John § 28
Female saints
They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
λέγουσιν αὐτῷ· διδάσκαλε, αὕτη ἡ γυνὴ κατείληπται ἐπ’ αὐτοφώρῳ μοιχευομένη·
глаго́лаша є҆мꙋ̀: ᲂу҆чт҃лю, сїѧ̀ жена̀ ꙗ҆́та є҆́сть нн҃ѣ въ прелюбодѣѧ́нїи:
"And they said to him: Master," they say this by way of flattery, so that they might deceive and conceal themselves: Chrysostom: "They call him Master, whose disciples they do not wish to be." They said something similar in Matthew twenty-two: "Master, we know that you are truthful and teach the way of God in truth." "This woman was just now caught in adultery," by the evidence of the deed, or by witnesses.
Commentary on John, Chapter 8The Evangelist shows them proceeding with their test. First, they point out the woman's fault; secondly, they state the justice of the case according to the Law; thirdly, they ask him for his verdict.
They point out the woman's fault when they say this woman has just now been caught in adultery. They detail her fault in three ways, calculated to deflect Christ from his gentle manner. First, they mention the freshness of her fault, saying just now; for an old fault does not affect us so much, because the person might have made amends. Secondly, they note its certainty, saying, caught, so that she could not excuse herself. This is characteristic of women, as we see from Proverbs (33:20): "She wipes her mouth and says: 'I have done no evil.'" Thirdly, they point out that her fault is great, in adultery, which is a serious crime and the cause of many evils. "Every woman who is an adulterous will sin" (Sir 9), and first of all against the law of her God.
Commentary on JohnNow Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
καὶ ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ἡμῶν Μωϋσῆς ἐνετείλατο τὰς τοιαύτας λιθάζειν.
въ зако́нѣ же на́мъ мѡѷсе́й повелѣ̀ такѡвы́ѧ ка́менїемъ побива́ти: ты́ же что̀ гл҃еши;
(Tract. xxxiii. s. 4) They had remarked upon Him already, as being over lenient. Of Him indeed it had been prophesied, Ride on because of the word of truth, of meekness, and of righteousness. (Ps. 44) So as a teacher He exhibited truth, as a deliverer meekness, as a judge righteousness. When He spoke, His truth was acknowledged; when against His enemies He used no violence, His meekness was praised. So they raised the scandal on the score of justice. For they said among themselves, If He decide to let her go, He will not do justice; for the law cannot command what is unjust: Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but to maintain His meekness, which has made Him already so acceptable to the people, He must decide to let her go. Wherefore they demand His opinion: And what sayest Thou? hoping to find an occasion to accuse Him, as a transgressor of the law: And this they said tempting Him, that they might have to accuse Him. But our Lord in His answer both maintained His justice, and departed not from meekness. Jesus stooped down, and with His finger wrote on the ground.
Catena Aurea by AquinasWhen the Lord was about to give pardon to the sinful woman, he desired to write with his finger on the ground, in order to point out that it was he himself who once wrote the Ten Commandments of the law on stone with his finger, that is, by the action of the Holy Spirit. And it is good that the law was written upon stone, since it was given to subdue the inmost hearts of a hard-hearted and defiant people.
Homilies on the Gospels 1.25"But in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women": Deuteronomy twenty-two: "If a man has lain with his neighbor's wife, both shall die," that is, the adulterer and the adulteress. "What therefore do you say?" They asked this not from zeal for inquiry, but from guile to deceive: and this the Evangelist expresses.
Commentary on John, Chapter 8The Scribes and Pharisees kept accusing her and kept earnestly pressing the case, for they wished to stone her to death, according to the law. "But Jesus, stooping down, began to write with his finger on the ground," the sins, to be sure, of those who were making the accusation, as well as the sins of all mortal beings according to what is written in the prophet, "Those who depart from you shall be written in the earth."
Against the Pelagians 2.17They appeal to the justice contained in the Law when they remark, in the Law, that is, in Leviticus (20:10) and in Deuteronomy (22:21), Moses commanded us to stone such a woman.
They ask Jesus for his verdict when they say, But what do you say? Their question is a trap, for they are saying in effect: If he decides that she should be let go, he will not be acting according to justice, yet he cannot condemn her because he came to seek and to save those who are lost: "God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him" (3:17). Now the Law could not command anything unjust. Thus, Jesus does not say, "Let her go," lest he seem to be acting in violation of the Law.
Commentary on JohnThis they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
σὺ οὖν τί λέγεις; τοῦτο δὲ εἶπον ἐκπειράζοντες αὐτόν, ἵνα σχῶσι κατηγορίαν κατ’ αὐτοῦ. ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς κάτω κύψας τῷ δακτύλῳ ἔγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν.
Сїе́ же рѣ́ша и҆скꙋша́юще є҆го̀, да бы́ша и҆мѣ́ли что̀ глаго́лати на́нь. І҆и҃съ же до́лꙋ прекло́ньсѧ, пе́рстомъ писа́ше на землѝ, не слага́ѧ (и҆̀мъ).
The ground denotes the human heart, which yieldeth the fruit either of good or of bad actions: the finger jointed and flexible, discretion. He instructs us then, when we see any faults in our neighbours, not immediately and rashly to condemn them, but after searching our own hearts to begin with, to examine them attentively with the finger of discretion.
Catena Aurea by AquinasHe who had come as the Redeemer, not the condemner (for He had come to redeem what was lost) turned away from them, as if not wishing to look at them. This turning away from them is no trivial thing. Something is implied in this turning away. As if He would say: "You bring a sinner to Me, you sinners. If you think I should condemn sins, I begin with you."
Sermon 16AHe wrote with His finger upon the ground, as if He would indicate that people of the character of these men would be written on earth, and not in heaven, as He also admonished His disciples to rejoice that their names were written in heaven! Or, it may be that He meant to convey the idea that it was by humbling Himself (which He expressed by bending down His head) that He wrought signs upon the earth; or, that the time was now come when His law should be written, not, as formerly, on the sterile stone, but on a soil which would yield fruit.
The Harmony of the Gospels, Book 4What did this indulgence signify? Grace. What did that hardness signify? The law given on stones. Therefore, the Lord was writing with His finger, but now on the ground, from which fruit could be received. However, whatever is sown on stone does not sprout, because it cannot send down roots. The finger of God, and the finger of God: the law was written by the finger of God, the finger of God, the Holy Spirit.
Sermon 272B(de Con. Evang. lib. ii. c. 10) As if to signify that such persons were to be written in earth, not in heaven, where He told His disciples they should rejoice they were written. Or His bowing His head (to write on the ground), is an expression of humility; the writing on the ground signifying that His law was written on the earth which bore fruit, not on the barren stone, as before.
Catena Aurea by AquinasHis writing with His finger on the ground perhaps showed, that it was He who had written the law on stone.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas"But this they said, testing him, that they might be able to accuse him." Whence to those questioning in a similar manner the Lord responded, Matthew twenty-two: "Why do you test me, hypocrites?" "That they might accuse him," as in the Passion; Matthew twenty-seven: "And when he was accused by the elders and chief priests, he answered nothing."
"But Jesus, bending down." Here the third point is touched upon, namely Christ's prudent response. For he responded prudently, because with great moderation. For he was moderate, not hastening his judgment. Whence he says: "Jesus, bending down, wrote with his finger on the ground," namely waiting, if perchance they might come to their senses from their deceitful question: "he wrote with his finger," to indicate that he had written the Law with his finger, Deuteronomy nine and Exodus thirty-one. He was also moderate in passing judgment, because he neither inclined to the rigor of the Law, so as to say she should be killed, nor did he contradict the Law, so as to give them occasion to accuse him.
But a doubt arises here: since this question could easily have been determined from the Law, and one who tests ought to ask doubtful things, whence is it that the deceitful Pharisees proposed such a question to the Lord?
Some respond that the whole thing seems to have been done by human contrivance; whence they said that this was inserted into the Gospel of John, just as the story of Susanna into Daniel. As testimony for this matter they adduced that Chrysostom makes no mention of this; whence he leaps to that passage: "Again Jesus spoke," etc.
But Augustine and our expositors explain it as part of the sequence of the Gospel.
As for the fact that Chrysostom says nothing about it, I do not know the reason. Some say that it was not found in the ancient Greek books, because John added it after the Gospel was completed.
Therefore it must be said that the Pharisees envied the Lord because He was praised for meekness and justice together, according to that verse of the Psalm: "For truth and meekness and justice." Therefore they propose a question in which He would necessarily have to incline toward the rigor of justice against meekness, so that He would be considered harsh, or contradict the justice of the Law. And they had contrived it as though insoluble, so that whichever side He took, they would obtain their purpose; but the Lord wisely responded to the person, not to the argument.
Likewise it is asked about the fact that the Lord was writing on the ground during the delivery of His sentence.
For it seemed a childish act, because it was not lasting, nor could anyone read it. Likewise, why did He write with His finger? Likewise, what was He writing? I respond: The moral reason why He wrote before the sentence and after on the ground is to teach us, as Bede says, that "before we rebuke a sinning neighbor, and after we have rendered the ministry of correction, we should examine ourselves with a worthy investigation of humility, lest perchance we be entangled either in the same sins that we rebuke, or in others." Another reason is to show that a sentence is to be delivered with deliberation and first written down, and that words are to be measured according to the order of law.
The third reason is to show that He condemns unwillingly, and that a man ought to deliver a sentence of condemnation unwillingly and with sorrow.
The fourth reason is to give them opportunity to desist from their malicious case; and this indeed pertains to judges.
As to what is asked: what was He writing? Augustine responds that He wrote what He spoke. But Ambrose says that He wrote: "Earth, earth, write down the rejected men," and this is drawn from Jeremiah chapter twenty-two. The Interlinear Gloss says that He was writing "their sins." Others say that He was writing letters in which each one could read his own sins.
As to what is asked: why did He write with His finger? The reason is literal, because I believe He did not have another pen. There is also a moral and allegorical reason: moral, because by the finger is understood discernment; He wished each person to examine himself with discernment; allegorical, to signify that He was the one who had written the Law with His finger, Exodus chapter thirty-one.
Commentary on John, Chapter 8Now, as a literary historian, I am perfectly convinced that whatever else the Gospels are they are not legends. I have read a great deal of legend and I am quite clear that they are not the same sort of thing. They are not artistic enough to be legends. From an imaginative point of view they are clumsy, they don't work up to things properly. Most of the life of Jesus is totally unknown to us, as is the life of anyone else who lived at that time, and no people building up a legend would allow that to be so. Apart from bits of the Platonic dialogues, there are no conversations that I know of in ancient literature like the Fourth Gospel. There is nothing, even in modern literature, until about a hundred years ago when the realistic novel came into existence. In the story of the woman taken in adultery we are told Christ bent down and scribbled in the dust with His finger. Nothing comes of this. No one has ever based any doctrine on it. And the art of inventing little irrelevant details to make an imaginary scene more convincing is a purely modern art. Surely the only explanation of this passage is that the thing really happened? The author put it in simply because he had seen it.
What Are We to Make of Jesus Christ?, from God in the DockThe Evangelist reveals the malicious intention behind those who were questioning Jesus when he says, They said this to test him so that they could accuse him. For they thought that Christ would say that she should be let go, so as not to be acting contrary to his gentle manner; and then they would accuse him of acting in violation of the Law: "Let us not test Christ as they did" as we read in 1 Corinthians (10:9).
Then, Jesus checks his enemies by his wisdom. The Pharisees were testing him on two points: his justice and his mercy. But Jesus preserved both in his answer. First, the Evangelist shows how Jesus kept to what was just; and secondly, that he did not abandon mercy (v 7). As to the first, he does two things: first, he mentions the sentence in accordance with justice; secondly the effect of this sentence (v 9). About the first he does three things: first, we see Jesus writing his sentence; then pronouncing it; and thirdly, continuing again to write it down.
Jesus wrote his sentence on the earth with his finger: But Jesus bending down wrote on the ground with his finger. Some say that he wrote the words Jeremiah: "O earth, earth, listen—write down this man as sterile" (Jer 22:29). According to others, and this is the better opinion, Jesus wrote down the very words he spoke, that is, Whoever among you is without sin, let him be the first to cast a stone at her. However, neither of these opinions is certain.
Jesus wrote on the earth for three reasons. First, according to Augustine, to show that those who were testing him would be written on the earth: "O Lord, all who leave you will be written on the earth" (Jer 17:13). But those who are just and the disciples who follow him are written in heaven: "Rejoice, because your names are written in heaven" (Lk 10:20). Secondly, he wrote on earth to show that he would perform signs on earth, for he who writes make signs. Thus, to write on the earth is to make signs. And so he says that Jesus was bending down, by the mystery of the Incarnation, by means of which he performed miracles in the flesh he had assumed. Thirdly, he wrote on the earth because the Old Law was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31; 2 Cor 3), which signify its harshness: "A man who violates the law of Moses dies without mercy" (Heb 10:28). But the earth is soft. And so Jesus wrote on the earth to show the sweetness and the softness of the New Law that he gave to us.
We can see from this that there are three things to be considered in giving sentences. First, there should be kindness in condescending to those to be punished; and so he says, Jesus was bending down: "There is judgment without mercy to him who does not have mercy" (Jas 2:13); "If a man is overtaken in any fault, you who are spiritual instruct him in a spirit of mildness" (Gal 6:1). Secondly, there should be discretion in determining the judgment and so he says that Jesus wrote with his finger, which because of its flexibility signifies discretion: "The fingers of a man's hand appeared, writing" (Dan 5:5). Thirdly, there should be certitude about the sentence given; and so he says, Jesus wrote.
Commentary on JohnSo when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
ὡς δὲ ἐπέμενον ἐρωτῶντες αὐτόν, ἀνέκυψε καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν πρῶτος βαλέτω λίθον ἐπ’ αὐτήν.
Ꙗ҆́коже прилѣжа́хꙋ вопроша́юще є҆го̀, воскло́ньсѧ речѐ къ ни̑мъ: и҆́же є҆́сть без̾ грѣха̀ въ ва́съ, пре́жде {пе́рвый} ве́рзи ка́мень на ню̀.
And He, who had come to forgive sins, said: "Whoever among you knows himself to be without sin, let him first cast a stone at her." O response, or proposal! If they wished to cast a stone at the sinner, at that moment it would again be said: "In whatever judgment you judge, you will be judged." You condemn, you will be condemned. However, although they did not recognize the Creator, they knew their own conscience. Putting their faces one after another, so that they would not see each other out of shame, from the oldest—as the Evangelist said—to the youngest, they all went out. For the Holy Spirit had said: "All have turned away, together they have become worthless; there is none who does good, not even one."
Sermon 16AWhat answer, then, did the Lord Jesus make? How answered the Truth? How answered Wisdom? How answered that Righteousness against which a false accusation was ready? He did not say, Let her not be stoned; lest He should seem to speak against the law. But God forbid that He should say, Let her be stoned: for He came not to lose, what He had found, but to seek what was lost. What then did He answer? See you how full it is of righteousness, how full of meekness and truth! "He that is without sin of you," saith He, "let him first cast a stone at her." O answer of Wisdom! How He sent them unto themselves! For without they stood to accuse and censure, themselves they examined not inwardly: they saw the adulteress, they looked not into themselves. Transgressors of the law, they wished the law to be fulfilled, and this by heedlessly accusing; not really fulfilling it, as if condemning adulteries by chastity. You have heard, O Jews, you have heard, O Pharisees, you have heard, O teachers of the law, the guardian of the law, but have not yet understood Him as the Lawgiver. What else does He signify to you when He writes with His finger on the ground? For the law was written with the finger of God; but written on stone because of the hard-hearted. The Lord now wrote on the ground, because He was seeking fruit. You have heard then, Let the law be fulfilled, let the adulteress be stoned. But is it by punishing her that the law is to be fulfilled by those that ought to be punished? Let each of you consider himself, let him enter into himself, ascend the judgment-seat of his own mind, place himself at the bar of his own conscience, oblige himself to confess. For he knows what he is: for "no man knoweth the things of a man, but the spirit of man which is in him." Each looking carefully into himself, finds himself a sinner. Yes, indeed. Hence, either let this woman go, or together with her receive ye the penalty of the law. Had He said, Let not the adulteress be stoned, He would be proved unjust: had He said, Let her be stoned, He would not appear gentle: let Him say what it became Him to say, both the gentle and the just, "Whoso is without sin of you, let him first cast a stone at her." This is the voice of Justice: Let her, the sinner, be punished, but not by sinners: let the law be fulfilled, but not by the transgressors of the law. This certainly is the voice of justice: by which justice, those men pierced through as if by a dart, looking into themselves and finding themselves guilty, "one after another all withdrew." The two were left alone, the wretched woman and Mercy. But the Lord, having struck them through with that dart of justice, deigned not to heed their fall, but, turning away His look from them, "again He wrote with His finger on the ground."
Tractates on John 33(Tract. xxxiii. 5) He did not say, Stone her not, lest He should seem to speak contrary to the law. But God forbid that He should say, Stone her; for He came not to destroy that which He found, but to seek that which was lost. What then did He answer? He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. This is the voice of justice. Let the sinner be punished, but not by sinners; the law carried into effect, but not by transgressors of the law.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas"But when they persisted in questioning him," and would not desist from their folly: "he raised himself up and said to them: Let him who is without sin among you cast the first stone at her." Having bent down through mercy, he raised himself up, through justice: and said to them, pronouncing the sentence: "He who is without sin" etc., inflicting the punishment. In which moderate response he confuted them as hypocrites, according to that passage of Matthew seven: "Why do you see the speck in your brother's eye, but do not see the beam in your own eye? Cast out first the beam from your own eye, and then you will see to cast out the speck from your brother's eye."
He was also moderate after the pronouncement of the sentence.
Likewise it is asked about the Lord's response: "He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her."
From this response it seems that no one could accuse anyone, because no one is clean from filth and no one is without sin; and if this is so, crimes will remain unpunished.
If you say that the Lord understood this concerning mortal sin, then it is objected: because it is commanded to correct a brother and to accuse him; therefore, if no one sins by doing what he is bound to do, then if a sinner is bound to accuse, because he is not absolved on account of his fault, therefore he does not sin by accusing.
If you say that he sins not in this, that he does it, but in this, that he does not do it worthily, it is objected: because this is not a privileged work.
I respond: It must be said that a sinner existing in mortal sin who accuses another is either a notorious sinner in the same kind of sin, and then he scandalizes, as far as lies in him, and sins with a twofold sin, namely of scandal and contempt. But a hidden sinner, whether in the same kind of sin or in another: if he knows that he has sin, and considers his brother's sin and judges it, and neglects himself, he sins with the sin of contempt — not in this, that he accuses, but in this, that when he ought to purge and examine himself, he neglects and despises this. Hence the word of the Lord is to be understood in this way; and thus the response to that objection is clear.
Commentary on John, Chapter 8For he that does not judge himself first, is ignorant what to judge right in another; and if perchance he did know by the hearing what to judge right, yet he is not able to judge rightly the merits of another, who has no rule of judging supplied him by the consciousness of his own innocence. Hence it is that it is said to certain persons dealing deceitfully, when they brought an adulteress to receive punishment; "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." For they went for the punishing of others' sins, and they had left their own behind; and so they are called back to their conscience within them, that they should first correct their own faults, and then reprove those of others.
Morals on the Book of Job 14.29.34For he who judges not himself first, cannot know how to judge correctly in the case of another. For though He know what the offence is, from being told, yet He cannot judge of another's deserts, who supposing himself innocent, will not apply the rule of justice to himself.
Catena Aurea by AquinasIt was at their insistence that Jesus gave his sentence; and so the Evangelist says, As they persisted in the question, he stood up and said to them: Whoever among you is without sin, let him be the first to cast a stone at her. The Pharisees were violators of the Law; and yet they tried to accuse Christ of violating the Law and were attempting to make him condemn the woman. So Christ proposes a sentence in accord with justice, saying, Whoever among you is without sin. He is saying in effect: Let the sinner be punished, but not by sinners; let the Law be accomplished, but not by those who break it, because "When you judge another you condemn yourself" (Rom 2:1). Therefore, either let this woman go, or suffer the penalty of the Law with her.
Here the question arises as to whether a sinful judge sins by passing sentence against another person who has committed the same sin. It is obvious that if the judge who passes sentence is a public sinner, he sins by giving scandal. Yet, this seems to be true also if his sin is hidden, for we read in Romans (2:1): "When you judge another you condemn yourself." However, it is clear that no one condemns himself except by sinning. And thus it seems that he sins by judging another.
My answer to this is that two distinctions have to be made. For the judge is either continuing in his determination to sin, or he has repented of his sins; and again, he is either punishing as a minister of the law or on his own initiative. Now if he has repented of his sin, he is no longer a sinner, and so he can pass sentence without sinning. But if he continues in his determination to sin, he does not sin in passing sentence if he does this as a minister of the law; although he would be sinning by doing the very things for which he deserves a similar sentence. But if he passes sentence on his own authority, then I say that he sins in justice, but from some evil root; otherwise he would first punish in himself what he notices in someone else, because "A just person is the first to accuse himself" (Prv 18:17).
Commentary on JohnAnd again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
καὶ πάλιν κάτω κύψας ἔγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν.
И҆ па́ки до́лꙋ прекло́ньсѧ, писа́ше на землѝ.
This is like our Lord; while His eyes are fixed, and He seems attending to something else, He gives the bystanders an opportunity of retiring: a tacit admonition to us to consider always both before we condemn a brother for a sin, and after we have punished him, whether we are not guilty ourselves of the same fault, or others as bad.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas(Tract. xxxiii. 5) Having with the weapon of justice smitten them, He deigned not even to look on the fallen, but averted His eyes: And again He stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
Catena Aurea by AquinasIn line with our usual human way of doing things, we can understand that the reason why the Lord might wish to bend before his unprincipled tempters and to write on the ground was that by directing his look elsewhere he might give them the freedom to go away. He foresaw that as they had been astounded by his answer, they would be more inclined to depart quickly than to ask him more questions.…Figuratively speaking, the fact that both before and after he gave his opinion he bent and wrote on the ground admonishes us that both before we rebuke a sinning neighbor and after we have rendered to him the ministry of due correction, we should subject ourselves to a suitably humble examination, lest perhaps we be entangled in the same things that we censure in [our neighbors] or in any other sort of misdeeds. For it often comes about, for example, that people who publicly judge a murderer to be a sinner may not perceive the worse evil of the hatred with which they themselves despoil someone in secret. People who bring an accusation against a fornicator may ignore the plague of the pride with which they congratulate themselves for their own chastity. People who condemn a drunkard may not see the venom of envy with which they themselves are eaten away. In dangers of this sort, what saving remedy is left for us except that, when we look at some other sinner, we immediately bend down—that is, we humbly observe how we would be cast down by our frail condition if divine benevolence did not keep us from falling? Let us write with a finger on the ground—that is, let us meticulously ponder with discrimination whether we can say with blessed Job, "For our heart does not censure us in all our life," and let us painstakingly remember that if our heart censures us, God is greater than our heart and he knows all things.
Homilies on the Gospels 1.25"And again bending down, he wrote on the ground," so that he might give those who were confounded a place to depart without shame. Whence Bede: "He wished to bend down before his tempters and write on the ground, so that, turning his face to something else, he might give them free departure, since he foresaw that those struck by his response would depart sooner than ask further questions"; Jeremiah seventeen: "All who forsake you shall be confounded: those who depart from you shall be written in the earth"; Jeremiah twenty-two: "O earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord: Write this man as barren."
Commentary on John, Chapter 8Jesus continued to write, and again bending down, he wrote. He did this, first, to show the firmness of his sentence, "God is not like a man, who may lie, or like a son of man, so that he may change" (Num 23:19). Secondly, he did it to show that they were not worthy to look at him. Because he had disturbed them with his zeal for justice, he did not think it fit to look at them, but turned from their sight. Thirdly, he did this out of consideration for their embarrassment, to give them complete freedom to leave.
Commentary on JohnAnd they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες ἐξήρχοντο εἷς καθ’ εἷς, ἀρξάμενοι ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, καὶ κατελείφθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἐν μέσῳ οὖσα.
Ѻ҆ни́ же слы́шавше и҆ со́вѣстїю ѡ҆блича́еми, и҆схожда́хꙋ є҆ди́нъ по є҆ди́номꙋ, наче́нше ѿ ста́рєцъ до послѣ́днихъ: и҆ ѡ҆ста̀ є҆ди́нъ і҆и҃съ, и҆ жена̀ посредѣ̀ сꙋ́щи.
The ones whom that act of the Lord displeases are themselves shameless. It is not chastity that makes them stern. They belong, rather, to those men of whom the Lord says, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her." But the men [of the text], terrified by their consciences, departed. And they stopped putting Christ on trial and vilifying the adultress. These men, on the contrary, sick as they are, censure the physician and although they themselves are adulterers, they rage at the adulteress.
ON ADULTEROUS MARRIAGES 2.7.6When we speak to these men in this way, they not only are not willing to detract at all from their severity but also become enraged at the truth. They say in answer: We are men; will the dignity of our sex sustain this affront, so that we become like women in paying the penalty for our sins if we have relations with women other than our own wives? As if for this very reason, that they are men, they ought not all the more to bridle their sinful desires, as becomes men.… And yet, they become indignant if they should hear that men, guilty of adultery, pay the same penalty as adulterous women, although they should be punished as much more severely as it befits them to surpass the virtue of their wives and to govern them by their examples.… There are some who are not pleased at the fact that, in the matter of chastity, there is a single norm for both husband and wife. In this matter, particularly, they would rather be subject to the standard of the world than the law of Christ, because civil law does not seem to restrict men with the same bonds of chastity as it does women.
ON ADULTEROUS MARRIAGES 2.8.7But when that woman was left alone, and all they were gone out, He raised His eyes to the woman. We have heard the voice of justice, let us also hear the voice of clemency. For I suppose that woman was the more terrified when she had heard it said by the Lord, "He that is without sin of you, let him first cast a stone at her." But they, turning their thought to themselves, and by that very withdrawal having confessed concerning themselves, had left the woman with her great sin to Him who was without sin. And because she had heard this, "He that is without sin, let him first cast a stone at her," she expected to be punished by Him in whom sin could not be found. But He, who had driven back her adversaries with the tongue of justice, raising the eyes of clemency towards her, asked her, "Hath no man condemned thee?" She answered, "No man, Lord." And He said, "Neither do I condemn thee;" by whom, perhaps, thou didst fear to be condemned, because in me thou hast not found sin. "Neither will I condemn thee." What is this, O Lord? Dost Thou therefore favor sins? Not so, evidently. Mark what follows: "Go, henceforth sin no more." Therefore the Lord did also condemn, but condemned sins, not man. For if He were a patron of sin, He would say, Neither will I condemn thee; go, live as thou wilt: be secure in my deliverance; how much soever thou wilt sin, I will deliver thee from all punishment even of hell, and from the tormentors of the infernal world. He said not this.
Tractates on John 33(Tract. xxxiii. s. 5) Thus smitten then with the voice of justice, as with a weapon, they examine themselves, find themselves guilty, and one by one retire: And they which heard it, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas(Tract. xxxiii. 5, 6) There were left however two, the pitiable and the pitiful, And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst: the woman, you may suppose, in great alarm, expecting punishment from one in whom no sin could be found. But He who had repelled her adversaries with the word of justice, lifted on her the eyes of mercy, and asked; When Jesus had lifted Himself up, and saw none but the woman, He said unto her, Woman, where are these thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. We heard above the voice of justice; let us hear now that of mercy: Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee; I, who thou fearedst would condemn thee, because thou foundest no fault in me. What then, Lord? Dost Thou favour sin? No, surely. Listen to what follows, Go, and sin no more. So then our Lord condemned sin, but not the sinner. For did He favour sin, He would have said, Go, and live as thou wilt: depend on my deliverance: howsoever great thy sins be, it matters not: I will deliver thee from hell, and its tormentors. But He did not say this. Let those attend, who love the Lord's mercy, and fear His truth. Truly, Gracious and righteous is the Lord. (Ps. 35:7)
Catena Aurea by AquinasHere the fourth point is noted, namely the confusion of the Pharisees, which was made manifest in their dispersal; therefore he says: "Now when they heard this," namely, so prudent and just a response, "they went out one by one, beginning from the elders." Those who had come gathered together departed scattered, and the elders went out first, because they themselves had been first in guilt, and therefore also first in flight: Daniel 13, "Iniquity went forth from the elder judges, who seemed to govern the people"; and all departed, because all were confounded. Whence he says: "And Jesus remained alone, and the woman standing in the midst. He remained alone," who seeks a place of solitude: Hosea 2: "I will lead her into the wilderness and there I will speak to her heart"; or because he alone was the one offended; the Psalm: "Against you alone have I sinned and done evil before you." Augustine: "Two remained: misery and mercy"; and because mercy looks upon misery.
Commentary on John, Chapter 8The more guilty of them, perhaps, or those who were more conscious of their faults.
Catena Aurea by AquinasThe effect of his justice is their embarrassment, for on hearing this, one after the other departed, both because they had been involved in more serious sins and their conscience gnawed them more: "Iniquity came out from the elder judges who were seen to rule the people" (Dn 13:5), and because they better realized the fairness of the sentence he gave: "I will go therefore to the great men and speak to them: for they have known the way of the Lord and the judgment of their God" (Jer 5:5).
And there remained only Jesus and the woman standing there, that is, mercy and misery. Jesus alone remained because he alone was without sin; as the Psalm says (Ps 13:1): "There is no one who does what is good not even one," except Christ. So perhaps this woman was afraid, and thought she would be punished by him.
If only Jesus remained, why does it say that the woman was standing there in the center? I answer that the woman was standing in the center of the disciples, and so the word only excludes outsiders, not the disciples. Or, we could say, in the center, that is, in doubt whether she would be forgiven or condemned. And so it is clear that our Lord's answer preserved justice.
Commentary on JohnWhen Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
ἀνακύψας δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῇ· γύναι, ποῦ εἰσιν; οὐδείς σε κατέκρινεν;
Воскло́ньсѧ же і҆и҃съ и҆ ни є҆ди́наго ви́дѣвъ, то́чїю женꙋ̀, речѐ є҆́й: же́но, гдѣ̀ сꙋ́ть, и҆̀же важда́хꙋ на тѧ̀; никі́йже ли тебѐ ѡ҆сꙋдѝ;
He was granting pardon, but while he was granting it he raised his face to her and said, "Has no one stoned you?" And she did not say, "Why? What have I done, Lord? I'm not guilty, am I? That is not what she said. What she said was, "No one, Lord." She accused herself. They had been unable to prove it against her and had withdrawn. But she confessed, because her Lord was not unaware of her guilt but was nonetheless seeking her faith and her confession. "Has no one stoned you?" "No one, Lord." "No one"—that is confession of sins. "Lord"—that is pardon of what she deserved. "No one, Lord. I acknowledge both things. I know who you are; I know who I am. It is to you I am confessing. You see, I have heard the words, 'Confess to the Lord, for he is good.' I know my confession, I know your mercy."
SERMON 16A.5"But Jesus, raising himself up," in which the fifth point is noted, namely the merciful liberation of the accused woman. And because mercy runs together with justice and is not against justice, the Lord asks her about condemnation and accusation. Therefore he says: "Woman, where are those who accused you? Has no one condemned you?" He asks two things, and because the one is evident from the departure of the accusers, the woman answers the question about condemnation.
Commentary on John, Chapter 8If you [the bishop] are not merciful to the penitent, you sin against the Lord God because you have not been persuaded, nor have you believed our Savior and God by doing what he did for that sinful woman whom the elders set before him and went away, leaving him to pass sentence. But he who searches the hearts asked her, " 'Have the elders condemned you, my daughter?' She answered him, 'No, Lord.' Then he said to her, 'Go your way. I also do not condemn you.' " This is where our Savior, King and God must be a pattern for you bishops.
DIDASCALIA 7Then (v 10), he shows that Jesus did not abandon mercy, but gave a merciful sentence. First, Jesus questions the woman; then forgives her; and finally, cautions her.
Jesus questioned her about her accusers; thus he says that Jesus rising up, that is, turning from the ground on which he was writing and looking at the woman, asked her, Woman, where are those who accuse you? He asks about her condemnation saying, Has no one condemned you? And she answers, No one, Lord.
Commentary on JohnShe said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
ἡ δὲ εἶπεν· οὐδείς, Κύριε. εἶπε δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· οὐδὲ ἐγώ σε κατακρίνω· πορεύου καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν μηκέτι ἁμάρτανε.
Ѻ҆на́ же речѐ: никто́же, гдⷭ҇и. Рече́ же є҆́й і҆и҃съ: ни а҆́зъ тебѐ ѡ҆сꙋжда́ю: и҆дѝ и҆ (ѿсе́лѣ) ктомꙋ̀ не согрѣша́й.
He says also to another, a woman that was a sinner: "Thy sins, which are many, are forgiven, for thou lovest much." And when the elders had set another woman which had sinned before Him, and had left the sentence to Him, and were gone out, our Lord, the Searcher of the hearts, inquiring of her whether the elders had condemned her, and being answered No, He said unto her: "Go thy way therefore, for neither do I condemn thee." This Jesus, O ye bishops, our Saviour, our King, and our God, ought to be set before you as your pattern; and Him you ought to imitate, in being meek, quiet, compassionate, merciful, peaceable, without passion, apt to teach, and diligent to convert, willing to receive and to comfort.
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles Book 2Let them take heed, then, who love His gentleness in the Lord, and let them fear His truth. For "The Lord is sweet and right." Thou lovest Him in that He is sweet; fear Him in that He is right. As the meek, He said, "I held my peace;" but as the just, He said, "Shall I always be silent?" "The Lord is merciful and pitiful." So He is, certainly. Add yet further, "Long-suffering;" add yet further, "And very pitiful:" but fear what comes last, "And true." For those whom He now bears with as sinners, He will judge as despisers. "Or despisest thou the riches of His long-suffering and gentleness; not knowing that the forbearance of God leadeth thee to repentance? But thou, after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up for thyself wrath against the day of wrath and the revelation of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according to his deeds." The Lord is gentle, the Lord is long-suffering, the Lord is pitiful; but the Lord is also just, the Lord is also true. He bestows on thee space for correction; but thou lovest the delay of judgment more than the amendment of thy ways. Hast thou been a bad man yesterday? To-day be a good man. Hast thou gone on in thy wickedness to-day? At any rate change to-morrow. Thou art always expecting, and from the mercy of God makest exceeding great promises to thyself. As if He, who has promised thee pardon through repentance, promised thee also a longer life. How knowest thou what to-morrow may bring forth? Rightly thou sayest in thy heart: When I shall have corrected my ways, God will put all my sins away. We cannot deny that God has promised pardon to those that have amended their ways and are converted. For in what prophet thou readest to me that God has promised pardon to him that amends, thou dost not read to me that God has promised thee a long life.
From both, then, men are in danger; both from hoping and despairing, from contrary things, from contrary affections. Who is deceived by hoping? He who says, God is good, God is merciful, let me do what I please, what I like; let me give loose reins to my lusts, let me gratify the desires of my soul. Why this? Because God is merciful, God is good, God is kind. These men are in danger by hope. And those are in danger from despair, who, having fallen into grievous sins, fancying that they can no more be pardoned upon repentance, and believing that they are without doubt doomed to damnation, do say with themselves, We are already destined to be damned, why not do what we please with the disposition of gladiators destined to the sword. This is the reason that desperate men are dangerous: for, having no longer aught to fear, they are to be feared exceedingly. Despair kills these; hope, those. The mind is tossed to and fro between hope and despair. Thou hast to fear lest hope slay thee; and, when thou hopest much from mercy, lest thou fall into judgment: again, thou hast to fear lest despair slay thee, and, when thou thinkest that the grievous sins which thou hast committed cannot be forgiven thee, thou dost not repent, and thou incurrest the sentence of Wisdom, which says, "I also will laugh at your perdition." How then does the Lord treat those who are in danger from both these maladies? To those who are in danger from hope, He says, "Be not slow to be converted to the Lord, neither put it off from day to day; for suddenly His anger will come, and in the time of vengeance, will utterly destroy thee." To those who are in danger from despair, what does He say? "In what day soever the wicked man shall be converted, I will forget all his iniquities." Accordingly, for the sake of those who are in danger by despair, He has offered us a refuge of pardon; and because of those who are in danger by hope, and are deluded by delays, He has made the day of death uncertain. Thou knowest not when thy last day may come. Art thou ungrateful because thou hast to-day on which thou mayest be improved? Thus therefore said He to the woman, "Neither will I condemn thee;" but, being made secure concerning the past, beware of the future. "Neither will I condemn thee:" I have blotted out what thou hast done; keep what I have commanded thee, that thou mayest find what I have promised.
Tractates on John 33"She said: No one, Lord," supply: has condemned me; it is not for man to condemn; Matthew 7: "Do not condemn," etc.; and therefore I am left to you. And there follows the merciful liberation of the woman; whence he says: "But Jesus said: Neither will I condemn you": behold, mercy: Romans 8: "God who justifies, who is it that shall condemn?" "Go and sin no more": behold, justice, which so absolves from guilt that it nevertheless does not give liberty to return to guilt; Sirach 5: "Mercy and wrath quickly draw near from him, and his wrath looks upon sinners." Whence Augustine: "Let those who love gentleness in the Lord take heed, and let them fear his truth; for indeed the Lord is sweet and upright. Do you love that he is sweet? Fear that he is upright. As one who is gentle he says: I was silent; but as one who is upright he says: I will speak as a woman in labor," Isaiah 42. Therefore he adds: "Sin no more."
Likewise, it is asked concerning the absolution of the woman.
It seems that the Lord directly acted against the Law, because he absolved the one whom the Law condemned, and the time of the Law and its observance still endured.
Likewise, it seems that he acted unjustly, because he imposed no punishment; it seems that he gave license to sin.
I respond: The Lord did not act against the Law, because he himself was above the Law and could dispense from the precept of the Law. Nor however did he act against it, because the accusers did not persist in accusing, and the woman was alone and without an accuser, and such a one the Law did not condemn. Hence he first repelled the adversaries with the tongue of justice, and afterward, when she was left to him, he raised the eyes of mercy. Nor however would he have condemned her, even if the adversaries had persisted, as Augustine says: "Far be it that he should condemn, who came to save."
To the other point it must be said that he was the Lord, and therefore could pardon all; nor however did he favor sins by pardoning, because he forbade her to sin any further; and this because, as Augustine says, "God condemned not the person but the sin."
Commentary on John, Chapter 8Let him see to it that he sin no more, that the sentence of the Gospel may abide in him: "Go, and sin no more."
In passing from this subject I may note that there is a queer fallacy to the effect that materialistic fatalism is in some way favourable to mercy, to the abolition of cruel punishments or punishments of any kind. This is startlingly the reverse of the truth. It is quite tenable that the doctrine of necessity makes no difference at all; that it leaves the flogger flogging and the kind friend exhorting as before. But obviously if it stops either of them it stops the kind exhortation. That the sins are inevitable does not prevent punishment; if it prevents anything it prevents persuasion. Determinism is quite as likely to lead to cruelty as it is certain to lead to cowardice. Determinism is not inconsistent with the cruel treatment of criminals. What it is (perhaps) inconsistent with is the generous treatment of criminals; with any appeal to their better feelings or encouragement in their moral struggle. The determinist does not believe in appealing to the will, but he does believe in changing the environment. He must not say to the sinner, "Go and sin no more," because the sinner cannot help it. But he can put him in boiling oil; for boiling oil is an environment. Considered as a figure, therefore, the materialist has the fantastic outline of the figure of the madman. Both take up a position at once unanswerable and intolerable.
Orthodoxy, Ch. 2: The Maniac (1908)There is in [The Passing of the Third Floor Back] none of this great Christian idea of tearing their evil out of men; it lacks the realism of the saints. Redemption should bring truth as well as peace; and truth is a fine thing, though the materialists did go mad about it. Things must be faced, even in order to be forgiven; the great objection to "letting sleeping dogs lie" is that they lie in more senses than one. But in Mr. Jerome's Passing of the Third Floor Back the redeemer is not a divine detective, pitiless in his resolve to know and pardon. Rather he is a sort of divine dupe, who does not pardon at all, because he does not see anything that is going on. It may, or may not, be true to say, "Tout comprendre est tout pardonner." But it is much more evidently true to say, "Rien comprendre est rien Pardonner," and the "Third Floor Back" does not seem to comprehend anything. He might, after all, be a quite selfish sentimentalist, who found it comforting to think well of his neighbours. There is nothing very heroic in loving after you have been deceived. The heroic business is to love after you have been undeceived.
A Miscellany of Men, The Divine Detective (1912)Jesus forgives her; and so it says, Then Jesus said: Nor will I condemn you, I who perhaps you feared would condemn you, because you saw that I was without sin. This should not surprise us for "God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him" (3:17); "I do not desire the death of the sinner" (Ez 18:23). And he forgave her sin without imposing any penance on her because since he made her inwardly just by outwardly forgiving her, he was well able to change her so much within by sufficient sorrow for her sins that she would be made free from any penance. This should not be taken as a precedent for anyone to forgive another without confession and the assigning of a penance on the ground of Christ's example, for Christ has power over the sacraments, and could confer the effect without the sacrament. No mere man can do this.
Finally, Jesus cautions her when he says, Go, and do not sin again. There were two things in that woman: her nature and her sin. Our Lord could have condemned both. For example, he could have condemned her nature if he had ordered them to stone her, and he could have condemned her sin if he had not forgiven her. He was also able to absolve each. For example, if he had given her license to sin, saying: "Go, live as you wish, and put your hope in my freeing you. No matter how much you sin, I will free you even from Gehenna and from the tortures of hell." But our Lord does not love sin, and does not favor wrongdoing, and so he condemned her sin but not her nature, saying, Go, and do not sin again. We see here how kind our Lord is because of his gentleness, and how just he is because of his truth.
Commentary on John
And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
ἄγουσι δὲ οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι γυναῖκα ἐπὶ μοιχείᾳ κατειλημμένην, καὶ στήσαντες αὐτὴν ἐν μέσῳ
[Заⷱ҇ 28] Приведо́ша же кни́жницы и҆ фарїсе́є къ немꙋ̀ женꙋ̀ въ прелюбодѣѧ́нїи ꙗ҆́тꙋ, и҆ поста́вивше ю҆̀ посредѣ̀,
Some men of slight faith, or, rather, some hostile to true faith, fearing, as I believe, that liberty to sin with impunity is granted their wives, remove from their scriptural texts the account of our Lord's pardon of the adulteress, as though he who said, "From now on, sin no more," granted permission to sin, or as though the woman should not have been cured by the divine physician by the remission of that sin in order not to offend others who are equally unclean.
ON ADULTEROUS MARRIAGES 2.7.6The Jews, it says, brought a woman, possibly a prostitute, to the Lord, to test him, and they said, "Master, this woman has just now been caught in adultery. In the law of Moses it is written that any woman caught in adultery should be stoned. What do you say?" That is what the tongue said, but it did not acknowledge the Creator. These people had no inclination to pray and say, "Snatch my soul from a deceitful tongue." It was deceitfully, after all, that they had approached him.This, you see, is what they were intending to do. The Lord had come not to destroy the law but to fulfill it and to forgive sins. So the Jews said to themselves, "If he says 'Let her be stoned,' we shall say to him, 'What has become of your forgiving sins? Aren't you the one who says "Your sins are forgiven you?" But if he says, 'Let her go,' we shall say, 'What has become of your coming to fulfill the law and not to destroy it?' " Notice how deceitful toward God the tongue is.
SERMON 16A.4And now observe wherein the Lord's gentleness was tempted by His enemies. "And the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman just taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst, and said to Him, Master, this woman has just been taken in adultery. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? But this they said, tempting Him, that they might accuse Him." Why accuse Him? Had they detected Himself in any misdeed; or was that woman said to have been concerned with Him in any manner? What, then, is the meaning of "tempting Him, that they might accuse Him"? We understand, brethren, that a wonderful gentleness shone out pre-eminently in the Lord. They observed that He was very meek, very gentle: for of Him it had been previously foretold, "Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, O most Mighty; in Thy splendor and beauty urge on, march on prosperously, and reign, because of truth, and meekness, and righteousness." Accordingly, as a teacher, He brought truth; as a deliverer, He brought gentleness; as a protector, He brought righteousness. That He was to reign on account of these things, the prophet had by the Holy Spirit foretold. When He spoke His truth was acknowledged; when He was not provoked to anger against His enemies, His meekness was praised. Whilst, therefore, in respect of these two,-namely, His truth and meekness,-His enemies were tormented with malice and envy; in respect of the third,-namely, righteousness,-they laid a stumbling-block for Him. In what way? Because the law had commanded the adulterers to be stoned, and surely the law could not command what was unjust: if any man should say other than the law had commanded, he would be detected as unjust. Therefore they said among themselves, "He is accounted true, he appears to be gentle; an accusation must be sought against him in respect of righteousness. Let us bring before him a woman taken in adultery; let us say to him what is ordered in the law concerning such: if he shall approve her being stoned, he will not show his gentleness; if he consent to let her go, he will not keep righteousness. But, say they, that he may not lose the reputation of gentleness, for which he is become an object of love to the people, without doubt he will say that she must be let go. Hence we find an opportunity of accusing him, and we charge him as being a transgressor of the law: saying to him, Thou art an enemy to the law; thou answerest against Moses, nay, against Him who gave the law through Moses; thou art worthy of death: thou too must be stoned with this woman." By these words and sentiments they might possibly be able to inflame envy against Him, to urge accusation, and cause His condemnation to be eagerly demanded. But this against whom? It was perversity against rectitude, falsehood against the truth, the corrupt heart against the upright heart, folly against wisdom. When did such men prepare snares, into which they did not first thrust their own heads? Behold, the Lord in answering them will both keep righteousness, and will not depart from gentleness. He was not taken for whom the snare was laid, but rather they were taken who laid it, because they believed not on Him who could pull them out of the net.
Tractates on John 33In the Gospel, according to John, there is found in many of both the Greek as well as the Latin copies, the story of the adulteress who was accused before the Lord.
Against the Pelagians 2.17And there was at that time in Hierapolis a distinguished master [Papias] who had many treatises, and he wrote five treatises on the Gospel. And he mentions in his treatise on the Gospel of John, that in the book of John the Evangelist, he speaks of a woman who was adulterous, so when they presented her to Christ our Lord, to whom be glory, He told the Jews who brought her to Him, "Whoever of you knows that he is innocent of what she has done, let him testify against her with what he has." So when He told them that, none of them responded with anything and they left.
Universal History Year 12 of Trajen (110AD) Patrologia Orientalis vol. 7 p.48-49And he [Papias] relates another story of a woman, who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. These things we have thought it necessary to observe in addition to what has been already stated.
Church History (Book III), Chapter 39, Section 16And there was at that time in Hierapolis a distinguished master [Papias] who had many treatises, and he wrote five treatises on the Gospel. And he mentions in his treatise on the Gospel of John, that in the book of John the Evangelist, he speaks of a woman who was adulterous, so when they presented her to Christ our Lord, to whom be glory, He told the Jews who brought her to Him, "Whoever of you knows that he is innocent of what she has done, let him testify against her with what he has." So when He told them that, none of them responded with anything and they left.
Universal History Year 12 of Trajen (110AD) Patrologia Orientalis vol. 7 p.48-49And he [Papias] relates another story of a woman, who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. These things we have thought it necessary to observe in addition to what has been already stated.
Church History (Book III), Chapter 39, Section 16But while these kind and simple persons are full of admiration at our Lord's discourse, the Scribes and Pharisees put questions to Him, not for the sake of instruction, but only to entangle the truth in their nets: And the Scribes and Pharisees brought unto Him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto Him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
Catena Aurea by AquinasIf he determined that she was to be stoned, they would scoff at him inasmuch as he had forgotten the mercy that he was always teaching. If he prohibited the stoning, they would gnash their teeth at him, and, as they saw it, rightly condemn him as a doer of wicked deeds contrary to the law. But it was beyond the ability of earthly stupidity to find out what he would say and from heavenly wisdom to fail [to know] what he would answer. Far be it from blind wickedness to stand in the way of the "Sun of justice" to keep him from giving light to the world.
Homilies on the Gospels 1.25Here is touched upon the second point, namely the malicious question. The question was about a woman caught in adultery, whether she was to be stoned according to the command of the Law: on account of which he says: "The scribes and Pharisees bring to him a woman caught in adultery": therefore the scribes and Pharisees, because they were more cunning and more envious: the scribes envied his wisdom, but the Pharisees his goodness; Luke eleven: "The Pharisees and lawyers began to press him vehemently," etc. "And they set her in the midst," because they wished to inquire about her.
Commentary on John, Chapter 8Then (v 3), our Lord wards off his opponents. First, we see him tested, so that he can then be accused; and secondly, he checks his accusers (v 6b). As to the first, the Evangelist does three things: first, he mentions the occasion for the test; secondly, he describes the test itself (v 4); and thirdly, the purpose of those who were testing our Lord.
The occasion for the test is a woman's adultery. And so first, her accusers detail the crime; and also exhibit the sinner. As to the first, the Evangelist says, Then the scribes and Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. As Augustine says, three things were noteworthy about Christ: his truth, his gentleness, and his justice. Indeed, it was predicted about him: "Go forth and reign, because of truth, gentleness, and justice" (Ps 44:5). For he set forth the truth as a teacher; and the Pharisees and scribes noticed this while he was teaching: "If I speak the truth, why do you not believe me?" (8:46). Since they could find nothing false in his words or his teachings, they had ceased their accusations on that score. He showed his gentleness as a liberator or savior; and they saw this when he could not be provoked against his enemies and persecutors: "When he was reviled, he did not revile" (1 Pet 2:23). Thus Matthew has: "Learn from me, for I am gentle and humble of heart" (11:29). Thus they did not accuse him on this point. And he exercised justice as its advocate; he did this because it was not yet known among the Jews, especially in legal proceedings. It was on this point that they wanted to test him, to see if he would abandon justice for the sake of mercy. So they present him with a known crime, deserving denunciation, adultery: "Every woman who is a harlot will be walked on like dung on the road" (Sir 9:10). Then they present the sinner in person to further influence him: and placed her in their midst. "This woman will be brought into the assembly, and among the sons of God" (Sir 23:24).
Commentary on John