Raymond E. Brown, The Churches the Apostles Left Behind.
Chapter 7: The Heritage of the Beloved Disciple and the Epistles: Individuals Guided by the Paraclete-Spirit, p. 102-123

(Detailed summary)

One very important aspect of Johannine ecclesiology remains to be addressed, namely the role of the Spirit under the title of Paraclete. However, in order to understand the importance of the Paraclete in Johannine thought and the subsequent destiny of the Johannine community as illustrated in John's epistles, at least a brief overview of the history underlying the fourth Gospel is necessary.

1. The History of the Johannine Community

   It would therefore seem that, at least in its origins, Johannine Christianity was not too far removed from the dominant style of Christianity in the movement centered on Jesus, as evidenced by John 1: 35-51, with the presence of disciples known from the other Gospels (Andrew, Peter, Philip) and the usual titles given to Jesus (Messiah, Son of God, King, Son of Man). In chapter 4 of John, however, with the Samaritans converting and worship at the Temple in Jerusalem being declared to have lost its importance, John departs considerably from the description of the ministry in the other gospels and moves closer to the developments described in Acts 6-8. There, the Hellenistic Jewish Christians separate administratively from the majority of Hebrew Christians in Jerusalem who are faithful to Temple observances; and (in the person of Stephen) Hellenistic preaching proclaims that God does not dwell in the Temple. It was these Hellenistic Christians, not Peter or the Twelve, who converted Samaria. Thus, Johannine Christianity was not composed only of the type of Hebrew Christians whose heritage is preserved in many other works of the New Testament, but also of groups similar to the Hellenists, who were more radical in their attitude toward Judaism. There were also Samaritan converts. This mixture may have accelerated the innovative developments in Johannine Christology and made Johannine Christians particularly troublesome to Jews who did not believe in Jesus.

   From Chapter 5 onwards, a dominant theme in the Johannine account of Jesus' ministry is the hatred that “the Jews” have for Jesus because he pretends to be God. The divinity of Jesus as the one who came down from God is publicly evoked and attacked. There are lengthy debates between Jesus and “the Jews” that become increasingly hostile. What lies beneath the surface becomes evident in the story of the man born blind in John 9: there is a debate about whether Jesus comes from God. The synagogue and the Johannine community are thus opposed to each other as disciples of Moses and disciples of Jesus; and through the struggles of Jesus' life, the struggles between these two groups are recounted. (In other words, the fourth gospel tells a story on two levels: the level of Jesus' life and the level of the community's life). Just as the man born blind is judged before the Pharisees or “the Jews,” the members of the Johannine community were judged by the leaders of the synagogue. Just as the man born blind was expelled from the synagogue for confessing that Jesus came from God, the Johannine Christians were expelled from the synagogue for confessing Jesus (see also Jn 16:2). And during this action by the synagogue, considered persecution, the Johannine Christians were put to death, either directly by the Jewish authorities or indirectly by being denounced to the Roman authorities (Jn 15:20; 16:2-3). Faced with this treatment, the Johannine Jesus's rhetorical response is bitter: the Jews who are trying to kill him are the children of the devil, who was a murderer from the beginning (Jn 8:40, 44).

   The fact that they were expelled from the synagogue because they believed that Jesus came from God inevitably strengthened and reinforced the Johannine Christians' adherence to their high Christology. Jesus is so one with the Father (Jn 10:30) that he is not only Lord, but also God (Jn 20:28). The fourth Gospel expresses contempt for Jews who believed in Jesus but did not want to confess him openly for fear of being excluded from the synagogue (Jn 12:42). There is hostility towards Jewish disciples who openly followed Jesus but who objected when it was said that he came down from heaven and could give his flesh to eat (Jn 6:60-66) or because he is described as existing before Abraham (Jn 8:58). These criticisms of others suggest that Johannine Christians must have been extremely controversial because of their Christology, which was contested both by Jews who did not believe in Jesus and by those who did believe in him.

   The judicial atmosphere of the fourth Gospel, with its constant emphasis on testimony, accusation, and judgment (Jn 1:19-21; 5:31-47; 7:50-51; 8:14-18; etc.) and its debates about the implications of scriptural texts (Jn 6:31-33; 7:40-43, 52; 10:34-36) reflects the controversies and the way in which they were conducted. The struggle with the synagogue and the resulting polemical atmosphere are very important for understanding what is present in John, but also what is absent. The leaders of the synagogue apparently believed that John's confession of Jesus as God denied the fundamental faith of Israel: “The Lord our God is one.” In response, the evangelist defended Jesus' divinity so forcefully that the fourth gospel leaves little room for human limitations. Jesus cannot ask a simple question without a Johannine footnote explaining that he already knew the answer (Jn 6:5-6). Jesus cannot choose a disciple who strays from the right path without John insisting that he had foreseen it from the beginning (Jn 6:70-71). Jesus cannot utter a prayer of supplication without the assurance that he is only teaching the spectators the truth that the Father always listens to him (Jn 11:41-42). Jesus cannot ask that the hour of passion pass him by (as he does in the other Gospels), because his arrival at that hour is intentional (Jn 12:27). Jesus' passion cannot be recounted in a way that would place him at the mercy of his captors, because he has the sovereign power to lay down his life and take it up again (Jn 10:18; see 18:6). The entire presentation protects Jesus from anything that might call his divinity into question. If asked whether Jesus was human, the Johannine evangelist would undoubtedly have replied, “Of course, he walked among us.” But the evangelist does not emphasize this humanity, because it was never questioned by the polemicists of the synagogue. Similarly, ethical or moral guidelines are almost entirely absent from John—there is nothing like Matthew's Sermon on the Mount—almost certainly because fundamental principles such as the commandments were not a matter of dispute between the Johannine community and the synagogue. The evangelist may have presupposed a more complete portrait of Jesus, but the one he painted is somewhat monochromatic, because the struggle with the synagogue limited the palette to black and white.

2. The proposed solution: the action of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter
   1. The Spirit as a substitute for Jesus' personal presence

      The early Christians had very different notions of what the term “Spirit” meant. Since the Greek word pneuma is neuter and the Spirit is referred to as “he” in the New Testament writings, it is difficult to determine to what extent Paul, Acts, or 1 Peter considered the Spirit to be a person. But once again, Christology had a powerful impact on John's views, for in the fourth Gospel's account of the Last Supper, the Spirit must come from God after Jesus' return to the Father. The motif of replacement is so strong that almost everything said about the Spirit has already been said about Jesus. The Spirit clearly appears as a personal presence, the continuing presence of Jesus while he is absent from the earth and with the Father in heaven.

   2. The Holy Spirit as advocate to support and console, as Jesus would have done

      In its original meaning, the Greek term parakletos means “called [kletos] beside [para]”; and like its Latin equivalent advocatus (“called [vocatus] to [ad]”), it has a judicial or legal usage. When people are in trouble, they call on a lawyer, advisor, or defender to accompany them to court. The legal context corresponds to the Johannine story, in which members of the community had to defend themselves for their Christological opinions. Their help and guarantee was the Paraclete-Spirit who dwelt in them and correctly interpreted the meaning of Jesus. Another reason why the Spirit is “called to their side” is for consolation in difficult times, hence the Comforter or Holy Spirit. In the context of the Last Supper, Jesus is leaving, but the Paraclete dwells in every believer forever (Jn 14:15-17). Thus, the Paraclete is a more intimate and lasting presence. This is another facet of John's emphasis on the individual's relationship with Jesus. Just as Jesus represents on earth the Father who sent him, the Paraclete represents on earth Jesus who sent him.

   3. The Holy Spirit as Teacher and Innovator

      The Paraclete acts as a teacher: “The Paraclete... will teach you everything and remind you of all that I have said to you... and will tell you things to come” (Jn 14:26; 16:13-14). Jesus received everything he had to say from the Father, but he actualized this revelation by proclaiming it to his disciples on earth. The Paraclete will receive everything he has to say from Jesus; but, dwelling in the heart of every Christian, he will actualize it in every age and in every place, thus enabling Christians to face the things to come. Thus, the Paraclete has a dual role: to preserve the past without corrupting it, for he receives everything from Jesus and gives no new revelation, but at the same time to give a living teaching that is not content to repeat a tradition of the past. If the presbyter-bishops of the Pastoral Epistles were to teach by holding fast to what they had been taught (Titus 1:9), the Paraclete not only declares what he has received from Jesus (Jn 16:14), but through this means he also declares things to come (Jn 16:13). If we look for an example of what the old and the new mean in the teaching role attributed to the Paraclete, we can turn to the fourth Gospel itself. This constitutes the testimony given by the Paraclete through the beloved disciple and evangelist. It is a gospel, like the other gospels, centered on the public activity of Jesus leading to his death and resurrection; but it presents this story in a truly innovative way, so that every page is transformed by the unique perception of Johannine Christology.

3. The strengths and weaknesses of this ecclesiology
   1. The strengths
      1. This ecclesiology provides assurance that the Christological perception of the community is correct.

         Since the Paraclete came from the Father (Jn 15:26), was sent by Jesus (Jn 16:7), and spoke only what he had heard from Jesus (Jn 16:13), the Johannine community that bears witness through him (Jn 15:27) feels unshakable in its Christology. Thus, the death of the great figures of the first generation who had seen Jesus on earth or resurrected, whether they were apostles or not, cannot weaken the confidence of Johannine Christians in the accuracy of their current perceptions. The figures of this first generation bore significant witness, but only because they possessed the Paraclete; and this same Paraclete remains in the hearts of the second and third generations of Johannine Christians.

      2. This ecclesiology promotes egalitarianism in the community.

         The idea that God would be worshiped neither in Jerusalem nor on the Samaritan mountain, but in Spirit and in truth (Jn 4:21-23) means that there are no second-class Christians in geographical terms. God is Spirit (Jn 4:24), and the Spirit of truth dwells in every Christian, everywhere. The idea that the Paraclete is given to everyone who loves Jesus and keeps his commandments, and that he remains with them forever (Jn 14:15-16), means that there are no second-class Christians in terms of chronology. Certainly, those who saw Jesus and believed were privileged, but blessed are those who have not seen Jesus and yet believe (Jn 20:29). Jesus prays for those who believed during his ministry (Jn 17:8-9), but he also prays for future generations who will believe because of their word (Jn 17:20). Thus, Johannine ecclesiology is devoid of any barriers of status, space, or time that might distance some from Jesus more than others.

   2. The weaknesses

      It does not take much imagination to guess the weaknesses of this ecclesiology, for one need only observe what happened historically to the Johannine community.

      Let us first consider the data from the Johannine letters. Written less than ten years after the fourth gospel, the Johannine epistles reflect a surprising change in the community's situation. There is a split within this community, a split so serious that it is described in apocalyptic terms: the author speaks of antichrists, of the coming of the last hour, of people who have left the community (1 Jn 2:18-19). The author of the epistle writes with such urgency because the secessionists are engaged in ongoing missionary activity that undermines the adherence of his disciples; he hopes, through his writings, to stem their success, for the whole world is listening to them (1 Jn 4:5). The issue reaches its climax in 2 John, which is a warning addressed to a peripheral community that has not yet been affected by the secession: the author therefore begs the Christians there not even to let these people enter the door of the house church (2 John 10).

      What can we reconstruct of the secessionists' thinking? They are progressive innovators (2 Jn 9) in the eyes of an author who considers himself conservative, sticking to what has been taught from the beginning (1 Jn 3:11a). Christologically, the secessionists are accused of neglecting the “flesh” or humanity of Jesus (1 Jn 4:2; 2 Jn 7). This probably means that they did not attach salvific importance to the whole of Jesus' life, including his death, because it was the simple fact of the pre-existent Word entering the world as light that gave eternal life to those who believe (Jn 3:16-17). Ethically, the Secessionists considered that the only sin was to refuse to believe in Jesus. Consequently, without encouraging licentiousness, the secessionists would have proclaimed that there is no salvific value in doing good deeds or obeying the commandments, and that there is no sin as long as one believes (1 Jn 1:8, 10). Against such Christological and ethical opinions, the author would assert that from the beginning it was known that salvation came not only from the incarnation of the Word, but also from the death of Jesus as an essential component. Jesus came “not only in water, but in water and blood” (1 Jn 5:6). God's supreme love was to send his Son into the world, certainly, but as an atonement for our sins (1 Jn 4:9-10); and this atonement was accomplished by the blood of Jesus, which cleanses us from our sins (1 Jn 1:7). The way Jesus “walked” on earth was very important, not only from a Christological point of view, but also from an ethical point of view, because we must walk as he walked (1 Jn 1:7), purify ourselves as he was pure (1 Jn 3:3), avoid sin as he was sinless (1 Jn 3:5-6), and act justly as he was just (1 Jn 3:7). The author of the epistle does not deny that it is through faith and baptism that we receive eternal life from God, but there is still a future development. “Yes, beloved, we are now children of God, but what we will be has not yet been revealed” (1 Jn 3:2). This revelation will come at the Last Judgment, before which we must be careful not to be ashamed of what we have done (1 Jn 2:28-3:2).

      All this raises the question: how could the community situation have evolved to the point of such a schism? It is highly likely that all this stems from a divergent interpretation of the Gospel according to John. And this is the weakness of Johannine ecclesiology. In fact, it highlights four weaknesses inherent in the Johannine tradition, because this tradition was shaped by controversy and claimed unquestionable guidance from the Paraclete.

      1. The unilateral nature of a theology shaped by controversy

         This controversy ultimately led to exaggeration and division. Emphasizing what “the Jews” and other Christians denied—the pre-existing divinity of Jesus—was appropriate in a setting where the fourth gospel was read by Johannine Christians who took for granted that Jesus was human, that while the incarnation had brought light into the world, that light could only be fully perceived after death and resurrection, and that belief in Jesus necessarily implied a continuing commitment to live in a manner worthy of that belief. The emphasis on belief or unbelief as judgment made sense as long as it was proclaimed in a context where Jesus' ultimate return as judge was simply taken for granted, a return that would reveal the blindness of those who claimed to be believers. But the problem arises when what is passed on to the next generation is only that which has been the subject of struggle. From then on, the one-sided nature of the fourth gospel could become, and did become, a stumbling block for those who were unaware of the presuppositions.

         The reason the author of the epistle has to go back to “the beginning” to refute the secessionists is that there is dangerously little in the fourth gospel itself to refute them. They read that during his public ministry, Jesus offered eternal life to those who believed that he was the light that had come into the world, sent by the Father. How could readers without traditional training know that this eternal life only became possible after Jesus died for our sins? Of course, the fourth gospel contains a statement about “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), and there are references to Jesus dying as a Passover lamb, which implies that his very coming into the world took away the sin of the world. But without a good knowledge of earlier tradition, these allusions were too subtle for the new generation. Moreover, since Christians had been expelled from the synagogue, this generation was no longer in touch with the moral meaning of Judaism, according to which God must be served by living according to the commandments of his covenant.

         The fourth gospel produced by the controversy is like a diamond that has been made to shine by the cuts of the cutter, but only the polished face attracts the eye. The controversy made this gospel exciting and attractive, but uneven. In contrast, Luke/Acts is a less exciting work theologically, but more balanced. Therefore, one cannot accept the Johannine gospel without being aware of its polemical context and the limitations of its one-sided character.

         Thus, if the members of the Johannine community were sufficiently convinced of the pre-existing divinity of Jesus to be expelled from the synagogue on charges of worshipping another God, and if this expulsion made them more categorical, so that in their description of Jesus they avoided human traits that could provide the synagogue with arguments against them, it was inevitable that some members would go further by completely minimizing humanity, causing horror among those who thought this went too far. It had taken enormous courage to separate from the synagogue; it would take less for a new split to occur within the group itself.

         For the author of the Johannine epistles, the secessionists left the community by going too far in their evolution. We can be sure that, for the secessionists, the author of the letters and his supporters were in the wrong, because they did not see the potential of the community's ideas and were trying to freeze them at a particular stage. The author claimed that he was sticking to the tradition as it had been understood from the beginning; the secessionists probably claimed that they embodied the momentum that had given birth to the tradition.

      2. The expulsion from the synagogue led to a loss of heritage.

         The controversy between Johannine Christians and Jews, followed by their expulsion from the synagogue, led to a loss of heritage. It is tragic that, within a group expelled after a controversial confrontation, a schism often occurs when some push for exaggeration. Perhaps even more tragic is that the expulsion itself tends to create such a wide gap with the original group that much of the heritage that had never been disputed is now lost. Despite the differences caused by their insistence on the pre-existent divinity of Jesus, the Johannine Christian community had more in common religiously with the synagogue Jews who had expelled them than with the pagan religious world in which they lived. They shared with the Jews of the synagogue a belief in one God, the Scriptures, liturgical feasts, the fundamental ethics of the Law, etc. Yet shortly after the expulsion, we read in the fourth Gospel, in reference to the Jews, the expression "their law " (Jn 15:25), as if the law of the Old Testament (in fact, in this case, the Psalms) did not also belong to Christians. The great feasts of Passover and Tabernacles are in John feasts “of the Jews” and foreign to Christians. There is a division between the disciples of Moses and the disciples of Jesus, as if the disciples of Jesus were not also disciples of Moses. In other words, the great common heritage disappears from view as the points of division become more pronounced.

         The gap will tend to widen if there is an internal split among those who have been expelled, with some taking to extremes the theological vision of the community that caused the problem in the first place. A final stage then occurs when the parent group and those who were expelled, who once had so much in common, become two different religions. Ironically, they may then feel awkward, defensive, or sensitive about the commonalities that remain. For example, in the middle of the 2nd century, the great common heritage that remained between Jews and Christians was the Old Testament; but they could not agree on the interpretation of the Old Testament and accused each other of distorting or falsifying it!

         We can see, then, that the more brilliant the insight, the more likely it is that other aspects of the truth will be relegated to the background, often neglected and forgotten. A balanced religious group, sufficiently confident in its great ideas, is not afraid to look back peacefully in order to recover what has been lost as a result of its strong emphasis on those ideas. But when controversy has been the catalyst that gave rise to a community's identity-forming ideas, the possibility of looking back to recover some of the lost heritage is greatly reduced. In such a situation, the community's own identity has been reinforced by propaganda against the lost values, as if they were worthless. In the fourth gospel, Jesus is presented as speaking about the main Jewish festivals, replacing their meaning with statements about his own gifts. How, then, can members of the community shaped by this gospel question the lost liturgical values when they have been expelled from the synagogue?

         Attempting to recover some of these losses while continuing to advance what had been gained is what the author of the Johannine epistles attempted to do in the aftermath of the brilliant period of the fourth gospel in the history of the Johannine community. At no point does he deny the ideas of the fourth gospel, but he seeks to place them in the context of assumptions that the evangelist probably took for granted but never mentioned or emphasized. Through his efforts, the author of the epistles proved to the theologians of the later Church that the fourth Gospel (which, in the 2nd century, was the focus of Gnostic commentaries) was perfectly capable of serving orthodox Christianity.

      3. Love becomes confined to “brothers” and hostility is felt towards strangers.

         The fourth Gospel describes Jesus' adversaries in extremely harsh terms, particularly “the Jews.” The devil is their father, a murderer from the beginning; he is a liar, and therefore they refuse to believe the truth (Jn 8:43-46, 55). They prefer darkness to light because their deeds are evil (Jn 3:19-21; 12:35); indeed, God has blinded their eyes (Jn 12:40). When the focus of John's conflict shifted from external unbelievers to internal schism, as evidenced in the Epistles, it is interesting to note that the same opprobrium is applied to the secessionists. They are like Cain, who belonged to the Evil One and killed his brother (1 Jn 3:12); they are the children of the devil who has been a sinner from the beginning (1 Jn 3:8-10). They are liars (1 Jn 2:22) and they have a spirit of deception opposed to the Spirit of truth (1 Jn 4:1-6). Darkness has blinded their eyes (1 Jn 2:11).

         At first glance, it is difficult to reconcile this apparent hatred with the observance of Jesus' commandment in the fourth Gospel: “Love one another as I have loved you” (Jn 13:34; 15:12,17). But in reality, this commandment concerns only mutual love or love of one's brother. There is no requirement to love one's neighbor as in the synoptic tradition (Mt 5:43; Lk 10:27), where the context clearly indicates that one's neighbor includes enemies and strangers (Mt 5:44; Lk 10:29-37). It can therefore be said that the Johannine tradition does not emphasize love for strangers; John's ideal is love for the children of God who have come into being through faith in Jesus. If, in the Epistles, this love does not seem to extend to dissenters, it is because they have left and are no longer members of the community or children of God.

         In other words, closeness to Jesus, which is the great strength of the ecclesiology of the fourth Gospel, tended to create a closed group for which most others constituted an evil outside world. In the fourth Gospel, “the Jews” are the first example of the world that refuses to believe in Jesus (Jn 16:8-9); in the Epistles, the secessionists belong to the world (1 Jn 4:5). The coming of Jesus into the world produced a division between those who come to the light because they act in truth and those who prefer darkness to light because their works are evil (Jn 3:19-21). Subsequently, the evangelist equates the world and darkness with the kingdom of Satan, who is the prince of this world (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11). This is why Jesus does not pray for the world (Jn 17:9) and his disciples, although they are in the world, are not of it (Jn 17:14-18). This attitude is found in the Epistles, where the author speaks of a “sin that leads to death,” a reference to the secessionists who left the community: “I am not saying that we should pray for that” (1 Jn 5:16-17).

         Such a narrow conception of Christian love does not do justice to Jesus, who truly cared for strangers, that is, sinners, tax collectors, and prostitutes. Is it a coincidence that such openness is not described in the fourth Gospel? On the contrary, the Last Supper begins with the words: “Having loved his own... he loved them to the end” (Jn 13:1). The fourth Gospel was written by a spokesman for a group persecuted by strangers, and today it will be increasingly appealing to those whose main concern is their own community. In short, we must highlight the serious problem posed by the Johannine writings, which, without ever saying “hate the world,” say “do not love the world” (1 Jn 2:15).

      4. The uncontrollable division when everyone calls upon the Paraclete

         Perhaps the most serious weakness in Johannine ecclesiology, and the most apparent in the Johannine epistles, concerns the role of the Paraclete. The idea that there is a divine teacher living in the heart of every believer—a teacher who is the permanent presence of Jesus, preserving what he taught but reinterpreting it for each generation—is certainly one of the greatest contributions made to Christianity by the fourth Gospel. But the Jesus who sends the Paraclete never tells his disciples what will happen when believers who possess the Paraclete disagree with one another. The Johannine epistles tell us what frequently happens: they break communion with one another. If the Spirit is the highest and only authority, and if each side appeals to him to support its position, it is almost impossible to make concessions and find compromises.

         In the conflictual situation encountered in the Johannine epistles, the author appeals to tradition as it was “from the beginning” to support part of his interpretation. But it is very clear that he is counting on the fact that his readers have been anointed with the Spirit and can therefore recognize the truth that comes from him when they hear it. If the author of the Johannine epistles were a presbyter-bishop according to the model of the pastoral epistles, he could silence his opponents by his own authority (Titus 1:11). One of his tasks as an appointed teacher would have been to discern sound doctrine (Titus 2:1). But the author of the Johannine epistles is bound by the Johannine tradition that the Paraclete is the one who guides people into all truth (Jn 16:13). Therefore, even in the midst of this great schism, he must write: “The anointing you received [...] remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you” (1 Jn 2:27).

         However noble it may be, his principle did not work and will not work. The secessionists who had been members of the Johannine community had been anointed with the Paraclete Spirit, and this anointing, which is supposed to be “true and without falsehood” (1 Jn 2:27), did not prevent them from becoming liars. Therefore, the author of the Johannine epistles addresses this issue by emphasizing that there is a spirit of deception as well as a spirit of truth, and that spirits must be tested (1 Jn 4:1-6). The test he proposes is that those who listen to him have the spirit of truth, while those who disagree with him have the spirit of deception. It is easy to imagine that the secessionists would advocate the opposite: if you agree with us, you have the Spirit of truth. And in fact, the author seems to admit that the secessionists prevail numerically in this fierce struggle, for “the world listens to them” (1 Jn 4:5).

         As we can see, there is no way to control such a division in a community guided by the Paraclete. The Johannine community discovered this, for it divided and ceased to exist. Based on evidence from the 2nd century, the larger group of Johannine Christians, who were of a secessionist tendency, turned to Gnosticism, taking with them the fourth gospel. Another group reconciled with the main body of Christians, whom Ignatius calls “the Catholic Church” (Smyrnaeans 8:2)—a Church that included teachers such as presbyter-bishops and, ultimately, the sole bishops of each region. The epilogue of the fourth gospel, which may represent the last stage of the Johannine writings that have come down to us, recognizes the authority of a human shepherd (Jn 21:15-17), even if it frames this authority with Johannine guarantees. Thus, a branch of the Johannine community had to familiarize itself with the ecclesiology of the pastoral epistles, however rigid and formal it may be, in order to integrate into a non-Gnostic Christianity.