: quotquot baptizati estis, Christum induistis. Nisi enim ille fuisset missus, nemo nostrum esset ab iniquitate dimissus. Secundum Gregorium autem, per salivam sapor intimae contemplationi accipitur, quae ad os de capite defluit, quia de caritate conditoris adhuc in hac vita nos positos, gustu revelationis tangit. Unde dominus salivam luto miscuit, et caeci nati oculos reparavit, quia superna gratia carnalem cogitationem nostram per mixtionem suae contemplationis irradiat, et ab originali caecitate homines ad intellectum reformat et cetera.
9:8
Posita miraculosa illuminatione caeci, hic consequenter ponitur miraculi examinatio, et primo quidem miraculum examinatur a populo; secundo a Pharisaeis et principibus, ibi adducunt eum ad Pharisaeos; tertio caecus propter suam confessionem instruitur a Christo et commendatur, ibi audivit Iesus quia eiecerunt eum foras. Circa primum tria facit, quia primo inquiritur de persona illuminati; secundo de ipsa illuminatione, ibi dicebant ergo ei etc.; tertio de persona illuminantis, ibi et dixerunt ei: ubi est ille? Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponitur quaestio de persona illuminati; secundo assumuntur diversae opiniones ad quaestionem; tertio determinatur quaestio. Ponitur quidem quaestio a populo. Unde dicit itaque vicini, et qui viderant eum prius, quia mendicus erat, dicebant: nonne hic est qui sedebat et mendicabat? Ubi duo consideranda occurrunt. Unum est quod ex miraculi magnitudine ipsum incredibile reddebatur: unde dicebant, infra: a saeculo non est auditum quod aperuerit quis oculos caeci nati. Unde impletur in eis quod dicitur Hab. I, 5: opus factum est in diebus nostris, quod nemo credet cum narrabitur. Aliud est mirabilis Dei clementia, quia non solum circa potentes, sed etiam circa ignobiles dominus miracula operatur, dum eos qui mendicant, cum multa pietate curabat: in quo ostenditur quod propter paupertatem nullum repellit, qui propter salutem hominum venit; Iac. II, 5: nonne dominus elegit pauperes, divites in fide, et haeredes regni? Unde et isti signanter dicunt nonne hic est qui sedebat et mendicabat? Quasi dicant, ignobilis et curatione indignus. Contra dicitur Baruch III, 26: ibi gigantes nominati. Opiniones autem ponuntur a plebe: unde dicit alii dicebant quia hic est, scilicet qui mendicabat; et hoc ideo, quia pluries eum viderant mendicantem, et similiter discurrentem per civitatem, quando cum luto ad natatoria ibat, inspexerant. Unde non ultra poterant dicere, non est hic. Sed aliorum opinio erat contraria: unde dicebant nequaquam, scilicet hic est, sed similis eius est. Cuius ratio est, quia, ut Augustinus dicit, oculi restituti mutaverunt vultum eius. Nihil enim ita cognoscibile sicut visus; Eccli. c. XIX, 26: ex visu cognoscitur sensatus. Quaestio determinatur per caecum; quia ille dicebat, scilicet caecus, ego sum, scilicet qui mendicabam. Vox grata est ista, ne damnetur ingrata. Quia enim non poterat esse ingratus tanto beneficio, nec aliud signum gratitudinis ostendere poterat quam quod constanter confiteretur se a Christo curatum, dicit ego sum, qui scilicet caecus eram, et mendicabam; et modo video; Tob. c. XII, 6: benedicite Deum, coeli, et coram omnibus viventibus confitemini ei, quia fecit vobiscum misericordiam suam.
9:10
Consequenter cum dicit dicebant ergo ei: quomodo aperti sunt oculi tui?, agitur de inquisitione facti, scilicet de ipsa illuminatione, et primo ponitur quaestio Iudaeorum; secundo responsio caeci, ibi respondit: ille homo, qui dicitur Iesus, lutum fecit et cetera. Dicit ergo: si tu es ille qui caecus mendicabas, dic ergo nobis quomodo aperti sunt tibi oculi? Sed ista quaestio ex curiositate procedit, quia hunc modum nec ipse qui curatus est, nec nos novimus; Eccli. c. III, 24: in pluribus operibus eius ne fueris curiosus.
9:11
Responsio caeci fuit mirabilis, unde dicit respondit: ille homo, qui dicitur Iesus, lutum fecit, et unxit oculos meos et cetera. In qua primo quidem demonstrat personam illuminantem, dicens ille homo qui dicitur Iesus. Recte nominat eum hominem, quem hominem noverat, et verus homo erat; Phil. c. II, 7: in similitudinem hominum factus. Licet autem eum non vidisset, quia caecus ab eo recessit, ad Siloe vadens, cognovit eum ex auditu et collocutione hominum de ipso. Secundo recitat factum, dicens lutum fecit, et unxit oculos meos; ubi se veracem ostendit, non asserens incerta. Dominus enim lutum fecerat ex sputo, quod quidem iste nescivit; sed lutum factum, et oculis superpositum, per sensum tactus didicit; et ideo non dixit lutum fecit ex sputo sed simpliciter lutum fecit, et unxit oculos meos; I Io. c. I, 1: quod audivimus, quod vidimus oculis nostris, et perspeximus, et manus nostrae contrectaverunt (...) testamur et annuntiamus vobis. Tertio refert mandatum dicens et dixit mihi, scilicet Iesus, vade ad natatoria Siloe, et lava. Hoc etiam nobis necessarium est; nam si volumus mundari a caecitate cordis, oportet quod spiritualiter lavemur; Is. I, 16: lavamini, mundi estote. Quarto commendat suam obedientiam, dicens et abii, et lavi, quasi diceret: ex quo mandatum audivi, desiderio visionis ductus, executus sum mandatum. Neque mirum: quia dicitur Prov. VI, 23: mandatum, scilicet impletum, lucerna est, et lex lux. Quinto confitetur beneficii effectum, dicens et vidi. Et recte post obedientiam illuminatur: quia, ut dicitur Act. V, 32, dabit spiritum sanctum obedientibus sibi. Vide caeci constantiam. Nam, ut Augustinus dicit, ecce annuntiator factus est gratiae, ecce evangelizat et confitetur Iudaeis. Caecus ille confitebatur, et cor impiorum stringebatur, quia non habebant lumen, scilicet in corde, quod ille habebat in facie.
9:12
Consequenter cum dicit et dixerunt ei: ubi est ille? Ponitur inquisitio de persona illuminantis; et primo ponitur Iudaeorum quaestio, cum dicunt ubi est ille? Malitiose interrogant occisionem meditantes; iam enim adversus Christum conspiraverant; supra VIII, 40: nunc autem quaeritis me interficere? Secundo ponitur caeci responsio, cum ait nescio. Ut Augustinus dicit, ex verbis apparet quod sicut corporaliter in ipso gestum fuit, ita spiritualiter diversis temporibus repraesentatur. Nam adhuc primo linitur caecus, et post lotus videt. Et inunctio quidem inchoationem sanitatis corporalis repraesentat; lotio autem perfectam consequitur sanitatem. Specialiter autem inunctio efficit catechumenum; lotio, scilicet Baptismus, perficit et illuminat. Sic ergo diversa diversis temporibus repraesentatur fides. Nam per hoc quod dicit nescio, repraesentatur fides imperfecta in catechumenis; supra IV: vos adoratis quod nescitis. Potest etiam per hoc significari fides nostra; I Cor. XIII, 9: ex parte enim cognoscimus et ex parte prophetamus.
9:13
Consequenter cum subditur adducunt eum ad Pharisaeos, agitur de inquisitione, et primo inquirunt a caeco; secundo a parentibus, ibi non crediderunt ergo Iudaei. Circa primum tria facit. Primo praesentatur inquirendus; secundo ponitur inquirentium intentio; tertio ponitur ipsa inquisitio. Inquirendus autem, scil. caecus, praesentatur a populo Pharisaeis; unde adducunt, scilicet turbae, eum qui caecus fuerat, ad Pharisaeos; et hoc ideo, quia quaesierant ab eo ubi esset Iesus, ut si eum invenirent ducerent eum ad Pharisaeos, damnandum propter solutionem sabbati. Quia vero Christum non habuerunt, ducunt caecum, ut eum vehementius interrogantes, cogant importunitate vel timore aliquid falsitatis contra Christum confingere; Ier. V, 5: ibo ergo ad optimates; ipsi enim cognoverunt viam domini, iudicium Dei sui; et ecce hi magis confregerunt iugum, ruperunt vincula.
9:14
Intentionem autem eorum Evangelista perversam esse ostendit, dicens erat autem sabbatum quando lutum fecit. Hoc dicit, ut eorum malam mentem demonstret, et causam propter quam eum quaerebant; ut scilicet occasionem contra eum invenirent, et detraherent miraculo per aestimatam legis praevaricationem; cum tamen, Matth. XII, 8, dicatur quod dominus est filius hominis etiam sabbati.
9:15
Examinatio autem fit a Pharisaeis, cum dicitur iterum ergo interrogabant eum Pharisaei, etc., et primo interrogant de facto; secundo de persona facientis, ibi dicebant ergo ex Pharisaeis quidam. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponitur eorum interrogatio; secundo caeci responsio. Interrogant autem eum de materia consecutae visionis: unde iterum interrogabant eum Pharisaei etc.: non ut scirent, sed ut calumniam inferrent et falsitatem imponerent. Respondit autem caecus, non dictis contraria, nec dissona veritati. Unde ille, scilicet caecus, dixit eis: lutum posuit mihi super oculos. Ubi primo admiranda est caeci constantia; nam etsi coram turbis, a quibus sine periculo interrogabatur, veritatem dixerat, non magnum videbatur; sed hoc mirae est constantiae quod in ampliori periculo constitutus, scilicet coram Pharisaeis, neque negat, neque contraria dicit prioribus, secundum illud Ps. CXVIII, 46: loquebar de testimoniis tuis in conspectu regum, et non confundebar. Secundo admiranda est eius industria; nam mores recitantium servat, qui primo diffuse et cum circumstantiis omnibus referunt; et si secundo referri oporteat, succinctius loquuntur. Unde neque nomen dicentis expressit, neque quoniam: dixit mihi: vade et lava, sed confestim solam substantiam facti tangens, dicit lutum fecit. Consequenter cum subditur dicebant ergo ex Pharisaeis quidam etc., fit inquisitio de persona illuminantis, et primo ponuntur diversae sententiae Pharisaeorum de Christo; secundo exquiritur sententia caeci, ibi dicunt ergo caeco iterum. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponit opinionem Christum blasphemantium; secundo opinionem eum commendantium; et tertio concludit, quod inter eos erat schisma et dissidium. Circa primum sciendum est, quod illi qui malitiose contra aliquem agunt, tacent, si quid boni in facto eius vident; et mala, si qua videntur, manifestant, etiam bonum in malum convertentes; secundum illud Eccli. XI, 33: bona in mala convertens insidiatur, et in electis imponet maculam. Quod et isti faciunt; nam id quod videbatur bonum, scil. caeci illuminationem, subticentes, quod contra Christum esse poterat, manifestant, scilicet solutionem sabbati. Unde dicebant quidam ex Pharisaeis, scilicet malitiosi et pravi, non est hic homo a Deo, qui sabbatum non custodit; cum tamen Christus sabbatum servaret. Dominus enim prohibens operari in sabbato, intendit de opere servili, quod est peccatum; supra VIII, 34: qui facit peccatum, servus est peccati. Ergo qui facit opera peccati in sabbato, solvit sabbatum. Christus ergo qui sine peccato erat, potius sabbatum, quam ipsi, custodiebat.
9:16
Commendantium autem opinio ponitur, cum subdit quomodo potest homo peccator haec signa facere? Isti enim aliquam fidem ex signis conceperant et imperfecte et imbecilliter erant dispositi; quia ex timore Pharisaeorum et principum, quasi sub dubio proponunt, dicentes quomodo potest homo peccator haec signa facere? Infra XII, 42, dicitur, quod multi ex principibus crediderunt in eum, sed propter Pharisaeos non confitebantur. Qui tamen potius debuissent ostendere qualiter sabbatum non solveret, et convenienter respondere pro Iesu. Dissidium autem concludit inter eos, dicens et schisma erat inter eos: quod scilicet fuerat etiam inter populos; et hoc erat signum interitus illorum; Oseae X, 2: divisum est cor eorum, nunc interibunt; Matth. XII, 25: omne regnum in seipsum divisum, desolabitur. Consequenter inquirunt sententiam a caeco, et dicunt tu quid dicis de illo qui aperuit oculos tuos? Et primo ponitur Pharisaeorum interrogatio; secundo caeci responsio.
9:17
Interrogant quidem cum dicunt tu quid dicis de illo? Quae quidem interrogatio, secundum Chrysostomum, non est eorum qui Christum blasphemabant, sed eorum qui commendabant. Et hoc apparet ex modo interrogandi. Unde commemorant ei receptum beneficium, dicentes tu quid dicis de illo qui aperuit oculos tuos? Alioquin si alii interrogassent, non hoc dixissent, sed potius, qui solvit sabbatum. Ideo autem beneficium commemorant, ut eum gratum reddentes, inducant ad Christi praedicationem. Secundum autem Augustinum, est interrogatio adversariorum, volentium calumniari hominem qui constanter veritatem confitebatur, vel ut ex timore mutaret sententiam, vel saltem ut eum de synagoga eiicerent. Responsio autem caeci constans ponitur: unde subdit ille autem dixit, quia propheta est. Licet enim adhuc, quasi inunctus in corde, Dei filium nondum confiteretur, constanter tamen quod sentiebat expressit, non tamen mentitus est. Nam ipse dominus de se dixit Mc. VI, 4 et Matth. XIII, 57: non est propheta sine honore nisi in patria sua; Deut. XVIII, 15: prophetam suscitabit vobis Deus, ipsum audietis.
9:18
Consequenter cum dicit non crediderunt ergo Iudaei de illo, agitur de inquisitione a parentibus, et primo ponitur causa inquisitionis; secundo subditur interrogatio, ibi et interrogaverunt; tertio adhibetur responsio, ibi responderunt ergo eis; quarto assignatur responsionis ratio, ibi hoc dixerunt parentes eius. Causa autem secundae inquisitionis fuit infidelitas Pharisaeorum. Et hoc est quod dicit non crediderunt ergo de illo, scilicet Pharisaei, quod caecus natus fuisset, et vidisset, donec vocaverunt parentes eius, scilicet caeci, qui viderat. Hoc quidem faciunt volentes annullare Christi miraculum, ne perdant gloriam suam; supra V, 44: quomodo potestis credere, qui gloriam ab invicem accipitis? Inquisitio autem ponitur a Pharisaeis ad parentes: ubi tria proponunt.
9:19
Primo de persona filii, dicentes hic est filius vester? Quasi dicerent: numquid est hic? Secundo de eius caecitate: unde subdunt quem dicitis quia natus est caecus? Non dicunt, qui quandoque fuit caecus sed quem dicitis; quasi dicerent: hoc confingitis. Numquid hoc est verum? Sed, o inquinati. Quis pater eligeret talia mentiri de filio? Conantur enim per hoc eos ad negationem ducere. Tertio quaerunt de modo consecutae visionis, dicentes quomodo ergo nunc videt? Quasi dicant: aut hoc est falsum quod nunc videat, aut primum quod caecus fuerat; sed constat hoc esse verum, quod videt: falsum ergo fuit quod caecum eum dicebant; Eccli. c. XIII, 14: ex multa enim loquela tentabit te, et subridens interrogabit te de absconditis tuis.
9:20
Responsio parentum ponitur consequenter, cum dicit responderunt eis parentes eius et cetera. De tribus autem interrogaverant Pharisaei; sed de duobus constanter respondent, et de tertio remittunt ad filium. Primo quidem confitentur primum, scilicet quod filius eorum sit: unde dicunt scimus quia hic est filius noster. Item confitentur secundum, cum subdunt et quia caecus natus est. In quo patet quod veritas semper vincit mendacium. Unde in apocryphis Esdrae dicitur, quod veritas super omnia vincit. Tertium autem, scilicet qualiter vidit, dicunt quomodo autem nunc videat, nescimus. Secundo de persona illuminante, cum subdunt aut quis aperuit oculos eius, nos nescimus. Hoc ideo dicunt, quia inquisitio fiebat contra personam illuminantem.
9:21
Et ideo remittunt ad filium, dicentes ipsum interrogate: aetatem habet, ipse de se loquatur; quasi dicant: etsi genuimus eum caecum, non tamen mutum; unde loqui potest pro se in causa. Quod quidem dispensative factum est, ut, dum parentes confitentur quod sciunt, et caecus confirmat qui est curatus, veritas miraculi magis appareret.
9:22
Ratio autem responsionis ponitur, cum subdit hoc dixerunt parentes eius, quoniam timebant Iudaeos: adhuc enim imperfecti erant, nec adimplere ausi quod dicit dominus, Matth. X, 28: nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus. Causa autem timoris fuit, quia iam conspiraverant Iudaei, ut si quis eum confiteretur esse Christum, extra synagogam fieret. Infra XVI, 1: haec locutus sum vobis, ut non scandalizemini: absque synagogis facient vos. Et, ut dicit Augustinus, iam non erat malum fieri extra synagogam: nam quos illi repellebant, Christus recipiebat.
9:24
Posita supra inquisitione negotii, scilicet a caeco et parentibus, hic persuadent negare veritatem, et afferre falsitatem, et primo persuadent veritatis negationem; secundo irrogant maledictionem; tertio inferunt condemnationem. Secundum ibi maledixerunt ergo ei; tertium ibi responderunt et dixerunt ei: in peccatis natus es totus. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit quomodo persuadent ei veritatem negare; secundo quomodo iterato interrogant, ut calumniam possint inferre, ibi dixerunt ergo illi: quid fecit tibi? Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit eorum malitiam; secundo caeci constantiam, ibi dixit ergo ille. Malitia Pharisaeorum ostenditur in veritatis negandae persuasione. Constantia caeci apparet in firma veritatis confessione. Dicit ergo, quantum ad primum, vocaverunt ergo, scilicet Pharisaei, rursum hominem qui fuerat caecus: nam parentes interrogati remiserant eos ad caecum, et dixerunt ei: da gloriam Deo. Unum dicunt, sed aliud intendunt. Intendunt quidem ut cogant eum dicere, se non fuisse illuminatum a Christo, vel, si hoc non possunt, saltem confiteatur se ab eo aliquo maleficio curatum. Hoc tamen non aperte dicunt; sed tacite et sub praetextu religionis. Ad hoc enim inducere volunt dicentes da gloriam Deo; quasi dicant: illuminatus es; sed hoc non est nisi a Deo: ergo hoc nulli alii attribuas nisi Deo, et non isti, scilicet Christo, quia si hoc facis, ostendis te non accepisse a Deo curationis beneficium, quia Deus per peccatores non operatur miracula. Unde subdunt nos scimus quia hic homo peccator est; quasi dicerent: confitere quoniam hic nihil operatus est, nega quod accepisti. Sed, ut Augustinus dicit, si hoc fecisset, non dedisset gloriam Deo, sed potius ingratus existens blasphemasset. Sed vere mendacium locutus est stylus Pharisaeorum, dicentium nos scimus quoniam hic homo peccator est; nam supra VIII, v. 46, eumdem de peccato arguere non potuerunt, cum dixit: quis ex vobis arguet me de peccato? Nec mirum, quia hoc dicitur I Petr. II, 22: peccatum non fecit, nec inventus est dolus in ore eius.
9:25
Hic ponitur caeci constantia: nam stomachatus contra Pharisaeorum duritiam, et impatiens ad verba eorum, cum veritatis assertione dicit si peccator est, nescio. Sed, cum supra dixerit quia propheta est, numquid hoc propter timorem quasi dubitans dicit si peccator est, nescio? Absit; sed quasi indignatus Pharisaeos irridens. Quasi dicat: vos asseritis eum peccatorem; sed hoc ego nescio quod sit peccator, et miror quod hoc asseritis, quia opus fecit quod non videtur esse peccatoris, quia caecus cum essem, modo video, eius beneficio. Secundum Augustinum, hoc dicit ut neque pateretur calumniam, neque veritatem subcelaret. Fortassis enim si dixisset, scio eum iustum, quod verum erat, calumniati fuissent eum. Sed, secundum Chrysostomum, ideo hoc dixit ut daret eis maius testimonium, scilicet ipsius miraculosae operationis, et suam responsionem faceret fide dignam ab accepto beneficio. Hic iterato interrogant, ut calumniam inferant, et primo ponitur dolosa Pharisaeorum interrogatio; secundo respondentis caeci derisio, ibi respondit eis et cetera.
9:26
Dicit ergo quantum ad primum, dixerunt ergo illi: quid fecit tibi? Quia enim caecus confessus fuerat se a Christo visum recepisse, quod isti non quaerebant, sed potius in ipso modo faciendi, contra Christum calumniam inferre intendebant. Ideo non dicunt, qualiter vidisti? Sed quomodo aperuit tibi oculos? Quasi dicant: numquid aliquo praestigio seu maleficio hoc fecit? Secundum illud Ps. XXXVII, 13: qui quaerebant mala mihi, locuti sunt vanitates, et dolos tota die meditabantur. Hic ponitur responsio: quia enim caecus quasi iam viderat, ideo non remisse, sed audacter de reliquo eis loquitur. Unde primo irridet Pharisaeorum iteratam interrogationem, dicens dixi vobis iam, et audistis: quid iterum vultis audire? Quasi dicat: ex quo semel dixi vobis, quid iterum vultis audire? Hoc enim insipientis est. Videtur enim quod non attenditis ad ea quae dicuntur. Unde non est ultra respondendum vobis, inaniter interrogantibus, et cavillari potius quam discere volentibus; Eccli. XXII, v. 9: cum dormiente loquitur qui narrat stulto sapientiam: et in fine narrationis dicit: quis est hic?
9:27
Secundo deridet praesumptuosam Pharisaeorum intentionem, dicens numquid et vos vultis discipuli eius fieri? Quando enim aliquis diligenter inquirit: aut hoc facit bona intentione, ut scilicet ei adhaereat, aut mala, ut eum condemnet. Quia ergo isti diligenter quaerebant, et caecus non ausus est eis imponere quod mala intentione quaererent, declinat ad aliam partem, dicens numquid et vos vultis discipuli eius fieri? Quasi dicat: si non quaeritis malitiose, ergo vultis adhaerere ei; Ier. XIII, 23: si mutare potest Aethiops pellem suam, aut pardus varietates suas; et vos poteritis bene facere. Et, ut Augustinus dicit, illuminatus libenter volebat istos illuminare. Unde signanter dicit et vos, quasi se innuens discipulum; quasi dicat: numquid et vos vultis, ut et ego sum, discipuli eius fieri? Ego iam video, vestrae illuminationi non invideo. Et, ut Chrysostomus dicit, ex ista caeci constantia apparet quam forte quid sit veritas, quae si despectos assumpserit, claros et fortes eos facit. Et quam imbecille quid sit mendacium, quod etsi cum fortibus fuerit, imbecilles eos monstrat et reddit. Hic irrogatur caeco a Pharisaeis maledictio, et primo ponitur Pharisaeorum ad caecum maledictio; secundo caeci ad Pharisaeos redargutio, ibi respondit ille. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ponitur Pharisaeorum maledictio; secundo maledictionis occasio, ibi nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus. Dicit ergo quantum ad primum: maledixerunt ei, scilicet Pharisaei caeco, et dixerunt: tu discipulus eius sis. Quae quidem maledictio est, si pravum cor eorum discutias, non si verba perpendas: immo est summa benedictio. Et tale maledictum sit super nos, et super filios nostros; supra VIII, v. 31: vere discipuli mei eritis, si manseritis in sermone meo. Ideo tamen Evangelista dixit maledixerunt, quia ex malo eorum corde procedebant; Prov. XXVI, 23: quomodo si ornare velis vas fictile argento sordido, sic labia tumentia cum pessimo corde sociata. Et de hac maledictione dicitur in Ps. CVIII, v. 28: maledicent illi, et ut benedices; et Matth. V, 11: beati eritis cum maledixerint vobis et cetera.
9:28
Causam maledictionis subiungit consequenter cum dicit nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus. Reputabant enim maledictionem quod caecus dixerat eis, quod fierent discipuli Christi; cum ipsi gloriarentur se esse discipulos Moysi, quem maiorem reputabant. Et ideo primo proponunt suam conditionem, dicentes nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus. Eccli. XXIV, 33: legem mandavit Moyses in primitiis iustitiarum et cetera. Sed falsa est eorum gloria, quia nec eum sequebantur, nec praecepta eius implebant; supra V, 46: si crederetis Moysi, crederetis forsitan et mihi; quasi dicat: nec sequimini servum, et deorsum ponitis contra dominum. Secundo extollunt Moysi dignitatem, cum dicunt nos scimus quia Moysi locutus est Deus. In quo verum dicunt, quia, ut dicitur Ex. XXXIII, 11, loquebatur dominus Moysi facie ad faciem, sicut loqui solet homo ad amicum suum; et Num. XII, 6, dicit dominus: si fuerit inter vos propheta domini, in visione apparebo ei, vel per somnium loquar ad illum. At non talis servus meus Moyses, qui in omni domo mea fidelissimus est: ore enim ad os loquor ei. Unde excellentiori modo loquebatur cum eo quam cum aliis prophetis. Et de hac locutione hic ipsi loquuntur. Constat autem quod cum ad Moysem Deus loqueretur verbum suum, quod dignitas Moysi est ex verbo Dei. Et sic verbum maioris dignitatis est quam Moyses; Hebr. c. III, 3: amplioris gloriae iste, scilicet Christus, prae Moyse dignus habitus est, quanto ampliorem honorem habet domus, qui aedificavit illam. Tertio occulte insinuant Christi dignitatem, cum dicit hunc autem, scilicet Christum, nescimus unde sit: quod quidem verum est, non tamen secundum eorum intentionem. Nesciebant enim patrem, unde Christus erat; supra VIII, 19: neque me scitis, neque patrem meum. Sed falsum est quantum ad eorum intentionem.
9:29
Dixerunt enim hunc autem nescimus unde sit; quasi dicant: nullius auctoritatis est, et quasi apocryphum, ita ut non constet de eo an a Deo venerit; per quod videbantur ei imponere illud Ier. XXIII, v. 21: non mittebam eos, et ipsi currebant. Hic ponitur caeci contra Pharisaeos argutio, et primo admiratur eorum duritiam; secundo confutat eorum falsitatem, ibi scimus autem quia peccatores Deus non audit. Sciendum autem circa primum, quod non ea quae frequenter fiunt, et secundum communem modum miramur; sed insolita et ardua, sive bona, sive mala sint, admiramur. Nam insolita bona et ardua admiramur, secundum illud Esther XV, 17: valde enim admirabilis es, domine, et facies tua plena est gratiarum. Admiramur etiam ardua mala, secundum illud Ier. II, 12: super hoc obstupescite, caeli (...) duo enim mala fecit populus meus.
9:30
Secundum hoc ergo respondens caecus, dixit eis in hoc mirabile est quia vos nescitis unde sit, quasi dicat: si aliquem parvum et nobis similem non reputaretis alicuius auctoritatis, non esset mirandum; sed quia videtis expressum et evidens signum divinae virtutis in Christo, et dicitis quia vos nescitis unde sit, valde mirabile est, praesertim quia aperuit mihi oculos.
9:31
Falsitatem eorum confutat dicens scimus autem quia peccatores Deus non audit. Utitur tali ratione. Quemcumque Deus audit, est a Deo; sed Deus exaudivit Christum: ergo est a Deo. Primo ergo ponit primam; secundo assumit minorem, ibi a saeculo non est auditum etc.; et tertio infert conclusionem, ibi si non esset hic a Deo, non poterat facere quidquam. Circa primum duo facit. Primo insinuat quos Deus non audiat; secundo ostendit quos Deus audiat, ibi sed si quis Dei cultor est (...) hunc exaudit. Non audit autem Deus peccatores; et quantum ad hoc dicit scimus quia peccatores Deus non audit, quasi dicat: in ista opinione ego et vos consentimus, quod non exaudiantur peccatores a Deo. Unde in Ps. XVII, 42: clamaverunt ad dominum, et non exaudivit eos; Prov. I, 28: tunc invocabunt me, et non audiam. Sed contra. II Paral. VI, 36: si autem peccaverint tibi neque enim est homo qui non peccet, (...) et reversi fuerint ad te in toto corde suo (...) aperiantur, quaeso, oculi tui, et aures tuae intentae sint ad orationem quae fit in loco isto. Lc. XVIII, 14, de publicano dicitur, quod descendit iustificatus in domum suam. Et propter hoc dicit Augustinus, quod caecus iste adhuc loquitur ut inunctus, nondum perfecte sciens. Nam et peccatores exaudit Deus, alias frustra publicanus diceret: domine Deus, propitius esto mihi peccatori. Si autem verbum caeci salvare volumus, dicendum est, quod Deus non exaudivit peccatores in peccatis persistentes; exaudivit tamen peccatores de peccatis poenitentes, qui magis sunt computandi in numero poenitentium, quam peccatorum. Sed insurgit dubitatio. Constat enim quod miracula non fiunt ab hominibus propria virtute, sed per orationem. Peccatores autem frequenter miracula faciunt, secundum illud Matth. VII, 22: nonne in nomine tuo prophetavimus (...) et virtutes multas fecimus? Et tamen Deus non novit eos. Non videtur ergo verum quod caecus dicit scimus quia peccatores Deus non audit. Ad hoc est duplex responsio. Una communis. Oratio enim duo habet, quia scilicet impetrat, et meretur: quandoque ergo impetrat, et non meretur; quandoque autem meretur, et non impetrat. Et sic nihil prohibet orationem peccatoris impetrare quod petit, absque hoc quod mereatur. Sic ergo Deus audit peccatores, non per modum meriti, sed inquantum ex divina virtute, quam praedicant, impetrant quod petunt. Alia est specialis, in casu isto quo loquebatur, scilicet quando miraculum factum notificabat personam Christi. Sciendum est autem, quod omne miraculum factum testimonium quoddam est. Quandoque ergo miraculum fit in testimonium veritatis praedicatae; quandoque autem in testimonium personae facientis. Est autem attendendum, quod nullum verum miraculum fit nisi virtute divina; et quod Deus numquam est testis mendacii. Dico ergo quod, quandocumque miraculum fit in testimonium doctrinae praedicatae, necessarium est doctrinam illam esse veram, etsi persona praedicans non sit bona. Quando etiam fit in testimonium personae, necesse est similiter quod persona illa sit bona. Constat autem quod miracula Christi fiebant in testimonium personae eius; supra V, 36: opera quae dedit mihi pater ut perficiam ea, testimonium perhibent de me. Hoc ergo modo loquendo caecus dixit, quod numquam Deus peccatores audit, scilicet quod faciant miracula attestantia sanctitati peccatorum. Consequenter cum dicit sed si quis Dei cultor est (...) hunc exaudit, ostendit quod iusti exaudiuntur a Deo et per modum meriti. Ubi sciendum est, quod operatio miraculorum attribuitur fidei; Matth. XXI, 21: si dixeritis huic monti, tolle, et iacta te in mare, fiet. Cuius ratio est, quia miracula fiunt per omnipotentiam Dei, cui fides innititur: qui ergo vult impetrare a Deo aliquid, oportet quod habeat fidem; Iac. I, 6: postulet autem in fide. Si autem vult merendo impetrare, oportet quod faciat Dei voluntatem. Et ista duo hic ponuntur. Quantum ad primum dicit sed si quis Dei cultor est, per sacrificia et hostias; Is. XIX, 21: colent eum in hostiis etc. in his enim consistit cultus latriae, quae fidei attestatur. Quantum ad secundum dicit et voluntatem eius facit, implendo eius mandatum, hunc exaudit: supple, Deus. Hic assumit minorem suae rationis; quasi dicat: ex ipso opere eius, quod adhuc nullus hominum fecit, manifestum est quod per operationem Dei hoc fecit, et quod exauditus est a Deo; infra XV, 24: si opera non fecissem in eis quae nemo alius fecit, peccatum non haberent. Hic infert conclusionem; quasi dicat: ex quo talia opera operatur, manifestum est quod est a Deo.
9:33
Nam, nisi esset hic a Deo, non poterat facere quidquam, scilicet libere, constanter et veraciter: quia ut dicitur infra XV, 5: sine me nihil potestis facere. Hic Pharisaei caecum condemnant. In qua quidem condemnatione triplicem defectum sive peccatum incurrunt; scilicet mendacii, superbiae et iniustitiae. Mendacii quidem, caecitatem improperando; unde dicunt in peccatis natus es totus. Ubi sciendum est, Iudaeos huius opinionis fuisse, quod omnes infirmitates et adversitates temporales provenirent hominibus propter eorum praecedentia peccata; quam quidem opinionem asserit Eliphaz dicens, Iob c. IV, 7: recordare, obsecro, quis unquam innocens periit, aut quando recti deleti sunt? Quin potius vidi eos qui operantur iniquitatem et seminant dolos, et metunt eos, flante Deo, periisse. Cuius quidem opinionis ratio est, quia in veteri lege et pro bonis praemia temporalia, et pro malis poenae temporales promittebantur; Is. I, 19: si volueritis et audieritis me, bona terrae comedetis. Videntes ergo quod iste homo caecus natus fuerat, credebant quod hoc contigisset ei propter sua peccata; et ideo dicunt in peccatis natus es totus. Sed falsum dicunt, quia supra, eodem, dominus: neque hic peccavit, neque parentes eius; Eccli. XIX, 28: est correctio mendax in ira contumeliosi. Addunt autem, totus, ut ostendant quod non solum est peccatis inquinatus quantum ad animam, secundum quod omnes nascuntur peccatores, sed etiam quod peccatorum vestigia appareant in corpore per caecitatem. Vel, secundum Chrysostomum, totus, idest, toto tempore vitae tuae, et a primaeva aetate in peccatis es. Superbiae vero defectum incurrunt, contemnendo caeci doctrinam, cum dicunt tu doces nos? Quasi dicerent: non es dignus. In quo apparet eorum superbia: nullus enim homo, quantumcumque sapiens, debet a quocumque parvo doctrinam repellere; unde apostolus docet, I Cor. XIV, 30, quod si minori aliquid revelatum fuerit, quod tunc maiores debent tacere, et eum audire. Dan. XIII, v. 60 dicitur quod totus populus et seniores audierunt iudicium pueri iunioris, scilicet Danielis, cuius spiritum dominus suscitavit.
9:34
Iniustitiae autem defectum incurrunt, iniuste eum eiiciendo: unde dicitur, quod eiecerunt eum foras, scilicet propter veritatis confessionem. In caeco autem iam impletur quod dominus dixerat, Lc. VI, 22: beati eritis cum vos oderint homines, et separaverint vos, et eiecerint nomen vestrum tamquam malum propter filium hominis.
Postquam Evangelista ostendit quomodo Iudaei caecum in veritate persistentem eiecerunt hic ostendit quomodo Iesus eum recepit et instruxerit, et primo ponitur Christi instructio; secundo caeci devotio, ibi at ille ait: credo, domine; tertio devotionis eius commendatio, ibi dixit ei Iesus: in iudicium ego in hunc mundum veni. Circa primum tria facit. Primo proponit studium Christi ad instruendum; secundo desiderium caeci ad credendum, ibi respondit ille, et dixit: quis est, domine? Tertio fidei documentum ad perficiendum, ibi dixit ei Iesus: et vidisti eum. Studium autem Christi ad instruendum describitur ex tribus. Primo ex diligenti consideratione eorum quae circa caecum agebantur. Sicut enim princeps diligenter considerat ea quae suus athleta patitur propter eum, ita et Christus ea quae caecus patiebatur propter veritatem et sui confessionem, diligenter attendit. Et ideo dicit quod audivit Iesus, idest diligenter attendit, quia Pharisaei eiecerunt eum foras, scilicet ex templo; Ier. XVIII, 19: attende, domine, ad me, et ad voces adversariorum meorum.
9:35
Secundo ex diligenti inquisitione; unde subdit et cum invenisset eum, dixit ei et cetera. Illud enim inveniri dicitur quod diligenter quaeritur; Lc. XV, 8: quaerit diligenter donec inveniat. Ex quo videtur quod Christus solum eum quaerat, quia in illo solo plus invenit de fide quam in omnibus aliis. Unde colligitur quod plus diligitur unus iustus a Deo, quam decem millia peccatorum, Is. XIII, v. 12: pretiosior erit vir auro, et homo mundo obrizo. Et Gen. XVII, dominus pro decem iustis voluit servare Sodomam. Tertio ex seriosa interrogatione; unde dixit ei: tu credis in filium Dei? Iste caecus typum baptizandorum gerebat. Unde etiam consuetudo inolevit in Ecclesia ut baptizandi interrogentur de fide; I Petr. III, 21: nos salvos facit Baptisma, non carnis depositio sordium sed bonae conscientiae interrogatio in Deum. Interrogans autem de fide non dicit, credis in Christum? Sed in filium Dei: quia, ut Hilarius dicit, futurum erat ut aliqui Christum confiterentur, quem tamen filium Dei et Deum negarent; quod postmodum Arius finxit. Unde per hoc error eius manifeste excluditur. Nam si Christus non esset Deus, non esset in eum credendum, cum solus Deus sit obiectum fidei, quae in prima veritate quiescit. Unde et signanter dicit, in filium: nam bene possum credere alicui creaturae, puta Petro et Paulo; non tamen in Petrum, sed in Deum solum sicut in obiectum. Unde patet quod filius Dei non est creatura; Io. XIV, 1: creditis in Deum, et in me credite. Hic ponitur desiderium caeci ad credendum. Sciendum est autem circa hoc, quod caecus iste adhuc non viderat Christum corporaliter: nam quando Christus linivit oculos suos, et misit eum ad natatoria Siloe, nondum viderat eum; et antequam ad eum reverteretur, postquam lavit et vidit, detentus fuit a Pharisaeis et Iudaeis. Licet autem corporaliter eum non vidisset, credebat tamen eum qui aperuit oculos suos, esse filium Dei.
9:36
Et ideo in verba desiderantis et valde inquirentis animae prorumpit, dicens quis est, domine? Scilicet filius Dei, qui aperuit mihi oculos, ut credam in eum? Ex quo hic apparet, quod eum ex parte cognoscebat, et ex parte ignorabat. Nisi enim eum cognovisset, non tam constanter pro eo disputasset, et si non ignorasset, non utique dixisset quis est, domine? Is. XXVI, 9: anima mea desideravit te in nocte, scilicet ignorantiae. Sed quia, ut dicitur Sap.
9:37
VI, 14: praeoccupat eos qui se concupiscunt, scilicet sapientia, ideo caeco se concupiscenti demonstrat, cum dicit et vidisti eum, et qui loquitur tecum, ipse est: in quo ponitur documentum fidei, quo Christus eum instruit. Et primo commemorat ei susceptum beneficium, dicens et vidisti eum, scilicet corporaliter, qui prius nullum videbas. Quasi dicat: ab ipso virtutem videndi accepisti; Lc. X, 23: beati oculi qui vident quae vos videtis; et Lc. II, 29: nunc dimittis servum tuum, domine (...) quia viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum. Secundo ponitur documentum, cum dicit et qui loquitur tecum, ipse est; Hebr. I, 2: novissime locutus est nobis in filio. Ex his ergo verbis confutatur error Nestorii, qui dixit, aliud suppositum in Christo filii Dei, aliud filii hominis. Nam qui loquebatur, ex Maria natus est, et hominis filius: et ipse idem qui loquitur est filius Dei, ut dominus dicit. Non est ergo alius et alius, quamvis natura non sit eadem utriusque.
9:38
Consequenter cum dicit at ille ait, credo, domine, ponitur devotio fidei in caeco. Et primo fidem quam credit corde, confitetur ore, dicens credo, domine; Rom. c. X, 10: corde creditur ad iustitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem. Secundo protestatur eam opere; unde procidens adoravit eum: per quod ostendit se credere eius divinam naturam, quia mundata conscientia cognoscit illum non solum filium hominis, quod exterius videbatur, sed filium Dei, qui carnem susceperat: nam adoratio debetur soli Deo; Deut. VI, 13: dominum Deum tuum adorabis. Consequenter cum dicit et dixit ei Iesus etc. commendatur caeci devotio, et primo ponitur devotionis caeci commendatio; secundo Iudaeorum murmuratio, ibi audierunt quidam ex Pharisaeis; tertio murmurantium confutatio, ibi dixit eis Iesus: si caeci essetis, non haberetis peccatum.
9:39
Commendatur autem caecus ex fidei illuminatione; unde dicit in iudicium ego in hunc mundum veni. Contra. Supra III, 17: non enim misit Deus filium suum in mundum ut iudicet mundum et cetera. Respondeo. Loquitur de iudicio condemnationis, de quo dicitur supra V, 29: qui mala egerunt, ibunt in resurrectionem iudicii, idest condemnationis; ad quod non misit Deus filium suum in primo adventu, sed potius ad salvandum. Hic vero loquitur de iudicio discretionis, de quo dicitur in Ps. XLII, 1: iudica me, Deus, et discerne causam meam et cetera. Nam ad hoc venit ut discerneret bonos a malis: et hoc ostendunt verba sequentia, scilicet ut qui non vident, videant; et qui vident, caeci fiant. Nam secundum Augustinum, illi non vident qui reputant se videre, illi autem qui reputant se non videre, vident. Dicuntur autem homines caeci spiritualiter, inquantum habent peccata; Sap. c. II, 21: excaecavit eos malitia eorum. Ille ergo reputat se videntem, qui peccata sua non recognoscit; non videre autem se reputat qui recognoscit se peccatorem. Primum est proprium superborum; secundum est humilium. Est ergo sensus: in iudicium veni ut non videntes videant, ut discernam humiles a superbis. Dies enim erat inter lucem et tenebras discernens, ut scilicet, humiles, qui non vident, idest reputant se peccatores, videant, illuminati per fidem, et qui vident, idest superbi, caeci fiant, idest remaneant in tenebris. Secundum Chrysostomum, exponitur de iudicio condemnationis, ita tamen quod hoc quod dicit in iudicium ego in hunc mundum veni, non accipiatur causaliter, sed consecutive; quasi dicat: me veniente in mundum, consecutum est in quibusdam iudicium condemnationis, inquantum in aliquibus condemnationis causa magis crevit. Simile dicitur Lucae II, 34: ecce positus est in ruinam et in resurrectionem multorum: non quod ipse sit causa ruinae, sed quia ex adventu suo hoc consequitur. Et subditur ut qui non vident, scilicet gentiles, carentes lumine divinae notitiae, videant, idest, admittantur ad cognitionem Dei; Is. IX, 2: populus qui ambulabat in tenebris, vidit lucem magnam, et qui vident, scilicet Iudaei, habentes Dei cognitionem, Ps. LXXV, 2: notus in Iudaea Deus, caeci fiant, idest, ab ipsa Dei cognitione excidant. Et hoc expresse tangit apostolus, Rom. IX, 30: gentes quae non sectabantur iustitiam, apprehenderunt iustitiam.
9:40
Hic ponitur murmur Iudaeorum: quia enim verba domini carnaliter intellexerunt, videntes caecum corporaliter illuminatum, et intelligentes quod dominus commendaret in ipso solum lumen faciei et non mentis, crediderunt similiter quod comminaretur eis corporalem caecitatem, et exprobraret, cum dixit caeci fiant et ideo dicit quod audierunt quidam ex Pharisaeis qui cum ipso erant, verba praedicta. Ideo autem dicit qui cum ipso erant, ut ostendat eorum instabilitatem: quia quandoque cum ipso sunt propter aliqua miracula quae vident; sed tamen ab eo recedunt, cum aperitur eis veritas; Lc. VIII, 13: ad tempus credunt, et in tempore tentationis recedunt. Et dixerunt ei: numquid et nos caeci sumus? Scilicet corporaliter; quamvis spiritualiter caeci essent; Matth. XV, 14: sinite illos: caeci sunt et duces caecorum. Hic ponitur Iudaeorum confutatio: ubi, secundum expositionem Augustini, manifestatur intentio praecedentium, ut scilicet ostendatur de qua caecitate loquitur dominus, quia de spirituali.
9:41
Dicit ergo si caeci essetis, idest vos caecos reputaretis, recognoscentes per humilitatem peccatum vestrum, non haberetis peccatum: quia curreretis ad remedium. Peccatum enim remittitur per gratiam, quae non datur nisi humilibus; Iac. IV, 6: humilibus autem dat gratiam. Nunc vero dicitis quia videmus; idest, superbe vos videre putantes, non recognoscitis vos peccatores. Peccatum vestrum manet, idest non remittitur; Iac. IV, 6: Deus superbis resistit. Secundum Chrysostomum, exponitur de caecitate corporali, ut sit sensus si caeci essetis, corporaliter, non haberetis peccatum, de hoc quod caeci essetis: quia cum sit corporalis defectus, non habet rationem peccati. Nunc vero quia dicitis, videmus, peccatum vestrum magis arguitur; quia videntes oculis corporalibus miracula quae ego facio, non creditis mihi; Is. VI, 10: excaeca cor populi huius. Vel aliter, si caeci essetis, idest ignorantes iudiciorum Dei et sacramentorum legis, non haberetis peccatum; supple: tantum. Quasi dicat: si ex ignorantia peccaretis, peccatum vestrum non esset adeo grave. Nunc vero quia dicitis, videmus, idest arrogatis vobis scientiam legis et cognitionem Dei, et tamen peccatis, ideo peccatum vestrum manet, idest aggravatur; Lc. XII, 47: servus qui scit voluntatem domini sui, et non fecit secundum voluntatem eius, vapulabit multis.
9:1
v. 1 et praeteriens Iesus vidit hominem caecum a nativitate, idque adeo cum 8,59 connectit, ut secundum editiones ne nomen quidem /esus repetatur, sed ex antecedenti : Iesus autem abscondit se, suppleri debeat. Quare dicendum erit cum Chr. e templo egressus caecum sanavit (sim. ΕἸ. Mald. Schz.) et vix cum Fil. aliisget pro longiore intervallo : exeunti e templo non adfuisse discipulos, . nunc adesse. Nam incredibile videtur Christum sine discipulis comitibus cp. 8in templum venisse, populum docuisse, cum Iudaeis disputasse. Nonne iam illa tam accurata narratio, qua singula quae disputabantur:cp. 8 proponuntur, satis per se testatur evangelistam disceptationibus interfuisse? Homo ille ut caecus a nativitate notus erat, prout ex discipulorum interrogatione consequitur. Iesus vidit duritiem illorum immanitatemque emollire et fidem dictis conciliare. Atque eo modo oculos dirigitin eum eumque aspicit, ut discipuli reddantur ad eum attenti (Chr. Theoph. Ians. Tol.); unde v.9 et interrogaverunt eum discipuli exus : Rabbi, quis peccavit, hic aut parentes etus , ut caecus nasceretur? sunt itaque discipuli in eodem errore , in quo versantur v. g. amici Iob, afflictionem omnem poenam esse peccati. Morbos etiam infligi in poenam peccatorum certum est, uti colligere poterant ex eo quoque quod Iesus monuit 5,15 : iam noli peccare ne deterius tibi aliquid contingat, quod addit, postquam dixit : ecce sanus factus es; unde morbum illum fuisse poenam peccatorum facile consequitur. Verum longius progressi omnem morbum rationem habere poenae pro peccato personali censent. Facile discipulis in mentem venire poterat infantes puniri ob pec- ^ cata parentum. Nam minatur Deus se iniquitatem puniturum usque in δ tertiam et φυδνηίδπι generationem (Deut. 5,9) et Gen. 19 propter vitia B Sodomitarum etiam infantes perierunt; propter peccatum David parus vulus mortuus est 9 Reg. 19,14 etc.; praeterea vitiis parentum fieri potest, ut filii nascantur variis defectibus morbisque infecti; insuper apud rabbinos pervulgatum est liberos ob parentum peccata nasci mancos, tortos, aliqua parte mutilos (cf. Lightfoot, Horae hebr. ad h. 1., Wünsche p. 53, Edersheim ll p. 178 seq.). Sed quomodo quaerere poterant, ipsene peccasset, ut caecus nasceretur? De praeexsistentia quadam animarum , in quo statu peccare possent (Cyr.) apud Iudaeos sermo esse vix potest, neque de migratione animarum ab uno corpore ad aliud, quam migrationem losephus quidem a pharisaeis | affirmari contendit (Bell. iud. 2,8,15), at alio in loco iis eam opinio- V nem negare videtur (Antiq. 18,1,3). Num putabant aliquem puniri P propter peccata futura a Deo praevisa? haec opinio ab aliquibus explicationis gratia affertur (Theod. M.). Verbis ipsis suadetur, fieri posse ut quis peccet antequam nascatur; docent enim rabbini malum affectum incipere dominari a nativitate; nam Gen. 5,7 dici : peccatum cubat ad ostium (cf. LigAtfoot , Wünsche l. c.). Cuius opinionis occasio vel fulcrum etiam esse potuit quod habetur Gen. 95,22 collidebantur in utero eius parvuli, et Os. 12,3 : in utero supplantavit fratrem suum. — Aliter Chr. Thom. quaestionem accipiunt : rogare discipulos quaenam sit causa caecitatis eo in casu, quia ipse caecus non potuerit peccare antequam natus esset , neque filius puniatur pro peccatis parentum (Deut. 35,16. Ez. 18,20 : filius non portabit iniquitatem patris). Sed manifestum est,si hoc voluissent exprimere, alio plane modo eosloqui debuisse. Quare verba nativa sua notione retinenda sunt et dicendum, discipulos obscuro aliquo et vago modo opinatos esse potuisse fieri ut ipse esset in culpa cur caecus nasceretur. Censet Tol. eam opinionem eos hausisse ex iis locis, in quibus dicitur : in iniquitatibus conceptus sum ; non est mundus, nec infans unius diei, omnes esse peccatores. Addit insuper, propter peccatum originale Deum saepe poenis corporalibus infantes affligere, « quod recte docuit Augustinus lib. 99 de Civit. cap..22 ». Quod eo sensu verum est, quia propter peccatum origioale varii morbi, miseriae, scelera inducta sunt, ex quibus fieri potest, ut infantes gignantur multis etiam vitiis corporalibus infecti. Solum enim peccatum originale quod omnibus infantibus inest, non potest assignari causa, cur hic caecus natus sit. Illum errorem quo censent omnem calamitatem infligi propter peccatum commissum Iesus responsione sua dispellit
9:3
v. 3 respondit Iesus : neque hic peccavit. neque parentes eius, scil. dt caecus nasceretur, quae verba ἵνα τυφλὸς γεννηθῇ apud Chr. Theoph. Cyr. ipsitextui inserta leguntur, sed ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo i. e. propterea caecus natus est, ut etc.; ostendendum erat in illo qualia essent Dei opera, quantae potentiae et quantae rursum bonitatis (Jans.). Nascuntur multi variis obnoxii defectibus, caeci, claudi. Vires enim naturales quandoque deficiunt vel aliae subsunt causae quibus impeditur ne partus ad debitam pertingat perfectionem. Quod ita causis naturalibus exsistit Deus pro sua providentia et bonitate ad finem altiorem dirigit. Permisit itaque in caeco illo caecitatem, ut ex ea opera Dei, gloria Dei, gloria Filii Dei (CAr.) manifestarentur; pro homine quoque iste defectus occasio erat boni spiritualis. Quia igitur eiusmodi defectus causis naturalibus oriuntur, non est hic quaerendum, quomodo Deus sine iniustitia talem poenam absque ulla hominis culpa infligere possit; neque opus est dicere hominem non habere ius, neque Deum negare debita, sed solum non omnia donare quae donare potuerit (cf. To/.). Christus itaque indicat ad quem finem defectus ille directus sit ἃ Deo; neque tamen inde sequitur caecitatem immediate et directe a Deo esse effectam. Putant aliqui tva ut non posse bene accipi nisi de eventu (ἐκδατιχῶς, Chr. Cyr. Theoph. Mald.); at nulla est ratio recedendi a nativa notione, uti iam TÁom. Tol. ostendunt. Quam manifestationem operum Dei Christum efficere oportet v. ἡ me oportet operari opera eius qui misit me, graece saepe legitur ἡμᾶς; plerumque tamen solum in membro priore, quandoque utrobique (Cyr.) qua lectione Iesus apostolos suos in societatem operis assumit quo opera Dei perfici oportet et ostendit opus ἃ se inceptum, qui missus sit a Patre ad illud inaugurandum, continuandum esse ab apostolis; oportet autem in iis operari donec dies est; venit noz, quando nemo potest operari; « et diem quidem hic corporeae vitae tempus nominat, noctem vero diem mortis; dies enim tribuitur operibus, nox otio et somno; idcirco vitae tempus quo operandum est diem esse dicunt, noctem autem dormiendi tempus, quo Δ omni opere cessatur » (Cyr.); dicit itaque Christus etiam pro se : dum vivo, operandum mihi est (Chr.) et diem vocat tempus corporalis suae in mundo praesentiae; noctem vero tempus mortis, quo ex decreto Patris vacaturus erat a doctrina et miraculorum operibus, sic ut ea per sese non corporaliter sit exhibiturus (lans. Tol. Mald.). Et cum dicatur : venit nox, quando nemo... sententia et applicatio generalis iam satis enuntiatur vel pro singulis vel pro genere humano (cf. Chr. Euth. Mald.). Et cur Christum oporteat operari, donec dies est, i. e. dum in hac vita mortali versatur, ratio affertur
9:5
v. 5 quamdiu sum in mundo, lux sum mundi, est autem lux eo quod doctrina et operibus illuminat; lux autem non potest non lucere; eadem itaque necessitate Christus opera Patris peragit; « eos qui obtenebraü sunt, oportet illuminari per fidem, priusquam a mundo transeam; quid ergo, cum in coelo est, non est lux mundi? est utique, sed nunc de conversatione sua in terra dicit, simul et ad fidem adhortans et propinquam esse mortem suam significans » (Euth.). Verba haec de vita Iesu terrestri dici, plerique merito tenent (cf. Cyr. Theod. M. Thom. Ians. Tol. Maid. Schz.); alii tamen explicant de toto tempore usque ad consummationem saeculorum (Aug. Bed. Rup. Schg.). Sed cum Christus loquatur de operibus quae ipse debeat peragere ante suam mortem, etiam in v. 5 idem tempus intelligi debet, quod ipsa locutione ὅταν ἐν τῷ χόσμῳ ὦ quando sum tn mundo significatur; nam dicitur missus in mundum, venisse in mundum, loqui in mundo, transire ex hoc mundo, relinquere mundum et dum in eo est, ut relinquat mundum, dicit : iam non sum in mundo (17,11; cf. 3,17. 19; 6,14; 8,96; 11,97; 19,46; 13,1; 16,28 etc.). Iam hisce locutionibus indubius redditur sensus, etsi connexionem cum v. ἀξ non respexeris. Et quia lux est, lucet (opera Dei peragit), etsi oculi male affecti lucis fulgore offendantur et excaecentur, neque enim propter illos reliquis beneficium lucis subtrahi potest. Unde ad miraculum patrandum progreditur
9:6
v. 6 haec cum dixisset , proin quae in v. 3-5 continentur, nos docent qua ratione hoc miraculum oporteat considerare; iam saepius innuerat appropinquare finem vitae suae temporalis (7,33; 8,28; 9,4); quare modo quasi insigniore, quo quam maxime omnes percellantur, opus perficere vult, ita ut de eo quam firmissime constet eiusque veritas a nullo possit in quaestionem vocari; ezsputt in terram et fecit lutum ez sputo et linivit lutum super oculos eius v. '1 et dixit ei : vade, lava in natatoria Siloe (quod interpretatur Missus); bene notat Jans. : « porro ne quis miretur quod sic a Domino caecus permiserit se tractari et luto oculos perungi, advertendum evangelistam brevitati studentem non omnia scripsisse quae circa ea quae narrat sunt dicta vel facta, verum multa nobis reliquisse intelligenda » (sim. Tol.); ita caecus scit quis lutum fecerit; ergo a discipulis vel turba ei dictum est; fortasse Iesus eum interrogavit, velletne visum recipere et alia huiusmodi, quae facile supplentur. Vario modo Iesus patrat miracula; solo verbo sanavit aegrotum 5,8; hoc loco non item. Efficit sanationem eo modo quo malevoli aemuiatores traditionum humanarum offenduntur et mira stoliditate excaecantur (v. 16. 21) et quo fides et obedientia caeci elucet et ipsa quoque sauatüo latius innotescit, dum caecus non sine multorum admiratione oculis luto illititur. Quae singula conferunt ad opus Dei manifestandum quod Christus operatur, uti ipse indicat v. 39. — Aliae rationes afferri solent : Christum eo modo oculos restituisse, ac Creatorem (cf. Chr. Cyr. Theoph. Theod. M. Thom. lans. Tol. Maíd.); eo: modo sanasse qui effectui potius esset contrarius; luto enim oculos non aperiri sed claudi (cf. Cyr. [ans.); etiam hic voluisse Iesum ostendere corpus suum, in quantum sit divinitatis organum, virtutem quandam salutarem esse sortitum (Thom. sim. Cyr. Schg.); ea autem ab evangelista ideo quoque commemorari, ut errores illi gnostici de materia in se mala excludantur et explodantur (ScAz.). — Mittitur ad piscinam Siloe; vallem Tyropoion usque ad fontem Siloe protendi ait Josephus (Bell. iud. 5,&,1); hodiernum Ain Silwán fere locum priscae piscinae Siloe occupare dicitur (cf. Rzess, Bibelatlas); nomen legitur Neh. 3,15 nou, Is. 8,6 πω, ni^v, unde explicatio petitur Missus, ἀπεσταλμένος. Evangelista alias quoque nomina hebraea graece explicat (cf. 1,38. &1; 11,16) ; unde quis suspicari possit eandem consuetudinem hic servari. At hoc loco tamen aliud quid indicare censendus erit; lotione illa visum recipit caecus, recipit visum postquam Missum adiit; unde nomine ipso innuitur verus ille Missus, beneficii largitor (cf. Chr. Aug. lans. Tol. Schz. Fil.). Typica haec vel symbolica ratio eo facilius agnosci potest quia in festo tabernaculorum ex Siloe aqua hauriebatur sollemni pompa (vide ad 7,37) : haurietis aquas in gaudio de fontibus salutis (Is. 12,3). Magna fide obedit homo : aótit ergo et lavit et venit videns; inutile est quaerere cum aliquibus, utrum prius domum tetenderit ad parentes, 8η ad templum Deo gratias acturus; prius aliqui concludunt, quia in v. 8 de vicinissit sermo qui eum viderint; at isti vicini non desinunt esse vicini, etsi eum in templo vel alicubi in urbe viderint;
9:8
v. 8 //aque victni et qui viderant eum prius quia mendicus erat dicebant : nonne htc est qui sedebat et mendicabat? nominat evangelista eos qui caecum optime norant : vicinos, qui prope eius domum habitabant, eos qui frequenter eum propterea viderant quia mendicus erat (ὁτι explica causaliter, lans. Tol. Schz.); mirantur itaque, quod nunc eum vident sanum oculis, quem eousque oculis captum noverant; a/i? dicebant, quia hic est,
9:9
v. 9 alit autem : nequaquam, sed similis est ei, admiratione et quaestione illa facta alii affirmant, negant alii, uti fere in re insolita et creditu difficili fieri solet, prout scil. singuli vel rem conditionesque melius perspiciunt vel indole sunt ad credendum aut ad dubitandum negandumque promptiores. Hic vero eo maior suberat ratio , negandi pro eis qui hominem non frequentissime viderant, « quia, ut Augustinus dieit, oculi restitati mutaverunt vultum eius; quaestio determinatur per caecum » (TAom.); ille vero dicebat : quia ego sum, vox grata (Aug.); ego sum qui caecus eram et mendicabam et nunc video. Quo audito natura ipsa insitum est animisque insculptum, ut inquiratur causa;
9:10
v. 10 dicebant ergo : quomodo aperti sunt tibi oculi?
9:11
v. 11 respondit : ille homo qui dicitur Iesus lutum fecit et unzit oculos meos et dizit mihi : vade ad natatoria Siloe et lava; et abii et lavi et video; non dixit : exspuit in terram; nam tunc non viderat, sed lutum factum et oculis superpositum per sensum tactus didicit (TAom. sim. Theoph. EutA.). Audierunt : lutum fecit, unxit oculos meos; aderant, qui iam imbuti videntur prohibitione illa mischnica (de sabb. 95,3; Surenhusius I p. 75, Wünsche p. 538), licere quidem aquam infundere, neque tamen depsere; unde sabbatum esse violatum opinantes
9:12
v. 19 dizerunt ei : ubi est ille? ipsa quaestio et modus quo Iesum designant animum eorum malevolum prodit; ait : nescio.
9:13
v. 13 adducunt eum ad pharisaeos qui caecus fuerat, « ut manifestum reumque faciant violatae legis Dominum, qui lutum in sabbato fecisset » (Cyr. sim. Thom. lans. Tol. Mald.); quare explicationis gratia subiungitur
9:14
v. 14 erat autem sabbatum, quando lutum fecit Iesus et aperuit oculos eius; notat Maid. : videtur indicari non fuisse sabbatum, sed aliquem alium post sabbatum diem, cum eum ad pharisaeos adduxerunt. Quae tamen conclusio non videtur certa. Pharisaeis exponunt illi rem et modum; hi audientes quod sabbato factum erat, nou magnitudine miraculi inducuntur ad denuo interrogandum, sed quo certius ansam habeant. accusationis; id quod particulis ?terum ergo indicatur
9:15
v. 15 tterum ergo tnterrogabant eum pharisaei, quomodo vidisset; en, non miraculum, non beneficium collatum , non opus adeo stupendum, singulare curant; modum solum faciendi inquirunt; homo rem enarrat simpliciter : t/le autem dixit eis : lutum mihi posuit super oculos et lavi et video xài βλέπω: v. 11 ἀνέῤλεψα; quare in v. 11 fortasse licet illud ava negligere, praesertim quia de visu terum recepto apud profanos quoque dicitur πάλιν ἀνχβλέπειν (Ar. Plut. 95,117 cf. Pape, s. v.); alii tamen monent haud inepte dici eum recipere visum , cui abfuerit vel solum in potentia adfuerit quod communiter naturae actu tribuatur (cf. ScAz.). Qui malitiose agunt, ut Thom. notat, tacent quod bonum est, malum si quod videtur, manifestant, etiam bonum in malum convertentes; ita quidam petulantiores (οἱ ἰταμώτεροι Chr.) bonum subticentes quod contra Iesum esse poterat manifestant
9:16
v. 16 dicebant ergo er pharisaeis quidam : non est hic homo a Deo qui (lege quia , ὅτι) sabbatum non custodit; quae tamen ratio aliis nimis stulta videbatur; alii autem, qui non ex illis erant delirantibus sed εὐμαθέστεροι aequius iudicabant (Cyr.), dicebant : quomodo potest homo peccator haec signa facere? merito monent non solum de uno, sed de plurimis signis agi atque etiam de iis quae sabbato facta sint (cf. 5,10); accedit quod Iesus ea patrat et ad ea provocat pro sua a Deo missione; unde quam maxime conveniens erat illis malevolis talem opponere quaestionem. Opponitur itaque 80 iis qui in Iesum credebant ex pharisaeis; nam etiam ex principibus multi crediderunt in eum; at non confitebantur illos aiios fuisse ex plebe; verum narratio a v. 13 ea tractat quae pharisaei agunt; isti interrogant et quaestione posita οἵ responsione risaeos. Proinde isti αἰϊὲ tantum fortitudinis habebant, ut non in aliorum sententiam concederent. Uti supra apud populum opiniones magis obstinatio pharisaeorum culpae est obnoxia hoc in eventu, quia ne illam quidem umbram excusationis habent, quam praetendebant 7,48. Ipsius sanati exquirunt sententiam
9:17
rat : tu quid dicis de eo? dixit eis : centes: estne hic filius vester? nonne vos dicitis, quod caecus natus sit? quomodo igitur nunc videt? In v. ?1 sin habet nescimus solum semel in fine; ecce ipse est dominus annorum suorum; ex eo potestis scire. In v. 22 sin nam scribae et pharisaei decreverunt; sim e, r. In v. 23 sin om aetatem habet; r ipse pro se loquatur. In v. 24 et 25 sin qui sanatus erat, οἵ per eum video; in v. 26 sin sanavit te... v. 27 (et audistis) quare iterum interrogatis me? v. 31 vocem peccatorum non audit; v. 33 quomodo fecit hoc? Cum Iesum pharisaeis, vindicibus legis de sabbato, sistere non possent, saltem caecum sanatum sistunt v. 17 dicunt ergo caeco iterum : tu quid dicis de illo qui (lege quia, ὅτι) aperuit oculos tuos? cum schisma esset inter ipsos, obstinati illi hanc ponunt quaestionem, ut fortasse ex ipsa responsione novam capiant materiam calumniandi Iesum. Nam magnum iam praeiudicium in Iesum gigni videretur, si ipse sanatus.a laude benefactoris abstineret et certe sperabant fore ut non auderet eum laudare, de quo ipsi iam aliud plane iudicium palam enuntiassent; « existimabant siquidem, se cum multi essent, unum eumque pauperem et vilem et mendicum in partes suas facile tiendum » (Apollin. cat. Cord.). Ita similiter censent Cyr. Aug. Bed. Maid. Schz. quaeri id a malis illis pharisaeis, et bene dicit περ. : nitebantur infirmitatem causae suae linguae eius baculo sustentare, multum sibi illo schismate valere arbitrantes, si de illo nec ipse boni aliquid sentiret qui tantum ab eo commodum percepisset. Alii autumant hoc quaeri a bonis, qui suae sententiae (peccatorem non posse talia signa facere) patronum accersere optent (Euth. Thom. Tol.) ; insistunt quia interrogatur de eo quia aperuit oculos, non quia fecit lutum. Sed prior acceptio multo est probabilior et commendatur quoque ex v. 18; homo autem eorum exspectationem fefellit neque ullo modo pharisaeorum auctoritate aut supercilio perterritus est : tle autem dixit : quia propheta esti. e. homoa Deo missus, qui nomine et mandato Dei loquitur et agit. En, simplex homo sana usus ratione id deprehendit facillime quod signo illo indubie manifestatur. Aliud responsum acceperunt ac speraverant; unde
9:18
v. 18 non credtderunt ergo Iudaei de illo quia caecus fuisset et vidisset ; « notanda est particula ergo, nam ex superioribus deducit sequentia, ut sit sensus : audientes caecum favere parti Iesum a Deo dicenlium, cum non haberent aliud refugium negarunt factum » (Tol. sim. lans. Schz.); « ecce per aliud foramen evadere contendunt vulpeculae, ne gloriam Filii Dei cogantur videre; ad hunc resilierunt exitum, ut non crederent οἴ non credendo quasi dubium facerent quod caecus fuisset et vidisset ; fama quippe tantae rei etsi non penitus abscondi, tamen utcumque per hanc dissimulationem posse videbatur obscurari » (Rup.). putasse fraudem subesse et sanationem confictam, ut Iesu auctoritas conciliaretur, aliquorum est sententia (Chr. Theoph. Euth. Mald. Schg.' Fil. Weiss) ac si conspiratio inter hominem atque Iesum exstitisset? non crediderunt, donec vocaverunt parentes eius qui viderat ; nolebant. credere miraculum ; proin nihil aliud relinquebatur ad hanc suam sententiam vestiendam nisi ut parentes accerserent; « sperarunt se eos adigere posse ut nihili veritatem facerent et ex sua sententia loquerentur » (Cyr.) vel saltem ut ex responsis parentum aliquid colligereturad obscuritatem eventui offundendam. Quare ferocius eos interrogant (Cyr:)
9:19
v. 19 et interrogaverunt eos dicentes : hic est filius vester quem vos dicitis quia caecus natus est? quomodo ergo nunc videt? « metu percellunt adigere volentes velut ex vi et necessitate ut respondeant quod audire cupiunt non esse natum caecum » (Cyr.); tria quaeri censent Chr. Theoph. Euth. Thom. lans. Tol. Mald. Fil. ;sed ipsa phrasi et resufficit dici duo inquiri (Schg. Schz.). Rigide interrogant ; etiam illud quem vos dicitis etc. innuit atque notat eos id falso dicere solitos esse; nec dicunt simpliciter : quomodo videt? sed quomodo ergo nunc videt? quasi dicerent : aut falsum est quod nunc videt aut quod caecus natus sit; sed videre eum constat, ergo falsum esse necesse est quod caecus natus sit (lans.). Verum quo magis veritatem obscurare et oppugnare student, eo magis confirmatur et singuli eorum conatus evertendi rem, rem clarius et evidentius demonstrant; comparat eos Cyr. oppugnatoribus urbis munitae, qui eam undique circumvallant et omnibus modis obsident; sic eos ad omnem audaciam proiectos perversitate sua miraculum obsidere; at frustra, eo magis in aperto ponitur vis eius insuperabilis. Parentes ita respondent, ut factum plane confirment neque tamen ullam praebeant speciem vel ad rem obscurandam vel ad sul accusationem
9:20
v. 20 responderunt eis parentes eius et dixerunt : scimus quia hic est filius noster et quia caecus natus est;
9:21
v. 21 quomodo autem nunc videat nescimus aut quis eius aperuit oculos nos nescimus ; tpsum tnterrogate ; aetatem habet , 1pse de se loquatur; ergo quod sciunt aperte fatentur ad id officii ratione invitati; nosse vero medicum ei convenit qui gratiam et beneficium in se expertus est; quod igitur magis consentaneum erat eum referre, utpote qui haberet certiorem notitiam, hoc exponere ipsum iubent (Cyr.) et ita se extra periculum constituunt, cum iis non possit crimini verti quod quaestionem ad eum remittunt, qui ea in re erat fide dignior (Eu/A.). Et cur ita caute et circumspecte responderint, explicat evangelista simul docens ad quantum iam culmen odium synedristarum in Iesum daeos; iam enim conspiraverant Iudaei συνετέθειντο convenerat inter eos, Euth. explicat συμφωνεῖν, de vero decreto synedristarum vocem non accipiunt; sed synedristis curae erat ut hoc suum consilium vel propositum omnibus innotesceret, quo fidem in Iesum efficacius coercerent, ut si quis eum confiteretur esse Christum , extra synagogam fieret, ἀποσυνάγωγος, ἃ coetu sacro exclusus (cf. Esdr. 10,8); eius excommunicationis duo gradus seu ordines in talmude distinguuntur : nidduj expulsio et cherem, anathema, maledictum. Expulsus veste lugubri incedere debebat et plerumque sacris prohibebatur; maledicto onustus penitus sacris prohibebatur et ab omni cum aliis Israelitis consortio excludebatur. Incertum tamen est, uter modus excommunicationis tempore Christi in usu fuerit. Voce ipsa solum exclusio ἃ synagoga, proin modus prior, indicatur (cf. ScAz. Wünsche p. 539). Sed patet hac a sacris exclusione etiam pro vitae communis consuetudine atque commercio exstitisse incommoda haud parva, iis enim nota impietatis et infamiae erat apud pios inusta et homines habebantur sacrilegi. Unde profecto erat, cur parentes tale periculum avertere sedulo curarent. Excusandi sunt, quamvis animum minus gratum erga beneficii largitorem ostenderint; eos excusare videtur ipse evangelista addens
9:23
v. 23 propterea parentes eius dizerunt, quia aetatem habet, ipsum interrogate. - Ipsa sua inquisitione duo constare manifestissime ostenderunt : hominem fuisse caecum natum et a Iesu visu donatum. Neutrum possunt negare. Quid igitur pro eorum indole malevola et obstinata relinquitur? Id saltem obtinere conantur, ne homo praeco exsistat laudis Iesu, ergo ut miraculum oblivioni detur;
9:24
v. 2& vocaverunt ergo rursum hominem qui fuerat caecus et dizerunt ei : da gloriam Deo; nos scimus quia hic homo peccator est; formula : da gloriam Deo, est formula quasi adiurationis qua quis sollemni modo admonetur ad veritatis confessionem, se stare coram Deo, reverendam esse eius maiestatem, né ergo coram illo mentiatur, sed affirmando veritatem Deum, ipsam veritatem, honoret (Maid. lans. Tol.), quo sensu quoque legitur los. 7,19 et similiter 1 Reg. 6,5. Quod autem hac adiurationc &b eo extorquere volunt est, ut Iesum non dicat prophetam, sed ut peccatorem eum fateatur. Quare sua abutentes auctoritate cum emphasi dicunt nos scimus, synedristae, doctores in Israel, magistratus. « Ecce fabricatores mendacii, quomodo circumeunt, ut hunc non proselytum aut hospitem, sed civem ac domesticum gratiae Dei, secum faciant filium perditionis, cogentes eum, ut in mendacium commutet veritatem Dei; quid enim agitant, nisi ut istum suo faciant contestari mendacio et dicere : quia hic homo non est a Deo » (Rup.)? Volunt itaque, ut secum affirmet Iesum esse peccatorem (Cai. Tol. Lap. Calm.). Saepius verba ita accipiunt, ut iubeatur negare quod acceperit beneficium (Aug.), vel fateri se sanatum a Deo, non a Iesu, Iesum nihil fecisse, vel praestigiis esse usum (cf. Chr. Cyr. Thom.) , vel totam rem esse fraudem (Maid. Fil.). At eiusmodi vel similia verbis non exprimuntur; neque credi potest eos ad tantum insaniae procedere, ut vellent homini persuadere ipsum non accepisse beneficium neque fuisse caecum. Valde prudenter respondet homo simplex et moderate etiam, ne eos irritare et ad iram concitare videatur
9:25
v. 25 dizit ergo eis ille : si peccator est , nescio ; unum scio , quia caecus cum essem, modo video ; id quod est praecipuum et quod illi supprimere volunt graviter effert. Attamen, ut Cyr. advertit, sermonem coniuncta verecundia temperans et gradui praefecturae debitum honorem reddens apposite dicit : si peccator est nescio ; quod in me cernitur miraculum , vestris assentiri sermonibus non me sinit. Neque id dicit dubitando, sed more dubitantis (iv σχήματι διστάζοντος) eiusmodi nugas repellens (Euth.) ; « nihil de ea re nunc dico, neque sententiam fero » (CAr. Ians.). « Quia igitur rem gestam non poterant evertere vel abolere, rursus ad modum curationis explorandum redeunt, velut si quipiam feram undique pervestigantes modo huc , modo illuc accurrant » (CÀr.). Sperant scil. repetita quaestione hominem fortasse rem aliter narraturum aut aliquid additurum, quod in calumniam trahere possent aut adhibere ad falsitatem demonstrandam (lans.). Agunt ut iudices solent, qui reum iteratis quaestionibus perturbant, ut sibi ipsi contradicat et convinci possit;
9:26
v. 26 dizerunt ergo illi : quid fecit tibi? quomodo aperuit tibi oculos? « quid ergo ille? illis devictis et prostratis non ultra remisse loquitur; donec enim res examine et perquisitione opus habuit, moderate rem declaravit; postquam autem illos cepit splendidamque victoriam retulit, audacter illos aggreditur » (CAr.; sim. Theod. M. Theoph.) et stomachans adversus duritiam Iudaeorum et ex caeco videns non ferens caecos (Aug.)
9:27
v. 27 respondit eis : dizi vobis iam et audistis, graece οὐχ ἠκούσατε et non audistis (uti a f q gat) id est audire noluistis, vel uti aliqui minusculi codices habent οὐχ ἐπιστεύ- I0AN. 9,91-31. gate , οὗ πιστεύετε et non creditis (uti r praebet), sed graecum etiam per interrogationem legi potest : nonne audistis? quae explicatio probabilis est, quia ἀχούειν bis eodem sensu adhibetur; nam pergit : guid iterum vultis audire? repetita interrogatio etiam animum commotum et merito eis indignantem prodit; « vides mendici adversus scribas et pharisaeos confidentiam (παρρησίαν); tam firma res est veritas, tam infirmum mendacium » (CAr.). Immo audacter eos pungit (To/.) et cum ironia quaerit : numquid et vos vultis discipuli eius fieri? dicit et vos, scil. cum admiratione ironica, quos nempe maxime infensos esse Iesu bene novit! aliqui e£ vos ita, accipiunt, ut iam sese declaret discipulum Iesu; « quid est ; numquid et vos? nisi : quia ego iam sum » (Aug. sim. CÀr. Ians. Mald.). Sed. sane homo mendicus talem honorem non sibi attribuit, ut iam putet se accipi a Iesu comitem ac socium. Et profecto et vos dicere poterat ratione eorum qui iam erant discipuli (uti Jans. etiam monet). « Nihil pharisaeis scientiae opinione inflatis contumeliosius dici poterat quodque homines superbos magis ureret quam eos velle aut posse, non dico Christi quem tanto odio prosequebantur, sed etiam cuiuscumque hominis discipulos esse » (Ma/d.);
9:28
v. 28 maledixzerunt ergo ei et dixerunt : tu discipulus illius sis; nos autem Moysi discipuli sumus,
9:29
v. 99 nos scimus quia Moysi locutus est Deus; hunc autem nescimus unde sit; illius per contemptum proferunt; ipsi vero intolerabili fastu elati stulte dicunt : nos, nos scimus (Cyr.). Eorum perversitatem aptissime perstringit
9:30
v. 30 respondit ille homo et dizit eis : tn hoc entm mirabile est à» τούτῳ videtur explicandum : in hac re, cum res ita se habeat, uti expositum est, in hac rei gestae conditione; alii referunt ad sequens quia (cf. Schz.); notio γὰρ in responsione est nativa illa affirmandi significatio quae ex origine particulae γέ ἄρα derivatur; respicit enim ad ea quae alter antea dixerat et continet cum affirmatione conclusionem quae ex rebus ita comparatis facienda sit (Klotz, Devar. II p. 232. 242). Quare γάρ hoc loco poni pro certe, sane haud immerito lans. Tol. Mald. asseruerunt (plenius dixeris : sane igitur); graecus articulus τὸ θαυμαστόν non caret emphasi; rem esse dicit plane miram, insolitam, quae debeat esse omnibus offensioni, rem fere incredibilem, quia vos nescitis unde sit, ἃ quo scil. missus, et aperuit meos oculos; Moyses miraculo probavit se a Deo missum esse ; hoc illi sciunt; inde credunt Deum ei locutum esse; Iesus quoque miracula patrat affirmans a Deo se esse missum ; hunc autem nesciunt unde sit. Quam perverse et malitiose agant, mendicus ille optime perspicit; quare eos iis quae sana ratio dictat graviter perstringit
9:31
v. 31 scimus autem quia peccatores Deus non audit, ego, homo idiota scio et vos eliam scitis; frequenter enim sacris litteris legitur eiusmodi, orationem eius qui declinat a lege esse exsecrabilem ; Deum non exaudire quia manus vestrae sanguine plenae sunt; iniquitates diviserunt inter vos et Deum; iniquitatem si aspexi in corde meo, non exaudiet Deus; numquid Deus audiet clamorem eius (impii)? longe est Dominus &b impiis ete. cf. Prov. 15,99; 98,9. Ps. 65,18. Iob 27,9. Is. 1,15; 59,2 etc. (cf. Rup. lans. Maid. Schg. Schz.). Revocat illis in mentem quod antea aliqui ex illis ipsis dixerant : quomodo potest homo peccator talia signa facere (v. 16; CAr.)? Peccatores non audiri, quo sensu verum sit aliqui inquirunt. Advertunt, si peccatores petunt remissionem, iam non petere ut peccatores, audiri a Deo ut poenitentes (2 Par. 6,37. Luc. 18,14); etiam miracula fleri posse ἃ peccatoribus patet (Matth. 7,29); at id nunquam permittere potest Deus, ut fiant ad sanctitatem hominis perversi comprobandam neque ad errores confortandos (cf. Tom. Theoph.); sed si quis Dei cultor est et voluntatem eius facit, hunc ezaudit; nam : oculi Domini super iustos et aures eius in preces eorum; quoniam in me speravit, liberebo eum; clamabit ad me et exaudiam eum etc. (cf. Ps. 33,16; 90,44. 15. Eccli. 15,20 etc.). Nunc quantum ac quale miraculum Iesus in se operatus sit, effert
9:32
v. 32 a saeculo non est auditum quia quis aperuit oculos caeci nati; nec Moyses nec ullus prophetarum eiusmodi patrasse dicitur vel fertur in sacris litteris; « non parum indignatus est tot conviciis impeti Iesum; unde festinat ei patrocinari et quodammodo gestis Moysi praeclara servatoris facta opponit, quanto maior sit in miraculis patrandis, tanto praestantiorem esse demonstrans » (Cyr. sim. Ma/d.). Sed iure dixeris haec caeco nondum esse obversata. Argumentandi seriem triumphantis in modum contra eos concludit
9:33
v. 33 nisi esset hic a Deo, non poterat facere quidquam scil. quod vires humanas excedens singularem Dei opem et interventum requirit, i. e. non poterat facere ullum miraculum. Deprehensi sunt et convicti; respondere non possunt neque rem gestam, sanationem, negare; sed « cum ad respondendum lingua haereat, ad conviciandum soluta est » (Ma/d.)
9:34
v. 3& responderunt et dixerunt ei : in peccatis natus es totus et. tu doces nos? et eiecerunt eum foras; en, ita solvunt argumentum caeci nati. Utique nihil aliud iis restabat, quia apud eos iamdudum fixum ratumque erat odium letale in Iesum, ἃ quo odio nolunt dimoveri; totus in anima et corpore, quia caecitas ut documentum peccatorum in corpore apparet (cf. TAom. Tol.); alii volunt insinuari simul eum a nativitate eousque peccatis addidisse peccata (cf. Ma/d.). Cum emphatica indignatione efferunt : tu doces nos, homo vilis, abiectus, totus in peccatis a prima aetate, tu doces nos « sanctitatis et scientiae opinione praecellentes, ut uno verbo dicam, pharisaeos i. e. egregios, ab imperita multitudine segregatos » (Mald.). Voce eiecerunt eum foras ἐξέβαλον ἔξω significari videtur expulsio et eiectio a templo vel a loco, ubi inquisitio facta est (Theoph. Ians.), ἐχπέμπουσιν αὐτὸν Cyr. , docentem proiecerunt (Aug.), eloco eiecerunt (Mald. Bar. Schz.) ; excommunicalionem i. e. eiectionem e synagoga alii intelligunt (Bed. Rup. Euth. Tol. Cai. Calm. Fil.); hanc quidem a coetu religioso exclusionem aliter vidimus designari in v. 22; at ob v. 35 tamen videri potest plus indicari quam solam expulsionem a praesentia pharisaeorum. Impletur in doctoribus Israel, uti Cyr. adnotavit, illud : vae vobis legisperitis, quia tulistis clavem scientiae; ipsi non introistis et eos qui introibant prohibuistis Sed quem eiecerunt Iudaei, eum Christus maiore donat beneficio
9:35
v. 35 audivit Iesus quia eum eiecerunt foras, et cum invenisset eum, dizit ei : tu credis in. Filium Dei? graece (vide lect. var.) in Filium hominis i. e. in Messiam (cf. 12,35, quo loco patet etiam populo non fuisse plane ignotam hanc Messiae designationem). Animum promptum ac paratum ostendit
9:36
v. 36 respondit ille et dizit : quis est, Domine, ut credam in eum? e sono vocis poterat cognoscere se interrogari ab eo a quo sanatus erat; unde eum magna cum reverentia alloquilur, paratus verbo eius omnem adhibere fidem; animus exhibetur simplex et candidus, qui post multiplicem illam pharisaeorum malitiam et contumaciam obduratam legenti affert delectationem :
9:37
v. 37 e£ dixit ei Iesus : et vidisti eum &ópaxas, οὐ πρότερον, ἀλλὰ νῦν (Euth. sim. Mald. Schz.), est scil. tempus perfectum , quo actio completa perdurans declaratur : modo vidisti et etiam nunc vides (cf. F1.) et qui loquitur tecum, tpse est &xstvog ille est;
9:38
v. 38 et ille ait : credo, Domine; et procidens adoravit eum; Iesus qui externe ad eum loquitur, interna sua gratia eum docet et illustrat (cf. To/.). Credit interius et exterius verbo et habitu fidem profitetur; corde enim creditur ad iustitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem (Rom. 10,10). lam subiungit Iesus quid in hoc quoque eventu manifestetur
9:39
v. 39 et dizit Iesus : in iudicium ego in hunc mundum veni, ut qui non vident videant et qui vident caeci fiant; ipsa enim Christi praesentia , doctrina, operatio verum evadit iudicium , quo alii salventur, alii sua obduratione et contumacia pereant. Christus ad hoc iudicium efficiendum in mundum venit. Eandem sententiam iam enuntiavit Simeon : positus est hic in ruinam et in resurrectionem multorum in Israel (Luc. 9,34). Modus loquendi ex ipsa re modo gesta depromitur et transitus est ἃ visu corporali ad visum spiritualem, ad illustrationem mentis per fidem. Illi qui vident et caeci fiunt sunt, uti ex re narrata patet, illi qui sibi ipsis sapientes videntur et ideo pro sua superbia clarissima illa Christi legati Dei documenta et argumenta repudiant. lis opponuntur qui non vident, homines simplices, a fastu alieni; sententia et oppositio est eadem quae cernitur in illo : esurientes implevit bonis et divites dimisit inanes (Luc. 1,53). Qui bona messiana desiderant suam agnoscentes pauperiem , eorum erunt participes; qui vero se nulla re indigere utpote divites et bonis caducis satiati arbitrantur, isti bonis veris carebunt; eodem modo loquitur Christus hic metaphora a visione petita : qui se agnoscunt carentes scientia et sapientia salutari, ea illuminabuntur; qui se sapientes iactant, in tenebris reiecta veritate in dies magis versabuntur. Eius effati demonstratio et exemplum luculentissimum in ipsa habetur narratione. Aliquibus illud ἵνα negotium facessit; recurrunt ad distinctionem illam, particulam non τελιχῶς, Sed ἐχβατιχῶς esse accipiendam. Ex Christi adventu et doctrina consequi effectus contrarios; id utique verum est. Sed uti durum videtur prius membrum de effectu salutari ad meram consecutionem redigere, ita haud satis consultum est particulam 0 (va nativa sua notione privare. Verum attendere oportet, quod saepius usu venit, recte quidem nos dicere Deum permittere mala, permittere obcaecationem; at permissio talis ita concipi debet, ut Deus qui liberum arbitrium dedit et abusum libertatis praevidit, etiam illa quae ex abusu hoc sequuntur, peccata scil. suae gubernationi subservire faciat i. e. ut res ita ordinet quatenus ipsa mala sapientiam, potentiam, iustitiam Dei patefaciant. Insuper ex modo loquendi Scripturae Deus etiam illa facere dicitur, quae quamvis conditionibus mutatis vel maiore gratia apposita non fierent, tamen conditionibus illis non inductis fieri sinit. Haec si considerantur, particula illa iam non' potest esse offensioni (cf. quae dixi ad Is. 6,9-10); nam peccato hominis supposito Deus revera vu/t pro sua sanctitate et iustitia quae cum peccato nexu quodam interno ac necessario coniuncta sunt (cf. ad Marc. 4,12). Aderant pharisaei hoc audientes; intellexerunt notari se, cum caeco adversarentur et Christus caecum qui ex. caeco videris factus sit , aliis, id est eius adversariis opponeret, et animadvertünt caecitatem spiritualem iis impingi;
9:40
v. &0 δέ audierunt quidam ez pharisaeis qui cum ipso erant et dixerunt. ei : numquid. et nos caeci sumus? animo arroganti id ab eis quaeri, ut Iesum irrideant, etiam ex responsione colligitur
9:41
v. &4 dizi ets Iesus - si caect essetis, non haberetis peccatum; nunc vero dicitis, quia videmus, peccatum vestrum manet; qui invinis non habet peccatum reiectae veritatis; pharisaei vero se iactant sapientes et ob hanc suam sapientiam superbe reiiciunt apertissima veritatis ἃ Christo enuntiatae documenta, ideoque peccatum eorum manet; declarat verbum hoc moram, habitum, inhaesionem eius quod antea iam adfuit (Maid.); non tollitur neque tolli potest quamdiu se videntes arbitrantur. Nam propter eam quam sibi confinxerunt scientiam illis contingit quod Paulus dicit : ignorantes iustitiam Dei et suam quaerentes statuere, iustitiae Dei non sunt subiecti (Rom. 10,3); pariter ad eos applicari debet illud : si quis videtur inter vos sapiens esse in hoc saeculo, stultus fiat ut sit sapiens (1 Cor. 3,18) i. e. sapientiam suam mundanam et existimatam deserat, sese tradat animo simplici in disciplinam veri magistri; tum poterit evadere vere sapiens. Uti alibi pharisaei exhibentur qui se iustos existimantes poenitentia non indigeant (Matth. 3,9; 5,20. Luc. 18,9. 11. Ioan. 8,33), ita hoc loco ut tales qui scientia rerum divinarum praediti institutione Christi carere velint; nam « dicendo : videmus, medicum non quaeritis, in caecitate vestra remanetis » (Aug.). Christus ipse in v. 39 sanationem caeci transfert symbolice ad illuminationem spiritualem. Quare mirum non est veteres praeter sensum litteralem etiam allegoricam proponere explicationem. Vident enim in caeco isto
9:1
Le fait miraculeux, οἱ 165 premières impressions qu'il cause (1-12); 2) l'enquête des Pharisiens (13-34); 3) l’action du miracle et des paroles de Jésus auprès de l'aveugle guéri et des Pharisiens (35-41).
9:2
On est assez surpris de voir ici les disciples dont il n’était plus question depuis le ch. vi, car vu, 3 fait allusion à ceux de la Judée. Leur question ne leur fait pas grand honneur; raison de plus pour y voir une donnée de fait. Les disciples n'avaient garde de s’immiscer dans les controverses; loin de Ia foule ils retrouvent un peu d'initiative dans l'intimité. S'ils ont su que l'aveugle était né tel, c'est sans doute qu'il le criait à tue-tête pour exciter La compassion, el que l'opinion publique ne le démentait pas. Sur quoi les disciples, convaincus que cette infirmité était un châtiment, se trouvent dans un grand embarras (ἀποροῦντες Chrys.). Jésus ἃ semblé attribuer la maladie du miraculé de Bezatha à ses péchés. Mais cette fois que croire? De même, dit Chrys., Lorsqu'un enfant souffre, nous demandons avec anxiété : « Qu’a donc fait cet enfant »? selon cette idée si profondément ancrée dans les esprits que Dieu n'inflige pas une souffrance: à qui ne l'a pas méritée. Les disciples ne savent donc que penser : lui coupable? Mais on sait bien qu'avant la naissance les enfants n’ont fait ni bien ni mal (Rom. 1x, 41). Les parents coupables? Mais pourquoi porterait-il la responsabililé? C’est d’un bon sens un peu court, tel que pouvait être le ressort mental de ces Galiléens peu cultivés. — Les exégètes peu satisfaits de cette admirable exégèse de Chrysostome veulent qu'ils aient eu en vue des systèmes définis, sur lesquels ils veulent obtenir l'avis du Christ. Alors on a recours pour Îa première hypothèse soit à la préexistence des âmes, connue des Esséniens (Jos. Bell. 11. var, 11.) et de Philon (De gigantibus, 8 6 ss.; 1, 263; De somnüs, I, $ 161; 1, 648), soit à la prédominance du mauvais penchant dans le sein de la mère, d'après Sanh. 91b (Wänsche, p. 531); mais cette prédominance (1) indique que la nature est inclinée au mal, elle n’est pas un acte de péché. Pour la seconde hypothèse, les disciples pouvaient hésiter entre les textes qui parlent de la responsabilité jusqu’à la quatrième génération (Ex. xx, 5; Di. v, 9) et le principe de la responsabilité personnelle posé par Ezéchiel (vin, 2 ss.; οὗ, 16». χχχι, 39 5. Dt. χχῖν, 16). — Mais il est peu probable que ces braves gens aient pesé toutes ces considérations! ya : c'est un des cas les plus clairs d’un ἵνα consécutif ou métabatique; cas d'autant plus étrange que l'action qui suit ἵνα n'est pas envisagée comme à venir, mais comme réalisée; on peut citer cependant Le. 1x, 45 et Épictète πὶ, 1, 42 : τί εἶδεν ἐν ἐμοὶ 6 Ἐπίχτητος, ἵνα βλέπων με τοιοῦτον... περιίδη «(καὶΣ» μηδέποτε μηδὲ ῥῆμα εἴπῃ; (Deb. ἃ 391, 5).
9:3
Jésus ne résout pas des hypothèses qui n'étaient pas d'ailleurs posées clairement en théorie; il s’en tient au cas qui a mis les disciples dans l'embarras. Ni cet homme n’a péché, comme il est évident, ni ses parents ne sont coupables dans le cas présent et Jésus n'allègue pas non plus le péché originel. La souffrance ne doit donc pas être envisagée dans ses causes, qui échappent assez souvent, mais dans le dessein de Dieu; il apparait ici plein de miséricorde pour cet homme que son infirmité guérie mettra sur la voie du salut, tandis que les Juifs demeureront aveugles (Chrys.). — ἐν αὐτῷ se lie à φανερωθῇ : les œuvres ne sont pas directement la guérison et la conversion qui paraîtront dans l’aveugle, mais dans son cas particulier on verra resplendir les œuvres de Dieu, c'est-àdire cette action surnaturelle où l'on doit reconnaitre à la fois le pou voir de Jésus et de celui qui l’a envoyé (v, 36; x, 31; xIv, 16). Le pluriel s’explique parce qu'il y ἃ une série dont chaque acte ἃ le même but. Si l'on tient compte du v. 3, il semble que la manifestation montre en Jésus la lumière du monde; la guérison de l'aveugle entre dans ce plan divin, si bien que déjà elle apparait comme la figure de l’illumination spirituelle. Dès le début le caractère symbolique du miracle est indiqué (Zahn, Loisy, Bauer).
9:4
ἡμᾶς avec THS (KBWDL sah. boh. Or. Cyr.) et non eue avec V (la masse); mais pe avec HSV (la masse) et non ἡμᾶς avec ΤΙΝΙ, sah.). La leçon difficile qui unit le pluriel et le singulier a été corrigée soit en mettant deux singuliers, ce qui plaçait mieux le Christ en vedette, soit en mettant deux pluriels, ce qui prouve bien l'autorité de ἡμᾶς au début, car ἡμᾶς est tout à fait impossible avec πέρψαντος, qui se dit singuliècement du Christ. ἡμᾶς du début ne signifie pas les contemporains de Jo., comme l’imaginent Baucr et Loisy et n’est pas non plus un pluriel de majesté (tr, 11), puisqu'il est isolé. Il s'applique donc aux dis- ciples, mis en scène dès le début et que Jésus associe ici à son œuvre (iv, 38), en conformité avec la tradition synoptique (Mc. vi, 7 ss. et parall.). Le devoir pour l'envoyé de Dieu et pour ses disciples est de travailler tant qu'il fait jour. C’est comparer leur activité à celle des bons ouvriers qui ne s'arrêtent qu'à la nuit; car dans les civilisations anciennes, spécialement en Judée, tout travail cessait à la nuit. Cependant ἔρχεται νύξ introduit la nuit comme une personne, si bien que le sens allégorique se présente naturellement : c'est la mort qui arrête même les plus ardents. Mais ce n’est ni uniquement la mort du Christ, ni le jugement dernier; c’est un terme propre à chacun quoique le même pour tous. Ὁ) Jésus suppose que son activité à lui-même sera interrompue d'une certaine manière, et on entend bien que ce sera par la mort qui le fera sortir de ce monde; mais tant qu'il y agit comme homme, il est sa lumière. Ce n'est pas précisément parce que cette lumière ne peut supporter la cécité comme une sorte de résistance à ses bienfaits qu'il guérira un aveugle, puisqu'il ne les guérit pas tous; mais parce que cette guérison sera la figure de la lumière qu'il est venu répandre (cf. τ, 8 s.; 11, 19; vin, 13; xt, 35). — ὅταν quandiu (Vg) cf. Le. x1, 34 et non quandoquidem, car si le Verbe est toujours la lumière du monde (1, 4), il s'est manifesté cependant d'une manière spéciale durant sa vie mortelle (vur, 12). — IL faut se garder de rattacher trop étroitement ce v. au précédent, comme si le Christ était la lumière nécessaire à son propre travail, ee qui serait une image étrange. Le dessein de travailler aux œuvres de son Père étant pris, Jésus s'approche de l’aveugle, et fait cette réflexion qu'il est la lumière du monde. La leçon ἡμᾶς au v. 4 n'est donc nullement impossible (contre Loïsy). 6 s.) Jésus qui est la lumière, se dispose donc à donner la vue à l'aveugle. 1] prend très nettement l'initiative, comme les Pères l'ont remarqué, et procède sans demander son avis à l'infirme dont il se réserve d’éprouver la foi d’une autre façon. Ce qui suit est très mystérieux et a été interprété de bien des manières, selon de multiples combinaisons. Il faut partir de ce point reconnu «le tous, semble-t-il, que le miracle ne s'est fait que lorsque l'aveugle s’est lavé dans la piscine. Nous en concluons qu'on peut très bien n'attribuer au premier acte aucune vertu efficiente. Jésus s'est servi de sa salive comme moyen de guérison (Mc. vu, 33; vin, 23), mais ici ce qu'il se propose d'employer, c'est de la boue; s’il crache à terre pour cela, c'est sans doute qu'il n’a pas d’eau sous la main. ἢ fait donc de la boue, et il en oint les yeux de l'aveugle. C'eût été le condamner à ne pas voir, s’il n'avait déjà été aveugle : c'est cécité sur cécité. L'idée ne pouvait venir à personne que cette boue avait le pouvoir de guérir. C'était donc une manière de rendre la cécité encore plus évidente avant de la guérir (Chrys.). Le miracle, opéré au moment voulu, n’en serait que plus extraordinaire. Mais n'est-ce pas là une action symbolique à la façon des anciens prophètes (II Regn. xxir, 41; [5. vi, 4-4.48; Jer. xix, 1 SS., XXvII, 2 ss.)? Plusieurs Pères l'ont pensé. Irénée (V, xv, 2) ἃ cru que Jésus symbolisait l'acte de la création de l'homme et se mettait donc sur le même rang que le Créateur, mais ne voyait pas là comme Loisy l'indice d’une création spirituellc. Des deux façons l'analogie est trop éloignée, car la boue appliquée sur les yeux ne peut être censée réparer la lacune laissée par le Créateur à l'enfant dans le sein de sa mère, puisque c'est l'eau qui fera le miracle. Si elle ne fait, comme nous l'avons dit, qu'extérioriser la cécité, on pourra croire avec Érasme qu'elle marque le renoncement à la lumière propre : plus qua caeeus fiat oportet, qui velit accipere lucem a Christo (cité par Schanz). L'aveugle, avec ses yeux ouverts, avait l'apparence de la vue; il lui faut renoncer à une connaissance d'apparence pour recevoir la vraie lumière du Christ (Zahn), ou, comme dit Augustin, il entre d'abord dans les rangs des catéchumènes, ce qui suppose l'humilité et la disposition à accepter les ordres du Christ. L'ordre du Christ c’est d'aller se laver à une piscine, épreuve pour la foi plus sérieuse que celle de Naaman se syrien (IV Regn. v, 1 s5.), puisque Jésus a commencé la cure d’une si étrange façon. Si son remède ne pouvait rien, qu'ajouterait l’ablution qui le ferait disparaître? Cette piscine est celle de Siloé, récemment découverte par M. Fr. Bliss (Jérusalem... par les PP. Vincent et Abel, t. IE, ch. xxxiv, $ 2). Le nom de nt (Is. vin, 6) ἃ été rendu Σιλωαμ par le ms. sinaïlique. C'était un nom propre qui désignait d’abord le canal amenant ἡ l'eau de la source intermittente nommée aujourd'hui ‘Ain Sitti Mariam, el qui par conséquent signifiait quelque chose comme l'envoyeur, celui qui transmet l'eau. De ce nom vulgaire, Jo. fait un nom symbolique, qui signifiera l'envoyé, comme si la forme était passive, c'est-à-dire l'envoyé par excellence (cf. x, vi, 29.38.44.57; VIL 16.18.28.29.33; vis, 16.18.26.29. 17: 1v, 25; v, 24.30.36; e. Comment donc Jésus envoie-t-il l'aveugle à Jésus? 423 1x, 4), Jésus lui-mêm iscine qui porte son nom, et où son action se fera 11 l'envoie plutôt à la p sentir par le baptème. Il n'y ἃ aucune discordance à attribuer à Jésns lui-même ce symbolisme après les déclarations à Nicodème (in, 5 ss.) L'aveugle obéit ponctuellement, et s'en va ayant acquis la vue. _— Nous lisons ἐπέχοισεν car ἐπέθηχεν n'est soutenu que par B et un autre ïns., et peut-être G; ils ont pu l'emprunter au v. 15. — αὐτοῦ ne peut se rapporter à Jésus; c'est le complément de τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, placé en avant pour mettre l'aveugle en relief, οἱ corrigé en αὐτῷ par quelques mss. — νίψαι εἰς cfuMctr, 9; non pas en entrant dans la piscine, mais simplemenht en se penchant pour y laver ses yeux. 9. om. ὃε p. αλλοι 2° (TH) plutôt que add. (SV). — om. δὲ p. εἐχεινος (THV) et non add. (S).
9:5
Circonstances qu'on regarde ordinairement comme destinées à prouver aux lecteurs la réalité du miracle. Mais Jo. ne s’en préoccupe pas ordinairement; il veut assurément être cru, mais surtout montrer comment l’événement avait dés lors toute l'authenticité désirable. Ceux mêmes qui avaient d’abord répugné à croire au miracle se sont bien vile rendus à l'évidence et ont seulement interrogé sur les circonstances. Il n'en sera pas de même des Pharisiens.
9:6
ἐπεχρισεν (TSV) plutôt que ἐπεθηκεν (H).
9:8
On suppose l’aveugle rentré chez lui, où il était connu des voisins; d’autres s'étaient accoutumés à le voir assis à une place fixe, suivant l'usage des mendiants, qui ont chacun leur quartier. — ὅτι : on le connaissait pour celte raison.
9:10
οὖν, car ils ne pouvaient raisonnablement refuser de le reconnaître quoique le don de la vue ait changé sa physionomie.
9:11
L'aveugle guéri n'a pas encore bien réfléchi sur son cas. Jésus n’est d'abord qu'un homme quelconque. Le nom pouvait être assez commun, mais Jésus était déjà assez célèbre pour que ce nom seul le désignât. — ἀναδλέπειν signifie ordinairement recouvrer la vue. Pour un cas soi-disant miraculeux, cf. Drrr, Syll. 807 (après 138 ap. J.-C.) : deux aveugles sont guéris par Esculape, dont l’un, soldat, n'était pas aveugle de naissance, mais cela n'est pas dit non plus du premier, On ἃ donc prétendu que ce mot est emprunté aux synoptiques (Mt. xx, 34; Mc. x, 52). En fait Jo. semble l'avoir évité à dessein, en. employant βλέπω (7.15.19.21.25), mais il a pu se servir sans scrupule du mot admis couramment à propos des aveugles; c'est aussi le cas dans Pausanias, IV, x, 7, cité depuis longtemps : συνέδη τὸν Ὀφιονέα,., τὸν ἐκ γενετῆς τυφλὸν ἀναδλέψαι : la vue est naturelle; l’aveugle-né guéri rentre dans son droit.
9:12
I faut convenir que le miraculé lui-même ne montre pas beaucoup d'empressement envers son bienfaiteur, Ceux qui sont en cause ne sont pas tous des gens très bien élevés, de sentiments délicats; mais enfin ils n’affectent pas de fermer les yeux à l'évidence.
9:13
D’après Loisy : « Dans la perspective du récit, l'on est toujours au sabbat, qui est en même temps, dans la perspective actuelle de l'évangile, le dernier jour de la fête des tabernacles » (p. 312). — Mais Bauer remarque avec raison que Jo. ne se soucie nullement de ces prétendues perspectives chronologiques, et Zahn que le présent ἄγουσι, sans lien avec les passés qui précèdent, suggère plutôt qu’un certain temps s'est écoulé; il n'est même pas clair que les personnes mises en scène soient le sujet du verbe; ce peut être « on amène »… Il n'est pas indiqué non plus que l'intention ait été mauvaise, comme si l'on avait voulu poursuivre une violation du sabbat.
9:14
εν ἢ ἥμερα (THV) plutôt que οτε (S).
Si c'était formellement pour dénoncer Jésus qu'ils sont venus, il eût fallu écrire ἦν γάρ; — δέ au lieu de γάρ indique que ce trait n'est utile à connaître que pour ce qui suit, pour expliquer d’une certaine façon l'attitude des Pharisiens. En elle-même la guérison de l'aveugle était un fait extraordinaire sur lequel on désirait avoir l'avis des Pharisiens, chefs spirituels auxquels on en référait pour tout ce qui avait un côté religieux. Il n’est pas question du Sanhédrin. — Cyrille a bien vu que la proposition incidente ἃ quelque chose d'ironique : n'était-il pas ridicule qu’on püt prendre feu pour si peu! ἐπισημαίνεται τὴν τοῦ πράγματος γελοιότητα. — ἐν ἢ fuéoa est certainement plus probable que ὅτε, Ce jour est déjà passé.
9:15
οὖν se rapporte à πάλιν, qui 50 rapporte au v. 10 : ce n’est pas à cause du sabbat qu'il se fait une seconde interrogation, mais parce qu'il y en à eu une première. — De nouveau l'aveugle ne parle pas de la salive (41); peut-être parce qu’il n'avait pas vu l'opération (Catena); c'est cependant un indice que Jo. n'y attache pas une portée spéciale miraculeuse. Πηλὺν ἐπέθηχέν peu ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐφθχλμούς, χαὶ Enbaurv, καὶ βλέπω. 19 ἕλε ὦ Η ΕΥ FE À ET. er, γον οὖν Ex τῶν Φαρισαίων τινές Οὐκ ἔστιν οὗτος παρὰ θεοῦ 5 ἄνθρωπος, ὅτι τὸ σάββατον οὐ τηρεῖ, ἄλλοι δὲ ἔλεγον [los δύναται ἄνθρωπος aus Ρ̓ 8 τ ἦν" ὰ 2 δ, ἢ dt - {7 ξνρυσιν οὖ τωλὸς τοιαῦτα σημεῖα ποιεῖν; val σχίσμα ἦν ἐν αὐτοῖς. ᾿ξέψουσιν οὖν en 2 = ε ὦ ἢ EC TTL, à LU τῷ τυφλῷ πάλιν Τί σὺ λέγεις περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἔνοιξέν σου τοὺς ἐφθαλμούς; ὃ δὲ εἶπεν ὅτι Προφήτης ἐστ. ἰδΟὐχ ἐπίστευσαν οὖν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι περὶ EE = Li νὰ CE ur cou Lo b- HG Ci αὐτοῦ τι ἦν τυφλὸς χαὶ ἀνέβλεψεν, ἕως ὅτου ἐφώνησαν τοὺς γεν 255$ τοῦ ἀναβλέψαντος 19 χαὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτοὺς λέγοντες Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ vide ὑμῶν, ὃν ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι τυφλὸς ἐγεννήθη: πῶς οὖν βλέπει ἄρτι; 20 ἀπεχοίθησαν οὖν οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ χαὶ εἶπαν Οἴδαμεν ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς ἡμῶν χαὶ ἔτι τυφλὸς ἐγεννήθη" rw: δὲ νῦν βλέπει οὐχ οἴδαμεν, À τίς ἤνοιξεν αὐτοῦ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἡμεῖς οὐχ οἴδαμεν" αὐτὸν ἐρωτήσατε, ἡλιχίαν ἔχει, αὑτὸς est ἑαυτοῦ λαλήσει. ὁ ταῦτα εἶπαν οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ ὅτι ἐφοβοῦντο τοὺς 10"
9:16
Au premier moment le fait paraît avéré; mais une partie des Pharisiens y veut voir la preuve que Jésus n'a pas agi en envoyé de Dieu, puisqu'il a violé le sabbat. D'autres leur demandaient si l'on pouvait regarder comme pécheur quelqu'un qui faisait des prodiges non pas quelconques, mais aussi extraordinaires. Grave sujet de discussion et de division (cf. vu, 43).
9:17
ἡνοιξεν (TV) où Ὥνεωξεν (H) plutôt que ἀνεωξεν (5).
On dirait qu'ils se sont mis d'accord pour avoir là-dessus l'avis de l'aveugle, mais on ne peut les croire disposés à se rendre à son avis, la suite le montrera bien. Ceux ou plutôt celui qui interroge au nom de tous escompte donc une réponse défavorable à Jésus. — L'aveugle ἃ sans doute réfléchi aux circonstances de sa guérison, et il ne manque pas de courage, car il a pu se rendre compte des sentiments hostiles d'une bonne partie des enquêteurs. Il parle comme la Samaritaine (1v, 19). ὅτι est cité par Burney (p. 76} comme représentant le pronom relatif araméen de : « qui t'a ouvert », mais ce peut être en grec une expression concise; ef. 11, 18. — ἤνοιξεν est beaucoup plus soutenu que ἠνέῳξεν {avec trois augments) de B W et une dizaine de mss. L'auteur qui vient d'écrire ἀνέῳξεν, a peut-être voulu varier; cf. τ. 32.
9:18
Les adversaires de Jésus — et tous ces Pharisiens en étaient — ne songent pas un instant à conclure comme l'aveugle; mais sa réponse a du moins le résultat de les convaincre que l'opinion des dissidents est irréfutable, si le fait est authentique. Peut-être ces dissidents n'avaientils soulevé leur difficulté que pour montrer le danger d'accepter trop facilement! le fait. Jo. ne parle “plus d'eux. L'accord se rétablit sans doute, car nier le fait était une manière commode de résoudre la difficulté spéculative. On pouvait d'ailleurs retenir l'accusation de violer le sabbat, sauf à nier le résultat miraculeux. C'est sur ce point que se concentrent tous les efforts des Juifs, nouveau nom donné aux mêmes personnes, pour désigner les puissants adversaires de Jésus. — Noter l'élégance du changement des temps : il était alors ct habituellement (ἦν), mais il a, à un moment donné, acquis la vue (ἀνέδλεψεν), — ἕως ὅτου « pas avant d’avoir appelé », ce qui n'indique pas qu'ils ont cru après. 115 commencent par différer leur assentiment, comme s'ils étaient prêts à se rendre.
9:19
Les Juifs ne mettent pas en doute qu'il voie, ni qu'il soit leur fils, mais ils cherchent à les embarrasser : s’il était né aveugle comme ils le prétendent, et comme cela paraît impossible, alors qu'ils fournissent une explication de ce changement invraisemblable. La première question comprend deux points identité de la personne; sa situation avant le moment critique. 20 s.) Les parents fixent les deux premiers points et se dérobent sur le point scabreux, mais avec la maladresse de témoins laissant voir qu'ils en savent iong tout en refusant de répondre, et d'autant plus gauchement que leur réticence dissimule mal leur soupçon : Jésus était la vraie raison d'être de l’enquète et l’objet de la haine des Juifs. S'ils ne parlent pas, c’est pour ne pas se com— promettre; quant à leur fils, il s'est déjà compromis, qu'il s'arrange. ἡλιχία ἃ certainement eu en Égypte le sens de majorité (Papyrus cités par MM., par exemple P. Ryland τι, 256 [15 8. av. J.-C.] ἐμοῦ ἐν ἡλικίᾳ γεγονότος, etc.), mais on ne saurait dire si Jo. ἃ visé ce sens technique.
9:20
οὖν (TH) plutôt que ὃξ (8) ou om. (V).
9:22
La crainte des parents se comprend très bien. Reconnaître que le miracle avait été fait par Jésus, ce n'était pas le confesser comme Christ, mais c'était tout de même lui rendre un hommage éclatant que les malintentionnés pouvaient interpréter comme une adhésion au Messie. Il n'y ἃ aucune raison de révoquer en doute l'affirmation de Jo. Dès le retour de la captivité les Juifs pratiquèrent l'exclusion de la communauté: cf. II Esdr. x, 8 nai αὐτὸς διασταλή- 26. om. παλιν p. αὐτω (TH) et non add. (SV). σεται ἀπὸ ἐχχλησίας τῆς ἀποικίας. Dans Le. vr, 22, le mot employé est ἀφορίζειν dans Jo. ἀποσυνάγωγος, χη, 42; xvi, 2. C'était une mesure individuelle, qui se perpétua dans les communautés chrétiennes (1 Cor. v, 2. 5), et qu’il ne faut pas confondre avec la malédiction prononcée contre les chrétiens par les Juifs (ef. Le Messianisme... p. 294). D'ailleurs nous ne sommes pas informés pour cette époque sur le détail de cette excommunication, sa durée, les pénalités secondaires qu'elle comportait (défense de se couper les cheveux, Moed Qatôn, ax, 1-2) etc. Il est très vraisemblable que les chefs des Juifs s'en soient servis contre ceux qui adhéraient à Jésus. D'après vu, 82, ils avaient nettement pris parti contre ce qu'ils regardaient comme des prétentions messianiques. Entre eux et Jésus le désaccord était des plus graves : il était un Messie qui se disait proprement Fils de Dieu. Mais le public n'avait pas à pénétrer dans cette sphère; il suffisait de le mettre en garde contre les séductions qui étaient à sa portée. On pourra comparer la parole de Chime‘ôn ben Chetakh qui envoya dire à R. Khoni : Je t'excommunierais (à cause de la témérité de sa prière) si tu n'étais Khoni..… tu es comme un fils auprès de Dieu; il fait ce qu'il te plait, etc. (Taanith, nr, 8). — On s'étonne de l'assurance de M. Loisy : « Une telle excommunication existait certainement au temps où fut écrit notre évangile; elle n'existait certainement pas encore aux premiers temps de la prédication chrétienne, à plus forte raison au temps de Jésus » (p. 3144). N'aurait-il pas confondu la menace d'excommunication au temps de Jésus que nous connaissons par Jo. et la malédiction du Chemoné-esré? Évidemment. l'excommuniτ cation des chrétiens comme tels n'existait pas au temps de Jésus; mais l'excommunication existait, et les Juifs durent l'employer pour arrêter le progrès de la doctrine de Jésus de son vivant aussi bien qu'après sa mort.
9:23
Répétition qui ne serait pas sans redondance, si Jo. n'avait voulu insister sur la peur qu'inspiraient les Juifs, et sur les obstacles qu'ils mettaient à la
9:24
Bien plus ils essayent de peser sur le miraculé lui-même, au nom de leur compétence dans l'appréciation des valeurs morales et religieuses. Au. besoin ils reconnaïîtraient le miracle, pourvu qu’il n'ait pas été fait par Jésus : cela seul leur importe. Cependant la formule «rends gloire à Dieu » ne signifie pas « rapporte à Dieu seul l'honneur du miracle »; c'est une adjuration de dire la vérité (Jos. vu, 49; cf. 1 (1Π) Esdr. 1x, 8; Esdr. x, 14), et cela pour arracher un mensonge!
9:25
Réponse plus courageuse qu'elle ne paraît, car elle est ironique : vous savez ce que vous savez; je sais ce que je sais. À vous de faire une conciliation, qui a déjà été jugée impossible (16). — ὦν, participe présent pour le passé; οἷς, Mt. xxvi, 40; Apoc. xx, 10.
9:26
Alors comment faire? retour aux vwv. 10 et 15. C'est bien ici qu’on piétine, indice évident de l'embarras de la hiérarchie.
9:27
αὐτου μαθηται (THV) ou μ. a. (S).
Cette fois l'ironie est flagrante, et devait passer auprès des Pharisiens pour de l’insolence. — Ordinairement θέλειν est suivi de l’infinitif de l'aoriste; mais ici : « Voulez-vous toujours entendre la même chose (Deb. 8.338), devenir peu à peu ses disciples »? — μή suppose une réponse nésalive. Le trop charitable Augustin, et qui aime l’antithèse, fait dire à l’aveugle qu'il serait bien aise de leur conversion iam vides, sed non invides; alors qu'il n'est même pas encore dit que l’aveugle se soil rangé parmi les disciples.
9:28
καὶ 1° (H) ou 0%. (TV) mais non ot δε (8).
Ces Pharisiens bien élevés descendent à l’insulte, et estiment insulter encore en conseillant à l'aveugle de se faire disciple de Jésus. [15 lui rejettent son ironie, et lui laissent entendre qu'il n'est plus disciple de Moïse s'il fait cc pas, car on ne peut être avec le législateur et avec celui qui viole la Loi.
9:29
S'ils s'en élaient tenus au premier point! Mais le parailélisme par contraste es engage à dire qu'ils ne savent pas si Jésus ἃ un mandat de Dieu. 81. o θεὸς ἁμαρτωλων (H) où αμ. ὁ. 8. (STV). ΄ 32. nvaëev (TSV) ou ἡνεωξεν (H). 35. om. avrw p. εἰπεν (TH) plutôt que add. (SV). — του ἀνθρωπον (TH) plutôt que tou Beou (SV).
9:30
115 ont prêté 16 flanc, l'homme enfonce le trait. — γάρ au sens de « certes » dans une réplique vive qui sonne comme un défi; cf. AnisToPnanr, Ranae 262, τούτῳ γὰρ οὐ νιχήσετε.
9:31
οἴδαμεν : « nous savons » après « je sais » ef « vous ne savez pas », qui est lui-même après « nous savons ». Décidément l'aveugle avait prêté l'ouïe au cliquetis des mots. Cette fois, dit-il, nous voilà d'accord sur un point qui est en effet enseigné à chaque page de la Bible (Ps. xvir, 41 s., Prov. 1, 27 5s.; χν, 29; Is. 1, 11. 45, etc. sans parler de Job). Dieu est toujours prêt à accorder le pardon aux pécheurs$ mais, tant qu'ils ne changent pas de dispositions, on ne conçoit pas qu'il fasse en leur faveur des miracles. Il en est autrement de ceux qui ajoutent à la piélé la pratique de la volonté de Dieu, ce qui était bien l'enseignement et le fait de Jésus (iv, 34; γι, 38). Dans la rigueur des termes la proposition est trop générale (Aug. : adhuc inunclus loquitur), mais elle est limitée par le sujet.
9:32
Le procédé employé n'avait rien de comparable aux interventions chirurgicales. — Pour la forme de ἀνοίγω ef. sur v. 17; ἠνέῳξεν est encore moins soutenu cette fois, mais toujours par B W; cette forme aurait-elle été plus usitée en Égypte? .
9:33
Cette fois le miraculé conclut ouvertement, comme entrainé par son propre sylogisme; il n'emploie pas cependant le mot de Messie, comme pour s'arrêter au point où il se sent irréfutable.
9:34
D’après Tillmann, les Pharisiens tranchent contre l'aveugle la question posée au v. 3; sa cécité serait la suite et Le châtiment de ses péchés. C'est se décider sans raison à leur attribuer une opinion étrangère à la foi d'Israël. Il était écrit de tout homme qu'il naissait dans le péché (cf. Ps. 1, 7; Lvir, 4), mais lui est né tout entier (ὅλος) dans le péché, contaminé même dans son Corps, comme le prouvait sa cécité. On pouvait Soupçonner que la cécité était le résultat physique d’un désordre moral antérieur de ses parents. Mais il était injuste d'en rendre l'aveugle responsable et de lui en faire un reproche : σύ mais celui-là, nous ne savons d’où il est. » 30 L'homme répondit et leur dit : « C'est cela certes qui est étonnant, que vous ne sachiez pas d'où il est, alors qu'il m'a ouvert les yeux. 3 Nous Dieu n’écoute pas les pécheurs, mais si quelqu'un est savons que & Au grand jamais pieux et fait sa volonté, c’est celui-là qu’il écoute. on n’a entendu dire que quelqu'un ait ouvert les yeux d'un aveu- 33Si celui-ci n’était de Dieu, ilne pourrait rien faire. » gle-né. « Tu es né tout entier dans les 34 [ls répondirent et lui dirent Et ils le chassèrent dehors. péchés, et tu nous fais la leçon ? ὁ dehors et l’ayant trouvé, 36 Jésus apprit qu'ils l'avaient chass et ἡμᾶς : lui avec l'impureté corporelle résultat du péché et cause nécessaire justes, qui ont usé leurs yeux dans l'étude d'ignorance; — eux les purs, les de la Loi! — lis le chassèrent du lieu où ils étaient; le texte ne dit rien de plus {avec Schanz contre Bauer, Loisy, Tüll.; ΠῚ Jo. 10 ajoute ἐκ τῆς ἐχκλησίας); ON peut seulement conjecturer que l'excommunication s’ensuivit. — Cette brutalité était plus facile qu’une réponse.
9:35
Sur cette manière providentielle de trouver, cf. τ, 42. 45, et surtout v, 14. Cette fois on dirait bien que Jésus ἃ désiré La rencontre pour récompenser le miraculé de sa confesssion courageuse et le consoler du mauvais traitement qu'il a subi. — ἐξέδαλον... ἔξω ne fait que répéter les termes du v. 34; rien n'indique une application du v. 22, conçu dans des termes différents. — Dans les paroles de Jésus υἱὸν] τοῦ ἀνθρώπου est Ja leçon de ἈΝ ΒΟΥ sak syrsin et très certainement Origène (dans Preuschen, p. 539). Tout le reste est pour τοῦ θεοῦ, avec Tert. Praxeas 22, etc. On peut juger que la première leçon est trop exclusivement égyptienne (dans notre opinion sur l'origine première de D et syrsin), mais ποῦ θεοῦ est plus vraisemblable comme correction que τοῦ ἀν., étant plus aisé οἱ plus noble, allant plus vite au fond de la démonstration proposée par Jésus, tandis que le miraculé semble avoir eu besoin de commencer par une notion imparfaite (Or.) : d'après ses réponses précédentes il suit une marche ascendante et ne sait rien des discussions antérieures. Suivant l'usage de Jo. (,51; πι, 18; vi, 27. 53. 62, Vi, 28) « le fils de l’homme » est un titre que Jésus airne à prendre, lui qui est Fils de Dieu parmi les hommes, mais on n'y voyait ignation expresse du Messie (xu, 34). Il faut donc reconnaître que pas une dés tait point complètement révélatrice. L'aveugle pouvait ne pas il n'avait qu'à demander une explication, ce qu'il fait comprendre très bien 37. on. de p. εἰπεν (TH) et non add. (SV).
9:36
Le plus simple est de penser avec Théodore que l’aveugle a reconnu Jésus à sa voix. D'ailleurs des explications ont pu être échangées ; Jo. raconte toujours sommairement, même quand il fournit des détails. Ayant reconnu et confessé que Jésus est un prophète envoyé de Dieu, il est tout prêt à suivre ses indications, ce que paraît indiquer καί : mais il faut qu’il sache qui est ce fils de l’homme, envers lequel il est décidé à faire un acte de foi, et qu'il considère donc comme un être surnaturel. — Le vague du terme de Fils de l'homme est sans doute la raison qui l’a fait remplacer par « Fils de Dieu », car on ne voit nulle part un acte de foi envers le Fils de l’homme, et en effet il est difficile d'en analyser la valeur théologique précise. Mais elle n'était pas en question : l'acte de foi en Jésus comprend tout. — ἵνα après une question comme 1, 22 : « dis-le moi » sousentendu.
9:37
La vue et l’ouïe sont deux manières de percevoir; la mention de la vue a plus d'intérêt ici : désormais tu peux le voir; ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν à la fin est très saisissant.
9:38
Lorsque l’aveugle dit : « je crois », on peut estimer qu'une lumière plus complèle encore s'est faite dans son esprit et qu’il adora le Fils de Dieu ; Or. καὶ τόγχα 6 μὲν ἀρχόμενος πιστεύει εἰς τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, 6 δὲ διαθαίνων ἀναθαίνει χαὶ ἐπὶ τὸ πιστεῦσαι εἰς τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, Dans Jo. (ιν, 20 58., χα, 20; cf. Apoc. τν, 40; vil, 14, etc.) προσκυνεῖν n'indique pas seulement se prosterner, mais adorer (Schanz, Bauer, Loisy).
9:39
Jésus ἃ dit qu'il n’était pas venu pour juger, mais pour sauver (nr, 17; vit, 45; xn, 47); il n’en est pas moins vrai que c'est ἃ son sujet que se fait le discernement (κρίμα), comme il a été déjà dit en d’autres termes (V, 24; 11, 41 5.); c'est d'ailleurs une idée enregistrée par Le. τι, 34. — Et c'est aussi l'affirmation solennelle de Jésus dans Mt. χι, 25, et Le. x, 21, que des choses cachées aux sages et aux habiles ont été révélées aux petits. Ici on comprend aussitôt quels sont ceux qui voyaient ou croyaient voir et sont devenus aveugles : ce sont les Pharisiens. Les autres sont représentés par l’aveugle devenu voyant, que ce miracle désignait pour en être le type. En effet cet homme, sans instruction, méprisé par les sages, ἃ été élevé peu à peu à la lumière de la foi. C'était aussi le cas des disciples. Cette pensée n'est pas moins en situation durant la vie de Sésus sous la plume de Jo. que dans les synoptiques. ἢ est tout à fait arbitraire de dire avec Loïsy que Jésus vise ici directement les Juifs et les Gentils; tout au plus sont-ils figurés en seconde ligne. Le sens symbolique du miracle est dévoilé sans allusion aux destinées ultérieures de l’évangile; c’est le passage de la cécité à la lumière (cf. Is. χα, 16), se détachant sur le sombre fond de l'aveuglement persistant (cf. Is. vi, 9; Lvr, 40).
9:40
Il se trouve là des Pharisiens, non plus la coterie dirigeante qui ἃ figuré précédemment, mais des curieux comme il pouvait toujours y en avoir autour de Jésus. — μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ n'indique nullement qu'ils soient ou aient été disciples, comme on ne pourrait même pas le conclure de πὶ, 26, mais simplement leur présence (xn, 17; xx, 24. 26). Ils paraissent plutôt embarrassés que malveillants. Jésus a fait deux catégories; ils ne sont pas tentés de se ranger dans la seconde, menacée de cécité : mais ils ne supposent pas (μη) que Jésus osera les mettre eux aussi (καὶ ἡμεῖς) parmi les non-voyants pà βλέποντες (39) qu'ils nomment aveugles, pour accentuer l’énormité de l'hypothèse envers des gens instruits.
9:41
Jésus adopte leur mot : aveugles. même cela vaudrait mieux, dans l'hypothèse d’une ignorance comme celle des gens du peuple, du miraculé par exemple, qui ne demandent qu'à être instruits de la vérité religieuse. Le péché sur ce point ne commence que lorsqu'on prétend n'avoir pas besoin de lumière. λέγετε doit s'entendre de la réflexion des Pharisiens, car elle prouvait bien qu'ils se mettaient parmi les voyants, et à cause de νῦν; mais cette réflexion ils l'ont faite souvent, du moins intérieurement, et c'est ainsi que le péché d’aveuglement volontaire a pénétré en eux et qu'il demeure, parce qu'il détruit la racine même du salut, le désir d'être instruit et corrigé, de recevoir la lumière οἱ d’en user. — Il est sous-entendu qu'il sera effacé s'ils passent dans la catégorie de ceux qui ont le sentiment de leur cécité et désirent la guérir. On ne voit pas un rapprochement étroit entre ectte parole et celle sur le péché irrémissible dans Me. m1, 22-30 et Mt, xu, 22-37, encore moins peut-on écrire : « Noire évangile ne fait que transposer et interpréter les données des synoptiques » (Loïsy, p. 79). χ, 1-21. LE PASTEUR ET LE TROUPEAU. Cette page admirable reçoit encore des interprétations très différentes, soit pour son rapport avec ce qui précède (d’où dépend souvent le sens qu'on lui donne), soit pour sa structure littéraire, soit pour le sens et l’origine des images : nous ne toucherons ce dernier point qu'après l'explication du texte, mais il est nécessaire pour la clarté d'indiquer d'avance quelques opinions et A’y ajouter une vue générale. a) Contexte. On convient que cette péricope se termine au v. 21, le morceau suivant étant complètement distinct. Mais que penser de son rapport avec ce qui précède? — 1] y a incontestablement une soudure extérieure ; c'est le même discours, en ce sens qu'il s'adresse au même public (αὐτοῖς, v. 6), et il se termine par une allusion à la guérison de l'aveugle-né (21). Cependant le chap. commence par : « en vérité », etc. et si ce n’est jamais le début d'un discours dans Jo., du moins cela indique une modification dans le thème. De quelle portée est æelte modification? C'est toute la question. D'après Godet, l'union est si étroite que le ch. x, 4-21 n'est que la reproduclion des faits du chap. précédent sous forme de parabole : intolérance des mauvais pasteurs (1x, 22, 34), charité du bon pasteur pour l’aveugle (35-38). Holtzmann fait une péricope de 1x, 35-x, 21, intitulée « le bon et les mauvais pasteurs ». Maldonat commencerait volontiers une péricope à 1x, 39. De même plus ou moins Schanz, Tillmann, etc. Il en résulte qu'on donne au discours un caractère accentué de polémique contre les Pharisiens; Schanz : loin que l’adhésion à Jésus soit un juste motif d'excommunication (1x, 22), elle conduit au salut; Tillmann : la condamnation contre les Pharisiens est poussée plus loin et motivée; Loisy : c'est un morceau de polé- -mique dirigé contre le culte des fils de Dieu; Knabenbauer : le lien est étroit avec ce qui précède : hoc sermone Jesus demonstrat eos non esse pastores gregis domini, verum corruptores ac deceptores, etc. Mais déjà Cyrille avait compris qu'il n'y a pas en réalité de lien logique entre les énoncés du ch. 1x et ceux-ci, et il devait recourir pour trouver un lien à l'hypothèse que Jésus répondait aux pensées des Pharisiens plutôt qu'à leurs paroles. Saint Thomas a vu très clairement qu’en somme le sujet est nouveau : après la virtus illuminativa, Jésus traiterait de la virtus vivificativa. Loisy : « L'instruction se rattache apparemment à la parole sur les non-voyants et les voyants qui «deviennent aveugles (1x, 24 [lis. 39]); elle ne tient pas pourtant si étroitement à cette introduction qu'elle n’eût pu être aussi bien logée ailleurs » (p. 320). Nous pensons que s'il ÿ a dans la situation antécédente une amorce, l'instruction porte sur un sujet spécial que nous aurons à déterminer. b) La structure littéraire. D'après Godet, ce sont trois paraboles, ou plutôt trois allégories : le berger (4-8), la porte (7-10), le bon berger (41-18). C'est encore l'avis de Tilimann, si ce n'est que la première comparaison se rapproche plus de la parabole synoptique. D'après Loisy, ce qui regarde la porte est une surcharge rédactionnelle comme l'a bien vu Wellhausen (cf. Bauer). D'après Zahn, il y a une allégorie qui n’est pas expliquée par Jésus, et deux nouvelles instructions qui y font suite. Holtzmann n’admet qu’une seule allégorie qui se développe. Calmes : « Jésus retrace d’abord une scène de la vie pastorale (1-6), puis il s'applique à lui-même les deux traits les plus saillants du tableau » (7-10; 41-18). C'est précisément ce qu'il fallait voir. Mais au lieu de classer le tableau dans le genre de l’allégorie, nous montrerons que c'est plutôt une parabole, semblable à celles des synoptiques pour le fond. c) Sujet de l'instruction. Nous avons déjà vu comment la superstition du contexte avait porté à exagérer le caractère polémique de l'instruction, qu'on croit dirigée contre les mauvais pasteurs avant même quelle ne soit le portrait du bon pasteur. L'étude la plus fouillée, celle de Zahn, consiste à tout expliquer en allégorie (1-6). Jésus y donne les caractères du vrai pasteur : il vient par le bon endroit, il est reconnu par le portier, il est en intimité avec ses brebis. C’est bien le cas de Jésus qui est venu par le chemin régulier, le baptême de Jean, l’assistance aux fêtes, la participation à l’enseignement des synagogues; comme on n'avait rien à lui reprocher, on n'a pu lui refuser l'accès auprès des foules, on ἃ dû renoncer aux mesures de rigueur; son influence sur la foule n’est pas douteuse, surtout sur son petit troupeau. Il est donc le vrai pasteur, c'est-à-dire le Christ les voleurs et les brigands sont les princes de la maison d’Hérode et même les Asmonéens, Judas le Galiléen, les Zélotes, etc. L’allégorie est donc apologétique et confirmée par les deux instructions sur la porte et le pasteur légitime et Or, il nous paraît clair que si Le Christ se donne pour le bon pasteur, ce n'est pas précisément pour revendiquer un titre messianique, mais pour expliquer comment il comprend et pratique son rôle : on le jugera à son œuvre qui est la formation d’un nouveau troupeau, composé de l’ancien troupeau et d'autres brebis qui déjà lui appartiennent. Il faut le dire : il fait pressentir la fondation de l'Église, formée par sa mort, dont il sera néanmoins toujours le chef, car il reprendra la vie qu’il aura donnée pour son troupeau. On comprend même très bien (9) qu'il agréera d’autres pasteurs, qui tiendront de lui ;eur investiture. Dans l’ordre historique, cette idée aurait dû venir à la fin : elle précède (7-10 avant 11-16) parce que tel était l’ordre dans le récit parabolique fondé sur la nature des choses. Tout cet enseignement spécial est terminé au v. 16. Les +v. 17 et 48 sont une explication sur le point particulier de la mort volontaire de Jésus. Nous avons donc dans cette page un enseignement de la plus haute importance sur l'œuvre que désus a faite par sa mort volontaire, une instruction prophétique, dont la valeur apolegétique ne se dégagera que plus tard, et où la polémique ne sert qu'à rehausser par l'opposition des traits la figure et le rôle du Pasteur. Yient ensuite, comme tout le monde en convient, une note sur l'impression causée par teus ces discours et [6 fait qui y ἃ donné lies (49-241).
9:1
ỷ. 1. PRETERIENS JESUS, VIDIT HOMINEM CÆCUM ANATIVITATE. Comme JESUS passoit, il vid un homme aveugle dès sa naissance. JESUS s’étant fortı du Temple, alla apparemment passer la nuit au mont des Oliviers, selon sa coutume. Le lendemain, qui étoit un jour du Sabbat, il vint dans la ville; & passant dans la ruë, il y trouva un aveugle dès sa naissance; qui étoit assis dans un coin, & demandoit l’aumône aux passans.
9:2
ỷ. 2. RABBI, QUIS PECCAVIT, HIC, AUT PARENTES EJUS? Maître, est-ce le péché de cet homme, ou le péché de ceux qui l’ont mis au monde, qui est cause qu’il est né aveugle? Demande qui peut avoir donné lieu à quelques-uns de croire que les Apôtres étoient dans l’opinion de la préexistence des ames, ou de la métempsycose. Il est impossible que cet homme soit frappé de Dieu d’une manière aussi terrible, sans de justes causes. Or il n’a pû mériter ce châtiment par les péchez commis depuis sa naissance, puisqu’il l’a apporté au monde; il faut donc qu’il s’en soit rendu digne par quelque faute commise avant sa naissance; ou du moins que le Seigneur, qui Châtie les péchez des pères sur les enfans, jusqu’à la troisième, & quatrième génération, ait fait tomber sur celui-ci la punition du péché de ses parens. Voilà, disent ils, le raisonnement des Apôtres. Il est visible qu’ils supposent que l’homme peut faire avant sa naissance quelque péché, dont il souffre la peine durant sa vie. Philon reconnoît la même chose dans plus d’un endroit. Il dit que l’air est rempli d’ames de deux efpeces. Les unes descendent dans les corps ; & les autres en ont un très-grand éloignement. De celle qui se joignent aux corps, les unes remplies d’idées sublimes d’une excellente Philosophie, s’occupent sans cesse de la mort du corps, & ménent une vie toute céleste. Les autres accablées par le poids de la chair, négligent l’étude de la sagesse, & se livrent au gré des passions, & de la fortune. Il rebat souvent ce sentiment, qu’il a tiré de Platon. Joseph dit que les Pharisiens tiennent à peu près la même chose. Ils disent que les ames font immortelles, & demeurent éternellement : Qu’elles viennent de la région de l’air le plus subtil, s’engager dans les corps, comme dans des prisons, aufquels elles demeurent comme collées, y étant attirées par une inclination naturelle, & un amour auquel elles ne résistent pas. Il dit ailleurs que les mêmes Pharisiens croyent que les ames des méchans étant séparées du corps, sont enfermées dans des prisons éternelles, où elles sont tourmentées, & d’où elles ne sortent jamais ; au lieu que celles des gens de bien reviennent aisément sur la terre pour animer d’autres corps, après la mort des premiers qu’elles ont animés. Les Rabbins croyent aussi une efpece de métèmpfycofe ; & cette opinion est répanduë depuis très-long-tems dans tout l’Orient. Origènes cite un Livre apocryphe des Hébreux, dans lequel Jacob parle ainsi : Je suis un Ange de Dieu, & un des premiers Esprits. Les hommes m’appellent Jacob ; mais mon vrai nom, qui est celui que Dieu m’a donné, est Israël. Plusieurs Docteurs Juifs croyent que les ames d’Adam, d’Abraham, de Phinées ont animé successivement plusieurs grands Hommes de leur nation. Il n’est donc nullement étrange que les Apôtres ayent raisonné comme ils semblent raisonner ici, sur l’incommodité de cet aveugle, & qu’ils ayent crû que c’étoit lui, qui par quelque péché secret commis avant la naissance, s’étoit attiré cette disgrâce. Les Rabbins sont persuadez aussi que les pechez, & sur tout l’incontinence des peres, & des meres, sont souvent funestes à leurs enfans; & que les incommoditez de ceux-ci sont pour l’ordinaire des fuittes des excés de ceux-là : Que c’est principalement sur la crainte de ces incommoditez pour les enfans, que sont fondées les Loix de Moyse, qui défendent au mari sous peine de mort, de s’approcher de la femme durant l’accident qui arrive à son sexe. Les Apôtres étoient nourris dans ces préjugés ; & l’experience avoit souvent fait voir que ces terreurs n’étoient pas sans fondement.
9:3
ỷ. 3. NEQUE HIC PECCAVIT, NEQUE PARENTES EJUS. Ce n’est point qu’il ait péché, ni ceux qui l’ont mis au monde ; mais c’est afin que les œuvres de la puissance de Dieu éclatent en lui. JESUS-CHRIST ne nie pas que les parens de cet aveugle n’ayent peché ; mais il dit feulement que ce n’est pas leur péché qui est la cause de l’incommodité de leur fils. Il ne nie pas non plus que le péché Originel de cet homme n’eût été une cause suffisante pour justifier la conduite de Dieu, qui avoit permis qu’il nâquit aveugle. Ils ne demandoient pas quelle étoit la cause générale de ce mal ; il s’agissoit de savoir quelle en étoit la cause particulière. Le Sauveur élève l’esprit, & l’attention de ses Apôtres à une cause superieure, qui est la Providence, & la Sagesse de Dieu, qui vouloit procurer sa propre gloire aux yeux des hommes, par le miracle de la guérison de l’aveugle-né. Ce n’est pas à dire que Dieu ait voulu directement le malheur de cet homme, dans la vue de procurer sa propre gloire; mais seulement qu’il permit que cet homme n’aquît aveugle, & qu’ensuite il se servit de cette occasion, pour faire éclater sa puissance, & sa miséricorde. Afin que n’est point ici une particule causale; elle marque seulement l’événement qui suivit.
9:4
ỷ. 4. ME OPORTET OPERARI OPERA EJUS QUI MISIT ME, DONEC DIES EST. Il faut que je fasse les œuvres de celui qui m’a envoyé, pendant qu’il est jour; c’est-à-dire, pendant que je suis en vie, & que je parois en ce monde; car après ma mort, & ma résurrection, il ne fera plus tems de faire des miracles, & de donner aux hommes des preuves de ma Divinité, & de ma mission. Comme ce jour-là étoit un jour de Sabbat, & que cet aveugle ne pensoit point à lui demander la guérison, le Sauveur prépare l’esprit de ses Apôtres par ce préambule: Il faut me hâter d’achever mon ouvrage; comme un manœuvre qui voit la nuit s’approcher. JESUS-CHRIST n’avoit plus que six mois à vivre. Son ouvrage étoit la prédication, & les actions miraculeuses dont il devoit l’accompagner. Quoiqu’il soit aujourd’hui jour du Sabbat, & que je prévoie que mes ennemis en prendront sujet de scandale, je dois me hâter de rendre la santé à cet homme, encore qu’il ne me la demande pas. Je fais que la gloire de Dieu en recevra un notable accroissement, & que cela avancera mon ouvrage.
9:5
ỷ. 5. QUANDIU SUM IN MUNDO. Tant que je suis dans le monde, j’suis la lumière du monde. A l’occasion du jour, & de la nuit, dont il a parlé au verset précédent, il dit ici qu’il est la lumière du monde. Je suis comme le Soleil qui éclaire le monde. Il est de mon devoir de porter la lumière par tout, & de ne manquer aucune occasion d’éclairer les hommes. C’est pour cela que mon Pere m’a envoyé. Cet homme est dans les ténèbres, je vais lui rendre la vûë, & lui faire voir la lumière.
9:6
ỷ. 6. HEC CUM DIXISSET EXPUIT IN TERRAM. Après avoir dit cela, il cracha à terre, &c. Le Sauveur a soin pour l’ordinaire de donner à ses miracles tous les degrés de certitude dont ils sont capables, afin que non seulement ceux qui étoient présens, mais aussi ceux qui devoient venir dans la suite, ne pussent pas les contester, niles révoquer en doute. Plus on en examine les circonstances, & les particularitez, plus leur certitude est évidente. Voici un aveugle, & un aveugle de naïssance, & par conséquent que la médecine ne pouvoit guérir. De son propre mouvement, il entreprend de lui rendre la vûë; il crache à terre, il fait un peu de bouë, il en frotte les yeux de l’aveugle, chose qui auroit dû l’aveugler, s’il ne l’eût pas été. Il l’envoye à la fontaine de Siloë pour y laver ses yeux. Il y va, il revient clair-voyant.
9:7
ỷ. 7. VADE, ET LAVA IN NATATORIA SILOE. Allez vous laver dans la piscine de Siloë. La fontaine de Siloë étoit au pied des murs de Jérusalem, du côté de l’orient. On recüeilloit ses eaux dans un grand réservoir pour la commodité de la ville. C’est à ce réservoir que JESUS-CHRIST envoye l’aveugle. Siloë signifie envoyé, ou une fontaine qui fort de sa source avec impétuosité. JESUS-CHRIST étoit envoyé au monde de la part de son Pere Eternel, pour éclairer tous les hommes, figurez par cet aveugle né. La piscine de Siloé étoit un symbole du Baptême, qui nous sanctifie, & nous rend Chrétiens. Les Turcs encore aujourd’hui ont la fontaine de Siloé en vénération ; ils croyent que ses eaux sont propres à fouler les maux des yeux.
9:8
ỷ. 8. VICINI, ET QUI VIDERANT EUM PRIUS. Ses voisins, & ceux qui l’avoient vû auparavant. Le miracle ne fut ni fait en cachette, ni connu de peu de gens, ni crû légèrement. Ceux qui connoissoient cet aveugle furent partagez sur son sujet, non pour savoir s’il voyoit, car la chose étoit notoire, mais pour savoir si c’étoit lui qui étoit connu dans le quartier, parce qu’il y demandoit publiquement l’aumône, dans un certain endroit, où il demeuroit assis. Le Grec imprimé, & la plûpart des Manuscrits lisent simplement: Ses voisins, & ceux qui l’avoient vû auparavant, parce qu’il étoit aveugle, disoient, &c. Mais la Vulgate, le Syriaque, le Copte, l’Armenien, le Gotique, l’Arabe, l’Ethiopien, & un grand nombre de bons Manuscrits Grecs, & la plûpart des Peres Grecs, & Latins lisent: Qu’il étoit aveugle, & qu’il demandoit l’aumône, &c.
9:11
ỷ. 11. ILLE HOMO QUI DICITUR JESUS. Cet homme qu’on appelle JESUS. Cet aveugle n’avoit pas vû JESUS-CHRIST, mais il avoit appris ce qui s’étoit fait lorsqu’il avoit été guéri. Il n’étoit encore éclairé qu’à demi des yeux de l’ame, puisqu’il ne connoissoit encore JESUS-CHRIST que comme un homme de bien, & un Prophète. ỷ. 17.
9:12
ỷ. 12. UBI EST ILLE? Où est-il? Leur dessein étoit de le salir, & de l’amener devant le Sanhédrin, pour le juger comme violateur du Sabbat.
9:14
ỷ. 14. ERAT SABBATUM, QUANDO LUTUM FECIT C’étoit le jour du Sabbat que JESUS avoit fait cette bouë. Les Rabbins enseignent que la salive d’un homme à jeûn est bonne contre les maux des yeux, & qu’il n’est pas permis d’en mettre à ce dessein sur les yeux un jour de Sabbat. Mais il y a toute forte d’apparence que cela n’a été inventé que pour rendre odieuse l’action du Sauveur, comme contraire au repos du Sabbat. Faire de la bouë avec de la salive, est une manière de paîtrir, & par conséquent une action contraire au Sabbat, suivant l’idée des Juifs.
9:16
ỷ. 16. NON EST HIC HOMO A DEO QUI SABBATUM NON CUSTODIT. Cet homme n’est point envoyé de Dieu, puisqu’il ne garde pas le Sabbat. Ce raisonnement est plausible. Un homme qui viole visiblement la Loi de Dieu, ne peut être rempli de son esprit, ni envoyé de sa part. Mais il y a trois choses à dire à cela. 1°. JESUS-CHRIST comme Dieu, pouvoit ne pas observer le Sabbat; cette Loi étoit pour les hommes, & non pour lui. 2°. Il pouvoit même, en qualité d’homme, violer le Sabbat, quand il s’agissoit de procurer la gloire de Dieu, ou le salut de l’âme, ou la santé du prochain, comme JESUS-CHRIST lui-même l’a prouvé ailleurs. 3°. Enfin il étoit faux que le Sauveur violât le Sabbat; car il n’avoit certainement fait aucune action servile. Toutefois les Pharisiens raisonnent sur ce faux principe, comme sur un fait certain. ALIIDICEBANT : QUOMODO POTEST HOMO PECCATOR, &c. D’autres disoient : Comment un méchant homme pourroit-il faire de tels prodiges ? Quelques Pharisiens, & quelques Prêtres fidèles, & attachez à JESUS-CHRIST, comme Nicodème. Ces gens semblent raisonner sur un faux principe, qu’est que les pécheurs ne peuvent faire des miracles, ou du moins de grands miracles ; des miracles semblables à ceux de JESUS-CHRIST : car il est certain que les méchans en font quelquefois, qui paroissent aussi grands que ceux des gens de bien. Les Magiciens de Pharaon imitèrent presque tous les miracles que fit Moyse ; & ce Législateur dit que les faux Prophètes peuvent quelquefois faire des prodiges, & prédire l’avenir. Mais il est impossible que Dieu autorise par une fuite de vrais miracles, un séducteur, un faux Prophète, un méchant. Il est impossible qu’il permette que des gens qui cherchent sincèrement la vérité, soient trompez jusqu’à la fin par des imposteurs, qui corrompent la religion, & ne cherchent qu’à sédüire. Enfin il est impossible qu’un méchant vive comme a vécu JESUS-CHRIST, qu’il enseigne comme il a enseigné, qu’il fasse des miracles comme il en a faits, par son autorité, par sa parole ; sans préparation, sans vanité, sans ostentation, sans effort. En ce sens, il est vrai qu’un pécheur ne peut pas faire de tels prodiges.
9:17
ỷ. 17. TU, QUID DICIS DE ILLO? Quedis-tu de cet homme? C’est un Prophète. Ils tendent des piéges à ce pauvre homme, pour avoir occasion de le maltraitter. Mais lui sans s’é-mouvoir, leur declare que JESUS-CHRIST est un Prophète, un homme de bien, un homme envoyé de Dieu; car les Hébreux donnoient le nom de Prophètes à tous ceux que Dieu honoroit de ses faveurs extraordinaires. Et c’étoit parmi eux une maxime, qu’un Prophète pouvoit dispenser de la Loi du Sabbat.
9:21
ỷ. 21. ÆTATEM HABET. Interrogez-le; il a de l’âge. Ou plûtôt : Il a l’âge convenable pour être oüi en jugement, & pour rendre témoignage de sa propre conduite. Cet âge chez les Hébreux étoit fixé à treize ans.
9:22
ỷ. 22. UT EXTRA SYNAGOGAM FIERET. Ils avoient résolu que quiconque reconnoitroit que JESUS est le Christ, seroit chassé de la Synagogue. On croit qu’il faut l’entendre de la moindre excommunication, appellée nidui, ou séparation. Elle consistoit simplement à être séparé de l’assemblée. Nous avons parlé des diverses sortes d’excommunications usitées chez les Juifs, dans la Dissertation sur les Supplices des Hébreux, à la tête du Deuteronomie, p. LVIII. & dans le Commentaire sur S. Matthieu, Chap. XVIII. 18.
9:24
ỷ. 24. DA GLORIAM DEO. Rends gloire à Dieu. Manière de parler, dont les juges se servoient pour exiger le ferment & pour faire souvenir celui à qui l’on parloit, de dire la pure vérité, comme dans la présence de Dieu. Ces Pharisiens veulent intimider cet homme, pour l’obliger à dire quelque chose contre JESUS-CHRIST. Nous savons que cet homme est pécheur; avouë la même chose.
9:25
ỷ. 25. SI PECCATOR EST, NES-CIO. Si c’est un pécheur, je n’en sçai rien. Je ne prétens pas contester avec vous. Puisque vous dites que vous savez qu’il est pécheur, je n’examine point les raisons que vous avez de le croire: mais je fais parfaitement que c’est lui qui m’a guéri; & je ne conçois point que ce soit là une preuve qu’il soit un méchant homme. Il ne faut pas prendre ce terme nescio, comme s’il doutoit que JESUS-CHRIST fut un homme de bien. Il avoit confessé trop hautement, ỷ. 17. qu’il étoit un Prophète, & il continuë trop constamment à le défendre, pour croire qu’il ait changé de sentiment sur son sujet.
9:27
ỷ. 27. NUMQUID ET VOS VULTIS, &c. Est-ce que vous voulez aussi devenir ses Disciples? C’est un espèce de reproche qu’il fait aux Pharisiens de leur acharnement à vouloir à quelque prix que ce soit, trouver du mal dans la conduite de JESUS CHRIST. Cette curiosité, ces empressemens que vous avez à favor ce qui s’est passé dans ma guérison, viennent-ils de l’envie de devenir ses Disciples, comme je le suis?
9:29
ỷ. 29. NOS SCIMUS QUIA MOYSI LOCUTUS EST DEUS. Nous savons que le Seigneur a parlé à Moyse : mais pour celui-ci, nous ne savons d’où il est ; ou plutôt, nous ne savons d’où il vient, ni qui l’a envoyé ; si c’est un homme suscité de Dieu, ou si c’est un sédufteur ; car ils ne savoient que trop qu’il étoit venu de Galilée, & qu’il avoit long-tems prêché en ce pays-là. Dieu nous préserve de quitter Moyse, dont la mission est certaine, pour nous attacher à un inconnu ; comme s’ils comptoient pour rien les témoignages que saint Jean-Baptiste lui avoit rendus, & celui de ses miracles, & de sa Doctrine toute céleste. Mais quand la passion s’est emparée d’un cœur, on n’en doit plus espérer d’équité & de bonnes raisons.
9:30
ỷ. 30. IN HOC MIRABILE EST. C’est ce qui est étonnant, que vous ne sachiez d’où il vient, & qu’il m’ait ouvert les yeux. Est-il possible que des gens qui sont chargez de discerner les vrais, & les faux Prophètes, & qui se vantent de distinguer ce qui vient du bon, ou du mauvais Esprit, ne puissent pas prendre leur parti dans une matière, qui paroît si aisée ? Un homme d’une vie irréprochable, d’une Doctrine toute divine, fait sur moi un miracle reconnu de toute la ville, & que vous-mêmes ne sauriez contester ; & après tout cela, vous doutez encore s’il est envoyé de Dieu ?
9:31
ỷ. 31. SCIMUS QUIA PECCATORES DEUS NON AUDIT. Nous savons que Dieu n’exauce pas les pécheurs. Cet homme parle suivant l’opinion du peuple, & comme un Disciple encore peu instruit. L’Ecriture s’exprime souvent d’une manière qui lui paroît favorable : Si j’ai gardé l’iniquité dans mon cœur, le Seigneur ne m’exaucera point, dit le Psaumiste. Lorsque vous étendrez vos mains vers moi, je détournerai mes yeux de vous, dit le Seigneur dans Isaïe. Lorsque vous multiplierez vos prières, je ne les exaucerai point, parce que vos mains sont remplies de sang. Et ailleurs : Ses oreilles sont appesanties, & il ne vous écoute point, parce que vos iniquitez forment un mur de séparation entre Dieu, & vous. On peut même assurer que le pécheur, tandis qu’il demeure dans l’affection au péché, dans la haine de la justice, & de la vérité ; tandis qu’il ne sent aucun mouvement de charité, ni aucune impression de l’Esprit saint, qui commence au moins à le remuer, & à l’exciter, & qu’il ne crie au Seigneur que par un faiblissement de frayeur, par un mouvement naturel d’amour propre, Dieu ne l’exauce point ; parce qu’il n’écoute pas les prières que son Esprit n’a pas formées dans le cœur, & aufquelles il n’a aucune part : Et en ce sens, il est vrai, comme le dit ici l’aveugle-né, que le Seigneur n’exauce pas les pécheurs. On peut ajouter que quand il les exauceroit, ce n’est jamais au point de leur faire faire des miracles, & de leur accorder des faveurs extraordinaires, & de manifester leur sainteté aux hommes, par des endroits si éclattans, & si singuliers. Si dans quelques rencontres Dieu permet que des méchans, des séducteurs, des faux Prophètes fassent des miracles, & que par-là il semble les exaucer; il les exauce dans sa colère, & leur donne sâché, ce qu’il leur auroit refusé dans sa misericorde. Metuendum ne quod posset non dare propitius, concedat iratus, dit saint Augustin. Il exauce même quelquefois les Démons; comme lorsqu’il permet à Satan de tenter Job, & qu’il accorde aux Démons d’entrer dans le corps des pourceaux. Ce n’est pas que les prières de ces mauvais Esprits lui soient agréables; non plus que celles des Hébreux murmurateurs, à qui il donne de la chair, comme ils lui en avoient demandé; ni qu’il approuve la résolution des Israélites, aufquels il permet de choisir un Roi, comme ils le souhaitoient. C’est pour nous apprendre, dit saint Augustin, à ne nous pas affliger, lorsqu’il nous refuse quelque chose que nous désirons mal; & à ne nous pas flatter, lorsqu’il nous accorde ce que nous ne devrions pas lui demander, si nous connoissions nos véritables interets. Ce n’est pas un grand bien d’être exaucé suivant sa volonté: mais ç’en est un d’être exaucé de la manière qui nous est plus utile : Non habecatis pro magno exaudiri ad voluntatem, dit le même Pere; habete pro magno exaudiri ad utilitatem. Ce n’est donc pas être écouté dans la colère de Dieu, que l’aveuglené appelle ici être exaucé de Dieu : Deus peccatores non audit. Il l’entend des prières que Dieu écoute dans sa misericorde, & dont il nous accorde l’effet pour sa gloire, & pour nôtre Satisfaction : Exaudiri ad utilitatem, non ad voluntatem. L’Aveugle-né supposa encore ici deux autres choses, qui ne font nullement vraies : La première, que JESUS-CHRIST n’étoit qu’un simple homme de bien, ou un Prophète ; & la seconde, qu’il ne faisoit pas ses miracles par sa propre vertu ; mais par le moyen des prières qu’il employoit ou en public, ou en secret, pour obtenir de Dieu la grace de faire des actions miraculeuses. Il ne reconnoit la Divinité du Sauveur, & la puissance absolue, & infinie, que depuis qu’il eut avec lui l’entretien que nous voyons ici, versets 35. 36. 37. 38. Les Donatistes abusoient de ce passage de l’aveugle-né, pour soutenir que les Sacremens donnez par les méchans, ne conféroient pas la grace, & étoient nuls. Ils raisonnoient sur ce faux principe, que les Sacremens tirent leurs effets de la disposition, ou du mérite de celui qui les confère ; au lieu que l’Eglise enseigne que JESUS-CHRIST Auteur, & Instituteur des Sacremens, en est aussi le ministre invisible, & que c’est lui, & non le Ministre, qui leur donne la vertu, & l’efficace. Si le Ministre prie, il prie au nom de l’Eglise ; s’il baptise, c’est au nom de JESUS-CHRIST, & de l’Eglise. Ses prières de lui comme particulier, peuvent être mauvaises : mais celles de l’Eglise, dont il est Ministre, sont toujours exaucées.
9:32
ỷ. 32. A SÆCULO NON EST AUDITUM. On n’a jamais oüi dire que personne ait ouvert les yeux d’un aveugle-né. Ni Moyse, ni les Prophètes n’ont jamais rien fait de semblable. Comment donc celui qui m’a rendu la vue, ne feroit-il pas un vrai Prophète ? Est-il croyable que Dieu favorise un méchant, & qu’il lui donne un pouvoir, qu’il n’a jamais accordé à ses plus grand serviteurs? Ce raisonnement est fort plausible, & fort populaire : mais dans la rigueur, il n’est pas concluant. La grandeur, & la multitude des miracles ne décident pas toûjours du mérite de celui qui les fait. On concluëroit par ce principe, que quelques-uns des Disciples de JESUS-CHRIST ont eu plus de mérite que leur Maître, puisqu’ils ont fait un plus grand nombre de prodiges.
9:34
ỷ. 34. IN PECCATIS NATUS ES TOTUS. Tu n’es que péché dès le ventre de ta mere; & tu veux nous enseigner? Lorf-qu’ils virent qu’ils ne pouvoient rien gagner sur l’esprit de cet homme ni par ménaces, ni par caresses, ile le chassèrent honteusement de leur assemblée, & l’excommuniérent : Ejecerunt eum foras. Ils lui reprochent son ancienne incommodité, comme si elle eût été une preuve de la honte, & du crime de sa naissance. Ils supposent qu’il est né criminel, & que son aveuglement étoit une preuve de quelque péché caché qu’il auroit commis avant sa naissance. C’est la même erreur où, comme nous l’avons déja remarqué, quelques-uns ont crû qu’étoient les Apôtres, avant que JESUS-CHRIST les eût instruits sur cela.
9:35
ỷ. 35. AUDIVIT JESUS. Jesus apprit. Il le savoit déja par sa science divine, & infinie : mais il veut bien agir comme s’il l’apprenoit à la manière des autres hommes. On lui dit le traitement qui avoit été fait à cet homme.
TU CREDIS IN FILIUM DEI ? Croyez-vous au Fils de Dieu ? Il ne lui dit pas d’abord : Croyez-vous en moi ? Il veut le conduire par degréz, & insensiblement à la foi. Cet homme croyoit déja que JESUS-CHRIST étoit un Prophéte. Le Sauveur lui découvre ici sa Divinité, & sa qualité de Messie: Credis in Filium Dei?
9:36
ỷ. 36. QUIS EST, DOMINE? Qui est-il, Seigneur? Quelques-uns (1) croyent que l’aveugle-né ne doutoit pas que JESUS-CHRIST ne fut le Fils de Dieu : mais il ne savoit si celui qui lui parloit, étoit JESUS-CHRIST ; car il ne l’avoit jamais vû. Mais il est bien plus probable qu’il savoit qu’il parloit à JESUS de Nazareth, qu’il ne considéroit encore que comme un Prophète. Il lui demande : Où est-il le Fils de Dieu ? Qui est-il, afin que j’aille lui rendre mes adorations ?
9:37
ỷ. 37. ET VIDISTI EUM, &c. Vous l’avez vû. C’est moi-même. Vous avez éprouvé les effets de sa puissance ; c’est lui qui vous a rendu la vûë : Vidisti eum.
9:38
ỷ. 38. CREDO, DOMINE, &c. Je crois, Seigneur. Je vous reconnois pour le Messie, & pour le Fils de Dieu ; & en même-tems il l’adore, il lui rend le culte souverain, qui n’est dû qu’à Dieu seul. Jusqu’alors il le reconnoissoit pour un saint homme, pour un Prophète : mais il ne l’adore que quand il apprend qu’il est le Fils de Dieu : Vis videre qualem credis ? & procidens adoravit eum, dit saint Augustin sur cet endroit.
9:39
ỷ. 39. IN JUDICIUM EGO IN HUNC MUNDUM VENI. Je suis venu en ce monde pour y exercer un jugement. Et quel est ce jugement ? Afin que ceux qui ne voyent point, voyent, & que ceux qui voyent, deviennent aveugles. Voilà ce que je suis venu faire en ce monde. Les Payens qui sont dans les ténèbres, recevront la lumière ; les Juifs qui sont dans la lumière, tomberont dans les ténèbres. Les Prêtres, les Pharisiens, & les Docteurs de la Loi, qui sont instruits dans la Loi, feront aveugles; & les plus simples d’entre le peuple, qui ont le cœur droit, & l’ame moins corrompue, feront éclairez de la lumière de la foi, & de la vérité. Le jugement se prend ici, & pour la condamnation que fait JESUS-CHRIST des Juifs présumptueux, & endurcis, & pour la grace qu’il accorde aux Gentils, qui doivent entrer dans l’Eglise ; ou pour la manifestation des desseins de Dieu sur les hommes, dont les uns demeurent dans l’infidélité, & les autres reçoivent la lumière de la foi, par un jugement sécret, & impénétrable de la Justice, & de la Sagesse de Dieu.. C’est ainsi que le saint Vieillard Siméon disoit que JESUS-CHRIST étoit venu pour la chute, & pour la résurrection de plusieurs ; & que Jérémie est envoyé pour détruire, & pour rebâtir; pour arracher, & pour planter ; & qu’Isaïe reçoit ordre d’aveugler, & d’endurcir les Juifs. Ni ces Prophètes, ni le Sauveur en tant qu’homme n’ont rien fait de tout cela par eux-mêmes, & directement. Le Saint Esprit a voulu simplement montrer par ces paroles ce qui devoit arriver ; il n’a pas prétendu nous en découvrir la cause. On ne doit la chercher que dans la malice du cœur humain, & dans la profondeur des jugemens de Dieu.
9:41
ỷ. 41. SI CECI ESTETIS, NON HABERETIS PECCATUM. Si vous étiez aveugles, vous n’auriez point de péché. Si vous étiez assez humbles pour reconnoître vôtre ignorance, & vôtre foiblesse, & pour en rechercher sérieusement le remede, vous feriez bien-tôt exemts de péché; vous trouveriez aîsément la guérison de cet aveuglement, qui fait vôtre malheur, & vôtre péché. Mais comme vous êtes tous remplis de présomption, vous demeurez dans vôtre aveuglement, & dans vôtre crime. Il appelle leur aveuglement, leur péché; parce qu’en effet étant volontaire, il étoit criminel, & inexcusable.
9:1
CIECHI - Guarigione del c. nato (Io. 9, 1 segg.).
… 5-13; Lc. 7, 1-10), del paralitico di Cafarnao (Mt. 9, 1-8), dei due ciechi (ibid. 9, 27-31), del sordomuto (Mc. 7, 31-37), del cieco di Gerico (ibid. 10, 46-52), del paralitico di Gerusalemme (Io. 5, 1 sgg.), dell'idropico (Lc. 14, 1-4), del cieco nato (Io. 9, 1 sgg.).
Inoltre, se è vero che Gesù si adattava al modo di parlare dei suoi contemporanei trattando di fenomeni fisici o di questioni secondarie, ciò non avveniva però in questioni di carattere religioso; anzi, su questo punto intendeva correggere le idee false (cf. Io. 9, 1-3). Ora l'influsso dei demoni sull'umanità costituiva un punto importante della sua missione religiosa; Gesù ne parlava di propria iniziativa (Lc. 11, 21 sg.; 22, 31; Io. 12, 31; 14, …
… occhi del cieco di Bethsaida (Mc. 8, 23) e sulla donna rattrappita (Lc. 13, 11-15); tocca il lebbroso (Mt. 8, 2-3; Mc. 1, 40-42; Lc. 5, 12-13), i ciechi (Mt. 9, 2-3; 20, 29-34); ma ridona anche la vista unendo gli occhi con terra inumidita con saliva (Io. 9, 1-38); l'emorroissa è risanata al semplice contatto con le vesti del Signore; la sorella di Lazzaro si avvicina supplice al divino Maestro (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, tavv. 125, 5; 126; l'artista, …
9:3
Nell'ascetica è di grande valore l'accettazione generosa della s. « Beati quelli che piangono, perché essi saranno consolati » (Mt. 5, 5). La s. entra nei disegni salvifici di Dio, non solo come elemento di espiazione, ma per manifestare le opere di Dio (Io. 9, 3) e che tutti i mali sono indirizzati a un bene. …
9:4
… piscina preannunzia il potere di G. di dare la vita (Io. 5, 19-30); la risurrezione di Lazzaro simboleggia il fatto che G. è la risurrezione e la vita per quelli che credono in lui (ibid. 11, 25); la guarigione del cieco nato, che G. è la luce del mondo (ibid. 9, 4-5). Anche quando non è notato esplicitamente, c'è in tutti i miracoli il senso di annunzi del Regno, segni che la salvezza dell'uomo si sta operando, nell'anima e nel corpo: G. salva …
… Così hanno senso le esortazioni di Gesù alla vigilanza, attività, perseveranza (Mt. 24, 42-51; 25, 13; Mc. 13, 33; Lc. 12, 35-40), poiché dopo la « notte » nessuno può più lavorare (cf. Io. 9,4). Lo stesso pensiero e le stesse esortazioni si trovano negli Apostoli (cf. Gal. 6, 9-10; I Cor. 9, 24 sgg.; II Cor. 5, 1-10; I Thess. 5, 2-3; I Pt. 1, 3-8; II Pt. 3,10; Iac. 4, 13-15; …
9:5
PRIMATO DI SAN PIETRO E DEL ROMANO PONTEFICE
A ciò non si può obiettare che il Nuovo Testamento non conosce che un unico fondamento della Chiesa (Io. 2, 19; I Cor. 3, 11), poiché Gesù, che si era dichiarato luce del mondo (Io. 8, 12; 9, 5; 12, 46), designò gli Apostoli come luce del mondo (Mt. 5, 14), né si può opporre il rimprovero di Cristo agli Apostoli che discutevano sul p. nel Regno dei cieli (Mt. 20, 25-28), …
9:7
… osato esporre le insegne romane, e sottrarre al tesoro del Tempio le somme necessarie alla costruzione dell'acquedotto, che dalle sorgenti di Ethan conduceva l'acqua a G. Dei luoghi ricordati nel Vangelo sono sicuramente conosciuti la piscina di Siloc (Io. 9, 7) e quella di Bezetha (v.; Io. 5, 1). Assicurati da antica tradizione sono l'orto del Gethsemani e il Cenacolo; ma incerto resta ancora il luogo del processo religioso di Gesù al palazzo …
9:14
II. CONDIZIONI DEL M. DELL'U. — 1. Da parte dell'operante. — Questi deve essere: a) in statu viae, perché «al sopraggiungere della notte (la morte), nessuno può più operare» (Io. 9, 14); occorre compiere il bene «mentre abbiamo tempo» (Gal. 6, 10); b) in statu gratiae (v. il Concilio Tridentino e la condanna degli errori di Bajo, sopra citati), deve cioè essere …
risci, contro i quali insorge spesso Gesù (cf. Mt. 12, 1 sgg.; Lc. 13, 10 sgg.; 14, 1-6; Io. 5, 8 sgg.; 9, 14 sgg., ecc.), il quale dichiara che il s. è per gli uomini, non questi schiavi di quello (Mc. 2, 27). Il culmine della meticolosità è raggiunto nella Mishāh, che contiene un intero trattato …
9:16
Cristo risplende in tutta la sua vita (L. de Grandmaison, Jésus-Christ, II, 18e ed., Parigi 1931, pp. 79-121); non trova detrattori, tranne che negli scribi e nei farisei (i quali l'accusarono di golosità [Mt. 11, 19], di illegalità, particolarmente di violazione del sabato [Io. 5, 18; 9, 16] e di bestemmia [Mc. 2, 7; Mt. 26, 27; Io. 5, 18]; anzi arrivarono persino a chiamarlo indemoniato [Io. 7, 20; 8, 48-49; 10, 20; cf. Mt. 12, 24]) e in alcuni neo-protestanti liberali …
9:22
… e l'esclusione dalla società dei fedeli (Esd. 10, 8), si veniva formando dal tempo di Esdra il concetto di scomunica sinagogale; per cui nel Nuovo Testamento appaiono già coniati ἀποσυνάγωγος e ἀφορίζειν « essere espulso o separato dalla sinagoga » (Io. 9, 22; 12, 42; 16, 42; Lc. 6, 22). Nel Talmud si distinguono due forme di tale scomunica: il niddūj implicante l'esclusione temporanea (30, 60, 90 giorni) dalle sacre adunanze e forse anche …
1. CENNI STORICI. - 1. La censura in sé. - Non è stato dimostrato che essa tragga la sua origine dalla s. irrogata dalla sinagoga (Jo. 9, 22); nè sembra esatto affermare che il passo di s. Matteo (18, 17) sostanzialmente sancisca una s., perchè ivi non si parla di cristiano punito
… I suoi costruttori erano considerati benefattori di tutto il gruppo (cf. Lc. 7, 4), mentre l'allontanamento di un ebreo da questo luogo di preghiera comune era ritenuto un grave castigo (cf. Io. 9, 22; 12, 42; 16, 2).
9:39
… di ipocrisia (Mt. 23). Essi, che si sentono buoni e santi, non possono tollerare che questo profeta faccia loro sentire che sono lontani dalla vera salvezza, e che per trovarla hanno bisogno di lui. Questa è la cecità o induramento di cui parlano G. (Io. 9, 39-41) e il suo Evangelista (ibid. 12, 37-43): il non riconoscere che hanno bisogno di lui. Così la missione di G., che ha per scopo di illuminare, ha per effetto, causa la cattiva disposizione, …
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · Douay-Rheims originale (Reims 1582), trascrizione EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Pubblico dominio.