Commentary on the Gospel of John 32 part 1/5

Prospering from God through Jesus Christ, let us proceed on the great road of the Gospel, which is also living for us, if indeed it should be known and traveled by us, so that we may also reach its end.

But now let us try to set foot, as it were, upon the thirty-second encampment in the things that are about to be said; and may the pillar of the shining cloud of Jesus be present with us, leading us forward when it is necessary, and halting us when necessary, by the guidance of the shining cloud and by the dictation of the things pertaining to the Gospel — O holy brother and man of God, Ambrose — let us go through the Gospel, not growing faint-hearted because of the length of the journey, nor growing weary because of our own weakness, but forcing ourselves to walk in the footsteps of the pillar of truth.

But whether he wishes our mind to complete, through these dictations, the journey through the whole writing of the Gospel according to John, or not, God himself would know.

"...only; and while we are at home in the body and away from the Lord, until we come to be at home with the Lord, let us not go outside the gospel, so that we may enjoy, in the paradise of God's delight, both the deeds and words of those who bring the beatitudes." And while supper was taking place, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, that he should betray him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God, rises from supper and lays aside his garments; and taking a towel he girded himself. Then he pours water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel with which he was girded.

In the homilies on the Gospel according to Luke, we compared the parables with one another, and we inquired what "breakfast" signifies according to the divine Scriptures, and what "supper" according to them represents.

So now, then, let it be said that "breakfast" is the first spiritual food, fitting for beginners, before the completion of the day in this life; while "supper" is the last, set fittingly, in due course, before those who have already made greater progress.

And in another way one might say that "breakfast" is the sense of the old writings, while "supper" is the mysteries hidden within the new covenant.

These things have been said as a preface for one who is going to examine how, when supper was taking place, Jesus rises from supper, and, having poured water into the basin, begins to wash the disciples' feet.

For I think that those who sup with Jesus, and who, on the day at the end of this life, partake with him of food, do indeed need some purification — not, however, concerning any of the upper parts of the, so to call it, "body" of the soul, but, as one might say, they need to have the last and lowest parts washed, those which of necessity come into contact with the earth.

And this purification, in the first instance, can come about by no one other than Jesus alone; but in the second instance, also by his disciples, to whom he said: "You also ought to wash one another's feet; for I have given you an example, that just as I have done to you, you also should do."

And it seems to me that the evangelist, in these things, is rousing our mind toward the intelligible sense of the passage, in that he did not preserve the bodily sequence concerning the washing — namely, that before supper and before reclining to dine, those who need to have their feet washed are washed — but, passing over that occasion, has by his account represented Jesus as having already reclined for supper and only then as having risen from supper, so that it is after they have supped that the teacher and lord begins to wash the disciples' feet.

For before supper they had been bathed, and had become wholly clean according to "Wash yourselves, become clean, remove your wicked deeds from before your eyes," and what follows; but after that bathing they had need of a second water, for the feet alone, that is, for the lowest parts of the body.

For I think it is impossible that nothing of the soul, not even its last and lowest parts, should be defiled, even if someone seems to be perfect among human beings.

So then, the many, even after the bath, become filled with the dust of sins at the head, or a little below it; but those who have genuinely been made disciples of Jesus — so as to have arrived even at supping together with him — have only their feet in need of the washing performed by the Word.

And if you look closely at the differences among sins, and consider those things that are sins in relation to the exactness and strength of the Word, but which, in relation to the many, are not even reckoned to be sins, you will see what sort of things they are, on account of which the feet need to be washed by Jesus.

And if such is the state of defilements, what shall we do, who have never arrived at the supper with Jesus, and who are defiled not merely in the feet? — since Jesus says to Peter, who did not then know, but who would afterward know, the mystery of the washing of the feet cleansed by Jesus: "If I do not wash you, you have no part with me."

You will inquire what this signifies: whether it means that you have no part at all in the good unless I wash you — said of me, regarding those who, among those who have bathed, have neither supped the supper with me nor had their feet washed by me, or who have supped indeed, but have not been washed.

But I pause to reflect on this, on account of "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone opens the door to me, I will come in to him and will sup with him, and he with me" — lest perhaps Jesus neither "breakfasts" with anyone (for he has no need of introduction and first lessons), nor does anyone "breakfast" with him, but the one who eats with him only "sups." "For," he says, "something greater than Solomon is here," concerning whom it is written: "And this was Solomon's breakfast," which is set down in...

...the third book of Kingdoms. And I would venture also to say this, as a consequence of "If I do not wash you, you have no part with me": that he did not wash the feet of Judas, because the devil had already cast into his heart the intent that he should betray the teacher and lord, having found him not clothed with the full armor for quenching the fiery darts of the evil one.

For since it is written, "the devil having already cast [into the heart]", I understand this as also taught concerning this matter by Scripture in the seventh Psalm — the devil as an archer, working out fiery darts against those who do not, with all watchfulness,

...guard their own heart. And the wording of the Psalm is thus: "If you do not turn back, he will sharpen his sword; he has bent his bow and made it ready. And in it he has prepared instruments of death; he has wrought his arrows for those who burn. Behold, he has been in travail with injustice, he has conceived trouble and brought forth iniquity."

Everyone, then, will agree that "Behold, he has been in travail with injustice, he has conceived trouble and brought forth iniquity" can be referred to the devil. But it is absurd not to suppose that these words too are said in like manner: "If you do not turn back, he will sharpen his sword; he has bent his bow and made it ready; and in it he has prepared instruments of death." For no one else has prepared instruments of death in his own bow which he bent, except the one through whose envy death entered into the world.

From these arrows, then, which the devil wrought for those who burn, he cast one into the heart of Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, already struck during the supper — not, however, so as to give him pleasure, since the food of this supper, and the wine in it, could not become a source of joy in a heart already struck by the devil with a dart concerning the betrayal of, perhaps, its host — since it does not appear clearly in these words who it was by whom the supper was given, as in the passages before these: "They made him a supper there," it says, "and Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those reclining at table with him."

So then, in the case of Judas it is written: "The devil having already cast into his heart that Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, should betray him." And in accordance with this you might say, concerning each of those wounded in the heart by the devil: "the devil having already cast into the heart of so-and-so, that he should fornicate"; "of so-and-so, that he should defraud"; and "of so-and-so, that he, being mad for gifts, should take up the idolatry of flattering those who seem to hold positions of honor"; and so on with the rest of the sins which the devil casts into the heart that is bare of the shield of faith. With that shield of faith, one is able to quench not one nor two, but even all the fiery darts of the evil one.

III. Now, then, as the dispensation concerning the Passion draws near, at which point Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, wounded by the devil, was about to betray him, and supper already taking place: "Jesus, knowing," it says, "that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God, rises from supper."

Therefore the things which were not previously in the hands of Jesus are given by the Father into his hands — and not some indeed, but others not, but all things. Which also, seeing by the Spirit, David says: "The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."

For indeed the enemies of Jesus were a certain part of all those whom Jesus knew, so far as his foreknowledge extended, to have been given to him by the Father. But in order that we may see more clearly what it means that "the Father has given him all things into his hands," let us attend to: "For as in Adam all die, so also in the Lord shall all be made alive."

But if the Father has also given him all things into his hands, and in Christ all shall be made alive, justice is not confounded, since there is added to "so in Christ all shall be made alive" the words: "But each in his own order."

Again, in turn, you will understand the different orders of those who are to be made alive in Christ, when "the Father has given him all things into his hands" is fulfilled — attending to: "Christ the firstfruits; then those who are Christ's at his coming; then the end" — which end will come to pass along with Christ's coming, when "he will deliver the kingdom to God and the Father, having first abolished all rule and all authority and power."

And these, I think, are the things against which is the struggle; and for this reason there will no longer be any struggle, once all rule and authority and power have been abolished.

And what moves me to hold that every rule and every authority and power that is being abolished are the very things against which is the struggle, is what is added by Paul next to these words: "For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet." Then: "The last enemy to be abolished is death."

And it indeed agrees with "the Father has given him all things into his hands" what the apostle says in setting it forth more clearly: "But when it says that all things have been subjected, it is clear that this is with the exception of him who subjected all things to him."

But if all things have been subjected, this too is clear, that all things have been subjected except him who subjected all things to him. And this one, concerning whom it is written, "Before the Lord Almighty he was thrown down by the neck," shall be among those subjected to him, having been overcome so as to yield to the Word and to be subjected to the image of God, and to become a footstool for the feet of Christ.

So then, seeing the dispensation already proceeding toward its good end, because of "the devil having already cast into his heart that he should betray him," the Father gave him into hands able to contain all things, so that all things might be subject to him — that is, "the Father has given him all things into his hands" means: into his own actions and his noble deeds. For, he says, "My Father works until now, and I work."

And on account of the things that had gone out, he went out from God, as though God had become something "outside," and he who did not, in a primary sense, wish to go out from the Father — went out in order that the things that had gone out might come, by way and order, into the hands of Jesus, and might be so ordered as to go toward God, following him, so that, by following him, they might come to be with God.

Now to Peter it was once said: "Where I am going, you cannot follow me now, but you will follow later" (for Peter still had, at that time, that which did not permit him to follow the Word).

But you must understand that something similar will be said, according to a certain just proportion, to each of all those whom the Father gave into the Son's hands. For to each of all it will be said: "But you will follow me later" — although they will not all follow at the same time.

The "later" that is fitting for each of those who are to follow him, in the saying "but you will follow later," is not referred to the same time for all.

And understand this also concerning all the things that are being abolished — whether when he abolishes every rule, or every authority, or every power — and, simply put, concerning "until he puts all his enemies under his feet"; "the last enemy to be abolished is death."

"Jesus, then, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God," and knowing — so far as concerns the matters we have been examining, as we have narrated, setting forth what has been made manifest to us concerning "he came from God" and "he goes to God" — "rises," it says, "from supper," which let us consider hereafter, together with what follows.

And see whether you can say, in these matters, that supping with the disciples gladdened him without any particular occasion; but that it was on account of a particular occasion and necessarily, for the disciples' sake, that he rises from supper, and ceases from supping for a while, until he should cleanse the disciples' feet — since they were not able to have a part with him unless he himself washed them.

Let us consider, then, what is said after "He rises from supper." "He lays aside," it says, "his garments, and taking a towel, girded himself."

And to these things we might say, to those who are unwilling to rise up from the literal words and to understand intelligibly the foods of the soul set forth in these passages: for what would it have harmed him, being still clothed, to wash the disciples' feet?

But perhaps, if we look, worthily of Jesus, at his garments, which he wore while supping and rejoicing with the disciples, we may understand what adornment the Word who became flesh wears.

And this garment, consisting of a certain weave of words joined to words and of sounds joined to sounds, he lays aside, and becomes more bare, taking the form of a servant — which is signified by "taking a towel, he girded himself" — so that he might not be altogether bare, and so that, after washing, with a more fitting fabric he might wipe the disciples' feet.

And observe, in these things, how the great and glorified Word, having become flesh, makes himself small, in order that a basin...

Abraham, then, when "lifting up his eyes he saw, and behold, three men were standing above him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the door of the tent, and bowed down to the ground, and said: Lord, if indeed I have found favor before you, do not pass by your servant" — he himself does not take water, nor does he promise to wash their feet, as though strangers had come to him, but says: "Let water indeed be brought, and let them wash your feet."

But neither did Joseph bring water to wash the feet of his eleven brothers; rather, the man who was over Joseph's house brought Simeon out to them, and brought water to wash their feet. But he who said...

"I came not as one who reclines but as one who serves," and rightly saying "Learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart" — he himself pours water into the basin. For he knew that no one else could so wash the disciples' feet as to give them, through that washing, their portion with him, as he himself could.

And the water, in my view, was a certain word, washing the feet of the disciples who had come to the basin set before them by Jesus.

Then I inquire why in the world it is not written "he washed the disciples' feet," but rather it is said "and he began to wash the disciples' feet."

Is it, then, some such customary usage of the Scriptures, according to which "he began" seems, without good reason as judged by ordinary usage, to be placed first? Or rather, at that time Jesus indeed "began" to wash the disciples' feet, yet he did not then finish washing all of their feet.

For afterward he washed and completed the washing, since they had been defiled, according to "All of you will be scandalized because of me on this night," and what is said to Peter: "The rooster will not crow at all until you deny me three times."

For, these sins having occurred, the feet of the disciples that had been defiled again needed washing — feet which he began to wash when he rose from supper, and he completed the washing, cleansing them so that they would no longer be defiled.

So too, in the same way, he "began" to wipe the disciples' feet, but he "completed" the wiping when he had also completed the washing. — "He comes, then, to Simon Peter. He says to him: Lord, do you wash my feet? Jesus answered and said to him: What I am doing you do not know now, but you will know afterward. Peter says to him: You shall never wash my feet. Jesus answered him: If I do not wash you, you have no part with me. Simon Peter says to him: Not my feet only, but also my hands and my head. Jesus says to him: He who has bathed has no need except to wash his feet, but is wholly clean; and you are clean, but not all. For he knew the one who would betray him; because of this he said, You are not all clean."

We shall make use, at the appropriate time, of what is now said by Peter, for the sake of an example, should it be needed anywhere, to show that it is possible for someone, out of the best intention, on account of ignorance, to say things that are in no way beneficial to himself.

For if it was beneficial to have a part with Jesus by having one's feet washed by him, and Peter, not knowing that this was beneficial, said first, as it were in perplexed embarrassment, "Lord, do you wash my feet?" and second, "You shall never wash my feet," and these sayings were hindrances to the act that would have brought him to have a part with the Savior — it is clear that, even if he said this with a healthy intention and reverence toward the teacher, he was speaking to his own harm.

And human life is full of this kind of sin, of those who, in believing, set before themselves the better things, but who, through ignorance, say or even do things that lead to the contrary.

And such indeed are those who say "Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle" concerning all the things that are destined for decay with human use, according to a certain teaching far inferior to the divine teaching, "You shall die like a man."

And what need is there to speak of those who, tossed about in the heresies and carried about by every wind at the cunning trickery of men, proclaim destructive things as though they were salutary, and hold false opinions about Jesus as though it were done out of reverence for him?

And often the Scripture has marked Peter as being of this sort, too fervent in promising the things that seemed to him better — just as also in the case where, without due examination and in a manner rejecting the saying, he responded to "You will all be scandalized because of me on this night," and to the reason set forth in "For it is written: I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered." For, without due examination in response to this, and rejecting Jesus' pronouncement, he said: "Even if all are scandalized because of you, I will not be scandalized."

And this rashness, still present at that time in his soul, was, I think, the cause of his sinning beyond the measure of the scandal of the rest, in that he denied Jesus three times before the crowing of the rooster.

For this reason, having attended to such earlier rashness of his own, he was greatly benefited, even in the greatest matters, so as to become most steadfast and most long-suffering — which is shown by the fact that, when Paul said to him before everyone: "If you, being a Jew, live like the gentiles and not like the Jews, how do you compel the gentiles to Judaize?" and what follows — he, after these words, kept silence, and did not, with the greatest forbearance, set forth what would have been reasonable to say in that situation — concerning which someone will treat more properly in the commentary on Galatians.

And in the Acts of the Apostles too, his settled disposition, transformed into this very same image, will be evident to each one who attends and gives heed.

So here too, then, when Jesus had risen from the supper and laid aside his garments and girded himself with the towel he had taken, and was pouring water into the basin and beginning to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel with which he was girded, all of them offered their feet, in accordance with their preconception concerning Jesus, considering that one so great would not, without reason — as most people might say — wishing to burden the disciples, wash their feet, but would be accomplishing something useful which they expected to know afterward, thinking that perhaps these things were being done as a symbol of something. But Peter alone, looking only to the more superficial reaction and setting alongside it no other reasoning, as though revering Jesus, did not offer his feet to be washed, but first attempted to embarrass him with, "Lord, do you wash my feet?" — and afterward, when he ought to have been persuaded by "What I am doing you do not know now, but you will know afterward," he says, "You shall never wash my feet."

But whereas the rest of the disciples entrusted themselves to Jesus and disputed nothing with him, this one, by what he says, even if he seemed to set out with sound intention, accuses not only Jesus, as having begun without reason to wash the disciples' feet, but also his fellow disciples.

For if he himself, as he supposed, did the fitting thing in wishing to prevent it, while the others had not perceived this, he accused them of having offered their feet to Jesus contrary to what was fitting; and if he had thought it right not to oppose what was reasonable, and had judged reasonable what was taking place in the washing of the disciples' feet by Jesus, he would not have opposed what was happening.

It appears, then, that he judged, without due examination, that Jesus washing the disciples' feet was not reasonable. But since it is fitting to search the Scripture even down to things reckoned least, one might ask why in the world, since Peter is enumerated first in the number of the twelve — perhaps as being more honored than the rest, since indeed Judas was truly the last of all, cast back to the last place on account of his wicked disposition — Jesus, having begun to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel with which he was girded, did not begin with Peter.

And it must be said, in response to this, that just as a physician, ministering by his art to many sick people, begins his treatment with those who are most urgent and who have suffered the worse condition, so too he who washes the disciples' defiled feet begins with those more defiled, and perhaps he came to Peter last, as one needing the washing of the feet less than all the rest.

And perhaps also the condition of his feet, being near to purity, contributed to his apparent objection.

And when we examine closely the saying of Jesus, "He who has bathed has no need to be washed, but is wholly clean; and you are clean, but not all" — this would perhaps suggest such a sense as this: that, the disciples' feet already having been washed by Jesus, and they, in addition to having been bathed, no longer having need of washing, and moreover Peter himself already being clean, even before Jesus washed his feet...

But if anyone should ask, in response to this, why in the world, though saying "He who has bathed has no need to be washed, but is wholly clean," Jesus washes their feet when the disciples have no need to be washed — one must say to him: "To everyone who has, more shall be given, and it shall be added."

Since, then, the disciples too had this state of being clean, Jesus adds to their cleanness also the washing of their feet — for he would wash neither those who had not been bathed, nor those who were not wholly clean, but in such a way that one might say concerning those who are clean in this manner: for even if someone is perfect among the sons of men, if the cleanness that comes from Jesus, so to name it, is absent, he shall not be reckoned as clean.

And I set these things forth later, having occurred to me after the earlier material had been dictated, while we preserve also the order of the thoughts that have subsequently come to us: how at first one saw that the disciples' feet, having been defiled, needed the washing from Jesus; but now, that by washing their feet he did so because, although they were clean as judged among men, they were not clean also before God. For apart from Jesus no one becomes clean before God, even if before this he should be thought, through some particular diligence, to have made himself clean.

But in those who have already become clean as among men, and have washed with the baptism of Jesus, and have had their feet washed by him, the Holy Spirit is able to dwell, as well as the power from on high, like a garment.

Peter, then, not perceiving the reason for Jesus's intention, when he began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel with which he was girded, says to him: 'Lord, do you wash my feet?' — saying this in a perplexed and abashed manner. But Jesus answered and said to him, teaching that this was a mystery: 'What I do you do not know now, but you will know after these things.'

But what was it that Jesus was doing when he washed the disciples' feet? Was he not, by washing their feet and wiping them with the towel with which he was girded, making them beautiful, since they were about to proclaim the good news of good things?

For when Jesus washed the disciples' feet, then, I think, was fulfilled what was spoken prophetically concerning his apostles: 'How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things.'

But if by washing the disciples' feet he makes them beautiful, what shall we say comes to be, from the true beauty, in those who have been baptized wholly by Jesus in the Holy Spirit and fire?

The feet of those bringing good news of good things became beautiful, so that, having been washed and cleansed and wiped by the hands of Christ, they might be able to step upon the holy way and to journey toward him who said, 'I am the way.'

For only he — and indeed every one — who has had his feet washed by Jesus journeys along this living way that leads to the Father; and this way does not admit defiled feet, nor those that are not yet clean.

Moses, then, needed to loose the sandal from his feet, since the place he had reached, where he was standing, was holy ground; and likewise Joshua son of Nun.