The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: S. Mark
Chapter 6
1 Christ is contemned of his countrymen, 7 He giveth the twelve power over unclean spirits. 14 Divers opinions of Christ. 27 John Baptist is beheaded; 29 and buried. 30 The apostles return from preaching. 34 The miracle of five loaves and two fishes. 48 Christ walketh on the sea : 53 and healeth all that touch him.
Ver. 1. Going out from thence , i.e., from Capernaum, where He raised Jairus’ daughter.
He went into His own country , i.e., to Nazareth, where He was brought up.
Ver. 2. They were in admiration at His doctrine : literally, they admired in His doctrine. This is a Hebraism. For the Hebrews use ב as a preposition of contact either corporal or mental in the place of an accusative. Thus they say, I touch in the hand , instead of, I touch the hand ; I believe in God, instead of, I believe God ; I admire in wisdom, for I admire wisdom .
Ver. 5. And He could not do any miracles there. Could not, i.e., would not, because He did not think it proper to give what was holy to dogs, that is, to force His miracles upon unbelieving and ungrateful citizens. So could not is used for would not (Gen. xxxvii. 4, and John vii. 7). “ Because,” says Victor of Antioch on this passage, “two things must coincide for the attaining of health, namely, the faith of those who need healing, and the power of him who will heal; therefore, if either of these be wanting, the blessing of a cure will not readily be attained.”
Ver. 6. He wondered because of their unbelief. This seems to conflict with what is said in Luke iv. 23, And all bare Him record , and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth. I answer, that the inhabitants of Nazareth wondered, indeed, that Jesus, the son of a carpenter, their well-known neighbour , should be so wise and eloquent, and yet were incredulous with respect to His doctrine and person, that He was in very deed the Messias or Christ. And that this was so is plain from what Luke subjoins.
Ver. 13. They anointed with oil many that were sick , and healed them. Some are of opinion that this anointing was the same as that of which S. James speaks in his Epistle (v. 14), that is to say, the Sacrament of Extreme Unction. So Bede, Theophylact, Lyra, and others, who think that the Sacrament of Extreme Unction was at this time instituted by Christ, and that the Apostles by His command conferred it upon the sick, although they had not as yet been ordained priests.
But the contrary seems more probable: 1. Because the priest alone is the minister of this sacrament ; but the Apostles were not yet priests, for Christ created them priests afterwards.
2. Because the Apostles here anointed all sorts of sick persons, those not baptized, and those not about to die. But Extreme Unction is conferred only upon those who are baptized, and in danger of death.
3. All who were here anointed by the Apostles were healed. But this is not the case in Extreme Unction, which has primary reference to the health and strength of the soul.
4. Because the Council of Trent (Sess. 14) says that the Sacrament of Extreme Unction was hinted at in S. Mark, but was commended and promulgated to the faithful by S. James, the Lord’s brother. This anointing, therefore, was a type, and as it were a prelude, of the institution of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, not the sacrament itself. This, then, was a miraculous anointing, or a gift of miracles, bestowed upon the Apostles for a time, that they might by its means confirm their preaching of Christ. It was not the sacrament itself. So S. Genoveva and many holy anchorites were wont to heal the sick by means of oil blessed by them and sent to the sick. Victor of Antioch gives the reason why they used oil rather than wine, — “oil, amongst other things, assuages the affliction of labours, cherishes light, and promotes gladness.” Oil, therefore, which is used in the holy anointing, signifies the mercy of God, the healing of disease, and the enlightenment of the heart. In a similar way the baptism of John was not a sacrament, but a type and prelude of the Sacrament of Baptism.
Ver. 16. Which Herod hearing said, John whom I beheaded , he is risen again from the dead. It was as if he said, The soul of John has passed into Jesus, and so there, as it were, by rising again, has become more divine, and works such great and stupendous miracles. Luke (ix. 7) says that Herod doubted at first, but afterwards , on account of the universal fame of the miracles of Jesus, believed that John had risen again in Him. So S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Augustine, and others. For the opinion of Pythagoras concerning the metempsychosis or transmigration of souls was then very prevalent. S. Chrysostom says, “ How great a thing is virtue! for Herod fears even the dead man.” For, as Rabanus says, “ it is agreed by all that the saints shall have greater power when they rise again.” So also Bede.
Ver. 17. For Herod himself had sent and apprehended John , and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, the wife of Philip, because he had married her. This Herod was not the Great, who was called Herod of Ascalon, who slew the infants of Bethlehem, but his son, surnamed Antipas, who arrayed Christ in a white robe and mocked Him. He it was who beheaded John the Baptist.
You will say, Herod Antipas was only a tetrarch, for so Matthew calls him (xiv. 1). Why, then, does Mark here call him a king? I reply, he calls him king because he was the chief potentate in his tetrarchy, equal to a king in his kingdom. Wherefore he assumed the name of king, and it was given him by others, even by S. Matthew himself (xiv. 9).
In prison. Josephus adds that John was incarcerated in the fortress of Macher, on the confines of Galilee and Arabia, where he was beheaded. This prison was made famous by S. John, for the place, says Philo (lib. de Joseph.), was not so much a prison as a school of discipline. Seneca says (in Consolat. ad Albinam ), “When Socrates entered his prison, he was about to deprive the very place of ignominy, for that could not seem to be a prison where Socrates was.” Whence S. Cyprian (lib. 4, epist. 1, ad Martyr. ) says, “O blessed prison, which your presence has made illustrious: O darkness, brighter than the sun himself, where the temples of God have been!” The same (lib. 3, epist. 25) says concerning the chains of the martyrs, “They are ornaments, not bonds. They do not link the feet to infamy, but glorify them for the crown.” Wherefore S. Ambrose says (lib. de Joseph, c. 5), “Let not the innocent be distressed when they are the victims of false accusations. God visits His own, even in their prison. Then, therefore, is there the more help where is the greater peril. And what marvel is it if God visit those who are in prison, who speaks of Himself as shut up with His people in prison ? I was in prison, He says, and ye visited Me not” (Matt xxv. 44).