The miracles of Jesus belong to the foundational historical testimony of Revelation. The Evangelists present them as deeds of Christ and name words, places, participants, and reactions. The Church receives these accounts as Holy Scripture and through them proclaims the power and mercy of the Redeemer.
The investigation explores the transmitted wording, context, and testimony of the Apostles. Manuscripts, parallel passages, and early interpretation help us understand the accounts precisely. Specific examples show how the historical sequence and its spiritual significance belong together.
The Gospels as Foundational Testimony of Faith
This does not abandon their historical claim. Dei Verbum affirms the historicity of the Gospels and connects it to their origin in apostolic preaching. The Evangelists selected, summarized, and explained for their respective readers. The investigation therefore attends to intended meaning, literary form, contemporary language, and the context of the text as a whole.[1]
This entails their particular ecclesiastical standing: the miracle accounts are interpreted as part of canonical Holy Scripture. They do not undergo today's recognition procedure for a new private revelation.[1][4]
Establishing, Comparing, and Interpreting the Text
A clear examination section for each biblical miracle comprises four steps:
1. Establish the text: give the exact Bible passage and distinguish the translation and significant textual variants. Later devotional additions remain identifiable as such.
2. Compare the accounts: read existing parallel passages side by side. Shared tradition and literary dependence cannot simply be counted as independent multiple attestation.
3. Explain the historical setting: clarify place, people, contemporary terms for illnesses, and social consequences. Archaeological knowledge of a site can illuminate the setting; it does not by itself prove the miracle reported there.
4. Explore the sign's meaning: explain what Jesus does and how the Evangelist connects this deed with his person, mission, and faith. This interpretation must neither invent a modern diagnosis nor silently replace the claimed event with a mere symbol.
Pius XII already called for attention to original languages, textual criticism, and ancient authors' modes of expression in scriptural interpretation. Present-day expectations of technical precision must not be applied uncritically as a standard for ancient narrative. Careful reading therefore means taking the text seriously in its own form while also making clear the scope of historical reconstruction.[2]
A Concrete Example: The Healing of a Paralytic
In Mk 2,1–12, the sick man lowered down, Jesus' words of assurance, the dispute over forgiveness of sins, and his subsequent walking are read together; Mt 9,1–8 and Lk 5,17–26 provide comparison texts. The dossier can describe the reported gain in function. Without further findings, however, it must not add a specific neurological diagnosis. It also explains why the visible event in the text attests to Jesus' authority. The event account, historical investigation, and theological meaning thus each remain clear.[3]
Sources and procedural documents
- [1] Dei Verbum – Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation
Intended meaning and literary forms, together with the apostolic origin and historicity of the Gospels.
Open source · vatican.va ↗ - [2] Divino afflante Spiritu
Original languages, textual criticism, and ancient modes of expression as foundations of Catholic scriptural interpretation.
Open source · vatican.va ↗ - [3] The Gospel According to Mark – Healing of a Paralytic
Biblical primary text. For internal links, Catholon's Bible reader can be used with the same passage reference.
Open source · bible.usccb.org ↗ - [4] Catechism of the Catholic Church
Foundation: the completion of public Revelation and the place of private revelations.
Open source · vatican.va ↗