Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 19

1. Above, the Evangelist gave us an account of what Christ suffered from the Jews; here he describes what He endured from the Gentiles in particular. He suffered three things, as He had predicted: they will deliver him to the Gentiles, to be mocked and scourged and crucified (Matthew 20:19). The Evangelist describes:

   • The scourging of Christ.
   • His mockery: and the soldiers, weaving a crown of thorns, put it on his head.
   • His crucifixion: Pilate therefore went out again, and said to them: Behold, I am bringing him out to you (John 19:4).

2. He says, then, after all their shouting, Pilate took Jesus and scourged him, not with his own hands, but by using his soldiers. He did this hoping that the Jews would be satisfied with these wounds and be softened so as to no longer demand His death.

   It is natural for our anger to subside if we see the one we are angry with humiliated and punished, as the Philosopher says in his Rhetoric. This is true of anger that seeks to inflict a limited amount of harm, but it is not the case with hatred, which seeks the complete destruction of the one hated: an enemy... if he finds an opportunity his thirst for blood will be insatiable . The Jews hated Christ, and so His scourging did not satisfy them: all the day long I have been scourged (Psalms 73:14); I gave my back to the smiters (Isaiah 50:6).

3. Does this intention excuse Pilate for the scourging?

   It does not, because of all those things that are evil in themselves, none can be made completely good by a good intention. To harm an innocent person, and especially the Son of God, is an evil in itself in the highest degree. Consequently, it cannot be excused by any intention.

4. Now the Evangelist shows us Christ being ridiculed. He describes:

   • The mock honors paid to Him.
   • The real dishonor shown to Him: and struck him.

   They pay Him mock honors by calling Him a king, thus referring 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:

   • A mock crown.
   • Mock clothing.
   • Mock acclamations.

5. They mock Him with a crown, because it is customary for kings to wear a crown of gold: a crown of gold upon his head . The Psalm mentions this: you set a crown of fine gold upon his head (Psalms 21:3). And the soldiers, weaving a crown of thorns, 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 (Isaiah 28:5).

   It was fittingly 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 (Jeremiah 4:3). These thorns also take away the thorns of punishment that burden us: thorns and thistles it will bring forth to you (Genesis 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, so that the hatred of the Jews would be satisfied and Pilate could more easily release Jesus.

6. Second, they mock Him with clothing. The soldiers... put a purple garment on him, which was the sign of royal dignity for the Romans. In Maccabees 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: Why is your apparel red, and your garments like his that treads in the wine press? (Isaiah 63:2).

   At the same time, it indicates the sufferings of the martyrs, which stain the entire body of Christ—that is, the Church—red.

7. Third, they mock Him in 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 Samuel 16:16).

   As for the mystical interpretation, those who greet Christ mockingly are those who profess Him with words but deny him with their deeds (Titus 1:16). Not everyone that says to me Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 7:21).

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

1. Now the Evangelist discusses the crucifixion of Christ:

   First, the crucifixion itself.

   Second, the death of Christ: afterwards, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled (John 19:28).

   Third, his burial: and after these things, Joseph of Arimathea . . . asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus (John 19:38).

   Regarding the crucifixion, he first mentions the dispute Pilate had with the Jews; second, we have the sentencing of Christ: when Pilate therefore had heard this saying, he feared all the more; and third, the sentence is carried out: and they took Jesus and led him out (John 19:16).

   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.

   Second, by declaring his innocence: Pilate said to them, Take him yourselves and crucify him, for I find no cause in him.

   Regarding the first point, the Evangelist describes Jesus being shown to the crowd, and second, the effect this had: when the chief priests, therefore, and the servants, had seen him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.

2. Three things are mentioned concerning this first point.

   First is the intention of Pilate, which was to free him. He says, Pilate therefore 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 cause in him, deserving of death. Why then, unrighteous Pilate, was there this shameful bargaining without a reason? Was it so the Jews would not believe you would release him out of partiality? What kind of partiality is it that involves giving someone such a thrashing? Or perhaps it was so that his enemies, seeing his disgrace, would gladly no longer thirst for his blood. In effect, he is saying, “If there were a reason for his death, I would condemn him just as 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.”

3. Second, we see Christ being presented before the crowd: Jesus therefore came out, bearing the crown of thorns and the purple garment. 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 (Psalms 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 (Isaiah 51:7).

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

5. Now we see the effect of this exhibition on the Jews. No matter how disgraced, wretched, and beaten he appeared, their hatred did not lessen but was still burning and growing.

   When the chief priests, therefore, and the servants, had seen him, when Jesus was brought out, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him! Their desire was so strong that they shouted this twice. And they would not be satisfied with any kind of death, but demanded the most dishonorable kind, namely crucifixion: let us condemn him to a shameful death .

   He said, when they had seen 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 .

6. 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 second, the Jews repeated his guilt: we have a law, and according to the law he ought to die.

7. Regarding Christ’s innocence, Pilate said to them, Take him yourselves, and crucify him. It is as if he were 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 cause in him deserving of crucifixion.” For the prince of this world is coming, and in me he has nothing (John 14:30); Jesus whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him (Acts 3:13).

8. But the Jews repeat Christ’s offense: The Jews answered him, We have a law, and according to the law he ought to die. They seemed to understand from Pilate’s response that he would not move against Christ on the charge of claiming a kingdom, although they had thought this charge would especially incline him 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 their law—for which he could be condemned and for which they were already condemning him. Thus they say, according to the law he ought to die.

   First, they charge Christ with a crime against the law of the Jews; second, against the law of the Romans: If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend.

   In regard to the first, we see the accusation of the Jews against Christ, and second, the effect of this on Pilate: When Pilate therefore had heard this saying, he feared all the more.

9. The crime against the Jewish law that they charged Christ with was that he made himself the Son of God, and for this he deserved death. Therefore, the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was his Father, making himself equal to God (John 5:18); and again, we do not stone you for a good work but for blasphemy (John 10:33).

   They always said that he made himself the Son of God, on the assumption that he was not. But this was not against the law, as Christ proved to them before (John 10:34), by citing, I say, You are gods (Psalms 82:6). 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.

10. Now the Evangelist mentions the effect which the accusation of the Jews had on Pilate. First it produced fear, for when Pilate therefore had heard this saying, that is, that Christ made himself the Son of God, he feared all the more that it might be true and that it would be disastrous to proceed against him without cause. From this, we understand that the Gentiles were afraid when they heard of the betrayal of the Son of God. O Lord, I have heard your report, and was afraid (Habakkuk 3:2).

11. Second, he mentions another effect it produced: doubt and questioning. And he entered the praetorium again, and he said to Jesus, Where are you from?

    First, we have the question Pilate asked; second, the silence of Christ; and third, the reproach of Pilate.

12. In regard to the first, he says, he entered the praetorium again, struck with fear, and he said to Jesus, whom he had led back with him, Where are you from? He wished 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 (John 8:23).

13. Jesus, because he chose to, did not give an answer, so that he might show that he was unwilling to overwhelm with words or to make excuses, since he had come to suffer.

    At the same time, he is an example of patience for us and fulfilled what is found in Isaiah: like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth (Isaiah 53:7). 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.

14. Then the Evangelist shows how Pilate reproached him for his silence, when he says that Pilate therefore said to him, Do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to crucify you and I have power to release you? (John 19:10).

    First, we see Pilate boasting of his power; second, we have what Christ said about this power.

15. Pilate was displeased that Jesus did not answer him and said, Do you not speak to me? With these words, 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 any crime? I will condemn you out of your own mouth (Luke 19:22); because you have authority among men, mortal though you are, you do what you please .

16. Pilate was boasting about his power: men who... boast of the abundance of their riches (Psalms 49:6). So our Lord corrects him, saying, You would not have any power against me, unless it had been given to you from above. As Augustine said, “When Christ was silent, he was silent like a lamb; when he spoke, he taught as a shepherd.” So, first Christ teaches Pilate about the source of his power, and second, about the greatness of his sin.

17. In regard to the first, he says, You would not have any power against me, unless it had been given to you from above. He is saying, in effect, “If you seem to have some power, you do not have this from yourself, but it has been given to you from above, from God, from whom all power comes”: by me kings reign (Proverbs 8:15). He says any power, that is, no matter how little, because Pilate had a limited power under a greater one, the power of Caesar: for I am a man under authority (Matthew 8:9).

18. Therefore, he concludes, he who delivered me to you, that is, Judas or the chief priests, has the greater sin. He says greater to indicate that both those who delivered him up to Pilate and Pilate himself were guilty of sin. But those who delivered him up had the greater sin because they delivered him up out of malice, whereas Pilate acted out of fear of a superior power.

    This refutes those heretics who say that all sins are equal, for if they were, our Lord would not have said, the greater sin. Woe to that man by whom the temptation comes! (Matthew 18:7).

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

Previously, the Jews accused Christ of a crime against their law, but Pilate seemed to consider this a minor matter since he himself was not subject to this law. So they now accuse Christ of a crime against Roman law, hoping this would pressure Pilate into taking his life.

1. They state the danger hanging over Pilate if he releases Christ.

2. They give the reason for this danger: for whosoever makes himself a king, speaks against Caesar.

The Evangelist says that after Pilate tried to release Christ, the Jews cried out, saying, “If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend”; that is, you will lose his friendship.

It frequently happens that we estimate others based on our own character. Since it was written of these Jews that they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God (John 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 (Psalms 118:9). The Philosopher also says that truth is to be preferred to friendship.

They add the reason for the danger that threatened Pilate when they say, whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar. It is the nature of earthly power that one power cannot endure the presence of another. 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 .

In treating the condemnation of Christ, the Evangelist mentions three things:

1. The place.

2. The time: and it was the parasceve of the Pasch, about the sixth hour (John 19:14).

3. The manner of the condemnation: and he said to the Jews, “Behold your king.”

Regarding the first point, the Evangelist indicates Pilate’s motive when he says, When Pilate therefore had heard this saying, he grew all the more fearful. 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, and no soldiers to indicate that he was seizing a kingdom. Rather, Christ always sat alone with his disciples, plain in food, clothing, and dwelling. Yet as we read in Proverbs, the wicked flee when no one pursues (Proverbs 28:1). They trembled in fear when there was no fear (Psalms 53:5); be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks (Ezekiel 2:6).

Then he mentions the place, saying, and sat down in the judgment seat. A tribunal is the seat of a judge, as 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 (Proverbs 20:8). It was called a tribunal because, among the Romans, it was the tribunes who adjudicated certain cases; they were named from the tribes they headed. [It says in the judgment seat, that is, before the tribunal, because in Greek the preposition “on” is the same as the Latin “before” or “in.”]

This tribunal was in the place that is called Lithostrotos, that is, a pavement of stones. Lithos in Greek means 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.

The time of the condemnation is given when he says, now it was the parasceve of the Pasch, about the sixth hour.

Among the Jews, the Sabbath was in some respects more solemn than any other feast, because 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 for the Passover. This practice originated 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 (Exodus 16:24). In this matter, they made no exception for any feast. Accordingly, although the present Friday was a solemn feast for them, they still prepared the Sabbath food on that day.

He adds that it was about the sixth hour. This does not agree with Mark, who says, and it was the third hour, when they crucified him (Mark 15:25). 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! (John 19:6), 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! (John 19:6). It is John who follows the actual 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 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 sacrificed. Thus, the preparation of the Passover is the preparation for the sacrifice of Christ. This preparation began at the ninth hour of the night, when the Jews shouted to the captured Christ, He deserves death! (Matthew 26:66). If we add the three remaining hours of the night to the three hours of the day, 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.

Now the Evangelist tells us about the manner and order of the condemnation: and he said to the Jews, “Behold your king.”

Pilate still wanted to free Christ, although his fear of Caesar weighed upon him.

1. We see Pilate’s attempt to free Christ.

2. He consents to have him crucified: then therefore he delivered him to them to be crucified.

Concerning the first point, we see two things:

• The attempt of Pilate.

• The malice of the Jews: but they cried out, “Away with him, away with him!”

The Evangelist says that after Pilate sat down on the judgment seat, he said to the Jews, in exasperation, “Behold your king!” It was as if he was 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 says: I am poor and in labor from my youth (Psalms 88:15).

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 . Therefore, let us condemn him to a shameful death , which is the same as Crucify him! (John 19:6).

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.”

Second, 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 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 Samuel 8:7); they have forsaken me, the fountain of living water, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water (Jeremiah 2:13).

Then the Evangelist mentions Pilate’s consent to the killing of Christ: Then therefore he delivered him to them—to the Jews, who had been subject to the power and will of the Romans—to be crucified. This was against the counsel of Exodus: You will not follow a multitude to do evil (Exodus 23:2); 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 (Jeremiah 12:7).

Now the Evangelist deals with the crucifixion of Christ:

1. The dishonor of the cross.

2. The events surrounding the crucifixion: and Pilate wrote a title also (John 19:19).

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.

Those who crucified him were soldiers. And they took Jesus. This was done indeed by the soldiers, for we read below, the soldiers therefore, when they had crucified him (John 19:23), but it was 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 (Matthew 21:43).

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 (Deuteronomy 21:23). And thus, avoiding the cross as something unholy and fearing even to touch it, they laid the cross on the condemned Jesus. Thus, it says that he went out, bearing his own cross.

Matthew says that they compelled a certain Simon of Cyrene, on his way from the fields, to carry Christ’s cross (Matthew 27:32).

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 him in imitation, especially strangers—that is, the Gentiles. Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example (1 Peter 2:21); if any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me (Matthew 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 Corinthians 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 (Psalms 95:9); the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called: Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace (Isaiah 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 (Colossians 2:15). Again, he carried his cross as a teacher his lampstand, 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 (Luke 11:33).

The place where Christ suffered was also dishonorable, and for two reasons. First, it was outside the city: he went out to that place which is 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 (Hebrews 13:12).

This was for two reasons. First, to show that the effectiveness of his passion was not enclosed within the boundaries of the Jewish nation. Second, 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 (Hebrews 13:13).

Second, this place was dishonorable because it was one of the lowest and basest: to that place which is called Calvary. I am reckoned among those who go down to the Pit (Psalms 88:4). Chrysostom tells us that some say 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. But, as Jerome says, this interpretation is pleasing to the ears of the people, but it is not true, because Adam is buried in Hebron: Adam, the greatest among the Anakim, was laid there (Joshua 14:15). Therefore, it is said that there was a gate outside Jerusalem where the condemned were beheaded. The place took the name of Calvary from this, on account of the skulls of the condemned.

Those who suffered with him also added to his dishonor, for they crucified with him two others, who were criminals, as Luke mentions (Luke 23:33), one on each 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. The Jews intended this fact to 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 (Isaiah 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). 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 and 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.

1. The Evangelist has just told of Christ’s crucifixion; now he mentions the events that accompanied and followed it.

   First, as they relate to Pilate.

   Second, as they relate to the soldiers: the soldiers therefore, when they had crucified him, took his garments.

   Finally, he tells about Christ’s friends who were standing by: now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

   Concerning Pilate, we see the title being written on the cross, its being read, and its preservation.

2. Two things are mentioned about the writing of the title. First is the act of writing it: 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. Just as inscriptions are placed on trophies of victory so that 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 (Genesis 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! (Lamentations 3:19).

3. Second, he mentions the content of the title, Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews, words which are very fitting for the mystery of the cross. The word Jesus, which means Savior, corresponds to the power of the cross by which we have been saved: you will call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins (Matthew 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 of Solomon 2:1); a flower will rise up out of his root (Isaiah 11:1). The words King of the Jews accord with the power and dominion which Christ earned by His suffering: therefore God has highly exalted him (Philippians 2:9); he will reign as king and be wise (Jeremiah 23:5); he will sit upon the throne of David and over his kingdom (Isaiah 9:7).

4. 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 (Psalms 6:8). Why then did the Evangelist write only King of the Jews?

   I answer that the Gentiles were grafted onto the abundant olive tree: and if some of the branches are broken and you, being a wild olive, are grafted in among them (Romans 11:17). Just as 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 King of the Jews, non-Jewish converts are also included.

5. Next, we see that the title was read: this title therefore many of the Jews did read. The fact that it was read signifies that more are saved by faith in reading about the passion of Christ than were saved by actually seeing it, for these are written that you may believe (John 20:31).

   Second, the Evangelist mentions how easy this was to read. It was easy first because Jesus was crucified near the city, the place where Jesus was crucified was close to the city, where many people passed. Second, it was easy because it was written in a number of languages: 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.

   Furthermore, the Hebrew tongue signified that theology and philosophy ought to be ruled by Christ, which is signified by Hebrew because knowledge of divine matters was entrusted to the Jews. The Greek language signified that Christ was to rule over natural philosophy, for the Greeks were engaged in speculation about nature. Latin signified that Christ will rule over practical philosophy, because moral speculation especially flourished among the Romans. And so, all thought is brought into captivity and obedience to Christ (2 Corinthians 10:5).

6. We now read that this title was not changed, when it says: then the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate: do not write: the King of the Jews.

   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 that he said, I am the 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 them that they had their king crucified.

   But if the title had read, he said, I am King of the Jews, it would have been a taunting sarcasm against Christ and would have indicated his crime. This was what the chief priests wanted to do: to take away the reputation of the one they crucified, just as they had already taken away his life: I am the talk of those who sit in the gate (Psalms 69:12).

7. Second, 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 the title, Do not destroy, for David, for an inscription of a title. Indeed, this Psalm especially concerns the passion: deliver me from my enemies, O my God (Psalms 58:2). And so do the two preceding Psalms: be merciful to me, O God, be merciful to me, for in you my soul takes refuge (Psalms 56:1) and if indeed you speak justice (Psalms 57:1). It was therefore foolishness for the chief priests to complain, for just as they could not destroy what the Truth had said, they also could not destroy what Pilate had written. As Augustine remarks, Pilate said, what I have written I have written, because what the Lord said, He said.

8. Now the Evangelist shows the role played by the soldiers: the soldiers therefore, when they had crucified him, took his garments.

   1. He mentions that Christ’s garments were distributed among them.

   2. We see that lots were cast for his tunic: also his coat.

   3. He leads into the pronunciation of the prophecy, at that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

9. He says, the soldiers therefore, when they had crucified him, took his garments. We can gather two things from this: the humiliation of the dying Christ, for the soldiers stripped him, which was done only to those they despised; and second, the greed of the soldiers, because they took his garments and made four parts, one for each soldier. Soldiers were a very greedy group, and so John the Baptist told them to rob no one... and be content with your pay (Luke 3:14); they send men away naked, taking away their clothes (Job 24:7).

10. In regard to the second point, he says, also his coat.

    1. His tunic is described.

    2. Lots are cast for it: they then said to one another: let us not cut it.

11. He says, also his coat, that is, they took that along with his other garments. Now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

    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 Corinthians 8:9).

12. As for the mystical interpretation, this passage can be referred to the mystical body of Christ. 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 will put them all on as an ornament, you will bind them on as a bride does (Isaiah 49:18).

    The seamless tunic, which was not divided, indicates charity. 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 faith reveals our ultimate end and hope directs us toward it, only charity unites us with it: and above all these put on love, which binds everything together (Colossians 3:14). The tunic is said to be woven from the top because charity is above all the other virtues: I will show you a still more excellent way (1 Corinthians 12:31); to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God (Ephesians 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 (Romans 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 above, by the Holy Spirit: that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:20).

13. The Evangelist says that lots were cast for Christ’s tunic: they then said to one another: let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it will 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; 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 (Proverbs 16:33); and again, the lot puts an end to disputes (Proverbs 18:18).

14. Matthew says something different: they divided his garments among them by casting lots (Matthew 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.

15. 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 (Mark 15:24).

    According to Augustine, this should be understood from the words of Mark and means they cast lots for one of his garments to decide which one would take the tunic that was left over.

16. Now the Evangelist brings in the prophecy of this event: that the Scripture might be fulfilled. 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, that the Scripture might be fulfilled one thing after another, which said (Psalms 22:18) that they parted my garments among them—not saying "garment," because there was more than one—and for my clothing, that is, for my tunic, they cast lots.

    Second, he states that the prophecy was fulfilled: so the soldiers indeed did these things. 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 (Matthew 6:18); everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled (Luke 24:44).

17. Third, we see the part played by the friends of Jesus: now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

    1. The Evangelist mentions the women who were standing there.

    2. He mentions Christ's concern for the care of His mother: when Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing there.

    3. He mentions the ready obedience of the disciple: and from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.

18. Three women are mentioned as standing by the cross of Jesus: his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary 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.

19. Matthew (Matthew 27:55) and Mark (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 sight, and they could be described as far because other people were between them and Jesus.

    Alternatively, one could say that when the crucifixion was beginning, the women were standing near Christ and were able to speak to him. 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.

20. The other issue is that John mentions Mary of Clopas, while in her place, 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.

21. 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 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 (Job 19:20).

22. The Evangelist now mentions Christ’s concern for His mother: when Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing there.

    1. First we see His concern for the welfare of His disciple, whom He entrusted to His mother.

    2. Then we see His concern for His mother, whom He gave into the keeping of His disciple: after that, he said to the disciple: behold your mother.

23. As to the first, he says, when Jesus therefore had seen his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing there, he said to his mother: woman, behold, your son! He is saying: "Until now I have taken care of you and watched over you. Now, you take care of my disciple." This shows the eminence of John.

    Before, when the mother of Jesus said to him, they have no wine (John 2:3), he replied, woman, what is that to me and to you? My hour has not yet come. That is, the hour of my passion, when I will suffer by means of what I have received from you. But when that hour comes, I will acknowledge you. And now that the hour has come, He does acknowledge His mother. Yet He implies that He does not have the power to work miracles through what He received from her, but rather through what He has from the generation of the Father; that is, insofar as He is God.

24. As Augustine says, Christ hanging on the cross is like a teacher in his teaching chair. He is teaching us to help our parents in their needs and to take care of them: honor your father and your mother (Exodus 20:12); if any one does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his own family, he has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever (1 Timothy 5:8).

    Why is the contrary found in Luke? If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple (Luke 14:26).

    I answer that when our Lord commands us to hate our parents and ourselves, He is commanding us to love them in their individual nature and to hate the moral evil that turns our natures away from God. This means that we must aid our parents, loving and reverencing them as human beings, but hating their moral vices and whatever in them turns us away from God.

25. As to the second, he says, behold, your mother! This is so that John will care for her as much as a son cares for his mother, and Mary is to love John as a mother loves her son.

26. The Evangelist shows the obedience of the disciple when he says, and from that hour the disciple took her to his own. According to Bede, this should be read as "as his own," so the meaning is, the disciple, John, took her, the mother of Jesus, as his own, namely, as his mother. But according to Augustine, and agreeing with the Greek text, we should read it as to his own. This does not mean to his own home, for John was one of those who said, we have left everything and followed you (Matthew 19:27). Rather, the disciple took Mary to his own guardianship, to eagerly and respectfully care for her.

1. After dealing with the crucifixion and the events that accompanied it, the Evangelist now describes the venerable death of Christ.

   • First, he shows that it was at the appropriate time.
   • Second, its manner: and bowing his head, he gave up his spirit.
   • And third, the piercing of the dead body: then the Jews (because it was the parasceve) … asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

   He shows that the time was fitting for his death, because all things were now accomplished.

   • First, he mentions that Christ knew that all things had been accomplished.
   • Second, we see Christ doing what remained to be done: Jesus therefore, when he had taken the vinegar, said: it is consummated.

2. In regard to the first, he says, afterwards, after the things that had just been mentioned, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished. This means that 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 (Luke 24:44); I have seen the end of every consummation (Psalms 119:96).

3. But because another thing foretold in scripture had to be done, the Evangelist adds that Jesus said (in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled), I thirst.

   • First, we see the words spoken by Christ.
   • Then, how his desire could be satisfied.
   • And finally, he is given the vinegar.

4. Jesus said this in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled. The phrase in order that indicates the sequence of events and does not state the cause for why Jesus spoke, for he did not speak in order that the Scripture of the Old Testament might be fulfilled. 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 Timothy 2:4); for the Son of man came to seek and to save the lost (Luke 19:10). Indeed, we express our intense desires in terms of thirst: my soul thirsts for God (Psalms 42:3).

5. This desire could be satisfied because there was a vessel that had been put there, full of vinegar. 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.

6. Christ is given the vinegar, for they, putting a sponge full of vinegar on hyssop, put 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, who says that the sponge was put on a reed (Matthew 27:48). Or, according to others, it was put on hyssop, which was long, and this is what Matthew called a reed.

7. 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.

   Alternatively, 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 (Psalms 51:7).

8. The final fulfillment is mentioned when the Evangelist says, Jesus therefore, when he had taken the vinegar, said: it is consummated. This could refer to the fulfillment accomplished by Christ’s death: for it was fitting that the author of our salvation be fulfilled by glory through his passion (Hebrews 2:10). Or, it can be understood to refer to the fulfillment of our sanctification, which was brought about by his passion and cross: for by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified (Hebrews 10:14). Or, it can refer to the fulfillment of the Scriptures: everything that is written of the Son of man by the prophets will be accomplished (Luke 18:31).

9. Then the Evangelist describes the death of Christ: bowing his head, he gave up his spirit.

   First, he mentions the cause of his death: bowing his head. We should not think that because he gave up his spirit, he bowed his head. Rather, because he bowed his head, he gave up his spirit, for the bowing of his head indicated that he died out of obedience: he became obedient unto death (Philippians 2:8).

   Second, the Evangelist mentions the power of the one dying: he gave up his spirit, that is, by his own power. No man takes it away from me, but I lay it down of myself (John 10:18). As Augustine says, we do not have the power to sleep when we choose to, but Christ had the power to die when he willed to.

10. Some think that the phrase, gave up his spirit, implies that man has two souls: an intellectual soul, which they call the spirit, and an animal soul, that is, a vegetative-sensitive soul which gives life to the body and is called a soul in the proper sense. So they say that Christ gave up only his intellectual soul.

    p>

    This is false, both because the assertion that there are two souls in man is listed among the errors compiled in the book The Dogmas of the Church, and because if Christ had given up his spirit and retained a soul, he would not have died. Therefore, since in man the spirit and the soul are the same, we must say that Christ gave up his spirit, that is, his soul.

    This also destroys the error of those who say that the human souls of those who have died do not go directly after death to paradise, hell, or purgatory, but remain in the grave until the day of judgment. For our Lord immediately gave up his spirit to the Father, from which we see that the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God .

11. Now we see the piercing of Christ’s body:

    • First, the act itself.
    • And then, the certainty of what the Evangelist tells us: and he that saw it, has given testimony.

    With respect to the first, he does two things:

    • First, we see the intervention and intention of the Jews.
    • Second, how this is partially accomplished.
    • Third, how this was accomplished with regard to Christ.

12. With respect to the first, he says, because it was the parasceve, in order that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the Sabbath … the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

    In Deuteronomy, 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 (Deuteronomy 21:22–23). 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! (Matthew 23:24).

13. He says how this was done in part: the soldiers therefore came; and they broke the legs of the first thief, to whom they had come first, and of the other that was crucified with him, with Jesus. This shows their cruelty: you eat the flesh of my people (Micah 3:3).

14. Why does the Evangelist add, but after they had come to Jesus, when they 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 did not pierce his side: because when the soldiers saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.

15. To make sure that Jesus was dead, one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear: but one of the soldiers with a spear, opened his side. It deserves notice that he does not say “wounded” but 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! (Revelation 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 (Genesis 7).

    This door is the cause of our salvation; and so, immediately 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.

    This also happened 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 you 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 Peter 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 will be clean from all your filthiness (Ezekiel 36:25); on that day there will be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness (Zechariah 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.

16. Now the Evangelist shows that these events are certainly true:

    • First, from the testimony of the Apostle himself.
    • Second, from a prophecy in the scriptures: for these things were done that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

17. He does three things regarding the first point:

    1. He mentions the credentials of the witness, he that saw it has given witness, and this is John himself: that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you (1 John 1:3).
    2. He affirms that this testimony is true, his testimony is true: I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying (Romans 9:1); you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:32).
    3. He asks us to believe: and he knows that he speaks the truth, that you also may believe: these are written, so that you may believe (John 20:31).

18. This truth is not guaranteed only by the testimony of the Apostle; there is also a prophecy of Scripture. Thus he says, these things were done that the Scripture might be fulfilled. Here again, 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: you shall not break a bone of it (Exodus 12:46), that is, the Passover lamb, which was a prefiguration of Christ, because as we read in 1 Corinthians, Christ, our Paschal lamb, has been sacrificed (1 Corinthians 5:7).

    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 Corinthians 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 (John 8:28).

19. The second authority refers to his statement, one of the soldiers with a spear, opened his side, and is taken from Zechariah: they will look on him whom they have pierced. Our text of Zechariah reads: they will look on me whom they have pierced (Zechariah 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 will 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 on.