He therefore, leaning on the breast of Jesus, saith to him: Lord, who is it?
επιπεσων δε εκεινος ουτως επι το στηθος του ιησου λεγει αυτω κυριε τις εστιν
12 Church Fathers comment on this verse
Why, then, does he lean upon His breast? The disciples did not yet think anything great about Christ, and by this John also relieved his sorrow. It is natural that their faces were then sorrowful. If they were troubled in their souls, much more was this trouble visible on their faces. Therefore, while consoling them by words and questions, Jesus also permits and allows them to lean upon His breast.
Why, then, does John lean upon Jesus’ breast in so irreverent and improper a way? Because he did not yet understand anything great about Christ. They had not been taught to render fitting honor to venerable persons, for they were fishermen and ignorant of decorum. The Lord allows him to lean upon His breast in order to lessen his grief, calm the agitation in his soul, and in general quiet his sorrow. For it is natural that much grief was shown also on their faces.
Here also, with every justice, we must marvel at the holy disciples' ardor for the love of God and at their great zeal for reverence. They could not discover the guilty one by themselves, yet they did not fall into deceptive guesses.
Again they inquire and hasten to learn through one of the foremost, namely Peter. Yet he did not put the question himself. He allowed the one nearest and beloved because of his great purity to ask.
This was John, the writer of the book now being interpreted. Since, as he says, he was beloved by the Lord, he concealed his name and passed it over in silence, lest he seem vainglorious to anyone. For the mind of the saints is free from love of glory.
Leaning a little toward the Teacher, he speaks secretly and in a whisper, asking Him to point out the son of perdition. But the Savior gives him no other indication than what had long ago been foretold by the prophet's voice.
"He who eats My bread has lifted up his heel against Me" (Ps 41:9). For having dipped the morsel, He gives it, thereby indicating the one who eats His bread.
At the same time He removes fear from the holy Apostles. He also brings to their memory another prophecy, which says, "But you, a man of one soul with me, my guide and my close friend, who together with me enjoyed meals, with whom we walked in concord in the house of God" (Ps 55:13-14).
The betrayer himself had once been of one soul with the Savior. He had been close, a companion at table, and everything that belongs to intimacy. He was numbered with the other holy disciples.
They had one purpose with the Savior. Going throughout the land of Judea, they proved zealous servants of miracles and strove to accomplish all that pertained to His honor and glory.
But this close and like-minded disciple exchanged the grace of Him who honored him for shameful gain.
Notice how beautifully the most wise Evangelist encourages us to choose the wisest life. He urges us to exercise the sharpness of our mind for the easier apprehension of divine contemplations, and to strive for possible precision in words concerning the knowledge of God.
He says that John was especially honored and beloved by Christ our Savior. He even reclined near Him, upon the very breast of the Master. He presents this as proof of Christ's surpassing love for him.
Therefore those who have a pure heart will be near God and in the first places with Him, above all others. The Savior Himself appoints them a special reward, calling the pure in heart blessed, because they shall see God (Mt 5:8).
To prove the truth of these words, let us bring forward this most wise Evangelist himself. He beheld the glory of Christ, according to his word: "I beheld His glory, glory as of the Only-begotten from the Father, the Word full of grace and truth" (Jn 1:14).
No one, of course, can behold with bodily eyes the Nature wholly invisible to all creation. For no one has seen the Father, according to the Savior's word, except the One who is from God, that is, the Son. "He has seen the Father" (Jn 6:46).
Yet to those whose mind is free from worldly impurity and vain care, even in this present life, Christ reveals His own glory. He does this by a certain subtle contemplation that surpasses the mind.
In this glory He also shows the glory of the Father. Therefore He said, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father" (Jn 14:9).
This is the same John to whom this Gospel belongs, as he himself says later (cf. Jn 21:20-24). Among those who prepared the sacred writings for us, it was formerly customary that, when one of them had to report something concerning himself, he spoke as though it concerned another.
In this way the author placed himself within the narrative, so that he might be one describing the events, not one proclaiming himself. Saint Matthew did the same (cf. Mt 9:9). [...] Does truth suffer any loss when the events are set forth and there is no boasting on the writer's part?
What he meant by saying "in the bosom," he explains a little later when he says, "on Jesus' breast" (Jn 13:25). This was John, whose Gospel is in question, as he himself later openly says (cf. Jn 21:20-24).
It was the custom of those who handed down the Holy Scriptures to us that, when one of them narrates the divine history and the account reaches himself, he speaks as though about another. Thus he includes himself in the thread of his narrative, as if he were the narrator of another's deeds, not the teller of his own.
In the Latin text of the Gospel, two different words are used here for Jesus' breast. First comes sinus, "bosom" or "fold." Then comes pectus, "breast." The use of a word not directly meaning the breast led Augustine to give this explanation.
Saint Matthew did the same. When the narrative touched on him, he said, "He saw a man sitting at the tax office, named Matthew, and He says to him, 'Follow Me'" (Mt 9:9). He did not say, "He saw me and said to me."
Blessed Moses acted in the same way, writing everything about himself as though about another. He says, "And the Lord said to Moses" (Ex 6:1).
The Apostle Paul also acted in the same way, with this difference. He did so not in a history where events are described, but in an Epistle. For he said of himself, "I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago, whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows, was caught up to the third heaven" (2 Cor 12:2).
Therefore let us attribute it to the custom of our authors that here also the blessed Evangelist does not say, "I reclined in Jesus' bosom." Instead he says, "one of the disciples was reclining." Let us not be surprised.
For would any harm be done to truth if the events are set forth and the narrator seeks in some way to avoid boasting? Certainly not. For he was narrating something that belonged to his great glory.
And what does "whom Jesus loved" mean? Did He not love the others, of whom John himself says above, "He loved them to the end" (Jn 13:1)? He is speaking of himself in the third person.
The Lord Himself also says, "Greater love has no one than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" (Jn 15:13). Who can enumerate all the testimonies from the divine pages, in which the Lord Jesus is revealed in His love?
He loved not only him and the others who were then with Him. He loved also those who would afterward be His members and His whole Church.
Yet here, of course, something is hidden, and it concerns the bosom on which the narrator himself reclined. For what else is signified by "bosom" if not mystery? There is, however, another more fitting place in the Gospel. Then, if the Lord permits, we shall say what is sufficient about this mystery.
Since he was reclining, that is, without rising but only turning around, John leaned upon the breast of Jesus Christ out of love and simplicity of heart. He did not know that their Teacher is God by nature. The Savior permitted this in order to bind him still more closely to Himself.
But when the Son of Man set before Himself how one of these very disciples, who had enjoyed His special love, would deny Him and become the instrument of His enemies, this thought troubled even His spirit. He spoke more clearly: "One of you will betray Me" (Jn 13:21).
Such a disclosure brought all of them into amazement. How could there be a betrayer from among them? Who was this betrayer?
The Lord continued: "The Son of Man goes as it is written of Him." But He added, "Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would have been better for that man if he had not been born" (Mt 26:21-24).
The disciples fell into despondency and looked at one another. All asked, "Is it I?" The Lord was silent.
But Peter gave John a sign to ask the Lord about this. John occupied such a place that he could lean on the Savior's breast and speak quietly with Him. Then the Lord answered him, also quietly, "It is he whose turn has now come to receive from Me a morsel of the lamb, dipped in the dish."
It was a morsel of lamb, not bread, as in the Slavonic translation of John's Gospel. And He gave it to Judas. Troubled by the secret conversation of Jesus with John, Judas himself brazenly asked, "Is it I?" The Lord answered, "You have said it."
In the account of the revelation of Judas as the betrayer, there is the following difference among the Evangelists. Luke, who relates this history very briefly, says that after Jesus Christ foretold the betrayer, the disciples "began to question one another, which of them it was who would do this."
John also points to this circumstance, saying that "the disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom He spoke" (22). Matthew and Mark, however, do not mention this circumstance. They state that the disciples were greatly saddened and began to say to Him, each of them, "Is it I, Lord?"
To this they received the answer, "He who has dipped his hand with Me in the dish will betray Me." Matthew alone adds that afterward Judas also asked the Lord, "Is it I, Rabbi?" and received an affirmative answer.
Finally, John says nothing about the questions each disciple put to the Lord. He relates how John, who was reclining at that time on Jesus' breast, asked the Lord at Peter's sign and received the answer, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it."
The end of this history belongs to John alone. Clearly the Evangelists relate different circumstances of the same event.
Luke, shortening the account, gives only the prediction of the betrayer and Jesus Christ's warning to him. Concerning the disciples, he gives their first confusion and their conversation with one another.
Matthew and Mark give the questions which each of them then addressed to the Lord. They also give the first indication of the betrayer, still general and unclear, together with a warning to him.
One may think that the fulfillment of this indication occurred at the same time as the indication given to John. Judas, striving either to be unconstrained and bold, or to appear so, turned to the Lord with the question, "Is it I, Rabbi?" He received the quiet answer, "Yes, you."
The disciples probably did not hear this last answer. They understood the Lord's words, "He who has dipped his hand with Me in the dish," in the most general sense. It meant, "one of the twelve," or, "the hand of him who betrays Me is with Me at the table" (Lk 22:21).
Then Peter turned to John and gave him a sign to ask Jesus who it was. If this happened during that part of the supper when the master of the house broke the bread and distributed it to those present, the revelation of Judas as the betrayer may be understood in this way.
Jesus Christ answered John, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it." This was the moment when, passing the portions of bread in order, He was to give a portion to Judas.
Judas's agitated state, and his effort to mask that state of soul, made him move his hand toward the dish too early. The Lord was still only lowering His hand into the dish with the morsel of bread intended for him.
The thoughts of the Apostles were so occupied with the news that had struck them that they either did not hear or did not understand Jesus' answer to Judas's question. Meanwhile they wished to know the betrayer's name.
So Peter looked at John, who was reclining beside Jesus, and by signs asked him to ask Jesus who would betray Him. John, leaning upon Jesus' breast, quietly asked, "Lord, who is it?" Jesus answered him just as quietly, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it."
The Evangelist Matthew relates that to the Apostles' questions, "Is it I, Lord?" Jesus answered, "He who has dipped his hand with Me in the dish will betray Me" (Mt 26:23).
Since we do not admit contradiction in the Evangelists' accounts, we must recognize that Jesus first said, as it were to all, that the one who would betray Him was he who would put his hand into the dish at the same time as He did.
But the troubled Apostles were probably so occupied by the news that had struck them that they did not even follow which of them stretched out his hand to the dish at the same time as Jesus. Therefore, in answer to John's question, Jesus gave another indication.
At the Paschal supper, besides the roasted lamb, unleavened bread, and bitter herbs, a thick sauce of dates, figs, and other fruits was served on a separate dish. Forks and knives were not then used. Food was taken simply with the hands.
They ate unleavened bread by dipping its pieces into the dish with the sweet sauce.
The disciples did not pay proper attention to this indication. After the washing was finished, they took their places at the supper.
The Teacher took the middle and chief place. John reclined at His right, and Judas Iscariot seems to have reclined at the Savior's left. He had brazenly taken this place himself, claiming some advantage over the other disciples as keeper of the common purse.
Peter's place was apparently at the edge of the next couch, to the left of Judas. When the supper began, the Savior explained to them the meaning of His action. It was a visible lesson in the humility with which they must treat one another.
But His gaze fell upon Judas, and His spirit was troubled. Seeing that the disciples had not noticed His earlier hint, Christ now declared openly, for all to hear, "Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray Me."
This declaration struck them like thunder. Fear seized them, and each, feeling a certain uncertainty within himself, turned to the Teacher with the question, "Is it I, Lord?"
In order not to reveal his guilt before his brethren, Iscariot too asked unwillingly, "Is it I, Teacher?" He received the answer, "You have said it."
But again this clear answer was not noticed by the Apostles. Peter, with his usual impatience, wished to know more exactly who the betrayer was. He urged John, whose head was inclined close to the Savior's breast, to ask Him who would betray Him.
To this Christ answered, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it." Then indeed, "having dipped the morsel, He gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot." This revelation bound John's tongue with horror, and he told no one.
The disciples were troubled and perplexed, not knowing whom Christ meant. John was nearest to Jesus, reclining at His breast. In humility, the Evangelist John does not name himself in his Gospel (13:23).
The Apostle Peter gave John a sign to ask Jesus who His betrayer was. Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it."
This was the last attempt to awaken repentance in the soul of Judas. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself gives him bread, thereby showing him special attention and honor above the other Apostles.
John lovingly fulfills Peter’s wish. He lay with his back toward the Teacher, in His bosom. Wishing to ask the question, he turned his face toward Jesus, inclined with tender love upon His breast, and, uniting love with reverence, asked: “Lord, who is it?”
The Lord and His disciples, as we see from this, reclined at table according to the Roman custom, or more precisely according to the Greek custom of that time. We should note that, according to the most ancient custom of the Hebrews, they did not recline but sat at table.
Thus Jacob says to his father, "Arise, sit, and eat" (Gen 27:18). David says to Jonathan, "I should sit with the king at table." Further on, "the king sat down to eat food on the seat" (1 Sam 20:24-25).
In Egypt also, among the many images from private Egyptian life collected by Sir Gardner Wilkinson from their monuments, there is no example of reclining at table. Compare Gen 43:33, where Joseph's brothers sit down to dine in his hall.
Yet already in the prophet Amos we read the rebuke: "You who lie upon beds of ivory" (Amos 6:4). In Homer, too, the ancient Greeks do not recline, but sit at table.
The custom of reclining at table was probably borrowed from the Far East. We do not know where it began, but we suppose it was borrowed from the Persians, though there are no direct indications of this.
The Roman custom assigned one couch to three persons. According to the Greek, or Athenian, custom, only two persons occupied one couch, and the head of one came to the height of the other's breast.
All reclined on the left elbow, so as to have the right hand free. Those reclining on one couch could speak with one another. One lay obliquely on the couch and could see over the head of the first reclining person the one who lay on another couch behind him.
But that latter person could not speak with his neighbor except by turning his head backward. See various articles and drawings on this in the dictionaries of Smith and Kitto, the Real-Encyclopedia, and others.
We have entered into these explanations so that one may understand why it was easier for Peter, lying on the second couch behind the Lord, to signal John. John was lying obliquely on the couch with the Lord. It was easier than addressing Jesus himself with a question.
Likewise, from this description of the table with its couches, it is clear that it was entirely convenient for John to bend forward only slightly, lean upon the Lord's breast, and whisperingly ask Him about the doubt troubling them all.
Likewise, the Lord's answer, falling into John's ear, remained completely unknown to the other disciples. This is clear from verse 28. After the Lord gave the piece of bread to Judas, none of them understood why the Lord had given it to him.
Nor did they understand why He said to him, "What you do, do quickly." Yet it is notable that John himself also seems not to have understood, or not fully understood, Judas's betrayal. As Chrysostom indicates, he did not dare think that a disciple could reach such great iniquity.
In general, the disciples' eyes were closed. As Chrysostom very rightly notes, the Lord deliberately did not reveal the betrayer clearly to them. It could have happened that, in the first impulse of their indignation, the betrayer would have been killed and torn apart by them on the spot.
Chrysostom also explains why Peter, while all the disciples look at one another in fear and amazement, signals John to ask the Lord and does not dare address Him with a question himself. Chrysostom says that Peter is still in some confusion after being rebuked concerning the washing of the feet.
We have seen above that the very arrangement of the table helped Peter give a silent sign to John. This was all the more so because he felt that the question could not be asked aloud. It was evident to all that the Lord did not wish to name the betrayer directly.
We should also note that all the smallest details recorded by the Evangelist certainly testify that the Gospel was written by an eyewitness of these events. The periphrasis by which Saint John always avoids his own name is deeply moving in its humility.
Passages read together with this verse.
Greek text, 14 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS