Cyril of Alexandria

For their good therefore He bade them with their own hands to loose him, that they might have no opportunity of misrepresenting what had been done, but might be witnesses of the miracle. And this too is representative of the general resurrection, when, being loosed from sin and the corruption of death, every one will be set free. For, falling into sin, we have wrapped the shame of it like a veil about the face of our soul, and are fast bound by the cords of death. When therefore the Christ shall at the time of the resurrection bring us out from our tombs in the earth, then in very truth does He loosen us from our former evils, and as it were remove the veil of shame, and command that we be let go freely from that time forward; not under the dominion of sin, not subject to corruption, or indeed any of the other troubles that are wont to cause suffering; so that there will be fulfilled in us that which was said by one of the holy prophets: Ye shall both go forth and leap as calves let loose from bonds.

And consider I pray you the miracle as regards its inner meaning. For if our mind be dead like Lazarus, it behoves our material flesh and our nobler soul, like Martha and Mary [respectively,] to approach the Christ with a confession of faith, and to entreat His help. Then He will stand by us, and command the hardness that lies upon our 1 memory to be taken away, and cry with the loud voice of the Evangelic trumpet: "Come forth from the distractions of the world," and loose the cords of our sins; so that we may be able in full vigour to devote ourselves to virtue.

Caiaphas makes a true statement, his words being verified not by the perversity of the people but by the power and wisdom of God.… Nevertheless, his language was made to indicate something true, spoken by one in the official position of a prophet. For he proclaims beforehand of what good things the death of the Christ would become the source. He speaks of what he does not understand, glorifying God (as Balaam did) under constraint, since he was holding the prerogative of the priestly order. The prophecy was given, as it were, not to him personally but to the outward representative of the priesthood. Or, indeed, it may have been the case that the words spoken by Caiaphas were accomplished and happened afterward without his having received any prophetic gift whatever. For it is probable that what some people say will really happen, although they may say it without really knowing whether or not it will happen. Caiaphas then said that the death of Christ would be for the Jews only. But the Evangelist says that it would be for all humankind. For we are all called the offspring and children of God inasmuch as he is the Father of all, having by way of creation begotten as it were and brought into existence the things that were not. And also [we are called his children] because we had from the first the honor of being made in his image, and were allotted the supremacy over earthly things, and were accounted worthy of the divine covenant and enjoyed the life and bliss of paradise. But Satan, unwilling to let us remain in that condition, scattered us and in diverse ways led humanity astray from its nearness to God. And the Christ collected us all together again and brought us through faith into one fold, the church. He united us under one yoke, all being made one, Jews, Greeks, Barbarians, Scythians. We are fashioned again into one new person and worship one God.

Behold, the very thing of which we were speaking, the very thing which the Jews were secretly exercising themselves to bring into effect, this their high priest openly counsels them to do, even to kill the Christ; saying that it would be for the nation, although the nation was unjust. And he makes a true statement, his words being verified not by the perversity of the people, but by the power and wisdom of God. For they, to their own destruction put the Christ to death, but He, being put to death in the flesh, became for us a source of all good things. And what he calls the destruction of the nation, namely, the being under the hand of the Romans and losing the shadow of the law: the very thing which they were seeking to turn away, they actually suffered. Prompted therefore by an unlawful principle, Caiaphas said what he did; nevertheless his language was made to indicate something true, as being spoken by one in the official position of a prophet. For he proclaims beforehand of what good things the death of the Christ would become the source, saying that which he did not understand, and glorifying God (as Balaam did) under constraint, since he was holding the prerogative of the priestly order: the prophecy being as it were given, not to him personally, but to the outward representative of the priesthood. Unless indeed, as may have been the case, the words spoken by Caiaphas were accomplished and came to pass afterwards, without his having received any prophetic gift whatever. For it is probable that what some people say, will really happen, although they may say it without certainly knowing that it will come to pass. Caiaphas then said that the death of Christ would be for the Jews only, but the Evangelist says that it would be for all mankind. For we are all called the offspring and children of God inasmuch as He is the Father of all, having by way of creation begotten as it were and brought into existence the things that were not. And also, because we had from the first the honour of being made in His image, and were allotted the supremacy over earthly things, and were accounted worthy of the Divine covenant, and enjoyed the life and bliss of Paradise. But Satan, being unwilling that we should remain in that condition, scattered us, and in divers manners led man astray from his nearness to God. And the Christ collected us all together again and brought us through faith into one fold, the Church; and united us under one yoke, all being made one, Jews, Greeks, Barbarians, Scythians; and we are fashioned again into one new man, and worship one God

The form of expression however leaves it doubtful whether the words: Think ye that He will not come to the feast?, are the utterance of those who hated or of those who loved Him. For it was not unlikely that those who believed on Him might speak to the unbelievers thus: "Since ye took counsel to put Jesus to death, and think that He is ignorant of what you have secretly planned, this will be a clear sign to you that He is God. For of course He will not come now to join us in celebrating the feast, because as God He knows your plans." Or the expression may be thus paraphrased as the utterance of those who hated Jesus: "As it is ever a custom with Jesus to set aside the law, are ye who believe on Him willing to acknowledge that this is His character, seeing that He is not now come to the feast, disregarding the law of the feast by not joining us in the celebration of it?" And they say this, not because it was necessary for all to go together to Jerusalem at the passover, as at the feast of Tabernacles, but rather implying that His not coming up to Jerusalem was an indication of cowardice, as though He was unable to protect Himself at such a time, and on that account failed to come. Or again, those appointed to take Him may have said these words to one another, being in despair, because they did not yet see Him come, and were eager quickly to execute that to which they had been appointed.

[Jesus went] to Bethany. He did not actually go into Jerusalem, since if he suddenly appeared to the Jews, he might kindle their anger. Instead the rumor of his being so near gradually softens the rage of their wrath. He eats with Lazarus, reminding those who saw them of his divine power. And by telling us this, the Evangelist shows that Christ did not despise the Law. This is also why the text mentions that it was “six days before the Passover,” when it was necessary that the lamb should be purchased and kept until the fourteenth day. This is when he ate with Lazarus and his friends, doing so perhaps because it was a custom not of law but from long usage, for the Jews to have some little merrymaking on the day before the lamb was taken, in order that after the lamb was obtained they might devote themselves, from that time until the feast, to fasting or a lesser amount of food and to purifications. The Lord therefore is shown to have given honor even to these customs of the feast. And in amazement the Evangelist says that he who had been four days dead was eating with the Christ, to remind us of his divine power. And he adds that Martha, out of her love toward Christ, served and ministered at the labors of the table.

Disdaining the plot of the Jews, the Lord gives Himself up, willing to suffer when the time for suffering was come, going to Bethany; not actually into Jerusalem, lest, suddenly appearing to the Jews, He might kindle them to anger; but by the rumour of His being so near gradually softening the rage of their wrath. And He eats with Lazarus, thereby reminding those who saw them of His God-befitting power. And by telling us this, the Evangelist shows that Christ did not despise the law; whence also six days before the passover, when it was necessary that the lamb should be purchased and kept until the fourteenth day, He ate with Lazarus and his friends: perhaps because it was a custom, not of law but from long usage, for the Jews to have some little merry-making on the day before the lamb was taken, in order that after the lamb was obtained they might devote themselves, from that time until the feast, to fasting or spareness of food, and to purifications. The Lord therefore is seen to have honoured even in this the customs of the feast. And in amazement the Evangelist says that he who had been four days dead was eating with the Christ, to remind us of His God-befitting power. And he adds that Martha, out of her love towards Christ, served, and ministered at the labours of the table.

And the Savior also brings forward an argument that convinces us that nothing is better than devotion toward him. For, he says, love for the poor is very praiseworthy, only let it be put after veneration of God. And what he says amounts to this: The time, he says, that has been appointed for my being honored, that is to say, the time of my sojourn on earth, does not require that the poor should be honored before me. And this he said with reference to the incarnation. He does not, however, in any way forbid the sympathetic person to exercise love toward the poor. Therefore, when there is need of service or of singing, these must be honored before love toward the poor. For it is possible to do good after the spiritual services are over. He says therefore that it is not necessary always without intermission to devote our time to honoring himself or to spend everything on the priestly service but to lay out the greatest part on the poor. Or think of it this way: As he asks his disciples to fast after he had ascended to the Father, so also he says that then they may more freely give attention to the care of the poor and exercise their love for the poor with less disturbance and more time, which indeed was the case. For after the ascension of the Savior, when they were no longer following their Master on his journeys but had leisure, then they eagerly spent all the offerings that were brought to them on the poor.