John § 41

As the time approached in which our Lord had resolved to suffer, He approached the place which He had chosen for the scene of His suffering: Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany. First, He went to Bethany, then to Jerusalem; to Jerusalem to suffer, to Bethany to keep alive the recollection of the recent resurrection of Lazarus; Where Lazarus was, which had been dead, whom He raised from the dead.

Mystically, that He came to Bethany six days before the passover, means, that He who made all things in six days, who created man on the sixth, in the sixth age of the world, the sixth day, the sixth hour, came to redeem mankind.

"Then Jesus, six days before the passover, came to Bethany, where Lazarus was who had been dead, whom Jesus raised from the dead. And there they made Him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that reclined at the table." To prevent people thinking that the man had become a phantom, because he had risen from the dead, he was one of those who reclined at table; he was living, speaking, feasting: the truth was made manifest, and the unbelief of the Jews was confounded. The Lord, therefore, reclined at table with Lazarus and the others; and they were waited on by Martha, one of the sisters of Lazarus.

"The Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus," who had come down to earth from heaven in order to suffer for the salvation of the human race, as the hour of his passion was drawing near, willed to draw near the place of his passion. Even by this it was to become apparent that he would not be suffering unwillingly but of his own volition.… He willed to come five days before the Passover … that by this again he might show that he was the stainless lamb who would take away the sins of the world. It was commanded that the paschal lamb, by whose immolation the people of Israel were freed from slavery in Egypt, should be selected five days before the Passover, that is, on the tenth day of the month, and immolated on the fourteenth day of the month.

Being sure of the glory of his resurrection, Jesus first came to Bethany, a town near Jerusalem, where Lazarus was, whom he had raised from the dead. Then he went to Jerusalem, where he himself was to suffer and rise from the dead. He went to Jerusalem so that he might die there, but to Bethany so that the raising up of Lazarus might be imprinted more deeply on the memory of all.

Jesus therefore six days before, etc. After the conspiracy of the Jews has been described, here is described secondly its strengthening; the conspiracy itself received strength from the indignation of the traitor. This indignation of the traitor, therefore, had its origin in avarice, but its occasion from the pouring out of ointment made at the banquet. Therefore it is described in this manner: first is described the banquet of the Lord; second, the pouring out of the ointment; third, the indignation of Judas; fourth, the defense of Mary.

The banquet was made for Christ the Lord where Lazarus had been raised, six days before the feast day; whence he says: Jesus therefore six days before the Passover, that is, on the sixth day before the Passover, came to Bethany, where Lazarus had been dead, whom Jesus raised. There the banquet was made in the presence of the raised Lazarus.

Question I. But it is asked here first concerning what he says, that six days before the Passover he came to Bethany, where he was anointed by Mary:

1. Because in Matthew 26 it is said: You know that after two days the Passover will take place, and afterward, that in the house of Simon he was anointed by Mary: therefore it seems two days before, and here it is said that six days.

2. Likewise, an objection is raised concerning what he says, that she anointed his feet, because in Matthew 26 it is said that she poured it over his head. If she poured it over his head, how did she anoint his feet?

3. Likewise, concerning another contradiction, because there it is said that the disciples, seeing this, were indignant: but here it is said that one was indignant, namely the traitor.

These three contradictions are resolved through three rules of Augustine, from On the Harmony of the Evangelists:

The first, that it should be noted that sometimes one Evangelist says something according to the historical sequence, another says it by way of recapitulation. And through this the first is resolved; because Matthew speaks by way of recapitulation, as he shows in that same place.

The second rule is that one omits, another states: and both things were done, but both were not said by both; thus the second is resolved: because she both anointed the feet and then poured the whole over the head.

The third rule is that it is the custom of the Evangelists to put the plural number for the singular through synecdoche; and therefore the others said that the disciples were indignant, but John expresses specifically who it was.

Disdaining the plot of the Jews, the Lord gives Himself up, willing to suffer when the time for suffering was come, going to Bethany; not actually into Jerusalem, lest, suddenly appearing to the Jews, He might kindle them to anger; but by the rumour of His being so near gradually softening the rage of their wrath. And He eats with Lazarus, thereby reminding those who saw them of His God-befitting power. And by telling us this, the Evangelist shows that Christ did not despise the law; whence also six days before the passover, when it was necessary that the lamb should be purchased and kept until the fourteenth day, He ate with Lazarus and his friends: perhaps because it was a custom, not of law but from long usage, for the Jews to have some little merry-making on the day before the lamb was taken, in order that after the lamb was obtained they might devote themselves, from that time until the feast, to fasting or spareness of food, and to purifications. The Lord therefore is seen to have honoured even in this the customs of the feast. And in amazement the Evangelist says that he who had been four days dead was eating with the Christ, to remind us of His God-befitting power. And he adds that Martha, out of her love towards Christ, served, and ministered at the labours of the table.

[Jesus went] to Bethany. He did not actually go into Jerusalem, since if he suddenly appeared to the Jews, he might kindle their anger. Instead the rumor of his being so near gradually softens the rage of their wrath. He eats with Lazarus, reminding those who saw them of his divine power. And by telling us this, the Evangelist shows that Christ did not despise the Law. This is also why the text mentions that it was "six days before the Passover," when it was necessary that the lamb should be purchased and kept until the fourteenth day. This is when he ate with Lazarus and his friends, doing so perhaps because it was a custom not of law but from long usage, for the Jews to have some little merrymaking on the day before the lamb was taken, in order that after the lamb was obtained they might devote themselves, from that time until the feast, to fasting or a lesser amount of food and to purifications. The Lord therefore is shown to have given honor even to these customs of the feast. And in amazement the Evangelist says that he who had been four days dead was eating with the Christ, to remind us of his divine power. And he adds that Martha, out of her love toward Christ, served and ministered at the labors of the table.

On the tenth day of the month they choose a lamb for slaughter for the feast of Passover (Exod. 12:3), and from that same time they begin to prepare everything necessary for the feast. Customarily, six days before Passover as well, that is, on the ninth day of the month, they eat more lavishly, and with this day they begin the feast. Therefore Jesus too, having come to Bethany, shares in the supper.

On the tenth day of the month they took the lamb which was to be sacrificed on the passover, and from that time began the preparation for the feast. Or rather the ninth day of the month, i. e. six days before the passover, was the commencement of the feast. They feasted abundantly on that day. Thus we find Jesus partook of a banquet at Bethany: There they made Him a supper, and Martha served. That Martha served, shows that the entertainment was in her house. See the fidelity of the woman: she does not leave the task of serving to the domestics, but takes it upon herself. The Evangelist adds, in order, it would seem, to settle Lazarus' resurrection beyond dispute, But Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with Him.

So far the Evangelist has been showing the power of Christ's divinity by what he did and taught during his public life. Now he begins to show the power of his divinity as manifested in his passion and death.

First, he treats of Christ's passion and death; secondly, of his resurrection (c 20). The first is divided into three parts: in the first he states what caused or occasioned Christ's passion and death; in the second, how Christ prepared his disciples, since his death involved his physical separation from them (c 13); in the third, he describes his passion and death (c 18).

Now there were two things which caused or occasioned the passion of Christ: the glory of Christ, which aroused the envy of the Jews, and their disbelief, which blinded them. So first, he treats of the glory Christ received; secondly, of the unbelief of the Jews (v 37). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows how Christ received glory from other people; secondly, how he received glory from God (v 27). Concerning the first he does three things: first, he shows how Christ received glory from his intimate friends; secondly, from the crowd of the Jewish people (v 9): thirdly, from the Gentiles (v 20). Concerning the first he does two things: first, he shows the glory Christ received by being ministered to by his friends; secondly, how this kindled the indignation of the one who was to betray him (v 4). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he describes the time; secondly, the place (v 1); and thirdly, the kindness shown to Christ (v 2).

He says first, what we have already stated: that before the Passover Christ went into a region near the wilderness, and since the feast was drawing near, the Jews began to look for him. Thus, when the paschal season was at hand, during which the symbolic lamb was immolated, he, as the true lamb, came to the place where he would suffer and of his own free will be immolated for the salvation of the world: "He was offered because it was his own will," as we read in Isaiah (53:7).

The Evangelist says Christ came there six days before the Passover, to inform us that by the day of the Passover he did not mean the fourteenth day of the first month (when according to the twelfth chapter of Exodus, the Passover lamb was slain in the evening), but the fifteenth day. This entire day was festive, and that year it fell on the Friday our Lord suffered. Thus the sixth day before the Passover was the first day of the week, i.e., the Palm Sunday on which our Lord entered Jerusalem. Consequently, Christ came to Bethany on the previous day, that is, on the Sabbath. This is what he means by the phrase, six days before the Passover.

This number is very appropriate to the mystery to be enacted. First of all, because of the number itself, for six is a perfect number. For God completed the works of creation in six days. For this reason it was appropriate that it should take six days to accomplish the work of the passion, which would restore all things: "to reconcile all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross" (Col 1:20); "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (2 Cor 5:19).

Secondly, it is appropriate to the mystery, considering its foreshadowing. For Exodus (v 12) commanded that on the tenth day of the first month every man was to take a lamb for his household and keep it for the sacrifice. Thus it was also on the tenth day of the first month, i.e., on the sixth day before the fifteenth day, that our Lord decided to enter Jerusalem, drawing near to the place where he would be sacrificed. This is clear from what follows: "The next day a great crowd who had come to the feast heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem. So they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him" (12:12).

Then when he says, Jesus came to Bethany, the place is mentioned. Bethany was a village near Jerusalem, and it means the "house of obedience." This also is appropriate to the mystery. First, as regards a reason for the passion: "He became obedient unto death" (Phil 2:8). Secondly, with respect to the fruit of the passion, which is obtained only by those who obey Christ: "He became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him" (Heb 5:9).

It is significant that he added, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead, because in the house of obedience those who are spiritually dead are raised to life by being restored to the way of righteousness: "By one man's obedience many will be made righteous" (Rom 5:19). According to the literal sense, however, this was written to show that Christ came to Bethany in order to revive the memory of the resurrection of Lazarus: "He has caused his wonderful works to be remembered; the Lord is gracious and merciful" as we read in the Psalm (11:4).

The Lord's Supper is the faith of the Church, working by love. Martha serveth, whenever a believing soul devotes itself to the worship of the Lord. Lazarus is one of them that sit at table, when those who have been raised from the death of sin, rejoice together with the righteous, who have been ever such, in the presence of truth, and are fed with the gifts of heavenly grace. The banquet is given in Bethany, which means, house of obedience, i. e. in the Church: for the Church is the house of obedience.

Martha herself was taking great care with the service and was ministering to Christ with all her heart. Mary herself was seated at the feet of Jesus and kissing them.… Christ beholds them both with his divine eyes and is cheered and rejoices over the purity of their mode of life and the offering to him of their undefiled service.

You have seen this great public favor, that Lazarus was one of those who were reclining with Jesus. You saw not only that he gave him life again and took him from the hand of death but also that he granted him this great honor of eating with him at his supper. O these great favors that God grants to those who love him and keep his commandments! Moreover, you have seen the favor well fulfilled. Lazarus was reclining, eating with Jesus. For Jesus relied on his holy apostles to [eat and drink] with humankind.… Lazarus, on the other hand, [Jesus says], ate and drank with my Father. Come to me, Lazarus, and I shall take away the evil odor that is in your flesh over which death ruled, and I shall give you the sweet odor. See, I shall go to Jerusalem, and everyone will see you going with me in this body in which you have slept in the grave for four days. Afterward I gave you life, for truly again you yourself have served others. For in accordance with the measure that someone measures, it will be measured to himself.

(Tr. l. 5) He lived, talked, feasted; the truth was established, the unbelief of the Jews confounded.

And they made him a supper there: because Revelation 3, "If anyone shall open the door to me, I will enter in to him and will sup with him, and he with me." And although it took place in the presence of Lazarus, Lazarus did not minister but ate, so that the truth of the resurrection might be proven: Mark 5, concerning the girl who was raised, "he commanded that something be given her to eat," etc. On account of which he says: And Martha ministered, but Lazarus was one of those reclining at table with him. Martha always ministers and is solicitous as a prudent woman; whence Luke 10: "Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me alone to minister?" Therefore through her we rightly understand the active life, which is anxious with cares.

Spiritually, two things are to be noted here, namely what that banquet was, and what the ointment was.

And it should be noted that we read of a threefold banquet made for the Lord: the first, by Matthew, the converted publican; Matthew nine: As he sat at table in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners sat at table with him; this is the banquet of the penitent:

The second, by Simon the Pharisee; Luke seven: A certain Pharisee asked Jesus to eat with him: this is the banquet of the proficient, because the Pharisees kept the Law.

The third, by Mary, Martha, and Lazarus in Bethany, as here. Bethany is the house of obedience, and this is the religious life, in which people are in the state of perfection, according to that passage in Matthew 19: If you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have, and give to the poor: and this is the banquet of the perfect.

This was a proof of the genuineness of his resurrection, that after many days he both lived and ate. "And Martha ministered"; whence it is clear that the meal was in her house, for they received Jesus as loving and beloved. Some, however, say, that it took place in the house of another. Mary did not minister, for she was a disciple. Here again she acted in the more spiritual manner. For she did not minister as being invited, nor did she afford her services to all alike. But she directeth the honor to Him alone, and approacheth Him not as a man, but as a God. On this account she poured out the ointment, and wiped (His feet) with the hairs of her head, which was the action of one who did not entertain the same opinion concerning Him as did others; yet Judas rebuked her, under the pretense forsooth of carefulness.

The Evangelist, wishing to show the truth of the resurrection of Lazarus, says: "and Lazarus was one of those reclining at table with Him." For he, having appeared alive, did not immediately die, but remained on earth for a long time, eating, drinking, and performing other usual activities. By the words "Martha served," he indicated that the feast was at her house. Note, I pray you, the faith of this woman. She did not entrust the service to maidservants, but carries it out herself in person. And Paul speaks of a widow who "washed the feet of the saints" (1 Tim. 5:10).

Then when he says, there they made him a supper, he mentions the kindness shown to Christ by his friends: first, by his friends in general; secondly, in particular. Martha served, etc.

It was also appropriate to this mystery that they served him a supper there, at Bethany, because the Lord is spiritually refreshed in the house of obedience since our obedience pleases him, according to: "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me" (Rev 3:20).

Next he mentions the three people who attended or sat with Jesus: Martha, Lazarus and Mary. Martha signifies the prelates who are appointed to serve in the churches: "This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewardess of the mysteries of God" (1 Cor 4:1). Thus we read that Martha served: "Martha was busy with much serving" (Lk 10:40). Lazarus, who had been raised to life, signifies those who have been brought from sin to the state of righteousness by the ministry or service of the prelates; and they, alone with the other righteous, feast spiritually with the Lord. Thus he says, and Lazarus was one of those at table with him: "Let the just feast and rejoice before God and be delighted with gladness" (Ps 67:4). Mary signifies the contemplatives, for we read in Luke (10:39): "Mary sat at the Lord's feet and listened to his teaching."

Or pistici means genuine, non-adulterated. She is the woman that was a sinner, who came to our Lord in Simon's house with the box of ointment.

And observe, on the first occasion of her anointing, she anointed His feet only, but now she anoints both His feet and head. The former denotes the beginnings of penitence, the latter the righteousness of souls perfected. By the head of our Lord the loftiness of His Divine nature, by His feet the lowliness of His incarnation are signified; or by the head, Christ Himself, by the feet, the poor who are His members.

In loving this body, that is, the church, bring water for his feet and kiss his feet, not only pardoning those who have become enmeshed in sin but by your peace giving them harmony and putting them at peace. Pour ointment on his feet, that the whole house wherein Christ reclines at table may be filled with the odor of your ointment, that all at table with him may be pleased with your perfume. In other words, pay honor to the least.

Let us therefore notice how harmony is maintained here between these three evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and John, regarding whom there is no doubt that they record the self-same occurrence at Bethany, on occasion of which the disciples also, as all three mention, murmured against the woman, ostensibly on the ground of the waste of the very precious ointment. Now the further fact that Matthew and Mark tell us that it was the Lord's head on which the ointment was poured, while John says it was His feet, can be shown to involve no contradiction, if we apply the principle which we have already expounded in dealing with the scene of the feeding of the multitudes with the five loaves. ... And this example ought to have made it plain to us, as I pressed it upon my readers in discussing that section, that even where the several evangelists introduce only the one fact each, we should take the case to have been really, that both things were elements in the actual occurrence. In the same way, our conclusion with regard to the passage now before us should be, that the woman poured the ointment not only upon the Lord's head, but also on His feet. It is true that some person may possibly be found absurd and artful enough to argue, that because Mark states that the ointment was poured out only after the alabaster vase was broken there could not have remained in the shattered vessel anything with which she could anoint His feet. But while a person of that character, in his endeavours to disprove the veracity of the Gospel, may contend that the vase was broken, in a manner making it impossible that any portion of the contents could have been left in it, how much better and more accordant with piety must the position of a very different individual appear, whose aim will be to uphold the truthfulness of the Gospel, and who may therefore contend that the vessel was not broken in a manner involving the total outpouring of the ointment! Moreover, if that calumniator is so persistently blinded as to attempt to shatter the harmony of the evangelists on this subject of the shattering of the vase, he should rather accept the alternative, that the Lord's feet were anointed before the vessel itself was broken, and that it thus remained whole, and filled with ointment sufficient for the anointing also of the head, when, by the breakage referred to, the entire contents were discharged. For we allow that there is a due regard to the several parts of our nature when the act commences with the head, but we may also say that an equally natural order is preserved when we ascend from the feet to the head.

But "Mary," the other sister of Lazarus, "took a pound of ointment of pure nard, very precious, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the odor of the ointment." Such was the incident, let us look into the mystery it imported. Whatever soul of you wishes to be truly faithful, anoint like Mary the feet of the Lord with precious ointment. That ointment was righteousness, and therefore it was exactly a pound weight: but it was ointment of pure nard, very precious. From his calling it "pistici," we ought to infer that there was some locality from which it derived its preciousness: but this does not exhaust its meaning, and it harmonizes well with a sacramental symbol. The root of the word "pure" in the Greek is by us called "faith." Thou wast seeking to work righteousness: the just shall live by faith. Anoint the feet of Jesus: follow by a good life the Lord's footsteps. Wipe them with thy hair: what thou hast of superfluity, give to the poor, and thou hast wiped the feet of the Lord; for the hair seems to be the superfluous part of the body. Thou hast something to spare of thy abundance: it is superfluous to thee, but necessary for the feet of the Lord. Perhaps on this earth the Lord's feet are still in need. For of whom but of His members is He yet to say in the end, "Inasmuch as ye did it to one of the least of mine, ye did it unto me"? Ye spent what was superfluous for yourselves, but ye have done what was grateful to my feet.

"And the house was filled with the odor." The world is filled with the fame of a good character: for a good character is as a pleasant odor. Those who live wickedly and bear the name of Christians, do injury to Christ: of such it is said, that through them "the name of the Lord is blasphemed." If through such God's name is blasphemed, through the good the name of the Lord is honored. Listen to the apostle, when he says, "We are a sweet savor of Christ in every place." As it is said also in the Song of Songs, "Thy name is as ointment poured forth."

(Tr. li. 7) The house was filled with the odour; the world was filled with the good fame.

(Tr. l. 6) The word pistici seems to be the name of some place, from which this precious ointment came.

(Tr. l) Remember the Apostle's words: To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. (2 cor. 11:16)

(Tr. li. 6) The ointment with which Mary anointed the feet of Jesus was justice. It was therefore a pound. It was ointment of spikenard (pistici) too, very precious. Πίστις is Greek for faith. Dost thou seek to do justice? The just liveth by faith. (Heb. 10:38) Anoint the feet of Jesus by good living, follow the Lord's footsteps: if thou hast a superfluity, give to the poor, and thou hast wiped the Lord's feet; for the hair is a superfluous part of the body.

However, if we say that this invisible and spiritual ointment was symbolized by the visible ointment with which the sinful woman, as the Gospel describes, visibly anointed the corporeal feet of God, we cannot regard it as entirely worthless. For what do we read in the Gospel? "The house," it says, "was full of the scent of the ointment." It trickled from the hands of a courtesan, pouring over the feet, the body's extremities; and yet it was not so paltry, not so contemptible, as to prevent the house's being filled with the power of its aroma, the sweetness of its scent. So if we consider how great the fragrance with which the Church is perfumed in the conversion of one sinner, what a sweet smell of life leading to life each penitent can become! Provided that his repentance is wholehearted and visible to all, may we not with equal assurance say of him: "The house was full of the scent of the ointment." We can even say that this perfume of repentance reaches to the very abodes of the blessed in heaven because we have the witness of Truth itself that there is rejoicing among the angels of God over one repentant sinner.

Mary therefore took a pound. Here the second point is touched upon, namely the pouring out of the ointment, which was done by Mary, who neither reclined at table nor ministered, but herself fed the Lord with a special refreshment; whence she burned with vehement devotion toward him, whose devotion is expressed in the ointment poured out. On account of which he says: Mary therefore took a pound of ointment: the quantity of ointment was great, because her devotion was great; not of just any kind, but of spikenard, that is, from nard. Nard is an aromatic herb, as Isidore says, which is of vehement fragrance; on account of which it is said in Song of Songs 1: "While the king was on his couch, my nard gave forth its fragrance." From the spikes of nard a precious ointment is made; whence it is said Mark 14: "Of spikenard." Pistici: the Gloss says: "that is, genuine," as distinct from adulterated; precious, because it was of great price and value. And she anointed the feet of Jesus; and the house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment. According to the literal sense, the Jews were accustomed to nourish themselves with highly fragrant ointments; therefore the Lord commanded the most precious ointment to be offered to himself, Exodus 30, and prohibited it to others; whence he called it holy of holies, which would be "for a most sweet fragrance to the Lord."

Note likewise concerning the ointment according to the spiritual understanding, that it is threefold, whence Mary is also read to have anointed the Lord three times. For there is the ointment of contrition, which was signified in that passage, Luke 7: She began to wash his feet with tears and anointed them with ointment. Of devotion, and this was signified here and in Matthew 26: When Jesus was in the house of Simon the leper, a woman came to him having an alabaster jar of precious ointment and poured it over the head of him as he reclined at table. Of compassion, and this in the last chapter of Mark: Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Salome bought spices, so that coming they might anoint Jesus. With the first ointment the feet are anointed: with the second, the head: but with the third, the whole body of the Lord.

See the humility of this holy woman. She does not anoint his head but his feet. It is only afterward that she anoints the Lord's head. Therefore, first she washes his feet and then his head. But she began at his feet so that she might be found worthy to proceed [to anoint] his head. For "those who are humble," as it is written, "will be exalted, and those who are exalted will be humbled." … And she wipes his feet not with a towel but with her hair so that she might exhibit even greater service to the Lord.… Allegorically, the woman was anticipating the figure of the church who truly in the fullness of faith brings its devotion to Christ. And this he freely receives as a very precious perfume.

While Martha was serving, Mary anointed the Lord with ointment, thus accomplishing her love towards Him; and by the actions of both, the measure of love was filled up and made perfect.

An abundance is oil with which sinners do business: the forgiveness of sins. By oil the Anointed forgave the sins of the sinner who anointed [his] feet. With [oil] Mary poured out her sin upon the head of the Lord of her sins. It wafted its scent; it tested the reclining as in a furnace: It exposed the theft clothed in the care of the poor. It became the bridge to the remembrance of Mary to pass on her glory from generation to generation. In its flowings is hidden joy, for oil does indeed gladden the face. It brings its shoulder to all burdens in rejoicing and grieving with everyone: For it serves joy yet is obeyed by gloom, For faces joyful of life by it are resplendent, And with it, the gloomy face of death is prepared for burial and dies.

There seems then much likeness and some connection about the woman in the four Evangelists. Yet I would say to those who think that all wrote of the same woman, "Do you think that the very same woman who poured precious ointment on Jesus' head, as Matthew and Mark have related, also anointed his feet with ointment (or "myrrh," "myrrha") as Luke and John have related?But it is not possible that the Evangelists should have contradicted one another in relating about the same woman, since they were perfected in the same understanding and the same spirit and the same mind, and they had been seeking to minister to the welfare of the church. But if anyone thinks it is the same woman in Luke and John, let him tell us if Mary was the woman who is said in Luke to have been a sinner in a city who, learning that Jesus had sat down to meet in a Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment and stood behind his feet weeping, washing his feet with her tears. It is incredible that Mary, whom Jesus loved, the sister of Martha, who had chosen the better portion, should be said to have been a sinner in the city. And the woman who, according to Matthew and Mark, poured precious ointment on Jesus' head is not actually written to have been a sinner. But she who according to Luke is described as a sinner did not dare to reach to Christ's head but washed his feet with her tears—as if scarcely worthy of his very feet—from sorrow that brought about sincere repentance with salvation. The woman in Luke wails and weeps much so that she may wash Jesus' feet. But she, who according to John is Mary, is introduced neither as a sinner nor as weeping. Perhaps then one will say that four different women are recorded by the Evangelists. But I rather agree that there were three. There was the one of whom Matthew and Mark wrote in complete agreement. There was also the woman of whom Luke wrote, while John wrote of yet another, differing from the other woman not only in what is written about the ointment but also because Jesus loved Mary and Martha—although she also is related to have been at Bethany like the woman in Matthew and Mark.

Everything by which anyone is anointed is called oil. Ointment is one form of oil. So one form of ointment is costly; another is not. And so, every righteous action is called a good work. But one kind of good work is what we do for our fellow human beings or according to their [expectations]. Another kind of good work is something we do because of God and according to [his expectations]. Of the latter, one form is profitable to humanity; another serves only to the glory of God. For example, a person does something well under the influence of natural justice, not because of God, as sometimes even heathen or a lot of other people do. This kind of work is common oil, not of great fragrance, and yet it is duly accepted by God.…Peter says [in the Clementines] that good works done by unbelievers profit them in this world but not also in the other to the attainment of eternal life. This is only right, since they are not done because of God but because of human nature itself. But those who do them because of God, that is, believers, profit not only in this world but more especially in the one to come. What believers do because of God is a kind of ointment that has a pleasing fragrance. But part of this very work that believers do because of God … is done for the welfare of humanity, such as the giving of alms, visitations of the sick, entertainments of strangers, humility, kindness.… Those who do these things to Christians anoint the Lord's feet with ointment because they are the Lord's feet with which he always walks—something that penitents are especially accustomed to do in the remission of their sins. This is a work called a fragrant ointment, but it is not the best. Rather, those who pursue charity, continue in fasting and prayer, have patience in adversities like Job, in temptations, those who are not afraid to confess the truth of God—all of which are things that are of no benefit to other people but only promote the glory of God—this is the ointment that anoints the head of the Lord Christ and from there runs down through his whole body, that is, the whole church. And this is very costly ointment whose fragrance fills the whole house, that is, the church of Christ.

So then, Martha herself serves everyone in general, while Mary honors Christ alone, because she attends to Him not as a man, but as God. For she poured out the myrrh and wiped it with the hairs of her head, because she had a conception of Him not such as others had, not as of a mere man, but as of the Master and Lord. Mary can also be understood in a higher sense — as referring to the divinity of the Father and Lord of all; for Mary means "lady." Thus, the Lordship of the Father's Divinity anointed the feet of Jesus — the flesh assumed in the last times by the Lord the Word — anointed it with the myrrh of the Spirit, as David also says: "Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness" (Ps. 45:7); and the great Peter says: "Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36). For the Flesh assumed by the Word, anointed by the divine Spirit who descended upon the Virgin's womb, and having become the same as the Word, that is, God, filled the world with blessing, just as the myrrh of Mary filled the whole house with fragrance. What then are the "hairs" by which the feet were wiped? They are, of course, the saints who adorn the head of God and His supreme authority. For they, being to the glory of God, may be called His adornment. They also became partakers of the anointing of the Lord's flesh, just as David calls them "companions" (Ps. 45:7), and the Apostle Paul says to the Corinthians: "Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and has anointed us is God" (2 Cor. 1:21). And everywhere we learn that those who live according to Christ are called christs (anointed ones). Thus, by the hairs which wiped the feet of Jesus and which partake of the divine anointing, we may understand Christians. Hairs are something dead. And Christians are dead, for they "have crucified the flesh" (Gal. 5:24) and "put to death the members which are on the earth" (Col. 3:5), and have died to the world. Hairs adorn the head and constitute its glory. The saints also constitute the glory of God, "since their light shines before men, and the Father is glorified through them" (Matt. 5:16), and they make their eating and drinking "to the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31), and in their members they glorify Him. And you, since Jesus has raised your mind, as if it were a certain Lazarus, receive Him into the house of your soul; let the one who was raised recline with Him; anoint the feet of the Lord, six days before Pascha, before the Pascha of the age to come arrives, while you live in this world, which was created in six days. By the "feet" of Christ one may understand: the Apostle and the Gospel, and in general the commandments, for by them He walks in us. So then, to these commandments add myrrh — a disposition composed of various virtues, of which the highest is faith, fervent as spikenard. For if you do not show a fervent, zealous, and virtuous disposition toward these commandments and do not wipe them with your mortified members, as with hair, and do not receive them into yourself, you will not be able to fill your house with fragrance. By the "feet" of the Lord one may also understand the least of the brethren, in whose person Christ comes to the door of each one and asks for what is needed: anoint them with the myrrh of almsgiving. Many give alms for show, and therefore receive no benefit for themselves, for they receive their reward here (Matt. 6:1–2). But you, wipe with the hairs of your head and receive the benefit for your soul, gather the fruit of almsgiving in the ruling part. And if you have anything dead and lifeless, like hair — perfume it with this good anointing. For it is said: "Redeem your sins with almsgiving" (Dan. 4:24).

Three things are mentioned about Mary's kindness: first, the ointment she used; secondly, the kindness she offered; thirdly, its effect.

With regard to the ointment, three things are noted. First, the amount, and it was a large amount, a pound of ointment: "If you have many possessions, make your gift from them in proportion" (Tobit 4:8). Secondly, its matter, for it was made of nard: "While the king was on his couch, my nard gave forth its fragrance" (Song 1:11). Recall that nard is a short black aromatic herb; and the ointment which is made from it has a fragrance which has the power to give strength and comfort. Thirdly, its composition is noted, for the nard is described as pisticus. According to Augustine, the word pisticus is taken from the place where nard originates. However, it is better to interpret this word as meaning "true" or "pure," that is, as not adulterated: for pistis in Greek is the same as our fides (truthful, honest). He adds that it was costly, because it was made from nard, which is used in costly ointments, and perhaps other expensive ingredients were added to it. This teaches us that we should offer to God those things we regard as most precious: "I will offer to thee burnt offerings of fatlings, with the smoke of the sacrifice of rams" (Ps 66:15); "Cursed be the cheat who has a male in his flock, and vows it, and yet sacrifices to the Lord what is blemished" (Mal 1:14).

See Mary's humility, for she fell down at the feet of Jesus and anointed the feet of Jesus, according to, "Let us worship at his footstool" (Ps 132:7). Secondly, see her devotion, for she wiped his feet with her hair, in this way making an offering of herself: "Yield your members to God as instruments of righteousness" (Rom 6:13).

He mentions the effect of her ministering when he says, and the house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment. This tells us of the goodness of this ointment, which filled the entire house: "We will run after thee to the odor of thy ointments" (Song 1:3).

The question is raised as to whether this woman is the same woman who anointed our Lord as mentioned in Luke (7:37), Matthew (26:7) and Mark (14:3). We learn from Jerome and Chrysostom that many think that the sinful woman mentioned by Luke is not the sister of Lazarus, Mary, who is said in John to have anointed the Lord. Origen adds that in John she is also not the woman of whom Matthew and Mark speak, but they were speaking of some other woman. He gives three reasons for this opinion. The first is based on the time: for the woman in John anointed the Lord six days before the Passover, while the woman mentioned by Matthew and Mark did so some time during the two days preceding the Passover. For Matthew prefaces his account by stating that the Lord said: "You know that after two days the Passover is coming" (Matt 26:2); and in Mark we read: "It was now two days before the Passover and the feast of the Unleavened Bread" (Mk 14:1). The second reason is based on the place: for in Matthew and Mark the woman is said to have anointed the Lord in the house of Simon the leper, but in John she seems to be in the house of Martha, for we read that Martha was serving the guests. And Augustine agrees with this. The third reason is from the action itself: for the woman in Matthew and Mark anointed the head of our Lord, while the one in John anointed his feet.

On the other hand, Augustine and Gregory claim that the four Evangelists are speaking of one and the same woman, but that she anointed our Lord twice. The first time, mentioned by Luke, was at the beginning of her conversion, some time during the middle of Christ's public life. The second time, mentioned by the other three Evangelists, was a few days before Christ's passion. Thus the same act is mentioned here in John and in Matthew and Mark.

As for the discrepancy in the time, Augustine says that John preserved the historical order, while Matthew and Mark merely remembered that it took place just prior to Judas' betrayal, which was believed to have been occasioned by this event. As for the argument based on the difference of place, there is no reason why the house of Simon the leper could not be the house of Mary and Martha, since Simon might have been the head of the house. He is called a leper because at one time he was a leper, but was cured by Christ. As far as the act itself is concerned, Augustine says that the woman anointed both the head and feet of Jesus.

If the objection is raised that according to Mark she broke the alabaster jar and poured ointment on the head of Jesus, one might answer this in two ways. First, that it was broken in such a way that some remained for anointing his feet; secondly, she could have anointed his feet first, and then, breaking the jar, poured the rest on his head.

Mystically, the pound Mary used denotes the work of justice, for it belongs to justice to weigh things and give pound for pound: "Their weight shall be equal" (Ezek 45:11). Now four other virtues must be added if the work of justice is to be perfect. First, compassion: and so he says, ointment, which, because it is soothing, represents mercy: "For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy" (James 2:12). Secondly, humility is needed: so he says, nard, which, since it is a small herb, signifies humility: "The greater you are, the more you must humble yourself" (Si 3:18). Thirdly, faith is needed: thus he says, pure (pisticus), that is believing (fidelis): "The righteous shall live by his faith" (Hab 2:4). Fourthly, charity must be present: so he says, costly, for charity alone pays the price for eternal life: "If I give away all I have, but have not love, I gain nothing" (1 Cor 13:3).

The works of justice anoint both the feet and head of Jesus. By his feet we understand the mystery of his humanity; and by his head, his divinity, according to: "The head of Christ is God" (1 Cor 11:3). Thus one who venerates the divinity and humanity of Christ is said to anoint his head and feet.

Or, we can take the head as indicating the very person of Christ, according to: "He has made him the head over all things for the church" (Eph 1:22). Then the feet are Christ's faithful, of whom we read: "As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me" (Matt 25:40); "How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good tidings, who publishes peace" (Is 52:7). Thus, one who honors Christ himself, anoints the head of Christ; and one who serves his faithful anoints our Lord's feet.

Again, because the hair is produced from what is superfluous in the body, one dries the Lord's feet with his hair when he takes what he has in surplus and relieves the needs of his neighbor: "Give that which remains as alms" (Lk 11:41). Thus Augustine says: "If you have a surplus of anything, give it to the poor and you have dried the feet of the Lord."

The fact that the house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment signifies that because of the works of justice, the Church enjoys and is filled with a good name: "We are the aroma of Christ" (2 Cor 2:15).

And now, lastly, listen to what we have here, how this ointment was to some a sweet savor unto life, and to others a sweet savor unto death. When the pious Mary had rendered this grateful service to the Lord, straightway one of His disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was yet to betray Him, said, "Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?" Alas for thee, wretched man! the sweet savor hath slain thee. For the cause that led him so to speak is disclosed by the holy evangelist. But we, too, might have supposed, had not the real state of his mind been revealed in the Gospel, that the care of the poor might have induced him so to speak. Not so. What then? Hearken to a true witness: "This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the money bag, and bare what was put therein." Did he bear it about, or bear it away? For the common service he bore it, as a thief he bore it away.

(de Con. Evang. ii. lxxix. [156.]) Then saith one of His disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray Him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? In the other Gospels it is the disciples who murmured at the waste of the ointment. I think myself that Judas is put for the whole body of disciples; the singular for the plural. But at any rate we may supply for ourselves, that the other disciples said it, or thought it, or were persuaded by this very speech of Judas. The only difference is, that Matthew and Mark expressly mention the concurrence of the others, whereas John only mentions Judas, whose habit of thieving He takes occasion to notice: This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.

One of his disciples therefore said, Judas. The third point is touched upon here, namely the indignation of Judas against the woman, because she had poured out the ointment; on account of which he says: One of his disciples therefore said, Judas Iscariot, who was about to betray him, namely on account of avarice.

How then does another evangelist (Matt. 26:8–9) say that all the disciples said this? To this it must be said that although all said this, the others did not say it with the same thought as Judas.

Next, the Evangelist describes the traitor's indignation at this. He does two things concerning it: first, he shows his indignation; secondly, how it was curbed (v 7). Concerning the first he does three things: first, he describes the traitor; secondly, he mentions what he said; and thirdly, he states that his intention was evil (v 6).

The traitor is portrayed in three ways. First, his dignity is given when he says, one of his disciples. This teaches us that no one should presume on himself no matter to what dignity he has been raised: "His angels he charges with wickedness" (Job 4:18). Secondly, his name, Judas Iscariot. The name "Judas" means "professing," to indicate to us that in addition to a way of professing that is virtuous - "Man professes with his lips and so is saved" (Rom 10:10) - there is a way of professing that is blameworthy and mercenary - "He will profess you," that is, profess your praises, "when you have done good to him" (Ps 49:18). Thirdly, his crime is mentioned, he who was to betray him: "Even my bosom friend in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread, has lifted his heel against me" (Ps 41:10).

O traitor Judas, you value the ointment of his passion at three hundred pence, and you sell his passion at thirty pence. Rich in valuing, cheap in wickedness!

Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor? Matthew twenty-six: "To what purpose is this waste? For it could have been sold for much and given to the poor." And because he seemed to have said this out of piety, the Evangelist shows that he said this out of cupidity.

Judas valued cheating above everything else—except his hatred of the Savior. Nevertheless, under the pretext of piety, he brings out these deceitful words.… Impious beyond measure and filled with a savage disposition, influenced by his fraudulent greed, it is evident that he expresses this particular charge, attempting to hide it under the guise of religion.

Judas, being covetous, did not approve of such a manner of care. "Why," he says as it were, "did you bring not money, from which I could steal, but myrrh?"

Then he gives the traitor's words, from which we see that he had died spiritually from the aroma of the ointment, according to: "For we are the aroma of Christ, to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life" (2 Cor 2:15). Judas was displeased because the ointment was not sold but poured out as an act of homage to Christ. Thus Judas says, Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii? But as we read in 2 Corinthians (11:14), the ministers of Satan disguise themselves as angels of righteousness. Thus Judas hid his evil under the cloak of piety, saying, and given to the poor: "His heart will work iniquity to practice hypocrisy and speak to the Lord deceitfully" (Is 32:6).

He carried it as a servant, he took it out as a thief.

[Judas] was chosen among the twelve apostles and had charge of the money bag, to distribute it among the poor, so that it might not seem as though he had betrayed the Lord because he was not honored or in want. And so, the Lord granted him this office so that he might also be shown to be just in his dealings with him. Judas would be guilty of a greater fault, not as one driven to it by a wrong done to him but as one misusing grace.

And Judas knowing this, who for a long time had been perverted, but was then smitten by the devil himself with the love of money, although he had been long entrusted with the purse.

"You shall not steal:" [Exodus 20:15] for Achan, when he had stolen in Israel at Jericho, was stoned to death; [Joshua 7:1] and Gehazi, who stole, and told a lie, inherited the leprosy of Naaman; [2 Kings 5:27] and Judas, who stole the poor's money, betrayed the Lord of glory to the Jews, [John 12:6] and repented, and hanged himself, and burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out; [Matthew 27:5; Acts 1:18] and Ananias, and Sapphira his wife, who stole their own goods, and "tempted the Spirit of the Lord," were immediately, at the sentence of Peter our fellow-apostle, struck dead. [Acts 5:1-11]

Look now, and learn that this Judas did not become perverted only at the time when he yielded to the bribery of the Jews and betrayed his Lord. It was not then that he perished, but he was already a thief, and a reprobate, when following the Lord; for it was with his body and not with his heart that he followed. He made up the apostolic number of twelve, but had no part in the apostolic blessedness: he had been made the twelfth in semblance, and on his departure, and the succession of another, the apostolic reality was completed, and the entireness of the number conserved. What lesson then, my brethren, did our Lord Jesus Christ wish to impress on His Church, when it pleased Him to have one castaway among the twelve, but this, that we should bear with the wicked, and refrain from dividing the body of Christ? Here you have Judas among the saints,-that Judas, mark you! who was a thief, yea-do not overlook it-not a thief of any ordinary type, but a thief and a sacrilegist: a robber of money bags, but of such as were the Lord's; of money bags, but of such as were sacred.

Lay to heart our Lord's example while living with man upon earth. Why had He a money bag, who was ministered unto by angels, save to intimate that His Church was destined thereafter to have her repository for money? Why gave He admission to a thief, save to teach His Church patiently to bear with thieves?

(Tr. l. 10) Judas did not perish at the time when he received money from the Jews to betray our Lord. He was already a thief, already lost, and followed our Lord in body, not in heart; wherein we are taught the duty of tolerating wicked men, lest we divide the body of Christ. He who robs the Church of any thing may be compared to the lost Judas. Tolerate the wicked, thou that art good, that thou mayest receive the reward of the good, and not fall into the punishment of the wicked. Follow the example of our Lord's conversation upon earth. Wherefore had He bags, to Whom the Angels ministered, except because His Church should afterwards have bags? Why did He admit thieves, but to show that His Church should tolerate thieves, while it suffered from them. It is not surprising that Judas, who was accustomed to steal money from the bags, should betray our Lord for money.

Because "a greedy person always is in need," [Judas], being faithless and wicked, never remembered the trust [placed in him] but went on from the theft of the money that he had been asked to carry to betraying our Lord who showed confidence [in him].

Now he said this, not because he cared for the poor, because he did not care about the poor; against which Ecclesiasticus four: "My son, do not defraud the poor of alms, and do not turn your eyes away from the poor," etc.; but because he was a thief and having the money bag, as steward, he carried what was put in, that is, he carried it away and stole it, and therefore he rejoiced when more was given; whence on account of his avarice he sold the Lord; whence it is said in Matthew twenty-six, that "he went to the chief priests and said: What will you give me, and I will deliver him to you?" Whence Chrysostom: "Avarice reduces the heart to servitude; this made Judas a traitor and Gehazi a leper and delivered Ananias to death."

Question II. Likewise it is asked concerning what the Evangelist says, that Judas said this, not because the care of the poor pertained to him.

But to the contrary: He was the steward: therefore it did pertain to him.

Likewise he says that he was a thief and had the money box: whence is it that the Lord wished to entrust the money box to a thief? It seems that he gave him an occasion of sinning.

Likewise, why did the Lord not correct him, since he knew that he was in sin?

Likewise, since the Lord was in extreme poverty and had commanded the disciples not to receive money, how is it that he had money bags?

I say to the first that "to pertain" can be taken in two ways: either with respect to affection, or with respect to office; in the first way it did not pertain to him, in the second way it did.

To the second I say that there was a twofold reason, namely the dispensation of divine judgment and our instruction: the dispensation of divine judgment in this, that the Lord was satisfying his evil desire, just as he enriches the avaricious in the present life: so that Judas also would not have the excuse that he betrayed the Lord on account of want. Our instruction, because the Lord showed that he places little weight on the riches of the Churches, but great weight on the treasure of souls.

To the other it must be said that he did not correct him, because he knew that he would not be made better, but would become worse; nor did he take away his office, lest he reveal the crime and incite him to a greater crime.

To the other it must be said that, as Jerome says, the Lord had money bags not for his own use, but rather for the use of the poor. Hence when he paid the didrachma, he sent Peter to the sea, Matthew 17, where he found the coin in the mouth of the fish; because he did not wish to convert to his own use those things which had been given to the poor.

Another reason was so that it might be made known against heretics that it was lawful for his Church to possess riches.

To that which is objected, that Christ had a money-bag: it must be said that Christ had a money-bag for three reasons. For He had a money-bag for other poor persons, according to what Jerome says: "Christ was of such great poverty" etc.: and this does not take away supreme poverty. He also had a money-bag in condescension to the weak, as is said in the Gloss on that verse of the Psalm: Producing hay for beasts of burden: "The Lord had a money-bag for the use of those who were with Him, His own and the devout women in His company, who ministered to Him from their substance, in these things taking on rather the person of the weak. For He foresaw that many weak persons would come and would seek these things, just as He also took on the person of the same where He said: My soul is sorrowful even unto death." And concerning these two, on that passage of John twelve: The things that were contributed etc.; the Gloss says: "He whom Angels serve has a money-bag for the expenses of the poor, condescending to the weak." He also had a money-bag in a time of necessity, as for instance when He was passing through the Samaritans. In which time of necessity He also permitted the disciples to have money-bags, according to that passage of Luke twenty-two: When I sent you without purse and scrip etc.; the Gloss says: "He does not instruct the disciples with the same rule of living in a time of persecution as in a time of peace. When He sent the disciples to preach, He gave the ordered precept that they should take nothing for the journey, namely, that he who proclaims the Gospel should live by the Gospel. But when the moment of death was at hand, and that entire nation was persecuting both shepherd and flock together, He decreed a rule fitting for that time, permitting them to take the necessities of sustenance, until, the madness of the persecutors being calmed, the time for evangelizing should return." From these Glosses it manifestly appears that the manner of having money bags in the Lord in no way diminished poverty.

The traitor rebukes the woman who had shown her devotion towards Christ, and attacks the admirable deed, and affects to blame it out of love towards the poor, because ointment was brought and not money. But it was out of ignorance as to what is really excellent that Judas said this. For the bringing of presents unto God ought to be honoured more than the poor. The Evangelist however sets forth the reason, on account of which Judas said this: it was not that he felt any concern for the poor, but because he was a thief and a sacrilegious person, stealing the money which was dedicated to God.

Our Lord, because he saw that Judas was greedy for money, had placed him in charge of the money to satisfy him and to prevent him becoming a traitor for the sake of money. It would have been better for him, however, to have stolen the money rather than to have betrayed the Creator of money.… Should not the thief of money fear the Creator of money? Perhaps that is what he remembered when he hanged himself.

How then saith another Evangelist, that all the disciples used these words? All used them, and so did he, but the others not with like purpose. And if any one ask why He put the bag of the poor in the hands of a thief, and made him steward who was a lover of money, we would reply, that God knoweth the secret reason; but that, if we may say something by conjecture, it was that He might cut off from him all excuse. For he could not say that he did this thing from love of money, (for he had in the bag sufficient to allay his desire,) but from excessive wickedness which Christ wished to restrain, using much condescension towards him. Wherefore He did not even rebuke him as stealing, although aware of it, stopping the way to his wicked desire, and taking from him all excuse.

If Judas was covetous and a thief, then why did the Lord entrust him with the management of the money? For that very reason — because he was a thief — so as to take away from him every excuse. For he could not say that he betrayed Him (Jesus) out of love of money. The money box consoled him, but even while carrying the box, he was not faithful. For he carried away, that is, stole what was put into it, and was a sacrileger, appropriating for himself the offerings intended for a holy purpose. Let the sacrilegious hear what their lot is. The height of evil is that Judas afterwards betrayed Jesus and the Lord. Do you see where covetousness leads? To betrayal. Therefore, the Apostle Paul fittingly called "the love of money the root of all evils" (1 Tim. 6:10), because it betrayed the Lord and always does so. Some say that Judas was entrusted with the keeping of the money as one lesser than the rest. For serving around money is a lesser task than teaching, just as in Acts (Acts 6:2) the apostles say: "It is not right for us to leave the word of God and serve tables."

Some suppose that Judas had the keeping of the money, as being the lowest kind of service. For that the ministry of money matters ranks below the ministry of doctrine, we know from what the Apostle says in the Acts, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. (Acts 6:2)

The Evangelist unmasks the deceit when he adds, This he said, not that he cared for the poor but because he was a thief. For he was not interested in helping the poor - "The hearts of the wicked are cruel" (Prv 12:10) - but because he was a thief, and accustomed to stealing, he was pained that the use of the ointment had deprived him of an opportunity to steal, and it was this avarice that led to the betrayal, for we read: "Nothing is more wicked than the covetous man" (Sir 10:9); and "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy" (10:10). He had the opportunity to steal for he had the money box, that is, he was in charge of our Lord's purse, and he used to take what was put into it, i.e., whatever was donated by the faithful for Christ's use and for the poor he carried as a duty, but carried off as a thief.

Two things can be noted here. First, that Christ lived on alms as a poor person: "As for me, I am poor and needy" (Ps 40:17). Secondly, it is not opposed to perfection to keep alms in a money box. Thus what we read in Matthew (6:34), "Do not be anxious about tomorrow," does not forbid one from saving for tomorrow, since our Lord did this very thing, and he is the supreme model of perfection.

One might ask why our Lord, since he knew that Judas was a thief, entrusted him with the money box? This can be answered in three ways. First, according to Augustine, Christ did this so that his Church would be patient when it was robbed; for one is not good if he cannot endure those who are evil. Thus we read: "As a lily among brambles, so is my love among maidens" (Song 2:2). Secondly, our Lord entrusted him with the money box to lessen his danger of final damnation, because he could then satisfy his greed from the money box. But as it is said: "He who loves money will not be satisfied with money" (Eccl 5:10). Thirdly, according to others, he did this in order to teach us that spiritual things should be entrusted to those who are more worthy, and temporal things should be entrusted to the less worthy. Thus the Apostles said: "It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables" (Acts 6:2), and they entrusted this work to one of the deacons.

But why does it say here that only Judas said this when the ointment was poured out, while Matthew says that the disciples said this? One reply is that Matthew uses the plural for the singular, as he also did in "Those who sought the child's life are dead" (2:20). Or, one might answer that Judas was the first to grumble and that this incited the others to say the same, although not from the same motive.

"Much people of the Jews therefore knew that He was there: and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead." They were drawn by curiosity, not by charity: they came and saw.

(Tr. l. 14) Much people of the Jews therefore knew that He was there, and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom He had raised from the dead. Curiosity brought them, not love.

A great multitude therefore knew. The conspiracy and the strengthening of the conspiracy have been predetermined; here in the third place the amplification of the conspiracy is touched upon. For previously they had planned to kill Jesus; here not only Jesus, but also the resurrected Lazarus. And the reason was: because many on account of him believed in Jesus. Two things therefore are noted here, namely the multitude of believers and the amplification of the perversity of the Jews.

The multitude of believers came about on the occasion of the raising of Lazarus; on account of which he says: A great multitude therefore of the Jews knew that he was there, namely in Bethany: and they came, not for Jesus only, but that they might see Lazarus, whom he raised from the dead. They were still weak, because their eyes were not delighted solely by the sight of the Author, but also by his works: whence they were among those of whom it is said above in chapter two, "Many believed in him, seeing the signs which he did"; whence they wished to see miracles, above in chapter six: "A great multitude followed Jesus, because they saw the signs."

Through the strangeness of the sign the multitude are astonished; and that which they heard to have been done they wished also to behold with their eyes, that they might believe it more confidently. And they not only wished to see Lazarus, but also the Christ, the doer of the sign; not then seeing Him for the first time, for they had often seen Him and companied with Him; but inasmuch as He had gone into retirement, that He might not suffer before the proper time, they were seeking again to see Him: and the more reasonable among them even admired Him, as they recognised no fault in Him. With a settled purpose therefore the Lord did not immediately enter into Jerusalem, but remained outside, in order that by the report [which would reach the city] He might draw the common people to a desire of wishing to see Him.

As wealth is wont to hurl into destruction those who are not heedful, so also is power; the first leads into covetousness, the second into pride. See, for instance, how the subject multitude of the Jews is sound, and their rulers corrupt; for that the first of these believed Christ, the Evangelists continually assert, saying, that "many of the multitude believed on Him"; but they who were of the rulers, believed not. And they themselves say, not the multitude, "Hath any of the rulers believed on Him?" But what saith one? "The multitude who know not God are accursed"; the believers they call accursed, and themselves the slayers, wise. In this place also, having beheld the miracle, the many believed; but the rulers were not contented with their own evil deeds, they also attempted to kill Lazarus. Suppose they did attempt to slay Christ because He broke the Sabbath, because He made Himself equal to the Father, and because of the Romans whom ye allege, yet what charge had they against Lazarus, that they sought to kill him? Is the having received a benefit a crime? Seest thou how murderous is their will? Yet He had worked many miracles; but none exasperated them so much as this one, not the paralytic, not the blind. For this was more wonderful in its nature, and was wrought after many others, and it was a strange thing to see one, who had been dead four days, walking and speaking. An honorable action, in truth, for the feast, to mix up the solemn assembly with murders. Besides, in the one case they thought to charge Him concerning the Sabbath, and so to draw away the multitudes; but here, since they had no fault to find with Him, they make the attempt on the man who had been healed. For here they could not even say that He was opposed to the Father, since the prayer stopped their mouths. Since then the charge which they continually brought against Him was removed, and the miracle was evident, they hasten to murder. So that they would have done the same in the case of the blind man, had it not been in their power to find fault respecting the Sabbath. Besides, that man was of no note, and they cast him out of the temple; but Lazarus was a person of distinction, as is clear, since many came to comfort his sisters; and the miracle was done in the sight of all, and most marvelously. On which account all ran to see. This then stung them, that while the feast was going on, all should leave it and go to Bethany. They set their hand therefore to kill him, and thought they were not daring anything, so murderous were they. On this account the Law at its commencement opens with this, "Thou shall not kill"; and the Prophet brings this charge against them, "Their hands are full of blood."

The Jews discovered that Jesus was again in Bethany, staying with Lazarus and his sisters, and was in fact with them at that moment. Many came … perhaps expecting to hear something extraordinary from him, like somebody who comes back to civilization from a strange and remote land. For this reason the chief priests, when they saw that the crowd was also greatly attracted by the desire to see Lazarus, thought to kill Lazarus together with Christ. They obviously had the idea that the crowds would have not confined themselves to see Lazarus but by seeing him would have been led to faith in Christ—as if he who had raised [Lazarus] from the dead once could not bring him back to life again.

Those who came to the Lord were better-intentioned than the rest, who were senseless and frenzied; for they came not only for the sake of Jesus, but also to see Lazarus. Since a truly great miracle had been performed, many wished to be spectators of the risen man, perhaps in the hope of learning from Lazarus something about those in Hades.

They wished to see with their own eyes him who had been raised from the dead, and thought that Lazarus might bring back a report of the regions below.

Next, the Evangelist shows how Jesus was honored by many of the Jews; first, by the crowd that went to see him there; secondly, by the crowd which met him on his way to Jerusalem (v 12). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows the eagerness of those who came to see him; secondly, he shows the vehemence of the Pharisees aroused by their envy (v 10).

The first part is divided into two parts: first, he states that a crowd came to him; secondly, he gives the reason why they came. As to the first, he says, When the great crowd of the Jews learned that he was there, they came, to Bethany. This was in keeping with our Lord's invitation: "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matt 11:28). And so, when we know where Jesus is, we should go to him quickly.

Now there were two reasons why they came. The first was to enjoy the sight and teaching of Christ. Secondly, they came to see Lazarus. And they came to see Lazarus for two reasons. First, because of the extraordinary miracle accomplished on Lazarus, that is, his being raised back to the living after four days in the tomb; and the people desired to see this: "Your works are wonderful, and my soul knows them well," that is, it attempts to understand them (Ps 138:14). Secondly, they came because they hoped they would learn something about the other life from Lazarus, for man has an inborn desire for knowledge of this kind, in spite of what the foolish say: "For they reasoned unsoundly, saying to themselves, 'Short and sorrowful is our life, and there is no remedy when a man comes to his end, and no one has been known to return from Hades'" (Wis 2:1). But here he is! Lazarus, whom he raised from the dead, has resumed from the lower world.

In the presence of such grace given by the Lord, of such a miracle of divine bounty, when all ought to have rejoiced, the wicked were stirred up and gathered a council against Christ and wished moreover to kill Lazarus also. Do you not recognize that you are the successors of those whose hardness you inherit? For you too are angry and gather a council against the church, because you see the dead come to life again in the church and raised again by receiving forgiveness of their sins. And thus, so far as you are concerned, you desire to slay again through envy those who are raised to life.

Hearken to the strange scheming of human vanity. Having seen Lazarus as one raised from the dead,—for the fame of such a miracle of the Lord's had been accompanied everywhere with so much evidence of its genuineness, and it had been so openly performed, that they could neither conceal nor deny what had been done,—only think of the plan they hit upon. "But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus." O foolish consultation and blinded rage! Could not Christ the Lord, who was able to raise the dead, raise also the slain? When you were preparing a violent death for Lazarus, were you at the same time denuding the Lord of His power? If you think a dead man one thing, a murdered man another, look you only to this, that the Lord made both, and raised Lazarus to life when dead, and Himself when slain.

(Tr. l. 14) When the news of this great miracle had spread every where, and was supported by such clear evidence, that they could neither suppress or deny the fact, then, The chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus to death. O blind rage! as if the Lord could raise the dead, and not raise the slain. Lo, the Lord hath done both. He raised Lazarus, and He raised Himself.

Blind cunning of the blind, to wish to kill one who had been restored to life! As if [Jesus] could not restore to life one who had been killed when he had been able to restore to life one who had died! And, indeed, he taught that he was about do both, since he restored to life both Lazarus, who had died, and himself, who had been killed.

But the chief priests thought. Here the second point is touched upon, namely the amplification of the conspiracy and perversity against the Author, because they raged not only against the Lord, but against others on account of him; whence he says: But the chief priests thought to kill Lazarus also, not only Jesus; Isaiah chapter one: "Your hands are full of blood."

The Pharisees, however, are so inhuman that they want to kill not only Jesus but also Lazarus, because he served as an occasion of salvation for many through the miracle performed upon him, leading simple people to faith. Thus even the beneficence of Jesus became a crime in their eyes.

Then the Evangelist describes the vehemence of the Pharisees in their envy, when he says, So the chief priests planned to put Lazarus also to death. In this they were opposing God: for God had raised him to life, and they wanted to kill him: "Running stubbornly against him" (Job 15:26). Then the reason for their vehemence is stated, because on account of him many of the Jews were going away and believing in Jesus.

But since Christ had cured many people, such as the paralytic and the man born blind, why did they want to kill only Lazarus? Chrysostom gives four reasons. First, because this miracle was more evident, it was performed before many people, and it was absolutely astounding to see a man dead for four days walking and speaking. The second reason was that Lazarus was a well-known person, while the blind man was unimportant, so much so that they even expelled him from the temple. The third reason was because this miracle was accomplished near the time of a great feast, and all the Jewish people who had come for the feast disregarded the solemnities and went to Bethany. The fourth reason was that in the other miracles they could accuse Christ of breaking the Sabbath, and in this way alienate the people from him; but this time that way was closed. And so because they could find no reason to attack Jesus, they attacked Lazarus as the best way to conceal the miracle: "Their feet run to evil and they make haste to shed blood" (Prv 1:16).

Because many on account of him went away from the Jews and believed in Jesus: and therefore they wished to kill him. Augustine: "Foolish thought! Could not the Lord, who was able to raise the dead, also raise one who had been slain? When you were bringing death upon Lazarus, were you taking away the Lord's power? If a dead man seems one thing and a slain man another: behold, the Lord did both: he raised both Lazarus who was dead and himself who was slain." They wished to close the way of salvation: Matthew chapter twenty-three: "You yourselves did not enter in, and those who were entering in you hindered."

See now how frantic the rulers seem to become, wildly rushing here and there under the influence of their envy and saying nothing coherently. They seriously meditate murder on murder, thinking they can remove the force of the miraculous deed at the same time as their victim in order to stop the people from running to believe Christ.

They were especially vexed by the fact that, with the approach of the feast, everyone was going to Bethany, learning of the miracle, and seeing the risen man with their own eyes.

"On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took branches of palm trees and went forth to meet Him, and cried, Hosanna: blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord as the King of Israel." The branches of palm trees are laudatory emblems, significant of victory, because the Lord was about to overcome death by dying, and by the trophy of His cross to triumph over the devil, the prince of death.

(Tr. li. 1) See how great was the fruit of His preaching, and how large a flock of the lost sheep of the house of Israel heard the voice of their Shepherd: On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took branches of palm trees. The branches of palms are songs of praise, for the victory which our Lord was about to obtain by His death over death, and His triumph over the devil, the prince of death, by the trophy of the cross.

(Tr. li. 2) Hosanna is a simple exclamation, rather indicating some excitement of the mind, than having any particular meaning; like many interjections that we have in Latin.

(Tr. li. 4) It were a small thing to the King eternal to be made a human king. Christ was not the King of Israel, to exact tribute, and command armies, but to direct souls, and bring them to the kingdom of heaven. For Christ then to be King of Israel, was a condescension, not an elevation, a sign of Hispity, not an increase of His power. For He who was called on earth the King of the Jews, is in heaven the King of Angels.

On the next day, etc. The amplification of the conspiracy has been determined; here in the fourth and last place is determined the consummation of malice through obstinacy. And this obstinacy had its occasion from the honor shown to the Lord, on account of which they leapt forth into wondrous envy; and the procedure is as follows. First is determined the honoring of Christ; second, the approval of that honor through Scripture; third, the reason for honoring him; fourth, the most malevolent obstinacy of the Pharisees.

Now the honor is described in three ways: first with respect to the manner of meeting him, because it was with joy; on account of which he says: On the next day a great multitude, when they had heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, went out to meet him with joy.

Question I. But it is asked here: because it seems that the Lord in his works was contrary to himself:

1. Because above in chapter 11 it is said that the Lord hid himself from the face of the Jews who were persecuting him: but here he so openly presents himself.

2. Likewise, the Lord above in chapter 6 fled to the mountain, when they wanted to make him king: here he accepts the honor bestowed upon him as king and approves it.

I respond: It must be said that the Lord, as Augustine says, does not do contrary things, but according to fittingness does diverse things, just as he first issued the old and afterwards the new testament.

1. On account of which it must be said that the time of the passion had not yet arrived before, but now it was at hand: therefore previously he was hiding himself, because he was awaiting the time: now, when the opportunity and the time are present, he manifests himself.

2. Similarly to the second point: because before the passion he wished to be unknown, but near and after the passion he was to be glorified: therefore he accepted the royal honor then and not before.

Another reason is that these did not make him king, but recognized him as sent by God; whereas those wished to make him king.

The third reason is that since the Lord was about to suffer almost immediately after these things, he willed to be honored, so that from this honor the succeeding ignominy of the passion might be intensified.

The multitudes, being more obedient and yielding to the effect of the sign, went to meet the Christ.

But how, after not walking openly in Jewry, and retiring into the wilderness, doth He again enter openly? Having quenched their anger by retiring, He cometh to them when they were stilled.

(Hom. lxiv) The Law enjoined, that on the tenth day of the first month a lamb or a kid should be shut up in the house, and be kept to the fourteenth day of the same month, on the evening of which day it was sacrificed. In accordance with this law, the Elect Lamb, the Lamb without spot, when He went up to Jerusalem to be immolated for the sanctification of the people, went up five days before, i. e. on the tenth day.

The Lord, having withdrawn into the wilderness for a short time in order to calm the fury of the bloodthirsty, again openly enters Judea and shows Himself before all. The time to suffer had finally come, and He ought not to hide, but to give Himself up for the salvation of the world. See then what the sequence of the Passion was. The Lord raised Lazarus, having reserved this miracle, the most important of all the rest, for the end; as a result of this, many flocked to Him and believed. Because many believed, the envy of His enemies increased. After this followed the plots against Him and the Cross.

Here we see the fervor of the crowd which went to meet Christ. First, they go to meet Christ; secondly, we have the reaction of the Pharisees (v 19). Concerning the first the Evangelist does three things: first, he mentions their going out; secondly, he tells of our Lord's entrance (v 14); and thirdly, he states why the crowd went out to him.

He mentions four things concerning the crowd which went out to the Lord. First, the time they went out, the next day, that is, the day following the one he meant when he said, "six days before the Passover"; in other words, the tenth day of the month. This is in keeping with the figure in Exodus (12:3), where we read that the Paschal lamb which was to be immolated on the fourteenth day in the evening should be procured on the tenth day of the month.

Secondly, the ones who went out are described, a great crowd who had come to the feast. They signify the multitudes of the people who would be converted to Christ: "Let the assembly of the people be gathered about thee" (Ps 7:7). He says to the feast, because believers are converted to Christ so that they may come to the feast day of the heavenly Jerusalem: "Many will come from east and west and sit at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven" (Matt 8:11).

Thirdly, the Evangelist mentions their motive for going out, which was that they heard that Jesus was coming: he says that they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem. For all the faithful are converted to Christ through what they hear about the faith: "Faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ" (Rom 10:17); "and the children of Israel heard that the Lord had visited the children of Israel; and the peoples believed," as we read in Exodus (4:31).

When the crowd took the palm branches from the date palms and went before Christ as he was about to go up to the feast, all of them bore witness that he had called Lazarus forth from the grave and had raised him from the dead. Because of this, this great throng believed on him when they heard that he had done this sign. For all the people had come out of the tomb before they buried him and closed the mouth of the tomb. A great wonder seized them all when they heard that he was alive again.

The exclamation used by the worshipping people is Hosanna, indicating, as some who know the Hebrew language affirm, rather a state of mind than having any positive significance; just as in our own tongue we have what are called interjections, as when in our grief we say, Alas! or in our joy, Ha! or in our admiration, O how fine! where O! expresses only the feeling of the admirer.

But when it is said, "Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord, [as] the King of Israel," by "in the name of the Lord" we are rather to understand "in the name of God the Father," although it might also be understood as in His own name, inasmuch as He is also Himself the Lord. As we find Scripture also saying in another place, "The Lord rained [upon Sodom fire] from the Lord." But His own words are a better guide to our understanding, when He saith, "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: another will come in his own name, and him ye will receive." For the true teacher of humility is Christ, who humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. But He does not lose His divinity in teaching us humility; in the one He is the Father's equal, in the other He is assimilated to us. By that which made Him the equal of the Father, He called us into existence; and by that in which He is like unto us, He redeemed us from ruin.

With one and the same voice of confession and praise, they exalt the Lord, both those who go before and those who follow: because there is indeed one faith of those who were proven before the Lord's incarnation and those afterward, although they had different sacraments according to the times, as Peter attests, who says: But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus we shall be saved, even as they (Acts 15). And what they say, Hosanna to the Son of David, this is what is read in the psalm: The salvation of the Lord is, and upon your people is your blessing (Psalm 3), this is, what in great devotion of praise the chorus of saints resonates in the Revelation: Salvation to our God who sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb (Rev. 7).

But the crowds take up a verse of praise from the one hundred and seventeenth psalm, which no one doubts is sung about the Lord. Whence it is beautifully stated about Him in the same psalm: The stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; because indeed Christ, whom the Jewish builders rejected with their decrees of traditions, has become the foundation of the believing people, namely the Jews and the Gentiles. For what is called the cornerstone in the psalm is Christ, who is praised in the Gospel by the voices of the preceding and following crowds.

Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. In the name of the Lord signifies in the name of God the Father, which He elsewhere says to the unbelieving Jews: I have come in the name of My Father, and you did not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive (John V). For Christ came in the name of God the Father, because in all that He did and said He took care to glorify the Father and proclaim Him as to be glorified by men. The Antichrist will come in his own name, who, although the most wicked of all men and full of the devil as his companion, will not disdain to call himself the Son of God: for he opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped.

It is a compound of two words; Hosi is shortened into save; Anna a mere exclamation, complete. Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord. The name of the Lord here is the name of God the Father; though we may understand it as His own name; inasmuch as He also is the Lord. But the former sense agrees better with the text above, I am come in My Father's name. (5:43) He does not lose His divinity, when He teaches us humility.

They took branches of palms and went forth to meet him: they had this custom from the Law: whence it is said in the eighth chapter of Second Esdras: "Go forth to the mountain and bring branches of olive and branches of the most beautiful tree and branches of palms" etc.

There is also described the manner of praising: on account of which he says: And they cried out: Hosanna: as the Gloss says, "this word is that of one beseeching, indicating an affection rather than something definite, like interjections," and it means as much as save, I beseech. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, the King of Israel: in which they confess in him royal dignity, not from man, but from God: therefore they say: the King of Israel in the name of the Lord, according to that passage in the first chapter of Luke: "He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father, and he shall reign in the house of Jacob forever." There is also described the manner of proceeding: because he did not proceed on foot, but sat upon an ass.

The multitudes do not praise Jesus with ordinary language but quote from the inspired Scripture that which was beautifully spoken regarding him. Confessing that he was indeed the King of Israel, they call him their own king and accept the lordship of the Christ.

The multitudes hymned Christ as One Who had conquered death, carrying palm branches. And they do not praise Him with ordinary language, but quote from the inspired Scripture that which was beautifully spoken with regard to Him; confessing that He was indeed King of Israel, Whom also they called specially their own King, accepting the lordship of the Christ. And the Son, they say, is Blessed: not because He Who blesseth all things and guards them from destruction, and Who is of the ineffable Essence of the Father, receives the blessing which comes from the Father; but because the blessing which is due to One Who is God and Lord by Nature is offered to Him from us, inasmuch as He came in the Name of the Lord. For all the saints did not come with the authority of lordship, but as trusted servants; This One, on the contrary, as Lord. Wherefore the prophetic language was quoted very suitably with regard to Him. For indeed some are called lords, who are not such by nature, but have the honourable name granted to them by favour. As also, to take another case, men are called "true," when they abstain from falsehood: but this is not the thing to say with regard to Christ; for He is not called "Truth" for the reason that He does not speak falsely, but because He has that Nature which is altogether superior to falsehood.

As, therefore, hosanna is said in the psalm we are considering, which is translated "Save us now," and the Hebrew has "Lord, save us," and the words "blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord" are taken from the same psalm, and these words can only refer to the Christ of God, we naturally apply the rest of the prediction to him as well.

...the one and the same Lord granted, by means of His advent, a greater gift of grace to those of a later period, than what He had granted to those under the Old Testament dispensation. For they indeed used to hear, by means of [His] servants, that the King would come, and they rejoiced to a certain extent, inasmuch as they hoped for His coming; but those who have beheld Him actually present, and have obtained liberty, and been made partakers of His gifts, do possess a greater amount of grace, and a higher degree of exultation, rejoicing because of the King's arrival: as also David says, "My soul shall rejoice in the Lord; it shall be glad in His salvation." And for this cause, upon His entrance into Jerusalem, all those who were in the way recognised David their king in His sorrow of soul, and spread their garments for Him, and ornamented the way with green boughs, crying out with great joy and gladness, "Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord: hosanna in the highest." But to the envious wicked stewards, who circumvented those under them, and ruled over those that had no great intelligence, and for this reason were unwilling that the king should come, and who said to Him, "Hearest thou what these say?" did the Lord reply, "Have ye never read, Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings hast Thou perfected praise?"-thus pointing out that what had been declared by David concerning the Son of God, was accomplished in His own person; and indicating that they were indeed ignorant of the meaning of the Scripture and the dispensation of God; but declaring that it was Himself who was announced by the prophets as Christ, whose name is praised in all the earth, and who perfects praise to His Father from the mouth of babes and sucklings; wherefore also His glory has been raised above the heavens.

Seest thou that this most choked them, the persuasion which all men had that He was not an enemy of God? And this most divided the people, His saying that He came from the Father.

Moreover, the multitude which went before and which followed after was sufficient to cast them into an agony; for no sign so much attracted the people as that of Lazarus. And another Evangelist saith, that they strewed their garments under His feet, and that "the whole city was moved"; with so great honor did He enter.

And they took the small branches of palm trees and olives, and strewed their garments in the way, showing that they now had a higher opinion concerning Him than of a Prophet.

In psalms and hymns, let us raise to Him our shouts of thanksgiving; and, without ceasing, let us exclaim, "Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord; "

With palms everyone came On the occasion of your arrival, Savior, Crying to you, "Hosanna!" Now all of us sing praises to you From our pitiful mouths, As we wave to you the branches of our souls and cry out: "O you, who are in the highest, save the world That you brought into being, Lord, And blot out our sins, Just as you previously dried The tears of Mary and Martha." The holy church holds a high festival, Faithfully calling together her children, O Lover of humanity; With palms she meets you and strews garments of joy So that you, along with your disciples and your friends, May establish your feet and grant deep peace for your servants, And release them from oppression, as previously you checked The tears of Mary and Martha. Incline your ear, O God of the universe, And hear our prayers, And snatch us from the bonds of death.… Let those of us who have died because of our sins, and who dwell in the tomb Because of our knowledge of evils, Imitate the sisters of faithful Lazarus as we cry to Christ with tears, and in faith and in love: "Save us, you who willed to become man. And raise us up from the tomb of our sins, You, alone who are immortal."

The palms perhaps signified that He, having raised Lazarus, became the conqueror of death, for the palm was given to victors in combat. Perhaps they also expressed that the One being glorified is a heavenly Being who came from above. For the palm alone among other trees reaches, so to speak, heaven itself, puts forth leaves at its height, has white kernels in its leaves, yet in its trunk and middle, up to the top, is rough and difficult to climb, since it has thorns on its branches. So too, whoever strives toward the knowledge of the Son and Word of God will find it not easy but difficult, ascending through the labors of virtue; but upon reaching the height of knowledge, he will be illumined by the bright light of the knowledge of God and the revelation of ineffable mysteries, as if by the whitest kernels of the palm. The people, having heard that Jesus was coming, met Him with glory, undoubtedly on account of the miracle over Lazarus, rendering Him honor greater than what would befit a mere man. For they no longer received Him as a prophet, because to which of the prophets had their fathers rendered such honor? Therefore they also exclaimed: "Hosanna! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!" From this exclamation we understand, first, that He is God; for "hosanna" means "save." This is how the Seventy translators rendered the word in Greek in Psalm 117 (Ps. 117:25). For in the Hebrew language it reads "hosanna," but in Greek it is "O Lord, save!" To save is proper to God alone, and to Him it was said: "Save us, O Lord our God!" From all the passages of Scripture, anyone can learn that salvation is ascribed by Scripture to God alone. Thus, those who exclaimed to Christ with the words of David show by this, first, that He is God; and then, that He is God in the proper sense. For they say "He who comes," and not "He who is led." The latter is something servile, while to come is an act of sovereignty. With the words "in the name of the Lord" they express the very same thing, that He is true God. For they do not say that He comes in the name of a servant, but in the name of the "Lord." Furthermore, they also indicate that He is not an adversary of God, but came in the name of the Father, as the Lord Himself says: "I have come in My Father's name, and another will come in his own name" (John 5:43). They also call Him King of Israel, perhaps dreaming of a sensible kingdom; for they expected that some king of a nature higher than human would arise and deliver them from the dominion of the Romans.

The Jews, when they called Him King of Israel, dreamed of an earthly king. They expected a king to arise, of more than human greatness, who would deliver them from the government of the Romans. But how did our Lord come? The next words tell us; And Jesus when He had found a young ass, sat thereon.

Fourthly, he mentions how they conducted themselves. And first of all, what they did: they took branches of palm trees. Now the palm, since it retains its freshness, signifies victory. Thus in antiquity it was conferred upon conquerors as a symbol of their victory. Again, we read in Revelation (7:9) of the conquering martyrs that they held "palm branches in their hands." And so the branches of palm trees were given as praise, signifying victory, because our Lord was to conquer death by dying and to triumph over Satan, the prince of death, by the victory of the cross. And went out to meet him: "Prepare to meet your God, O Israel!" (Amos 4:12).

Secondly, the Evangelist mentions what they said: they shouted out Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, the King of Israel! Here they combine both petition and praise. There is petition when they say, Hosanna, that is "Save us, I implore you." It is like saying: hosy, which means "save," and anna, which means "implore." According to Augustine, this is not a word, but rather an exclamation of one praying. And it is quite proper that they should ask the Lord Jesus for salvation, because we read in Isaiah (35:4): "Behold your God, He will come and save you"; "Stir up thy might, and come to save us!" (Ps 80:2).

They praise him for two things: for his coming and for the power of his reign or kingdom. They praise his coming when they say, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Note that to bless is to speak good things. Now God blesses us in one way, and we bless God in another way. For when God blesses us he makes us good, since for God to speak is to do: "For he commanded (that is, spoke), and they were created" (Ps 148:5). But when we bless God, we profess his goodness: "We bless you from the house of the Lord" (Ps 118:26); "Blessed be every one who blesses you!" (Gen 27:29). Therefore, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, for Christ worked in the name of God, because every thing he did he directed to the glory of God.

Now because both the Father and the Son are the Lord, the phrase, in the name of the Lord, can be understood in two ways. In one way, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, means blessed is he who comes in his own name, as Lord: "The Lord is our ruler" (Is 33:22). Moses did not come in the name of the Lord in this way, because he came as a servant: "Now Moses was faithful in all God's house as a servant, to testify to the things that were to be spoken later" (Heb 3:5). According to Augustine, the better interpretation would be to say that in the name of the Lord means in the name of the Father. For Christ's words direct our minds to this: "I have come in my Father's name" (5:45). Further, there are two ways in which Christ is said to have come in the name of the Father. First, he came as the Son, which implies the Father; secondly, he came to manifest the Father: "I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gave me" (17:6).

The people praise the power of his reign when they say, the King of Israel! Literally, the Jews believed that he had come to reign over them temporally, and ransom them from subjection to the Romans. That is why they hailed him as a king: "He shall reign as king and deal wisely" (Jer 23:5); "Behold, a king will reign in righteousness, and princes will rule in justice" (Is 32:1).

We should note that the above words can be gathered from the Psalms. For when the Psalm says, "The stone which the builders rejected..." (Ps 118:22), it then continues on, "Save us, we beseech thee, O Lord! Blessed is he who enters in the name of the Lord!" (v 25-26). And there Jerome, according to the meaning of the Hebrew, translated hosanna as "blessed." But what the people added, the King of Israel, is not in the psalms. Instead, the Psalm says: "The Lord is God, and he has given us light" (v 27). In saying this, the people, due to their blindness, have lessened his praise: for the Psalm praises our Lord as God, but they praised him as a temporal king.

"And Jesus, when He had found a young ass, sat thereon." Here the account is briefly given: for how it all happened may be found at full length in the other evangelists. But there is appended to the circumstance itself a testimony from the prophets, to make it evident that He in whom was fulfilled all they read in Scripture, was entirely misunderstood by the evil-minded rulers of the Jews.

(Tr. li. 5) John relates the matter briefly, the other Evangelists are more full. The ass, we read in them, was the foal of an ass on which no man had sat: i. e. the Gentile world, who had not received our Lord. The other ass, which was brought, (not the foal, for there were two,) is the believing Jew.

(Tr. li) This act of our Lord's is pointed to in the Prophets, though the malignant rulers of the Jews did not see in it any fulfilment of prophecy: As it is written, Fear not, daughter of Sion, behold thy King cometh sitting on an ass's colt. Yea, in that nation though reprobate, though blind, there remained still the daughter of Sion; even Jerusalem. To her it is said, Fear not, acknowledge Him whom thou praisest, and tremble not when He suffers. That blood it is which shall wipe away thy sins, and redeem thy life.

And Jesus found a young ass and sat upon it. Although he was the true King and permitted royal honor to be offered to him, nevertheless he came not with a multitude of horses, but upon an ass. In which is signified, as Augustine says, that "he was not a king for exacting tribute, not for arming an army with iron, but the King of Israel, who rules minds, who takes counsel, who leads believers, hopers, and lovers into the kingdom of heaven."

As it is written. Here is touched upon the second point, namely the approval of that deed through Scripture, and this he does by showing that it had been foretold in Scripture: because this gives strength to true faith. Therefore he says that he sat upon an ass in royal honor: lest you think this was done by chance, therefore he says: As it is written, in the ninth chapter of Zechariah.

Question II. Likewise, a question is raised about the apparent contradiction:

1. Because it is said in Matthew twenty-one that he first sent into the village for the donkey, and then that the crowd came to meet him.

2. Likewise, in the same place it is said that he sat upon the she-donkey and the colt, but here it is said that upon a young donkey.

3. Likewise, this is not written in Zechariah: Fear not, daughter of Sion, but rather: Rejoice and shout for joy, daughter, etc.

I respond: To this last point, it must be said that because the Evangelists spoke through the Holy Spirit, who composed all of Scripture and is its author, they did not insist upon the similarity of words but upon the integrity of meaning; and the very same thing that the prophet said through the word rejoicing, the Evangelist says through the word not fearing.

As for the objection concerning the contradiction and the reversal of order: it must be said that the Lord sat upon the she-donkey and also upon her colt. And some say this happened in this way: he first mounted the colt, and because it was bucking, he afterward sat upon the she-donkey. But this amounts to nothing, because I do not believe that the colt would ever buck while the Lord was sitting upon it; rather, it should be understood that the Lord, for the sake of the figure, first sat upon the she-donkey, that is, upon the old synagogue, and afterward upon the colt, that is, the untamed gentile world.

And he first sat upon the she-donkey before the crowds came to meet him; therefore Matthew narrates this first. But afterward, when the crowds came to meet him, then he sat upon the young donkey. And therefore John says after the arrival of the crowds: Jesus found a young donkey and sat upon it, not troubling to tell the whole, because another had already told it.

And since, contrary to his usual habits, on this occasion only, Christ appears seated on a donkey, we do not say that he sat on it because it was a long distance to the city. For it was not more than two miles away. Nor do we say that it was because there was a multitude. For it is certain that on other occasions when he was found with a multitude he did not do this; but he does this to indicate that he is about to make subject to himself as a new people the unclean among the Gentiles, and to lead them up to the prerogative of righteousness and to the Jerusalem above of which the earthly is a type. It is into this Jerusalem that this people, being made clean, shall enter with Christ, who will be hymned by the guileless angels of whom the babes are a type. And he calls the donkey a colt, because the people of the Gentiles had been untrained in the piety that faith produces.

"Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion"? Because all their kings had for the most part been an unjust and covetous kind of men, and had given them over to their enemies, and had perverted the people, and made them subject to their foes; "Be of good courage," It saith, "this is not such an one, but meek and gentle"; as is shown by the ass, for He entered not with an army in His train, but having an ass alone.

And this He did, figuring one prophecy and fulfilling another; and the same act was the beginning of the one and the end of the other. For the, "Rejoice, for thy King cometh unto thee meek," belonged to Him as fulfilling a prophecy, but the sitting upon an ass was the act of one prefiguring a future event, that He was about to have the impure race of the Gentiles subject to Him.

But how say the others, that He sent disciples, and said, "Loose the ass and the colt," while John saith nothing of the kind, but that "having found a young ass, He sat upon it"? Because it is likely that both circumstances took place, and that He after the ass was loosed, while the disciples were bringing it, found the colt, and sat upon it.

For state reasons, the various orders of the [Roman] citizens … are crowned with laurel crowns.… There are also provincial crowns of gold, needing now the larger heads of images instead of those of men. But your orders, and your magistracies and your very place of meeting, that is, the church, are Christ's. You belong to him, for you have been enrolled in the books of life. There the blood of the Lord serves for your purple robe, and your broad stripe is his own cross. There the axe is already laid to the trunk of the tree. There the branch is from the root of Jesse. Never mind the state horses with their crown. Your Lord, when, according to the Scripture, he would enter Jerusalem in triumph, had not even a donkey of his own. These [put their trust] in chariots, and these in horses. But we will seek our help in the name of the Lord our God.

The other Evangelists say that the Lord told the disciples: "Untie it and bring it to Me" (Matt. 21:1–2; Mark 11:2; Luke 19:30). But here John mentions none of this, and simply says: "Jesus found a young donkey." However, there is no disagreement among the Evangelists. The others spoke more at length, while John said it more briefly: "Jesus, having found a young donkey." When the disciples untied it and brought it, Jesus found it and sat upon it.

When the Evangelist says, and Jesus found a young ass and sat upon it, he describes our Lord's coming: first, he tells how he came; secondly, he mentions a prophecy (v 15); and thirdly, he describes the state of mind of the disciples in regard to this event (v 16).

It should be noted in regard to the first point, that John the Evangelist wrote his Gospel after all the others. And so, after carefully noting what these had written, he merely summarized what they had already mentioned, but filled in what they had omitted. Therefore, since the other Evangelists had already told how the Lord sent two of his disciples to bring the ass, John contents himself with mentioning briefly that Jesus found a young ass and sat upon it.

Here it should be pointed out that Christ's actions are in a way midway between the events of the Old Testament and of the New Testament. Thus the crowds praised him, both the one which went before him, and the one which followed him, because Christ's actions are the rule and exemplar of the things that are done in the New Testament, and they were prefigured by the fathers of the Old Testament.

The young ass is an awkward animal, and signifies the Gentiles. Christ sat upon it to signify that he would redeem the Gentiles: "I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth" (Is 49:6); "Happy are you who sow beside all waters, who let the feet of the ox and the ass range free," that is, thus uniting the Jews and the Gentiles in one faith.

Now Matthew wrote his Gospel for the Jews, and so he made mention of a she-ass. This she-ass signifies the synagogue of the Jews, which was like a mother to the Gentiles in spiritual matters, because "out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem" (Is 2:3). The other Evangelists, however, wrote their Gospels for the Gentiles, and so they mention the young colt of the she-ass.

Jesus, then, "found a young ass, and sat thereon; as it is written, Fear not, daughter of Zion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt." Among that people, then, was the daughter of Zion to be found; for Zion is the same as Jerusalem. Among that very people, I say, reprobate and blind as they were, was the daughter of Zion, to whom it was said, "Fear not, daughter of Zion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt." This daughter of Zion, who was thus divinely addressed, was amongst those sheep that were hearing the Shepherd's voice, and in that multitude which was celebrating the Lord's coming with such religious zeal, and accompanying Him in such warlike array. To her was it said, "Fear not:" acknowledge Him whom thou art now extolling, and give not way to fear when He comes to suffering; for by the shedding of His blood is thy guilt to be blotted out, and thy life restored. But by the ass's colt, on which no man had ever sat (for so it is found recorded in the other evangelists), we are to understand the Gentile nations which had not received the law of the Lord; by the ass, on the other hand (for both animals were brought to the Lord), that people of His which came of the nation of Israel, and was already so far subdued as to recognize its Master's crib.

Fear not, daughter of Sion, that is, the Church: he says less and means more, that is, rejoice: in the ninth chapter of Zechariah: "Rejoice greatly, daughter of Sion; shout for joy, daughter of Jerusalem." And the reason for rejoicing is given: Behold, your king comes to you; behold, royal dignity: sitting upon the foal of an ass; behold, meekness and humility. And at the coming of such a one there is cause for gladness, because it is said in the sixteenth chapter of Proverbs: "In the cheerfulness of the king's countenance is life, and his clemency is like the latter rain."

Zechariah gave this prophecy after the return from Babylon toward the conclusion of prophecy. But there is no record of a Jewish king since that time, such as the prophecy predicts, except our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, in whom this prediction was fulfilled.… But what was his riding on a donkey meant to show but the lowly and humble manner that marked his first coming?

In this circumstance He was also fulfilling the prophecy of Zechariah, who said: "Fear not, daughter of Zion! Behold, your King comes to you, sitting on a young donkey" (Zech. 9:9). Since the kings of Jerusalem were, for the most part, unjust and greedy, the prophet says: "Fear not, daughter of Zion! The King of whom I foretell to you is not such, but is meek and humble-minded, and not at all proud." This is evident also from the fact that He came sitting on a donkey. For He entered not accompanied by an army, but rode on a single donkey. The Lord's sitting upon the donkey was also a figure of things to come. This animal, unclean according to the law, was a figure of the unclean nation of the gentiles, upon which Jesus, the Word of God, sits, subjecting to Himself this disobedient and rough new people, like a donkey, whom He also leads up to the true Jerusalem after they have become tame and obedient to Him. For did not the Lord take up to heaven with Himself those gentiles who became His people and submitted to the preaching of the Gospel?

When the Evangelist says, as it is written, Fear not, daughter of Zion! he cites the prophesy which was written in Zechariah (9:9). First, he reassures them; secondly, he promises a kingly majesty; and thirdly, he adds the benefit which the king will bring.

He reassures them when he says, Fear not, daughter of Zion. Zion was the fortress in Jerusalem where the king lived. The daughter of Zion, therefore, would be the people of Jerusalem and of Judea who were subject to the king of Jerusalem. Thus the Jews are being told, Fear not, because the Lord is your defender: "Who are you that you are afraid of man who dies, of the son of man who is made like grass?" (Is 51:12); "The Lord is the defender of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?" (Ps 27:1). Here the Evangelist is driving out their worldly and servile fear.

He promises them a kingly majesty, saying, behold, your king is coming: "For to us a son is given" (Is 9:6); "Upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom" (9:7). He says, your king, that means, taking flesh from you, for "It is not with angels that he is concerned, but with the descendants of Abraham" (Heb 2:16). Again, your king, that is, for your benefit. Thus he adds, is coming, to you: "Would that even today you knew the things that make for peace! But now they are hid from your eyes" (Lk 19:42). But when they resisted, they hindered their own good.

The king comes to you, I say, not to harm you, but to set you free; thus he adds, sitting on an ass's colt! This signifies the mercy of the king, which is most welcome to his subjects: "His throne is upheld by mercy" (Prv 20:28). This is just the opposite to "A king's wrath is like the growling of a lion" (Prv 19:12). He is saying in effect: He is not coming as a haughty king - which would make him hateful - but with gentleness: "If they make you master of the feast, do not exalt yourself" (Sir 32:1). Therefore, have no fear that the king will oppress you. Now the Old Law was given in fear, because the Law produced slaves. This phrase also signifies the power of the king, because by coming with humility and in weakness he attracted the entire world: "The weakness of God is stronger than men" (1 Cor 1:25).

"These things understood not His disciples at the first; but when Jesus was glorified," that is, when He had manifested the power of His resurrection, "then remembered they that these things were written of Him, and they had done these things unto Him," that is, they did nothing else but what had been written concerning Him. In short, mentally comparing with the contents of Scripture what was accomplished both prior to and in the course of our Lord's passion, they found this also therein, that it was in accordance with the utterance of the prophets that He sat on an ass's colt.

(Tr. li) i. e. When He showed the power of His resurrection, then they remembered that these things were written of Him, and that they had done these things unto Him, i. e. those things that were written of Him.

And although this honor had been foretold, nevertheless it was not foreknown by the disciples of Christ, so that you may know that this was not done by human invention, but by divine dispensation. Therefore he adds: These things his disciples did not understand at first, namely when they conferred this honor; but when Jesus was glorified, after the resurrection and ascension, then they remembered, that is, they perceived, that these things were written of him: and these things they had done to him. After his glorification they understood, not before: because then for the first time, as is said in the last chapter of Luke, "he opened their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures."

At first therefore they were ignorant that these words had been written with regard to Him; but after the Resurrection, they did not continue to suffer from the Jewish blindness, but the knowledge of the Divine words was revealed to them through the Spirit. And then was the Christ glorified, when after being crucified He came to life again. And the Evangelist does not blush to mention the ignorance of the disciples, and again their knowledge, since his object was, to take no heed of respect for men, but to plead for the glory of the Spirit; and to show what sort of men the disciples were before the Resurrection, and what sort of men they became after the Resurrection. If therefore these disciples were ignorant, how much more were the other Jews. And after He was crucified, the veil was rent, in order that we may know that nothing any longer remains hidden and concealed from the faithful and godly. They were enlightened therefore with knowledge from the time of the Resurrection, when the Christ breathed into their face, and they became different from the rest of men. And to a still greater extent they were enlightened on the Day of Pentecost, when they were transformed into the power of the Holy Spirit Who came upon them.

The Evangelist does not hesitate to mention the ignorance of the disciples, nor their subsequent understanding, since he did not care about the respect of people but pleads for the glory of the Spirit and shows what kind of men the disciples were before the resurrection and what sort of men they had become after the resurrection.

"But this," saith the Evangelist, "the disciples knew not, that it was written of Him." Seest thou that they were ignorant on most points, because He did not reveal to them? For when He said, "Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up," neither then did the disciples understand. And another Evangelist saith, that "the saying was hid from them," and they knew not that He should rise from the dead. Now this was with reason concealed from them, (wherefore another Evangelist saith, that as they heard it from time to time, they grieved and were dejected, and this because they understood not the saying concerning the Resurrection,) it was with reason concealed, as being too high for them: but why was not the matter of the ass revealed to them? Because this was a great thing also. But observe the wisdom of the Evangelist, how he is not ashamed to parade their former ignorance. That it was written they knew, that it was written of Him they knew not. For it would have offended them if He being a King were about to suffer such things, and be so betrayed. Besides, they could not at once have taken in the knowledge of the Kingdom of which He spake; for another Evangelist saith, that they thought the words were spoken of a kingdom of this world.

I ask you, marvel at the evangelist, how he is not ashamed, but openly speaks of the former ignorance of the apostles. "His disciples," he says, "did not understand these things at first, but understood when Jesus was glorified." By glory he means the ascension, which followed the suffering and death. Then, without doubt, after the descent of the Holy Spirit, they came to know that these things had been written about Him. That these things were written, they perhaps knew, but that what was written referred to Jesus, this was hidden from them, and not without benefit. Otherwise they would have been scandalized by His crucifixion, when He whom Scripture calls King suffers so.

Then when he says, his disciples did not understand this at first, he describes the state of mind of the disciples regarding this prophecy. And he admits his own ignorance and that of the disciples, for as we read: "The just person is the first to accuse himself" (Prv 18:17). So he says, his disciples did not understand this, what was predicted, at first, that is, before the passion. But when Jesus was glorified, i.e., when he showed the power of his resurrection, then they remembered that this had been written of him and had been done to him. The reason they knew only after he had been glorified was because it was then that they received the power of the Holy Spirit, which made them wiser than all the wise: "The breath of the Almighty makes a man understand" (Job 32:8).

"The people, therefore, that was with Him when He called Lazarus out of his tomb, and raised him from the dead, bare record. For this cause the crowd also met Him, for that they heard that He had done this miracle. The Pharisees, therefore, said among themselves: Perceive ye that we prevail nothing? Behold, the whole world is gone after Him." Mob set mob in motion. "But why art thou, blinded mob that thou art, filled with envy because the world has gone after its Maker?"

(Tr. li. 7) The crowd was disturbed by the crowd. (Turba turbavit turbam) But why grudgeth that blind crowd, that the world should go after Him, by Whom the world was made?

Therefore the crowd bore witness, etc. Here the third point is touched upon, namely the reason for the honor shown: and this was the very wondrous raising of Lazarus, which was well known to the crowds: on account of which he says: Therefore the crowd that was with him bore witness to him, when he called Lazarus from the tomb and raised him from the dead, saying: "Lazarus, come forth." This crowd bore witness to his omnipotence, namely the crowd of the simple and also the crowd of the wise: of the wise, Acts 10: "To him all the Prophets bear witness"; of the simple, the Psalm: "Out of the mouth of infants and sucklings you have perfected praise."

The gathering of the common people, having heard what had happened, were readily persuaded by those who had witnessed that the Christ had raised Lazarus to life and annulled the power of death, as the prophets said. This is why they too went and met him.

So tell me, where did you learn that you did not belong to those who are foreknown and predestined to become conformed to the image of God's glory? Tell me, who told you this? Was it, maybe, God Who announced this to you, Himself, or by one of His prophets, or through an angel? "No," you say, "but I do suppose that I am not predestined to salvation, and that all my effort would be in vain." And why do you not believe instead with all your soul that God has sent His only-begotten Son on the earth for your sake alone, and for your salvation, that He knew you beforehand and predestined you to become His brother and co-heir? Why are you not eager to love Him with all your heart and to honor His saving commandments? Why do you not rather believe that, having been slaughtered for your sake, He will never abandon you, nor allow you to perish? Do you not hear Him saying: "Can a woman forget her suckling child . . . yet I will not forget you" [Isaiah 49:15]? So, if by anticipation you judge yourself unworthy, and willfully separate yourself from the flock of Christ's sheep, you should understand that it is none other than you who are the cause of your own damnation.

Therefore, casting out of our souls all faithlessness, sloth, and hesitation, let us draw near with all our heart, with unhesitating faith and burning desire, like slaves who have been newly purchased with precious blood. Indeed, with reverence for the price paid on our behalf, and with love for our Master Who paid it, and as having accepted His love for us, let us recognize that, if He had not wished to save by means of Himself us who have been purchased, He would not have come down to earth, nor would He have been slain for our sake. But, as it is written, He has done this because He wills that all should be saved. Listen to Him say it Himself: "I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world" (John 12:17). - "Second Ethical Discourse"

Since through Adam death came, which subjected everyone, they had heard through their prophets and believed that death would be defeated. When they saw that this had been done by our Lord, who raised a man dead for four days, they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him as the victor over death, which oppresses humankind, and praised him with appropriate hymns. Since the Pharisees did not like this, they reproached them by saying that they followed him in vain, but it was their reproach that was in vain, since all the people went after him anyway.

The people, having seen the miracle over Lazarus, bore witness and proclaimed the power of Jesus.

See then the consequences of our Lord's passion. It was not to no purpose that He had reserved His greatest miracle for the last. For the resurrection of Lazarus it was that made the crowd believe in Him. The people therefore that was with Him when He called Lazarus out of his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record. For this cause the people also met Him, for that they heard that He had done this miracle. Hence the spite and plotting of the Pharisees: The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold the world is gone after Him.

As if they said, The more you attack Him, the more will His power and reputation increase. What use then of these attempts?

Then he mentions why the crowd went to meet Jesus, which was to bear witness. This was done by the crowd that had been with him, at the resurrection of Lazarus, when he called Lazarus out of the tomb and raised him from the dead.

For this reason the crowd came to meet him, because they heard that he had done this sign. The simple crowd, seeing the signs, was moved to faith and devotion; on account of which it is said in Matthew 9: "The crowds seeing this feared and glorified God, who had given such power to men"; but the scribes were saying that he was blaspheming.

Therefore those who had heard of the performance of this miracle also met Him with glory, that is, they believed; for if they had not believed, they would not have changed so quickly.

The reason why the crowd went to meet him was that they heard he had done this sign. "For Jews demand signs" (1 Cor 1:22). Now this was a clearer and more marvelous sign than the others; thus Christ made it the last in order to impress it more forcefully on their memory.