|
Objection 1: It would seem that the witnesses of the transfiguration
were unfittingly chosen. For everyone is a better witness of things
that he knows. But at the time of Christ's transfiguration no one
but the angels had as yet any knowledge from experience of the glory to
come. Therefore the witnesses of the transfiguration should have been
angels rather than men.
Objection 2: Further, truth, not fiction, is becoming in a
witness of the truth. Now, Moses and Elias were there, not
really, but only in appearance; for a gloss on Lk. 9:30,
"They were Moses and Elias," says: "It must be observed that
Moses and Elias were there neither in body nor in soul"; but that
those bodies were formed "of some available matter. It is also
credible that this was the result of the angelic ministries, through
the angels impersonating them." Therefore it seems that they were
unsuitable witnesses.
Objection 3: Further, it is said (Acts 10:43) that "all
the prophets give testimony" to Christ. Therefore not only Moses
and Elias, but also all the prophets, should have been present as
witnesses.
Objection 4: Further, Christ's glory is promised as a reward to
all the faithful (2 Cor. 3:18; Phil. 3:21), in whom He
wished by His transfiguration to enkindle a desire of that glory.
Therefore He should have taken not only Peter, James, and John,
but all His disciples, to be witnesses of His transfiguration.
On the contrary is the authority of the Gospel.
I answer that, Christ wished to be transfigured in order to show men
His glory, and to arouse men to a desire of it, as stated above
(Article 1). Now men are brought to the glory of eternal beatitude
by Christ---not only those who lived after Him, but also those who
preceded Him; therefore, when He was approaching His Passion,
both "the multitude that followed" and that "which went before,
cried saying: 'Hosanna,'" as related Mt. 21:9, beseeching
Him, as it were, to save them. Consequently it was fitting that
witnesses should be present from among those who preceded
Him---namely, Moses and Elias---and from those who followed
after Him---namely, Peter, James, and John---that "in the
mouth of two or three witnesses" this word might stand.
Reply to Objection 1: By His transfiguration Christ manifested to
His disciples the glory of His body, which belongs to men only. It
was therefore fitting that He should choose men and not angels as
witnesses.
Reply to Objection 2: This gloss is said to be taken from a book
entitled On the Marvels of Holy Scripture. It is not an authentic
work, but is wrongly ascribed to St. Augustine; consequently we
need not stand by it. For Jerome says on Mt. 17:3: "Observe
that when the Scribes and Pharisees asked for a sign from heaven, He
refused to give one; whereas here in order to increase the apostles'
faith, He gives a sign from heaven, Elias coming down thence,
whither he had ascended, and Moses arising from the nether world."
This is not to be understood as though the soul of Moses was reunited
to his body, but that his soul appeared through some assumed body,
just as the angels do. But Elias appeared in his own body, not that
he was brought down from the empyrean heaven, but from some place on
high whither he was taken up in the fiery chariot.
Reply to Objection 3: As Chrysostom says on Mt. 17:3:
"Moses and Elias are brought forward for many reasons." And,
first of all, "because the multitude said He was Elias or Jeremias
or one of the prophets, He brings the leaders of the prophets with
Him; that hereby at least they might see the difference between the
servants and their Lord." Another reason was " . . . that Moses
gave the Law . . . while Elias . . . was jealous for the glory
of God." Therefore by appearing together with Christ, they show
how falsely the Jews "accused Him of transgressing the Law, and of
blasphemously appropriating to Himself the glory of God." A third
reason was "to show that He has power of death and life, and that He
is the judge of the dead and the living; by bringing with Him Moses
who had died, and Elias who still lived." A fourth reason was
because, as Luke says (9:31), "they spoke" with Him "of
His decease that He should accomplish in Jerusalem," i.e. of His
Passion and death. Therefore, "in order to strengthen the hearts of
His disciples with a view to this," He sets before them those who
had exposed themselves to death for God's sake: since Moses braved
death in opposing Pharaoh, and Elias in opposing Achab. A fifth
reason was that "He wished His disciples to imitate the meekness of
Moses and the zeal of Elias." Hilary adds a sixth
reason---namely, in order to signify that He had been foretold by
the Law, which Moses gave them, and by the prophets, of whom Elias
was the principal.
Reply to Objection 4: Lofty mysteries should not be immediately
explained to everyone, but should be handed down through superiors to
others in their proper turn. Consequently, as Chrysostom says (on
Mt. 17:3), "He took these three as being superior to the
rest." For "Peter excelled in the love" he bore to Christ and in
the power bestowed on him; John in the privilege of Christ's love
for him on account of his virginity, and, again, on account of his
being privileged to be an Evangelist; James on account of the
privilege of martyrdom. Nevertheless He did not wish them to tell
others what they had seen before His Resurrection; "lest," as
Jerome says on Mt. 17:19, "such a wonderful thing should seem
incredible to them; and lest, after hearing of so great glory, they
should be scandalized at the Cross" that followed; or, again,
"lest [the Cross] should be entirely hindered by the people"
[Bede, Hom. xviii; Catena Aurea]; and "in order that they
might then be witnesses of spiritual things when they should be filled
with the Holy Ghost" [Hilary, in Matth. xvii].
|
|