The Gospel of John is very different
from the Synoptic Gospels in its testimony of Jesus. Its narratives and
discourses have put a lot of emphasis on the divinity of Jesus who is
pre-existent with the Father. On the other hand, the three Johannine Epistles contain
clues on the internal struggle within the Johannine community[1]
and the eventual integration of the orthodox portion of community into the
early Christian Church. In the book “The Community of the Beloved Disciple”
written by Raymond E. Brown, the author has made an insightful analysis on the
development of the Johannine community from the mid-first century to early
second century AD. With reference to Brown’s book, this paper contains a series
of instructions on the issues for a program for presentation to our church
community to stimulate the interests of church members to know more about the
New Testament and enable them to continue to deliver the message.
According to Brown, the “Beloved
Disciple” was an eye-witness of the ministry of Jesus. He is unlikely to be one
of the twelve Apostles (i.e., probably not John the Apostle according to
tradition), since in the Gospel of John, his connection with Jesus was somewhat
different from that of the other apostles as represented by Peter. It is more likely
that he was a relatively minor figure during the ministry of Jesus, who later
became the founder the Johannine community.[2]
In reconstructing the Johannine community life, Brown posited four phases.
Phase 1, the pre-Gospel era (mid-50s to late 80s AD), involved the origins of
the community, and its relation to mid-first century Judaism. The Johannine
Christians, originally composed of Jews, were later joined by some Jews of
peculiar anti-Temple views who had converted the Samaritans. The community picked
up some elements of the Samaritan thought and portrayed Jesus as the
pre-existent divine Word. Since the Jews considered this belief as blasphemy in
contrary with their monotheistic belief, they expelled the Johannine Christians
from the synagogues (Brown 22). The Johannine Christians, on the other hand,
considered the Jews “children of the devil” (The New Oxford Annotated Bible, Jn
8:44).
Phase 2 involved the life-situation of
the Johannine community at the time the Gospel was written (around 90 AD). Since
the Jews did not receive Jesus’ divinity, Gentiles were called into the
Johannine community. After the Johannine Christians had had sufficient dealings
with the Gentiles, they came to realize that the non-Jews were no more disposed
to accept Jesus than were the Jews. To the Johannine Christians, the human race
was divided into believers and non-believers. The non-believers were “the
world” who became a blanket term for all those who preferred darkness to the
light. They should be condemned. And even for the believers, the Johannine
Christians considered those Christians outside their community as having an
inadequate understanding on the divinity of Jesus (Brown 23). Thus far, there
was unity and harmony among the Johannine Christians. They had been bound by
the greatest commandment of Jesus, “love one another as I have loved you” (Jn
15:12) since the establishment of the community.
Phase 3 involved the life-situation of
two divided groups of Johannine Christians at the time the Epistles were written
(around 100 AD). Reading between the lines of the Johannine Epistles, the areas
of dispute between the two groups would probably include Christology, ethics,
eschatology and pneumatology (theology of the Spirit), which might be the
result of a misinterpretation of the Gospel of John by the secessionists.[3]
In 1 John, the secessionists of the community replaced the non-believers to
stand for the world (1 Jn 4:5) and substituted the Jews as the children of the
devil (1 Jn 3:10). It might well be the situation that the secessionists had
won the support of the majority of the Johannine community (Brown 23).
Phase 4 saw the dissolution of the two
Johannine groups after the Epistles were written. The secessionists developed
exaggerated views and moved towards Docetism (from a fully human Jesus to a
mere appearance of humanity), Gnosticism (from a pre-existent Jesus to
pre-existent believers who also came down from the heavenly regions), and
Montanism (from possessing the Paraclete, i.e. the Spirit, to the embodiment of
the Paraclete) in the second century AD. The orthodox portion of the Johannine
community gradually merged with the mainstream Christian community of the early
second century AD and accepted the authority of the presbyter-bishop structure,
as represented by Ignatius of Antioch (Brown 24). Based on Brown’s theory on
the division into the above four phases of the development of the Johannine
community, we can identify eight issues relating to the study of the Johannine
writings[4]
and the New Testament. These issues are discussed below.
First, Historicity. As we see it, the
Gospel of John is very different from the Synoptic Gospels in its testimony of
Jesus. So a likely question is whether the Gospel of John contains historical
truths. To address this question, we need to have a good understanding on the “Instruction
on the Historical Truth of the Gospels” (“Instruction”) issued by the
Pontifical Biblical Commission. According to the “Instruction”, there are three
stages of tradition by which the life and teaching of Jesus is transmitted to
us. The first stage of the tradition is the words and works witnessed by the
apostles and disciples who followed Jesus during his ministry on earth. They
had seen his works and heard his words and were deeply impressed in their minds
on what he had said and done. They also grasped correctly the miracles done by
Jesus and the messages conveyed by him so as to transmit the doctrine of
salvation to other people, teaching them to obey the commandments of the Lord.
In the context of the Gospel of John, the “Beloved Disciple” was an eye-witness
of the ministry of Jesus. Being the founder of the Johannine community, the
“Beloved Disciple” began to form his views on what he considered to be the most
important attributes of Jesus and his teachings, e.g., “love one another as I
have loved you” (Jn 15:12). This stage has always seemed to be the stage of the
greatest importance to Christians. It is however noteworthy that the Pontifical
Biblical Commission does not insist in any way that the Gospels in their
present state are a record of this first stage of tradition.
In the second stage of tradition, the
apostles and disciples who were the eye-witnesses of Jesus’ ministry of earth,
bearing the testimony of what Jesus had proclaimed, notably his death and
glorious resurrection, faithfully conveyed the words and deeds of Jesus to the
hearers of their time. In their preaching, they took account of the
circumstances of the hearers to enable them to get the doctrine of salvation
and believe in Jesus. Since they are the eye witnesses of Jesus’ death and
resurrection, their faith in the Lord enabled them to consolidate what they saw
and heard from him before his death, and more importantly, after they were
illuminated by the Holy Spirit upon the resurrection of the Lord, they got a
fuller understanding on Jesus’ words and deeds against the background of the
Old Testament. In turn, they interpreted his words and deeds to the hearers in
accordance with needs of the audience. For the Johannine community, it might be
the time when we see the admission of a second group into the community. This
second group plausibly consisted of anti-Temple Jews who converted Samaritans.
In the story of the Samaritan woman, the woman said to Jesus, “I know that
Messiah is coming (who is called Christ)” (Jn 4:25). And Jesus answered her, “I
am he” (Jn 4:26). It is unlikely that a Samaritan would have believed in Jesus
as the Davidic Messiah, which is a common understanding in the Synoptic
Gospels.[5]
Rather, they would expect a Taheb, a teacher and revealer, who was seen as a
Moses-returned figure. They thought that Moses had seen God and his return
would reveal to the people what God had said. Upon the admission of anti-Temple
Jews who converted the Samaritans into the Johannine community, the community
incorporated some elements of the Samaritan thought into its belief and
portrayed Jesus (rather than Moses) as the one who had seen God and would
“proclaim all things” (Jn 4:25) that he heard from God (Brown 44-45). Hence,
the story of the Samaritan woman is such a unique piece in the Gospel of John.
While the story may not be historical, it nevertheless reflects its importance
as a tradition to the initial audience of the Gospel (who were the Johannine
Christians).
The third stage of tradition involves
the sacred authors of the Gospels, who took the earliest body of instructions,
which were either passed on to them orally or partly already in writing, wrote
the Gospels to draw up a narrative of the matters concerning Jesus. They did
this under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for the benefit of the Church
community. They selected certain things out of many, some of which they
synthesized, some others explained in more details, and some in different
orders, in order to address the needs of the readers in their church
communities, so that they would better be able to understand the solid truth of
the things that they had been instructed. As a result, different evangelists
would have their account of matters concerning Jesus conveyed differently under
the different contexts of their intended audience. This explains why the events
captured in the three Synoptic Gospels are slightly different, and more
significantly, the Gospel of John reads so differently from the Synoptic Gospels.
For example, the cleansing of the Temple is put in the Gospel of John at the
beginning of Jesus’ ministry (Jn 2:13-22), instead of towards the end of his
ministry as in the Synoptic Gospels. This is so because it represents an early
conflict between the Johannine community and the other Jews. Despite not
keeping the very letter, the sense of the Lord’s salvation message is
preserved. All the Gospels are inspired writings of God. For the church
community today, we should always bear in mind that the life and words of Jesus
are not just simply reported for what they are being remembered, but are
preached for the purpose that the early church community would be able to get
the doctrines of salvation as a basis of faith and morals.
Second, Christology. As “these are
written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of
God, and that through believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31).
While the Synoptic Gospels also portray Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of
God, what is unique in the Gospel of John is its focus put on the divinity of
Jesus who is pre-existent with the Father. It marks a high point in early
Christology.
In Brown’s Phase 1 development of the
Johannine community, members of the community consisted initially of Jews whose
belief in Jesus involved a relatively low Christology, i.e., application to
Jesus of titles derived from the Old Testament, most notably Messiah (or
Christ) and Son of God, which do not automatically imply the divine nature of
Jesus. We should be well aware that these titles are also commonly applied to
Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels. The “Beloved Disciple”, founder of the Johannine
community, who had previously been a disciple of John the Baptist, was called
to follow Jesus. He might be the unnamed disciple who was called along with
Andrew mentioned in Jn 1:35-40. The early Johannine community, following the
teaching of John the Baptist, had little difficulty to find Jesus the Messiah
they expected, “We have found him about whom Moses in the law and also the
prophets wrote” (Jn 1:45). In the Gospel of John, we can also find miracle
stories similar to those in the Synoptic Gospels including the healing of the
sick, the lame and the blind, the multiplication of the loaves and fish, and
the raising from the dead.[6]
The beginnings of the Johannine community were unexceptional, i.e., essentially
going along with the mainstream Christian belief (Brown 25-34).
With the inclusion of Samaritan thoughts,
the Johannine community began to understand Jesus more fully than the surface
appearance. In Jesus’ first miracle in Cana, it starts to reveal the divinity
of Jesus. He called his mother “woman” (Jn 2:4), deliberately downplaying her
claim to human blood ties. Through the miracle, he “revealed his glory” (Jn
2:11) coming from God the Father. We may also notice that there are no infancy
narratives in the Gospel of John. In sharp contrast with the Gospels of Matthew
and Luke, the Gospel of John begins with portraying Jesus as the pre-existent
Word, the true light who is full of grace and truth (Jn 1:1-14). John the
Baptist did not baptize Jesus because there is no need (or even improper) for
him to do so.[7] He only introduced Jesus
as the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29, 36). There is also no account on the temptation
of Jesus because it is unconceivable for God to be tested.
High Christology further developed in
the Johannine community and became the mainstream belief among its members.
Quite foreign to the Synoptic Gospels, their beliefs include the Word that
existed in God’s presence before creation has become flesh in Jesus (Jn 1:1,
14); Jesus’ coming into the world like a light (Jn 1:9-10, 8:12, 9:5); Jesus is
with the Father (Jn 10:30) and sees Him (Jn 14:9); Jesus can refer himself as
the divine “I Am”;[8] and a realized eschatology
through the early ministry of Jesus (Jn 3:13, 6:62). This very different
Christology, opposition of the Temple cult, and their Samaritan elements made
the Johannine community a unique group of Christians and served as a catalyst
in their breakage with the synagogue. The Johannine Christians recognized the
divinity of Jesus, “The Word was God” (Jn 1:1), and hailed his divine name, “My
Lord and My God” (Jn 20:28) (Brown 34-51).
In the Gospel of John, we can easily
identify unique characteristics concerning high Christology which are not
apparent in the Synoptic Gospels. For example, Jesus seems scarcely to eat or
drink in the normal sense. The mentions of food, water and bread all take a
spiritual perspective. As Jesus is pre-existent with the Father, he does not
need to “pray” to the Father. We cannot locate in the Gospel of John “Our
Father” and other instances where Jesus prayed alone in the Synoptic Gospels.
Also interestingly enough, when Jesus raised Lazarus, he said to the Father, “Father,
I thank you for having heard me” (Jn 11:41). In Gethsemane, Jesus said,
“Father, save me from this hour? No, it is for this reason that I have come to
this hour. Father, glorify your name” (Jn 12:27). This is very different from
the Synoptic tradition that Jesus prayed with great fear while he was in
Gethsemane. According to the Gospel of John, as Jesus is God, there is no
distinction between Jesus’ will and the Father’s will (Brown 114-116). To our
church community, the Gospel of John provides a good source for us to learn
about and reflect on the divinity of Jesus. As Christians, are we putting
enough faith in Jesus and proclaiming that he is indeed our Lord and our God?
Third, Sacraments. Baptism by water is
mentioned in all the four Gospels, although the Gospel of John said that it was
not Jesus himself but his disciples who baptized (Jn: 4:2), perhaps to dispel
the impression that Jesus (the divine Son) had baptized people in imitation of
John the Baptist (Brown, Fitzmyer, Murray 956). The use of figurative language
or metaphors to describe Jesus and present his message makes the stories in the
Gospel of John (e.g., “living water” in the story of the Samaritan woman and “light
of life” in the story of healing of a man blind from birth) more persuasive
than the Synoptic Gospels in its salvation message of Baptism.
What is most unique in the Gospel of
John is the Eucharist. In the discourse on the bread of life in the Gospel of
John, Jesus told his disciples that “those who eat my flesh and drink my blood
abide in me, and I in them … so whoever eats me will live because of me” (Jn
6:56-57). However, it is reported in the Gospel that when many of his disciples
heard it, they found the teaching too difficult to accept. Many of them turned
back and left Jesus. To the Johannine Christians, these “Christians” were not
true followers of Jesus because they did not understand the nature of the
Eucharist (Brown 74). It is amazing that one cannot locate the “Institution of
the Eucharist” in the narrative of the Last Supper in the Gospel of John
because the discourse on the bread of life already contains a deeper meaning of
the Eucharist not found in the Synoptic Gospels. In the Roman Catholic Church,
we are so blessed to continue with keeping the early tradition that the
Eucharist is the real body and blood of Christ as the Johannine Christians had
originally believed.
Fourth, Ethics and Moral. In the Gospel
of John, the Jews were called the children of the devil while the true
disciples will know the truth, and the truth will make them free (Jn 8:22).
Jesus also told Peter, “One who has bathed does not need to wash, except for
the feet, but is entirely clean” (Jn 13:10). The greatest commandment among the
Johannine Christians is “to love one another as I have loved you”. We may notice
that this commandment is slightly different from the commandment of Jesus in
the Synoptic Gospels, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart,
and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and
your neighbor as yourself” (Lk 10:27).
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus even asked us to love our enemies and pray
for those who persecute us (Mt 5:44). When the secessionists of the Johannine
community developed extreme views on the divinity of Jesus, they might have
taken that those who had been enlightened by Jesus would be free from the guilt
of sin. In another sense, they gave no salvific importance to the ethical
behavior since the claims of intimacy with God might well have been made
without emphasizing on what one did in the world. 1 John challenges this
position by relating righteousness and believers becoming the children of God
with keeping the commandments (1 Jn 2:3, 3:22, 24, 5:2-3). This understanding
also better aligns with the Synoptic tradition on “love your neighbors as
yourself” preached by Jesus in the Sermon the Mount (Brown 123-135).[9]
While the Synoptic Gospels have given us
a wider perspective on love for others, yet our church community can also
reflect on whether we are doing enough to our sisters and brothers in Christ in
light of the Johannine writings. Based on the motto “love one another as I have
loved you”, the Johannine Christians maintained an intimate relationship among
themselves and with Jesus. Being part of the church community, are we doing
enough to foster a close relationship among ourselves which is centered on
Jesus? For example, are we regularly engaged together in Biblical studies to
strengthen our Christian faith?
Fifth, Attitude towards the Jewish
Religion. As discussed earlier, the Jews did not accept the divinity of Jesus
as this seemed to be in contrary with their monotheistic belief of the one and
only God of Israel. The Johannine Christians were expelled from the synagogues
by the Jewish authorities who represented the Jews and there were numerous
disputes in the Gospel (Jn 5:39-40, 45-47, 6:31-33, 7:23, 8:34-57, 10:34-36)
between Jesus and the Jews (Brown 66-69). As compared to the Synoptic Gospels,
we should discover that Jesus’ disputes with the Jews in the Gospel of John are
primarily relating to his divine status (even if reference is made to the Old
Testament) than to their external adherence to the Mosaic Law. Moreover, the
Johannine Christians also held the view of realized eschatology and perhaps later
developed among the secessionists into a more critical view of no final eschatology
as Jesus said “everyone who lives and believes in me will never die” (Jn 11:26)
(Brown 135-138).[10] This is fundamentally
different from the belief of the Pharisees who were waiting for the final
eschatology (on the creation of new heavens and a new earth) in fulfillment of
God’s promise in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Not only were the Johannine Christians
hostile to the Jews who were Pharisees (this is also the case in the Synoptic
Gospels), they also disliked the adherents of John the Baptist. Despite that
the Johannine Christians were rooted from the followers of John the Baptist, it
is rather surprising that there are many negative statements in the Gospel
pertaining to John the Baptist, even though some of these words were put into
his mouth to reduce the negative impact. For example, he is not the light (Jn
1:9); he does not antedate Jesus (Jn 1:15,30); he is not the Messiah nor Elijah
(Jn 1:29-34, 3:28); he is not the bridegroom who must decrease while Jesus must
increase (Jn: 3:29-30); and he had not performed any miracles (Jn 10:34).
Indeed, there is a scene in the Gospel of John where there were two groups of
baptizers – Jesus and his disciples and John and his disciples (Jn 3:22-23),
who were seemingly competing against each other. It is plausible that the
sectarians of John the Baptist believed that their master and not Jesus was the
Messiah. Therefore, to the Johannine Christians, they were also non-believers
though the condemnation against them was not as severe as those who preferred
darkness to the light (Brown 69-71).
Even for the Jewish Christian Churches,
the Johannine Christians considered them having inadequate faith in Jesus. An
instance of inadequate faith can be found among the brothers of Jesus in Jn
7:3-5, who urged Jesus to go to Judea to perform miracles there, but Jesus
refused them (Jn 7:6-9). This fits into James, the brother of Jesus,[11]
who was the leader of the Jewish Christian community in Jerusalem and held more
conservative views than Peter and Paul (Gal 2:12). It also echoes the
astonishing question Jesus asked his Twelve Apostles, “Do you also wish to go
away?” (Jn: 6:67). These Jewish Christians were not considered real “brothers”
of Jesus. His real brothers were the “Beloved Disciple” and his fellow
Christians (hence the scene and the words of Jesus on the cross to his mother
and the “Beloved Disciple” in Jn 19:25-27). A further example of these Jewish
Christians in the Gospel is Jn 8:31-59 on the long debate between Jesus and the
Jews who claimed to be the descendants of Abraham. When Jesus made the
Christological claim, “Before Abraham was, I Am” (Jn 8:58), they attempted to
stone him. Perhaps, these Jewish Christians were considered enemies to the
Johannine Christians as they might be supporting the Jewish authorities to
persecute the latter (Brown 73-78).
Plausibly because of their real-life experience,
the Johannine community, despite originated from among the Jews, considered the
Jews their principal enemies. Having a background understanding on the above,
it is nonetheless essential for modern Christians to get a more balanced
perspective so as to understand the relationship between the Jewish Religion
and Christianity. In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus said, “Do you think that I
have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to
fulfill” (Mt 5:17). In the letter to the Romans, Paul wrote that the Gentiles
are the “wild olive shoot” which were grafted in place of some of the branches
that were broken off from the olive tree (i.e., the Jews who did not believe in
Jesus). As such, God’s salvation has already been rooted in the Jewish
tradition and the Gentiles (we are also part of them) should always remember
that it is not they that support the root, but the root that supports them. “Without
the Old Testament, the New Testament would be an incomprehensible book, a plant
deprived of its roots and destined to dry up and wither” (The Jewish People and
their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible #84).
Despite that most of the Jews in Jesus’
age might see him as “disruptive”, our view on God’s salvific plan is indeed a
progression from the Old Testament to the New in the overall scheme of things
because it is through Jesus and the Church established by him that the incomplete
and temporary nature of the Old Testament can be fulfilled. Perhaps, the Letter
to the Hebrews can encompass both perspectives, “Long ago God spoke to our
ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has
spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he
also created the worlds” (Heb 1:1-2). Indeed, the promises made by God and the
laws in the Old Testament have been fulfilled with the paschal mystery of
Jesus.
Sixth, Ecclesiology. From the Gospel of
John, we can identify another group of Christians who are different from the
Johannine Christians. They belonged to the Apostolic Churches, who were
represented by Peter and other members of the Twelve. In contrast with the
Jews, this group led by Peter positively acclaimed that Jesus had the words of
eternal life (Jn 6:68). Jesus also asked Peter to tend his sheep (Jn 21:15-17).
Nonetheless, the Johannine Christians clearly regarded themselves as closer to
Jesus than the Christians of the Apostolic Churches. For example, the “Beloved
Disciple” in the Gospel of John is closer to Jesus both in life (Jn 13:23) and
in death (19:26-27). And even more significantly, when he saw the linen
wrappings lying in the tomb and the cloth that had been on Jesus’ head rolled
up in a place by itself, he immediately recalled the scene of Lazarus (Jn
11:44) and believed in the resurrection. Essentially, he is the first true
believer of resurrection though Peter was the first to see the empty tomb. This
resurrection scene is unique in the four Gospels. The Apostolic Christians
recognized Jesus as a king, lord and savior from the moment of his birth but
they had yet to appreciate the high Christology theology on the pre-existent
divine Word. Another major separator between the two groups could possibly be
the difference in ecclesiology. We may notice that in the Gospel of John, there
is no mention of the category of “apostle” as opposed to a number of references
in the Synoptic Gospels. Moreover, with the death of the Beloved Disciple (Jn
21:20-23), it is the Paraclete (Holy Spirit) who remains forever within
everyone who loves Jesus and keeps his commandments (Jn 15:15-17); he is the
guide to all truth (Jn 16:13). No institution or structure can substitute that
(Brown 81-88).
The personal role of the Holy Spirit in
the Gospel of John under the title of Paraclete is unique among the Gospels.
When the secessionists broke away from the Johannine community, they might have
designated themselves as teachers and prophets and claimed to speak under the
guidance of the Holy Spirit. The problem was how the Johannine Christians would
be able to differentiate what came from the Holy Spirit and what came from a
spirit that did not belong to God. The instruction given in 1 John is “every
spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and
every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God” (1 Jn 4:2). Yet this
interpretation could be vague to the Johannine Christians as the pre-existent
divine Word remained the primary message proclaimed among them while the Word
became flesh, though also important, was no longer with them with the death and
resurrection of Jesus, only leaving behind the Paraclete for guiding and
comforting them. And it might well be the situation that the secessionists had
won the support of the majority of the Johannine community as reflected in the
second Epistle of John, “Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who
do not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh … Be on your guard, so
that you do not lose what we have worked for, but may receive a full reward” (2
Jn v7-8) and the author’s pessimistic conviction that “the last hour” (1 Jn
2:18) is at hand (Brown 135-144).
The Paraclete-centered ecclesiology of
the Johannine community offered no real protection against schismatics. To
uphold the true belief of the “Beloved Disciple” and avoid further
disintegration of the Johannine community into the hands of the secessionists,
the followers of the school of Johannine writing disciples[12]
accepted the authority of the presbyter-bishop structure, which in the early
second century AD had become dominant in the Christian Church, as represented
by Ignatius of Antioch. The Johannine Christians gradually merged with the
Apostolic Christians and brought into their belief the high Johannine
Christology of pre-existence. One relatively minor but interesting point to
note is the church leader Diotrephes challenged by the elder (the author) in
the third Epistle of John might indeed have made a prudent decision to exclude
all emissary-teachers and to discipline those who received them since he might
have faced the practical difficulty of telling true teacher-emissaries from
false teacher-emissaries. It may well be leaders like Diotrephes who had helped
make the transition from a solely Paraclete-centered ecclesiology to an
ecclesiastical polity (Brown 160-161).
Prima facie, it seems to be a loss of
the theology of the Paraclete for individuals to the theology of the Holy
Spirit guiding the authoritative teaching of the Magisterium. However, we
should also recognize that it is the genuine doctrines of the Johannine
Christians that had eventually helped the early Church to prevail against
Gnosticism and perhaps also Arianism. In the spirit of the Second Vatican Council,
perhaps our Christian community can reflect on whether we are putting a right
balance on the authority of the Magisterium and the involvement of the laity in
building the Church and the development of doctrines to keep pace with the
ever-changing necessities of the world?
Seventh, Ministry of the Church. In the
Gospel of John, there are many references to “the world” such as Jesus comes to
judge the world (Jn 9:39, 12:31); Jesus does not belong to the world (Jn 17:14,
16); the world hates Jesus and his followers (Jn 7:7, 15:18-19, 16:20); and
Jesus refuses to pray for the world (Jn 17:9). It is apparent from the Gospel
of John that the message of Jesus’ opposition to the world is most dominant in
the latter part of the Gospel, which is a clear shift from the opposition from
the Jews in the earlier part of the Gospel since the Johannine community was
also facing opposition from the Gentiles by the time the Gospel was written.
When comparing this with the spreading of the Good News by Paul to the Gentiles,
one would agree that the latter had been more successful in its endeavors
because Paul’s motto is “I have become all things to all people, that I might
by all means save some” (1 Cor 9:22), which is rather impractical for an
intimate and relatively closed group of Johannine Christians.
In the modern world, it is clear that
the Church would need to open to the rest of the world. In the Second Vatican
Council document “Gaudium et Spes” – the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in
the Modern World, the emphasis is put on how the Church – as the Lord’s
representative in the world, would need to engage in dialogues with the rest of
the world so that the virtues of truth, justice, love and peace can be
maintained and further developed in tandem with the social, economic,
political, technology and science developments in the world. Gaudium et Spes is
a “pastoral” constitution because it expresses the relation of the Church with
mankind, particularly in the first part of the document. The second part is
more doctrinal in nature to address practical issues relating to marriage and
family, culture, economic and social life, political environment, and promotion
of world peace. “Love” is by far the clearest message brought out by Gaudium et
Spes. Our church members are encouraged to read the document and share among
ourselves how the dialogues between the Church and the world can help us build
the Kingdom of God on earth.
As a final note, the Johannine writings
also bring us to an interesting point about the formation of the New Testament
Canon. When the secessionists of the Johannine community went further in their
ultra-high Christology, they took the Gospel of John with them which was
accepted by the gnostics who commented on it (Brown 166-167). As the Gospel of
John was misused by the gnostics, it had taken a while for it to be accepted
into the Canon of the New Testament. Nevertheless, the Johannine Epistle’s
campaign against the secessionists ultimately encouraged writers like Irenaeus
in the late second century AD to employ the Gospel in a war against the
gnostics who were spiritual descendants of the secessionists. In a certain
sense, the author of 1 John may have been the contributor in saving the
canonical status of the Gospel of John (Brown 149-150). This is one of the many
instances of the Canon development process which was long and gradual. During
the process, the occurrence of issues and heretics in the early Church, the
citation from certain books by the early Church Fathers in their writings, and
the public reading of Christian documents in Church services of divine worship
had a profound effect on the selection of books for inclusion into the Canon
(Metzger 1-8). The church community is recommended to read the book “The Canon
of the New Testament: Its Origin,
Development, and Significance” written by Bruce M. Metzger, which
provides a detailed analysis on the various factors leading to the finalization
of the New Testament Canon.
Bibliography
Brown, Raymond Edward. An
Introduction to the New Testament. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2007. Print.
Brown, Raymond Edward. The
Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist, 1979. Print.
Brown, Raymond Edward., Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E.
Murphy. The New Jerome
Biblical Commentary. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1990. Print.
Coogan, Michael D. The
New Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha.
N.p.: Oxford UP, 2010. Print.
Metzger, Bruce M. The Canon of the New Testament: Its
Origin, Development, and Significance. Oxford: Clarendon, 1987. Print.
"Pastoral
Constitution on the Church in the Modern Word - Gaudium et Spes." Vatican:
the Holy See. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Mar. 2014.
<http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html>.
Pontifical Biblical
Commission. "Instruction on the Historical Truth of the Gospels."
CatholicCulture.org, n.d. Web. 01 Mar. 2014.
<http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1352>.
"The Jewish
People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible." The
Pontifical Biblical Commission N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Mar. 2014.
<http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20020212_popolo-ebraico_en.html>.
[1] The Johannine community was a community of Christians which was
founded by the “Beloved Disciple” (the disciple whom Jesus loved) who appears in
many instances in the Gospel of John (Jn 13:23-25, 19:26-27, 20:1-10, 21:20-24).
The original audience of the Gospel was primarily members of the Johannine
community.
[2] Raymond E. Brown, “An Introduction to the New Testament” (p. 368)
[3] Apparently, it is the unique messages enshrined in the Gospel of
John which has led to the split of the community because two groups interpreted
them in different ways (Brown 95).
[4] Consisting of the Gospel of John and the three Johannine Epistles.
The Book of Revelation, despite its traditional attribution to the same author,
contains quite different theological and pastoral perspectives from these
Johannine writings.
[5] The Davidic Messiah comes to fulfill God’s promises in the Old
Testament.
[6] However, the Gospel of John contains extensive interpretative
theological dialogues alongside the miracles, thus making them so different
from the Synoptic Gospels.
[7] The purpose of Jesus’ baptism in the Synoptic Gospels: “to fulfill
all righteousness” is not a major theme of the Gospel of John which portrays
Jesus as the divine Word.
[8] The name of God in Ex 3:14.
[9] However, unlike the Sermon on the Mount, there is not much elaboration
on the “commandments” in 1 John.
[10] 1 John corrects this misunderstanding by saying that, “we are God’s
children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is
this, when he (Jesus) is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as
he is” (1 Jn 3:2). Essentially, it brings the theology of eschatology closer to
the Synoptic tradition on the second coming of Jesus.
[11] This is normally understood as the cousin of Jesus or a
half-brother from a previous marriage of Joseph.
No comments:
Post a Comment