The sun., 1883-10-28

onurcnes suohsy o'ncueu W hi' he"'''
Peter and James, also. had their spiritual
family by adoption. IL was desired 10
do as much for John. to make him Peters
eanal; IT was even maintained. by way OF de-
preciating tho latter, that. In many respects
John had occupied the highest place In Gospel
history and rs the existing Gospels did not
adequately sustain these pretensions recourse
was had 10 one OF the pious frauds which. In
those days no one scrupieu TO porpetrate. lhus
may be explained now II happens tnat IL is
from Ephesus we sec cnsc"reiy emerging
shortly AFTER tho close OF the APOSTOLIC age
class OF books destined 10 ontaih nt iater
date In Christian theology a rank superior 10
all other inspired pages.
That John himself wrote these WORKS Is no
longer admissible. That they we're written IN
MS circle during MS ola age. anu WIN MS
acnuiescence-eNen this Is very doubtful IL
seems more probable that disciple OF the
apostle, the depositary OF some oil his recollec-
lions. believed himself authorized to speak IN
the Apostles nnmc and to commit TO paper
twenty.nveor thirty years after his death. what
men regretted That John hnd not himsell
set down in MS lifetime. Ephesus. Mt all
events possessed special traditions concerning
tho life OF Jesus. and. IL may venture to say
So a liie OF Jesus for Its private use. These
traditions dwelt mainly in the memory OF two
persons who were regarded In those parts as
the two highest authorities on Gospel history.
VIZ. man bearing the same name with tho
Apostle 1ohn, who was called the PresbytcroS
Johannes. and certain Aris.ion who knew
many OF the sayings of tho Lord by
heart. About the date where we now
nre. Papias had already consulted these
two men as II they were oracles. and had taken
notes OF their traditions which he was to insert
In his grent work entitled Discourscs OF the
Lord very remarkable trait OF the Frcsby-
teros was the judgment which he pronounced
upon Marks Gospel He considered 1t made
puate. and. above all. destitute OF order: he
detected in 1t Il complete Ignorance of the real
sequence OF events In the life OF Jesus The
Presbyteros evidently believed that he himself
possessed better knowledge of the facts. and
his tradition. II he committed 1t to writing,
must have diverged widely In respect Of plan
from Marks.
We incline to believe that the fourth Gospel
represents the traiitiohs OF this fresbyteros
ana OF Arlstlon. when NAV nave been trans
mitted from the Apostle John. 1t seems. more
over. that by way ol preparing for the pious
fraud Its authors ilrst launched catholic epis-
Tie. processing TO oe John =. which was 10 ac-
custom the Christ'an pubnc IN the homah
province of Asia 10 the style that 1t would be
caiieo upon 10 RECOGNIZES ms that oil the apostle
In this eplstle was opened the attack upon the
Docetcs Tor upholders OF tho theory that
Jesus was a phantomh VINO Mt that time
constituted the Rreat peril OF Chrlstihnity
IN homan Asia. Ihe writer OF the letter dwelt
iorcin'y. ana even Win supefhuous empha-
sis. on the value OF the testimony coming
from the Apostle who hnd been an eyewitness
OF the uospei lncts. me author' VINO was
sRlIiui man oil letters IN MS way, may nave
Initiated the tone OF tho apostle JOINS conver-
satloh. Inc spirit OF this little WORK Is proaa
ana eieVatea. notwlthstnnolng some traces Oh
I.'kasaite oouities. lls teaenines are eNceheh'.
II en1oihs reciprocal charltS. INC lo'e OF your
'eiio" man. h"treo Oh 'he corrupt "oriu. me
s'Sle. "nich is touchihg urgent ana pehetrat-
Ing Is aosoiuteiy the same az that OF the Goa
pei the ianlts OF the iourth Gospel tho pro-
i!*itS ana ariulty resulting from intermihab'e
u'S.''uis'nse. iu'i VI ""et' ueo ihe,"pl'scs anu
ee,i-nesef'ion "ie n'oc" 'ess o'sp'easihs III lne
epi'''e'
Inc style OF the pseudo-Johannic writings is
something altogether unique. no example OF it
having been Afforded before the Presbyteros.
1t has been too much admired. 1t has heat.
and at times sort of subimity. but there is
something inflated. false. and obscure about it.
Art1essness is wholly wanting. The author
Goes not tell story; lie develops syllogism.
Nothine is more tiresomc than MS spun-out
description OF miracles and those discussions
turning on misunderstandings wherein the
aufersarles oi Jesus play the part OF idiots.
How lar this verbose pathos falls short
| OF tine sweet style. still wholly Hebrew.
OF the sermon on the Mount. and OF
mat 'impld How which cartivates our ear
IN tho narratives OF tho primitive evanCelists.
Tho latter have no need to repeat incessantly
that they have seen what they recount. and
| that what they tell us is true. Their sincerity.
unconscious that objections over will be raised.
has mono OF that feversh thirst for reiterated
attcstatons which shows that increduity and
doubt arc already born From the slightly en-
cited tone OF this now biographer. You would
shy thnt no Is AFRAID OF not being believed. and
mat ne seeks by his assertions. surcharGed
| with emphasis. to take as IT were by surprise
the rellglous conscience OF his readers.
| At the same time that he insists strongly on
his qualification ms eye witness. and on the
value Of his individual testimony. the author
OF the fourth Gospel mover says. Il. john;