And, behold, one of them who was with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear.
All Commentaries on Matthew 26:51 Go To Matthew 26
Cornelius a Lapide
AD 1637
And behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched forth his hand, and struck the servant of the high priest. Peter, that Isaiah , who was more fervent and resolute than the others. S. Luke adds that he first asked permission from Christ, "Shall we smite with the sword?" but waited not for His answer, and in his zeal for Christ in His imminent danger drew his sword.
A question is raised, what was this sword ? merely a knife (culter), or a military sword (ensis), or an ordinary sword (gladius)? The Fathers are in favour of ensis.5 S. Hilary says that the sword was ordered to be sheathed, because He was about to destroy them with no human sword, but with the word of His mouth ( Revelation 1:16, Revelation 19:15). S. Ambrose explains the two swords ( Luke 22:38) mystically, as the Old and New Testaments, with which we are armed against the wiles of the devil.
But writers on all sides explain these two swords allegorically as the twofold power of the Church, temporal and spiritual (see Extrav. "Unam sanctam" De Majoritate et obedientia). And again by the sword is denoted excommunication, which cuts off a man from the Church.
Many think that Peter intended to kill Malchus, but that God guided the blow so that he merely cut off his ear.
Tropologically: S. Ambrose by this sword understands martyrdom. "There Isaiah ," saith Hebrews , "the sword of suffering, by which thou canst cast off the body, and purchase for thyself the crown of a martyr by putting off the slough of the body." Cornelius urges many reasons why it should be a sword, and not merely a knife which S. Peter used, adding that the sword of Peter is still preserved, and exposed to the veneration of the faithful.
A servant of the high Priest, named Malchus ( John 18:10). S. Peter seems to have attacked him, as being the most bold and forward in assailing Christ.
Cut off his ear. His right ear, say S. John and S. Luke , signifying, as Origen says, that the Jews in reading and hearing Scriptures had lost their right ear, the true understanding of heavenly things
S. Augustine (Contr. Faust. xxii70) remarks that Moses, after he had smitten the Egyptian, was made the head of the Synagogue. S. Peter, after mutilating Malchus, was made the head of the Church. Both of them went beyond bounds, not from hateful cruelty, but from blameless impetuosity. For Peter sinned through rashness, for it was without the knowledge, rather6 against the will of Christ that he drew his sword, his sole means of defending Christ against so many armed men, and in cutting off Malchus" ear he provoked them the rather against Christ. But he showed his ardour and zeal for Christ, blameable as it was; and when this fault had been corrected at Pentecost, he obtained through Him to be the Pastor and Prince of the Church.
Christ by blaming and restraining S. Peter, and by healing Malchus" ear, manifested most strikingly His power and clemency. Especially since it is a theological dogma (as Paulus de Palatio adds) that when the Lord heals, He heals perfectly. If Christ healed Malchus both in body and mind, what greater proof could there be of charity, what stronger evidence of an undisturbed mind? It is clear from Acts 2:37 that many of these persecutors of Christ were converted. And what marvel if Malchus were, who had experienced so striking an evidence of Christ"s goodness and power? Christ thus acted that He might furnish no ground for the charge that He had opposed the public ministers of justice, and also to exhibit a pattern of forbearance and gentleness, as He did when He converted Saul into Paul. Mystically, the Gloss says that the wounding and healing of Malchus" car is the restoration of hearing, when the old man is taken away, for slavery is the old estate, healing is liberty.
