ANALYSIS AND THEORY OF ST. JOHN’S GOSPEL— 1Jo 1:1
IN the opening verses of this Epistle we have a sentence whose ample
and prolonged prelude has but one parallel in St. John’s writings.
It
is, as an old divine says, "prefaced and brought in with more
magnificent ceremony than any passage in Scripture." The very emotion and enthusiasm with which it is written, and the
sublimity of the exordium as a whole, tend to make the highest sense
also the most natural sense. Of what or of whom does St. John speak
in the phrase "concerning the Lord of Life," or "the Lord who is
the Life"? The neuter "that which" is used for the masculines "He
who"—according to St. John’s practice of employing the neuter
comprehensively when a collective whole is to be expressed. The
phrase "from the beginning," taken by itself, might no doubt be
employed to signify the beginning of Christianity, or of the
ministry
of Christ. But even viewing it as entirely isolated from its context
of language and circumstance, it has a greater claim to be looked
upon as from eternity or from the beginning of the creation. Other
considerations are decisive in favour of the last interpretation. (1) We have already adverted to the lofty and transcendental tone
of the whole passage, elevating as it does each clause by the
irresistible upward tendency of the whole sentence. "The climax and
resting place cannot stop short of the bosom of God." (2) But again, we must also bear in mind that the Epistle is
everywhere to be read with the Gospel before us, and the language of
the Epistle to be connected with that of the Gospel. The procemium
of
the Epistle is the subjective version of the objective historical
point of view which we find at the close of the preface to the
Gospel. "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us"; so St. John
begins his sentence in the Gospel with a statement of a historical
fact. But he proceeds, "and we delightedly beheld His glory"; that
is a statement of the personal impression attested by his own
consciousness and that of other witnesses. But let us note carefully
that in the Epistle, which is in subjective relation to the Gospel,
this process is exactly reversed. The Apostle begins with the
personal impression; pauses to affirm the reality of the many proofs
in the realm of fact of that
which produced this impression through the senses upon the
conceptions and emotions of those who were brought into contact with
the Saviour; and then returns to the subjective impression from
which
he had originally started. (3) Much of the language in this passage is inconsistent with our
understanding by the Word the first announcement of the Gospel
preaching. One might of course speak of hearing the commencement of
the Gospel message, but surely not of seeing and handling it. (4) It is a noteworthy fact that the Gospel and the Apocalypse
begin with the mention of the personal Word. This may well lead us
to
expect that Logos should be used in the same sense in the prooemium
of the great Epistle by the same author. We conclude then that when St. John here speaks of the Word of Life,
he refers to something higher again than the preaching of life, and
that he has in view both the manifestation of the life which has
taken place in our humanity, and Him who is personally at once the
Word and the Life. The procemium may be thus paraphrased. "That
which in all its collective influence was from the beginning as
understood by Moses, by Solomon, and Micah; which we have first and
above all heard in divinely human utterances, but which we have also
seen with these very eyes; which we gazed upon with the full and
entranced sight that delights in the object contemplated; and which
these hands handled reverentially at His bidding. I speak all this
concerning the Word who is also the Life." Tracts and sheets are often printed in our day with anthologies of
texts which are supposed to contain the very essence of the Gospel.
But the sweetest scents, it is said, are not distilled exclusively
from. flowers, for the flower is but an exhalation. The Seeds, the
leaf, the stem, the very bark should be macerated, because they
contain the odoriferous substance in minute sacs. So the purest
Christian doctrine is distilled, not only from a few exquisite
flower’s in a textual anthology, but from the whole substance, so to
speak, of the message. Now it will be observed that at the beginning
of the Epistle which accompanied the fourth Gospel, our attention is
directed not to a sentiment, but to a fact and to a Person. In the
collections of texts to which reference has been made, we should
probably never find two brief passages which may not unjustly be
considered to concentrate the essence of the scheme of salvation
more
nearly than any others. "The Word was made flesh." "Concerning the
Word of Life (and that Life was once manifested, and we have seen
and
consequently are witnesses and announce to you from Him who sent us
that Life, that eternal Life whose it is to have been in eternal
relation with the Father, and manifested to us); That which we have
seen and heard declare we from Him who sent us unto you, to the end
that you too may have fellowship with us." It would be disrespectful to the theologian of the New Testament to
pass by the great dogmatic term never, so far as we are told,
applied
by our Lord to Himself, but with which St. John begins each of his
three principal writings—The Word. Such mountains of erudition have been heaped over this term that it
has become difficult to discover the buried thought. The Apostle
adopted a word which was already in use in various quarters simply
because if, from the nature of the case necessarily inadequate, it
was yet more suitable than any other. He also as profound ancient
thinkers conceived, looked into the depths of the human mind, into
the first principles of that which is the chief distinction of man
from the lower creation—language. The human word, these thinkers
taught, is twofold; inner and outer—now as the manifestation to the
mind itself of unuttered thought, now as a part of language uttered
to others. The word as signifying unuttered thought, the mould in
which it exists in the mind, illustrates the eternal relation of the
Father to the Son. The word as signifying uttered thought
illustrates
the relation as conveyed to man by the Incarnation. "No man hath
seen God at any time; the only begotten God which is in the bosom of
the Father He interpreted Him." For the theologian of the Church
Jesus is thus the Word; because He had His being from the Father in
a
way which presents some analogy to the human word, which is
sometimes
the inner vesture, sometimes the outward utterance of
thought—sometimes the human thought in that language without which
man cannot think, sometimes the speech whereby the speaker
interprets
it to others. Christ is the Word Whom out of the fulness of His
thought and being the Father has eternally inspoken and outspoken
into personal existence. One too well knows that such teaching as this runs the risk of
appearing uselessly subtle and technical, but its practical value
will appear upon reflection. Because it gives us possession of the
point of view from which St. John himself surveys, and from which he
would have the Church contemplate, the history of the life of our
Lord. And indeed for that life the theology of the Word, i.e., of
the Incarnation, is simply necessary. For we must agree with M. Renan so far at least as this, that a
great
life, even as the world counts greatness, is an organic whole with
an
underlying vitalising idea; which must be construed as such, and
cannot be adequately rendered by a mere narration of facts. Without
this unifying principle the facts will be not only incoherent but
inconsistent. There must be a point of view from which we can
embrace
the life as one. The great test here, as in art, is the formation of
a living, consistent, unmutilated whole. Thus a general point of view (if we are to use modern language
easily
capable of being misunderstood we must say a theory) is wanted of
the
Person, the work, the character of Christ. The synoptical
Evangelists
had furnished the Church with the narrative of His earthly origin.
St. John in his Gospel and Epistle, under the guidance of the
Spirit,
endowed it with the theory of His Person. Other points of view have been adopted, from the heresies of the
early ages to the speculations of our own. All but St. John’s have
failed to coordinate the elements of the problem. The earlier
attempts essayed to read the history upon the assumption that He was
merely human or merely divine. They tried in their weary round to
unhumanise or undeify the God-Man, to degrade the perfect Deity, to
mutilate the perfect Humanity—to present to the adoration of mankind
a something neither entirely human nor entirely divine, but an
impossible mixture of the two. The truth on these momentous subjects
was fused under the fires of controversy. The last centuries have
produced theories less subtle and metaphysical, but bolder and more
blasphemous. Some have looked upon Him as a pretender or an
enthusiast. But the depth and sobriety of His teaching upon ground
where we are able to test it—the texture of circumstantial word and
work which will bear to be inspected under any microscope or cross
examined by any prosecutor—have almost shamed such blasphemy into
respectful silence. Others of later date admit with patronising
admiration that the martyr of Calvary is a saint of transcendent
excellence. But if He who called Himself Son of God was not much
more
than saint, He was something less. Indeed He would have been
something of three characters; saint, visionary, pretender—at
moments the Son of God in His elevated devotion, at other times
condescending to something of the practice of the charlatan, His
unparalleled presumption only excused by His unparalleled success. Now the point of view taken by St. John is the only one which is
possible or consistent—the only one which reconciles the humiliation
and the glory recorded in the Gospels, which harmonises the
otherwise
insoluble contradictions that beset His Person and His work. One
after another, to the question, "What think ye of Christ?" answers
are attempted, sometimes angry, sometimes sorrowful, always
confused.
The frank respectful bewilderment of the better Socinianism, the gay
brilliance of French romance, the heavy insolence of German
criticism, have woven their revolting or perplexed christologies.
The
Church still points with a confidence, which only deepens as the
ages
pass, to the enunciation of the theory of the Savlout’s Person by
St.
John.—in his Gospel, "The Word was made flesh"—in his Epistle,
"Concerning the Word of Life." |