T.J. WalsheApologeticsChapter 25

Christ's Testimony is Confirmed by His Miracles — Part II: The Resurrection and Continuing Miracles

Art. 2.—The Resurrection of Christ.

I.—The Resurrection of Christ is recorded not only in the Gospels but in the Acts of the Apostles, and the statement is made in the epistles of St. Paul that the Resurrection preached by the Apostles is the strongest motive of credibility.

Rationalists and Modernists have suggested at least four theories to explain away the Resurrection—the theories of fraud, exaggeration, hallucination and spiritual vision.

1° With the Deists of the Eighteenth Century, Reimarus resuscitated the explanation of the empty tomb given by Jewish priests and promulgated by Celsus, namely, that the Apostles had removed the body of Christ secretly, and were conscious liars regarding the Resurrection they proclaimed.

2° Some Rationalists, e.g., Weizsäcker (Das Apostolische Zeitalter) and Martineau (The Seat of Authority) maintained that the Apostles declared only in a general way that they had seen the Lord, meaning that they believed in His immortality. Disciples exaggerated the statement, and finally believed that Christ really rose from the dead.

3° Other Rationalists suggest that the Apostles suffered from hallucination (Cf. Strauss, Renan, Harnack, Réville, Meyer, etc.).

4° Not a few Rationalists, such as Keim, Ewald, Schenkel, Stapfer, etc., assert that Christ really appeared to the Apostles, but only spiritually. Amongst Modernists E. Le Roy holds a somewhat similar view. After death the soul of Christ continued to function; therefore, according to pragmatic principles we may act as if Christ had arisen bodily (Dogme et Critique). This opinion, based on pragmatism, has been condemned (D. 2026), as well as those of Loisy: (1) that the Resurrection was not a fact of the historical but of the liturgical order, and therefore not demonstrable, and (2) that the original belief in the Resurrection was not belief in the fact itself, but in the immortality of Christ (D. 2036 sq.).

II.—The importance of the Resurrection of Christ according to His own declarations and those of the Apostles.

(A) Christ Himself chose this sign as the seal of His miracles and as an irrefragable argument of His Divine mission.

(a) When the Pharisees said: “Master, we would see a sign from thee,” Our Lord answered: “The Son of Man shall be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights” (Matt. xii. 40; Luke xi. 29). Again, speaking to Pharisees, Christ said: “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up” (John ii. 19; Mark xiv. 58).

(b) To His disciples Christ predicted His Resurrection at least four times:

(1) After the Confession of Peter (Matt. xvi. 21; Mark viii. 31; Luke ix. 22).

(2) After His Transfiguration (Matt. xvii. 22; Mark ix. 30).

(3) After His triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt. xx. 19; Mark x. 34; Luke xviii. 33).

(4) After the Last Supper (Matt. xxvi. 32; Mark xiv. 28).

(c) There is further testimony of the prophecy from the blasphemy uttered against Him on the cross: “Thou that destroyest the temple of God and in three days buildest it up again, save thyself: coming down from the cross” (Matt. xxvi. 61; Mark xv. 29, 30). After His death the chief priests and Pharisees went to Pilate saying: “Sir, we have remembered that that seducer said, while he was yet alive: after three days I will rise again. Command therefore the sepulchre to be guarded until the third day: lest perhaps his disciples come and steal him away and say to the people, he is risen from the dead: and the last error shall be worse than the first” (Matt. xxvii. 63, 64).

(B) The Apostles appealed to the Resurrection to confirm the truth of their preaching.

Mathias was chosen because he could testify to the Resurrection (Acts i. 22). Peter in his first sermon appealed to this miracle (Acts ii. 32-36). Paul, speaking to the Athenians, made the same appeal (Acts xvii. 31). Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “Christ … rose again the third day … he was seen by Cephas: and after that by the eleven: then he was seen by more than five hundred brethren at once… . After that He was seen by James, then by all the Apostles, and last of all he was seen by me also as by one born out of due time” (1 Cor. xv. 3-8). “If Christ be not risen then is our preaching vain and your faith is also vain … and you are yet in your sins” (1 Cor. xv. 14-17). St. Paul argues that faith in the risen Christ is the root of justification (Rom. iv. 25) and if He has not risen, He has not removed sin. Chrysostom, Theophilus and others use the same argument.

In this last declaration of St. Paul the importance of the Resurrection of Christ appears, and its intimate connexion with the principal mysteries of the Christian Faith. “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. vi. 23). Therefore He who invisibly takes away the sins of the world should visibly take away death, the effect of sin, so that we may have a most certain sign of His victory over sin and of our Redemption. Under this high aspect, the Resurrection of Christ is a mystery belonging intrinsically to Christianity and an object of Faith, although under its exterior aspect it is a fact of history.

Thus when Rationalists object that the Resurrection is impossible because it is without sufficient reason, St. Paul shows the supreme reason of this fundamental reality. Thus also when Modernists object that a miracle is a sign too extrinsic to Religion and cannot serve to lead men to interior faith, St. Paul shows that the Resurrection is intrinsic to Religion and deeply and wonderfully connected with other mysteries. Thus finally whilst other adversaries assert that no true certitude can be founded on the appearances of Christ, it is clear that the Apostles possessed absolute certitude of this great mystery (Acts iii. 15; iv. 32-33), worked miracles in confirmation thereof, and finally shed their blood in witness of its truth.

III.—Christ died.

Jews and enemies of Christianity never doubted the reality of the death of Christ. It was only in the Nineteenth Century that certain Rationalists (Paulus, Schleiermacher, Hase, Herder), suggested that Christ did not really die when crucified, but recovered and afterwards shewed Himself to His disciples. Huxley, in England, adopted this hypothesis. Other Rationalists reject the suggestion as physically and morally impossible. A. Réville (Jésus de Nazareth) writes: “This theory of Paulus, which had its period of vogue in the last century, is only a tissue of material and moral improbabilities.”

1° The four Evangelists as well as the writers of the Epistles, in fact all Christians have regarded the death of Christ as indubitable, and as the cause of the Redemption of mankind. Very many have shed their blood in testimony of their belief in this truth.

2° Many were ocular witnesses of the death: the Centurion, several soldiers, St. John, the Blessed Virgin, the pious women. Pilate received testimony of the death of Christ from the Centurion (Mark xv. 39, 44, 45). When the soldiers saw that He was dead, they opened His side with a lance and “immediately there came out blood and water” (John xix. 34). Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus “took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury” (John xix. 40).

3° The survival of Christ was physically impossible. The scourging, crowning with thorns, carrying of the cross, three hours’ agony thereon, the opening of His side—such sufferings made survival impossible. Moreover the sepulchre was guarded.

4° The survival of Christ was morally impossible. Such an hypothesis necessitates either deliberate deception on the part of Christ, or that He allowed His followers to be deceived and permitted a lie to be put forward as the surest argument of the truth of the Christian Faith.

IV.—It is historically certain that Christ arose from the dead.

1° The testimony of St. Paul in his Epistles is anterior to that of the Gospels. In the First Epistle to the Corinthians, written about A.D. 57-58, St. Paul records apparitions of Christ, of which he had already informed the Corinthians some years earlier (c. A.D. 52 or 53): “I delivered unto you first of all which I also received: how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures: and that he was buried and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: and that he was seen by Cephas, and after that by the eleven: then was he seen by more than five hundred brethren at once: of whom many remain until this present and some are fallen asleep: after that he was seen by James, then by all the Apostles, and last of all he was seen also by me as by one born out of due time” (1 Cor. xv. 3-8).

St. Paul does not intend to chronicle all the apparitions. He confines himself chiefly to those which the Apostles beheld. The last appearance was that vouchsafed to St. Paul on his journey to Damascus. On that occasion he saw Christ “last of all,” a statement which would be false, if he meant merely an appearance in vision, as such an appearance in vision was seen by Ananias later (Acts ix. 10). Neither does St. Paul mean to write only of the immortality of Christ. He speaks again and again of the resurrection of the body, which he puts forward as the exemplar of our future corporeal resurrection (Cf. 1 Thessal. i. 10; iv. 13).

2° Testimony of the Evangelists.

SS. Matthew and John were witnesses of several apparitions. St. Mark records the preaching of St. Peter and therefore his testimony. St. Luke probably received his information regarding the Passion and Resurrection of Christ from Joanna, wife of Chusa, the steward of Herod (Luke viii. 3; xxiii. 7-12; xxiv. 10).

(A) All affirm that the tomb was found empty. All relate that Joseph of Arimathea went to Pilate and asked for the body of Christ, that Joseph wrapped the body in a clean linen cloth and having placed the body within the sepulchre rolled a great stone to the door (Cf. Matt. xxvii. 57-60; Mark xv. 42-46; Luke xxiii. 50-53; John xix. 38).

With permission of Pilate, the Pharisees sealed the monument and placed guards (Matt. xxvii. 66). When the women and disciples came in the early morning after the Sabbath, they found the stone rolled away and the tomb empty. An angel announced that Christ had arisen (Cf. Matt. xxviii. 1 sq.; Mark xvi. 1 sq.; Luke xxiv. 1 sq.; John xx. 1 sq.).

A. Réville (Jésus de Nazareth) suggests that the chief priests had taken the body of Christ, lest it should be venerated by the disciples. Stapfer, another Rationalist, replies (La Mort et la Résurrection de Jésus-Christ): “Nothing can be cited in support of this hypothesis; not a fact or text or allusion, however fugitive, gives it support. It is supremely unlikely, for it would have been singularly stupid that the high priest should himself furnish the Apostles with a pretext for believing in the Resurrection.” Loisy’s hypothesis that the body of Christ was thrown into a ditch is without any foundation, and contrary to the united testimonies of St. Peter and St. Paul and of the Evangelists (Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 4; Romans vi. 4; Coloss. ii. 12; Acts ii. 24-32).

(B) All the Evangelists together with St. Paul agree that Christ appeared to the eleven Apostles.

Twelve apparitions are recorded:

To Mary Magdalene near the sepulchre (Mark xvi. 9; John xx. 11-18).
To women returning from sepulchre (Matt. xxviii. 9, 10).
To Simon Peter (Luke xxiv. 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5).
To two disciples going to Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 15-35).
To Apostles, Thomas being absent (Mark xvi. 14; Luke xxiv. 36-43; John xx. 19-23).
To Apostles, Thomas being present (John xx. 24 sq.; 1 Cor. xv. 5).
To five Apostles and two disciples at Sea of Galilee (John xxi. 1-24).
To the eleven Apostles who had gone to Galilee (Matt. xxviii. 16 sq.).
To more than five hundred brethren (1 Cor. xv. 6).
To James (1 Cor. xv. 7).
To the eleven Apostles in Jerusalem and Bethania on the day of the Ascension (Mark xvi. 19; Luke xxiv. 50-52; Acts i. 1-12).
To St. Paul near Damascus (Acts ix. 3 sq.; 1 Cor. xv. 8).

Moreover it is stated that to His Apostles Christ “shewed himself alive after His passion, by many proofs, for forty days appearing to them, and speaking of the Kingdom of God” (Acts i. 3).

An objection may be raised. Christ foretold that “the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.”

Answer: The prediction was made in this form only once (Matt. xii. 40), whereas Christ foretold on three recorded occasions that He would rise the third day (Matt. xvi. 21; xvii. 22; xx. 19; xxvii. 63; Mark viii. 31; ix. 30; x. 34; Luke ix. 22; xviii. 33; 1 Cor. xv. 4).

The expression “three days and three nights” is explained by likeness to the sign of Jonas the prophet. As St. Augustine and St. Thomas note, the part is placed for the whole by synecdoche. It is a modus loquendi because of the similitude between figure and reality.

3° The Evangelists did not suffer from hallucination.

Strauss and Renan supported this suggestion. The Apostles, writes Renan, could not believe that Christ had been conquered by His enemies. They examined the Scriptures and found prophecies of the Resurrection. Vehemently desiring the triumph of Christ, their imaginations were affected, and they believed in the Resurrection. Meyer wrote in a similar strain (Die Auferstehung Christi).

(A) It is historically certain that Apostles and disciples did not expect the Resurrection.

Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea placed the body in the sepulchre. Mary Magdalene and the pious women came with spices to anoint His dead body. They were amazed when they saw the empty tomb. When the women announced the Resurrection, their words seemed to the Apostles as “idle tales and they did not believe them” (Luke xxiv. 11). The disciples, who journeyed to Emmaus, had lost all hope. The incredulity of Thomas is well known.

(B) From a psychological point of view there was no room for hallucination.¹

(a) There was no exaltation of the imagination, no vehement desire or fear.

(b) They saw, heard and touched the risen Christ.

(d) Hallucination is corrected by reflexion; whereas the Apostles were convinced that they had seen the Lord bodily, and gladly suffered martyrdom to testify the sincerity of their conviction.

(e) Is it possible that the spread of Christian Faith and morality has been based upon an hallucination?

(f) What explanation can be given of the empty tomb?

4° Christ appeared to the Apostles not merely spiritually but corporally.

When Christ appeared to the Eleven on the Resurrection day, the Apostles “being troubled and affrighted supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them: why are you troubled, and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? See my hands and feet that it is I myself: handle and see for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me to have. And when he had said this he shewed them his hands and feet. But while they believed not and wondered for joy, he said: have you anything here to eat? And they offered him a piece of broiled fish and a honeycomb. And when he had eaten before them, taking the remains he gave to them” (Luke xxiv. 37-43). Thus not only Thomas but the Apostles touched Our Lord’s body. Moreover, if His body had not been re-animated, the sepulchre would not have been empty, and St. Paul’s argument concerning the future resurrection of bodies, based on the corporal resurrection of Christ, would fall to the ground. St. Paul on the way to Damascus saw Christ “corporally” (Cf. Matt. xxviii. 9; Luke xxiv. 39-40; John xx. 27). St. Thomas writes: “Christ manifested the glory of His resurrection to the disciples by the fact that He entered when the doors were shut… . Similarly it is a property of a glorified body to vanish suddenly from their sight” (IIIᵃ q. 55 a. 5 and 6).

5° The reality of the bodily resurrection of Christ is confirmed by its influence upon the Apostles and by the conversion of St. Paul.

In the case of the Apostles there was a change from uncertainty, timidity, despair to wisdom, fearlessness, constancy. Peter said to princes, ancients and scribes: “We cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard”; “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts iv. 20; v. 29); the Apostles “went from the presence of the council rejoicing that they were accounted worthy to suffer reproach for the name of Jesus” (Acts v. 41). The sudden conversion of St. Paul and his enthusiasm for work and suffering in the cause of Christ were due to the corporal appearance of his risen Saviour.

An obvious difficulty suggests itself. How could the Resurrection have been an article of supernatural Faith to the Apostles since they saw the risen Christ?

Answer: The Resurrection of Christ was not only a miracle known naturally by certain signs (e.g. the wounds), but a mystery of Faith. And this mystery consisted not only in the re-animation of the body, but in the raising of Himself to life by His own power—the power of the Son of God—whereby the Resurrection is associated with the mysteries of Redemption and of future glory. This aspect transcends reason, and is believed on the authority of God who reveals. St. Thomas writes of the Apostle Thomas: “He saw one thing and believed another; he saw the wounds of Christ and believed Him to be God” (IIIᵃ q. 55 a. 5 ad 3). Faith is said to be seen (oculata) when some external circumstance of a mystery is visible. Hence the mystery of the Resurrection is historically certain with moral certitude, and supernaturally certain, because of the infallible testimony of the Church (D. 2036).

Art. 3.—Miracles still take place in the Catholic Church and in the Catholic Church alone.

I.—Christ promised that miracles would continue in the Church.

“Amen, amen, I say to you, he that believeth Me, the works that I do, he also shall do and greater than these shall he do” (John xiv. 12).

When Christ said to His Apostles: “Go ye into the whole world and preach the gospel,” He added “In my name they shall cast out devils, they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them: they shall lay their hands upon the sick and they shall recover. But they going forth preached everywhere, the Lord working withal, and confirming the word with signs that followed” (Mark xvi. 17, 18, 20).

II.—In the Catholic Church miracles have continued and are wrought nowadays.

Incidents of miraculous healing are recorded in the Acts and in the Epistles of St. Paul (Acts v. 12-16; iv. 16; vi. 8; Romans xv. 18; 1 Cor. xii. 28).

The Apostolic Fathers—SS. Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp—speaking for the second century record miracles.

SS. Irenæus, Justin, Cyprian, Origen and Tertullian are witnesses for the third century.

Eusebius, SS. Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, testify for the fourth century.

The writings of Ruinart and of the Bollandists reveal the reality of heroic sanctity and miraculous power in every age. The Congregation of Rites institutes a searching inquiry into the miracles submitted for the canonisation of Saints.

The miracles wrought at Lourdes are examined by a medical commission. Bertrin writes: “Cures of nervous disorders number only one-thirteenth of the whole, i.e., 180 cases out of 2,600. There have been 571 cures of tubercular diseases; 394 cases of diseased digestive apparatus; 68 of circulatory apparatus; 99 of respiratory organs; 383 of brain trouble; 95 of diseased bones; 15 of cancer; 27 of wounds; 34 cures of blind; 28 of deaf-mutes, etc. (Cf. “Histoire critique des évenements de Lourdes,” Paris 1905).

III.—In other forms of religion, the miraculous element is absent.

Both Luther and Calvin disclaimed miraculous power. Luther wrote: “From us, who deny free-will, miracles cannot be expected” (“de servo arbitrio”). Calvin, in his letter to the King of France declared that “they do wrong who demand miracles from us.”

The same may be said of the Greek Church (Cf. Martinov: Revue des Questions historiques, Jan. 1884, p. 272).

IV.—By these miracles the Divine origin of the Catholic Church is manifested.

As already shown, miracles are so many Divine testimonies to the truth of Catholic teaching.

Should the objection be raised that more miracles were wrought in the early ages of the Church than at the present time, St. Thomas answers: “The wonderful conversion of the world to the Christian Faith is a most certain proof of past miracles, so that it is not necessary to repeat them, since they appear evidently in their effect. God does not cease even in our times to work miracles through His saints for the confirmation of the Faith” (C. Gentes, Book I and VI).

Notes

(Cf. W. N. Rice “Christian Faith in an Age of Science” p. 369.) ↩