Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:20:58.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent writings on the Miracles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Michael Maher MSC
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Any study of any aspect of the life of the historical Jesus is complicated because of the fact that the gospel accounts of his ministry are interpretations and applications of what he did and said rather than straightforward accounts of his life and activity. Add to this the fact that many Christians today seriously question the possibility of miracles and either dismiss them as fables or explain them as the result of Jesus’ extraordinary psychic gifts, and one becomes aware of the difficulty and delicacy of the task of drawing any conclusions about the miracles, about their historicity, and about their place in modern Christianity. Yet the complexity and sensitivity of the topic has not daunted the exegetes, and recent years have given us a constant flow of books and articles on the miracles. The aim of the present essay is not to attempt the impossible task of reviewing this immense body of literature, but to draw attention to some approaches and trends in modem miracle studies and to examine at some length a few of the more recent books. We will pay special attention to the historical questions raised by the miracle stories, and we treat only of the synoptic miracles, omitting those of John which give rise to somewhat different problems.

One of the striking things about the works of recent writers on the miracles is the lessening of emphasis on the apologetic value of the mighty deeds of Jesus. Not that these writers would deny the teaching of Vatican I that the miracles are most sure signs of divine revelation (cf DS 3009). Nor would they despise the assertion of Vatican II that ‘the miracles of Jesus also confirm that the kingdom has arrived on earth’ (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church no. 5). But they do not look upon the miracles as events praeter, extra, or contra naturam which prove the divinity of Jesus and the validity of his claim.

Type
Research Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 56 , Issue 659 , April 1975 , pp. 165 - 174
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers

References

1 On the Johannine miracles see, for example, Jürgen Becker, New Testament Studies, 16 (1969‐70), 130‐148; Brown, R. E., The Gospel According to John (1‐12) (Anchor Bible), London: Chapman, 1971, pp. 525‐531Google Scholar.

2 Cf. e.g., Brown, R. E., New Testament Essays, London‐Dublin: Chapman, 1965, pp. 169fGoogle Scholar.

3 For a brief study of the miracles from the point of view of science and physics see Hesse, Mary, Miracles and the Law of Nature, in Moule, C. F. D. (editor), Miracles, Cambridge Studies in their Philosophy and History. London: Mowbray & Co., 1965, pp. 35‐42Google Scholar. For a philosopher's view of miracles see Swinburne, Richard, The Concept of Miracle, London: Macmillan & Co., 1970CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Cf. Mussner, F., The Miracles of Jesus. An Introduction. Translated from the German by Wimmer, A.. Shannon: Ecclesia Press, 1970, pp. 5‐18Google Scholar; Fuller, R. H.. Interpreting the Miracles. London: S.C.M. Press, 1966, pp. 8‐17Google Scholar; Sabourin, L., Old Testament Miracles in Biblical Theology Bulletin, 1 (1971), 227‐261Google Scholar.

5 Cf. Mussner, op. cit., pp. 41‐53: R. E. Brown, in the Jerome Biblical Commentary, London: Chapman. 1968, 78:126Google Scholar.

6 Cf. Vögtle, A., in Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, 2nd edition, Freiburg: Herder, 1965, vol. X, po. 1259‐1261Google Scholar: Mussner, op. tit, pp. 55ff.

7 Kertelge, K., Die Wunder Jesu nach dem Markusevangelium. Eine redaktionsge‐schichtliche Untersuchung. (StANT, 23). Munich, 1970Google Scholar. studies Mark's theological interest in the miracle tradition which he took over from his sources. See also Tasawa, Kenzo, Miracles et Evangile. La Pensée Personnelle de ĽEvangéliste Marc. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1966Google Scholar. Held, H. J., Matthew as Interpreter of the Miracle Stories, in Bornkamm‐�, G.��Barth‐�, G.��H. Held, J.. Tradition and Internretation in Matthew, translated from the German by Percy Scott, London: S.C.M., 1963, pp. 165‐299Google Scholar, shows how Matthew applied and interpreted Mark's miracle stories.

8 See, for example, Xavier Leén‐Dufour's studv of three miracle stories (Peter's mother‐in‐law, Mk. 1:19‐31 par.: the stilling of the storm, Mk. 4:35‐41 par.; the eoileotic demoniac, Mk. 9:14‐29 par.;) in Etudes ?Evangile, Paris: Editions du du Seuil. 1965, pp. 124‐226: P. Lemavche, Le Possédé de Gerasa, in Nouvelle Revue Theologiaue, 90 (1968), 581‐597; C. Schütz. Die Wunder Jesu, in Mysterium Salutis. III, 2. Einsiedeln, 1969, pp. 97‐123.

9 Loos, H. Van der, The Miracles of Jesus, Leiden: Brill, 1965CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Biblical Theology Bulletin, 2 (1972), 281‐307: the quotation is from p. 305. See also P. J. Achtemeier, Interpretation, 26 (1972), 174‐197; Howard C. Lee, New Testament Studies, 14 (1968), 232‐246.

11 See Smyth, Morton, Prolegomena to a Discussion of Aretalogies, Divine Men, the Gospels and Jesus, in Journal of Biblical Literature, 90 (1971), 174‐199CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kertelge, op. cit., 73‐77. If one accepts the view of Schille, G. (Die Urchristliche Wundertradition. Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem irdischen Jesus, Stuttgart, 1967)Google Scholar that the miracle stories originated in North Galilee where Greek influence was undoubtedly very strong one can admit even more readily that the Gospel miracle accounts would have been influenced by the hellenistic wonder‐tales.

12 op. cit. pp. 18‐39: the above quotations are from pp. 19, 32 and 39.

13 Richardson, Alan, The Miracle Stories of the Gospels, London: S.C.M. Press, 1941, pp. 128‐130Google Scholar.

14 Kamphaus, F., The Gospel for Preachers and Teachers. Translated from the German by David Bourke, London: Sheed & Ward, 1974, pp. 158fGoogle Scholar.

15 Heising, A., Die Botschaft der Brotvermehrung, Stuttgart, 1966Google Scholar. See also by the same author Exegese und Theologie der Alt‐ und Neutestamentlichen Speise‐wunder in Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie, 86 (1964), 80‐96Google Scholar.

16 op. cit., p. 1.

17 Rudolf Pesch, Jesu Ureigene Taten? Ein Beitrag zur Wunderfrage. (Quaes‐tiones Disputatae, 52), Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1970. Cf. Irish Theological Quarterly, 38 (1971), 275‐278.

18 Cf. Theologische Revue, 68 (1972), 177‐185.

19 Cf., e.g., R. Latourelle, Gregorianum, 54 (1973), 225‐262; F. Lentzen‐Deis, Theologie und Philosophie, 43 (1968), 400‐402.

20 See Mussner, The Miracles of Jesus, pp. 41‐44; Sabourin, Biblical Theology Bulletin, 1 (1971), 71f.

21 On the question of the need for such honesty and openness see M. Seckler, Plädoyer für Ehrlichkeit im Umgang mit Wundern, in Theologische Quartal‐schrift (Tubingen), 151 (1971), 662‐684Google Scholar.

22 Cf., e.g., R. Pesch, Ecumenical Review, 23 (1971), 362.

23 Hull, John M., Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition (Studies in Biblical Theology, Second Series, 28), London: S.C.M. Press, 1974Google Scholar.