--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/john/english/John18.html	Tue Nov 24 20:16:17 2009 +0000
@@ -0,0 +1,1446 @@
+<html>
+<head>
+</head>
+<body style=text-align:justify><blockquote>
+<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 60pt">18</span>
+<p align=center><B>LECTURE I
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with
+his disciples across the Kidron valley [brook], where there was a garden, which
+he and his disciples entered. 2 Now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew the
+place; for Jesus often met there with his disciples. 3 So Judas, procuring a
+band of soldiers and some officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees,
+went there with lanterns and torches and weapons. 4 Then Jesus, knowing all
+that was to befall him, came forward and said to them, "Whom do you seek?" 5
+They answered him, "Jesus of Nazareth. "Jesus said to them, I am he." Judas,
+who betrayed him, was standing with them. 6 When he said to them, "I am he,"
+they drew back and fell to the ground. 7 Again he asked them, "Whom do you
+seek?" And they said, "Jesus of Nazareth." 8 Jesus answered, "I told you that I
+am he; so, if you seek me, let these men go." 9 This was to fulfill the word
+which he had spoken, "Of those whom you gave me I lost not one."<a href="#_ftn1"
+name="_ftnref1">[1]</a></b></BLOCKQUOTE>
+
+<p>2271 Before his passion, as we saw above, our Lord prepared
+his disciples in many ways: teaching them by his example, comforting them with
+his words, and aiding them by his prayers. Now the Evangelist begins the
+history of the passion: first, he sets forth the mystery of the passion; secondly,
+the glory of the resurrection (20:1).
+
+<pIndent>Christ's passion was effected partly by the Jews,
+and partly by the Gentiles. Thus, he first describes what Christ suffered from
+the Jews; secondly, what he suffered from the Gentiles (19:1). He does three things
+regarding the first: he shows how our Lord was betrayed by a disciple;
+secondly, how he was brought before the high priests (v 13); and thirdly, how
+he was accused before Pilate (v 28).
+
+<p>In regard to Christ's betrayal, the
+Evangelist mentions three things: first, the place; secondly, the procedure;
+and thirdly, the willingness of Christ to submit to the betrayal (v 4). The
+place of the betrayal was shown to be appropriate in three ways: because it was
+outside the city; it was private and enclosed; and it was known to the traitor.
+
+<p>2272 The place of the betrayal was some distance from the
+city, and so Judas could more easily do what he intended. The Evangelist says, <b>When
+Jesus had spoken these words, </b>the words we have read above. But since what
+Christ said belonged to his prayer, it would seem more appropriate for the
+Evangelist to say, "When Jesus had prayed." The Evangelist put it the way he
+did to show that Christ did not pray because of any need of his own, since he
+was the one who, as man, prayed, and who, as God, heard the prayer. Rather,
+Christ prayed in order to teach us. Thus this prayer is described as "spoken
+words."
+
+<p>2273 <b>He went forth with his disciples, </b>but not
+immediately after this prayer, as Augustine notes.<a href="#_ftn2"
+name="_ftnref2">[2]</a>
+Other things happened, omitted by this Evangelist, but mentioned by the others.
+For example, there was an argument among the disciples about who was to be
+regarded as the greatest (Lk 22:24); before setting out he said to Peter:
+"Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have
+prayed for you that your faith may not fail" (Lk 22:31); again, the disciples
+recited a hymn with the Lord, as Matthew (26:30) and Mark (14:26) report. And
+so we should not think that they went out immediately after the words of the
+previous chapter, but that Christ said these things before they went out.
+
+<p>2274 He went forth <b>across the Kidron brook. </b>Matthew
+and Mark say that they went to the Mount of Olives, and then to a garden called
+ Gethsemane. There is no conflict here, because all of them are referring to
+the same place, for the Kidron brook is at the foot of the Mount of Olives,
+where there was a garden called Gethsemane. In Greek, Kidron is genitive
+plural; and so in effect he is saying a brook "of cedars." Perhaps there were
+many cedar trees planted there.
+
+<p>It is fitting for this mystery that
+he cross a brook, because the brook indicates his passion: "He will drink from
+the brook by the way; therefore he will lift up his head" (Ps 110:7). Again, it
+is fitting that he cross the Kidron brook for Kidron is interpreted to mean an
+overshadowing, and by his passion Christ removed the shadow of sin and of the
+law, and stretching out his arms on the cross, he protected us under the shadow
+of his arms: "Hide me in the shadow of your wings" (Ps 17:8).
+
+<p>2275 The place was especially suitable for the betrayal. He
+says, <b>there was a garden, which he and his disciples entered. </b>This was
+especially suitable because Christ was satisfying for the sin of our first
+parent which had been committed in a garden (for paradise means a garden of
+delights). It was also suitable because by his passion he is leading us into
+another garden and paradise to receive a crown: "Today you will be with me in Paradise" (Lk 23:43).
+
+<p>2276 It was also an appropriate place because it was known
+to the traitor, <b>now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew the place; for Jesus
+often met there with his disciples, </b>including Judas, who was like a wolf
+among sheep: "Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?"
+(6:71). This wolf in sheep's clothing, who had been tolerated among the sheep
+according to the profound plan of the master, learned where he could scatter
+the small flock when the time came.
+
+<p>2277 Since Judas had left the supper a while before the
+others, how did he know that Christ would later be in the garden? Chrysostom
+says that it was Christ's custom, especially at the major feasts, to bring his
+disciples there after supper and teach them the deeper meaning of the feasts,
+things that others were not ready to hear.<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3"
+title="">[3]</a>
+And so, because this was an important feast, Judas surmised that Christ would
+be going there after supper. It was Christ's custom to teach his disciples
+these sublime matters in the mountains or in private gardens, seeking places
+free from disturbance so they would not be distracted: "I will allure her, and
+bring her into the wilderness, and speak tenderly to her" (Hos 2:14).
+
+<p>2278 Now the Evangelist shows the procedure of the traitor.
+Notice, as we see from Luke (22:4), that after Judas had agreed with the chief
+priests to betray Christ, he looked for an opportunity to deliver him without
+disturbing the people. Consequently, he wanted to come to him privately and at
+night, because during the day Christ was always busy teaching the people. Yet
+even at night it was possible that he be hindered by a quickly gathering crowd,
+or by the darkness in which Christ could be spirited away or escape from their
+hands. So against the crowd, he armed himself with weapons, and against the
+darkness he brought lanterns and torches. And because some of the crowd might
+resist, he took a band of soldiers, not from the Jews, but from the governor.
+In this way, no one would dare to resist because they would see the marks of
+legitimate authority. Further, some Jews might resist out of zeal for the law,
+especially because Christ was being taken by Gentiles. For this reason Judas
+took some servants or <b>officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees: </b>"He
+has run against God with his head held high" [Job 15:26]; "Have you come out as
+against a robber, with swords and clubs?" (Lk 22:52)
+
+<p>2279 Now the Evangelist shows the promptness of Christ to
+willingly undergo betrayal: first, by voluntarily offering himself; secondly,
+by stopping one of the disciples who was resisting (v 10). In regard to the
+first, the Evangelist does two things: first, he tells how Christ identified
+himself to show his power; secondly, to show his patience (v 7). In regard to
+the first he does three things: first, he states the question Christ asked;
+secondly, he shows Christ identifying himself, <b>I am he</b>; thirdly, we see
+the effect this has (v 6).
+
+<p>2280 He does three things regarding the first. First, he
+recalls Christ's knowledge: <b>Then Jesus, knowing all that was to befall him,
+came forward</b>;<b> </b>"Jesus knew that his hour had come" (13:1). The
+Evangelist mentions this for two reasons: first, so that it does not appear
+that the question he is asking comes from his ignorance; and secondly, so that
+it does not seem that he is offering himself unintentionally and without knowing
+that they have come to kill him. He knew everything that would happen to him.
+
+<p>Secondly, he states Christ's
+question, for although he knew all these things he <b>came forward and said to
+them, Whom do you seek? </b>But this was not because of his ignorance, as we said.
+Thirdly, he gives their answer, <b>Jesus of Nazareth</b>. They were seeking him
+not to imitate him, but to slander and kill him: "You will seek me and die in
+your sin" (8:21).
+
+<p>2281 Now we see Jesus identifying himself and offering
+himself so that they can seize him. <b>I am he</b>, he says, that is, I am
+Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are looking for. The Evangelist adds that Judas was
+also there because he had mentioned before that Judas had left them (13:31). It
+could be expected that they might not recognize the face of Christ because of
+the darkness. But this darkness would not explain why they did not know Christ
+from his voice, especially those who were quite familiar with him. By saying, <b>I
+am he</b>, Christ shows that he was not recognized even by Judas who was with
+them and on close terms with Christ. This in particular shows the power of
+Christ's divinity. <b>Judas ... was standing with them</b>, that is, he
+continued in his evil to the point of identifying him with a kiss.
+
+<p>2282 Now we see the effect of his revealing himself:<b> they
+drew back and fell to the ground. </b>As Gregory says, sometimes we read that
+the saints fall to the ground: "The king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face and
+did homage to Daniel" (Dan 2:46); "When I saw it, I fell upon my face" (Ez
+1:28).<a href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4">[4]</a>
+We also read that the evil fall: "Your men shall fall by the sword" (Is 3:25).
+Yet there is a difference. It is said that the evil fall backward: "Eli fell
+over backward from his seat" (1 Sam 4:18); while the saints fall on their face.
+The reason for this is given in Proverbs (4:18): "The path of the righteous is
+like the light of dawn.... The path of the wicked is like deep darkness; they
+do not know over what they stumble." Now those who fall backward do not see
+where they fall. And so those who are evil are said to fall backward because
+they fall over things that are invisible. Those who fall forward see where they
+are falling. Thus the saints, who willingly cast themselves down with respect
+to visible things, so they can be raised up to invisible things, are said to
+fall on their face because they humble themselves.
+
+<p>Mystically understood, we can say
+that by this falling backward we can understand that the Jewish people, who
+were a special people, because they did not listen to the voice of Christ in
+his preaching, fell backward, excluded from the kingdom.
+
+<p>2283 Now we see Christ questioning them a second time. First
+we see his question; secondly, he identifies himself; thirdly, he offers
+himself to them.
+
+<p>According to Chrysostom, there are
+two reasons why Christ asks them a second time whom they were seeking.<a
+href="#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5">[5]</a>
+First, to teach the faithful that he was captured because he willed it: "He was
+offered because it was his own will" [Is 53:7]; he had already shown his power
+because when his enemies came against him, they fell backward to the ground
+before him. Secondly, he wanted, as far as he could, to give the Jews a reason
+to be converted, having seen this miracle of his power: "What more was there to
+do for my vineyard, that I have not done it?" (Is 5:4). And when they were not
+converted by the revelation of his power, he voluntarily offered himself to be
+taken by them. When <b>Again he asked them, Whom do you seek? And they said,
+Jesus of Nazareth, </b>he again identified himself and answered, <b>I told you
+that I am he</b>. It is obvious from this that they were so blind that they
+could not recognize him.
+
+<p>He offers himself when he says, <b>if
+you seek me</b>, to arrest me, then do what you want, but <b>let these men go</b>,
+my disciples, for it is not yet their time to be taken from the world by suffering:
+"I do not pray that you should take them out of the world" (17:15). It is clear
+from this that Christ gave them the power to capture him, for just as he saved
+his disciples by his own power, so, much more clearly, he could have saved
+himself: "No one takes it [my life] from me, but I lay it down of my own
+accord" (10:18).
+
+<p>2284 The Evangelist shows that the officers allowed the
+apostles to leave not because Christ persuaded them to do so, but because of
+his power, when he says, <b>This was to fulfill the word which he had spoken. </b>The
+officers let the apostles go because they were not able to hold them, since
+Christ had said that <b>of those whom you gave me I lost not one</b>.
+
+<p>2285 On the contrary. When our Lord said that none was lost,
+he was referring to the soul. How can the Evangelist adapt this to refer to the
+loss of the body? We may answer, according to Chrysostom, that our Lord was
+speaking (17:12) of the loss of both the soul and the body.<a href="#_ftn6"
+name="_ftnref6">[6]</a>
+And if he spoke only of the soul we could say that here the Evangelist extends
+it to the loss of the body. Or, we could say, with Augustine, that we must
+understand these words to refer here also to the loss of the soul.<a
+href="#_ftn7" name="_ftnref7">[7]</a>
+The reason being that the apostles did not yet believe in the way that those
+who do not perish believe. And so, if they had left the world then, some would
+have perished.
+
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><b>LECTURE 2
+
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>10 Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck
+the high priest's slave and cut off his right ear. The slave's name was
+Malchus. 11 Jesus said to Peter, "Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not
+drink the cup which the Father has given me?"</BLOCKQUOTE></b>
+
+<p>2286 The Evangelist has shown how ready Christ was to suffer
+his betrayal since he willingly offered himself. He now shows this same
+readiness because Christ forbade a disciple to resist. First, he mentions the
+resistance of the disciple; secondly, his being restrained (v 11). In regard to
+the first he does two things: first, he shows the zeal of the disciple in
+striking the servant; secondly, we see the name of the servant.
+
+<p>2287 He says that the officers arrested Jesus, but that <b>then
+Simon Peter, </b>more volatile than that the other disciples, <b>having a
+sword, drew it and struck the high priest's slave, </b>who was among the
+officers, <b>and cut off his right ear</b>. This was not his intention; rather,
+he wanted to kill him, but the strike to the servant's head missed and struck
+the ear. Peter aimed for the head so that he could more easily show that he was
+doing it out of zeal for his Lord: "I have been very jealous for the Lord" (1 Kgs
+19:10).
+
+<p>2288 Two questions can be asked about this. Since the Lord
+had commanded his disciples not to have even two tunics (Mt 10:10), why was it
+that Peter had a sword? I answer that Christ gave them this command when he
+sent them out to preach, and it was to be in effect until his passion. But when
+his passion drew near, Christ revoked it: "When I sent you out with no purse or
+bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" (Lk 22:35). And then (in v 36): "But
+now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a bag. And let him who has
+no sword sell his mantle and buy one." Because of this permission Peter
+understood that he was allowed to carry a sword.
+
+<p>How could he get a sword so
+quickly, since our Lord had spoken these words such a short time before? According
+to Chrysostom, Peter obtained the sword earlier, when he heard that the Jews
+were planning to deliver Christ over to the chief priests to be crucified.<a
+href="#_ftn8" name="_ftnref8">[8]</a>
+Or, we could say, with the Interlinear, that "sword" is used here for a knife,
+which he probably had at the paschal meal, and which he took along when they
+left.<a href="#_ftn9" name="_ftnref9">[9]</a>
+
+<p>2289 The second question is why Peter struck the servant of
+the high priest, since our Lord had told them not to resist evil (Mt 5:39). One
+could answer that they were forbidden to resist someone in order to defend
+themselves, but this did not apply to defending the Lord. Or, one could say
+that they had not yet been strengthened by a power coming from above: "Stay in
+the city, until you are clothed with power from on high" (Lk 24:49). And for
+this reason they were not yet so perfect that they could not resist evil
+entirely.
+
+<p>2290 Now the name of the servant is given. Only John
+mentions this name because, as stated below (v 15), John himself was known by
+the high priest, and so he also knew some of the priest's servants. Since John
+was certain of this servant's name, he gives it.
+
+<p>It is Luke (22:51) who adds that
+our Lord healed the ear. This is appropriate for a mystery: for the servant
+stands for the Jewish people, who were oppressed by the chief priests: "You eat
+the fat" (Ez 34:3). Peter, the head of the apostles, takes away this servant's
+sense of hearing, because he heard the words of the law in a defective way, in
+a carnal way. But our Lord gave him back a new sense of hearing: "As soon as
+they heard of me they obeyed me" (Ps 18:44). With this in mind the servant is
+fittingly named Malchus, which means "king," because through Christ we have
+become kings by having a new life: "You ... have made them a kingdom and
+priests to our God, and they shall reign on earth" (Rev 5:10).
+
+<p>2291 Now we see the zeal of Peter being restrained. First,
+we see Peter's zeal; secondly, the reason it was restrained (11b).
+
+<p>2292 The Evangelist says that Peter drew his sword, and our
+Lord said to him, <b>Put your sword into its sheath. </b>It was like saying
+that it was not defense that was needed, but patience, and that he was not
+allowed to use a material sword: "Ah, sword of the Lord! How long till you are
+quiet?" (Jer 47:6). The mystical interpretation is that this signifies that the
+sword of God's word was to be put into its sheath, that is, into the faith of
+the Gentiles.
+
+<p>2293 The reason Christ restrained Peter is given when he
+says, <b>Shall I not drink the cup which the Father has given me? </b>For one
+should not resist what has been arranged by divine providence: "Who has
+resisted him and has had peace?" [Job 9:4]. The passion is called a cup, a
+drinking vessel, because the charity of the one suffering gave it a certain
+sweetness, but in its own nature it was bitter. It was like a healing medicine
+which, because it gives hope of being cured, acquires a certain sweetness,
+although it has a bitter taste: "I will lift up the cup of salvation and call
+on the name of the Lord" (Ps 116:13).
+
+<p>The Father gave Christ this cup
+because Christ willingly underwent the passion by his own will and by the will
+of the Father: "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you
+from above" (19:11).
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><b>LECTURE 3
+
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>12 So the band of soldiers and their captain and the
+officers of the Jews seized Jesus and bound him. 13 First they led him to
+Annas; for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high
+priest that year. 14 It was Caiaphas who had given counsel to the Jews that it
+was expedient that one man should die for the people. 15 Simon Peter followed
+Jesus, and so did another disciple. As this disciple was known to the high
+priest, he entered the court of the high priest along with Jesus, 16 while
+Peter stood outside at the door. So the other disciple, who was known to the
+high priest, went out and spoke to the maid who kept the door, and brought
+Peter in. 17 The maid who kept the door said to Peter, "Are not you also one of
+this man's disciples?" He said, "I am not." 18 Now the servants and officers
+had made a charcoal fire, because it was cold, and they were standing and
+warming themselves; Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself. 19
+The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. 20
+Jesus answered him, "I have spoken openly to the world; I have always taught in
+synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together, I have said nothing
+secretly. 21 Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me, what I said to
+them; they know what I said."<a href="#_ftn10" name="_ftnref10">[10]</b></a></BLOCKQUOTE>
+
+<p>2294 Now the Evangelist describes how our Lord was taken by
+the officers and led before the leaders. First, he is led to one of the
+leaders, Annas; secondly, to another, Caiaphas (v 24). In regard to the first
+he does two things: first, he mentions how he was presented before Annas;
+secondly, how he was questioned by Annas (v 19). In regard to the first he does
+two things: he mentions that he is led to Annas' house; secondly, that Christ's
+disciples followed him (v 15). In regard to the first he does two things: he
+mentions what was done to Jesus; secondly, he describes the high priest before
+whom Jesus was brought (v 13b).
+
+<p>2295 Three things were done to Christ. First, he was seized;
+for he says, <b>the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the
+Jews seized Jesus, </b>who is not apprehensible: "great in counsel,
+incomprehensible in thought" [Jer 32:19]. Perhaps they were thinking of the
+Psalm (71:11): "God has forsaken him; pursue and seize him, for there is none
+to deliver him." Again, "The breath of our mouth, Christ the Lord, is taken in
+our sins," that is, on account of our sins, in order to free us: "Even the
+captives of the mighty shall be taken" (Is 49:25).
+
+<p>Secondly, Christ was bound, <b>and
+bound him, </b>who came to untie their bonds and break their chains: "You have
+loosed my bonds" (Ps 116:16).
+
+<p>Thirdly, he was led away, <b>they
+led him to Annas, </b>so that they might destroy him who came to lead all to
+the way of salvation: "You have led me, because you became my hope" [Ps 61:4].
+
+<p>2296 Two reasons can be given why Jesus was first brought to
+Annas. This could have been done by the order of Caiaphas, the high priest that
+year. Caiaphas did this because he would have had more of an excuse for
+condemning Jesus if Annas had already condemned him. The other reason was that
+they were nearer to the house of Annas, which was on their way. They were
+fearful that if the people became aroused Jesus might be taken away from them,
+and so they made straight for the house of Annas.
+
+<p>2297 Here the high priest is described by his relationship
+to Caiaphas, <b>he was the father&#8209;in&#8209;law of Caiaphas. </b>Then
+Caiaphas is described as <b>high priest that year. </b>We should remember that
+according to the law the high priest was to hold his office for life, and when
+he died to be succeeded by his son. But as the envy and the ambition of the leaders
+increased, not only did the son not succeed the father, but the office itself
+was not held for more than a year; and even then it was bought with money, as
+Josephus says. And so it is not out of character that in the year of that high
+priesthood, so wickedly obtained, that the high priest acted so despicably.
+
+<p>2298 He is described by the advice he gave: <b>It was
+Caiaphas who had given counsel to the Jews that it was expedient that one man
+should die for the people </b>(in 11:50). The Evangelist recalls this to
+prevent the hearts of the faithful from faltering. He shows that even by the
+prophecy of the enemy Christ was captured<i> </i>and killed, not because he was
+weak and lacked power, but for the salvation of the people, that is, so the
+entire nation would not perish. For the testimony of one's adversary is very
+effective; and truth is of such a nature that even its enemy is unable not to
+speak it.
+
+<p>2299 Now we see how the disciples joined Christ. First, how
+Peter and another disciple followed him; secondly, we see how they entered the
+place where Christ was; thirdly, how one denied him.
+
+<p>2300 In regard to the first he says, <b>Simon Peter followed
+Jesus</b>, because of his devotedness, but at a distance because of his fear, <b>and
+so did another disciple, </b>John, who out of humility does not mention
+himself. We can understand from this that the other disciples fled and
+abandoned Jesus, as Matthew says (26:56).
+
+<p>2301 In the mystical interpretation, these two disciples
+indicate the two ways of life in which Christ is followed: the active life,
+which is signified by Peter, and the contemplative life, signified by John.
+Those in the active life follow Christ by obedience, "My sheep hear my voice"
+(10:27). Those in the contemplative life follow Christ by knowledge and
+contemplation, "We will know and follow you" [Ps 4:3].
+
+<p>2302 These two disciples followed Christ because they loved
+him more than the others did; and so they were the first to come to the tomb
+(20:2). And it was these two who came because they were united to each other by
+a stronger bond of love; and so they are frequently mentioned together in the
+Gospel and in the Acts, where we read that "They sent to them Peter and John"
+(Acts 8:14), and again that "Peter and John were going up to the temple at the
+hour of prayer" (Acts 3:1).
+
+<p>2303 Now the order in which they entered is given: John
+entered first and then he brought in Peter (v 16).
+
+<p>2304 It was John who entered first, with Jesus, <b>as this
+disciple was known to the high priest ... while Peter stood outside at the door.
+</b>Although John had been a fisherman and had been called as a young man by
+Christ, he was still known by the high priest, either because John's father was
+a servant of the high priest, or a relative. John did not mention that the high
+priest knew him because he was proud, but because of his humility, so that the
+fact that he was the first to enter, with Jesus, into the court of the high
+priest, ahead of Peter, would not be ascribed to his virtue and superiority
+rather than to his acquaintance with the high priest. Thus he says, <b>as this
+disciple</b>, John himself, <b>was known to the high priest</b>. Consequently,
+he was able to enter with Jesus into the high priest's court, where Christ had
+been led. <b>While Peter stood outside</b>;<b> </b>this was like a foreboding
+of his future denial: "Those who saw me, fled outside from me" [Ps 31:11].
+
+<p>2305 Mystically understood, John enters with Jesus because
+the contemplative life is one of familiarity with Jesus: "When I enter my
+house, I shall find rest with her [wisdom]" (Wis 8:16). Peter stands outside
+because the active life is busy with exterior things: "Mary sat at the Lord's
+feet and listened to his teaching. But Martha was distracted with much serving"
+(Lk 10:39).
+
+<p>2306 Here we see how Peter was let in due to John's
+intervention, because <b>the other disciple, John who was known to the high
+priest, went out and spoke to the maid who kept the door, </b>with the
+intention of bringing Peter in, and then he brought Peter in. The mystical
+interpretation of this is that the active life is brought to Christ by the
+contemplative life: for just as the lower reason is directed by the higher
+reason, so the active life is directed by the contemplative life: "Oh send out
+your light and your truth; let them lead me, let them bring me to your holy
+hill and to your dwelling" (Ps 43:3).
+
+<p>2307 Now we see the denial of Peter: first, the
+circumstances or the incitement of his denial; secondly the denial itself (v
+17b); thirdly, Peter strengthens his denial (v 18).
+
+<p>2308 The circumstances and incitement of his denial was the
+question of the maid who kept the door: <b>The maid who kept the door said to
+Peter, Are not you also one of this man's disciples?</b> She says <b>you also</b>
+because she knew that John was a disciple of Christ, but she did not mention
+this to him because of their friendliness. This incident shows how weak Peter
+was at that time, for he was incited to deny Christ under feeble circumstances.
+How weak these circumstances were is shown, first of all, from the person who
+asked him: for it was not an armed soldier or an imposing high priest, but a
+woman, and a door keeper at that. Secondly, from the very form of the question:
+she did not say, "Are you a disciple of that traitor?" but rather, <b>Are not
+you also one of this man's disciples?</b> This seemed to indicate a certain
+sympathy. We can learn from this that "By the word of the Lord the heavens were
+made, and all their power by the breath of his mouth" [Ps 33:6], because this
+same person who denied Christ at the questioning of a maid servant afterwards
+professed and preached the name of Christ before the chief priests (Acts 4:8).
+
+<p>2309 Now comes Peter's denial, when he says, <b>He said, I
+am not</b>. We should note, according to Augustine, that Christ is denied not
+only by those who say that he is not the Christ, but also by those who deny
+that they are Christians.<a href="#_ftn11" name="_ftnref11">[11]</a>
+For Peter at this time did nothing other than deny that he was a Christian. Our
+Lord permitted Peter to deny him because he wanted the very one who was to be
+the head of the entire Church to be all the more compassionate to the weak and
+sinners, having experienced in himself his own weakness in the face of sin:
+"For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weakness,
+but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sinning" (Heb
+4:15). This is true of Christ, and it can also be said of Peter, with his sins.
+
+<p>Some say that Peter's denial did
+not come from fear, but from love: for he wanted to always be with Christ and
+to follow him all the time. But he knew that if he admitted he was a disciple
+of Christ, he would have been separated from him and expelled. But this does
+not agree with our Lord's words: for Peter did not deny Christ because he
+feared to be separated from him, but because he was not willing to lay down his
+life for Christ. Before, when Peter said, "I will lay down my life for you,"
+Jesus answered, "Will you lay down your life for me? Truly, truly, I say to
+you, the cock will not crow, till you have denied me three times" (13:37).
+
+<p>2310 We see Peter strengthen his denial when we read, <b>Now
+the servants and officers had made a charcoal fire ... Peter also was with
+them, standing and warming himself, </b>so he would not seem to be one of
+Christ's disciples. Trying not to seem a disciple, he mixed with the servants
+and officers standing by the fire because of the cold, which sometimes occurs
+in March during the early spring. Peter was not attentive to the Psalm: "Be
+holy with the holy, persevere with those who persevere" [Ps 18:26]. Even the
+very time of the year corresponded to his heart, in which charity had grown
+cold: "Most men's love will grow cold" (Mt 24: 12).
+
+<p>2311 <b>The high priest then questioned Jesus. </b>First we
+see Christ's interrogation; secondly, his reply (v 20); thirdly, he is abused
+for his reply (v 22).
+
+<p>2312 Two charges were brought against Christ by the Jews: he
+had false and novel teachings: "What is this? A new teaching!" (Mk 1:27); and
+he was inciting civil discord, gathering his own followers: "He stirs up the
+people, teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place" (Lk
+23:5). Consequently, he is interrogated on these two points: first, about his
+followers, <b>about his disciples</b>, whom were thought to be misled;
+secondly, about <b>his teaching</b>, regarded as false.
+
+<p>2213 Now our Lord's answer is given: first, we see his
+manner of teaching; secondly, he asks for the testimony of others (v 21). Two
+things are done about the first: we see how Christ taught his doctrine;
+secondly, this is further described.
+
+<p>2314 He says, <b>I have spoken openly to the world. </b>This
+seems to conflict with "The hour is coming when I shall no longer speak to you
+in figures but tell you plainly of the Father" (16:25). So, if he had not yet
+spoken openly to his disciples, how could he have spoken openly to the world? I
+answer that he had not yet spoken openly to his disciples in the sense that he
+had set forth for them his most profound thoughts. But he did speak openly to
+the world in the sense that he spoke to many, publicly.
+
+<p>2315 This is described more fully as he says, <b>I have always
+taught in the synagogues and in the temple</b>.<b> </b>On the contrary, Matthew
+(c 16) shows that Christ taught his disciples when alone with them many things
+without using figures. This can be answered in three ways. First, what Christ
+said to the twelve disciples was not considered to be spoken in secret.
+Secondly, he did not teach these things to them with the intention that they be
+kept hidden. Thirdly, our Lord is speaking here of the teaching he gave to the
+people, which was not given to them secretly but in public places: "I have told
+the glad news of deliverance in the great congregation" (Ps 40:9); "I did not
+speak in secret, in a land of darkness" (Is 45:19).
+
+<p>2316 To support him he asks for the testimony of others,
+saying, <b>Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me, what I said to them.
+</b>First, he sends them to the testimony of others; secondly, he shows whose
+testimony he wants; thirdly, he gives the reason for this.
+
+<p>As to the first he says, <b>Why do
+you ask me?</b> He is saying in effect: You can find this out from others. And
+then he adds, referring to the second point, <b>Ask those who have heard me</b>:
+"Then the Pharisees went and took counsel how to entangle him in his talk" (Mt
+22:15). Nevertheless, they could not find anything against him. Then he gives
+the reason for his request saying, <b>they know what I said, </b>and they can
+testify to this.
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><b>LECTURE 4
+
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>22 When he had said this, one of the officers standing by
+struck Jesus with his hand, saying, "Is that how you answer the high priest?"
+23 Jesus answered him, "If I have spoken wrongly, bear witness to the wrong;
+but if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?" 24 Annas then sent him
+bound to Caiaphas the high priest. 25 Now Simon Peter was standing and warming
+himself. They said to him, "Are not you also one of his disciples?" He denied
+it and said, "I am not." 26 One of the servants of the high priest, a kinsman
+of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked, "Did I not see you in the garden
+with him?" 27 Peter again denied it; and at once the cock crowed.<a
+href="#_ftn12" name="_ftnref12">[12]</b></a></BLOCKQUOTE>
+
+<p>2317 After telling us of our Lord's answer, the Evangelist
+now shows how it was rebuked: first, we see the rebuke given by an officer;
+secondly, our Lord's defense of his answer (v 23).
+
+<p>2318 An officer reproached our Lord's answer, first of all,
+by an action. He delivered a reproving blow; for the Evangelist says, <b>When
+he</b>, that is, Jesus, <b>had said this, one of the officers</b>, of the high
+priest, <b>standing by struck Jesus with his hand</b>. This did not happen by
+chance; it had been predicted long before and many times: "I gave my back to
+the smiters, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard" (Is 50:6); "Let
+him give his cheek to the smiter, and be filled with insults" (Lam 3:30); "With
+a rod they strike upon the cheek the ruler of Israel" (Mic 5:1).
+
+<p>Secondly, the officer reproached
+Christ with words, saying, <b>Is that how your answer the high priest? </b>We
+can see from this that Annas was a high priest, and that Jesus had not yet been
+sent to Caiaphas. This is why Luke mentions two high priests: "in the high&#8209;priesthood
+of Annas and Caiaphas" (Lk 3:2). Two high priests are mentioned because they
+alternated as high priests, but that year Annas [really Caiaphas] was the high
+priest.
+
+<p>2319 Earlier, when the testimony of those who had heard
+Jesus was being sought, and the chief priests had sent their officers to arrest
+him (7:32), they themselves were captivated by the words of Jesus and returned
+saying, "No man ever spoke like this man" (7:46). The officer who now struck
+Christ was incited to do so in order to show that he had not been one of those
+in the prior group. He thought that Christ had shown a lack of respect because
+in saying, <b>Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me</b>, he seemed to
+be finding fault with the high priest for asking a thoughtless question, and it
+is written: "You will not speak evil of a ruler of your people" [Ex 23:28].
+
+<p>2320 Jesus justified himself, saying, <b>If I have spoken
+wrongly</b>, in my answer to the high priest, <b>bear witness to the wrong. </b>That
+is, if your have reason to reproach me for what I have just said, show that I
+have spoken badly, because "Only on the evidence of two witnesses, or of three
+witnesses, shall a charge be sustained" (Deut 19:18). <b>But if I have spoken
+rightly</b>, if you cannot show I have spoken badly, <b>why do you strike me?</b>
+Why flare up against me?
+
+<p>Or, this reply of Christ could be
+referred to what he had said before this time: "Ask those who have heard me,
+what I said to them" (v 21). Then the meaning is: <b>If I have spoken badly</b>,
+in the synagogue and in the temple, which I should not have done, <b>bear
+witness to the wrong</b>, report what I have said to the high priest. But the
+officer was unable to do his. <b>But if I have spoken rightly</b>, that is,
+taught rightly, <b>Why do you strike me?</b> In other words: This is unjust:
+"Is evil a recompense for good? Yet they have dug a pit for my life" (Jer
+18:20).
+
+<p>2321 A difficulty arises here for in Matthew our Lord
+commanded his disciples, "If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him
+the other also" (Mt 5:39). And we also read about Christ that "Jesus began to
+do and teach" (Acts 1:1). So, Christ ought to have done himself what he had
+taught others to do. But he did not do this. Indeed, he did the contrary and
+defended himself.
+
+<p>I say to this, with Augustine, that
+the statements and commands found in sacred scripture can be interpreted and
+understood from the actions of the saints, since it is the same Holy Spirit who
+inspired the prophets and the other sacred authors and who inspires the actions
+of the saints. As we read: "Moved by the Holy Spirit holy men of God spoke" (2
+Pet 1:21); and "For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God" (Rom
+8:14). Thus, sacred scripture should be understood according to the way Christ
+and other holy persons followed it. Now, Christ did not turn his other cheek
+here; and Paul did not do so either (Acts 16:22). Accordingly, we should not
+think that Christ has commanded us to actually turn our physical cheek to one
+who has struck the other. We should understand it to mean that we should be
+ready to do this if it turned out to be necessary to do so. That is, our
+attitude should be such that we would not be inwardly stirred up against the
+one striking us, but be ready or disposed to endure the same or even more. This
+is how out Lord observed it, for he offered his body to be killed.<a
+href="#_ftn13" name="_ftnref13">[13]</a>
+So, our Lord's defense is useful for our instruction.
+
+<p>2322 Now there is mention that he was sent from one high
+priest to the other. First, it is mentioned that Jesus was sent to the other
+high priest; secondly, the narration of Peter's denial is completed (v 25).
+
+<p>2323 He says, <b>Annas then sent him bound to Caiaphas the
+high priest, </b>to whom he was originally being led. We saw before why he had
+been first brought to Annas. Note the wickedness of Annas: although he ought to
+have released Christ, since he was without fault, he yet sent him tied to
+Caiaphas.
+
+<p>2324 Now the second and third denials of Peter are
+presented: first, the circumstances of the denials; secondly, the two denials;
+and thirdly, the fulfillment of Christ's prediction (v 27).
+
+<p>2325 The circumstance of Peter's second denial was his
+staying with the officers of the high priest who were standing near the fire.
+Chrysostom says that although Christ was on his way to Caiaphas, Peter still
+remained with the officers [by the fire].  Peter had become so preoccupied with
+his sin after his denial that he, who before was so ardent, now seemed not to
+care what happened to Christ: "No man repents of his wickedness, saying, 'What
+have I done?'" (Jer 8:6). For Chrysostom, <b>Simon Peter was still standing and
+warming himself, </b>although Christ had already left, unmindful of the saying:
+"Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked" (Ps 1:1).<a
+href="#_ftn14" name="_ftnref14">[14]</a>
+
+<p>But this interpretation is not
+acceptable because it would follow that Peter's second and third denials were
+made in the absence of Christ. This is contrary to Luke (22:61), who says that
+after the third denial of Peter, our Lord turned and looked at him. For this
+reason Augustine explains it another way and says that the Evangelist is giving
+a general view in his own way to show the connection and order of the denials.
+The Evangelist had said above that "the servants and officers had made a
+charcoal fire, because it was cold, and they were standing and warming
+themselves; Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself" (v 18). The
+Evangelist then interposes the examination of Christ by the high priest (v 19&#8209;23),
+and immediately returns to continue the series of Peter's denials, using
+practically the same words as before, "Now Simon Peter was standing and warming
+himself" (v 25), that is, referring to the time before Christ was sent to
+Caiaphas.
+
+<p>2326 Then the Evangelist mentions the next two denials of
+Peter (v 25). Two things are stated about each: the circumstance of the denial,
+that is, the question, and the denial itself. There are two questions about the
+literal meaning. When Matthew speaks of the second denial, he says, "And when
+he went out to the porch, another maid saw him, and she said to the bystanders,
+'This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.' And again he denied it with an oath" (Mt
+26:71&#8209;2). There seems to be two disagreements here. John says that Peter
+denied Christ by the fire (v 25), and Matthew says this happened as Peter was
+going out to the porch. Again, in Matthew, Peter is questioned by another maid,
+but John has him questioned by others, that is, a number of others, for he
+says, <b>They said to him, Are not you also one of his disciples? </b>(v 25).
+Luke also says that Christ was questioned by one person, "And after an interval
+of about an hour still another insisted, saying, 'Certainly this man also was
+with him'" (Lk 22:59). [This is the third denial in Luke, and his second denial
+is also instigated by one person, Lk 22:58].
+
+<p>We should say to these points that
+after Peter first denied Christ, he then got up and as he was going out to the
+porch another maid questioned him. Or, this maid told others that Peter was one
+of them, as Matthew says (Mt 26:71). Thus Peter denied Christ a second time.
+After this Peter returned so as to avoid seeming to be a follower of Christ and
+sat with the others. As he was sitting there, bystanders, who had heard it from
+the maid, questioned him again, as Matthew says (Mt 26:73). Or, one of the
+servants asked first, as John has here (v 26) and then other bystanders joined
+in. This was Peter's third denial.
+
+<p>About this third denial, John says,
+<b>One of the servants of the high priest, a kinsman of the man whose ear Peter
+had cut off</b>. This person testified to what he had seen, <b>Did I not see you
+in the garden with him? </b>And so after an interval of an hour Peter again
+denied it, the third time.
+
+<p>It is not important if other
+Evangelists say that the third question was asked by several persons, while
+John has it asked by one. For it is possible that this man, being more certain,
+asked first, and that incited the others to ask also. Those who were standing
+about said many things about this matter, and one Evangelist speaks of one of
+these, and another of something else. This happened because their main
+intention was not to note these details, but to show the statement Peter made
+and to show that what our Lord had said to Peter came true. Accordingly, all
+agree on what Peter said: "What the Lord speaks, that will I speak" (Num
+24:13).
+
+<p>2327 Now he mentions the sign given by Christ which Peter
+recalled. <b>And at once the cock crowed, </b>moved by God's power, so that the
+prediction of the physician would be fulfilled and to demonstrate the
+presumption of the one who was sick. 
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><b>LECTURE 5
+
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>28 Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the
+praetorium [to Caiaphas, to the praetorium]. It was early. They themselves did
+not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the
+passover. 29 So Pilate went out to them and said, "What accusation do you bring
+against this man?" 30 They answered him, "If this man were not an evildoer, we
+would not have handed him over." 31 Pilate said to them, "Take him yourselves
+and judge him by your own law." The Jews said to him, "It is not lawful for us
+to put any man to death." 32 This was to fulfill the word which Jesus had
+spoken to show by what death he was to die.</BLOCKQUOTE></b>
+
+<p>2328 Now the Evangelist tells about Christ's being handed
+over to the Gentiles: first, we see him delivered to the governor; secondly,
+Christ is examined by him (v 29); thirdly, the governor declares that Christ is
+innocent (v 38b). He does three things about the first: the place where Christ
+was delivered is stated; secondly, the time; thirdly, the way he was handed
+over.
+
+<p>2329 The place was the praetorium, for he says, <b>They led
+Jesus to Caiaphas, to the praetorium. </b>This is the place where judgment is
+given. In the army the commander's tent was known as the praetorium; and so
+this residence of the governor was also called a praetorium.
+
+<p>But how can Christ be led to
+Caiaphas, to the praetorium? One could say that Caiaphas had come ahead to the
+residence of Pilate to tell him that Jesus would be handed over to him. And so
+Jesus was led to Caiaphas when he was in the praetorium with Pilate. Or, one
+could say that since Caiaphas was the high priest, he had a large dwelling, so
+large that the governor lived there and made it his residence. Then the meaning
+is: <b>they led Jesus to Caiaphas</b>, to his residence, and so <b>to the
+praetorium.</b>
+
+<p>Or, one could say that the Greek
+text is better, which says, <b>Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the
+praetorium. </b>This takes away the problem.
+
+<p>2330 The time is mentioned, <b>It was early</b>, for their
+villainy was so great that they could hardly wait to turn him over to Pilate to
+be killed: "Woe to those who devise wickedness and work evil upon their beds!
+When the morning dawns, they perform it" (Mic 2:1); "The murderer rises at the
+light" (Job 24:14).
+
+<p>Here we find a difficult problem.
+The other three Evangelists say that early in the evening Christ was struck at
+the residence of Caiaphas, and questioned by him: "If you are the Christ, tell
+us" (Luke 22:67), and in the morning Christ was led to Pilate. But John says
+that he was led to Caiaphas. If we want to keep to the letter of the text, we
+could say that Caiaphas first saw Jesus when he was at the house of Annas,
+during the night, and at that time Christ could be examined by him.
+
+<p>But there still remains the
+difficulty that they say that Christ was struck at the residence of Caiaphas.
+This is solved by the Greek text which says that "they led Jesus from Caiaphas
+to the praetorium," because then during the night he was led from the residence
+of Annas to the residence of Caiaphas, where he was struck and examined by him,
+and in the morning he was led from Caiaphas to the praetorium.
+
+<p>2331 <b>They themselves did not enter the praetorium, so
+that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover. </b>Here we see,
+first, their useless superstition, because they would not go into the praetorium.
+Secondly, we see the deference Pilate paid them, since he went out to meet
+them. A problem arises about the first point: that they would not enter the
+praetorium so as not to be defiled. The other Evangelists say that Christ was
+seized in the evening, on the day of the supper; and this would be the passover
+meal: "I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you" (Lk 22:15). And
+then in the morning of the next day he was brought to the praetorium. Why then
+do we read <b>so that they might eat the passover</b>,<b> </b>since it was the
+day after the passover? Some of the modem Greeks say that we are now on the
+fourteenth lunar day of the month, and that Christ was crucified on the day the
+Jews celebrated the passover, but that Christ anticipated the passover by one
+day, since he knew he would be killed on the day of the Jewish passover. Thus,
+he celebrated the passover on the thirteenth lunar day, in the evening. And
+since the law commanded that the Jews should not have leavened bread from the
+fourteenth day of the first month to the twenty&#8209;first day, they say that
+Christ consecrated leavened bread.
+
+<p>2332 This is not acceptable for two reasons. First, the Old
+Testament has no instance where anyone was permitted to anticipate the
+celebration of the passover. But if one was prevented, he could postpone it to
+the next month: "If any man of you or of your descendants is unclean ... he
+shall still keep the passover to the Lord. In the second month on the
+fourteenth day in the evening they shall keep it "(Num 9:10). And since Christ
+never omitted any observance of the law, it is not true to say that he
+anticipated the passover. Secondly, Mark (14:12) states explicitly that Christ
+came on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the passover
+lamb; and Matthew says that "on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples
+came to Jesus saying, 'Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the
+passover?'" (Mt 26:17). So, we should not say that Christ anticipated the
+passover.
+
+<p>2333 Accordingly, Chrysostom explains this another way.<a
+href="#_ftn15" name="_ftnref15">[15]</a>
+He said that Christ fulfilled the law in all matters and did observe the
+passover on the proper day, that is, the fourteenth day, in the evening. But
+the Jews were so intent on killing Christ that they did not observe it on the
+proper day, but on the day following, the fifteenth. Thus the sense is: <b>so
+that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover </b>which they had
+neglected the day before.
+
+<p>This is not acceptable either, for
+in Numbers (9:10) it is said that if anyone is prevented from eating the
+passover on the fourteenth day of the first month, he is to eat it, not on the
+following day, but on the fourteenth day of the second month.
+
+<p>2334 Therefore we should say with Jerome, Augustine and
+other Latin Fathers, that the fourteenth day is the beginning of the feast; but
+the passover refers not just to that evening, but to the entire time of the
+seven days during which they ate unleavened bread, which was to be eaten by
+those who were clean.<a href="#_ftn16" name="_ftnref16">[16]</a>
+And because the Jews would have contracted uncleanness by entering the
+residence of a foreign judge, they did not enter so that <b>they might not be
+defiled, but might eat the passover, </b>that is, the unleavened bread.
+
+<p>See their wicked blindness, for
+they feared becoming defiled from a gentile man, but did not fear to shed the
+blood of a God and a man, "Those who laid you waste go forth from you" (Is
+49:17).
+
+<p>2335 Now we see the deference Pilate showed them when he
+says, <b>So Pilate went out to them, </b>to take Christ, whom they were
+offering, and said, <b>What accusation do you bring against this man? </b>In
+this examination of Christ, we see first, how Christ is examined before his
+accusers by Pilate; secondly, how Christ is examined by Pilate in private (v
+33). Concerning the first he does two things: first, we have Pilate's
+questioning; secondly, his generous concession to the Jews, <b>Take him
+yourselves</b>.
+
+<p>2336 Concerning the first, we have the examination by
+Pilate, and then the malicious reply of the Jews. When Pilate saw Jesus bound
+and brought by so may seeking his condemnation, he said, <b>What accusation do
+you bring against this man? </b>Their reply was, <b>If this man were not an
+evildoer, we would not have handed him over. </b>They are saying here: We have
+already examined and condemned him, and are now handing him over to you to be
+punished. They were regarding their own judgment as sufficient for Pilate. Yet
+they were not speaking truly when they said he was an evildoer, for "He went
+about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil" (Acts 10:38).
+They were acting like the Psalm says, "They requite me evil for good" (Ps
+35:12).
+
+<p>2337 Luke is different, for he says that the Jews accused
+Christ of many crimes: "He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea,
+from Galilee even to this place" (Lk 23:5). I reply that, as Augustine says,
+the Jews said many things to Pilate at that time, and it could be that they
+first said what John reports, and then said what Luke tells us.<a href="#_ftn17"
+name="_ftnref17">[17]</a>
+
+<p>2338 The Evangelist now mentions Pilate's generous
+concession (v 31): first, we see this concession; secondly, the Jews refuse it;
+and thirdly, we see the reason for their refusal (v 32).
+
+<p>2339 Pilate said, <b>Take him yourselves, </b>intending to
+do them a favor. Festus did the same to Paul: "But Festus, wishing to do the
+Jews a favor, said to Paul, 'Do you wish to go up to Jerusalem, and there be
+tried on these charges before me?'" (Acts 25:9). Or, this could be said as a
+taunting remark: for they had already examined and condemned Christ, and Pilate
+wanted those who had condemned Christ as an evildoer to pass the sentence,
+because "It was not the custom of the Romans to give up any one before the
+accused met the accusers face to face, and had opportunity to make his defense
+concerning the charge laid against him" (Acts 25:16). So the meaning is then:
+You want my judgment, but <b>Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law</b>,<b>
+</b>for I will never be that kind of a judge.
+
+<p>2340 The refusal of the Jews is mentioned when he says, <b>The
+Jews said to him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death. </b>This
+seems not to agree with Exodus [22:18]: "You will not permit a sorcerer to
+live." And they regarded Jesus as a sorcerer.
+
+<p>According to Augustine the meaning
+is, <b>It is not lawful for us to put any man to death </b>on a feast day, but
+it is lawful on other days.<a href="#_ftn18" name="_ftnref18">[18]</a>
+Or, according to Chrysostom, the Jews had lost much of their power: for they
+could not pass judgment on a crime against the state.<a href="#_ftn19"
+name="_ftnref19">[19]</a>
+But here they intended to condemn Christ especially for matters against the
+state: "Everyone who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar" (19:12).
+This is why they said, <b>It is not lawful for us to put any man to death</b>,<b>
+</b>for crimes against the state, although we can do this for some sins against
+the law, for this kind of judgment was reserved to them. Or, it could be said
+that some things are not lawful either because they are prohibited by divine
+law &#8209; and they were not prohibited from doing this by divine law &#8209;
+or because they are forbidden by human law &#8209; and in this way it was not
+lawful for them to put anyone to death, for such power was now in the hands of
+the governor.
+
+<p>2341 There is another question: How then could they have
+stoned Stephen (Acts 7:58)? Chrysostom answers this by saying that the Romans
+allowed the Jews to make use of their own laws, and because the punishment of
+stoning was part of their law, the Romans allowed them to do this.<a
+href="#_ftn20" name="_ftnref20">[20]</a>
+But in the law death on the cross was abhorred: "A hanged [on a tree] man is
+accursed by God" (Deut 21:23). And so they did not use this kind of death. The
+Jews, in their malice, were not satisfied just to stone Christ, they wanted to
+condemn him to the most disgraceful of deaths, as we see from Wisdom (2:20).
+Thus they now say, <b>It is not lawful for us to put any man to death, </b>meaning
+the death on the cross. Or, one could say that Stephen was stoned during a
+change of governors, when many laws were violated.
+
+<p>2342 The Evangelist gives the reason the Jews refused when
+he says, <b>This was to fulfill the word which Jesus had spoken to show by what
+death he was to die. </b>The words <b>this was to fulfill </b>do not indicate
+the intention the Jews had, but the arrangement of God's providence. For Jesus
+had said (Mt 20:19) that it was by the Gentiles that he would be crucified and
+killed, but that he would be handed over to them by the Jews. So, in order that
+this be accomplished, the Jews were unwilling to judge and kill him themselves.
+
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><b>LECTURE 6
+
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>33 Pilate entered the praetorium again and called Jesus,
+and said to him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" 34 Jesus answered, "Do you say
+this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?" 35 Pilate
+answered, "Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have handed you
+over to me; what have you done?" 36 Jesus answered, "My kingship [kingdom] is
+not of this world; if my kingship [kingdom] were of this world, my [ministers]
+servants would fight, that I might not be handed over to the Jews; but my
+kingship [kingdom] is not from the world." 37 Pilate said to him, "So you are a
+king?" Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for
+this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is
+of the truth hears my voice." 38 Pilate said to him, "What is truth?" After he
+had said this, he went out to the Jews again, and told them, "I find no crime
+in him. 39 But you have a custom that I should release one man for you at the
+Passover; will you have me release for you the King of the Jews?" 40 They cried
+out again, "Not this man, but Barabbas!" Now Barabbas was a robber.<a
+href="#_ftn21" name="_ftnref21">[21]</b></a></BLOCKQUOTE>
+
+<p>2343 Above, the Evangelist told how Pilate examined Christ
+before those who accused him; here he describes how Pilate questioned him in
+private. First, the Evangelist gives Pilate's question; then, the answer of
+Jesus (v 34). In regard to the first he does two things: first, we have
+Pilate's question; secondly, we see Christ asking the reason for the question, <b>Do
+you say this of your own accord?</b>
+
+<p>2344 In regard to the first, note that Pilate, as a just
+judge, and as one proceeding cautiously, did not immediately agree with the
+accusation of the high priest, "You shall not follow a multitude to do evil;
+nor shall you bear witness in a suit, turning aside after a multitude, so as to
+pervert justice" (Ex 23:2). Rather, <b>Pilate entered the praetorium again and
+called Jesus </b>aside, because he had serious doubts about him. So he called
+Christ over to examine the case more closely and to allow Christ to answer in
+more peace and away from the shouts of the Jews: "I searched out the cause of
+him whom I did not know" (Job 29:16).
+
+<p>2345 Then Pilate said to him, <b>Are you the King of the
+Jews?</b> This shows, as Luke says (Lk 23:2), that the Jews were accusing
+Christ of this crime, although John says only that "If this man were not an
+evildoer, we would not have handed him over" (18:30), and may other crimes were
+laid on him. But the charge about his being a king touched the heart of Pilate
+most, and that is why he questioned him only about this: "For out of the
+abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (Mt 12:34).
+
+<p>2346 Then (v 34), Jesus is seen questioning his examiner:
+first, we have Christ's question; then Pilate's answer, <b>Am I a Jew?</b>
+
+<p>2347 The Evangelist says, <b>Jesus answered</b>, asking a
+question in return, <b>Do you say this of your own accord or did others say it
+to you about me?</b> There are two reasons why someone asks a question.
+Sometimes it is to find out something that the questioner does not know; as
+when a student questions his teacher. Sometimes one asks a question about
+things he already knows in order to learn what answer will be given; as when a
+teacher questions his student. Now our Lord knew both what he asked about, and
+what answer would be given, and thus he was not asking out of ignorance, "All
+are open and laid bear to the eyes of him with whom we have to do" (Heb 4:13).
+Rather, he asked so that we might know what the Jews and Gentiles thought, and
+at the same time be taught about that kingdom.
+
+<p>2348 <b>Pilate answered, Am I a Jew?</b> Why did he answer
+this way? Because our Lord had asked him whether he said this on his own.
+Pilate showed by this that it was not his concern to inquire if Christ was the
+King of the Jews; it was rather the affair of the Jews, whose King he said he
+was. By giving this answer Pilate showed that it was others who had told him
+that Christ was the King of the Jews. Accordingly he says, <b>Your own nation
+and the chief priests have handed you over to me</b>, by bringing this charge
+against you. He says, <b>your own nation</b>, because, considering his human
+nature, Christ was born a Jew: "For I hear many whispering. Terror is on every
+side. 'Denounce him! Let us denounce him!' say all my familiar friends" (Jer
+20:10); "A man's enemies are the men of his own house" (Mic 7:6). And we read <b>chief
+priests</b>, because the greater their power the greater their crime: "And in
+this faithlessness the hand of the officials and chief men has been foremost"
+(Ezra 9:2); "I will go to the great, and will speak to them; for they know the
+way of the Lord, the law of their God. But they all alike had broken the yoke,
+they had burst the bonds" (Jer 5:5). If they have handed you over to me, <b>What
+have you done?</b> It's unbelievable that they would have handed you over to me
+except for some serious matter.
+
+<p>2349 Now Christ's answer is given: and first, the mistaken
+impression about his kingdom is corrected; secondly, the truth is established
+(37b). As to the first he does two things: the mistaken impression is
+corrected; and a sign is given as proof, <b>if my kingdom were of this
+world....</b>
+
+<p>2350 The false idea of Christ's kingdom is rejected by his
+saying, <b>My kingdom is not of this world. </b>The Manicheans misunderstood
+this, and said that there were two gods and two kingdoms; there was a good god,
+who had his kingdom in a region of light, and an evil god, who had his kingdom
+in a region of darkness, and this darkness was this world, because all material
+things, they said, were darkness. The meaning would then be, <b>My kingdom is
+not of this world, </b>that is, God, the Father, who is good, and I, do not
+have our kingdom in this region of darkness.
+
+<p>But this is contrary to, "God is
+the king of all the earth" (Ps 47:7); and again, "Whatever the Lord pleases he
+does, in heaven and on earth" (Ps 134:6). Thus we should say that Christ said
+this for the sake of Pilate, who believed that Christ was claiming an earthly
+kingdom in which he would reign in the physical way that those of earth do, and
+so should be punished by death for trying to reign unlawfully.
+
+<p>2351 Sometimes the word <b>kingdom </b>means the people who
+reign, and sometimes the authority to reign. Taking the word in its first
+sense, Augustine says, <b>My kingdom, </b>that is, my faithful &#8209; you
+"have made them a kingdom ... to our Lord" (Rev 5:10) &#8209; <b>is not of this
+world.<a href="#_ftn22" name="_ftnref22"><b>[22]</b></a>
+</b>He does not say they are not "in the world" (17:11), but that they are <b>not
+of this world, </b>because of what they love and imitate, since they have been
+wrested from it by grace. For this is how God has delivered us from the power
+of darkness and has brought us into the kingdom of his love.
+
+<p>Chrysostom explains this sentence
+by taking <b>kingdom</b> in the second sense, and says, <b>My kingdom</b>, that
+is, the power and authority which makes me a king, <b>is not of this world</b>,
+that is, does not have its origin in earthly causes and human choice, but from
+another source, from the Father: "His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
+which shall not pass away" (Dan 7:14).<a href="#_ftn23" name="_ftnref23"
+title="">[23]</a>
+
+<p>2352 Here he shows by clear signs that his kingdom is not of
+this world: first, a sign is given; secondly, the conclusion is drawn (v 36).
+
+<p>2353 In regard to the first, note that one who has an
+earthly kingdom, whether by right or by force, needs associates and ministers
+to keep him in power: the reason being that he is powerful through his
+ministers, not all by himself: "There was a long war between the house of Saul
+and the house of David; and David grew stronger and stronger, while the house
+of Saul became weaker and weaker" (2 Sam 3:1). But the heavenly king, because
+he is powerful by himself, gives power to his servants; and consequently he
+does not need ministers for his kingdom. And thus Christ says that his kingdom
+is not of this world, because <b>if my kingdom were of this world, my ministers
+would fight, that I might not be handed over to the Jews. </b>When Peter
+started to fight for Christ (18:10), he forgot that he was not of this world.
+Still, our Lord did have some ministers, the angels, who could have rescued him
+from the hands of the Jews, but he chose not to be rescued: "Do you think that
+I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve
+legions of angels?" (Mt 26:53).
+
+<p>2354 <b>But my kingdom is not from the world</b>, that is,
+because Christ does not need such ministers, he concludes that his <b>kingdom
+is not from the world, </b>that is, does not have its source from this world.
+And yet it is here, because it is everywhere: "She [Wisdom] reaches mightily from
+one end of the earth to the other, and she orders all things well" (Wis 8:1);
+"Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the
+earth your possession" (Ps 2:8); "And to him was given dominion and glory and
+kingdom, that all peoples, nations and languages should serve him" (Dan 7:14).
+
+<p>2355 Now our Lord reveals the truth about his kingdom:
+first, we see the circumstances for this; secondly, the revelation itself; and
+thirdly, the effect this revelation had, <b>What is truth?</b>
+
+<p>2356 In respect to the first, note that Pilate understood
+our Lord's statements to mean that he did have a physical kingdom, but far
+away: "The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God ...
+and he is not able to understand them" (1 Cor 2:14). Accordingly he was in a
+hurry to know the truth, and so said, <b>So you are a king?</b>, you also?
+
+<p>2357 When he answers, <b>You say that I am a king</b>,
+Christ first says that he is a king; secondly, he shows the nature of his
+kingdom (v 37); thirdly, he mentions those over whom he reigns, <b>Every one
+who is of the truth</b>.
+
+<p>2358 With regard to the first, note that our Lord's answer
+about his kingship was so worded that he neither seemed to be clearly asserting
+that he was a king &#8209; since he was not a king in the sense in which Pilate
+understood it &#8209; nor denying it &#8209; since spiritually he was the King
+of Kings.
+
+<p>He says, <b>You say that I am a
+king</b>, in the physical sense in which I am not a king; but in another way I
+am a king, "Behold a king will reign in righteousness, and princes will rule in
+justice" (Is 32:1).
+
+<p>2359 He shows the character and nature of his kingdom when
+he says, <b>For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to
+bear witness to the truth. </b>This is explained in two ways.
+
+<p>In one way by Augustine, so that
+the kingdom of Christ is his faithful, as was said above. Thus, Christ reigns
+over his faithful; and he came into the world to gather his faithful to himself
+and establish a kingdom: "A nobleman went into a far country to receive a
+kingdom" [Lk 19:12]. The meaning then is this: <b>For this I was born</b>, that
+is, for this purpose I was born in the flesh. He explains this saying, <b>and
+for this I have come into the world, </b>by physical birth &#8209; for this is
+the way he came into the world, "God sent his Son into the world" [Gal 4:4] &#8209;
+<b>to bear witness to the truth, </b>that is, to myself, who am the truth,
+"Even if I do bear witness to myself, my testimony is true" (8:14). And to the
+extent that I manifest myself, the Truth, to that extent I establish my
+kingdom. For this cannot be done without manifesting the truth, which can only
+be done fittingly by me, who am the light: "The only Son, who is in the bosom
+of the Father, he has made him known" (1:18); "It was declared at first by the
+Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God also bore
+witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by the gifts of the Holy
+Spirit" (Heb 2:3).
+
+<p>2360 Chrysostom explains it differently, this way.<a
+href="#_ftn24" name="_ftnref24">[24]</a>
+You ask if I am a king, and I say that I am: but I am a king by divine power,
+because <b>for this I was born</b>, that is, born from the Father, by an
+eternal birth; just as I am God from God, so I am king from king: "I was
+appointed king" [Ps 2:6], and then follows, "Today I have begotten you" [v 7].
+Then when he adds <b>and for this I have come into the world, </b>it is not to
+explain the previous words, but to refer to his birth in time. It is like
+saying: Although I am an eternal king, yet I have come into the world for this,
+<b>to bear witness to the truth, </b>that is, to myself, that I am a king from
+God the Father.
+
+<p>2361 Now he shows over whom he reigns. Before (10:11), he
+said that he was a shepherd and those under him were sheep; that is the same as
+what he is saying here, that he is a king and his subjects are the kingdom.
+This is so because a king is to his subjects as a shepherd to his sheep; and
+just as a shepherd feeds his sheep &#8209; "Should not shepherds feed the
+sheep?" (Ez 34:2) &#8209; so a king supports his subjects. He said in
+particular, "My sheep hear my voice" (10:27); accordingly, he also says here, <b>every
+one who is of the truth hears my voice, </b>not just outwardly, but with an
+interior belief and love, and carrying this out in action: "Every one who has
+heard and learned from the Father comes to me" (6:45). But why does a person
+hear my voice? Because such a one is <b>of the truth, </b>which is God.
+
+<p>2362 But since all of us are from God, all are of the truth
+and hear his voice. We can answer this by saying that all are from God by
+creation, and this is one way we are of God. But besides this, some are said to
+be of God because they love and imitate him. We read before, "You are not of
+God" (8:47), that is, considering your affections, but you are of God by
+creation. <b>Every one hears my voice</b>, with belief and love, <b>who is of
+the truth, </b>that is, who has accepted the duty of loving the truth.
+
+<p>2363 He does not say, "Every one who hears my voice is of
+the truth," because it would follow that we are of the truth because we
+believed. But actually, we believe because we are of the truth, that is,
+because we have received the gift of God which enables us to believe and love
+the truth: "By grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your
+own doing, it is the gift of God" (Eph 2:8); "For it has been granted to you
+that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer
+for his sake" (Phil 1:29).
+
+<p>2364 Now the Evangelist tells us the effect of Christ's
+answer. We can see from this that Pilate abandoned his idea that Christ had an
+earthly kingdom, and now thought of Christ as a king in the sense of one who
+teaches the truth. He desired to learn this truth and to become a member of
+this kingdom and so he said, <b>What is truth? </b>He was not asking for a
+definition of truth, but wanted to know that truth by whose power he could
+become a member of this kingdom. This indicates that truth was not known by the
+world and had vanished from almost everyone, as long as they remained
+unbelievers: "Truth has fallen in the public squares, and uprightness cannot
+enter" (Is 59:14); "Truth has decayed in the children of men" [Ps 12:1]. But
+Pilate did not wait for Christ's answer.
+
+<p>2365 Apropos of this question, note that we find two kinds
+of truth in the gospel. One is uncreated and making: this is Christ: "I am the
+way, and the truth, and the life" (14:6); the other truth is made, "Grace and
+truth came [were made] through Jesus Christ" (1:17).
+
+<p>By its nature truth implies a
+conformity between a reality and the intellect. The intellect is related in two
+ways to reality. An intellect can be related to things as a measure of these
+things; that would be the intellect which is the cause of these things. Another
+intellect is measured by things, this would be an intellect whose knowledge is
+caused by these things. Now truth is not in the divine intellect because the
+intellect is conformed to things, but because things are conformed to the
+divine intellect. While truth is in our intellect because it understands
+things, conforms to them, as they are. And so uncreated truth and the divine
+intellect is a truth which is not measured or made, but a truth which measures
+and makes two kinds of truth: one is in the things themselves, insofar as it
+makes them so they are in conformity with what they are in the divine
+intellect; and it makes the other truth in our souls, and this is a measured
+truth, not a measuring truth. Therefore, the uncreated truth of the divine
+intellect is appropriated, especially referred, to the Son, who is the very
+concept of the divine intellect and the Word of God. For truth is a consequence
+of the intellect's concept.<a href="#_ftn25" name="_ftnref25">[25]</a>
+
+<p>2366 Now, (v 38) we see Pilate's finding in regard to
+Christ: first, Pilate states his innocence; secondly, we see his intention to
+show mercy (v 39).
+
+<p>2367 Concerning the first, note that Pilate, as Augustine
+says, was eager to free Christ.<a href="#_ftn26" name="_ftnref26">[26]</a>
+When he had asked Christ, <b>What is truth? </b>he suddenly realized how he
+could free Christ by means of a custom which allowed him to release a prisoner
+at the time of the passover. And so, not waiting for an answer to his question,
+he decided to make use of this custom to do this. This is why the Evangelist
+says about Pilate, <b>After he had said this.</b>
+
+<p>Pilate heard the cries of the Jews,
+and thinking that he could calm them and then listen to Christ's answer to this
+difficult question under more tranquil conditions, <b>went out to the Jews
+again, </b>and declared Christ's innocence, <b>I find no crime in him</b>, that
+is, nothing deserving death: "He committed no sin" (1 Pet 2:22). But even if he
+did commit a crime, I, who have authority in these matters, and especially the
+authority to judge of matters against the state, I wish to free and release
+him.
+
+<p>2368 Accordingly he says, <b>But you have a custom that I
+should release one man for you at the Passover. </b>First, he offers to release
+Christ; secondly, the Evangelist gives the reply of the Jews.
+
+<p>2369 This practice was started by Pilate or some other Roman
+governor as a favor to the people. Wishing to free Christ using this custom
+Pilate said, <b>Will you have me release for you the King of the Jews? </b>He
+did not call him this as if this were a crime, but to heighten their malice. It
+was like saying: Even if he is the king of the Jews, which is not your role to
+judge, but mine, still, if you want me to, I will release him for you.
+
+<p>2370 The Jews <b>cried out again, Not this man, but
+Barabbas! </b>Then to indicate the malice of the Jews, the Evangelist mentions
+the crime committed by the one they wanted released, saying, <b>Now Barabbas
+was a robber</b>:<b> </b>"Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves"
+(Is 1:23). This fulfills the words of Jeremiah (12:8): "My heritage has become
+to me like a lion in the forest." "But you denied the Holy and Righteous One
+and asked for a murderer to be granted to you" (Acts 3:14).
+
+</div>
+
+<div><br clear=all>
+
+<hr align=left size=1 width="33%">
+
+<div id=ftn1>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 18:6 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae:</i> III, q. 44, a. 3, ad 1.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn2>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">[2]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 112, ch., 1, col 1930; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:1-2.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn3>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">[3]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 82, ch.
+1; PG 59, col. 447; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:1-2.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn4>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4">[4]</a> <i>Commentarium in Esaiam</i><i>, 9</i>;  cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:3-9.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn5>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5">[5]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 83, ch. 1; PG 59, col. 448; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>,
+18:3-9.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn6>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref6" name="_ftn6">[6]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 83, ch.
+1; PG 59, col. 448; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:3-9.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn7>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref7" name="_ftn7">[7]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 112, ch. 4, col 1931; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:3-9.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn8>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref8" name="_ftn8">[8]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 83, ch. 2; PG 59, col. 449; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:10-11.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn9>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref9" name="_ftn9">[9]</a> Interlinear (Theophyl); cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:10-11.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn10>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref10" name="_ftn10">[10]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 18:20 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae:</i> III, q. 42, a. 3, s. c.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn11>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref11" name="_ftn11">[11]</a>
+<i>Tract. in Io</i>.,
+113, ch. 2, col. 1933; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>,<i>
+</i>18:-17.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn12>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref12" name="_ftn12">[12]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 18:23 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae</i>: II-II, q. 72, a. 3.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn13>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref13" name="_ftn13">[13]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 113, ch. 4, col. 1934-5; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:22-24.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn14>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref14" name="_ftn14">[14]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 83, ch. 3; PG 59, col. 451; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:25-27.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn15>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref15" name="_ftn15">[15]</a>
+Chrysostom-(This is NOT what Chrysostom says in In Ioannem hom, 83.3.452)
+Chrysostom says that the whole feast was called the Passover and that Christ
+died on the high day of the Feast, on which day the Passover was
+customarily/formerly celebrated.) This should probably be looked at by a better
+Latinist.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn16>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref16" name="_ftn16">[16]</a>
+Augustine, <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 114, ch. 1, col. 1936; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:28-32.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn17>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref17" name="_ftn17">[17]</a> <i>De consensus evangelistarum</i>, 3, ch. 8; PL 34; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:28-32.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn18>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref18" name="_ftn18">[18]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 114, ch. 4, col. 1937; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:28-32.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn19>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref19" name="_ftn19">[19]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 83, ch.
+4; PG 59, col. 452; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:28-32.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn20>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref20" name="_ftn20">[20]</a> Ibid.; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:28-32.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn21>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref21" name="_ftn21">[21]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 18:35 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae</i>: III, q. 47, a. 3, obj. 3; q. 47, a. 6, ad 2; Jn 18:37: <i>ST </i>III,
+q. 3, a. 8, obj. 1; q. 12, a. 3; q. 35, a. 7, obj. 3; q. 40, a. 1.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn22>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref22" name="_ftn22">[22]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 115, ch. 1, col. 1938-9; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:33-38.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn23>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref23" name="_ftn23">[23]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>., 83, ch. 4; PG 59, col. 453; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:33-38.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn24>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref24" name="_ftn24">[24]</a> <i>In
+Ioannem hom</i>., 83, ch. 4; PG 59, col. 453; cf.
+<i>Catena Aurea</i>, 18:33-38.
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn25>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref25" name="_ftn25">[25]</a>
+Summa-truth. 
+
+</div>
+
+<div id=ftn26>
+
+<p><a href="#_ftnref26" name="_ftn26">[26]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 115, ch. 5, col. 1941; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea</i>,<i> </i>18:38-40.
+</body></html>