The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: S. John
Ver. 9, 10. — When he had said these words , &c. Christ appears not to have taken the straight road through Samaria, but to have crossed the Jordan, and after dismissing the multitudes, to have gone up to Jerusalem, with a few of His favoured disciples, in secret (see Matt. xix. 1, 2 ; Luke ix. 51, 53 ; Mark ix. 29, x. 1).
Ver. 11. — The Jews therefore sought Him at the feast , and said. Where is He ? S. Chrysostom says that on a feast day they were always disposed to murder, and they endeavoured to catch Him on feast days. And Euthymius, “Admirable work for feast days, in making them occasions for murder ; and that on the very day they ought to have been searching for Christ in order to believe on Him; they were aiming only at His death.” And thus in our days many on the feast days on which they ought to be making their peace with God, only offend Him by their gross sins and blaspheming, making their feasts to the devil and not to God ; this is the fraud and suggestion of the devil, who takes away the service due to God, and appropriates it to himself.
Where is He, that impostor, and deceiver of the people ? In their extreme wrath, says S. Chrysostom, they could not bear to mention
Ver. 12. — And there was much murmuring , &c. He would make Himself the founder of a new faction, and stir up sedition and rebellion.
A good man, nay, a teacher and a prophet; this was the opinion of those who had heard Him teaching, and seen His miracles in Galilee. The contrary was the opinion of the Scribes and Rulers, and the multitude who followed them.
Ver. 13. — Howbeit no man spake, &c., i.e., from fear of the Scribes, Pharisees, and Chief Priests. S. John speaks of them merely as Jews, so as not to derogate from the authority of the Scribes and Priests, and also, as Cyril says, he counted it wrong to term persons so estrayed from holiness, priests or elders. “No one,” i.e., of those who said that Jesus was a good man, says Euthymius ; or as S. Augustine says, “They loudly proclaimed, ‘He seduces the people;’ ‘He is a good man,’ they spoke in suppressed whispers.”
But about the midst of the feast, Jesus went up into the temple. On the fourth or fifth day, for it lasted for eight days.
S. Augustine, Theophylact, and others think that Christ entered Jerusalem and the temple on the same day : for when He came to the city He used first of all to visit the temple, as an act of piety, and many Christians follow his example. On the other hand,
Toletus, Maldonatus, and others think that He went up shortly after His kinsfolk, so as to be present at the beginning of the feast, but that He did not enter the temple till the fourth day. This the language of S. John both here and in verse 10 seems to require. And besides Jesus, as a teacher and pattern of religion, wished for the edification of others to keep the whole of this festival (See Lev. xxiii. 43.) Moreover, they were required to erect their booths on the first day of the feast, which Jesus probably did, unless you suppose that He was taken into the booth of a disciple or friend. Coming up secretly in this way on the first day of the feast He ran no risk, unless He entered the temple, which He did not do till the fourth day, remaining hid in a booth for the first three days. His first entry then was in secret, His second was public, the one to keep the feast in the booths outside, and then afterwards to teach in the temple.
But why did He not at once enter the temple? First, as S. Augustine and others reply, in order that the anger of the Scribes and Chief Priests who lived in the temple might cool down. (2.) His remaining concealed was for example's sake and from His weakness as man, as His coming forth afterwards was a proof of Divine power, says S. Augustine, and Bede after him. (3.) To create in His expectant hearers a greater desire of hearing Him after such delay. (4.) That they might be more free to hear Him, when unemployed in the necessary arrangements for the feast.
And taught, after His own manner, the things which concerned salvation, and led to the kingdom of heaven; and publicly too before the Scribes and Rulers who hated Him. Behold here the nobleness of His mind in intrepidly discharging His office in the midst of danger. For although the anger of the Scribes had somewhat cooled down by the delay of three days, yet it could be easily rekindled by His teaching thus in public. But Jesus nobly despised it, both because He was ready to be killed by them, and also because He knew that God would thwart their designs against Him, because the appointed time of His death had not come. By His three days’ concealment He teaches us prudence, and by His coming forth and preaching openly on the fourth day He gave us a pattern of boldness, to discharge resolutely the duty imposed on us by God, even at the peril of our life, in sure trust that He will either deliver us from danger or give us strength and fortitude to bear and overcome it.
Ver. 15 . — And the Jews wondered, saying, See. “ They marvelled,” says Cyril, “ when they saw in Him such unheard-of wisdom and power of speech ; ” for, as Theophylact says, “He spake wondrous words, restraining and changing their minds in a wondrous manner,” so that their fury was changed into love and admiration of Christ. “For they heard Him,” says S. Augustine, “ disputing about the law, and adducing its testimony,” and explaining it with such grace and manner as was not human but divine. For, as he adds, " Many knew where He was born, and how brought up, but had never seen Him learning anything.” And hence the Scribes ought to have inferred that His great learning and wisdom had not been acquired , but infused by God. But blinded and stupefied by hatred they stand still in wonder, and proceed not to investigate the origin of that which surprises them. So S. Chrysostom. And for this very cause God willed that Jesus should leap up into the chair of learning, not from the schools, but from the carpenter’s trade, to the end that all might acknowledge that His learning was not taught by man but inspired by God.
Ver. 16.— Jesus answered, &c. My doctrines are not My inventions nor the result of My study. They did not primarily and originally proceed from Me, but from God the Father. He, as I am God, communicated to Me His own omniscience. But, as I am man, He gave and infused into Me His own Blessed knowledge of all things, according to that of Isaiah xi. 2. “ The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him,” &c. So S. Chrysostom and others, who observe that in this very way Christ implies that He is God : as if He said, “ I together with the Divine Essence have derived all My omniscience and doctrine from the Father.” As S. Augustine says ( Tract 29), “What is the doctrine of the Father, but the Word of the Father? Christ Himself, therefore, is the doctrine of the Father, if He is the Word of the Father. But because a Word cannot be of no one, but of some one, He called Himself His own doctrine, and yet not His own, because He is the Word of the Father. For what is so much thine as thyself? and what is so little thine as thyself if thou art from some one else?”
Ver. 17. — If any one is willing, &c. That is, something invented by Me, and therefore disagreeing, or contrary to the will of God. As S. Chrysostom says, “If anybody has love of virtue, he will understand the force of My words that they come from God. For of Him cometh every virtue, of which I am the earnest teacher. For he who loves to observe the commands of God in this matter, will love and observe My Word, because I do not say or do anything contrary to what is pleasing and commanded by God;”
tacitly hinting that they loved vice, and therefore were opposed to the teaching both of God and Himself. “Put away,” says Chrysostom, “this doubt, your anger and malice and intense hatred of Me, and nothing will then keep you from acknowledging that My words are those of God. But now these tempers obscure your judgment, and if you put them aside you would think otherwise.”