Monday of the 21st week after Pentecost

(Verse 38.) Therefore, Saint Matthew introduces this woman pouring ointment on Christ's head (Matthew 26:7): and perhaps he did not want to say she was a sinner, as the sinner according to Luke poured ointment on Christ's feet. Therefore, it is possible that they are not the same, so that the evangelists do not seem to contradict each other. It is also possible that the question is resolved by the difference in merit and time, so that the former is still a sinner, while the latter is more perfect. For although the Church or the soul does not change its person, it does change its progress. Therefore, if you determine that the soul approaches God faithfully, not with shameful and obscene sins, but serving God's Word devoutly, having the confidence of immaculate chastity, you notice that it ascends to the head of Christ (and the head of Christ is God (I Cor. XI, 3)) and spreads the fragrance of its merits: for we are the good fragrance of Christ to God (II Cor. II, 15). For indeed, the good honours God, like a fragrant odor, the life of the righteous.

If you understand these things, you will see that this woman is very blessed, wherever this Gospel is proclaimed, her name is mentioned, and her memory will never fade away (Matthew 26:13); for she poured perfume on the head of Christ, the sweet fragrance of good morals and righteous deeds. Whoever approaches the head cannot be elevated; just as the one who is empty and swollen with the mind of carnal desires, and does not hold the head. But whoever does not hold the head of Christ should hold the feet; because the one body, joined and supplied, grows for the increase of God (Colossians 2:19).

Or, the leper, is the prince of this world; the house of Simon the leper, is the earth. The Lord therefore descended from the higher parts to this earth; for this woman could not have been healed, who bears the figure of a soul or the Church, had not Christ come upon earth. But rightly does she receive the figure of a sinner, for Christ also took the form of a sinner. If then thou makest thy soul approach in faith to God, it not with foul and shameful sins, but piously obeying the word of God, and in the confidence of unspotted purity, ascends to the very head of Christ. But the head of Christ is God. (1 Cor. 11:3.) But let him who holds not the head of Christ, hold the feet, the sinner at the feet, the just at the head; nevertheless she also who sinned, has ointment.

He asked him, he said, one of the Pharisees, to eat with him. And he entered the house of the Pharisee, and sat down. And behold, a woman who was in the city, a sinner, knew that he was lying down in the Pharisee's house; she brought an alabaster jar of ointment. Alabaster is a type of white marble, marked with various colors, which they usually hollow out for ointment vessels, because it is said to preserve them best incorrupt. It is found around Thebes in Egypt and Damascus of Syria, whiter than others, the best being from India. Some say that this woman was not the same one who, at the approaching Lord's passion, anointed his head and feet with ointment, because this one washed with tears and wiped with her hair, and is clearly called a sinner; about that other one, nothing similar is written, nor could a prostitute immediately be deemed worthy at the Lord's head. However, those who investigate more diligently find this same woman, namely Mary Magdalene, the sister of Lazarus, as John narrates, having been engaged in the same act of service twice. Once indeed in this place, when first approaching with humility and tears, she merits the forgiveness of sins. For John, although he did not narrate how, as Luke did, points out this very Mary, commending her where he begins to speak about her brother raised from the dead. "There was a certain man," he said, "Lazarus, sick from Bethany, from the village of Mary and her sister Martha. (Mary, however, was the one who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair [John XI])." Secondly, in Bethany (for it happened first in Galilee), she is found not as a sinner now, but as a chaste, holy, and devoted woman to Christ, no longer anointing just his feet but also his head. This also agrees beautifully with the rules of allegory. Because each faithful soul, first humbled at the Lord's feet and freed from sins, bends; then, as merits grow over time, with the joy of fervent faith, it perfumes, as it were, the Lord's head with the scent of spices. And the universal Church itself, in the present indeed, by celebrating the mysteries of his incarnation, which is designated by the name of feet, renders devoted service to its Redeemer. But in the future, perceiving both the glory of his humanity and the eternity of his divinity, because the head of Christ is God, simultaneously with the perpetual praises of confessions, it glorifies him as with genuine nard. Therefore, he said, she brought an alabaster jar of ointment.

And He entered, it says, the house of the Pharisee and reclined at the table. The house of the Pharisee is the guardianship of the law and the prophets, in which the Jewish people gloried as their continual abode of conversation. The Lord entered it because, appearing in the flesh temporally, He came not to destroy the law or the prophets, but to fulfill them. He reclined because the one who could not be comprehended in the height of His majesty assumed the humility of the form of a servant, by which He could be seen.

Having said just before, And the people that heard him justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John, the same Evangelist builds up in deed what he had proposed in word, namely, wisdom justified by the righteous and the penitent, saying, And one of the Pharisees desired him, &c.

Now a certain Pharisee asked him. Above the Evangelist showed the sublimity of the Lord and Savior with regard to the excellence of power and with regard to the evidence of truth; here thirdly he shows with regard to the abundance of piety. Now this abundance of piety is shown in the Lord Jesus as great in the reception of the sinful woman, greater in his approbation, but greatest in his absolution. For he received her as she approached, commended her as she loved, and absolved her as she repented. As to the first, it should be noted that the reception of the sinful woman approaching the Lord is shown to be of great piety and mercy, both on account of the solemnity of the banquet in which he received her; and on account of the familiarity of the service to which he admitted her; and on account of the rashness of another's judgment, on account of which he did not dismiss her.

First, therefore, as to the solemnity of the banquet in which the sinful woman was piously received by the Lord, it is said: And a certain Pharisee asked him to eat with him: there is no doubt that he asked the Lord Jesus; and rightly so, according to the counsel and purpose of the Wise Man, Wisdom 8: "I proposed to bring her," that is, wisdom, Christ, "to live with me, knowing that she will share with me of her good things." But this Pharisee was no longer divided from the Lord, but rather united to him, and therefore he confidently asked the Lord and invited him to the banquet, according to that passage in Job 22: "If you return to the Almighty, you shall be built up"; and it follows: "You shall pray to him, and he will hear you."

Which this man also obtained; whence it is added: And entering the house of the Pharisee, he reclined at table. He sat down to eat and thus fulfilled visibly what he spiritually promises in Apocalypse 3: "If anyone opens to me, I will enter to him and will sup with him, and he with me." Nor is this a wonder, because, as he himself says in Proverbs 8, "my delights are to be with the children of men." He says this with regard to the excess of charity, on account of which he was made man and willingly took upon himself and endured human needs among men, according to that passage in Baruch 3: "Afterwards he was seen upon earth and conversed with men." These things, therefore, were introduced on account of the solemnity of the banquet.

(Hom. de Mul. Peccat.) This account is full of precious instruction. For there are very many who justify themselves, being puffed up with the dreamings of an idle fancy, who before the time of judgment comes, separate themselves as lambs from the herds, not willing even to join in eating with the many, and hardly with those who go not to extremes, but keep the middle path in life. St. Luke, the physician of souls rather than of bodies, represents therefore our Lord and Saviour most mercifully visiting others, as it follows, And he went into the Pharisees' house, and sat down to meat. Not that He should share any of his faults, but might impart somewhat of His own righteousness.

You perceive that Christ came to the Pharisee's table not to be filled with food for the body but to carry on the business of heaven while he was in the flesh.

The behaviour of "the woman which was a sinner," when she covered the Lord's feet with her kisses, bathed them with her tears, wiped them with the hairs of her head, anointed them with ointment, produced an evidence that what she handled was not an empty phantom, but a really solid body, and that her repentance as a sinner deserved forgiveness according to the mind of the Creator, who is accustomed to prefer mercy to sacrifice.

(Vers. 46.) Blessed is he who can and desires to anoint the feet of Christ: for Simon had not yet anointed them. But more blessed is she who anointed them with ointment; for she spreads the various sweet fragrances of many flowers collected into one. And perhaps no one else can bear this ointment except the Church alone, which has countless flowers of different scents: which rightly receives the appearance of a sinner, since Christ also assumed the form of a sinner.

Now in this place many seem to be perplexed with the question, whether the Evangelists do not appear to have differed concerning the faith.

Matthew has introduced this woman as pouring ointment upon the head of Christ, and was therefore unwilling to call her a sinner, for the sinner, according to Luke, poured ointment upon the feet of Christ. She cannot then be the same, lest the Evangelists should seem to be at variance with one another. The difficulty may be also solved by the difference of merit and of time, so that the former woman may have been yet a sinner, the latter now more perfect.

Bring thou also repentance after sin. Wherever thou hearest the name of Christ, speed thither; into whatever house thou knowest that Jesus has entered, thither hasten; when thou findest wisdom, when thou findest justice sitting in any inner chamber, run to its feet, that is, seek even the lowest part of wisdom; confess thy sins with tears. Perhaps Christ washed not His own feet, that we might wash them with our tears. Blessed tears, which can not only wash away our own sin, but also water the footsteps of the heavenly Word, that His goings may abound in us. Blessed tears, in which there is not only the redemption of sinners, but the refreshing of the righteous.

Throw about thy hair, scatter before Him all the graces of thy body. The hair is not to be despised which can wash the feet of Christ.

(Severus Antiochenus.) For since the four Evangelists relate that Christ was anointed with ointment by a woman, I think that there were three women, differing according to the quality of each, their mode of action, and the difference of times. John, for example, relates that Mary, the sister of Lazarus, six days before the Passover, anointed the feet of Jesus in her own house; but Matthew, after that the Lord had said, You know that after two days will be the Passover, adds, that in Bethany, at the house of Simon the leper, a woman poured ointment upon the head of our Lord, but did not anoint His feet as Mary. Mark also says the same as Matthew; but Luke gives the account not near the time of the Passover, but in the middle of the Gospel. Chrysostom explains it that there were two different women, one indeed who is described in John, another who is mentioned by the three.

But the woman brought an alabaster jar of ointment. What is expressed by the ointment but the aroma of good reputation? Thus Paul says: "We are the pleasing aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing" (2 Corinthians 2). If we do good works, by which we sprinkle the Church with the aroma of good reputation, what do we pour on the Lord's body except ointment? But the woman stood behind His feet. We stood against the feet of the Lord, when bound in sins, we were held captive by worldly ways. But if after sins we turn to true repentance, we are now standing behind His feet, for we follow the footsteps of Him whom we once opposed. The woman washed His feet with her tears, a true act indeed if we also incline towards the lowest members of the Lord with the affection of compassion, if we share in the sufferings of His saints in tribulation, if we consider their sorrow as our own.

The woman who was a sinner in the city recognized that He was reclining in the house of the Pharisee, for the gentiles, previously bound by unclean deeds in worldly ways, learnt through the preaching of the apostles that God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law (Galatians 4). And in the house of the Pharisee, it is not the Pharisee but she who is justified, as the Jewish people adhered only to the letter of the law while we follow both the law and the grace of the Spirit. The Pharisee considers Jesus not a prophet because He receives sinners, while we acknowledge this one as even the true God who can justify sinners.

Alabaster is a kind of white marble tinged with various colours, which is generally used for vessels holding ointment, because it is said to be the best sort for preserving the ointment sweet.

As for the familiarity of service, to which she was admitted, it is added: And behold, a woman who was in the city, a sinner, whose infamy was known to the whole city, such that what is said in Jeremiah 3 could be said to her: "You have had the forehead of a harlot, you refused to blush." This is that woman of whom it is said in Ecclesiastes 7: "I have found more bitter than death the woman who is a snare of hunters, and whose heart is a net"; and this, because she was a manifest fornicatress, as the Ravennan says that "her infamy had injured the whole city," such that what the Lord threatens through Amos to Amaziah the priest was fulfilled in her, Amos 7: "Your wife shall play the harlot in the city." And therefore she is rightly called a sinner both by reason of infamy and by reason of frequency, according to that saying in Sirach 3: "A wicked heart shall be laden with sorrows, and the sinner shall add sin to sin"; and Revelation, last chapter: "He who is filthy, let him be filthy still." Not only had she repeated her fault, but she had also sinned in diverse ways: whence upon that which is said in Mark, last chapter, that "Christ had cast seven demons out of Mary," Gregory says: "By the number seven, universality is rightly designated. Mary therefore had seven demons, because she was full of all vices."

Since therefore she was thus a sinner and unclean, she rightly ought to have been repelled, especially from the place of the banquet: and yet on account of the piety of the Lord, which she recognized, she was drawn: whence it is added: When she learned that Jesus had reclined at table in the house of the Pharisee, she brought an alabaster jar of ointment, that is, a box or vessel of alabaster, which "is of a certain kind of marble in which ointments are preserved uncorrupted." This the sinful woman brought to the house of the Pharisee, in which she knew Christ to be and by whom she was received, according to that saying of the Psalm: "God shall be known in her houses, when he shall receive her." She brought, I say, the ointment of humility, where Christ reclined, so that what is said in Song of Songs 1 might be fulfilled: "While the king was at his repose, my spikenard gave forth its fragrance." Moreover, these spices or ointments which Magdalene brought to Christ were prefigured in 2 Chronicles 9: "There were no spices such as these which the queen of Sheba gave to Solomon." Or Magdalene brought ointments to the Savior in order to render familiar service, to which she was admitted, namely to render to Christ out of devotion what she had rendered to herself out of lust, that is, to wash, to wipe, to kiss, and to anoint the most sacred and most pure flesh of Christ, to which she was admitted on account of the affection of penitence and benevolence.

That woman had not yet entered communion with the Word, because she was still a sinner. She paid the Master honor with what she considered the most precious thing she had, her perfume. She wiped off the remainder of the perfume with the garland of her head, her hair. She poured out upon the Lord her tears of repentance. Therefore her sins were forgiven her.This is a symbol of the Lord's teachings and of his sufferings. The anointing of his feet with sweet-smelling myrrh suggests the divine teaching whose good smell and fame has spread to the ends of the earth. "Their sound has gone forth to the ends of the earth." Moreover, those anointed feet of the Lord (not to be too subtle) are the apostles. The sweet odor of the myrrh prefigures their reception of the Holy Spirit. I mean that the figure of the Lord's feet is to be understood of the apostles, who journeyed about the whole world preaching the gospel.

A woman of corrupt life, but testifying her faithful affection, comes to Christ, as having power to release her from every fault, and to grant her pardon for the crimes she had committed. For it follows, And behold a woman in the city, which was a sinner, brought an alabaster box of ointment.

As I think about Mary's repentance, I would rather weep than say anything. For whose heart, even if made of stone, would those tears of this sinful woman not soften toward the example of repentance? For she considered what she had done, and she refused to restrain what she would do. She entered upon those dining, she came unbidden, amid the feast she offered tears. Learn with what sorrow she burns, who is not ashamed to weep even amid a feast. This woman whom Luke calls a sinful woman, John names Mary, and we believe her to be that Mary from whom Mark testifies seven demons were cast out. And what is signified by seven demons, except all vices? For since all time is comprised in seven days, rightly by the number seven is universality represented. Therefore Mary had seven demons, because she was full of all vices. But behold, because she perceived the stains of her own shame, she ran to the fountain of mercy to be washed, she was not ashamed before those dining. For because she was gravely ashamed of herself within, she believed there was nothing to be ashamed of outwardly. What then do we marvel at, brothers, Mary coming, or the Lord receiving her? Shall I say receiving, or drawing? I shall say better, drawing and receiving, because surely he himself drew her inwardly through mercy, who received her outwardly through gentleness.

(in Hom. 33. in Ev.) For this woman, beholding the spots of her shame, ran to wash them at the fountain of mercy, and blushed not at seeing the guests, for since she was courageously ashamed of herself within, she thought there was nothing which could shame her from without. Observe with what sorrow she is wrung who is not ashamed to weep even in the midst of a feast!

(Hom. 6. in Matt.) Thus the harlot became then more honourable than the virgins. For no sooner was she inflamed with penitence, than she burst forth in love for Christ. And these things indeed which have been spoken of were done outwardly, but those which her mind pondered within itself, were much more fervent. God alone beheld them.

"And behold," it says, "a woman in the town who was a sinner." Who is this woman? Beyond any doubt, she is the church.…She heard that Christ had come to the house of the Pharisee, that is, to the synagogue. She heard that there, that is, at the Jewish Passover, he had instituted the mysteries of his passion, disclosed the sacrament of his body and blood, and revealed the secret of our redemption. She ignored the scribes like contemptible doorkeepers. "Woe to you lawyers! You who have taken away the key of knowledge." She broke open the doors of quarrels and despised the very superiority of the Pharisaical group. Ardent, panting and perspiring, she made her way to the large inner chamber of the banquet of the law. There she learned that Christ was betrayed amid sweet cups and a banquet of love.

With her hands of good works, she holds the feet of those who preach his kingdom. She washes them with tears of charity, kisses them with praising lips, and pours out the whole ointment of mercy, until he will turn her. This means that he will come back to her and say to Simon, to the Pharisees, to those who deny, to the nation of the Jews, "I came into your house. You gave me no water for my feet."When will he speak these words? He will speak them when he will come in the majesty of his Father and separate the righteous from the unrighteous like a shepherd who separates the sheep from the goats. He will say, "I was hungry, and you did not give me to eat. I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink. I was a stranger, and you did not take me in." This is equivalent to saying, "But this woman, while she was bathing my feet, anointing them and kissing them, did to the servants what you did not do for the Master." She did for the feet what you refused to the Head. She expended upon the lowliest members what you refused to your Creator. Then he will say to the church, "Your sins, many as they are, are forgiven you because you have loved much."

Under no circumstances would any reasonable person imagine that the Lord's feet were anointed with precious ointment by the woman for the same reason that was customary for sensual, dissolute men whose banquets were such that we loathe them. In that case the good odor is the good reputation that each one will possess by the works of good life, as long as one follows the footsteps of Christ, and as it were, anoints his feet with very precious ointment. Hence what is frequently sinful in other persons is a symbol of some sublime truth in the person of God or a prophet.

(de Cons. Ev. lib. ii. c. 79.) For I think we must understand that the same Mary did this twice, once indeed as Luke has related, when at first coming with humility and weeping, she was thought worthy to receive forgiveness of sins. Hence John, when he began to speak of the resurrection of Lazarus, before he came to Bethany, says, But it was Mary who anointed our Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick. (John 11:2.) Mary therefore had already done this; but what she again did in Bethany is another occurrence, which belongs not to the relation of Luke, but is equally told by the other three.

And standing behind him at his feet, she began to wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head. And she kissed his feet and anointed them with the ointment. It is clear to everyone that the woman, previously engaged in illicit acts, had used the ointment for the scent of her own flesh. So what she had previously exhibited shamefully for herself, she was now offering praiseworthily to God. She had coveted earthly things with her eyes, but now, through penitence, she was weeping. She had used her hair for the composition of her face, but now she was wiping her tears with her hair. She had spoken arrogantly with her mouth, but kissing the feet of the Lord, she was now fixing this in the footsteps of her Redeemer. Therefore, as many pleasures as she had in herself, so many holocausts she found of herself. She converted the number of her crimes into a number of virtues, so that everything she had served in guilt against God, she now served in penitence for God.

The woman wiped the feet she had washed with her hair. Hair naturally abounds on the body. And what is the superfluous earthly wealth but resembles hair? It can be cut off without pain. We wipe the feet of the Lord with our hair when we extend that which is superfluous to us to His saints out of charity, so that our compassion inwardly feels pain, while our generosity outwardly shows it. The woman kissed the feet she had wiped. We also fully accomplish this if we diligently love those we support with our generosity, so that the need of our neighbor does not burden us heavily, nor does their sustained indigence become burdensome, so that when the hand gives what is necessary, the spirit does not grow slack in love.

The very mystery of his incarnation can also be understood by the feet, by which divinity touched the earth, because it assumed flesh. For the Word was made flesh, and dwelt in us (John 1). We therefore kiss the feet of the Redeemer when we love the mystery of his incarnation with all our heart. We anoint the feet with ointment when we praise the very power of his humanity with the good opinion of sacred eloquence. But the Pharisee sees this and envies. For when the Jewish people see that the gentiles preach God, their malice within melts away. But our Redeemer recounts to him the deeds of the woman, as if listing the good of the gentiles, so that he may recognize in what evil he lies. I entered into your house, you did not give water for my feet. But she has washed my feet with tears. Indeed, water is outside us, the moisture of tears is within us. For that unfaithful people never offered for the Lord even those things which were outside themselves; but the converted gentiles not only poured out the substance of things for Him, but also their blood. You did not give me a kiss. But since she entered, she has not ceased kissing my feet. For a kiss is the sign of love. And that unfaithful people did not give a kiss to God, because they did not want to love God out of charity, to whom they served out of fear. But the called gentiles do not cease to kiss the footsteps of their Redeemer, because they constantly sigh in his love. You did not anoint my head with oil. If we understand the feet of the Lord to signify the mystery of the incarnation, appropriately through his head divinity itself is designated. Hence it is said through the Apostle: the head of Christ is God (1 Cor. 11). For the Jewish people professed to believe in God and not in themselves as in a man. But it is said to the Pharisee, you did not anoint my head with oil, because he neglected to praise with due glory the very power of divinity in which the Jewish people professed to believe. But she has anointed my feet with ointment. For while the gentiles believed in his mystery of incarnation, they praised with great glory even his lowest parts. Also, the two debtors, about whom the parable of Simon is put forth, designate both peoples, namely the Jews and the gentiles, who, to one lender, that is, to their Creator, owed not material money, but the coin of their own salvation. For our Creator, whom He created to His image and likeness, elevated them almost with a loaned coin to be preserved. For the coin is usually formed with the image and name of the king. But from everyone to whom much is given, much will be required; and from him to whom they much committed, they will ask the more. And indeed, the debt of both peoples is multiplied through the number five.

As regards the affect of penance it is said: And standing behind at his feet, she began to wash his feet with tears, through sorrow. For in the penitent soul there ought to be shame, fear and sorrow. Shame was present, because she stood behind; fear, because at his feet; sorrow, because she washed with tears, as in that publican below in the eighteenth chapter: "But the publican, standing afar off, would not so much as lift up his eyes toward heaven, but struck his breast, saying: God, be merciful to me a sinner"; Jeremiah thirty-one: "Convert me, O Lord, and I shall be converted, for you are my God. After you converted me, I did penance, and after you showed me, I struck my thigh. I was confounded and I blushed," etc.: where the three aforementioned things are touched upon. — But as regards the affect of benevolence it is added: And she wiped them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with ointment, where the love of benevolence is shown to be pure, affectionate and devout. For charity ought to proceed "from a pure heart." Moreover, she cared more for the lowest part of his body than for the highest part of her own. For she no longer sought to please the world, but Christ alone, so that she could say that word from Song of Songs eight: "Who will give you to me as my brother, that I may find you alone outside and kiss you, and now no one may despise me"?

And in these two things consists perfect conversion to Christ. For just as in sin there is conversion through concupiscence and aversion through pride, so in the remedy there is aversion from sin through penance and conversion to God through benevolence. And truly this woman was perfectly converted and returned, because, as Gregory says, "as many delights as she had in herself, so many holocausts did she find from herself." For sinful women are accustomed to offend most greatly in these four things, namely, in the wanton glances of the eyes; Isaiah three: "They went with wanton glances of the eyes"; the excesses of the hair: First Peter three: "Let there not be outward adornment of hair"; in the pleasures of kisses: Proverbs seven: "And having seized the young man, she kisses him"; the sweetness of ointments, as it is said in Esther two, that the king's maidens "were anointed with oil of myrrh," etc. And therefore the perfect penitent employed her eyes for weeping, so that Christ could say to her that word from Fourth Kings twenty: "I have heard your prayer; I have seen your tear"; her hair for wiping, so that it could be said to her from Song of Songs four: "You have wounded my heart with one hair of your neck"; her mouth for kissing, so that Christ could say to her from Song of Songs four: "Your lips are a dripping honeycomb"; her ointments she employed for anointing, so that it could be said to her: "We shall run after the fragrance of your ointments."

And here it is to be noted morally that in these six things which are said of this penitent sinful woman, namely that she stood behind and lay at his feet, bathed with tears, wiped with her hair, and kissed and anointed: those things are understood which ought to be in a true penitent, namely the shame of blushing, which is noted when it says standing behind: below in the eighteenth chapter: "The publican standing afar off." The fear of reverence, which is noted there: At his feet: Psalm: "Adore his footstool, for it is holy." — The sorrow of penitence: She began to bathe his feet with tears; Lamentations 2: "Pour down tears like a torrent." The brightness of purity: She wiped with her hair: Isaiah 1: "Wash yourselves, be clean, put away evil." The ardor of benevolence: She kissed his feet; and here: "You gave me no kiss," etc., up to: "Because she loved much." The sweetness of interior devotion: And she anointed with ointment; Song of Songs 1: "Your breasts are better than wine, fragrant with the finest ointments." Good is the ointment of compunction, better that of compassion, but best that of devotion: first the feet, second the body, but third the head is anointed. And therefore the Magdalene is read to have come three times to anoint the Lord: here, and in John 12, and in Matthew 26, and in Mark 16.

(ubi sup.) But to mark her own unworthiness, she stands behind with downcast eyes, and with her hair thrown about embraces His feet, and washing them with her tears, betokened a mind distressed at her state, and imploring pardon. For it follows, And standing behind, she began to wash his feet with her tears.

She brought an alabaster jar of ointment, and standing behind at Jesus's feet, she began to wet his feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with ointment. It is clear, brothers, that this woman, previously devoted to illicit acts, had applied ointment to herself for the fragrance of her flesh. What she had shamefully used for herself, she was now offering to God in a praiseworthy manner. With her eyes she had lusted after earthly things, but now crushing them through penitence, she wept. She had used her hair for adorning her face, but now with her hair she wiped away tears. With her mouth she had spoken proud words, but kissing the Lord's feet, she pressed this same mouth to the footprints of her Redeemer. Therefore, as many pleasures as she had in herself, so many burnt offerings did she find from herself. She converted the number of her sins into virtues, so that everything which had despised God through her fault might serve God entirely in penitence.

In a mystical sense, what is expressed by the ointment except the fragrance of good reputation? Hence Paul also says: "We are the good fragrance of Christ to God in every place." If therefore we do right works by which we spread the fragrance of good reputation upon the Church, what do we pour upon the Lord's body but ointment? But the woman stood beside Jesus' feet. For we stood against the Lord's feet when, placed in sins, we were held back from his ways. But if we turn to true penitence after sins, we now stand behind beside his feet, because we follow the footsteps of him whom we opposed. The woman washes his feet with tears. This we also truly do if we bend down with the feeling of compassion to any of the least members of the Lord, if we suffer with his saints in tribulation, if we consider their sorrow our own. The woman wiped with her hair the feet she had washed. For hair is superfluous to the body. And what does abundant earthly substance represent except the appearance of hair? Which, when it is superfluous to necessary use, does not even feel it when cut off. Therefore we wipe the Lord's feet with our hair when we show mercy to his saints, with whom we suffer out of charity, even from those things which are superfluous to us, so that the mind may grieve through compassion, and the generous hand may also show the feeling of grief. For one washes the Redeemer's feet with tears but does not wipe them with hair, who somehow suffers with a neighbor's pain but nevertheless does not show mercy to them from what is superfluous to himself. One weeps and does not wipe who indeed offers words of sorrow but does not in the least cut off the force of pain by ministering what is lacking. The woman kisses the feet she wipes. This we also fully do if we lovingly cherish those whom we support with generosity, lest the need of our neighbor be burdensome to us, lest his very poverty which is sustained become onerous to us, and while the hand gives what is necessary, the soul grows cold in love.

The feet can also be understood as the mystery of his incarnation, by which his divinity touched the earth, because he took on flesh. For the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Therefore we kiss the Redeemer's feet when we love the mystery of his incarnation with our whole heart. We anoint the feet with ointment when we proclaim the very power of his humanity with good report of sacred eloquence.

(in Hom. 33. in Evang.) For her eyes which once coveted after earthly things, she was now wearing out with penitential weeping. She once displayed her hair for the setting off of her face, she now wiped her tears with her hair. As it follows, And she wiped them with the hairs of her head. She once uttered proud things with her mouth, but kissing the feet of the Lord, she impressed her lips on the footsteps of her Redeemer. She once used ointment for the perfume of her body; what she had unworthily applied to herself, she now laudably offered to God. As it follows, And she anointed with ointment. As many enjoyments as she had in herself, so many offerings did she devise out of herself. She converts the number of her faults into the same number of virtues, that as much of her might wholly serve God in her penitence, as had despised God in her sin.

(ubi sup.) What else is expressed by the ointment, but the sweet savour of a good report? If then we do good works by which we may sprinkle the Church with the sweet odour of a good report, what else do we but pour ointment upon the body of our Lord? But the woman stood by His feet, for we stood over against the feet of the Lord, when yet in our sins we resisted His ways. But if we are converted from our sins to true repentance, we now again stand by His feet, for we follow His footsteps whom we before opposed.

(Hom. 33. in Evan.) For we water the feet of our Lord with tears if we are moved with compassion to any even the lowest members of our Lord. We wipe our Lord's feet with our hair, when we show pity to His saints (with whom we suffer in love) by the sacrifice of those things with which we abound.

(ubi sup.) The woman kisses the feet which she has wiped. This also we fully do when we ardently love those whom we maintain by our bounty. By the feet also may be understood the mystery itself of the Incarnation. We then kiss the feet of the Redeemer when we love with our whole heart the mystery of the Incarnation. We anoint the feet with ointment, when we proclaim the power of His humanity with the good tidings of holy eloquence.

Now, if someone does not wish, whether like the sinful woman to embrace the feet of Christ (Luke 7:38), or like the prodigal son to run back to Him with burning repentance [Luke 15:11ff], or like the woman with a hemorrhage and bowed with infirmity [Luke 8:43 and 13:11] even to approach Him, why does he then make excuses for his sins by saying, "Those whom He foreknew, them also"-and them alone!-"He called"?

One may perhaps reasonably reply to the person so disposed that "God, Who is before eternity and Who knows all things before creating them, also knew you beforehand, knew that you would not obey Him when He called, that you would not believe in His promises and in His words, yet still, even while knowing this, He "bowed the heavens and came down" [Psalm 18:19] and became man, and for your sake has come to the place where you lie prone. Indeed, visiting you many times every day, sometimes in His own Person and sometimes as well through His servants, He exhorts you to get up from the calamity in which you lie and to follow Him Who ascends to the Kingdom of Heaven and enter it together with Him. But you, you still refuse to do it. - "Second Ethical Discourse"

(Verse 39) Look at the economy: in the house of the Pharisee, the sinful woman is glorified, in the house of the Law and the Prophets, not the Pharisee, but the Church is justified; for the Pharisee did not believe, he believed these things. Finally, he said: If this man were a prophet, he would surely know who and what kind of woman is touching him. But the house of the Law is Judea, which is not written in stones, but on the tablets of the heart. In this the Church is now justified by a greater Law; for the Law of sins does not know forgiveness; the Law does not have the mystery by which hidden things are cleansed; and therefore what is lacking in the Law is completed in the Gospel.

She will not think that she has been forgiven little and so love little, and, ignorant of the justice of God and seeking to establish her own, not submit to the justice of God. Simon was ensnared in this vice, and the woman, to whom many sins were forgiven because she loved much, surpassed him. She will more safely and more truly consider that all the sins that God preserved her from committing should be accounted as though they are forgiven.

But when the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself: If this man were a prophet, he would know who and what kind of woman she is who is touching him, for she is a sinner. Behold, the Pharisee was truly proud in his own mind, falsely just, reproaching the sick woman for her sickness, and the physician for his assistance, while he, too, suffered from the wound of arrogance and was unaware of it. Hence, it is always necessary that when we see any sinners, we first lament ourselves in their calamity. For perhaps we have similarly fallen, or we can fall if we have not fallen. And although the discipline of masters should always pursue vices with the power of teaching, it is nevertheless important that we carefully discern, because strictness is due to vices, compassion to nature. But now let us hear with what sentence this proud and arrogant one is convicted.

Third, regarding the rashness of another's judgment, on account of which she was not repulsed, he says: Now when the Pharisee who had invited him, namely to the banquet, saw, I say, with an eye not simple but evil, according to that saying of Ecclesiasticus thirty-one: "Remember that an evil eye is wicked. What has been created more wicked than the eye?" And truly evil, because, according to that saying of Ecclesiasticus eleven, "turning good things into evil, he lies in wait, and upon the elect he will impose a stain." And therefore the banquet of such persons is not much to be accepted, according to that saying of Proverbs twenty-three: "Do not eat with an envious man, nor desire his foods, because like a soothsayer and a diviner he estimates what he does not know. Eat and drink, he will say to you, and his mind is not with you." And such was this Pharisee; which is evident from what follows: He said within himself, namely thinking as a hypocrite, of whom Job fifteen says: "His belly prepares deceits."

Whence follows the judgment: This man, if he were a Prophet, would surely know who and what manner of woman this is who touches him. And thus he judged him not to be a Prophet, but an ignorant man, saying in his heart: "We have not seen our signs; there is no longer a Prophet, and he will know no more." But to this one can be said that word of Job twenty-two: "Do you not think that God is higher than heaven and is elevated above the summit of the stars? And you say: What indeed does God know? And as if through darkness he judges." But certainly he himself "knows the things constituted in darkness, and light is with him," as is said in Daniel two.

And note that in this way from the true he was falling into the false. For it is manifest that God and the divine man knows hidden things not only of the good but also of the evil; Proverbs fifteen: "The eyes of the Lord in every place behold the good and the evil." But in this he erred, because he believed Christ to be ignorant of this, while he allowed himself to be touched by a sinful woman. Whence he also judged badly concerning her; on account of which he adds: Because she is a sinner, as if to say: she should not be admitted but repelled. He was of those of whom Isaiah sixty-five says: "Who say: Depart from us and do not approach, because you are unclean." So also the other Pharisee said of the publican below in the eighteenth chapter: "God, I give you thanks that I am not like the rest of men, as also this publican." And he judged badly, and yet Christ on account of his evil judgment did not cease to show mercy; concerning which above in the fifth chapter he said to the Pharisees: "They who are well do not need a physician, but they who are ill. For I have not come to call the just, but sinners to repentance."

Great therefore was the mercy of Christ shown in the reception of the sinful woman approaching to touch Christ amid the feasting of the diners and the cunning of those judging. In this is simultaneously commended Christ's clemency and the sinful woman's penitence. Whence Gregory: "When I think of Mary's penitence, I would rather weep than say anything. For whose heart, even if of stone, would these tears of this sinful woman not soften to the example of repenting? She entered upon those dining, amid the feast she poured out tears: what then do we marvel at? Mary coming, or the Lord receiving her? Shall I say receiving, or drawing? But better receiving and drawing, because surely he who through gentleness received her outwardly, through mercy drew her inwardly."

Our Lord worked wonders with common things so that we would know the things those who scorn wonders are deprived of knowing. If such healing as this was snatched from his hem in secret, he was most certainly capable of the healing that his word worked in public. If impure lips became holy by kissing his feet, how much holier would pure lips become by kissing his mouth? With her kisses, the sinful woman received the favor of blessed feet that had worked to bring her the forgiveness of sins. She was graciously comforting with oil the feet of her Physician, who had graciously brought the treasury of healing to her suffering. The One who fills the hungry was not invited because of his stomach. The One who justifies sinners invited himself because of the sinful woman's repentance.

A witness of divine mercy is present: this very Mary of whom we speak, about whom the Pharisee, wishing to obstruct the fountain of piety, said: "If this man were a prophet, he would surely know who and what kind of woman this is who touches him, that she is a sinner." But she washed the stains of her heart and body with tears, and touched the feet of her Redeemer, she who had abandoned her wicked ways. She sat at the feet of Jesus and heard the word from his mouth. She had clung to him while living; she sought him when dead. She found living the one whom she had sought as dead. And she found such a place of grace with him that she herself announced him even to the apostles themselves, that is, to his messengers.

But the Pharisee, observing this, despises her, and reproves not only the sinful woman who came but also the Lord who received her, saying within himself: "This man, if he were a prophet, would surely know who and what kind of woman this is who touches him, for she is a sinner." Behold, the Pharisee, truly proud within himself and falsely righteous, reproves the sick woman for her sickness and the physician for his assistance—he who was himself also sick from the wound of pride and did not know it. Between two sick persons the physician was present; but one sick person retained sound judgment in her fever, while the other had lost both the sense of the flesh and of the mind in his fever. For she wept over what she had done; but the Pharisee, puffed up with false righteousness, was aggravating the force of his own illness. In his sickness, therefore, he had also lost his judgment, who did not even know this very thing: that he was far from salvation.

But amid these things, a groaning compels us to look at certain men of our own order who, endowed with the priestly office, if perhaps they have done anything outwardly righteous, even slightly, immediately despise those subject to them, and disdain any sinners placed among the people, and refuse to have compassion on those confessing their fault, and, as if in the manner of the Pharisee, disdain to be touched by a sinful woman. If indeed this woman had come to the feet of the Pharisee, she would certainly have departed, driven back by his kicks. For he would have believed himself defiled by another's sin. But because true righteousness did not fill him, he was sick from another's wound. Hence it is always necessary that when we observe any sinners, we first bewail ourselves in their calamity, because perhaps we have either fallen into similar sins or, if we have not fallen, we can fall. And if the censure of the teacher's office ought always to pursue vices with the force of discipline, it is nevertheless fitting that we carefully distinguish, because we owe severity to vices but compassion to nature. For if the sinner must be struck, the neighbor must be nourished. But when through repentance he himself now strikes what he has done, the sinner is now no longer our neighbor in that sense, because when he directs God's justice against himself, he punishes in himself what divine justice reproves.

In a mystical sense, the Pharisee sees this and envies it, because when the Jewish people observe the Gentiles preaching God, they waste away in their own malice.

(ubi sup.) But the Pharisee beholding these things despises them, and finds fault, not only with the woman who was a sinner, but with the Lord who received her, as it follows, Now when the Pharisee who had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is which toucheth him. We see the Pharisee really proud in himself, and hypocritically righteous, blaming the sick woman for her sickness, the physician for his aid. The woman surely if she had come to the feet of the Pharisee would have departed with the heel lifted up against her. For he would have thought that he was polluted by another's sin, not having sufficient of his own real righteousness to fill him. So also some gifted with the priests' office, if perchance they have done any just thing outwardly or slightly, forthwith despise those who are put under them, and look with disdain on sinners who are of the people. But when we behold sinners, we must first bewail ourselves for their calamity, since we perhaps have had and are certainly liable to a similar fall. But it is necessary that we should carefully distinguish, for we are bound to make distinction in vices, but to have compassion on nature. For if we must punish the sinner, we must cherish a brother. But when by penance he has himself punished his own deed, our brother is no more a sinner, for he punished in himself what Divine justice condemned. The Physician was between two sick persons, but the one preserved her faculties in the fever, the other lost his mental perception. For she wept at what she had done; but the Pharisee, elated with a false sense of righteousness, overrated the vigour of his own health.

(in Hom. 33. in Evang.) Now in a mystical sense the Pharisee, presuming upon his pretended righteousness, is the Jewish people; the woman who was a sinner, but who came and wept at our Lord's feet, represents the conversion of the Gentiles.

And therefore let our soul put on charity, and such charity as may be strong as death; for as death is the end of sins, so is charity the end also. For he that loveth the Lord, ceaseth from sin; for charity thinketh no evil, nor rejoiceth in iniquity, but beareth all things. For he that seeketh not the things that are his own, how shall he seek the things that are another's? And there is a mortal sin, which is washed away by baptism, by which all sin is buried, and the guilt is taken away. Such was the charity which that Gospel woman displayed, of whom the Lord said: Her many sins are forgiven her, because she loved much (Luke 7:47). And such is that powerful death of the holy martyrs, which wipes away previous guilt; and therefore powerful, since it is matched by a charity which equals the martyr's sufferings, so as to remove the guilt of transgressions.

And those who sat at the table with him began to say within themselves: Who is this who even forgives sins? But the heavenly physician does not regard those who are sick, for he even sees some becoming worse from the medicine. He confirms the one he had healed by the sentence of his compassion, saying:

Second, as regards the perverse judgment of human impiety, there is added: And those who were reclining at table together began to say within themselves, namely by judging wrongly and despising him: Who is this, who even forgives sins? As if they were saying: since he is lowly and a nobody, how does he attribute to himself what God alone can do? According to that passage of Isaiah forty-three: "I am, I am he who blots out your iniquities for my own sake." And thus was verified that saying of Sirach thirteen: "The poor man spoke, and they say: Who is this?" So also in their hearts those who were eating together were devising deceit, so that that word of the Psalm might be fulfilled: "If he who hated me had spoken great things against me, I would perhaps have hidden myself from him. But you, a man of one mind with me," etc. Whence these men, by judging wrongly about her healing, were themselves becoming sick, as Bede says: "The sick woman having been healed, others grow sick over her salvation." And thus was verified that saying of Hosea seven: "When I would have healed Israel, the iniquity of Ephraim was revealed and the wickedness of Samaria, because they have wrought falsehood."

He came that he might forgive the debtors much and little and show mercy upon small and great, that there might be no one whatsoever who did not participate in his goodness. As a pledge and plain example of his grace, he freed that unchaste woman from her many iniquities by saying, "Your sins are forgiven you." A declaration such as this is truly worthy of God! It is a word joined with supreme authority. Since the law condemned those that were in sin, who, I ask, was able to declare things above the law, except the One who ordained it? He immediately both set the woman free and directed the attention of that Pharisee and those who were dining with him to more excellent things. They learned that the Word being God was not like one of the prophets, but rather far beyond the measure of humanity although he became man.

Behold, she who had come sick to the physician has been healed, but others are still sick concerning her salvation. For those reclining at table together complained, saying among themselves: "Who is this who even forgives sins?" But the heavenly physician does not despise the sick, even those whom he sees becoming worse from the medicine.

(ubi sup.) Behold she who had come sick to the Physician was healed, but because of her safety others are still sick; for it follows, And they that sat at meat began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also. But the heavenly Physician regards not those sick, whom He sees to be made still worse by His remedy, but her whom He had healed He encourages by making mention of her own piety; as it follows, But he said unto the woman, Thy faith hath made thee whole; for in truth she doubted not that she would receive what she sought for.

It happens that, whatever state of life a man has reached, he sometimes can offer pure and devout prayer. Even in the lowliest place, where a man is repenting from fear of punishment and the judgment to come, his petitions can enrich him with the same fervor of spirit as the man, who attained to purity of heart, gazes upon God's blessing and is filled with an overwhelming happiness. As the Lord said, "The one who knows he has been forgiven more begins to love more."

(Verse 53, 54.) And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these parables, that he departed from there. And coming into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, so that they marveled and said. After the parables that he spoke to the people, and that only the apostles understood, he went to his own country to teach more openly there.

Where does this wisdom and these virtues come from? The Nazarenes marvel at where he gets his wisdom and virtue; but the error is obvious, for they suspect that he is the son of a carpenter.

After the parables which the Lord spake to the people, and which the Apostles only understand, He goes over into His own country that He may teach there also.

Wonderful folly of the Nazarenes! They wonder whence Wisdom itself has wisdom, whence Power has mighty works! But the source of their error is at hand, because they regard Him as the Son of a carpenter; as they say, Is not this the carpenter's son?

Matthew says "these parables" because in a short time He would tell them other ones. He departed so that He could benefit others by His presence. "His own country" means Nazareth, for He was raised there. He was teaching in the synagogue, speaking openly in public, that they might not later have grounds to claim that He was teaching things contrary to the law.

The Nazarenes were foolish to think that low birth and plain ancestry hinder anyone from pleasing God. Let us suppose that Jesus was simply man and not God. What would have prevented Him from being a great wonderworker? So they are proven to be foolish and spiteful. They ought rather to have taken pride that their native city had produced such a good man.

The Lord is dishonored by his own. Although his wisdom in teaching and his mighty works excited admiration, their faithlessness held them back from true discernment. For they did not believe that God was doing these things in a man. Moreover, they referred to his father, his mother, brothers and sisters and took offense at him.

Thus the Lord is held in no honour by His own; and though the wisdom of His teaching, and the power of His working raised their admiration, yet do they not believe that He did these things in the name of the Lord, and they cast His father's trade in His teeth. Amid all the wonderful works which He did, they were moved with the contemplation of His Body, and hence they ask, Whence hath this man these things? And thus they were offended in him.

And what doth he now call His country? As it seems to me, Nazareth. "For He did not many mighty works there," it is said, but in Capernaum He did miracles: wherefore He said also, "And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto Heaven, shalt be brought down to hell; for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day."

But having come there, while He slackens somewhat in His miracles; so as not to inflame them unto more envy, nor to condemn them more grievously, by the aggravation of their unbelief: He yet puts forth a doctrine, having no less of wonder in it than the miracles. For these utterly senseless men, when they ought to have marvelled, and to have been amazed at the power of His words, they on the contrary hold Him cheap, because of him who seemed to be His father; yet we know they had many examples of these things in the former times, and from fathers of no note had seen illustrious children. For so David was the son of a certain mean husbandman, Jesse; and Amos, the child of a goatherd, and himself a goatherd; and Moses too, the lawgiver, had a father very inferior to himself. When they therefore, for this especially, ought to adore and be amazed, that being of such parents He spake such things, it being quite manifest, that so it was not of man's care, but of God's grace: yet they, what things they should admire Him for, for those they despise Him.

He is moreover continually frequenting the synagogues, lest if He were always abiding in the wilderness, they should the more accuse Him as making a schism, and fighting against their polity. Being amazed therefore, and in perplexity, they said, "Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these powers?" either calling the miracles powers, or even the wisdom itself.

The synagogues could not be his. A malicious and disbelieving crowd gathered there. A people full of hate rather than love came together. A group of ill-disposed and ill-mannered people assembled. "He began to teach in their synagogues, so that they were astonished." They were astonished because of indignation and not because of grace. They were amazed because of envy and not because of praise. They raged because what the proud seated on the floor were unable to discern, humility on its feet was thoroughly teaching.

"So that they were astonished, and said, 'Where did he get this wisdom?' " The one who speaks this way does not know God, from whom is wisdom and from whom are mighty works. Solomon points to that source of wisdom. While still young, he accepted the highest honor of the kingdom so he might rule the people entrusted to him with virtue and not with arrogance, with wisdom and not with pride, with his heart and not with his head. He wanted wisdom from God, earnestly asked for it and received it. "Where did he get this wisdom and these mighty works?" The mighty power that gives eyesight denied by nature, that restores hearing to those drowned in silence, that unscrambles the words of those who are mute, that enables the lame to walk again and that orders souls headed for the realm of the dead to return to their bodies is from God, unless someone envious of salvation should deny it.

He taught in their synagogues where great numbers were met, because it was for the salvation of the multitude that He came from heaven upon earth. It follows; So that they marvelled, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these many mighty works? His wisdom is referred to His doctrine, His mighty works to His miracles.

As the case stood, however, it was actually the ordinary condition of His terrene flesh which made all things else about Him wonderful, as when they said, "Whence hath this man this wisdom and these mighty works? " Thus spake even they who despised His outward form.

And coming into his own country. His country is sometimes called Nazareth, where he was brought up, and there he worked few miracles; sometimes Bethlehem, where he was born; sometimes Capharnaum, because he worked miracles there. And he taught them in their synagogues, etc. There follows the wonder. And first the wonder is set forth; secondly, its effect is identified. He says: so that they wondered. It was not surprising if they wondered; Ps 118:129: your testimonies are wonderful. They wondered whence those powers came: for wonder is caused when the effect is seen but the cause is unknown. They saw the manifest effect, but did not know the cause; hence they said: whence has this man this wisdom and these mighty works? But this was a foolish wonder, because 1 Cor 1:24 states that he is the power and the wisdom of God. But they did not know this, and therefore they wondered.

Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son.

Those heretics were called Antidicomarites who denied the virginity of Mary to the point that they claim that after the birth of Christ she had intercourse with her husband.

(Quæst. in Matt. q. 17.) No wonder then that any kinsmen by the mother's side should be called the Lord's brethren, when even by their kindred to Joseph some are here called His brethren by those who thought Him the son of Joseph.

Jude, who wrote the Catholic Epistle, the brother of the sons of Joseph, and very religious, while knowing the near relationship of the Lord, yet did not say that he himself was His brother. But what said he? "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ,"— of Him as Lord; but "the brother of James." [Jude 1] For this is true; he was His brother, (the son) of Joseph.

And verily the blessed Jeremiah says, as to our Lord Jesus Christ, "For both thy brethren and the house of thy father, they too despised Thee, and they cried out; of thy followers were they gathered together: believe them not, for they will speak fair words unto Thee." [Jeremiah 12:6] For His brethren who before the faith thought little of Him, and in the words just spoken, all but attempt to cry out against Him, were gathered together through faith, and have spoken fair words unto Him, both aiding others, and striving with words in behalf of the faith. Very watchfully did the Prophet, having named His brethren, profitably add, The house of Thy father, lest they too should be supposed to have been of the blessed Virgin, rather than of His father Joseph alone.

It helps us to understand the terms 'first-born' and 'only-begotten' when the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin 'until she brought forth her first-born son' [Matt. 1:25]; for neither did Mary, who is to be honored and praised above all others, marry anyone else, nor did she ever become the Mother of anyone else, but even after childbirth she remained always and forever an immaculate virgin

Because there are those who dare to say that Mary cohabited with Joseph after she bore the Redeemer, we reply, 'How would it have been possible for her who was the home of the indwelling of the Spirit, whom the divine power overshadowed, that she be joined by a mortal being, and gave birth filled with birthpangs, in the image of the primeval curse?' If Mary was blessed of women, she would have been exempt from the curse from the beginning, and from the bearing of children in birthpangs and curses. It would be impossible therefore to call one who gave birth with these birthpangs blessed.

For I have heard from someone that certain persons are venturing to say that she had marital relations after the Savior's birth. And I am not surprised. The ignorance of persons who do not know the sacred scriptures well and have not consulted histories, always turns them to one thing after another, and distracts anyone who wants to track down something about the truth out of his own head. To begin with, when the Virgin was entrusted to Joseph - lots having compelled her to take this step - she was not entrusted to him for marriage, since he was a widower. He was called her husband because of the Law, but it plainly follows from the Jewish tradition that the Virgin was not entrusted to him for matrimony. It was for the preservation of her virginity in witness to the things to come - [a witness] that Christ's incarnation was nothing spurious but was truly attested, as without a man's seed but truly brought about by the Holy Spirit.

And yet some very depraved men take from this the basis of their view that there were many brothers of our Lord as a point of tradition. If there had been sons of Mary who were not rather produced from a previous marriage of Joseph's, Mary never would have been transferred to the apostle John as his mother at the time of the Passion, nor would the Lord have said to them both, "Woman, behold your son," and to John, "Behold your mother," [John 19:26-27] unless perhaps he was leaving his disciple's filial love in order to comfort her who was left behind.

But clearly this was the son of the carpenter who was subduing iron with fire, melting away all the might of the world with good judgment and forming the mass into every work that was humanly useful. He was molding the formless material of our bodies into members for different ministries and for every work of eternal life. They all became irritated at these things. Among the many astonishing things he did, they were most deeply moved by his contemplativeness and his bodily self-control.

And this was the carpenter's son who subdues iron by means of fire, who tries the virtue of this world in the judgment, and forms the rude mass to every work of human need; the figure of our bodies, for example, to the divers ministrations of the limbs, and all the actions of life eternal.

How then, says Helvidius, do you make out that they were called the Lord's brethren who were not his brethren? I will show how that is. In Holy Scripture there are four kinds of brethren — by nature, race, kindred, love. Instances of brethren by nature are Esau and Jacob, the twelve patriarchs, Andrew and Peter, James and John. As to race, all Jews are called brethren of one another, as in Deuteronomy, [Deuteronomy 15:12] "If your brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto you, and serve you six years; then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you." And in the same book, [Deuteronomy 17:15] "You shall in anywise set him king over you, whom the Lord your God shall choose: one from among your brethren shall you set king over you; you may not put a foreigner over you, which is not your brother." And again, [Deuteronomy 22:1] "You shall not see your brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and hide yourself from them: you shall surely bring them again unto your brother. And if your brother be not near unto you, or if you know him not, then you shall bring it home to your house, and it shall be with you until your brother seek after it, and you shall restore it to him again." And the Apostle Paul says, [Romans 9:3-4] "I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh: who are Israelites." Moreover they are called brethren by kindred who are of one family, that is πατρία, which corresponds to the Latin paternitas, because from a single root a numerous progeny proceeds. In Genesis [Genesis 13:8, 11] we read, "And Abram said to Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray you, between me and you, and between my herdmen and your herdmen; for we are brethren." And again, "So Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan, and Lot journeyed east: and they separated each from his brother." Certainly Lot was not Abraham's brother, but the son of Abraham's brother Aram. For Terah begot Abraham and Nahor and Aram: and Aram begot Lot. Again we read, [Genesis 12:4] "And Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son." But if you still doubt whether a nephew can be called a son, let me give you an instance. [Genesis 14:14] "And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen." And after describing the night attack and the slaughter, he adds, "And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot." Let this suffice by way of proof of my assertion. But for fear you may make some cavilling objection, and wriggle out of your difficulty like a snake, I must bind you fast with the bonds of proof to stop your hissing and complaining, for I know you would like to say you have been overcome not so much by Scripture truth as by intricate arguments. Jacob, the son of Isaac and Rebecca, when in fear of his brother's treachery he had gone to Mesopotamia, drew near and rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, and watered the flocks of Laban, his mother's brother. [Genesis 29:11] "And Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice, and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother, and that he was Rebekah's son." Here is an example of the rule already referred to, by which a nephew is called a brother. And again, [Genesis 29:15] "Laban said to Jacob. Because you are my brother, should you therefore serve me for nought? Tell me what shall your wages be." And so, when, at the end of twenty years, without the knowledge of his father-in-law and accompanied by his wives and sons he was returning to his country, on Laban overtaking him in the mountain of Gilead and failing to find the idols which Rachel hid among the baggage, Jacob answered and said to Laban, [Genesis 31:36-37] "What is my trespass? What is my sin, that you have so hotly pursued after me? Whereas you have felt all about my stuff, what have you found of all your household stuff? Set it here before my brethren and your brethren, that they may judge between us two." Tell me who are those brothers of Jacob and Laban who were present there? Esau, Jacob's brother, was certainly not there, and Laban, the son of Bethuel, had no brothers although he had a sister Rebecca.

Innumerable instances of the same kind are to be found in the sacred books. But, to be brief, I will return to the last of the four classes of brethren, those, namely, who are brethren by affection, and these again fall into two divisions, those of the spiritual and those of the general relationship. I say spiritual because all of us Christians are called brethren, as in the verse, "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity." And in another psalm the Saviour says, "I will declare your name unto my brethren." And elsewhere, [John 20:17] "Go unto my brethren and say to them." I say also general, because we are all children of one Father, there is a like bond of brotherhood between us all. [Isaiah 66:5] "Tell these who hate you," says the prophet, "you are our brethren." And the Apostle writing to the Corinthians: [1 Corinthians 5:11] "If any man that is named brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such a one no, not to eat." I now ask to which class you consider the Lord's brethren in the Gospel must be assigned. They are brethren by nature, you say. But Scripture does not say so; it calls them neither sons of Mary, nor of Joseph. Shall we say they are brethren by race? But it is absurd to suppose that a few Jews were called His brethren when all Jews of the time might upon this principle have borne the title. Were they brethren by virtue of close intimacy and the union of heart and mind? If that were so, who were more truly His brethren than the apostles who received His private instruction and were called by Him His mother and His brethren? Again, if all men, as such, were His brethren, it would have been foolish to deliver a special message, "Behold, your brethren seek you," for all men alike were entitled to the name. The only alternative is to adopt the previous explanation and understand them to be called brethren in virtue of the bond of kindred, not of love and sympathy, nor by prerogative of race, nor yet by nature. Just as Lot was called Abraham's brother, and Jacob Laban's, just as the daughters of Zelophehad received a lot among their brethren, just as Abraham himself had to wife Sarah his sister, for he says, [Genesis 20:11] "She is indeed my sister, on the father's side, not on the mother's," that is to say, she was the daughter of his brother, not of his sister...

It is clear that our Lord's brethren bore the name in the same way that Joseph was called his father: [Luke 1:18] "I and your father sought you sorrowing." It was His mother who said this, not the Jews. The Evangelist himself relates that His father and His mother were marvelling at the things which were spoken concerning Him, and there are similar passages which we have already quoted in which Joseph and Mary are called his parents. Seeing that you have been foolish enough to persuade yourself that the Greek manuscripts are corrupt, you will perhaps plead the diversity of readings. I therefore come to the Gospel of John, and there it is plainly written, [John 1:45] "Philip finds Nathanael, and says unto him, We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." You will certainly find this in your manuscript. Now tell me, how is Jesus the son of Joseph when it is clear that He was begotten of the Holy Ghost? Was Joseph His true father? Dull as you are, you will not venture to say that. Was he His reputed father? If so, let the same rule be applied to them when they are called brethren, that you apply to Joseph when he is called father.

(Verse 55, 56.) Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother called Mary, and his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did he get all these things? And they took offense at him. The error of the Jews is our salvation, and the condemnation of the heretics. For they saw Jesus Christ merely as a man, so that the carpenters thought him to be the son: Isn't this the carpenter's son? Are you surprised if they err about his brothers, when they err about his father? This place has been explained more fully in the aforementioned book against Helvedius.

(in Helvid. 14.) Those who are here called the Lord's brethren, are the sons of a Mary, His Mother's sister; she is the mother of this James and Joseph, that is to say, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and this is the Mary who is called the mother of James the Less.

And when they are mistaken in His Father, no wonder if they are also mistaken in His brethren. Whence it is added, Is not his mother Mary, and his brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?

This error of the Jews is our salvation, and the condemnation of the heretics, for they perceived Jesus Christ to be man so far as to think Him the son of a carpenter.

Under the word 'brethren' the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.

Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ's 'brothers' are sometimes mentioned.

How then, one may say, are James and the others called His brethren? In the same kind of way as Joseph himself was supposed to be husband of Mary. For many were the veils provided, that the birth, being such as it was, might be for a time screened. Wherefore even John so called them, saying, "For neither did His brethren believe in Him."

"Is not this the carpenter's son?" The greater then the marvel, and the more abundant the ground of amaze. "Is not His mother called Mary, and His brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? and His sisters, are they not all with us? Whence hath this man these things? And they were offended in Him."

Seest thou that Nazareth was where He was discoursing? "Are not his brethren," it is said, "such a one, and such a one?" And what of this? Why, by this especially you ought to have been led on to faith. But envy you see is a poor base thing, and often falls foul of itself. For what things were strange and marvellous, and enough to have gained them over, these offended them.

I believe that He [Jesus] was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.

I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.

And depreciating the whole of what appeared to be His nearest kindred, they said, "Is not His mother called Mary? And His brethren, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?" [Matthew 13:55-56] They thought, then, that He was the son of Joseph and Mary. But some say, basing it on a tradition in the Gospel according to Peter, as it is entitled, or "The Book of James," that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honour of Mary in virginity to the end, so that that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word which said, "The Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you," [Luke 1:35] might not know intercourse with a man after that the Holy Ghost came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the first-fruit among men of the purity which consists in chastity, and Mary among women; for it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the first-fruit of virginity. And James is he whom Paul says in the Epistle to the Galatians that he saw, "But other of the Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother." [Galatians 1:19] And to so great a reputation among the people for righteousness did this James rise, that Flavius Josephus, who wrote the "Antiquities of the Jews" in twenty books, when wishing to exhibit the cause why the people suffered so great misfortunes that even the temple was razed to the ground, said, that these things happened to them in accordance with the wrath of God in consequence of the things which they had dared to do against James the brother of Jesus who is called Christ. And the wonderful thing is, that, though he did not accept Jesus as Christ, he yet gave testimony that the righteousness of James was so great; and he says that the people thought that they had suffered these things because of James. And Jude, who wrote a letter of few lines, it is true, but filled with the healthful words of heavenly grace, said in the preface, "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ and the brother of James." [Jude 1]

(1) Mary the mother of the Lord; (2) Mary the wife of Cleophas or Alphaeus, who was the mother of James the bishop and apostle, and of Simon and Thaddeus, and of one Joseph; (3) Mary Salome, wife of Zebedee, mother of John the evangelist and James; (4) Mary Magdalene. These four are found in the Gospel. James and Judas and Joseph were sons of an aunt (2) of the Lord's. James also and John were sons of another aunt (3) of the Lord's. Mary (2), mother of James the Less and Joseph, wife of Alphaeus was the sister of Mary the mother of the Lord, whom John names of Cleophas, either from her father or from the family of the clan, or for some other reason. Mary Salome (3) is called Salome either from her husband or her village. Some affirm that she is the same as Mary of Cleophas, because she had two husbands.

[NOTE: This is often erroneously attributed to Papias of Hierapolis, AD 130]

And the priest said to Joseph, You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the virgin of the Lord. But Joseph refused, saying: I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl. I am afraid lest I become a laughing-stock to the sons of Israel.

(non occ. cf. Serm. 135. App.) For the Father of Christ is that Divine Workman who made all these works of nature, who set forth Noah's ark, who ordained the tabernacle of Moses, and instituted the Ark of the covenant; that Workman who polishes the stubborn mind, and cuts down the proud thoughts.

Come, now, if you have read in the utterance of the prophet in the Psalms, "God hath reigned from the tree," I wait to hear what you understand thereby; for fear you may perhaps think some carpenter-king is signified, and not Christ, who has reigned from that time onward when he overcame the death which ensued from His passion of "the tree.

John was related to Jesus, in the following manner. Joseph, the Betrothed of the most pure Theotokos, had seven children by his previous wife—four sons, and three daughters whose names were Martha, Esther, and Salome. John was the son of Salome; therefore, Jesus was John's uncle. Because Salome was the daughter of Joseph—the "father of the Lord"—she was considered to be the Lord's sister; and her son, John, the Lord's nephew. Salome means "peaceful"; John means "the grace of her." May every soul understand that Christ's peace, which is offered to all men, calms the passions of the soul, and gives birth to divine grace within us. But a soul in turmoil, always battling with others and with itself, cannot be counted worthy of divine grace. Consider another marvelous thing about John. Only he is said to have three mothers: first, Salome, his natural mother; second, thunder, for he is a "son of thunder" (Mk 3:17), on account of his powerful proclamation of the Gospel ; and third, Mary, the Theotokos, concerning whom the Lord said to John, "Behold thy mother" (Jn 19:27).

The Lord had brothers and sisters, the children of Joseph which he begat by the wife of his brother Cleopas. For when Cleopas died childless, Joseph took his wife in accordance with the law and had six children by her, four boys and two girls, Mary, who was called the daughter of Cleopas, in accordance with the law, and Salome.

Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children. For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection: for as He is in His Godhead the Only-Begotten of the Father, being thus His Son in every respect perfect, so it was becoming that He should be the Only-begotten son of His Mother, as being her perfect offspring.

Secondly, this error is an insult to the Holy Ghost, whose "shrine" was the virginal womb ["Sacrarium Spiritus Sancti" (Office of B. M. V., Ant. ad Benedictus, T. P.), wherein He had formed the flesh of Christ: wherefore it was unbecoming that it should be desecrated by intercourse with man.

Thirdly, this is derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God's Mother: for thus she would seem to be most ungrateful, were she not content with such a Son; and were she, of her own accord, by carnal intercourse to forfeit that virginity which had been miraculously preserved in her.

Fourthly, it would be tantamount to an imputation of extreme presumption in Joseph, to assume that he attempted to violate her whom by the angel's revelation he knew to have conceived by the Holy Ghost.

We must therefore simply assert that the Mother of God, as she was a virgin in conceiving Him and a virgin in giving Him birth, did she remain a virgin ever afterwards...

Some, as Jerome says on Matthew 12:49-50, "suppose that the brethren of the Lord were Joseph's sons by another wife. But we understand the brethren of the Lord to be not sons of Joseph, but cousins of the Saviour, the sons of Mary, His Mother's sister." For "Scripture speaks of brethren in four senses; namely, those who are united by being of the same parents, of the same nation, of the same family, by common affection." Wherefore the brethren of the Lord are so called, not by birth, as being born of the same mother; but by relationship, as being blood-relations of His. But Joseph, as Jerome says (Contra Helvid. ix), is rather to be believed to have remained a virgin, "since he is not said to have had another wife," and "a holy man does not live otherwise than chastely."

And they set forth their wonder and their knowledge: hence they said, is not this the carpenter's son? For he was thought to be the son of Joseph, who was not an ironworker but a woodworker: although he could also be called the son of the craftsman who fashioned the dawn and the sun, Ps 73:16. Is not his mother called Mary? They knew all the things that pertained to his humanity. About Mary it is stated above at 1:18: when his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, etc. And his brethren James and Joseph, Simon and Jude. Helvidius understood these to be sons of Mary. But this is false; rather they were his cousins. Or they are called brethren because they were of the kindred of Joseph, who was thought to be the father of Jesus. Gen 13:8: let there be no strife between me and you, for we are brethren, Abraham said to Lot: although Lot was the son of his brother.

I have never thought, still less taught, or declared publicly, anything concerning the subject of the ever Virgin Mary, Mother of our salvation, which could be considered dishonorable, impious, unworthy or evil... I believe with all my heart according to the word of holy gospel that this pure virgin bore for us the Son of God and that she remained, in the birth and after it, a pure and unsullied virgin, for eternity.

The Lord had brothers and sisters, the children of Joseph which he begat by the wife of his brother Cleopas. For when Cleopas died childless, Joseph took his wife in accordance with the law and had six children by her, four boys and two girls, Mary, who was called the daughter of Cleopas, in accordance with the law, and Salome.

And in the same way is to be understood what follows: and his sisters, are they not all with us? Therefore from those things which pertained to the flesh, they went forth into wonder, saying: whence then has this man all these things?

(Verse 58) And he did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief. Not because he was unable to do many miracles for them, who were unbelieving; but rather because in doing many miracles he would condemn the unbelieving citizens. It can also be understood in another way, that Jesus is despised in his own home and country, that is, among the Jewish people. And therefore, he performed only a few signs there, so that they would not become completely without excuse. But he performs greater signs daily among the nations through his apostles, not so much in the healing of bodies, but in the salvation of souls.

Not that because they did not believe He could not do His mighty works; but that He might not by doing them be condemning His fellow-citizens in their unbelief.

Or we may understand it otherwise, that Jesus is despised in His own house and country, signifies in the Jewish people; and therefore He did among them few miracles, that they might not be altogether without excuse; but among the Gentiles He does daily greater miracles by His Apostles, not so much in healing their bodies, as in saving their souls.

But if His miracles raised their wonder, why did He not work many? Because He looked not to display of Himself, but to what would profit others; and when that did not result, He despised what pertained only to Himself that He might not increase their punishment. Why then did He even these few miracles? That they should not say, We should have believed had any miracles been done among us.

It seems to me that the production of miracles is similar in some ways to the case of physical things. Cultivation is not sufficient to produce a harvest of fruits unless the soil, or rather the atmosphere, cooperates to this end. And the atmosphere of itself is not sufficient to produce a harvest without cultivation. The one who providentially orders creation did not design things to spring up from the earth without cultivation. Only in the first instance did he do so when he said, "Let the earth bring forth vegetation, with the seed sowing according to its kind and according to its likeness."It is just this way in regard to the production of miracles. The complete work resulting in a healing is not displayed without those being healed exercising faith. Faith, of whatever quality it might be, does not produce a healing without divine power.

Christ indeed came to his own country, because it was written, "He came among his own, and his own did not receive him." In plain fact, when he says, "A prophet is not without honor except in his own country," he is teaching that it is a painful situation to have influence among his own. To stand out among the local denizens is similar to an inflammation. A near relation's glory burns the near relations. If neighbors have to pay homage to a neighbor, they consider it servitude. "And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief." Power has no effect where unbelief does not deserve it. And while Christ does not demand a reward when he heals, he becomes indignant when injustice is shown to him instead of honor.

Hence it follows: and he did not work many miracles there; not because he could not, since he was omnipotent, but he did not, because the purpose for which he worked miracles was that they might believe in him. But they held him in contempt, because they interpreted things in a bad sense, and therefore they were not disposed to faith: yet he worked some, so that they might be rendered inexcusable; and therefore he says not many, because he worked some. And this was on account of their unbelief.