Chapter XX

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.