John 13:18

Literally, this means, I know who each person is whom I have chosen. Therefore, I also know who Judas is, and he does not escape my notice, although the devil has already put the things against me into his heart.

(Hom. Lxxi. 2) For all know, but all do not do. He then rebukes the traitor, not openly, but covertly: I speak not of you all.

(Hom. Lxxii. 3) As the disciples were about to go forth and to suffer many things, He consoles them by promising His own assistance and that of others; His own, when He says, Happy are ye if ye do them; that of others, in what follows, Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send, receiveth Me; and he that receiveth Me receiveth Him that sent Me.

"I speak not," He saith, "of you all." O what forbearance! Not yet doth He convict the traitor, but veileth the matter, hence giving him room for repentance. He convicteth and yet doth not convict him when He saith thus, "He that eateth bread with Me hath lifted up his heel against Me." It seems to me that the, "The servant is not greater than his lord," was uttered for this purpose also, that if any persons should at any time suffer harm either from domestics or from any of the meaner sort, they should not be offended; looking to the instance of Judas, who having enjoyed ten thousand good things, repaid his Benefactor with the contrary. On this account He added, "He that eateth bread with Me," and letting pass all the rest, He hath put that which was most fitted to restrain and shame him; "he who was fed by Me," He saith, "and who shared My table." And He spake the words, to instruct them to benefit those who did evil to them, even though such persons should continue incurable.

But having said, "I speak not of you all," in order not to attach fear to more than one, He at last separateth the traitor, speaking thus; "He that eateth bread with Me." For the, "not of you all," doth not direct the words to any single one, therefore He added, "He that eateth bread with Me"; showing to that wretched one that He was not seized in ignorance, but even with full knowledge; a thing which of itself was most of all fitted to restrain him. And He said not, "betrayeth Me," but, "hath lifted up his heel against Me," desiring to represent the deceit, the treachery, the secrecy of the plot.

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?" Was it that he also was chosen for some purpose, for which he was really necessary; although not for the blessedness of 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."

(Tr. lix. 1) As if to say, There is one among you who will not be blessed, nor doeth these things. I know whom I have chosen. Whom, but those who shall be happy by doing His commandments? Judas therefore was not chosen. But if so, why does He say in another place, Have not I chosen you twelve? Because Judas was chosen for that for which he was necessary, but not for that happiness of which He says, Happy are ye, if ye do them.

(Tr. lix. 1) Shall lift up his heel against Me, i. e. shall tread upon Me. The traitor Judas is meant.

(Tr. lix. 1) They then who were chosen ate the Lord; he ate the bread of the Lord, to injure the Lord; they ate life, he damnation; for he that eateth unworthily, eateth damnation to himself. (1 Cor. 11:27)

The meaning of these words is involved in no slight uncertainty. For while saying that they shall be blessed, who, knowing what is good, are ever zealous to carry it out in action, He straightway adds: I speak not of all. In these words, as I with many others believe, He hints darkly at the traitor; for in no enviable plight is one who is hated of God, and never would one be reckoned among the blessed who had so degraded his soul as to make it capable of such horrible impiety. And this interpretation of the passage before us is the one currently accepted with most men: but there is besides yet another possible meaning. For as Christ was intending to say, according to the perfect and most holy word of Scripture: He that eateth My bread did magnify himself contemptuously, or lifted up his heel against Me, He in some sort explains Himself beforehand, and carefully avoids giving pain to the faithful company of the other disciples, by attaching the force of His reproach to one single individual. For since they were all eating His bread, that is, sharing the same feast and helping to consume the food that He had caused to be provided, therefore He does well in not allowing the minds of the innocent to be crushed by vain fears, and He drives away the bitterness of suspicion by saying: I speak not of you all; for I know whom I have chosen. But, He says, that the Scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth My bread lifted up his heel against Me, or, did magnify himself contemptuously, according to the voice of the Psalmist. Something of this kind I imagine the passage to imply. Seeing therefore that a double meaning is delivered to us by these words, let the devout student test for himself the better and truer sense of them: but now let us comment further on the saying, in the endeavour to confirm the faith of simple folk.

For doubts may be felt regarding this passage in two ways. And first, some one will meet us with the objection: "If we believe that Christ was all-knowing, why did He choose Judas; and why did He associate him with the other disciples, if He was not unaware that he would be convicted of treachery and fall a prey to the snares of covetousness?" Furthermore, another will say: "And if, as Christ Himself says, Judas lifted up his heel against his Master on this account, namely, that the Scripture may be fulfilled, surely he himself could not be deemed guilty, as responsible for what had happened, but the blame must rest with the power that caused the Scripture to be fulfilled."

Now it is our duty speedily to give answers in detail to the objections we have mentioned, and to construct by all the arguments in our power the proper defence to be urged against each, for the edification and comfort of those who are not enabled by the resources of their own minds to understand the contents of the Divine Scripture. And first we have this to say, that if we were to be carried away by such criticisms on all the dealings of God, we should never cease to censure our Maker, but should be ever railing against the God Who calls non-existent things into being, and ignorantly depreciating His boundless love to man. For tell me what there is to prevent others also from using, possibly, objections such as this: "Why didst Thou choose Saul and anoint him to be king over Israel, when Thou knewest that he would altogether disregard Thy favour?" And why do I say only this? For the plausible nature of the charge thus laid will extend back to Adam, the leader of our race. Some one of those who are thus minded will perhaps say: "Why didst Thou, the All-knowing, fashion man out of the ground? For Thou wast not ignorant that he would fall and transgress the commandment given to him." On the same principle he would go on to make further clamorous objections on even higher and more important matters: "Why hast Thou created the nature of angels, well knowing, as God, the senseless decadence into apostasy that would befal some of them? For not all of them have kept their own principality." What result therefore would such reasoning lead to? The foreknowledge of God would never have allowed Him to appear as Creator, nor would the rational creation have even passed at all into existence, so that God would have been Sovereign of the irrational and senseless creation only, without anyone to acknowledge Him as being in His nature God. Now I think that those who look into the matter cannot help very clearly perceiving, that the Creator of all things entrusted to the rational among His creatures the guidance of their own purposes; and suffered them to move, at the bidding of impulses regulated by themselves, towards whatsoever object each might individually choose, after discovering by tests the best possible course. Those therefore that have inclined rightly to the side of good, preserve safe their own fair reputation, and remain sharers of the good things that have been allotted to them, and find themselves undisturbed in their tranquillity of mind. But those that are corrupted in their own evil thoughts, and are dragged down to lawlessness as it were by irresistible torrents of passions, endure the penalty that befits their crime; and, justly convicted on the charge of their utter ingratitude, will be subjected to severe and endless retribution. You will find also the nature of the angels to have been created with similar possibilities and limitations. For those that kept their own principality have their abiding-place and station in the midst of all beatitude sure and steadfast: but they who by their proneness to evil have fallen gradually away from their ancient glory, are cast down to hell in chains of darkness, as it is written, and are kept unto the judgment of the great day. In like manner was the first man, that is, Adam, created in the beginning. For he was in Paradise, and amid the highest delights, namely those that are spiritual, and in the presence of the glory of God. And he would have remained in the enjoyment of the good things that were bestowed on his nature at the beginning, if he had not been turned away to apostasy and disobedience, most rashly transgressing the commandment enjoined from above. Thus, too, God anointed Saul to be king: for he was in the beginning a not ignoble character; when however his conduct showed that a change had come over him, God removed him from his honourable rank and regal splendour.

In like manner Christ chose Judas and associated him with the holy disciples, since he was certainly gifted at first with a capacity for discipleship. But when after a while the temptations of Satan succeeded in making him captive to base greediness for gain, when he was conquered by passion and had become by this means a traitor, then he was rejected by God. This therefore was in no way the fault of Him Who called this man to be an Apostle. For it lay in the power of Judas to have saved himself from falling, namely, by making the more excellent choice, and transforming his whole heart and soul so as to become a sincere follower of Christ.

And to the second of the objections we are considering we make this answer. Let no one suppose, as do some ignorant persons, that the oracles delivered by the holy prophets are carried onward to final accomplishment simply in order that the Scriptures may be fulfilled. For if this is truly the case, there will be nothing to prevent those who have minutely shaped their conduct according to the letter of Scripture, from finding not invalid excuses for sin, or rather from actually making out that they have never erred at all. "For if it needs must have been," one will say, "that the Scriptures should be fulfilled by such and such things, surely those who were the instruments of the fulfilment must be free from all censure." The Divine Scripture therefore in such a case must have appeared especially as a minister of sin, urging men on as it were by force to the deeds spoken of by it, in order that what was uttered in days of old might really come to pass. But, because of this, I think the argument is very full of blasphemy. For who could ever be so utterly void of proper reason as to suppose that the Word of the Holy Ghost should become to any a patron of sin? Therefore we do not believe that the deeds of any were done simply for this reason, namely, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled. But the Holy Ghost has spoken in perfect foreknowledge as to what will happen, in order that, when the time comes for the event, we may find in the prediction which describes the event, a pledge to establish our faith, and may thenceforward hold it without hesitation. And as our discussion of this question in another book is very full, it seems now somewhat superfluous to linger any further in lengthy discourses on the matter.

The hateful Iscariot, heedless,
By intent, of the law of friendship,
Readied for betrayal the feet
Which Christ had washed. And though he ate
Your bread, the divine Body,
He raised his heel against you, O Christ,
And knew not how to cry out:
"Praise the Lord, O his works,
and exalt him unto all ages."

The man without conscience received
The Body which redeems from sin
And the divine blood poured out
For the sake of the world;
But he was not ashamed to drink
What he sold for a price;
He took no offense at his wickedness,
And knew not how to cry out:
"Praise the Lord, O his works,
and exalt him unto all ages."

With these veiled words He exposes the betrayer and at the same time does not convict him, for He wished to bring him to repentance. Therefore, passing over all the other benefactions He had shown him, He puts forward the one which more than all others could convert him.
"I do not speak of you all." So as not to bring fear upon many, He clearly separates him (the betrayer) and shows that only one is plotting against Him. Therefore He says "he who eats bread with Me."
When Jesus said "I know whom I have chosen," what did He tell us about Judas? Did He choose him as well? Yes, when he was good, He chose him, just as He chose Saul (but he himself changed, for he was free; and the Lord allows each person to act according to his own will, because He does not take away freedom); but when Judas changed, He rejected him, even though He had previously chosen him.
He who eats My bread, whom I nourish, who shares My table (a circumstance that softens even enemies), that one… and He did not say "betrays" Me, but — "has lifted up his heel against Me" (Ps. 41:9), that is, has employed against Me cunning and deceit, after the manner of wrestlers who use trickery against their opponents and, tripping their heels, throw them down.
"That the Scripture might be fulfilled." Understand this expression in the same way as the other similar ones, about which we have often spoken.

I do not speak of all of you, namely that you will be blessed, but of the elect: hence he says: I know whom I have chosen; Matthew 20: "Many are called, but few are chosen"; 2 Timothy 2: "The Lord knows who are his"; hence what I said: "You will be blessed" is to be understood of some of you, and indeed of the majority. But that the Scripture may be fulfilled: He who eats bread with me, that is, a companion at table, will lift up his heel against me in the Psalm: according to another translation: "The man of my peace, in whom I hoped, who ate my bread, has magnified supplanting against me." To lift up the heel, as Chrysostom says, is to lift up kicking, deceit and fraud and the concealment of treachery. And he speaks by way of similitude: just as a man, when he wishes to trample upon a thing, lifts his heel over it, so Judas trampled upon Christ. And he said this about Judas, not accusing him, but instructing the disciples, lest they believe he was betrayed as a mere man.

Question. It is asked concerning what he says: I do not speak of all: I know whom I have chosen. Contrary: Above in the sixth chapter it is said: Did I not choose twelve of you? If he chose twelve, Judas was chosen, the contrary of which he now says. I respond: It must be said that there is being chosen for present dignity: and in this way Judas was chosen, just as wicked bishops and prelates are chosen, not by error, but by a wondrous dispensation. There is election to eternal solemnity: and in this way Judas was not chosen, because this pertains to those who are finally good.

He excludes someone when he says, I am not speaking of you all. First, he says there is an exception; secondly, he gives the reason for the exception (v 18). Thirdly, he tells why he said there was an exception (v 19). He does two things about the first: he mentions there is an exception; he answers an unspoken question.

He says there is an exception when he says, I am not speaking of you all. He is saying in effect: You will be blessed, but not all of you, because I am not speaking of you all when I say you will be blessed: "All the runners compete, but only one receives the prize" (1 Cor 9:24). For there is one of you, that is, Judas, who will not be blessed, and he will not do these things.

According to Origen, our Lord did not say blessed are you, without qualification; but he added a condition, if you do them. And this is true for all of them, even Judas; for if Judas had done these things, he would have been blessed. So for Origen, Jesus is excluding Judas from his servants, "a servant is not greater than his master" (v 16). It was like saying: I say you are servants and apostles, but I am not speaking of you all: for Judas, since he was a servant of sin, was not a servant of the Divine Word, nor was he an apostle once the devil had entered into his heart.

Someone could say: Since Christ does not say that all are blessed or his apostles, then some member of his group might perish unexpectedly. Our Lord answers this saying, I know whom I have chosen. This was like saying: Those who have been chosen will not perish; but not all have been chosen. So, the one who will perish will be the one who has not been chosen, that is, Judas: "You did not choose me, but I chose you" (15:16).

This seems to conflict with his earlier statement: "Did I not choose you, the twelve?" (6:71). Therefore, since Judas was one of the twelve, it seems that he was chosen. I answer that one can be chosen in two ways. One is for a present righteousness; and Judas was chosen for this. The other is for final glory; and Judas was not chosen for this.

The reason there was an exception was so that the scripture may be fulfilled - not that scripture forced the event, but it did mention an event that would happen: "Everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled" (Lk 24:44); "Not an iota, nor a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished" (Mt 5:18). This scripture says: He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me. This is another translation of what we have in the Psalm (41:9) as: "The man of my peace, in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has greatly deceived me." The intimacy Judas had with Christ is shown when we read, he who ate my bread: for Judas, along with the other disciples, ate bread with Christ, even consecrated bread. Further, his malicious efforts against Christ are shown when it says, has lifted his heel against me; that is, he will try to crush me. And we do crush our enemies under our heel: "She shall crush your head, and you will lie in wait for her heel" (Gen 3:15). And so one is said to raise his heel against another when he tries to crush him. But Judas will not be able to do this, because I will be exalted by the very thing with which he wants to crush me: "And I, when am lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself" (12:32).

We have an example in this for ourselves: let us not be set back if we happen to suffer evil from those close to us or from the malicious, since we can remember the conduct of Judas who, in spite of having received unlimited goods, returned the contrary to his benefactor. Our Lord chose Judas, whom he knew would become an evil person, so that we could realize that there would be no human society which does not have some evil members: "As a lily among brambles, so is my love among maidens" (Song 2:2). And in one of his letters Augustine says: "I don't care to assume that my household is better than the group of the apostles." We can also understand from this that if a prelate receives someone into the Church, and this person becomes bad, the prelate should not be blamed. Look at Judas! Even though he was chosen by Christ he turned out to be a traitor. The same thing happened to Philip when he received Simon the magician: "Shall they repay good with evil, by making a snare to take my life?" (Jer 18:20); "A man's foes will be those of his own household" (Mt 10:36).