Matthew 26:3Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Do you notice the remarkable chaos in the situation of the Jewish people? They approach the high priest to engage in unlawful acts, seeking approval where they should encounter obstacles. How many high priests were there? The law stipulates that there should be only one, yet there were many. This indicates that the governance of the Jewish people was deteriorating at this moment. As previously mentioned, Moses instructed that there should be only one high priest, and upon his death, another should take his place, with the duration of the first's life dictated by the exile of those who committed unintentional manslaughter. Why then did they have numerous high priests? Because in later times they were appointed annually.

Despite the law’s instruction that a single bishop should serve a lifelong term, the Jewish leaders, in contradiction to this decree, appointed numerous bishops, changing them every year. Consequently, those tasked with punishing the wrongdoers gathered to consult the bishop of that year. The Evangelist refers to those who had completed their one-year tenure as bishops. In their intent to carry out a heinous act, they held no reverence for God but were apprehensive of the public. They feared that if they executed Christ during the festival, the people might retaliate or that their actions could divert the populace from the lawful offerings, depriving themselves of the benefits from these sacrifices.

At the approaching Passover celebration, those responsible for preparing the sacrifices, cleansing the temple, mopping the floors, scrubbing the utensils, and purifying them according to the established rituals of the law gathered together to discuss how they could bring about the Lord's death. Their intentions were not driven by a fear of betrayal, as their open discussions reveal, but rather out of caution that He might be rescued from their grasp through the support of the people.

While the Law prescribed that a single high priest ought to serve for the entirety of his life, with succession only occurring after his death, the Jews chose to disregard this command and limited the tenure of the high priest to just one year. Consequently, it was common for several high priests to have served by that time, which the evangelist refers to as bishops. The scribes are identified as the legal experts, the teachers of the Law are noted, and the elders are recognized as the most senior and knowledgeable individuals. Together, they convened in council under Caiaphas, who, at that moment, occupied the position of high priest, intending to strip him of the initial incentive to commit murder, a action they should have actively discouraged. Through flattery or deception, he refers to this covert plot, as they were cautious of openly acting due to his disciples and followers present in other regions.

According to the narrative provided by St. John, following the miracle of Lazarus' resurrection, the Sanhedrin resolved to eliminate Jesus. They issued commands to seek out and capture the Nazarene Teacher; however, the Lord concealed Himself to avoid premature danger. This occurred one week prior to the Passover (John 11:53, 55, 57; John 12:11). The Sanhedrin convened with the intent to implement their verdict against Him. They first chose to plot in secrecy, and secondly, they resolved that His execution should not take place during the Passover celebration (Mark 14:2). What motivated the Sanhedrin to pursue Jesus in this manner? They wished to prevent any rumors among the populace, as the people held Him in high regard (Luke 22:2).

In their shared animosity towards Jesus Christ, they set aside all their differences: the Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, priests, scribes, elders, the shrewd and ruthless Annas, and the subservient Caiaphas all stood united. St. John Chrysostom observes that they engaged in unrighteous acts as they approached the high priest, seeking permission where one would expect barriers. According to the Law, there must be a single high priest, and upon his death, another should arise. However, during that time, there were numerous high priests, as they had been appointed annually; thus, referencing "the high priests" indicates the former high priests.

In the account according to the Hebrew Matthew, Jesus Christ concluded His prophetic teachings concerning the final days of both Jerusalem and the world with a foretelling of His imminent sufferings during the upcoming Passover, which was merely two days away. Since these prophetic discourses were delivered on the evening of Tuesday, as noted in Luke 21:37-38, Jesus imparted this forewarning of His sufferings to His disciples that same evening. The convening of the Sanhedrin could not have occurred until the following morning, which would be Wednesday. However, because the Jewish method of timekeeping deemed Tuesday evening as the beginning of Wednesday, the Evangelist continues by stating that “then the chief priests were assembled,” and so forth.

At that time, the chief priests, Pharisees, scribes, and elders gathered in Jerusalem at the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest. Their discussion centered on the plans for the execution of Jesus. This decision had been made long ago, and they had instructed that anyone who discovered His location should report it to the Sanhedrin. Thus, the only matter left to determine was the timing and method of carrying out this sentence. The events that had unfolded that day in the temple, particularly Jesus's public rebuke of them, led to this urgent assembly of the Sanhedrin, where they meticulously deliberated on the sensitive issues at hand.

While the upright rested, the wicked conspired malevolently. On Wednesday evening, the Sanhedrin convened in the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, and fervently debated their course of action regarding the Galilean, whom they deemed a threat. Their attempts to apprehend Him in the temple or incite the populace against Him, as well as to arouse the suspicions of the Roman authorities, proved futile, thwarted by the devotion of His faithful followers and by His own wisdom, which dismantled their most treacherous schemes. There may have been voices advocating for allowing Him to continue unhindered until His mission and teachings were fully revealed.

A few days prior to the trial of Jesus Christ, the Sanhedrin convened once again in the residence of the high priest Caiaphas. On this occasion, the Evangelist states, "then gathered the chief priests and the scribes and the elders of the people into the court of the high priest, named Caiaphas." If the term "into the court" (εἰς τήν αὐλήν) does not refer broadly to a house or palace, then it likely denotes the second courtyard previously mentioned. Regardless, it is important to note that the trial of Jesus did not occur in this location, as referenced in Matthew 26:57.

As Christ engaged in profound discussions with His disciples, a sorrowful turn of events unfolded. The chief priests and scribes, as noted in Matthew 2:4, alongside the elders of the community—who were not only respected figures in governance but were also prominent elders from various locales—gathered. This assembly was likely comprised not of all elders but specifically those who were aligned with the adversaries of Jesus Christ, having made the determination to condemn Him while they were in Jerusalem.

In the final days, the bitter adversaries of the Lord were once again reminded of the despised Prophet from Galilee. Shortly before this, they had determined to eliminate Him and commanded that anyone aware of His location should inform them for subsequent directives (John 11:53, 57). When the moment arrived for the fulfillment of the divine decree aimed at humanity's salvation, and the appointed hour from Heaven came (7:6, 30), the Lamb of God, who bears away the sins of the world (1:29, 36), willingly yielded Himself to sinful hands (Matt. 26:45).