Malchus

Mal´chus, the servant of the high-priest Caiaphas, whose right ear was cut off by Peter in the garden of Gethsemane (Joh 18:10).

The servant whose right ear was cut off by Peter and miraculously restored by Christ, in Gethsemane, Mat 26:51 . The seizure of the Savior immediately after two manifestations of his divinity, Luk 22:51 ; Joh 18:6, evinces the blindness and obstinacy of mankind in sin.\par

Mal’chus. (king or kingdom). The name of the servant of the high priest whose right ear Peter cut off at the time of the Saviour’s apprehension in the garden. Mat 26:51; Mar 14:17; Luk 22:49; Luk 22:51; Joh 18:10.

Malluch in Old Testament (1Ch 6:44; Neh 10:4.) The assault by Peter on the high priest’s servant (slave), when in the act of arresting Jesus, is given by all the evangelists, but the name of the servant by John only (Joh 18:10; Joh 18:15-16). Naturally so, for John was "known to the high-priest" and his household, so that he procured admission from her that kept the door, for his close colleague Peter, and was able to state, what the other evangelists omit, that another servant who charged Peter with being Jesus’ disciple "was his kinsman whose ear Peter cut off." Another incidental propriety confirming genuineness is, Jesus says to Pilate, "if My kingdom were of this world then would My servants fight"; yet none charged Him, not even Malchus’s kinsman who was near, with the violence which Peter had used to Malchus. Why?

Because Jesus by a touch had healed him (Luk 22:51), and it would have wonderfully tended to elevate Jesus as one more than human in love and in power, in Pilate’s estimation, had they charged Him with Peter’s act. Malchus was Caiaphas the high priest’s own servant, not a minister or apparitor of the council. ’There were but two swords in the disciples’ hands (Luk 22:38); while the holder of one was waiting for Christ’s reply to their question, "Lord, shall we smite with the sword?" the holder of the other, Peter, in the same spirit as in Mat 16:22, smote with the weapon of the flesh. What a narrow escape Peter providentially had of a malefactor’s and a murderer’s end! The sheath is the place for the Christian’s sword, except as the judicial minister of God’s wrath upon evil doers (Rom 13:4).

Seeing the coming stroke Malchus threw his head to the left, so as to expose the right ear more than the other. Our Lord when His enemies held His hands said to them (not to the disciples), "suffer Me thus far," i.e. leave Me free until I have healed him. Luke (Luk 22:51) alone records this. Matthew and Mark mention the previous laying hold of Him; Luke does not, but in undesigned coincidence, marking truthfulness, implies it here. Jesus used His last moment of liberty in touching and healing afflicted man. The healing by a "touch" implies that the ear hung to its place by a small portion of flesh. Luke, the physician, appropriately is the only one who records the healing. This was Jesus’ last miracle relieving human suffering. The hands so often put forth to bless and to cure were thenceforth bound and stretched on the cross, that form of His ministry in the flesh ceasing forever.

[Mal’chus]

The high priest’s servant whose ear Peter cut off, but who was healed by the Lord. Joh 18:10.

MALCHUS (Μάλχος).—The name of the man whom Peter wounded in the right ear at the arrest of Jesus (Joh 18:10).

Malchus was a common Semitic name, though not certainly met with among the Jews proper. By both Delitzsch and Salkinson it is vocalized מָלְכו̇ם, which is no more than a transliteration. Josephus (see Niese’s index) mentions five persons who bore it under the form of Μάλχος or Μάλιχος, whence an original מָלִיךְ has been inferred (Dalman, Gram. Aram. Aramaic 104). But the true Greek form seems to have been Μαλίχας (Periplus maris Erythrœi, cf. Müll. Geogr. Gr. Min. i. 272); and מלבו, pronounced מָלִבוּ, appears in three inscriptions (CIS [Note: IS Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum.] ii. 158, 174, 218) that may be dated with some confidence between b.c. 40 and a.d. 40. In these inscriptions the name is Nabataean; but the root מלך is common to all the Semitic languages, and appears to belong to the unhistorical period prior to the separation of the various peoples. In Assyrian it is a designation of a subordinate ruler (Schrader, COT [Note: OT Cuneiform Inscriptions and the OT.] i. 23), a prince rather than a king. While there are instances of its use in relation to a god (cf. Boehmer in Expos. Times, xvi. [1905] 473 ff.), there is no need to see in it anything more than an allusion, serious or playful, to superiority in rank or in pretence.

The bearer of the name in the Gospel narrative held a position of trust in the household of the high priest, probably Caiaphas (Joh 18:13). It has been assumed that the other Evangelists suppressed the name (Mat 26:51, Mar 14:47, Luk 22:50) with a view to protect Peter from revenge or an action at law on the part of the Jews. It is at least as likely that they were ignorant of the name, or of opinion that no purpose was to be served by its mention. There is no evidence that Malchus was exceptionally active in the arrest, or anything more than an onlooker. Peter’s forward rush, when his indignation could be restrained no longer, towards the group of which Jesus was becoming the centre (Joh 18:4), suggests rather that Malchus was on the skirt of the group, and not immediately engaged in binding Jesus. He happened to be in Peter’s way in his attempt to rescue his Master, and may well have been personally unknown to the majority of the disciples. If John was the unnamed disciple who was ‘known unto the high priest’ (Joh 18:15), possibly because he supplied the family of Annas with fish (according to an old tradition; cf. David Smith, Days of His Flesh, 465), he would be acquainted with both Malchus and his kinsman (Joh 18:26); and the mention of the name in the Fourth Gospel may be taken as one of the undesigned indications of Johannine authorship. The healing of the ear of Malchus is recorded by Lk. alone, but is an essential part of the story (cf. Expos. Times, x. [1898–99] 139, 188), and exactly such an incident as would be likely to attract the notice of a physician, and so to calm the soldiers as to make the subsequent remonstrance preserved by each of the Synoptics possible. The natural order of events was first the healing of the wound, followed, while Malchus’ friends were crowding around him, by the rebuke of Peter, and then, as soon as the people were ready to listen, by the taunting protest in regard to the manner of the arrest. Thereupon Jesus consented to be seized, and in perfect self-possession passed on to His trial and death.

R. W. Moss.

(CLEODEMUS THE PROPHET):

By: Crawford Howell Toy, Isaac Broydé

Hellenistic writer of the second century B.C. His Semitic name, "Malchus," a very common one in Phenicia and Syria but not met with among the Jews, combined with the pagan traditions abounding in his work, has given rise to discussions concerning his origin. Ewald supposes him to have been a Phenician; Herzfeld, a Syrian; Freudenthal endeavors to prove that he was a Samaritan; and Schürer holds that he must have been either a Jew or a Samaritan.

Cleodemus was the author of a history of the Jews in Greek, in which Jewish traditions are blended with Greek mythology. A short notice of this history, which is no longer in existence, is quoted by Josephus ("Ant." i. 15) from Alexander Polyhistor. Cleodemus relates that among the sons of Abraham and Keturah were three, Apher, Surim, and Japhran (ᾈφέραν, ᾈσουρείμ, Ἰάφραν), from whom the town of Aphra, the land of Assyria, and Africa derived their names. He relates further that these three sons helped Hercules in his fight against Libya and Antæus, and that Hercules married the daughter of Aphra, by whom he had a son, Didorus, from whose son Sophon the Sophacians derived their name.

Bibliography:

Ewald, Gesch. vii. 91;

Herzfeld, Gesch. des Volkes Israel, iii. 498, 575;

Freudenthal, Alexander Polyhistor, p. 130 et passim;

Schürer, Gesch. iii. 357 (Eng. transl. ii. iii. 209).

MALCHUS.—The name of the high priest’s servant whose ear Peter cut off in the Garden of Gethsemane at the arrest of our Lord. St. John is the only Evangelist who mentions his name (Joh 18:10), thereby substantiating the fact that he was intimately acquainted with the high priest and his household (Joh 18:16). The incident is related in the other three Gospels (Mat 26:61, Mar 14:47, Luk 22:50). On a comparison of the four accounts, it seems that Malchus pressed forward eagerly to seize Jesus, whereupon Peter struck at him with his sword. The blow, missing its main object, almost severed the ear, but not quite, as Jesus touched it and healed it.

Luke, the physician, is the only Evangelist who mentions the hearing of the ear.

Morley Stevenson.

A servant of the high-priest who came with Judas to the Garden of Gethsemane. Saint Peter struck off his ear when he and his comrades were about to seize Jesus, who immediately healed the wound.

(Málchos).Greek form of MALLUCH (i.e. counsellor), a name common in the Semitic languages and of special interest as being that borne by the Jewish servant whose ear was struck off by St. Peter.The incident is described by all the Evangelists (Matthew 26:51; Mark 14:47; Luke 22:50; John 18:10), though St. John alone furnishes us the names of the servant and the disciple, and only St. Luke mentions the miraculous healing of the injury. According to the Fourth Gospel, Judas, accompanied by a band of soldiers and servants sent out by the high-priests and Pharisees, set out from the city to apprehend Jesus. After the meeting, when the soldiers were about to seize Jesus, St. Peter drew his sword and cut off the right ear of a servant of the high-priest. We may conclude that Malchus was in the van of the hostile party and showing particular zeal, for St. Peter would hardly have singled him out without reason. Christ at once healed the wound and took occasion to teach His followers a lesson of peace.Later in the evening a servant, related to Malchus, wrung the second denial from St. Peter (John 18:26-7). Since St. John alone gives the name of the servant, we may conclude that he himself was the disciple known to the high priest (John 18:15). The silence of the other sacred writers with regard to Peter’s identity may be ascribed to a motive of prudence, for at the time they wrote the Jews might have punished the disciple, had they known his name.-----------------------------------JOSEPH V. MOLLOY. Transcribed by WGKofron With thanks to St. Mary’s Church, Akron, Ohio The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IXCopyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, CensorImprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York

mal´kus (Μάλχος, Málchos, from מלך, melekh, i.e. “counselor” or “king”): The name of the servant of the high priest Caiaphas whose right ear was smitten off by Simon Peter at the arrest of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane (compare Mat 26:51; Mar 14:47; Luk 22:50; Joh 18:10). It is noteworthy that Luke “the physician” alone gives an account of the healing of the wound (Luk 22:51). As Jesus “touched his ear, and healed him,” the ear was not entirely severed from the head. The words of Jesus, “Suffer ye thus far,” may have been addressed either to the disciples, i.e. “Suffer ye that I thus far show kindness to my captors,” or to those about to bind him, i.e. asking a short respite to heal Malchus. They were not addressed directly to Peter, as the Greek form is plural, whereas in Mat 26:52; Joh 18:11, where, immediately after the smiting of Malchus, Jesus does address Peter, the singular form is used; nor do the words of Jesus there refer to the healing but to the action of his disciple. A kinsman of Malchus, also a servant of the high priest, was one of those who put the questions which made Peter deny Jesus (Joh 18:26).