This is that disciple who giveth testimony of these things, and hath written these things; and we know that his testimony is true.

“(Hom. lxxxviii. 2) John appeals to his own knowledge of these events, having been witness of them: This is the disciple which testifieth of these things. When we assert any undoubted fact in common life, we do not withhold our testimony: much less would he, who wrote by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:32) And thus the other Apostles, And we are witnesses of these things, and wrote these things. John is only one who appeals to his own testimony; and he does so, because he was the last who wrote. And for this reason he often mentions Christ’s love for him, i. e. to shew the motive which led him to write, and to give weight to his history. And we know that his testimony is true. He was present at every event, even at the crucifixion, when our Lord committed His mother to him; circumstances which both shew Christ’s love, and his own importance as a witness. But if any believe not, let him consider what follows: And there are also many other things which Jesus did. If, when there were so many things to relate, I have not said so much as the other, and have selected often reproaches and contumelies in preference to other things, it is evident that I have not written partially. One who wants to shew another off to advantage does the very contrary, omits the dishonourable parts.”

“After the Evangelist has set forth what the Lord showed to Peter, here he narrates what he showed to John, that is, to himself; and first the commendation of the disciple is set down; second, the commendation of his own Gospel, at the place, "Now there are also many other things which Jesus did." Concerning the first, first the occasion of the commendation is set down; second, the commendation of the disciple himself is added, at the place, "Peter, turning, saw that disciple whom Jesus loved." Now the occasion of the commendation of John was Christ's invitation, inviting Peter to follow: for when he had said these things, namely concerning the office and the martyrdom, Jesus said to Peter, "Follow me" — according to Augustine, as regards martyrdom, namely by suffering for me: for it is not enough to suffer in just any way, but only by following Christ, that is, for his sake. Luke 6:22: "Blessed shall you be when men hate you for the Son of man's sake"; 1 Peter 2:21: "Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example." But since many others who were present there suffered for Christ, and especially James, who was killed first — Acts 12:2: "And he killed James the brother of John with the sword" — why is "Follow me" said specially to Peter? The reason, according to Augustine, is that he not only suffered death for Christ, but also followed Christ in the very kind of death, namely of the cross. Matthew 16:24: "If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me." Or, according to Chrysostom, "Follow me" is said with respect to the office of headship; as if he were saying: just as I have from God the Father the care of the Church — Psalm 2:8: "Ask of me, and I will give you the nations for your inheritance" — so are you to be in my place over the whole Church. But why then did James have the primacy in Jerusalem after Christ's ascension? To this it must be said that he indeed had a special primacy of that particular place, whereas Peter had the universal dominion over the whole Church of the faithful. Here the commendation of John is set down, first as regards the past; second as regards the future, at the place, "When Peter therefore had seen him," etc. John is commended as regards the past by a threefold privilege. First, the privilege of Christ's special love; hence it says, "Peter, turning" — who had now begun especially and bodily to follow Jesus — "saw that disciple whom Jesus loved": in which it is given to be understood that Peter, now made a shepherd, was attending to the care of others. Luke 22:32: "And you, being once converted, confirm your brothers." Now Jesus loved John without excluding others, since above, at 15:9, he said: "As the Father has loved me, I also have loved you." But he loved him with a special love above the rest, and this for three reasons. First, on account of the keenness of his intellect; for teachers especially love intelligent disciples. Proverbs 14:35: "An intelligent servant is acceptable to the king." Second, on account of the purity of his cleanness, because he was a virgin. Proverbs 22:2: "He who loves cleanness of heart, for the grace of his lips shall have the king for his friend." Third, on account of his tender age: for we have more compassion on children and on the weak, and we show signs of familiarity, just as Christ did toward John, who turned to him while young. Hosea 11:1: "Israel was a child, and I loved him." In which it is given to be understood that God especially loves those who serve him from their youth. Micah 7:1: "My soul has desired the early figs." But against this: Proverbs 8:17: "I love those who love me." But Peter loved Christ more; above: "Do you love me more than these?" Therefore Christ ought to have loved Peter more than John. Response. It could be said that John, because more loved, was more fortunate, but Peter, because loving more, was better. But this would be against justice. And therefore this is referred to a mystery: for by these two a twofold life is signified, namely the active and the contemplative, and the end and object of both is Christ. But the active life, which is signified by Peter, loves God more than the contemplative life, which is signified by John: because it feels more the hardships of the present life, and more ardently desires to be freed from them and to go to God. But God loves the contemplative life more, because he preserves it more; for it does not end together with the life of the body, as the active life does. Psalm 86:2: "The Lord loves the gates of Sion above all the tabernacles of Jacob." But some, wishing to resolve this according to the letter, distinguish in Christ a twofold love, according to a twofold will, namely the divine and the human, and say that Christ loved Peter more with the divine love, but John more with the human love. But against this is the fact that the human will in Christ was wholly conformed to the divine will: hence whomever he loved more by the divine will, he also loved more by the human will. It must therefore be said that he loved more the one for whom he willed the greater good. Now he loved Peter more with a view to this, that he might make him more his lover; but he loved John with a view to something else, namely to keenness of intellect. Ecclesiasticus 15:5: "The Lord filled him with the spirit of wisdom and understanding." And according to this Peter is better, because charity surpasses knowledge, 1 Corinthians 13:8; but John is better as regards keenness of intellect. But to weigh their merits belongs to God alone. Proverbs 16:1: "The Lord is the weigher of spirits." And therefore others say, and better, that Peter loved Christ more in his members, and thus also was loved more by Christ, and therefore he entrusted the Church to him; but John loved Christ more in himself, and thus was loved more by him, whence he entrusted his mother to him. Or it must be said that Peter loved Christ as regards readiness and fervor, but John was more loved as regards the signs of familiarity, which Christ showed to him more on account of his youth and purity. And so consequently, when it adds, "who also leaned back at supper upon his breast," he is commended by a second privilege, namely of special familiarity with Christ; and this has been expounded above. Third, he is commended by the privilege of a special confidence which he had regarding Christ, such that he questioned him more confidently than all the others; hence it says: "and said to him: Lord, who is it that will betray you?" Which has likewise been expounded. Chrysostom said that the reason why John commemorates these privileges of his own is for the commendation of Peter. For it could be believed that Peter, because he had denied Christ, had not been admitted back to his former familiarity; and therefore, in order to exclude this, he shows that he was admitted to a greater one. He who at the supper did not dare to question, but committed the questioning to John, after the passion is entrusted with the headship over the brethren, and questions not only for himself, but for John. In which it is given to be understood that those who have fallen into sin sometimes rise again into greater grace. Baruch 4:28: "For as it was your mind to go astray from God, so, turning again, you shall seek him ten times as much." And therefore the Evangelist immediately adds, first, the question, saying: "Peter therefore, when he had seen him, said to Jesus: And what of this man?" Here the commendation of John is set down as regards the future, and first the question of Peter is set down; second, the response of Christ, at the place, "Jesus said to him: So I will have him remain till I come"; third, the understanding of this response is set down, at the place, "The saying therefore went abroad among the brethren," etc. Now it must be known, as regards the first, that when the Lord said to Peter, "Follow me," Peter began to follow him with bodily step, and John also along with him; and Peter, seeing him following, asks Christ on his behalf, saying: "And what shall this man do?" As if he were saying: behold, I follow you in the passion, but shall this man die? John also would have asked about this, but he did not dare. But according to Chrysostom, Peter did not intend to ask about the passion, but about headship. For Peter loved John above all the other fellow disciples, and they are always read to have been together, both in the Gospel and in Acts 3:1; and therefore he wished to have him as a companion in the office of preaching throughout the world: hence he says, "And what of this man" — supply: "shall he do"? Let him come with me. Consequently the response of Christ is set down, when it says: "Jesus says to him: So I will have him remain till I come." But it must be known that in the Greek it is not "so," but "if I will have him remain," etc. But it does not matter much: for however it be said, that sense of these words occurs from the outset which appeared to the apostles themselves, namely, that he does not die. For he says, "So I will have him remain till I come," as if he were saying: he will not die until my coming. But this is excluded by what is added: "and Jesus did not say, He does not die; but, So I will have him remain till I come: what is it to you?" But some, wishing to maintain this sense, say that John adds this not in order to exclude the aforesaid understanding, but in order to show that the Lord did not express this understanding through these words, but only through those, "so I will have him remain." And on account of this they say that John has not yet died. But there has been diverse opinion concerning his burial. For it is true, according to all, that he entered a tomb, and it still appears. But some say that he entered the tomb while living, and by divine power went out, translated to the place of Enoch and Elijah, where he is kept in reserve until the end of the world. And according to this it is expounded thus: "So I will have him," living, "remain," until the end of the world; and then he will suffer martyrdom for me at the hands of the Antichrist along with those two. For it is unfitting that he should not die: for whatever is born, dies. Hebrews 9:27: "It is appointed for all men once to die." But others say that he entered his tomb, which is at Ephesus, while living, and still lives in it, sleeping, until Christ comes; having as an argument for this, that there the earth wells up as if bubbling upward, which they say happens by his breathing. But Augustine excludes this, saying that it is less that he should live sleeping than that he should live in blessedness. Why then would Christ have granted, as a great gift, a long sleep to the disciple whom he loved above the rest, and deprived him of so great a good, for which the apostle desired to be dissolved and to be with Christ? Philippians 1:23. And therefore this is not to be believed; but rather that he died, and rose again even in body. And a sign of this sort is that his body is not found, and thus he remains blessed with Christ, according as he invited him. Revelation, last chapter, 20: "He who gives testimony of these things says: Surely I come quickly." It must therefore be expounded mystically, according to Augustine, so that by what he says, "remain," is understood to abide, or to wait, according to that word of Luke 24:49: "Remain in the city until you be endowed with power from on high." And thus the Lord says of John, that is, of the contemplative life: "So I will have him remain," that is, wait, "till I come," either at the end of the world, or at the death of any contemplative: because the contemplative life begun here is not brought to perfection; but, begun, it remains, and waits until Christ comes, to be perfected when he comes. Revelation 6:11: "It was said to them that they should rest for a little time yet, until the number of their fellow servants should be completed"; Luke 10:43: "Mary has chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her"; Proverbs 3:16: "Length of days is in her right hand, and in her left hand riches and glory." But the perfected active life, formed by the example of his passion, meanwhile follows Christ, by suffering for him. But, according to Chrysostom, it is read thus: "So I will have him remain," that is, to remain in Judea, and in this land, in order to preach; "and I will have you follow me," by having care of the whole world, and by suffering for me; and this "till I come," to destroy the Jews — "what is it to you?" As if he were saying: it is mine to ordain. For, as is found in the histories, John did not depart from Judea until the time when Vespasian, coming into Judea, took Jerusalem; and then, departing from there, he came to Asia. Or, according to Jerome: "You follow me," that is, through the passion; "and so," namely John, "I will have remain," without the passion of martyrdom and of death, "till I come" to call him to myself; above, 14:3: "I will come again, and take you to myself." "What is it to you?" Namely, concerning this privilege. Hence it is said in the legend of blessed John that when he was ninety years old, the Lord Jesus Christ appeared to him and invited him to his own banquet. Consequently, when it says, "This saying therefore went abroad among the brethren, that that disciple does not die," it is set down how the disciples understood the aforesaid words of the Lord, namely, that he would not die. And this is what it says: "the saying went abroad," that is, was made common, "among the brethren," that is, among the disciples — Psalm 132:1: "Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity" — "that that disciple," namely John, "does not die." But he corrects this understanding, saying: "and Jesus did not say, He does not die"; Matthew 15:16: "Are you also yet without understanding?" All the other things have been expounded.”

“This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,.... Recorded in this chapter concerning the appearance of Christ to his disciples at the sea of Tiberias, and what were done by him in their presence, what passed between them; particularly the conversation he had with Peter, both concerning himself, and the disciple John: and also, of all things that are written in this whole Gospel. These are testified to be true by this very disciple John, concerning whom the above report went upon a mistaken sense of Christ's words, and who himself wrote these things; all that is contained in this book, as well as the particulars relating to this conversation of Christ with Peter: and we know that his testimony is true. The testimony of one that was an eye and ear-witness, as John was, of all that he testified and wrote, must be known, owned, and allowed by all to be true, firm, and unquestionable; and therefore the apostle speaks in the plural number, as being not only his own sense, but the sense of all men. Though some take this to be the attestation of the Ephesian church, or of the bishops of the Asiatic churches, who put John upon writing this Gospel; of which they give their judgment and testimony, as believing it to be a true and faithful narrative.”

“This is the disciple - It is, I think, very likely that these two verses were added by some of the believers at that time, as a testimony to the truth of the preceding narration; and I allow, with Bishop Pearce and others, that it is possible that John may mean himself when he says We know, etc., yet, I think that it is very unlikely. It is certain that this Gospel loses no part of its authority in admitting the suffrage of the Church of God: it rather strengthens the important truths which are delivered in it; and in the mouths of so many witnesses the sacred matters which concern the peace and salvation of the world, are still more abundantly established. See the last note on the preceding chapter. We know - Instead of οιδαμεν, we know, some have written οιδα μεν, I know indeed; but this is mere conjecture, and is worthy of no regard. It is likely that these verses were added by those to whom John gave his work in charge.”

“This is that disciple, &c. Some conjecture, that these words were added by the Church of Ephesus. But the ancient Fathers, St. Chrysostom, St. Cyril, St. Augustine, expound them as they do the rest, without any such remark. Nor is it unusual for a person to write in this manner of himself, as of a third person. It is what St. John hath done of himself, chap. xix. ver. 35. (Witham) — Some conjecture, that these words were added by the Church of Ephesus, to point out St. John to be the real author of this history, and to record their own assent to this his testimony. But the ancient Fathers give no such comment. Nor is it unusual for a person to write of himself, as of a third person. It is what St. John hath done before.”