Father Augustus Bisping's Commentary on John 12:1-11

 Father Augustus Bisping's Commentary on John 12:1-11

I. The Anointing of Jesus in Bethany, Jn 12:1-8. See on Matt. 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9.

This story of the anointing of Christ by Mary is not to be confused with the similar story communicated in Luke 7:36ff., where a public sinner (Mary Magdalene?) anointed Jesus while he was at table with a certain Pharisee Simon; but it is identical with that which is reported by Matthew and Mark in the aforementioned places. The narrative of the story in the two other evangelists agrees essentially with the present one; only there the personality of Mary stands out more, here more that of Judas Iscariot. John wishes to give in advance individual features of the character of this man, so that the reader may find his subsequent deed comprehensible.

Jn 12:1-2: "Jesus therefore came six days before the Passover to Bethany, where Lazarus was, the dead man, whom Jesus raised from the dead." In some, but insufficient, witnesses ὁ τεθνηκώς [the dead man] is lacking. Since it appeared superfluous before ὃν ἤγειρεν κ. τ. λ. [whom he raised, etc.], it was easily omitted. The particle οὖν [therefore] takes up the narrative of 11:55 again and carries it forward. Concerning the expression πρὸ ἓξ ἡμερῶν τοῦ πάσχα instead of ἓξ ἡμέρας πρὸ τοῦ πάσχα, see § on 11:18. Win. p. 491. Since one was accustomed to say: πρὸ ἓξ ἡμερῶν, as we say: "six days ago," where it actually ought to mean: "six days before now," so one retained the formula even when a designation of the point in time to which the determination pointed was necessary.

For the calculation of the six days, the following is to be noted: The 14th of Nisan, on the evening of which the Passover meal was held, was accustomed to be counted entirely as part of the feast (cf. Matt. 26:17), so that the 13th of Nisan is to be assumed as the first day before the Passover. Since now, as will appear later, in the year of the Lord's death according to the Jerusalem calendar, which John follows, the 14th of Nisan fell on a Friday (see on 13:2), then accordingly Jesus would have arrived on Saturday, the 8th of Nisan, from Ephraim (11:54) via Jericho (cf. Luke 19:6) in Bethany. But since we cannot well assume that Jesus should have broken the law of the Sabbath journey (see on Acts 1:12) by such a long journey, it is probable that he already arrived in Bethany on Friday, the 7th of Nisan. The time determination πρὸ ἓξ ἡμ. τ. πάσχα belongs then, strictly speaking, not to ἦλθε [came], but to the ἐποίησαν αὐτῷ δεῖπνον [they made him a supper] v. 2 (see on 13:1), and this meal was a solemn Sabbath meal, as the Jews in general loved to hold hospitable meals on the Sabbath.

—"They prepared him a meal there, and Martha served, but Lazarus was one of those who sat at table with him."—Where the meal was held, John does not say; but Matthew and Mark note that it was in the house of a certain Simon, who had suffered from leprosy and was probably healed by Jesus. If we assume that this Simon was related to Lazarus (some apocrypha make him the father of Lazarus), then it is easily explained how the careful Martha could serve at the meal, Mary move so freely, and Lazarus appear as a guest.

Jn 12:3. Mary now used this opportunity to testify to the Lord her gratitude for the raised brother. She "took a pound of precious balsam of genuine nard and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair. But the house was filled with the fragrance of the balsam." Concerning the expression νάρδος πιστική [genuine nard], see § on Mark 14:3. As there πολυτελοῦς [costly], so here πολυτίμου [precious] is not to be drawn to νάρδου [of nard], but to μύρου [of ointment]. The feet of the guests were usually washed before the meal, because one took off the sandals and lay on couches; to anoint them and then even to wipe them with the hair was a particularly tender and respectful distinction for a guest. The quantity of the balsam, a litra or 12 ounces, has been found too large; but love is not stingy, but gives abundantly: "Charitas modum saepe vescit" [Charity often exceeds measure], says Thomas à Kempis. The two other evangelists relate that Mary anointed the head of Jesus according to Jewish custom, to pour aromatics into the hair of the invited at feast meals. If she anointed head and feet, then the large quantity of balsam can no longer be striking. And is it said here that she expended all the balsam? Is not the opposite indicated in v. 7?

Jn 12:4-5. How was it now possible that such reverence and love, expressed in such a moving manner, was misunderstood? And yet Judas Iscariot, the future betrayer of the Lord, was narrow-minded enough to disapprove in his heart of the deed of this loving woman, and he was tactless enough to express his disapproval to his fellow disciples in a manner audible also to Mary and disturbing her in her beautiful work. "Why," he said, "was this balsam not sold for 300 denarii (about 60 thalers) and (the proceeds) given to poor people." Judas did not grasp the pious deed of Mary; for he lacked the feelings of Mary. In his money-greedy eyes the loving woman appeared nothing better than a spendthrift. Thus all too often the commonest avarice seeks to cloak itself in the appearance of thriftiness, even of charity.

—ὁ μέλλων αὐτὸν παραδιδόναι [who was about to betray him] the evangelist adds in v. 4, because the following expression of Judas already stood in psychological connection with his betrayal.

—300 denarii, Hengstenberg remarks: "It is characteristic for Judas, the type of the later money-Jews, that he knows the price of a thing so exactly which concerns him not at all. Even if we did not have the report of John, it would still be close at hand to attribute this estimation, which is also found in Mark, to Judas."

Jn 12:6. Here the evangelist gives an explanation to the words of Judas: "But he said this not because he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief and had the bag and carried away what was put in." For how could Judas have cared much for the absent poor, since he remained unmoved by the sight of the present Savior and the loving Mary! The word γλωσσόκομον designates first a little box for the mouthpieces (γλώσσαι) of flutes; then generally a small container, casket. In this casket now, which Judas had in keeping and at his disposition, were the gifts (τὰ βαλλόμενα) of the friends and followers of Jesus for his and his disciples' sustenance. For the Savior, who miraculously fed thousands, did not disdain to enter into poverty so far that he lived with his disciples from the alms of love, which particularly pious women offered him (cf. Luke 8:3).

The ἐβάσταζε is usually taken with the Vulgate (portabat) in the meaning "he carried." But it is unmistakable that this interpretation yields a self-evident, tautological element. Therefore it seems better, following the example of Origen, to take βαστάζειν here in the meaning of auferre [to carry away], which the verb demonstrably has sometimes in later Greek (cf. 20:15; Matt. 8:17; Polyb. 1, 48, 2; also φέρω often stands for ἀποφέρω): "he carried away," i.e., he embezzled, put aside. The older exegetes usually raise the question here: Why did Jesus make precisely Judas, whose covetous and thievish mind he yet knew (cf. 2:25), the treasurer? The only answer which we can give to this question is: It belongs to the adorable ways of divine providence regarding sin, that the sinner is placed in circumstances in which his inner wickedness must break forth. All further questions are to be rejected as presumptuous. Cf. what was said on Matt. 10:4.

Jn 12:7f. To the intimately revering and loving Mary a heavy offense had been done by Judas. For the purer the mind, the more faithfully the deed is meant, the more painful the unfavorable reception of the same. The speech of the disciple must therefore have hurt her deeply. Jesus therefore takes her in protection: "Let her alone, that she may keep it for the day of my burial." We read with Lachm. and Tischend. according to preponderant witnesses: ἵνα τηρήσῃ αὐτό. Vulg.: ut in diem sepulturae meae servet illud [that she may keep it for the day of my burial]. According to this, the most natural explanation is that which already Rupert of Tuit gives: "That she may not sell what remains of the nard oil for the poor, but keep it, to complete soon on the near day of my burial what she has begun today." The τηρήσῃ stands opposite the ἐπράθη [was sold] v. 5, and the ἡμέρα τοῦ ἐνταφιασμοῦ is the actual, impending burial day. 1) The Textus Receptus has τετήρηκεν αὐτό without ἵνα, a reading which reveals itself as a change according to Mark 14:8. According to this, the sense would be: "To anoint me in advance therewith today, she has not given the nard oil for the poor, but kept the same," and this statement would agree exactly with that in Matt. 26:12. The present day of the foot anointing would then be presented proleptically as that of the corpse anointing (Meyer).

Without doubt the Lord wished with these words also to prepare Mary herself for the unspeakable pain which awaited her. For what must she have felt when she saw him die on the cross who had raised her brother! Into what struggle must her faith have come at such contrasts! According to the two other evangelists, Jesus added further: "Truly, I say to you, wherever in the whole world this Gospel is preached, there will also be said to her memory what she has done." This prophecy has been completely fulfilled.

Jn 12:8. Ground of the ἵνα - - τηρήσῃ αὐτό: "For the poor you always have with you, i.e., in your vicinity, so that you can do them good, as often as you will, but me you do not always have"; rather I soon depart from you.

II. Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem, Jn 12:9-19. See on Matt. 21:1-11; Mark 11:1-11; Luke 19:29-44.

Jn 12:9ff. Since now Jesus stayed in the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem, many inhabitants of the city learned of it; and as it seems, still on the day of the feast, thus on the Sabbath, a multitude of people streamed out, "not only on account of Jesus, but also to see Lazarus," and to convince themselves of his real and continuing resuscitation.

Jn 12:10f.: "But the chief priests consulted that they might kill Lazarus also; for many of the Jews went away on his account and believed in Jesus." Because of the great sensation which the resuscitation of Lazarus continually made among the people, the chief priests, in whose hierarchical interest it lay particularly to dampen the sympathetic movement in the people, formed the resolution to remove not only Jesus but also Lazarus out of the way, so as to erase at once all memory of the matter. Perhaps they also sought to persuade themselves that the whole awakening was only a game arranged between Jesus and Lazarus. – ὑπῆγον "they went away," namely to Bethany to Lazarus, not: "they fell away" (Corn. a Lap.).