Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 9:8-23

"The neighbors therefore, and they that saw him aforetime, that he was a beggar, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? Others said, It is he: others said, No, but he is like him. He said, I am [he]. They said therefore unto him, How then were thine eyes opened? He answered, The man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to Siloam, and wash: so I went away and washed, and I received sight. And they said unto him, Where is he? He saith, I know not. They bring to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind. Now it was the sabbath on the day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. Again therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he received his sight. And he said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and I see. Some therefore of the Pharisees said, This man is not from God, because he keepeth not the sabbath. But others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such signs? And there was division among them. They say therefore unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, in that he opened thine eyes? And he said, He is a prophet. The Jews therefore 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, and asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? How then doth he now see? His parents answered and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind: but how he now seeth, we know not; or who opened his eyes, we know not: ask him; he is of age; he shall speak for himself. These things said his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man should confess him [to be] Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him." — John 9:8-23 (ASV)

1. After describing the miraculous healing of the blind man, the Evangelist tells of the miracle being examined. The miracle is examined in three stages:

   • First, by the people.
   • Second, by the Pharisees and rulers: they brought him who had been blind to the Pharisees.
   • Third, on account of his confession, the blind man is instructed and commended by Christ: Jesus heard that they had cast him out (John 9:35).

   Regarding the first stage, the Evangelist mentions three things:

   • First, an inquiry about the person who received his sight.
   • Second, an inquiry about the restoration itself: therefore they said to him.
   • Third, an inquiry about the one who restored his sight: and they said to him: where is he?

   Regarding the inquiry about the person, he does three things:

   • First, a question is raised about the one who received his sight.
   • Second, the different opinions about this are given.
   • Third, the question is settled.

2. The question is asked by the people. He says, therefore the neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar said: is this not he who sat and begged?

   Here, two things are to be considered. One is that due to the greatness of the miracle, it was considered incredible. So we read: from the beginning of the world it has not been heard that any man has opened the eyes of one born blind (John 9:32). This fulfills for them what is said: I am doing a work in your days that you would not believe if told (Habakkuk 1:5).

   Second, we should note the wonderful compassion of God, because our Lord performs miracles not only for the powerful but also for outcasts, since he healed, with great pity, those who begged. This shows that he who came for our salvation rejected no one because of their poverty: has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom? (James 2:5). Thus they explicitly say, is this not he who sat and begged? This is like saying, “He is an outcast and does not deserve to be cured.” But the opposite is said: the giants who were born there . . . God did not choose them .

3. The opinions of the people are presented when he says, some said: this is he, because they had often seen him begging, and later hurrying through the town when he went to the pool with the clay on his eyes. Thus they could not deny that it was he. But others held the contrary opinion, so they said, no, but he is like him. The reason for this, as Augustine says, is that the man’s appearance changed when he regained his sight, for nothing is so characteristic as the expression a person gets from his eyes: a sensible man is known by his face .

4. The question is settled by the man himself, because he, the formerly blind man, said, I am he, the one who used to beg. His voice was grateful, so that he would not be guilty of ingratitude. Since he could not be ungrateful for such a great favor and was unable to show any other sign of gratitude than to constantly declare that he had been cured by Christ, he said, I am he, the one who was blind and begged; and now I see. Bless the God of heaven, give glory to him in the sight of all that live, for he has shown his mercy to you .

5. Then, they said therefore to him: how were your eyes opened? Here we see the investigation of the act, which was the restoration of the man’s sight.

   • First, we have the question asked by the Jews.
   • Second, the answer of the man who was blind: he answered: that man who is called Jesus made clay and anointed my eyes.

6. They continue: if you are the blind man who used to beg, then tell us, how were your eyes opened? This question came from their vain curiosity because neither the one who was cured nor we ourselves know how it was done: do not meddle in what is beyond your tasks .

7. The man’s answer was remarkable; he says, that man who is called Jesus made clay and anointed my eyes, and said to me: go to the pool of Siloam and wash. In his answer he makes several points.

   1. He points out the person who gave him his sight, saying that man who is called Jesus. He was right in calling him a man; he knew that he was a man, and he was a true man: born in the likeness of man (Philippians 2:7). For although he had not seen Jesus, because he had left while still blind to go to Siloam, he knew him from listening and from the conversations of others about him.

   2. He tells what was done, saying, he made clay and anointed my eyes. Here he shows that he is truthful, not asserting what is not certain. For our Lord had made clay from spittle, but the man did not know this; yet through his sense of touch he recognized the clay which was made and placed over his eyes. So he did not say, “He made clay from spittle,” but only, made clay and anointed my eyes. That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands . . . we proclaim also to you (1 John 1:1).

   3. He mentions the command, saying, and said to me, go to the pool of Siloam and wash. This was also necessary for us, for if we wish to be cleansed from our blindness of heart, it is necessary that we be spiritually washed: wash yourselves; make yourselves clean (Isaiah 1:16).

   4. He shows his obedience, saying, and I went, and I washed. He is saying in effect, “Because I heard this command and desired to see, I obeyed.” And it is no wonder, because we read: for the commandment, that is, when obeyed, is a lamp and the teaching a light (Proverbs 6:23).

   5. He mentions the good effect, saying, and I see. It was fitting that he be enlightened after obeying, because as it says: it is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him (Acts 5:32). Notice the perseverance of this man. As Augustine says, “Look at him! He became a preacher of grace. See him! He preaches and testifies to the Jews. This blind man testified, and the hearts of the wicked were vexed, because they did not have the light in their hearts which he had in his face.”

8. Next, we have the inquiry about the person who restored his sight: and they said to him: where is he? He said: I do not know. First, there is the question asked by the Jews, where is he? They asked this maliciously, as they were thinking of killing him, for they had already formed a conspiracy against Christ: but now you seek to kill me (John 8:40).

   Second, we have the man’s answer, I do not know. As Augustine says, from these words it is clear that what was accomplished in him physically represents what is accomplished spiritually at different stages. For at first, the blind man is anointed, and then sees after his washing. The anointing represents the beginning of his physical health, and the washing leads to complete health. In particular, an anointing produces a catechumen, and the washing—that is, baptism—perfects and enlightens him. Thus we have a representation of the difference in faith found at different stages. For when he says, I do not know, this represents the imperfect faith of catechumens: you adore that which we do know (John 4:22). This can also signify our faith: for our knowledge is imperfect and our prophesying is imperfect (1 Corinthians 13:9).

9. Then when he says, they brought him who had been blind to the Pharisees, we see his examination by the Pharisees. This examination has two parts:

   • First, they question the man born blind.
   • Second, they question his parents: the Jews then did not believe.

   In the first part, he does three things:

   • First, we see the person to be examined.
   • Second, he mentions the intention of the examiners.
   • Third, we have the interrogation itself.

10. The one to be examined, the formerly blind man, is led to the Pharisees by the people. They, that is, the crowd, brought him who had been blind to the Pharisees. They did this because the crowd was trying to find out from him where Jesus was, so that if they found him they could bring him to the Pharisees and accuse him of breaking the Sabbath. So because they did not have Christ, they took the man, so that by questioning him more roughly they might force him by fear to make up something false about Christ: I will go to the great, and will speak to them; for they know the way of the Lord, the law of their God. But they all alike had broken the yoke, they had burst the bonds (Jeremiah 5:5).

11. The Evangelist shows that their intention was perverse, saying, it was the Sabbath when Jesus made the clay and opened his eyes. He says this to show their evil intention and the reason why they sought Jesus: namely, to find a charge against him and detract from his miracle by his supposed violation of the law. Nevertheless, it should be said that the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:8).

12. His examination is conducted by the Pharisees, since it is said, again therefore the Pharisees asked him how he had received his sight. They question him about two things:

    • First, about what was done.
    • Second, about the person who did it: some of the Pharisees said.

13. The Evangelist does two things regarding the first point: first, he presents their interrogation; second, the man’s answer.

    They ask him about the sign he received, again therefore the Pharisees asked him how he had received his sight, not in order to learn, but to find a reason to accuse him of lying.

    p>The man answers them, not contradicting what he said before, nor deviating from the truth. He, that is, the man, said to them, he put clay on my eyes. We must, first, admire the perseverance of this man. Although it may not seem such a great thing to have spoken the truth when he, without danger, was questioned by the crowd, he showed remarkable perseverance when in greater danger before the Pharisees he neither denied what he had said before nor changed his account: I will also speak of your testimonies before kings, and will not be put to shame (Psalms 119:46). Second, we should admire his skill, for it is good practice to first relate an event in detail and with all its circumstances, and then if it has to be repeated, to speak more concisely. So here, he does not repeat the name of the one who spoke to him, nor that he said to me: go and wash. But without hesitation he relays only the essential, and says, he put clay on my eyes.

14. Next, an inquiry is made about the one who restored the man’s sight: some of the Pharisees said: this man is not of God . . . But others said: how is a man who is a sinner able to do such miracles?

    • First, the different opinions of the Pharisees concerning Christ are given.
    • Second, the opinion of the man is sought: therefore they said to the blind man again.

    Regarding the first point, he does three things:

    • First, he presents the opinion of those who were blaspheming Christ.
    • Then, the opinion of those who were commending him.
    • Third, he concludes with the fact that they were arguing and disagreeing among themselves.

15. We should note, concerning the first point, that those who act maliciously against someone keep silent if they see anything good in his work. They reveal the evil, if any is seen, even turning what is good into evil, as it is written: beware of a scoundrel, for he devises evil, lest he give you a lasting blemish . This is what they are doing here: for they do not mention what seemed good—that is, the restoration of the man’s sight—but stress what they can against Christ, that is, his breaking of the Sabbath. Thus some of the Pharisees said, that is, those who were malicious and corrupt, this man is not from God, who does not keep the Sabbath. But Christ did keep the Sabbath, for when the Lord forbade work on the Sabbath he had in mind servile work, which is a sin: whoever commits sin is the slave of sin (John 8:34). Therefore, he who performs works of sin on the Sabbath breaks the Sabbath. So Christ, who was without sin, kept the Sabbath, rather than they.

16. The opinion of those commending him is presented when he reports them as saying, how is a man who is a sinner able to do such miracles? These others had some faith due to the signs that Christ worked, but were still weak and imperfect. It was out of fear of the Pharisees and the elders that they asked with hesitation, how is a man who is a sinner able to do such miracles? We read below that many of the chief men also believed in him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him (John 12:42). They should have shown how our Lord had not broken the Sabbath and have appropriately replied in defense of Jesus.

17. The difference of opinion among them is mentioned when he says, and there was division among them; and this division was also found in the people. This was a sign of their destruction: their heart is false; now they must bear their guilt (Hosea 10:2); every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste (Matthew 12:25).

18. Next, at what do you say about him who opened your eyes? they ask the man for his opinion. First we have the question the Pharisees asked; second, the man’s answer.

    They question him, saying, what do you say about him? According to Chrysostom, this question was not asked by those who were blaspheming Christ, but by those favorably disposed. This is clear from the way they questioned him, for they call his attention to the gift he received, saying, what do you say about him who opened your eyes? If the others had been doing the questioning, they would not have said this, but would rather recall that Christ broke the Sabbath. But these remind him of the benefit that he received to make him grateful and lead him to testify to Christ. But according to Augustine, this question was asked by Christ’s enemies, who wanted to discredit this man who constantly professed the truth, or they were trying to get him to change his opinion out of fear, or at least were attempting to exclude him from the synagogue.

    The man’s answer remained the same: and he said: he is a prophet. Although up to this time, as though unanointed in heart, he did not yet profess that Christ was the Son of God, he firmly expressed what he thought and did not lie. For our Lord said of himself: a prophet is not without honor except in his own country (Matthew 13:57; Mark 6:4); the Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet . . . him will you hear (Deuteronomy 18:15).

19. Next, at the Jews then did not believe, we see his parents questioned. This section has four parts:

    • First, we have the reason why they were questioned.
    • Second, the question itself: and they asked.
    • Third, their answer: his parents answered them.
    • Fourth, the reason for this answer: these things his parents said.

20. The reason for this second questioning was the unbelief of the Pharisees. He says, the Jews, that is, the Pharisees, did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of him who received his sight. They did this in an attempt to nullify the miracle of Christ and to preserve their own glory: how are you able to believe who receive glory from one another? (John 5:44).

21. The Pharisees now question his parents. Here they ask about three things. First, about their son, saying is this your son? Which is like saying, “Surely this is not he?”

    Second, about his blindness; and so they add, who you say was born blind. They did not say, “who at one time was blind,” but who you say, as if to say, “You made this up. Surely it is not true?” But what father would lie in such a way about his son? Yet they were trying to make him say he did.

    Third, they ask how he had obtained his sight, how does he now see? This was like saying, “Either it is false that he now sees, or that he was once blind; but obviously the truth is that he sees; therefore it was false to say that he had been blind.” The powerful man will test you through much talking, and while he smiles he will be examining you .

22. Then, the answer of his parents is given: his parents answered them and said: we know that this is our son and that he was born blind. The Pharisees had asked about three things; they answer firmly about two and, in regard to the third, they refer them to their son. First, they admit the first point, namely, that he is their son; so they say, we know that this is our son. They also admit the second when they add, and that he was born blind. This shows that the truth always conquers what is false, as we read in the apocryphal Ezra: truth conquers all (Ezra 3:13). Yet as to the third question, how their son sees, they answer, but how he now sees we do not know. They reply, second, about the person who gave him his sight, nor do we know who opened his eyes. They answer this way because the question was directed against the one who gave sight to their son, and so they refer this to their son, saying, ask him, he is of age, he speaks for himself. This was like saying, “He was born blind, not mute; thus he can speak for himself in this matter.” The testimony about this miracle was from several sources so as to make it more believable: the parents told what they knew, and their son confirmed that he had been cured.

23. The reason for their answer is given when he says, his parents said these things because they feared the Jews; for they were still imperfect and did not dare do what our Lord says: do not fear those who kill the body (Matthew 10:28). The reason for their fear was for the Jews had already agreed among themselves that, if any man should confess him to be the Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. And, these things have I spoken to you, that you may not be scandalized (John 16:1). As Augustine says, “It was no longer an evil to be cast out of the synagogue, for the ones they rejected, Christ welcomed.”