1‐10. *On Easter Sunday morning Magdalen comes to the tomb, and
then runs to Peter and John, who also come to the tomb.*
11‐17. *Magdalen, having followed Peter and John back to the tomb,
sees first two angels, and then Jesus Himself.*
18. *Then she announces to the disciples that Jesus had appeared
to her.*
19‐23. *Appearance of Jesus to the disciples on Easter Sunday
evening when he instituted the Sacrament of Penance.*
24, 25. *Incredulity of Thomas.*
26‐29. *Appearance of Jesus again on Low Sunday to Thomas and the
other disciples, when Thomas believes, and confesses his faith.*
30, 31. *Incompleteness of this narrative regarding the miracles
which Christ wrought to prove his resurrection, and statement of
the object which St. John had in view in recording what he has
recorded.*
St. John’s narrative regarding the visit of Magdalen to the tomb on Easter
Sunday morning is very simple, when taken by itself. She came to the tomb
or, at least, started for it, “when it was yet dark,” and then ran from
the tomb to tell Peter and John that the body of Jesus had been removed
(xx. 1, 2). But when we compare this account with those of the other
Evangelists several serious difficulties arise. Thus, while St. John says
that Magdalen “cometh early, _when it was yet dark_, unto the sepulchre;”
St. Matthew says that she and the other Mary came to see the sepulchre “in
the _end of the Sabbath_ (according to the Vulgate: ‘_Vespere_ Sabbati’),
when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week” (Matt. xxviii.
1). And St. Mark creates still further difficulty when he says: “And when
the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalen, and Mary (the mother) of James, and
Salome bought (not brought; Vulg. emerunt) sweet spices, that coming they
might anoint Jesus. And very early in the morning, the first day of the
week, they come to the sepulchre, _the sun being now risen_” (Mark xvi.
1‐2). Thus, while St. Matt. represents Magdalen as coming to the sepulchre
in the end of the Sabbath, or as the still more difficult text of the
Vulgate has it: “Vespere Sabbati,” St. Mark represents her as coming on
Sunday morning, _when the sun was risen_; and St. John, as coming on the
Sunday morning _when it was yet dark_.
Again, while St. John does not mention the appearance of any angel on the
occasion of Magdalen’s first visit to the tomb (John xx. 1), St. Mark says
that when the women entered the tomb “they saw a young man _sitting_ on
the right side clothed with a white robe” (Mark xvi. 5); and St. Luke,
that after the women entered the tomb, and found not the body of the Lord
“behold _two_ men _stood_ by them in shining apparel” (Luke xxiv. 4).(132)
Various theories have been advanced to reconcile these different accounts.
Maldonatus (on Matt. xxviii. 3) undertakes, with his usual great ability,
but, we think, without success, to reconcile them in the hypothesis, not
merely that there was only one company of women, but also that Mary
Magdalen visited the tomb but once on the morning of the resurrection.
Others, while admitting that Magdalen came twice to the tomb that morning,
as, indeed, seems to follow naturally from St. John’s account (xx. 2‐11),
hold that there was only one company of women, and that all the
Evangelists speak of the same company. Others again hold that not only did
Magdalen come twice to the tomb, but that at least two different companies
of women visited the tomb that morning, and that some Evangelists refer to
the visit of one company, others to the visit of the other company. Thus
Patrizzi (_De Evang._, Diss. liii. 5, 6, 7) supposes SS. Matt. and Mark to
refer to the visit of one company, SS. Luke and John to the visit of a
different company. On the other hand Dr. Walsh (_Harmony of the Gosp.
Narr._), Cornely (Introd. III., _Synops. Chron._, p. 301), and Greswell
(_Harm. of the Gosp._), suppose St. Luke to refer to the visit of one
company, the other three Evangelists to that of a different company.
The following seems to us the most satisfactory method of reconciling all
the accounts. Very early on Sunday morning, “when it was yet dark” (John
xx. 1), Mary Magdalen, accompanied, perhaps from the start, by Mary of
Cleophas, set out from Bethany, where we suppose her to have spent the
preceding day and night in the house of her brother Lazarus. To this same
departure from Bethany and to the same two women (compare Matt. xxviii. 1
with xxvii. 56) St. Matt. refers: “And in the end of the Sabbath, when it
began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and
the other Mary to see the sepulchre” (Matt. xxviii. 1).(133) Proceeding on
their way they were joined by Salome and probably by others, and arrived
at the tomb, “the sun being now risen” (Mark xvi. 2). The journey from
Bethany was nearly three miles, for Bethany was nearly two miles east of
Jerusalem (John xi. 18), and Calvary was another mile westward from the
eastern part of the city. We may well suppose, then, that an hour and a
half—the length of morning twilight at Jerusalem about the season of the
Pasch (Patriz. Diss. liii. 2)—was spent on the journey, especially if, as
we may suppose, there were delays on the way while the party was being
joined by other women; and hence, though the start from Bethany took place
while it was still dark (John xx. 1), they did not arrive at the tomb till
the sun had risen (Mark xvi. 2).
While these women were on their way, Christ rose and quitted the sealed
tomb, and after His resurrection an angel rolled away the stone and sat
upon it, _in the sight of the guards_ (Matt. xxviii. 2‐4). The women on
arriving saw the stone already rolled away (Mark xvi. 4; John xx. 1), and
Magdalen probably ran and looked into the tomb. Not seeing the body of
Jesus, she concluded it had been removed, and ran to say so to the
disciples (John xx. 2).
Her companions remained at the tomb and entered it, and the angel
mentioned by St. Matt. (xxviii. 5) and St. Mark (xvi. 5) appeared to them.
The women then left the tomb in fear and astonishment and great joy, and
ran to tell the disciples, but through fear told no one _on the way_ (Mark
xvi. 8), though their hearts were full of the wonderful and joyous event.
Soon after their departure from the tomb, Peter and John arrived coming to
see if what Magdalen announced was true. Then Peter and John departed, and
Magdalen who had followed them to the tomb, remained behind them, and saw
the two angels _sitting_ (John xx. 12). Then Jesus appeared to her (John
xx. 14‐17), before he had appeared to anyone else, as we learn from St.
Mark: “But He rising early the first day of the week appeared first to
Mary Magdalen out of whom he had cast seven devils” (xvi. 9).(134)
Meantime the women, Magdalen’s companions, were on their way to the
disciples, and now Jesus appeared to them (Matt. xxviii. 9), immediately
after He had appeared to Magdalen.
And now we have reconciled the accounts of SS. Matthew, Mark, and John
regarding Magdalen and her companions. It remains to speak of St. Luke’s
account.
We believe that St. Luke speaks of a different company of women from that
referred to by the other Evangelists. There is nothing improbable in
supposing that more than one company of women came to the tomb on Sunday
morning. As they had not been able to visit it on the Sabbath, a visit of
several companies on Sunday morning is just what might be expected. But we
are not obliged to depend merely on _a priori_ reasoning. For St. Luke’s
company prepared their spices on Friday evening before the Sabbath: “and
returning they prepared spices and ointments: and on the Sabbath‐day they
rested according to the commandment” (Luke xxiii. 56); the other company,
after the Sabbath, when the first day of the Jewish week had begun: “and
when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalen and Mary _the mother_ of James
and Salome bought sweet spices, that coming they might anoint Jesus.”
(Mark xvi. 1). Moreover, the women of whom St. Luke speaks seem to have
come to the tomb earlier than any other company, for they came ὄρθρου
βαθέος (literally, at the first dawn, Luke xxiv. 1): and we are not to
conclude that they merely set out for the tomb at this early hour, for
they seem to have arrived at the tomb before the sun was risen: see Luke
xxiv. 22: ὄρθριαι ἐπὶ τό μνημεῖον.
Again, the natural inference from Luke xxiv. 9‐12, 22‐24 is that the women
he mentions had returned from the tomb and announced Christ’s resurrection
before Peter and John went to the tomb. We are disposed to hold with
Patrizzi (Lib. iii., Diss. liii. 4) that St. Luke xxiv. 10 is a summary
account of _all_ the announcements made by the various women to the
different followers of Christ that morning; and hence all the women there
referred to need not be supposed to have gone to the disciples before
Peter and John went to the tomb. But we think that Luke xxiv. 22‐24,
compared with Luke xxiv. 12, proves that others besides Magdalen had come
to the disciples from the tomb before Peter and John went thither. “Yea,
and certain women also of our company affrighted us, who before it was
light (ὄρθριαι) were at the sepulchre. And not finding his body, came,
saying that they had also seen a vision of angels, who say that he is
alive. And some of our people went to the sepulchre: and found it so as
the women had said, but him they found not” (Luke xxiv. 22‐24).
Hence we hold that St. Luke’s company of women started for the tomb at
early dawn, after Magdalen had set out from Bethany, but as they probably
spent the night in Jerusalem, they _arrived before_ her, saw the two
angels _standing_ (Luke xxiv. 4), and then went to announce Christ’s
resurrection to the disciples. Not long after the departure of this
company, Magdalen and her companions arrived at the tomb, and Magdalen
_running_ from the tomb (John xx. 2) arrived at the house where Peter and
John were staying, about the same time as St. Luke’s company, or perhaps a
little later. Her announcement that the Lord’s body had been removed,
confirming to some extent the announcement of St. Luke’s company that He
had risen, Peter and John now ran to the tomb. The events that followed
have been already arranged above.
1. Una autem sabbati, Maria 1. And on the first day of the
Magdalene venit mane, cum week, Mary Magdalen cometh
adhuc tenebrae essent, ad early, when it was yet dark
monumentum; et vidit lapidem unto the sepulchre: and she
sublatum a monumento. saw the stone taken away from
the sepulchre.
1. *The first day of the week.* The Vulgate reading “una” (μιᾶ) is a
Hebraism for _prima_; and the week is called by the name of its principal
day, the Sabbath. Comp. Luke xviii. 22.
*And when it was yet dark.* She started from Bethany while it was yet
dark, but she did not arrive at Calvary till the sun was risen (Mark xvi.
2).
2. Cucurrit ergo, et venit ad 2. She ran therefore, and
Simonem Petrum, et ad alium cometh to Simon Peter, and to
discipulum quem amabat Iesus, the other disciple whom Jesus
et dicit illis: Tulerunt loved, and saith to them: They
Dominum de monumento, et have taken away the Lord out
nescimus ubi posuerunt eum. of the sepulchre, and we know
not where they have laid him.
2. It is likely that before running to tell the Apostles that the body was
removed, Magdalen had looked into the sepulchre and convinced herself it
was not there.
*And cometh to Simon Peter.* Notwithstanding his fall on the preceding
Thursday night, which can hardly have remained till now unknown to
Magdalen, Peter was still regarded as the leader of the disciples.
*The other disciple whom Jesus loved*, is our Evangelist. He and Peter may
have been staying in different places in the city. Our Blessed Lady was
staying in the same house as St. John (xix. 27).
*They have taken away the Lord.* It is plain that the angels had not yet
appeared to Magdalen and told her that Jesus was risen. Yet Maldonatus
supposes she had already seen the angels, and learned that Jesus was
risen, as recorded below in verses 11, 12, ff.
*We know not.* These words show that Magdalen had not come alone to the
tomb.
3. Exiit ergo Petrus, et ille 3. Peter therefore went out,
alius discipulus, et venerunt and that other disciple, and
ad monumentum. they came to the sepulchre.
3. *And they came to the sepulchre.* The meaning is that they “went
towards” (ἤρχοντο εἰς) the sepulchre.
4. Currebant autem duo simul, 4. And they both ran together,
et ille alius discipulus and that other disciple did
praecucurrit citius Petro, et outrun Peter, and came first
venit primus ad monumentum. to the sepulchre.
4. We have here the vivid touches of one of the two actors in the scene.
The incidents of that eventful morning must have remained for ever fresh
in his memory. St. John being the younger man was able to run more quickly
than Peter.
5. Et cum se inclinasset, 5. And when he stooped down,
vidit posita linteamina, non he saw the linen cloths lying:
tamen introivit. but yet he went not in.
5. It would appear from this, as indeed we might expect, that it was
necessary to stoop in order to look into the sepulchre. See also verse 11
and Luke xxiv. 12.
Having stooped and looked in, St. John saw (seeth) the linen swathes in
which the body of our Saviour had been bound (xix. 40).
6. Venit ergo Simon Petrus 6. Then cometh Simon Peter,
sequens eum, et introivit in following him, and went into
monumentum, et vidit the sepulchre, and saw the
linteamina posita. linen cloths lying.
6. St. John had arrived first at the tomb, but (deterred by some feeling
of fear or awe) he did not enter, as he takes care to record. Then Peter
arrived less fleet but more brave, and, apparently, without pausing to
look in, at once enters the tomb.
*And saw (seeth).* In the original we have here the verb θεωρέι, denoting
an intent and searching gaze, as distinct from St. John’s simple look
(βλέπει) described in the preceding verse.
7. Et sudarium quod fuerat 7. And the napkin that had
super caput eius, non cum been about his head, not lying
linteaminibus positum, sed with the linen cloths, but
separatim involutum in unum apart, wrapt up into one
locum. place.
7. *And the napkin.* St. Peter’s more searching examination discovered
what had been unnoticed by St. John. The presence of the linen swathes,
and the napkin folded and laid apart, are doubtless mentioned as proof
that Christ was truly risen. Had His body been simply taken away to some
other tomb, those taking it, whether friends or enemies, would not have
gone to the useless trouble of removing the spice‐covered bandages and the
napkin. And, certainly, if it had been hurriedly stolen, such nice care
would not have been taken to fold the napkin and place it apart. So,
substantially, St. Chrysostom on this verse.
8. Tunc ergo introivit et ille 8. Then that other disciple
discipulus qui venerat primus also went in, who came first
ad monumentum, et vidit, et to the sepulchre: and he saw
credidit: and believed.
8. St. John now followed Peter into the cave.
*And he saw and believed.* St. Augustine understands this to mean that
John believed what Magdalen had said (verse 2), namely that the body of
Jesus had been removed. We prefer to understand that he believed what St.
Luke’s company of women had told him, namely, that Jesus was risen from
the dead; for when our Evangelist speaks of belief _absolutely_, as here,
he usually means faith.
9. Nondum enim sciebant 9. For as yet they knew not
scripturam, quia oportebat eum the scripture, that he must
a mortuis resurgere. rise again from the dead.
9. *For as yet.* We take the meaning to be, that as yet _until now_ they
knew not the Scripture, that it was necessary Jesus should rise from the
dead. Even now St. Peter “went away, wondering in himself at that which
was come to pass” (Luke xxiv. 12).
10. Abierunt ergo iterum 10. The disciples therefore
discipuli ad semetipsos. departed again to their home.
10. *The disciples therefore*—thinking that they could learn nothing more
there—*departed again to their home*.
11. Maria autem stabat ad 11. But Mary stood at the
monumentum foris, plorans. Dum sepulchre without, weeping.
ergo fleret, inclinavit se, et Now as she was weeping, she
prospexit in monumentum: stooped down, and looked into
the sepulchre.
11. *But Mary stood at the sepulchre without, weeping.* Maldonatus holds
that what is here recorded took place when Magdalen came to the tomb
(verse 1), but that St. John hastening to tell of the coming of St. Peter
and himself to the tomb, inverts the order of events in his narrative. But
this is unnatural. We take it that Magdalen had followed Peter and John
back to the tomb, and now remained behind them. “A stronger affection,”
says St. Augustine, “riveted to the spot one of a weaker nature.”
12. Et vidit duos angelos in 12. And she saw two angels in
albis, sedentes, unum ad white, sitting, one at the
caput, et unum ad pedes, ubi head, and one at the feet,
positum fuerat corpus Iesu. where the body of Jesus had
been laid.
12. *And she saw two angels.* The vision of angels now accorded to
Magdalen is not mentioned by any other Evangelist.
13. Dicunt ei illi: Mulier, 13. They say to her: Woman,
quid ploras? Dicit eis: Quia why weepest thou? She saith to
tulerunt Dominum meum: et them: Because they have taken
nescio ubi posuerunt eum. away my Lord: and I know not
where they have laid him.
13. Magdalen’s words here are the same as in verse 2, except that “my
Lord” is substituted for “The Lord,” and “I know not” for “we know not.”
Both her statement and her loss are now more personal.
14. Haec cum dixisset, 14. When she had thus said,
conversa est retrorsum, et she turned herself back, and
vidit Iesum stantem: et non saw Jesus standing; and she
sciebat quia Iesus est. knew not that it was Jesus.
14. *She turned herself back.* Magdalen, conscious, perhaps, of another
presence, or moved by the ecstatic gaze of the angels on Jesus, now turned
round and saw Him, but did not recognise Him. Probably, as happened to the
two disciples on the way to Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 16), her eyes were held
that she should not know Him.
15. Dicit ei Iesus: Mulier, 15. Jesus saith to her: Woman,
quid ploras? quem quaeris? why weepest thou? Whom seekest
Illa existimans quia thou? She thinking that it was
hortulanus esset, dicit ei: the gardener, saith to him:
Domine, si tu sustulisti eum, Sir, if thou hast taken him
dicito mihi ubi posuisti eum: hence, tell me where thou hast
et ego eum tollam. laid him: and I will take him
away.
15. *The gardener*; that is, the man who had charge of Joseph’s garden, in
which our Lord was buried. The man’s presence in the garden at that hour
of the morning—about 7 o’clock—naturally suggested the thought. Without
answering his question, Magdalen replies: *Sir, if thou hast taken him
hence.*... As if she imagined everyone to be filled like herself with only
one thought, she does not say who it is she is seeking.
*And I will take him away.* To her love everything seemed possible, nor
does she pause to think whether she could carry the body, nor whither she
would bear it.
16. Dicit ei Iesus: Maria. 16. Jesus saith to her: Mary.
Conversa illa, dicit ei: She turning, saith to him:
Rabboni (quod dicitur Rabboni (which is to say,
magister). Master).
16. Our Lord now calls her by her name, and she at once recognises Him.
*She, turning, saith to him* (very many authorities add “in Hebrew”)
*Rabboni*. The word strictly means “my Master,” but the pronominal suffix,
just as in Rabbi, gradually became almost a part of the title. The Hebrew
spoken by Magdalen was of course Syrochaldaic The corresponding word in
pure Hebrew would be Rabban (רבן).
17. Dicit ei Iesus: Noli me 17. Jesus saith to her: Do not
tangere, nondum enim ascendi touch me, for I am not yet
ad Patrem meum, vade autem ad ascended to my Father: but go
fratres meos, et dic eis: to my brethren, and say to
Ascendo ad Patrem meum, et them: I ascend to my Father
Patrem vestrum, Deum meum, et and to your Father, to my God
Deum vestrum. and your God.
17. Probably Magdalen had prostrated herself at His feet, and was clinging
to them, as did other women that morning (Matt. xxviii. 9). Christ’s words
are variously explained. The following view seems to be the most natural:
Do not seek to cling to Me, to remain with Me now (ἅπτεσθαι is often used
not in the sense of touching, but of clinging to, hanging on by. See Lidd.
and Scott); you shall have other opportunities of satisfying your love,
since I am to remain with you for forty days, and am not at once ascending
to My Father.
*But go to My brethren and say to them.* For her consolation she is made
the harbinger of Christ’s further exaltation.
*To My Father and to your Father.* “Non ait Patrem nostrum, sed _Patrem
meum et Patrem vestrum_. Aliter ergo meum, aliter vestrum: natura meum,
gratia vestrum. Neque dixit Deum nostrum, sed _Deum meum_, sub quo ego
homo; et Deum vestrum, inter quos et ipsum mediator sum” (St. Aug. on St.
John Tr. 121.)
18. Venit Maria Magdalene 18. Mary Magdalen cometh and
annuntians discipulis: Quia telleth the disciples: I have
vidi Dominum, et haec dixit seen the Lord, and these
mihi. things he said to me.
18. Magdalen went and announced to the disciples that she had seen the
Lord; but, as St. Mark, xvi. 11, tells us, they did not believe her.
19. Cum ergo sero esset die 19. Now when it was late that
illo, uno sabbatorum, et fores same day, the first of the
essen clausae, ubi erant week, and the doors were shut,
discipuli congregati propter where the disciples were
metum Iudaeorum: venit Iesus, gathered together for fear of
et stetit in medio, et dixit the Jews, Jesus came and stood
eis: Pax vobis. in the midst, and said to
them: Peace be to you.
19. *Now when it was late that same day.* Jesus now appears to the ten
Apostles on Easter Sunday evening. Before this, and after the appearance
to Magdalen, He had appeared to the women returning from the tomb (Matthew
xxviii. 9); then to Peter (Luke xxiv. 34); then, towards evening, to the
two disciples on the way to Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 13, 31); so that the
apparition to the apostles on Easter Sunday evening was the _fifth_
apparition of Jesus on that day, mentioned in the Gospels. He passed
through the closed doors in virtue of the property of subtility which His
glorified body possessed, and saluted the Apostles “and those who were
with them” (Luke xxiv. 33‐36) with the usual Jewish salutation.
From a comparison of St. Luke (xxiv. 33‐36), we know that the disciples
who had returned from Emmaus were present when our Lord appeared on the
occasion here mentioned by St. John. Now, Emmaus was sixty stadia (about
seven English miles) from Jerusalem (Luke xxiv. 13), and the two disciples
did not reach Emmaus till it was “towards evening,” and the day was “far
spent” (Luke xxiv. 29). Hence though they tarried only a short time in
Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 33), they can hardly have returned much before dark.
Indeed it may have been after dark, and in that case the words “when it
was late that same day” would prove that our Evangelist speaks here, not
according to the Jewish method of counting the day from evening to
evening, but according to the Greek method of counting, as we do, from
midnight to midnight.
20. Et cum hoc dixisset, 20. And when he had said this,
ostendit eis manus et latus. he shewed them his hands, and
Gavisi sunt ergo discipuli, his side. The disciples
viso Domino. therefore were glad, when they
saw the Lord.
20. Then to convince them that it was not a spirit they saw (see Luke
xxiv. 37), He showed them (the wounds in) His hands, and feet (Luke xxiv.
39), and side, and said to them, as St. Luke tells us: “Handle and see,
for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me to have” (Luke xxiv.
39). From these words it is plain that Christ’s glorified body, though it
had passed through the closed doors, was yet capable of being touched and
handled.(135) When He had partaken of food in presence of the disciples
(Luke xxiv. 42, 43), and dispelled all their doubts as to the reality of
His body, then, as St. John tells us here, they were glad.
21. Dixit ergo eis iterum: Pax 21. He said therefore to them
vobis. Sicut misit me Pater, again: Peace be to you. As the
et ego mitto vos. Father hath sent me, I also
send you.
21. When fear had been dispelled and doubt overcome, He saluted them again
with the usual salutation, and proceeded to confer upon them the power of
forgiving sins. *As the Father hath sent me*, with Divine authority for
the salvation of mankind, so with the same authority and for the same
purpose, I, who have equal authority with the Father, send you.
22. Haec cum dixisset, 22. When he had said this, he
insufflavit: et dixit eis: breathed on them; and he said
Accipite Spiritum sanctum: to them: Receive ye the Holy
Ghost:
22. *He breathed on them.* He breathed upon the Apostles (probably with
one breath upon all) to signify what His words expressed, that He was
giving them the Holy Ghost. Already, indeed, the Holy Ghost was in their
souls, but He was now given to them more fully in His grace, and in the
new power which they received of forgiving sins. This power of forgiving
sins is common to the three Divine Persons, but is here attributed to the
Holy Ghost, like all other things pertaining to our sanctification. Though
the Apostles already had the Holy Ghost in their souls and though He was
given to them more fully now, yet He was still to be given in a _visible_
and fuller manner on the day of Pentecost. It is important to note that
the power of forgiving sins here evidently attributed to the Holy Ghost
proves Him to be God, for only God, who is offended by sin, can give
authority and power to forgive it.
23. Quorum remiseritis 23. Whose sins you shall
peccata, remittuntur eis: et forgive, they are forgiven
quorum retinueritis, retenta them: and whose _sins_ you
sunt. shall retain, they are
retained.
23. The Council of Trent has defined that there is question here of the
remission of sins in the Sacrament of Penance.(136) As the Council points
out, the Church always understood the words in this sense, and the natural
meaning of the words signifies that the sins are to be remitted or
retained by a _judicial sentence_ of the persons here addressed. For the
words are: _If you remit_ the sins of some (Greek, ἄν τινων), that is if
you _decide_ to remit the sins of some, and to retain the sins of others,
&c.
Since there is question of a judicial sentence, and since judgment can be
passed only upon subjects, it follows that there can be question here only
of sins committed _after_ Baptism.
Upon the words of this text note—(1) That the persons to whom this
wondrous power is given are to _forgive_ (remiseritis) sins, not merely to
_declare_ them forgiven by God.
(2) That there is no restriction as to the sins that may be forgiven; so
that there is no such thing as an irremissible sin, if only the minister
can decide that the penitent is worthy to receive the Sacrament, and the
penitent have the proper dispositions. (3) That instead of the present
tense (remittuntur eis) which stands in the first member(137), we have the
perfect (retenta sunt) in the second member, implying that the sins
_remain_ as they were. (4) That in the second member the words are not:
Whose sins you shall not forgive, but whose sins you shall _retain_;
implying, in the minister, a _positive_ judgment adverse to the penitent.
For other questions arising out of this text, consult works on Dogmatic
Theology.
It appears from St. Luke, xxiv. 33, that there were other persons than the
Apostles present, when these words were spoken and this power to forgive
sins conferred. It may be that Christ made it clear that this power was
given only to the Apostles and their successors, the bishops and priests
of the Catholic Church; but, at all events, the tradition of the Catholic
Church, with which the Holy Ghost remains to teach her all truth (John
xvi. 13), has decided that the power was given only to these.
Whether the power of forgiving sins was on this occasion given to Thomas,
who was absent, is disputed. Some, as Mald., hold that it was, and appeal
to the case mentioned in Numb. xi. 26, when the spirit of prophecy was
given to Eldad and Medad, though they were absent. Others, as Toletus, and
A Lap., hold that it was not, as Thomas was now incredulous, but that it
was given on the following Sunday, when Jesus appeared to Thomas and
converted him.
24. Thomas autem unus ex 24. Now Thomas, one of the
duodecim, qui dicitur Didymus, twelve, who is called Didymus,
non erat cum eis quando venit was not with them when Jesus
Iesus. came.
24. *Thomas.* See above on xi. 16. *One of the twelve* “He says one of the
twelve, although the Apostolic College was _now_ reduced to _eleven_,
because ‘twelve’ was the original number, just as in the case of the
‘Decemvirs,’ they would be thus termed, although only _nine_ out of the
_ten_ were present on a particular occasion” (M’Ev.).
25. Dixerunt ergo ei alii 25. The other disciples
discipuli: Vidimus Dominum. therefore said to him: We have
Ille autem dixit eis: Nisi seen the Lord. But he said to
videro in manibus eius fixuram them: Except I shall see in
clavorum, et mittam digitum his hands the print of the
meum in locum clavorum, et nails, and put my finger into
mittam manum meum in latus the place of the nails, and
eius, non credam. put my my hand into his side,
I will not believe.
25. The reply of Thomas shows how he had dwelt on each terrible detail of
the Passion. The other Apostles may have told him how Christ had pointed
to His hands and feet, and invited them to “handle and see” that it was He
Himself. (Luke xxiv. 29, 30). If so, the language of Thomas would
naturally be shaped in accordance with what they told him.
26. Et post dies octo, iterum 26. And after eight days,
erant discipuli eius intus: et again his disciples were
Thomas cum eis. Venit Iesus, within, and Thomas with them.
ianuis clausis, et stetit in Jesus cometh, the doors being
medio, et dixit: Pax vobis. shut, and stood in the midst,
and said: Peace be to you.
26. *And after eight days*, that is to say, on Low Sunday, Christ again
appeared to the Apostles, Thomas being present; and this was His _sixth_
appearance. Thomas, though still without faith, had remained in the
company of the Apostles.
27. Deinde dicit Thomae: Infer 27. Then he said to Thomas:
digitum tuum huc, et vide put in thy finger hither, and
manus meas, et affer manum see my hands, and bring hither
tuam, et mitte in latus meum: thy hand and put it into my
et noli esse incredulus, sed side; and be not faithless,
fidelis. but believing.
27. We may here admire our Lord’s tender and touching mercy in
condescending to such pains to dispel the unbelief of Thomas. The language
used is such as to prove to the Apostle that Jesus knew the very words in
which he had questioned the resurrection.
28. Respondit Thomas, et dixit 28. Thomas answered, and said
ei: Dominus meus et Deus meus. to him: My Lord, and my God.
28. *My Lord, and my God* (ὁ κύρίος μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου). As often in the
New Testament (Mark ix. 25; Luke viii. 54; John viii. 10), the nominative
is here used for the vocative (see Beel., _Gr. Gram._, § 29, Adnot. 1).
For the Evangelist expressly states that Thomas addressed Christ. It is
absurd then to contend, as the Socinians and Paul of Heidelberg did, that
these words are simply an exclamation, meaning: O Jehovah! For, besides
the fact that Christ is addressed, the Jews were not in the habit of using
any such exclamation. The second council of Constant., cap. 12, condemned
those who, following the teaching of Theodore of Mopsuestia, said: “Haec
verba a Thoma non dicta fuisse de Christo, sed miraculo resurrectionis
perculsum, Thomam laudasse Deum qui Christum resuscitasset.”
Thomas’s words, then, are a confession of faith, as our Lord’s words in
the next verse prove, and of faith in Christ’s humanity and Divinity.
In confessing Jesus to be his Lord, Thomas acknowledges Him to be “the
master” who had been crucified; while, in the remaining words, he clearly
confesses Christ’s Divinity. And so our Evangelist, ever mindful of his
object in writing this Gospel, records this splendid testimony to the
humanity and Divinity of Jesus Christ, and our Lord’s approval thereof.
29. Dixit ei Iesus: Quia 29. Jesus saith to him:
vidisti me Thoma, credidisti: Because thou hast seen me,
beati qui non viderunt et Thomas, thou hast believed:
crediderunt. blessed are they that have not
seen, and have believed.
29. *Because thou hast seen Me, Thomas thou hast believed.* “Aliud vidit,
et aliud credidit. Vidit hominem et cicatrices, et ex hoc credidit
divinitatem resurgentis” (St. Thomas Aquin).
*Blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed.* Rather: “Blessed
are they that _saw not_ (ἱδόντες), and believed.”
The aorist seems to point to something that had already taken place during
the preceding week. Some had believed who had merely heard from the
Apostles or the pious women that Jesus was risen, and their faith was more
prompt and praiseworthy than that of Thomas.
30. Multa quidem et alia signa 30. Many other signs also did
fecit Iesus in conspectu Jesus in the sight of his
discipulorum suorum, quae non disciples, which are not
sunt scripta in libro hoc. written in this book.
30. *Many other signs.* We understand not of the various other miracles of
Christ’s mortal and risen life, but of the other _proofs_ (σημεῖα,
literally signs) of His resurrection and Divinity, which he afforded
during His risen life. For, the miracles of His mortal life were wrought
in the sight of all the people; but the _proofs_ of His resurrection were
given only “in the sight of His disciples.” So Mald., Tol., Corn., &c.
31. Haec autem scripta sunt ut 31. But these are written that
credatis quia Iesus est you may believe that Jesus is
Christus Filius Dei: et ut the Christ the Son of God; and
credentes, vitam habeatis in that believing you may have
nomine eius. life in his name.
31. But what is here written _in evidence of His resurrection_ is written
in order that you may believe that Jesus is the Messias (ὁ Χριστός), the
Son of God; and that believing you may have life, the life of grace here,
and of glory hereafter, through His name; that is, through faith in Him.