“If this man were not of God, he could do nothing.”
If this man were not of God, he could do nothing — the conclusion is stark: 'If this man were not of God' (ei mē ein houtos para tou Theou), he could not do such a thing. The works prove the origin: works of this magnitude and kind can only come from God. The man's testimony, beginning in personal experience ('I see'), has developed into theological argument: his cure demonstrates Jesus's relation to God.
Church Fathers on John 9:33
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 you, but conceal their object under the presence of religion: Give God the praise, i.e. confess that this man has had nothing to do with the work.
Deny that you have received the benefit. This is not to give God the glory, but rather to blaspheme Him.
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 is a sinner or no, I know not.
Read all 18 entries in the readerCatena Aurea · St. Thomas Aquinas, tr. J. H. Newman · public domain
COMMUNITY REFLECTIONS
Publish a reflection on this verse
No reflections on this verse yet. Be the first to write one!