Raymond E. Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple.
Phase 4: After the epistles - Johannine Dissolution, p. 145-164

(Detailed summary)

The presbyter's words concerning the “last hour” seem to have been prophetic, for in the 2nd century all trace of a distinct and separate Johannine community is lost. What happened? It is likely that the presbyter's followers and the secessionists were “swallowed up,” the former by the “Great Church,” the latter by the Gnostic movement. And in this transition and in the effort to adapt, both groups lost the distinct identity of Johannine Christianity that we know from the fourth Gospel and the epistles. Let us summarize what may have happened before going into detail.

If the Johannine community around the presbyter gradually joined the “Great Church,” it brought with it the high Christology of pre-existence, but with the nuances of its interpretation that had been required by its struggle against the secessionists, in order to avoid the error of Docetism and Monophysitism. But at the same time, because an ecclesiology centered on the Paraclete offered no protection against schismatics, the members of this Johannine community eventually accepted in the 2nd century a teaching structure centered on the role of the presbyter-bishop, a structure dominant in the “Great Church” but foreign to the Johannine tradition.

For their part, the secessionists, deprived of the moderating role of the presbyter's supporters, evolved towards an ultra-high Christology that became true Docetism. Considering that Jesus' earthly life had no salvific value, they ended up believing that this earthly life was not real. Moreover, after believing that they were sons of God by God's choice, they came to believe that they had been sons of God before their earthly birth, so that they too were of divine origin like Jesus. Thus, like the Son, they too came into the world, but they went astray; it was therefore Jesus' role to show them the way back to heaven. For the Docetists and Gnostics, the fourth gospel brought by the secessionists provided a basis for developing their thinking.

The “Great Church” was initially suspicious of the fourth gospel, which was used by those considered heretics. But with the addition of the Johannine epistles to guide a correct interpretation of the gospel, it proposed it as orthodox and part of the New Testament canon (cf. Irenaeus, around 180). Let us now give the details of this evolution.

1. The History of the Fourth Gospel in the Second Century

   Historical data indicates that the fourth gospel was first widely accepted in heterodox circles before being accepted by orthodox Christians. The oldest commentary on John comes from the Gnostic Heracleon (160-180). Moreover, this gospel was highly appreciated by the Valentinian Gnostics, as Irenaeus had to refute their exegesis of John. The Gnostic book The Odes of Solomon (early or mid-2nd century) has affinities with John. In the Gnostic writings of Nag Hammadi, we find a Christology of the Word in the Tripartite Tractate and a Christology of “I am” in the Second Apocalypse of James, as well as in Thunder, Perfect Mind, and the Trimorphic Protenoia. Montanus (around 170), founder of a spiritual, prophetic, and eschatological movement, considered himself to be the incarnation of the Paraclete.

   What about the circles considered orthodox in the early church? There are no Johannine quotations in either Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35–110) or Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 69–155). The oldest undisputed use of John in orthodox circles is that of Theophilus, bishop of Antioch (169–182), in his Apology to Autlycus (around 180). Its acceptance into the canon of Scripture before the year 200, as evidenced by the Muratorian Fragment (late 2nd century), came at the cost of a long process of ensuring that it had an apostolic origin, which Irenaeus attempted to demonstrate.

   This curious history of the fourth gospel becomes understandable if we accept the idea that both the supporters of the presbyter and the secessionists took this gospel with them. This would explain why in the 2nd century we find Johannine ideas but no quotations from the gospel in the writings of the early church, due to its use by the Docetists, Gnostics, and Montanists. But ultimately, the example of 1 John paved the way for an orthodox reading of the fourth gospel, and its campaign against the secessionists encouraged writers such as Irenaeus to use the gospel against the Gnostics.

   Let us now consider the possible theological development of the secessionists in various forms of a heterodox movement in the second century.

2. The Secessionists and Second-Century Heterodoxy
   1. Gnosticism

      A thesis common to all Gnostic systems implies the pre-existence of human beings in the divine world before their life on earth. But for the fourth gospel, only the Son of God pre-exists, while humans become children of God through faith, water, and the Spirit during their earthly life. The status of “not being of this world” is a choice, not an ontological status. Nevertheless, the Gospel served as a matrix for the Gnostic conception of a pre-existence of human beings who come from God and must return to Him. Similarly, John's insistence on the predestination of the children of light was the catalyst for the Gnostics' idea that human beings are drawn to God long before the coming of Jesus, so that Jesus merely reveals their predisposition (Jn 3:17-21). For the Gnostics, this natural orientation toward God is explained by the pre-existence of human beings in God. When the secessionists claimed to be sinless, the Gnostics explained this by the fact that they were by nature sons of light, and not by the faith that sanctifies.

   2. Cerinthus

      The Docetism of Cerinthus, for whom the divine element of Jesus left him just before the crucifixion, may have stemmed from a misinterpretation of John's insistence on the crucifixion as “exaltation” (Jn 12:32-33; 3:14; 8:28). Let us recall that from the beginning of his last supper, John tells us that the time has come for Jesus to pass from this world to his Father, and he puts various references to his departure into Jesus' mouth, particularly Jn 17:11: “Now I am no longer in the world.” Cerinthus would have interpreted this last sentence literally.

   3. Montanus

      Montanus saw in the announcements of the Paraclete (Jn 14:15, 26; 15:26; 16:7, 13) a prediction of his own career as a person inspired by the Spirit. The emphasis on prophecy among the Montanists may have been a continuation of the emphasis on prophecy among the Secessionists. Montanus used two female prophets, Risca and Maximilla, who revealed the words of the Lord in ecstasy. This can be seen as a continuation of the place John gives to women as heralds: the Samaritan woman converts a village through her words (Jn 4:39), Martha confesses that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (Jn 11:27), Mary Magdalene is the first to see the risen Jesus (Jn 20:14) and the first to proclaim the resurrection (Jn 20:18).

3. The Author’s Adherents and the Great Church

   Even though there are no clear references to the fourth gospel in the last quarter of the second century, Johannine ideas had been accepted earlier. Let us focus on Ignatius, bishop of Antioch.

   1. High Christology

      First, it should be noted that there is a similar atmosphere between the Johannine writings and the letters of Ignatius, as the latter had to fight on two fronts: against Jewish Christians who displayed inadequate faith, such as the group V analyzed earlier, and against Docetism and emerging Gnosticism.

      In Ignatius, we find elements of a high Christology similar to that of John:

      Ignatius of Antioch	John
      "The one God who manifested Himself through Jesus Christ, His Son" (Epistle to the Magnesians, 8, 2)	"that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent" (Jn 17: 3); "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father" (Jn 14: 9)
      "God’s Word proceeding from silence who in all things was pleasing to Him who sent him" (Epistle to the Magnesians, 8, 2)	Johannine elements: Word Sent by God Proceeding from

      Similarly, it is fascinating to discover in Ignatius a mixture of ideas from both John and the apostolic tradition. For example, alongside the mention of Jesus' pre-existence, there is that of his virgin birth: “The prince of this world ignored Mary's virginity and her childbirth” (Epistle to the Ephesians 19:1); “born of Mary and born of God, first subject to suffering and now impervious to suffering, Jesus Christ our Lord” (ibid., 7:2). However, the notion of Mary's virginity has come down to us only through Matthew/Luke. Another example of a mixture of Johannine and non-Johannine elements is given to us in the Epistle to the Trallians, 9:2: “... who is also truly risen from the dead... apart from whom we have no true life”: to speak of “true life” is typically Johannine, to speak of the resurrection of the dead is not. We attach some importance to this theological mixture, because it fulfills the prayer of John 17:21 (“that they may all be one”), a desire of Johannine Christians for unity with apostolic Christians. And Ignatius of Antioch illustrates this compromise between the high Christology of Jesus' pre-existence and the low Christology of birth through a woman.

   2. Eucharist

      In addition to sharing a theology rich in Christology, Ignatius and John share a sacramental vision of the Eucharist, in both cases opposing Jewish Christians: "Take care, then, to participate in only one Eucharist; for there is only one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to unite us in his blood “ (Epistle to the Philadelphians, 4:1). Speaking of the flesh and blood of Jesus is very Johannine. Similarly, a phrase such as ”breaking the same bread, which is the remedy of immortality, the antidote to death, but to live in Jesus Christ forever “ (Epistle to the Ephesians, 20:2) is very close to what John says in Jn 6:51-58, where the flesh and blood of Jesus are true food and drink, and ”whoever eats this bread will live forever."

   3. Church Structure

      Despite the similarity of Christological and sacramental positions, there is a major obstacle to the integration of Johannine Christians into the Catholic Church or “great church”: the ecclesial structure. It should be remembered that in the Johannine community there was no specific role for exercising doctrinal control, such as that of presbyter-bishop, which is found in Luke-Acts, the Pastoral Epistles, and Matthew. Ignatius goes even further in his hierarchical model with the bishop at the top who controls baptism and the Eucharist; this human authority becomes the visible sign of divine authority, as evidenced by the following:

      "All of you, follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows his Father; and follow those in the presbyterate as if they were the apostles; and reverence those in the diaconate as you would a commandment from God" (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, 8, 1)

      "It is good to know God and the bishop. He who honors the bishop has been honored by God; he who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop is serving the devil" (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, 9, 1)

      "Let us be careful not to oppose the bishop, that we may be subject to God" (Epistle to the Ephesians, 5, 3)

      "When you are obedient to your bishop as thrugh to Jesus Christ, it is clear to me that you are living afte the manner of Jesus Christ himself." (Epistle to the Trallians, 2, 1)

      How could Johannine Christians accept an ecclesiology in which the bishop receives the prerogatives of the Paraclete? Clearly, this was not in harmony with Johannine tradition. But it is possible that they reluctantly tolerated such a structure for the greater good, especially in view of the ineffectiveness of dependence on the Paraclete as teacher. The supporters of the presbyter may have observed that the truth could not be preserved in the face of theological errors simply by appealing to the anointing of the Spirit who teaches all things (1 Jn 2:27). In their own way, they learned the same lesson as the Pauline churches, that a form of authority under the teaching role of presbyter-bishops could be a bulwark against doctrinal errors (1 Tim 6:3). Thus, the Johannine community came to recognize that the hierarchy proposed by the “Catholic Church” constituted a valid teaching role, insofar as this function was exercised in the name of the Paraclete.

      We may have an early example of acceptance of a more authoritarian ecclesial structure during the presbyter's lifetime in the figure of Diotrephes in 3 Jn. Indeed, the tension between the latter and the presbyter does not seem to concern Christology or ethics, but two styles of authority for preserving believers from erroneous teaching. Diotrephes could be an emerging bishop according to the Ignatian model. Indeed, 2 John tells us that false teachers and false emissaries were circulating, and the presbyter believes that they should be refused entry into a house church (2 John 1:10). Diotrephes, for his part, believes he is authorized to distinguish between true and false teachers himself, and considering the testing of spirits to be completely impractical, he would have decided to exclude all emissary-teachers and to discipline those who welcome them (3 Jn 1:10).

      Finally, let us mention what appears to be a testimony to how the Johannine community integrated into the apostolic church, which comes to us from John 21. Indeed, chapter 21 of the fourth Gospel, which appears as an appendix to the Gospel, was probably written and added at the time when the presbyter wrote 1 Jn. In chapter 21, the beloved disciple retains the same dignity he has throughout the Gospel, even though he does not die a martyr like Peter. At the same time, the writer recommends the figure of Peter, to whom Jesus assigns a pastoral role. Of course, he did not understand Jesus as deeply as the beloved disciple, but by saying three times that he loves Jesus, he meets the Johannine criterion of the true disciple, and that is why Jesus can give him pastoral authority. Since no similar role is given to the beloved disciple, we are faced with the structural difference between two types of church. Therefore, in chapter 21, we would have a moderate voice seeking to persuade Johannine Christians that the pastoral authority practiced by the apostolic churches and the Catholic Church was instituted by Jesus and is acceptable without denying the special place in history given to the beloved disciple.

4. Reflection

   Our reflection focuses on the significance of the Johannine community's integration into the wider church and the acceptance of the Johannine writings into the canon of Scripture. On several occasions, we have described the fourth Gospel as a challenging text because it is so different, volatile, dangerous, and the most adventurous of the New Testament. The history of the Johannine secessionists, who claimed this gospel as their own, should explain these adjectives. Over the centuries, the Gospel of John has been fertile ground for many exotic forms of individualistic pietism and quietism. Johannine Christology has nourished a widespread, unconscious monophysitism, popular today, according to which Jesus is not really like us in everything except sin, but omniscient, incapable of suffering or being tempted, foreseeing the whole future.

   However, what is remarkable is the Church's hermeneutical decision to place John in the same canon as Mark, Matthew, and Luke, gospels that implicitly support several positions opposed to those of John. This means that “the great church,” or, to use the language of Ignatius of Antioch, the Catholic Church, consciously or unconsciously, chose to live with tension. It chose not a Jesus who is either God or man, but both; it chose not a Jesus who is either virginally conceived or a pre-existent Son of God, but both; not either a Spirit associated with a magisterium or a Paraclete-teacher given to every Christian, but both. Not either Peter or a beloved disciple, but both. Such tension is not easy in ordinary life, and there is a tendency to want to eliminate it. The same is true in the history of the Church. But because of its initial decision to accept this tension in the canon of Scripture, any effort to replace this tension with the static position of one side or the other is unfaithful to the entire New Testament.

   Today, a church like the Catholic Church, which places great emphasis on authority and structure, can find in the Johannine writings an integrated conscience against the abuses of authoritarianism. Like a branch of the Johannine community, Roman Catholics have come to understand that Peter's pastoral role is truly willed by the risen Lord, but the presence in our Scriptures of a disciple whom Jesus loves more than he loves Peter is an eloquent commentary on the relative value of ecclesiastical office. Similarly, the importance of power in various offices is not necessarily proportional to Jesus' esteem and love.