The Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide: S. John
I know and have known whom and what manner of men I have elected to be apostles , who will be worthy , and who will not , who will persevere, and therefore be blessed , and who will not ; I know those who will do these things which I have said , and who will not , as I know and have known , that Judas being chosen by Me, would not do these things , but would be My betrayer. Wherefore I did not choose him in ignorance , nay rather I foreknew and foresaw that he would betray Me, yet did I choose him to use his malice for the common good , that through him My Passion might be fulfilled , and through it the salvation and redemption of men . Wherefore He adds, — But that the Scripture may be fulfilled ; He that eateth bread with Me shall lift up his heel against Me. I knew that Judas would be My betrayer , yet I elected him an Apostle , that through him the Scripture which foretold My Passion and its manner , might be fulfilled , for it foretold that it should be begun by the treachery of My familiar friend , of one of Mine own household, of Judas who has abused My friendship and familiarity in order to betray Me. And I have been willing to allow this, that from his wickedness I may elicit an infinite good — the salvation , namely, of the world — just as I permitted the fall of Lucifer and of Adam, to draw from thence the Incarnation of Christ.
Lift up his heel . He is quoting Ps. xl. 9, where the Septuagint translate “made great upon Me his tripping up,” and S. Jerome, “lifted up against me the sole of his foot,” that is, tried to deceive, trip up, betray, and bring Me to ruin ; nay, he did indeed trip Me up by his deceit, caused Me to fall into the hands of the Jews, and led Me to My Cross and death. David is speaking literally of Achitophel, who betrayed him to his son Absalom, but mystically of Judas, the betrayer of Christ, of whom Achitophel was a type as David was of Christ.
Ver. 19. — I say to you at once, before it come to pass , that when it come to pass ye may believe that I am. Now , in the Greek, ἀπ’ ἄρτι, which may be translated from now or from this time, as in the Syriac Version, or, as here, straightway , forthwith, indicating the treachery of Judas to be near at hand. A few hours hence Judas shall betray Me, and therefore I foretell it to you, that when you see Me betrayed, seized, and killed, you may not be disturbed, but may believe— persevere in My Faith, that I am — the Messiah, the Son of God, freely offering Myself to death for the redemption of mankind. I foretell all these things to you that you may believe that I know them all beforehand and could withdraw Myself from danger, but that I will not, but wish to suffer for the salvation of the world. Then, too, shall you see that I said truly, “ Ye are not all clean ” — that Judas is unclean and wicked, and therefore to be reprobated and condemned, when you see him for the enormity of his crime strangle himself with a cord. Let, therefore, this prediction of Mine, coupled with the occurrence of the thing predicted, make you firm and strong in My faith when you are on the point of tottering. So Cyril.
Ver. 20. — Verily , verily I say to you, that He that receives him whom I have sent, receives Me; and he that receives Me receives Him that sent Me. It is not clear how these words are connected with those which precede. First Chrysostom (Hom. 21), and Theophylact after him, refer them to the passion and cross of Christ, as though He were encouraging the apostles to imitate it. In other words : Fear not the persecutions, death, and crosses which you shall suffer in preaching My faith, for in this you will be following Me, — suffering as My ambassadors, sent by Me and therefore by God the Father. Wherefore this suffering shall not bring ignominy on you, but glory. There is, however, no reference here to the sufferings of the apostles, but to their reception by the world.
Then again Cyril (bk. ix. ch. 12) thinks that Christ is showing the heinousness of Judas’ treachery by means of an argument from its contrary, thus — Just as he who receives and honours one sent by Me receives and honours Me, so, too, he who rejects him that I send offers a grievous insult not only to Me, but also to God who sent Me. Here, however, we must supply a great many things which Christ did not say.
Gaetano, Jansenius, and Ribera, with more probability, hold that Christ wished, at the close of His discourse on the washing of feet, to make some additional remarks by way of exhorting all the faithful to receive and treat with kindness the apostles sent to them, just as He had previously exhorted the apostles to be kind to the faithful. In this way He consoles the apostles too, whom He had bidden labour in offices of charity for the good of all (Chrysostom, Homily 71.)
Lastly, Toletus thinks that this is connected with the example given in the washing of feet by Christ, in order that the apostles and the faithful may not excuse themselves from following it on the score that such an act lowers a man. For Christ Himself practised it, and in so doing rendered it honourable and noble. The meaning then is: He who entertains guests who are of the faith, especially apostles, and washes their feet, as it were receives Me who sent them, but he that receives Me receives also the Father who sent Me.
Christ, then, here teaches that offices of humility, such as the washing of feet, must be undertaken even by apostles and prelates , and not refused by them on the score of the dignity of their station, for by these works they shall become honourable as true imitators of Christ and His genuinely accredited agents. It was for this that St Francis Xavier when, on his voyage to India, he used to make the beds of the sick people, cook their food, and give them their medicine, hearing the complaint made that such degrading occupations were not becoming to an Apostolic Legate as he was, answered that they were becoming to a disciple and apostle of Christ, since Christ Himself underwent, and, as it were, ennobled them. For in the school of Christ humility alone ennobles and exalts, because it makes us like Christ our God and Lord. So says Tursellinus in his life of this Saint.
S. Charles Borromeo would, on an occasion of public supplication, go with his feet bare, a halter tied round his neck, carrying a cross. He used to discharge servile functions towards the poor, minister to those who were stricken with the plague, and fulfil every menial office ; yet did he not by so doing derogate from his dignity as an Archbishop and a Cardinal, but rather enhanced it, and earned the name of “ the Holy Cardinal.” For as a carbuncle set in a gold ring increases its beauty, so does humility shed a lustre upon the insignia of high station.
Ver. 21. — When He had said these things , Jesus was troubled in spirit , and testified (openly and plainly), saying , Verily, I say unto you, that one of you will betray Me. In the Syriac, “ These things said Jeschua, and groaned in spirit, and testified and said, Amin, amin, I say to you,” κ.τ.λ. In the Arabic Version “was moved in spirit.” This emotion, then, was an immense grief and indignation at the crime of Judas. Christ was pained in the innermost feelings of His soul, and groaned in spirit for the enormity of this crime as well as for the perdition of Judas. And this sorrow he did not suffer involuntarily, but admitted it of His free will, and took it upon Him at this point of His own accord, as He did at the death of Lazarus. See commentary on ch. xi. ver. 33.
The question arises here, Did this prediction of Christ take place before or after the institution of the Eucharist? John omits all mention of that event, it having been narrated fully by the other Evangelists. Matthew and Mark put the prediction before the institution of the Eucharist in order of time, but Luke puts it after.
There are three probable opinions on this point. The first is that of Jansenius and Francis Lucas, who think that Christ predicted the treason of Judas after the Eucharist, as Luke has it, and that Matthew and Mark, in making it come before, anticipate intentionally. The reason for this view is that if Christ had predicted the treason of Judas before the institution of the Eucharist, He would have disturbed the minds of the apostles, moved them to anger, and rendered their dispositions for its reception less collected than would have been fitting. But this is not conclusive. For Christ before the Eucharist foretold His passion and death, and this disturbed the apostles far more : and soon after the Eucharist— as these interpreters themselves admit — He foretold the treason of Judas, and this disturbed them then, so that they did not duly dispose themselves for that recollection which is proper after Communion. Then again this prediction would, before the Eucharist, have had the force of deterring Judas from his crime, as well as producing compunction in the hearts of the apostles and making them all careful to examine each one his own conscience, lest Christ should there find anything to bring to light and complain of, as He did the crime of Judas.