Matthew 26:4Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Do you recognize the remarkable chaos surrounding the Jewish people? They approach the high priest to engage in unlawful acts, seeking approval in situations where they should anticipate obstruction. Yet, how many high priests were there? The law stipulated the existence of one, but there were many during this period. It is clear that the state of affairs for the Jews was beginning to falter. As I previously mentioned, Moses commanded the appointment of a single high priest, with the successor designated upon the death of the former, whose tenure was determined by the expulsion of those guilty of inadvertent manslaughter. Why, then, were there multiple high priests? Because, in later times, they were elected yearly.

Despite the law's stipulation that only one bishop should serve for a lifetime, the Jewish leaders, in defiance of this command, appointed multiple bishops, changing them annually. Those tasked with punishing the culprits approached the bishop of that particular year for a council. However, the Evangelist refers to those who had completed their year of service as bishops. In their plot to commit a heinous crime, they displayed no reverence for God but rather feared the people. They were apprehensive that if they executed Christ during the festival, the crowd would rise in vengeance or that their act might divert the people from the rightful sacrifices, thereby depriving themselves of the benefits derived from those offerings.

As the Passover approached, those tasked with preparing the offerings, cleansing the temple, washing the floors, scrubbing the utensils, and sanctifying them according to the rituals mandated by the law, gathered to discuss plans to execute the Lord. They refrained from acting out of fear of causing an uprising, as their open discussions revealed, but primarily out of caution that He might be rescued from their grasp by the crowds.

Although the law stipulated that a single high priest should be appointed for a lifetime, with a successor designated only after the former’s death, the Jewish leaders violated this ordinance by limiting the high priesthood to a term of one year. Consequently, it was common during that period to find many individuals who had previously served as high priests, referred to by the evangelist as bishops. He denoted the scribes as legal experts, the teachers of the Law, while the elders were identified as the most senior and wise members. Together, they convened in a council under Caiaphas, who was the acting high priest at that time, with the intention of denying him the primary role in instigating murder, an action they should have sought to prevent. Through artful persuasion and subterfuge, he covertly referred to their plotting, as they were cautious about overt actions due to the presence of his disciples and followers in other locations.

In the narrative provided by St. John, following the miraculous raising of Lazarus, the Sanhedrin resolved to eliminate Jesus. They issued commands to track down and apprehend the Nazarene Teacher; however, the Lord chose to conceal Himself to avoid danger until the appointed time, as the week of Passover approached (John 11:53, 55, 57; John 12:11). The Sanhedrin convened to strategize how to implement their intent to execute Jesus. Their first decision was to proceed in secrecy, and secondly, they resolved that His execution should not occur during the Passover Feast (Mark 14:2). What motivated the Sanhedrin's approach against Jesus? They sought to avoid stirring the populace, as many revered Him (Luke 22:2).

The chief priest Caiaphas seemed to oversee the gatherings of the leaders. Had any of Jesus Christ’s followers been aware of how these meetings of Judah's authorities concluded, they might have assumed that, having gleaned something about the Lord's discourse on the Mount of Olives with His followers, the leaders were intent on thwarting the fulfillment of His prophecy regarding His death. There is a decisive agreement to take His life, and to achieve this, it is imperative to capture Him, not within two days as He conveyed to His disciples, but after the full eight-day celebration, as stated by Innocent, Archbishop of Kherson.

In the account presented by Hebrews, Jesus Christ concluded His prophetic message regarding the final days of Jerusalem and the world with a foretelling of His upcoming suffering during the Passover, which was just two days away. Given that Christ delivered these prophetic teachings on Tuesday evening, as noted in Luke 21:37-38, it follows that He shared this prediction with His disciples that same evening. The session of the Sanhedrin would not have occurred until the following morning, which is to say Wednesday. Nonetheless, because Tuesday evening was already acknowledged as the beginning of Wednesday according to the timekeeping of that era, the Evangelist continues by stating, 'then the chief priests were assembled,’ and so forth.

At that moment, the leading priests, Pharisees, scribes, and elders convened in Jerusalem at the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest. Their discussion centered on the means and timing of Jesus' execution. They had previously resolved to eliminate Him, issuing directives that anyone who learned of His location was required to inform the Sanhedrin. Thus, the only remaining questions were when and how this sentence would be carried out. The events that had unfolded that day in the temple, particularly Jesus' public condemnation of them, spurred them to call an extraordinary session of the Sanhedrin to carefully address all the sensitive issues surrounding this matter.

While the righteous rested, the wicked schemed malevolently. On the evening of Wednesday, the Sanhedrin convened at the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, to fervently debate their course of action regarding the Galilean, whom they deemed a threat. All attempts to apprehend Him within the temple, incite the populace against Him, or provoke the Roman authorities were rendered futile, thwarted by the devotion of His followers and His divine wisdom that dismantled their most malicious plots. Some may have advocated for allowing Him freedom until His mission and teachings could be fully understood. However, the opposing faction triumphed; a decision was reached in their council to eliminate Him—if not overtly, then through deceitful and treacherous means. The question remained: how could this be executed? During their discussions, word reached them that one of Jesus of Nazareth's closest disciples intended to make a significant revelation to them.

To capture Jesus through deception... not during the festival: the people had recently encountered the Lord during His triumphant entry into Jerusalem, recognizing Him as their foremost prophet and awaited Messiah. By the time of the festival, the crowd had undoubtedly grown (with estimates suggesting two million people came to Jerusalem for this occasion). Those who conspired to execute Jesus feared that the public would not advocate for Him and that there would be no uproar, particularly since such disturbances typically arose during festivals. Consequently, they resolved in their council to apprehend the Lord discreetly, away from the crowds and after the festivities had concluded.

The happenings of the final days brought the Lord's adversaries once more into focus with the despised Prophet of Galilee. Just prior, they had resolved to eliminate Him and commanded that anyone aware of His location report back to them for further instructions (John 11:53, 57). When the moment arrived for the fulfillment of the divine plan for humanity's redemption and the time designated from above was at hand (7:6, 30), the Lamb of God, who bears away the sins of the world (1:29, 36), was handed over to transgressors (Matt. 26:45).