Church Fathers Commentary Matthew 26:6-13

"Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, there came unto him a woman having an alabaster cruse of exceeding precious ointment, and she poured it upon his head, as he sat at meat. But when the disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? For this [ointment] might have been sold for much, and given to the poor. But Jesus perceiving it said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always. For in that she poured this ointment upon my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, that also which this woman hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her." — Matthew 26:6-13 (ASV)

Glossa Ordinaria: Having presented the counsels of the Jewish leaders concerning the death of Christ, the Evangelist proceeds to describe their execution. He recounts the bargain Judas made with the Jews to hand Him over, but first shows the cause of this betrayal. Judas was grieved that the ointment the woman poured on Christ's head had not been sold so that he might have taken some of the money for himself. To make up for this loss, he was willing to betray his Master.¹

Therefore, he continues, "Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper."

St. Jerome: This does not mean he was still a leper, but having been one and then healed by the Savior, he retained the name to show forth the power of the One who healed him.

Rabanus Maurus: "Alabaster" is a kind of marble, white but marked with veins of different colors, which was used for vessels to hold ointment because it was said to preserve it from corruption.

St. Jerome: Another Evangelist, instead of "alabastrum," has "nardum pisticam," that is, genuine and unadulterated.ⁱ

Rabanus Maurus: From the Greek πιστις (pistis), meaning faith, comes "pisticus," meaning faithful. For this ointment was pure and unadulterated.

Origen of Alexandria: Someone might perhaps think that the Evangelists wrote about four different women, but I agree with those who think there are only three: one described by Matthew and Mark, one by Luke, and another by John.

St. Jerome: Let no one think that the woman who anointed His head and the one who anointed His feet were the same person. The latter washed His feet with her tears, wiped them with her hair, and is plainly said to have been a prostitute. But of this woman, nothing of the sort is recorded; indeed, a prostitute could not have at once been made worthy of anointing the Lord's head.

St. Ambrose of Milan: It is possible, therefore, that they were different women, 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 in two different stages of merit: first, while still a sinner, and afterwards, more advanced.²

St. John Chrysostom: In this way, it may be the same woman in the three Evangelists: Matthew, Mark, and Luke. And not without good reason does the Evangelist mention Simon's leprosy, for it shows what gave this woman the confidence to come to Christ.

Leprosy was an unclean disease. When she saw that Jesus had healed the man with whom He was now lodging, she trusted that He could also cleanse the uncleanness of her soul. Whereas other women came to Christ to be healed in their bodies, she came only for the honor and healing of her soul, having no disease in her body. For this, she is worthy of our highest admiration. But the woman in John's Gospel is different—the wonderful sister of Lazarus.³

Origen of Alexandria: 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. Furthermore, according to John, Jesus came to Bethany six days before the Passover, where Mary and Martha made Him a supper. But here, the event takes place in the house of Simon the leper, two days before the Passover.

And in Matthew and Mark, it is the disciples who are indignant, with good intent; in John, it is Judas alone, with the intent to steal; in Luke, no one finds fault.

St. Gregory the Great: Or, we may think that this is the same woman whom Luke calls a "sinner" and John names Mary.⁴

St. Augustine of Hippo: Although the action described in Luke is the same as the one described here, and the name of the man with whom the Lord dined is the same (for Luke also names Simon), it is more probable that this was another Simon, not the leper, in whose house in Bethany these things were done. This is because it is not contrary to nature or custom for two men to have the same name.⁵

I would suppose that the woman who on that occasion came near to Jesus' feet and this woman were not two different people, but that the same Mary did this twice. The first time is the one narrated by Luke. John even 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.

The anointing she did later in Bethany is distinct from Luke's account but is the same event recorded by John, Matthew, and Mark. The fact that Matthew and Mark say she anointed the Lord's head, while John says His feet, can be reconciled by supposing that she anointed both.

Against this, one might raise an objection from what Mark says: that she anointed His head by breaking the box over it, so that none of the ointment could have been left to anoint His feet as well. Let such a critic understand that His feet were anointed first, before the box was broken. While it was still whole, enough ointment remained in it to anoint His head by breaking the box and pouring out its contents.

But let no one suppose that the Lord's feet were bathed in ointment by this woman in the manner of the luxurious and debauched. In all things of this nature, it is not the action itself but the mind of the one performing it that is at fault. Whoever uses things in a way that goes beyond the bounds observed by the good people with whom he lives either has a special meaningⁱ in what he does or is corrupt. Therefore, what is a vice in others becomes a sign of something great when done by a divine or prophetic person.⁶

The good fragrance is the good reputation one gains through the works of a good life; in following Christ's footsteps, one sheds a most precious fragrance on His feet.

Still, there may seem to be a discrepancy between the narratives of Matthew and Mark, who say, "after two days is the feast of the Passover," and then bring Jesus to Bethany, and that of John, who, in relating this history of the ointment, says, "Six days before the Passover."⁷

Those who argue this do not understand that in Matthew and Mark, the events in Bethany are inserted out of their chronological place, a little later than when they occurred. It should be observed that neither of them introduces their account with the word "afterwards."

St. John Chrysostom: The disciples had heard their Master say, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice (Matthew 9:13). Therefore, they thought among themselves, "If He does not accept burnt offerings, much less will He accept the use of such an ointment as this."

St. Jerome: I know that some raise an objection here, because John says that Judas alone was grieved (since he held the money bag and was a thief from the beginning), while Matthew says that all the disciples were sorrowful. These critics do not know the rhetorical figure of syllepsis, by which one name is used for many, and many for one. For example, Paul says in the Epistle to the Hebrews, They were sawn asunder (Hebrews 11:37), when it is thought that only one person, namely Isaiah, was.

St. Augustine of Hippo: We may, however, understand that the other disciples thought or said the same thing, or that they agreed with what Judas said, and thus Matthew and Mark described their common consent. But Judas said it because he was a thief, while the others said it out of their care for the poor. John wished to mention it only in the case of Judas, whose thievish propensity he thought ought to be recorded.⁸

St. John Chrysostom: The disciples, then, thought this, but Jesus, who saw the woman's thoughts, allowed it. For her piety was great and her ardor was unspeakable, which is why He condescended to allow her to pour the ointment on His head. Just as the Father accepted the smoke and odor of the slain victim, so also Christ accepted this votive anointing of His head, even though the disciples, who could not see her heart, murmured.

Remigius of Auxerre: He clearly shows that the Apostles had said something harsh against her when He says, Why do you trouble the woman? And He beautifully adds, She has done a good work for me. This is as much as to say, "It is not a waste of ointment, as you claim, but a good work—that is, a service of piety and devotion."

St. John Chrysostom: And He does not merely say, She has done a good work, but first says, Why do you trouble the woman? This teaches us that we ought to receive, cherish, and cultivate every good act done by anyone, even if it lacks something of exact propriety, and not demand strict correctness from a beginner. If He had been asked before the woman did this, He would not have directed her to do it. But since it was already done, the disciples' rebuke was out of place, and He Himself spoke these things for her comfort, to guard her from their persistent attacks.

Remigius of Auxerre: For you always have the poor with you. In these words, the Lord shows with clear purpose that those who ministered to Him from their substance while He lived in a mortal body were not to be blamed. This is because the poor would always be in the Church, and believers could do good to them whenever they wished, but He would remain with them in the body for only a very short time.

From this it follows, But me you will not always have.

St. Jerome: Here a question arises: how could the Lord have said elsewhere to His disciples, Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world (Matthew 28:20), but here say, Me you will not always have?

I suppose that in this passage He is speaking of His bodily presence, which would not be with them after the resurrection for daily interaction and friendship, as it was then.

Remigius of Auxerre: Or, this can be explained by supposing it was spoken to Judas only. He did not say, "You do not have," but You will not have, because this was spoken in the person of Judas to all his followers. And He says, not always, even though they never truly have Him, because the wicked seem to have Christ in this present world while they mix with His members and approach His table. But they will not have Him in this way forever, for He will one day say to His elect, Come, you blessed of my Father (Matthew 25:34).

It was the custom among this people to embalm the bodies of the dead with various spices so that they might be preserved from decay for as long as possible. Since this woman was eager to embalm the Lord's dead body but would be unable to (because she would be preempted by His resurrection), it was arranged by Divine Providence that she should anoint the Lord's living body instead. This, then, is what He means: in pouring this ointment, she is signifying My death and burial by anointing My living body.

St. John Chrysostom: That this mention of His death and burial might not cause her to despair, He comforts her with what follows: Truly I say to you, wherever this gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will also be told in memory of her.

Rabanus Maurus: That is, to whatever place throughout the whole world the Church spreads, what she has done will also be told. What is added also signifies that just as Judas, by his rebuke of her, earned an evil reputation for treachery, so she has earned the glory of pious devotion.

St. Jerome: Note His knowledge of the future: though He was about to suffer death within two days, He knew that His Gospel would be preached throughout the whole world.

St. John Chrysostom: Behold the fulfillment of this saying! To whatever part of the world you go, you will find this woman famous, and this has been accomplished by the power of Him who spoke this word. How many victories of kings and captains have been forgotten! How many who built cities and enslaved nations are now known neither by report nor by name!

But the deed of this woman—pouring ointment in a leper's house in the presence of twelve men—resounds throughout the world. And though so much time has passed, the memory of what was done has not been erased.

But why did He promise this woman no spiritual gift, but only everlasting remembrance? Because the promise He did make gave her confidence that she would receive the other as well. Since she performed a good work, it is clear that she will receive an adequate reward.

St. Jerome: Mystically, the Lord, about to suffer for the whole world, stays in Bethany, the "house of obedience," which was once the house of Simon the leper. The name Simon is also interpreted as "obedient," or, according to another interpretation, "the world," in whose house the Church is healed.

Origen of Alexandria: Throughout Scripture, oil represents the work of mercy, with which the lamp of the word is fed. It can also represent doctrine, the hearing of which sustains the word of faith once it is kindled. All substances with which people anoint are comprehensively called "oil," and one kind of oil is ointment, and one kind of ointment is precious.

Similarly, all righteous acts are called good works. Of these good works, there is one kind that we do for or to people, and another that we do for or to God. Likewise, what we do for God in part advances the good of people, and in part, the glory of God.

For example, one might do a kindness to a person out of feelings of natural righteousness, not for God's sake, as the Gentiles sometimes did. Such a work is like common oil with no fine fragrance, yet it is acceptable to God. For, as Peter says in Clement, the good works that unbelievers do profit them in this world but do not help them gain eternal life in the next. Those who do the same for God's sake, however, profit not only in this world but also in the next, and what they do is an ointment of good fragrance.

Another kind of work is that done for the good of people, such as giving alms and the like. He who does this for Christians anoints the Lord's feet, for they are the Lord's feet; this is what penitents are most often found doing for the remission of their sins. But he who devotes himself to chastity, and continues in fasting, prayer, and other things that contribute only to God's glory—this is the ointment that anoints the Lord's head, and its fragrance fills the whole Church. This is the work suitable not for penitents, but for the perfect.

This anointing of the head is also the doctrine that is necessary for humanity. But the acknowledgment of the faith, which belongs to God alone, is the ointment with which the head of Christ is anointed, with which we are buried together with Christ by baptism into death (Romans 6:4).

St. Hilary of Poitiers: This woman prefigures the Gentile people, who gave glory to God in Christ's passion. For she anointed His head—and the head of Christ is God—and the ointment is the fruit of good works. The disciples, however, anxious for the salvation of Israel, say that the ointment ought to have been sold for the poor, prophetically designating the faithless Jews by the name "poor."

The Lord answers that there is abundant time for them to show their care for the poor, but that salvation can be extended to the Gentiles only through obedience to His command. That is, they must be buried together with Him through the pouring out of this woman's ointment, because regeneration can only be given to those who are dead in the profession of baptism.

And this work of hers will be told wherever the Gospel is preached, because when Israel draws back, the glory of the Gospel is proclaimed through the faith of the Gentiles.

1. non. occ.
2. Ambros. in Luc. 7, 37
3. Hom. lxxx
4. Hom. in Ev., xxxiii, 1
5. de Cons. Ev., ii, 79
6. de Doctr. Christ., iii, 12
7. de Cons. Ev., ii, 78
8. de Cons. Ev., ii, 79