that chapter were evidently intended to finish and wind up John's narrative, and that the twenty-first chapter comes in awkwardly and abruptly.
From all these theories I entirely dissent, and repudiate them altogether. I see no proof whatever that the two last verses of the twentieth chapter were intended to be a winding up of the whole Gospel. To me they appear to be a characteristic comment of the Evangelist, such as he often makes, on the ac- count he has given in the chapter of our Lord's appearances to the disciples after His resurrection, and nothing more. To me it appears perfectly natural that he should go on writing, and give a further account of our Lord's most instructive appear- ance at the sea of Galilee ; and I see in the narrative no ab- ruptness or awkward fitting whatever. On the contrary, I see a peculiar beauty in the selection of the matter which the twenty-first chapter contains. It seems to me a most fitting conclusion to the whole narrative of the Gospel, to tell us our Lord's last sayings about two such Apostles as Peter and John. — Concerning Peter, it should be remembered that none of the Apostles had professed so much, and yet fallen so sadly as he had. John takes care to tell us how graciously and emphat- ically Jesus restores him to his commission, and specially bids him feed His Church, and foretells his end. — Concerning John, it should be remembered that he had been peculiarly mention- ed, as the disciple whom Jesus loved. He meekly tells us that the only prediction about himself, if it can be called one, was that his future end was left in obscurity by his Lord. And thus he concludes his Gospel. If any one thinks that such a chapter comes in awkwardly, and is not a fitting conclusion to John's narrative after the twentieth chapter, I cannot agree with him.
Of evidence, whether external or internal, that the theories I have referred to deserve consideration, there is a conspicuous absence. There is not the slightest proof that any trustworthy ancient writer ever regarded the last chapter of St, John's Gos- pel, as less genuine and less inspired than the rest of the book. There is nothing in the language or style of the chapter, to create any suspicion that any other person than John composed it. Those who wish to see this subject fully investigated, are advised to study Wordsworth's Appendix to St. John's Gospel, in his Commentary.
When I add to this statement the fact that, in every age, the ■wisest and holiest commentators have seen in this chapter sev- eral singularly deep and interesting types of the history and position of Christ's Church in the world, I think I shall have said enough to satisfy many readers, that they may approach the last chapter of St. John's Gospel with as much reverence, and as much reasonable expectation of getting benefit from it as any other chapter in the book.