2 John
THEOLOGY AND LIFE IN KYRIA’S LETTER— 2Jo 1:3
OF old God addressed men in tones that were, so to speak, distant.
Sometimes He spoke with the stern precision of law or ritual;
sometimes in the dark and lofty utterances of prophets; sometimes
through the subtle voices of history, which lend themselves to
different interpretations. But in the New Testament He whom no man
hath seen at any time, "interpreted" {Joh 1:18} Himself with a
sweet familiarity. It is of a piece with the dispensation of
condescendence, that the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven should
come to us in such large measure through epistles. For a letter is
just the result of taking up one’s pen to converse with one who is
absent, a familiar talk with a friend. Of the epistles in our New Testament, a few are addressed to
individuals. The effect of three of these letters upon the Church,
and even upon the world, has been great. The Epistles to Timothy and
Titus, according to the most prevalent interpretation of them, have
been felt in the outward organisation of the Church. The Epistle to
Philemon, with its eager tenderness, its softness as of a woman’s
heart, its chivalrous courtesy, has told in another direction. With
all its freedom from the rashness of social revolution; its almost
painful abstinence (as abolitionists have sometimes confessed to
feeling) from actual invective against slavery in the abstract; that
letter is yet pervaded by thoughts whose issue can only be worked
out
by the liberty of the slave. The word emancipation may not be
pronounced, but it hovers upon the Apostle’s lips. The second Epistle is, in our judgment, a letter to an individual.
Certainly we are unable to find in its whole contents any probable
allusion to a Church personified as a lady. It is, as we read it,
addressed to Kyria, an Ephesian lady, or one who lived in the circle
of Ephesian influence. It was sent by the Apostle during an absence
from Ephesus. That absence might have been for the purpose of one of
the visitations of the Churches of Asia Minor, which (as we are told
by ancient Church writers) the Apostle was in the habit of holding.
Possibly, however, in the case of a writer so brief and so reserved
in the expression of personal sentiment as St. John, the gush and
sunshine of anticipated joy at the close of this note might tempt us
to think of a rift in some sky that had been long darkened; of the
close of some protracted separation, soon to be forgotten in a happy
meeting. "Having many things to write unto you, I would not do so by
means of paper and ink; but I hope to come unto you, and to speak
face to face that our joy may be fulfilled." (Ver. 12.) The
expression might not seem unsuitable for a return from exile.
Several
touches of language and feeling in the letter point to the
conclusion
that Kyria was a widow. There is no mention of her husband, the
father of her children. In the case of a writer who uses the names
of
God with such subtle and tender suitability, the association of
Kyria’s "children walking in truth" with "even as we received
commandment from the Father," may well point to Him who was for them
the Father of the fatherless. We need not with some expositors draw
the sad conclusion that St. John affectionately hints that there
were
others of the family who could not be included in this joyful
message. But it would seem highly probable from the language used
that there were several sons, and also that Kyria had no daughters.
Over these sons who had lost one earthly parent, the Apostle
rejoices
with the heart of a father in God. He bursts out with his eureka,
the eureka not of a philosopher, but of a saint. "I rejoiced
exceedingly that I found (ευρηκα ver. 4) certain of the number of
thy children walking in truth." While we may not trace in this little Epistle the same fountain of
wide spreading influence as in others to which we have referred;
while we feel that, like its author, its work is deep and silent
rather than commanding, reflection will also lead us to the
conclusion that it is worthy of the Apostle who was looked upon as
one of the "pillars" of the faith. 1. Let us reflect that this letter is addressed by the aged
Apostle to a widow, and concerns her family. It is significant that Kyria was, in all probability, a widow of
Ephesus. Too many of us have more or less acquaintance with one department of
French literature. A Parisian widow is too often the questionable
heroine of some shameful romance, to have read which is enough to
taint the virginity of the young imagination. Ephesus was the Paris
of Ionia. Petronius was the Daudet or Zola of his day. An Ephesian
widow is the heroine of one of the most cynically corrupt of his
stories. But "where sin abounded, grace did more than abound." Strange that
first in an epistle to a Bishop of the Church of Ephesus, St. Paul
should have presented us with that picture of a Christian
widow—"she that is a widow, indeed, and desolate, who hath her hope
set on God, and continueth in prayer night and day"—yet who, if she
has the devotion, the almost entire absorption in God, of Anna, the
daughter of Phanuel, leaves upon the track of her daily road to
heaven the trophies of Dorcas—"having brought up children well,
used hospitality to strangers, washed the saints’ feet, relieved the
afflicted, diligently followed every good work." Such widows are the
leaders of the long procession of women, veiled or unveiled, with
vows or, without them, who have ministered to Jesus through the
ages.
Christ has a beautiful art of turning the affliction of His
daughters
into the consolation of suffering. When life’s fairest hopes are
disappointed by falsehood, by cruel circumstances, by death; the
broken heart is soothed by the love of Christ, the only love which
is
proof against death and change. The consolation thus received is the
most unselfish of gifts. It overflows, and is lavishly poured out
upon the sick and weary. With St. Paul’s picture of a widow of this
kind, contrast another by the same hand which hangs close beside it.
The younger Ephesian widow, such as Petronius described, was known
by
St. Paul also. If any count the Apostle as a fanatic, destitute of
all knowledge of the world because he lived above it, let them look
at those lines, which are full of such caustic power, as they hit
off
the characteristics of certain idle and wanton affecters of a sorrow
which they never felt. {1Ti 5:6-11,12,13} What a distance
between such widows and Kyria, "beloved for the truth’s sake which
abideth in us!" {2Jo 1:2} But the short letter of St. John is addressed to Kyria’s family, as
well as to herself. "The elder to the excellent Kyria and her
children." (Ver. 1.) There is one question which we naturally ask about every school and
form of religion. It is the question which a great English Professor
of Divinity used to ask his pupils to put in a homely form about
every religious scheme and mode of utterance—"will it wash
well?" Is it an influence which seems to be productive and lasting?
Does it abide through time and trials? Is it capable of being passed
on to another generation? Are plans, services, organisations,
preachings, classes, vital or showy? Are they fads to meet fancies,
or works to supply wants? Is that which we hold such sober, solid
truth, that wise piety can say of it, half in benediction, half in
prophecy—"the truth which abideth in us; yea, and with us it shall
be forever"? 2. We turn to the contents of the Epistle. We shall be better able to appreciate the value of these, if we
consider the state of Christian literature at that tithe. What had Christians to read and carry about with them? The excellent
work of the Bible Society was physically impossible for long.
centuries to come. No doubt the LXX version of the Old Testament was
widely spread. In every great city of the Roman Empire there was a
vast population of Jews. Many of these were baptised into the
Church,
and carried into it with them their passionate belief in the Old
Testament. The Christians of the time and place to which we refer
could, probably, with little trouble, if not read, yet hear the Old
Covenant and able expositions of it. But they had not copies of the
entire New Testament. Indeed, if all the New Testament was then
written, it certainly was not collected into one volume, nor
constituted one supreme authority. "Many barbarous nations," says a
very ancient Father, "believe in Christ without written record,
having salvation impressed through the Spirit in their hearts, and
diligently preserving the old tradition." Possibly a Church or
single believer had one synoptical Gospel. At Ephesus Christians had
doubtless been catechised in, and were deeply imbued with, St.
John’s
view of the Person, work, and teaching of our Lord. This had now
been
moulded into shape, and definitely committed to writing in that
glorious Gospel, the Church’s Holy of Holies, St. John’s Gospel. For
them and for their contemporaries there was a living realisation of
the Gospel. They had heard it from eyewitnesses. They had passed
into
the wonderland of God. The earth on which Jesus trod had blossomed
into miracle. The air was haunted by the echoes of His voice. They
had, probably, also a certain number of the Epistles of St. Paul.
The
Christians of Ephesus would have a special interest in their own
Epistle to the Ephesians, and in the two which were written to their
first Bishop, Timothy. They had also (whether written or not)
impressed upon their memories by their weekly Eucharist, the
liturgical Canon of consecration according to the Ephesian
usage—from which, and not the Roman, the Spanish and Gallican seem
to be derived. The Ephesian Christians had also the first Epistle of
St. John, which in some form accompanied the Gospel, and is, indeed,
a picture of spiritual life drawn from it. But let us remember that
the Epistle is not of a character to be very quickly or readily
learned by heart. Its subtle, latent links of connection do not
present many grappling hooks for the memory to fasten itself to.
Copies also must have been comparatively few. Now let us see how the second Epistle may well have been related to
the first. Supremely, and above all else, the first Epistle contained three
warnings, very necessary for those times. (1) There was a danger of losing the true Christ, the Word made
Flesh, Who for the forgiveness of our sins did shed out of His most
precious side both water and blood—in a false, because shadowy and
ideal Christ. (2) There was danger of losing true love, and therefore spiritual
life, with truth. (3) With the true Christ and true love there was a danger of
losing the true commandment—love of God and of the brethren. Now in the second Epistle these very three warnings were written on
a
leaflet in a form more calculated for circulation and for
remembrance. (1) Against the peril of faith, of losing the true Christ. "Many
deceivers are gone out into the world—they who confess not Jesus
Christ coming in flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist."
With the true Christ, the true doctrine of Christ would also vanish,
and with it all living hold upon God. Progress was the watchword;
but
it was in reality regress. "Everyone who abideth not in the doctrine
of Christ hath not God." (2) Against the peril of losing love. "I beseech thee,
Kyria that we love one another." (3) Against the peril of losing the true commandment (the great
spiritual principle of charity), or the true commandments (that
principle in the details of life). "And this is love, that we walk
after His commandments. This is the commandment, that even as ye
heard from the beginning ye should walk in it." Here then were the chief practical elements of the first Epistle
contracted into a brief and easily remembered shape. Easily remembered, too, was the stern, practical prohibition of the
intimacies of hospitality with those who came to the home of the
Christian, in the capacity of emissaries of the antichrist above
indicated. "Receive him not into your house, and good speed salute
him not with." Many are offended with this. No doubt Christianity is the religion
of
love—"the epiphany of the sweet naturedness and philanthropy of
God."
Wevery often look upon heresy or unbelief with the tolerance of
curiosity rather than of love. At all events, the Gospel has its
intolerance as well as tolerance. St. John certainly had this. It is
not a true conception of art which invests him with the mawkish
sweetness of perpetual youth. There is a sense in which he was a son
of Thunder to the last. He who believes and knows must formulate a
dogma. A dogma frozen by formality, or soured by hate, or narrowed
by
stupidity, makes a bigot. In reading the Church History of the first
four centuries we are often tempted to ask, why all this subtlety,
this theology spinning, this dogma hammering? The answer stands out
clear above the mists of controversy. Without all this the Church
would have lost the conception of Christ, and thus finally Christ
Himself. St. John’s denunciations have had a function in Christendom
as well as his love. 3. There are two most precious indications of the highest
Christian truth with which we may conclude. We have prefixed to this Epistle that beautiful Apostolic salutation
which is found in two only among the Epistles of St. Paul. After
that
simple, but exquisite expression of blessing merged in
prophecy—"the truth which abideth in us—yes! and with us it shall
be forever"—there comes another verse in the same key. "There
shall be with us grace, mercy, peace, from God the Father, and from
Jesus Christ the Son of the Father, in truth" of thought, "and
love" of life. This rush and reduplication of words is not very like the usual
reserve and absence of emotional excitement in St. John’s style. Can
it be that something (possibly the glorious death of martyrdom by
which Timothy died) led St. John to use words which were probably
familiar to Ephesian Christians? However this may be, let us live by, and learn from, those lovely
words. Our poverty wants grace, our guilt wants mercy, our misery
wants peace: Let us ever keep the Apostle’s order. Do not let us put
peace, our feeling of peace, first. The emotionalists’ is a topsy
turvy theology. Apostles do not say "peace and grace," but "grace
and peace." Once more—in an age which substitutes an ideal something called the
spirit of Christianity for Christ, let us hold fast to that which is
the essence of the Gospel and the kernel of our three creeds. "To
confess Jesus Christ coming in flesh." Couple with this a canon of
the First Epistle—"confesseth Jesus Christ come in flesh." The
second is the Incarnation fact with its abiding consequences; the
first, the Incarnation principle ever living in a Person, Who will
also be personally manifested. This is the substance of the Gospels;
this the life of prayers, and sacraments; this the expectation of
the
saints.
|