Jesus answered,
Neither has this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
Read Chapter 9
Cornelius a Lapide
AD 1637
Jesus answered, &c. Christ denies not that he and his parents had sinned both by original and actual sin. But He denies that he was condemned to blindness for these sins, beyond other people, who had committed the same and even greater sins. So S. Augustine. In vain therefore do the Pelagians misuse this passage to do away with original sin.
The reason why God inflicted blindness on this man was that the miraculous power of Christ should be made manifest in his case, and thus Christ be acknowledged as the true Messiah. So the Fathers quoted above. The Gloss gives the mystical meaning, that it was to signify what Christ would do in enlightening mankind in like manner by His grace, and the doctrine of the Gospel. And accordingly the man himself was enlightened not only in his body, but in his mind, as will be seen below. And therefore he suffered no wrong, but gained a benefit by his blindness (says S. Chrysostom), for in consequence of it he beheld with the eyes of his mind, Him who fr...
That which lies before us is hard to explain and capable of causing much perplexity, so that it would be perhaps not unlearned to pass it over in silence, and because of its excessive difficulty to leave it. But when the Jewish doctrines have been refuted, lest another thing akin to them, like any root of bitterness springing up, trouble you, as Paul says; (for perhaps some will hence suspect that the bodies of men are affected with sufferings, in order that the works of Grod may be made manifest in them;) I, for my part, think it seasonable to subjoin a few words with reference to this, that thereby we may both keep off any injuries arising from this source, and leave no loophole for deceptive arguments. That God does not bring the sins of parents upon children unless they are partakers of their wickedness, and further, that embodiment is not on account of sins previously committed by the soul, we have shown. For by speaking in opposition to these two errors, Christ in a wonderful man...
When Christ says that neither he nor his parents had sinned, we must not understand that he was born without original sin, nor even that he had not committed other sins. For both he and his parents had sinned; but the meaning is, that this blindness was not a penal blindness inflicted in punishment of any sin either himself or his parents had committed; but, as is afterwards subjoined, it was sent him for the manifestation of the glory of God. (St. Augustine, tract. xliv. in Joan.)
And therefore, when His disciples asked Him for what cause the man had been born blind, whether for his own or his parents' fault, He replied, "Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him."
This He says not as acquitting them of sins, for He says not simply, Neither has this man sinned, nor his parents, but adds, that he should have been born blind — but that the Son of God should be glorified in him. For both this man has sinned and his parents, but his blindness proceeds not from that. And this He said, not signifying that though this man indeed was not in such case, yet that others had been made blind from such a cause, the sins of their parents, since it cannot be that when one sins another should be punished. For if we allow this, we must also allow that he sinned before his birth. As therefore when He declared, neither has this man sinned, He said not that it is possible to sin from one's very birth, and be punished for it; so when He said, nor his parents, He said not that one may be punished for his parents' sake. This supposition He re moves by the mouth of Ezekiel; As I live says the Lord, this proverb shall not be, that is used, The fathers have eaten s...
Now another perplexity arises. One might ask, “How could Christ say this? Was it not unjust to deprive this man of his sight so that the works of God should be made manifest in him? Could not these works have been revealed some other way?” We would answer, “How have you been treated unjustly, O man?” “I have been robbed of light,” he replies. “But what harm did you suffer by being deprived of material light? Now you have received not only physical vision, but that incomparable blessing—the enlightenment of the eyes of your soul.” Thus the affliction was to the blind man’s benefit, and through his healing he came to know the true Sun of Righteousness. Therefore, the blind man was not wronged; he was blessed.
Now, understand this as well, every student of Divine Scripture: the conjunctions ἵνα and ὅπως (both translated in English as “that”) are often used to express the outcome, but not the intended result, of the action stated in the main clause. Thus David says, Against Thee only ha...
