---
title: "Catena Aurea: The Four Gospels"
author: "Thomas Aquinas"
translator: "John Henry Newman (ed.)"
languages: [en]
shelf: "Commentaries"
section: 135 of 394
url: https://scriptura.si/works/thomas-aquinas-catena-aurea-the-four-gospels/135/
cite: "Thomas Aquinas, tr. John Henry Newman (ed.), Catena Aurea: The Four Gospels, section 135. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/thomas-aquinas-catena-aurea-the-four-gospels/135/"
---

# Catena Aurea: The Four Gospels

*Thomas Aquinas, tr. John Henry Newman (ed.)*

The four Gospels read through chains of quotations from the Church Fathers.

## 135. Matthew 26 · 1 of 9

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/thomas-aquinas-catena-aurea-the-four-gospels/135/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/thomas-aquinas-catena-aurea-the-four-gospels/135/#p-N

[¶0] Ver. 1. And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples,2. "Ye know that after two days is the feast of the Passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified."

[¶1] Hilary: After the discourse in which the Lord had declared that He should return in splendour, He announces to them His approaching Passion, that they might learn the close connection between the sacrament of the Cross, and the glory of eternity.

[¶2] Rabanus: "All these sayings," i.e. about the consummation of the world, and the day of judgment. Or, "finished," because He had fulfilled in doing and preaching all things from the beginning of the Gospel to His Passion.

[¶3] Origen: Yet it is not "all" barely, but "all these;" for there were other sayings which He must speak before He should be delivered up.

[¶4] Aug., de Cons. Ev., ii, 78: We gather from John’s account, that six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, and thence entered Jerusalem sitting upon the ass, after which were done the things related to have been done at Jerusalem. We understand therefore that four days elapsed from His coming to Bethany, to make this two days before the Passover. The difference between the Passover and the feast of unleavened bread is this; the name Passover is given to that one day on which the lamb was slain in the evening, that is, the fourteenth moon of the first month; and on the fifteenth moon, the day that the people came out of Egypt, followed the festival of unleavened bread. But the Evangelists seem to use the terms indifferently. [[Acts 12:3]]

[¶5] Jerome: The Passover, called in Hebrew Phase, does not come as most think from ’to suffer,’ but from the Hebrew word signifying ’to pass over;’ because the destroyer passed over when he saw the blood on the doors of the Israelites, and smote them not; or the Lord Himself walked on high, succouring His people.

[¶6] Remigius: Or, because by the help of the Lord the Israelitish people, freed from Egyptian bondage, passed forth into liberty.

[¶7] Origen: He said not, "After two days" will be, or will come, "the feast of the Passover," but not meaning the ordinary annual Passover, but that Passover such as had never before been, "the Passover will be offered."

[¶8] Remigius: Mystically, that is called the Passover, because on that day Christ passed out of the world to His Father, from corruption to incorruption, from life to death, or because He redeemed the world by causing it savingly to pass from the slavery of the Devil.

[¶9] Jerome: After the two days of the shining light of the Old and of the New Testament, the true Passover is slain for the world. Also our Passover is celebrated when we leave the things of earth, and hasten to the things of heaven.

[¶10] Origen: He foretels His crucifixion to His disciples, adding, "And the Son of Man shall be delivered to be crucified;" thus fortifying them against that shock of surprise, which the sight of their Master, led forth to crucifixion, would otherwise have occasioned them. And He expresses it impersonally "shall be delivered," because God delivered Him up in mercy to the human race, Judas from covetousness, the Priest for envy, the Devil through fear that through His teaching the human race would be plucked out of His hand, little aware how much more that would be effected by His death, than either by His teaching or miracles.

[¶11] Ver. 3. Then assembled together the Chief Priests, and the Scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the High Priest, who was called Caiaphas,4. And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.5. But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.

[¶12] Gloss., non occ.: Then the Evangelist lays before us the hidden springs and machinery by which the Lord’s Passion was brought to pass.

[¶13] Remigius: This, "then," is to be referred to the preceding words, and means before the Feast of the Passover.

[¶14] Origen: Not true Priests and elders, but Priests and elders of what seemed the people of God, but was indeed the people of Gomorrah; these, not knowing God’s High Priest, laid a plot against Him, not recognizing "the firstborn of the whole creation, [[Col 1:15]] yea, even against Him that was elder than them all, did they take counsel.

[¶15] Chrysostom: With such ill designs they came to the chief Priest, seeking a sanction whence a prohibition should have issued. There were at that time several Chief Priests, while the Law allowed but of one, whence it was manifest that the dissolution of the Jewish state was having its beginning. For Moses had commanded that there should be one Chief Priest, whose office should be filled up at death; but in process of time it grew to be annual. All those then who had been Chief Priests [Source note: [marg. note: ] are here called "Chief Priests."

[¶16] Remigius: They are condemned both because they were gathered together, and because they were the Chief Priests; for the more the numbers, and the higher the rank and station of those who band together for any villainy, the greater the enormity of what they do, and the heavier the punishment stored up for them. To shew the Lord’s innocence and openness, the Evangelist adds, "that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him."

[¶17] Chrysostom: For what then did they conspire, to seize Him secretly, or put Him to death? For both; but they feared the people, and therefore waited till the feast was over, for "they said, not on the feast-day." For the Devil would not that Christ should suffer at the Passover, that His Passion might not be notorious. The Chief Priests had no fear in respect of God, namely, that their guilt might be aggravated by the season, but took into account human things only, "Lest there be an uproar among the people."

[¶18] Origen: By reason of the parties among the populace, those who favoured and those who hated Christ, those who believed and those who believed not.

[¶19] Leo, Serm. 58, 2: This precaution of the Chief Priests arose not from reverence for the festival, but, from care for the success of their plot; they feared an insurrection at that season, not because of the guilt the populace might thereby incur, but because they might rescue Christ.

[¶20] Chrysostom: But their fury set aside their caution, and finding a betrayer, they put Christ to death in the middle of the feast.

[¶21] Leo, Serm. 58, 1: We recognise here a providential arrangement whereby the chief men of the Jews, who had often sought occasion of effecting their cruel purposes against Christ, could never yet succeed till the days of the paschal celebration. For it behoved that the things which had long been promised in symbol and mystery should be accomplished in manifest reality, that the typical lamb should be displaced by the true, and one sacrifice embrace the whole catalogue of the varied victims. That shadows should give way to substance, and copies to the presence of the original; victim is commuted for victim, blood is abolished by blood, and the festival of the Law is at once fulfilled and changed.

[¶22] Ver. 6. Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,7. There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.8. But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, "To what purpose is this waste?9. For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor."10. When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, "Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.11. For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.12. For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.13. Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her."

[¶23] Gloss, non. occ.: Having set before us the counsels of the chief of the Jews concerning the death of Christ, the Evangelist would proceed to follow out their execution, and to relate the bargain of Judas with the Jews to deliver Him up, but be first shews the cause of this betrayal. He was grieved that the ointment which the woman poured upon Christ’s head had not been sold that he might have carried off something out of the price it brought, and to make up this loss he was willing to betray his Master. And therefore he proceeds, "Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper."

[¶24] Jerome: Not that he was a leper yet, but having been so, and having been healed by the Saviour, be retained the appellation to shew forth the power of Him who healed him.

[¶25] Rabanus: "Alabaster" is a kind of marble, white but marked with veins of different colours, which was in use for vessels to hold ointment, because it was said to preserve it from corruption.

[¶26] Jerome: Another Evangelist instead of ’alabastruin’ has ’nardum pisticam,’ that is, genuine, unadulterated. [[John 12:3]]

[¶27] Rabanus: From the Greek, faith, whence ’pisticus,’ faithful. For this ointment was pure, unadulterated.

[¶28] Origen: Some one may perhaps think that there are four different women of whom the Evangelists have written, but I rather agree with those who think that they are only three; one of whom Matthew and Mark wrote, one of whom Luke, another of whom John.

[¶29] Jerome: For let no one think that she who anointed His head and she who anointed His feet were one and the same; for the latter washed His feet with her tears, and wiped them with her hair, and is plainly said to have been a harlot. But of this woman nothing of this kind is recorded, and indeed a harlot could not have at once been made deserving of the Lord’s head.

[¶30] Ambrose, Ambros. in Luc. 7, 37: It is possible therefore that they were different persons, and so all appearance of contradiction between the Evangelists is removed. Or it is possible that it was the same woman at two different times and two different stages of desert; first while yet a sinner, afterwards more advanced.

[¶31] Chrys., Hom. lxxx: And in this way it may be the same in the three Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke. And not without good reason does the Evangelist mention Simon’s leprosy, to shew what gave this woman confidence to come to Christ. The leprosy was an unclean disease; when then she saw that Jesus had healed the man with whom He now lodged, she trusted that He could also cleanse the uncleanness of her soul; and so whereas other women came to Christ to be healed in their bodies, she came only for the honour and the healing of her soul, having nothing diseased in her body; and for this she is worthy our highest admiration. But she in John is a different woman, the wonderful sister of Lazarus.

[¶32] Origen: Matthew and Mark relate that this was done in the house of Simon the leper; but John says that Jesus came to a house where Lazarus was; and that not Simon, but Mary and Martha served. Further, according to John, six days before the Passover, He came to Bethany where Mary and Martha made Him a supper. But here it is in the house of Simon the leper, and two days before the Passover.

[¶33] And in Matthew and Mark, it is the disciples that have indignation with a good intent; in John, Judas alone with intent to steal; in Luke, no one finds fault.

[¶34] Greg., Hom. in Ev., xxxiii, 1: Or, we may think that this is the same woman whom Luke calls a "sinner," and John names Mary.

[¶35] Aug., de Cons. Ev., ii, 79: Though the action described in Luke is the same as that described here, and the name of him with whom the Lord supped is the same, for Luke also names Simon; yet because it is not contrary to either nature or custom for two men to bear the same name, it is more probable that this was another Simon, not the leper, in whose house in Bethany these things were done.

[¶36] I would only suppose that the woman who on that occasion came near to Jesus’ feet, and this woman, were not two different persons, but that the same Mary did this twice. The first time is that narrated by Luke; for John mentions it in praise of Mary before Christ’s coming to Bethany, "It was that Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick." [[John 11:2]] Mary therefore had done this before. That she did afterwards in Bethany is distinct from Luke’s account, but is the same event that is recorded by all three, John, Matthew, and Mark. That Matthew and Mark say it was the Lord’s head that she anointed, and John His feet, is reconciled by supposing that she anointed both.

[¶37] Against this one might raise a cavil from what Mark says, that she anointed His head by breaking the box over it, so that there could be none of the ointment left with which to anoint His feet also. Let such caviller understand, that His feet were first anointed before the box was broken, and there remained in it, yet whole, enough wherewith to anoint the head by breaking the box and shedding the contents.

[¶38] Aug., de Doctr. Christ., iii, 12: But let not any suppose that the Lord’s feet were by this woman bathed in ointment after the manner which the luxurious and debauched use. In all things of this nature, it is not the thing itself, but the mind of him who uses it, that is in fault. Whoso uses things after such sort as to pass the bounds observed by good men with whom he lives, either has some meaning [Source note: [marg. note: aliquid significat] in what he does, or is vicious. What then is vice in others, in a divine or prophetic person is a sign of some great thing.

[¶39] The good odour is the good report which one has gained by the works of a good life, and in following Christ’s footsteps sheds a most precious odour on His feet.

[¶40] Aug., de Cons. Ev., ii, 78: Still there may seem to be some discrepancy between the narrative of Matthew and Mark, who say, that "after two days is the feast of the Passover," and then bring Jesus to Bethany; and that of John, who, relating this history of the ointment, says "Six days before the Passover."

[¶41] They who urge this do not understand that the events in Bethany are in Matthew and Mark inserted out of their place, a little later than the time of their occurrence. Neither of them, it is to be observed, introduce their account with ’afterwards.’

[¶42] Chrysostom: The disciples had heard their Master say, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice," [[Matt 9:13]] wherefore they thought among themselves, If He accepts not burnt-offerings, much less will He the application of such ointment as this.

[¶43] Jerome: I know that some raise a cavil here, because John says that Judas alone was grieved because he had the bag, and was a thief from the beginning; but Matthew, that all the disciples were sorrowful. These know not the figure syllepsis, by which one name is put for many, and many for one; as Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews says, "They were sawn asunder," [[Heb 11:37]] when it is thought that one only, Esaias namely, was so.

[¶44] Aug., de Cons. Ev., ii, 79: We may however understand that the other disciples thought or said the same, or that they assented to what Judas said, and thus Matthew and Mark have described their common consent. But Judas said it because he was a thief, the others out of their care for the poor; and John desired to mention it only in the case of him whose thievish propensity he thought ought to be recorded.