20 Observations from Thomas Aquinas on the Gospel of John's PassionNarrative

In the past, we here at TheSacredPage.com have offered commentary on the Good Friday readings. (Here is last year's fine commentary from John Bergsma).

While the lectionary for Sundays and Holy Days follows a three year cycle, the readings for the Good Friday service remain the same every year. So you can go back and read those commentaries if you'd like--they are just as relevant now as they were when we originally posted them.

Instead of essentially re-doing a past post, I thought this year I'd offer something a little different. (Besides, I don't think I can top John's excellent work.) 

This year I'd like to highlight 20 Things Thomas Aquinas has to say about the Passion Narrative in the Gospel of John--the Gospel reading for the Good Friday service. 

A couple caveats.

First, I'm not going to get into some of the critical issues that could be raised. For example, Thomas assumes--as all the Fathers and Doctors do--that the author of the Fourth Gospel is meant to be understood as the Apostle John, the son of Zebedee. Many contemporary scholars, of course, reject that identification. I don't have time to deal with this issue here. Suffice it to say, there are good reasons to think the author is identifying himself as the Apostle John (for one treatment, listen to Mark Goodacre's podcast on the topic). 

Second, there are many aspects of Thomas' commentary on Jesus passion I have not included. Certainly, some will complain that I have left out some things I should have included and have included some things I should have left out. The only defense--dubious as it is--that I can offer is: "What I have written, I have written."  

The following quotes are all taken from St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of John (trans. F. Larcher, O.P. and J. A. Weisheipl, O.P. with M. Levering and D. Keating; Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2010). 

1. On the two-fold involvement of the Jews and the Romans

Thomas has an interesting take on the structure of the Passion in the Fourth Gospel, which comprises John 18-19. Thomas divides the two chapters by saying that ch. 18 deals with Christ's suffering at the hands of the Jews, while ch. 19 deals with what he had to suffer at the hands of the Gentiles (i.e., Romans). He also emphasizes the role of three major parties in the Passion: the disciples, the high priests, and Pilate. 

"Christ’s passion was effected partly by the Jews, and partly by the Gentiles. Thus, he first describes what Christ suffered from the Jews; secondly, what he suffered from the Gentiles (19:1). He does three things regarding the first: he shows how our Lord was betrayed by a disciple; secondly, how he was brought before the high priests (v. 13); and thirdly, how he was accused before Pilate (v. 28)." (no. 2271)

Crucifixion: History, Archaeology (with photos!), and Why Jesus Died This Way (Post and Podcast)

Click below to listen to our special Good Friday podcast. Also be sure to come back tomorrow and Sunday for special podcasts on Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday! 



Crucifixion: History, Archaeology, and Why Jesus Died This Way (Good Friday Podcast)(Right click to download)

Today we meditate on the crucifixion of Jesus. In places around the world, images of the Christ crucified will be contemplated and venerated. Indeed, the image of the cross is quite familiar to us. It is part and parcel of Christian iconography.

Perhaps, it is too familiar.

Put frankly, the cross has in many ways been sanitized. To some extent, Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ (2004) helped bring attention to the actual violence associated with this form of ancient execution. Indeed, the attempt to re-dramatize the violence caused deep controversy.

Some have even claimed that the film exaggerated the violence of Jesus’ death. For example, some complained that the scene of the scourging, a vicious punishment carried out prior to crucifixion, was unrealistic.

Such complaints reveal just how “safe” Christian art has made Jesus’ suffering. As New Testament scholar Mark Goodacre explains, a quick look at ancient sources reveals Gibson actually showed some restraint. Describing the scourging of another first century man named Jesus—Jesus ben Ananias—Josephus, a first century Jewish historian, relates how his bones were “laid bare” (B.J. 6.304)(cf. Goodacre's piece defending the film here).

Ancient Accounts of Crucifixion

The reality is, crucifixion was ghastly. Here I can only offer a brief treatment of the evidence. The fullest study is written by Martin Hengel.1 I’d also recommend Joe Zias’ fine overview here. In addition, be sure to check out Mark Goodacre's fine podcast on the topic.

Josephus describes crucifixion as “the most wretched of deaths” (B.J. 7.203). The first century writer Origen calls it the “utterly vile death” (Commentary on Matthew 27:22). Cicero was horrified that any Roman citizen should crucified—in fact, he wrote that even the mention of the cross was too offensive to be mentioned:

But the executioner, the veiling of the head and the very word ̳cross‘ should be far removed not only from the person of a Roman citizen but from his thoughts, his eyes and his ears. For it is not only the actual occurrence of these things or the endurance of them, but liability to them, the expectation, indeed the very mention of them, that is unworthy of a Roman citizen and a free man. (Pro Rabirio 16)

Seneca pointed to crucifixion to make the case for suicide. He made the case that no one would fault a person facing such a death for choosing to take their own life in order to avoid having to endure such a death.

Can anyone be found who would prefer wasting away in pain dying limb by limb, or letting out his life drop by drop, rather than expiring once for all? Can any man be found willing to be fastened to the accursed tree, long sickly, already deformed, swelling with ugly weals on shoulders and chest, and drawing the breath of life amid long drawn-out agony? He would have many excuses for dying even before mounting the cross.” (Seneca, Epistle 101 to Lucilius).

(Note the implicit reference here to the effects of the scourging prior to crucifixion—the body is “already deformed” when fastened to the tree.)