John Calvin Commentary Matthew 26:65

"Then the high priest rent his garments, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy: what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard the blasphemy:" — Matthew 26:65 (ASV)

Then the high priest rent his garments. From this, we see how little benefit wicked men gained from the miracles by which Christ had proved his Divinity. But we should not be surprised that, in the humble clothing of a servant, the Son of God was despised by those who were not troubled by any concern for the promised salvation. For if they had not completely abandoned every pious feeling, their pitiful condition should have led them to look eagerly for the Redeemer. Yet now, when they reject him when offered to them without any inquiry, do they not, as much as they can, destroy all the promises of God?

The high priest first declares Christ to be a blasphemer, to which the others then agree. The rending of the clothes plainly shows how boldly and wickedly those who profanely despise God make false claims of zeal. It would indeed have been praiseworthy for the high priest, upon hearing God's name shamefully profaned, not only to feel inward resentment and excruciating pain but also to openly display his detestation. However, by refusing to make any inquiry, he instead fabricated an unfounded charge of blasphemy.

And yet, this treacherous hypocrite, while pretending to a character that was not his, taught God's servants with what severe displeasure they should regard blasphemies. By his example, he also condemned the shameful cowardice of those who are no more affected by an outrage against religion than if they were listening to comedians making foolish jokes.

Then they spat in his face. Either Luke has inverted the order of the narrative, or our Lord twice endured this extremely disrespectful treatment. The latter possibility seems probable to me. And yet, I have no doubt that the servants were emboldened to spit on Christ and to strike him with greater insolence, after they had seen that the council, as far as its decision had influence, condemned him to death. The purpose of all these expressions of contempt was to show that nothing was more unlikely than that he should be a prince of prophets, who, as a result of being blindfolded,²³³ was not even able to ward off blows. But this insolence was turned by the providence of God to a very different outcome; for the face of Christ, dishonored by spitting and blows, has restored to us that image which had been disfigured, and almost erased, by sin.

²³³ “Lequel ayant seulement un voile devant les yeux;” — “who having only a veil before his eyes.”;” — “who having only a veil before his eyes.”