1473. Lazarus was at Bethany, of Bethany, the town of Mary and her sister Martha. The village of Bethany was near Jerusalem, and our Lord was often a guest there, as has been said above many times. It means a ‘house of obedience’, and leads us to understand that if one who is ill obeys God, he can easily be cured by him, just as one who is sick and obeys his doctor gains his health. The servants of Naaman said to him: my father, if the prophet had commanded you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? (2 Kgs 5:13).
1473. Locus infirmi erat Bethania; unde dicit a Bethania de castello Mariae et Marthae: quae quidem Bethania villa quaedam erat prope Ierusalem, ubi Dominus consueverat frequenter hospitari, ut frequenter supra dictum est. Et interpretatur ‘domus obedientiae’. Per quod datur intelligi, quod si infirmus sit Deo obediens, potest ab eo de facili curari; sicut infirmus obediens medico, facilius ab eo beneficium consequitur sanitatis; IV Reg. V, 13, dixerunt servi Naaman ad eum: pater, etsi rem grandem dixisset tibi propheta, facere debuisses.
Bethany was the home of Mary and Martha, the sisters of Lazarus. Martha and Mary represent two ways of life, the active and the contemplative. And we can understand from the above that it is by obedience that one becomes perfect, both in the active and in the contemplative life.
Ista Bethania castellum erat Mariae et Marthae sororum Lazari: per quas duplex vita signatur, activa scilicet et contemplativa, ut sic per hoc detur intelligi quod per obedientiam homo perfectus redditur in vita activa et contemplativa.
1474. His relative was Mary: Mary was she who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair. The Evangelist describes this Mary by her most famous action so we can distinguish her from the many other women with the same name: Mary was she that anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair.
1474. Persona coniuncta erat Maria; unde dicit Maria autem erat quae unxit Dominum unguento. Quia enim mentionem fecerat de Maria et plures mulieres huius nominis erant, ideo ne erremus ex nomine, notificat eam ex notissima actione, dicens quae unxit Dominum unguento, et extersit pedes eius capillis suis.
Still, there is some disagreement among the saints about this Mary. Some, like Jerome and Origen, say that this Mary, the sister of Lazarus, is not the same as the sinner mentioned: a woman of the city, who was a sinner . . . brought an alabaster flask of ointment, and standing behind him at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head (Luke 7:37). So, as Chrysostom says, she was not the prostitute mentioned in Luke. The Mary mentioned by John was an honorable woman, eager to receive Christ, while the name of the woman who was the sinner was kept secret. Furthermore, the Mary mentioned here by John could have done for Christ at the time of his Passion, because of her special devotion and love, something similar to what was done for him by the sinner out of remorse and love. John, in order to praise her, is mentioning here, in anticipation, the action she would perform later (John 12:1–8).
De hac autem Maria diversitas quaedam est inter sanctos. Quidam enim dicunt, ut Hieronymus et Origenes, quod haec Maria soror Lazari non est eadem cum illa quae peccatrix erat, de qua dicitur Lc. VII, 37, quod attulit alabastrum unguenti, et stans retro secus pedes eius, lacrymis coepit rigare pedes eius, et capillis capitis sui tergebat. Unde, sicut dicit Chrysostomus, haec non fuit illa meretrix quae in Luca legitur. Haec enim honesta fuit et studiosa circa susceptionem Christi: nam peccatricis illius nomen tacetur. Potuit autem Maria ista erga Christum tempore suae Passionis ex devotione et speciali dilectione simile opus fecisse, quod fecit ei peccatrix illa diligens et compuncta: quod quidem factum hic ab Evangelista propter Mariae nominis magnitudinem per anticipationem recitatur.
Others, such as Augustine and Gregory, say that this Mary, mentioned by John, is the same as the sinner mentioned by Luke. Augustine bases his reason on this text. For the Evangelist is speaking here of the time before Mary anointed our Lord at the time of the Passion; as John says further on: Mary took a pound of costly ointment of pure nard and anointed the feet of Jesus (John 12:3). So he says that what the Evangelist has mentioned here is the same event mentioned elsewhere (Luke 7:37). Ambrose maintains both sides. So, according to the opinion of Augustine, it is clear that the sinner mentioned by Luke is this Mary whose brother Lazarus was sick, that is, a consuming fever was wasting his wretched body with its furnace-like flames.
Quidam alii, sicut Augustinus et Gregorius, dicunt quod haec eadem Maria de qua hic agitur, est illa peccatrix de qua agitur Lc. VII. Et argumentum huius ex hoc verbo Augustinus assumit. Nam hic Evangelista dicit antequam Maria ungeret Dominum unguento, quia illud fuit imminente Passione; infra XII, 3, ubi dicitur: Maria ergo sumpsit libram unguenti nardi pistici pretiosi, et unxit pedes Iesu. Unde dicit quod hoc quod hic dicit Evangelista de ea factum, recitatur Lc. VII. Ambrosius autem utramque partem tenet. Secundum ergo opinionem Augustini manifestum est quod peccatrix illa de qua dicitur in Luca, est Maria ista. Cuius frater Lazarus infirmabatur, idest, miserandum corpus eius fornaceis febribus alendum edax incendium assumebat.
1475. The sisters of Lazarus, who were taking care of him, inform Jesus of his illness. Grief-stricken at the misfortune of the ailing youth, therefore, his sisters sent to him, Jesus, saying: Lord, behold, he whom you love is sick. This message brings to mind three things for consideration. First, we see that the friends of God are sometimes afflicted with bodily illness; thus, if someone has a bodily illness, this is not a sign that the person is not a friend of God. Eliphaz mistakenly argued against Job that it was: think now, who that was innocent every perished? Or where were the upright cut off? (Job 4:7). Accordingly, they say, Lord, behold, he whom you love is sick: for the Lord reproves him whom he loves, as a father the son in whom he delights (Prov 3:12).
1475. Hic ponitur infirmitatis denuntiatio a sororibus Lazari, quae languenti aderant, et casu dolentes iuvenis aegrotantis, miserunt ad eum, scilicet Iesum, dicentes: Domine, ecce quem amas infirmatur. In qua quidem denuntiatione tria consideranda occurrunt. Unum est, quod amici Dei quandoque corporaliter affliguntur: unde non est signum quod aliquis non sit amicus Dei, si aliquando corporaliter affligatur, sicut Eliphaz contra Iob falso arguit, Iob IV, 7: recordare, obsecro, quis unquam innocens periit, aut quando recti deleti sunt? Et ideo dicunt Domine, ecce quem amas infirmatur; Prov. c. III, 12: quem diligit Dominus corripit, et quasi pater in filio complacet sibi.
The second thing to note is that his sisters do not say, Lord, come and heal him, but simply to mention his sickness, he is ill. This indicates that it is enough merely to state one’s need to a friend, without adding a request. For a friend, since he wills the good of his friend as his own good, is just as interested in warding off harm from his friends as he is in warding it off from himself. And this is especially true of the one who most truly loves: the Lord preserves all who love him (Ps 145:20).
Secundum est quod non dicunt Domine veni, sana eum sed tantum infirmitatem exponentes, dicunt infirmatur. In quo signatur quod sufficit amico tantum necessitatem exponere, absque alicuius petitionis additamento. Nam amicus cum velit bonum amici sicut bonum suum, sicut sollicitus est ad repellendum malum suum, ita et ad repellendum malum amici sui. Et hoc maxime verum est de eo qui verissime diligit; Ps. CXLIV, v. 6: custodit Dominus diligentes se.
The third thing to consider is that these two sisters, who wanted the cure of their sick brother, did not come in person to Christ, as did the paralytic (Luke 5:18), and the centurion (Matt 8:5). This was because of the confidence they had in Christ due to the special love and friendship which he had shown for them; or, perhaps it was their grief that kept them away: a friend, if he is steadfast, will be to you as yourself (Sir 6:11).
Tertium est quod istae duae sorores desiderantes curationem fratris languidi, non venerunt personaliter ad Christum, sicut paralyticus, Lc. V, 18, et centurio, Matth. VIII, v. 5: et hoc propter confidentiam quam habebant ad Christum ex speciali dilectione et familiaritate quam Christus erga eas ostenderat: et forte a luctu detinebantur, ut Chrysostomus dicit; Eccli. VI, 11: amicus si permanserit fixus, erit tibi coaequalis, et in domesticis tuis fiducialiter aget.
1476. Now we have the reasons for the foregoing:
1476. Hic ponitur praemissorum ratio, et
first, the illness of Lazarus;
primo ratio ipsius infirmitatis;
second, the reason why, according to Augustine, his sisters did not come in person to Christ: now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister Mary, and Lazarus.
secundo quare sorores eius non venerunt ad Christum, secundum Augustinum, ibi diligebat autem Iesus Martham, et sororem eius Mariam, et Lazarum.
1477. The reason for the illness of Lazarus is the glorification of the Son of God; thus the Evangelist says, and Jesus, hearing it, said to them: this sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God.
1477. Ratio autem infirmitatis est glorificatio Filii Dei; unde dicit dixit eis Iesus: infirmitas haec non est ad mortem, sed pro gloria Dei.
Here we should note that some physical illness is unto death and some is not. Those are unto death which are not ordained to something else. Further, every evil of punishment is inflicted by divine providence: does evil befall a city, unless the Lord has done it? (Amos 3:6). But as for the evil of fault, God is not the author, but the punisher. Now all things that are from God are ordered. Consequently, every evil of punishment is ordered to something: some to death, and some to something else. This illness was not ordered to death, but to the glory of God.
Ubi sciendum est, quod infirmitatum corporalium quaedam sunt ad mortem, quaedam autem non. Illae autem sunt ad mortem quae ad aliquod aliud non ordinantur. Nam omnia mala poenae ex divina providentia infliguntur; Amos III, 6: si est malum in civitate quod Dominus non faciat. Mali vero culpae Deus ultor est, non tamen auctor. Omnia autem quae a Deo sunt, ordinata sunt; et ideo omnia mala poenae ad aliquid ordinantur: quaedam ad mortem, quaedam ad aliquid aliud. Haec autem infirmitas non est ordinata ad mortem, sed ad gloriam Dei.
1478. But did not Lazarus die from this illness? It seems so, otherwise he would not have had the odor of one four days in the tomb, nor would his raising have been a miracle.
1478. Sed numquid non fuit mortuus Lazarus ex hac infirmitate? Videtur quod sic. Alias non foeteret quatriduanus in monumento, nec resuscitatio fuisset miraculosa.
I answer that his illness was not ordained to death as a final end, but to something else, as has been said, that is, that he who was raised, chastened as it were, might live a holy life for the glory of God, and that the Jewish people who saw this miracle might be converted to the faith: the Lord has chastened me sorely but he has not given me over to death (Ps 118:18). Thus he adds, for the glory of God, that the Son of God maybe glorified by it. In this passage, according to Chrysostom, the words for and that do not indicate the reason for the events, but their sequence. For Lazarus was not made ill so that from it God might be glorified; rather, his illness came from some other cause, and from it the fact followed that the Son of God would be glorified insofar as Christ used it for the glory of God by raising Lazarus.
Responsio. Dicendum quod infirmitas haec non fuit ordinata ad mortem ut ad finem ultimum, sed propter aliud, ut dictum est: ut scilicet ipse qui resuscitatus fuit, quasi castigatus, iuste viveret ad Dei gloriam, et populus Iudaeus videns miraculum, converteretur ad fidem; Ps. CXVII, 18: castigans castigavit me Dominus, et morti non tradidit me. Unde sequitur sed pro gloria Dei, ut glorificetur Filius Dei per eam. Ubi, secundum Chrysostomum, ly pro et ly ut non tenentur causaliter, sed consecutive. Non enim ideo infirmatus est ut ex hoc Deus glorificaretur; sed aliunde quidem infirmitas haec venit, et ex ea consecutum est hoc, ut glorificaretur Filius Dei, inquantum eum resuscitando usus est ea ad gloriam Dei.
This is true in one way, but not in another. It is possible to consider two reasons for Lazarus’ illness. One is the natural cause, and from this point of view the statement of Chrysostom is true, because Lazarus’ illness, considering its natural causes, was not ordained to his rising from the dead. But we can consider another reason, and this is divine providence; and then Chrysostom’s statement is not true. For under divine providence an illness of this kind was ordained to the glory of God. And so according to this, the for and the that do indicate the reason. It is the same as saying: for the glory of God, because although it was not ordained to this from the intent of its natural cause, yet from the intent of divine providence it was ordained to the glory of God, insofar as, once the miracle had been performed, people would believe in Christ and escape real death. So he says, that the Son of God may be glorified by it.
Hoc autem uno quidem modo veritatem habet, sed alio modo non. Potest enim infirmitatis Lazari duplex causa considerari. Una naturalis; et secundum hanc verificatur dictum Chrysostomi, quia infirmitas Lazari secundum causam naturalem non ordinabatur ad resuscitationem. Alia causa potest considerari divina providentia; et tunc non habet veritatem dictum Chrysostomi, nam ex divina providentia huiusmodi infirmitas ordinabatur ad gloriam Dei. Et secundum hoc ly pro et ly ut tenentur causaliter; quasi dicat sed pro gloria Dei: quia, licet ad hoc non ordinaretur ex intentione causae naturalis, ordinabatur tamen ex intentione divinae providentiae ad gloriam Dei, inquantum facto miraculo crederent homines in Christum, et vitarent veram mortem. Unde dicit ut glorificetur Filius Dei per eam.
Here our Lord clearly calls himself the Son of God: for he was to be glorified in the resurrection of Lazarus because he is true God: that we may be in his true Son (1 John 5:20); neither this man nor his parents has sinned, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him (John 9:3).
Hic manifeste Dominus Filium Dei se nominat: nam ipse glorificandus erat in resuscitatione Lazari, quia ipse est verus Deus; I Io. ult., 20: ut simus in vero Filio eius; supra IX, 3: neque hic peccavit neque parentes eius; sed ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo.
1479. Here, according to Augustine, the Evangelist gives the reason why Lazarus’ two sisters did not come to Christ, and it was due to their confidence in him because of the special love he had for them; so the Evangelist remarks, now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister Mary, and Lazarus. Indeed, he who is the consoler of the sorrowful loved the sorrowing sisters, and he who was the savior of the weary loved the weary and dead Lazarus: yea, he loved his people; all those consecrated to him were in his hand (Deut 33:3).
1479. Hic, secundum Augustinum, Evangelista assignat rationem quare duae sorores non venerunt ad Christum: quae scilicet sumitur ex confidentia specialis dilectionis, unde dicit diligebat autem Iesus Martham, et Mariam sororem eius, et Lazarum. Quippe qui tristium consolator erat, sorores tristes diligebat; et qui languentium salvator erat, languidum et mortuum Lazarum diligebat; Deut. XXX, 3: dilexit populos: omnes sancti in manu illius sunt.
Lecture 2
Lectio 2
Christ remains in the same place
Christ manet in eodem loco
11:6 When he had heard therefore that he was sick, he remained in the same place for two days. [n. 1481]
11:6 Ut ergo audivit quia infirmabatur, tunc quidem mansit in eodem loco duobus diebus. [n. 1481]
11:7 Then after that, he said to his disciples: let us go into Judea again. [n. 1482]
11:7 Deinde post haec dicit discipulis suis: eamus in Iudaeam iterum. [n. 1482]
11:8 The disciples said to him: Rabbi, the Jews but now sought to stone you, and you would go there again? [n. 1484]
11:8 Dicunt ei discipuli: Rabbi, nunc quaerebant te Iudaei lapidare, et iterum vadis illuc? [n. 1484]
11:9 Jesus answered: are there not twelve hours of the day? If a man walk in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world: [n. 1485]
11:9 Respondit Iesus: nonne duodecim horae sunt diei? Si quis ambulaverit in die, non offendit, quia lucem huius mundi videt. [n. 1485]
11:10 But if he walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him. [n. 1489]
11:10 Si autem ambulaverit in nocte, offendit, quia lux non est in eo. [n. 1489]
1480. Here the Evangelist presents the raising of the dead Lazarus.
1480. Hic agitur de mortui resuscitatione, et
First, we see that Christ desired to do this;
primo ponitur resuscitandi propositum;
and second, the sequence of events surrounding the raising are given, at Jesus therefore came (John 11:17).
secundo subditur suscitationis ordo, ibi venit itaque Iesus etc.
We see three things related to the first.
Circa primum tria facit.
First, our Lord allows death;
Primo dat Dominus locum morti;
second, he states his intention to go to the place where Lazarus died, at then after that, he said;
secundo praenuntiat propositum de accedendo ad locum ubi mortuus erat, ibi deinde post haec dicit etc.;
and third, he reveals his intention to raise him, at these things he said, and after that he said to them (John 11:11).
tertio praenuntiat propositum suscitandi, ibi haec ait, et post haec dicit illis etc.
1481. Christ allowed this death by prolonging his stay beyond the Jordan: when he had heard therefore that he was sick, he remained in the same place for two days. One may infer from this that Lazarus died on the very day that Jesus received the message from his sisters: for when Christ went to the place where he died, it was already the fourth day. After receiving the message, Christ then remained two days in the same place, and on the day after these two days, he went to Judea.
1481. Dat autem locum morti, moram trahendo Dominus trans Iordanem: et ideo dicit ut autem audivit quia infirmabatur, mansit in eodem loco duobus diebus. Ex quo notatur quod eodem die quo Christus recepit nuntium sororum Lazari, mortuus fuit Lazarus: nam quando Christus venit ad locum ubi mortuus fuit, iam quatriduanus erat; Christus autem duobus diebus postquam recepit nuntium, remansit in eodem loco, et sequenti die ab illis duobus ivit in Iudaeam.
He delayed these few days for two reasons. First, so that the death of Lazarus would not be prevented by his presence; for where life is present, death has no entry. In the second place, in order to make the miracle more credible, and so that people would not say that Christ revived Lazarus, not from death, but only from a coma.
Dedit autem locum morti per tot dies, propter duo. Primo quidem ne ex praesentia eius mors Lazari impedita fuisset: nam ubi vita praesens est, mors locum non habet. Secundo, ut miraculum credibilius redderetur, et nullus posset dicere quoniam nondum defunctum eum suscitavit, sed potius stupefactum.
1482. Here our Lord declares his intention to go to the place where Lazarus died, at then after that, he said to his disciples: let us go into Judea again.
1482. Consequenter cum dicit deinde post haec dicit discipulis suis, Dominus manifestat propositum accessus sui ad locum, et
First, we see our Lord’s plan;
primo praenuntiat propositum;