The Divine Lamp

Note: Technically speaking, “The Passion Narrative” is a misleading description. For the account of the Passion does not stand in isolation to that of the Resurrection. Matthew 26-28 is one literary unit within the Gospel as a whole and should be treated as such. For reasons of convenience only, do I speak of “the Passion Narrative.” In my posts on the Passion I will be linking to the text of the RSV which, in accord with Canon Law can be used by Catholics for the purpose of Scripture study. Unfortunately, I’ve gotten some conflicting information regarding the laws governing the use (quoting) of the RSV; for this reason, in my notes I’ll be using the text of the ASV with some occasional modifications done by me. This version is not in copyright and it hews rather close to that of the RSV.

Like Mark, Matthew’s Passion narrative begins with the story of the opposition and machinations of the Jewish leaders against Jesus (1-5), to which Judas will join himself in verses 14-16. As in Mark 14:1-11 the account of the anointing at Bethany (6-13), which is an act of discipleship, is sandwiched between these accounts of the hostility of the Jewish leaders and the betrayal of Judas. The significance of this will be dealt with when we come to those verses. The overall section sets some of the major themes for the rest of the narrative while building upon things already predicted, as will be shown in the notes. It should also be noted that Matthew, in view of his own theological and pastoral tendencies, has expanded what we find in Mark; some of this will be brought out in the notes as well.

RSV Tranlation 26:1-16
26:1- And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these words, he said unto his disciples… “

As he had at the end of the first four Discourses found in the Gospel, Matthew ends this one with a statement that the teaching was over (see 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1). Here, however he adds the word “all” (these words). As Father Donald Senior notes in the Matthean edition of his commentary series on the Passion:

The end is near and Jesus has finished his great ministry of teaching the disciples, which Matthew has especially illustrated throughout the Gospel by means of Jesus’ major discourses. Now Jesus’ teaching draws to a close; there remains only one lesson, that of his obedient death.-The Passion of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew (Wilmington:Michael Glazier, 1985), pg. 50.

John P. Meir is of the same opinion. The Jerome Biblical Commentary, Cornelius A Lapide, and many others see it as a link only to the last discourse. Perhaps Rabanus, who is quoted by Aquinas in the Cantena Aurea is correct; he places emphasis on the word “finished” (completed) and sees it as a reference to all that Jesus both did and taught. Inasmuch as Our Lord goes on to speak about his passion in verse 2, which he had predicted on three occasions outside of the great discourses, and since there are many allusions in the Passion Narrative to previous events in the Gospel, I tend to think Rabanus is correct.

It is interesting to note that Jesus’ last great discourse takes place on the Mount of Olives and is followed by a reference to his death. Some see this as an allusion to the last discourse of Moses which is ended with words similar to Mt 26:1: “And Moses made an end of speaking ALL THESE WORDS to all Israel (Deut 32:45). Moses then climbs Mount Nebo, views the promised land, and dies.

26:2 “You know that after two days the passover comes, and the Son of Man is to be delivered up to be crucified.““

The time reference of “after two days” places these words of Jesus and the machinations of the chief priests (vs 3-4) and elders on Wednesday of Holy Week, known in the Catholic liturgical tradition as Spy Wednesday because of St Mark’s account which tells us that the Jewish leaders “kept looking” for a way to kill him. Matthew will place the emphasis on their plotting to kill Jesus, rather than on their vigilance to see it done (see below).

St Matthew here draws a close connection between the death of Jesus and the Passover; but St John will bring out more fully the implications. I would like to note the irony of the statement. At a time when devout Jews would be preparing for one of the great worship feasts; a feast which celebrated their liberation from slavery and service to false gods and a transferal to new life in the Holy Land; the Jewish leaders are plotting the arrest Jesus and put him to death. The feast was supposed to be a remembrance of what God had done for them, but they take counsel concerning what to do with Jesus.
You know… They know because on three previous occasions Our Blessed Lord had predicted his passion (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:17-19). As in each of those instances (see their broader contexts), so too here, the apostles are shown not getting the full significance of what is being said (6-13). This passage is unique to Matthew’s Gospel.
The Son of Man is to be delivered up to be crucified. Jesus used the misunderstandings which occurred in the first three predictions to issue some teachings about discipleship; here no such thing takes place. The fact that there is absolutely no reaction whatsoever on the part of the disciples to this fourth announcement is striking, because Jesus is no longer speaking of an event in the future, as he had on the previous occasions (”shall be delivered up”); here he speaks in the present “is being delivered up” (Greek text). This emphasizes the nearness of the event and its inevitability. Some see the words as an announcement which puts the events into motion (see note on 26:3). The phrase, which is in reality a single word in Greek, is in the present tense with the passive voice. Scholars sometimes call this construction, when used in prophecy, “the divine passive,” for it highlights God as the agent of the event.

26:3-4 Then were gathered together the chief priests, and the elders of the people, into the court of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas; and they took counsel together that they might take Jesus by subtlety, and kill him.

Then… The word “then” which begins this verse is significant in light of what was said about the divine passive in the previous note. On previous occasions some leaders had attempted to arrest and kill Jesus but those plans came to nothing. Now, in verse 2, Jesus has set in motion the events about to unfold in accord with the Father’s will, and not in accord with the will of the leaders (their plan to arrest Jesus after the Passover [vs 5] will be thwarted). It is certainly no accident that the words of Jesus,- “The Son of Man is being delivered up”-come before the narration of the plot.

They gathered together… The “gathering” of the “chief priests and elders of the people to plot against Jesus calls to mind the first persecution of the Messiah. Recall that King Herod, upon hearing of the birth of the “King of the Jews” had “gathered together the chief priests and scribes of the people” (2:4). Already at the crib the cross was being foreshadowed.

And they took counsel together that they might take Jesus by subtlety and kill him. Calls to mind Psalm 2:1-2: “Why do the nations rage, and the peoples meditate a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and His anointed one.” Historically/literally the psalm is referring to a rebellion of Gentile peoples and rulers resulting from the ascension of a new Davidic king (the death of a monarch and the rise of his heir often motivated such rebellion on the part of subservient nations). Because the Jewish leaders have set themselves against God and his anointed (christened) one, they are no better than gentiles. In Acts 4, after having been told by the Sanhedrin, the ruling body of the Jews consisting of chief priest, scribes and elders, not to preach about Jesus, the apostles prayed this psalm (Acts 4:1-28). The connection with the psalm and the infancy narrative helps explain why Matthew emphasizes the plotting (taking counsel) of the leaders, as opposed to Mark’s emphasis on their incessant watching.
Take Jesus by subtlety and kill him. the word “subtlety” calls to mind the description of the serpent in the Garden of Eden (Gen 3:1). The plot takes place in a “court” of the high priest (vs 3); can this be taken as a garden? Perhaps, with this reference to subtlety and to the gathering together of the leaders, we are to call to mind Our Lord’s previous description of the scribes and Pharisees as “serpents,” and “offspring of vipers” who, like their ancestors, were responsible for “shedding righteous blood” and thwarting Jesus’ plan to “gather together” his people (see 23:29-39).

26:5 But they said, “not during the feast, lest a tumult arise among the people.” The leader’s fear of the people has been mentioned previously (21:46). The desire not to arrest and execute Jesus during the Passover will be thwarted. Thus this stated desire of their stands in marked contrast to Jesus’ prediction in verse 2.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS