The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 95

the climax of the prologue. Moreover, the Elijah of the new covcul\ut converses with his own disciph·s touching the mystery of Christ's sacrificial del\th, the decel\se which he would ncco~)plish l\t ~erusalem (eh. i. 29). J csus manifested his glory (..¾,v Bd{av .. ~.,oii) at Cana (eh. 11. 11; xn. 41). Nathanael was promised the vision of the opening of hea-rcn o-rer the Son of man (eh. i. 61); and in eh. xii. 28 we bear emphatically of a voice from bca-ren, which declared "that Heaven had glorified the Name of the Lord, and wouU do so again." It is in the Fourth Gospel we read of "light and crlnry" visible to the spiritual eye, and that a re"elation of the Father was made to those ;ho l\pprehended nis Sonship. The proloi:ue is rich in the uttera.uce of this thouaht. "The life" thl\t wa8 in t~e Logos was "the light of men" (eh. i. 4, note). The light which before the Incarnat1on and ever since has been ~hiniu~ into the <larkuess-" that light has C'ome into the world_" (eh. i. 9). Christ's own declarations convey the same thought, and assert the tes_tmg force of such a re.elation of the archetypal light (eh. iii. 19-21). To the same image Christ reverted on two subsequent occasions. In eh. viii. 12 he claimed to be " the Light of the worlJ;" and iu eh. ix. 5, before he proceeded to illumine the dark eyes of the blind man, he ~aid, " Whensoever I am in the world, I am the Light of the world." In eh. xiv. 21 he claimed that through and to "love" the manif~station should be made. Nowhere, certainly, more than in John's Gospel do we le:trn that the highest radiance falls on those who receive, adore, and love. John tells us in his Epistle that "he that loveth not knoweth not." Consequently, the erangelist learned throughout his career, and from an early introduction to Christ, that the highest glory and most vivid illumination were mattera of spiritual sympathy and the revelations of love. The mountain of Transfiguration, though it conveyed the same ideas to him along the old theophanic lines, yet sank, after the lapse of years, into comparative oblivion for him, in comparison with the veritable illumination that love always searches for and finds. A.gain, the account of the Transfiguration is the record of the final effect made by the early Galihean ministry upon different classes. The synoptists record the impression produced upon the following groups successively: upon the brethren of Jesus; upon his own townsfolk; upon the multitudes; upon those diseased; upon little children; upon ta lien women; upon John the Baptist; upon Herod Antipas; upon the Pharisaic party; upon the world of unseen and evil spirits; upon the twelve disciples; upon Peter especially; and finally upon the heavenly world, and upon the eternal Father. The scene of the Transfiguration is a fitting climax: to a vast group of testimonies. There is no such place prepared for it in John's Gospel, nor is it essential to the completion of any series of related events. The highest truth taught in the Transfiguration was universalized., and became a sacred doctrine in the words, " If a man love me, he will keep my words ; and my Father will love him, and we will come, and make our abode with him." And where Jesus prays "that the glory which he had with the Father before the world was" may encompass him, " and that his own disciples may see it" (eh. xvii. 5, 24). The unity of the Christ of the synoptists and the Christ of the fourth evangelist is apparent enough. 'l'he omission by the latter of this event is justified by his obvious enlargement of all the ideas of the Transfiguration, viz. the inherent fulness of being, power, and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ; his at-homenees in heaven; the desire of the Christ that by any means and by full revelation of himself his disciples should see the essential Divineness of his life. Prejudice has been excited against the author by this method of his proof of the greatest glories of his Lord; but the reflection that tbe disciple looked back through the vista of years upon the events and teachings of Christ, is more than explanation of his choice. The doctrine of John renders the recorded fact of the Transfiguration comprehensible. The omission cannot be put down to the unwillingness of John to deal with the transcendent.31 revelations of Christ. The Apocalypse is adequate proof of that for those who believe that he iH its author; but so also is the Gospel ; for the latter is not silent about the special and unique functions and characteristics of the body of the Lord, e.g. his walking upon the sea ; the physical effect produced. upon the temple guards by his majewtic glance; the obvious alarm produced in the mind of Pilate by his look a.lid word; the miraculous accompaniments of his death in the stream of blood and water that issued from his side.  'l'HE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOJJN. CV ----------- ----- (c) 'l'ho omission of the institution of the Lord's Supper. This circumstance is without doubt perplexing, if we are looking to the Fourth Gospel for a. complete biography from an apostolic standpoint. But we must r,•fer again to the fra'!lllentary no.ture of this Gospel, which is RB conspicuous M the fra·"mcntary character ;f each of the eynoptice. Now, wbon "John" wrote it the Church was an organized institution, which had passed throu~h the severe ordeals of transplantation from Jerusalem to Antioch, to Corinth, to Alexandria, to Ephesus, and to Rome. Tbron"hout the Roman world the Holy Supper had a recognized place. The authentic Epistles of Paul to Corinth show incontestably the grounds on which the universal custom rested. The synoptic Gospels had long since presented, with instructive differences and side-lights, the historic origin of the ceremony; and it was therefore far more probable that the apostle should have felt himself free to set forth some of its fundamental ideas and the deepest truths connoted by it, than that a theological writer of the second century, claiming to be an apostle, should have taken such a course. Such a writer could not be by any possibility ignorant of the reputed origin of the well-known rite; nor would he have dared to omit it. The omiosion, with a. reason, justifies apostolic authorship. Let it be observed that the Fourth Gospel records the occurrence of a feast on the night of the Passion, a.ad one in which the Lord," having loved his own, loved them to the end," or "manifested that love even to the uttermost." It is in the folds and clauses of this wonderful sentence (eh. xiii. 1, 2) that the best place is to be found for the institution of the Supper. The entire discourse that follows (eh. xiii.-xvii.) is charged with the ideas involved in the Eucharistic service. A few of these may be indicated.. (a) The mutual affection a.ad reciprocal devotion to be cherished by the disciples. (.B) Tile necessity or incumbent duty of these disciples to receive Christ himself into their inmost nature, to take hold of him, and to find in doing it that they were receiving him that sent him (eh. xiii. 20). ('l') "The new commandment," suggested in the anticipated betrayal by the son of perdition, and the foreseen denial by Peter. (11) The prediction of Christ's speedy departure from them, but his con• tinuous work for them, the promise of a return after that departure, both in a physical and spiritual fashion (eh. xiv. 28; xvi. li-23). (•) Above a.II, the repeated affirma- tion of the intimate, mystic, Divine union between himself and his disciples, and even between himself and "those also who should believe on him through their [the apostles'] word." Thie was to be effected by his departure, followed by his spiritual return. Not only do many or the ideas of the Eucharist thus find expression, but it is obvious that in eh. vi. the mysterious phraseology used in the institution of the Supper had been anticipated. Our Lord had spoken of faith in himself under the imagery of "ea.ting his flesh and drinking his blood." The flesh of Christ was "veritable food," the blood of Christ "veritable drink." In other words, bis cruel death, if accepted as the climax of all his work, would be the life of those who should believe in it. Apa.rt from such participation, no life was possible. "He that eateth me," said Christ, "eveu he shall live because of me" (eh. vi. 67). The first presentation of this thought, the earliest expression of this intimate union with and participation of Christ, is set forth under the image of "ea.ting the Bread of life" (eh. vi. 60), accepting the truth of the Divine commission and nature of the Christ, admitting the fact that he came down from heaven, that he came with measureless ea.pa.city and resources to sa.tis[y the hunger and thirst of mankind, to giv41 eternal life, and to raise up the possessors of eternal life at the last day (eh. vi. 3~0). The next stage is the full apprehension of the Incarnation, and that his humanity itself, being a manhood whose entrance int-0 the world was unique, had become the accessible form of the living Bread, the embodiment of a visible eternal truth. The glory of God was seen and was offered to man in his humanity, in his God-Manhood. This idea naturally perplexed some of his followers, but it intensified the faith of others. Christ discriminated once more, and laid emphasis, not only on the apprehension of his ·u flesh," but also of his " blood," not only of the blood which is the life, but of the shed blood, making it evident that the death of the Divine humanity was au integrl\l part of the mission from heaven, or, as we have it in the synoptics, that he would give his life" a ransom in place of many." He declared that we have to drink this blood, to appreciate, to accept, and to assimilate as spiritual food, the stupendous idea of the death of the Obrist of Gad. Apa.rt from  cvl INTRODUCTION TO