[98] "Imitate not that which is evil, but that which is good" (3 John 12). A comparison of this verse with John xxi. 24 would lead to the supposition that the writer of the letter is quoting the Gospel, and a.s.sumes an intimate knowledge of it on the part of Caius. See Discourse XVII. Part ii. of this vol.

[99] See note A at the end of this discourse.

[100] 1 John iv. 9.

[101] apesta??e?.

[102] apeste??e?.

[103] 1 John iv. 20.

[104] 1 John iv. 16.

[105] pep?ste??ae? t?? a?ap??, 1 John iv. 16.

[106] For the aor. conj. in this place as distinguished from the pres.

conj. cf. John v. 20, 23, vi. 28, 29, 30. Professor Westcott's refined scholarship corrects the error of many commentators, "that the Apostle is simply warning us not to draw encouragement for license from the doctrine of forgiveness." The tense is decisive against this, the thought is of the single _act_ not of the _state_.

[107] ea? t?? ?a?t?, 1 John ii. 1.

[108] _In Epist. Johann._, Tract. I.

[109] 1 John ii. 12, is, of course, an important exception.

[110] 1 John iii. 19, 20.

[111] See Prof. Westcott's valuable note on 1 John v. 15. The very things literally asked for would be ta a?t??e?ta, not ta a?t?ata.

[112] 2 John 11.

[113] 3 John 10.

[114] _Mart. Ignat._, i. _S. Hieron, de Script. Eccles._, xvii.

[115] ? ?e???, 1 John ii. 4, 6, 9.

[116] _Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes._, xv., cf. 1 John ii. 14, iv. 9, 17, iii. 2.

[117] _S. Ignat. Epist. ad Philad._, iv.; cf. _Epist. ad Smyrn._, vii.; _Epist. ad Ephes._, xx.

[118] The most elaborate pa.s.sage in the Ignatian remains is probably this. "Your Presbytery is fitted together harmoniously with the Bishop as chords with the cithara. Hereby in your symphonious love Jesus Christ is sung in concord. Taking your part man by man become one choir, that being harmoniously accordant in your like-mindedness, having received in unity the chromatic music of G.o.d (???a Te??

?a??te?), ye may sing with one voice through Jesus Christ unto the Father."--_Epist. ad Ephes._, iv. The same image is differently applied, _Epist. ad Philad._, i.

[119] The story is given by Socrates. (_H. E._, vi. 8.)

[120] 1 John iv. 7, 12.

[121] 1 John ii. 6, 9, i. 7-10, ii. 1, 2.

[122] 1 John i. 7, ii. 2, iv. 3, 6; 2 John 7-11; 3 John 9, 10.

[123] 1 John iii. 19, v. 14, 15, iv. 2, 3, v. 4, 5, 18.

[124] These sentences do not go so far as the mischievous and antiscriptural legend of later ascetic heretics, who marred the beauty and the purpose of the miracle at Cana, by a.s.serting that John was the bridegroom, and that our Lord took him away from his bride. _Acta Johannis_, XXI. _Act. Apost. Apoc._, Tisch., 275).

[125] This legend no doubt arose from the promise--"if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them" (Mark xvi. 18).

"Virus fidens sorbuit." Adam of St. Victor, _Seq._ x.x.xIII.

[126]

"Aurum hic de frondibus, Gemmas de silicibus, Fractis de fragminibus, Fecit firmas."--_Ibid._

There is something interesting in the persistency of legends about St.

John's power over gems, when connected with the pa.s.sage, flashing all over with the light of precious stones, whose exquisite disposition is the wonder of lapidaries. Apoc. xxi, 18, 22.

[127] See note B at the end of the Discourse.

[128] 1 John v. 18.

[129] Ibid. v. 19.

[130] Ibid. v. 20.

[131] Said by Luther of Psalm xxii. 1.

PART II.

SOME GENERAL RULES FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF THE FIRST EPISTLE OF ST.

JOHN.

I. SUBJECT MATTER.

(1) The _Epistle_ is to be read through with constant reference to the _Gospel_. In what _precise form_ the former is related to the latter (whether as a preface or as an appendix, as a spiritual commentary or an encyclical) critics may decide. But there is a vital and constant connection. The two doc.u.ments not only touch each other in thought, but _interpenetrate_ each other; and the Epistle is constantly _suggesting_ questions which the Gospel only can answer, _e.g._, 1 John i. 1, cf. John i. 1-14; 1 John v. 9, "witness of men," cf. John i. 15-36, 41, 45, 49, iii. 2, 27-36, iv. 29-42, vi. 68, 69, vii. 46, ix. 38, xi. 27, xviii. 38, xix. 5, 6, xx. 28.

(2) Such eloquence of _style_ as St. John possesses is _real_ rather than _verbal_. The interpreter must look not only at the words themselves, but at that which _precedes_ and _follows_; above all he must fix his attention not only upon the _verbal expression_ of the thought, but upon the _thought itself_. For the formal connecting link is not rarely omitted, and must be supplied by the devout and candid diligence of the reader. The "root below the stream" can only be traced by our bending over the water until it becomes translucent to us.

_E.g._ 1 John i. 7, 8. Ver. 7, "the root below the stream" is a question of this kind, which naturally arises from reading ver.

6--"must it be said that the sons of light need a constant cleansing by the blood of Jesus, which implies a constant guilt"? Some such thought is the latent root of connection. The answer is supplied by the following verse. ["It is so" for] "if we say that we have no sin,"

etc. Cf. also iii. 16, 17, xiv. 8, 9, 10, 11, v. 3 (ad. fin.), 4.