Images de page

the Word was God. Sometimes instead of repeating the subject S. John introduces an apparently superfluous demonstrative pronoun; He that seeketh the glory of Him that sent Him, this one is true' (vii. 18); 'He that made me whole, that man said unto me' (v. 11). The personal pronouns are frequently inserted for emphasis and repeated for the same reason. This is specially true of 'I' in the discourses of Christ.

(c) Although S. John connects his sentences so simply, and sometimes merely places them side by side without conjunctions, yet he very frequently points out a sequence in fact or in thought. His two most characteristic particles are 'therefore' (ovv) and 'in order that' (iva). 'Therefore' occurs almost exclusively in narrative, and points out that one fact is a consequence of another, sometimes in cases where this would not have been obvious; 'He came therefore again into Cana of Galilee' (iv. 46), because of the welcome He had received there before; 'They sought therefore to take Him' (vii. 30), because of His claim to be sent from God.—While the frequent use of 'therefore' points to the conviction that nothing happens without a cause, the frequent use of 'in order that' points to the belief that nothing happens without a purpose. S. John uses ' in order that' not only where some other construction would have been suitable, but also where another construction would seem to be much more suitable; 'I am not worthy in order that I may unloose' (i. 27), 'My meat is in order that I may do the will' (iv. 34); 'This is the work of God, in order that ye may believe' (vi. 29); 'Who sinned, this man or his parents, in order that he should be born blind?' (ix. 2); 'It is expedient for you, in order that I go away' (xvi. 7). S. John is specially fond of this construction to point out the working of the Divine purpose, as in some of the instances just given (comp. v. 23, vi. 40, 50, x. 10, xi. 42, xiv. 16, &c. &c.) and in particular of the fulfilment of prophecy (xviii. 9, xix. 24, 28, 36). In this connexion an elliptical expression 'but in order that' (=but this was done in order that) is not uncommon; 'Neither this man sinned, nor his parents, but in order that, &c.' (ix. 3; comp. xi. 52, xiv. 31, xv. 25, xviii. 28).

(d) S. John, full of the spirit of Hebrew poetry, frequently employs that parallelism which to a large extent is the very form of Hebrew poetry: 'A servant is not greater than his lord; neither one that is sent greater than he that sent him' (xiii. 16); 'Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you... Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful' (xiv. 27). Sometimes the parallelism is antithetic, and the second clause denies the opposite of the first; 'He confessed, and denied not' (i. 20); 'I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish' (x. 28).

(e) Another peculiarity, also of Hebrew origin, is minuteness of detail. Instead of one word summing up the whole action, S. John uses two or three stating the details of the action; 'They asked him and said to him' (i. 25); 'John bare witness, saying' (i. 32); 'Jesus cried aloud in the Temple teaching and saying' (vii. 28). The frequent phrase 'answered and said,' illustrates both this particularity and also the preference for co-ordinate sentences (a). 'Answered and said' occurs thirtyfour times in S. John, and only two or three times in the Synoptists, who commonly write 'having answered said,' or 'answered saying.'

(f) In conclusion we may notice a few of S. John's favourite words and phrases; 'Abide' especially in the phrases expressing abiding in one another; 'believe on' a person; 'true' as opposed to lying, and 'true' as opposed to spurious, 'truly,' and 'truth;' 'witness' and 'bear witness;' 'the darkness,' of moral darkness; 'the light,' of spiritual light; 'life;' 'love ;' eternal life;' 'in frankness' or 'openly;' 'keep My word;' 'manifest;' 'the Jews,' of the opponents of Christ; 'the world,' of those alienated from Christ. The following words and phrases are used by S. John only; 'the Paraclete' or 'the Advocate,' of the Holy Spirit; 'the Word,' of the Son; 'onlybegotten,' of the Son; 'come out from God,' of the Son; 'lay down My life,' of Jesus Christ; 'Verily, verily;' 'the ruler of this world,' of Satan; 'the last day.'

These characteristics combined form a book which stands alone in Christian literature, as its author stands alone among

Christian teachers; the work of one who for threescore years and ten laboured as an Apostle. Called to follow the Baptist when only a lad, and by him soon transferred to the Christ, he may be said to have been the first who from his youth up was a Christian. Who, therefore, could so fitly grasp and state in their true proportions and with fitting impressiveness the great verities of the Christian faith? He had had no deep-seated prejudices to uproot, like his friend S. Peter and others who were called late in life. He had had no sudden wrench to make from the past, like S. Paul. He had not had the trying excitement of wandering abroad over the face of the earth, like most of the Twelve. He had remained at his post at Ephesus, directing, teaching, meditating; until at last when the fruit was ripe it was given to the Church in the fulness of beauty which it is still our privilege to possess and learn to love.



The Fourth Gospel presupposes the other three; the Evangelist assumes that the contents of his predecessors' Gospels are known to his readers. The details of Christ's birth are summed up in 'the Word became flesh.' His subjection to His parents is implied by contrast in His reply to His mother at Cana. The Baptism is involved in the Baptist's declaration, 'I have seen (the Spirit descending and abiding on Him) and have borne witness' (i. 34). The Ascension is promised through Mary Magdalene to the Apostles (xx. 17), but left unrecorded. Christian Baptism is assumed in the discourse with Nicodemus, and the Eucharist in that on the Bread of Life; but the reference in each case is left to speak for itself to Christians familiar with both those rites. S. John passes over their institution in silence.

The differences between the Fourth Gospel and the three first are real and very marked: but it is easy to exaggerate

them. They are conveniently grouped under two heads; (1) differences as to the scene and extent of Christ's ministry; (2) differences as to the view given of His Person.

(1) With regard to the first, it is urged that the Synoptists represent our Lord's ministry as lasting for one year only, including only one Passover and one visit to Jerusalem, with which the ministry closes. S. John, however, describes the ministry as extending over three or possibly more years, including at least three Passovers and several visits to Jerusalem. In considering this difficulty, if it be one, we must remember two things: (a) that all four Gospels are very incomplete and contain only a series of fragments; (b) that the date and duration of Christ's ministry remain and are likely to remain uncertain. (a) In the gaps in the Synoptic narrative there is plenty of room for all that is peculiar to S. John. In the spaces deliberately left by S. John between his carefully arranged scenes there is plenty of room for all that is peculiar to the Synoptists. When all have been pieced together there still remain large interstices which it would require at least four more Gospels to fill (xxi. 25). Therefore it can be no serious difficulty that so much of the Fourth Gospel has nothing parallel to it in the other three. (6) The additional fact of the uncertainty as to the date and duration of the Lord's public ministry is a further explanation of the apparent difference in the amount of time covered by the Synoptic narrative and that covered by the narrative of S. John. There is no contradiction between the two. The Synoptists nowhere say that the ministry lasted for only one year, although some commentators from very early times have proposed to understand 'the acceptable year of the Lord' (Luke iv. 19) literally. The three Passovers of S. John (ii. 13, vi. 4, xi. 55; v. 1 being omitted as very doubtful), compel us to give at least a little over two years to Christ's ministry. But S. John also nowhere implies that he has mentioned all the Passovers within the period; and the startling statement of Irenaeus (Haer. II. xxii. 5) must be borne in mind, that our Lord fulfilled the office of a Teacher until He was over forty years old, "even as the Gospel and all the elders bear witness,

who consorted with John the disciple of the Lord in Asia, (stating) that John had handed this down to them." Irenaeus makes the ministry begin when Christ was nearly thirty years of age (Luke iii. 23); so that he gives it a duration of more than ten years on what seems to be very high authority. All that can be affirmed with certainty is that the ministry cannot have begun earlier than A.D. 28 (the earlier alternative for the fifteenth year of Tiberius; Luke iii. 1), and cannot have ended later than A.D. 37, when Pilate was recalled by Tiberius shortly before his death. Indeed as Tiberius died in March, and Pilate found him already dead when he reached Rome, the recall probably took place in A.D. 36; and the Passover of A.D. 36 is the latest date possible for the Crucifixion. Chronology is not what the Evangelists aimed at giving us; and the fact that S. John spreads his narrative over a longer period than the Synoptists will cause a difficulty to those only who have mistaken the purpose of the Gospels.

(2) As to the second great difference between S. John and the Synoptists, it is said that, while they represent Jesus as a great Teacher and Reformer, with the powers and authority of a Prophet, who exasperates His countrymen by denouncing their immoral traditions, S. John gives us instead a mysterious Personage, invested with Divine attributes, who infuriates the hierarchy by claiming to be one with the Supreme God. It is urged, moreover, that there is a corresponding difference in the teaching attributed to Jesus in each case. The discourses in the Synoptic Gospels are simple, direct, and easily intelligible, inculcating for the most part high moral principles, which are enforced and illustrated by numerous parables and proverbs. Whereas the discourses in the Fourth Gospel are many and intricate, inculcating for the most part deep mystical truths, which are enforced by a ceaseless reiteration tending to obscure the exact line of the argument, and illustrated by not a single parable properly so called.

These important differences may be to a very great extent I explained by two considerations: (a) the peculiarities of S. John's own temperament; (b) the circumstances under which

« PrécédentContinuer »