John 13:9–30

He that is washed--in this thorough sense, to express which the word is carefully changed to one meaning to wash as in a bath. needeth not--to be so washed any more. save to wash his feet--needeth to do no more than wash his feet (and here the former word is resumed, meaning to wash the hands or feet). but is clean every whit--as a whole. This sentence is singularly instructive. Of the two cleansings, the one points to that which takes place at the commencement of the Christian life, embracing complete absolution from sin as a guilty state, and entire deliverance from it as a polluted life (Rev 1:5; Co1 6:11) --or, in the language of theology, Justification and Regeneration. This cleansing is effected once for all, and is never repeated. The other cleansing, described as that of "the feet," is such as one walking from a bath quite cleansed still needs, in consequence of his contact with the earth. (Compare Exo 30:18-19). It is the daily cleansing which we are taught to seek, when in the spirit of adoption we say, "Our Father which art in heaven . . . forgive us our debts" (Mat 6:9, Mat 6:12); and, when burdened with the sense of manifold shortcomings--as what tender spirit of a Christian is not?--is it not a relief to be permitted thus to wash our feet after a day's contact with the earth? This is not to call in question the completeness of our past justification. Our Lord, while graciously insisting on washing Peter's feet, refuses to extend the cleansing farther, that the symbolical instruction intended to be conveyed might not be marred. and ye are clean--in the first and whole sense. but not all--important, as showing that Judas, instead of being as true-hearted a disciple as the rest at first, and merely falling away afterwards--as many represent it--never experienced that cleansing at all which made the others what they were.

Know ye what I have done?--that is, its intent. The question, however, was put merely to summon their attention to His own answer.

Ye call me Master--Teacher. and Lord--learning of Him in the one capacity, obeying Him in the other. and ye say well, for so I am--The conscious dignity with which this claim is made is remarkable, following immediately on His laying aside the towel of service. Yet what is this whole history but a succession of such astonishing contrast from first to last?

If I then--the Lord. have washed your feet--the servants'. ye--but fellow servants. ought to wash one another's feet--not in the narrow sense of a literal washing, profanely caricatured by popes and emperors, but by the very humblest real services one to another.

The servant is not greater than his lord, &c.--an oft-repeated saying (Mat 10:24, &c.). If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them--a hint that even among real Christians the doing of such things would come lamentably short of the knowing.

Dan. iii. 88; that is, in the apocryphal piece called “The Song of the Three Children,” and which, as it has no place in the Hebrew Scriptures, is also omitted in our English version. Its place would fall between the 23d and 24th verses of chap. iii.—Tr. 5. But apart from this moral understanding of the passage, we remember that the way in which we commended to your attention the grandeur of this act of the Lord’s, was that, in washing the feet of disciples who were already washed and clean, the Lord instituted a sign, to the end that, on account of the human feelings that occupy us on earth, however far we may have advanced in our apprehension of righteousness, we might know that we are not exempt from sin; which He thereafter washes away by interceding for us, when we pray the Father, who is in heaven, to forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors. Matt. vi. 12. Rom. viii. 34. Jas. v. 16. Col. iii. 13.

Tractate LVIII. Chapter XIII. 10–15. 1. We have already, beloved, as the Lord was pleased to enable us, expounded to you those words of the Gospel, where the Lord, in washing His disciples’ feet, says, “He that is once washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.” Let us now look at what follows. “And ye,” He says, “are clean, but not all.” And to remove the need of inquiry on our part, the evangelist has himself explained its meaning, by adding: “For He knew who it was that should betray Him; therefore said He, Ye are not all clean.” Can anything be clearer? Let us therefore pass to what follows. 2. “So, after He had washed their feet, and had taken His garments, and was set down again, He said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?” Now it is that the blessed Peter gets that promise fulfilled: for he had been put off when, in the midst of his trembling and asserting, “Thou shalt never wash my feet,” he received the answer, “What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter” (vers. 7, 8). Here, then, is that very hereafter; it is now time to tell what was a little ago deferred. Accordingly, the Lord, mindful of His foregoing promise to make him understand an act of His so unexpected, so wonderful, so frightening, and, but for His own still more terrifying rejoinder, impossible to be permitted, that the Master not only of themselves, but of angels, and the Lord not only of them, but of all things, should wash the feet of His own disciples and servants: having then promised to let him know the meaning of so important an act, when He said, “Thou shalt know afterwards,” begins now to show them what it was that He did. 3. “Ye call me,” He says, “Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.” “Ye say well,” for ye only say the truth; I am indeed what ye say. There is a precept laid on man: “Let not thine own mouth praise thee, but the mouth of thy neighbor.” Prov. xxvii. 2.

self-pleasing is a perilous thing for one who has to be on his guard against falling into pride. But He who is over all things, however much He commend Himself, cannot exalt Himself above His actual dignity: nor can God be rightly termed arrogant. For it is to our advantage to know Him, not to His; nor can any one know Him, unless that self-knowing One make Himself known. If He, then, by abstaining from self-commendation, wish, as it were, to avoid arrogance, He will deny us the power of knowing Him. And no one surely would blame Him for calling Himself Master, even though believing Him to be nothing more than a man; seeing He only makes profession of what even men themselves in the various arts profess to such an extent, without any charge of arrogance, that they are termed professors. But to call Himself also the Lord of His disciples,—of men who, in an earthly sense, were themselves also free-born,—who would tolerate it in a man? But it is God that speaks. Here no elation is possible to loftiness so great, no lie to the truth: the profit is ours to be the subjects of such loftiness, the servants of the truth. That He calls Himself Lord is no imperfection on His side, but a benefit on ours. The words of a certain profane Sæcularis. Cicero, in Q. Cæcilium. Cicero, de Oratore. 2 Cor. xii. 6. 1 Cor. i. 31. Ps. xxxiv. 2. 4. “If I, then,” He says, “your Lord and Master, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.” This, blessed Peter, is what thou didst not know when thou wert not allowing it to be done. This is what He promised to let thee know afterwards, when thy Master and thy Lord terrified thee into submission, and washed thy feet. We have learned, brethren, humility from the Highest; let us, as humble, do to one another what He, the Highest, did in His humility. Great is the commendation we have here of humility: and brethren do this to one another in turn, even in the visible act itself, when they treat one another with hospitality; for the practice of such humility is generally prevalent, and finds expression in the very deed that makes it discernible. And hence the apostle, when he would commend the well-deserving widow, says, “If she is hospitable, if she has washed the saints’ feet.” 1 Tim. v. 10.

Preached at Portsmouth, at the ordination of the Rev. Mr. Job Strong, June 28, 1749. john xiii. 15, 16. For I have given you an example, that he should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, I say unto you. The servant is not greater than his lord, neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. we have in the context an account of one of the many very remarkable things that passed that night wherein Christ was betrayed, (which was on many accounts the most remarkable night that ever was,) viz. Christ’s washing his disciples’ feet; which action, as it was exceeding wonderful in itself, so it manifestly was symbolical, and represented something else far more important and more wonderful, even that greatest and most wonderful of all things that ever came to pass, which was accomplished the next day in his last sufferings. There were three symbolical representations given of that great event this evening; one in the passover, which Christ now partook of with his disciples; another in the Lord’s supper, which he instituted at this time; and another in this remarkable action of his washing his disciples’ feet. Washing the feet of guests was the office of servants, and one of their meanest offices: and therefore was fitly chosen by our Saviour to represent that great abasement which he was to be the subject of in the form of a servant, in becoming obedient unto death, even that ignominious and accursed death of the cross, that he might cleanse the souls of his disciples from their guilt and spiritual pollution.

This spiritual washing and cleansing of believers was the end for which Christ so abased himself for them. Tit. ii. 14. “Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people.”Eph. v. 25, 26. “Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water.” That Christ’s washing his disciples’ feet signified this spiritual washing of the soul, is manifest by his own words in the 8th verse. of the context. “Peter saith unto him, Thou shall never wash my feet. Jesus answered him. If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.” Christ, in being obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, not only did the part of a servant unto God, but in some respects also of a servant unto us. And this is not the only place where his so abasing himself for our sakes is compared to the doing of the part of a servant to guests. We have the like representation made in Luke xxii. 27. “For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? Is not ho that sitteth at meat? But 1 am among you as he that serveth.” And wherein Christ was among the disciples as he that did serve, is explained in Matt. xx. 28. namely, in his giving his life a ransom for them. When Christ had finished washing his disciples feet, he solemnly requires their attention to what he had done, and commands them to follow his example therein. verses 12-17. “So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done unto you? Ye call me Master and Lord, and ye say well, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet: for I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his Lord, neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.” When our Saviour calls on his disciples to imitate the example he had given them in what he had done, we are to understand him, not merely by the example he gave in the emblematical action, in washing his disciples’ feet, in itself considered; but more especially, of that much greater act of his that was signified by it, in abasing himself so low, and suffering so much, for the spiritual cleansing and salvation of his people.

This is what is chiefly insisted on as the great example Christ has given us to follow: so it is once and again afterwards, in the discourse Christ had with his disciples, this same night, verse 34. of the chapter wherein is the text: John xiii. 12-17 Christ, in the words of the text, does not only intend to recommend this example of his to the disciples as Christians, or some of his professing people, but especially as his ministers. This is evident by those words he uses to enforce this counsel, John xiii. 16. Mark xvi. 15 And what confirms this is, that Christ elsewhere recommends to officers in his church, that are in that respect chief among his followers, the example which he set in his abasing himself to be as a servant that ministers to guests at a table, in his giving his life for us; Matt. xx. 27, 28. “Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” Compare Luke xxii. 25-23. The work and business of inisters of the gospel is as it were that of servants, to wash and cleanse the souls of men: for this is done by the preaching of the word, which is their main business, Eph. v. 26. “That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word.” The words of the text thus considered, do undoubtedly lead us to this conclusion, and teach us this doctrine, viz. That it is the duty of ministers of the gospel, in the work of their ministry, to follow the example of their great Lord and Master. And this is what I would by divine assistance make the subject of my present discourse. And I propose to handle this subject in the following method. I. I would observe wherein ministers of the gospel ought to follow the example of Christ. II. Give some reasons why they should follow his example. III. I would endeavour to make a proper application of those things to myself, and others that are called to this work of the ministry. IV. Show what improvement should be made of them by the people of this church and congregation. I. Then, I would show wherein ministers of the gospel ought, by the work of their ministry, to follow the example of their great Lord and Master, Jesus Christ. And here, 1. In general, ministers should follow their Lord and Master in all those excellent virtues, and in that universal and eminent holiness of life, which he set an example of in this human nature.

It has generally been taken for granted by commentators that Christ's washing his disciples' feet, and the discourse that followed it, were the same night in which he was betrayed, and at the same sitting wherein he ate the passover and instituted the Lord's supper; but whether before the solemnity began, or after it was all over, or between the eating of the passover and the institution of the Lord's supper, they are not agreed. This evangelist, making it his business to gather up those passages which the others had omitted, industriously omits those which the others had recorded, which occasions some difficulty in putting them together. If it was then, we suppose that Judas went out (Joh 13:30) to get his men ready that were to apprehend the Lord Jesus in the garden. But Dr. Lightfoot is clearly of opinion that this was done and said, even all that is recorded to the end of ch. 14, not at the passover supper, for it is here said (Joh 13:1) to be before the feast of the passover, but at the supper in Bethany, two days before the passover (of which we read Mat 26:2-6), at which Mary the second time anointed Christ's head with the remainder of her box of ointment. Or, it might be at some other supper the night before the passover, not as that was in the house of Simon the leper, but in his own lodgings, where he had none but his disciples about him, and could be more free with them. In these verses we have the story of Christ's washing his disciples' feet; it was an action of a singular nature; no miracle, unless we call it a miracle of humility. Mary had just anointed his head; now, lest his acceptance of this should look like taking state, he presently balances it with this act of abasement. But why would Christ do this? If the disciples' feet needed washing, they could wash them themselves; a wise man will not do a thing that looks odd and unusual, but for very good causes and considerations. We are sure that it was not in a humour or a frolic that this was done; no, the transaction was very solemn, and carried on with a great deal of seriousness; and four reasons are here intimated why Christ did this: - 1. That he might testify his love to his disciples, Joh 13:1, Joh 13:2. 2. That he might give an instance of his own voluntary humility and condescension, Joh 13:3-5. 3. That he might signify to them spiritual washing, which is referred to in his discourse with Peter, Joh 13:6-11. 4. That he might set them an example, Joh 13:12-17. And the opening of these four reasons will take in the exposition of the whole story. I. Christ washed his disciples' feet that he might give a proof of that great love wherewith he loved them; loved them to the end, Joh 13:1, Joh 13:2. 1. It is here laid down as an undoubted truth that our Lord Jesus, having loved his own that were in the world, loved them to the end, Joh 13:1. (1.) This is true of the disciples that were his immediate followers, in particular the twelve. These were his own in the world, his family, his school, his bosom-friends. Children he had none to call his own, but he adopted them, and took them as his own. He had those that were his own in the other world, but he left them for a time, to look after his own in this world. These he loved, he called them into fellowship with himself, conversed familiarly with them, was always tender of them, and of their comfort and reputation. He allowed them to be very free with him, and bore with their infirmities. He loved them to the end, continued his love to them as long as he lived, and after his resurrection; he never took away his loving kindness. Though there were some persons of quality that espoused his cause, he did not lay aside his old friends, to make room for new ones, but still stuck to his poor fishermen. They were weak and defective in knowledge and grace, dull and forgetful; and yet, though he reproved them often, he never ceased to love them and take care of them. (2.) It is true of all believers, for these twelve patriarchs were the representatives of all the tribes of God's spiritual Israel. Note, [1.] Our Lord Jesus has a people in the world that are his own, - his own, for they were given him by the Father, he has purchased them, and paid dearly for them, and he has set them apart for himself, - his own, for they have devoted themselves to him as a peculiar people. His own; where his own were spoken of that received him not, it is tous idious - his own persons, as a man's wife and children are his own, to whom he stands in a constant relation. [2.] Christ has a cordial love for his own that are in the world. He did love them with a love of goodwill when he gave himself for their redemption. He does love them with a love of complacency when he admits them into communion with himself. Though they are in this world, a world of darkness and distance, of sin and corruption, yet he loves them. He was now going to his own in heaven, the spirits of just men made perfect there; but he seems most concerned for his own on earth, because they most needed his care: the sickly child is most indulged. [3.] Those whom Christ loves he loves to the end; he is constant in his love to his people; he rests in his love. He loves with an everlasting love (Jer 31:3), from everlasting in the counsels of it to everlasting in the consequences of it. Nothing can separate a believer from the love of Christ; he loves his own, eis telos - unto perfection, for he will perfect what concerns them, will bring them to that world where love is perfect. 2. Christ manifested his love to them by washing their feet, as that good woman (Luk 7:38) showed her love to Christ by washing his feet and wiping them. Thus he would show that as his love to them was constant so it was condescending, - that in prosecution of the designs of it he was willing to humble himself, - and that the glories of his exalted state, which he was now entering upon, should be no obstruction at all to the favour he bore to his chosen; and thus he would confirm the promise he had made to all the saints that he would make them sit down to meat, and would come forth and serve them (Luk 12:37), would put honour upon them as great and surprising as for a lord to serve his servants. The disciples had just now betrayed the weakness of their love to him, in grudging the ointment that was poured upon his head (Mat 26:8), yet he presently gives this proof of his love to them. Our infirmities are foils to Christ's kindnesses, and set them off. 3. He chose this time to do it, a little before his last passover, for two reasons: - (1.) Because now he knew that his hour was come, which he had long expected, when he should depart out of this world to the Father. Observe here, [1.] The change that was to pass over our Lord Jesus; he must depart. This began at his death, but was completed at his ascension. As Christ himself, so all believers, by virtue of their union with him, when they depart out of the world, are absent from the body, go to the Father, are present with the Lord. It is a departure out of the world, this unkind, injurious world, this faithless, treacherous world - this world of labour, toil, and temptation - this vale of tears; and it is a going to the Father, to the vision of the Father of spirits, and the fruition of him as ours. [2.] The time of this change: His hour was come. It is sometimes called his enemies' hour (Luk 22:53), the hour of their triumph; sometimes his hour, the hour of his triumph, the hour he had had in his eye all along. The time of his sufferings was fixed to an hour, and the continuance of them but for an hour. [3.] His foresight of it: He knew that his hour was come; he knew from the beginning that it would come, and when, but now he knew that it was come. We know not when our hour will come, and therefore what we have to do in habitual preparation for it ought never to be undone; but, when we know by the harbingers that our hour is come, we must vigorously apply ourselves to an actual preparation, as our Master did, Pe2 3:14. Now it was in the immediate foresight of his departure that he washed his disciples' feet; that, as his own head was anointed just now against the day of his burial, so their feet might be washed against the day of their consecration by the descent of the Holy Ghost fifty days after, as the priests were washed, Lev 8:6. When we see our day approaching, we should do what good we can to those we leave behind. (2.) Because the devil had now put it into the heart of Judas to betray him, Joh 13:2. These words in a parenthesis may be considered, [1.] As tracing Judas's treason to its origin; it was a sin of such a nature that it evidently bore the devil's image and superscription. What way of access the devil has to men's hearts, and by what methods he darts in his suggestions, and mingles them undiscerned with those thoughts which are the natives of the heart, we cannot tell. But there are some sins in their own nature so exceedingly sinful, and to which there is so little temptation from the world and the flesh, that it is plain Satan lays the egg of them in a heart disposed to be the nest to hatch them in. For Judas to betray such a master, to betray him so cheaply and upon no provocation, was such downright enmity to God as could not be forged but by Satan himself, who thereby thought to ruin the Redeemer's kingdom, but did in fact ruin his own. [2.] As intimating a reason why Christ now washed his disciples' feet. First, Judas being now resolved to betray him, the time of his departure could not be far off; if this matter be determined, it is easy to infer with St. Paul, I am now ready to be offered. Note, The more malicious we perceive our enemies to be against us, the more industrious we should be to prepare for the worst that may come. Secondly, Judas being now got into the snare, and the devil aiming at Peter and the rest of them (Luk 22:31), Christ would fortify his own against him. If the wolf has seized one of the flock, it is time for the shepherd to look well to the rest. Antidotes must be stirring, when the infection is begun. Dr. Lightfoot observes that the disciples had learned of Judas to murmur at the anointing of Christ; compare Joh 12:4, etc. with Mat 26:8. Now, lest those that had learned that of him should learn worse, he fortifies them by a lesson of humility against his most dangerous assaults. Thirdly, Judas, who was now plotting to betray him, was one of the twelve. Now Christ would hereby show that he did not design to cast them all off for the faults of one. Though one of their college had a devil, and was a traitor, yet they should fare never the worse for that. Christ loves his church though there are hypocrites in it, and had still a kindness for his disciples though there was a Judas among them and he knew it. II. Christ washed his disciples' feet that he might give an instance of his own wonderful humility, and show how lowly and condescending he was, and let all the world know how low he could stoop in love to his own. This is intimated, Joh 13:3-5. Jesus knowing, and now actually considering, and perhaps discoursing of, his honours as Mediator, and telling his friends that the Father had given all things into his hand, rises from supper, and, to the great surprise of the company, who wondered what he was going to do, washed his disciples' feet. 1. Here is the rightful advancement of the Lord Jesus. Glorious things are here said of Christ as Mediator. (1.) The Father had given all things into his hands; had given him a propriety in all, and a power over all, as possessor of heaven and earth, in pursuance of the great designs of his undertaking; see Mat 11:27. The accommodation and arbitration of all matters in variance between God and man were committed into his hands as the great umpire and referee; and the administration of the kingdom of God among men, in all the branches of it, was committed to him; so that all acts, both of government and judgme…

Tractate LVI. Chapter XIII. 6–10 1. When the Lord was washing the disciples’ feet, “He cometh to Simon Peter; and Peter saith unto Him, Lord, dost Thou wash my feet?” For who would not be filled with fear at having his feet washed by the Son of God? Although, therefore, it was a piece of the greatest audacity for the servant to contradict his Lord, the creature his God; yet Peter preferred doing this to the suffering of his feet to be washed by his Lord and God. Nor ought we to think that Peter was one amongst others who so expressed their fear and refusal, seeing that others before him had suffered it to be done to themselves with cheerfulness and equanimity. For it is easier so to understand the words of the Gospel, because that, after saying, “He began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith He was girded,” it is then added, “Then cometh He to Simon Peter,” as if He had already washed the feet of some, and after them had now come to the first of them all. For who can fail to know that the most blessed Peter was the first of the apostles? But we are not so to understand it, that it was after some others that He came to him; but that He began with him. It is curious to notice how Augustin here contradicts his previous and natural explanation of the passage, in order to uphold the primacy of Peter. It looks as if here he suddenly felt that his former words were rather adverse to the notion.—Tr. might have been frightened, and said, “Lord, dost Thou wash my feet?” What is implied in this “Thou”? and what in “my”? These are subjects for thought rather than for speech; lest perchance any adequate conception the soul may have formed of such words may fail of explanation in the utterance.

2. But “Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter.” And not even yet, terrified as he was by the sublimity of the Lord’s action, does he allow it to be done, while ignorant of its purpose; but is unwilling to see, unable to endure, that Christ should thus humble Himself to his very feet. “Thou shalt never,” he says, “wash my feet.” What is this “never” [in æternum]? I will never endure, never suffer, never permit it: that is, a thing is not done “in æternum” which is never done. Then the Saviour, to terrify His reluctant patient with the danger of his own salvation, says, “If I wash thee not, thou shalt have no part with me.” He speaks in this way, “If I wash thee not,” when He was referring only to his feet; just as it is customary to say, You are trampling on me, when it is only the foot that is trampled on. And now the other, in a perturbation of love and fear, and more frightened at the thought that Christ should be withheld from him, than even to see Him humbled at his feet, exclaims, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.” Since this, indeed, is Thy threat, that my bodily members must be washed by Thee, not only do I no longer withhold the lowest, but I lay the foremost also at Thy disposal. Deny me not having a part with Thee, and I deny Thee not any part of my body to be washed. 3. “Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.” Some one perhaps may be aroused at this, and say: Nay, but if he is every whit clean, what need has He even to wash his feet? But the Lord knew what He was saying, even though our weakness reach not into His secret purposes. Nevertheless, so far as He is pleased to instruct and teach us out of His law, up to the little measure of my apprehension, I would also, with His help, make some answer bearing on the depths of this question: and, first of all, I shall have no difficulty in showing that there is no self-contradiction in the manner of expression. For who may not say, as here, with the greatest propriety, He is all clean, except Of course, it is a mere elegance in the Latinity to which Augustin here refers, as between præter pedes and nisi pedes, when qualifying the expression, “Mundus est totus” (he is all clean).—Tr.

Of course, it is a mere elegance in the Latinity to which Augustin here refers, as between præter pedes and nisi pedes, when qualifying the expression, “Mundus est totus” (he is all clean).—Tr. Of course, it is a mere elegance in the Latinity to which Augustin here refers, as between præter pedes and nisi pedes, when qualifying the expression, “Mundus est totus” (he is all clean).—Tr. 4. But what is this? what does it mean? and what is there in it we need to examine? The Lord says, The Truth declares that even he who has been washed has need still to wash his feet. What, my brethren, what think you of it, save that in holy baptism a man has all of him washed, not all save his feet, but every whit; and yet, while thereafter living in this human state, he cannot fail to tread on the ground with his feet. And thus our human feelings themselves, which are inseparable from our mortal life on earth, are like feet wherewith we are brought into sensible contact with human affairs; and are so in such a way, that if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 1 John i. 8. Rom. viii. 34. Matt. vi. 12. 1 John i. 9. 5. Accordingly the Church, which Christ cleanseth with the washing of water in the word, is without spot and wrinkle, Eph. v. 26, 27. Song of Sol. v. 3. hath He not ascended into heaven, and sitteth He not at the Father’s right hand? Does not the apostle expressly declare, “If ye, then, be risen with Christ, set your thoughts on those things which are above, where Christ is sitting on the right hand of God. Seek the things which are above, not things which are on earth?” Col. iii. 1, 2.

Tractate LVII. Chapter XIII. 6–10 (continued), and Song of Sol. V. 2, 3 In what way the Church should fear to defile her feet, while proceeding on her way to Christ. 1. I Have not been unmindful of my debt, and acknowledge that the time of payment has now come. May He give me wherewith to pay, as He gave me cause to incur the debt. For He has given me the love, of which it is said, “Owe no man anything, but to love one another.” Rom. xiii. 8. Col. iii. 1, 2. Acts ix. 4. Matt. vi. 12. Chap. xiii. 5. Rom. viii. 34. Ps. xlv. 2. 2. For thus she speaks: “I sleep, but my heart waketh: it is the voice of my Beloved Patruelis, literally cousin (by the father’s side). Song of Sol. v. 2, 3. Matt. xxviii. 20. opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man”? Chap. i. 51. Phil. i. 23, 24. Eph. iii. 17. 1 Cor. ix. 27. 3. Therefore, as the Apostle James saith, “Let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak.” Jas. i. 19. Ps. li. 8. Chap. iii. 29. Ps. xlvi. 10. Ecclus. xxxviii. 24. Two readings, affectibus or affatibus. 4. But while the Church finds delightful repose in those who thus sweetly and humbly sit at her feet, here is one who knocks, and says: “What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light; and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the house-tops.” Matt. x. 27. Matt. xxiv. 12. 1 Cor. xi. 3. Rom. x. 14.

5. Hence it happens that those who love to devote their leisure to good studies, and shrink from encountering the troubles of toilsome labors, as feeling themselves unsuited to undertake and discharge such services with credit, would prefer, were it possible, to have the holy apostles and ancient preachers of the truth again raised up against that abounding of iniquity which hath so reduced the warmth of Christian love. But in regard to those who have already left the body, and put off the garment of the flesh (for they are not utterly parted), the Church replies, “I have put off my dress; how shall I put it on?” That dress shall, indeed, yet be recovered; and in the persons of those who have meanwhile laid it aside, shall the Church again put on the garment of flesh: only not now, when the cold are needing to be warmed; but then, when the dead shall rise again. Realizing, then, her present difficulty through the scarcity of preachers, and remembering those members of her own who were so sound in word and holy in character, but are now disunited from their bodies, the Church says in her sorrow, “I have put off my dress; how shall I put it on?” How can those members of mine, who had such surpassing power, through their preaching, to open the door to Christ, now return to the bodies which they have laid aside? 6. And then, turning again to those who preach, and gather in and govern the congregations of His people, and so open as they can to Christ, but are afraid, amid the difficulties of such work, of falling into sin, she says, “I have washed my feet; how shall I defile them?” For whosoever offendeth not in word, the same is a perfect man. And who, then, is perfect? Who is there that offendeth not amid such an abounding of iniquity, and such a freezing of charity? “I have washed my feet; how shall I defile them?” At times I read and hear: “My brethren, be not many masters, seeing that ye shall receive the greater condemnation: for in many things we offend all.” Jas. iii. 1, 2. Matt. vi. 12. Ps. li. 8.

Tractate LIX. Chapter XIII. 16–20. 1. We have just heard in the holy Gospel the Lord speaking, and saying, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord, nor the apostle [he that is sent] greater than he that sent him: if ye know these things, blessed shall ye be if ye do them.” He said this, therefore, because He had washed the disciples’ feet, as the Master of humility both by word and example. But we shall be able, with His help, to handle what is in need of more elaborate handling, if we linger not at what is perfectly clear. Accordingly, after uttering these words, the Lord added, “I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but, that the Scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me, shall lift up his heel upon me.” And what is this, but that he shall trample upon me? We know of whom He speaks: it is Judas, that betrayer of His, who is referred to. He had not therefore chosen the person whom, by these words, He setteth utterly apart from His chosen ones. When I say then, He continues, “Blessed shall ye be if ye do them, I speak not of you all:” there is one among you who will not be blessed, and who will not do these things. “I know whom I have chosen.” Whom, but those who shall be blessed in the doing of what has been commanded and shown as needful to be done, by Him who alone can make them blessed? The traitor Judas, He says, is not one of those that have been chosen. What, then, is meant by what He says in another place, “Have I not chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?” Chap. vi. 70. which He has just been saying, “Blessed shall ye be if ye do these things”? He speaketh not so of them all; for He knows whom He has chosen to be associated with Himself in blessedness. Of such he is not one, who ate His bread in order that he might lift up his heel upon Him. The bread they ate was the Lord Himself; he ate the Lord’s bread in enmity to the Lord: they ate life, and he punishment. “For he that eateth unworthily,” says the apostle, “eateth judgment unto himself.” 1 Cor. xi. 29. A modo; Greek, ’Απ’ ἄρτι; margin of English Bible, “From henceforth.”—Tr.

2. He then proceeds to say: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth Him that sent me.” Did He mean us to understand that there is as little distance between one sent by Him, and Himself, as there is between Himself and God the Father? If we take it in this way, I know not what measurements of distance (which may God forbid!) we shall be adopting, in the Arian fashion. For they, when they hear or read these words of the Gospel, have immediate recourse to their dogmatic measurements, whereby they ascend not to life, but fall headlong into death. For they straightway say: The Son’s messenger stands at the same relative distance from the Son, as expressed in the words, “He that receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth me,” as that in which the Son Himself stands from the Father, when He said, “He that receiveth me, receiveth Him that sent me.” But if thou sayest so, thou forgettest, heretic, thy measurements. For if, because of these words of the Lord, thou puttest the Son at as great a distance from the Father as the messenger [apostle] from the Son, where dost thou purpose to place the Holy Spirit? Has it escaped thee, that ye are wont to place Him after the Son? He will therefore come in between the messenger and the Son; and much greater, then, will be the distance between the Son and His messenger, than between the Father and His Son. Or perhaps, to preserve that distinction between the Son and His messenger, and between the Father and His Son, at their equality of distance, will the Holy Spirit be equal to the Son? But as little will ye allow this. And where, then, do ye think of placing Him, if ye place the Son as far beneath the Father, as ye place the messenger beneath the Son? Restrain, therefore, your foolhardy presumption; and do not be seeking to find in these words the same distance between the Son and His messenger as between the Father and His Son. But listen rather to the Son Himself, when He says, “I and my Father are one.” Chap. x. 30.

3. But now that the heretical slander has been disposed of, in what sense are we to understand these words of the Lord: “He that receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth Him that sent me”? For if we were inclined to understand the words, “He that receiveth me, receiveth Him that sent me,” as expressing the oneness in nature of the Father and the Son; the sequence from the similar arrangement of words in the other clause, “He that receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth me,” would be the unity in nature of the Son and His messenger. And there might, indeed, be no impropriety in so understanding it, seeing that a twofold substance belongeth to the strong man, who hath rejoiced to run the race; Ps. xix. 5. Chap. i. 14.

John 13:21-29 21. When Jesus had said these words, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I tell you, that one of you will betray me. 22. The disciples, therefore, looked on one another, doubting of whom he spoke. 23. And one of the disciples, whom Jesus loved, was lying at table in Jesus' bosom. 24. Therefore Simon Peter made a sign to him, to ask who it was of whom he spoke. 25. Lying on the breast of Jesus.,., therefore, he saith to him, Lord, who is he? 26. Jesus answered, It is he to whom I shall give the dipped sop; and when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. 27. And after the sop, Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus to him, What thou doest, do quickly. 28. And no one of those who were at table knew why he said this to him. 29. For some thought, because Judas had the purse, that Jesus said to him, Buy the things which we need for the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor. 21. When Jesus had said these words. The more sacred the apostolic office is, and the higher its dignity, the more base and detestable was the treachery of Judas. A crime so monstrous and detestable struck Christ himself with horror, when he saw how the incredible wickedness of one man had polluted that sacred order in which the majesty of God ought to have shone with brightness. To the same purpose is what the Evangelist adds, that he testified. His meaning is, the action was so monstrous that the bare mention of it could not be immediately believed. He was troubled in spirit. The Evangelist says that Christ was troubled in spirit, in order to inform us that he did not merely, in countenance and language, assume the appearance of a man who was troubled, but that he was deeply moved in his mind. Spirit here denotes the understanding, or, the soul; for I do not assent to the opinion of some who explain it, as if Christ had been driven by a violent impulse of the Holy Spirit to break out into these words. I readily acknowledge. that all the affections of Christ were guided by the Holy Spirit; but the meaning of the Evangelist is different, namely, that this suffering of Christ was inward, and was not feigned; and it is of great importance for us to know this, because his zeal is held out for our imitation, that we may be moved with deep horror by those monsters which overturn the sacred order of God and of his Church. 22. The disciples, therefore, looked on one another. They who are not conscious of any crime are rendered uneasy by what Christ has said: Judas alone is so stupid amidst his malice, that he remains unmoved. The authority of Christ was held in so great estimation by the disciples, that they were fully convinced that he said nothing without a good reason; but Satan had expelled from the heart of Judas all reverence, so that it was harder than a rock to reject every admonition. And though Christ appears to be somewhat unkind in inflicting this torture, for a time, on those who were innocent, yet as anxiety of this kind was profitable to them, Christ did them no injury. It is proper that, when the children of God have heard the sentence of the ungodly, they should themselves feel uneasiness, that they may sift themselves, and guard against hypocrisy; for this gives them an opportunity of examining themselves and their life. This passage shows that we ought sometimes to reprove the ungodly in such a manner as not instantly to point the finger to them, until God, by his own hand, drag them forth to the light. For it frequently happens that there are secret diseases in the Church, which we are not at liberty to disguise; and yet the wickedness of men is not so ripe as to be capable of being laid open. In such cases we ought to take this middle path. 23. Whom Jesus loved. The peculiar love with which Christ loved John plainly testifies that, if we love some more than others, this is not always inconsistent with brotherly love; but all lies in this, that our love shall be directed towards God, and that every man, in proportion as he excels in the gifts of God, shall share in it the more largely. From this end Christ never turned aside in the smallest degree; but with us the case is widely different, for such is the vanity of our mind, that there are few who, in loving men, approach more nearly to God. And yet the love of men towards each other will never be properly regulated, unless it be directed to God. Lay at table in Jesus' bosom. What is here related by John might be regarded in the present day as indecorous; but such was, at that time, the manner of being placed at table; for they did not sit, as we do, at table, but, after having put off their shoes, lay half-stretched out, reclining on small cushions. 26. To whom I shall give the dipped sop. It may be asked, what purpose did it serve to give a dipped sop, for discovering the traitor, when Christ might have openly pointed him out by name, if he wished to make him known? I answer, the sign was of such a nature, that it discovered Judas to one person only, and did not immediately bring him forward to the view of all. But it was advantageous that John should be witness of this fact, in order that he might afterwards reveal it to others at the proper time; and Christ intentionally delayed to make Judas publicly known, that, when hypocrites are concealed, we may more patiently bear, till they are dragged forth to the light. We see Judas sitting amongst the others, and yet condemned by the mouth of the Judge. In no respect better is the condition of those who hold a place among the children of God. 27. Satan entered into him. As it is certain that it was only at the instigation of Satan that Judas formed the design of committing so heinous a crime, why is it now said, for the first time, that Satan entered into him, who had already held the throne in his heart? But as they who are more fully confirmed in The faith which they formerly possessed are often said to believe, and thus an increase of their faith is called faith, so now that Judas is utterly given up to Satan, so as to be hurried on, by vehement impetuosity, to every extremity of evil, Satan is said to have entered into him. For as the saints make gradual progress, and in proportion to the new gifts by which they are continually enlarged, they are said to be filled with the Holy Spirit; so, in proportion as wicked men provoke the anger of God against themselves by their ingratitude, The Lord deprives them of his Spirit, of all light of reason, and, indeed, of all human feeling, and delivers them unreservedly to Satan. This is a dreadful vengeance of God, when men are given up to a reprobate mind, (Romans 1:28,) so that they scarcely differ at all from the brutes, and -- what is worse -- fall into horrid crimes from which the brutes themselves would shrink. We ought, therefore, to walk diligently in the fear of the Lord, lest, if we overpower his goodness by our wickedness, he at length give us up to the rage of, Satan. By giving the sop, Christ did not give an opportunity to Satan, but rather Judas, having received the sop, gave himself up entirely to Satan. It was, indeed, the occasion, but not the cause. His heart, which was harder than iron, ought to have been softened by so great kindness showed to him by Christ; and now his desperate and incurable obstinacy deserves that God, by his just judgment, should harden his heart still more by Satan. Thus, when, by acts of kindness to enemies, we heap coals of fire on their heads, (Romans 12:20,) if they are utterly incurable, they are the more enraged and inflamed [55] to their destruction. And yet no blame is due, on this account, to our kindness, by which their hearts ought to have been inflamed to love us. Augustine was wrong in thinking that this sop was an emblem of the body of Christ, since it was not during the Lord's Supper that it was given to Judas. It is also a very foolish dream to imagine that the devil entered essentially -- as the phrase is -- into Judas; for the Evangelist speaks only of the power and efficacy of Satan. This example reminds us what a dreadful punishment awaits all those who profane the gifts of the Lord by abusing them. What thou doest, do quickly. The exhortation addressed by Christ to Judas is not of such a nature that he can be regarded as exciting him to do the action: it is rather the language of one who views the crime with horror and detestation. [56] Hitherto he had endeavored, by various methods, to bring him back, but to no purpose. Now he addresses him as a desperate man, "Go to destruction, since you have resolved to go to destruction;" and, in doing so, he performs the office of a, judge, who condemns to death not those whom he, of his own accord, desires to ruin, but those who have already ruined themselves by their own fault. In short, Christ does not lay Judas under the necessity of perishing, but declares him to be what he had formerly been. 28. Not one of those who were at table. Either John had not yet related to others what Christ had told him, or they were so much struck by it, that they lost their presence of mind; and, indeed, ill is probable, that John himself was almost out of his senses. But what then happened to the disciples, we frequently see: taking place in the Church, that few of the believers discern the hypocrites whom the Lord loudly condemns. 29. Or that he should give something to the poor. It is plain enough from other passages how great was Christ's poverty, and yet, out of the little that he had, he gave something to the poor, in order to lay down a rule for us; for the Apostles would not have conjectured that he had spoken about the poor, if it had not been their usual custom to relieve the poor Footnotes: [55] "Ils se despitent et enflamment davantage." [56] "C'est plustost la parole d'un homme qui a en horreur et detestation quelque forfait."

John 13:30-35 30. When, therefore, he had received the sop, he went immediately out; and it was night. 31. When, therefore, he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him. 32. If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and will immediately glorify him. 33. Little children, but a little while am I yet with you. You shall seek me, and as I said to the Jews, that whither I go, you cannot come, so now I say to you. 34. A new commandment I give you, That you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35. By this will all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another. 31. Now is the Son of man glorified. The last hour was at hand; Christ knew that the minds of his disciples were very weak, and, therefore, he endeavored, by every possible method, to support them, that they might not give way. Even at the present day, the remembrance of the cross of Christ is sufficient to make us tremble, were we not instantly met by the consolation, that he triumphed in the cross, having obtained a victory over Satan, sin, and death. What, then, might have happened to the Apostles, when they saw the Lord soon dragged to the cross, loaded with every kind of reproaches? Might not an exhibition so melancholy and revolting have overwhelmed them a hundred times? Christ, therefore, provides against this danger, and withdraws them from the outward aspect of death to its spiritual fruit. Whatever ignominy, then, may be seen in the cross, fitted to confound believers, yet Christ testifies that the same cross brings glory and honor to him. [57] And God is glorified in him. This clause, which immediately follows the other, is added for confirmation; for it was a paradoxical statement, that the glory of the Son of man arose from a death which was reckoned ignominious among men, and was even accursed before God. He shows, therefore, in what manner he would obtain glory to himself from such a death. It is, because by it [58] he glorifies God the Father; for in the cross of Christ:, as in a magnificent theater, the inestimable goodness of God is displayed before the whole world. In all the creatures, indeed, both high and low, the glory of God shines, but nowhere has it shone more brightly than in the cross, in which there has been an astonishing change of things, the condemnation of all men has been manifested, sin has been blotted out, salvation has been restored to men; and, in short, the whole world has been renewed, and every thing restored to good order. In him. Though the preposition (en) in is often used instead of the Hebrew v, and, in such eases, is equivalent to by, yet I have preferred translating it simply, that God is glorified in the Son of man; because I considered that phrase to be more emphatic. When he says, and God is glorified, the meaning, I apprehend, is, for God is glorified 32. If God be glorified. Christ concludes that he will obtain a glorious triumph by his death; because his sole design in it is, to glorify his Father; for the Father did not seek his glory from the death of his Son in such a manner as not to make the Son a partaker of that glory. He promises, therefore, that when the ignominy which he shall endure for a short time has been effaced, illustrious honor will be displayed in his death. And this too was accomplished; for the death of the cross, which Christ suffered, is so far from obscuring his high rank, that in that death his high rank is chiefly displayed, since there his amazing love to mankind, his infinite righteousness in atoning for sin and appeasing the wrath of God, his wonderful power in conquering death, subduing Satan, and, at length, opening heaven, blazed with full brightness. This doctrine is now extended also to all of us; for though the whole world should conspire to cover us with infamy, yet if we sincerely and honestly endeavor to promote the glory of God, we ought not to doubt that God will also glorify us. And will immediately glorify him. Christ heightens the consolation by arguments drawn from the shortness of the time, when he promises that it will take place immediately. And though this glory began at the day of his resurrection, yet what is chiefly described here is the extension of it, which followed immediately afterwards, when, raising the dead by the power of the Gospel and of his Spirit, he created a new people for himself; for the honor which peculiarly belongs to the death of Christ, is the fruit which sprung from it for the salvation of men. 33. Little children, yet a little while am I with you. As it was impossible that the disciples should not be deeply grieved at their Master's departure, so he gives them early warning that he will no longer be with them, and, at the same time, exhorts them to patience. Lastly, to remove unseasonable eagerness of desire, he declares that they cannot immediately follow him. In calling them little children, he shows, by that gentle appellation, that his reason for departing from them is not that he cares little about their welfare, for he loves them very tenderly. True, the object which he had in view in clothing himself with our flesh was, that he might be our brother, but by that other name he expresses more strongly the ardor of his love. As I said to the Jews. When he says, that he repeats to them what he had formerly said to the Jews, this is true as to the words, but there is a wide difference in the meaning; for he declares that they cannot follow him, in order that they may endure patiently his temporary absence, and -- so to speak -- bridles them in, that; they may remain in their office, till they have finished their warfare on earth; so that he does not perpetually exclude them, as Jews, from the kingdom of God, but only bids them wait patiently, till he bring them, along with himself, into the heavenly kingdom. 34. A new commandment I give you. To the consolation he adds an exhortation, that they should love one another; as if he had said, "Yet while I am absent from you in body, testify, by mutual love, that I have not taught you in vain; let this be your constant study, your chief meditation." Why does he call it a new commandment? All are not agreed on this point. There are some who suppose the reason to be, that, while the injunction formerly contained in the Law about brotherly love was literal and external, Christ wrote it anew by his Spirit on the hearts of believers. Thus, according to them, the Law is new, because he publishes it in a new manner, that it may have full vigor. But that is, in my opinion, far-fetched, and at variance with Christ's meaning. The exposition given by others is, that, though the Law directs us to the exercise of love, still, because in it the doctrine of brotherly love is encumbered by many ceremonies and appendages, it is not so clearly exhibited; but, on the other hand, that perfection in love is laid down in the Gospel without any shadows. For my own part, though I do not absolutely reject this interpretation, I consider what Christ said to be more simple; for we know that laws are more carefully observed at the commencement, but they gradually slip out of the remembrance of men, till at length they become obsolete. In order to impress more deeply, therefore, on the minds of his disciples the doctrine of brotherly love, Christ recommends it on the ground of novelty; as if he had said, "I wish you continually to remember this commandment, as if it had been a law but lately made." In short, we see that it was the design of Christ, in this passage, to exhort his disciples to brotherly love, that they might never permit themselves to be withdrawn from the pursuit of it, or the doctrine of it to slip out of their minds. And how necessary this admonition was, we learn by daily experience; for, since it is difficult to maintain brotherly love, men lay it aside, and contrive, for themselves, new methods of worshipping God, and Satan suggests many things for the purpose of occupying their attention. Thus, by idle employments, they in vain attempt to mock God, but they deceive themselves. Let this title of novelty, therefore, excite us to the continual exercise of brotherly love. Meanwhile, let us know that it is called new, not because it now began, for the first time, to please God, since it is elsewhere called the fulfilling of the law, (Romans 13:10.) That you love one another. Brotherly love is, indeed, extended to strangers, for we are all of the same flesh, and are all created after the image of God; but because the image of God shines more brightly in those who have been regenerated, it is proper that the bond of love, among the disciples of Christ, should be far more close. In God brotherly love seeks its cause, from him it has its root, and to him it is directed. Thus, in proportion as it perceives any man to be a child of God, it embraces him with the greater warmth and affection. Besides, the mutual exercise of love cannot exist but in those who are guided by the same Spirit. It is the highest degree of brotherly love, therefore, that is here described by Christ; but we ought to believe, on the other hand, that, as the goodness of God extends to the whole world, so we ought to love all, even those who hate us. As I have loved you. He holds out his own example, not because we can reach it, for we are at a vast distance behind him, but that we may, at least, aim at the same end. 35. By this all men will know. Christ again confirms what he had formerly said, that they who mutually love one another have not been in vain taught in his school; as if he had said, Not only will you know that you are my disciples, but your profession will also be acknowledged by others to be sincere." Since Christ lays down this mark for distinguishing between his disciples and strangers, they who lay aside brotherly love, and adopt new and invented modes of worship, labor in vain; and folly of this kind prevails at this day in Popery. Nor is it superfluous that Christ dwells so largely on this subject. There is no greater agreement between the love of ourselves, and the love of our neighbor, than there is between fire and water. Self love keeps all our senses bound in such a manner that brotherly love is altogether banished; and yet we think that we fully discharge our duty, because Satan has many enticements to deceive us, that we may not perceive our faults. [59] Whoever, then, desires to be truly a disciple of Christ, and to be acknowledged by God, let him form and direct his whole life to love the brethren, and let him pursue this object with diligence. Footnotes: [57] "Luy est glorieuse et honorable." [58] "Par icelle." [59] "A ce que nous n'appercevions nos fautes."

I speak not of you all--the "happy are ye," of Joh 13:17, being on no supposition applicable to Judas. I know whom I have chosen--in the higher sense. But that the scripture may be fulfilled--that is, one has been added to your number, by no accident or mistake, who is none of Mine, but just that he might fulfil his predicted destiny. He that eateth bread with me--"did eat of my bread" (Psa 41:9), as one of My family; admitted to the nearest familiarity of discipleship and of social life. hath lifted up his heel against me--turned upon Me, adding insult to injury. (Compare Heb 10:29). In the Psalm the immediate reference is to Ahithophel's treachery against David (2Sa. 17:1-23), one of those scenes in which the parallel of his story with that of His great Antitype is exceedingly striking. "The eating bread derives a fearful meaning from the participation in the sacramental supper, a meaning which must be applied for ever to all unworthy communicants, as well as to all betrayers of Christ who eat the bread of His Church" (STIER, with whom, and others, we agree in thinking that Judas partook of the Lord's Supper).

I tell you before . . . that when it comes to pass, ye may believe--and it came to pass when they deeply needed such confirmation.

He that receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth me, &c.--(See on Mat 10:40). The connection here seems to be that despite the dishonor done to Him by Judas, and similar treatment awaiting themselves, they were to be cheered by the assurance that their office, even as His own, was divine.

THE TRAITOR INDICATED--HE LEAVES THE SUPPER ROOM. (Joh 13:21-30) When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, One of you shall betray me--The announcement of Joh 13:18 seems not to have been plain enough to be quite apprehended, save by the traitor himself. He will therefore speak it out in terms not to be misunderstood. But how much it cost Him to do this, appears from the "trouble" that came over His "spirit"--visible emotion, no doubt--before He got it uttered. What wounded susceptibility does this disclose, and what exquisite delicacy in His social intercourse with the Twelve, to whom He cannot, without an effort, break the subject!

the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spake--Further intensely interesting particulars are given in the other Gospels: (1) "They were exceeding sorrowful" (Mat 26:22). (2) "They began to inquire among themselves which of them it was that should do this thing" (Luk 22:23). (3) "They began to say unto Him one by one, Is it I, and another, Is it I?" (Mar 14:19). Generous, simple hearts! They abhorred the thought, but, instead of putting it on others, each was only anxious to purge himself and know if he could be the wretch. Their putting it at once to Jesus Himself, as knowing doubtless who was to do it, was the best, as it certainly was the most spontaneous and artless evidence of their innocence. (4) Jesus, apparently while this questioning was going on, added, "The Son of man goeth as it is written of Him, but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It had been good for that man if he had not been born" (Mat 26:24). (5) "Judas," last of all, "answered and said, Lord, is it I?" evidently feeling that when all were saying this, if he held his peace, that of itself would draw suspicion upon him. To prevent this the question is wrung out of him, but perhaps, amidst the stir and excitement at the table, in a half-suppressed tone as we are inclined to think the answer also was--"Thou hast said" (Mat 26:25), or possibly by little more than a sign; for from Joh 13:28 it is evident that till the moment when he went out, he was not openly discovered.

there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved--Thus modestly does our Evangelist denote himself, as reclining next to Jesus at the table. Peter . . . beckoned to him to ask who it should be of whom he spake--reclining probably at the corresponding place on the other side of Jesus.

Jesus answered--also inaudibly, the answer being communicated to Peter perhaps from behind. He . . . to whom I shall give a sop when I have dipped it--a piece of the bread soaked in the wine or the sauce of the dish; one of the ancient ways of testifying peculiar regard; compare Joh 13:18, "he that eateth bread with Me." And when he had dipped . . . he gave it to Judas, &c.--Thus the sign of Judas' treachery was an affecting expression, and the last, of the Saviour's wounded love!

after the sop Satan entered into him--Very solemn are these brief hints of the successive steps by which Judas reached the climax of his guilt. "The devil had already put it into his heart to betray his Lord." Yet who can tell what struggles he went through ere he brought himself to carry that suggestion into effect? Even after this, however, his compunctions were not at an end. With the thirty pieces of silver already in his possession, he seems still to have quailed--and can we wonder? When Jesus stooped to wash his feet, it may be the last struggle was reaching its crisis. But that word of the Psalm, about "one that ate of his bread who would lift up his heel against Him" (Psa 41:9) probably all but turned the dread scale, and the still more explicit announcement, that one of those sitting with Him at the table should betray Him, would beget the thought, "I am detected; it is now too late to draw back." At that moment the sop is given; offer of friendship is once more made--and how affectingly! But already "Satan has entered into him," and though the Saviour's act might seem enough to recall him even yet, hell is now in his bosom, and he says within himself, "The die is cast; now let me go through with it"; fear, begone!" (See on Mat 12:43). Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly--that is, Why linger here? Thy presence is a restraint, and thy work stands still; thou hast the wages of iniquity, go work for it!

no man . . . knew for what intent he spake this unto him . . . some thought . . . Jesus . . . said . . . But what we need . . . or, . . . give . . . to the poor--a very important statement, as showing how carefully. Jesus had kept the secret, and Judas his hypocrisy, to the last.

He then, having received the sop, went immediately out--severing himself for ever from that holy society with which he never had any spiritual sympathy. and it was night--but far blacker night in the soul of Judas than in the sky over his head.

Tractate LX. Chapter XIII. 21. 1. It is no light question, brethren, that meets us in the Gospel of the blessed John, when he says: “When Jesus had thus said, He was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.” Was it for this reason that Jesus was troubled, not in flesh, but in spirit, that He was now about to say, “One of you shall betray me”? Did this occur then for the first time to His mind, or was it at that moment suddenly revealed to Him for the first time, and so troubled Him by the startling novelty of so great a calamity? Was it not a little before that He was using these words, “He that eateth bread with me will lift up his heel against me”? And had He not also, previously to that, said, “And ye are clean, but not all”? where the evangelist added, “For He knew who should betray Him:” Chap. xiii. 18, 10, 11. Chap. vi. 71. Chap. xii. 27. 2. He was troubled, then, who had power to lay down His life, and had power to take it again. Chap. x. 18. Phil. iii. 21. The text has transfiguravit (pret.), “hath transformed,” in this as well as in the next clause, “hath transferred,” but here it is evidently a misprint for transfigurabit (fut.).—Tr. 3. Away with the reasons of philosophers, who assert that a wise man is not affected by mental perturbations. God hath made foolish the wisdom of this world; 1 Cor. i. 20. Ps. xciv. 11. also insensibility as soundness; not knowing that a man’s mind, like the limbs of his body, is only the more hopelessly diseased when it has lost even the feeling of pain. 4. But says some one: Ought the mind of the Christian to be troubled even at the prospect of death? For what comes of those words of the apostle, that he had a desire to depart, and to be with Christ, Phil. i. 23. Gaudium, non lætitia. Matt. xxvi. 38.

5. Strong-minded, indeed, are those Christians, if such there are, who experience no trouble at all in the prospect of death; but for all that, are they stronger-minded than Christ? Who would have the madness to say so? And what else, then, does His being troubled signify, but that, by voluntarily assuming the likeness of their weakness, He comforted the weak members in His own body, that is, in His Church; to the end that, if any of His own are still troubled at the approach of death, they may fix their gaze upon Him, and so be kept from thinking themselves castaways on this account, and being swallowed up in the more grievous death of despair? And how great, then, must be that good which we ought to expect and hope for in the participation of His divine nature, whose very perturbation tranquillizes us, and whose infirmity confirms us? Whether, therefore, on this occasion it was by His pity for Judas himself thus rushing into ruin, or by the near approach of His own death, that He was troubled, yet there is no possibility of doubting that it was not through any infirmity of mind, but in the fullness of power, that He was troubled, and so no despair of salvation need arise in our minds, when we are troubled, not in the possession of power, but in the midst of our weakness. He certainly bore the infirmity of the flesh,—an infirmity which was swallowed up in His resurrection. But He who was not only man, but God also, surpassed by an ineffable distance the whole human race in fortitude of mind. He was not, then, troubled by any outward plessure of man, but troubled Himself; which was very plainly declared of Him when He raised Lazarus from the dead: for it is there written that He troubled Himself, Chap. xi. 33, margin.

Tractate LXI. Chapter XIII. 21–26. 1. This short section of the Gospel, brethren, we have in this lesson brought forward for exposition, as thinking that we ought also to say something of the Lord’s betrayer, as now plainly enough disclosed by the dipping and holding out to him of the piece of bread. Of that indeed which precedes, (namely), that Jesus, when about to point him out, was troubled in spirit, we have treated in our last discourse; but what I perhaps omitted to mention there, the Lord, by His own perturbation of spirit, thought proper to indicate this also, that it is necessary to bear with false brethren, and those tares that are among the wheat in the Lord’s field until harvest-time, because that when we are compelled by urgent reasons to separate some of them even before the harvest, it cannot be done without disturbance to the Church. Such disturbance to His saints in the future, through schismatics and heretics, the Lord in a way foretold and prefigured in Himself, when, at the moment of that wicked man Judas’ departure, and of his thereby bringing to an end, in a very open and decided way, his past intermingling with the wheat, in which he had long been tolerated, He was troubled, not in body, but in spirit. For it is not spitefulness, but charity, that troubles His spiritual members in scandals of this kind; lest perchance, in separating some of the tares, any of the wheat should also be uprooted therewith. 2. “Jesus,” therefore, “was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said: Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.” “One of you,” in number, not in merit; in appearance, not in reality; in bodily commingling, not by any spiritual tie; a companion by fleshly juxtaposition, not in any unity of the heart; and therefore not one who is of you, but one who is to go forth from you. For how else can this “one of you” be true, of which the Lord so testified, and said, if that is true which the writer of this very Gospel says in his Epistle, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us”? 1 John ii. 19.

3. “Then the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom He spake.” For while they were imbued with a reverential love to their Master, they were none the less affected by human infirmity in their feelings towards each other. Each one’s own conscience was known to himself; but as he was ignorant of his neighbor’s, each one’s self-assurance was such that each was uncertain of all the others, and all the others were uncertain of that one. 4. “Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom, one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved.” What he meant by saying “in His bosom,” he tells us a little further on, where he says, “on the breast of Jesus.” It was that very John whose Gospel is before us, as he afterwards expressly declares. Chap. xxi. 20–24. Matt. ix. 9. Ex. vi. 1. 2 Cor. xii. 2. 5. But what mean the words, “whom Jesus loved”? As if He did not love the others, of whom this same John has said above, “He loved them to the end” (ver. 1); and as the Lord Himself, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” And who could enumerate all the testimonies of the sacred pages, in which the Lord Jesus is exhibited as the lover, not only of this one, or of those who were then around Him, but of such also as were to be His members in the distant future, and of His universal Church? But there is some truth, doubtless, underlying these words, and having reference to the bosom on which the narrator was leaning. For what else can be in dicated by the bosom but some hidden truth? But there is another more suitable passage, where the Lord may enable us to say something about this secret that may prove sufficient.

6. “Simon Peter therefore beckons, and says to him.” The original mss. give different readings of this verse. That followed by our English version is supported by the Codd. Alex. and Cantabr., which read, Νεύει οὖν τούτῳ Σίμων Πέτρος πυθέσθαι τίς ἂν εἴη περὶ οὗ λέγει. The Latin version used by Augustin reads, Innuit ergo Simon Petrus, et dicit ei, Quis est de quo dicit, and approaches nearly to that found in the Codd. Vat. and Ephr., which read, Νεύει οὗν τούτῳ Σ. Π., καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, Εἰπὲ τίς ἐστιν περὶ οὗ λέγει—“Simon Peter therefore beckons to this one, and says to him, Say [ask], who is it of whom He speaks?” Of the early versions, the Syriac adopts the former, while the Vulgate resembles the latter. The Sinaitic gives a fuller reading, compounded of both the others. There is thus some doubt as to the original text; but the latter has some special arguments of an internal kind in its favor: such as the consideration that, from its peculiar and somewhat redundant form, it could hardly have been substituted in place of the former, which is smoother and more elegant, while the converse is perfectly supposable; and also the weighty fact that John nowhere else makes use of the optative mood, as he would here (τίς ἂν εἴη), if the former reading—that followed by our English version—were the true one.—Tr. Wisd. of Sol. ii. 1. Pectoris sinus; the hollow, the inmost part of the breast.

Tractate LXII. Chapter XIII. 26–31. 1. I Know, dearly beloved, that some may be moved, as the godly to inquire into the meaning of, and the ungodly to find fault with, the statement, that it was after the Lord had given the bread, that had been dipped, to His betrayer that Satan entered into him. For so it is written: “And when He had dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the Son of Simon. And after the bread, then entered Satan into him.” For they say, Was this the worth of Christ’s bread, given from Christ’s own table, that after it Satan should enter into His disciple? And the answer we give them is, that thereby we are taught rather how much we need to beware of receiving what is good in a sinful spirit. For the point of special importance is, not the thing that is received, but the person that receives it; and not the character of the thing that is given, but of him to whom it is given. For even good things are hurtful, and evil things are beneficial, according to the character of the recipients. “Sin,” says the apostle, “that it might appear sin, wrought death to me by that which is good.” Rom. vii. 13. 2 Cor. xii. 7–9. that by such an instrumentality he might be perfected in Christ? In this way, both the good was injurious to the evil man, and the evil was beneficial to the good. Bear in mind the meaning of the Scripture, “Whosoever shall eat the bread or drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” 1 Cor. xi. 27. 2. It was after this bread, then, that Satan entered into the Lord’s betrayer, that, as now given over to his power, he might take full possession of one into whom before this he had only entered in order to lead him into error. For we are not to suppose that he was not in him when he went to the Jews and bargained about the price of betraying the Lord; for the evangelist Luke very plainly attests this when he says: “Then entered Satan into Judas, who was surnamed Iscariot, being one of the twelve; and he went his way, and communed with the chief priests.” Luke xxii. 3, 4. 3. But it was not then, as some thoughtless readers suppose, that Judas received the body of Christ. For we are to understand that the Lord had already dispensed to all of them the sacrament of His body and blood, when Judas also was present, as very clearly related by Saint Luke; Luke xxii. 19–21.

4. But still, possessed as Judas now was, not by the Lord, but by the devil, and now that the bread had entered the belly, and an enemy the soul of this man of ingratitude: still, I say, there was this enormous wickedness, already conceived in his heart, waiting to be wrought out to its full issue, for which the damnable desire had always preceded. Accordingly, when the Lord, the living Bread, had given this bread to the dead, and in giving it had revealed the betrayer of the Bread, He said, “What thou doest, do quickly.” He did not command the crime, but foretold evil to Judas, and good to us. For what could be worse for Judas, or what could be better for us, than the delivering up of Christ,—a deed done by him to his own destruction, but done, apart from him, in our behalf? “What thou doest, do quickly.” Oh that word of One whose wish was to be ready rather than to be angry! That word! expressing not so much the punishment of the traitor as the reward awaiting the Redeemer! For He said, “What thou doest, do quickly,” not as wrathfully looking to the destruction of the trust-betrayer, but in His own haste to accomplish the salvation of the faithful; for He was delivered for our offences, Rom. iv. 25. Eph. v. 25. Gal. ii. 20. 5. “Now no one of those at the table knew for what intent He spake this unto him. For some of them thought, because Judas had the money-bag, that Jesus said unto him, Buy those things which we have need of against the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor.” The Lord, therefore, had also a money-box, where He kept the offerings of believers, and distributed to the necessities of His own, and to others who were in need. It was then that the custom of having church-money was first introduced, so that thereby we might understand that His precept about taking no thought for the morrow Matt. vi. 34. 1 Tim. v. 16. 6. “He then, having received the morsel of bread, went immediately out: and it was night.” And he that went out was himself the night. “Therefore when” the night “was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified.” The day therefore uttered speech unto the day, that is, Christ did so to His faithful disciples, that they might hear and love Him as His followers; and the night showed knowledge unto the night, Ps. xix. 2.

He then lying--rather leaning over on Jesus' bosom. saith--in a whisper, "Lord, who is it?"