John § 59e

The passover was strictly the fourteenth day of the month, the day on which the lamb was killed in the evening: the seven days following were called the days of unleavened bread, in which nothing leavened ought to be found in their houses. Yet we find the day of the passover reckoned among the days of unleavened bread: Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto Him, Where wilt Thou that we prepare for Thee to eat the passover? (Mat. 26:17) And here also in like manner: That they might eat the passover; the passover here signifying not the sacrifice of the lamb, which took place the fourteenth day at evening, but the great festival which was celebrated on the fifteenth day, after the sacrifice of the lamb. Our Lord, like the rest of the Jews, kept the passover on the fourteenth day: on the fifteenth day, when the great festival was held, He was crucified. His immolation however began on the fourteenth day, from the time that He was taken in the garden.

Here we might suppose either that there had been something imperative requiring Caiaphas's presence in the hall of judgment and that he was absent on the occasion when the other chief priests held an inquiry on the Lord, or else that the hall of judgment was in his house. So then, from the beginning of this scene they had only been leading Jesus away to the personage in whose presence he was at last actually conducted. But since they brought the accused person in the character of one already convicted, and since it had previously approved itself to Caiaphas's judgment that Jesus should die, there was no further delay in delivering him over to Pilate with a view to his being put to death. And so it is that Matthew here relates what took place between Pilate and the Lord.

Let us now consider, so far as indicated by the evangelist John, what was done with, or in regard to, our Lord Jesus Christ, when brought before Pontius Pilate the governor. For he returns to the place of his narrative where he had left it, to explain the denial of Peter. He had already, you know, said, "And Annas sent Him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest:" and having returned from where he had dismissed Peter as he was warming himself at the fire in the hall, after completing the whole of his denial, which was thrice repeated, he says, "Then they bring Jesus unto Caiaphas into the hall of judgment (pretorium);" for he had said that He was sent to Caiaphas by his colleague and father-in-law Annas. But if to Caiaphas, why into the hall of judgment? Nothing else is thereby meant to be understood than the place where Pilate the governor dwelt. And therefore, either for some urgent reason Caiaphas had proceeded from the house of Annas, where both had met to give Jesus a hearing, to the governor's pretorium, and had left the hearing of Jesus to his father-in-law; or Pilate had made his pretorium in the house of Caiaphas, which was so large as to contain separate apartments for its own master, and the like for the judge.

"And it was morning; and they themselves," that is, those who brought Jesus, "went not into the judgment hall," to wit, into that part of the house which Pilate occupied, supposing it to be Caiaphas' house. And then in explanation of the reason why they went not into the judgment hall, he says, "lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover." For it was the commencement of the days of unleavened bread: on which they accounted it defilement to enter the abode of one of another nation. Impious blindness! Would they, forsooth, be defiled by a stranger's abode, and not be defiled by their own wickedness? They were afraid of being defiled by the pretorium of a foreign judge, and had no fear of defilement from the blood of an innocent brother: not to say more than this meanwhile, which was enough to fix guilt on the conscience of the wicked. For the additional fact, that it was the Lord who was led to death by their impiety, and the giver of life that was on the way to be slain, may be charged, not to their conscience, but to their ignorance.

(Tr. cxiv) The Evangelist returns to the part where he had left off, in order to relate Peter's denial: Then led they Jesus to Caiaphas (a Caiapha Vulg.) unto the hall of judgment: to Caiaphas from his colleague and father in law Annas, as has been said. But if to Caiaphas, how to the prætorium, which was the place where the governor Pilate resided?

(Tr. cxiv) Either then for some urgent reason Caiaphas proceeded from the house of Annas, where both had been sitting, to the prætorium of the governor, and left Jesus to the hearing of his father in law: or Pilate had established the prætorium in the house of Caiaphas, which was large enough to afford a separate lodging to its owner, and the governor at the same time.

(de Con. Evang. l. iii. c. vii) According to Matthew, When the morning came, they led Him away, and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate. (Mat. 27:1, 2) But He was to have been led to Caiaphas at first. How is it then that He was brought to him so late? The truth is, now He was going as it were a committed criminal, Caiaphas having already determined on His death. And He was to be given up to Pilate immediately. And it was early.

(Tr. xiv) And they themselves entered not into the judgment hall: i. e. into that part of the house which Pilate occupied, supposing it to be the house of Caiaphas. Why they did not enter is next explained: Lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover.

(Tr. cxiv) The days of unleavened bread were beginning; during which time it was defilement to enter the house of a stranger.

(Tr. cxiv) O impious blindness! They feared to be defiled by the judgment hall of a foreign prefect, to shed the blood of an innocent brother they feared not. For that He Whom they killed was the Lord and Giver of life, their blindness saved them from knowing.

The praetorium is the place where the praetor sat. Praetors were called prefects and preceptors, because they issue decrees.

It was the custom of the Jews when they condemned any one to death, to notify it to the governor, by delivering the man bound.

"They lead Jesus therefore," etc. Here is treated the third examination of Christ, which took place under Pilate. And in this the malice of the Jews is shown: first, because they lead the unwilling Pilate to judge; second in this, that they lead him who wished to free Christ as innocent to condemn him, at the passage: "And when he had said this, he went out again," etc. The first part is divided into two: for first is set forth the offering up of Christ; second, the examination of the one offered up, at: "Then he entered again," etc. In this offering up there is noted first the perversity of the Jews; second, their falsity; third, their wickedness; fourth, how from this the divine will is fulfilled.

Their perversity, because they lead an innocent man on a feast day to the place of condemnation: therefore he says: "They therefore lead Jesus," namely the officers, "to Caiaphas the high priest into the praetorium," because he had come there so that he might hand Christ over to Pilate. "Now it was morning:" the time increases their malice, because it was early morning; so greatly did they thirst for the death of Christ that they could not wait long. It was also a festive time: whence he adds: "And they themselves did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover," because they could not if defiled: Numbers 9: "Those who were unclean by reason of a dead man could not keep the Passover." Augustine: "O impious blindness! They feared to be defiled by the praetorium of a foreign judge, yet did not fear to be defiled by the blood of an innocent brother."

Question I. But the question is raised here concerning the statement that they lead him to Caiaphas into the praetorium, because it immediately says that they did not enter the praetorium. And Augustine responds that praetorium is said first of the place "where the governor dwelt"; but second it is said of the place where he judged, into which if they entered, they considered themselves unclean.

Question II. Likewise the question is raised concerning the statement: "It was morning," since it was said above that before the cock crowed, Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas. I respond: On this point Chrysostom and Augustine disagree. For Augustine says that they led him from Annas to Caiaphas into the praetorium, and he says that this can be understood either because Pilate held court in the house of Caiaphas, or because Caiaphas had gone to the house of Pilate. Chrysostom says that they do not now first lead him from Annas, but at the cock's crow they led him to the house of Caiaphas, and afterward in the morning from his house to Pilate, who had gone to the place of the praetorium.

Question III. Likewise the question is raised concerning the statement: "Lest they be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover." Therefore they had not yet eaten the Passover; therefore, since Christ ate it on the preceding day, he did not eat at the proper time. To this the Greeks respond that it is true that Christ anticipated the Passover on account of his death; whence they say that he ate leavened bread and from it consecrated, and therefore they themselves consecrate with leavened bread; and from this word they take the cause of their error. We, however, explain that the Passover is the same as the paschal food, and these are the unleavened breads which they ate for seven days.

Accordingly therefore, on the fourteenth day, when also Jesus suffered, the chief priests and scribes, bringing him early in the morning to Pilate, did not enter the Praetorium so that they might not be defiled but instead might without hindrance eat the Passover in the evening. By this precise reckoning of the days all the Scriptures agree, and the Gospels are harmonious. The resurrection also bears further witness. He rose on the third day, which is the first day of the weeks of harvest on which it was ordained that the priest should offer the sheaf.

They lead Jesus therefore from Caiaphas into the palace: and it was early; and they themselves entered not into the palace, that they might not be defiled, but that they might eat the passover.

Judge righteous judgment, and Thou shalt not slay the innocent and just man, were the express injunctions of the Law and the Word of God. These miserable men could not help being ashamed of their lack of charges against Him; but, finding their fury against Christ to be without excuse, and being prevented from killing Him with their own hands by the approach of the atoning sacrifice (for they were about to sacrifice the Paschal lamb, according to the Law, which yet with them had lost its power), they bring Him to Pilate; trusting, in their gross folly, that they would not be quite implicated in the charge of shedding blood unjustly if they did not slay Him themselves, but only brought Him to suffer death at the hands of another; though what was in their hearts was altogether at variance with the Mosaic Law. And we must convict them, besides, of the greatest folly in acting as follows. For, while sentencing the sinless One to the doom of death, and bringing down upon their own heads the guilt of so frightful an impiety, they yet shun the threshold of the judgment hall, as though it would cause them to be defiled, and anxiously shrink from having intercourse with men who were still unclean. For they believed, I suppose, that stones, and the bodies of men who were their brethren, could defile the soul of man; but deemed that the worst of all crimes, the most unjust shedding of blood, stained them not a whit. And, marvel of marvels, the most absurd and irrational idea of all, they think themselves purified by the slaughter of a lamb, which typified for us nothing but the shadow of the mystery that is in Christ; and, while honouring the type of what is coming to pass, they scorn the reality itself. For while they were performing that which was but the semblance of His Atonement, they were defiled by the shedding of the Blood of Christ. Christ, then, said well when He called them whited sepulchres, outwardly adorned with the superficial embellishments of art, but inwardly full of evil odours and detestable impurity; and when, in another place, He said that they strained out the gnat and swallowed the camel. For while they were often exact about matters that were, so to say, wholly unimportant and insignificant, or, rather, about a mere nothing (for what is the gnat?), they made of no account the most weighty of all the charges against themselves, and made clean the outside of the cup and platter, while they regarded not at all the uncleanness within. For see how, though the prophet Jeremiah said plainly: Wash thy heart from wickedness, O Jerusalem, that thou mayest be saved, they were thoroughly convinced that the inward impiety of the soul mattered not a whit; and, when they brought Christ to Pilate, they shrank from places as accursed, and from the bodies of uncircumcised men; and if they did not commit the lawless act with their own hands, they yet made Pilate, as it were, minister to their cruelty, and in their stupidity imagined that they remained free from all blame. It may well excite our wonder to find that the holy prophets were well aware even of this impiety of theirs; for the blessed Isaiah said concerning them: Woe unto the wicked! for the reward of his hands shall be given him. And Ezekiel also: As thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. Moreover, the inspired Psalmist exclaims: Render to them their desert; give them according to the work of their hands. For as they led Christ, the Saviour of all, captive to the Roman officers, so they received in their turn their reward, and were abandoned to the dominion of Rome, and were spoiled by the hand of their conquerors. For so fearful was the war that was kindled against them, and so frightful the extremities in which they were involved, that, if it had been possible, some, nay many, among them would rather have chosen to go into the mountains and rocks, and die there, before they saw the war----a choice which Christ foretold that they would make, when He said: When ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then shall ye say to the mountains, Cover us; and to the hills, Fall on us.

"They lead Him therefore from Caiaphas to Pilate." This was done, in order that the number of His judges might show, even against their will, how fully tested was His truth. "And it was early." Before cock crow He was brought to Caiaphas, early in the morning to Pilate; whence the Evangelist shows, that being questioned by Caiaphas during an entire half of the night, He was in nothing proved guilty; wherefore Caiaphas sent Him on to Pilate. But leaving these things for the others to relate, John speaks of what follows next.

And observe the ridiculous conduct of the Jews. They who had seized the innocent, and taken up arms, do not enter into the hall of judgment, "lest they should be polluted." And tell me, what kind of pollution was it to set foot in a judgment-hall, where wrong-doers suffer justice? They who paid tithes of mint and anise, did not think they were polluted when bent on killing unjustly, but thought that they polluted themselves by even treading in a court of justice.

"But what is, 'That they might eat the Passover?' For He had done this on the first day of unleavened bread." Either he calls the whole feast "the Passover," or means, that they were then keeping the Passover, while He delivered it to His followers one day sooner, reserving His own Sacrifice for the Preparation-day, when also of old the Passover was celebrated. But they, though they had taken up arms, which was unlawful, and were shedding blood, are scrupulous about the place, and bring forth Pilate to them.

We will prove that it may suffice that the death of the Christ had been prophesied, in order that, from the fact that the nature of the death had not been specified, it may be understood to have been affected by means of the cross and that the passion of the cross is not to be ascribed to any but him whose death was constantly being predicted.… For that you would do such a thing at the beginning of the first month of your new [years] even Moses prophesied when he was foretelling that all the community of the children of Israel were to sacrifice a lamb when evening came and were to eat this solemn sacrifice of this day [that is, of the Passover of unleavened bread] with bitterness." And then he added that "it was the Passover of the Lord," that is, the passion of Christ. This prediction was in this way also fulfilled that "on the first day of unleavened bread" you killed the Christ.

For that you would do thus at the beginning of the first month of your new (years) even Moses prophesied, when he was foretelling that all the community of the sons of lsrµl was to immolate at eventide a lamb, and were to eat this solemn sacrifice of this day (that is, of the passover of unleavened bread) with bitterness; "and added that "it was the passover of the Lord," that is, the passion of Christ. Which prediction was thus also fulfilled, that "on the first day of unleavened bread" you slew Christ; and (that the prophecies might be fulfilled) the day hasted to make an "eventide,"-that is, to cause darkness, which was made at mid-day; and thus "your festive days God converted into grief, and your canticles into lamentation.

The Lord is led through many tribunals, with the thought that they would disgrace Him; but the truth, on the contrary, was revealed all the more, through the examination of the case by many tribunals. For the Lord came out of all of them uncondemned, having received irrefutable vindication. They lead Him to the Praetorium, because they themselves did not have the authority to put anyone to death, since they were under the dominion of the Romans. At the same time, they were afraid that they might afterwards be subjected to trial and punishment for having put Him to death without a trial. "It was morning," he says, so that you might know that Caiaphas interrogated the Lord at midnight, for He had been led to Caiaphas before the rooster crowed. What he asked the Lord, this evangelist passed over in silence, but the others have told. When the night had passed in these interrogations, in the morning they lead Him to Pilate. What madness! When they kill unjustly, they do not think that they are defiled. But to enter the judgment hall they consider a defilement for themselves. The Lord performed it on the first day of unleavened bread (Mark 14:12). Therefore, by Pascha we must understand either the entire seven-day feast, or understand it in this way: that on this occasion they were supposed to eat the Pascha on Friday evening, but He performed it one day earlier, so as to reserve the slaying of Himself for Friday, when the Old Testament Pascha was also celebrated.

2328 Now the Evangelist tells about Christ's being handed over to the Gentiles: first, we see him delivered to the governor; secondly, Christ is examined by him (v 29); thirdly, the governor declares that Christ is innocent (v 38b). He does three things about the first: the place where Christ was delivered is stated; secondly, the time; thirdly, the way he was handed over.

2329 The place was the praetorium, for he says, They led Jesus to Caiaphas, to the praetorium. This is the place where judgment is given. In the army the commander's tent was known as the praetorium; and so this residence of the governor was also called a praetorium.

But how can Christ be led to Caiaphas, to the praetorium? One could say that Caiaphas had come ahead to the residence of Pilate to tell him that Jesus would be handed over to him. And so Jesus was led to Caiaphas when he was in the praetorium with Pilate. Or, one could say that since Caiaphas was the high priest, he had a large dwelling, so large that the governor lived there and made it his residence. Then the meaning is: they led Jesus to Caiaphas, to his residence, and so to the praetorium.

Or, one could say that the Greek text is better, which says, Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium. This takes away the problem.

2330 The time is mentioned, It was early, for their villainy was so great that they could hardly wait to turn him over to Pilate to be killed: "Woe to those who devise wickedness and work evil upon their beds! When the morning dawns, they perform it" (Mic 2:1); "The murderer rises at the light" (Job 24:14).

Here we find a difficult problem. The other three Evangelists say that early in the evening Christ was struck at the residence of Caiaphas, and questioned by him: "If you are the Christ, tell us" (Luke 22:67), and in the morning Christ was led to Pilate. But John says that he was led to Caiaphas. If we want to keep to the letter of the text, we could say that Caiaphas first saw Jesus when he was at the house of Annas, during the night, and at that time Christ could be examined by him.

But there still remains the difficulty that they say that Christ was struck at the residence of Caiaphas. This is solved by the Greek text which says that "they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium," because then during the night he was led from the residence of Annas to the residence of Caiaphas, where he was struck and examined by him, and in the morning he was led from Caiaphas to the praetorium.

2331 They themselves did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover. Here we see, first, their useless superstition, because they would not go into the praetorium. Secondly, we see the deference Pilate paid them, since he went out to meet them. A problem arises about the first point: that they would not enter the praetorium so as not to be defiled. The other Evangelists say that Christ was seized in the evening, on the day of the supper; and this would be the passover meal: "I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you" (Lk 22:15). And then in the morning of the next day he was brought to the praetorium. Why then do we read so that they might eat the passover, since it was the day after the passover? Some of the modern Greeks say that we are now on the fourteenth lunar day of the month, and that Christ was crucified on the day the Jews celebrated the passover, but that Christ anticipated the passover by one day, since he knew he would be killed on the day of the Jewish passover. Thus, he celebrated the passover on the thirteenth lunar day, in the evening. And since the law commanded that the Jews should not have leavened bread from the fourteenth day of the first month to the twenty‑first day, they say that Christ consecrated leavened bread.

2332 This is not acceptable for two reasons. First, the Old Testament has no instance where anyone was permitted to anticipate the celebration of the passover. But if one was prevented, he could postpone it to the next month: "If any man of you or of your descendants is unclean... he shall still keep the passover to the Lord. In the second month on the fourteenth day in the evening they shall keep it" (Num 9:10). And since Christ never omitted any observance of the law, it is not true to say that he anticipated the passover. Secondly, Mark (14:12) states explicitly that Christ came on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the passover lamb; and Matthew says that "on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus saying, 'Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the passover?'" (Mt 26:17). So, we should not say that Christ anticipated the passover.

2333 Accordingly, Chrysostom explains this another way. He said that Christ fulfilled the law in all matters and did observe the passover on the proper day, that is, the fourteenth day, in the evening. But the Jews were so intent on killing Christ that they did not observe it on the proper day, but on the day following, the fifteenth. Thus the sense is: so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover which they had neglected the day before.

This is not acceptable either, for in Numbers (9:10) it is said that if anyone is prevented from eating the passover on the fourteenth day of the first month, he is to eat it, not on the following day, but on the fourteenth day of the second month.

2334 Therefore we should say with Jerome, Augustine and other Latin Fathers, that the fourteenth day is the beginning of the feast; but the passover refers not just to that evening, but to the entire time of the seven days during which they ate unleavened bread, which was to be eaten by those who were clean. And because the Jews would have contracted uncleanness by entering the residence of a foreign judge, they did not enter so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover, that is, the unleavened bread.

See their wicked blindness, for they feared becoming defiled from a gentile man, but did not fear to shed the blood of a God and a man, "Those who laid you waste go forth from you" (Is 49:17).

We must look into this passage in order to show that it contains nothing inconsistent with Luke's version, which states that certain charges were brought against Him, and also specifies their terms. For Luke's words are these: "And they began to accuse Him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a king." On the other hand, according to the paragraph which I have now cited from John, the Jews seem to have been unwilling to state any specific accusations, when Pilate asked them, "What accusation bring ye against this man?" For their reply was, "If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee;" the purport of which was, that he should accept their authority, cease to inquire what fault was alleged against Him, and believe Him guilty for the simple reason that He had been [reckoned] worthy of being delivered up by them to him. This being the case, then, we ought to suppose that both these versions report words which were actually said, both the one before us at present, and the one given by Luke. For among the multitude of sayings and replies which passed between the parties, these writers have made their own selections as far as their judgment allowed them to go, and each of them has introduced into his narrative just what he considered sufficient. It is also true that John himself mentions certain charges which were alleged against Him, and which we shall find in their proper connections.

"Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man? They answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee." Let the question be put to, and the answer come from, those who had been delivered from foul spirits, from the sickly who had been healed, the lepers who had been cleansed, the deaf who were hearing, the dumb who were speaking, the blind who were seeing, the dead who were raised to life, and, above all, the foolish who were become wise, whether Jesus were a malefactor. But these things were said by those of whom He Himself had already foretold by the prophet, "They rewarded me evil for good."

(Tr. cxiv) Ask the freed from unclean spirits, the blind who saw, the dead who came to life again, and, what is greater than all, the fools who were made wise, and let them answer, whether Jesus was a malefactor. But they spoke, of whom He had Himself prophesied in the Psalms, They rewarded Me evil for good. (Ps. 39.)

"Pilate therefore went out to them and said." Here the falsity of the Jews is touched upon, because they impose a false charge upon Christ at the inquiry of Pilate: whence he says: "What accusation do you bring against this man?" As if he were saying: I do not wish to receive him without cause: Acts 25: "It is not the custom of the Romans to condemn any man before the one who is accused has his accusers present and receives opportunity to defend himself to clear away the charges."

Pilate therefore went out unto them, and saith, What accusation bring ye against this Man?

They shrank from the pollution, as they deemed it, of stones and walls, but Pilate went forth and inquired of them the reason of their coming to him, and required them to tell him the charges against the Captive they had brought unto him, judging the leaders of the Jews on the other hand. For, though he was a foreigner, he held in respect the ordinances of the Jews, and treated with consideration their prevailing customs. For he hastened out of the judgment hall, as was not his habit, expressing to the Jews by this significant action that their Law ought to be observed. They, being contrariwise minded to the Divine commandments, and paying very little heed to the Mosaic dispensation, were bringing about an unrighteous blood-shedding; while Pilate, who was outside the pale of the Law, inquired the charges, and investigated the accusations, they brought against Him, and pointed out to them, that it was absurd to chastise or exact a penalty from a Man Who had done no sin. And they, though they had nothing to say against Him, brought Him to Pilate, like a fierce robber. Well, then, was it said to the Synagogue of the Jews: Sodom has been justified by thee; and Christ Himself cries out, accusing the madness that the children of Israel here showed: Thou hast not done according to the judgments of the nations round about. And the saying is true; for the Greeks would not with defiled and unwashed hands have brought the usual sacrifices to the stones and blocks of wood they conceived to be gods, nor would they have destroyed one, unless it was in the most evil plight; but the Jews, though about to sacrifice the Passover to the true God, had their souls stained with the guilt of innocent blood, and were hastening to put to death unjustly Him Who was a stranger to all sin.

"And having gone out, he said, What accusation bring ye against this man?" Seest thou that he was free from fondness for rule and from malice? For seeing Jesus bound, and led by so many persons, he did not think that they had unquestionable proof of their accusation, but questions them, thinking it a strange thing that they should take for themselves the judgment, and then commit the punishment without any judgment to him.

Pilate acts somewhat more justly. He himself comes out. And although he saw the Lord bound, nevertheless, he did not consider this sufficient for the accusation of Christ, but asks why He is bound.

Pilate however proceeds in a more gentle way: Pilate then went out unto them.

2335 Now we see the deference Pilate showed them when he says, So Pilate went out to them, to take Christ, whom they were offering, and said, What accusation do you bring against this man? In this examination of Christ, we see first, how Christ is examined before his accusers by Pilate; secondly, how Christ is examined by Pilate in private (v 33). Concerning the first he does two things: first, we have Pilate's questioning; secondly, his generous concession to the Jews, Take him yourselves.

(de Cons. Evang. iii. 8) But is not this account contradictory to Luke's, who mentions certain positive charges: And they began to accuse Him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Cæsar, saying that He Himself is Christ a King. (Luke 23:2) According to John, the Jews seem to have been unwilling to bring actual charges, in order that Pilate might condemn Him simply on their authority, asking no questions, but taking it for granted that if He was delivered up to him, He was certainly guilty. Both accounts are however compatible. Each Evangelist only inserts what he thinks sufficient. And John's account implies that some charges had been made, when it comes to Pilate's answer: Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye Him, and judge Him according to your law.

"They answered and said to him: If this man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered him to you," wishing to observe that law: "The innocent and the just you shall not put to death," Exodus 23, as if they were saying: he is an evildoer. They do not prove it, but falsely charge him. Augustine: "Let those freed from unclean spirits answer, let the sick who were healed answer, whether Jesus is an evildoer. But these things were said by those of whom he had foretold through the Prophet: They repaid me evil for good." Job 36: "Your cause has been judged as that of the wicked."

They answered and said unto him, If this Man were not an evil-doer, we should not have delivered Him up unto thee.

They were perplexed for a specious plea against Him, but cloak the baseness of their impiety, and their apparent resolution to put Him to death unjustly, by the sophistical reply, that they would never have brought Jesus to suffer justice, if they had not taken Him in a criminal act. For they still affected to observe the Law, which bade them execute righteous judgment in all things; and, marvellous to relate, they use their respect for the Law as a weapon against the Lawgiver. They, who did not shrink from bringing an accusation against the Lawgiver, claimed credit as keepers of the Law. They declared that He That had come to take away sin had done evil, that the truth of the words that Christ spake, by the mouth of the Prophet Isaiah, might be seen: Woe unto them! for they have fled from Me: their doom is misery, because they have transgressed against Me. Though I have redeemed them, yet they have spoken lies against Me.

What then say they? "If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee." O madness! for why do ye not mention His evil deeds, instead of concealing them? Why do ye not prove the evil?

But they, having nothing to say, say: "If He were not an evildoer, we would not have handed Him over to you." Do you see how they everywhere avoid proofs? Annas asked, and found nothing, and sent Him to Caiaphas. The latter, having deliberated somewhat, sends Him to Pilate. Then Pilate again asks: "What do you accuse this Man of?" And here too they can say nothing.

2336 Concerning the first, we have the examination by Pilate, and then the malicious reply of the Jews. When Pilate saw Jesus bound and brought by so many seeking his condemnation, he said, What accusation do you bring against this man? Their reply was, If this man were not an evildoer, we would not have handed him over. They are saying here: We have already examined and condemned him, and are now handing him over to you to be punished. They were regarding their own judgment as sufficient for Pilate. Yet they were not speaking truly when they said he was an evildoer, for "He went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil" (Acts 10:38). They were acting like the Psalm says, "They requite me evil for good" (Ps 35:12).

2337 Luke is different, for he says that the Jews accused Christ of many crimes: "He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place" (Lk 23:5). I reply that, as Augustine says, the Jews said many things to Pilate at that time, and it could be that they first said what John reports, and then said what Luke tells us.

Or as if he said, Ye who have the law, know what the law judgeth concerning such: do what ye know to be just. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death.

"Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." What is this that their insane cruelty saith? Did not they put Him to death, whom they were here presenting for the very purpose? Or does the cross, forsooth, fail to kill? Such is the folly of those who do not pursue, but persecute wisdom. What then mean the words, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death"? If He is a malefactor, why is it not lawful? Did not the law command them not to spare malefactors, especially (as they accounted Him to be) those who seduced them from their God? We are, however, to understand that they said that it was not lawful for them to put any man to death, on account of the sanctity of the festal day, which they had just begun to celebrate, and on account of which they were afraid of being defiled even by entering the pretorium. Had you become so hardened, false Israelites? Were you by your excessive malice so lost to all sense, as to imagine that you were unpolluted by the blood of the innocent, because you gave it up to be shed by another? Was even Pilate himself going to slay Him with his own hands, when made over by you into his power for the very purpose? If you did not wish Him to be slain; if you did not lay snares for Him; if you did not get Him to be betrayed to you for money; if you did not lay hands upon Him, and bind Him, and bring Him there; if you did not with your own hands present Him, and with your voices demand Him to be slain,-then boast that He was not put to death by you. But if in addition to all these former deeds of yours, you also cried out, "Crucify, crucify [him];" then hear what it is against you that the prophet proclaims: "The sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword." These, look you, are the spears, the arrows, the sword, wherewith you slew the righteous, when you said that it was not lawful for you to put any man to death.

Hence it is also that when for the purpose of apprehending Jesus the chief priests did not themselves come, but sent; yet the evangelist Luke says in the same passage of his narrative, "Then said Jesus unto those who were come to him, [namely] the chief priests, and captains of the temple, and elders, Be ye come out, as against a thief," etc. As therefore the chief priests went not in their own persons, but by those whom they had sent, to apprehend Jesus, what else was that but coming themselves in the authority of their own order and so all, who cried out with impious voices for the crucifixion of Christ, slew Him, not, indeed, directly with their own hands, but personally through him who was impelled to such a crime by their clamor.

(Tr. cxiv. 4) But did not the law command not to spare malefactors, especially deceivers such as they thought Him? We must understand them however to mean, that the holiness of the day which they were beginning to celebrate, made it unlawful to put any man to death. Have ye then so lost your understanding by your wickedness, that ye think yourselves free from the pollution of innocent blood, because ye deliver it to be shed by another?

"Pilate therefore said to them." Here the third point is noted, namely the deceitfulness of the Jews, because they wanted to pour the blame onto another; but Pilate refuses to judge him, not seeing that they had a proper case; whence: "Pilate therefore said to them: Take him yourselves and judge him according to your Law," which says in Exodus twenty-two: "You shall not suffer sorcerers to live." But the Jews on the contrary show that he himself must judge, because the case is one of death, and it was not lawful for them to put anyone to death; on this account it says: "The Jews therefore said to him: It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death"; but it pertains to you, and this man "is guilty of death"; therefore you must take cognizance of this case. They deceitfully wish to kill through another, but they are not excused; whence it is said to them in Acts seven: "Of whom you were the betrayers and murderers."

Question IV. Likewise, the question is raised concerning what he says: "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death." For it is said in Exodus twenty-two: "You shall not suffer sorcerers to live," and the Law grants this many times. Augustine responds: "It should be understood that they said this on account of the sanctity of the feast day, which they had already begun to celebrate. — Or it should be said that they say this on account of the rule of the Romans, who had taken from them the power of putting to death, from whom they also purchased the priesthood."

Pilate therefore said unto them, Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your Law.

I should not do justice, he says, if I were to subject to legal penalties a Man Who has been convicted of no wrong, and Whose doom you left undecided; but judge Him, rather, according to your Law, if, indeed, he says, it has ordained that the Man Who is wholly without guilt deserves chastisement. It is not a little absurd, or, I should rather say, it is a subject for perpetual regret, that, while the Law of the Gentiles justified our Lord, so that even Pilate shrank from punishing Him That was brought to him on so vague a charge, they, who made it their boast that they were instructed in the Law of God, declared that He ought to be put to death.

"And why did they not kill Him, instead of bringing Him to Pilate?" In the first place, the greater part of their rule and authority had been cut away, when their affairs were placed under the power of the Romans; and besides, they feared lest they should afterwards be accused and punished by Him.

Seest thou that they everywhere avoid a direct accusation, and that they can say nothing? That Annas questioned Him about His doctrine, and having heard Him, sent Him to Caiaphas; and he having in his turn questioned Him, and discovered nothing, sent Him to Pilate. Pilate saith, "What accusation bring ye against this man?" Nor here have they anything to say, but again employ certain conjectures. At which Pilate being perplexed saith, "Take ye him and judge him according to your law. They therefore said, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death," But this they said, "that the saying of the Lord might be fulfilled, which He spake, signifying by what death He should die."

"And how did the expression, 'It is not lawful for us to put any man to death,' declare this?" Either the Evangelist means that He was about to be slain not by the Jews only, but by the Gentiles also, or that it was not lawful for them to crucify. But if they say, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death," they say it with reference to that season. For that they did slay men, and that they slew them in a different way, Stephen shows, being stoned. But they desired to crucify Him, that they might make a display of the manner of His death.

It was not as if he belonged to another god that they conceived an aversion against Christ and persecuted him, but simply as a man whom they regarded as a wonder-working juggler and an enemy because of his teaching. They brought him therefore to trial as a mere man, and one of their own too—that is, a Jew (only they saw him as a renegade and a destroyer of Judaism)—and punished him according to their law. If he had been a stranger, indeed, they would not have sat in judgment over him.

Since they bring forward no accusation, he says, "Take Him yourselves." Since you claim the right of judgment for yourselves and boast that you would never act unjustly (for they say, "If He were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you"), then take Him yourselves and judge Him. But if you have brought Him to me and give His case the appearance of a trial (a legal form), then it is necessary to state what this Man is guilty of. So judge Him yourselves, for I cannot be such a judge; if your law punishes without guilt, then judge Him yourselves. To this they say: "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death." They say this knowing that the Romans condemn rebels to crucifixion. So that the Lord would be crucified, and His death would be more shameful, and they would proclaim Him accursed, for this reason they pretend to say that they are not permitted to kill anyone. But how then did they stone Stephen? However, I have said that they say this because they wish the Lord to be crucified. It is as if they said: "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death on the cross, but we desire that This One be crucified."

As if to say, Since you will only have such a trial as will suit you, and are proud, as if you never did any thing profane, take ye Him, and condemn Him; I will not be made a judge for such a purpose.

2338 The Evangelist now mentions Pilate's generous concession (v 31): first, we see this concession; secondly, the Jews refuse it; and thirdly, we see the reason for their refusal (v 32).

2339 Pilate said, Take him yourselves, intending to do them a favor. Festus did the same to Paul: "But Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, said to Paul, 'Do you wish to go up to Jerusalem, and there be tried on these charges before me?'" (Acts 25:9). Or, this could be said as a taunting remark: for they had already examined and condemned Christ, and Pilate wanted those who had condemned Christ as an evildoer to pass the sentence, because "It was not the custom of the Romans to give up any one before the accused met the accusers face to face, and had opportunity to make his defense concerning the charge laid against him" (Acts 25:16). So the meaning is then: You want my judgment, but Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law, for I will never be that kind of a judge.

2340 The refusal of the Jews is mentioned when he says, The Jews said to him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death. This seems not to agree with Exodus [22:18]: "You will not permit a sorcerer to live." And they regarded Jesus as a sorcerer.

According to Augustine the meaning is, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death on a feast day, but it is lawful on other days. Or, according to Chrysostom, the Jews had lost much of their power: for they could not pass judgment on a crime against the state. But here they intended to condemn Christ especially for matters against the state: "Everyone who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar" (19:12). This is why they said, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death, for crimes against the state, although we can do this for some sins against the law, for this kind of judgment was reserved to them. Or, it could be said that some things are not lawful either because they are prohibited by divine law ‑ and they were not prohibited from doing this by divine law ‑ or because they are forbidden by human law ‑ and in this way it was not lawful for them to put anyone to death, for such power was now in the hands of the governor.

2341 There is another question: How then could they have stoned Stephen (Acts 7:58)? Chrysostom answers this by saying that the Romans allowed the Jews to make use of their own laws, and because the punishment of stoning was part of their law, the Romans allowed them to do this. But in the law death on the cross was abhorred: "A hanged [on a tree] man is accursed by God" (Deut 21:23). And so they did not use this kind of death. The Jews, in their malice, were not satisfied just to stone Christ, they wanted to condemn him to the most disgraceful of deaths, as we see from Wisdom (2:20). Thus they now say, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death, meaning the death on the cross. Or, one could say that Stephen was stoned during a change of governors, when many laws were violated.

But when the evangelist John adds, "That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which He spake, signifying what death He should die:" if we would understand such words as referring to the death of the cross, as if the Jews had said, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death," for this reason that it was one thing to be put to death, and another to be crucified: I do not see how such can be understood as a consequence, seeing that this was their answer to the words that Pilate had just addressed to them, "Take ye him, and judge him according to your law." If it were so, could they not then have taken Him, and crucified Him themselves, had they desired by any such form of punishment to avoid the putting of Him to death? But who is there that may not see the absurdity of allowing those to crucify any one, who were not allowed to put any one to death? Nay more, did not the Lord Himself call that same death of His, that is, the death of the cross, a putting to death, as we read in Mark, where he says, "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn Him to death, and shall deliver Him to the Gentiles: and they shall mock Him, and shall spit upon Him, and shall scourge Him, and shall put Him to death, and the third day He shall rise again"? There is no doubt, therefore, that in so speaking the Lord signified what death He should die: not that He here meant the death of the cross to be understood, but that the Jews were to deliver Him up to the Gentiles, or, in other words, to the Romans. For Pilate was a Roman, and had been sent by the Romans into Judea as governor. That, then, this saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, namely, that, being delivered up to them, He should be put to death by the Gentiles, as Jesus had foretold would happen; therefore when Pilate, who was the Roman judge, wished to hand Him back to the Jews, that they might judge Him according to their law, they refused to receive Him, saying, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." And so the saying of Jesus was fulfilled, which He foretold concerning His death, that, being delivered up by the Jews, He should be put to death by the Gentiles: whose crime was less than that of the Jews, who sought by this method to make themselves appear averse to His being put to death, to the end that, not their innocence, but their madness might be made manifest.

(Tr. cxiv) As we read in Mark, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn Him to death, and shall deliver Him to the Gentiles. (Mark 10:33) Pilate again was a Roman, and was sent to the government of Judæa, from Rome. That this saying of Jesus then might be fulfilled, i. e. that He might be delivered unto and killed by the Gentiles, they would not accept Pilate's offer, but said, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death.

"That the word of Jesus might be fulfilled." Here the fourth point is noted, namely that the will of Christ is fulfilled. For he willed to die the death of the cross, by which the Gentiles put to death; therefore it says: "That it might be fulfilled," that is, it so happened that the word might be fulfilled "which he spoke," above in the third chapter: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up," and above in the twelfth chapter: "signifying by what death he was to die," namely of the cross; Matthew twenty: "He shall be delivered to the Gentiles to be mocked and scourged and crucified." And the Lord chose this as the most vile death.

They answer, that their purification, accomplished by the slaughter of the Paschal lamb (if any purification at all were possible for such murderers), stood in their way, and was, as it were, an overpowering obstacle to their shedding His innocent Blood. For, surely, they would have been very ready to commit the impious crime, and would not have needed the co-operation of any other. The Jewish mind was very prone to work every kind of evil deed, and to shrink from no atrocity; and to feel no shame at doing anything displeasing to God. They deemed it right for Pilate to lend them the service of his own cruelty, and to' imitate the fury of the Jews, and to minister to them on this occasion, and to be by them overruled, so as to partake of their madness. And this also they say, that Christ might be proved to speak truth, and to have foreknown what manner of death He would die, and to have foretold it to His holy disciples. For what spake He unto them? Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man is betrayed unto the hands of sinners; and they shall crucify Him, and kill Him, and the third day He shall be raised up. It is requisite to make mention of this. For it was necessary that He should have this foreknowledge, that none might suppose that He, in Whose sight all things are naked and laid open, encountered His death involuntarily; but that men should believe that, of His own Will, He underwent the Cross on our behalf, and for our sakes.

"And how did the expression, 'It is not lawful for us to put any man to death,' declare this?" Either the Evangelist means that He was about to be slain not by the Jews only, but by the Gentiles also, or that it was not lawful for them to crucify. But if they say, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death," they say it with reference to that season. For that they did slay men, and that they slew them in a different way, Stephen shows, being stoned. But they desired to crucify Him, that they might make a display of the manner of His death.

"That the word of Jesus might be fulfilled" concerning His death, namely: either that He would be crucified (Matt. 20:18–19), or that He would be put to death not by the Jews, but by the Gentiles (Mark 10:33). So when the Jews said that it was not lawful for them to put anyone to death, then the Gentiles take Him, and according to their custom crucify Him on the cross, and thus the word of Jesus is fulfilled in both respects: in that He was delivered to the Gentiles, and in that He was crucified.

2342 The Evangelist gives the reason the Jews refused when he says, This was to fulfill the word which Jesus had spoken to show by what death he was to die. The words this was to fulfill do not indicate the intention the Jews had, but the arrangement of God's providence. For Jesus had said (Mt 20:19) that it was by the Gentiles that he would be crucified and killed, but that he would be handed over to them by the Jews. So, in order that this be accomplished, the Jews were unwilling to judge and kill him themselves.

Wherein Pilate shows that the Jews had charged Him with calling Himself King of the Jews.

"Then Pilate entered again," etc. Having set forth the handing over of Christ, by which the Jews delivered him to Pilate, there is set forth here his examination conducted by Pilate, in which four things are indicated: first, the inquiry; then, the origin of the inquiry; third, the response to the inquiry; fourth, the discussion of the response. First, therefore, the inquiry itself is noted; on account of which he says: "Then Pilate entered again into the praetorium," because he had gone out to seek the charge from the Jews and had not found it, he returned to inquire of it from the accused: "and he called Jesus and said to him: Are you the King of the Jews?" Truly he is king, because he is the one of whom Jeremiah twenty-three says: "I will raise up for David a righteous branch, and a king shall reign." Therefore he inquires especially about this, because by saying this he seemed to contradict Caesar, who then held dominion over the Jews.

Having nothing at all to accuse Him of, and none of those crimes to allege against Him, which seem to bring in their train just punishment on the doers of them, and Pilate persisting in inquiring why they had brought Him, they assert that Jesus had sinned against Caesar, in assuming on Himself the dominion which Caesar had acquired over the Jews, and in changing the glory of his kingdom to suit His personal pretensions. Great was the malice which suggested this device, and caused the false accusation to assume this shape; for they knew that Pilate, however reluctant he might be, would take thought for his own safety, and would swiftly and precipitately punish the man against whom any such outcry was raised. For, as the inhabitants of Judaea ever were continually moved to tumults and civil strife, and were easily provoked to revolt, Caesar's officers were the more vigilant in this respect, and were more careful guardians of order, and inflicted the most summary penalties on men who had this charge brought against them, sometimes groundlessly. The Jews, therefore, make it a charge against Christ, that He reigned over Israel. Therefore justly were they cast out, and the Gentiles brought in, and made subject to the yoke, and put into the Kingdom of Christ. Ask of Me, He says, and I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession. For when the one nation of the Jews provoked Him to wrath, all the nations of the world are given to Christ; and instead of one country, I mean Judaea, the uttermost parts of the earth. For, as Paul saith: Their fall is the riches of the world, and their loss the riches of the Gentiles. Pilate, then, speaks out plainly what he heard the Jews muttering, and bids Jesus answer him, whether He was in truth the King of the Jews. He was full of anxiety, it would appear, and thought Caesar's rule was menaced, and was, therefore, very desirous to learn the truth, in order to visit what had been done with appropriate retribution, and acquit of blame the office entrusted to him by the Romans.

Pilate, wishing to be freed from trouble, doth not dismiss Him for a long trial, but, "Having entered in, he asked Jesus, and said, Art thou the King of the Jews?" ... Pilate had heard this saying from many, and, since the accusers had nothing to say, in order that the enquiry might not be a long one, he desires to bring forward that which was continually reported. But when he said to them, "Judge him according to your law," wishing to show that His offense was not a Jewish one, they replied, "It is not lawful for us." "He hath not sinned against our law, but the indictment is general." Pilate then, having perceived this, saith, as being (himself) likely to be endangered, "Art thou the King of the Jews?"

But why was it that Pilate made the enquiry not in their presence, but apart, having gone into the judgment hall? He suspected something great respecting Him, and wished, without being troubled by the Jews, to learn all accurately.

Pilate called Jesus aside privately. Since there was a high opinion about Him, he wanted to learn everything more precisely, away from the tumult of the Jews. So he asks Him whether He is a king. What everyone was saying, that is what he brings up.

i. e. Apart, because he had a strong suspicion that He was innocent, and thought he could examine Him more accurately, away from the crowd: and said unto Him, Art Thou the King of the Jews?

2343 Above, the Evangelist told how Pilate examined Christ before those who accused him; here he describes how Pilate questioned him in private. First, the Evangelist gives Pilate's question; then, the answer of Jesus (v 34). In regard to the first he does two things: first, we have Pilate's question; secondly, we see Christ asking the reason for the question, Do you say this of your own accord?

2344 In regard to the first, note that Pilate, as a just judge, and as one proceeding cautiously, did not immediately agree with the accusation of the high priest, "You shall not follow a multitude to do evil; nor shall you bear witness in a suit, turning aside after a multitude, so as to pervert justice" (Ex 23:2). Rather, Pilate entered the praetorium again and called Jesus aside, because he had serious doubts about him. So he called Christ over to examine the case more closely and to allow Christ to answer in more peace and away from the shouts of the Jews: "I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know" (Job 29:16).

2345 Then Pilate said to him, Are you the King of the Jews? This shows, as Luke says (Lk 23:2), that the Jews were accusing Christ of this crime, although John says only that "If this man were not an evildoer, we would not have handed him over" (18:30), and many other crimes were laid on him. But the charge about his being a king touched the heart of Pilate most, and that is why he questioned him only about this: "For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (Mt 12:34).

(Tr. cxv) He rejects the imputation that He could have said it of Himself; Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered Thee unto me: adding, what hast Thou done? Whereby he shows that this charge had been brought against Him, for it is as much as to say, If Thou deniest that Thou art a King, what hast Thou done to be delivered up to me? As if it were no wonder that He should be delivered up, if He called Himself a King.

"Pilate answered: Am I a Jew?" As if to say: I do not lay this charge upon you; "your nation and your chief priests have delivered you to me"; as if to say: I received this from them. "What then have you done," that they accuse you so?

He now exposes the villainy of the Jews, and almost publishes the multitude of His accusers. It is as though he said: "It does not concern me to know about Thee, for I am not a Jew; but rather befits Thine own nation and kindred, who. it may be, have this knowledge, and so bring Thee to suffer death." He then accuses himself. For to say, What hast Thou done, implies nothing else but this. The holy Evangelist was very zealous to narrate every detail about the trial of Christ, and among them he tells us the fact that Pilate asked Jesus the question: What hast Thou done? And hereby we may best observe the total absence of charges against Him, and that, as none were brought forward, and Christ our Saviour was convicted of no crime, the sentence of death that went forth against Him was impious and most unjust.

On this point then declaring himself, Pilate replied, "Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me; what hast thou done?" Here desiring to clear himself of the matter. Then because he had said, "Art thou the King?" Jesus reproving him answereth, "This thou hast heard from the Jews. Why dost thou not make accurate enquiry? They have said that I am a malefactor; ask them what evil I have done. But this thou doest not, but art simply framing charges against Me." "Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself," or from others? Pilate then cannot at once say that he had heard it, but simply goes along with the people, saying, "They have delivered thee unto me." "I must needs therefore ask thee what thou hast done."

Therefore Pilate also rightly answers that His betrayers are the Jews, and deflects the blame from himself. Pilate does not say that he heard it from others, but simply refers to the opinion of the people and says: "They delivered You to me; what have You done?" This seems to be the words of one who is, as it were, grieved and embittered. "For," he says, "what have You done?"

2348 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Why did he answer this way? Because our Lord had asked him whether he said this on his own. Pilate showed by this that it was not his concern to inquire if Christ was the King of the Jews; it was rather the affair of the Jews, whose King he said he was. By giving this answer Pilate showed that it was others who had told him that Christ was the King of the Jews. Accordingly he says, Your own nation and the chief priests have handed you over to me, by bringing this charge against you. He says, your own nation, because, considering his human nature, Christ was born a Jew: "For I hear many whispering. Terror is on every side. 'Denounce him! Let us denounce him!' say all my familiar friends" (Jer 20:10); "A man's enemies are the men of his own house" (Mic 7:6). And we read chief priests, because the greater their power the greater their crime: "And in this faithlessness the hand of the officials and chief men has been foremost" (Ezra 9:2); "I will go to the great, and will speak to them; for they know the way of the Lord, the law of their God. But they all alike had broken the yoke, they had burst the bonds" (Jer 5:5). If they have handed you over to me, What have you done? It's unbelievable that they would have handed you over to me except for some serious matter.

Or, he did not wait to hear the reply, because he was unworthy to hear it. And saith unto them, I find no fault in Him.

And these reproaches did these bulls and dogs in their madness cast upon Him, till it was very early in the morning, and then they lead Him away to Annas, who was father-in-law to Caiaphas; and when they had done the like things to Him there, it being the day of the preparation, they delivered Him to Pilate the Roman governor, accusing Him of many and great things, none of which they could prove. Whereupon the governor, as out of patience with them, said: "I find no cause against Him." But they bringing two lying witnesses, wished to accuse the Lord falsely; but they being found to disagree, and so their testimony not conspiring together, they altered the accusation to that of treason...

You are righteous, O Lord, but we have sinned and committed iniquity and have done wickedly. Your hand has grown heavy on us, and it is only right that we are handed over to that ancient sinner, the governor of death. For he has persuaded our wills to be like his will because he does not remain in your truth. What will wretched people like us do? "Who shall deliver us from the body of this death?" It is only your grace through Jesus Christ our Lord, who was begotten co-eternal by you and was created in the beginning of your ways. The prince of this world found nothing worthy of death in him. Yet he killed him, and the handwriting of the decree against us was blotted out.

"Pilate said unto Him, What is truth?" Nor did he wait to hear the answer; but "when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and said unto them, I find in him no fault. But ye have a custom that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?" I believe when Pilate said, "What is truth?" there immediately occurred to his mind the custom of the Jews, according to which he was wont to release unto them one at the passover; and therefore he did not wait to hear Jesus' answer to his question, What is truth? to avoid delay on recollecting the custom whereby He might be released unto them during the passover - a thing which it is clear he greatly desired. It could not, however, be torn from his heart that Jesus was the King of the Jews, but was fixed there, as in the superscription, by the truth itself, whereof he had just inquired what it was.

(Tr. cxv) After Pilate had asked, What is truth? he remembered a custom of the Jews, of releasing one prisoner at the passover, and did not wait for Christ's answer, for fear of losing this chance of saving Him, which he much wished to do: And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews.

(Tr. cxv) He could not dismiss the idea from his mind, that Jesus was King of the Jews; as if the Truth itself, whom he had just asked what it was, had inscribed it there as a title.

"Pilate says to him: What is truth?" He did not hear the answer to this question, because he did not wait. To this the Lord gives the answer above in chapter 14: "I am the way, the truth, and the life."

Question III. Likewise, inquiry is made about the fact that Pilate did not await the Lord's response to his question. Augustine responds that "suddenly there came to his mind the custom of the Jews, by which one was accustomed to be released to them at Passover"; whence, because he wished to free him, he immediately went out. Chrysostom responds otherwise that "he knew that that question required time, and he himself was hastening toward the liberation of Christ; therefore he immediately went out." It can be said otherwise that because Pilate began his judgment from truth but did not remain in truth, he therefore merited to begin the question about truth but not to hear its resolution.

"And when he had said this," etc. Above, the malice of the Jews was shown in this, that they compelled Pilate to examine Christ; here it is shown in this, that they make him who wishes to release condemn. And this part is divided into two, in the first of which the Jews resist the judgment of truth, lest he be freed; in the second they obtain and extort the judgment of falsehood, so that he may be condemned, at the passage: "Pilate therefore, when he had heard these words." And because the manner of judging is threefold: according to benignity, severity, and equity; by this threefold judgment Pilate strives to free Christ, and the Jews on the contrary resist. Therefore there are three parts here. In the first they resist the judgment of benignity: in the second, the judgment of severity, at the passage: "Then Pilate took him"; in the third, the judgment of equity, at the passage: "Pilate says to them," etc. As regards the first, then, three things are indicated: the allegation of innocence in Christ, the recalling of clemency in the judge, the hardening of wickedness in the Jews.

Therefore the innocence in Christ is alleged, on account of which he ought to be released: whence the Evangelist says: "And when he had said this," namely the aforementioned question, desiring to free Christ: "he went out again to the Jews," who were outside the praetorium, to allege Christ's innocence: whence: "And he said to them: I find no cause in him," namely of death. And he spoke truly: whence in the Psalm: "Neither my iniquity nor my sin, O Lord."

He does not deny the glory of His Kingdom, nor leave it to the voice of Pilate only to affirm it, for as God He is King, whether man so will, or no; but He once more showed the power of the truth which impelled Pilate, though reluctant, to declare the glory of Him Who was on His trial; for, He says: Thou hast said, that I am a King. For this cause was I born, He says, and came into this world when I became Man, that I should bear witness unto the truth; that is, that He might take lying out of the world, and, having subdued the devil, who gained his way by guile, He might show truth triumphant over the universe; truth----that is, that nature that is truly sovereign by nature, which has not by craft acquired the ability to hold rule and dominion over heaven and earth, and, in a word, everything that is brought into being; nor has this been added unto it from without, but it is seen to be essentially and naturally inherent. In order, too, that He might show that Pilate's dulness of apprehension arose from his stubborn heart, and his reluctance to admit the truth, Christ fitly adds the word: Everyone that is of the truth heareth My voice. For the word of truth gains a ready acceptance from those who have already learnt and love it; but with others it is not so. Yea, the Prophet Isaiah said to some: If ye will not believe, neither shall ye understand. Pilate showed at once the truth of this, when he said: What is truth? For, just as those whose sight is injured, and who have wholly lost the use of their eyes, have their sense of colour entirely annihilated, so as not to note when gold is brought before them, or a shining and precious stone shown them, nay, even the very light of the sun's rays excites in them no wonder, as they have no perception thereof, and can gain no profit from any such thing; so to men whose minds are warped, truth seems a foul and ugly thing, although it instils into the minds of those who behold it its spiritual and Divine radiancy.

In order that he might show that the difficulty in Pilate's perception came from his stubborn heart and from his reluctance to admit the truth, Christ appropriately adds, "Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice." For the word of truth is readily accepted by those who have already learned and love it. But it is not the same for everyone. In fact, the prophet Isaiah said to some, "If you will not believe, neither shall you understand." Pilate showed at once how true this was when he said, "What is truth?" For there are those whose sight has been injured or who have entirely lost the use of their eyes and their sense of color has been entirely annihilated. They would not even be able to tell if someone placed gold before them or a brilliant precious stone. In fact, even the very light of the sun's rays does not engage them in any kind of wonder since they have lost all perception and can gain no profit from any of these things. In the same way, to people whose minds have become warped, truth seems a foul and ugly thing even as it instills a spiritual and divine brilliance into the minds of those who behold it.

But in the lightning flash of this incident, we see great Rome, the imperial republic, going downward under her Lucretian doom. Scepticism has eaten away even the confident sanity of the conquerors of the world. He who is enthroned to say what is justice can only ask, 'What is truth?' So in that drama which decided the whole fate of antiquity, one of the central figures is fixed in what seems the reverse of his true rôle. Rome was almost another name for responsibility. Yet he stands for ever as a sort of rocking statue of the irresponsible. Man could do no more. Even the practical had become the impracticable. Standing between the pillars of his own judgment-seat, a Roman had washed his hands of the world.

"What is truth?" But for the present he applieth himself to what was pressing, for he knew that this question needed time, and desired to rescue Him from the violence of the Jews. Wherefore he went out, and what said he? "I find no fault in him."

Consider how prudently he acted. He said not, "Since he hath sinned, and is deserving of death, forgive him on account of the Feast"; but having first acquitted Him of all guilt, he asks them over and above, if they were not minded to dismiss Him as innocent, yet as guilty to forgive Him on account of the time. Wherefore he added, "Ye have a custom that I should release unto you one at the Passover"; then in a persuasory way, "Will ye therefore that I release the king of the Jews? Then cried they all, Not this man, but Barabbas."

O accursed decision! They demand those like mannered with themselves, and let the guilty go; but bid him punish the innocent. For this was their custom from old time.

(Hom. lxxxiii) These words have an effect upon Pilate, persuade him to become a hearer, and elicit from him the short enquiry, What is truth? Pilate said unto Him, What is truth?

Who is this God? It is he who is himself truth and whose word is truth. And what is truth? That which is not fashioned or made or represented by art, that is, that has never been brought into existence and is on that account called truth. If, therefore, someone worships that which is made with hands, it is not the truth that he worships or yet the word of truth.

With these few words He so captivated Pilate that Pilate asked about truth, what it is. For it had nearly vanished among men, and no one knew it, and all were already in unbelief. But since this question required special time for resolution, and now it was necessary to deliver Jesus from the fury of the Jews, Pilate goes out to them and says: "I find no fault in Him," and he says this reasonably.

For it had almost vanished from the world, and become unknown in consequence of the general unbelief.

Pilate is judicious in replying that Jesus had done nothing wrong, and that there was no reason to suspect Him of aiming at a kingdom. For they might be sure that if He set Himself up as a King, and a rival of the Roman empire, a Roman prefect would not release Him.

2364 Now the Evangelist tells us the effect of Christ's answer. We can see from this that Pilate abandoned his idea that Christ had an earthly kingdom, and now thought of Christ as a king in the sense of one who teaches the truth. He desired to learn this truth and to become a member of this kingdom and so he said, What is truth? He was not asking for a definition of truth, but wanted to know that truth by whose power he could become a member of this kingdom. This indicates that truth was not known by the world and had vanished from almost everyone, as long as they remained unbelievers: "Truth has fallen in the public squares, and uprightness cannot enter" (Is 59:14); "Truth has decayed in the children of men" [Ps 12:1]. But Pilate did not wait for Christ's answer.

2365 Apropos of this question, note that we find two kinds of truth in the gospel. One is uncreated and making: this is Christ: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" (14:6); the other truth is made, "Grace and truth came [were made] through Jesus Christ" (1:17).

By its nature truth implies a conformity between a reality and the intellect. The intellect is related in two ways to reality. An intellect can be related to things as a measure of these things; that would be the intellect which is the cause of these things. Another intellect is measured by things, this would be an intellect whose knowledge is caused by these things. Now truth is not in the divine intellect because the intellect is conformed to things, but because things are conformed to the divine intellect. While truth is in our intellect because it understands things, conforms to them, as they are. And so uncreated truth and the divine intellect is a truth which is not measured or made, but a truth which measures and makes two kinds of truth: one is in the things themselves, insofar as it makes them so they are in conformity with what they are in the divine intellect; and it makes the other truth in our souls, and this is a measured truth, not a measuring truth. Therefore, the uncreated truth of the divine intellect is appropriated, especially referred, to the Son, who is the very concept of the divine intellect and the Word of God. For truth is a consequence of the intellect's concept.

2366 Now, (v 38) we see Pilate's finding in regard to Christ: first, Pilate states his innocence; secondly, we see his intention to show mercy (v 39).

2367 Concerning the first, note that Pilate, as Augustine says, was eager to free Christ. When he had asked Christ, What is truth? he suddenly realized how he could free Christ by means of a custom which allowed him to release a prisoner at the time of the passover. And so, not waiting for an answer to his question, he decided to make use of this custom to do this. This is why the Evangelist says about Pilate, After he had said this.

Pilate heard the cries of the Jews, and thinking that he could calm them and then listen to Christ's answer to this difficult question under more tranquil conditions, went out to the Jews again, and declared Christ's innocence, I find no crime in him, that is, nothing deserving death: "He committed no sin" (1 Pet 2:22). But even if he did commit a crime, I, who have authority in these matters, and especially the authority to judge of matters against the state, I wish to free and release him.

This custom was not commanded in the law, but had been handed down by tradition from the old fathers, viz. that in remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt, they should release a prisoner at the passover. Pilate tries to persuade them: Will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews.

And because it was not sufficient to allege innocence, therefore secondly clemency is recalled: "But you have a custom that I should release one to you at the Passover." Victor: "Because at the Passover they were freed from servitude, at the Passover this custom of releasing was theirs." "Do you wish that I release to you the King of the Jews?" Augustine: "It could not be torn from his heart that Christ was the King of the Jews, as though truth itself had fixed this there, as on the title, concerning which he had asked what it was."

As I was considering and meditating in my mind how the custom arose for the Jews to ask for one man to be released to them (a robber, it might be, or a murderer), the idea occurred to me that they no longer regulated their actions altogether according to the Law, but, choosing rather to use their own customs, they fell into a decayed state of manners not altogether in agreement with the law of Moses. But while I was searching the divine Scriptures and hunting everywhere for the origin of this custom, I came on one of the divine dictates that caused me to suspect that when the Jews sought the release of a malefactor, they were, in fact, in however mistaken a way, fulfilling one of the customs of the Law. At the end of the book called Numbers we find recorded the law concerning voluntary and involuntary homicide. When the penalty in the case of premeditated murder has been clearly laid down, the book goes on to speak of involuntary homicide, and, after other remarks, makes the following declaration: "But if he stabbed him suddenly without enmity, or hurled anything on him without lying in wait or used a stone, by which a man may die, and without seeing him cast it on him, so that he died, though he was not his enemy and did not seek his harm, then the congregation shall judge between the manslayer and the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to the city of his refuge, to which he had fled."Since this was the written commandment when any, as it happened, were involved in such a calamity, the Jews, when they were congregated together (and so that they might not appear altogether to neglect this enactment), sought the release of one of them. For the Law laid down that it was to be the act of the entire assembly. Since, then, they were permitted by the Law to ask for the release of a prisoner, they make this request of Pilate. For after they had once accepted the Roman yoke, from then on they were, for the most part, ruled by their laws in the administration of their affairs. We might say even further that, although it was lawful for them to put to death anyone convicted of a crime, they brought Jesus to Pilate as a criminal, saying, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." For, though they alleged as a plea their purification by the sacrifice of the Passover, yet they showed themselves flatterers of Rome in entrusting to the laws of the Romans the duty that the divine commandment from heaven laid on themselves.

When he called Jesus king of the Jews, he spoke in jest and tried to abate by ridicule the anger of the furious mob. He also clearly showed that this particular accusation was brought in vain. A Roman officer would never have thought a man condemned of plotting for a kingdom and revolution against Rome worthy to be released. He bore witness, then, to Jesus' utter innocence by the very reasons he gave for Jesus' release.

Do not wonder that the Roman government, holding sway over the Jews who had recently become their subjects, thought it was appropriate to grant them something acceptable at the feast of the Passover. They allowed them to ask for anyone they wanted [to be freed] even though he might appear guilty of many murders. For in this way nations sometimes grant favors to those whom they have conquered, until their rule is established. Yet this custom of releasing a prisoner existed at one time among the Jews also. … Let us inquire whether anything like this may take place also in God's judgment where the whole church may ask for any sinner to be released from the condemnation of sin especially if, while having other evil works, he is eager to do good for the church.

It is worthy of investigation on what occasion the custom arose among the Jews of releasing one prisoner for Passover. To this one may say, first, that those who teach "as doctrines the commandments of men" (Mark 7:7) introduced very much from their own reasoning, yet did not keep the commandments of God. So too they introduced this without any rational basis, while in other matters they neglected the rites prescribed by the law. Then, one may say that in Scripture there is also found a similar legal provision, from which they could have taken occasion to introduce into custom such releases of condemned persons. For concerning involuntary murder it is written: "If someone, not out of enmity and without particular intent, causes harm to his neighbor, throws a vessel or a stone, and the fallen object strikes a passerby, and that person dies, then such a killer is involuntary. The whole synagogue (assembly) shall judge concerning this, and they shall free him from death, for he did not kill with malicious intent, but they shall place him in a city of refuge, that is, punish him with exile." From this, perhaps, as we conjecture, they took occasion and introduced such a custom of releasing one of those condemned for murderous intent. The law prescribes that this matter be conducted by the Jewish synagogue, but since the Jews were under the authority of the Romans, the right to release prisoners they also yielded to Roman governors, as now to Pilate. For he did not say "although He has sinned and is worthy of death, yet for the sake of the feast forgive Him," but first declared Him free from all guilt, and only then proposed to them His release as well. Therefore, if Jesus is released, He owes them nothing at all, for they released an innocent man. If they condemn Him, their malice will be proven by this, because they condemned an innocent man. Look: even the title "King of the Jews" has a certain meaning of its own. By this, Pilate evidently expresses that Jesus is not at all guilty, but that they accuse Him in vain, as though He were seeking kingship. For one who proclaims himself king and rises up against the dominion of the Romans, a Roman governor would not have released. Therefore, by saying "I will release the King of the Jews," Pilate declares Jesus to be utterly innocent and mocks the Jews, speaking as if to say: "The One against Whom you bring false accusations that He proclaims Himself king, the One you call an insurgent and rebel—Him I find it necessary to release, evidently because He is not such a person."

When then He says, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? he clears Jesus of all guilt, and mocks the Jews, as if to say, Him whom ye accuse of thinking Himself a King, the same I bid you release: He does no such thing.

2368 Accordingly he says, But you have a custom that I should release one man for you at the Passover. First, he offers to release Christ; secondly, the Evangelist gives the reply of the Jews.

2369 This practice was started by Pilate or some other Roman governor as a favor to the people. Wishing to free Christ using this custom Pilate said, Will you have me release for you the King of the Jews? He did not call him this as if this were a crime, but to heighten their malice. It was like saying: Even if he is the king of the Jews, which is not your role to judge, but mine, still, if you want me to, I will release him for you.

The name Barabbas signifies, The son of their master, i. e. the devil; his master in his wickedness, the Jews' in their perfidy.

"But on hearing this, they all cried again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber." We blame you not, O Jews, for liberating the guilty during the passover, but for slaying the innocent; and yet unless that were done, the true passover would not take place. But a shadow of the truth was retained by the erring Jews, and by a marvellous dispensation of divine wisdom the truth of that same shadow was fulfilled by deluded men; because in order that the true passover might be kept, Christ was led as a sheep to the sacrificial slaughter.

(Tr. cxv) Upon this they cried out: Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber. We blame you not, O Jews, for releasing a guilty man at the passover, but for killing an innocent one. Yet unless this were done, it were not the true passover.

Inasmuch then as they abandoned the Saviour, and sought out a robber, to this day the devil practises his robberies upon them.

Then the hardening of malice in the Jews is added, who were not moved by Christ's innocence nor by the judge's clemency, but rather persisted in their accusation: whence he says: "They cried out again and said: Not this man, but Barabbas," namely not this innocent man, but one whom we know to be guilty: whence the Evangelist adds: "Now Barabbas was a robber," by which the astonishing malice of the Jews is expressed, that they preferred a robber and his welfare to Christ the Lord. Whence Chrysostom: "O polluted mind! They ask that the guilty one be released, but command the innocent one to be crucified": Acts 3: "You denied the Just and Holy One, and asked that a murderer be granted to you; but the Author of life you killed."

For they preferred a robber to him who did not regard his equality with God the Father [as robbery] and took our poverty upon him for this very end, that is, that he might deliver us from the true murderer, that is, Satan.… For the assembly, by its clamor, put him to death, though Pilate invited them to choose his release. In this way, even those who had not yet learned the divine law might be proved better than those instructed in the Law.

How many were offended … when they made that dreadful and monstrous assertion that the robber and housebreaker, the man laden with the crime of murder, deserved to be released rather than Jesus. How many were offended when, having received permission from the judge to make their choice, they preferred Barabbas, desiring not only to crucify Christ but also to involve him in infamy? For they thought that by these means they should be able to manufacture the belief that he was worse than the robber and such a great transgressor that neither on the plea of mercy nor the privilege of the festival was it possible to save him. For they did everything for the purpose of slandering his fame. This is also why they crucified the two robbers with him. Nevertheless the truth was not obscured but shone forth all the more clearly.

O accursed decision! They demand those like mannered with themselves, and let the guilty go; but bid him punish the innocent. For this was their custom from old time.

There is a likeness between the names of Barabbas and Jesus that is nothing short of a true mystery. Barabbas is appointed for making sedition and wars and murders in the souls of people, but Jesus is appointed for all good things as the Son of God and Peace and Word and Wisdom. These two therefore are bound in both human things and bodies. Here the people [of the Jews] asked for Barabbas to be released to them. Therefore, that nation [i.e., Israel] does not cease from having seditions and murders and robberies, as regards some of their own race in outward things but also as regards all the Jews who do not believe in Jesus who have also struggles within their own souls. For where Jesus is not, there are seditions and quarrels and battles. But where Jesus is … all good things, and innumerable spiritual riches, along with peace, rest in their hands. For he is our peace who made both one. And if anyone sees the opposite take place, he will recognize in them all that notable prisoner, Barabbas, whose release is craved not only then by sinful Israel according to the flesh but also by all like them in either doctrine or life. Whoever, therefore, does evil things in his body frees Barabbas and binds Christ. But whoever does good things frees Christ and binds Barabbas.

Celsus's comparison of Christ to a robber or murderer … is anticipated in the Gospels since God was numbered with the transgressors by wicked people who wanted a murderer (one who had been cast into prison for sedition and murder) to be released to them and wanted Jesus to be crucified. And they crucified him between two robbers. Jesus, indeed, is always being crucified with robbers among his genuine disciples and witnesses to the truth, and he suffers the same condemnation they do among people—if indeed we grant that those people have any resemblance to robbers who because of their godly lives suffer all kinds of injury and death so that they may keep their lives clean and pure.… But neither Jesus … nor they were … put to death according to any form of justice, and so it is his persecutors who are the ones who should incur the charge.

See to what extent the malice of the Jews is displayed. They beg for Barabbas, a notorious robber, to be set free, but deliver up the Lord.

2370 The Jews cried out again, Not this man, but Barabbas! Then to indicate the malice of the Jews, the Evangelist mentions the crime committed by the one they wanted released, saying, Now Barabbas was a robber: "Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves" (Is 1:23). This fulfills the words of Jeremiah (12:8): "My heritage has become to me like a lion in the forest." "But you denied the Holy and Righteous One and asked for a murderer to be granted to you" (Acts 3:14).

On the Jews crying out that they did not wish Jesus to be released unto them at the passover, but Barabbas the robber; not the Saviour, but the murderer; not the Giver of life, but the destroyer, - "then Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him." We must believe that Pilate acted thus for no other reason than that the Jews, glutted with the injuries done to Him, might consider themselves satisfied, and desist from madly pursuing Him even unto death. With a similar intention was it that, as governor, he also permitted his cohort to do what follows, or even perhaps ordered them, although the evangelist is silent on the subject. For he tells us what the soldiers did thereafter, but not that Pilate ordered it. "And the soldiers," he says, "platted a crown of thorns, and put it on His head, and they clothed Him with a purple robe. And they came to Him and said, Hail, King of the Jews! And they smote Him with their hands." Thus were fulfilled the very things which Christ had foretold of Himself; thus were the martyrs moulded for the endurance of all that their persecutors should be pleased to inflict; thus, by concealing for a time the terror of His power, He commended to us the prior imitation of His patience; thus the kingdom which was not of this world overcame that proud world, not by the ferocity of fighting, but by the humility of suffering; and thus the grain of corn that was yet to be multiplied was sown amid the horrors of shame, that it might come to fruition amid the wonders of glory.

(Tr. cxvi) When the Jews had cried out that they did not wish Jesus to be released on account of the passover, but Barabbas, Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged Him. Pilate seems to have done this for no reason but to satisfy the malice of the Jews with some punishment short of death. On which account he allowed his band to do what follows, or perhaps even commanded them. The Evangelist only says however that the soldiers did so, not that Pilate commanded them: And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on His head, and they put on Him a purple robe, and said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote Him with their hands.

(Tr. cxvi) Thus were fulfilled what Christ had prophesied of Himself; thus were martyrs taught to suffer all that the malice of persecutors could inflict; thus that kingdom which was not of this world conquered the proud world, not by fierce fighting, but by patient suffering.

Then he apprehended him, etc. Here Pilate intends to free him by a judgment of severity, scourging an innocent man, so that he might mitigate the zeal of the Jews: and there are here three parts. In the first is described the ignominious scourging of Christ: second, the showing of the scourged one, there: Pilate went out again: third, the hardening of the Jews, there: When therefore the chief priests had seen him.

The ignominious scourging of Christ is indicated first in the affliction, then in the derision.

He touches upon the affliction when he says: Then Pilate took Jesus and scourged him. Chrysostom: "Pilate scourged him, perhaps wishing to release him and to mitigate the Jewish zeal"; whence in Luke twenty-three Pilate said: "I will release him after chastising him," that is, afflicted with scourges, to further mitigate the zeal of the Jews.

Jesus was scourged unjustly so that he might deliver us from the punishment we deserved. He was beaten and struck so that we might beat Satan, who had beaten us, and that we might escape from the sin that cleaves to us through the original transgression. For if we think correctly, we shall believe that all of Christ's sufferings were for us and on our behalf and that they have power to release and deliver us from all those calamities we have deserved because of our rebellion against God.

But do thou all through observe the lovingkindness of the Lord in these circumstances. Pilate scourged Him perhaps desiring to exhaust and to soothe the fury of the Jews. For when he had not been able to deliver Him by his former measures, being anxious to stay the evil at this point, he scourged Him, and permitted to be done what was done, the robe and crown to be put on Him, so as to relax their anger. Wherefore also he led Him forth to them crowned, that, seeing the insult which had been done to Him, they might recover a little from their passion, and vomit their venom.

Like a lion they roared to seize The life of the lamb, Christ. Pilate, fulfilling their plan, Flogged you, the meek One. So he set to work on your back.… The Redeemer endured the whip. The Deliverer was in chains, Stripped and stretched out on a pillar, He who in a pillar of cloud Previously spoke to Moses and Aaron. He who laid the pillars of the earth, as David said, is bound to a pillar. He who made known to the people the way in the desert—for the pillar of fire showed [the way] before them— is fastened to a pillar. The rock is on a pillar, and hewn for me is The church.

Pilate scourges Him, wishing at least by this to calm and subdue their fury. Since he could not free Him from their hands by words, he scourges Him, hoping by this to restrain their madness.

2371 Above, the Evangelist gave us an account of what Christ suffered from the Jews; here he describes what in particular he endured from the Gentiles. He suffered three things, as he had predicted: "They will deliver him to the Gentiles, to be mocked and scourged and crucified" (Matt 20:19). First, he deals with the scourging of Christ; secondly, with his mockery (v 2); and thirdly, with his crucifixion (v 4).

2372 He says, Then, after all their shouting, Pilate took Jesus and scourged him, not with his own hands, but using his soldiers. He did this hoping that the Jews would be satisfied with these wounds and be softened so as no longer to demand his death. For it is natural for our anger to subside if we see the one we are angry at humiliated and punished, as the Philosopher says in his Rhetoric. This is true of that anger which seeks to inflict a limited amount of harm; but it is not the case of that hatred which seeks the entire destruction of the one hated: "An enemy... if he finds an opportunity his thirst for blood will be insatiable" (Sir 12:16). Now the Jews hated Christ, and so his scourging did not satisfy them: "All the day long I have been scourged" [Ps 73:14]; "I gave my back to the smiters" (Is 50:6).

2373 Does this intention excuse Pilate for the scourging? It does not; because of all those things which are evil in themselves (per se), none can be made totally good by a good intention. Now to harm an innocent person, and especially the Son of God, is in the highest degree an evil in itself. Consequently, it cannot be excused by any intention.

For instead of a diadem, they put upon Him a crown of thorns, and a purple robe to represent the purple robe which kings wear. Matthew says, a scarlet robe, (Mat. 27:28) but scarleta and purple are different names for the same colour. And though the soldiers did this in mockery, yet to us their acts have a meaning. For by the crown of thorns is signified the taking of our sins upon Him, the thorns which the earth of our body brings forth. And the purple robe signifies the flesh crucified. For our Lord is robed in purple, wherever He is glorified by the triumphs of holy martyrs.

To the affliction was added mockery:

And the soldiers plaiting, etc. And because kings are accustomed to be honored by a sign, by dress, and by word or salutation and the showing of reverence, therefore they mock him in four ways: first in the sign of the crown, which is a royal sign, whence: Plaiting, that is weaving, a crown of thorns, that is, of sharp sea rushes, pricking in the manner of thorns: they placed it on his head. Concerning this crown, Song of Songs three: "Go forth, daughters of Zion, and see King Solomon in the diadem with which his mother crowned him," that is, the synagogue.

Then they mock him in dress or clothing: whence it is said: And they clothed him with a purple garment, as if he were a king: in which is signified that his flesh was to be made purple with blood: which was signified in Genesis thirty-seven: "They took the tunic of Joseph and dipped it in the blood of a kid which they had killed"; and Isaiah sixty-three: "Why is your garment red, and your vestments like those of them that tread in the winepress?"

It is asked concerning this, that the soldiers so mocked Christ, when nevertheless they are not said to have had a command from Pilate. Whence was this? Chrysostom responds that they did this for money, because they had been bribed by the chief priests.

Likewise it is asked concerning this, that here John says Christ was mocked by the soldiers before the sentence of condemnation, whereas in Matthew twenty-seven it is said that the soldiers mocked the Lord after the condemnation: He delivered Jesus to them to be crucified: and then it is said that the soldiers mocked him. It can be said that it happened twice: both before the condemnation and after. Or Matthew says this by way of recapitulation, because it had been done before.

The Lord's crown of thorns prophetically pointed to us who once were barren but are placed around him through the church of which he is the head. But it is also a type of faith, of life in respect to the substance of the wood, of joy in respect to the appellation of crown, of danger in respect to the thorn. For there is no approaching the Word without blood.… They crowned Jesus raised up high, testifying to their own ignorance.… This crown is the flower of those who have believed on the glorified One, but it covers with blood and chastises those who have not believed. It is a symbol, too, of the Lord's successful work, he having borne on his head (the princely part of his body) all our iniquities by which we were pierced. For he by his own passion rescued us from offenses and sins and other thorns. And having destroyed the devil, deservedly said in triumph, "O Death, where is your sting?"

He scourges Him unjustly, and suffers the crowd of soldiers to insult Him, and put a crown of thorns about His Head, and throw a purple robe upon Him, and buffet Him with the palms of their hands, and otherwise dishonour Him. For he thought he could easily put to shame the people of the Jews, if they saw the Man Who was altogether free from guilt suffering this punishment, only without a cause. He was scourged unjustly, that He might deliver us from merited chastisement; He was buffeted and smitten, that we might buffet Satan, who had buffeted us, and that we might escape from the sin that cleaves to us through the original transgression. For if we think aright, we shall believe that all Christ's sufferings were for us and on our behalf, and have power to release and deliver us from all those calamities we have deserved for our revolt from God. For as Christ, Who knew not death, when He gave up His own Body for our salvation, was able to loose the bonds of death for all mankind, for He, being One, died for all; so we must understand that Christ's suffering all these things for us sufficed also to release us all from scourging and dishonour. Then in what way by His stripes are we healed, according to the Scripture? Because we have all gone astray, every man after his own way, as says the blessed Prophet Isaiah; and the Lord hath given Himself up for our transgressions, and for us is afflicted. For He was bruised for our iniquities, and has given His own back to the scourge, and His cheeks to the smiters, as he also says. The soldiers indeed take Jesus as a pretender to the throne, and insult Him soldierlike. And for this cause was a crown of thorns brought and put upon His brow, being the symbol of earthly sovereignty; and the purple robe was, as it were, an image and type of royal apparel; and ridicule also was thereby heaped upon Him, for they came near unto Him, and cried, as the Evangelist says: Hail, King of the Jews!

And I have heard some say, and to some the conceit is well-pleasing, that the crown of thorns further signifies the multitude of idol-worshippers who will be taken up by Christ, as it were, into a diadem, through faith in Him; and they liken the Gentiles to barren and useless thorns, through their bearing no fruit of piety, and being rather fit to feed consuming fire----just like rubbish in the fields, just as wild thicket, which grows up without any culture; and the royal apparel, I mean the purple robe, they say, means Christ's Kingdom, which will be extended over all the world. We may well receive any interpretation which is not alien to the truth, and which it is not unprofitable to believe in. We need not therefore reject such a construction of the passage, indicative as it is of careful ingenuity.

But it is essential to feel that he may have gone to Glastonbury: all songs, arts, and dedications branching and blossoming like the thorn, are rooted in some such sacred doubt. Taken thus, not heavily like a problem but lightly like an old tale, the thing does lead one along the road of very strange realities, and the thorn is found growing in the heart of a very secret maze of the soul. Something is really present in the place; some closer contact with the thing which covers Europe but is still a secret. Somehow the grey town and the green bush touch across the world the strange small country of the garden and the grave; there is verily some communion between the thorn tree and the crown of thorns.

(Hom. lxxxiii) Pilate having called Him the King of the Jews, they put the royal dress upon Him, in mockery.

There are those who still have thorns with which they crown and dishonor Jesus, those, namely, who are choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life and, though they have received the word of God, do not bring it to perfection. We must beware, therefore, lest we also, as crowning Jesus with thorns of our own, should be entered in the Gospel … and read how he is dishonored and mocked and beaten [by us].

What patriarch, what prophet, what Levite, or priest or ruler, or at a later period what apostle, or preacher of the gospel or bishop do you ever find the wearer of a crown?… If, perhaps, you object that Christ himself was crowned, to that you will get the brief reply: Go ahead and be crowned like he was. You have my full permission.

You belong to Christ 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.

Allow them to put a cloak on Him and place a crown on Him, also with the purpose of appeasing their anger.

2374 Now the Evangelist shows us Christ being ridiculed: first, the mock honors paid to him; secondly, the real dishonor showed him, and struck him. They pay him mock honors by calling him a king, thus adverting to the charge lodged by the Jews, who said that he made himself king of the Jews. Therefore, they pay him the three honors given to a king, but in a derisive way. First, we have a mock crown; and then mock clothing and acclamations.

2375 They mock him with a crown, because it is customary for kings to wear a crown, a crown of gold: "A crown of gold upon his head" [Sir 45:12]. The Psalm (21:3) mentions this: "Thou dost set a crown of fine gold upon his head." And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, the head of him who is a crown of glory to those who belong to him: "In that day the Lord of hosts will be a crown of glory, and a diadem of beauty, to the remnant of his people" (Is 28:5). It was appropriately made of thorns, because by them he removes the thorns of sin, which pain us through remorse of conscience: "Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns" (Jer 4:3). These thorns also take away the thorns of punishment which burden us: "Thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you" (Gen 3:18).

Was this crowning done by the governor's order? Chrysostom says that it was not, but that the soldiers were bribed with money and did this to satisfy the Jews. On the other hand, Augustine says that this was done by the command or the permission of the governor to the end that the hatred of the Jews would be satiated and Pilate could more easily release Jesus.

2376 Secondly, they mock him with clothing. The soldiers... arrayed him in a purple robe, which was the sign of a royal dignity for the Romans. In 1 Maccabees (8:14) we read that when the Romans ruled they wore a crown and were clothed in purple. This clothing of Christ in purple fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah (63:2): "Why is your apparel red, and your garments like his that treads in the wine press?" At the same time it indicates the sufferings of the martyrs, which stains red the entire body of Christ, that is, the church.

Then the mockery in the salutation: whence he says: And they came to him and said: Hail, King of the Jews, and this indeed as a reproach: Lamentations three: "He shall be filled with reproaches." — Not only in word, but in reverence, because in place of reverence they gave slaps: whence he says: And they gave him slaps: Lamentations three: "He shall give his cheek to him that strikes him"; and Isaiah fifty: "I have given my body to the strikers and my cheeks to those who plucked them."

They dressed him in a purple robe in mockery, of course. But they also fulfilled the prophecy, doing so under inspiration. For he was a King. However much they did it in a spirit of derision, still they did it. His royal dignity was emblematically heralded. So, likewise, though it was with thorns they crowned him, it was still a crown. And it was soldiers who crowned him. Kings are proclaimed by soldiers.

(Hom. xxxiv) It was not at the command of the governor that they did this, but in order to gratify the Jews. For neither were they commanded by him to go to the garden in the night, but the Jews gave them money to go. He bore however all these insults silently. Yet do thou, when thou hearest of them, keep stedfastly in thy mind the King of the whole earth, and Lord of Angels bearing all these contumelies in silence, and imitate His example.

But the soldiers do everything to please the Jews. They had heard Pilate say, "I will release the King of the Jews"; therefore they mock Him as a king. For it was not by Pilate's order that they did this, nor did those who went against Jesus at night do so with the governor's knowledge, but to please the Jews, for the sake of money.

2377 Thirdly, they mock him the way they address him: they came up to him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! It was the custom then, as it is now, for subjects to salute their king when they came into his presence: "And when Hushai the Archite, David's friend, came to Absalom, Hushai said to Absalom, 'Long live the king! Long live the king!'" (2 Sam 16:16).

As for the mystical interpretation, those greet Christ mockingly who profess him with words "but deny him with their deeds" (Titus 1:16).

2378 Now he mentions the real dishonor shown to Christ, and struck him with their hands, in order to show that the honor they did gave him was in mockery: "I gave my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard" (Is 50:6); "With a rod they strike upon the cheek the ruler of Israel" (Mic 5:1).

"Pilate went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth, that ye may know that I find no fault in him. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And he saith unto them, Behold the man!" Hence it is apparent that these things were done by the soldiers not without Pilate's knowledge, whether it was that he ordered them or only permitted them, namely, for the reason we have stated above, that His enemies might all the more willingly drink in the sight of such derisive treatment, and cease to thirst further for His blood. Jesus goes forth to them wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, not resplendent in kingly power, but laden with reproach; and the words are addressed to them, Behold the man! If you hate your king, spare him now when you see him sunk so low; he has been scourged, crowned with thorns, clothed with the garments of derision, jeered at with the bitterest insults, struck with the open hand; his ignominy is at the boiling point, let your ill-will sink to zero. But there is no such cooling on the part of the latter, but rather a further increase of heat and vehemence.

Pilate went out again. Here is set forth the showing of Christ scourged and mocked, so that they might be moved to pity. And first indeed his innocence is reiterated: whence: He says: Behold, I bring him out to you. He adds the reason: That you may know that I find no cause in him, namely "of death" or of punishment: and yet I have punished him.

He confesses the wrong he had done and is not ashamed. For he admitted that he had scourged him without cause and declares that he will show him to them supposing that would satisfy their savage passion by so pitiable a spectacle. In fact, he practically accuses them as well—and that publicly—of putting him to death unjustly and of compelling him openly to be a lawbreaker who, if he transgressed his own laws, could not escape without repercussions. The saying was fulfilled in Christ and shown to be true, that "the prince of this world comes and he will find nothing in me."

Pilate is faint-hearted and unvindictive in relation to the Jews. He brings Jesus out, once again wishing to extinguish their fury.

2379 Now the Evangelist treats of the crucifixion of Christ: first, the crucifixion itself; secondly, the death of Christ (v 28); and thirdly, his burial (v 38). As to the crucifixion, he first mentions the dispute Pilate had with the Jews; secondly, we have the sentencing of Christ (v 8); and thirdly, the sentence is carried out (v 17). Pilate, wanting to release Christ, began arguing with the Jews. First, the Evangelist shows how Pilate tried to release Christ by exhibiting him to the crowd; secondly, by declaring his innocence, I find no crime in him. As regards the first, the Evangelist shows Jesus being shown to the crowd; and secondly, the effect this had, Crucify him.

2380 Three things are mentioned concerning Christ's exhibition to the Jews. First there is the intention of Pilate, which was to free him. He says, Pilate went out again, from the praetorium, and said to them, to the Jews who were waiting there, Behold, I am bringing him out to you, for this purpose, that you may know that I find no crime in him, deserving of death. Why then, unrighteous Pilate, was there this shameful bargaining if there was no crime in him? Was it so the Jews would not believe that you would release him because you were partial to him? What kind of partiality is that when you give one so much thrashing? Or perhaps it was so that his enemies, gladly seeing his disgrace, would no longer thirst for blood. Pilate is saying in effect: If there were a reason for his death, I would condemn him just like I have scourged him. Perhaps he has committed some minor infraction of the law, which did deserve a scourging, but there was nothing deserving of death.

(Tr. cxvi) Hence it is apparent that these things were not done without Pilate's knowledge, whether he commanded, or only permitted them, for the reason we have mentioned, viz. that His enemies seeing the insults heaped upon Him, might not thirst any longer for His blood: Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe: not the insignia of empire, but the marks of ridicule. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man! as if to say, If ye envy the King, spare the outcast. Ignominy overflows, let envy subside.

Jesus therefore went out. Augustine: "Not illustrious in command, but full of reproach"; whence there follows: Bearing the crown of thorns and the purple garment, in which they had mocked him, according to that passage of Matthew 20: "They shall deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked and scourged." And he says to them: Behold, the man: behold, the showing forth of one scourged and reviled in this, that he had made himself king. Augustine: "He was crowned with thorns, clothed in a garment of mockery, mocked with bitter reproaches, struck with blows: indignity burns hot, let envy grow cold."

He showed, then, the Lord of all impiously outraged, and mocked by the intolerable insults of the soldiers, trusting that the furious wrath of the Jews would be sated, and now, at last, abate, and rest content with that most pitiable and dishonourable spectacle. But they were so far from showing any mercy in word or deed towards Him, and from entertaining any kind of good intentions, as even to surpass the ferocity of beasts, and to hurry onward to greater evil still, and make a still more furious outcry, condemning Him to the worst of deaths, and compelling Him to undergo the extremity of suffering. For what punishment can be as severe as the Cross? And it is to the leaders of the Jews alone, it appears, that the wise Evangelist ascribed the origin of this impious doom. For see how, as it were, carefully guarding his words, he says: When, therefore, the chief priests and the officers saw Him, they cried out, saying, Crucify Him, crucify Him. For, when the multitude of the vulgar were, it may be, somewhat ashamed by the sight of Christ's sufferings, for perhaps they called to mind the wonderful miracles wrought by Him, the rulers first start the clamour, and kindle into strange fury the passions of the people subject unto them. That which was said of God in the prophets, concerning them, is true: For the pastors have become brutish, and have not sought the Lord; therefore all their flock perceived Him not, and were scattered abroad. And the saying is true. For as those in the pasture, that is, the multitude of the vulgar, did not enjoy the direction of their rulers to the knowledge of Christ, they perished, and relapsed into ruinous heedlessness of Christ. For let any man that likes probe the origin of the impious crime, and he will ascribe it to the rulers. For it was in the outset their most unholy design; they it was who induced the traitor to make a bargain with them, and bought Him over with the money of the Sanctuary; they joined the band of soldiers to the officers, bade them bind Him like the meanest of robbers, and brought Him to Pilate; and now, when they saw Him scourged, and well-nigh beside Himself with insults from every quarter, are but exasperated the more, and utter the dictates of their unmeasured hatred. For they purposed to put the Lord of the Vineyard to death, and thought they would securely enjoy His heritage, and, if Christ were removed, that they would again rule and enjoy all honour. But, as the Psalmist says: He that sitteth in the heavens, shall laugh them to scorn; the Lord shall hold them in derision. For nothing happened according to their expectation, but, on the contrary, the course of events was completely reversed.

Just as in Adam Satan subdued the whole human race demonstrating its subjection to sin, so now Satan is vanquished by humanity. For the one who was truly God and without sin was still also human. And just as all of humanity was condemned under the sentence of sin through one man, the first Adam, in the same way, the blessing of justification by Christ is extended to all through one man, the second Adam.

2381 Secondly, we see Christ being presented before the crowd, Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. He was exhibited in the same robe he wore when he was mocked by the officers in the hope that the crowd would be appeased when they saw him, not respected for his authority, but entirely dishonored: "For it is for your sake that I have borne reproach, that shame has covered my face" (Ps 69:7). This teaches us that we should be ready to undergo any kind of disrespect for the name of Jesus Christ: "Fear not the reproach of men, and be not dismayed at their revilings" (Is 51:7).

2382 Thirdly, Christ's exhibition is further described through the words of Pilate, Here is the man! spoken in a sarcastic way, as if one so disgraced would dare to usurp a kingship. Look at the kind of person you are accusing of this! The words of the Psalm (22:6) apply to him: "I am a worm, and no man." And so, if you do hate your king, spare him now because you see him dishonored. "When disgrace increases, let your hatred decrease," as Augustine says.

"When the chief priests, therefore, and attendants saw Him, they cried out, saying, Crucify, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him and crucify him; for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by the law he ought to die because he made himself the Son of God." Behold another and still greater ground of hatred. The former, indeed, seemed but a small matter, as that shown towards the usurpation, by an unlawful act of daring, of the royal power; and yet of neither did Jesus falsely claim possession, but each of them is truly His as both the only-begotten Son of God, and by Him appointed King upon His holy hill of Zion; and both might He now have shown to be His, were it not that in proportion to the greatness of His power, He preferred to manifest the corresponding greatness of His patience.

(Tr. cxvi) The envy of the Jews does not subside at Christ's disgraces; yea, rather rises: When the chief priests therefore and officers saw Him, they cried out, saying, Crucify Him. crucify Him.

When therefore they had seen him. Here upon the showing of Christ there follows thirdly the hardening of the obstinacy of the Jews, especially of the chief priests: whence he says: When therefore the chief priests and ministers had seen him, they cried out saying: Crucify, crucify him. Isaiah 5: "I expected that he would do judgment: and behold, a cry." They say crucify twice to show the obstinacy of their mind: Jeremiah 12: "My inheritance has become to me as a lion in the forest: it has uttered its voice against me"; and the Psalm: "They opened their mouth against me like a lion seizing and roaring," on account of the cry.

Pilate says to them. Above, Pilate strove to free Christ by a judgment of kindness and of severity: here he strives by a judgment of equity, recurring to innocence, that it is just to release an innocent man and never to kill without cause. And the Jews resist this in two ways: first by accusing and then by threatening.

First therefore is set forth the justification of Christ, on account of which Pilate does not wish to condemn him, but offers him to the Jews: whence he says: Pilate says to them, who were seeking that Christ be crucified: Take him yourselves and crucify him: for I find no cause in him: and therefore I am unwilling to crucify without cause. Truly he did not find cause, because, 1 Peter 2, "he committed no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth."

Pilate is in consternation, that the people of the Jews and the inhuman crowd of the chief priests should attain to such a pitch of presumption, as not even to shrink from subjecting Christ to so frightful a death, though no fault was found in Him to bring Him to such a doom. And, therefore, he says, almost like one annoyed at an insult offered to himself: "Make you me a judge of this unjust shedding of blood? Am I, contrary to all Roman Law, become the murderer of the Innocent? and shall I, at your beck and call, fling to the winds all thought of myself? and shall I not, if I minister at my own peril to your requests, live in expectation of paying the penalty? If you do not think that you are doing an unholy deed; if you think the work presents no difficulty; do you yourselves, he says----you, who boast of Divine instruction, you, who vaunt so highly your knowledge of your Law----do you fix the cross, dare the murder, do of yourselves the unholy deed, bringing down on your own heads the charge of this great impiety; let the presumptuous act be the act of Jews, and upon them let the blood-guiltiness rest. If you have a Law that subjects the Sinless to so fearful a penalty, that chastises the Guiltless, execute it with your own hands; I will not endure to be a party to it." We may imagine this to be what Pilate says, for his words are pregnant with some such meaning. And the shamelessness of the Jews may here also well excite our amazement, for they are not even put to shame by the just judgment of a foreigner, though the Divine Law said concerning this people: For the priest's lips should keep judgment, and they should seek the Law from his mouth

Never yet was the devil in so shameful a plight. For whilst expecting to have Him, he lost even those he had; and when That Body was nailed to the Cross, the dead arose. There death received his wound, having met his death-stroke from a dead body. And as an athlete, when he thinks he has hit his adversary, himself is caught in a fatal grasp; so truly doth Christ also show, that to die with confidence is the devil's shame.

For he would have done everything to persuade men that He did not die, had he had the power. For seeing that of His Resurrection indeed all succeeding time was proof demonstrative; whilst of His death, no other time save that whereat it happened could ever furnish proof; therefore it was, that He died publicly in the sight of all men, but He arose not publicly, knowing that the aftertime would bear witness to the truth. For, that whilst the world was looking on, the serpent should be slain on high upon the Cross, herein is the marvel. For what did not the devil do, that He might die in secret? Hear Pilate saying, "Take ye Him away, and crucify Him, for I find no fault in Him," and withstanding them in a thousand ways. And again the Jews said unto Him, "If Thou art the Son of God, come down from the Cross." Then further, when He had received a mortal wound, and He came not down, for this reason He was also committed to burial; for it was in His power to have risen immediately: but He did not, that the fact might be believed. And yet in cases of private death indeed, it is possible to impute them to a swoon, but here, it is not possible to do this either. For even the soldiers brake not His legs, like those of the others, that it might be made manifest that He was dead. And those who buried The Body are known; and therefore too the Jews themselves seal the stone along with the soldiers. For, what was most of all attended to, was this very thing, that it should not be in obscurity. And the witnesses to it are from enemies, from the Jews. Hear them saying to Pilate, "That deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I rise again. Command therefore that the sepulchre be guarded by the soldiers." This was accordingly done, themselves also sealing it. Hear them further saying even afterwards to the Apostles, "Ye intend to bring this Man's blood upon us." He suffered not the very fashion of His Cross to be put to shame. For since the Angels have suffered nothing like it, He therefore doth everything for this, showing that His death achieved a mighty work. There was, as it were, a single combat. Death wounded Christ: but Christ, being wounded, did afterwards kill death. He that seemed to be immortal, was destroyed by a mortal body; and this the whole world saw. And what is truly wonderful is, that He committed not this thing to another.

But not even so was their rage quenched, but they cried out, "Crucify him, crucify him." Then Pilate, seeing that all was done in vain, said, "Take ye him, and crucify him." Whence it is clear that he had permitted what had been done before, because of their madness. "For I," he saith, "find no fault in him."

See in how many ways the judge makes His defense, continually acquitting Him of the charges; but none of these things shamed the dogs from their purpose. For the, "Take ye him and crucify him," is the expression of one clearing himself of the guilt, and thrusting them forward to an action not permitted to them. They therefore had brought Him, in order that the thing might be done by the decision of the governor; but the contrary fell out, that He was rather acquitted than condemned by the governor's decision. Then, because they were ashamed, "We have," they said, "a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God."

"How then when the judge said, 'Take ye him, and judge him according to your law,' did ye reply, 'It is not lawful for us to put any man to death,' while here ye fly to the law? And consider the charge, 'He made himself the Son of God.' Tell me, is this a ground of accusation, that He who performed the deeds of the Son of God should call Himself the Son of God?" What then doth Christ? While they held this dialogue one with the other, He held His peace, fulfilling that saying of the Prophet, that "He openeth not his mouth: in His humiliation His judgment was taken away."

The martyr Abel was envied by Cain and later murdered. This is what Christ also endured: Though he desired this envious people, He incited them to anger, while showing affection; He healed those who were sick, and instead of gratitude, he suffers and is crucified, In order that Adam might dance in celebration. The crowd of the lawless, feeling an antipathy towards the plethora of miracles Cried out: "Kill! Crucify him!" The One who sustains all things was delivered over to Pilate; They handed over to the court of justice Him who will judge both kings and paupers; The condemned judges the just Judge; The one who lives in obscurity Threatened to murder the Redeemer as a thief! Meanwhile he, in order to suffer, endures so long, in silence, standing speechless, In order that Adam might dance in celebration

But they were not tamed even by this, and cry out: "Crucify, crucify Him!" Pilate, seeing that everything he was doing remained in vain, says: "Take Him yourselves and crucify Him, for I find no fault in Him." He says this, urging them toward an act not permitted to them, so that Jesus might be released. "I," he says, "who have the authority to crucify, find no fault; but you, who have no authority to crucify, say that He is guilty. So take Him and crucify Him. But you have no authority." Therefore, this Man ought to be released. Such is Pilate's aim. He is more merciful, yet not steadfast for the truth.

2383 Now we see the effect of this exhibition on the Jews. No matter how disgraced and wretched and beaten he appeared, their hatred did not lessen, but was still burning and growing. When the chief priests and the officers saw him, when Jesus was brought out, they cried out, Crucify him, crucify him! Their desire was so strong that they shouted this twice. And they will not be satisfied with any kind of death, but demand the most dishonorable kind, crucifixion: "Let us condemn him to a shameful death" (Wis 2:20). He said, When they saw him, because the sight of the one they hated only served to incite and inflame their hearts with more hatred: "The very sight of him is a burden to us" (Wis 2:15).

2384 Now the Evangelist shows how Pilate tried to free Christ by declaring his innocence. As a result, a disagreement arose because, first, Pilate declared the innocence of Christ; while secondly, the Jews repeated his guilt, We have a law.

2385 As to Christ's innocence, Pilate said to them, Take him yourselves, and crucify him. It is like saying: I do not want to be a judge who judges unjustly. I will not crucify him. You crucify him if you want, but I find no crime in him, deserving of crucifixion: "The ruler of this world is coming. He has no power over me" (14:30); Jesus "whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him" (Acts 3:13).

"When the chief priests, therefore, and attendants saw Him, they cried out, saying, Crucify, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him and crucify him; for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by the law he ought to die because he made himself the Son of God." Behold another and still greater ground of hatred. The former, indeed, seemed but a small matter, as that shown towards the usurpation, by an unlawful act of daring, of the royal power; and yet of neither did Jesus falsely claim possession, but each of them is truly His as both the only-begotten Son of God, and by Him appointed King upon His holy hill of Zion; and both might He now have shown to be His, were it not that in proportion to the greatness of His power, He preferred to manifest the corresponding greatness of His patience.

(Tr. cxvi) Lo, another greater outbreak of envy. The former was lighter, being only to punish Him for aspiring to a usurpation of the royal power. Yet did Jesus make neither claim falsely; both were true: He was both the Only-begotten Son of God, and the King appointed by God upon the holy hill of Sion. And He would have demonstrated His right to both now, had He not been as patient as He was powerful.

(de Con. Evang. iii. 8) This agrees with Luke's account, We found this fellow perverting the nation, (Luke 23:2) only with the addition of, because He made Himself the Son of God.

The Jews answered him. Here is set forth the accusation of the Jews: whence they said: We have a Law, which namely we observe by the will of the Roman rulers. They allege the Law in their favor, when it is against them: above in chapter 7: "Did not Moses give you the Law, and none of you keeps the Law"? And according to the Law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God, and thus blasphemed: Leviticus 24: "He who blasphemes shall die the death"; whence above in chapter 10: "We do not stone you for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because you, being a man, make yourself God."

When their false accusation that they had at first contrived proved fruitless, and they established against Him no attempt at revolution or revolt against Caesar's rule (for the Lord parried these charges, saying: My Kingdom is not of this world; if my Kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews), and when Pilate thereupon gave a just and impartial verdict, and did not as yet comply with their will, but said openly that He found no fault in Him, the audacious Jews completely changed their tactics, and asserted that they had a law, which condemned the Saviour to death. What law was that? That which fixes the punishment for blasphemers; for in the book called Leviticus it is recorded, that certain men, who were counted among Jews, strove together, according to the Scripture, in the camp, and that one of them made mention of the Name of God, and blessed Him, for thus saith the Scripture euphemistically, meaning that he cursed and blasphemed Him, and was then doomed to die, and to pay a bitter penalty for his impious tongue, God plainly declaring: Whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin, and he that taketh the Name of the Lord in vain, shall be put to death, and all the congregation of Israel shall stone him: as well the stranger as he that is born in the land, when he taketh the Name of the Lord in vain, shall be put to death.

But, perhaps, someone may be in doubt, and ask this question: "What, then, does the Law say, and what does it intend to signify hereby?" For that a man who is convicted of blasphemy against God should die is, indeed, just, and he very rightly meets his doom. But suppose a man treat a false god with contumely, is he then not free from guilt? For the words of the Law are, If any man curse God, he shall bear his sin. What do we reply? The Lawgiver is infallible, for to love to hurl scorn upon false gods is, as it were, a course of preparation which makes us ready to utter blasphemies against the true God. Therefore also, in another passage, He dissuades us from it, saying: Gods thou shalt not revile; for He thought it meet to give unto the name of Godhead, though it be sometimes misplaced, the honour that is its due. The Law, however, did not certainly bid us ascribe any honour to gods erroneously so called, but teaches us to regard as holy the name of Godhead, though it be stolen by some.

As the Law, then, orders that the man who is convicted of blasphemy should be rewarded with death, they say that Christ is subject to the penalty, for that He made Himself the Son of God. We ought to bear in mind where, and in what sense, this was said by Christ. At the pool that was called after the sheep-gate, He healed the impotent man of his long and grievous infirmity on the Sabbath-day. And the Jews, when they ought to have marvelled at the wonders that He wrought, were, on the contrary, offended at His breaking the Sabbath, and for that reason only railed against Him. Then Christ answered, and said: My Father worketh even until now, and I work; and thereupon says the Evangelist: For this cause therefore the Jews persecuted Jesus, because He not only brake the Sabbath, but also called God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. The Jews, then, were offended when Christ called the Lord of all His Father; and then He made this most mild reply to them, saying: It is written in your Law, I said, Ye are gods, and are all sons of the Most High. If he called them gods unto whom the Word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), say ye of Him Whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? But the people of the Jews, remembering none of these things, make the truth a charge against the truth; and because Christ said what was in fact the truth, they assert that He is worthy of death. Here I will make use of the Prophet's words: How do ye say, We are wise, and the Law of the Lord is with us? For would it not have been right, either first to ascertain by the strictest scrutiny Who Christ was, and whence He came; and if He had been convicted of falsehood, then, very justly, to pass sentence upon Him, or if He spoke the truth, to worship Him? Why, then, did you Jews give up searching and satisfying yourselves by Holy Writ, and betake yourselves to making a mere outcry against Him? and why made you what was in fact the truth, the ground for accusation? You ought, when you said unto Pilate: He made Himself the Son of God, to have charged Him also with the works of Godhead, and to have made His mighty wonder-working power a count in the indictment; you ought to have cried out thereafter, that a man who had been three days dead, rose again, and came back to life at the mere bidding of the Saviour; you ought to have brought forward the only child of the widow, and the daughter of the leader of the synagogue; you ought to have called to mind that Divine saying, spoken unto the son of the widow: Young man, I say unto thee, Arise; and to the damsel: Maiden, Arise. You ought, besides, to have told Pilate, that He gave sight to the blind, and cleansed the lepers of their leprosy; and also, that by a single word of command He calmed the storm of the angry sea, and the onslaught of the raging billows; and whatever else Christ did. All this, however, they bury in the silence of ingratitude, and passing over those miracles whereby Christ was seen to be God, in malice they proceed to basely state the paradox; and, miserable wretches that they were, they cried out to a foreigner, who had no knowledge of the Divine Scripture, and saw that Jesus was a Man: He made Himself the Son of God; though the inspired Scripture declared that the Word of God should visit the world in human form: Behold, the Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call His Name Emmanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us. And what could that which was born of a virgin be but a man, like unto us in bodily appearance and nature? But, besides being Man, He was also truly God.

If you [Arians] will not learn who Christ is from those who know him, learn it at least from those who do not.… Can't you see your fellowship with the … Jews [of Jesus' day] in which your denial of the divine Sonship has involved you! For they have put on record the reason of their condemnation: "And by our law he ought to die because he made himself the Son of God." Isn't this the same charge that you are blasphemously bringing against him, that, while you pronounce him a creature, he calls himself the Son? He confesses himself the Son, and they declare him guilty of death. You too deny that he is the Son of God. What sentence do you pass on him? You have the same repugnance to his claim as had the Jews. You agree with their verdict. I want to know whether you will quarrel about the sentence. Your offense, in denying that he is the Son of God, is exactly the same as theirs, though their guilt is less, for they sinned in ignorance.

"How then when the judge said, 'Take ye him, and judge him according to your law,' did ye reply, 'It is not lawful for us to put any man to death,' while here ye fly to the law? And consider the charge, 'He made himself the Son of God.' Tell me, is this a ground of accusation, that He who performed the deeds of the Son of God should call Himself the Son of God?" What then doth Christ? While they held this dialogue one with the other, He held His peace, fulfilling that saying of the Prophet, that "He openeth not his mouth: in His humiliation His judgment was taken away." (Isa. liii. 7, 8 LXX.)

And they, having been put to shame by this, say: "By our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God." See how wickedness is inconsistent with itself. Previously Pilate said to them: "Take Him yourselves and judge Him according to your law"; they did not agree to this. But now they say that according to our law He ought to die. Before they accused Him of making Himself a King, but now, when that lie has been exposed, they accuse Him of making Himself the Son of God. And what is the crime in this? If He does the works of God, then what prevents Him from being the Son of God? Behold the Divine economy. They handed the Lord over to many tribunals in order to disgrace Him and obscure His glory; but this dishonor turns back upon their own heads, for with the most thorough investigation of the case, His innocence was proven all the more. How many times even Pilate declared that he found nothing in Him worthy of death.

2386 But the Jews repeat Christ's offense: We have a law.... They seemed to understand from Pilate's response that he would not go against Christ because of a charge of claiming a kingdom, although they had thought he would be especially inclined by this to kill him. And since this crime was not enough to put Christ to death, the Jews thought that when Pilate said, Take him yourselves and crucify him, he was asking if they had another crime, a violation of the law, for which he could be condemned and for which they were condemning him. Thus they say, by that law he ought to die. First, they charge Christ with a crime against the law of the Jews; secondly, against the law of the Romans (v 12). In regard to the first, we see the accusation of the Jews against Christ; secondly, the effect of this on Pilate, he was the more afraid.

2387 The crime against the Jewish law that they charged Christ with was that he has made himself the Son of God, and for this he deserved death: "This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath, but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God" (5:18); and again, "We stone you for no good work but for blasphemy; because you, being a man, make yourself God" (10:33). They always said that "he made himself the Son of God," assuming he was not. But this was not against the law, as Christ proved to them before (10:34), by citing the Psalm (82:6): "I say, You are gods." For if other people, who are adopted children, can call themselves children of God without blasphemy, how much more can Christ do this, who is the Son of God by nature. But they regarded him as a liar and blasphemer, each of which deserved death, because they did not understand his eternal generation.

It was not the law that he was afraid of, as he was a stranger: but he was more afraid, lest he should slay the Son of God.

When therefore he had heard. Here is placed thirdly the inquiry. He inquires, therefore, moved by the accusation of the Jews: whence he says: Pilate, when he had heard this saying, was the more afraid, lest, if he released him, he would act against the Law; and if he did not release him, he would crucify the Son of God. A good judge ought not to fear: whence Ecclesiasticus 7: "Do not seek to be made a judge, unless you have strength to break through iniquities."

The malicious design of the Jews had a result they little expected. They wanted to build up an indictment against Christ by saying that he had ventured to sin against the person of God himself. But the weighty character of the accusation itself increased Pilate's caution, and he was more alarmed and more careful concerning Christ than before. He became more particular in his questions: what Jesus was and where he came from. I think he believed that, though Jesus was a man, he might also be the Son of God. This idea and belief of his was not derived from holy Scripture but the mistaken notions of the Greeks. Greek fables call many men demi-gods and sons of gods. The Romans, too, who in such matters were still more superstitious, gave the name of god to the more distinguished of their own monarchs, and set up altars to them, and allotted them shrines and put them on pedestals. Therefore Pilate was more earnest and anxious than before in his inquiry of who Christ was and where he came from.

Then Pilate is alarmed when he hears from them, that He made Himself the Son of God, and dreads lest the assertion may possibly be true, and he should seem to transgress; but these men who had learnt this, both by His deeds and words, did not shudder, but are putting Him to death for the very reasons for which they ought to have worshiped Him.

For Him it behoved to be made a sacrifice on behalf of all Gentiles, who "was led as a sheep for a victim, and, like a lamb voiceless before his shearer, so opened not His mouth" (for He, when Pilate interrogated Him, spake nothing ); for "in humility His judgment was taken away: His nativity, moreover, who shall declare? "Because no one at all of human beings was conscious of the nativity of Christ at His conception, when as the Virgin Mary was found pregnant by the word of God; and because "His life was to be taken from the land.

Pilate, having heard only the one word that He is the Son of God, was afraid. But they saw His divine works, and yet they put Him to death for the very thing for which they ought to have worshipped Him.

2388 Now the Evangelist mentions the effect the accusation of the Jews had on Pilate. The first was that it produced fear: When Pilate heard these words, that is, that Christ made himself the Son of God, he was the more afraid that it might be true and that it would be disastrous to proceed against him without cause.

"When Pilate, therefore, heard that saying, he was the more afraid; and entered again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer." It is found, in comparing the narratives of all the evangelists, that this silence on the part of our Lord Jesus Christ took place more than once, both before the chief priests and before Herod, to whom, as Luke intimates, Pilate had sent Him for a hearing, and before Pilate himself; so that it was not in vain that the prophecy regarding Him had preceded, "As the lamb before its shearer was dumb, so He opened not His mouth," especially on those occasions when He answered not His questioners. For although He frequently replied to questions addressed to Him, yet because of those in regard to which He declined making any reply, the metaphor of the lamb is supplied, in order that in His silence He might be accounted not as guilty, but innocent. When, therefore, He was passing through the process of judgment, wherever He opened not His mouth it was in the character of a lamb that He did so; that is, not as one with an evil conscience who was convicted of his sins, but as one who in His meekness was sacrificed for the sins of others.

(Tr. cxvi. 4) In comparing the accounts of the different Evangelists together, we find that this silence was maintained more than once; viz. before the High Priest, before, Herod, and before Pilate. So that the prophecy of Him, As a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so opened He not His mouth, (Isa. 53:7.) was amply fulfilled. To many indeed of the questions put to Him, He did reply, but where He did not reply, this comparison of the sheep shows us that His was not a silence of guilt, but of innocence; not of self-condemnation, but of compassion, and willingness to suffer for the sins of others.

He entered again into the praetorium and said to Jesus: Whence art thou? He asks about his origin, because they accused him of this: he asks a great question beyond his powers: whence Isaiah 53: "His generation, who shall declare it?" And therefore he does not hear a response: Ecclesiasticus 3: "Seek not the things that are too high for thee, and search not into things above thy strength." Whence he says: But Jesus gave him no answer, so that the word of Isaiah 53 might be fulfilled: "As a lamb before his shearer shall be dumb, and shall not open his mouth." Augustine: "For this reason the similitude of the lamb was given, so that in his silence he might be held not as guilty, but as innocent"; Lamentations 3: "Out of the mouth of the Most High shall proceed neither good nor evil."

It is asked: why did the Lord not respond to Pilate asking: Where are you from? This seems to have been from arrogance. I respond that he did not answer that question because he could not grasp it: hence the Lord said to his disciples above in the sixteenth chapter: I have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. So also here.

On this account he no more asks Him, "What hast thou done?" but, shaken by fear, he begins the enquiry again, saying, "Art thou the Christ?" But He answered not. For he who had heard, "To this end was I born, and for this came I," and, "My Kingdom is not of this world," he, when he ought to have opposed His enemies and delivered Him, did not so, but seconded the fury of the Jews. Then they being in every way silenced, make their cry issue in a political charge, saying, "He that maketh himself a king, speaketh against Caesar." Pilate ought therefore to have accurately enquired, whether He had aimed at sovereignty, and set His hand to expel Caesar from the kingdom. But he makes not an exact enquiry, and therefore Christ answered him nothing, because He knew that he asked all the questions idly. Besides, since His works bare witness to Him, He would not prevail by word, nor compose any defense, showing that He came voluntarily to this condition.

Since he willed to suffer on behalf of the world, he is silent when examined and beaten by Pilate. For if he had spoken, he would not have been crucified from weakness, since there is no weakness in the words that the Word speaks.

The Thunderer stood voiceless The Word, without a word; For if he had raised his voice He would not have been overcome, And, victorious, he would not have been crucified, and Adam would not have been saved: Therefore, in order that he might suffer He who captures the wise Conquered by keeping silent. But when the judge saw that he did not speak out, overcome with desperation, He said: "What am I to do with one who does not speak?" But they answered: "He is guilty of those things about which we ask: Thus, he keeps silent.…" "Death now is a debt I owe," said my Savior "To the lawless people"—as for Pilate, Jesus did not consider the unspeakable brute Worthy of a word

He asks Him not as before – "What have You done?" – but "Who are You?" Then they were accusing Him as a king, so naturally he asked "What have You done?" But now, when they slander that He makes Himself out to be the Son of God, he asks: "Where are You from?" Jesus is silent, for He had already declared to Pilate: "For this I was born," and "My Kingdom is not from here." However, Pilate did not make any use of this and did not stand for the truth, but yielded to the demand of the people. Therefore the Lord, disdaining his questions as being asked in vain, answers nothing.

2389 Secondly, he mentions another effect it produced: doubt and questioning (v 9). First, we have the question Pilate asked; secondly, the silence of Christ; and thirdly, the reproach of Pilate.

2390 In regard to the first he says, he entered the praetorium again, stricken with fear, and said to Jesus, whom he had led back with himself, Where are you from? trying to find out whether Jesus was God, with a divine origin, or a man, with an earthly origin. This could be answered by what was said before, "You are from below, I am from above" (8:23).

2391 Jesus, because he chose to, did not give an answer, so that he might show that he was unwilling to overwhelm by words and to make excuses, since he had come to suffer. At the same time he is for us an example of patience, and fulfilled what is found in Isaiah (53:7): "like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth." It says, "like a sheep," to show that the silence of Jesus was not that of a man convicted of sin and aware of his evil, but the silence of a gentle person being sacrificed for the sins of others.

Pilate said to him: Speakest thou not to me? As if to say: you err in despising my question, when you ought rather to seek my goodwill, as one placed in my hands: and this he adds: Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and I have power to release thee? and therefore both to be feared and to be entreated. Whence he marveled at this, that Christ in such great necessity did not seek his favor: Matthew 27: "And he answered him not a word, so that the governor wondered exceedingly." And because Pilate boasted, Christ prudently responded in a way that humbled his pride, teaching him "not to be high-minded."

Pilate thought this silence of Jesus was the silence of a madman. Therefore, he stretches over him, as it were, the wand of his official power and thought that he could, through fear, induce Jesus to return a fruitless answer against his will. For he says that nothing could hinder his inclining whichever way he chose, either to punish him or to take compassion on him. He [implies] that there was nothing that could make him give a verdict against his will since it was with him alone that the fate of the accused rested. He rebukes Jesus, therefore, as though he felt himself insulted by untimely silence.

When He was silent, Pilate saith, "Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee?" Seest thou how he condemned himself beforehand; for, "if the whole rests with thee, why dost not thou let Him go, when thou hast found no fault in Him?" When then Pilate had uttered the sentence against himself, then He saith, "He that delivered Me unto thee hath the greater sin." Showing that he also was guilty of sin. Then, to pull down his pride and arrogance, He saith, "Thou wouldst have no power except it were given thee."

Showing that this did not come to pass merely in the common order of events, but that it was accomplished mystically. Then lest, when thou hearest, "Except it were given thee," thou shouldest deem that Pilate was exempt from all blame, on this account therefore He said, "Therefore he that delivered Me unto thee hath the greater sin." "And yet if it was given, neither he nor they were liable to any charge." "Thou objectest idly; for the 'given' in this place means what is 'allowed'; as though He had said, 'He hath permitted these things to be, yet not for that are ye clear of the wickedness.'" He awed Pilate by the words, and proffered a clear defense. On which account that person sought to release Him.

It turns out that Pilate has no firmness whatsoever, but any chance danger can shake him. He feared the Jews; he also trembled before Jesus, as the Son of God. Let us see, then, how he condemns himself by his own words: "I have power to crucify You and I have power to release You." If everything depended on you, why then did you not release Him whom you found innocent?

2392 Then the Evangelist shows how Pilate reproached him for his silence (v 10): first, we see Pilate boasting of his power; secondly, we have what Christ said about this power.

2393 Pilate was displeased that Jesus did not answer him, and said, You will not speak to me? He has condemned himself, for if this entire matter lay in his power, why does he not release Jesus since he has found him without crime? "I will condemn you out of your own mouth" (Lk 19:22); "Because you have authority among men, mortal though you are, you do what you please" (2 Mac 7:16).

This may very well agree with what Luke records in connection with the said accusation brought by the Jews. For after the words, "We found this fellow perverting our nation," he has added the clause, "And forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ a king." This will also offer a solution for the difficulty previously referred to, namely, the occasion which might seem to be given for supposing John to have indicated that no specific charge was laid by the Jews against the Lord, when they answered and said unto him, "If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee."

"Hence Pilate sought to release Him." What is to be understood by the word here used, "hence," as if he had not been seeking to do so before? Read what precedes, and thou wilt find that he had already for some time been seeking to release Jesus. By the original word, therefore, we are to understand, on this account, that is, for this reason, that he might not contract sin by slaying an innocent man who had been delivered into his hands, even though his sin would be less than that of the Jews, who delivered Him to him to be put to death. "From thence," therefore, that is, for this reason, that he might not commit such a sin, "he sought" not now for the first time, but from the beginning, "to release Him."

"But the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king, speaketh against Caesar." They thought to inspire Pilate with greater fear by terrifying him about Caesar, in order that he might put Christ to death, than formerly when they said, "We have the law, and by the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God." It was not their law, indeed, that impelled him through fear to the deed of murder, but rather it was his fear of the Son of God that held him back from the crime. But now he could not set Caesar, who was the author of his own power, at nought, in the same way as the law of another nation.

(Tr. cxvi) The Jews thought they could alarm Pilate more by the mention of Caesar, than by telling him of their law, as they had done above; We have a law, and by that law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God. So it follows, But the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this Man go, thou art not Caesar's friend; whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.

(Tr. cxvi) Pilate had sought from the first to release: so we must understand, from thence, to mean from this cause, i. e. lest he should incur guilt by putting to death an innocent person.

And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him. Understanding that his power was established under the power of another, he was unwilling to condemn an innocent man: therefore he wished to release him.

But the Jews cried out. Here the fourth point is set forth, namely the threatening of the Jews: and because they could not condemn Christ through accusation, they turned to clamorous threatening: whence they charge Pilate, if he should release him, with disloyalty against Caesar; therefore he says: But the Jews cried out, against Pilate, namely, because he wished to release Christ, saying: If you release this man, you are not a friend of Caesar, indeed a traitor: because you release an enemy of Caesar. And they prove this: For everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar; because at that time Caesar was the monarch, whence it belonged to him to grant the power of reigning; whoever therefore established himself as king was opposing Caesar. And this threatening drew Pilate back from the truth of judgment in freeing him, because he feared being accused before Caesar: Proverbs 29: "He who fears man will quickly fall." On account of this the Lord said to his disciples, Matthew 10: "Do not fear those who kill the body."

The exclamation of the Jews afflicts Pilate with panic, and sharpens the keenness of his caution, and makes him pause before putting Him to death. For they shouted out, that that very prisoner had made Himself the Son of God, Whom Pilate had been most anxious to release from all danger, and to acquit of every false accusation, having this fear at heart. The Israelites saw this, and returned to their original falsehood, saying, that Jesus had courted the people, and transgressed against Caesar's power, and, so far as His power went, had waged war against the rule of Rome, for He had made Himself a king. See how laborious and passionate was the attempt of His accusers against Him! For, first of all, they cried out with one accord, miserable wretches that they were, and asserted that He had ventured to assail Caesar's power. But when they did not meet with much success, Christ declaring that His Kingdom was not an earthly kingdom, they alleged, even unto Pilate, who sat in a Roman tribunal, His offence against God Himself, saying: He made Himself the Son of God. For the villains thought that they could thereby spur Pilate to heedless wrath, and lend him courage to doom the Saviour to death, making His action a mark of His piety towards God; but when their malicious attempt proved unavailing, they once more recurred to the charge they had presumed to make at first, declaring that He had ventured to assail the rule of Caesar, and violently accusing the judge of taking up arms against Caesar's majesty, if he did not consent to pass the sentence of fitting condemnation upon Him Who, as they alleged, had spoken against Caesar, by daring to take upon Himself, in any shape, the title of King; though Caesar did not claim an empire in the heavens, such as that of which Christ was, indeed, the Lord, but an earthly and inferior empire, which itself had its root in the power of Christ. For through Him kings reign, according to the Scripture, and monarchs rule over the earth. Therefore these most impious men bridled not their tongues, but, in their excessive enmity to God, attacked the glory of the Saviour. Them did the blessed Prophet Isaiah justly rebuke, saying: But draw near hither, ye sons of the sorceress, the seed of the adulterer and the whore. Against Whom do ye sport yourselves? against Whom make ye a wide mouth, and draw out the tongue? Are ye not children of perdition, a lawless seed? For it was not against any mere man that they made their outcry, and spoke out with unbridled tongues, and practised every sort of calumny; but against their own Lord Himself, Who ruleth over all with the Father. Therefore rightly did they become, and are in truth, children of perdition, and a lawless seed.

But they again cried out, saying, "If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend." For when they profited nothing by bringing charges drawn from their own law, they wickedly betook themselves to external laws, saying, "Every one that maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar."

And where hath this Man appeared as a tyrant? Whence can ye prove it? By the purple robe? By the diadem? By the dress? By the soldiers? Did not He ever walk unattended, save by His twelve disciples, following in every point a humble mode of living, both as to food, and clothing, and habitation?

"Crucify!" the murderer heard the impious crying out, And their will he fulfilled, Handing over, without being compelled to, The One whom he planned to have crucified. For having heard that he would be an enemy of Caesar, The coward was frightened. He would rather be the enemy of the Almighty Than the enemy of Caesar, Preferring his life over the Life. Therefore he will certainly not escape blame, Since, because of the lawless, He killed the Living One.

Accordingly, all the synagogue of Israel did slay Him, saying to Pilate, when he was desirous to dismiss Him, "His blood be upon us, and upon our children; " and, "If thou dismiss him, thou art not a friend of Caesar; " in order that all things might be fulfilled which had been written of Him.

And "the clouds were commanded not to rain a shower upon the vineyard of Sorek," -the clouds being celestial benefits, which were commanded not to be forthcoming to the house of Israel; for it "had borne thorns"-whereof that house of Israel had wrought a crown for Christ-and not "righteousness, but a clamour,"-the clamour whereby it had extorted His surrender to the cross. And thus, the former gifts of grace being withdrawn, "the law and the prophets were until John," and the fishpool of Bethsaida until the advent of Christ: thereafter it ceased curatively to remove from Israel infirmities of health; since, as the result of their perseverance in their frenzy, the name of the Lord was through them blasphemed, as it is written: "On your account the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles: " for it is from them that the infamy (attached to that name) began, and (was propagated during) the interval from Tiberius to Vespasian.

So, when the Lord frightened Pilate with these words, from that time on he sought all the more to release Him. The Jews, since they had been convicted of slander in claiming that He made Himself a king, and had not succeeded either in their appeal to their own law (for from that point Pilate feared all the more and wished to release Him, so as not to provoke God), again resort to foreign laws and frighten Pilate, as one who was timid. For when they saw that he reverently feared lest by condemning Jesus, the Son of God, he might sin, they instill in him fear of Caesar, and having accused the Lord of seizing royal power, they threaten Pilate that he would offend Caesar if he released one who was rising up against him. And where was He caught seizing royal power? How will you prove this? By a purple robe? A diadem? Soldiers? But is not everything about Him poor? Both His clothing, and His food, and His home? He does not even have a home.

2397 The effect of all this was that upon this Pilate sought to release him. As we saw before, Pilate tried to release Christ from the very beginning. Thus the upon this indicates he now sought it for another reason, that is, to escape from sinning. Or, he had tried to release him before, but upon this, from now on, he was fully and firmly determined to release him.

2398 Above, the Jews accused Christ of a crime against their law, but Pilate seemed to consider this a slight matter since he himself was not subject to this law. So they now accuse Christ of a crime against the Roman Law, hoping this would press Pilate into taking his life. First, they state the danger which is hanging over Pilate if he releases Christ; secondly, they give the reason for this danger (v 12).

2399 He says that after Pilate tried to release Christ, the Jews cried out, If you release this man, who is making himself king, you are not Caesar's friend, that is, you will lose his friendship. It frequently happens that we estimate others based on the way that we ourselves are. And since it was written of these Jews that "They loved the praise of men more than the praise of God" (12:43), they thought that Pilate would prefer the friendship of Caesar to the friendship of justice ‑ even though the opposite is commanded: "It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in princes" (Ps 118:9). The Philosopher says that truth is to be preferred to friendship.

2400 They add the reason for the danger which threatened Pilate when they say, every one who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar, for it is the nature of earthly power that one power cannot endure the presence of another power. And so Caesar did not allow another to rule: "Do not seek from men the highest office, nor the seat of honor from the king" [Sir 7:4].

(Tr. cxvi) Pilate was before afraid not of violating their law by sparing Him, but of killing the Son of God, in killing Him. But he could not treat his master Caesar with the same contempt with which he treated the law of a foreign nation: When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.

Lithostraton, i. e. laid with stone; the word signifies pavement. It was an elevated place.

Pilate therefore, when he had heard. The perversity of the Jews has been shown in their malice of resisting the judgment of truth: here their perversity is shown in extorting a judgment of falsehood concerning the condemnation of Christ.

The place is noted when he says: Pilate therefore, when he had heard these words. In which it is noted that he had already fallen from just resolve through fear of Caesar, as if to say: terrified by fear: he brought Jesus outside, that is, to a public place: therefore outside, so that he might be condemned in the sight of all. And he sat on the judgment seat in the place which is called Lithostrotos. Here the place is described specifically: on the judgment seat, that is, in the judicial seat. For the tribunal belongs to judges, the throne to kings, but the chair to teachers. Lithos, as Victor says, is interpreted as judgment: stratos from sterno means a pavement laid with various stones, in which kind of place the consistory was, where judgment was rendered. And this place in Hebrew is Gabbatha, that is, elevation, because judges are accustomed to sit in an elevated place. Or Gabbatha is interpreted as ornamentation or polishing and signifies the same as Lithostrotos, that is, the judicial place, painted or polished.

The tribunal is the seat of the judge, as the throne is the seat of the king, and the chair the seat of the doctor.

On the day of the preparation, then, at the third hour, He received the sentence from Pilate, the Father permitting that to happen; at the sixth hour He was crucified; at the ninth hour He gave up the ghost; and before sunset He was buried. During the Sabbath He continued under the earth in the tomb in which Joseph of Arimathaea had laid Him. At the dawning of the Lord's day He arose from the dead, according to what was spoken by Himself, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of man also be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." The day of the preparation, then, comprises the passion; the Sabbath embraces the burial; the Lord's Day contains the resurrection.

But O what shamelessness and ill-time cowardice! For Pilate, deeming that he should now incur some danger were he to overlook these words, comes forth as though to enquire into the matter, (for the "sitting down" showed this,) but without making any enquiry, he gave Him up to them, thinking to shame them. For to prove that he did it for this purpose, hear what he saith.

After his public ministry, Jesus did not eat of the lamb, but he himself suffered as the true Lamb in the Paschal feast, as John, the divine and Evangelist teaches us in the Gospel written by him. "… And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the third hour," as the correct books render it and the copy itself that was written by the hand of the Evangelist, which by divine grace has been preserved in the most holy church of Ephesus and is there adored by the faithful.… On that day, therefore, on which the Jews were about to eat the Passover in the evening, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ was crucified. He was made the victim to those who were about to partake by faith of the mystery concerning him. This is what is written by the blessed Paul, "For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us." It is not the case, as some who, carried along by ignorance, confidently affirm that after he had eaten the Passover, he was betrayed. We neither learn this from the holy Evangelists, nor has any of the blessed apostles handed it down to us. At the time, therefore, in which our Lord and God Jesus Christ suffered for us, according to the flesh, he did not eat of the legal Passover. Rather, as I have said, he himself, as the true Lamb, was sacrificed for us in the feast of the typical Passover on the day of the preparation, the fourteenth of the first lunar month. The typical Passover, therefore, then ceased, the true Passover being present: "For Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us," as was said earlier. And he was that chosen vessel, as the apostle Paul teaches.

It was the day of preparation, that is, the sixth holy day of the week, and it was about the sixth hour. For those who think that the words of the Evangelists are in contradiction, as some say at the third hour, others at about the sixth, it is necessary that we say something in this regard. Matthew and Luke, like John, said that there was darkness at about the sixth hour. Indeed, Pilate went out immediately and sat at the tribunal and handed Jesus over to be crucified. And after he was fixed to the cross, the darkness began to spread, as the Evangelists said. There are any number of reasons why it is not surprising that Mark said that it was the third hour. He said this, first of all, because he was not present. Second, he was not a disciple of our Lord but learned these facts from Peter or some other apostle. And finally, everyone has different opinions about times and hours, and the doubt about the hours does not affect in any way the reported facts. In addition, we especially must notice that Mark did not say that it was the third hour about any specific and well-known fact. But by relating in a simple and general way the things that happened, he rightly said that they took place at the third hour and so designated the entire interval of time in which these facts happened. Then he added, "They crucified him." Therefore the sentence, "It was nine in the morning" refers to the account of all those events, which happened in the meantime. "They crucified him" is added concerning the previous events.

But how little courage there was in Pilate, when he considered it dangerous for himself to leave such an accusation without investigation! He goes out, as if with the intention of investigating the matter, for this is what the words "sat down on the judgment seat" mean; meanwhile, having made no investigation, he hands Him over, thinking thereby to win them over.

2401 In treating the condemnation of Christ, the Evangelist mentions the place, secondly the time (v 14), and thirdly the manner of the condemnation (v 14b).

2402 In regard to the first, the Evangelist indicates the motive of Pilate when he says, When Pilate heard these words he grew more fearful, for it was not as easy for him to ignore Caesar, the source of his power, as it was to disdain the laws of a foreign people. So he says, he brought Jesus out. But there was no reason for Pilate to fear, because Jesus was not setting himself against Caesar. Christ had no purple, no scepter, no diadem, no chariots, no soldiers to indicate that he was seizing a kingdom. Rather, Christ always sat alone with his disciples, plain in food, in clothing and in dwelling. Yet as we read in Proverbs (28:1), "The wicked flee when no one pursues." "They trembled in fear when there was no fear" [Ps 53:5]; "Be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks" (Ez 2:6).

2403 Then he mentions the place saying, and sat down on the tribunal. A tribunal is the seat of a judge, like the throne is the seat of a king, and the professor's chair is the seat of a master: "A king who sits on the throne of judgment winnows all evil with his eyes" (Prv 20:8). It was called a tribunal because among the Romans it was the tribunes (named from the tribes they headed) who adjudicated in certain cases. This tribunal was at a place called Lithostrotos, that is, a pavement of stones. "Lithos" in Greek means the same as "stone," and the place where Pilate sat in his judgment seat had been paved with stones. In Hebrew this place was called Gabbatha, that is, a mound formed from stones.

Parasceve, i. e. preparation. This was a name for the sixth day, the day before the Sabbath, on which they prepared what was necessary for the Sabbath; as we read, On the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread. (Exod. 16:22) As man was made on the sixth day, and God rested on the seventh; so Christ suffered on the sixth day, and rested in the grave on the seventh. And it was about the sixth hour.

On Pilate's judgment and condemnation before the tribunal, they took the Lord Jesus Christ, about the sixth hour, and led Him away. "And He, bearing His cross, went forth into the place that is called Calvary, but in Hebrew, Golgotha; where they crucified Him." What else, then, is the meaning of the evangelist Mark saying, "And it was the third hour, and they crucified Him," but this, that the Lord was crucified at the third hour by the tongues of the Jews, at the sixth hour by the hands of the soldiers? That we may understand that the fifth hour was now completed, and there was some beginning made of the sixth, when Pilate took his seat before the tribunal, which is expressed by John as "about the sixth hour;" and when He was led forth, and nailed to the tree with the two robbers, and the events recorded were enacted beside His cross, the completion of the sixth hour was fully reached, being the hour from which, on to the ninth, the sun was obscured, and the darkness took place, we have it jointly attested on the authority of the three evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke. But as the Jews attempted to transfer the crime of slaying Christ from themselves to the Romans, that is to say, to Pilate and his soldiers, therefore Mark suppresses the hour at which Christ was crucified by the soldiers, and which then began to enter upon the sixth, and remembers rather to give an express place to the third hour, at which they are understood to have cried out before Pilate, "Crucify, crucify him," that it not only may be seen that the former crucified Jesus, namely, the soldiers who hung Him on the tree at the sixth hour, but the Jews also, who at the third hour cried out to have Him crucified.

There is also another solution of this question, that we should not here understand the sixth hour of the day, because John says not, And it was about the sixth hour of the day, or about the sixth hour, but says, "And it was the parasceve of the passover, about the sixth hour." And parasceve is in Latin praeparatio (preparation); but the Jews are fonder of using the Greek words in observances of this sort, even those of them who speak Latin rather than Greek. It was therefore the preparation of the passover. But "our passover, Christ," as the apostle says, "has been sacrificed;" and if we reckon the preparation of this passover from the ninth hour of the night (for then the chief priests seem to have given their verdict for the sacrifice of the Lord, when they said, "He is guilty of death," and when the hearing of His case was still proceeding in the high priest's house: whence there is a kind of harmony in understanding that therewith began the preparation of the true passover, whose shadow was the passover of the Jews, that is, of the sacrificing of Christ, when the priests gave their sentence that He was to be sacrificed), certainly from that hour of the night, which is conjectured to have been then the ninth, on to the third hour of the day, when the evangelist Mark testifies that Christ was crucified, there are six hours, three of the night, and three of the day.

(Tract. cxvii) Why then doth Mark say, And it was the third hour, and they crucified Him? (Mark 15:25) Because on the third hour our Lord was crucified by the tongues of the Jews, on the sixth by the hands of the soldiers. So that we must understand that the fifth hour was passed, and the sixth began, when Pilate sat down on the judgment seat, (about the sixth hour, John says,) and that the crucifixion, and all that took place in connection with it, filled up the rest of the hour, from which time up to the ninth hour there was darkness, according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke. But since the Jews tried to transfer the guilt of putting Christ to death from themselves to the Romans, i. e. to Pilate and his soldiers, Mark, omitting to mention the hour at which He was crucified by the soldiers, has expressly recorded the third hour; in order that it might be evident that not only the soldiers who crucified Jesus on the sixth hour, but the Jews who cried out for His death at the third, were His crucifiers. There is another way of solving this difficulty, viz. that the sixth hour here does not mean the sixth hour of the day; as John does not say, It was about the sixth hour of the day, but, It was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour. Parasceve means in Latin, praeparatio. For Christ our passover, as saith the Apostle, is sacrificed for us. The preparation for which passover, counting from the ninth hour of the night, which seems to have been the hour at which the chief priests pronounced upon our Lord's sacrifice, saying, He is guilty of death, between it and the third hour of the day, when He was crucified, according to Mark, is an interval of six hours, three of the night and three of the day.

And it was the preparation of the Passover.

Now it was the preparation. Behold, the time is added, because it was the sixth day of the week, which is called the preparation of the Passover, that is, the preparation of the Passover, because the preparation was made on Friday for the Sabbath day, as is said in Exodus 16, that on that day they gathered for two days. About the sixth hour. Here the specific time is touched upon, and he says about, because it is difficult to determine the exact hour of time.

And he says to the Jews. Here is noted the cause of Christ's condemnation, and this was not his fault, but the hardness of perversity in the Jews and the denial of truth: the hardness of perversity in this, that they seek him to be condemned by a most cruel death: whence he says: Behold, your king, as if Pilate were saying: you have nothing else to object against him.

It is asked concerning what he says, that Christ was condemned at about the sixth hour: because in Mark 15 it is said: And it was about the third hour of the day, and they crucified him. Likewise, in Matthew twenty-seven it is said that darkness was made from the sixth hour until the ninth hour: therefore before the sixth hour he was judged. Augustine responds: "At the third hour the Lord was crucified by the tongues of the Jews, at the sixth hour by the hands of the soldiers: so that we may understand that the fifth hour had passed, and something of the sixth had begun, when Pilate sat on the judgment seat: and while he was being led away, and the things narrated as having been done were being carried out, the sixth hour was completed, from which hour until the ninth the sun was darkened." Victor responds differently, that the Lord was crucified at the middle hour between the third and the sixth: and because the extremes are named, and the middle often receives the name of the extremes, therefore Mark says the third hour, but John the sixth, not simply, but with a qualification: about the sixth.

The Evangelist, when he thus speaks, throws the whole burden, as it were, of the charge of shedding Christ's blood upon the Jews. For he now clearly says, that Pilate was well-nigh overcome against his will by their opposition, so that he put away the thought of justice, and paid little heed to the consequence; and, therefore, he was dragged down to do the will of Christ's murderers, though he had often expressly told them, that Jesus had been found guilty of no fault at all, and it is this which will make Him subject to the worst of penalties. For, by preferring the pleasure of a mob to honouring the Just, and giving over a guiltless Man to the frenzy of the Jews, he will be convicted out of his own mouth of impiety. He ascends, therefore, to his usual judgment-seat, as about to pronounce sentence of death against Christ. The inspired Evangelist is induced to signify to our profit the day and hour, because of the resurrection itself, and His three days' sojourn among the departed, that the truth of our Lord's saying to the Jews might appear: For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so also shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The Roman ruler on his judgment-seat, pointing to Jesus, says: Behold your King! Either he was jesting with the multitude, and was granting, with a scornful smile, the innocent blood to those who thirsted for it without a cause, or, perhaps, he was casting in the teeth of the savage Jews the reproach that they endured to see in such evil plight Him Whom they themselves named and asserted to be King of Israel.

At that time, then, the Saviour appeared and showed His own body to the world, (born) of the Virgin, who was the "ark overlaid with pure gold," with the Word within and the Holy Spirit without; so that the truth is demonstrated, and the "ark" made manifest. From the birth of Christ, then, we must reckon the years that remain to make up the 6000, and thus the end shall be. And that the Saviour appeared in the world, bearing the imperishable ark, His own body, at a time which was the fifth and half, John declares: "Now it was the sixth hour," he says, intimating by that, one-half of the day. But a day with the Lord is 10000 years; and the half of that, therefore, is 500 years. For it was not meet that He should appear earlier, for the burden of the law still endured, nor yet when the sixth day was fulfilled (for the baptism is changed), but on the fifth and half, in order that in the remaining half time the gospel might be preached to the whole world, and that when the sixth day was completed He might end the present life.

(Hom. lxxxiv) Pilate, despairing of moving them, did not examine Him, as he intended, but delivered Him up. And he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!

The Evangelist Mark says that when Christ was crucified, "it was the third hour" (Mark 15:25), while John says that it was the "sixth" hour. How can this be? Some think to resolve this by saying that there is a scribal error. And that this could have happened, and that in John as well the third hour was written, and not the sixth as it now reads, is evident from the following. Three evangelists — Matthew, Mark, and Luke — agree in saying that from the sixth hour darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour. Clearly, our Lord was crucified before the sixth hour, before the onset of the darkness, namely around the third hour, as Mark noted, and likewise John, although the error of scribes changed the gamma into the sign of the episemon. Thus they resolve this disagreement. Others, however, say that Mark clearly and indisputably indicated the hour of the sentence regarding the crucifixion of the Lord. For it is said that judges crucified and executed from the time at which they pronounced the sentence, because in words the punishment and death received its force. Therefore Mark says that He was crucified at the third hour, the hour in which Pilate pronounced the sentence. And since Mark notes the time of the sentence, John recorded the hour at which the Lord was crucified. Moreover, consider how much was accomplished between Pilate's sentence of crucifixion and the hour at which the Lord ascended the cross. Having released Barabbas, he scourged Jesus and definitively handed Him over to crucifixion; for the release of Barabbas was the condemnation of the Lord. The soldiers mock Him. And consider how much time would have been spent on the prolonged mockery. Pilate brought Him out, conversed with the Jews; he goes back in again and judges Jesus; he comes out again and talks with the Jews. All of this could have occupied the time from the third hour to the sixth. Therefore John, having set forth these things with precision, as one who followed everything closely, mentions the sixth hour, when Pilate handed Him over completely "to be crucified," no longer conversing with the Jews nor judging Jesus, but having pronounced the final decision concerning Him. If someone should ask why, having already pronounced the sentence of crucifixion around the third hour, he again wished to release Him — first, let such a person know that he pronounced the sentence under compulsion from the crowd; then he was troubled by his wife's dream, for she had warned him: "Have nothing to do with that Righteous Man" (Matt. 27:19). With all this, notice how John expressed it: "It was about the sixth hour." He did not say affirmatively "it was six o'clock," but as if hesitantly and without certainty — "about the sixth hour." Therefore it should be of no importance to us that the Evangelists apparently do not perfectly agree with one another, even if we were to grant this disagreement. For consider: did they not all say that Jesus was crucified? And that concerning the hour one says it was the third, and another the sixth — does this in any way harm the truth? But it has been quite sufficiently demonstrated that there is not even a disagreement at all. We have said many times that Pilate is more weak and fearful than malicious. And now, look: he gives the matter the appearance of investigation and trial, but in everything acts weakly. "Behold," he says, "your King": he neither condemns Jesus nor directly exposes the Jews, but as if covertly reproaches them for their slander. "Behold," he says, "what kind of man you are accusing of seeking kingship over you—a poor man who does not even think of seeking this. The accusation is false. For what does He have that is characteristic of a usurper of power? Soldiers? Wealth? Noble birth? 'Behold your King.' What benefit is it to you if you kill Him, a Man who cannot cause the slightest harm?" So speaks Pilate, but without persistence and firmness, and without fighting for the truth.

Some suppose it to be a fault of the transcriber, who for the letter y, three, puts, six.

As if to say, See the kind of Man whom ye suspect of aspiring to the throne, a humble person, who cannot have any such design.

2404 The time of the condemnation is given when he says, Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. Among the Jews the Sabbath was in some respects more solemn than any other feast, insofar as out of reverence for that day no food was prepared on the Sabbath; it was prepared on the preceding Friday. Thus this Friday was called the day of Preparation of the Passover. This practice had its origin when the Jews in the desert were forbidden to gather manna on the Sabbath, but were directed to gather a double supply the day before (Ex 16:24). In this matter they yielded to no feast. Accordingly, although the present Friday was a solemn feast for them, they still prepared the Sabbath food on that day.

2405 He adds, it was about the sixth hour. This does not agree with Mark (15:25), who says, "And it was the third hour, when they crucified him." It is clear that Christ was before the tribunal before he was crucified.

According to Augustine, there are two explanations for this. The first, and better, is that Christ was crucified two times: once by the tongues and words of the shouting Jews, "Crucify him, crucify him" (v 6), and the second time by the hands of the soldiers who nailed him to the cross. Now the Jews wanted to blame the crucifixion on the Gentiles. And so Mark, who wrote his gospel for the Gentiles, blamed it on the Jews, saying that Christ was crucified by the Jews when at the third hour they shouted, "Crucify him, crucify him." It is John who follows the real time and he says, it was about the sixth hour. For when Christ was on the cross it was at the end of the fifth hour and at the beginning of the sixth, when darkness came and lasted three hours, that is, until the ninth hour. He says, about the sixth hour because the sixth hour had not yet begun.

The second explanation is that the preparation of the Passover was mentioned, and our Passover, Christ, was about to be immolated. Thus the preparation of the Passover is the preparation for the immolation of Christ. This preparation began at the ninth hour of the night, when the Jews shouted, to the captured Christ, "He deserves death" (Mt 26:66). If to the three remaining hours of the night we add the three hours of the day, when Christ was crucified, we can see that he was crucified at the sixth hour of the preparation, although this was the third hour of the day, as Mark says. And it was appropriate that he was crucified at the sixth hour because by his cross he restored human nature which was created on the sixth day.

2406 Now the Evangelist tells us about the manner and order of the condemnation (v 14). Pilate still wanted to free Christ, although his fear of Caesar weighed upon him. First we see Pilate's attempt to free Christ; secondly, he consents to have him crucified. (v 16). Concerning the first, we see the attempt of Pilate; and then the malice of the Jews (v 15b).

2407 The Evangelist says that after Pilate sat down on the judgment seat, he said to the Jews, in exasperation, Here is your King! It was like saying: I am astonished that you fear to have this man, so humiliated and destitute, as your king. For only the wealthy and strong aspire to the throne, and this man is neither. As the Psalm [88:15] said: "I am poor and in labor from my youth."

...the judge, who was a stranger, "washed his hands, and said, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. But Israel cried out, His blood be on us, and on our children." And when Pilate said, "Shall I crucify your king? they cried out, We have no king but Caesar: crucify Him, crucify Him; for every, one that maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar." And, "If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend." And Pilate the governor and Herod the king commanded Him to be crucified...

Because, indeed, they drew servitude upon themselves voluntarily, when they said, "We have no king but Caesar;" and, "If we do not slay Christ, all men will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and will take away both our place and nation." And so they prophesied unwittingly. For accordingly the nations believed on Him, and they themselves were deprived by the Romans of their power, and of their legal worship; and they have been forbidden to slay whom they please, and to sacrifice when they will.

As yet, however, the evangelist proceeds to say: "But when Pilate heard these sayings, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down before the tribunal, in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour." When Pilate, therefore, had sat down before the tribunal, "he saith unto the Jews, Behold your king! But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate said unto them, Shall I crucify your king?" As yet he tries to overcome the terror with which they had inspired him about Caesar, by seeking to break them from their purpose on the ground of the ignominy it brought on themselves, with the words, "Shall I crucify your king?" when he failed to soften them on the ground of the ignominy done to Christ; but by and by he is overcome by fear.

For "the chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he Him therefore unto them to be crucified." For he would have every appearance of acting against Caesar if, on their declaration that they had no king but Caesar, he were wishing to impose on them another king by releasing without punishment one whom for these very attempts they had delivered unto him to be put to death. "Therefore he delivered Him unto them to be crucified." But was it, then, anything different that he had previously desired when he said, "Take ye him, and crucify him;" or even earlier still, "Take ye him, and judge him according to your law?" And why did they show so great reluctance, when they said, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death," and were in every way urgent to have Him slain not by themselves, but by the governor, and therefore refused to receive Him for the purpose of putting Him to death, if now for the same purpose they actually do receive Him? Or if such be not the case, why was it said, "Then delivered he Him therefore unto them to be crucified?" Or is it of any importance? Plainly it is. For it was not said, "Then delivered he Him therefore unto them" that they might crucify Him, but "that He might be crucified," that is, that He might be crucified by the judicial sentence and power of the governor. But it is for this reason that the evangelist has said that He was delivered to them, that he might show that they were implicated in the crime from which they tried to hold themselves aloof; for Pilate would have done no such thing, save to implement what he perceived to be their fixed desire.

(Tr. cxvi. 8) Pilate still tries to overcome their apprehensions on Caesar's account; Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? He tries to shame them into doing what he had not been able to soften them into by putting Christ to shame. The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.

But they cried out: Away, away, crucify him. The doubling signifies the intensity of desire for Christ's death: Jeremiah twenty-six, "The priests and prophets spoke to the princes and to all the people, saying: The judgment of death is upon this man." And because the hardness of perversity would not suffice unless the denial of truth were added, therefore there follows Pilate's inquiry: Shall I crucify your king? as if by this word noting to them their perverse will in this, that they were seeking their own disgrace. But the reproach of a king redounds upon the people, and therefore, so that they might seem to flee reproach, they deny the truth: whence: The chief priests answered, saying: We have no king but Caesar; and thus this man is not our king, nor is his disgrace ours.

The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.

Hereupon the well-beloved Israel spurned his God, and started aside from his allegiance, and, as Moses said, abandoned the God that was his Father, and remembered not the Lord his helper. For see how he turned his eyes upon an harlot, according to the Scripture, refused to be ashamed, disowned his own glory, and denied his Lord. Of this very charge God accused Israel of old, speaking by the mouth of Jeremiah: For pass over the isles of Chittim, and send unto Kedar, and see whether the nations change their gods, who are yet no gods; but My people have changed their glory. And again: The heavens were astonished thereat, and were horribly afraid, saith the Lord; for My people have committed two evils: they have forsaken Me the fountain of living waters, and have hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that hold no water. For while other nations throughout the whole world clung fast to the deceitfulness of their idols, and steadfastly adhered to the gods whom they so deemed, and did not readily undergo a change of faith, nor easily alter their form of worship, the Israelites started aside, and joined themselves to the empire of Caesar, and cast off the rule of God. Therefore, very justly, were they given over into Caesar's hands, and, having at first welcomed his rule, afterwards brought themselves to grievous ruin, and underwent expulsion from their country, and the sufferings of war, and those irremediable calamities that befell them.

Observe, too, here the minuteness of the writer. For he does not say that the people started the impious cry, but rather their rulers. For he says: the chief priests cried out, everywhere pointing out, that it was through their submissively following their leaders that the multitude was carried down the precipice, and fell into the abyss of perdition. The chief priests incur the penalty, not merely as losing their own souls, but also as having been leaders and responsible guides of the people subject unto them, in the fatal shedding of blood; just as also the prophet rebuked them, saying: Because ye have been a snare unto the watch-tower, and as a net stretched out upon Tabor, which they who catch the prey have spread. The Prophet here means by the watch-tower the multitude, who were subject unto them, who were arrayed, as it were, to observe the conduct of their rulers, and to conform their own to it. And, therefore, the leading men of the people are called watchmen in Holy Writ. The chief priests themselves, then, were a snare and a net unto the watch-tower; for they both started this denial, and also induced all the rest to cry: We have no king but Caesar. These miserable men presumed so to say, though God the Father, by the mouth of the Prophet, predicted the coming of the Saviour, and cried out: Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: He is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass. These men, who had once brought Jesus into Jerusalem riding upon an ass, and honoured Him as a God with blind praises, with one accord, for they cried: Blessed is He that cometh in the Name of the Lord! now make an outcry against Him, accusing Him only of attacking the Roman rule, and shaking off, as it were, the yoke of the Kingdom of God from their necks. For this was the plain meaning of the cry: We have no king but Caesar. But we shall find that then, too, it was the people that raised the shout for the Saviour Christ, and that it was the chief priests who presumed in their madness to make this exclamation, just as the others had proceeded from them.

They reiterate their old cry with the same fury, and desisted not from their lust for blood, and were not softened at all by the insults He had endured, nor inclined to clemency by the outrages inflicted upon Him; but were rather goaded to a greater pitch of fury, and intreat that He Who had raised the dead in their midst, and shown Himself the worker of such marvels, should be crucified; at which Pilate was sore amazed, seeing that they declared with such vehemence, that He, Who had acquired such eminence among them as to be deemed the Son of God, and King, was not merely worthy of death, but that He deserved so cruel a fate, for crucifixion is the worst of deaths. The judge, therefore, makes their outcry a charge and reproach against them, that they should be desirous that He should be crucified, Who had excited so great admiration by deeds which were so pre-eminent as to transcend anything on earth. For what is there that is equal to what does not fall short of the Son of God, and King?

If any one, again, will look into Jacob's actions, he shall find them not destitute of meaning, but full of import with regard to the dispensations. Thus, in the first place, at his birth, since he laid hold on his brother's heel, he was called Jacob, that is, the supplanter-one who holds, but is not held; binding the feet, but not being bound; striving and conquering; grasping in his hand his adversary's heel, that is, victory. For to this end was the Lord born, the type of whose birth he set forth beforehand, of whom also John says in the Apocalypse: "He went forth conquering, that He should conquer." In the next place, [Jacob] received the rights of the first-born, when his brother looked on them with contempt; even as also the younger nation received Him, Christ, the first-begotten, when the elder nation rejected Him, saying, "We have no king but Caesar." But in Christ every blessing [is summed up], and therefore the latter people has snatched away the blessings of the former from the Father, just as Jacob took away the blessing of this Esau. For which cause his brother suffered the plots and persecutions of a brother, just as the Church suffers this self-same thing from the Jews.

[Daniel 13:60] "And the whole congregration (Vulgate: assembly) cried out with a great voice and blessed God, who saveth those who trust in Him..." If the whole congregation put them to death, the view which we mentioned earlier is apparently refuted, namely that these were the elders Ahab and Zedekiah, in conformity with Jeremiah's statement (Jeremiah 29:22). The only other possibility is that instead of taking the statement, "They killed them," literally, we interpret it as meaning that they gave them over to the king of Babylon to be put to death. That would be just like when we say that the Jews put the Savior to death; not that they smote Him themselves, but they gave Him over to be slain and cried out, "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!" (John 19:15).

"Behold your king!" But when they said, "Crucify him," he added again, "Shall I crucify your king?" But they cried out, "We have no king but Caesar."

Of their own will they subjected themselves to punishment; therefore also God gave them up, because they were the first to cast themselves out from His providence and superintendence; and since with one voice they rejected His sovereignty, He allowed them to fall by their own suffrages.

Still what had been said should have been sufficient to calm their passion, but they feared, lest, being let go, He should again draw the multitudes, and they did all they could to prevent this. For a dreadful thing is love of rule, dreadful and able to destroy the soul; it was on account of this that they had never heard Him.

And yet Pilate, in consequence of a few words, desired to let Him go, but they pressed on, saying, "Crucify him." And why did they strive to kill Him in this manner? It was a shameful death. Fearing therefore lest there should afterwards be any remembrance of Him, they desired to bring Him to the accursed punishment, not knowing that truth is exalted by hindrances.

And they say: "Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him"; they insist upon and demand the cross, because they wish to give Christ an evil reputation. For such a death was the most shameful and accursed, as it is said: "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree" (Deut. 21:23). But they did not know that just as by a tree came the fall, so by a tree would come the restoration. Note also how they themselves declare that they have no other king but Caesar, and through this they voluntarily submit themselves to the authority of the Romans and cut themselves off from the Kingdom of God. Therefore God also delivered them over to the Romans, whom they themselves had called their kings, having renounced the Providence and Protection of God.

2408 This did not lessen the malice of the Jews. In inexhaustible hatred they cried out, doubling their already great malice by repeating the words, Away with him, away with him, crucify him! This shows that they could not stand the sight of him: "They say to God, 'Depart from us! We do not desire the knowledge of thy ways'" (Job 21:14); "The very sight of him is a burden to us" (Wis 2:15). Therefore, "Let us condemn him to a shameful death" (Wis 2:20), which is the same as crucify him!

2409 Now we see how Pilate tried to free Christ by shaming the Jews. First, we see Pilate's attempt, Shall I crucify your King? He is saying in effect: If you are not affected by his humiliation, your own sense of shame should move you, because I am going to crucify the one who is trying to be your king. And this is to your disgrace since it is being done by a foreigner.

Secondly, we see how unyielding the Jews are when they say, We have no king but Caesar. By thus refusing to be subject to the authority of Christ, they have submitted themselves to perpetual subjection. And so even to this very day, they are strangers to Christ, and have become servants of Caesar and earthly powers: "For they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them" (1 Sam 8:7); "They have forsaken me, the fountain of living water and hewed out cisterns for themselves; broken cisterns that can hold no water" (Jer 2:13).

(Tr. cxvi) But Pilate is at last overcome by fear: Then delivered he Him therefore unto them to be crucified. For it would be taking part openly against Caesar, if when the Jews declared that they had no king but Caesar, he wished to put another king over them, as he would appear to do if he let go unpunished a Man whom they had delivered to him for punishment on this very ground. It is not however, delivered Him unto them to crucify Him, but, to be crucified, i. e. by the sentence and authority of the governor. The Evangelist says, delivered unto them, to show that they were implicated in the guilt from which they tried to escape. For Pilate would not have done this except to please them.

Then he handed him over to them, to be crucified. Here the third point is touched upon, namely the sentence itself, by which he was condemned to the punishment of the cross: and rightly he says: He handed him over to them, because he did it at their request: Acts three: "God glorified his Son Jesus, whom you indeed handed over and denied before the face of Pilate, when he judged that he should be released"; and Luke twenty-three: "Pilate adjudged that their request be carried out," namely the Jews'. Pilate acted against the Law; Exodus twenty-three: "You shall not follow the crowd to do evil, nor in judgment shall you acquiesce to the sentence of the many, so as to deviate from the truth."

They took Jesus therefore. First therefore the vileness of the passion in the procession is noted in this, that he is led as a robber, and he himself carries his own punishment; therefore it says: They took Jesus therefore: the Psalm: "They received me as a lion ready for prey," namely the soldiers Jesus: they led him, as a criminal, namely outside the camp: on account of which in the last chapter of Hebrews: "Let us go forth to him outside the camp, bearing the reproach" of his cross.

It is asked here concerning that custom which they had of releasing a prisoner, whether it was praiseworthy. And it seems that it was, because the Lord accepts mercy more than judgment, as is evident from the adulterous woman, above in chapter eight. But then it is objected: because it was commanded by the Law that evildoers be put to death; therefore to absolve the guilty was against the Law and a bad custom. It must be said that the custom was good, provided that he who was more fitting was released: because, even if it was then the time of justice, nevertheless they ought to have been mindful of the mercy done to them and yet to come at the Passover: and therefore as a sign this was permitted to them. As to the objection from the Law, it must be said that the excellence of the solemnity outweighed the severity of the Law.

Likewise it is asked whether they sinned by requesting Barabbas. That they did, it seems: in Acts three it is reproached to them: "You asked for a murderer to be given to you, but the author of life you killed." But that they did not sin, it seems: because it was permitted to them to request whomever they wished without distinction. I respond that they did not sin in this, that they freed one who was worthy of death; but in this, that they preferred him to an innocent man: hence there was there partiality of persons. Hence Augustine: "We do not reproach you, O Jews, because at the Passover you release a guilty man, but because you kill an innocent one."

It is asked: how did Pilate dare to hand him over to death? To this it must be said that he was terrified by fear lest he be accused before Caesar, and deceived by error, because he thought that the entire guilt belonged to the Jews, since he was laying hands on him at their request: hence it is said in Matthew twenty-seven that he took water and washed his hands and said: I am innocent; and the Jews took all the guilt upon themselves, hence they said: His blood be upon us and upon our children. But he erred, because one cannot consent to the death of an innocent person without sin.

Pilate henceforward permits the Jews, in their unbridled resentment, to run to all lengths in lawlessness; and, divesting himself of the power due unto a judge, suffers their uncontrolled passions at length to take their course unreproved, in allowing them to crucify One Who was wholly guiltless, and Who received this monstrous condemnation merely because He said He was the Son of God. One must lay the whole guilt of the impious crime at the door of the Jews; and rightly and justly, I think, accuse them of being the prime movers in the act, for with them originated this impiety against Christ. Yet we cannot acquit Pilate of complicity in their iniquity; for he shared their responsibility, inasmuch as when he might have delivered and rescued Him from the madness of His murderers, he did not merely refrain from releasing Him, but even gave Him up to them for the very purpose, that they might crucify Him

By the command of the governor, the soldiers took Christ to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led Him away.

"Successes" have terrible power to cast down or draw aside those who take not heed. Thus the Jews, who at first enjoyed the influence of God, sought the law of royalty from the Gentiles, and in the wilderness after the manna remembered the onions. In the same way here, refusing the Kingdom of Christ, they invited to themselves that of Caesar. Wherefore God set a king over them, according to their own decision. When then Pilate heard these things, he delivered Him to be crucified. Utterly without reason. For when he ought to have enquired whether Christ had aimed at sovereign power, he pronounced the sentence through fear alone. Yet that this might not befall him, Christ said beforehand, "My kingdom is not of this world"; but he having given himself wholly up to present things, would practice no great amount of wisdom. And yet his wife's dream should have been sufficient to terrify him; but by none of these things was he made better, nor did he look to heaven, but delivered Him up.

"Then at last he handed Him over to them." Madman! He ought to have investigated whether He could actually claim royal power for Himself, but instead you hand Him over, yield out of fear, and conclude the trial in a manner unworthy of a man.

2410 Then the Evangelist mentions the consent of Pilate to the killing of Christ, Then he handed him over to them, to the Jews, who had been subject to the power and the will of the Romans, to be crucified. This was against the advice of Exodus (23:2): "You shall not follow a multitude to do evil." "The earth is given into the hand of the wicked" (Job 9:24); "I have given my dear soul into the hands of her enemies" [Jer 12:7].

"And they took Jesus, and led Him away; and He, bearing His cross, went forth into the place that is called Calvary, in the Hebrew, Golgotha; where they crucified Him." Jesus, therefore, went to the place where He was to be crucified, bearing His cross. A grand spectacle! but if it be impiety that is the onlooker, a grand laughing-stock; if piety, a grand mystery: if impiety be the onlooker, a grand demonstration of ignominy; if piety, a grand bulwark of faith: if it is impiety that looketh on, it laughs at the King bearing, in place of His kingly rod, the tree of His punishment; if it is piety, it sees the King bearing the tree for His own crucifixion, which He was yet to affix even on the foreheads of kings, exposed to the contemptuous glances of the impious in connection with that wherein the hearts of saints were thereafter to glory. For to Paul, who was yet to say, "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ," He was commending that same cross of His by carrying it on His own shoulders, and bearing the candelabrum of that light that was yet to burn, and not to be placed under a bushel.

Jesus, therefore, went to the place where He was to be crucified, bearing His cross. A grand spectacle! but if it be impiety that is the onlooker, a grand laughing-stock; if piety, a grand mystery: if impiety be the onlooker, a grand demonstration of ignominy; if piety, a grand bulwark of faith: if it is impiety that looketh on, it laughs at the King bearing, in place of His kingly rod, the tree of His punishment; if it is piety, it sees the King bearing the tree for His own crucifixion, which He was yet to affix even on the foreheads of kings, exposed to the contemptuous glances of the impious in connection with that wherein the hearts of saints were thereafter to glory. For to Paul, who was yet to say, "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ," He was commending that same cross of His by carrying it on His own shoulders, and bearing the candelabrum of that light that was yet to burn, and not to be placed under a bushel. "Bearing," therefore, "His cross, He went forth into the place that is called Calvary, in the Hebrew, Golgotha; where they crucified Him, and two others with Him on either side one, and Jesus in the midst." These two, as we have learned in the narrative of the other evangelists, were thieves with whom He was crucified, and between whom He was fixed, whereof the prophecy sent before had declared, "And He was numbered among the transgressors."

(de Con. Evang. iii. x) Both bore it; first Jesus, as John says, then Simon, as the other three Evangelists say. On first going forth, He bore His own cross.

(Tract. cxvii) Great spectacle, to the profane a laughing-stock, to the pious a mystery. Profaneness sees a King bearing a cross instead of a sceptre; piety sees a King bearing a cross, thereon to nail Himself, and afterwards to nail it on the foreheads of kings. That to profane eyes was contemptible, which the hearts of Saints would afterwards glory in; Christ displaying His own cross on His shoulders, and bearing that which was not to be put under a bushel, the candlestick of that candle which was now about to burn.

And bearing his own cross, on which, namely, he was to be punished as a robber. Then was fulfilled what had been said in Isaiah twenty-two: "I will place the key of David upon his shoulder"; and in Isaiah nine: "The government was placed upon his shoulder," because there he triumphed. On this Augustine says: "A great spectacle! But if impiety looks on, a great mockery; if piety, a great mystery."

He went out to the place which is called Calvary. Here the degradation is indicated by the place: because he suffered in that place where robbers and criminals were punished. For that place is called Calvary because there the heads of the condemned were stripped bare. For Calvary means the skull of the head stripped of flesh: in Hebrew Golgotha, that is, "the place of beheading."

It is asked concerning what was said, that Jesus went out bearing his own cross: because in Matthew chapter twenty-seven it is said that they compelled a certain Simon to carry his cross. Augustine responds in the third book of On the Harmony of the Evangelists: "Jesus was carrying the cross when he went out to Calvary; but that Simon was pressed into service along the way, to whom the cross was afterward given to be carried to the place. Thus we read that both things happened: first what John says, then what Matthew says."

Isaac (for the narrative may be interpreted otherwise) is a type of the Lord, a child as a son. For he was the son of Abraham, as Christ was the Son of God, and a sacrifice as the Lord, but he was not immolated as the Lord. Isaac only bore the wood of the sacrifice, as the Lord the wood of the cross. And he laughed mystically, prophesying that the Lord should fill us with joy, who have been redeemed from corruption by the blood of the Lord. Isaac did everything but suffer, as was right, yielding the precedence of suffering to the Word. Furthermore, there is an intimation of the divinity of the Lord with his not being slain. For Jesus rose again after his burial, having suffered no harm, like Isaac released from sacrifice.

They lead away, then, to death the Author of Life; and for our sakes was this done, for by the power and incomprehensible Providence of God, Christ's death resulted in an unexpected reversal of things. For His suffering was prepared as a snare for the power of death, and the death of the Lord was the source of the renewal of mankind in incorruption and newness of life. Bearing the Cross upon His shoulders, on which He was about to be crucified, He went forth; His doom was already fixed, and He had undergone, for our sakes, though innocent, the sentence of death. For, in His own Person, He bore the sentence righteously pronounced against sinners by the Law. For He became a curse for us, according to the Scripture: For cursed is everyone, it is said, that hangeth on a tree. And accursed are we all, for we are not able to fulfil the Law of God: For in many things we all stumble; and very prone to sin is the nature of man. And since, too, the Law of God says: Cursed is he which con-tinueth not in all things that are written in the book of this Law, to do them, the curse, then, belongeth unto us, and not to others. For those against whom the transgression of the Law may be charged, and who are very prone to err from its commandments, surely deserve chastisement. Therefore, He That knew no sin was accursed for our sakes, that He might deliver us from the old curse. For all-sufficient was the God Who is above all, so dying for all; and by the death of His own Body, purchasing the redemption of all mankind.

The Cross, then, that Christ bore, was not for His own deserts, but was the cross that awaited us, and was our due, through our condemnation by the Law. For as He was numbered among the dead, not for Himself, but for our sakes, that we might find in Him, the Author of everlasting life, subduing of Himself the power of death; so also, He took upon Himself the Cross that was our due, passing on Himself the condemnation of the Law, that the mouth of all lawlessness might henceforth be stopped, according to the saying of the Psalmist; the Sinless having suffered condemnation for the sin of all. And of great profit will the deed which Christ performed be to our souls----I mean, as a type of true manliness in God's service. For in no other way can we triumphantly attain to perfection in all virtue, and perfect union with God, save by setting our love toward Him above the earthly life, and zealously waging battle for the truth, if occasion calls us so to do. Moreover, our Lord Jesus Christ says: Every man that doth not take his cross and follow after Me, is not worthy of Me. And taking up the Cross means, I think, nothing else than bidding farewell to the world for God's sake, and preferring, if the opportunity arise, the hope of future glory to life in the body. But our Lord Jesus Christ is not ashamed to bear the Cross that is our due, and to suffer this indignity for love towards us; while we, poor wretches that we are, whose mother is the insensate earth beneath our feet, and who have been called into being out of nothing, sometimes do not even dare to touch the skirt of tribulation in God's service; but, if we have anything to bear in the service of Christ, at once account the shame intolerable, and shrinking from the ridicule of our adversaries, and those who sit in the seat of the scornful, as an accursed thing, and preferring to God's pleasure this paltry and ill-timed craving for reputation, fall sick of the disease of disdainful arrogance, which is the mother, so to say, of all evils, and so make ourselves subject to the charge. For thus is the servant above his lord, and the disciple above his master, and thinks and acts accordingly. Alas, for this grievous infirmity, which always in some strange shape lies athwart our path, and leads us astray from the pursuit of what is meet!

Call to mind, too, how the inspired Peter could not endure Christ's prophecy, when He foretold His sufferings upon the Cross, for He said: Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man is betrayed unto the hands of sinners; and they shall crucify Him, and kill Him. The disciple, not yet understanding the mysterious ways of God's providence, God-loving and teachable as he was, was moved by his scruples to exclaim: Be it far from Thee, Lord; this shall never be unto Thee. What answered Christ? Get thee behind Me, Satan; thou art a stumblingblock unto Me: for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men. But we may hence derive no small profit, for we shall know, that when occasion calls us to exhibit courage in God's service, and we are compelled to endure conflicts that ensue for virtue's sake; yea, even if they who honour and love us best strive to hinder us from doing anything that may tend to stablish virtue, alleging, it may be, our consequent dishonour among men, or from some worldly motive, we must not yield. For they, then, are in nowise unlike Satan, who loves and is ever wont to cast stumblingblocks in our path by divers deceits, and sometimes by smooth words, so as to divert from the pursuit of what is meet, the man who is urged thereto by the spirit of piety. And methinks Christ meant something like this, when He said: If, therefore, thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee. For that which does us injury is no longer our own, even though united to us by the bond of love, and though its connection with us be but its natural desert.

They led away the author of life to die—to die for our sake. In a way beyond our understanding, the power of God brought from Christ's passion an end far different from that intended by his enemies. His sufferings served as a snare for death and rendered it powerless. The Lord's death proved to be our restoration to immortality and newness of life. Condemned to death though innocent, he went forward bearing on his shoulders the cross on which he was to suffer. He did this for our sake, taking on himself the punishment that the law justly imposed on sinners. He was cursed for our sake according to the saying of Scripture: "A curse is on everyone who is hanged on a tree." … We who have all committed many sins were under that ancient curse for our refusal to obey the law of God. To set us free he who was without sin took that curse on himself. Since he is God who is above all, his sufferings sufficed for all, his death in the flesh was the redemption of all. And so, Christ carried the cross, a cross that was rightfully not his but ours, who were under the condemnation of the law.… Indeed, our Lord Jesus Christ has warned us that anyone who does not take up his cross and follow him is not worthy of him. And I think taking up the cross means simply renouncing the world for God's sake and, if this is required of us, putting the hope of future blessings before the life we now live in the body. Our Lord Jesus Christ was not ashamed to carry the cross we deserved, and he did so because he loved us.

Now Golgotha is interpreted "the place of a skull." Who were they, then, who prophetically named this spot Golgotha in which Christ the true head endured the cross? The apostle calls him "the image of the invisible God," and a little after, "the head of the body, the church." And again, "The head of every man is Christ." And again, "[He] is the head over all principalities and powers." The head suffered in "the place of the skull." O wondrous prophetic appellation! The very name also reminds you, saying, "Do not think of the Crucified as a mere man." He is "the head of all principalities and powers." That head that was crucified is the head of all power and has for his head the Father, "for the head of the man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God."

[The tradition that Adam died at Calvary is] an apt connection and smooth to the ear but not true. For the place where they cut off the heads of people condemned to death, called in consequence Calvary, was outside the city gates, whereas we read in the book of Jesus [i.e., Joshua] the son of Nave [Nun], that Adam was buried by Hebron and Arbah.

Well, then, to bring forward something still more out of place, we must go back to yet remoter times. Tradition has it that in this city, in fact, on this very spot, Adam lived and died. The place where our Lord was crucified is called Calvary, because the skull of the first man was buried there. So it came to pass that the second Adam, that is, the blood of Christ, as it dropped from the cross, washed away the sins of the buried one who was first formed, the first Adam, and thus the words of the apostle were fulfilled: "Awake, you who sleep, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give you light."

(super Matt. c. xxvii.) An apt connection, and smooth to the ear, but not true. For the place where they cut off the heads of men condemned to death, called in consequence Calvary, was outside the city gates, whereas we read in the book of Jesus the son of Nave, that Adam was buried by Hebron and Arbah.

And now they laid the cross upon Him as a malefactor. For even the wood they abominated, and endured not even to touch it. This was also the case in the type; for Isaac bare the wood. But then the matter stopped at the will of his father, for it was the type; while here it proceeded to action, for it was the reality.

"And He came to the place of a skull." Some say that Adam died there, and there lieth; and that Jesus in this place where death had reigned, there also set up the trophy. For He went forth bearing the Cross as a trophy over the tyranny of death: and as conquerors do, so He bare upon His shoulders the symbol of victory.

When our Lord was handed over to the will of his cruel foes, they ordered him, in mockery of his royal dignity, to carry the instrument of his own torture. This was done to fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah: "A child is born for us, a son is given to us; sovereignty is laid on his shoulders." To the wicked, the sight of the Lord carrying his own cross was indeed an object of derision. But to the faithful a great mystery was revealed, for the cross was destined to become the scepter of his power. Here was the majestic spectacle of a glorious conqueror mightily overthrowing the hostile forces of the devil and nobly bearing the trophy of his victory. On the shoulders of his invincible patience he carried the sign of salvation for all the kingdoms of the earth to worship, as if on that day he would strengthen all his future disciples by the symbol of his work and say to them, "Anyone who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me."

But it was fitting not only that the Savior should take his own cross but that we also should bear it, fulfilling our being pressed into service in the cause of salvation. But yet again, we do not profit from taking his cross as much as we do when Jesus himself takes his cross and bears it.

The place of the skull is said to have some special appropriateness for the death of him who was to die for humankind. A Hebraic tradition has come down to us that says that the body of Adam the first man was buried just where Christ was crucified. And so, as in Adam all die, so in Christ all should be made alive. In the place that is called the place of the skull or head, the head of the human race should find resurrection along with the whole people through the resurrection of the Lord and Savior who suffered there and rose again. For it was unfitting that when many born from him received remission of sins and attained the blessing of resurrection, the very father of all people should not also attain this grace.

"In you, Abraham, I foreshadow my plans, For indeed, O righteous one, You are clearly my figure in relief. Do you want to know what is to come after you as a result of your [actions]? For this is why I had you ascend here, to show you. For just as you did not spare Your son on account of me, So also I on account of all Will not spare my son; Instead I will give him to be slain for the sake of the world." … "In the same way that your Isaac carried The wood on his shoulders, My son will bear the cross upon his shoulders. Your great love has revealed Also what is about to happen. See now the ram [caught up] in the wood; When you see where its superior strength comes from, you will understand the mystery: It is by the horns that these bonds are overcome; The horns signify the hands of my son. Not only did they slaughter [my son] for me, But I also continue to protect your son for you."

Isaac the son of Abraham personally carried the wood for his own sacrifice when God had enjoined that he should be made a victim to God himself. But these had been mysteries that were being kept for perfect fulfillment in the times of Christ. Therefore Isaac, with his wood, was preserved when the ram that was caught by the horns in the bramble was offered in his place. Christ, however, carried his wood on his own shoulders, adhering to the horns of the cross with a thorny crown encircling his head. For he chose to be made a sacrifice on behalf of all.

Accordingly, to begin with, Isaac, when led by his father as a victim, and himself bearing his own "wood," was even at that early period pointing to Christ's death; conceded, as He was, as a victim by the Father; carrying, as He did, the "wood" of His own passion.

" Of course on His body that "wood" was put; for so Christ has revealed, calling His body "bread," whose body the prophet in bygone days announced under the term "bread.

When Christ was condemned, they laid his cross on him. However, on the way out to Golgotha, they met Simon of Cyrene and transferred it on to him. In this way there is no disagreement among the Evangelists.

Since they considered touching the wood of the cross a dishonorable thing, they laid the accursed wood upon Him as one already condemned and cursed. Note also that this takes place in accordance with the Old Testament prefiguration. Just as there Isaac, carrying the wood, went to the slaughter, so here the Lord goes carrying the Cross, and, like some warrior, bears the weapon by which He overthrows His adversary. That Isaac served as a type of the Lord is clear. Isaac means laughter or joy. And who else became our joy, if not He Who through the Angel at the very conception granted joy to human nature? For the glad tidings which the Virgin heard were received by all of human nature. Isaac's father Abraham means father of many nations and is a type of the God of all, Who is the Father of Jews and Gentiles, by Whose good pleasure and decree His Son bears the cross. Only in the Old Testament the matter was limited to the intention of the father, since that was a prefiguration, but here it was fulfilled in actual deed, because this was the truth. There may be yet another similarity. Just as there Isaac was released and a ram was slain, so here the divine nature remained free from suffering, while the human nature was slain, which is also called the Lamb, as the offspring of the lost sheep — Adam. How then does the other Evangelist (Mark 15:21) say that "they compelled Simon to carry the Cross"? Both things happened. At first the Lord went out carrying the Cross Himself, since everyone abhorred this wood and would not allow themselves even to touch it. But when they went out, they met Simon coming from the field, and then they laid this wood upon him. This place was called "The Place of the Skull," for there was a tradition preserved that Adam was buried here, so that where death had its beginning, there also its abolition would be accomplished. For there is a church tradition that after man's expulsion from paradise, his first dwelling place was Judea, given to him as consolation after the bliss of paradise, as a land better and more abundant than all others. It was also the first to receive the dead man. The people of that time, marveling at the dead skull, removed the skin from it and buried it here, and from it gave this place its name. And after the flood, Noah passed down the account of this to all. Therefore the Lord also accepts death there, where the source of death was, in order to dry it up.

But as there Isaac was let go, and a ram offered; so here too the Divine nature remains impassible, but the human, of which the ram was the type, the offspring of that straying ram, was slain. But why does another Evangelist say that they hired Simon to bear the cross?

2411 Now the Evangelist deals with the crucifixion of Christ: first, the dishonor of the cross; secondly, the events surrounding the crucifixion (v 19).

The dishonor of the cross is indicated by those who crucified Christ, by the way he was led to his death, by the place where this happened, and by those crucified with him.

2412 Those who crucified him were soldiers. So they took Jesus. This was done in deed by the soldiers ‑ for we read below (v 23), "When the soldiers had crucified Jesus" ‑ but done in desire by the Jews, because they brought about by threats what happened. For this they ought to lose the benefits of Christ's cross and have the Gentiles acquire them: "The Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it" (Mt 21:43).

2413 The way Christ was brought to his crucifixion was a dishonor, bearing his own cross, for death on a cross was a disgrace: "A hanged man is accursed by God" (Deut 21:23). Avoiding the cross as something unholy, and fearing even to touch it, they laid the cross on the condemned Jesus. He went out, bearing his own cross.

2414 Matthew (27:32) says that they compelled a certain Simon of Cyrene, on his way from the fields, to carry Christ's cross. We should say that Christ carried his cross from the beginning, but as he went along they found Simon to help him.

This does not lack its own mystery: for although Christ was the first to endure the sufferings of the cross, others did so after in imitation of him, especially strangers, that is, the Gentiles: "Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example" (1 Pet 2:21); "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me" (Mt 16:24).

Although this seems extremely bizarre to the irreligious and to unbelievers, it is a great mystery for believers and the devout: "For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor 1:18). Christ bore his cross as a king does his scepter; his cross is the sign of his glory, which is his universal dominion over all things: "The Lord will reign from the wood" [Ps 95:9]; "The government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called 'Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.'" (Is 9:6). He carried his cross as a victor carries the trophy of his victory: "He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in himself" [Col 2:15]. Again, he carried his cross as a teacher his candelabrum, as a support for the light of his teaching, because for believers the message of the cross is the power of God: "No one after lighting a lamp puts it in a cellar or under a bushel but on a stand, that those who enter may see the light" (Lk 11:33).

2415 The place where Christ suffered was also dishonorable, and for two reasons. First, it was outside the city, he went out to the place called Calvary, which is outside the walls of the city: "So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood" (Heb 13:12). This passion of Christ was outside the walls of the city to show that the effectiveness of his passion was not enclosed within the boundaries of the Jewish nation, and to indicate that those who want to obtain the fruit of his passion also have to go out from the world, at least with their affections. Thus the Apostle says in his next sentence, "Therefore let us go forth to him outside the camp" (Heb 13:13).

2416 Secondly, this place was dishonorable because it was one of the lowest and basest, to the place called Calvary. "I am reckoned among those who go down to the Pit" (Ps 88:4). Chrysostom tells us that there are some who say that Adam died and was buried at this very place. This is why it was called Calvary, from the skull (calvaria) of the first man. And just as death reigned there, so there also Christ erected the trophy of his victory.

However, as Jerome says, this is the popular interpretation and attractive to the people, but it is not true, because Adam was buried at Hebron: "Adam the greatest among the Anakim was buried there" [Jos 14:15]. So we should say that this place was outside the gate of Jerusalem, and it was there that the heads of the condemned were cut off. It was called Calvary because the skulls of the beheaded were strewn there.

(Tr. cxvi) They, i. e. the soldiers, the guards of the governor, as appears more clearly afterwards; Then the soldiers when they had crucified Jesus; though the Evangelist might justly have attributed the whole to the Jews, who were really the authors of what they procured to be done.

(Tr. xxxi. in fin.) Yea, even the cross, if thou consider it, was a judgment seat: for the Judge being the middle, one thief, who believed, was pardoned, the other, who mocked, was damned: a sign of what He would once do to the quick and dead, place the one on His right hand, the other on His left.

Where they crucified him. Here the degradation of the passion is noted from the kind of death, because it was the most degrading kind of death; Wisdom two: "Let us condemn him to a most shameful death."

And with him two others, on this side and on that, and Jesus in the middle. Here the degradation is noted from the company, because these two were robbers; whence Mark fifteen: "They crucify with him two robbers." Then was fulfilled what is said in Isaiah fifty-three: "And he was reckoned among the wicked." But he was placed in the middle to signify that he is the mediator: whence at his nativity he was in the midst of the animals, Habakkuk last chapter; and in his passion in the midst of robbers, because he is the true peace, Ephesians two.

It is asked concerning this, that the Jews asked for the Lord to be crucified: why did they wish the Lord to be killed by that kind of death rather than another? Chrysostom responds that "this was the most shameful death. Fearing therefore lest any memory of him should remain after him, they strive to lead him to a punishment declared accursed, not knowing that through obstacles the truth is exalted." On God's part the reason was both a mystery, because we sinned by a tree, and an example, lest anyone should dread a shameful death, and a judgment, because it pleased God through the foolishness of preaching to save those who believe.

Two robbers were crucified together with Christ, and this was owing to the malice of the Jews. For, as though to emphasize the dishonour of our Saviour's death, they involved the just Man in the same condemnation as the transgressors of the Law. And we may take the condemned criminals, who hung by Christ's side, as symbolical of the two nations who were shortly about to be brought into close contact with Him, I mean the children of Israel and the Gentiles. And why do we take condemned criminals as the type? Because the Jews were condemned by the Law, for they were guilty of transgressing it; and the Greeks by their idolatry, for they worshipped the creature more than the Creator.

And after another manner those who are united with Christ are also crucified with Him; for enduring, as it were, death to their old conversation in the flesh, they are reformed into a new life, according to the Gospel. Yea, Paul said: And they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh, with the passions and the lusts thereof; and again, speaking of himself in words applicable to all men: For I, through the Law, died unto the Law, that I might live unto God. I have been crucified with Christ: yet I live; and yet no longer I, but Christ liveth in me. And he exhorts also the Colossians: Wherefore, if ye died from the world, why do ye behave yourselves as though living in the world? For, by becoming dead unto worldly conversation, we are brought to the rudiments of conduct and life in Christ. Therefore the crucifixion of the two robbers, side by side with Christ, signifies in a manner to us, through the medium of that event, the juxtaposition of the two nations, dying together, as it were, with the Saviour Christ, by bidding farewell to worldly pleasures, and refusing any longer to live after the flesh, and preferring to live with their Lord, so far as may be, by fashioning their lives according to Him, and consecrating them in His service. And the meaning of the figure is in no way affected by the fact, that the men who hung by His side were malefactors; for we were by nature children of wrath, before we believed in Christ, and were all doomed to death, as we said before.

The two criminals who hung by Christ's side symbolize the two nations who were about to be brought into close contact with him, namely, the children of Israel and the Gentiles. And why do we take condemned criminals as the type? Because the Jews were condemned by the Law, for they were guilty of transgressing it. And the Greeks were condemned by their idolatry, for they worshiped the creature more than the Creator.… Therefore, the crucifixion of the two robbers, side by side with Christ, signifies … the juxtaposition of the two nations, dying together, as it were, with the Savior Christ by bidding farewell to worldly pleasures, refusing any longer to live after the flesh and preferring to live with their Lord, as far as possible, by fashioning their lives according to him and consecrating them to his service. And the meaning of the figure is in no way affected by the fact that the men who hung by his side were criminals. For we were by nature children of wrath before we believed in Christ and were all doomed to death.

What matter if the Jews did these things with a different intent. They crucified Him too with thieves, in this also unintentionally fulfilling prophecy; for what they did for insult contributed to the truth, that thou mayest learn how great is its power, since the Prophet had foretold of old, that "He was numbered with the transgressors." (Isa. liii. 12.) The devil therefore wished to cast a veil over what was done, but was unable; for the three were crucified, but Jesus alone was glorious, that thou mayest learn, that His power effected all. Yet the miracles took place when the three had been nailed to the cross; but no one attributed anything of what was done to either of those others, but to Jesus only; so entirely was the plot of the devil rendered vain, and all returned upon his own head. For even of these two, one was saved. He therefore did not insult the glory of the Cross, but contributed to it not a little. For it was not a less matter than shaking the rocks, to change a thief upon the cross, and to bring him unto Paradise.

Crucified with Him were also two others. The Jews wished by this to spread a bad rumor, as though He too were a robber. Meanwhile, they involuntarily fulfill the prophecy which says: "And He was numbered with the transgressors" (Isa. 53:12). Observe then the Wisdom of God, how It turned to the glory of the Lord that which they did to His dishonor. For on the very Cross He saved the robber, which is no less wondrous, and even more proves His Divinity. For He alone was glorified, even though others were crucified together with Him. This would not have happened if He were guilty and a transgressor of the law, and were not Himself above the law and the Judge of the lawless.

2417 Those who suffered with him also added to his dishonor, for they crucified with him two others, who were criminals, as Luke mentions (Lk 23:33). One on either side, one on the right and one on the left, and Jesus between them, in the middle. Even in his suffering Christ stood in the middle, a fact that the Jews intended should add to his dishonor, for it implied that the cause of his death was similar to that of the criminals: "He was numbered with the transgressors" (Is 53:12).

But if we contemplate this mystery, we see that it is related to the glory of Christ. It shows that by his suffering Christ merited the authority to judge: "Your cause has been judged as one of the wicked. You will recover cause and judgment" [Job 36:17]. And it is the function of a judge to be in the middle of the parties; so the Philosopher says that to go to a judge is to go to the middle. Christ was also placed in the middle, one on his right, another on his left, because in the judgment he will place the sheep on his right, and the goats on his left. It was the criminal on his right who believed and was saved; the one on his left, who reproached him, was condemned.

The title placed over his cross, on which was written "The King of the Jews," showed that they could not keep him from being their king even by his death.

But is Christ king only of the Jews, or of the Gentiles also? Yes, of the Gentiles also. For when He said in prophecy, "I am set king by Him upon His holy hill of Zion, declaring the decree of the Lord," that no one might say, because of the hill of Zion, that He was set king over the Jews alone, He immediately added, "The Lord said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of me, and I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession." Whence He Himself, speaking now with His own lips among the Jews, said, "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one flock and one Shepherd." Why then would we have some great mystery to be understood in this superscription, wherein it was written, "King of the Jews," if Christ is king also of the Gentiles? For this reason, because it was the wild olive tree that was made partaker of the fatness of the olive tree, and not the olive tree that was made partaker of the bitterness of the wild olive tree. For inasmuch as the title, "King of the Jews," was truthfully written regarding Christ, who are they that are to be understood as the Jews but the seed of Abraham, the children of the promise, who are also the children of God? For "they," saith the apostle, "who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." And the Gentiles were those to whom he said, "But if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." Christ therefore is king of the Jews, but of those who are Jews by the circumcision of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God; who belong to the Jerusalem that is free, our eternal mother in heaven, the spiritual Sarah, who casteth out the bond maid and her children from the house of liberty. And therefore what Pilate wrote he wrote, because what the Lord said He said.

Wherein was shown that His kingdom was not, as they thought, destroyed, but rather strengthened.

Pilate also wrote a title. Here is noted the second principal point, namely the dignity of the one suffering, and it is indicated in the title, because the title was that of a king.

The inscription of the title, therefore, is touched upon when he says: Pilate also wrote a title and placed it on the cross: Isaiah nineteen: "There shall be an altar of the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar of the Lord near its border." And note that a certain title is memorial, as for the dead; a certain one is proclamatory, as for a house; a certain one is triumphal: and this one is triumphal, whence it is to the praise of Christ and the reproach of the Jews, because, although he had been condemned as a robber, he was nevertheless not a robber but a king; and this the title declared: And it was written: Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews. Scripture approves this title: whence in Psalm two: "I have been appointed king by him over Sion, his holy mountain," etc. In this title Pilate describes him by name, when he says Jesus: Luke one: "You shall call his name Jesus"; by homeland, Nazarene: Luke two: "He went down with them and came to Nazareth"; by royal dignity, when he says king: Jeremiah twenty-three: "I will raise up for David a righteous branch, and a king shall reign."

According to Matthew, the title is called a cause: Matthew twenty-seven: "They placed over his head his written charge": because in that title it is indicated why he died, namely for the sake of saving, because Jesus, and for the sake of making us a kingdom for our God: Revelation five: "You are worthy, Lord God, to receive the book: because you were slain and have redeemed us for God in your blood and have made us a kingdom for our God."

It is asked concerning the inscription, whether Pilate wrote it sincerely or mockingly. That he wrote it sincerely seems evident from the text, because when the Jews requested it, he refused to erase it, but responded: What I have written, I have written. But that he wrote it mockingly seems evident, because he permitted him to be mocked by the soldiers as a fool, not as a true king—soldiers who had placed a crown of thorns on him and were striking him. To this it must be responded that Pilate had some illumination by which he recognized that he was innocent; hence he knew that they had handed him over out of envy, Matthew twenty-seven; by which he also recognized that he was the king promised to the Jews: hence he always called him king. Hence Augustine says: "It could not be torn from the heart of Pilate that Christ was the King of the Jews, as though truth itself had fixed this in his heart." As for the objection that he caused or permitted him to be mocked: I say that he permitted the king to be mocked just as he permitted the innocent one to be scourged, so that he might satisfy the Jews with his punishments and humiliations and incline them to mercy.

This is, in fact, the bond against us which, as the inspired Paul says, the Lord nailed to His Cross, and in it led in triumph the principalities and the powers as vanquished, and as having revolted from His rule. And if it were not Christ Himself that fixed the title on the Cross, but the fellow-worker and minister of the Jews, still, as He suffered it so to be, it is as though He were recorded as having inscribed it with His own Hand. And He triumphed over principalities in it. For it was open to the view of all who chose to learn, pointing to Him Who suffered for our sake, and Who was giving His Life as a ransom for the lives of all. For all men upon the earth, in that they have fallen into the snare of sin (for all have gone aside, and have all together become filthy, according to the Scripture), had made themselves liable to the accusation of the devil, and were living a hateful and miserable life. And the title contained a handwriting against us----the curse that, by the Divine Law, impends over the transgressors, and the sentence that went forth against all who erred against those ancient ordinances of the Law, like unto Adam's curse, which went forth against all mankind, in that all alike broke God's decrees. For God's anger did not cease with Adam's fall, but He was also provoked by those who after him dishonoured the Creator's decree; and the denunciation of the Law against transgressors was extended continuously over all. We were, then, accursed and condemned, by the sentence of God, through Adam's transgression, and through breach of the Law laid down after him; but the Saviour wiped out the handwriting against us, by nailing the title to His Cross, which very clearly pointed to the death upon the Cross which He underwent for the salvation of men, who lay under condemnation. For our sake He paid the penalty for our sins. For though He was One that suffered, yet was He far above any creature, as God, and more precious than the life of all. Therefore, as the Psalmist says, the mouth of all lawlessness was stopped, and the tongue of sin was silenced, unable any more to speak against sinners. For we are justified, now that Christ has paid the penalty for us; for by His stripes we are healed, according to the Scripture. And just as by the Cross the sin of our revolt was perfected, so also by the Cross was achieved our return to our original state, and the acceptable recovery of heavenly blessings; Christ, as it were, gathering up into Himself, for us, the very fount and origin of our infirmity.

"And Pilate wrote a title." At the same time requiting the Jews, and making a defense for Christ. For since, they had given Him up as worthless, and attempted to confirm this sentence by making Him share the punishment of the robbers, in order that for the future it might be in no man's power to prefer evil charges against him, or to accuse him as a worthless and wicked person, to close moreover their mouths and the mouths of all who might desire to accuse Him, and to show that they had risen up against their own King, Pilate thus placed, as on a trophy, those letters, which utter a clear voice, and show forth His Victory, and proclaim His Kingdom, though not in its completeness. And this he made manifest not in a single tongue, but in three languages; for since it was likely that there would be a mixed multitude among the Jews on account of the Feast, in order that none might be ignorant of the defense, he publicly recorded the madness of the Jews, in all the languages. For they bore malice against Him even when crucified. "Yet what did this harm you? Nothing. For if He was a mortal and weak, and was about to become extinct, why did ye fear the letters asserting that He is the King of the Jews?" And what do they ask? "Say that 'he said.' For now it is an assertion, and a general sentence, but if 'he said' be added, the charge is shown to be one arising from his own rashness and arrogance." Still Pilate was not turned aside, but stood to his first decision. And it is no little thing that is dispensed even from this circumstance, but the whole matter. For since the wood of the cross was buried, because no one was careful to take it up, inasmuch as fear was pressing, and the believers were hurrying to other urgent matters; and since it was in after times to be sought for, and it was likely that the three crosses would lie together, in order that the Lord's might not be unknown, it was made manifest to all, first by its lying in the middle, and then by the title. For those of the thieves had no titles.

As letters are inscribed on a trophy declaring the victory, so Pilate wrote a title on Christ's cross. And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross: thus at once distinguishing Christ from the thieves with Him, and exposing the malice of the Jews in rising up against their King: And the writing was, Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.

Whether in pretence or in truth, Christ is proclaimed king, and every letter bears witness of his reign, whether of Greeks, or Romans, or Hebrews. And for a crown above his head was written, "This is Jesus the King of the Jews." And since no other cause is found for his death (for there was none), this alone is put forward, "He was king of the Jews." … And the high priest according to the letter of the law used to carry on his head the form of the sign and the sanctification of the Lord written on the plate. But the true high priest and king, Jesus, on the cross has it written, "This is the King of the Jews." But ascending to the Father and receiving the Father into himself, he has for letters and for a name what he [God] is named and has him [the Father] as a crown.

Pilate writes a title on the cross, that is, the charge, the inscription, the declaration. The inscription indicated whose cross it was. So Pilate makes this inscription, on the one hand, in order to take revenge on the Jews for not having listened to him, and to show their malice, by which they rose up against their own king, and on the other hand, in order to defend the glory of Christ. They crucified Him with robbers, wishing to dishonor His name.

2418 The Evangelist just told of Christ's crucifixion; now he mentions things that accompanied and followed it: first, as they relate to Pilate; secondly as they relate to the soldiers; and finally, he tells about Christ's friends who were standing by (v 25). Concerning Pilate, we see the title being written on the cross, its being read, and its retention.

2419 Two things are mentioned about the first of these. First, the writing of the title, Pilate also wrote a title and put it on the cross. This was understandable, for it was a way of getting back at the Jews by showing their malice in rising up against their own king. It was also appropriate for this mystery, for just as inscriptions are placed on trophies of victory so the people will remember and celebrate the victory ‑ "Let us make a name for ourselves, before we are scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth" [Gen 11:4] ‑ so it was arranged that a title was put on the cross so that the sufferings of Christ would be remembered: "Remember my affliction and my bitterness, the wormwood and the gall!" (Lam 3:19).

2420 Secondly, he mentions the content of the title, Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews, words which are very fitting for this mystery of the cross. The word Jesus, which means Savior, corresponds to the power of the cross by which we have been saved: "You shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins" (Mt 1:21). The word Nazareth, which means abounding in flowers, corresponds to the innocence of the one suffering: "I am a rose of Sharon, a lily of the valleys" (Song 2:1); "A flower will rise up out of his root" [Is 11:1]. The words King of the Jews accord with the power, the dominion, which Christ earned by his suffering: "Therefore God has highly exalted him" (Phil 2:9); "He shall reign as King and be wise" (Jer 23:5); he will sit "upon the throne of David and over his kingdom" (Is 9:7).

2421 Through his cross Christ is not just the King of the Jews, but of all people ‑ for after we read, "I have set my king on Zion," there follows, "Ask of me and I will make the nations your heritage" (Ps 6:8). Why then did the Evangelist write only King of the Jews? I answer that the Gentiles were grafted on to the abundant olive tree (Rom 11:17). And just like a graft comes to share in the abundance of the olive tree, and it is not the olive tree that acquires the bitterness of the graft, so those Gentiles who were converted to the faith were made spiritually Jews, not by a circumcision of the flesh, but of the spirit. And so in saying the King of the Jews, non‑Jewish converts are also included.

"And Pilate wrote a title also, and put it on the cross, and the writing was, Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, The King of the Jews." For these three languages were conspicuous in that place beyond all others: the Hebrew on account of the Jews, who gloried in the law of God; the Greek, because of the wise men among the Gentiles; and the Latin, on account of the Romans, who at that very time were exercising sovereign power over many and almost all countries.

This title therefore. Here is set forth the publication of the title: whence he says: Many of the Jews read it, because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city: therefore many were reading, because many were gathering together, and not only Jews but also others: Isaiah thirty-four: "Search diligently in the book of the words of the Lord and read: not one of them was lacking." And it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, so that all might be able to read the title, because he was to be king of all, as it is said in Revelation nineteen, that he "is King of kings and Lord of lords"; therefore in three languages, because Deuteronomy nineteen: "In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word stands."

We may remark that it was very providential, and the fruit of God's inexpressible purpose, that the title that was written embraced three inscriptions ---- one in Hebrew, another in Latin, and another in Greek. For it lay open to the view, proclaiming the Kingdom of our Saviour Christ in three languages, the most widely known of all, and bringing to the crucified One the first-fruits, as it were, of the prophecy that had been spoken concerning Him. For the wise Daniel said that there was given Him glory and a Kingdom, and all nations and languages shall serve Him; and, to like effect, the holy Paul teaches us, crying out that every knee shall bow; of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth; and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Therefore the title proclaiming Jesus King was, as it were, the true firstfruits of the confession of tongues. And, in another sense, it accused the impiety of the Jews, and all but proclaimed expressly, to those who congregated to read it, that they had crucified their King and Lord, purblind wretches that they were, without thought of love toward Him, and sunk in crass insensibility.

It was providential and the fruit of God's inexpressible purpose that the title was written in three languages: one in Hebrew, another in Latin and another in Greek. For it lay in plain view, proclaiming the kingdom of our Savior Christ in the most widely known of all languages … fulfilling the prophecy that had been spoken concerning him. For the wise Daniel said that there was given him glory and a kingdom and that all nations and languages shall serve him. Similarly the holy Paul teaches us, crying out that "every knee shall bow; of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth. And every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Therefore the title proclaiming Jesus "king" was, as it were, the true firstfruits of the confession of tongues.

It is probable that many Gentiles as well as Jews bad come up to the feast. So the title was written in three languages, that all might read it: And it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

Pilate declares that He was not a robber, but their King, and he declares this not in one, but in three languages. For it was natural to suppose that because of the feast, many Gentiles had also come along with the Jews. Earlier the Evangelist (John 12:20–21) also mentions certain Greeks who came to see Jesus. Therefore, so that all might know of the madness of the Jews, Pilate proclaimed this about Him in all languages. The inscription, made in three languages, hints at something higher as well, namely: it shows that the Lord is the King of practical, natural, and theological philosophy. The Roman letters serve as an image of practical philosophy, for the power of the Romans is the most courageous and active in military affairs; the Greek letters are an image of natural philosophy, for the Greeks occupied themselves with the study of nature; the Hebrew letters represent theological philosophy, for to the Hebrews was entrusted the knowledge of God. Thus, glory to Him Who through the Cross revealed Himself as possessing such a Kingdom, Who both conquered the world, and strengthened our activity, and grants the knowledge of nature, and through it leads into the innermost part of the veil, into the knowledge and contemplation of Himself, that is, theology.

The title written in three languages signifies that our Lord was King of the whole world; practical, natural, and spiritual1. The Latin denotes the practical, because the Roman empire was the most powerful, and best managed one; the Greek the physical, the Greeks being the best physical philosophers; and, lastly, the Hebrew the theological, because the Jews had been made the depositaries of religious knowledge.

2422 Next we see that the title was read, Many of the Jews read this title. The fact that it was read signifies that more are saved by faith, by reading about the passion of Christ, than were saved by actually seeing it: "These are written that you may believe" (20:31). Secondly, the Evangelist mentions how easy this was to read: first, because Jesus was crucified near the city, the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, where many people passed; and secondly, because it was written in a number of languages, and it was written in Hebrew, in Latin, and in Greek, so that no one would fail to know it, and because these three languages were the most widely known. Hebrew was known because it was used in the worship of the one true God; Greek was known because it was used in the writings of the wise; and Latin was known due to the power of Rome. As Augustine says, these three tongues assumed a certain dignity by being associated with the cross of Christ. Further, the Hebrew tongue signified that by the cross of Christ those who were devout and religious were to be converted and ruled; and so were the wise, indicated by the Greek language; and so were those enjoying power, signified by the Latin language. Or, the use of Hebrew signified that Christ was to rule over theological teaching, because the knowledge of divine matters was entrusted to the Jews. The Greek signified that Christ was to rule over the knowledge of nature, for the Greeks were engaged in speculation about nature. Latin signified that Christ will rule over practical philosophy, because moral speculation was especially flourishing among the Romans. And so, all thought is brought into captivity and obedience to Christ, as we see in 2 Corinthians (10:5).

The leaders of the Jews urged Pilate not to write without qualification that he is the king of the Jews, but that he himself said he was the king of the Jews, to which he replied, "What I have written, I have written." This had Pilate representing the wild olive to be grafted on, while the leaders of the Jews represented the broken-off branches. He was, you see, a man of the nations, writing for the nations their confession of faith, convicting the Jews of their denial of it, so that the Lord himself rightly said to them, "The kingdom shall be taken away from you and given to a nation that does justice." … Pilate, certainly, wrote "king of the Jews," not "king of the Greeks or the Latins," although Jesus was going to reign over the nations. And what he has written, he has written, and he did not change it at the urging of unbelievers, as had been foretold such a long time before in the psalm, "Do not corrupt the inscription of the title." All the nations believe in the king of the Jews. He reigns over all the nations but reigns nonetheless as the king of the Jews. Such was the worth and potency of that root that it could change the engrafted wild olive into itself, while the wild olive could not eliminate the name of the olive.

"Then said the chief priests of the Jews unto Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews. Pilate answered, What I have written I have written." Oh the ineffable power of the working of God, even in the hearts of the ignorant! Was there not some hidden voice that sounded through Pilate's inner man with a kind, if one may so say, of loud-toned silence, the words that had been prophesied so long before in the very letter of the Psalms, "Corrupt not the inscription of the title"? Here, then, you see, he corrupted it not; what he has written he has written. But the high priests, who wished it to be corrupted, what did they say? "Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews." What is it, madmen, that you say? Why do you oppose the doing of that which you are utterly unable to alter? Will it by any such means become the less true that Jesus said, "I am King of the Jews"? If that cannot be tampered with which Pilate has written, can that be tampered with which the truth has uttered?

(Tract. cxviii) But was Christ the King of the Jews only? or of the Gentiles too? Of the Gentiles too, as we read in the Psalms, Yet have I set My King upon My holy hill of Sion; (Ps. 2:6) after which it follows, Demand of Me, and I will give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance. So this title expresses a great mystery, viz. that the wild olive-tree was made partaker of the fatness of the olive-tree, not the olive-tree made partaker of the bitterness of the wild olive-tree. Christ then is King of the Jews according to the circumcision not of the flesh, but of the heart; not in the letter, but in the spirit. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city.

(Tract. cxviii) These three were the languages most known there: the Hebrew, on account of being used in the worship of the Jews: the Greek, in consequence of the spread of Greek philosophy: the Latin, from the Roman empire being established every where.

O ineffable working of Divine power even in the hearts of ignorant men! Did not some hidden voice sound from within, and, if we may say so, with clamorous silence, saying to Pilate in the prophetic words of the Psalm, Alter not the inscription of the titlea? But what say ye, ye mad priests: will the title be the less true, because Jesus said, I am the King of the Jews? If that which Pilate wrote cannot be altered, can that be altered which the Truth spoke? Pilate wrote what he wrote, bceause our Lord said what He said.

The chief priests of the Jews therefore said to Pilate. Here is noted the contradiction of the Jews, by which they wanted to erase the title, since it was to their disgrace; whence they say: Do not write: King of the Jews, but that he said: I am King of the Jews, so that, namely, there would be shown not dignity but presumption, by which he would claim to be king: against which it is said in Hebrews five: "Christ did not glorify himself to be made a high priest," etc.

The rulers of the Jews took ill the writing on the title, and, full of bitter hatred, once more denied the Kingship of Christ, and said in their great folly that He had never reigned in fact, nor been accepted as King, but had merely used this expression: not knowing that to lie is contrary to the nature of truth, and Christ is Truth. He was, then, King of the Jews, if He was proved to have given Himself this title, as they themselves also confirmed by their own words. And Pilate rejected their request that he should alter the inscription, not consenting in all things to do despite unto the glory of our Saviour, doubtless owing to God's Ineffable Will. For the Kingship of Christ was firmly rooted, and beyond the reach of calumny, though the Jews might not consent thereunto, and might strive to deface the confession of His glory.

For after having done what they would, they endeavor also to injure His honor, fearing His resurrection. Therefore they say these things publicly, and crucified thieves with Him, and wishing to prove Him a deceiver, they say, "Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days come down from the cross." For since on telling Pilate to remove the accusation (this was the writing, "The king of the Jews"), they prevailed not, but he persevered in saying, "What I have written, I have written," they then endeavor by their derision of Him to show that He is not a king.

But the Jews grudged our Lord this title: Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that He said, I am King of the Jews, For as Pilate wrote it, it was a plain and single declaration that He was King, but the addition of, that he said, made it a charge against Him of petulance and vain glory. But Pilate was firm: Pilate answered, What I have written I have written.

The Jews envied Jesus even when He was crucified. For what do they say? Write that He Himself said it. For now the inscription appears as the common opinion of the Jews, but if it were added "He called Himself King," then the blame would be on His audacity and pride.

2423 We now read that this title was not changed (v 21). First we see the Jews trying to have the title changed, The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, Do not write, The King of the Jews, but, This man said, I am King of the Jews. The title King of the Jews was a praise for Christ, but a disgrace for the Jews, for it was a disgrace to the Jews that they had their king crucified. But if the title had read, This man said, I am King of the Jews, it would have been a taunting sarcasm against Christ and have indicated his crime. And this was what the chief priests wanted to do, to take away the reputation of the one they crucified as they had already taken away his life: "I am the talk of those who sit in the gate" (Ps 69:12).

The magi were from the Gentiles. Pilate too was a Gentile. They saw a star in the sky; he wrote a title on the tree. Both, however, were looking for or acknowledging the king, not of the Gentiles but of the Jews. Thus already there was a prefiguring of what the Lord himself spoke about later, "Many will come from the east and the west and sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom will go into outer darkness." The magi, you see, had come from the east, Pilate from the west. So they bore witness to the king of the Jews rising, that is, to his being born. Pilate bore witness to the king of the Jews setting, that is, to his dying. In this way, they could take their seats in the kingdom of heaven with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, from whom the Jews derived their descent. They were not descended from them, of course, in the flesh but grafted into them by faith. Thus the wild olive the apostle talks about, that was to be grafted into the olive, was already being prefigured.

Pilate answered. Here is set forth the affirmation or approval of the title against the malice of the Jews: whence Pilate does not erase it but approves it: What I have written, I have written. What I have written, truthfully, I have written, indelibly, as an irrevocable truth. Augustine: "If what Pilate wrote cannot be corrupted, can what Truth has said be corrupted?"

But Pilate did not agree, and remained of his former opinion. Therefore he also says: "What I have written, I have written." However, something else important is also arranged here. Since the three crosses, buried in the earth, would lie in one and the same place, so that it would not remain unknown which of them was the Cross of the Lord, it was arranged so that it alone had the title and inscription, and by this sign could be recognized. For the crosses of the robbers did not have inscriptions.

2424 Secondly, we read that Pilate was insistent on keeping the title. He refused to change it because he wanted to disgrace them. He said, What I have written I have written. This did not happen by chance; it had been arranged by God and predicted long before. Certain Psalms have as a title, "Do not Destroy. For David, for an inscription of a title." Indeed, Psalm 59 especially concerns the passion, "Deliver me from my enemies, O my God." And so do the two preceding Psalms: "Be merciful to me, O God, be merciful to me, for in thee my soul takes refuge" (Ps 57) and Psalm 58. And so it was folly for the chief priests to complain, for just as they could not destroy what the Truth had said, so also they could not destroy what Pilate had written. Pilate said, What I have written I have written, because what the Lord said, He said, as Augustine remarks.

Even the men who parted the garment of Christ among them did not rudely tear in pieces the seamless robe—and these were men who at that time had no faith in Christ's resurrection. In fact, they were witnessing his death. If, then, persecutors stopped themselves from tearing the clothing of Christ when he was hanging upon the cross, why should Christians destroy the sacrament of his institution now when he is sitting in heaven on his throne?

The things that were done beside the Lord's cross, when at length He was now crucified, we would take up, in dependence on His help, in the present discourse. "Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Him, took His garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also His coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots." It was done as the Jews wished; not that it was they themselves, but the soldiers who obeyed Pilate, who himself acted as judge, that crucified Jesus: and yet if we reflect on their wills, their plots, their endeavors, their delivering up, and, lastly, on their extorting clamors, it was the Jews certainly, more than any else, who crucified Jesus.

But we must not speak in a mere cursory way of the partition and dividing by lot of His garments. For although all the four evangelists make mention thereof, yet the others do so more briefly than John: and their notice of it is obscure, while his is in the plainest manner possible. For Matthew says, "And after they crucified Him, they parted His garments, casting lots." Mark: "And they crucified Him, and parted His garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take." Luke: "And they parted His raiment, and cast lots." But John has told us also how many parts they made of His garments, namely, four, that they might take one part apiece. From which it is apparent that there were four soldiers, who obeyed the governor's orders in crucifying Him. For he plainly says: "Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Him, took His garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and likewise the coat," where there is understood, they took: so that the meaning is, they took His garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and they took also His coat. And he so spake, that we might see that there was no lot cast on His other garments; but His coat, which they took along with the others, they did not similarly divide.

Some one, perhaps, may inquire what is signified by the division that was made of His garments into so many parts, and of the casting of lots for the coat. The raiment of the Lord Jesus Christ parted into four, symbolized His quadripartite Church, as spread abroad over the whole world, which consists of four quarters, and equally, that is to say, harmoniously, distributed over all these quarters. On which account He elsewhere says, that He will send His angels to gather His elect from the four winds: and what is that, but from the four quarters of the world, east, west, north, and south? But the coat, on which lots were cast, signifies the unity of all the parts, which is contained in the bond of charity. And when the apostle is about to speak of charity, he says, "I show you a more excellent way;" and in another place, "To know also the love of Christ, which far excelleth knowledge;" and still further elsewhere, "And above all these things charity which is the bond of perfectness." If, then, charity both has a more excellent way, and far excelleth knowledge, and is enjoined above all things, it is with great propriety that the garment, by which it is signified, is represented as woven from the top. And it was without seam, that its sewing might never be separated; and came into the possession of one man, because He gathereth all into one. Just as in the case of the apostles, who formed the exact number of twelve, in other words, were divisible into four parts of three each, when the question was put to all of them, Peter was the only one that answered, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;" and to whom it was said, "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven," as if he alone received the power of binding and loosing: seeing, then, that one so spake in behalf of all, and received the latter along with all, as if personifying the unity itself; therefore one stands for all, because there is unity in all. Whence, also, after here saying, "woven from the top," he added, "throughout." And this also, if referred to its meaning, implies that no one is excluded from a share thereof, who is discovered to belong to the whole: from which whole, as the Greek language indicates, the Church derives her name of Catholic. And by the casting of lots, what else is commended but the grace of God? For in this way in the person of one it reached to all, since the lot satisfied them all, because the grace of God also in its unity reacheth unto all; and when the lot is cast, the award is decided, not by the merits of each individual, but by the secret judgment of God.

And yet let no one say that such things had no good signification because they were done by the bad, that is to say, not by those who followed Christ, but by those who persecuted Him. For what could we have to say of the cross itself, which every one knows was in like manner made and fastened to Christ by enemies and sinners? And yet it is to it we may rightly understand the words of the apostle to be applicable, "what is the breadth, and the length, and the height, and the depth." For its breadth lies in the transverse beam, on which the hands of the Crucified are extended; and signifies good works in all the breadth of love: its length extends from the transverse beam to the ground, and is that whereto the back and feet are affixed; and signifies perseverance through the whole length of time to the end: its height is in the summit, which rises upwards above the transverse beam; and signifies the supernal goal, to which all works have reference, since all things that are done well and perseveringly, in respect of their breadth and length, are to be done also with due regard to the exalted character of the divine rewards: its depth is found in the part that is fixed into the ground; for there it is both concealed and invisible, and yet from thence spring up all those parts that are outstanding and evident to the senses; just as all that is good in us proceeds from the depths of the grace of God, which is beyond the reach of human comprehension and judgment. But even though the cross of Christ signified no more than what was said by the apostle, "And they who are Jesus Christ's have crucified the flesh with the passions and lusts," how great a good it is! And yet it does not this, unless the good spirit be lusting against the flesh, seeing that it was the opposing, or, in other words, the evil spirit that constructed the cross of Christ. And lastly, as every one knows, what else is the sign of Christ but the cross of Christ? For unless that sign be applied, whether it be to the foreheads of believers, or to the very water out of which they are regenerated, or to the oil with which they receive the anointing chrism, or to the sacrifice that nourishes them, none of them is properly administered. How then can it be that no good is signified by that which is done by the wicked, when by the cross of Christ, which the wicked made, every good thing is sealed to us in the celebration of His sacraments?

On Pilate giving sentence, the soldiers under his command crucified Jesus: Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments. And yet if we look to their intentions, their clamours, the Jews were rather the people which crucified Him. On the parting and casting lots for His garment, John gives more circumstances than the other Evangelists, And made four parts, to every soldier a part: whence we see there were four soldiers who executed the governor's sentence. And also His coat: took, understood. They took His coat too. The sentence is brought in so to shew that this was the only garment for which they cast lots, the others being divided. Now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

(Tract. cxviii) Why they cast lots for it, next appears: They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it whose it should be. It seems then that the other garments were made up of equal parts, as it was not necessary to rend them; the tunic only having to be rent in order to give each an equal share of it; to avoid which they preferred casting lots for it, and one having it all. This answered to the prophecy: That the Scripture might be fulfilled which saith, They parted My raiment among them, and for My vesture they did cast lots.

(Tract. cxviii. 3) Matthew in saying, They parted His garments, casting lots, (Mat. 27:35.) means us to understand the whole division of the garments, including the tunic also for which they cast lots. Luke says the same: They parted His raiment, and cast lots. (Luke 23:34) In parting His garments they came to the tunic, for which they cast lots. Mark is the only one that raises any question: They parted His garments, casting upon them what every man should take: (Mark 15:24) as if they cast lots for all the garments, and not the tunic only. But it is his brevity that creates the difficulty. Casting lots upon them: as if it was, casting lots when they were parting the garments. What every man should take: i. e. who should take the tunic; as if the whole stood thus: Casting lots upon them, who should take the tunic which remained over and above the equal shares, into which the rest of the garments were divided. The fourfold division of our Lord's garment represents His Church, spread over the four quarters of the globe, and distributed equally, i. e. in concord, to all. The tunic for which they cast lots signifies the unity of all the parts, which is contained in the bond of love. And if love is the more excellent way, above knowledge, and above all other commandments, according to Colossians, Above all things have charity, (Col. 3:14) the garment by which this is denoted, is well said to be woven from above. (desuper, ἄνωθεν) Through the whole, is added, because no one is void of it, who belongs to that whole, from which the Church Catholic is named. It is without seam again, so that it can never come unsown, and is in one piece, i. e. brings all together into one. (ad unum provenit) By the lot is signified the grace of God: for God elects not with respect to person or merits, but according to His own secret counsel.

(Tract. cxviii) Nor let any one say that these things had no good signification, because they were done by wicked men; for if so, what shall we say of the cross itself? For that was made by ungodly men, and yet certainly by it were signified, What is the length, and depth, and breadth, and height, (Eph. 3:18) as the Apostle saith. Its breadth consists of a cross beam, on which are stretched the hands of Him who hangs upon it. This signifies the breadth of charity, and the good works done therein. Its length consists of a cross beam going to the ground, and signifies perseverance in length of time. The height is the top which rises above the cross beam, and signifies the high end to which all things refer. The depth is that part which is fixed in the ground; there it is hidden, but the whole cross that we see rises from it. Even so all our good works proceed from the depth of God's incomprehensible grace. But though the cross of Christ only signify what the Apostle saith, They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts, (Gal. 5:24) how great a good is it? Lastly, what is the sign of Christ, but the cross of Christ? Which sign must be applied to the foreheads of believers, to the water of regeneration, to the oil of chrism, to the sacrifice whereby we are nourished, or none of these is profitable for life.

When the soldiers therefore had crucified him. Here is noted the third principal point, namely the cruelty or cupidity of those who crucified him, in this, that they stripped Christ and thus divided his garments. And three things are noted here, namely the division of the garments by parts: second, by lot: third, the confirmation of both by authority, lest anything in the death of Christ should seem to happen by chance.

They divide therefore by parts: whence he says: They took his garments and made four parts, a part for each soldier. In this it appears, as Augustine says, that there were four soldiers who crucified the Lord. And the tunic, supply: they took.

This sacrament of unity, this bond of a concord inseparably cohering, is set forth where in the Gospel the coat of the Lord Jesus Christ is not at all divided nor cut, but is received as an entire garment, and is possessed as an uninjured and undivided robe by those who cast lots concerning Christ's garment, who should rather put on Christ. Holy Scripture speaks, saying, "But of the coat, because it was not sewed, but woven from the top throughout, they said one to another, Let us not rend it, but cast lots whose it shall be." That coat bore with it an unity that came down from the top, that is, that came from heaven and the Father, which was not to be at all rent by the receiver and the possessor, but without separation we obtain a whole and substantial entireness. He cannot possess the garment of Christ who parts and divides the Church of Christ. On the other hand, again, when at Solomon's death his kingdom and people were divided, Abijah the prophet, meeting Jeroboam the king in the field, divided his garment into twelve sections, saying, "Take thee ten pieces; for thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and I will give ten sceptres unto thee; and two sceptres shall be unto him for my servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen to place my name there." As the twelve tribes of Israel were divided, the prophet Abijah rent his garment. But because Christ's people cannot be rent, His robe, woven and united throughout, is not divided by those who possess it; undivided, united, connected, it shows the coherent concord of our people who put on Christ. By the sacrament and sign of His garment, He has declared the unity of the Church.

"His tunic was not torn" since it represented his divinity, which was undivided because it was not composite. "His clothing, divided into four parts," symbolized his gospel, which was to go forth into the four parts of the world. Share then, for love of him, the body of him who, for love of you, shared his garment between those who were crucifying him. Take it, all of you, absorb it in its entirety, just as he, on his own, took and absorbed your death for everyone. Open the doors of your hearts to him who opened the doors of his kingdom to you.

And with that thought came a larger one, and the colossal figure of her Master had also crossed the theatre of my thoughts. The same modern difficulty which darkened the subject-matter of Anatole France also darkened that of Ernest Renan. Renan also divided his hero's pity from his hero's pugnacity. Renan even represented the righteous anger at Jerusalem as a mere nervous breakdown after the idyllic expectations of Galilee. As if there were any inconsistency between having a love for humanity and having a hatred for inhumanity! Altruists, with thin, weak voices, denounce Christ as an egoist. Egoists (with even thinner and weaker voices) denounce Him as an altruist. In our present atmosphere such cavils are comprehensible enough. The love of a hero is more terrible than the hatred of a tyrant. The hatred of a hero is more generous than the love of a philanthropist. There is a huge and heroic sanity of which moderns can only collect the fragments. There is a giant of whom we see only the lopped arms and legs walking about. They have torn the soul of Christ into silly strips, labelled egoism and altruism, and they are equally puzzled by His insane magnificence and His insane meekness. They have parted His garments among them, and for His vesture they have cast lots; though the coat was without seam woven from the top throughout.

The soldiers parted the garments, but not the coat. See the prophecies in every instance fulfilled by their wickednesses; for this also had been predicted of old; yet there were three crucified, but the matters of the prophecies were fulfilled in Him. For why did they not this in the case of the others, but in His case only? Consider too, I pray you, the exactness of the prophecy. For the Prophet saith not only, that they "parted," but that they "did not part." The rest therefore they divided, the coat they divided not, but committed the matter to a decision by lot. And the, "Woven from the top" is not put without a purpose; but some say that a figurative assertion is declared by it, that the Crucified was not simply man, but had also the Divinity from above. Others say that the Evangelist describes the very form of the coat. For since in Palestine they put together two strips of cloth and so weave their garments, John, to show that the coat was of this kind, saith, "Woven from the top"; and to me he seems to say this, alluding to the poorness of the garments, and that as in all other things, so in dress also, He followed a simple fashion.

On the other hand, Christ, who spoke not guile from His mouth, and who exhibited all righteousness and humility, not only (as we have above recorded it predicted of Him) was not exposed to that kind of death for his own deserts, but (was so exposed) in order that what was predicted by the prophets as destined to come upon Him through your means might be fulfilled; just as, in the Psalms, the Spirit Himself of Christ was already singing, saying, "They were repaying me evil for good; " and, "What I had not seized I was then paying in full; " They exterminated my hands and feet; " and, "They put into my drink gall, and in my thirst they slaked me with vinegar; " "Upon my vesture they did cast (the) lot; " just as the other (outrages) which you were to commit on Him were foretold,-all which He, actually and thoroughly suffering, suffered not for any evil action of His own, but "that the Scriptures from the mouth of the prophets might be fulfilled."

The words "woven from the top" are added not without significance. Some say that these words allegorically express that the Crucified One was not a mere Man, but also possessed Divinity "from above." Others say that the evangelist is describing the actual appearance of the tunic. Since in Palestine they join two pieces of fabric, that is, two cloths, to weave garments, using weaving instead of a seam, John, in order to show that such exactly was the tunic, said that it was "woven from the top throughout," that is, woven from the beginning and from top to bottom. By this remark he points to the poverty of Christ's clothing. Still others say that in Palestine they weave cloth not as we do: for us the warp and weft are on top, and the fabric is woven from below and thus proceeds upward; there, on the contrary, the warp is below, and the cloth is woven from the top. Such, they say, was the tunic of the Lord. Without doubt, here too a mystery is revealed. The Lord's body was woven from above, for the Holy Spirit came and the power of the Most High overshadowed the Virgin (Lk. 1:35). For although He assumed the lowly and fallen human nature, the Divine Flesh was formed and woven by the heavenly grace of the Holy Spirit. Thus, the Holy Body of Christ, divided and distributed in the four parts of the world, remains undivided. For, being imparted to each one individually and sanctifying each by His body, the Only-Begotten dwells wholly and undividedly in all through His flesh. For, being everywhere, He is in no way divided, as the apostle Paul also cries out (1 Cor. 1:13). Since all things are composed of four elements, by the garment of Jesus one may understand this visible and created nature, which the demons divide when they put to death the Word of God dwelling within us; they strive to draw us to their side through attachment to worldly goods, but they cannot tear the tunic, that is, the Word existing in all that exists, by which all things exist. For no matter how many times I may be beguiled by transient goods, I still know that they are transient; I know both the quality and the substance of deceptive and passing things.

Others say that they did not weave in Palestine, as we do, the shuttle being driven upwards through the warp; so that among them the woof was not carried upwards but downwardsb.

The garment without seam denotes the body of Christ, which was woven from above; for the Holy Ghost came upon the Virgin, and the power of the Highest overshadowed her. This holy body of Christ then is indivisible: for though it be distributed for every one to partake of, and to sanctify the soul and body of each one individually, yet it subsists in all wholly and indivisibly. The world consisting of four elements, the garments of Christ must be understood to represent the visible creation, which the devils divide amongst themselves, as often as they deliver to death the word of God which dwelleth in us, and by worldly allurements bring us over to their side.

2425 Now the Evangelist shows the role played by the soldiers (v 23): first, he mentions that Christ's garments were distributed among them; and secondly, we see that lots were cast for his tunic.

2426 He says, When the soldiers had crucified Jesus they took his garments. We can gather two things from this: the debasement of the dying Christ, for the soldiers stripped him, which was done only to those they despised; secondly, we see the greed of the soldiers, because they took his garments and made four parts, one for each soldier. Soldiers were a very rapacious group, and so John the Baptizer told them to "Rob no one... and be content with your pay" (Lk 3:14); "They send men away naked, taking away their clothes" [Job 24:7].

2427 In regard to the second, he says, also his tunic. First, his tunic is described; and then lots are cast for it (v 24).

2428 He says, also his tunic, that is, they took that along with his other garments. But the tunic was without seam, woven from top to bottom. He says that it was without a seam to indicate its unity. Some say this shows how valuable it was. On the other hand, Chrysostom says that the Evangelist says this to suggest that it was common and ordinary; for in Palestine the poor wear clothing made from many pieces of cloth, one sewn over another: "For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor" (2 Cor 8:9).

2429 As for the mystical interpretation, this passage can be referred to the mystical body of Christ. Then Christ's garments are divided into four parts because the Church is spread over the four parts of the world: "As I live, says the Lord, you shall put them all on as an ornament, you shall bind them on as a bride does" (Is 49:18). The tunic without seam, which was not divided, indicates charity, because the other virtues are not united by themselves, but by another, because all of them are directed to the ultimate end, and it is charity alone which unites us to this end. While it is faith which makes known our ultimate end, and by hope we tend toward it, only charity unites us to it: "And above all these put on love, which binds everything together" (Col 3:14).

The tunic is said to be woven from the top because charity is above, at the top, of all the other virtues: "I will show you a still more excellent way" (1 Cor 12:31); "To know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God" (Eph 3:19). Or, it is woven from the top because our charity does not come from ourselves, but from the Holy Spirit: "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us" (Rom 5:5). The tunic woven from the top can also signify the real body of Christ, because the body of Christ was formed by a higher power, one from the top, by the Holy Spirit "That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit" (Mt 1:20).

That they cast lots for his tunic alone, "woven from the top without seam," rather than dividing it, demonstrated clearly enough that the visible sacraments, even though they too are the garments of Christ, can still be had by anybody, good or bad. But that sincere and genuine faith, which "works through love" to achieve the integrity of unity—because "the love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us"5—that this faith does not belong to anybody at all but is given by God's hidden grace as by lot. Thus to Simon, who had baptism but did not have this, Peter could say, "You have no lot or part in this faith."

Here is noted the division of the tunic made by lot: and the reason is given: Now the tunic was seamless, woven from the top throughout, that is, entirely continuous: and because it could not be conveniently divided, the soldiers said to one another: Let us not tear it, but let us cast lots for it, whose it shall be: because, as is said in Proverbs 18, "the lot suppresses contradictions and judges even among the powerful." And lest it be thought that this happened by chance, it is shown that this was foretold by the Prophet, when he says: That the Scripture might be fulfilled, saying, in Psalm 21: "O God, my God, look upon me": They divided my garments, as to the first, and upon my vesture they cast lots, as to the division of the tunic. And this Scripture was understood not of the Jews, but of the soldiers: therefore he says: And the soldiers indeed did these things.

Spiritually, the tunic of Christ, which is undivided, signifies charity, which is a garment, because it covers shame: 1 Peter 4: Because charity covers a multitude of sins: and adorns, whence it is called the wedding garment, without which no one enters into the joy of the nuptials of the Lamb: whence Matthew 22: Friend, how did you come in here not having a wedding garment? This tunic is seamless, because it is not bound by another thing, but is itself the bond of others: Colossians 3: But above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection. This tunic is not to be divided by tearing: whence 1 Corinthians 1: I beseech you, brethren, that you all say the same thing: and Ephesians 4: Being solicitous to preserve the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. Those who divide this tunic are worse than the soldiers who crucified him, who were unwilling to divide the seamless garment of the Lord.

Since in Matthew twenty-seven it is said: They divided his garments, casting lots, it seems that they cast lots not only over the tunic but over all the garments; yet John speaks only of the tunic. The same thing is said in Mark fifteen: They divided his garments, casting lots upon them, who should take what. To this Augustine responds and says that "that passage in Matthew is understood as referring to the whole division of the garments, in the course of which they came to the tunic, over which they cast lots." To that passage in Mark it must be said that this is the meaning: "they divided the garments first, then casting lots over the tunic, which remained or was left over, as to who should take it."

The soldiers, then, divided our Saviour's garments among themselves, and this is indicative of their brutal ferocity and inhuman disposition. For it is the custom of executioners to be unmoved by the misery of condemned criminals, and to obey orders sometimes with unnecessary harshness, and to show a masculine indifference to the fate of the sufferers, and to divide their garments among themselves, as though the lot fell upon them by some sufficient and lawful reason. They divided, then, the dissevered garments into four portions, but kept the one coat whole and uncut. For they did not choose to tear it in pieces, and make it altogether useless, and so they decided it by casting lots. For Christ could not lie, Who thus spake by the voice of the Psalmist: They divided My raiment among them, and upon My vesture did they cast lots. All these things were foretold for our profit, that we might know, by comparing the prophecies with the events, what He is of Whom it was foretold that He should come for our sake in our likeness, and of Whom it was expected that He should die for the salvation of all men. For no man of sense can suppose that the Saviour Himself, like the foolish Jews, would strain out the gnat, that is, foretell a trifling detail concerning His sufferings, as in this mention of the partition of His raiment, and, as it were, swallow the camel, that is, think of no account the great lengths to which the impious presumption of the Jews carried them. Rather, when He foretold these details, He foretold also the great event itself; firstly, in order that we might know that, as He was by Nature God, He had perfect knowledge of the future; secondly, also, that we might believe that He was in fact the Messiah of prophecy, being led to the knowledge of the truth by the many and great things fulfilled in Him.

And if it behoves us also to declare another thought which strikes us with regard to the partition of the garments----a thought which can do no harm, and may possibly do good to those who hear it----I will speak as follows: Their division of the Saviour's garments into four parts, and retention of the coat in its undivided state, is perhaps symbolical of the mysterious providence whereby the four quarters of the world were destined to be saved. For the four quarters of the world divided, as it were, among themselves the garment of the Word, that is, His Body which yet remained indivisible. For though the Only-begotten be cut into small pieces, so far as individual needs are concerned, and sanctify the soul of every man, together with his body, by His Flesh; yet is He, being One, altogether subsistent in the whole Church in indivisible entirety; for, as Saint Paul saith, Christ cannot be divided. That such is the meaning of the mystery concerning Him, the Law dimly shadows forth. For the Law represented the taking of a lamb at the fitting time, and the taking, not of one lamb for every man, but of one for every house, according to the number of the household; for every man (if his household were too small) was to join with his neighbour that was next unto his house. And so the command was, that many should have a part in one lamb; but, in order that it might not appear, therefore, to be physically divided, by the flesh being dissevered from the bones, and taken from house to house, the Law laid down the further injunction: In one house shall it be eaten: ye shall not carry forth ought of the flesh abroad out of the house. For observe how, as I said just now, the Law took care that many who might be in one household should have a part in one lamb, but most carefully also took great precautions that it should not appear physically divided, but should be found in its completeness and entirety as one in all who partook of it, being, at the same time, divisible and indivisible. We must entertain some such view with regard to Christ's garments, for they were divided into four portions, but the coat remained undivided.

And it can do no harm also to add, that if any man choose, by way of speculation, to look upon the coat that was woven from the top throughout, and seamless, as an illustration of Christ's holy Body, because It came into being without any connection or intercourse of man with woman, but woven into its proper shape by the effective working of the Spirit from above, this view is worthy our acceptance. For such speculations as do no damage to the elements of the faith, but are rather fertile of profit, it would surely be ill-advised for us to reject; nay, we ought rather to commend them, as the fruit of an excellent disposition of mind.

And with that thought came a larger one, and the colossal figure of her Master had also crossed the theatre of my thoughts. The same modern difficulty which darkened the subject-matter of Anatole France also darkened that of Ernest Renan. Renan also divided his hero's pity from his hero's pugnacity. Renan even represented the righteous anger at Jerusalem as a mere nervous breakdown after the idyllic expectations of Galilee. As if there were any inconsistency between having a love for humanity and having a hatred for inhumanity! Altruists, with thin, weak voices, denounce Christ as an egoist. Egoists (with even thinner and weaker voices) denounce Him as an altruist. In our present atmosphere such cavils are comprehensible enough. The love of a hero is more terrible than the hatred of a tyrant. The hatred of a hero is more generous than the love of a philanthropist. There is a huge and heroic sanity of which moderns can only collect the fragments. There is a giant of whom we see only the lopped arms and legs walking about. They have torn the soul of Christ into silly strips, labelled egoism and altruism, and they are equally puzzled by His insane magnificence and His insane meekness. They have parted His garments among them, and for His vesture they have cast lots; though the coat was without seam woven from the top throughout.

What the devil contrives in his cunning serves to fulfill the prophecies. And behold the truth. There were three who were crucified, and yet the words of the prophets are fulfilled in Him alone. And note the precision of the prophecy. The prophet spoke not only about what they divided, but also about what they did not divide. The other garments they divided into parts, but the tunic they did not, instead leaving its fate to the casting of lots (Ps. 22:18). Soldiers acted according to their own folly.

While the soldiers were doing their cruel work, He was thinking anxiously of His mother: These things therefore the soldiers did. Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.

2430 The Evangelist says that lots were cast for Christ's tunic, they said to one another, Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be. There is one way of casting lots which is a form of divination; this is unlawful because there is no necessity for it. Sometimes lots are cast to know how things should be allotted or divided up; and this is lawful in earthly matters but not in spiritual things. The purpose of this is to submit to God's plan and will those matters that we cannot decide by ourselves. "The lot is cast into the lap, but the decision is wholly from the Lord" (Prv 16:33); and again, "The lot puts an end to disputes" (Prv 18:18).

2431 Matthew says something different, that "they divided his garments among them by casting lots" (Mt 27:35). The reply is that Matthew does not say that they cast lots for all his garments. Indeed, while they divided some among themselves, they cast lots for his tunic.

2432 Mark is still more forceful, saying, "They divided his garments among them, casting lots for them, to decide what each should take" of all his clothes (Mk 15:24). According to Augustine, this means they cast lots for one of his garments, to decide which one would take the tunic.

2433 Now the Evangelist brings in the prophecy of this event (v 24). First, he mentions the prophecy. The prophet's exactness is remarkable, for he foretold in detail some of the things that were done to Christ. Clearly these things did not happen by chance; thus he says, this was to fulfill the scripture, one thing after another, which said (Ps 22:18) that they parted my garments among them, not saying garment, because there were more than one, and for my clothing, that is, for my tunic they cast lots.

Secondly, he states that the prophecy was fulfilled, So the soldiers did this. We can see from this that the divine Scripture is fulfilled even in its details: "Not an iota, not a jot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished" (Mt 6:18); "Everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled" (Lk 24:44).

Mary, the mother of the Lord, stood by her Son's cross. No one has taught me this but the holy Evangelist John. Others have related how the earth was shaken at the Lord's passion, the sky was covered with darkness, the sun withdrew itself and how the thief was, after a faithful confession, received into paradise. John tells us what the others have not told, how the Lord while fixed on the cross called to his mother. He thought it was more important that, victorious over his sufferings, Jesus gave her the offices of piety than that he gave her a heavenly kingdom. For if it is the mark of religion to grant pardon to the thief, it is a mark of much greater piety that a mother is honored with such affection by her Son. "Behold," he says, "your son." … "Behold your mother." Christ testified from the cross and divided the offices of piety between the mother and the disciple.…Nor was Mary below what was becoming the mother of Christ. When the apostles fled, she stood at the cross and with pious eyes beheld her Son's wounds. For she did not look to the death of her offspring but to the salvation of the world. Or perhaps, because that "royal hall" knew that the redemption of the world would be through the death of her Son, she thought that by her death she also might add something to that universal gift. But Jesus did not need a helper for the redemption of all, who saved all without a helper. This is why he says, "I am counted among those who go down to the pit. I am like those who have no help." He received indeed the affection of his mother but sought not another's help. Imitate her, holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of maternal virtue. For neither have you sweeter children, nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son.

Mary the mother of our Lord stood before the cross of her Son. None of the Evangelists hath told me this except John. The others have related how that at our Lord's Passion the earth quaked, the heaven was overspread with darkness, the sun fled, the thief was taken into paradise after confession. John hath told us, what the others have not, how that from the cross whereon He hung, He called to His mother. He thought it a greater thing to show Him victorious over punishment, fulfilling the offices of piety to His mother, than giving the kingdom of heaven and eternal life to the thief. For if it was religious to give life to the thief, a much richer work of piety it is for a son to honour his mother with such affection. Behold, He saith, thy son; behold thy mother. Christ made His Testament from the cross, and divided the offices of piety between the Mother and the disciples. Our Lord made not only a public, but also a domestic Testamnet. And this His Testament John sealed, a witness worthy of such a Testator. A good testament it was, not of money, but of eternal life, which was not written with ink, but with the spirit of the living God: My tongue is the pen of a ready writer. (Ps. 45:1) Mary, as became the mother of our Lord, stood before the cross, when the Apostles fled, and with pitiful eyes beheld the wounds of her Son. For she looked not on the death of the Hostage, but on the salvation of the world; and perhaps knowing that her Son's death would bring this salvation, she who had been the habitation of the King, thought that by her death she might add to that universal gift. But Jesus did not need any help for saving the world, as we read in the Psalm, I have been even as a man with no help, free among the dead. (Ps. 87) He received indeed the affection of a parent, but He did not seek another's help. Imitate her, ye holy matrons, who, as towards her only most beloved Son, hath set you an example of such virtue: for ye have not sweeter sons, nor did the Virgin seek consolation in again becoming a mother.

(de Con. Ev. iii. 21) If Matthew and Mark had not mentioned by name Mary Magdalen, we should have thought that there were two parties, one of which stood far off, and the other near. But how must we account for the same Mary Magdalen and the other women standing afar off, as Matthew and Mark say, and being near the cross, as John says? By supposing that they were within such a distance as to be within sight of our Lord, and yet sufficiently far off to be out of the way of the crowd and Centurion, and soldiers who were immediately about Him. Or, we may suppose that after our Lord had commended His mother to the disciple, they retired to be out of the way of the crowd, and saw what took place afterwards at a distance: so that those Evangelists who do not mention them till after our Lord's death, describe them as standing afar off. (Matthew and Mark.) That some women are mentioned by all alike, others not, makes no matter.

Simeon … prophesies about Mary herself, that when standing by the cross and seeing what is being done and hearing the voices, after the witness of Gabriel, after her secret knowledge of the divine conception, after the great exhibition of miracles, she shall feel about her soul a mighty tempest. The Lord was bound to taste of death for every human being—to become a propitiation for the world and to justify all people by his own blood.

She paid this price as a woman strong and devout, namely when Christ suffered on the cross to pay this price, so that he might purify, wash, and redeem us; then the blessed Virgin was present, accepting and consenting to the divine will. And it pleased her that the price of her womb should be offered on the cross for us. Whence in John: "There stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother and the disciple standing, whom he loved, he said to his mother: Woman, behold your son," namely, who will be handed over as the price of redemption of the human race: as if he were saying: it is necessary for you to be without me, and for me to be without you; and you yourself, as a holy woman, conceived him, and as a devout woman, you offer him; may it please you, O Virgin, that I redeem the human race and appease God. And lest she be left desolate, he said to the disciple: "Behold, your mother"; he gave a virgin man to the Virgin.

Now there stood by the cross etc. Here is noted the paucity of those who shared in his suffering: because out of all his dear ones, three women were present, among whom was also the Mother of the Lord, for whom the Lord also felt compassion. And four things are noted here: the compassion of the women toward the Lord, the Lord's solicitude toward his Mother, and from that solicitude, his commendation, and lastly, the acceptance of the commendation.

Therefore the compassion of the women is noted in this that he says: They stood near the cross of Jesus: they drew near in body because the feeling of compassion drew them. Others indeed had withdrawn far away through lack of compassion; whence it is said in the Psalm: "Those who were near me stood afar off." But these women stood near, who loved more, namely his Mother, who suffered with him above all others: whence Luke chapter two: "A sword shall pierce through your own soul"; and the sister of his Mother, Mary of Cleophas: she was the mother of James. It should be noted that Anne is said to have had three husbands: Joachim, Cleophas, and Salome, and from these three husbands she had three Marys, namely the Mother of the Lord, who was the daughter of Joachim; the mother of James, who was the daughter of Cleophas; the mother of Simon and Jude, who was the daughter of Salome. And Mary Magdalene, who was so called from the town of Magdala. These three women, as being more compassionate, stood near the cross of the Lord.

This also the inspired Evangelist mentions to our profit, showing herein also, that none of the words of Holy Writ fall to the ground. What do I mean by this? I will tell you. He represents, as standing by the Cross, His mother, and with her the rest, clearly weeping. For women are ever prone to tears, and very much inclined to lament, especially when they have abundant occasion for shedding tears. What, then, induced the blessed Evangelist to go so much into detail, as to make mention of the women as staying beside the Cross? His object was to teach us that, as was likely, the unexpected fate of our Lord was an offence unto His mother, and that His exceeding bitter death upon the Cross almost banished from her heart due reflection; and, besides the insults of the Jews, and the soldiers also, who probably stayed by the Cross and derided Him Who hung thereon, and who presumed, in His mother's very sight, to divide His garments among themselves, had this effect. For, doubtless, some such train of thought as this passed through her mind: "I conceived Him That is mocked upon the Cross. He said, indeed, that He was the true Son of Almighty God, but it may be that He was deceived; He may have erred when He said: I am the Life. How did His crucifixion come to pass? and how was He entangled in the snares of His murderers? How was it that He did not prevail over the conspiracy of His persecutors against Him? And why does He not come down from the Cross, though He bade Lazarus return to life, and struck all Judaea with amazement by His miracles?" The woman, as is likely, not exactly understanding the mystery, wandered astray into some such train of thought; for we shall do well to remember, that the character of these events was such as to awe and subdue the most sober mind. And no marvel if a woman fell into such an error, when even Peter himself, the elect of the holy disciples, was once offended, when Christ in plain words instructed him that He would be betrayed unto the hands of sinners, and would undergo crucifixion and death, so that he impetuously exclaimed: Be it far from Thee, Lord; this shall never be unto Thee. What wonder, then, if a woman's frail mind was also plunged into thoughts which betrayed weakness? And when we thus speak, we are not shooting at a venture, as some may suppose, but are led to suspect this by what is written concerning the mother of our Lord. For we remember that the righteous Simeon, when he received the infant Lord into his arms, after having blessed Him, and said: Now lettest Thou Thy servant depart, O Lord, according to Thy Word, in peace; for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation, he also said to the holy Virgin herself: Behold, this Child is set for the falling and rising up of many in Israel; and for a sign which is spoken against; yea, and a sword shall pierce through thine own soul, that thoughts out of many hearts may be revealed. By a sword he meant the keen pang of suffering, which would divide the mind of the woman into strange thoughts; for temptations prove the hearts of those who are tempted, and leave them bare of the thoughts that filled them.

Let's begin with some things that we ought to know about John, but which we usually don't. John was very likely the Lord's first cousin on their mothers' side. John was a son of Zebedee, and his mother's name was Salome, which we can find out by comparing Mark 16:1 and Matt.27:56. Mark says that the third woman who went to the tomb was Salome and Matthew said it was the mother of Zebedee's children. And then in John 19:25, it says that four women were present at the crucifixion—two Marys from Mark and Matthew, the Lord's mother, and the Lord's aunt. This helps make sense of how the Lord would entrust the care of His mother to John, which on this reading would be her nephew. It also helps explain the particular closeness of Jesus and John (John 21:7).

John was also from a well-to-do family with respectable connections. His father had hired servants (Mark 1:20), and Salome was one of the women who was a financial patroness of the Lord's ministry (Luke 8:3; Mark 15:40). John was known to the high priest (John 18:15-16), and was able to get Peter into the place where the Lord was being tried.

We also know a great deal about John's giftedness and related challenges. Jesus named him, together with his brother, a son of thunder (Mark 3:17). He was a fire-eater, and sometimes succumbed to the temptations that come with that—which would be misdirected zeal and ambition. He was one of the disciples who wanted Jesus to torch a Samaritan village (Luke 9:54), and it was Salome who made the request for James and John to sit at Christ's left and right hand (Matt. 20:20; Mark 10:37). John was not formally trained (Acts 4:13), but was nonetheless a staggering genius. He was a tender and humble man as revealed by all his writings, but it is very plain that this was the result of the Spirit taming a lot of horsepower.

He remained in Jerusalem for a number of years—at least 14 (Gal. 2:9), but then moved to Ephesus, where he wrote his gospel (according to Irenaeus. That was the time during which he was exiled to Patmos. According to early reports, he lived until the reign of Trajan (which started in 98 A.D.)

After the martyrdom of James and the conquest of Jerusalem which immediately followed, it is said that those of the apostles and disciples of the Lord that were still living came together from all directions with those that were related to the Lord according to the flesh (for the majority of them also were still alive) to take counsel as to who was worthy to succeed James.

They all with one consent pronounced Symeon, the son of Clopas, of whom the Gospel also makes mention; to be worthy of the episcopal throne of that parish. He was a cousin, as they say, of the Saviour. For Hegesippus records that Clopas was a brother of Joseph.

1. It is reported that after the age of Nero and Domitian, under the emperor whose times we are now recording, a persecution was stirred up against us in certain cities in consequence of a popular uprising. In this persecution we have understood that Symeon, the son of Clopas, who, as we have shown, was the second bishop of the church of Jerusalem, suffered martyrdom.

Hegesippus, whose words we have already quoted in various places, is a witness to this fact also. Speaking of certain heretics he adds that Symeon was accused by them at this time; and since it was clear that he was a Christian, he was tortured in various ways for many days, and astonished even the judge himself and his attendants in the highest degree, and finally he suffered a death similar to that of our Lord.

But there is nothing like hearing the historian himself, who writes as follows: "Certain of these heretics brought accusation against Symeon, the son of Clopas, on the ground that he was a descendant of David and a Christian; and thus he suffered martyrdom, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, while Trajan was emperor and Atticus governor."

And the same writer says that his accusers also, when search was made for the descendants of David, were arrested as belonging to that family. And it might be reasonably assumed that Symeon was one of those that saw and heard the Lord, judging from the length of his life, and from the fact that the Gospel makes mention of Mary, the wife of Clopas, who was the father of Symeon, as has been already shown.

The same historian says that there were also others, descended from one of the so-called brothers of the Saviour, whose name was Judas, who, after they had borne testimony before Domitian, as has been already recorded, in behalf of faith in Christ, lived until the same reign.

He writes as follows: "They came, therefore, and took the lead of every church as witnesses and as relatives of the Lord. And profound peace being established in every church, they remained until the reign of the Emperor Trajan, and until the above-mentioned Symeon, son of Clopas, an uncle of the Lord, was informed against by the heretics, and was himself in like manner accused for the same cause before the governor Atticus. And after being tortured for many days he suffered martyrdom, and all, including even the proconsul, marveled that, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, he could endure so much. And orders were given that he should be crucified."

Clopas was a brother of Joseph.

Certain of these heretics brought accusation against Symeon, the son of Clopas, on the ground that he was a descendant of David and a Christian; and thus he suffered martyrdom, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, while Trajan was emperor and Atticus governor... They came, therefore, and took the lead of every church as witnesses and as relatives of the Lord. And profound peace being established in every church, they remained until the reign of the Emperor Trajan, and until the above-mentioned Symeon, son of Clopas, an uncle of the Lord, was informed against by the heretics, and was himself in like manner accused for the same cause before the governor Atticus. And after being tortured for many days he suffered martyrdom, and all, including even the proconsul, marveled that, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, he could endure so much. And orders were given that he should be crucified.

And after James the Just had suffered martyrdom, as the Lord had also on the same account, Symeon, the son of the Lord's uncle, Clopas, was appointed the next bishop. All proposed him as second bishop because he was a cousin of the Lord.

The Mary who is described as the mother of James the Less was the wife of Alphæus and sister of Mary the Lord's mother, the one who is called by John the Evangelist "Mary of Clopas," whether after her father, or kindred, or for some other reason. But if you think they are two persons because elsewhere we read, "Mary the mother of James the Less," and here, "Mary of Clopas," you have still to learn that it is customary in Scripture for the same individual to bear different names.

The Mary which in Mark and Matthew is called the mother of James and Joses, was the wife of Alpheus, and sister of Mary the mother of our Lord: which Mary John here designates of Cleophas, either from her father, or family, or for some other reason. She need not be thought a different person, because she is called in one place Mary the mother of James the less, and here Mary of Cleophas, for it is customary in Scripture to give different names to the same person.

But the women stood by the Cross, and the weaker sex then appeared the manlier; so entirely henceforth were all things transformed.

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

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

The lamb, Mary, beholding her lamb advancing to the slaughter, Followed him wearily with the other women, saying, "Where are you going, O my son?… Is there another wedding again in Cana, And are you hurrying there now In order that you may make wine from water for them? Shall I go with you, my child, or should I wait for you instead? Give me some word, O Word, And do not pass me by in silence, You who have kept me pure, My son and my God.…

"You go on, O child, to an unjust death, And no one shares in your suffering with you. Peter does not accompany you— He who said to you, 'I shall never deny you, even if I die.' Thomas has left you—the one who cried out, 'Let us all die with him.' And again the others, family and sons [of God], Destined to judge the twelve tribes, where are they now? Not one of all of them is here. But the one above all, You, alone, O Son, saved all who were opposed [to you]. You reconciled all who were against [you], My son and my God." …

[Jesus replies] "O Mother, hold on for a little longer, and you will see how, like a healer, I strip down and come where they lie dead And heal their wounds, Cutting their callousness and hardness with the point of the spear. And when I receive the vinegar, I use it as an astringent on the wound; And when I have opened up the cut with the scalpel of the nails, I will use my tunic as a dressing, Having my cross as the remedy, I use it, O Mother, so that you may sing with understanding: 'By suffering he has redeemed suffering, My son and my God.'

"Therefore leave behind your grief, O Mother And set out on your journey with joy. For I am already hurrying towards that for which I came, To fulfill the plan of him who sent me; For, this was from the beginning what was ordained for me Even by my Father, and it did not displease my spirit then that I should become incarnate And suffer on behalf of the fallen. Hurry then, O Mother, announce to all, 'By suffering he strikes down the one who hates Adam And, having conquered, he comes, My son and my God.' "

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

Why is Mary of Cleopas called the sister of His Mother, when Joachim had no other child? Cleopas was a brother of Joseph. When Cleopas died childless, according to the account of some, Joseph took his wife for himself and begat children for his brother. One of them is the Mary now mentioned. She is called a sister of the Theotokos, that is, a relative. For Scripture has the custom of calling kinsmen brothers. For example, Isaac says of Rebekah that she is his sister, although she was his wife. So here too the reputed daughter of Cleopas is called the sister of the Theotokos by kinship. In the Gospels there appear four Marys: one is the Theotokos, who is called the Mother of James and Joses, for they were children of Joseph, born from his first wife, perhaps the wife of Cleopas. The Theotokos is called their Mother, as a stepmother, for She was considered the wife of Joseph. Another is the Magdalene, from whom the Lord cast out seven demons; the third is the wife of Cleopas, and the fourth is the sister of Lazarus.

2434 Thirdly, we see the part played by the friends of Jesus. First, the Evangelist mentions the women who were standing there; secondly, his eagerness for the care of his mother (v 26); thirdly, the ready obedience of the disciple (v 27).

2435 Three women are mentioned as standing by the cross of Jesus: his mother, then his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When the Evangelists mention the women who were standing with Christ, it is only John who mentions the Blessed Virgin. Two questions occur about this incident.

2436 Matthew (27:55) and Mark (15:40) say that the women were standing far off, while John says that they stood by the cross. One could say in answer that the women mentioned by Matthew and Mark were not the same as those mentioned by John. However, the difficulty with this answer is that Mary Magdalene is in the group mentioned by Matthew and Mark, and also in the group mentioned by John. So one should say that all were referring to the same women. But there is no contradiction. Near and far are relative; and nothing prevents something from being near in one sense and far in another. The women were said to be near because they were within the range of sight, and they could be described as afar because other people were between them and Jesus. Or, one could say that when the crucifixion was beginning, the women were standing near Christ and were able to speak to him; while later, when a number of people came forward to taunt him, the women withdrew and stood further away. Thus John is telling what happened at first, and the other Evangelists what happened after.

2437 The other issue is that John mentions Mary of Clopas, while in place of her, Matthew and Mark mention Mary, the mother of James, who is also described as Mary of Alphaeus. We should say about this that Mary of Clopas, mentioned by John, is the same as Mary of Alphaeus, mentioned by Matthew. For this Mary had two husbands, Clopas and Alphaeus. Or, one could say that Clopas was her father.

2438 The fact that the women stood by the cross while the disciples left Christ and ran away is an expression of their unfailing affection. As Job (19:20) says: "My flesh is consumed, my bones cleave to my skin," where the flesh can stand for the disciples, who ran off, and the skin can stand for the women, for they stayed close to Christ.

The Samaritan woman at the well found the Lord thirsting, and by him thirsting, she was filled. She first found him thirsting in order that he might drink from her faith. And when he was on the cross, he said, "I thirst," although they did not give him that for which he was thirsting. For he was thirsting for them.

He then adds: "After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and fixed it upon hyssop, and put it to His mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, He said, It is finished: and He bowed His head, and gave up the ghost." Who has the power of so adjusting what he does, as this Man had of arranging all that He suffered? But this Man was the Mediator between God and men; the Man of whom we read in prophecy, He is man also, and who shall acknowledge Him? for the men who did such things acknowledged not this Man as God. For He who was manifest as man, was hid as God: He who was manifest suffered all these things, and He Himself also, who was hid, arranged them all. He saw, therefore, that all was accomplished that required to be done before He received the vinegar, and gave up the ghost; and that this also might be accomplished which the scripture had foretold, "And in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink," He said, "I thirst:" as if it were, One thing still you have failed to do, give me what you are. For the Jews were themselves the vinegar, degenerated as they were from the wine of the patriarchs and prophets; and filled like a full vessel with the wickedness of this world, with hearts like a sponge, deceitful in the formation of its cavernous and tortuous recesses. But the hyssop, whereon they placed the sponge filled with vinegar, being a lowly herb, and purging the heart, we fitly take for the humility of Christ Himself; which they thus enclosed, and imagined they had completely ensnared. Hence we have it said in the psalm, "Thou shalt purge me with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed." For it is by Christ's humility that we are cleansed; because, had He not humbled Himself, and became obedient unto the death of the cross, His blood certainly would not have been shed for the remission of sins, or, in other words, for our cleansing.

(Tr. cxix.) He who appeared man, suffered all these things; He who was God, ordered them: After this Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished; i. e. knowing the prophecy in the Psalms, And when I was thirsty, they gave me vinegar to drink, (Ps. 68) said, I thirst:As if to say, ye have not done all (minus): give me yourselves: for the Jews were themselves vinegar, having degenerated from the wine of the Patriarchs and the Prophets. Now there was a vessel full of vinegar: they had drunk from the wickedness of the world, as from a full vessel, and their heart was deceitful, as it were, a spunge full of caves and crooked hiding places: And they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.

The hyssop around which they put the spunge full of vinegar, being a mean herb, taken to purge the breast, represents the humility of Christ, which they hemmed in and thought they had circumvented. (ὑσσώπῳ περιθέντες) For we are made clean by Christ's humility. Nor let it perplex you that they were able to reach His mouth when He was such a height above the ground: for we read in the other Evangelists, what John omits to mention, that the spunge was put upon a reed.

Afterward, Jesus knowing, etc. Above he treated of the passion; here he treats of the consummation of the passion. The consummation, therefore, of Christ's passion with respect to the testimony of Scripture is attended to in this, that around him all things should come to pass which had been foretold through the Prophets.

The intention of consummating, therefore, is indicated in what he says: Afterward, Jesus knowing that all things were now consummated, supply: which are written concerning the Son of man; but not fully, therefore he says now; that the Scripture might be fulfilled, that is, willing to perfectly fulfill the Scripture, which says in the Psalm: "In my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink"; he says: I thirst. And this was a sign of the weakness assumed and of the truth of his nature, against those heretics who said that he had not truly suffered. And indeed he said this not so much on account of need as for the fulfilling of Scripture.

It is asked concerning what he says, that, in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled, he asked for drink. The order seems reversed, because the Lord does not exist for the sake of the Law, but the Law and the Scripture for the sake of the Lord; whence: Christ is the end of the Law. It must be said that the "that" here is not causal but consecutive; so the sense is not that the Lord did this in order that Scripture might be fulfilled, but that this followed upon the Lord's action, namely the fulfillment of Scripture, which had foretold this.

When the iniquity of the Jews had fully wrought the impious crime against Christ, and when there was nothing left wanting to the perfect satisfaction of their savage cruelty, the flesh, at the last extremity, felt a natural craving, for it was parched by the various acts of outrage, and felt thirst. For pain is very apt to provoke thirst, spending the natural moisture of the body in excessive inward heat, and burning the inward parts with the pangs of inflammation. It would have been easy for the Word, the Almighty God, to have released His Flesh from this torment; but, just as He willingly underwent His other sufferings, so He bore this also of His own Will. Then He sought to drink; but so pitiless and far removed from the love of God were they, that, instead of liquid to quench His thirst, they gave Him something to aggravate it, and, in rendering the very service of love, committed a further act of impiety. For, in acceding at all to His request, were they not assuming the appearance of affection? But it was impossible that the inspired Scripture should ever lie, which put into the mouth of the Saviour these words concerning them: They gave Me gall to eat, and when I was athirst, they gave Me vinegar to drink.

"After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished." That is, "that nothing was wanting to the Dispensation." For He was everywhere desirous to show, that this Death was of a new kind, if indeed the whole lay in the power of the Person dying, and death came not on the Body before He willed it; and He willed it after He had fulfilled all things. Therefore also He said, "I have power to lay down My life; and I have power to take it again." (c. x. 18.) Knowing therefore that all things were fulfilled, He saith, "I thirst." Here again fulfilling a prophecy. But consider, I pray, the accursed nature of the bystanders. Though we have ten thousand enemies, and have suffered intolerable things at their hands, yet when we see them perishing, we relent; but they did not even so make peace with Him, nor were tamed by what they saw, but rather became more savage, and increased their irony; and having brought to Him vinegar on a sponge, as men bring it to the condemned, thus they gave Him to drink; since it is on this account that the hyssop is added.

If, on the one hand it was as God that Jesus suffered thirst and when he had tasted would not drink, surely he must be subject to passion also as God. For thirst and taste are passions. But if it was not as God but altogether as man that he was thirsty, similarly as man he must be endowed with will.

"Knowing," he says, "that all things were now accomplished," that is, that nothing remained unfulfilled in the plan of God's economy. So free was His death. For the end did not come upon His body before He Himself willed it, and He willed it after He had fulfilled all things. For this reason He also said: "I have power to lay down My life" (Jn. 10:18). "He says: I thirst," and in this case again fulfills prophecy.

2444 After dealing with the crucifixion and the events that accompanied it, the Evangelist now describes the death of Christ, which we should reverence. First, he shows that it was at the appropriate time; secondly its manner, he bowed his head; and thirdly, the piercing of the dead body (v 31).

He shows that the time was fitting because all was now finished, accomplished. First, he mentions that Christ knew that all things had been accomplished; secondly, we see Christ doing what remained to be done (v 30).

2445 In regard to the first he says, After this, after the things that had just been mentioned, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, that is, all that the law and the prophets had foretold about him had now been accomplished: "Everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled" (Lk 24:44); "I have seen the end of every consummation" [Ps 119:96].

2446 But because another thing foretold in scripture had to be done, the Evangelist adds that Jesus said (to fulfill the scripture), I thirst. First, we see the words spoken by Christ; then, how his desire could be satisfied; and finally, he is given the vinegar.

2447 The Evangelist says that Jesus said this to fulfill the scripture. This indicates the sequence of events, and does not state the cause why Jesus spoke, for he did not speak in order to fulfill the scripture of the Old Testament. Rather, things were written in the Old Testament because they would be fulfilled by Christ. If we say that Christ acted because the scriptures foretold it, it would follow that the New Testament existed for the sake of the Old Testament and for its fulfillment, although the opposite is true. Therefore, it was because these things would be accomplished by Christ that they were predicted.

By saying, I thirst, he showed that his death was real, and not just imaginary. It also indicated his intense desire for the salvation of the human race: "God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved" (1 Tim 2:4); "For the Son of man came to seek and to save the lost" (Lk 19:10). Indeed, we express our intense desires in terms of thirst: "My soul thirsts for God" (Ps 42:3).

What He said: I thirst; He was seeking faith from His own: but because He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him; instead of the sweetness of faith, they gave the sourness of unbelief, and this on a sponge. Truly, those worthy of comparison to a sponge, not solid, but swollen; not open with the straightforward path of confession, but cavernous with the tortuous windings of treachery. Certainly, that drink also contained hyssop, which is a humble herb said to cling to the rock with the strongest root. Indeed, in that people were those for whom this act for humbling by repentance was kept, then to be cast away. He knew them Himself, who accepted the hyssop with the vinegar. For He also prayed for them, as another evangelist testifies, when hanging on the cross He said: Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.

He said, "I thirst:" as if it were, One thing still you have failed to do, give me what you Are. For the Jews were themselves the vinegar, degenerated as they were from the wine of the patriarchs and prophets; and filled like a full vessel with the wickedness of this world, with hearts like a sponge, deceitful in the formation of its cavernous and tortuous recesses. But the hyssop, whereon they placed the sponge filled with vinegar, being a lowly herb, and purging the heart, we fitly take for the humility of Christ Himself; which they thus enclosed, and imagined they had completely ensnared. Hence we have it said in the psalm, "Thou shalt purge me with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed." For it is by Christ's humility that we are cleansed; because, had He not humbled Himself, and became obedient unto the death of the cross, His blood certainly would not have been shed for the remission of sins, or, in other words, for our cleansing.

Nor need we be disturbed with the question, how the sponge could be applied to His mouth when He was lifted up from the earth on the cross. For as we read in the other evangelists, what is omitted by this one, it was fixed on a reed, so that such drink as was contained in the sponge might be raised to the highest part of the cross. By the reed, however, the scripture was signified, which was fulfilled by this very act. For as a tongue is called either Greek or Latin, or any other, significant of the sound, which is uttered by the tongue; so the reed may give its name to the letter which is written with a reed. We most usually, however, call those tongues that express the sounds of the human voice: while in calling scripture a reed, the very rareness of the thing only enhances the mystical nature of that which it symbolizes. A wicked people did such things, a compassionate Christ suffered them. They who did them, knew not what they did; but He who suffered, not only knew what was done, and why it was so, but also wrought what was good through those who were doing what was evil.

A vessel therefore was set there. Here is set forth the consummation itself, by which they gave him vinegar to drink, which indeed they had at hand; whence he says: A vessel therefore was set there full of vinegar; and they, placing a sponge full of vinegar around hyssop, that is, placing the sponge bound around hyssop, offered it to his mouth, by means of a reed, as is said in Matthew twenty-seven: "One of them running and taking a sponge filled it with vinegar and put it on a reed and gave him to drink."

It is asked about this, that they immediately had vinegar prepared in this way; how this came about. Did they know that he would ask for drink? To this some say that they had brought wine to drink, which on account of the heat had turned into vinegar. Others say that they had deliberately brought vinegar, so that by drinking it he would die more quickly. Others say that it was myrrhed wine, which was most bitter and sharp like vinegar, to torment him further who was already crucified. Whence they say that then also Scripture was fulfilled: They gave gall for my food, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.

The blessed Evangelist John says that they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it on hyssop, and so brought it. Luke makes no mention of anything of the kind, but merely declares that they brought Him vinegar. Matthew and Mark say that the sponge was put on a reed. Some may perhaps think there is a discrepancy in the accounts of the holy Evangelists; but no one who is right-minded will be so persuaded. We must rather try to search, and see by every means in our power, in what way the act of impiety was effected. The inspired Luke, then, disregarding the way in which the vinegar was brought, says, in brief, that vinegar was brought to Him when He was athirst. And there can be no question, that the Evangelists would not have disagreed with each other in these trifling and unimportant details, when, in all essential matters, they are in such perfect harmony and concord. What, then, is the difference between them? and of what treatment is it susceptible? There is no doubt, that the officers who executed the impious crime against Christ were many in number, I mean the soldiers who brought Him to the Cross; several also of the Jews shared in their cruelty, some putting the sponge on a reed, others on a stick of what is called hyssop----for the hyssop is a kind of shrub----and gave Jesus to drink of it; doing this, purblind wretches that they were, to their own condemnation. For, unawares, they were proving themselves utterly undeserv-ing of compassion, when they thus altogether discarded mercy and humanity, and with unparalleled audacity vied with each other in impiety alone. Therefore, by the mouth of the Prophet Ezekiel, God thus spake unto the mother of the Jews, I mean Jerusalem: As thou hast done, so shall it be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head; and by the mouth of Isaiah, to lawless Israel: Woe unto the wicked! It shall be ill with him: for the reward of his hands shall be given him. This completed the measure of all the crimes that had been committed against Christ; but here, too, we may find a lesson to our profit. For hereby we may know that those who are of a God-loving temper, and who are firmly rooted in the love of Christ, shall wage, as it were, a ceaseless war with those who are of a different spirit; who will not, even to their latest breath, desist from raging against them, preparing for them severe temptations from every quarter, and eagerly devising every sort of thing that may hurt them. But, just as the wicked cease not from troubling them, so also shall their courage be continually sustained; and just as their trials, and the tribulation of temptation, have no abatement, so also the blessedness of the Saints shall have no end, and the joy of their state of glory shall remain for evermore, and world without end.

Jesus says, "I thirst"—he who had brought forth water for them out of the craggy rock. Then he asked for fruit of the vine that he had planted. But what does the vine do? When the Lord was thirsty, this vine … having filled a sponge and put it on a reed, offers him vinegar. "They gave me also gall for my food, and in my thirst, they gave me vinegar to drink." See how clear the prophet's description is. But what sort of gall did they put into my mouth? "They gave him," it says, "wine mingled with myrrh." Now myrrh tastes a lot like gall, and very bitter. Are these things how you reward the Lord? Are these your offerings, O vine, for your master? The prophet Isaiah was right when in times past he wailed, "My beloved had a vineyard in a hill in a fruitful place … and I waited for it to bring forth grapes." I thirsted, and it should have given me wine "but sprouted thorns instead."

The sour wine perhaps signified the sharp turn and change that happened to Jesus—freedom from suffering instead of suffering, immortality instead of death, incorruption instead of corruption, judging instead of being judged, reigning as king instead of suffering from tyranny. For the sponge, as I think, signified the entire and complete infusion of the Holy Spirit that was in him. The reed implied the royal scepter and the divine law. The hyssop showed his living and saving resurrection through which he restored us also to health.

He is given vinegar to drink mingled with gall. Who? He who turned water into wine, the destroyer of the bitter taste who is sweetness and altogether desire.

And they gave Him gall to drink, and this to insult Him, but He would not. But another saith, that having tasted it, He said, "It is finished." And what meaneth, "It is finished?" The prophecy was fulfilled concerning Him. "For they gave me," it is said, "gall for my meat, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink." But neither doth that evangelist indicate that He drank, for merely to taste differs not from not drinking, but hath one and the same signification.

But they, displaying their villainous character, give Him vinegar to drink, as they did with criminals. For hyssop is applied for the reason that it is harmful. Some, however, say that the reed is called hyssop, for such is the top of the reed. They placed the sponge on the reed because the mouth of Jesus was high up. And thus the prophecy was fulfilled which says: "And in My thirst they gave Me vinegar to drink" (Ps. 69:21).

Some say that the hyssop is put here for reed, its leaves being like a reed.

2448 This desire could be satisfied because a bowl full of vinegar stood there. This bowl signified the Jewish synagogue, in which the wine of the Patriarchs and Prophets had degenerated into vinegar, that is, into the malice and severity of the chief priests.

2449 Christ is given the vinegar, for they put a sponge full of vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth. There is a question on the literal meaning. How could they put the sponge to Christ's mouth, since he was hanging high off the ground? This is answered by Matthew (27:48), who says that the sponge was put on a reed. Or, according to others, it was put on hyssop, which was long, and this is what Matthew called a reed.

2450 As for the mystical sense, these three things signify the three evils that were present in the Jews: the vinegar signifies their ill‑will; the sponge, full of crooked hiding places, signifies their craftiness; and the bitterness of the hyssop stands for their malice. Or, the hyssop represents the humility of Christ, for the hyssop is a bush used for purification, and our hearts are purified especially by humility: "Sprinkle me with hyssop and I will be cleansed" [Ps 51:7].

After that the Lord Jesus had accomplished all that He foreknew required accomplishment before His death, and had, when it pleased Himself, given up the ghost, what followed thereafter, as related by the evangelist, let us now consider. "The Jews therefore," he says, "because it was the preparation (parasceve), that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath-day (for that Sabbath-day was an high day), besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away." Not that their legs might be taken away, but the persons themselves whose legs were broken for the purpose of effecting their death, and permitting them to be detached from the tree, lest their continuing to hang on the crosses should defile the great festal day by the horrible spectacle of their day-long torments.

(Tr. cxx) Not in order to take away the legs, but to cause death, that they might be taken down from the cross, and the feast clay not be defiled by the sight of such horrid torments.

Parasceve is interpreted as preparation.… They called it this as the day when it was necessary that they prepare for the sabbath according to the command they had received concerning the manna, "On the sixth day you shall gather double, etc." … Therefore, because it was on the sixth day that human beings were made and the whole creation of the world completed, but on the seventh day it was required that he rested from his work and this is the sabbath, that is, rest—so it is only right to call that the day on which our Lord was crucified the sixth day fulfilling the reparation of humanity back to what it was at the beginning. [And we read], "And when he received the strong drink, he said 'It is finished,' " that is, the work of the sixth day is perfect as I have totally accomplished the restoration of the world. But on the sabbath he rests in the sepulcher awaiting the event of the resurrection, which will occur on the eight day.

Parasceue, i. e. preparation: the sixth day was so called because the children of Israel prepared twice the number of loaves on that day. For that sabbath day was an high day, i. e. on account of the feast of the passover. Besought Pilate that their legs might be broken.

The Jews therefore, because it was the Preparation. Here is set forth the consummation in the effect of the Passion, which indeed was in the opening of the side of Christ, from which flowed "blood and water," whence the Sacraments have their efficacy, as the Gloss says. And four things are noted here, namely: the petition for the removal of the crucified, the breaking of the legs of the thieves, the opening of the side of Christ, and the confirmation of the testimony.

The petition for the removal of the crucified was made by the Jews: and the reason is given, because on the following day was the great day of the Sabbath: on account of which he says: The Jews therefore, because it was the Preparation, that is, the day immediately before the Sabbath: that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the Sabbath, on account of the solemnity, namely: for that day of the Sabbath was a great day, because it fell within the solemnity of unleavened bread: they asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and they might be taken away. Augustine: "Therefore their legs were broken, so that they might die and be taken down from the wood, lest hanging on their crosses they should defile the great feast day with the horror of their prolonged torment." Deuteronomy 21: "When a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and having been condemned to death is hanged on a gibbet, his body shall not remain on the wood, but shall be buried on the same day."

It is not with the motive of testifying to the reverence for holy days felt by men inured to shed blood with brutal ferocity, and found guilty of so monstrous an iniquity, that the blessed Evangelist says this; but rather from the wish to show that, in their gross stupidity, they committed that folly of which Christ spoke. For they strained out the gnat while they swallowed the camel; for they are found to reckon as of no account at all the most outrageous and awful of all crimes against God, while they exercised the greatest diligence with reference to the most paltry and insignificant matters, showing their folly in either case. The proof of this is not far to seek. For, behold, in the very act of putting Christ to death, they put great store on the respect due to the Sabbath; and, while they insulted the Lawgiver by outrages which surpass description, they parade their reverence of the Law; and, as that Sabbath was a high day, they affect to pay honour to it----the very men who destroyed the Lord of the high day; and they ask a favour, which well suited their cruel spirit. For they besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, wishing to embitter, by this last intolerable outrage, the pangs of approaching death, to those who were already in agony.

The Jews strained out the gnat while they swallowed the camel. They completely discounted the most outrageous and awful of all crimes against God, while they exercised the greatest diligence with reference to the most paltry and insignificant matters, showing their folly in either case.

But the Jews, on the other hand, who swallowed the camel and strained at the gnat, having wrought so atrocious a deed, are very precise concerning the day. "Because it was the Preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross - they besought Pilate that their legs might be broken." Seest thou how strong a thing is truth? By means of the very things which are the objects of their zeal, prophecy is fulfilled, for by occasion of those things, this plain prediction, unconnected with them, receives its accomplishment. For the soldiers when they came, brake the legs of the others, but not those of Christ. Yet these to gratify the Jews pierced His side with a spear, and now insulted the dead body. O abominable and accursed purpose! Yet, beloved, be not thou confounded, be not thou desponding; for the things which these men did from a wicked will, fought on the side of the truth. Since there was a prophecy, saying, (from this circumstance, "They shall look on Him whom they pierced." (Zech. xii. 10.) And not this only, but the deed then dared was a demonstration of the faith, to those who should afterwards disbelieve; as to Thomas, and those like him. With this too an ineffable mystery was accomplished. For "there came forth water and blood." Not without a purpose, or by chance, did those founts come forth, but because by means of these two together the Church consisteth. And the initiated know it, being by water indeed regenerate, and nourished by the Blood and the Flesh. Hence the Mysteries take their beginning; that when thou approachest to that awful cup, thou mayest so approach, as drinking from the very side.

What do they [i.e., the Jews] take it to mean when it says, "For six consecutive days you shall gather. On the sixth day, however, you shall gather double"? It appears that that day that is placed before the sabbath is called the sixth day, which we call the Day of Preparation.

He tells us himself clearly enough what he means by "elements," even the rudiments of the law: "Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years" -the sabbaths, I suppose, and "the preparations," and the fasts, and the "high days.

He tells us himself clearly enough what he means by "elements," even the rudiments of the law: "Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years" -the sabbaths, I suppose, and "the preparations," and the fasts, and the "high days." For the cessation of even these, no less than of circumcision, was appointed by the Creator's decrees, who had said by Isaiah, "Your new moons, and your sabbaths, and your high days I cannot bear; your fasting, and feasts, and ceremonies my soul hateth; " also by Amos, "I hate, I despise your feast-days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies; " and again by Hosea, "I will cause to cease all her mirth, and her feast-days, and her sabbaths, and her new moons, and all her solemn assemblies.

But those who swallow a camel and strain out a gnat (Matt. 23:24), having committed so great a crime, show particular concern about the day. "For," he says, "so that the bodies would not remain on the cross, they asked Pilate," that is, they asked that they be taken down. So, they did not want to appear as avengers and murderers on the day of the feast. Otherwise: the law also commanded that the sun should not go down on a man's anger (Eph. 4:26). See how through the schemes of the Jews the prophecies are fulfilled. Here two prophecies are fulfilled at once, as the evangelist says further.

Our Lord gave up His ghost to God the Father, showing that the souls of the saints do not remain in the tomb, but go into the hand of the Father of all; while sinners are reserved for the place of punishment, i. e. hell.

For it was commanded in the Law that the sun should not set on the punishment of any one; or they were unwilling to appear tormentors and homicides on a feast day.

2454 Now we see the piercing of Christ's body: the act itself; and then the certainty of what the Evangelist tells us (v 35). With respect to the first he does two things: first, we see the intervention and intention of the Jews; secondly, this is partially accomplished; thirdly, how this was accomplished with regard to Christ.

2455 With respect to the first he says, Since it was the day of Preparation, in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on the sabbath (for that sabbath was a high day) the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. In Deuteronomy (21:22) we see that it is a precept of the law that the bodies of the dead who had been hanged for crimes were not to be left hanging until the morning, lest the land be defiled, and to blot out the disgrace of those who were hanged, for this kind of death was regarded as most disgraceful: "a hanged man is accursed by God" (Deut 21:23). Although the Jews did not now have the authority to inflict this punishment, they still tried to do what they could. And so because it was the Preparation day they asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away, so that Christ's body and those of the others would not remain on the cross on the sabbath, which was a very solemn day, and particularly this sabbath during the Feast of the Unleavened Bread. They were careful to keep the law in small matters, but they ignored it in important things: "You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!" (Mt 23:24).

The Gospel declares those who were present especially marveled at this, that after the lament in which he expressed the figure of sin, he immediately gave up his spirit. For those who were suspended on the cross were tortured by a lingering death. Consequently, the legs of the thieves were broken, in order that they might quickly die and be taken down from the cross before the sabbath. But that he was found to be dead was a cause for amazement. And we read that Pilate also wondered at this when the body of the Lord was asked of him for burial.

The soldiers therefore came. Here is noted the breaking of the legs of the thieves. The soldiers therefore came, at the petition of the Jews, and of the first indeed, namely the one to whom they first came, they broke the legs, because he was still alive; and of the other, who was crucified with him, supply: they broke the legs, and so they expired: so that they might thus be distinguished from the Lamb, whose bones were to be preserved whole, because he alone was whole from sin. They could say that word of Psalm 6: "Heal me, O Lord, for my bones are troubled."

In pursuance of the request of the Jews, men afflicted with a madness akin to their cruelty----I mean the soldiers of Pilate----break the legs of the two robbers, as they were still numbered among the living, intensifying the bitter pang of their last agony, and finally despatching them by the most grievous act of violence. But when they found Jesus with His Head bowed down, and saw that He had already given up the ghost, they thought it lost labour to break His Legs; but, as they still had a faint suspicion that He might not be actually dead, they with a spear pierced His Side, which sent forth Blood, mingled with Water; God presenting us thereby with a type, as it were, and foreshadowing of the mystery of the Eucharist, and Holy Baptism. For Holy Baptism is of Christ, and Christ's institution; and the power of the mystery of the Eucharist grew up for us out of His Holy Flesh.

They ask for the legs to be broken for what reason? So that, even if they remain alive, they would be incapable of action (for they were robbers).

2456 He says how this was done in part, So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first thief, to whom they had come first, and of the other who had been crucified with him, with Jesus. This shows their cruelty: "You eat the flesh of my people" (Mic 3:3).

But when they had come to Jesus. Here is noted the opening of Christ's side. And first he says why they did not break his legs, namely because he was dead: and this is what he says: When they saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs: because they did this in order to hasten death.

Whence, too, it was that there flowed out of the wound in the Lord's side water and blood, the materials of either baptism. I ought, then, by the first baptism too to (have the fight of) setting another free if I can by the second: and we must necessarily force upon the mind (of our opponents this conclusion): Whatever authority, whatever reason, restores ecclesiastical peace to the adulterer and fornicator, the same will be bound to come to the aid of the murderer and idolater in their repentance,-at all events, of the apostate, and of course of him whom, in the battle of his confession, after hard struggling with torments, savagery has overthrown.

2457 Why does the Evangelist add, but when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs? Surely Jesus was crucified between the two others? We should say that one soldier went to one of the criminals and another soldier went to the other one to break their legs, and when they were done with this they both came to Jesus. We are told why they pierced his side, because when the soldiers saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.

At the Lamb's high feast we sing Praise to our victorious King, Who has washed us in the tide Flowing from his pierced side. Praise we him whose love divine Gives the guests his blood for wine, Gives his body for the feast, Love the victim, love the priest. Where the Paschal blood is poured, Death's dark angel sheathes his sword; Israel's hosts triumphant go Through the wave that drowns the foe. Christ, the Lamb whose blood was shed, Paschal victim, Paschal bread; With sincerity and love Eat we manna from above. Mighty victim from the sky, Powers of hell beneath you lie; Death is conquered in the fight; You have brought us life and light. Alleluia!

A suggestive word was made use of by the evangelist, in not saying pierced, or wounded His side, or anything else, but "opened;" that thereby, in a sense, the gate of life might be thrown open, from whence have flowed forth the sacraments of the Church, without which there is no entrance to the life which is the true life. That blood was shed for the remission of sins; that water it is that makes up the health-giving cup, and supplies at once the layer of baptism and water for drinking. This was announced beforehand, when Noah was commanded to make a door in the side of the ark, whereby the animals might enter which were not destined to perish in the flood, and by which the Church was prefigured. Because of this, the first woman was formed from the side of the man when asleep, and was called Life, and the mother of all living. Truly it pointed to a great good, prior to the great evil of the transgression (in the guise of one thus lying asleep). This second Adam bowed His head and fell asleep on the cross, that a spouse might be formed for Him from that which flowed from the sleeper's side. O death, whereby the dead are raised anew to life! What can be purer than such blood? What more health-giving than such a wound?

(Tr. cxx.) The Evangelist has expressed himself cautiously; not struck, or wounded, but opened His side: (ἔνυξε, aperuit V.) whereby was opened the gate of life, from whence the sacraments of the Church flowed, without which we cannot enter into that life which is the true life: And forthwith came thereout blood and water. That blood was shed for the remission of sins, that water tempers the cup of salvation. This it was which was prefigured when Noah was commanded to make a door in the side of the ark, by which the animals that were not to perish by the deluge entered; which animals prefigured the Church. To shadow forth this, the woman was made out of the side of the sleeping man; for this second Adam bowed His head, and slept on the cross, that out of that which came therefrom, there might be formed a wife for Him. O death, by which the dead are quickened, what can be purer than that blood, what more salutary than that wound!

Was not the Church formed from the side of Christ, when Christ fell asleep on the cross? And from His side flowed forth blood and water, that is, the Sacraments, through which the Church is reborn. From the rib of Adam, Eve was formed, who was joined to him in marriage. Just as man was formed from virgin earth, so Christ from the glorious Virgin. And just as from the side of the sleeping Adam woman was formed, so the Church from Christ hanging on the cross. And just as from Adam and Eve, Abel and his successors were formed, so from Christ and the Church the whole Christian people. And just as Eve is the mother of Abel and of all of us, so the Christian people has the Virgin as mother.

But one of the soldiers opened his side with a lance. Augustine: "Concerning this he does not say wounded, but opened, so that there a door might in a certain way be thrown open, whence the Sacraments of the Church flowed forth." And therefore it is added: And immediately there came out blood and water. Augustine: "This blood was poured out for the remission of sins; this water tempers the saving cup; it provides both a washing and a drink"; Apocalypse 1: "He washed us from our sins in his blood"; and Ephesians 5: "Christ loved the Church, cleansing her by the washing" etc.

It is asked: why was his side opened or wounded after death and not before? And it must be understood that nothing was done to him except what God permitted for a fitting reason. The reason for this is given both allegorically and literally: allegorically, because just as Eve was formed from the side of the sleeping Adam, so the Church was formed from the side of Christ sleeping on the cross. Whence Augustine says: "For this reason the second Adam slept on the cross, so that from there his bride might be formed, from what flowed out of his side." The literal reason is that the Lord Christ, although He showed His humanity, nevertheless wished at the same time to show the truth of His Divinity. Hence He showed this before the Passion in His arrest, this in the Passion in the darkness, and this after death He showed in the flowing forth of water and blood. Hence Ambrose says: "Although the nature of Christ's body was mortal, yet its grace was unlike ours. For after death the blood in our bodies congeals, but from that incorrupt body the life of all flowed forth; water and blood came forth: the former to wash clean, the latter to redeem. We drink our ransom, so that by drinking we may be redeemed."

The sacred vine produced the prophetic cluster. This was a sign to them, after they had been trained from wandering to [find] their rest. The sacred vine represented the great cluster of the Word, bruised for us. For the blood of the grape—that is, the Word—desired to be mixed with water, as his blood is mingled with salvation. And the blood of the Lord is twofold. For there is the blood of his flesh, by which we are redeemed from corruption. And there is the spiritual blood, that by which we are anointed. And to drink the blood of Jesus is to become a partaker of the Lord's immortality with the Spirit as the enervating principle of the Word, as blood is of flesh. Accordingly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with humankind. And the one, the mixture of wine and water, nourishes the faith; while the other, the Spirit, brings us to immortality. And the mixture of both, of the water and of the Word, is called Eucharist, renowned and glorious grace. And they who by faith partake of it are sanctified both in body and soul. For the Father's will has mystically compounded the divine mixture, man, by the Spirit and the Word. For in truth, the spirit is joined to the soul, which is inspired by it. And the flesh, by reason of which the Word became flesh, is joined to the Word.

The beginning of signs under Moses was blood and water. And the last of all Jesus' signs was the same. First, Moses changed the river into blood. And Jesus at the last gave forth from his side water with blood.… In the Gospels, the power of saving baptism happens in two ways: one is granted through water to the illuminated, a second is granted to holy martyrs in persecutions through their own blood. Since this is so, blood and water came out of that saving Side to confirm the grace of the confession made for Christ, whether in baptism or martyrdom.

"There came forth blood and water," which is his church, and it is built on him, just as [in the case of] Adam, whose wife was taken from his side. Adam's rib is his wife, and the blood of our Lord is his church. From Adam's rib there was death, but from our Lord's rib, life. The olive tree [symbolizes] the mystery of Christ, from which spring forth milk, water and oil; milk for the children, water for the youths and oil for the sick. The olive tree gave water and blood through its death, [just as] the Messiah gave these through his death.

But above all, it is true of the most tremendous issue; of that tragedy which has created the divine comedy of our creed. Nothing short of the extreme and strong and startling doctrine of the divinity of Christ will give that particular effect that can truly stir the popular sense like a trumpet; the idea of the king himself serving in the ranks like a common soldier. By making that figure merely human we make that story much less human. We take away the point of the story which actually pierces humanity; the point of the story which was quite literally the point of a spear.

The body of the Lord presented both these to the world, the sacred blood and the holy water.

And His body, though dead after the manner of man, possesses in it great power of life. For streams which flow not from dead bodies flowed forth from Him, viz., blood and water; in order that we might know what power for life is held by the virtue that dwelt in His body, so as that it appears not to be dead like others, and is able to shed forth for us the springs of life.

And not a bone of the Holy Lamb is broken, this figure showing us that suffering toucheth not His strength. For the bones are the strength of the body.

Moreover, how could the Lord, with any justice, if He belonged to another father, have acknowledged the bread to be His body, while He took it from that creation to which we belong, and affirmed the mixed cup to be His blood? And why did He acknowledge Himself to be the Son of man, if He had not gone through that birth which belongs to a human being? How, too, could He forgive us those sins for which we are answerable to our Maker and God? And how, again, supposing that He was not flesh, but was a man merely in appearance, could He have been crucified, and could blood and water have issued from His pierced side? What body, moreover, was it that those who buried Him consigned to the tomb? And what was that which rose again from the dead?

Christ came and opened up baptism by his cross, so that it should be a mother of life for the world in place of Eve, water and blood for the fashioning of spiritual infants flowed forth from it, and baptism became the mother of life. No previous baptism [i.e., of Moses or of John] ever gave the Holy Spirit. Only the baptism that was opened by the Son of God on the cross did so. It gives birth to children spiritually with the "water and the blood," and, instead of a soul, the Holy Spirit is breathed into them.

Pilate sought to gratify the whole people who had said, "Crucify, crucify him." He also feared a riot among the people and so did not give orders (according to the usual practice of the Romans with those who are crucified) for Jesus to be stabbed under his armpits. This is sometimes done by those who condemn people guilty of greater crimes, because greater suffering is endured by those who are not stabbed after crucifixion who end up living in very great torment sometimes even the whole night and still the whole day after. Jesus therefore, since he had not been stabbed and was expected to hang a long time on the cross and endure greater torments, prayed to the Father and was heard. Immediately on crying to the Father, he was taken. Or, as one who had the power to lay down his life, he laid it down when he wanted to.

Celsus asks whether the blood in the body of the crucified Jesus was the same as that which flows in the bodies of the immortal gods. He asks in jest, but we shall show that it was no mythic or Homeric blood that flowed from the body of Jesus.… With other dead bodies the blood congeals and pure water does not flow. But in the case of Jesus' dead body, the miraculous feature was that both blood and water flowed forth from his side.

If there is anyone who, when he reads Moses, murmurs against him, and the Law which has been written according to the letter is displeasing to him because it seems incoherent in many things, Moses shows him the rock which is Christ and leads him to it that he may drink from it and quench his thirst. But this rock will not give water unless it has been struck, but when it has been struck it brings forth streams. For after Christ had been struck and crucified, he brought forth the streams of the New Testament. This is why it was said of him, "I will the strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered." He had to be struck, therefore, for unless he had been struck and unless "water and blood had gone out from his side," we all would suffer "thirst for the word of God." This, therefore, is what the Apostle also understood when he said, "They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of the spiritual rock which followed, but the rock was Christ."

Onward even to the passion does the witness of baptism last: while He is being surrendered to the cross, water intervenes; witness Pilate's hands: when He is wounded, forth from His side bursts water; witness the soldier's lance!

For He had come "by means of water and blood," just as John has written; that He might be baptized by the water, glorified by the blood; to make us, in like manner, called by water, chosen by blood. These two baptisms He sent out from the wound in His pierced side, in order that they who believed in His blood might be bathed with the water; they who had been bathed in the water might likewise drink the blood.

When the soldiers pierced the Savior's side with the lance, what flowed out of it according to the Gospel writers? Blood and water. He called the Savior's blood, therefore, the blood of a grape. For if the Lord was called a vine, and if the fruit of the vine is called wine, and if springs of blood and water poured from the Lord's side and ran over the rest of his body to the ground, then the patriarch's prophecy was reasonable and appropriate: "He will wash his robe in wine and his garment in blood of the grape." For just as we call the sacramental fruit of the vine the Lord's blood after the consecration, so he called the blood of the true vine blood of the grape.

Although they did not break the legs of Jesus, nevertheless, to please the Jews they pierced Him, and blood and water flowed out. And this is wondrous. They thought to mock even the dead body, but the mockery turns into a miracle for them. It is also worthy of wonder that blood flows from a dead body. However, someone among the skeptics will say that probably there was still some vital force remaining in the body. But when water also flowed out, the miracle is indisputable. This did not happen without reason, but because life in the Church begins and continues through these two things: by water we are born, and by the Blood and Body we are nourished. Therefore, when you approach the cup of communion of the Blood of Christ, dispose yourself as though you were drinking from the very side. Note, if you will, how through the pierced rib the wound of the rib, that is, of Eve, is healed. There Adam, having fallen asleep, lost a rib; and here the Lord, having fallen asleep, gives His rib to the soldier. The soldier's spear is a figure of the sword that turned every way and drove us out of paradise (Gen. 3:24). And since everything that revolves does not stop in its movement until it strikes against something, the Lord, showing that He will stop that sword, presents His rib to the soldier's sword, so that it would be clear to us that just as the soldier's spear, having struck against the rib, came to a stop, so too the flaming sword will come to a stop and will no longer terrify with its turning or bar the entrance into paradise. Let the Arians be put to shame, who in the sacrament of communion do not add water to the wine. For they, it seems, do not believe that water also flowed from the side, which is more wondrous, but believe that only blood flowed out, and thereby they diminish the greatness of the miracle. For the blood shows that the Crucified One is a man, while the water shows that He is above man, namely, God.

To please the Jews, they pierce Christ, thus insulting even His lifeless body. But the insult issues in a miracle: for a miracle it is that blood should flow from a dead body.

Shame then upon them who mix not water with the wine in the holy mysteries: they seem as if they believed not that the water flowed from the side. Had blood flowed only, a man might have said that there was some life left in the body, and that that was why the blood flowed. But the water flowing is an irresistible miracle, and therefore the Evangelist adds, And he that saw it bare record.

2458 To make sure that Jesus was dead one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear. It deserves notice that he does not say "wounded" but "pierced," that is "opened," because in his side the door of eternal life is opened to us: "After this I looked, and lo, in heaven, an open door!" (Rev 4:1). This is the door in the side of the ark through which those animals entered who were not to perish in the flood (Gen 7).

This door is the cause of our salvation; and so, at once there came out blood and water. This is a remarkable miracle, that blood should flow from the body of a dead person where blood congeals. And if someone says that this was because the body was still warm, the flow of the water cannot be explained without a miracle, since this was pure water. This outpouring of blood and water happened so that Christ might show that he was truly human. For human beings have a twofold composition: one from the elements and the other from the humors. One of these elements is water, and blood is the main humor.

Another reason why this happened was to show that by the passion of Christ we acquire a complete cleansing from our sins and stains. We are cleansed from our sins by his blood, which is the price of our redemption: "You know that your were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers, not with perishable things, such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot" (1 Pet 1:18). And we are cleansed from our stains by the water, which is the bath of our rebirth: "I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses" (Ez 36:25); "On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness" (Zech 13:1). And so it is these two things which are especially associated with two sacraments: water with the sacrament of baptism, and blood with the Eucharist.

Or, both blood and water are associated with the Eucharist because in this sacrament water is mixed with wine, although water is not of the substance of the sacrament.

This event was also prefigured: for just as from the side of Christ, sleeping on the cross, there flowed blood and water, which makes the Church holy, so from the side of the sleeping Adam there was formed the woman, who prefigured the Church.

It is written that when the side of Jesus was pierced, "he poured out blood and water." This has a mystical meaning. For Jesus himself had said, "Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water."

"And he that saw it," he says, "bare record, and his record is true; and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye also might believe." He said not, That ye also might know, but "that ye might believe;" for he knoweth who hath seen, that he who hath not seen might believe his testimony. And believing belongs more to the nature of faith than seeing. For what else is meant by believing than giving to faith a suitable reception?

(Tr. cxx) He that saw it knoweth; let him that saw not believe his testimony.

The third certainty derives from an intellectual vision combined with bodily vision. This occurred in the minds of the apostles. What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked upon and our hands have handled, the Word of Life. And we announce to you nothing else than what we have seen. And elsewhere it is written: He who saw it has borne witness.

And he who saw etc. Here is indicated the fourth point, namely the confirmation of testimony. And he confirms this by his own testimony and by the testimony of Scripture: by his own, because he himself saw and was present: whence he says: And he who saw bore witness. And he approves the testimony, because it is true, whence: and his testimony is true: and because it is certain, whence: and he knows that he speaks the truth. And therefore he says: That you also may believe: because faith is more readily given to one who saw than to one who learned by report: Proverbs 12: "He who speaks what he knows is a judge of justice; but he who lies is a fraudulent witness"; and 1 John 1: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and our hands have handled, of the Word of life" etc.

"And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true." That is, "I heard it not from others, but was myself present and saw it, and the testimony is true." As may be supposed. For he relates an insult done; he relates not anything great and admirable, that thou shouldest suspect his narrative; but securing the mouths of heretics, and loudly proclaiming beforehand the Mysteries that should be, and beholding the treasure laid up in them, he is very exact concerning what took place. And that prophecy also is fulfilled, "A bone of Him shall not be broken." (Ex. xii. 46; Num. ix. 12.) For even if this was said with reference to the lamb of the Jews, still it was for the sake of the reality that the type preceded, and in Him the prophecy was more fully accomplished. On this account the Evangelist brought forward the Prophet. For since by continually producing himself as witness he would have seemed unworthy of credit, he brings Moses to help him, and saith, that neither did this come to pass without a purpose, but was written before of old. And this is the meaning of the words, "A bone of Him shall not be broken." Again he confirms the Prophet's words by his own witness. "These things," saith he, "I have told you, that ye might learn that great is the connection of the type with the reality." Seest thou what pains he takes to make that believed which seemed to be matter of reproach, and bringing shame? For that the soldier should insult even the dead body, was far worse than being crucified. "But still, even these things," he saith, "I have told, and told with much earnestness, 'that ye might believe.' Let none then be unbelieving, nor through shame injure our cause. For the things which appear to be most shameful, are the very venerable records of our good things."

The Evangelist alludes to himself, because he always talks about himself without mentioning his name. From this it is clear that John was present at these events. It seems also that he wants to suggest the emission of blood and water did not occur so that everybody might see it but that it remained invisible to many. Indeed, he points out this by saying, "He who saw this has testified," and he means that he only saw and testified to this event. But he was worthy to be believed about this, even though he said that he only saw and testified. Therefore he also recalled the words of Scripture. Indeed, those events happened just like they had been written. So the death of our Lord happened in this manner.

"Not from others," he says, "did I hear, but I myself was there and saw, and my testimony is true." He rightly remarks this. He is narrating about the mockery, and not about something great and honorable, so that you might suspect this account. "For this reason," he says, "I describe this in detail and do not conceal what is apparently dishonorable, so that you may believe that all this is undoubtedly true, and not composed in anyone's favor." For whoever speaks in someone's favor presents what is more glorious.

2459 Now the Evangelist shows that these events are certainly true: first, from the testimony of the Apostle himself; secondly, from a prophecy in the scriptures (v 36).

2460 He does three things about the first: he mentions the credentials of the witness, he who saw it has borne witness, and this is John himself: "That which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you" (1 Jn 1:3). Secondly, he affirms that this testimony is true, his testimony is true: "I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying" (Rom 9:1); "You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free" (8:32). Thirdly, he asks us to believe, and he knows that he tells the truth that you also may believe: "These are written that you may believe" (20:31).

In the passover a lamb is killed, representing Christ, of whom it is said in the Gospel, "Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world!" In the passover the bones of the lamb were not to be broken; and on the cross the bones of the Lord were not broken. The evangelist, in reference to this, quotes the words, "A bone of Him shall not be broken." The posts were marked with blood to keep away destruction, as people are marked on their foreheads with the sign of the Lord's passion for their salvation.

"For these things were done," he adds, "that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of Him ye shall not break." He has furnished two testimonies from the Scriptures for each of the things which he has recorded as having been done. For to the words, "But when they came to Jesus, and saw that He was dead already, they brake not His legs," belongeth the testimony, "A bone of Him ye shall not break:" an injunction which was laid upon those who were commanded to celebrate the passover by the sacrifice of a sheep in the old law, which went before as a shadow of the passion of Christ. Whence "our passover has been offered, even Christ," of whom the prophet Isaiah also had predicted, "He shall be led as a lamb to the slaughter."

(Tr. cxx) He gives testimonies from the Scriptures to each of these two things he relates. After, they brake not His legs, He adds, For these things were done, that the Scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of Him shall not be broken, a commandment which applied to the sacrifice of the paschal lamb under the old law, which sacrifice foreshadowed our Lord's.

These things were done, that the Scripture might be fulfilled: You shall not break a bone of him, Exodus 12: and therefore they did not break his legs.

By his account of what took place, the wise Evangelist confirms his hearers in the belief that He was the Christ long ago foretold by Holy Writ; for the events of His life harmonised with what was written concerning Him. For not a bone of Him was broken, and He was pierced with the spear of the soldier, according to the Scripture. He says himself, that the disciple that bare record of these things was a spectator and eye-witness of what took place, and knew, in fact, that his testimony was true; and the disciple to whom he thus alludes is none other than himself. For he shrank from speaking more openly, putting away from himself the assumption of love of glory, as an unholy thing, and as a grievous infirmity.

Therefore, because He had laid down His life while fastened to the cross, His executioners did not think it necessary to break His bones (as was their prevailing custom), but they only pierced His side. Thus His unbroken body was taken down from the cross, and carefully enclosed in a tomb. Now all these things were done lest His body, being injured and broken, should be rendered unsuitable for rising again. That also was a principal cause why God chose the cross, because it was necessary that He should be lifted up on it, and the passion of God become known to all nations. For since he who is suspended upon a cross is both conspicuous to all and higher than others, the cross was especially chosen, which might signify that He would be so conspicuous, and so raised on high, that all nations from the whole world should meet together at once to know and worship Him.

And since they considered Moses more trustworthy than him, he brings him too as a witness. What Moses said about the lamb slain at Passover: "a bone shall not be broken" (Exod. 12:10, 46), according to the evangelist's explanation, was fulfilled in Christ. For that lamb was a type of Him, and there is much in common between it and the Truth. So, "a bone shall not be broken" in Jesus; and His side pours forth for us the fountains of being and life. Water is the fountain of being, for through it we become Christians, and Blood is the fountain of life, for by it we are nourished. And the Word of God is the Lamb. Partaking of Him from head to feet (the head of the divinity, for it is the chief part, and the feet of the flesh, for it is the lowest part), and also His inward parts, that is, the secret and hidden things, receiving them with reverence as food, we do not break the bones, that is, the thoughts that are difficult to understand and lofty. For what we cannot understand, we do not break, that is, we do not attempt to understand wrongly and with distortion. So, when we understand soundly, then we do not break, for we preserve the divine things intact. But when we strain to understand and accept a heretical understanding, then we crush and break the firm and inaccessible thoughts. Such matters, that is, those hard to understand, must be burned with fire, that is, surrendered to the Spirit, and He will work upon and refine them, because He comprehends all things, "even the depths of God" (1 Cor. 2:10).

2461 This truth is not just guaranteed by the testimony of the apostle; there is also a prophecy of scripture. Thus he says, these things took place that the scripture might be fulfilled. Here again, as before, the phrase that the scripture might be fulfilled, indicates the sequence of events. The Evangelist cites two authorities from the Old Testament. One refers to his statement that they did not break his legs and is found in Exodus (12:46), "You shall not break a bone of it," that is, the Passover lamb, which was a prefiguration of Christ, because as we read in 1 Corinthians (5:7), "Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed." It was commanded that the bones of the Passover lamb should not be broken in order to teach us that the courage of the true Lamb and unspotted Jesus Christ would in no way be crushed by his passion. The Jews were trying to use the passion to destroy the power of Christ's teaching, but his passion only made it stronger: "For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor 1:18). This is why Jesus said before: "When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he" (8:28).

...from the first Lord's day count forty days, from the Lord's day till the fifth day of the week, and celebrate the feast of the ascension of the Lord, whereon He finished all His dispensation and constitution, and returned to that God and Father that sent Him, and sat down at the right hand of power, and remains there until His enemies are put under His feet; who also will come at the consummation of the world with power and great glory, to judge the quick and the dead, and to recompense to every one according to his works. And then shall they see the beloved Son of God whom they pierced; and when they know Him, they shall mourn for themselves, tribe by tribe, and their wives apart.

Certainly the words that the Septuagint has translated, "They shall look on me because they insulted me," stand in the Hebrew, "They shall look on me whom they pierced." And by this word the crucifixion of Christ is certainly more plainly indicated. But the Septuagint translators preferred to allude to the insult that was involved in his whole passion. For in point of fact they insulted him both when he was arrested and when he was bound, when he was judged, when he was mocked by the robe they put on him and the homage they did on bended knee, when he was crowned with thorns and struck with a rod on the head, when he bore his cross and when at last he hung upon the tree. And therefore we recognize more fully the Lord's passion when we do not confine ourselves to one interpretation but combine both and read both "insulted" and "pierced." When, therefore, we read in the prophetical books that God is to come to do judgment at the last, from the mere mention of the judgment, and although there is nothing else to determine the meaning, we must gather that Christ is meant. For though the Father will judge, he will judge by the coming of the Son. For he himself, by his own manifested presence, "judges no one but has committed all judgment to the Son." For as the Son was judged as a man, he shall also judge in human form.

"And hath given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of man." What judgment, what kind of judgment? "Marvel not at this" which I have said, - gave Him authority to execute judgment, - "for the hour is coming." He does not add, "and now is:" therefore He means to make known to us a certain hour in the end of the world.

The hour is now that the dead rise, the hour will be in the end of the world that the dead rise: but that they rise now in the mind, then in the flesh; that they rise now in the mind by the Word of God, the Son of God; then in the flesh by the Word of God made flesh, the Son of man. For it will not be the Father Himself that will come to judgment, notwithstanding the Father doth not withdraw Himself from the Son. How, then, is it that the Father Himself will not come? In that He will not be seen in the judgment. "They shall look on Him whom they pierced." That form which stood before the judge, will be Judge: that form will judge which was judged; for it was judged unjustly, it will judge justly.

"And again, another scripture saith, They shall look on Him whom they pierced." To the words, "But one of the soldiers laid open His side with a spear," belongeth this testimony, "They shall look on Him whom they pierced;" where Christ is promised in the very flesh wherein He was afterwards to come to be crucified.

(Tr. cxx) Also after, One of the soldiers with a spear opened His side, then follows another Scripture testimony; And again another Scripture saith, They shall look on Him whom they pierced, (Zech. 12:10) a prophecy which implies that Christ will come in the very flesh in which He was crucified.

And again another Scripture says: They shall look on him whom they pierced: Zechariah 12: "They shall look upon me, whom they have pierced"; and therefore it is true that the soldier opened his side. This Scripture has not yet been fully fulfilled, but will be on the day of judgment: Apocalypse 1: "Every eye shall see him, and those who pierced him." Chrysostom: "Let no one disbelieve nor look upon these things with shame: for those things which seem most reproachful are the foundations of our goods."

Then shall the son of perdition be brought forward, to wit, the accuser, with his demons and with his servants, by angels stern and inexorable. And they shall be given over to the fire that is never quenched, and to the worm that never sleepeth, and to the outer darkness. For the people of the Hebrews shall see Him in human form, as He appeared to them when He came by the holy Virgin in the flesh, and as they crucified Him. And He will show them the prints of the nails in His hands and feet, and His side pierced with the spear, and His head crowned with thorns, and His honourable cross. And once for all shall the people of the Hebrews see all these things, and they shall mourn and weep, as the prophet exclaims, "They shall look on Him whom they have pierced; " and there shall be none to help them or to pity them, because they repented not, neither turned aside from the wicked way. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment with the demons and the accuser.

"Simeon and Levi, brethren, fulfilled iniquity of their own choice. Into their counsel let not my soul enter, and in their assembly let not my heart contend; for in their anger they slew men, and in their passion they houghed a bull." [Gen. XLIX. 5]

This he says regarding the conspiracy into which they were to enter against the Lord. And that he means this conspiracy, is evident to us. For the blessed David sings, "Rulers have taken counsel together against the Lord," and so forth. And of this conspiracy the Spirit prophesied, saying, "Let not my soul contend," desiring to draw them off, if possible, so that that future crime might not happen through them. "They slew men, and houghed the bull; "by the "strong bull" he means Christ. And "they houghed," since, when He was suspended on the tree, they pierced through His sinews. Again, "in their anger they houghed a bull." And mark the nicety of the expression: for "they slew men, and houghed a bull." For they killed the saints, and they remain dead, awaiting the time of the resurrection. But as a young bull, so to speak, when houghed, sinks down to the ground, such was Christ in submitting voluntarily to the death of the flesh; but He was not overcome of death. But though as man He became one of the dead, He remained alive in the nature of divinity. For Christ is the bull,-an animal, above all, strong and neat and devoted to sacred use. And the Son is Lord of all power, who did no sin, but rather offered Himself for us, a savour of a sweet smell to His God and Father. Therefore let those hear who houghed this august bull: "Cursed be their anger, for it was stubborn; and their wrath, for it was hardened." But this people of the Jews dared to boast of houghing the bull: "Our hands shed this." For this is nothing different, I think, from the word of folly: "His blood" (be upon us), and so forth. Moses recalls the curse against Levi, or, rather converts it into a blessing, on account of the subsequent zeal of the tribe, and of Phinehas in particular, in behalf of God. But that against Simeon he did not recall. Wherefore it also was fulfilled in deed. For Simeon did not obtain an inheritance like the other tribes, for he dwelt in the midst of Judah. Yet his tribe was preserved, although it was small in numbers.

Look at this instance from Zechariah where the Evangelist John quotes from the Hebrew, "They shall look on him whom they pierced." We read in the Septuagint, "And they shall look on me because they have mocked me." In the Latin version, we read, "And they shall look on me for the things that they have mocked or insulted." Here the Evangelist, the Septuagint and our own version all differ. And yet, the divergence of language is atoned for by oneness of spirit.

(Pref. ad Pentet.) This testimony is taken from Zacharias.

Who is it then, that has aroused the Lord, now at God's right hand so unseasonably and with such severity "shake terribly" (as Isaiah expresses it ("that earth," which, I suppose, is as yet unshattered? Who has thus early put "Christ's enemies beneath His feet" (to use the language of David ), making Him more hurried than the Father, whilst every crowd in our popular assemblies is still with shouts consigning "the Christians to the lions? " Who has yet beheld Jesus descending from heaven in like manner as the apostles saw Him ascend, according to the appointment of the two angels? Up to the present moment they have not, tribe by tribe, smitten their breasts, looking on Him whom they pierced. No one has as yet fallen in with Elias; no one has as yet escaped from Antichrist; no one has as yet had to bewail the downfall of Babylon.

That, however, which we have reserved for a concluding argument, will now stand as a plea for all, and for the apostle himself, who in very deed would have to be charged with extreme indiscretion, if he had so abruptly, as some will have it, and as they say, blindfold, and so indiscriminately, and so unconditionally, excluded from the kingdom of God, and indeed from the court of heaven itself, all flesh and blood whatsoever; since Jesus is still sitting there at the right hand of the Father, man, yet God-the last Adam, yet the primary Word-flesh and blood, yet purer than ours-who "shall descend in like manner as He ascended into heaven" the same both in substance and form, as the angels affirmed, so as even to be recognised by those who pierced Him. Designated, as He is, "the Mediator between God and man," He keeps in His own self the deposit of the flesh which has been committed to Him by both parties-the pledge and security of its entire perfection.

He promised to come again. And so, he will be seen both by those who have believed and those who have crucified, for it is written, "They shall look on him whom they pierced."

Another prophecy will also be fulfilled, which says: "They shall look on Him whom they pierced" (Zech. 12:10). For when He comes to judge, then they will see Him in a better and most godlike body, and those who pierced Him will recognize Him and weep. Moreover, this audacious deed of the enemies of Jesus will be a door of faith and proof for unbelievers, as, for example, for Thomas. For he was assured of the resurrection through touching the side.

2462 The second authority refers to his statement, one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and is taken from Zechariah: They shall look on him whom they have pierced. Our text of Zechariah reads: "They will look on me whom they have pierced" [Zech 12:10]. If we join the statement of the Prophet to what the Evangelist says, it is clear that the crucified Christ is God, for what the Prophet says he says as God, and the Evangelist applies this to Christ.

They shall look on him, he says, at the coming judgment. Or, they will look on him when they have been converted to the faith, and so forth.