|
Objection 1: It would seem that in Christ there was not the gift of
prophecy. For prophecy implies a certain obscure and imperfect
knowledge, according to Num. 12:6: "If there be among you a
prophet of the Lord, I will appear to him in a vision, or I will
speak to him in a dream." But Christ had full and unveiled
knowledge, much more than Moses, of whom it is subjoined that
"plainly and not by riddles and figures doth he see God" (Num.
6:8). Therefore we ought not to admit prophecy in Christ.
Objection 2: Further, as faith has to do with what is not seen,
and hope with what is not possessed, so prophecy has to do with what is
not present, but distant; for a prophet means, as it were, a teller
of far-off things. But in Christ there could be neither faith nor
hope, as was said above (Articles 3,4). Hence prophecy also
ought not to be admitted in Christ.
Objection 3: Further, a prophet is in an inferior order to an
angel; hence Moses, who was the greatest of the prophets, as was
said above (SS, Question 174, Article 4) is said (Acts
7:38) to have spoken with an angel in the desert. But Christ was
"made lower than the angels," not as to the knowledge of His soul,
but only as regards the sufferings of His body, as is shown Heb.
2:9. Therefore it seems that Christ was not a prophet.
On the contrary, It is written of Him (Dt. 18:15): "Thy
God will raise up to thee a prophet of thy nation and of thy
brethren," and He says of Himself (Mt. 13:57; Jn.
4:44): "A prophet is not without honor, save in his own
country."
I answer that, A prophet means, as it were, a teller or seer of
far-off things, inasmuch as he knows and announces what things are far
from men's senses, as Augustine says (Contra Faust. xvi,
18). Now we must bear in mind that no one can be called a prophet
for knowing and announcing what is distant from others, with whom he is
not. And this is clear in regard to place and time. For if anyone
living in France were to know and announce to others living in France
what things were transpiring in Syria, it would be prophetical, as
Eliseus told Giezi (4 Kgs. 5:26) how the man had leaped down
from his chariot to meet him. But if anyone living in Syria were to
announce what things were there, it would not be prophetical. And the
same appears in regard to time. For it was prophetical of Isaias to
announce that Cyrus, King of the Persians, would rebuild the temple
of God, as is clear from Is. 44:28. But it was not
prophetical of Esdras to write it, in whose time it took place.
Hence if God or angels, or even the blessed, know and announce what
is beyond our knowing, this does not pertain to prophecy, since they
nowise touch our state. Now Christ before His passion touched our
state, inasmuch as He was not merely a "comprehensor," but a
"wayfarer." Hence it was prophetical in Him to know and announce
what was beyond the knowledge of other "wayfarers": and for this
reason He is called a prophet.
Reply to Objection 1: These words do not prove that enigmatical
knowledge, viz. by dream and vision, belongs to the nature of
prophecy; but the comparison is drawn between other prophets, who saw
Divine things in dreams and visions, and Moses, who saw God plainly
and not by riddles, and who yet is called a prophet, according to
Dt. 24:10: "And there arose no more a prophet in Israel like
unto Moses." Nevertheless it may be said that although Christ had
full and unveiled knowledge as regards the intellective part, yet in
the imaginative part He had certain similitudes, in which Divine
things could be viewed, inasmuch as He was not only a
"comprehensor," but a "wayfarer."
Reply to Objection 2: Faith regards such things as are unseen by
him who believes; and hope, too, is of such things as are not
possessed by the one who hopes; but prophecy is of such things as are
beyond the sense of men, with whom the prophet dwells and converses in
this state of life. And hence faith and hope are repugnant to the
perfection of Christ's beatitude; but prophecy is not.
Reply to Objection 3: Angels, being "comprehensors," are above
prophets, who are merely "wayfarers"; but not above Christ, Who
was both a "comprehensor" and a "wayfarer."
|
|