The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: S. Luke
Ver. 12. — And when Jesus saw her (the Arabic has “Jesus looked upon her ; ” with the eyes, that is, of both body and mind ; with the eyes of grace, pity, and mercy), He called her to Him, and said to her, Woman , thou art loosed , &c. “ Loosed,” that is, thou shalt be dismissed ; thou art healed ; healed by Me, through the laying on of My hands, as followed. For Christ seems to have done two things at the same time : to have laid His hands upon her, and so healed her, and to have said, Thou art loosed. He said, “ Thou art loosed,” and not “ I loose thee,” to sharpen the woman’s faith. For Christ often ascribes healing and salvation to His touch, to show the virtue of His word and contact, for in the same moment in which He touched this woman, He healed her. “ There was a divine virtue,” says S. Cyril in the Catena, “in the flesh of Christ, in an instant He worked great and wonderful miracles.
As when He said ‘ This is My Body,’ He transmuted the bread into His Body, as He transubstantiates it daily in the Mass. For, to have said, This is My body, is to have made it so ; as in the words, ‘He spake and it was done.’ " Hence, Titus, “ By a word, assuredly most divine, and by a most perfect heavenly power, He removed the infirmity of this woman.” Lastly, the words “ Thou art loosed,” that is, thou art freed, shows that the woman had been bound by Satan, constrained, kept down, as by a chain, so that her head appeared fixed to her knees and thighs. This bond Christ loosed, and thus made her erect. For Christ came to destroy the works of the devil.
Ver. 13. — And He laid His hands on her. The hands signify the power of Christ, His authority, rule over diseases and devils ; and equally His loving-kindness and beneficence, by which He conferred the benefit of healing upon the woman, through the beneficence of His touch.
Ver. 14. — And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation . With indignation, because he envied Jesus the glory of a miracle by which He had shown Himself, before the whole synagogue and people, to be greater than the ruler. This man made religion and zeal for the observation of the Sabbath the cloak of his feeling. He is therefore called a hypocrite by Christ. So S. Cyril in the Catena. “When the ruler of this ungrateful synagogue saw the woman made suddenly erect by a mere touch, and celebrating the great acts of God, he sullied his zeal for the glory of the Lord with envy, and censured the miracle as if he would show himself solicitous for the Sabbath.” Observe the word “ ungrateful .” He ought to have been grateful to Christ and to have given Him thanks for having honoured himself and the synagogue, and distinguished it by this miracle. But envy had so blinded him, that he thought the glory of Christ his own dishonour and disgrace, for he was unable to perform such and so great acts, himself. So Saul ought to have given thanks to David for slaying Goliath, the dread of himself and of all Israel. But envy made him so perverse that he thought the glory of David his own ignominy, imagining that David was preferred to himself, and that he himself though the king, was placed below him. This is the living image of envy — the mask of religion — veiled and cloaked.
Ver. 15. — The Lord then answered him , and said , Thou hypocrite. Hypocrites who feign sanctity abroad, when within they are full of envy and malice. S. Chrysostom in the Catena : “Christ rightly called him a hypocrite, because he had the face of one who observed the law carefully, but the mind of cunning and envy. He was not disturbed for the Sabbath and its violation, but because of Christ, because He obtained glory.” I have treated the subject at length, Ecclus. i. 37, on the words ne fueris, and ii. 14, Vae duplici.
This daughter of Abraham. The argument of Christ is most
applicable and forcible, showing that the healing was not a servile act, but one liberal and divine, and therefore, not only not unworthy, but rather most worthy, of the Sabbath — for the Sabbath, nay, even God Himself, the author of it, was wonderfully sanctified and made glorious, as S. Irenaeus shows when he says that, “ Christ, in healing the sick on the Sabbath day, acted not contrarily but according to the law.” Christ then compares, opposes, and prefers the bond and release of the woman to the bond and release of the ox and ass.
Again, every word contains a pregnant antithesis. In the first Christ compares, and prefers the woman, as a daughter of Abraham, to the ox or ass. 2. He compares and prefers the spiritual bond and deliverance of the woman to those of the ox and ass. 3. The woman had suffered this bondage for eighteen years. The ox had borne its tether, and therefore its thirst, only an hour or two. 4.
The setting of the ox free was a long and troublesome work, but the healing of the woman was the act of a moment, in which the obligation of the Sabbath could in no way be violated. 5. By this release the woman was restored to perfect health and sanctity, but the ox only drank a little draught of water. Lastly, He convicts the ruler and the Pharisees of inhumanity, because, in the words of Bede, “ he postponed the healing of a human being to care of cattle.”
The glorious things that were done by Him. The Syriac — In all the miracles which were done by His hand.
Ver. 18. — Then said He. The word “then” is illative, as is shown by what precedes and follows. Christ saw that He had silenced His enemies, the Pharisees, by His wisdom, and that the people rejoiced and praised both Himself and His word. When He saw them thus rightly disposed, He proposed to them the parable of the kingdom of heaven, for He saw that the way was now prepared for proclaiming this, and for His preaching — that He might incite all to attempt its attainment, and therefore to receive His evangelical doctrine and life. I have explained the parable on S. Matthew xiii.
Ver. 23. — Then said one unto Him, Lord, are there few that be saved ? Christ answered in the affirmative that few should be saved, as S. Luke signifies and S. Matt, plainly states, vii. 14. Isaiah speaks to the same effect, x. 22 ; xxiv. 13. Understand “few” by a comparison of all the inhabitants of the whole world ; or of the faithful with the unbelieving, for all the latter are condemned for their unbelief, and equally many of the faithful for their wicked lives. The faithful alone are saved, and not all of these. But whether the greater number of them are saved or lost is the question. Some think that the greater number are saved, through the holy sacraments (which very many of them only receive at the end of their lives). Others think that most are lost because they live in a state of mortal sin. The rule of S. Augustine is that as men have lived, so they die. Of these opinions I have shown which is the true one, on S. James ii. 13, on the words “Mercy rejoiceth against judgment.” The judgment of S. Chrysostom, Homily xl. to the
Antiochenes, who numbered 100,000 or more, is formidable. " In our city,” he says, “among so many thousands, scarcely can 100 be found who will be saved, for in the youngers is great wickedness, and in the elders deadness.” And S. Augustine (Bk. iv. ch. 53, against Cresconius) compares the Church to a threshing-floor, on which there is much more chaff than grain, i.e. more reprobate than elect.
Ver. 31. — The same day there came certain of the Pharisees , saying, Herod will kill Thee, as he slew John Thy forerunner. Christ seems not to have preached in Galilee at this time, as He had previously left it (Matt, xix.), but in Perea in Judaea, for Herod ruled over Perea as well as Galilee. So thinks F. Lucas. Maldonatus and others, however, suppose that these things were done in Galilee, that S. Luke may now insert by recapitulation what had been done there previously, as we find in ver. 24 and chap. ix. 51.
Moreover the Pharisees, by this falsehood, pretended that Herod was hostile to Christ, that they might banish Him from among them, or at least that they might test His freedom and conscience and depress Him by implanting in his mind the fear of Herod, and might thus drive Him out of their country. “ Lest,” says Euthymius, “ by His presence and miracles He might gain fame and attract a multitude.” And perhaps, when going from Perea to Judaea, He might fall into the hands of the chief Priests, whom they knew to be contriving His death, as is plain from S. John vii 20. 25. Herod, indeed, was not opposed to Christ, for he desired to see Him and His miracles, as in chap. ix. 9 ; nay, he would not condemn Christ when Christ was sent to him by Pilate, but sent Him back to Pilate clad in a white (alba, Vulg., λαμπράν, Greek) robe, as if He were worthy of ridicule and not death, chap. xxiii. So Jansenius, Maldonatus, F. Lucas and others.