Lecture 6 — Entrance into Galilee

^4:43^ Now after two days, he departed from there and went into Galilee. [n. 665]

^4:44^ For Jesus himself gave testimony that a prophet has no honor in his own country. [n. 666]

^4:45^ And when he had come into Galilee, the Galileans received him, having seen all the things he had done at Jerusalem on the festival day; for they also went to the festival day. [n. 670]

^4:46^ Therefore he came again into Cana of Galilee, where he made the water wine. And there was a certain ruler, whose son was sick at Capernaum. [n. 673]

664. Having described the conversion of the gentiles due to teaching, their conversion due to miracles is now given. The Evangelist mentions a miracle performed by Christ:

first, giving the place;

second, describing the miracle, at and there was a certain ruler, whose son was sick at Capernaum, and

third, its effect, at **the father therefore knew that it was at the same hour **(John 4:53).

He does two things about the first.

First, he gives the general location of the miracle, that is, Christ’s own homeland.

Second, the specific place, at therefore he came again into Cana of Galilee.

With respect to the first he does two things.

First, he mentions the general place.

Second, he tells how Christ was received there, at and when he had come into Galilee.

Concerning the first he does two things.

First, he indicates the general place.

Second, he gives a certain reason, at for Jesus himself gave testimony.

665. He says first of all: I say that Jesus remained with these Samaritans for two days, and after two days, he departed from there, i.e., Samaria, and went to Galilee, where he had been raised. This signifies that at the end of the world, when the gentiles have been confirmed in the faith and in the truth, a return will be made to convert the Jews, according to: until the full number of the gentiles enters, and so all Israel will be saved (Rom 11:25).

666. Then he gives a certain reason, saying: Jesus himself gave testimony that a prophet has no honor in his own country.

There are two questions here: one is about the literal meaning; and the other about the continuity of this passage with the first.

The problem about the literal meaning is that it does not seem to be true, as stated here, that a prophet has no honor in his own country: for we read that other prophets were honored in their own land.

Chrysostom answers this by saying that the Lord is speaking here about the majority of cases. So, although there might be an exception in some individual cases, however, what is said here should not be considered false: for in matters concerning nature and morals, that rule is true which is verified in most cases; and if a few cases are otherwise, the rule is not considered to be false. Now what the Lord says was true with respect to most of the prophets, because in the Old Testament it is hard to find any prophet who did not suffer persecution from his own people: which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? (Acts 7:52); Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you (Matt 23:37).

Further, this statement of our Lord holds true not only in the case of the prophets among the Jews, but also, as Origen says, with many among the gentiles, because they were held in contempt by their fellow citizens and put to death: for living with men in the usual way, and too much familiarity, lessen respect and breed contempt. So it is that those with whom we are more familiar we come to reverence less, and those with whom we cannot become acquainted we regard more highly. However, the opposite happens with God: for the more intimate we become with God through love and contemplation, realizing how superior he is, the more we respect him and the less do we esteem ourselves. I have heard you, but now I see you, and so I reprove myself, and do penance in dust and ashes (Job 42:5). The reason for this is that man’s nature is weak and fragile; and when one lives with another for a long time, he notices certain weaknesses in him, and this results in a loss of respect for him. But since God is infinitely perfect, the more a person knows him the more he admires his superior perfection, and as a result the more he respects him.

667. But was Christ a prophet? At first glance it seems not, because prophecy involves an obscure knowledge: if there is a prophet of the Lord among you, I will appear to him in a vision (Num 12:6). Christ’s knowledge, however, was not obscure.

Yet he was a prophet, as is clear from, the Lord your God will raise up a prophet for you, from your nation and your brothers; he will be like me. You will listen to him (Deut 18:15). This text is referred to Christ.

I answer that a prophet has a twofold function. First, that of seeing: he who is now called a prophet was formerly called a seer (I Sam 9:9). Second, he makes known, announces; Christ was a prophet in this sense for he made known the truth about God: for this I was born, and for this I came into the world, that I should give testimony to the truth (John 18:37). As for the seeing function of a prophet, we should note that Christ was at once both a wayfarer and a blessed. He was a wayfarer in the sufferings of his human nature and in all the things that relate to this. He was a blessed in his union with the divinity, by which he enjoyed God in the most perfect way.

There are two things in the vision or seeing of a prophet. First, the intellectual light of his mind; and as regards this Christ was not a prophet, because his light was not at all deficient; his light was that of the blessed. Second, an imaginary vision is also involved; and with respect to this Christ did have a likeness to the prophets insofar as he was a wayfarer and was able to form various images with his imagination.

668. Second, there is the problem about continuity. For the Evangelist does not seem to be right in connecting the fact that now after two days, he departed from there and went into Galilee, with the statement of Jesus that a prophet has no honor in his own country. It would seem that the Evangelist should have said that Christ did not go into Galilee, for if he was not honored there, that would be a reason for not going there: for Jesus himself gave testimony that a prophet has no honor in his own country.

Augustine answers this by suggesting that the Evangelist said this to answer a question that could have been raised, namely: why did Christ return to Galilee since he had lived there for a long time, and the Galileans were still not converted to him; while the Samaritans were converted in two days? It is the same as saying: even though the Galileans had not been converted, still Jesus went there, for Jesus himself gave testimony that a prophet has no honor in his own country.

Chrysostom explains this in a different way: after two days, he departed from there, not for Capernaum, which was his homeland because of his continuous residence there, nor for Bethlehem, where he was born, nor for Nazareth, where he was educated. Thus he did not go to Capernaum; hence he upbraids them, saying: and you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You will descend even to hell (Matt 11:23). He went rather to Cana in Galilee. And he gives the reason here: because they were ill-disposed toward him. This is what he says: for Jesus himself gave testimony that a prophet has no honor in his own country.

669. Was Christ seeking glory from men? It seems not, for he says: I do not seek my own glory (John 8:50).

I answer that it is only God who seeks his own glory without sin. A man should not seek his own glory from men, but rather the glory of God. Christ, however, as God, fittingly sought his own glory, and as man, he sought the glory of God in himself.

670. Then he shows that Christ was received by the Galileans more respectfully than before, saying, **and when he had come into Galilee, the Galileans received him **honorably. The reason behind this was that they had seen all the things he had done at Jerusalem on the festival day; for they also went to the festival day, as the law commanded.

This seems to conflict with the fact that we did not read above of any miracles being performed by Christ at Jerusalem.

I answer, with the opinion of Origen, that the Jews thought it a great miracle that Christ drove the traders from the temple with such authority (John 2:14). Or, we could say that Christ performed many miracles which were not written down, according to, many other signs as well did Jesus do . . . which are not written in this book (John 20:30).

671. In its mystical sense, this gives us an example that if we wish to receive Jesus Christ within ourselves, we should go up to Jerusalem on a festive day, that is, we should seek tranquility of mind, and examine everything which Jesus does there: look upon Zion, the city of our festive days (Isa 33:20); I have meditated on all Your works (Ps 142:5).

672. Note that as men were lesser in dignity, they were better with respect to God. The Judeans were superior in dignity to the Galileans: search the Scriptures and see that, out of Galilee, a prophet does not rise (John 7:52); and the Galileans were superior in dignity to the Samaritans: the Jews do not communicate with the Samaritans (John 4:9). On the other hand, the Samaritans were better than the Galileans because more of them believed in Christ in two days without any miracles than the Galileans did in a long period of time and even with the miracle of the wine: for none of them believed in him except his disciples. Finally, the Judeans were worse than the Galileans, because none of them believed in Jesus, except perhaps Nicodemus.

673. Then he says, he came again into Cana of Galilee. According to Chrysostom, this is given as a conclusion from what went before; it is as though he were saying: Christ did not go to Capernaum because he was not held in honor there. But he was under an obligation to go to Cana in Galilee: for on the first occasion he had been invited to the wedding, and now he goes again without being invited. The two trips to Cana are mentioned by the Evangelist to show their hardness of heart: for at the first miracle of the wine, only his disciples believed in Christ; and at the second miracle, only the official and his household believed. On the other hand, the Samaritans believed on Christ’s words alone.

674. In the mystical sense, the two visits to Cana signify the effect of God’s words on our minds. First of all they cause delight, because they who hear the word receive the word with joy (Matt 13:20). This is signified in the miracle of the wine, which gladdens the heart of man (Ps 103:15). Second, the word of God heals: it was neither a herb nor a poultice that healed them, but your word, O Lord, which heals all things (Wis 16:12). And this is signified by the curing of the sick son.

Further, these two visits to Cana indicate the two comings of the Son of God. The first coming was in all gentleness to bring joy: rejoice and give praise, people of Zion, for he is great who is in your midst, the Holy One of Israel (Isa 12:6). So the angel said to the shepherds: I bring you good news of great joy . . . this day a savior has been born to you (Luke 2:10). This is signified by the wine. His second coming into the world will be in majesty, when he will come to take away our weaknesses and our punishments, and to make us like his radiant body. And this is signified in the cure of the sick son.